Intro to the Semantic Web
This video is ...
This video is difficult to masturbate to, but not impossible!
This is neat ...
This is neat technology, but I don't like how the big search engines are actually using it! It introduces problems that we never had before, and it will actually brake the web! This creates a bubble around each user, and each user will live in it's own world! He will never find out how the world really is and instead he will be isolated in it's own beliefs and ideas! This will have huge consequences on our species! If we don't do something about it, this will ruin our civilization!
Very helpful - ...
Very helpful - cheers :)
The beginning of ...
The beginning of Cybernet......
"Quick"
"Quick"
thanks man this ...
thanks man this was really helpful
the ultimate ...
the ultimate conundrum which blows all semantics out of the water is: how do you type/write the sound that the Fonz makes? "YOOOOOOOH" .....nope, that aint it
Thanks for this ...
Thanks for this explanation , this is the best way to understand the semantic web,then we can start with understand the meaning of web ontology and the reasoning
Great video, ...
Great video, explained it pretty well. But what's bugging me is what did you use to create it? It looked like you drew on the slides with a real pen.
It seems like a ...
It seems like a good move towards making the web more meaningful, but ultimately it will be the need to use semantics for SEO that drives adoption rather than the semantics utility being needed. Adding semantics to web content seems like we're having to cater for machines, rather than having machines understand content.
you are only sweet ...
you are only sweet boy benaughtyman.info
very important :)
very important :)
According to ...
According to googlesystem.blogspot.com, this video is supposed to launch in HTML5 + WebM, but it doesn't even though I've just installed Firefox 4. I just see the standard Flash player layout. Is anybody else getting this problem?
It is not ...
It is not technical feasibility I was pointing out, but rather the difficulty of having to still markup elements in a document for consumption carries an overhead in content generation. Embracing a standard for semantics is in the interest of those in the content discovery business, but for almost nobody else. That Reasoners have a concept of context solves nothing. How are contexts determined? How do they arise? Who specifies contexts? There is no standard metadata for Thought.
re: 1) No, see one ...
re: 1) No, see one of the biggest problems was being able to generate this type of data that could be reasoned over. Before RDFa - there was no standard, scalable way of doing so in Web pages. re: 2) Content producers are embracing the semantic web /today/ because it is in their best interest - look up Drupal 7/Google Rich Snippets/RDFa/etc. and how it's affecting SEO. re: 3) Exactly right - context matters and is why Reasoners have the concept of a context in which they are reasoning.
Then haven't you ...
Then haven't you simply pushed the problem one level up? Reasoners can only resolve semantic conflicts through policies set by the users. At every junction, user interaction is still necessary in order to extract relevant meaning from the corpus. I see 2 problems: first that the system does not introduce enough additional value to justify the extra effort necessary from the content producers; second that there is no universal semantic given how semantics themselves change with contexts.
The semantic web ...
The semantic web does not assume proper content. It assumes inaccuracies, lies, vagueness and all of the other things that humans deal with every day. When we talk about "statements" on the semantic web - we talk in terms of "claims", not "facts". One website can claim things about you, another can claim a different set of things (possibly contradictory). The important thing is that we have a way of dealing with these contradictions... that's the job of software called "Reasoners"
The semantic web ...
The semantic web assumes that the participants in it will mark up the proper content without inaccuracies or worse, lies. You would still have to filter out the chaff, but this time through your semantic technologies. Since the production and consumption of the "semantic web' content is still by humans, it provides no additional value in the end.
that would help ...
that would help find good porn
She is hot and sexy ...
She is hot and sexy wonna meet her gettop5.info
If the fruit of ...
If the fruit of trees could be eaten without rewarding the tree by spreading the seeds within the fruit, trees will no longer produce fruit. Semantic web wants the data, and wants it as pure data. The content creators offer their content in a CONTEXT that rewards the creator. Remove that context and you remove the motivation to provide content.
more like semantic ...
more like semantic infiltration. This is rudimentary programming stuff marketed as profound. Computers will NEVER understand meaning besides squiggle squiggle.
The example at the ...
The example at the beginning is somewhat of a contradiction because 'love' is a word that is semantically problematic.