[Sigia-l] ROI/Value of Search Engine Design - Resources?

[Boniface Lau]

> From: sigia-l-admin at asis.org [mailto:sigia-l-admin at asis.org]On
> Behalf Of paula.thornton
>  
> Jared: I looked at http://www.findlaw.com. It looked like a lot of
> 'noise' to me (but then I'm ADHD -- mentally distracted by visual
> noise, seeks to avoid/get past such situations quickly -- hmmm,
> wonder if you've filtered for that in your research?) [a specific
> artifact showing that knowing something about someone's background
> helps in understanding their response, Mr. Lau].

Thank you. I heard that insight meditation is helpful for people with
ADHD.


> 
> My question is, how are you accounting for the learning concepts
> brought forward by the studies of Quantum Theory: (1) that the act
> of observation 'slants' the results to the universe of understanding
> of the observer 

That is why it is important to form a hypothesis and agreeing on a way
of interpreting data _before_ doing data collection.

Data collected at the end of a chain of events does not explain
things. It only confirms or denies a hypothesis. When there is no
hypothesis to start with, data collection is a great candidate for
abuse because people can project bias on to the collected data or even
massage the data to fit hidden agenda.

Thus, when Jared joined this discussion, I wanted to trace his logic
to understand his theory or hypothesis behind his conclusion.
Unfortunately, Jared balked at such attempt.


> and (2) that looking at an individual activity separated from its
> whole can provide 'misleading' observations/conclusions?

Thus, it is not sufficient to just observe. People need to form models
and validate them. 

Two persons observing the same phenomenon can have drastically
different conclusions. Having data does not mean a conclusion is
valid. You need a validated model or theory to back up your
conclusion. If a conclusion (http://www.uie.com/searchar.htm) has
holes in its supporting logic
(http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/0302/0200print.html) the
conclusion is flawed. Data is not a substitute for reasoning. 

Intelligence is not in data, but in people's mind.


[...]
> 
> Perhaps, by focusing on his own strengths, Jared provides a valuable
> 'start' to the work yet to be done (he's gathering 'local'
> artifacts).

It would really help if Jared could engage in logical discussions
regarding his opinions based on his collected data. 


Boniface