h a l f b a k e r y
This is what happens when one confuses "random" with "profound."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
In a lot of places on the internet, there are gatherings of people
talk or discuss a general veneer of pretty much everything,
with no particular focus.
However, elsewhere, in proper places where there is a focus on a
topic, people discuss stuff focusing on that topic. Within
of the topic there are often many domain-attached words,
product names, acronyms, made-up words, intentional corruptions
words, and general esoterica that isn't general to everywhere else.
In typing stuff in to text fields, something somewhere either at
browser level or OS level will try and dictate, like a dictator, how
your spelling should be orthoganolised, and frequently, on a phone
tablet, not let you get past without accepting the executive
commands of the dictatorship. This is not only annoying, but
basically I disown the result of the web interaction. I know what I
typed, I know what I typed was correct, that's all I need to do - do
the correct thing. If the system I am typing in wants to do
incorrect to what I have correctly executed, that's not my doing,
that's something else, which isn't me, so I didnt' do that. If you
to read what I actually wrote, you should have been here when I
It occurs to me that the web app itself at the site level could
a microservice that contains a lot of topic-specific words that
a lot in that forum or discussion area. Product names, for
would be a candidate, as they're often corruptions of sensible
The ideal would be that it requires no human intervention to build
the dictionary, but on the other hand, you wouldn't want it
itself with habitual mis-spellings, so if there's any statistical
aggregation, it'd have to be able to tell the difference between a
of people in one place getting it incorrect, and an intentional
With correct integration, the browser presents the microservice to
the thing that is doing the correcting, to override with greater
specificity, the latent dictionarial tendencies.
What is a
dictionary ? [popbottle, May 30 2017]
||That would be very useful indeed - I've been pulling my
hair out over the last year and a half trying to get
computers to read text and generate topical summaries
to pointy haired bosses that are demonstrably and
verifiably "good" (the summaries, not the bosses).
||What started off as an exercise in linear
algebra quickly became bogged down in
specific wordlists to be hoisted into or out of the process
depending on the context. What I like about the sound of
this idea is that it could be used to generate and publish
those wordlists up front, rather than me having to infer
||And by infer them, I mean take a list of all the words
used in a given corpus, run them against a dictionary to
find the matches, then take the unmatched set, and try
to figure out whether they are spelling mistakes,
neologisms, jargon, in-jokes or are otherwise being used
"on purpose". That's achievable, with a little human
curation, but very difficult to
explain to a pointy haired one who wants to know what
you've been doing for the past 6 months.
||http://www.longevity.org sort of has this. If you hover your mouse over a word like "resveratrol" it makes a mini hover box describing resveratrol. The topics are not gathered automatically as far as I know.
||I prefer the idea that you originally typed.
||Bayesian derived tag cloud.
||No, you can't have that, it'd be guaranteed to be incorrect
due to cretins. Off this topic, but to illustrate, if you went
by what cretins type into the internet, you'd think that
"loose" was a legitimate way of expressing a lack or a loss
of something rather than expressing how it is floppy or
dangly or how it it rattles around. You'd think there's such a
"rediculous", and why not purpleiculous or yellowiculous.
You'd think that when someone "defiantly"
should do something or buy something, it indicates that
they shouldn't have, or wouldn't have, or were forced not
to, but they went ahead and stubbornly did it anyway. This
is because there's a lot of cretins on the internet.
||//guaranteed to be incorrect due to cretins//