I tried a few entries on Quiki, and a lot of it is taken directly from
Wikipedia but with a synthetic voice reading the text. They also play
a lot of pictures, which may or may not be relevant to the topic. (01)
A lot of people might find the format more attractive, but the
information content is less than what you'd find in Wikipedia.
FK: Still no sign of an interface between entries
Back to Watson and Qwiki as inverses
Clearly, if you know the solution of a puzzle, the you can create one. Without
knowing the clue, no puzzple is any fun.
The stupid thing about Q/A systems that I assume they do not record the route
they follow in search - do not turn them into hardware as it happens with most
of other algorithms of smartt objects.
So the muscle machine working on the a non normative or verified bunch of
corpora sorted on alpha is wasting its time as opposed to an other structure
where you work the other way round, records associated to keywords directly,
hanging like arrays. Of course it is more stuipid, as there is no reasoning,
who needs reasoning of the kind illustrated by Watson?
Intelligence is proportional to the length of chaining thoughts with operations
interspersed with an outcome of leading to at least one correct answer seen as
such in term sof adaptation to the environment. Already a mite has got that
Attention is the weakest, but a minimum form of connecting.
It is also the minimum price you pay for getting connected.
Getting connected means exchanging information. "Information is transformation"
(Bela Hamvas) (04)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (05)