Semantics. What does it mean? - Part 2

One of the great benefits of a semantic web will be semantic search. As semantic web and semantic search are just in their infant stages, what the words actually mean themselves are still slightly ambiguous.

A good analogy to describe the semantic search is when one person talks to another person. When I talk to my friend, I can ask him, "What do cows produce?" His answer will be "milk". My friend is able to answer the question with information because he understood the meaning of my question. He used his brain, which already knew the association between cows and milk, to give the answer.

The current web mostly uses keyword search which is based on syntax, so instead of understanding my question, all it will do is try to match the keywords with the tags on a web page. The problem with this is that it just scans the internet for web pages with the tag "cows", then for web pages with the word "produce". What I end up with is a whole heap of data which I have to sift through myself to find the information that I want. One of the problems with Web 2.0 is that there is just too much content. Semantic web will overcome this problem by understanding the data on a web page similar as a person would, and this will enable me to acquire the information I am seeking without having to process all the data.

This video is an advertisement for semantic search engine optimisation, but it helps to give us some insight into semantic search and how it will affect business.

Another aspect of semantic search is disambiguation. Words often have multiple meanings, and people usually infer the correct meaning by looking at the word in context. With the current web that uses keyword search, a search word can sometimes return an incorrect result. For example if I search "What bands do people listen to?", the current key word search engine might possibly return results for rubber bands or headbands. A semantic search on the other hand will look at the context of the word band and see that it only refers to music bands. This will increase the accuracy of the search and reduce the number of irrelevant results that would waste time.

So what do you think of semantic search? Will it radically change the way we search? or is it just an over hyped minor advancement of the web? 

Semantics. What does it mean?

As the world moves from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 we are seeing many changes such as social networking and two way media. So what is next on the agenda? My answer would be "semantic web".

So what is semantic web? To answer this question, we first need to understand what semantics means.

According to dictionary.com

se·man·tics

  

noun (used with a singular verb)

1.

Linguistics.

a.

the study of meaning.

b.

the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.

2.

Also called significs. the branch of semiotics dealing with the relations between signs and what they denote.

3.

the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.: Let's not argue about semantics.

4.

general semantics.

Origin: 1895–1900; see semantic, -ics

Related forms

Computing Dictionary

semantics definition

theory The meaning of a string in some language, as opposed to syntax which describes how symbols may be combined independent of their meaning. The semantics of a programming language is a function from programs to answers. A program is a closedterm and, in practical languages, an answer is a member of the syntactic category of values. The two main kinds are denotational semantics and operational semantics. (1995-06-21)

So what we should begin to understand from these definitions is that semantics refers to the meaning of a word or sentence. Syntax on the other hand refers to the structure, grammar, punctuation, letters and words of a sentence. For example, the semantics of the word "pencil" is a cylindrical piece of wood with a cylinder of carbon running through the centre of the wood. The syntax of the word "pencil" refers to the structure of the letters. If say you removed the letter "i" from the word, then you would be left with "pencl", which would be a syntax error.

When humans think, they think in concepts or ideas. They do not think in words. For example, if you read the word "cow", your brain will  convert the word into a concept or idea of a big mammal with four legs that produces milk. Though we think in concepts, when we communicate with each other we use language. Language is the medium that we use to transfer ideas to each other. Semantics refers to the concepts and ideas being transmitted through language. Syntax refers to the rules and principles of language.

The problem with the current web is that it operates almost completely by syntax. Semantic web will revolutionise the web by adding meaning to it.

As the web evolves and starts to understand the information on web pages, what are some possibilities that you can see? Is this a step towards artificial intelligence? (Read this if you are interested in artificial intelligence)

Take it to the bank, of Facebook?

The Bank of Facebook? Have you ever heard of such an idea?

After reading a few blogs here and there, I have read that Facebook could possibly become a bank. Due to its huge user base of over 800 million, around 12% of the world's population, Facebook has the potential to service the banking needs of one of the largest communities in the world. In my last blog I talked about virtual currencies such as Facebook credits which are currently used to buy virtual items. What if we could buy real, tangible items with Facebook credits? That would allow us to complete transactions to meet our daily needs, using an electronic currency. This would be the starting point towards Facebook becoming a bank.

If we could live our lives just by earning and spending Facebook credits, wouldn't it make sense to have a place where I could store my credits, or even loan it out to earn interest?

In Thomas Power's blog and video he suggests that Facebook could possibly provide banking services such as savings accounts, credit cards, mortgages or even pensions. Imagine that!

I would have to disagree with him when he says that peer to peer lending would be safer. I can't possibly see how lending money to one person is safer than lending money to a bank unless Facebook were to guarantee all peer to peer loans. If they were to do this, they would have to calculate the risk of having to pay out a guarantee if a peer defaults on a loan. This is called credit risk. They would then have to charge the customers to cover the credit risk. This is where they would end up being like any other bank. For example, if the statistics showed that peers defaulted on $1 out of every $100 on average, then Facebook would need to charge it's customers 1% of every loan just to manage the credit risk. This still does not factor in administration costs and profit.

Though this video is funny, it does reflect the fact that the general public will not do business with a party they do not trust.

Hypothetically, would you trust Facebook enough to firstly use its currency to buy tangible goods and secondly to do your banking with Facebook? Do you think it will become a reality for the next generation, as they will grew up accepting technology as the norm? Share you thoughts below

Bit buy Bit

The ever increasing adoption and improvement of computers and the internet is bringing change to the financial world as we once knew it. The development of electronic currencies in recent years has made most of our lives easier by allowing us to transact online. So what is electronic currency/money? According to Wikipedia, "electronic money (also known as e-currency, e-money, electronic cash, electronic currency, digital money, digital cash, digital currency, cyber currency) refers to money or scrip which is only exchanged electronically." If you are using Electronic Funds Transfers or direct deposits, you are using electronic money, though they probably do not involve purely electronic currency. Examples of purely electronic currencies include Nexus cash, Linden dollars, zCoins, Bitcoins and WebMoney. Many electronic currencies are created for people to buy items in online games, such as Nexus cash which can be used in a game called Maple Story. Other online currencies can be used to purchase real, tangible items. Bitcoin is an example of a currency that people use to trade for real life items.

Some of the main advantages include no financial intermediaries, no central issuer or authority and anonymous transacting. Bitcoin has not come without opposition. The use of Bitcoins has been fiercely debated over YouTube.

So tell me what you think about Bitcoin or any other electronic currency. Do you see a future for Bitcoin? With the rise of globalisation, will people prefer to transact in purely electronic currencies, rather than government controlled currencies?

There are TwoSides to every story

If you have ever read the comments on YouTube, you may think that some people just go on there to mass debate. In my opinion, they should save that for RedTube. Haha. Kidding. If you don't get the joke, DO NOT go and type RedTube into the address bar to see what it is. People behave like animals on YouTube because they can hide behind their computer screen. The types of comments people make are raw and tactless since they can remain mostly anonymous. Though there are a lot of trolls and haters on on the internet, there are some users who make opinionated comments that are genuinely heartfelt. For example, if you ever see a video even remotely related to a tender nerve such as religion, I can guarantee that someone will make a comment on whether on not they think God exists. I, like most people, want to shoot all the haters and trolls, but I don't see the harm in someone voicing their genuine opinion. Isn't that what the comments section is for? And the internet for that matter? That is why I think it can be a good thing that the internet provides a way for people to voice their raw opinion without inhibition or fear of retribution.

Introducing TwoSides.

TwoSides is an  is an environment where people can debate all they want. On the about page it says that, "TWOSIDES is based on the fundamental idea that the world would be a better place if everyone looked at every side of an issue. A world where people are more informed, open-minded, and tolerant."

This site will allow you to share your opinion, view other people's opinions, agree with other people's opinions, give evidence to support your position and even see how much influence you have. You can even find friends on this site, as it allows you to compare how your opinions line up with others.

I think this is a genius idea, but then again, you may not. Maybe we should debate this on TwoSides. What is your opinion of this site? Do you think it will take off?

Time is Money

Recently at Facebook's annual F8 conference, Mark Zuckerberg announced a new Facebook feature called Timeline. Timeline will enable a users to not only show recent events in their lives, but to also display their whole life on one page.

The timeline will display more detail for recent events, and as a viewer scrolls down to older dates in the timeline, they will see less detail ed information. More detail can be displayed if the viewer chooses to click on little dots on the timeline.

In many ways, this Timeline profile will be great. Users will be able to share a lot more about themselves, and know a lot more about their friends. They will also be able to scroll back in time and reminisce about good times, at the touch of a button. Brands will also have a Timeline, allowing them to tell a more in depth and meaningful story of the brand. This should build customers loyalty to the brand. On the other hand, is this new Timeline profile just a ruse by Facebook to get more information out of people to have more accurately targeted advertisements?

What do you think? Is Facebook creating Timeline because it truly wants to enrich the user's experience, or does it just want to collect more information?

Tread your own Path

As we all know by now, social networking sites will play a huge role in the future of marketing. Currently in the lead by far is Facebook.

HAHAHA......Myspace.... The last time I saw Myspace was on failblog.org. After fighting it out with Facebook for members, Myspace decided to forfeit the losing battle at the end of last year. Mike Jones, the CEO of Myspace stated, "MySpace is a not a social network anymore. It is now a social entertainment destination.” Now Myspace targets a niche market for musicians to share their talent, or lack thereof.

Recently I stumbled upon a new social networking site called "Path", which has a unique take on social networking. Instead of trying to take Facebook head on, Path aims to create personal networks. Whereas Facebook allows you to have hundreds or even thousands of meaningless "friends", Path will limit you to 150 friends. This will force you to only choose your closest family/friends. The whole concept is based on the research by Professor Robin Dunbar at Oxford University, which  found that people tend to have 5 best friends, 15 good friends and 50 close family and friends, and 150 friends. The second biggest difference is that Path only allows you to share Photos with tags. The reason for limiting communication to pictures is so that the only way to know what your friends are doing is to see them do it. In this way, the moment is captured and shared among friends, instead of having a text status update or tweet. For a quick overview, watch this video.

So as you can see, Path is not directly competing with Facebook. Instead, Path tries to offer a slightly different product on top of existing social networks. You can even add Path friends using Facebook.


I think this is an interesting concept. One advantage I can see is that people will be less afraid to express themselves more freely, knowing that only their closest friends can see their photos. Then again, you could just create another Facebook account for your close family and friends. Another advantage that Facebook will still have is the ability to reconnect old childhood friends and classmates, and to keep them in your contact list in case you want to talk to them again. That being said, Path does not aim to replace social networks, but to "augment" them.

What's your opinion on Path? Will you ever use it? Do you think it will take off?