(Lather. Rinse. Repeat.)
10,764 karma · joined April 15, 2008
(Lather. Rinse. Repeat.)
The Sanskrit alphabet is very elegant indeed, but Sanskrit doesn't have a writing system. None of the various scripts used to encode Sanskrit (Siddham, Lantsa, Devanagari, Kharoshti etc.) are, in my opinion, anywhere near as well-structured as the Sanskrit alphabet.
>In addition to that, sanskrit alphabets encompasses almost every possible consonant and vowel sounds that a human can generate.
That's nowhere near true; listen to some languages like Xhosa, or even a tonal language like Chinese, and try to transliterate them using Sanskrit.
>Sanskrit grammar is again another beautiful and well thought creation that is considered the best grammar to be used for scientific work.
Sanskrit grammar is highly regular, which is why it is used in some AI applications, but there's no reason to think it is "the best grammar to be used for scientific work." And, as structured as Sanskrit grammar is, it still opens itself up to ambiguities-- it is nowhere near as clean as an artificial language would be.
Sanskrit is a great language, but there's no need to oversell it.
I'd love to see the identification of these-- it seems quite perverse to mention them in a blog posting without at least a footnote giving the details.
I'll give it a shot. What you should have done, in my opinion, is just provide a link alongside a one-line summary, along the lines of "Here's an article we found fascinating."
If the article you are writing is based on a single source, it's not an article-- it's a paraphrase.
We work immensely had to product original content as well as link to original sources when deserved...this case was absolutely no different.
so, which was this? It was more than a link, but it surely doesn't qualify as "original content" by any stretch of the imagination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Evans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Evans
That's not the case. If one accepts the Church Turing Thesis, then those functions the brain performs on effectively calculable functions can be performed on a Turing Machine. The brain is at least a Turing Machine, but may be greatly more than one, and Gödel's limitations will only apply to that portion doing calculations. The brain may very well be doing a great deal more than simple computation.
Thus, when you write I argue that the mind is a program that runs on that Turing machine, you're leaping off into wild speculation.
Paper is good, but clay tablets FTW.
It sounds like a cool project.
There's quite a bit of space on the spectrum between "trying things on your own" and "surgery".
If you are (like me) more interested in looking for Graph Databases to consider, it looks like Knuth's "Stanford GraphBase" is still the go-to source.
If I had to guess, I'd say it was because of too many submissions getting flagged.
But isn't that the status quo?
I can't think of any piece of software I use that doesn't give me a fairly easy way to temporarily turn off the notifications. I don't want to get notified by Facebook? No problem, I shut it down. Don't want to be interrupted by my telephone? I put it in silent mode. Etc., etc.
(Note: I am not a lawyer.)
Companies not complying with labor laws should be avoided, for your own protection.
It's that simple.