Gustav Brock
Gustav at cactus.dk
Mon Oct 3 04:15:58 CDT 2011
Hi Stuart Yes. The art of retrieving the "correct" adds for you at a given context requires exactly the same. That's what Apple and Google try to do ... /gustav >>> stuart at lexacorp.com.pg 03-10-2011 10:55 >>> The only way it can work is if the system knows a lot more about you than you would want it to. You give up a lot of privacy in return for convenience. :-( -- Stuart On 3 Oct 2011 at 3:34, Arthur Fuller wrote: > I get your point. Could be "Little Red Riding Hood" not "Linux". But > that is precisely the conundrum, the meaning of "meaning". That is one > tough nut to crack, and I do not pretend to have any solutions; I'm > still working on it! And I thought databases were tough. This is a > much more difficult problem LOL. > > A. > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Gustav Brock <Gustav at cactus.dk> wrote: > > > Hi Arthur > > > > I can help you. > > > > Regarding searching for information, for something to have a Meaning > > means that it is relevant to the context - as defined by the user. > > If a child searches for "red hat" it is probably not related to > > Linux. But it could be, thus initially the user must be granted a > > method to define the context. The machine cannot make that decision > > for the user. > > > > /gustav