<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/516488</link>
		<description>Comments by jonathanjoseph</description>
<item>
<title>Feld Thoughts : The Maturing of the Implicit Web</title>
<link>http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/04/the-maturing-of-the-implicit-web.html#IDComment19691659</link>
<description>Thought provoking as usual, Brad. And while I know that you are far smarter than I, I remain skeptical that any near term technology can solve the implicit web problem.  And its for the same reason that Cuil, Powerset, et al will never challenge Google. While semantic/natural language search is far superior to keyword/Boolean search in theory, in practice the technology does not work effectively at web scale. Similarly, I do not believe that any horizontal algorithm can find what I am looking for without my intervention (i.e. the kinds of semantic content discovery companies that debuted at the recent DEMO).  I think many would agree that the leading practicitioner of the implicit web to date is @Gabe, and Techmeme is not only vertically oriented but I found it very telling that he recently added a human/editorial function. And I believe that there will not be any algorithm or technology that can solve this problem by itself in the short or medium term.   I think both vertical focus and editorial intervention will be required for any real adoption. $.02 </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/04/the-maturing-of-the-implicit-web.html#IDComment19691659</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>