Saturday, February 25, 2017

Understanding the two level, internet ring decoder

What words does my ring decoder key off of?

Anything measurable, like survey; and anything that is a member of a set like Senator.  The first level of the semantics is what is the event.  The second level is how frequently does that event happen otherwise. But the decoder imposes the no replacement rule, it is estimating frequency of events over a purposefully short backward window. The decoder atyempts to reconstruct the complete flow channel where events like the one stated occur.

Here is an example taken from a comment in a blog.  The discussion was political spending reform, the commentor is from California:

amazing. you have to credit them [local Republican politicians] for relentless effort and working the system for every advantage. I participate with a reform group here in California, called California Clean Money Campaign. Even though I value it, I have to admit the goals are almost pathetically modest. I just completed a survey from our new Senator, Kamala Harris. She listed a lot of worthy goals, but electoral reform was not among them. Honestly, I dont see how we win long term without such reform. Neither do I see enough effort from Dems toachieve it.

I added the brackets to connect this comment to the context.

My decoder keyed on Senator and survey and money  and electorial  and effort.  All imply measurablility, and in the semantics of the web, a convolution with set identification will collect a fair sample of like minded measurable terms,the beginnings of a frequency chart, a histogram.

Hard to do, and my ring decoder needs plenty of human help.  But I read a blog comment or post and can quite systematically generate the proper search phrases to grab the complete 'group' results. Once I have a nearly complete histogram, it is Shannon all the way, like a forensic accountant. I reconstruct the likely distribution net, I follow the money.  My role  is quite systematic, I am clever, not brilliant; easily replaceable in singularity 2.0.

No comments: