-Caveat Lector- In news:internal.ml.new-age.ctrl, Adam Ness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:54:59 -0800:
> -Caveat Lector- > > > Well, those aren't really grammatically correct unless you're Tarzan or > > an Indian Chief. > > They may not be gramatically correct, but read a newspaper some time and > analyze their headlines. They are rarely if ever Gramatically correct, but > they are how people speak. I've never heard anyone speak like that unless they were imagining what the headlines might be in tomorrow's paper when everyone finds out about such and so. > If you're going to enforce proper english grammar to the > computer, you'll lose about 80% of the American computer market. Computer Program: Yo! Get that file and slap that bitch up on yo' screen fo' I bust yo' ass. That's how people seem to talk these days. The thing is, if we use proper grammar, then English classes in school will serve two purposes: Proper sentence structure and computer programming. > > I think the languaged used would have to be literal. And debugging might > > be even easier. The software could simply report to the programmer, "I > > don't understand this sentence" and highlight the > > appropriate statement. > > All modern debuggers do this already, but they reference the computer code, > rather than english. They also provide more detail than "I don't > understand", generally highlighting the specific thing that is not > understoond, and explaining why it's not understood. True, but it doesn't really offer much help on how to correct it. I've actually seen programs generate errors and tell me that a character is missing and it'll tell me where it's missing. Well, if it knows all that, then why doesn't it just insert the appropriate character and leave me alone? > > The programmer would examine his sentence and find a better way to word > > it. And it wouldn't be that the computer requires very strict adherence to > > a set of rules, which is the problem with current programming languages, > > but the sentences used would have to be literal and grammatically correct, > > and the spelling would have to be correct, too, but we already have spell > > checkers. We already have grammar checkers, too. > > Grammar and Spell checkers are far from perfect. I've never had a single > document I've typed up that didn't have some items incorrectly marked as > Gramatical or Spelling errors. If the Spelling and Grammar checkers can't > even identify correct grammar or spelling, how can they be expected to > extract the correct meaning from the sentence? Well, with what we're talking about here, by the time computers can interpret language this way, they'll also be able to decide which spelling is correct depending on the context. > > The computer could be told to operate in "polite mode" which would accept > > an asking as a commmand. Statements beginning with "Would you" or "Could > > you" or "Can you" would be executed based optionally on an assumption > > that if the human unit is asking if a file can be opened, then he > > obviously wants it to be opened. > > Most people don't use the passive voice in entire paragraphs, they are used > in several sentences within a paragraph. For exampe: > > "I'm looking for a file that I wrote about a week ago. It contains > information about the TPM reports that I was composing for my boss. Can you > find that file and send it to him?" > > This is completely syntactically valid, comprises a completely valid set of > instructions, and doesn't mean a thing to a computer. It has no idea who > your boss is, or what a TPM report is. If the TPM report was composed on the same computer, then the computer would know about the file and it could find the file you worked on about a week ago, perhaps looking for TPM or something that stands for TPM. It would show you the file name and the contents and you could tell the computer whether it's the correct file or not. If it's not, the computer can ask for more information. As for who the boss is, the computer can be told that information ahead of time if the computer is being used for work. The computer would know ahead of time that your boss is Gene Huffnagel and it would know his contact information. > It uses the passive voice in one sentence, and doesn't know > whether you want an answer to that question, or if you would > actually like it to perform the action contained in the sentence. People would have to learn to stop being polite to their computers. THey should just give their computer orders, or they can put the computer in "polite mode" so a question such as that will be interpreted as a command. Or you could word the question, "Is it possible for you to find that file and send it to him?" The computer might, however, run a test on the internet to see if there's an available path to get the files to him. Certainly the user would know that, under normal conditions, such a request is certainly possible. > And what does the phrase "About a week ago" mean? Is it a week or less? > what if it was only a day ago? Do you mean a work week, or an actual seven > day week? How does the computer know which version of "week" you mean? Either people will have to be more precise with their language and say what they mean, or the computer will just have to start within the timeframe given by the user and expand it from there until the file is found. > Even the problem of trying to encode that knowledge into the computer is > non-trivial. Remember, computer's "brains" (cpu's) don't even actually deal > with letters, much less words, much less "TPM Reports". > > > Well, if there's no indication of who your mom is in the filename, then > > the computer would search all files created by your word processor last > > night. If it can't find a reference to "Mom" then it would reply, "I > > can't seem to find that file. Can you be more specific?" Hey, a > > computer that can interpret English should certainly be able to speak it > > in a conversational manner. > > Part of the problem with that is computer speeds are still not up to the > point where searching of all of your documents is reasonable. Try using the > Windows Find feature to find all of your documents containing the word > "Frank" some time. It will take several minutes, and that's an unacceptable > response time for most people to wait for the response "There's no file > containing Frank. Please try a different query." I think all the capabilities will come together at the same time. But people may have to get used to not being polite to the computer just because it can talk back to them. If you want a file, you'll have to TELL it to open the file, not ask it. We certainly don't have a "Please" button we must click on before accessing the start menu, do we? -- Sayonaramaste Damon Richter www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
