Re: [-empyre-] archiving + preservation
On May 6, 2004, at 7:40 PM, Jaka Zeleznikar wrote:
I find this a bit suspicious:
- dragon (at least in my culture) has noting to do with computers (so
you can link anything to 'computer')
- 'foxglove' can be popuped to 'fox' and 'glove' (but does it make
- 'rob' can be linked to 'rob' (first 'rob' in English, second in
Slovene (meaning 'border') ...
- dragon: 'drag' 'on' ...
- 'd' 'r' 'a' 'g' ...
True, although liken does not support links at the atomic level -- that
is, we don't allow individual characters to become links. The cool
thing about Chinese/Kanji is that each pictogram represents one or more
concepts(although its true as Ken pointed out that they also describe a
sound), whereas in the Roman alphabet, "c" has no particular meaning.
While the sub-concepts of a complex word (ie, "dragon" in computer) may
have little or nothing to do with the complex word, that is not
necessarily a drawback in the context of liken, and may actually be a
benefit. To address the "rob" issue, liken was really intended to be
used with one language and its sub-dialects at a time; once you
introduce more than one language, things quickly get too wiggy.
Although the idea of a pictogram-native and pictogram-only wiki/liki
continues to intrigue me.
Liken was designed with the knowledge that its suggested links may
sometimes be non-sensical [and/or] irrelevant -- to criticalartware,
this was an interesting feature of the system. Since liken's decision
to proactively link two things is never actually random, but rather
based on word frequency, it could link two documents that have nothing
to do with each other, but that use similar language. A system of paths
that was at least partially based on a common lexicon or snippets of
shared language was exciting in the extreme.
If you take this further to the autolinks ("liki" links), "foxglove"
can break down to "fox" and "glove," it's true. But "fox" and "glove"
are not likely to be extant nodes in liken, since its goal is not to be
a general purpose knowledgebase. However, "strong" will display a link
for popular motion picture "TRON." Does that link make sense? Maybe
not. But does the [practice/procedure] itself make sense? I think so.
You don't wan to limit "TRON" to linking to just the word "TRON,"
because what if you get this: "TronCycle"? You definitely want that to
link up. We'd have to have millions of nodes before over-atomization
became a real problem.
I've come to love these features of liken, since they underscore the
design goals of connecting disparate chunks of information. To navigate
liken is to walk into a world of serendipity, ultrahyperlinking,
complete relevance and utter nonsense.
+ if I understood correctly links are made more visible by being more
I understood Vanevar B. and some other people that they wish something
the way we think - and we think in emotions also (so some terms in way
links might be more visible relating to our emotional state and not
so one day strongest link from rock might be music and the other day
Most definitely! However, liken is a bit different than a singular
mind, because all of our users help shape and alter the structure of
liken. We like to point out that liken is like a neural network, but
the local computation is not being done by small computing processes or
neurons, but rather, by human computers.
So in that way, liken reflects how the collective consciousness of our
users thinks. So one day, the strongest link from rock might be music,
and the next day it might be geology, but it won't be because of one
person, but rather the distributed neural net that you're already
participating in by posting to empyre!
+ any way I find the project extremely interesting
Thanks! We continue to be inspired + excited by our users, and we
constantly [re]examine our methodology...
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and