Hi Len, (01)
I missed your post. (02)
You can look on these results as an opportunity to expand tools if you like. (03)
One result may be that we keep "old" theories around. If there turn
out to be vastly more "theories" implicit in most sets of data than
there are data points, the efficiencies of doing so will become
questionable, but you could do it. (04)
I like the idea that the power of computation to continually find new
solutions in a given set of data might change us from partisans to
pluralists (but I won't hold my breath! :-) (05)
-Rob (06)
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:45 AM, Len Yabloko <lenya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I think what happens is not the "end" or "birth" of any theory. To me it
>looks like an
> opportunity to expand the set of tools available for exploration of data. For
>example, we
> no longer have to speak about what theories might be buried in data - we can
>consider
> to keep some of them around, just in case. This is the luxury people could
>not afford in
> the past. So many good theories where buried (some forever). You see,
>computers will
> never supersede their creators, but they may change us from partisans we are
>to
> ultimate pluralists. (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|