Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Syntatic Truism 4

An example of a parallelism in the rhetoric (quite similar to the semantic Truism(s) 4 a,b,and c) is the following:
The sky was red
The car was red
Her lipstick was red
But the blood was black against the snow
Wait, that's not right, isn't that just 4A? How about...
Artic Terns migrate
Swallows migrate
Robbins used to migrate
But now they are around all winter
With the use of "but" these clearly are using implicit assumptions of some kind. Is it just a byproduct of parallel phrasing or is it more? I am wondering about the sudden and spontaneous conversion of the word "migrate" into a category from which we can say the last line of the stanza is excluded.

Exclusion from a category is hardly the stuff of proto semantics. So for now let's go with this: parallel phrasing can create categories and a higher level truism accompanies the lower level Trusim 4: It says if "X in category" and "Y in category"....then also the next "Z in category".

I want voice activated keyboard shortcuts in Windows 11

I don't mean voice dictation, I mean voice enhanced typing. And I don't want to have to program macros either. I say this with no hope Microsoft is listening but, some basic keyboard improvements are right there for whoever can integrate them into Word. A redesign of the basic keyboard is imminent. The point is to solve these sorts of headache:
  • swapping words
  • putting words in quotes, after the fact
  • fixing a recent typo
Generally these include marking a position, doing something, then returning the cursor to its original mark. Which suggests a little voice activated set of commands: "mark.. (select word1, select word2)...verb". Where the verb could be "swap", "quote", "fix".

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

To my reader from Florida

You are one of only two people who occasionally reads this blog. I know who the other is but who are you? Send an email or leave a comment.
And bye the way: thank you so much for visiting.

Oliver Wendell Holmes's "Free Speech" Limitation versus Fake News

I recall (maybe incorrectly) the OWH used the example of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater where there is no fire, as a an example where speech should not be "Free".
I am not sure of the reasoning but clearly such "speech" causes harm and is equivalent to fake news stories that cause damage. Why then are the people who create Fake News not being prosecuted for negligent damage? are they?

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Voice Enhanced Keyboards

For a long time I have been wrestling with the idea that the keyboard is a pain when it comes to slight edits to what you just typed. Two examples are: when I decide, afterwards, that a word should appear in quotes; or when I spot a typo several words back. It is a total pain to change small things like that and, generally, whatever you do takes about the same time as going back to the error and retyping everything. That is because typing words is much faster than correcting the typos. Moving the cursor around is so time consuming and may move the right hand back and forth from the keyboard to the mouse.
So I have been wondering about magic keystrokes or other things that could be embedded in conventional word processing that would solve the problem. Here is an answer: voice activated keyboard shortcuts and edits. So you might highlight a word with the mouse, hold the control key, and say "quote". Or hold the control key and say "end" or "end paragraph". This has lots of possible advantages in avoiding moving the right hand back and forth from the keyboard to the mouse - during edits. Or in keeping both hands on the keyboard for other operations.
I see that such things already exist. I am not surprised but I think some things, like quoting, are not easy to implement as a keyboard macro, so perhaps there is still room for some new ideas.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

What are chatbots for?

I am doing a survey on about what is the purpose of the various forum poster's personally developed chatbot. So far, 3 out of 3 report their chatbots are "pets" either for their own entertainment or for someone else's.
I am puzzled. Is this a disconnect between an old guy and a younger generation, where I am focused on how to get work done using a chatbot, and these younger (?) programmers are focused on how to get entertained? Is this the post-reality world I have been reading about where games are real and reality doesn't exist? Somehow I suspect: no, it is a field that attracts people who are not engaged in traditional business and have no experience with business applications.
Added:  It has something to do with the view that language is comprised, at the lowest level, of sentence structure. These chatbots are good at using the structure of the sentences to simulate appropriate responses where nouns of the response are simply substituted from nouns of input sentences. My (flabbergasted) response is that this is not a story: "noun verb noun".

AI Startup Gamalon

Read: Bayesian Program Synthesis (BPS). The technology is such that it writes and rewrites its own Bayesian programs. 

Sounds like Data Equilibrium and AODiagrams. Check it out on Source Forge
Added:  I was wrong, it is much more like Narwhal.
Added: Wrong again. I watched a great TED talk from the founder of Gamalon at 2:30 AM and then went back to bed to think about it. That fellow understands perfectly well that models, which he calls "stories", are critical in forming a machine learning solution. He also vindicates my impression that (1) AI is not new but is being amp'ed up by powerful machinery and data bases; and (2) that 90% of the AI startups [of which there are many in the Boston area these days] do not understand the importance of "stories" and, by implication, those startups will fail.
Good stuff! He is right. He also tried to introduce the principle of using the goodness of fit as a weighting factor in a Bayesian Network. Not sure what he means there.
Added: In Bayesian networks it is the connections between nodes that get weighted, so to make sense of what he said, is to put narratives in the role of connections between nodes of a graph. But you know, there are more than one way these nodes can be connected in different narrative structures. Still not sure I get it.