As the accuracy of conventional classifiers, based only on a static partitioning of feature space, appears to be approaching a limit, it may be useful to consider alternative approaches. Interactive classification is often more accurate then algorithmic classification, and requires less time than the unaided human. It is more suitable for the recognition of natural patterns in a narrow domain like trees, weeds or faces than for symbolic patterns like letters and phonemes. On the other hand, symbolic patterns lend themselves better to using context and style to recognize entire fields instead of individual patterns. Algorithmic learning and adaptation is facilitated by accurate statistics gleaned from large samples in the case of symbolic patterns, and by skilled human judgment in the case of natural patterns. Recent technological advances like pocket computers, camera phones and wireless networks will have greater influence on mobile, distributed, interactive recognition of natural pat...