Re: Vote for my Semantic Web presentation at SXSW

On 8/17/11 12:13 PM, adasal wrote:
>
>     If you ever want to see a time when 'killer apps' are possible
>     again, it would be wise to group the sheep so the likes and
>     dislikes (of the heard) take on semantic form, because the sheep
>     and the shepherd answer the question "How many Triples in an
>     Identity ?" quite differently.
>
>
> Ah ha - someone understands - a bit.
>

Since I am truly tired of repetitive debates, I refer you to my recent 
G+ post about structured profiles [1][2] :-)

I can assure of this: the Semantic Web vision isn't a solution looking 
for a problem. Same applies to Linked Data which delivers a critical 
foundation (structured data) component to this broad vision.

Links:

1. http://goo.gl/PpDhS -- post about G+ profile in Linked Data form with 
some interesting comments

2. http://goo.gl/2Rqx1 -- using WebID (an application) Linked Data to 
kill off SPAM via semantically enhanced mail filters .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen


> Adam
>
> On 17 August 2011 15:50, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com 
> <mailto:gannon_dick@yahoo.com>> wrote:
> > Nice rant Sampo :o) I might have agreed 100% five years ago.  I'd 
> have to downgrade that to 90% today.  Economies are consumer poor (but 
> not necessarily producer/resource rich) in these days and a 'killer 
> app' requires a pressing information need to dominate.  In other 
> words, Hollandaise Sauce is a 'killer app', only as long as you have 
> plenty of butter and eggs laying around.
> >
> > The Semantic Web provides a way out, but FOAF, IMHO, is exactly the 
> wrong way to go about it.  Governance should be the search normal, and 
> for the Semantic Web, it is.  The Commercial imperative is to shear as 
> many sheep as possible in the shortest amount of time.  That goal is 
> self-limiting because the sheep are not happy with it at the moment. 
>  No one, it seems, thought the sheep's opinion, or capabilities mattered.
> >
> > If you ever want to see a time when 'killer apps' are possible 
> again, it would be wise to group the sheep so the likes and dislikes 
> (of the heard) take on semantic form, because the sheep and the 
> shepherd answer the question "How many Triples in an Identity ?" quite 
> differently.
> >
> > --Gannon
> >
> > --- On Tue, 8/16/11, Sampo Syreeni <decoy@iki.fi 
> <mailto:decoy@iki.fi>> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Sampo Syreeni <decoy@iki.fi <mailto:decoy@iki.fi>>
> >> Subject: Re: Vote for my Semantic Web presentation at SXSW
> >> To: "Juan Sequeda" <juanfederico@gmail.com 
> <mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com>>
> >> Cc: "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org 
> <mailto:semantic-web@w3.org>>, "public-lod" <public-lod@w3.org 
> <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>>
> >> Date: Tuesday, August 16, 2011, 7:15 PM
> >> On 2011-08-16, Juan Sequeda wrote:
> >>
> >> > In the past two years, I've tried to get people
> >> together to submit panels and presentations about Semantic
> >> Web to SXSW. Unfortunately, it has barely been successful.
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> I think it's not successful because the Semantic Web itself
> >> is not successful. It still lacks a killer app, and the
> >> integration, and especially the visual candy that rules over
> >> everything else, adoption-wise. It's still a solution in
> >> search of a real problem.
> >>
> >> One of the surest signs to me is that pretty much every
> >> SemWeb presentation I've seen a) starts with the same,
> >> already-tired, academic litany of theoretical promises, a
> >> layer cake or whathaveyou, and b) is presented by somebody
> >> supported by a grant/tenure/government salary/whatever. I
> >> see absolutely *no* stuff from private, venture funded
> >> entrepreneurs which tell me they successfully solved a
> >> pressing, real life problem using SemWeb technology, and
> >> because of the tech, more rapidly retired with a hefty trust
> >> fund.
> >>
> >> Because that, honest to God, is the only criterion of a
> >> Solution. It's the criterion *even* if the technology was
> >> primarily poised to solve a problem of a public goods nature
> >> where you have to go through the nasty gymnastics of
> >> convincing a government to make its data open, and linked.
> >> That's just not going to happen unless the private sector is
> >> already thriving around your data model, vision, solution,
> >> usability and consumer candy-appeal. What instead happens is
> >> that you flat out lose to PDF (textual description of your
> >> data), and in particular to Facebook (dynamic, social
> >> description, again over unstructured text).
> >>
> >> Now, I'm not saying SemWeb is dead in the water. Far from
> >> it: I'm a big believer in the basic principles of it. But as
> >> of now, the focus remains totally wrong. First, FOAF has
> >> lingered on as a potential killer app for a while, and
> >> stagnated. Second, I'm seeing no Android/iOS/HTML5 apps
> >> which make serious use of the semantic web, *while
> >> substantially and measurably benefiting from it*. Third,
> >> that's prolly because the plumbing isn't there or is too
> >> heavy to be deployed incrementally and/or cheaply. Fourth,
> >> heavy duty data really doesn't sit too well with the basic
> >> encodings like RDF/XML; or would you happily run your
> >> production database over it/them? Fifth, where's the truly
> >> transparent and user-satisfying integration with established
> >> media? Et cetera, ad infinitum.
> >>
> >> The semantic web holds great promise, but it always has
> >> been and sadly seems to remain more of an academic exercise
> >> than something truly practicable and profitable. More a
> >> tentative solution to a hypothetical problem, than a real
> >> solution to a pressing need. Then, it stagnates for lack of
> >> profitable investment, as it has for its entire duration.
> >> Like some relic, preserved by W3C's saving graces or
> >> reverence to TimBL The Great Weaver.
> >>
> >> I think instead we should have a fast and dirty triple
> >> serving protocol, or perhaps even a protocol which breaks
> >> with the triple model as such for efficiency. Then a flashy
> >> app for distributed social networking, based on some revived
> >> derivative of FOAF, on *all* of the app stores around.
> >> Embeddable and integrable. That'd already go *miles* towards
> >> adoption. Then do the same for the rest of the Linked Data.
> >> -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy@iki.fi <mailto:decoy@iki.fi>, 
> http://decoy.iki.fi/front
> >> +358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9
> >> 0509 85C2
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>