Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology based conversational interfaces

[Azamat Abdoullaev <ontopaedia@xxxxxxxxx>]

 RC: “Democracy as practiced by Athens only democratized the male citizens, not the slaves, the females, visitors, etc.  But democracy practiced that way becomes tyranny fast.  "Tyranny of the majority" is the phrase used, if you google for it”.

ASHA: “Indeed. It is a kind of “ochlocracy”, the rule by the general populace, mobocracy, could be more oppressive than any autocratic tyranny. You can’t only rely on humans, be it a small group or large mass, but smart machines, balancing intelligence and reason with passion and emotions”.  

RC: “So depressing as politics seems to be, the public sees more reality of it than we used to see.  That means some smart poli sci and comp sci pair will make a zillion by solving that problem before too much longer”.

ASHA: “Indeed. It is a huge market of i-Government technologies disrupting the traditional human-driven polities. As such, it involves the latest ICT technologies, like as the IBM Smarter Government solutions or Oracle iGovernment platform for innovative, integrated, and intelligent operations of servers and storage, virtualized operating environments, database, middleware, and applications built on open standards and a service-oriented architecture. http://www.slideshare.net/ashabook/intelligent-world

Before soon, you could see intelligent republics or smart polities run by digital governance systems…, among which may be SMART America as well”. Some relevant links below:

http://www.slideshare.net/ashabook/superpowers-smart-states-global-initiative   

http://eu-smartcities.eu/blog/smart-superpowers-projects-states-powers-great-powers-and-hyperpowers

Ed: “I agree with almost all of what you say.  But I would point out that U.S. Republicans and Democrats, like the political parties of other major “democracies”, must agree on a “common world” (universe of discourse) in order to communicate and legislate”. 

ASHA: That’s a great point. The parties marked by competing political ideologies, promoting specific political systems and socio-economic policies, be it traditional conservatism or neoliberal policy, “the market is the king”.

They do have something common: to “control and exercise control over political decision-making” to their own benefits and special group interests by any means and ways. The big trick is, the hired political technologies should convince the constituencies/electors that it is about national interest, in the first place.

BS: “What I want to see happen – along with 100 other less revolutionary reforms – is the emergence of highly idealized forms of network-mediated democracy”,…

ASHA: It is now emerging as the (semantic ontology-driven) 5i-Government Platform (intelligent, interconnected, instrumented, innovative and inclusive) technologically enabling a real Digital Direct Democracy (a 3D Government), or full “Citizen Empowerment”.

The 3D Government is making invalid plutocracy and bureaucracy, and a “representational democracy” division between a “largely passive, uninvolved and often uninformed electorate” vs. “professional policymakers”, “a body of individuals, who control and exercise control over political decision-making” to their own benefits and special group interests.

http://www.slideshare.net/ashabook/intelligent-global-government

BS: “Yes, right, it’s blue sky, it’s idealistic, utopian, we’re all busy, and who is going to pay for it.  But maybe the bigger question is – as we might see in health care reform or prison reform (or 100 other issues) – who’s going to pay if we DON’T do this….?”

ASHA: It is no more the “castle in the air”, but a huge i-government market involving such big players as IBM and Oracle,…

I assure you that the emerging technologies are to disrupt the traditional government systems regardless of all bureaucratic resistance and opposition…

Smart Government Technologies: Intelligent Systems for the Management of Smart Sustainable Cities and Communities: Technology Trends, Market Analysis, and Global Forecasts

http://www.navigantresearch.com/research/smart-government-technologies

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Rich Cooper <metasemantics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear John,

 

You wrote:

JFS: If that's what you believe, you have totally misunderstood Dan A's lecture.  He was trying to make the point that *all of us* have the *same kind* of biases in how we interpret our experiences.

 

I didn't say otherwise.  DA's work is on finding common behavior in situations under various stresses.  I didn't say otherwise. 

 

But notice the subject line: this is on conversational interfaces based on ontologies.  One possible ontology would be to encode the knowledge DA describes here, and in his other videos and books, to model human behavior. 

 

The differences people have in perception, and the differences in their situations even when you think the situations are the same, are reality. 

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper,

Rich Cooper,

 

Chief Technology Officer,

MetaSemantics Corporation

MetaSemantics AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

( 9 4 9 ) 5 2 5-5 7 1 2

http://www.EnglishLogicKernel.com

 

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 2:21 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology based conversational interfaces

 

Bruce and Rich,

 

Bruce

> If I have to remember every word that creates confusion or arguments,

> I’m gonna be a basket case.

 

There is no need to remember anything.  I'm just drawing attention to the fact that this thread has been getting tied up in knots by vague words whose meanings shift with every note.

 

And my suggestion is very modest:  replace the vague words with concrete words.  The criteria are simple:  If you can explain the word to a bright 10-year-old child, it's a good concrete word.

If you can explain it to a 6-year-old child, it's even better.

 

But if you can't find two PhD philosophers who agree on the definition, it's a very bad word.

 

Rich

> since you don't like the word "world", let's not put in any

> substitution at all for the main point: its "objective reality" we should put there:

 

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

That is the diametric *opposite* of what I'm recommending.

 

Peirce's pragmatism:  The meaning of any concept is grounded in the "twin gates" of perception and purposive action.

 

Try explaining the terms 'objective' and 'reality' to

(a) a 10-year-old, (b) a 6-year-old, and (c) a philosopher.

See what happens.

 

> we have become more and more biased in our particularly chosen

> directions.

 

No.  If that's what you believe, you have totally misunderstood Dan A's lecture.  He was trying to make the point that *all of us* have the *same kind* of biases in how we interpret our experiences.

 

Those biases are hardwired in our brains (and the brains of all our mammalian relatives) because they help us focus on aspects of experience that are important for survival.  Unfortunately, those biases can often divert attention from other aspects that might be important for other reasons.  Go listen to Dan A's talk and take notes (or to other talks by him on the same YouTube page).

 

To return to the earlier point:

 

JFS

> One of the few instances in which Dan A. says "the world" could be

> replaced by the phrase "planet earth" without changing the point:

> "Much of our experience of the world comes from inside our brains."

 

RC

> I don't particularly like stipulating that "planet earth" captures the

> concept.

 

I certainly agree that the phrase 'planet earth' does not capture what you mean by 'world'.  There is *no* precise term that can exactly replace a hopelessly vague term.

 

But what I do claim is that when Dan A. said "the world", he was talking about the physical environment that all human beings are living in.  The replacement 'planet earth' is the simplest phrase that comes close to that meaning.

 

John

 

_________________________________________________________________

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
 

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)