bct

43 ms·

421.
by bct 19y ago
Good point. I think you've changed my mind about the utility of inferencing :). The difference between querying and inferencing isn't what I was trying to emphasise, though. My point was the difference between being designed for making quer
422.
by bct 19y ago
It's not deducing a third property "hasParentNamed". It's joining the two graphs so that you can do a query like this: SELECT ?parentName WHERE { ?child name 'Brendan' ?parent parentOf ?child ?parent name ?parent
423.
by bct 19y ago
This has gotten kind of confused. When I talk about merging data, I'm talking about taking two independent documents: <brian> parentOf <bct> <brian> name 'Brian' and <bct> name 'Brendan' an
424.
by bct 19y ago
Where does TimBL say that "intelligent agents" will be blindly crawling? Certainly agents have to follow links they haven't seen before (there wouldn't be much point if they didn't), but following links provided by trusted sources is vastly
425.
by bct 19y ago
I'm very happy with my Thinkpad T60. I got a big discount for buying it with Visa: http://www.visaperks.ca/visaperks/
426.
by bct 19y ago
I don't want to turn this into a huge debate either, but those articles (and uncritical readings of them) have set the web back years. > Because Wikipedia is centralized, and the SemWeb isn't. If data-Wikipedia and a television station
427.
by bct 19y ago
It involves Paul Graham.
428.
Thinking in URLs(oreillynet.com)
1 points by bct 19y ago|0 comments
429.
by bct 19y ago
Yum, declarative! I can't say I'm crazy about the syntax, but I'll give this a try when I get home.
430.
by bct 19y ago
Why is "metacrap" a problem for the semantic web, but not for data-Wikipedia? The Shirky article is a well-known strawman. Thanks for the pointer to the last one, I'll read it when I get a chance.
431.
by bct 19y ago
It's so painfully obvious that this is a good idea, and yet people are skeptical of the Semantic Web, which has been promoting this idea for almost a decade (and doesn't require centralization). Why?
432.
by bct 19y ago
I was pretty young at the time, but I got in at the very tail end. There was a BBS for farmers called FBMInet that my parents were on. I don't remember much about it (except that there were lots of pirated games). I still use the same passw
433.
by bct 19y ago
No. But who cares? It's still fun, and a perfectly viable choice.
434.
by bct 19y ago
I think it's more charitable to say that he's complaining that nobody's selling oranges, but fair enough. :)
435.
by bct 19y ago
The appeal of being a person in a virtual world is in creating your own stories. If your experiences are identical to everybody else's, if you can't have a real effect on the world, then you're a passive observer rather than a real particip
436.
by bct 19y ago
There are two camps; people that want to make/play games, and people that want to make/play worlds. For now at least, it's easier to make games than worlds.
437.
by bct 19y ago
The Semantic Signatures® demo they have on there is pretty crummy, judging by the few test passages I pasted in. I have yet to see NLP that isn't more trouble than it's worth.
438.
Interoperability by Friction (re: the Spolsky article that you're probably sick of reading about)(betaversion.org)
1 points by bct 19y ago|0 comments
439.
by bct 19y ago
Interesting. What issues with HTTP do you think need to be addressed?
440.
by bct 19y ago
It's sort of a bootstrapping process. You build yourself the most basic girlfriend possible, and use her to compile one that's more complete.
441.
Defending the Problem(enthusiasm.cozy.org)
1 points by bct 19y ago|0 comments
442.
by bct 19y ago
I'd like to see something like this that overlays multiple people's highlights; the more people highlighting a section, the brighter that section gets. It might help with arguments where nobody can even agree what the debate is actually abo
443.
by bct 19y ago
The main difference between your idea and eRDF or RDFa is lack of namespaces. The "web-wide tagging" and "let the tagging evolve" bits are a huge part of RDF.
444.
by bct 19y ago
> You're not going to get the sort of fine-grained meta data that the semantic web expects. Like what? Articles was a bad choice of example for me to use, because it's a common misconception that the Semantic Web is about making it easi
445.
by bct 19y ago
"The challenge, experts say, is in finding a way to represent all data so that when it is connected to the web, links to other relevant information can be recognised and established." That's not the challenge, RDF has made that possible for
446.
by bct 19y ago
> meaning is something that is an emergent property, not something that's hard-coded into the raw data. Unless you store everything in unstructured text, it is hard-coded into the data. When you stick an article in a database, you're sa
447.
by bct 19y ago
> I don't think there is any social network or service that has a lock on its users, assuming they are exposed to something better. It's a question of how much better that something is compared to the cost of switching.
448.
by bct 19y ago
1. 99% of people use the same login details on every site they go to anyways. That's not likely to change. For those people OpenID is actually more secure, since their password is only ever exposed to one site. 2. Your email address is alre
449.
by bct 19y ago
> the article did make me wonder if most developers view .net developers as lesser developers because of their chosen toolset. At least part of it is that in many cases it's not their chosen toolset; it's what they were given. > Fro
450.
Quick Intro to RDF: "represent[ing] knowledge in a distributed world."(rdfabout.com)
10 points by bct 19y ago|0 comments

More ›