Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Alphabet's Jigsaw Wants To Explain Tech Jargon To You, Launches Sideways Dictionary (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the sideway-dictionary dept.

It might sound obvious, but the thing about tech is that sometimes it can get really, well, technical. From a report on CNET: So Alphabet wants to help make nitty-gritty tech jargon simpler to explain to the masses. On Tuesday, Jigsaw, a tech incubator owned by Google's parent company, launched a website called the Sideways Dictionary that takes jargon and puts it into terms normal people would understand. Jigsaw partnered with the Washington Post to build the tool.

66 comments

  1. Dictionary? by peetm · · Score: 2

    What's that?

    --
    @peetm
    1. Re:Dictionary? by StarryEyed · · Score: 1

      Bought this in school:

      Newton's Telecom Dictionary: Telecommunications, Networking, Information Technologies, The Internet, Wired, Wireless, Satellites and Fiber

      Does what it says on the tin.

    2. Re:Dictionary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My hovercraft is full of eels"

    3. Re:Dictionary? by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

      http://www.dictionary.com/brow...

  2. Alternative jargon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    So will WaPo's 'help' be fact checked? Why does the CIA want to turn technical jargon into a political weapon? It is bad enough tech companies let the CIA listen to everything we do, now they have to redefine words too?

    1. Re:Alternative jargon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So will WaPo's 'help' be fact checked? Why does the CIA want to turn technical jargon into a political weapon? It is bad enough tech companies let the CIA listen to everything we do, now they have to redefine words too?

      CBS will "fact check" the WaPo.

      It'll be fake, but accurate.

    2. Re:Alternative jargon? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Crowd-sourced with Reddit-style voting. Unlike Urban Dictionary, I assume they have some way of reviewing and taking overriding action. This also means that Boaty McBoatface-style answers will be caught.

    3. Re:Alternative jargon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ones redefining words are in the White House using "alternative facts."

  3. Link is ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blank page

    1. Re:Link is ? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      Blank page

      Kind of. You're presented with a blank page, it then takes 4 or 5 seconds to load the text "Sideways Dictionary" at the bottom of the page. Not wildly impressed.

      Content seems to be largely snippets worthy of BadAnalogyGuy.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Link is ? by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 1

      And when it does load, I can hardly read what's on the page, aside from the blue "Please Explain." The text that says "write here" is barely visible, too small and way too light. Light gray on white is not exactly conducive to a good UI.

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    3. Re:Link is ? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Doesn't work in Chrome with uBlock and Privacy Badger. Disabled uBlock, could see definitions but could not log in. Gave up.

      Does not load at all on IE10. My work PC won't install IE11 for some reason.

      I have not seen a site this shitty for a while. Normally something at least kinda works.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Link is ? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The blinking cursor is readable enough. Explanatory text in full size and color is taken to mean literally text to most dumb end users, and they'll keep clicking next to it and hitting backspace. The search suggestions are only that - suggestions. You don't strictly need to see them either.

      In real-world use, this site will presumably be linked to by article body text to define jargon in the article, so the search UI is very secondary.

    5. Re:Link is ? by m2shariy · · Score: 1

      Blank page, login link at the bottom. They don't like ad blockers so much?

  4. Too much money by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    This is what happens when you have too much money.

  5. nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exciting! This is new territory for fake news.

  6. Bierce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ambrose Bierce has prior art.

  7. The jargon file by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

    Anyone else thought about The Jargon File?
    It is not that at all.

    1. Re:The jargon file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First thing that came to mind was Saw's Jigsaw...

    2. Re:The jargon file by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      When they said "tech jargon", I was thinking about such things as "enthalpy", "eutectic alloy", "P-N junction", or "differentiable manifold". Sadly, it's probably going to be the most trivial stuff, probably only related to computing, and just a small part of it at that to boot.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:The jargon file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. When it comes to decoding neologisms, I head for Urbandictionary. It does have a lot of juvenile giggling, posturing and peacock displays, but it also features obscurities such as "Chabuduo" and "Hater Steak".

  8. Too many bad analogies by kevmeister · · Score: 1

    This tool provides only a bunch of analogies for tech jargon, but many are not good.

    An API to a turnstile??? Not really at all useful to most people. The "Cinderella" one for 2-factor authentication is better, but still leaves off the most critical requirement that the 2 factors be of different nature. Generally this means two of: Something you know (password), something you have (token), or something you are (biometrics)

    I keep seeing claims for 2-factor that are only having more than one of "something you know" which is not real 2-factor. (Cindrella's slipper is, though.)

    --
    Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    1. Re:Too many bad analogies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My favorite was cloud computing being like a library so you can read any book you want instead of the few on your bookshelf at home or something like that. (No, no it isn't! It's nothing like that! ARgh!) A lot of the analogies are heavily biased towards putting Google's and other tech megacorp's services in a positive light. No surprises there, naturally.

    2. Re:Too many bad analogies by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Okay, so the idea is that we have these analogies that "regular people" can understand. Then I look at an analogy for "Hackathon"

      It’s like a cosplay convention.

      Okay, let's go look up "cosplay." Nope. Not there.

      So much for "regular people" understanding...

    3. Re:Too many bad analogies by SharpFang · · Score: 2

      It has absolutely dumb algorithm of finding synonyms.

      Asking about LED takes me to "Cryptography."
        "File": "Internet Service Provider"
      "Script":"Backend"
      "WWW": Domain Name Servers.

      It's beyond useless - it's actively harmful.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    4. Re: Too many bad analogies by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      That isn't the DK effect at all actually. Knowing what cosplay means is in no way an indicator of intelligence. You should probably add an entry claiming it is though for consistencies sake (As every entry I saw was WAY off the Mark)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  9. These are pretty bad by crgrace · · Score: 1

    I have to give technical explanations to business types regularly and in my experience a poor analogy that gives the wrong impression of a technical concept is worse than useless. I've found in my career is if you can express why it is valuable for someone to understand a technical term or concept, they are more than capable of understanding it. People usually don't understand all this technical jargon not because it's hard, but because they can't be bothered.

    I would call these analogies flawed at best. For example, there is one that says Agile Development is like Punk Rock: instead of learning your instruments you learn three chords and get on with it. If someone explained Agile like that to me I would ban it from our office (while in reality it is an excellent methodology for some types of development).

    1. Re:These are pretty bad by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      If your analogy makes them shut up and do what you say it's as correct as it needs to be.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  10. It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This dictionary thing may actually be useful.

    Can anyone tell me if it defines the term "moz://a"?

    I saw that term recently, but I'm not sure what it means.

    At first I thought it might be a URL using a cool new protocol, but I've never heard of the "moz" protocol and the hostname of just "a" seems really unusual. That hostname doesn't even resolve for me!

    So maybe it isn't a URL. Should I ignore the strange characters? I'm not sure what a "Moz a" is, though.

    Should I read it as "Moza"? I don't know what that is, either, but it reminds me of mozzarella cheese.

    That's the best that I can come up with. It must refer to some kind of cheese. But maybe this new dictionary will confirm that I'm right?

    I'd try this new dictionary site for myself, but all that site shows is a blank white page, even after waiting a while. Maybe it's an HTML 6 page, but I'm only using an HTML 5 browser?

    1. Re:It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      That's called a "wordmark". It's a logo or brand formed primarily out of stylized letters and symbols. Creative license is sometimes taken with the letterforms.

      Just because it can be typed on a keyboard does not mean it should be taken literally.

    2. Re:It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      So basically it's poncy hispter shit.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Wordmarks are a form of logo that's been around for hundreds of years.

    4. Re:It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Such as?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:It might be useful! Does it define "moz://a"? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I'm lazy, so I may not go far enough back, but GE had its first wordmark in 1892. Not every wordmark changes the shapes of its letterforms to slightly non-letter shapes, only the more creative ones - some are subtle enough that you may have never noticed.

      The Twinings tea company's logo is multiple hundreds of years old, but may or may not be considered a wordmark due to the fact that it's usually combined with a symbol.

      The Staples word mark does not contain a letter L. That is a literal staple. This only goes back to 1986. But it was the first wordmark that comes to mind that substitutes a symbol for a letter as in Mozilla.

  11. So far it sucks. by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Informative

    I went there looking for a geekanese to normie dictionary, instead I find an Urban Dictionary analogy list. I was going to share this with my users, as for now, I think I'll pass.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:So far it sucks. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed.

      Ad Blocking:

      "Itâ(TM)s like vandalizing outdoor posters. A legitimate form of protest against adverts that have invaded public space. Or criminal damage to private property."

      "Itâ(TM)s like fare dodging. If one person dodges their bus fare, it wonâ(TM)t have any great effect on the viability of the service. But if everyone does it, the bus company runs out of money and cancels the service."

      "Itâ(TM)s like music piracy. Some people say ad blocking is to brands what music piracy was to music companies. You can see it as an existential threat, or a wake-up call."

      Ironically I had to disable my ad-blocker to see that. Even without it, I can't seem to log in and add my own definition.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:So far it sucks. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Well it's good to see that the world's largest pusher of adverts is entirely honest and een handed on the issue.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:So far it sucks. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      My analogy is:

      It is like having sex when you are unsure if your partner has any STDs, so you wear a condom to protect yourself.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  12. im sure the redundancy was noticed. by nimbius · · Score: 3, Funny

    internet: we already have this, its called wikipedia, and simple wikipedia. its much more complete and open.
    Alphabet: ah yes well but did you know this version came with a name that was determined by a focus group, and is funded by a team of people who think caviar tastes different on Yachts than it does on private jets?
    internet: but we dont need this...
    Alphabet: Thats what we thought about yacht caviar but that turned out spectacular even though its almost the same as resort caviar.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  13. Piece of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a complete piece of excrement. Take a look at this gem:

    Encryption —
    It’s like sending a sealed letter instead of a postcard. To ban encryption would be like requiring all mail to be sent as postcards, including bank statements, medical letters and holiday photos. Your postman, neighbors and postal service would soon know you pretty well.

    A sealed letter? You mean like HTTP?

    HTTP also "seals" the message inside the protocol's encapsulation, same as the letter. And just like the letter, the "seal" is paper thin. A postcard would be like a telnet connection or something: just a raw message with no encapsulation.

    HTTPS (encryption), however, would be like sending your message inside an Armageddon-proof safe with a massive lock. Apparently no genius thought of that analogy, even though the most common metaphor used for encryption is lock+key.

    That "dictionary" is full of similar gems. Definitely hilarious stuff. Nice one Google.

    1. Re:Piece of by omnichad · · Score: 1

      HTTP also "seals" the message inside the protocol's encapsulation

      The encapsulation for an HTTP message is the bounds of physical paper (which grows in size to fit the contents, of course). It's not hidden from view at all.

      HTTPS is not even just a lined envelope. It's more like writing in secret code - the message itself is still plainly visible.

    2. Re:Piece of by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Well, they already say that IP packets are like postcards, so once you encrypt, you logically can't use IP anymore. Perfectly non-confusing explanations!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Piece of by pr0fessor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At this point it's more a joke than anything else... I like the ransomware.

      "It’s like taking a hostage. As the name suggests, it’s a form of kidnapping, where your data is taken hostage (often using a virus) and a ransom demand follows. In the more sophisticated cases, even Liam Neeson can’t help you."

    4. Re: Piece of by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Minor correction ... The CONTENT is in plain view but the message is not visible without knowing the magic word. (OMFG .... Now I'm doing it!)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  14. Normal People? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article says, "the Sideways Dictionary that takes jargon and puts it into terms normal people would understand." So, tech experts aren't "normal people"?

  15. Fucking JS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This blank white page does not answer any of my technology questions.

  16. Wow by Oxygen99 · · Score: 1

    Christ on a bike that's embarrassing. Wonder how much it cost?

    --
    I had a dream, bright and carefree, but now there's doubt and gravity
  17. Poorly implemented website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Too much javascript interfering with scrolling and animations. Makes the user experience clunky and annoying. Looks like another Google-cum-Alphabet project destined for the dustbin.

  18. But... by adam.voss · · Score: 1

    can it do car analogies?

    1. Re:But... by adam.voss · · Score: 1

      can it do car analogies?

      It can, but there are none: https://sidewaysdictionary.com...

  19. It's bad enought that marketing has taken over by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    technical language to the point where technical people now have a hard time understanding their own work. Now corporations can get on the game too and commercialize the language.

  20. If only we could read it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Contrast is so horrible it's impossible to read. (Gee, a lot like slashdot...)

  21. Instead of fixing the YouTube API. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a name like Jigsaw, I was hoping for either nitty-gritty medical jargon being explained to the masses or video showing how the other developers bloodied and beat up the YouTube development team to explain why the YouTube v3 API is *still* a disaster.

  22. Needs a lot of TLC... by aicrules · · Score: 1

    Which would come over time from the community adding/refining explanations and voting them up and down till the best ones are at the top. Very limited so far. And the quality of many of the analogies is pretty weak. WPA for example. You don't really walk away knowing what WPA is, but you definitely know that a bunch of people have a bone to pick with it as if someone wanting to know what it means automatically means that person is looking for a SINGLE way to secure themselves on the internet. But that would improve over time.

    1. Re:Needs a lot of TLC... by aicrules · · Score: 1

      The interface is complete shit right now. But the capability concept is good.

  23. Like the Foldoc? From 1985? by Beeftopia · · Score: 2

    This site: http://foldoc.org/

    Here's a wiki entry about it.

    "What has been will be again,
            what has been done will be done again;
            there is nothing new under the sun." -- Ecclesiastes 1:9

    Goes twice for technology.

  24. Needless JS, WAPO partnership unimpressive by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile Wikipedia (and related services including Wiktionary) get a lot more views, doesn't require JS to use, and works with a lot more browsers (including textual browsers). I'm also not impressed by the Washington Post "partnership". WAPO has been a source of "fake news" Russophobic hysteria lately: the Russians reportedly attacking the US electrical grid via a Vermont electrical facility (a story they still haven't retracted), and using the PropOrNot website as a viable source when we don't know who is behind what that site claims is propaganda and the terms of being considered propaganda there are so broad many more sources could have been included.

    --
    Digital Citizen
  25. rofl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Agile Software Development, It's like punk rock.
    not bad lol...

  26. sideways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sideways dictionary? is that the same as a horizontal dictionary?

  27. ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    didn't Randall Munroe already solve this problem?