Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bible Semantic Search

share.streamlit.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 93 posts

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#81

Post by wincy »

dbrueck wrote: post #24
wincy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Must be for Mormons. They only read the King James Version because otherwise the Book of Mormon would sound super weird seeing as how it’s the worlds most popular Bible fanfic. Source: technically a Mormon.

Not really. It's true that KJV is the default for English speakers, but less than half of the church's members are native English speakers. Even among those that speak English, many study the NIV and ESV, for example. It's not even that uncommon to hear non-KJV quotes in GenCon for that matter.

Hey today I learned, thanks! I catch maybe five minutes of General Conference, my wife’s more likely to watch it than I am. I was also very confused about what a tabletop gaming convention founded by Gary Gygax (of Dungeons and Dragons fame) had to do with Mormons at first hahah.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#82

Post by _8j50 »

Is this site hijacking just my history or something (can't get back to hn after opening it all the history is spammed with their own domain). Poor quality site this behavior should be discouraged.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#83

Post by gibspaulding »

xhrpost wrote: post #68
chrislee973 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, creator of the Bible Semantic Search app here. I 100% agree with you. I hacked together this prototype for the purposes of learning the Pinecone API rather than fine-tuning a language model, but I'm still pleasantly surprised by the quality of the search results despite all the shortcomings you mentioned. The results aren't great, but they're decent. I'm surprised how well SBERT works out of the box considering…

Some modern translations might have copyright rules preventing this without express permission (which may or may not be difficult to acquire, obviously other sites/apps have done it). They all have different rules and limitations but I remember reading that the NET Bible was specifically built for more permissive copyright requirements in the Internet age.

I just looked up NET because I was thinking the same thing, but it seems their free license is strictly for print versions and As someone else pointed out, the WEB translation is public domain so it might be a better option.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#84

Post by gk1 »

michaelmior wrote: post #78
angrygoat wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does pinecone compare to pgvector? https://github.com/pgvector/pgvector

Milvus[0] would be another interesting comparison. [0] https://milvus.io/

Same general difference: Pinecone is SaaS that's ready to go with a few API calls, while Milvus an open-source tool that requires work to set up, scale, and maintain.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#85

Post by hnal943 »

overthemoon wrote: post #80
the_only_law wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the KJV popular among evangelical sects as well? I remember seeing more of those as a kid than any modernized version.

At least when I was growing up it was the New International Version. You were a fundie if you insisted on the KJV or the NKJV among people I knew.

The NIV changed their interpretive philosophy around the turn of the century to favor gender neutral language. Most churches switched to ESV at that point.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#86

Post by hnal943 »

eru wrote: post #25
wincy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Must be for Mormons. They only read the King James Version because otherwise the Book of Mormon would sound super weird seeing as how it’s the worlds most popular Bible fanfic. Source: technically a Mormon.

Well, I guess the Bible is also its own 'fanfic', as not every part was written at the same time and some later parts clearly reference earlier parts.

Fanfic would imply that the work is non-canon, wouldn't it? The bible represents some of the earliest arguments about what is canon.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#87

Post by stosto88 »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #10

SBERT isn't trained on this type of archaic English and you can see it failing. It needs to be fine tuned or you should use a modern Bible translation. A clear example is the query: "homosexuality" This returns: > James 2:3 - And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool It's clearly seei…

No post body was provided.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#88

Post by michaelmior »

gk1 wrote: post #84
michaelmior wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Milvus[0] would be another interesting comparison. [0] https://milvus.io/

Same general difference: Pinecone is SaaS that's ready to go with a few API calls, while Milvus an open-source tool that requires work to set up, scale, and maintain.

I meant in terms of performance, but all those points are certainly true.

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#89

Post by telotortium »

Amezarak wrote: post #62
chrislee973 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I figured it was the quintessential version of the Bible ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. I'm not religious so cut me some slack haha. Looking back, I should've used a version using modern English.

KJV is still wildly popular and some sects even regard it as an inspired translation. Never heard that about anything else. NKJV is more readable for people who grew up reading blog posts instead of old books and generally retains the poetry of the KJV, but it's under copyright. I think it would be allowed for a use like this though, because they explicitly allow (as do most translations) quoting up to a certain numb…

My understanding of the Eastern Orthodox Church is that they see the Septuagint as an inspired translation of the Old Testament (from Hebrew to Koine Greek).

Re: Bible Semantic Search

#90

Post by elihu »

anjbe wrote: post #67
elihu wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...another reason is that KJV is not currently under copyright, unlike (as far as I know) all modern English translations.

Fun fact: in the United Kingdom, the King James Version is still copyrighted—perpetually copyrighted, in fact—by (who else?) the British monarchy. Since the author of this app is based in the United States, he should be safe… we have a bit of precedent for ignoring royal prerogatives here :)

Interesting.
Post reply on HN