Re: Thinking & Information Retrieval


Subject: Re: Thinking & Information Retrieval
From: James Hunter (James.Hunter@Jhuapl.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 26 2000 - 15:27:03 MET DST


Seth Russell wrote:

> James Hunter wrote:
>
> > Seth Russell wrote:
> >
> > > It's interesting to note the parallels between thinking
> > > and information retrieval. When we think our attention
> > > switches from one topic to another in a train of thought.
> > > Who knows how it does that, but it does do it, and the
> > > process is subconscious. When we do research in a
> > > library or on the web, out attention also switches from
> > > one topic (page, paper, email, news post) to another.
> > > It seems to me that the science of information retrieval
> > > is converging on duplicating the subconscious function
> > > of mental retrieval and therefore of thinking.
> > >
> > > Comments ?
> >
> > I think information retrieval is an important of thinking,
> > but I don't think computer/Net archetectures are anything
> > like the brain's internal organization. There is nothing
> > directing the information passing on the Web.
>
> People are directing the information passing on the Internet.

People are directing the information passing on the Internet
in same way my TV Guide directs information, so there is no
essential difference. Your idea of "information retrieval"
is no different than if you were standing face-to-face
talking to somebody, so the *net* has nothing to do
conscious or subconsciousness.

> Broadcast radio & television are closer to being "thinking"
> archectures than the Web is.

Broadcasting has been around for several decades and is getting
dumber every year. The peer-to-peer internet is less than 1 decade
old (as a mass medium) and has already developed more smarts than
all the broadcasting networks combined. Since broadcast mode is
one-to-many; all the intelligence must come from the one; it is a
simple
hierarchy incapable of the feedback loops required for intelligent
interaction. The only thing mass broadcast media is good for is
totalitarian government and wasting time.

 I was talking about the *architecture* of broadcasting,
 not any specific content.

I'm sure you have a point, but you certainly have not made it.

> --
> Seth Russell
> http://RobustAi.net/Ai/SymKnow.htm
> http://RobustAi.net/Ai/Conjecture.htm

 Likewise, your conjecture about an intelligent net is without a point.

############################################################################
This message was posted through the fuzzy mailing list.
(1) To subscribe to this mailing list, send a message body of
"SUB FUZZY-MAIL myFirstName mySurname" to listproc@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
(2) To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message body of
"UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL" or "UNSUB FUZZY-MAIL yoursubscription@email.address.com"
to listproc@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
(3) To reach the human who maintains the list, send mail to
fuzzy-owner@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
(4) WWW access and other information on Fuzzy Sets and Logic see
http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/ftp/mlowner/fuzzy-mail.info
(5) WWW archive: http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/marchives/fuzzy-mail/index.html



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Apr 26 2000 - 15:40:52 MET DST