WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
Moderators: eye_of_tiger, shalimar123, RishiRahul
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
…
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
Re: WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
Yes absolutely! The human astrologer; but many would not believe that.Rohiniranjan wrote:…
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
Rishi
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Re: WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
Yes Rishi, but the point really is that those yogas and text-book canned phrases are giving a very inaccurate and incomplete reading and despite all kinds of 'anecdotal' claims and bravado (sorry no other fitting word!) that we see on the web and off the web, there must be something more to an astrological readingRishiRahul wrote:Yes absolutely! The human astrologer; but many would not believe that.Rohiniranjan wrote:…
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
Rishi
Until that can be understood and analyzed and incorporated, interpretive software would simply remains 'toys'! :smt015 :smt020
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
Re: WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
Rohiniranjan wrote:Yes Rishi, but the point really is that those yogas and text-book canned phrases are giving a very inaccurate and incomplete reading and despite all kinds of 'anecdotal' claims and bravado (sorry no other fitting word!) that we see on the web and off the web, there must be something more to an astrological readingRishiRahul wrote:Yes absolutely! The human astrologer; but many would not believe that.Rohiniranjan wrote:…
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
Rishi
Until that can be understood and analyzed and incorporated, interpretive software would simply remains 'toys'! :smt015 :smt020
My guess is that the answer is in rasi dasas, more than vimshottari===my guess though.
Rather vimshottari and rasi dasas together.
Rishi
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
Re: WHY COMPUTERIZED PREDICTIONS DO NOT WORK…?
Rohiniranjan wrote:Yes Rishi, but the point really is that those yogas and text-book canned phrases are giving a very inaccurate and incomplete reading and despite all kinds of 'anecdotal' claims and bravado (sorry no other fitting word!) that we see on the web and off the web, there must be something more to an astrological readingRishiRahul wrote:Yes absolutely! The human astrologer; but many would not believe that.Rohiniranjan wrote:…
Even before astrology met with the computer, going back to the early 80s, even knowledgeable people had been toying with the dream that once the algorithms are programmed in computers (software) would make astrological predictions a cinch! Earlier software catering to tropical astrology focused on astrological calculations -- and indeed that happened to be the main niche for computers in astrology. Even in the early 80s software attempted at producing an astrological report or two; however, these tended to be general, descriptive character analyses of variable accuracy and other than entertainment, of questionable value! Somewhere later in that decade people began to witness early computerized attempts on the sidereal (Vedic astrology) side of things. Most of these strictly remain focused on calculations, rudimentary and partial at first but with each version of individual software more and more calculations got added to these. Most of these were produced by people who were well-versed in programming but were obviously relying on others (astrologers) for advice on what to include which resulted in some variability (repertoire, accuracy, options available etc.). A few of the software on the PC side never broke the MS-DOS "barrier" or vanished after the early windows versions. Of the ones remaining standing a novel feature breathed new life and interest in the jyotish software pallet. This was in the form of astrological reports, identification of the numerous planetary combinations available in jyotish and interpretations thereof. While these were of immense utility to beginners who were bobbing up and down confusedly overwhelmed by the ocean of information and possibilities inherent in jyotish, based on feedback and observations my impression is that very few beginners ended up availing of these. Some of it could be linked to the lack of serious or sincere interest possessed by the individuals, further offset by the cost of software which typically ran into hundreds of dollars and probably did not just justify the expense for the beginners. Some professionals tried these as well but found the reports somewhat lopsided, incomplete or even confusing. By the late 90s and later jyotish saw a reemergence of techniques which used to be quite cumbersome to calculate by hand plus many of these were used by silos of practitioners earlier. Jyotish as we have it today, though richer on the one hand, has also become a smorgasbord resplendent with "variations on a theme". Meaning, multiple opinions exist on how to calculate or interpret a given para-meter or combination (yoga etc.). Lots of confusion!
Through all this upheaval the interpretive report (as well as research features) remained on the side and in some cases with all the typographical errors, weird syntax, grammatical errors and similar nightmares! In short, less than useful.
The common problem with most of these interpretive software has to do with the algorithm which only looks at one factor at a time and then tries to SUMMATE the reading fragments somewhat ineffectively. Now most jyotishis do not operate exactly in that way but likely use their quick cerebral analytical synthetic ability to judge the participation of the astrological factors, while keeping in view weighting factors such as shadebala, ashtakavargas as well as modulating considerations: a whole slew of those! And this is just skimming the surface of what goes on inside the mind of the astrologer! It is little wonder that the software attempts made so far, though heroic, leave a bad taste in the mouth (of the jyotishi as well as the Nativity or client). A big factor obviously that stood in the way of development of the predictive side of Astro software is that software development is costly business and the market for jyotish software simply does not exist. Calculations on the other hand are easier and a lot simpler to incorporate and evidently huge strides have been made in that area. Ironically though with the plethora of options and preferences available many beginners and even experts find it confusing to operate the software efficiently. Those who like to experiment have to meticulously remember to reset the changed para meters back to their normal default for their paid work!
I suppose the silver lining in all this is that the human astrologer shall remain irreplaceable for some time! ; –)
Rishi
Until that can be understood and analyzed and incorporated, interpretive software would simply remains 'toys'! :smt015 :smt020
My guess is that the answer is in rasi dasas, more than vimshottari===my guess though.
Rather vimshottari and rasi dasas together.
Rishi
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Easy to program. What I meant <LOL>RishiRahul wrote:Rohiniranjan wrote:Okay <LOL>
That should be simple!
What I merant was the common facyor amongst the two; and Palmistry and /numerology would help make the timing precise, and simple.
Just with astrology it doesnt become simple; at least for me too.
Rishi
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Rishirahul thinks that the problem with jyotish interpretive software (and why those are ridiculously inadequate and imprecise!) is because those do not incorporate numerology and palmistry.
That may or may not be the widely acceptable view, unfortunately.
That also unnecessarily distracts from the main premise of this thread, namely, that existing minority of such (jyotish) software that attempts at interpretive reports relies on recognising *patterns* in a chart and then utilizes 'canned' phrases from jyotish books (old and new) in the naïve hope that those canned phrases actually capture reality. It is almost like trying to complete a jig-saw puzzle using a few pieces only. The 'gaps' is what existing software has no built-in programming algorithm to fill up, whereas the human brain (well-trained and experienced) intelligently, intuitively-imaginatively fills those. The process is somewhat similar to what photo-editing software (photohop, lightroom, DXOmark etc) manages to do when it is trying to remove blemishes or using masking etc through layers. Layers can be seen as single or simple factors, the composite then moves closer to reality.
So, rather than getting distracted and waylaid by numbers or lines etc, the interpretive programmers should first focus on jyotih 'LAYERS" or else it would result in another plate-full of canine delicacies, I'm afraid! :smt018
That may or may not be the widely acceptable view, unfortunately.
That also unnecessarily distracts from the main premise of this thread, namely, that existing minority of such (jyotish) software that attempts at interpretive reports relies on recognising *patterns* in a chart and then utilizes 'canned' phrases from jyotish books (old and new) in the naïve hope that those canned phrases actually capture reality. It is almost like trying to complete a jig-saw puzzle using a few pieces only. The 'gaps' is what existing software has no built-in programming algorithm to fill up, whereas the human brain (well-trained and experienced) intelligently, intuitively-imaginatively fills those. The process is somewhat similar to what photo-editing software (photohop, lightroom, DXOmark etc) manages to do when it is trying to remove blemishes or using masking etc through layers. Layers can be seen as single or simple factors, the composite then moves closer to reality.
So, rather than getting distracted and waylaid by numbers or lines etc, the interpretive programmers should first focus on jyotih 'LAYERS" or else it would result in another plate-full of canine delicacies, I'm afraid! :smt018
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Absolutely in agreement with you Talia, and that is why this thread. It is nothing particular to or special about thee divinatory modalities, but related to the inadequacy of algorithms (programming) that exist in currently available software!Talia wrote:Forgive me for but in, but any software cannot reproduce or come close to a talented reader whatever the modality. It happens all the time with tarot too, and althoug I do not understand (yet) your jyotishi words I can understand the logic behind them
My sense is that the current limitations are imposed on software oracles because the 'delineative' process that human oracles use is unclear! It often varies from one to another, and in this consideration (software) further 'muddied' by the use of intuitive processes which are often not clearly understood by the oracles and many of them perhaps not even aware of those consciously of such!
If you think about this, it is symbolically that mercurian process (logic) is slower and subject to 'to and fro', whereas moon proceeds blazingly fast (relatively-speaking) and forwards only!
Just as a 'curve' is really a large collection of straight lines, although may not seem so, the analogy may well serve the current matter too?
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
Rohiniranjan wrote:Rishirahul thinks that the problem with jyotish interpretive software (and why those are ridiculously inadequate and imprecise!) is because those do not incorporate numerology and palmistry.
That may or may not be the widely acceptable view, unfortunately.
That also unnecessarily distracts from the main premise of this thread, namely, that existing minority of such (jyotish) software that attempts at interpretive reports relies on recognising *patterns* in a chart and then utilizes 'canned' phrases from jyotish books (old and new) in the naïve hope that those canned phrases actually capture reality. It is almost like trying to complete a jig-saw puzzle using a few pieces only. The 'gaps' is what existing software has no built-in programming algorithm to fill up, whereas the human brain (well-trained and experienced) intelligently, intuitively-imaginatively fills those. The process is somewhat similar to what photo-editing software (photohop, lightroom, DXOmark etc) manages to do when it is trying to remove blemishes or using masking etc through layers. Layers can be seen as single or simple factors, the composite then moves closer to reality.
So, rather than getting distracted and waylaid by numbers or lines etc, the interpretive programmers should first focus on jyotih 'LAYERS" or else it would result in another plate-full of canine delicacies, I'm afraid! :smt018
The human brain is far better and intelligent than any astrological software; rather any predictive software.
Adding palmistry and numerology to Jyotish softwares will not only distract or move away from the main essence of this thread, but the software will probably become impossible to formulate.
I was only mentioning the predictive solution to predicting timings for Yogas are quite difficult, so was suggesting a solution to it.
My fault that I was misunderstood.
RishiRahul
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Software has made great progress in fairly short years and lots of folks trust their lives to those. All the unmanned navigation systems and more being developed continually. Human mind, on the other hand instead of growing seems to be regressing as evident from the rising crime, wars, unrest etc.RishiRahul wrote: ...
The human brain is far better and intelligent than any astrological software; rather any predictive software.
Adding palmistry and numerology to Jyotish softwares will not only distract or move away from the main essence of this thread, but the software will probably become impossible to formulate.
I was only mentioning the predictive solution to predicting timings for Yogas are quite difficult, so was suggesting a solution to it.
My fault that I was misunderstood.
RishiRahul
So I think it is not as much about differential states between silicon software and carbon-based software (brain), but lack of information about how astrologers proceed when reading a chart or numerologists or tarot-practitioners etc. Sometimes the lack of info is because of commercial reluctance, at other times less than complete awareness in the practitioner him/herself. Sometimes worse...!
- RishiRahul
- Astrology Reader
- Posts: 7193
- Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
- Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
- Contact:
Rohiniranjan wrote:Software has made great progress in fairly short years and lots of folks trust their lives to those. All the unmanned navigation systems and more being developed continually. Human mind, on the other hand instead of growing seems to be regressing as evident from the rising crime, wars, unrest etc.RishiRahul wrote: ...
The human brain is far better and intelligent than any astrological software; rather any predictive software.
Adding palmistry and numerology to Jyotish softwares will not only distract or move away from the main essence of this thread, but the software will probably become impossible to formulate.
I was only mentioning the predictive solution to predicting timings for Yogas are quite difficult, so was suggesting a solution to it.
My fault that I was misunderstood.
RishiRahul
So I think it is not as much about differential states between silicon software and carbon-based software (brain), but lack of information about how astrologers proceed when reading a chart or numerologists or tarot-practitioners etc. Sometimes the lack of info is because of commercial reluctance, at other times less than complete awareness in the practitioner him/herself. Sometimes worse...!
Thats true. The softawres have much progress lately over the years.
Without the human mind the software couldn't have progressed as much; in fact the human mind and technology has helped softwares' to better.
To Incorporate the timings of events such as yogas' (for example), the astrologers need to decide how to find out the time themselves (the method of finding the time for yoga fructification), to be able to incorporate it in the softwares.
Rishi
-
- Posts: 7470
- Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
- Location: N.A.
Rishi ji Maharaj, either the humans have already figured that out or the so called castle of infalliable astrology is one big balloon filled with...? :smt004RishiRahul wrote: ...
Thats true. The softawres have much progress lately over the years.
Without the human mind the software couldn't have progressed as much; in fact the human mind and technology has helped softwares' to better.
To Incorporate the timings of events such as yogas' (for example), the astrologers need to decide how to find out the time themselves (the method of finding the time for yoga fructification), to be able to incorporate it in the softwares.
Rishi
Even before this example you interestingly chose, namely, time of yoga fructification -- rules would have to be established and laid out in the software for: When is a yoga a mere mirage! :smt003
Just to bring the wild ponies back to the ranch -- ?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests