17 Burst results for "van avar bush"

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

04:28 min | 2 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engines. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classification systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents systems. The first two of those designate books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover. This can get a little complicated. It is and no pun intended. Subjective you have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects? Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, so They just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece. People can find stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush Wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think, and it contains some fairly present ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert in everything to get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resources to that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classification system might encompass several categories it couldn't get as granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on ever more precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got you know minor categories within those major categories, so it gets harder to start classifying things, Bush said. We needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said..

Microsoft Library of Congress Google Bush Vannevar Bush Today 21 categories 19 forties first Library of Congress System each work Three big First both Peace Atlantic Monthly System two One
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

04:03 min | 6 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Well to explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields, Alan necessity That you couldn't just be a general knowledge, Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas s O far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said..

Library of Congress Vannevar Bush Bush 21 categories Microsoft First eight books 19 forties each work first two both Library of Congress System Three big ones Atlantic Dewey Decimal System Alan
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

04:34 min | 7 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Well to explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classification systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System at the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't make books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems and more detailed to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields, Alan necessity That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, they doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related..

Library of Congress Bush Vannevar Bush Microsoft 21 categories First Library of Congress System first two 19 forties each work both Three big one Atlantic
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:26 min | 8 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Well to explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal system at the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended. Subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects? Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, so They just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush Wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think, and it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field, such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information and a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. It would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions, non the information retrieval method that Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Ah, Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction. So your terms have Victor's your documents have vectors, And the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results, well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say. I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. That saves you time when you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now, Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context. So you couldn't of retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Jonathan Strickland executive producer Victor Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Salton Jerry Salton Jerry Sultan Cornell University
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:34 min | 8 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. Classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems and more detailed to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas s O far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classification system might encompass several categories, it couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got you know minor categories within those major categories, so it gets harder to start classifying things, Bush said. We needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, they doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. It would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Ah, Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and a direction. So your terms have Victor's your documents have vectors, and the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results. Well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say, I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. That saves you time and you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now. Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context. So you couldn't of retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs. So that is a limitation of this model. But still, it was a pretty good starting point. So Sultan's work was incredibly important..

Vannevar Bush Google Jerry Sultan Microsoft executive producer superintendent Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Salton Victor Jerry Salton Cornell University scientist
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

06:19 min | 9 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"With how stuff works. And I heart radio in the love all things tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classification systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I have to do an episode about these systems and more detailed to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize now skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model..

Vannevar Bush Google Microsoft superintendent Library of Congress System Library of Congress Atlantic Monthly Jerry Sultan Cornell University Jerry Salton scientist
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:34 min | 9 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush Wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think, and it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas s O far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us, But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize Skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions, non the information retrieval method that Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space by the number of terms in a retrieval request, So if your request included five terms The vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction. So your terms have Victor's your documents have vectors, And the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results, well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say. I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. That saves you time when you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now, Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context. So you couldn't of retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs. So that is a limitation of this model. But still, it was a pretty good starting point. So some things work was incredibly important..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Salton Victor Jerry Salton Jerry Sultan Cornell University scientist
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

06:11 min | 9 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Well to explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal system at the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge, Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas s O far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record. It could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways and ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. It would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties..

Vannevar Bush Google Microsoft superintendent Library of Congress Library of Congress System Strickland. executive producer Atlantic Monthly
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

07:35 min | 10 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Hey there and welcome to Tech stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works. And I heart radio in the love all things tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems and more detailed to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classification system might encompass several categories, it couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record. It could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. It would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions, non the information retrieval methods at Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space by the number of terms in a retrieval request, So if your request included five terms The vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction..

Vannevar Bush Google Microsoft Jonathan Strickland Salton executive producer superintendent Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Jerry Sultan Cornell University Victor Jerry Salton
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

07:31 min | 10 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio in the love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't make books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field, such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classification system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, they doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions, non the information retrieval method that Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Ah, Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Jonathan Strickland Salton executive producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Victor Jerry Salton Jerry Sultan Cornell University
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:59 min | 10 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Hey there and welcome to Tech stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of the things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, the Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter, So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this congenital little complicated it is and and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece, people confined stuff. Otherwise, you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The piece had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas s O far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've you've got, you know minor categories within those major categories, so it gets harder to start classifying things, Bush said. We needed to have a record. It could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But He went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, they doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off. Well, Bush, that would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. A good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. It would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about the conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Salton. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions, non the information retrieval method that Salton set up, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, rusty on your physics terms as I am. Ah, Victor is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction. So your terms have Victor's your documents have vectors, And the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results, well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say. I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. That saves you time and you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now. Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context so you could end of retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs. So that is a limitation of this model. But still it was a pretty good starting point. So some things work was incredibly important. Another big thinker who helped shape the course of what would become the Internet and the Web is a guy named Ted Nelson, who in the 19 sixties proposed an idea he called Xanadu and I'm not talking about the cheesy movie starring Olivia Newton John about roller skating. Greek muse is but There's a side note. I really love that movie. No..

Vannevar Bush Google Microsoft Jonathan Strickland executive producer superintendent Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Salton Ted Nelson Victor Olivia Newton Cornell University
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

07:28 min | 11 months ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Hey there and welcome to Tech stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and a love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck other things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? To explain how we got there. It's good. I did it. Walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look Att how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter. So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this, Khun get a little complicated it is and and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, so They just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same as to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you'd just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush I wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think, and it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas. Eso far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert in everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've got no minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record. It could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But Oh, he went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us, But on the very surface of it, they there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This's really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off well, Bush said. That would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could, at the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. Ah, good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information and a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize now skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Sultan. Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves. So most the time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Salton setup, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were president within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Jonathan Strickland executive producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Salton Jerry Sultan Atlantic Monthly Khun Cornell University president
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

07:24 min | 1 year ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and a love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of of things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Let's explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look Att how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. How First the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, and it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter. So you divide the books up based upon one of her subjects. They cover this, Khun get a little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same. It's to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection. By classifying each work on designating the physical location for that peace. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you'd just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas. Eso far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've got no minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But Oh, he went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us, But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This's really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off well, Bush said. That would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could, at the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. Ah, good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information and a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Sultan setup, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were president within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts..

Vannevar Bush Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan Google superintendent Microsoft executive producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Atlantic Monthly Khun Cornell University scientist president
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

07:21 min | 1 year ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"And I heart radio in the love all things tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does weigh more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of of things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Let's explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look Att how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter. So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this, Khun get a little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, so They just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same as to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works a word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you'd just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas. Eso far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. Helen Older Library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've got a minor categories within those major categories, so it gets harder to start classifying things, Bush said. We needed to have a record. It could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But Oh, he went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This's really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off well, Bush said. That would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could, at the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. Ah, good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M A M a X, and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, in our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Salton setup, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were president within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan Library of Congress Library of Congress System Salton Helen Older Library Atlantic Monthly Khun Cornell University scientist president
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:50 min | 1 year ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I'm an executive producer with how stuff works. And I heart radio in the love all things tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck of of things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Let's explain how we got there. It's good. I did it. Walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look Att how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The 1st 2 of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter. So you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this, Khun get a little complicated it is and and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work. So they just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same as to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work on designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you'd just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about the systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas. Eso far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've got no minor categories within those major categories, So it gets harder to start classifying things Bush that we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But Oh, he went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us. But on the very surface of it, they there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This's really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off well, Bush said. That would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. But we could, at the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. Ah, good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M E m a X and that would use associative factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives. Now, In our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so much The time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Salton setup, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were president within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, Rusty on your physics terms as I am a vector is a quantity that has a magnitude and a direction. So your terms have vectors. Your documents have vectors, And the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results, well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say. I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. And that saves you time when you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now, Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context so you could end up retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs. So that is a limitation of this model. But still it was a pretty good starting point. The Sultan's work was incredibly important. Another big thinker who helped shape the course of what would become the Internet and the Web is a guy named Ted Nelson, who in the 19 sixties proposed an idea he called Xanadu and I'm not talking about the cheesy movie starring Olivia Newton John about roller skating..

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft executive producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan Atlantic Monthly Ted Nelson Khun Salton Olivia Newton Cornell University
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

08:40 min | 1 year ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio in the love all things Tech. Today. I thought I'd talk a bit about Internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors, most of which came out well before Google dead Now, these days, lots of people use Google as a word for Web searching in general, even though the company does way more than Web search, and there's still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there. I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck other things but That doesn't happen. I think we're now at the point where people will talk about Googling even if they're using a different search engine. So how did that happen? How did we get to that point? Well to explain how we got there. It's a good idea to walk down memory lane. I mean, you know, I love to do this. Every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look Att how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public, Internet and the Web. Now. First, the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time, And it rose out of necessity kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so A predecessor to search engines are the various library classifications systems. Three big ones are the Dewey Decimal System, Library of Congress System and the superintendent of documents system. The 1st 2 of those doesn't eight books with call numbers, according to subject matter. So you divide the books up based upon one of her subjects. They cover this, Khun get a little complicated it is and no pun intended subjective. You have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. Meanwhile, the superintendent of documents system is totally different. It doesn't divide it up by subject. It divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work, so They just divided up by where the book came from, Not what the book covers. Whatever the system, the purpose is the same as to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work. In an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work on designating the physical location for that piece. People confined stuff. Otherwise, you'd just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all, and finding anything would take ages. Now. Someday I'll have to do an episode about these systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time. Because it's actually a pretty interesting story. But we're going to jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age. However, rather we're going to jump forward to the 19 forties. That's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar Bush wrote an article for the Atlantic Monthly. The Peace had the title as we may think. And it contains some fairly prescient ideas in it. Bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge, we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity. That you couldn't just be a general knowledge Master. Eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas. Eso far that you had to specialize. You couldn't be an expert and everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry. We might dedicate all our resource is too that pursuit as an individual. Meanwhile, there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that. Now this, Bush argued, presented a new challenge. How do we create a usable record of our discoveries? One that's easily navigable and remains relevant over time. While an older library classifications system might encompass several categories. It couldn't get his granular as our knowledge was growing to be, for example, the Library of Congress classifications system. Has 21 categories that you can use to group books together. But as our research and discoveries honed in on evermore precise slices of those categories, the system becomes less relevant. Because you've got no minor categories within those major categories, so it gets harder to start classifying things, Bush said. We needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult. But Oh, he went even further out than that, he said. To make it a really useful record. We need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to help the human mind works. Bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other, sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us, But on the very surface of it, they there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas. And you may have experienced this where you're thinking about one thing, and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related. And then you're able to relate the two. This is really human ingenuity. It's where innovation really takes off well, Bush said. That would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency. We could have the very least designed something that acknowledges that human trait so it works better for us. So if we did that, if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information We might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs. Ah, good system would be able to anticipate that and serve up the information for us. So Bush proposed a hypothetical system called mimics. M E m a X and that would use associative factors to organize information and a virtually limitless storage space again. This is hypothetical. There would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever it was. You were asking for that your query Essentially, he was talking about a conceptual model that the Internet attempts to realize I'll skip ahead to the 19 sixties. Then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan taught at Cornell University, and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model. Now this gets a bit mind bendy for people who haven't worked with Victor space models. But follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in and are day to day lives. Now, In our reality, we can perceive three dimensions and we experience 1/4 1 that of time. We cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves. So most the time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions on the information retrieval method that Salton setup, he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space. By the number of terms in a retrieval request. So if your request included five terms, the vector space model would have five dimensions. Documents within the model would virtually appear as vectors within the space, according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were president within the documents. The queries, and the documents are both vectors of the term counts. And just in case yours, Rusty on your physics terms as I am a vector is a quantity that has a magnitude and direction. So your terms have vectors. Your documents have vectors, And the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results, well, leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't mean a predetermined threshold of relevance. So you might say. I need to have X percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through and anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded. It's not. It's not served to me. And that saves you time when you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now, Suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms. But not necessarily their use within the document their context. So you couldn't retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search, but it has no real relevance to your actual needs. So that is a limitation of this model. But still, it was a pretty good starting point. The Sultan's work was incredibly important. Another big thinker who helped shape the course of what would become the Internet and the.

Vannevar Bush Google superintendent Microsoft Executive producer Library of Congress Library of Congress System Jerry Sultan Jerry Sultan Atlantic Monthly Khun Salton Cornell University Rusty scientist
"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

09:57 min | 2 years ago

"vannevar bush" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"The tax stuff I am your host Jonathan Strickland I'm an executive producer with how stuff works and I heart radio and I love all things tech and today I thought I'd talk a bit about internet search engines and how Google was able to sort of take the lead amongst a pack of competitors most of which came out well before Google dead now these days lots of people use Google as a word for web searching in general even though the company does way more than web search and there are still plenty of competitors that are still active that are out there I'm sure Microsoft would rather we all talk about bringing the heck out of things but. that doesn't happen I think we're now at the point where people talk about googling even if they're using a different search engines so how did that happen how did we get to that point well to explain how we got there it's a good idea to walk down memory lane I mean you know I love to do this every episode begins with a history lesson and to really look at how the idea of search engines developed and what things were like in the early days of the public internet and the web now first the idea of search engines predates both of those concepts by quite some time and it rose out of necessity it kind of evolved out of older methods of indexing so a predecessor to search engines are the various library classification systems. three big ones are the Dewey decimal system the library of Congress system and the superintendent of documents system the first two of those doesn't eight books with call numbers according to subject matter so you divide the books up based upon whatever subject they cover this can get a little complicated it is that and no pun intended subjective you have to determine where does the book best fit in the grand taxonomy of subjects. meanwhile the superintendent of documents system is totally different it doesn't divided up by subject it divides up books by the issuing agency responsible for the publication of the work so they just divided up by where the book came from not what the book covers whatever the system the purpose is the same as to make it possible for someone to track down a specific work in an enormous collection of works the word to figure out where to place a new work within an existing collection by classifying each work and then designating the physical location for that piece people can find stuff otherwise you just have an enormous pile of books with no organizational system at all and finding anything would take ages now Sunday I have to do an episode about the systems in more detail to talk about how they were developed and how they've evolved over time because it's actually pretty interesting story but we're gonna jump forward a bit not quite up to the computer age however rather we're gonna jump forward to the nineteen forties that's when a forward thinking fellow named Vannevar bush wrote an article for the Atlantic monthly the peace had the title as we may think and it contains some fairly Prashant ideas in it bush recognized that as we increase our knowledge we were beginning to specialize in certain fields out of necessity that you couldn't just be a general knowledge master eventually you were starting to develop our our knowledge in different areas so far that you had to specialize you couldn't be an expert in everything to get get a really deep understanding about a particular field such as physics or chemistry we might dedicate all our resources to that pursuit as an individual meanwhile there are other people who are exploring different subjects like pure mathematics or cosmology or something like that now this bush argued presented a new challenge how do we create a usable record of our discoveries one that's easily navigable and remains relevant. over time while an older library classification system might encompass several categories it couldn't get as granular as our knowledge was growing to be for example the library of Congress classification system has twenty one categories that you can use to group books together but as a research and discoveries honed in on ever more precise slices of those categories the system becomes less relevant because you've you've got. you don't. minor categories within those major categories and so it gets harder to start classifying things bush said we needed to have a record that could be continuously extended and easy to consult but he went even further out than that he said to make it a really useful record we need to structure it to respond to our queries in a way similar to how the human mind works bush argued that we think through associations we associate ideas with each other sometimes in pretty unusual ways in ways that might seem intuitive to us but on the very surface of it there there doesn't seem to be any relation between those ideas and you may have had experiences where you're thinking about one thing and you just start to think about a different thing that doesn't seem to be related and then you're able to relate to to this is really human ingenuity it's where innovation really takes off well bush said it would probably be impossible for us to create an artificial system that could replicate that tendency but we could at the very least design something betting knowledges that human trait so it works better for us so if we did that if we decide to search for a record for a particular type of information we might also see the opportunity to search for tangential data that is relevant to our needs a good system would be able to anticipate that and serve out the information for us so bush proposed a hypothetical system called minimax in E. M. E. acts and that would use associated factors to organize information in a virtually limitless storage space again this is hypothetical it would be a system that one could reference and send a retrieval command to get the most relevant information related to whatever was you were asking for your query essentially he was talking about a conceptual model that the internet attempts to realize. head to the nineteen sixties then you've got a computer scientist named Jerry sultan and Jerry sultan taught at Cornell University and he developed an indexing strategy using a vector space model now this gets a bit mind bending for people who haven't worked with vector space models but follow me here now start with an imaginary virtual space kind of analogous to the physical space we live in in our day to day lives now in our reality we can perceive three dimensions and we experience a fourth one that of time we cannot directly perceive any more than that ourselves so most the time we associate the physical world with three physical dimensions none the information retrieval method the Salton set up he defined the number of dimensions within his virtual space by the number of terms in a retrieval request so if your request included five terms the vector space model would have five dimensions documents within the model with virtually appear as vectors within the space according to which of the search terms were present within those documents and how frequently they were present within the documents the queries and the documents are both sectors of the term counts and just in case you're as rusty on your physics terms as I am a vector is a quantity that has a magnitude and a direction so your terms have vectors your documents have vectors and the goal is to identify the documents that are most similar to the initial query in an effort to retrieve the most relevant results well leaving out anything that doesn't meet the criteria or doesn't meet a predetermined threshold of relevance so you might say I need to have X. percentage match for the retrieval to actually come through in anything that doesn't meet that threshold gets discarded it's not it's not serve to me and that saves you time you start sorting through the results to see if any of those actually represent the information you were actually looking for now. suffice it to say this model really looks for the presence of specific terms but not necessarily their use within the document their context so you could end up retrieving a document that technically contains all the terms you used in the search but it has no real relevance to your actual needs so that is a limitation of this model but still it was a pretty good starting point two sons work was incredibly important another big thinker who helped shape the course of what would become the internet and the web there's a guy named Ted Nelson who in the nineteen sixties proposed an idea he called Xanadu and I'm not talking about the cheesy movie starring Olivia Newton John about roller skating Greek muses but as a side note I really love that movie no Nelson Xanadu was a hypothetical computer based writing system that would have a means to link different documents within a global depository so essentially he was talking about hypertext links which will allow users to navigate from document the document to relate documents together so that you could have a collection of documents about the same sort of of subject matter they make it very easy to reference different research it would also allow document creators to add their work to a growing collection of documents about similar subjects now on the web would incorporate many of Nelson's ideas he has stated that the web falls far short of what Xanadu was meant to do still those links will become very important for the web tech I mean you could argue the links are what make it a web in the first place the worldwide web there is a series of documents published on servers that have connective tissue between them that's the web that you navigate..

Jonathan Strickland executive producer