Posted by Jefferey Bridges on September 29, 2002 at 20:28:29:

In Reply to: Re: Comparing Search Engine posted by KK Aw on September 29, 2002 at 19:39:40:

The comparison was drawn between the specific human driven incomplete-invalidated-unreliable-taxonomy and a multiple-machine-and-multiple-human-generated index of targeted and focused information. The discussion was about your providing evidence of updated, rich, and context-sensitive information about specific KM technologies from the site that you favored a lot. And absence of that evidence in your response suggests that the alternative site does not have any page that can substantiate your earlier assertion. Hopefully, your silence on that question would help you take a more critical and skeptical view of any 'single' information source out there. I believe each of the processes (human-, machine-, or combination) has some upside and downside, but in some instances humans can use creativity and innovation to develop machine-based interfaces to better handle the routine stuff and focus their attention on the more interesting value-added stuff where machines have limited capabilities - isn't that what knowledge management is all about.

You also missed to see that Google is just one of the indexed link offered from within the KMNetwork portal interface, besides rank-weighted results from other search engines (meta search), search on articles from publications, compiled jobs from multiple job sites (meta job search), and book search. Anyway Google is good for general purpose search just like other search engines, whereas, what we are talking about here is "portal-on-demand" that is dynamically generated and updated with latest resources, articles, web sites, jobs, books, etc relevant to the search query. I hope you enjoyed the very interesting tête-à-tête as much as I did ;-)

---

Follow Ups:

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: