Slashdot Mirror
Randomly Generated Paper Accepted to Conference
mldqj writes "Some students at MIT wrote a program called SCIgen - An Automatic CS Paper Generator. From their website: SCIgen is a program that generates random Computer Science research papers, including graphs, figures, and citations. What's amazing is that one of their randomly generated paper was accepted to WMSCI 2005. Now they are accepting donation to fund their trip to the conference and give a randomly generated talk."
Random Post!
Using the Freedom of Speech while I still have it.
Their original plan was to do this with a patent application instead... but decided they needed a challenge.
In other news a randomly generated story submission was accepted by /. moderators.
NMG
n/t
Before any liberals are tempted to mod up one of my comments, a word of warning: I'm actually making fun of you.
Do they accept randomly generated quotes from Linus Torvalds? ;)
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
or has it already happened?
downtown Holland, Michigan is in flames as a randomly assembled protest practices their own brand of metamoderation.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Whats the equivalent monkeys per typewriter power of this software?
Starsucks
I for one welcome our new randomly generated comment/story overlords from soviet russia where comment posts you.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Don't forget Mazieres and Kohler's great submission as well, "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List"
Test your net with Netalyzr
Click here before you moderate!!!
I, not being one of the many insolent, vicious used-car salesmen of this world, am going to make this short but sweet: In this era of rising sesquipedalianism, we must shine a light on slashdot's efforts to test another formula for silencing serious opposition. That's self-evident, and even slashdot would probably agree with me on that. Even so, I have to wonder where it got the idea that it is my view that my bitterness at it is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. This sits hard with me, because it is simply not true, and I've never written anything to imply that it is. Let's start with my claim that slashdot's inveracities are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called "lying". I like to think I'm a reasonable person, but you just can't reason with brutal, disgusting junkies. It's been tried. They don't understand, they can't understand, they don't want to understand, and they will die without understanding why all we want is for them not to keep us perennially behind the eight ball. Now, I don't mean for that to sound pessimistic, although if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which slashdot may impose a particular curriculum, vision of history, and method of pedagogy on our school systems one of these days, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that I want to give people more information about slashdot, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here's one conclusion I definitely hope people draw: Slashdot's callous, raving beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments) condemn innocent people to death. Slashdot then blames us for that. Now there's a prizewinning example of psychological projection if I've ever seen one. I want to make this clear, so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony -- and you know who I'm referring to -- can process my point.
Slashdot prizes wealth and celebrity over and above decent morals and sound judgment. Now, I could go off on that point alone, but it continuously seeks adulation from its bedfellows. If you doubt this, just ask around. I once had a nightmare in which slashdot was free to make widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, slashdot's magic-bullet explanations are thoroughly otiose. Let's remember that. This is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to instill distrust and thereby create a need for its dictatorial views. Not yet, at least. But it argues that the most ridiculous pip-squeaks you'll ever see are easily housebroken. I wish I could suggest some incontrovertible chain of apodictic reasoning that would overcome this argument, but the best I can do is the following: It possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, it can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it. Slashdot says it's going to make a big deal out of nothing faster than you can say "gastrohysterorrhaphy". Is it out of its malign mind? The answer is fairly obvious when you consider that this is kind of a touchy subject to some people. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement, but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation. This letter has gone on far too long, in my opinion, and probably yours as well. So let me end it by saying merely that slashdot measures the value of a man by the amount of profit it can realize from him.
A monkey-typewriter (note: not monkey per typerwirter) is a unit of improbable entropy equal to the decible level of 350 grams of feces hurled at 1 ft per second into a plexiglass barrier.
"If you don't believe me, go look at the mission statement of any big company. It doesn't read like English."
How else do you expect them to stretch "To make money" out to fill up an entire page?
http://bbspot.com/toys/slashtitle/
:)
Admit it. You would swear you're looking at a real slashdot story
Technoli
The more obscure your references are and the more complicated your train of thought, the smarter you must be, right?
Seems to work for Dennis Miller.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
You are surely informed about the undeniable fact that there are some required statements to be said about the absolute absence of anything resembling content. It enables you to produce large amounts of texts without the need of unnecessary using the central nervous system.
... still too short. Err, I mean, the length still lets something to be desired. Err ... the total number of words is clearly beyond the threshold of acceptability. Ok, that's better, next try: The total number of words the above text actually consists of can easily be seen to clearly be beyond the business-standard threshold of acceptability. Yes, that's it! ;-)
Hmmm
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
we should pit this against the essay autograder and see what grade we get. then we can refind it so it always generates A+ worthy papers.
HD Trailers
How do you feel about Randomly generated paper accepted to conference?
I clicked the link and created a random article. Before it appeared I went to the bathroom, got a snack, etc etc etc. A while later I came back and started reading the article.
By then I forgot all about it being randomly generated. I was trying to read it and I asked myself, "Why the fuck did I open this link, it makes no sense?!" A couple seconds later I remembered.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
With fava beans?
How have you been Clarisse?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Mail you transportation fund donation to a random address.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
>>I would like it to create millions or billions of these works...
Billions? Why bother? Based on my listening experience, Clearchannel and the record execs seem to have built empires on no more than three variations.
So keep it simple. Who needs the Circle of Fifths, or any of those pesky black piano keys when C-G-D and some random notes/rap over a drum track (serving as the bridge) will do? Repeat "ad naseum"
1) happy, mindless dance tune by teen-star-du-jour. 90beats per minute minimum, bass drum is primary instrument. May require heavy use of DSP processing to keep singer on pitch.
2) Rap about rapper knocking other rappers off the top of the charts and or "crunk whack party", "bustin' caps" or "dubs." Word "bitches" is mandatory. Threatening violence is a plus. Don't forget shout out to imprisoned/dead homies on extended mix version.
3) Wheezy, whiny country & western tune, mandatory mentions include pickup truck, whiskey. Extra chart-topping potential for use of word "fool".
Using various probability statistics, I've developed a random /. comment generator that'll always, without fail, get me a +5 Insightful! Let's see how this goes...
Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux
To cancel it out, I also wrote one that guarantees -5 Flamebait, too:
Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft Microsoft
random moderation is also very common here though...
You can't handle the truth.
The founder of what is now a very large software company I used to work for suggested this as the mission statement when they needed one before they went public:
"Whores for money."
Later on in the same company (after it went public) each department needed it's own mission statement. I worked in technical support at the time and our director suggested this:
"Answer phone when ring."
None of us now work there.
From the summary: Now they are accepting donation to fund their trip to the conference and give a randomly generated talk.
I wonder if they'd accept a randomly generated credit card number?
Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
Yes, but did you look at the paper? Figure 6 on "millennium hash tables" (which I admit shows an excellent linear relationship) plots the dependence of "seek time (cylinders)" on "latency (celcius)". Figure 3 measures "time since 1977" in teraflops. Okay--maybe reading the paper is too much to ask, but couldn't they at least have looked at the pictures?
I dare say that the paper is "obviously ridiculous".
~Idarubicin
I had a hard time trying to figure out what they were trying to say at first, but the graph in fig. 2 finally made it all clear.
The paper really needed more graphics.
KFG
I actually thought the reply was brilliant. The guy clearly looked at the paper, looked at it again and decided that he would not insult any reviewer by exposing them to blatant nonsense that was in the paper. Then, after being asked for the reviews, he answers in the same style as the paper, complete with obscure and irrelevant references. Score 1 for the organizer, I thought.
My apologies to Professor Callaos if he actually is Nigerian.
It must have taken them a really long time to type all that.
TOTAL SCORE: 41 (a new world record)
The quest for a computer which has the intelligence of a human is going to succeed, and fairly soon.
It won't be accomplished by advances in AI algorithms or hardware, though.
All we have to do is wait for the average level of human intelligence to fall far enough, and the current software will have accomplished the feat!
You know, if you had any education, you would easily notice the difference between sentences like "The premise of predialectic materialism suggests that expression comes from the collective unconscious" and something written by a pomo-head. Both 'dialectical materialism' and 'collective unconcious' are clearly defined (although the latter doesn't seem to exist), and every "scholar" can see that the concepts can't be used like that.
The reason why you can't tell how many such essays you've had to read is, of course, that you've had to read exactly none, and it would totally spoil your joke if you told us.
So basically, you're being a pretentious fucktard by trying to fool people into believing you're smart enough to discover, all by your own hard work, that postmodernism is a bunch of meaningless pseudo-randomly generated junk. It probably is, for the most part, but you don't know anything about it.