The New Scientist article came out (nothing online). From the project blog.

The semantic blogging demonstrator has quite a broad scope. The idea is to enrich a blog with semantic metadata and then to do cool things with that metadata. The article describes a way to get metadata into the blog in the first place, using assisted categorisation. That is indeed an essential part of the picture. But once we have that, we can use that metadata to drive the blog view (semantic view), guide our browsing (semantic navigation) and search more effectively (semantic query). This is pretty much the vision I outlined at blogtalk. And we are working on the functionality to demonstrate (in a modest way) that vision.

Surfing in the wee hours, I saw a godblogger's post. He said God's favor was evident in some things happening to people. Three local examples were given, including someone finding a desparately needed job. God's favor. So, When your life sucks, that's because you're in God's doghouse? What happened to God the egalitarian? The everyone is equal before the Lord god?

I find it easier to believe (not saying I do) that God is busy keeping the universe's plumbing running, souls burning bright, and rooting for us to make good choices. The kind of God who set up the pool table, racked 'em up, and shot, not touching the balls in motion.  

Free will? An illusion rising from insufficient information. Compared to an omniscience, we're ignorant of the nuances of causation. What makes pool interesting, a game of skill, is what we don't know. We don't know the micro variances among ball masses and surface textures, the felt's lie, the exact force and vector applied with an imperfect cue on a table that isn't exactly level. With perfect knowledge, the results of each shot could be forecast, perfectly. But how boring is that? 

Can any of you philosophy majors name who said this first and better?

[a klog apart]

tekka maki and blog roll.

Note to self: more offline life.

[a klog apart]