Lost in Translation would be an excellent title for a new video game. You can only win if you don't get the girl at the end.
You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike. > north You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike. > north You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike. > north You are lost in translation.
It's quite easy to implement in C++. You can define something like bool operator==(const char*, const RegExp&). You would only have to define a class RegExp that can be statically constructed, so
class RegExp { RegExp(const char* expr) {... } }
Then you add your regular expressions as global variables (or static class variables):
It won't be long before people such as Ruben will be rightfully called terrorists and it'll be forbidden to make movies at home, just in case you were planning to re-enact some copyrighted scene at home.
Although they've gone over 4.000.000.000 (*quite* a nice number), the number of pages Google indexes is still below 2^32. How long is it going to take them to cross that dreaded threshold?
If that's the real reason, how come they release them as binaries? Reverse engineering will reveal exactly the same information (eh, sorry, intellectual property) as inspecting the source code, although it takes a little bit more work. So, does anyone think Intel gave the real reason?
As for his.emacs file, last time I looked, it wasn't empty, but contained a few lines to turn off the default disabling of novice-confusing commands like narrow-to-window
Well, that explains emacs' defaults: they're his. The rest of us will have to do the customisation outside the code...
And Mary was a virgin, right? I doubt you will find many serious historians that will claim that the NT is largely true, even if they can agree upon what it actually says. Millions of people have been killed over translation errors in the bible and now you want me to believe that serious historians will underwrite your particular view?
And it never occurred to you that the similarities between Jesus' life as portrayed in the NT with predictions that were known at the time the NT was written might be less the result of divine provenance than of human temptation? Or, put bluntly: that the NTs authors and translators simply fitted the predictions?
How did this get a +2 score? The savior never arrived, I'm sorry to tell you. And the flood never happened. And it wasn't foretold neither; it was history by the time the bible was written. And about the resurrection? Appealing and powerful tale, but as true as the rest of the bible.
Then at least our kids won't have to suffer this new, ridiculous fad... If the fundamentalists are wrong, let's just go and implant a few chips in mr. Silverman and see how the stock market responds to that announcement.
It is a 10 channel MIDI sound module, somewhat like an external sound card. And it was wonderful at the time, but outdated right now. It did have a few nice sounds, though, but it was not that special kind of synth you readlly would buy if you had the money...
For those of you who don't know: the MT-32 is a synthesizer module. So it's normal use is to generate sounds that people are going to use on commercial records. If you buy the box, you get the sounds. There are tons of sample CDs out there that contain samples of Roland instruments. So why is the PCM (sound) set of an MT-32 suddenly such a problem to them?
"Well imagine tying this guy into a neural net. It'd be strange at first, but over time, it would learn. It would learn english. It would even pick up slang."
You are right about learning slang, but it would not learn English given the current state of neural networks and language acquisition research.
But there you are: toddlers. And we sometimes think we can identify words just by its size, but always in very strong contexts (which also holds for toddlers: they only know a few words, so length provides enough information for identification).
You are using the word "word shape" in a very loose sense, but if it plays a role, it has to be in the right-peripheral perception (or left-peripheral when reading from right to left). However, word shape recognition seems to be a predecessor of character/feature recognition, and may not be isolated from it...
Papers on typography and readibility can be found everywhere, although most recent research is on web pages and other electronic means of displaying text. I no longer work at the university, so I don't have access to the on-line reference systems, but looking for readability in combination with e.g. ergonomy or ergonomics, cognitive psychology or psycho-linguistic(s) should turn up quite a few (references) to articles. Use extra words like "journal" to keep the number of hits down. Unfortunately, readability is also applied to texts as a whole, so you might also want to use words like "font(s)".
He says it's "simple, straightforward bottom up "letters then phonemes then syllables then words" recognition process"? The guy is obviously not a well-trained psycho-linguist. I am, although not trained in this particular field, and I know there are a zillion studies out there that show it's not like this. The process may play a part, or part of the process may be modelled like this, but it's definitely not the whole picture. As you mention, context is very important. And the "simple process" also fails to describe frequency effects, bigram effects, character shape effects, priming effects, etc., etc., ad nauseam...
It is old hat, but the notion of "word shape" is old hat too. There is no such thing. There are many, maby factors to consider in "readability". Unusual fonts is one of them, mismatch between expectation and input is another.
How come all these people have an opionion about a subject, psycho-linguistics in this case, they know absolutely nothing about?
How come this ridiculous article got published in the first place?
You are completely right. And funny. Most of the people here, including the poster and the editor, have got no clue at all when it comes to (psycho)-linguistics. The effect mainly exists because it uses short and frequent words. Everyone knows how difficult anagrams are, and keeping just two letters in place doesn't help. And the final letter certainly doesn't help in languages that have a lot of inflections (English has only got two forms for each noun and three for a regular verb; Catalan has 55 inflections for regular verbs).
Put otherwise: there is only one way to scramble a four letter word keeping the first and last letter in place (tihs, taht, wehn), and none for one (a, I), two (an, is, of, to, be, or, am) or three (the, and, was, are, you,...). That covers quite a big part of a text. About 50% to be precise.
So, the a-minor-tone-feed rulest is tatylol and celtomeply blockols, if you ask me (a computer scientist with 15 years of experience in computational psycho-linguistics).
What's the difference between playing as a gangster in a crime sim or a playing a soldier fighting a "justified" war, i.e. Desert Combat? The virtual motive?
You make an error here: there is no such thing as a virtual motive. The motivation is as real as it is in real life, only the object(ive) differs.
There maybe existential ramifications in guiding a make-believe character in a make-believe world, but you do the same thing as a spectator when you read a novel or watch TV.
No, you don't. While reading a book, your motivation is not to kill virtual beings.
Why produce these games in the first place? For profit? Isn't that a little bit too cynical?
The online summary of the article says literally: "Uit onze steekproef blijkt dat er veel rommel op de markt is. We hebben cd-r's aangetroffen die nooit op de markt hadden mogen komen. Het gaat daarbij mogelijk om afgedankte partijen."
Or, rather literally translated into English: "Our sample shows that there is a lot of junk on the market. We have found cd-rs that should never have been for sale. Possibly it concerns rejected batches." Which suggests to me that the correct heading of this article should be: CD-Rs are like everything else: you get what you pay for.
Slashdot Mirror
Lost in Translation would be an excellent title for a new video game. You can only win if you don't get the girl at the end.
You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike.
> north
You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike.
> north
You are in a maze of straight streets with bright neon signs, all alike.
> north
You are lost in translation.
Is the pirate ship in "introduce_characters()" or in "create_conflict()"?
And the mind of the reader will crash if you make a small mistake?
It's quite easy to implement in C++. You can define something like bool operator==(const char*, const RegExp&). You would only have to define a class RegExp that can be statically constructed, so
... } }
... }
class RegExp { RegExp(const char* expr) {
Then you add your regular expressions as global variables (or static class variables):
static RegExp number("[0-9]+");
and you can write
if ("144" == number) {
If that isn't simple enough...
It won't be long before people such as Ruben will be rightfully called terrorists and it'll be forbidden to make movies at home, just in case you were planning to re-enact some copyrighted scene at home.
Although they've gone over 4.000.000.000 (*quite* a nice number), the number of pages Google indexes is still below 2^32. How long is it going to take them to cross that dreaded threshold?
If that's the real reason, how come they release them as binaries? Reverse engineering will reveal exactly the same information (eh, sorry, intellectual property) as inspecting the source code, although it takes a little bit more work. So, does anyone think Intel gave the real reason?
Well, that explains emacs' defaults: they're his. The rest of us will have to do the customisation outside the code...
And Mary was a virgin, right? I doubt you will find many serious historians that will claim that the NT is largely true, even if they can agree upon what it actually says. Millions of people have been killed over translation errors in the bible and now you want me to believe that serious historians will underwrite your particular view?
And it never occurred to you that the similarities between Jesus' life as portrayed in the NT with predictions that were known at the time the NT was written might be less the result of divine provenance than of human temptation? Or, put bluntly: that the NTs authors and translators simply fitted the predictions?
How did this get a +2 score? The savior never arrived, I'm sorry to tell you. And the flood never happened. And it wasn't foretold neither; it was history by the time the bible was written. And about the resurrection? Appealing and powerful tale, but as true as the rest of the bible.
Then at least our kids won't have to suffer this new, ridiculous fad... If the fundamentalists are wrong, let's just go and implant a few chips in mr. Silverman and see how the stock market responds to that announcement.
Yeah, that's what it should be like perhaps, but how are you ever going to define the difference between a, b and c?
It is a 10 channel MIDI sound module, somewhat like an external sound card. And it was wonderful at the time, but outdated right now. It did have a few nice sounds, though, but it was not that special kind of synth you readlly would buy if you had the money...
For those of you who don't know: the MT-32 is a synthesizer module. So it's normal use is to generate sounds that people are going to use on commercial records. If you buy the box, you get the sounds. There are tons of sample CDs out there that contain samples of Roland instruments. So why is the PCM (sound) set of an MT-32 suddenly such a problem to them?
"Well imagine tying this guy into a neural net. It'd be strange at first, but over time, it would learn. It would learn english. It would even pick up slang."
You are right about learning slang, but it would not learn English given the current state of neural networks and language acquisition research.
Here are some good terms for Googling:
font OR fonts OR type "reading time" OR "reading times"
"Word shape" however is not a term en vogue in academics. I'll ask one of my friends for the proper term...
But there you are: toddlers. And we sometimes think we can identify words just by its size, but always in very strong contexts (which also holds for toddlers: they only know a few words, so length provides enough information for identification).
You are using the word "word shape" in a very loose sense, but if it plays a role, it has to be in the right-peripheral perception (or left-peripheral when reading from right to left). However, word shape recognition seems to be a predecessor of character/feature recognition, and may not be isolated from it...
Papers on typography and readibility can be found everywhere, although most recent research is on web pages and other electronic means of displaying text. I no longer work at the university, so I don't have access to the on-line reference systems, but looking for readability in combination with e.g. ergonomy or ergonomics, cognitive psychology or psycho-linguistic(s) should turn up quite a few (references) to articles. Use extra words like "journal" to keep the number of hits down. Unfortunately, readability is also applied to texts as a whole, so you might also want to use words like "font(s)".
He says it's "simple, straightforward bottom up "letters then phonemes then syllables then words" recognition process"? The guy is obviously not a well-trained psycho-linguist. I am, although not trained in this particular field, and I know there are a zillion studies out there that show it's not like this. The process may play a part, or part of the process may be modelled like this, but it's definitely not the whole picture. As you mention, context is very important. And the "simple process" also fails to describe frequency effects, bigram effects, character shape effects, priming effects, etc., etc., ad nauseam...
It is old hat, but the notion of "word shape" is old hat too. There is no such thing. There are many, maby factors to consider in "readability". Unusual fonts is one of them, mismatch between expectation and input is another.
How come all these people have an opionion about a subject, psycho-linguistics in this case, they know absolutely nothing about?
How come this ridiculous article got published in the first place?
I've put wheels under my keyboard and now I've got a 101-key mouse!
You are completely right. And funny. Most of the people here, including the poster and the editor, have got no clue at all when it comes to (psycho)-linguistics. The effect mainly exists because it uses short and frequent words. Everyone knows how difficult anagrams are, and keeping just two letters in place doesn't help. And the final letter certainly doesn't help in languages that have a lot of inflections (English has only got two forms for each noun and three for a regular verb; Catalan has 55 inflections for regular verbs).
...). That covers quite a big part of a text. About 50% to be precise.
Put otherwise: there is only one way to scramble a four letter word keeping the first and last letter in place (tihs, taht, wehn), and none for one (a, I), two (an, is, of, to, be, or, am) or three (the, and, was, are, you,
So, the a-minor-tone-feed rulest is tatylol and celtomeply blockols, if you ask me (a computer scientist with 15 years of experience in computational psycho-linguistics).
Theo
How can this be modded +4? The link doesn't even work!
And I know bash can do this, but it also beeps and blinks very, very annoyingly in these cases. Yuck.
You make an error here: there is no such thing as a virtual motive. The motivation is as real as it is in real life, only the object(ive) differs.
No, you don't. While reading a book, your motivation is not to kill virtual beings.
Why produce these games in the first place? For profit? Isn't that a little bit too cynical?
Or, rather literally translated into English: "Our sample shows that there is a lot of junk on the market. We have found cd-rs that should never have been for sale. Possibly it concerns rejected batches." Which suggests to me that the correct heading of this article should be: CD-Rs are like everything else: you get what you pay for.
I think I know what million lines they're referring to: they're the lines containing open and close braces.