Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:55:24 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
<003b01c77f90$8e596570$edb6c945@yourt0nynq8c3v> |
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7BIT |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Good points, all. But I think we may be underestimating the book to byte
transition.
Currently, the chief problem with search engines is that they search
relatively indiscriminately once given their commands. Neither the
search engines nor many of us, apparently, are able to differentiate
between the useful and the useless "hits" that come our way. What is
needed now is some way or ways to sort through the 100 or 1000 hits and
identify the 10 or 20 really useful ones--a "reliability" index of some
sort, maybe several of them (e.g., good enough for this, good enough for
that) would help.
Of course, once that's done, we're just a few software generations away
from the next obvious step, which is for the computer to provide the
user with a precis, report, or summary--according to user-supplied
specs--of the material that is found on the Net about topic a or b. This
would probably be a commercial service at first, maybe forever, but it
also might be the end of "research as we know it."
Not to worry, though. It'll still be a while before computer-generated
reports are sophisticated enough to discourse on the many meanings of
"cool." The human brain is much more complex than computers (I think
that's still a true statement!) and definitely quirkier, so we shouldn't
expect to be supplanted any time soon.... But in ten or twenty years?
Who can say?
Doug Deal
History/SUNY Oswego
|
|
|