3 ms·

Parts of it maybe. But as a whole not likely. Much like SRI we are hoping that we will license the tech to companies. We could build full products, but we think

by drakaal 14y ago

Parts of it maybe. But as a whole not likely. Much like SRI we are hoping that we will license the tech to companies. We could build full products, but we think that the way this can be best applied is as enhancements to other products. Search, Technical and Customer Support, Content Authoring, News Aggregation. We also have tech that could vastly improve book and movie reccomendations based on the content and themes of books, not just "did someone like you like this" kinds of systems.

sinkasapa 14y ago
So I guess whatever scientific insights you've gained that make you claim that linguists know nothing about modern English will remain unknown. At least the linguists publish. It is too bad because apparently we wouldn't need to study language and cognition any more if we had access to your work. I mean, why bother with neurolinguistics or anything having the stink of biology or psychology? Brain mapping projects and experimentation have nothing to tell us now that we know that there are 3.2 million words in English. That has been the burning question after all. You've made some progress working on the most widely and deeply studied language in the world with a richness of written data available that is unprecedented. But the linguist working to record, preserve and study a small Amazonian language that works nothing like English is probably just an idiot because they haven't figured out how language works yet. Do you even know what linguists are?
- drakaal 14y ago
  I can rephrase. Google releases their billions of NGrams. They did so because they knew that it would scare anyone from competing. Not because they thought it would help. They aren't that nice. Will I ever share? Possibly. But like Google it will likely be when I have a competitive advantage. I don't not share because I'm mean. I keep things close because as someone on the thread mentioned that they are competing if I published all the information you mention, then Google would build what I have built and we'd be out of business. Those brain mapping projects aren't done purely for the good of mankind they are trying to make money and get funding. My goals are the same.
  - sinkasapa 14y ago
    I wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with making money, just that if you're claiming that you're leaving the scientific study of language in the dust and insulting the people working in that field, it seems a little strange at the same time to not publish your insights. If you're competing with scientists, you kind of have to produce science, right? You made great software but why insult people working toward the understanding of language? Be more specific with what particular linguists you're talking about if you have a beef with someone. Why insult an entire discipline if you aren't even taking part in the discussion by publishing?
bambax 14y ago
Re: open source -- What would benefit the community would be a simple blog post highlighting what works and what doesn't in the common NLP libraries. It's hard to believe those libraries suck in their entirety (I use NLTK to do automatic categorization and it works reasonably well). Just listing areas of improvements (and where to begin) would go a long way. Of course it would take some of your time, but it seems you have done this work already, so all you need is to write it down. And I think it would buy you a lot of goodwill, whereas simply bragging that your technology is "light years ahead" of everyone else simply raises expectations... that your product'd better meet! ;-)

by drakaal 14y ago

sinkasapa 14y ago

So I guess whatever scientific insights you've gained that make you claim that linguists know nothing about modern English will remain unknown. At least the linguists publish. It is too bad because apparently we wouldn't need to study language and cognition any more if we had access to your work. I mean, why bother with neurolinguistics or anything having the stink of biology or psychology? Brain mapping projects and experimentation have nothing to tell us now that we know that there are 3.2 million words in English. That has been the burning question after all. You've made some progress working on the most widely and deeply studied language in the world with a richness of written data available that is unprecedented. But the linguist working to record, preserve and study a small Amazonian language that works nothing like English is probably just an idiot because they haven't figured out how language works yet. Do you even know what linguists are?

drakaal 14y ago
I can rephrase. Google releases their billions of NGrams. They did so because they knew that it would scare anyone from competing. Not because they thought it would help. They aren't that nice. Will I ever share? Possibly. But like Google it will likely be when I have a competitive advantage. I don't not share because I'm mean. I keep things close because as someone on the thread mentioned that they are competing if I published all the information you mention, then Google would build what I have built and we'd be out of business. Those brain mapping projects aren't done purely for the good of mankind they are trying to make money and get funding. My goals are the same.
- sinkasapa 14y ago
  I wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with making money, just that if you're claiming that you're leaving the scientific study of language in the dust and insulting the people working in that field, it seems a little strange at the same time to not publish your insights. If you're competing with scientists, you kind of have to produce science, right? You made great software but why insult people working toward the understanding of language? Be more specific with what particular linguists you're talking about if you have a beef with someone. Why insult an entire discipline if you aren't even taking part in the discussion by publishing?

bambax 14y ago

Re: open source -- What would benefit the community would be a simple blog post highlighting what works and what doesn't in the common NLP libraries. It's hard to believe those libraries suck in their entirety (I use NLTK to do automatic categorization and it works reasonably well). Just listing areas of improvements (and where to begin) would go a long way. Of course it would take some of your time, but it seems you have done this work already, so all you need is to write it down. And I think it would buy you a lot of goodwill, whereas simply bragging that your technology is "light years ahead" of everyone else simply raises expectations... that your product'd better meet! ;-)