Comments on: Semantic vs. Synaptic Web

By: mattledding

mattledding — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:31:46 +0000

I think it isn’t an either/or situation, and thus there is a false dilemna in the article.

Synaptic/semantic combinations are what make Google number one in search. As you pointed out, Zemantic, with its Natural Language Processing (which you can get open code and free info on via google) is a good 1st gen example of semantic web which uses tech to make synaptic links via semantic process.

More tools in both areas, of course, just add choice of tools, and you can use what is best depending on the job at hand, and enjoy the expanded ecosystem.

By: Zemanta API user: myBantu | Zemanta Ltd.

Zemanta API user: myBantu | Zemanta Ltd. — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 07:44:44 +0000

[...] Semantic vs. Synaptic Web @ Synaptic | preona (synaptic.preona.net) [...]

By: Will Saint

Will Saint — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 07:08:34 +0000

Thank you for explaining the differences between the semantic web and the synaptic web. I find the topic of the synaptic web to be extremely interesting. I am excited to monitor the progress of this concept and look forward to the amazing tools and sites it will create as it evolves. This is truly cutting edge and I am happy to have educated myself enough to know a great thing when I see it. Please do not hesitate to share your knowledge with me; it sometimes takes me a while to understand some of the terminology used in these articles, but I’m determined to learn as much as you all will share.

Thanks again,
Will Saint
http://www.twitter.com/willsaint
#mediasaint

By: Why we think Synaptic Web will focus on the users @ Synaptic | preona

Why we think Synaptic Web will focus on the users @ Synaptic | preona — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:52:25 +0000

[...] we think Synaptic Web will focus on the users Our earlier post about the Semantic vs. Synaptic Web has raised some questions about the users of this new web trend. Why do we think it will be about [...]

By: Mark Essel

Mark Essel — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:28:31 +0000

Funny you should mention social and semantic in contrasting light. My team is working on a project that relates disparate social information together by finding common meaning. My long term goal is to construct virtual assistants that help us managing the growing flood of relevant data given our time
constraints.

The synaptic web analogy plays very well with a recent post of mine. I’d like to chat more, great post but it’s part of a bigger emerging picture of the future and destiny many of us are creating.

By: Sylvain Hellegouarch

Sylvain Hellegouarch — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:57:13 +0000

I wholeheartedly agree with you and yet I think you miss something critical in your post when you say:

> Semantics are a good background protocol, a lovely standard for obsessive webdevs to follow, an amazingly good technology … but in and of itself without a purpose.

and

> We need computers that understand people and this is something you, of course, need semantics for. It’s also something that produces immediate value to the only person that really matters – The User.

You neither define the user nor his purpose.

I think everyone agrees that computers don’t really add much value as they stand and that the Internet is still in its infancy. But in the end, reading your idea one feels a bit like what many scientists must have felt 50 years ago when they were dreaming about AI. They wanted more. They wished for so much, so much more. Today we are trying to answer the same questions they had back then.

What is that defines us? What is that we want? How do we translate that to computers?

For now I agree with you that semantic web can’t answer to those, but is it in its scope?

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 10:07:09 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by preona: Blog post: Semantic vs. Synaptic Web http://bit.ly/4ofOEz #synapticweb…