3 ms·
Why do they do that, again? I'm not arguing against summaries. Just saying that if machines can read as well or better than humans, then machine-readable in the
by JabavuAdams 9y ago
Why do they do that, again? I'm not arguing against summaries. Just saying that if machines can read as well or better than humans, then machine-readable in the sense of using a simplified ontology, grammar, or alphabet is unnecessary.
- icebraining 9y agoMy point is that even humans make fewer mistakes when they're reading an established form structure with pre-defined fields over long-form text. Hence you'd expect a machine to process them better as well, even if it could read like a human.