I’ve been working on a detailed technical scheme for a “search by meaning” search engine (as opposed to [dumb] Google-like search by keyword) and I have to say that in conquering the workability challenge in my limited scope I can see the huge problem facing Google and other Web search engines in transitioning to a “search by meaning” model.
Related
- Wikipedia 3.0: The End of Google?
- P2P 3.0: The People’s Google
- Intelligence (Not Content) is King in Web 3.0
- Web 3.0 Blog Application
- Towards Intelligent Findability
- All About Web 3.0
Semantic Web, Web strandards, Trends, OWL, innovation, Startup, Evolution, Google, inference engine, Web 2.0, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, AI, Wikipedia, Wikipedia 3.0, Info Agent, Semantic MediaWiki, DBin, P2P 3.0, P2P AI, P2P Semantic Web inference Engine, intelligent findability, search by meaning
Evolving Trends 
context is a kind of meaning, innit?
You’re one piece short of Lego Land.
I have to make the trek down to San Diego and see what it’s all about.
How do you like that for context!? :)
Yesterday I got burnt real bad at Crane beach in Ipswich (not to be confused with Cisco’s IP Switch.) The water was freezing. Anyway, on the way there I was told about the one time when the kids (my nieces) asked their dad (who is a Cisco engineer) why Ipswich is called Ipswich. He said he didn’t know. They said “just make up a reason!!!!!!” (since they can’t take “I don’t know” for an answer) So he said they initially wanted to call it PI (pie) but decided it to switch the letters so it became IPSWICH. The kids loved that answer and kept asking him whenever they had their friends on a beach trip to explain why Ipswich is called Ipswich. I don’t get the humor. My logic circuits are not that sensitive. Somehow they see the illogic of it and they think it’s hilarious.
Engineers and scientists tend to approach the problem through the most complex path possible because that’s dictated by the context of their thinking, but genetic algorithms could do a better job at that, yet that’s absolutely not what I’m hinting is the answer.
The answer is a lot more simple (but the way simple answers are derived is often thru deep thought that abstracts/hides all the complexity)
I’ll stop one piece short cuz that will get people to take a shot at it and thereby create more discussion around the subject, in general, which will inevitably get more people to coalesce around the Web 3.0 idea.
[badly sun burnt face] + ] … It’s time to experiment with a digi cam … i.e. towards a photo + audio + web 3.0 blog!
An 8-mega pixel camera phone will do just fine! (see my post on tagging people in the real world.. it is another very simple idea but I like this one much much better.)
Marc
p.s. my neurons are still in perfectly good order but I can’t wear my socks!!!
Hey there, Marc.
Have talked to people about semantic web a bit more now, and will get my thoughts together on the subject before too long. The big issue, basically, is buy-in from the gazillions of content producers we have now. My impression is the big business will lead on semantic web, because it’s more useful to them right now, rather than you or I as ‘opinion/journalist’ types.
Luckily, I’m not an opinion journalist although I could easily pass for one.
You’ll see a lot of ‘doing’ from us now that we’re talking less :)
BTW, just started as Chief Architect with a VC funded Silicon Valley startup so that’s keeping me busy, but I’m recruiting developers and orchestrating a P2P 3.0 / Web 3.0 / Semantic Web (AI-enabled) open source project consistent with the vision we’ev outlined.
:] … dzzt.
Marc
Congratulations on the job, Marc. I know you’re a big thinker and I’m delighted to hear about that.
Hope we’ll still be able to do a little “fencing” around this subject!