My YC idea: User-created-language
What if we could communicate beyond words?
The idea is fairly simple. Creating a database of images for each word. For each word in the dictionary their will be images (that best describe it) uploaded by users. Now someone can write a a letter and most of the words, if not all, will be converted into images and sent to the recipient who can also decipher the message after attempting to read it.
I want to create a real interaction in messages. One that goes beyond words.
To make it smart, I will use the a YCnews voting style for each image.
BTW, I can use one more hacker
23 comments
[ 15.9 ms ] story [ 168 ms ] threadWhat would be the point? Sure it might be technically interesting to code etc. but this just introduces inefficiency to communication.
There's a reason we evolved from cave paintings and hieroglyphics to written form.
How would explain a concept such as searching? Or a hyperlink?
Granted those are some contrived examples, but whatever problems we have with text and losses in translation, we'll also have (perhaps to a lesser extent, perhaps to a greater extent) in picture messaging.
These are just my 2 cents.
5000 years from now, I hope we would have advanced enough to instantly translate (correctly) from one language to another. Or just speak one language.
Instead of this we must take x to w (w > x) and then reduce w to z. A human translator going exactly this way.
Sapir Whorf probably wasn't the right article to cite. There are studies which names escape me now. But long story short, there is no solid mapping between pictures and concepts. The textbook example is "what is a chair?"
What picture would you use? A four-leg? A stool (what is a stool, actually?)? A lazybone? A king's throne?
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype_Theory
It's just a problem I'm pointing out, and that a YC-style voting is not going to realize the potential of the idea. But my case about the prototype is very solid though. Your definition of a chair is not "correct." Nobody's is. I happen to lay my buttox on a teapot, now it's also a chair. Not trying to cavil here, but think of how that would affect your program if you type "chair" and a teapot shows up.
The other direction, which I hope is not what you are hinting at, is a universal mapping of words to pictures. From what I know, historically and theoretically, this is impossible. For one, universal language attemps have failed (esperanto being the largest ever and it's a dud). For two, not all word forms have concrete representations (try meta-concepts, the concept that represents, and even "meta-concepts" itself). For three, Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-Whorf_hypothesis
Language is a statistical thing; every new utterance communicated adds more data to the pool. Hence, even while there are dictionaries, the very second a definition is written down, if somebody uses the word, the definition is no longer perfect. In conjunction, there will never be a "best match" picture for a word.
If this is really your idea, consider not doing voting on pictures, but rather making a gigantic, associative map of words across languages. That will have immense educational value.
(if I remember correctly)
You can view sample pages here:
http://www.macrovu.com/VLBkExmplPgsMenu.html