h a l f b a k e r yBunned. James Bunned.
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,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I would like to see WcW and MechE's energy,wavelength,information debate as a visual representation.
The Venn circle diameter would grow if a debater got the high factual ground. Neutral would be a line and non factual argument would grow with a change in colour. And of course the circle extrusion
is relative to t.
Admittedly it would take a severe amount of analysis/logic. I would imagine it would look like the pipes screensaver with repetitive loops, unions and areas of missing space. May be a black hole for no one knows
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow …
http://en.m.wikiped...morrow_and_tomorrow
Clearly, education is something that happens to other people … [8th of 7, Feb 17 2014]
The "Debate"
Second_20Law_20of_2...Temporal_20Violator
I'll decline comment since I'm one of the principal actors. [MechE, Feb 18 2014]
[link]
|
| |
I'd like a simpler representation of heat vs light. |
|
| |
" .... It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing. " |
|
| |
All right, then. We will pander to the hoi-
polloi, just this once … |
|
| |
"I'm sorry sir. You won't be able to see him. Mr. Andreasen was venestrated from his ninth floor apartment last night around eight o'clock. The police just took the body away. Is there someone else who can help you?" said the temp secretary. |
|
| |
....not what I meant. I'm passingly familiar with Macbeth, 8th. |
|
| |
I was asking for a link to the "WcW and MechE's energy,wavelength,information debate". |
|
| |
The 3-D graphical representation of argument structure: it tantalises me. [+] |
|
| |
I don't think ground-height is a good metaphor for the factual element of the debate though. It's not a one-dimensional thing [-]. You need something more like interlocking gears straining against each other. |
|
| |
//interlocking gears straining against each other. // |
|
| |
... so, some sort of metaphor machine ? |
|
| |
Usually in an heated debate, both can be agreeing and not see it. I agree a radius is a bit simple for facts. Parties can have the same number of undesputed facts but each corner a different area of the discussion. |
|
| |
If the circle plane is the disbuted knowledge then each person can get an angle on the argument. How complex the argument is shown by the number of angles used. The bigger the full circle the closer to the having captured the base knowledge. |
|
| |
Watson could be used to isolate facts from sentences and verify statments against current research papers/encyclopedias. A numerical value would have to be assigned to how the fact that relates to the conflict (tricky bit). |
|
| |
An added visualisation of emotion used, would be interesting. |
|
| |
MechE, Art if for everyone to comment, feel something. |
|
| |
All of this is within (the extruding cuboid of?) E; so does E represent All Fact or All Opinion. I know I'm right... |
|
| |
//The argument in question contains a lot of repetition.// |
|
| |
So, it was actually a libretto? It just needed scoring? Could we have fat ladies (just so's to know when to clap)? |
|
| |
Was it a libretto ?
Was it a libretto ?
Was it, was it, was it a libretto, oh, oh ?
|
|
| |
(Mozart-esque recitative, ad nauseam) |
|
| |
That'd be an interesting exercise for an AI: map how an argument progresses. |
|
| |
// so, some sort of metaphor machine ? // |
|
| |
Yes, a metaphor machine or something simile. |
|
| |
//an interesting exercise for an AI// |
|
| |
More interesting, surely, would be to keep the humans in the loop, and use the software model as a heat-to-light converter. Well, more interesting to me, anyway. |
|
| |
I wonder what the psychological implications are, of
having a feedback system on your own argument.
Glass could display the Venn worms in real time. |
|
| |
A simpler feedback system would be to crowd source
a thumbs up or down per argument turn but this
would take time. Patience isn't in abundance in a
passionate contest. |
|
| |
[Harry] You and all of us would be purely right if we
were back at that mysterious time, before time,
when all E was a high, with order and information at
maximum. |
|
| |
//what the psychological implications are, of having a feedback system on your own argument// |
|
| |
Such things exist. They're called audiences. They are usually defective systems, however, utterly failing to grasp that you're right. |
|
| |