zlacker

>>mdszy+(OP)
in my experience, most people dismiss cyc as a failed science experiment. this shouldnt be! after all, many important deep learning concepts have their roots in the 80s, and it is possible that cyc could be revived too.

>>one_el+Lw
CYC effectively died the day OpenCYC died. There is no way that an entity that tries to catalogue human knowledge in this way will thrive on a closed set of data, there are only so many people working there.

Just like the Encyclopedia Brittanica has found its match in WikiPedia so CYC will find its match in something open. The engine - if the comments here are to be believed as still currently relevant - is a core that may be relevant and a huge number of domain specific hacks. Let's hope sooner or later CYC management comes to their senses and revives OpenCYC.

>>jacque+fo1
That is SUMO Ontology (http://ontologyportal.org)! It is open, in GitHub and people can contribute.