> Please go do your homework on the state of the art of AI today.
>
> An elevator pitch for something that nobody knows how to do
> would be worthless. (01)
It makes sense, of course :) (02)
BTW we almost have a solution 'cause the internet communication is a
framework to exchange strings ("texts") between computers at the web. To
make the Internet a true framework for a legal process (semantics driven) it
is necessary to have a judgement system which would claim a final
decisions - similar as an online trading process finished when a payment
done and a product delivered. (03)
Such "judgement system" (programmable automatic "moderator") would be grown
as a legal ontology while more people will play the duspute games and
improve such internet "judge". (04)
BTW social networks have been built on pretty simple internet technologies
but they have become a unique social phenomena as many people were involved
in the communication. Collectively programmable "judge" for the legal
disputes via the Internet could collect social knowledge similar as Google
and Wikipedia a collective social information. (05)
To break a vicious circle between the real and virtual worlds it would be
great to setup a special area of conflicts for the legal disputes online
where decisions would be made automatically (by proper legal ontology or
protocol). Some legal advisers could be set behind the system to help the
web developers. There could be legal disputes regarding copyrights at the
web, for example. Jurisdiction of such "internet judge" could be the Web. (06)
Ok, it's enogh to make a break :) (07)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] [Making the Case] Elevator Pitch (08)
> On 2/2/2011 11:10 AM, Yuriy Milov wrote:
>> We don't understand the nature of the mouse brain but a chess computer
>> wins
>> granmasters.
>
> Yes, but there are only two kinds of things that computers do better
> than humans (or even birds and mammals): storing large volumes of
> data exactly and computational things like arithmetic and chess.
>
> For go, the computational methods can beat amateurs, but not the
> lowest level of go masters. That's because humans use perceptual
> mechanisms that no computer today can come close to matching.
>
> Robots can do extremely precise detail, but they can't do things that
> are trivial for humans and other animals: e.g., wash dishes the way
> people do or build a bird's nest the way birds do.
>
>> Court trials is just a textual games by clear rules where a judge is
>> similar
>> to a game server, and if legal dusputes go online it would be a great
>> Elevator Pitch.
>
> Please go do your homework on the state of the art of AI today.
>
> An elevator pitch for something that nobody knows how to do
> would be worthless.
>
> John
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (010)
|