Math about Language is an "unsearchable expression" in Google

An unsearchable expression is an expression which, when entered into Google search, is always misinterpreted. Even when it is not completely unsearchable, if the answer you seek is several search pages deep it might as well be. My wife's name used to be pretty unsearchable. Such is the case when I search for discussions of the many interesting math problems associated to language and...I cannot even tell if such exist because the phrase "math about language" is (mis)interpreted as "language + math" and Google insists that what is relevant are discussions of math as a language. Which is a poor interpretation of the throwaway word "about".

So I am somewhat sorry for Google. They appear to have no f*-ing clue about the difference between search and single word association. Oops another clothe less emperor! On the other hand perhaps 95% of the world is happy with single word association.

The Mind's Eye - Who has the patent on voice controlled VR?

There is no internal mental picture when looking at an external picture. So the key to getting into someone's mind's eye is to have them look at something external.

The "mind's eye" is a surprisingly unused term. So let me copyright its use in describing or naming a VR/AR display that is language controlled - so you see what you speak about. I wonder who has the patent on voice controlled graphics and VR/AR in general? If nobody does, then I am claiming it right here. Sure they have voice controlled navigation but not voice controlled definition and changes to the content of the scene.

Imagine that as I speak of faeries they dance before my eyes?

Augmented Reality Design - using voice commands

It seems counter intuitive that it might be easier to do a 3D design with language than with 3D interactive tools. As long as the object being designed has well named parts and relationships it might be easier to say something. Like for an abutment where you say: "make the core a little thicker"; "increase the mesial tilt"; or "make the lingual margin a little deeper".
So to go whole hog: imagine wearing AR goggles but using voice to design an object.

Negatives are a reversed polarity without sentiment

I was just thinking about a Narwhal app where all there is no use of the exclusive '|' for VAR building. So all the VARs have exclusive = False and there is no sentiment involved. However in processing sentences with NOT/BUT and such things, there will still be a sign value associated to a filled NAR. So in this case those controls behave more like booleans.

Augmented Reality Dialog: Sharing a mental picture during a conversation

There is a really deep idea here but I only know it from an example.

Suppose a customer wants to talk to someone about an abutment design. They have the conversation and can agree and then share a sketch of the abutment. The design sketch does not update during the conversation but rather the designer renders the sketch afterwards and turns it around as quickly as possible to show the customer.
Now suppose that rather than a designer, the customer is interacting with a chatbot that could perform the rendering automatically as the customer speaks, to confirm an understanding of what was said. Then this would be like the customer having a conversation (in this case with an automated assistant) and seeing or sharing the mental picture as part of the conversation.

With the possibilities of Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) these days, it is not too far a leap to imagine two people conversing this way and using headsets to display a shared concept formed during the conversation. Unlike a game the view updates per the conversation not per actions and the scripted scenario of a game. We'll call this Augmented Reality Conversation - as if it existed.

Free Fall Coding

Bug free design and good procedures such as unit testing, code reviews, and QA are considered good software development practice. But I want to say that sometimes it is more important to create the bugs than to avoid them. There is an even wilder approach to software development which we can call free fall development. You do no regression testing because you want regression. And then, even worse, you operate with no version control. This allows you to totally break everything routinely and deal with the panic. Such shakeups are good for the organic and robust development of new ideas.

I don't seriously propose free fall development but if you want a hip software team, they should incorporate some of its principles

I am a victim of beauty

I am a victim of beauty

Held hostage by obsession