- From: Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2025 10:20:18 +0800
- To: Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com>
- Cc: W3C AIKR CG <public-aikr@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMXe=SpXs+CJvxO=L03YzoV739Zx8KXVHhKpgzVABu6SrGOAGA@mail.gmail.com>
Patrick glad you see what I see * singing Nail in the coffin parody song https://suno.com/s/tmIkDEuYEnOzKRIR Hintoon did say KR would help explainability in the sentence after to nail in the coffin tho I have been trying to put forward the notion of Neurosymbolic Knowledge Representation in itself, a rather trivial postulate perhaps https://figshare.com/articles/poster/A_New_Postulate_for_Knowledge_Representation_in_AI/9730268?file=17426480 academia seems to give more credibility to articles behind a paywall https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781003310785-9/towards-web-standard-neuro-symbolic-integration-knowledge-representation-using-model-cards-paola-di-maio the jist should be openly accessible https://figshare.com/articles/online_resource/Metamodel_Card_for_System_Level_Neurosymbolic_Integration/19567624 applied simplicity is the only way I know to reduce complexity I have been chipping at this for over 5 years. attention has been sparse.... would like to talk about this, at anyone's convenience..... *: refrain: nail in the coffin, nail in the coffin... repeat ad libitum* PDM On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 9:24 AM Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> wrote: > "nail in the coffin for symbolic knowledge representation" > > Of course that's already been demonstrated to be false. The industry is > desperate for so-called "neuro-symbolic" solutions. Those won't be easy > either. I'm not holding my breath. > > On Sat, May 31, 2025, 5:45 PM Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> What to say, Owen and Kevin >> >> Yesterday a famous phrase in the Hinton Turing Award speech kept rolling >> into my head >> 'the nail in the coffin for symbolic knowledge representation' heralding >> an age of non logic based machine learning >> >> I attach the url and transcript for those who may want to listen to it >> again, it was such a good lecture btw, >> Too bad it played down symbolic/logic AI >> Time to go back to those talks, >> This is where the troubles started (if not earlier) and kind of feels >> like it was a long time ago but 2018 ts just yesterday really >> >> I am enjoying every bit of AI, and I am also startled by its limitations >> (abandon logic and see what you get) >> >> Mind out, poor and deficient reasoning is not just a prerogative of AI, >> Humans excel and make errors. flawed conclusion and fallibility in general >> It is when AI becomes pervasive and starts interfering with our systems >> deleting our emails, rewriting our >> browser history that is going to be scary, when innocent people use the >> LLM to learn and write about a topic and do not realise >> that what they hear is only part of the story, however well written up >> and fast >> >> Again this is also true of all knowledge sources, bias is not something >> new, it has been part of records in world history >> But AI is now part of the interface that filters reality, and that is why >> it can become scary >> >> I have also seen bias and poor reasoning in the initiatives aimed at >> mitigating AI risks >> >> As long as we are aware I guess,to maintain that level of awareness in a >> dynamic requires paying a lot of attention to what is going on >> and that can only be done by a well tuned human brain >> >> https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-neuro-062111-150525 >> >> I want to also make a note of the transcript of the LLM output >> I made a mistake in my prompt, that tried to retrieve the Turing Award >> lecture mentioned above and wrote 2019, and the LLM hang on to the mistake >> throughout its response instead of correcting it. I attach two transcripts >> for reference only >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 1:35 AM Kevin Spellman <kevinfrsa@icloud.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Universal AI and LLM design as a regulated government responsibility >>> would bring accountability, uniformity, standards and ethics. Social media >>> and the algorithms that violate our digital rights only come to light when >>> we stumble on to it. LLM’s are based on our data and we did not clearly >>> agree to this (or at least I didn’t). There is an opacity on how they work, >>> how and what they are connected to and more so the steps in place to >>> mitigate bias as an example. In a field that is growing in complexity and >>> revenue, there are fewer safeguards and people to support and enforce a >>> standard for public and private AI handling our data. >>> >>> Please pardon the brevity >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> *Dr. Kevin J Spellman, FRSA, CMRS* >>> >>> On 31 May 2025, at 16:17, Owen Ambur <owen.ambur@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Paola, while it might be taken as self-serving flattery or, at least, >>> knowing your customer, ChatGPT's conclusion about the second of your two >>> references makes sense to me: >>> >>> Bottom Line >>> >>> Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is voicing a legitimate warning: *if we train >>> AIs on trash, they will produce trash.* But the current reality is not >>> that AI is collapsing—it’s that the ecosystem around it is fragile and >>> poorly governed. The way forward isn't to abandon AI but to become more *intentional >>> and structured* in how we curate knowledge, govern inputs, and manage >>> usage. >>> >>> That’s where standards like StratML, structured data, and truly >>> responsible AI design can help avert the kind of collapse the article warns >>> about. >>> >>> The details of its argument are available here >>> <https://chatgpt.com/share/683b1bb1-14c0-800b-9d9a-381ce0935ec8>. >>> >>> Owen Ambur >>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/ >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, May 31, 2025 at 12:10:11 AM EDT, Paola Di Maio < >>> paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Good day >>> >>> I hope everyone gets a change to smell the flowers at least once a day >>> >>> As predicted, we are rapidly rolling into a new age of AI driven >>> everything and knowledge is all we ve got to understand what is happening >>> and how >>> >>> The changes are already impacting our individual and collective lives >>> and behaviours etc >>> and we won't even know (scratching head) >>> >>> The best that we can do is hang onto our instruments of discernment, KR >>> being one of them >>> >>> Two articles below bring up important points >>> >>> *Gemini may summarize your emails even if you dont opt it for the >>> feature* >>> >>> https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/30/gemini-will-now-automatically-summarize-your-long-emails-unless-you-opt-out/ >>> >>> Honestly I do not know if this is true. It may even be illegal and if it >>> depends on the geographi loation could end up being very confusing >>> for those who travel around a lot. How will it work, if one day a person >>> reads an email from one country and another day from another? >>> if someone is a Google insider enough, should be investigated imho >>> >>> *AI Model Collapse* >>> https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/27/opinion_column_ai_model_collapse/ >>> When the AI models collapse all we are going to have left is going to be >>> the robust knowledge structure in our brain/minds and in our libraries >>> >>> >>> *Brace, brace* >>> >>> >>>
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2025 02:21:02 UTC