User:Ssstephen/Reading/An Archive of Words

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
< User:Ssstephen‎ | Reading
Revision as of 22:55, 28 October 2022 by Ssstephen (talk | contribs) (Created page with "[https://hub.xpub.nl/bootleglibrary/read/732/pdf#page=280 read it here] This reminds me of Vuk Cosic's File Extinguisher (which seems to be most easily accessed through the [https://web.archive.org/web/20060813091814/http://file-extinguisher.com/ Internet Archive's Wayback Machine] ironically). The File Extinguisher used to also have a map which unfortunately doesn't seem to be archived. The map as an archive is an interesting document as it primarily locates things in...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

read it here

This reminds me of Vuk Cosic's File Extinguisher (which seems to be most easily accessed through the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine ironically). The File Extinguisher used to also have a map which unfortunately doesn't seem to be archived. The map as an archive is an interesting document as it primarily locates things in relation to eachother. Where do you put something in the archive, what is beside it, what is it far away from?

It will be the foundation for the history of the epistemol-ogy of our contemporary era.

How does "the epistimology of our contemporary era" have a history? I can only understand this as part of a more general history of epistemology, maybe I'm missing the point.

Thomas Aquinas in Roberto Busa Mallet topic modeling software, can this be used to make a Zipfian distribution? Try on John Dee's Liber Loagaeth for example or some of Hildegard's Lingua Ignota

a feeling of and, a feeling of if, a feeling of but, and a feeling of by
the a the a  the the the  the a  the the a  a the a  a the  the  a a the  a the a a  a the  the  a a  the the the  the a  a a a  a the a the a the     the a the the  the the the  a a the     a a a a  a the  a a a the  a     a the the the  a a the  a a a  the     the a a  a a  a a a  the a the a  the the the  a a a the  a  a the a  a  the a a     the  a a a a  a     a a a  a  the a the a  a the a  a  the     the the  a  a a a  a a a  a the  the the a  a  a the a the a the     a the the a  a the a a  a  a the  a a a  a     a a a  a  the a  the a a     the a the the  the the the  a a the  a the a     a the  the a  a a a  a the the  a  a the a     the  the the the     the the the  a the a a  the a a     a the the a  a a  the a  the a the  the the a a the the     the a the a  a the  a the a  a     the the the  a a the a     the  a a a a  a     a a the a  a a the  the a  the a  the a the the     a a the a  a the  a the a  the the  the the a a the the     the a the a  a a a a  a the  a the a a  a a the a  the the the  the a  the  a the a the a the  a the a the a the  a the a the a the     a the a  the the the  the the a  a  a the a  the a the a the the     the a the a  a the  a the a  the the the  a the a a  the a the the  the a  a  a the the the the a  a a a     the the the  the a     the  a a a a  a     a the the a  a a a a  the the the  the a  a  the a the a the the 
the Microfiche Concordance  to  Old  English:  The  High-  Frequency  Words.11  This  marks  a  no-table development in the history of computer- generated concordances

No-table lol.

Ability of Google Search et al to understand or interpret natural language is super interesting. A search algorithm doesn't have the same logic of interpretation as a human, it finds meaning in other places and finds other meanings. Presumably corporate aims are to make this logic emulate human meaninging as much as possible to make it an efficient tool, but it's interesting to think about the alternative knowledge a meaning-making machine could find.

Pause at p279 for today