laff out loud, indeed All SPARQL (and the Open World Assumption) ever needed to play nice with the Central Limit Theorem is to stuff all the red herrings into Planck Scale boxes and pack them at the bottom of the <rdf:List> container.
I just invented a 4th Law of Thermodynamics - Conservation of Cat Video's. I'm goin' to Hell for that. Whatever. It is impossible to re-invent a wheel which takes more than half the implementation time of the original invention ... If it does your watch is broken. "You should call it entropy, for two reasons. In the first place your uncertainty function has been used in statistical mechanics under that name, so it already has a name. In the second place, and more important, no one really knows what entropy really is, so in a debate you will always have the advantage." John von Neumann to Claude Shannon "With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk." Also John von Neumann (apparently he was talking to himself. People were listening, but nobody was hearing.) --Gannon -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 3/31/14, Paul Houle <ontolo...@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Semantic Web culture vs Startup culture To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_d...@yahoo.com> Cc: "Linked Data community" <public-lod@w3.org>, "Kingsley Idehen" <kide...@openlinksw.com> Date: Monday, March 31, 2014, 12:48 PM What makes me laff is that the same people who think "RDF sucks" think Neo4J is the bee's knees. (Even if they've never quite shipped an actual product with it, or if they did a demo it performs worse than the same demo I did with MySQL in 2002) Somehow, SPARQL has never been seen as a "NoSQL" and I don't know why. On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Gannon Dick <gannon_d...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I agree, Kingsley. > > Problems with SKOS (Lists) and RDF (Lists) are implementation problems, not processing problems. It is very difficult to prevent people from perceiving a <first>, <rest>, <nil> sequence as a Monte Carlo integration of probability. From a young age we see that, if it is summer, winter is half a year forward or back and vice-versa. What good is SKOS or RDF if the graphs do not show/(provide a visualization of) that seasonal straight line depreciation accounting ? > > Dilemma Answer: make up a virtuous bookkeeper's scale and divide it by 4 (always possible) and call it a Quarterly Conference Calls and the last one an Annual Report. Profits ? Sorry, "absolutely" no telling when gravity=(1/1)=(2pi/2pi)=(360 Degrees/360 Degrees)=(Thing/sameAs), etc.). A bookkeeper is always virtuous, maybe because they are exactly congruent to virtue and maybe because they fear what a psychopathic authority might do to them if they fail to tell them the truth scaled to what they want to hear. That is not a probability either, it protects accomplices and keeps you and your friends safe. <foaf:Person> does not always make that my team-other team relation "all present and accounted for". > > http://www.rustprivacy.org/2014/balance/eCommerceVision.jpg > http://www.rustprivacy.org/2014/balance/CulturalHeritageVision.jpg > > Superstitious, bigoted Scientists are virtuous bookkeepers who often have to decide if icebergs float because they are Witches or float because they are Queer. You can't resolve that culture war by calling Alan Turing dirty names, and Implementers simply can not assume that an audience who knows what recursion is also knows what recursion does. That is a semantic mistake. > --Gannon > > -------------------------------------------- > On Sun, 3/30/14, Kingsley Idehen <kide...@openlinksw.com> wrote: > > Subject: Re: Semantic Web culture vs Startup culture > To: public-lod@w3.org > Date: Sunday, March 30, 2014, 1:00 PM > > On 3/29/14 1:41 PM, Luca Matteis > wrote: > > Started a sort of Semantic Web vs Startup culture war > on Hacker News: > > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7491925 > > > > Maybe you all can help me with some of the comments > ;-) > > > > > My comments, posted to the list: > > RDF is unpopular because it is generally misunderstood. This > problem arises (primarily) from how RDF has been presented > to the market in general. > To understand RDF you have first understand what Data > actually is [1], once you cross that hurdle two things [2[3] > ]will become obvious: > > 1. RDF is extremely useful in regards to all issues relating > to Data > 2. RDF has been poorly promoted. > > Links: > [1] http://slidesha.re/1epEyZ1 -- Understanding Data > [2] http://bit.ly/1fluti1 -- What is RDF, Really? > [3] http://bit.ly/1cqm7Hs -- RDF Relation (RDF should > really stand for: Relations Description Framework) . > > -- > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > Founder & CEO > OpenLink Software > Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen > Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about > LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > > > > > > > -- Paul Houle Expert on Freebase, DBpedia, Hadoop and RDF (607) 539 6254 paul.houle on Skype ontolo...@gmail.com
