4 ms·

Better page retrieval? This is what a lot of people just don't understand. It's not "what exists plus 30%". It's a different equation entirely. I live in th

Better page retrieval? This is what a lot of people just don't understand. It's not "what exists plus 30%". It's a different equation entirely. I live in the Czech Republic. A young girl recently put a note on our train station board offering babysitting services. Why didn't she use the web? Because she can't. Until someone makes a Czech babysitting database, she can't. Because no one would ever find it. Text doesn't work that way. How many web sites are: dating, real estate, jobs, etc? That's data. So why don't they put it on the web as text? Because no one would ever find it. Text doesn't work that way. Whoever fixes this, changes it all. They take out Google. They take out Monster.com. They take out Match.com. They take out Facebook. Whoever can do this will change everything. We've spent 15 years building the mountain of the web on the wrong construct. We need to rebuild it. You think it's doomed to failure but I'm telling you concretely, you'll see it within a year from today.

Tichy 17y ago
Of course if she put an ad for "babysitting" on the web, people would find it. There is nothing "semantic" about it. You simply search for the word "babysitting". More likely, she doesn't have a computer or the parents don't have computers.
- nekopa 17y ago
  Or, (and I say this living in the Czech Rep, and I just did a search on this country's top search site which is not google) if she put up a web page, nobody would find it, unless they wade through 30 pages of results. Unless she is a SEO wizard, it actually makes more sense for her to target locally (train station in the town she lives in) in a way that people will see it. Or, it could be financially motivated. (Hosting costs, etc...)
  - Tichy 17y ago
    Have you tried searching on Google Maps? I think they already automatically extract addresses from Web sites. So if you make a babysitting web site with your address, it should work. Also not sure how semantic web would help with targeting locally.
    - nekopa 17y ago
      I haven't tried google maps. But, neither would any locals out here. Google is number 3 out here for searches. And as to how the semantic web would help, I think your suggestion gives the evidence. Google is automatically extracting info based on its semantics, ie if it looks like an address, attach that semantic info to it, and utilise it. This also goes a long way to back up your point that the semantic web will probably start if we can do it automatically. Then I could see manual initiatives starting along the lines of wikipedia: someone has a cool way of adding semantic information via the crowdsource. That is when we will have a breakthrough in the SW
      - elblanco 17y ago
        But the semantics of searching on a map is not the "semantic web" that people like Tim Berners-Lee are talking about. It people out there can't be bothered to search google maps, is there some particular reason they'd instantiate a reasoning engine on a semantic graph to find a local babysitter?
        david927 17y ago
        Oh yes it is. In his first TED speech his exact example is naming a point on a map.
        elblanco 17y ago
        Demonstrate a working, genuinely useful semantic system and the world will believe you. Until then, the SW is a monumental waste of everybody's time. this is the semantic web http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web Searching google maps is not the semantic web no matter how you try to twist the term. You can't both claim the SW already exists and doesn't exist at the same time. The fact that I can already do something that the SW claims it will be able to do, in 15 or 20 years, already demonstrates that the principle isn't necessary and is already obsolete.
        17y ago
elblanco 17y ago
> Why didn't she use the web? Because she can't. Please describe why she can't? I shall now demonstrate why she can. Here's an example in the states. http://www.sitters.com/default.htm http://www.sitters.com/default.htm That took me approximately 1 second to find (give or take some insignificant fraction of a second). Or this. http://www.expats.cz/prague/t-284477.html http://www.expats.cz/prague/t-284477.html Wow, incredible! You want another couple hundred sources? If I could speak Czech I could probably find the same. There is absolutely nothing proposed with the SW that would have improved this. And in fact, an unranked, unattributed list of babysitters returned from some semantic datastore no matter how large (without attributable trust signals) will change that. Your example, would have required her to enter her babysitting availability in the SW instead of on some web site. Doesn't really make a difference, if it's crawlable, it's already retrievable. > Until someone makes a Czech babysitting database, she can't. Because no one would ever find it. Here, http://www.bibo-hlidani-deti.cz/ http://www.bibo-hlidani-deti.cz/ wow, impossible. Total retrieval time, in two languages, one of which I don't speak, 30 seconds. I can only imagine what I could find if I spoke Czech. Does Google not operate in your country? Is there some reason that building, maintaining and populating a "Czech babysitting database" is fundamentally different from populating the SW? >That's data. So why don't they put it on the web as text? Because no one would ever find it. Text doesn't work that way. The SW isn't some magical self populating entity made out of wishes. It would take an effort worth the cost of buying France to build a semantic web of the size and information density of the current Web. Furthermore, nobody has ever demonstrated why it would be better. Statement like "Whoever fixes this, changes it all. They take out Google. They take out Monster.com. They take out Match.com. They take out Facebook. Whoever can do this will change everything." are not only built on a completely incorrect premise -- searching large volumes of indexed text and providing a ranked relevant result set is impossible -- they aren't even built on the ability to point to a working, large scale semantic graph with the appropriate reasoning engines (which in an of themselves are barely in their most basic infancy)...not one presently exists, and the smaller scale examples haven't yielded much of anything valuable. And in many obvious ways it would be worse. People can put effort into a web page to send signals about quality, other sites and sources can rank a page as trustworthy or not. A list of "babysitters in the Czech Republic" offers none of that. And reasoning out that information across an infinitely large graph could take hours. I've worked with large semantic systems, with billions of entities and tens of billions of relationships, and almost universally they provide almost no additional value over traditional search, yet perform much more poorly.

Tichy 17y ago

Of course if she put an ad for "babysitting" on the web, people would find it. There is nothing "semantic" about it. You simply search for the word "babysitting". More likely, she doesn't have a computer or the parents don't have computers.

nekopa 17y ago
Or, (and I say this living in the Czech Rep, and I just did a search on this country's top search site which is not google) if she put up a web page, nobody would find it, unless they wade through 30 pages of results. Unless she is a SEO wizard, it actually makes more sense for her to target locally (train station in the town she lives in) in a way that people will see it. Or, it could be financially motivated. (Hosting costs, etc...)
- Tichy 17y ago
  Have you tried searching on Google Maps? I think they already automatically extract addresses from Web sites. So if you make a babysitting web site with your address, it should work. Also not sure how semantic web would help with targeting locally.
  - nekopa 17y ago
    I haven't tried google maps. But, neither would any locals out here. Google is number 3 out here for searches. And as to how the semantic web would help, I think your suggestion gives the evidence. Google is automatically extracting info based on its semantics, ie if it looks like an address, attach that semantic info to it, and utilise it. This also goes a long way to back up your point that the semantic web will probably start if we can do it automatically. Then I could see manual initiatives starting along the lines of wikipedia: someone has a cool way of adding semantic information via the crowdsource. That is when we will have a breakthrough in the SW
    - elblanco 17y ago
      But the semantics of searching on a map is not the "semantic web" that people like Tim Berners-Lee are talking about. It people out there can't be bothered to search google maps, is there some particular reason they'd instantiate a reasoning engine on a semantic graph to find a local babysitter?
      - david927 17y ago
        Oh yes it is. In his first TED speech his exact example is naming a point on a map.
        elblanco 17y ago
        Demonstrate a working, genuinely useful semantic system and the world will believe you. Until then, the SW is a monumental waste of everybody's time. this is the semantic web http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web Searching google maps is not the semantic web no matter how you try to twist the term. You can't both claim the SW already exists and doesn't exist at the same time. The fact that I can already do something that the SW claims it will be able to do, in 15 or 20 years, already demonstrates that the principle isn't necessary and is already obsolete.
        17y ago

elblanco 17y ago

> Why didn't she use the web? Because she can't. Please describe why she can't? I shall now demonstrate why she can. Here's an example in the states. http://www.sitters.com/default.htm http://www.sitters.com/default.htm That took me approximately 1 second to find (give or take some insignificant fraction of a second). Or this. http://www.expats.cz/prague/t-284477.html http://www.expats.cz/prague/t-284477.html Wow, incredible! You want another couple hundred sources? If I could speak Czech I could probably find the same. There is absolutely nothing proposed with the SW that would have improved this. And in fact, an unranked, unattributed list of babysitters returned from some semantic datastore no matter how large (without attributable trust signals) will change that. Your example, would have required her to enter her babysitting availability in the SW instead of on some web site. Doesn't really make a difference, if it's crawlable, it's already retrievable. > Until someone makes a Czech babysitting database, she can't. Because no one would ever find it. Here, http://www.bibo-hlidani-deti.cz/ http://www.bibo-hlidani-deti.cz/ wow, impossible. Total retrieval time, in two languages, one of which I don't speak, 30 seconds. I can only imagine what I could find if I spoke Czech. Does Google not operate in your country? Is there some reason that building, maintaining and populating a "Czech babysitting database" is fundamentally different from populating the SW? >That's data. So why don't they put it on the web as text? Because no one would ever find it. Text doesn't work that way. The SW isn't some magical self populating entity made out of wishes. It would take an effort worth the cost of buying France to build a semantic web of the size and information density of the current Web. Furthermore, nobody has ever demonstrated why it would be better. Statement like "Whoever fixes this, changes it all. They take out Google. They take out Monster.com. They take out Match.com. They take out Facebook. Whoever can do this will change everything." are not only built on a completely incorrect premise -- searching large volumes of indexed text and providing a ranked relevant result set is impossible -- they aren't even built on the ability to point to a working, large scale semantic graph with the appropriate reasoning engines (which in an of themselves are barely in their most basic infancy)...not one presently exists, and the smaller scale examples haven't yielded much of anything valuable. And in many obvious ways it would be worse. People can put effort into a web page to send signals about quality, other sites and sources can rank a page as trustworthy or not. A list of "babysitters in the Czech Republic" offers none of that. And reasoning out that information across an infinitely large graph could take hours. I've worked with large semantic systems, with billions of entities and tens of billions of relationships, and almost universally they provide almost no additional value over traditional search, yet perform much more poorly.