Slashdot Mirror
Crossword Database Analysis Spots What Looks Like Plagiarism
Seattle software developer Saul Pwanson has a hobby of developing crossword puzzles, but another related hobby, too: analyzing the way that existing puzzles have been constructed. He created a database that aggregates puzzles that have appeared in various publications, including, crucially, the New York Times and USA Today, and sorts them based on similarities. Puzzles that have a greater percentage of the same black squares, or the same letters in identical positions, are ranked as more similar. Crosswords often re-use answers; puzzle-solvers are used to encountering some of the usual glue words that connect parts of the grid. As 538 reports, though, Pwanson noticed something odd in the data: Many of the puzzles that appeared in USA Today and affiliated publications, listed under various creators' names but all published under Timothy Parker as editor, were highly similar to each other, differing in as little as four answer words. These Pwanson classifies as "shoddy" -- they seem to be about as different as test responses based on a passed-around answer sheet. These seem to shortchange readers expecting original works, but may represent no real copyright problem, since Universal Uclick holds the copyright to them all. Perhaps puzzle enthusiasts aren't surprised that a publishing syndicate economizes on crosswords with slight variations, or that horoscopes are sometimes recycled.
However, another tranche of puzzles Pwanson calls "shady": these are puzzles that bear such strong resemblance in their central clues and answers to puzzles that have appeared in the New York Times that it's very hard to accept Parker's claim that the overlap is coincidental. In one example given, for instance, the answers "Drive Up the Wall," "Get On One's Nerves," and "Rub the Wrong Way" appeared in the same order and the same position in a Parker-edited puzzle that appeared in USA Today in June 2010 as they had in a Will Shortz-edited puzzle published nine years before in the New York Times.
However, another tranche of puzzles Pwanson calls "shady": these are puzzles that bear such strong resemblance in their central clues and answers to puzzles that have appeared in the New York Times that it's very hard to accept Parker's claim that the overlap is coincidental. In one example given, for instance, the answers "Drive Up the Wall," "Get On One's Nerves," and "Rub the Wrong Way" appeared in the same order and the same position in a Parker-edited puzzle that appeared in USA Today in June 2010 as they had in a Will Shortz-edited puzzle published nine years before in the New York Times.
I remember when they sent a guy to Australia to report on the America's Cup. He got there well in advance, and wrote several preliminary columns to "educate" the readers in what sailing is all about. He began with an entire column's worth of rambling, incoherent explanation of the definitions of "port" and "starboard" -- and got it backwards.
I’ve never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!
#DeleteChrome
[...] these are puzzles that bear such strong resemblance in their central clues and answers to puzzles [...]
My parents gave me a Coleco Quiz Wiz game in the late 1970's. The trivia book had 1,001 questions with an electronic keyboard that could plug into different trivia books. I went through three trivia books before I discovered that I had a memorized the answers for all 1,001 questions, which were identical for all the trivia books. In fact, you don't even need a trivia book. You could punch in the same numbers and letters to get the correct answer. I threw it away in disgust because I expected the answers for each trivia book to be different. As an adult who have gotten back into electronics as a hobby, the circuits in many electronic games from that era were quite simple to implement repetitive game play.
https://steveffisher.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/retro-coleco-quiz-wiz-computer-game/
Horoscopes are always recycled. Otherwise how would they ever get it right?
Horoscopes are always right. If the one you read doesn't seem to apply that day, it's because your ascendant is more potent so you need a customized chart to understand how it applies to you. The problem could also be that your Chinese sign is confusing things, especially if your elemental aspect (Fire, Earth, Air and Water) in both traditions don't match. The celestial forces are complex and mysterious, only a certified astrologist can decipher your destiny.
Also, horoscopes are based on recurring astronomical events. Until there's a new planet or star significant enough to impact people's destiny, there will be a limited pool of possibilities; how those events are interpreted to individually reach the millions of people who have the same signs requires the expertise of a certified astrologist.
One last point: did you know that on the Yahoo portal, the horoscope is found in the Women section? How sexist is that?
https://www.yahoo.com/style/ho...
Thousands of years of cosmic wisdom now crammed between makeup tips and "should you break up with him" tests. Thank you Marissa.
lucm, indeed.
"Copyright law does not protect recipes that are mere listings of ingredients. Nor does it protect other mere listings of ingredients such as those found in formulas, compounds, or prescriptions. Copyright protection may, however, extend to substantial literary expression—a description, explanation, or illustration, for example—that accompanies a recipe or formula or to a combination of recipes, as in a cookbook."
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html