I can't imagine how one would define this as "too basic". Natural language processing on a conceptual level is an extremely hard problem. Sounds pretty useful, though, if you can then use that data to inter-relate and analyze seemingly disconnected facts. We have more data than at any point in human history (I guess that's tautology), and more is being added every day, and many scientists and medical researchers have argued that one of the biggest problems today is making good use of all of the research and anecdotal data that already exists.
It's not a tautology. The Dark Ages was a period when we seemed to be worse off than we had been when Greece and Rome were powerful. The reliable, continual improvement of human knowledge, without stuff getting lost, is a recent phenomenon.
I agree completely with you both. I have some amazing figures about it.
But the hard issue is not to understand at a symbolic level, but being aware of all the consequences and possible relations. I solved partially some things, but others are completely impossible for me. I have the impression that I could find a niche market: people interested in getting precise facts, and its sources, not so much on letting the machine do the thinking for you. This will not change the world, for sure, but it is very interesting though.
Comments
I can't imagine how one would define this as "too basic". Natural language processing on a conceptual level is an extremely hard problem. Sounds pretty useful, though, if you can then use that data to inter-relate and analyze seemingly disconnected facts. We have more data than at any point in human history (I guess that's tautology), and more is being added every day, and many scientists and medical researchers have argued that one of the biggest problems today is making good use of all of the research and anecdotal data that already exists.
It's not a tautology. The Dark Ages was a period when we seemed to be worse off than we had been when Greece and Rome were powerful. The reliable, continual improvement of human knowledge, without stuff getting lost, is a recent phenomenon.
I agree completely with you both. I have some amazing figures about it.
But the hard issue is not to understand at a symbolic level, but being aware of all the consequences and possible relations. I solved partially some things, but others are completely impossible for me. I have the impression that I could find a niche market: people interested in getting precise facts, and its sources, not so much on letting the machine do the thinking for you. This will not change the world, for sure, but it is very interesting though.
Max