h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Loogle V2
A shortcut to topical file system organization | |
Because I'm not much of a computer geek, I'd best describe what this is about by example:
Let's say Burt is an expert in underwater volcanoes, and currently his computer file organization has accumulated a high degree of entropy. Stored on one drive are his geologic surveys, in another far-off location
are his biological journals, and his environmental conditions of volcanoes are in a third. Burt writes a paper touching and including all of these subjects, which he'll file under his finished papers in some other random spot.
Burt's computer search system, during idle time, parses the words in the paper, and associates significant words automatically in a relational database. It then communicates these significant words with Google or a probabilistic search engine like it. Google returns its results for likely hits of other significant words that are frequently associated with the originals back to the operating system. The operating system then goes and searches all local files for the Google suggested return hits, (and optionally saves a copy of that search session, which it passes on to a selected peer group, in Burt's case, trusted fellow oceanographers). All local files that turn in a match are linked or shortcutted or whatever in one nice, neat, delivered package, which Burt can adjust and trim to teach the neural system. Effectively, Burt's computer now understands that underwater volcanoes and tubeworms have something to do with eachother, from a topical standpoint.
[link]
|
|
Lousy crash, wiped out all my annos. |
|
|
Ha, ha! You have no constructive criticism! </muntz> |
|
|
One suggestion is to make sure that Burt has total control over the trusted peer group's contents. Other than that, seems pretty nifty. |
|
|
I suppose this would be better explained in some sort step-by-step flowchart. |
|
|
I also think that Burt's initial Google search should perhaps be user-adjustable, to perhaps search only specific sites, or maybe his selected peer group. |
|
|
Also would be less-than-perfect if Burt's field was advanced far enough beyond the norm to not provide an effective probabilistic model for the engine to feed from. |
|
|
The search should include analogous subjects too. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but a simple one might be if someone's writing about earth-bound volcanoes, it looks at the stuff on Mars' too. [rubbish example, I know.] |
|
|
Seems like Watson has gone me a few better lately. |
|
|
Seems an awful lot like how chatGPT does what it does. Or am I wrong? |
|
| |