From: Ben Goertzel (ben@goertzel.org)
Date: Mon Dec 31 2001 - 12:58:48 MST
yo,
> And btw, while we're being naive: let's assume
> that you *can*
> extract such useful information from summaries. Why do you
> believe that this
> won't just cause pharma, etc. to clam up and not reveal *any* information?
> I.e., even if the technology is feasible, to the extent that it's
> available it
> will just trigger additional competitive concerns and restrict
> open publication
> further.
If any one pharma suddenly stopped letting their scientists publish, the
scientists would quit
and work elsewhere, because publication helps them build their careers.
However, I agree
that a slow industrywide move toward greater secrecy could happen.
> > I still believe that information extraction from
> > NL text will be an important part of the toolkit too.
>
> No doubt. My concern isn't that this isn't important, it's that
> having it as a
> sole --- or even primary, ahead of the other things --- focus is
> less useful at
> best, dangerous at worst.
Well I don't think it *is* the primary focus in bioinformatics or any
other domain I'm aware of, so no worries, mate..
> > http://www.geneontology.org/
>
> Yeah, yeah. We'll see how widely used it becomes.
I think it will take off in the yeast genetics community, which is mainly
academic.
If it works really well there, maybe that will be enough motivation for the
primarily
commercial human-genomics community to adopt something similar, who knows...
ben
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT