My first reaction, based on a quick glance at the Singularity.org web site: (01)
The term "singularity" is unfortunate. By drawing a parallel with black
holes, they do themselves a disservice. It's more like a "theory of
everything," IMHO. And there is also some risk, I think, among these
folks that they may fall into the same trap that early robotics
visionaries (at least the science fiction people) fell into: That
advanced, useful robots would look a lot like people. Do the singularity
folks believe that the bigger-better-faster artificial brain will look a
lot like our own brains? (I don't mean in the literal sense, of course.) (02)
Creating a "singularity" may not, by itself, be a critical human
endeavor, but the issues surrounding that effort should be relevant to
the ontology community. (03)
Advances in human society have come through observation of the
activities of others and oral sharing of "knowledge." More recently,
through sharing of recorded information. (04)
The problem we face currently is too much information and too little
knowledge. We are reaching the limits of what information can do for us.
Instead of paying attention to how people create, manage, and apply
knowledge, we have focused primarily on making incremental improvements
in information retrieval from ever larger resources and other marginal
improvements that are based on processing the surface characteristics of
natural language. Unfortunately, the amount of information is so great
that a significant portion of the human community simply surrenders and
resorts to slogans and meaning-free diatribes where knowledge should, as
always, be applied. (05)
Speaking as someone from outside the ontology community (but deeply
interested in its activities), if ontology rests fundamentally on
formalization of mapping of signs to/from meaning and "real-world"
objects (as in the Ogden-Richards triangle), then the issues surrounding
development of a "singularity" should be highly relevant to the ontology
community ... but the community must first accept that ontologies are
only one aspect of capture, management, improvement, and application of
knowledge. (06)
Hans Polzer's observation that "'frictional losses' and 'inherent
latency' associated with communicating/disseminating knowledge" begins
to get at that assertion, although M. Polzer seems rather pessimistic
about the prospects. What's missing, I believe, as that we have to do a
very thoughtful analysis of what actually happens when members of
knowledge-driven organizations communicate with each other, develop
shared understandings of ideas, and apply that meaning to work. (07)
And, no, I'm not referring to a lot of the ungrounded silliness that
goes on in "knowledge management." I am referring primarily to finding
better ways to convert existing communications into formal, reusable
representations of meaning as well as to methods of starting with
meaning ... and viewing information as a necessary but often
less-than-useful byproduct. We need to go more directly to meaning,
understand its role as an organizational asset. (Information is
primarily a cost of doing business, not an asset.) (08)
There are in fact *many* different communities/disciplines that can and
should contribute to a shared understanding of how we can make work and
society in general better. But we lack a shared language and shared
model for what happens in the processes of building shared, reliable
meaning. (09)
-- Phil Murray (010)
--------------------- (011)
The Semantic Advantage
Turning Information into Assets
phil.murray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
401-247-7899 (012)
Blog: http://semanticadvantage.wordpress.com
Web site: http://www.semanticadvantage.com (013)
Hans Polzer wrote:
> My own perspective is that neither Big Data nor Big Processing nor
> Intelligence, however they may be defined, is sufficient for achieving "the
> Singularity". It requires actuators in physical space (3-D printers,
> anyone?) of sufficient capability to build improved actuators so that
> improvements in information/knowledge space can translate into improved
> hardware capabilities to implement better information/knowledge space
> capabilities and so on in what is hopefully an exponential runaway (positive
> feedback loop - also known as "feedback") process. My own opinion is that
> "frictional losses" and "inherent latency" associated with
> communicating/disseminating knowledge will begin to dominate this process
> and keep it from staying exponential for very long (if it is in fact
> exponential now - a very debatable point). In other words, there won't be a
> Singularity - only a fast but long and possibly erratic elevator ride (as
> specific fundamental physical laws are uncovered and obstacles overcome).
>
> Hans
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Bottoms
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 2:26 PM
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: [ontolog-forum] The Singularity is Coming, The Singularity is
> Coming!
>
> (IMHO this is a topic of ontology...)
>
> It is a topic of discussion among technologists.
> Ask what the Singularity means, and you will get several answers.
>
> Some of these answers compound Big Processing with Big Data.
> Some of these answers confound Big Data with Intelligence
>
> So I try to be sympathetic and reason with them arguing connectionist
> systems vs grammar based systems. This has resulted in little success.
>
> What is the best way to address the "Potential of the Singulairty"?
>
> -John Bottoms
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
> (014)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (015)
|