tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post4863923377207490980..comments2024-03-17T05:03:46.056-07:00Comments on xkcd sucks: Comic 810: RedditCarlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01074589998141327538noreply@blogger.comBlogger147125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-67523988636749261642010-11-08T23:20:21.988-08:002010-11-08T23:20:21.988-08:00I dunno; for the context, the bots could be progra...I dunno; for the context, the bots could be programmed to recognize key phrases, but it would be incredibly long and tedious to make. Of course, we're looking at a bunch of people who have a LOT of free time on their hands.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-53851736989988780072010-11-01T13:52:16.861-07:002010-11-01T13:52:16.861-07:00that doesn't really bypass the problems I ment...that doesn't really bypass the problems I mentioned with the system, anyway--it just makes the road to a circle jerk a lot shorter.rshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-74614998394367075262010-11-01T13:48:23.311-07:002010-11-01T13:48:23.311-07:00That's not what the comic says, @10:02.That's not what the comic says, @10:02.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-56777058706529825592010-11-01T10:02:01.500-07:002010-11-01T10:02:01.500-07:00i could be wrong, but i feel like you're missi...i could be wrong, but i feel like you're missing the point of the comic. admittedly, as i wrote the previous sentence, i realised that the point of the comic is first to be funny, so you're right that it fails its most important job. anyway, the crucial part of the proposed system is that in the first frame. the very first responders to a particular thread would be presented with a set of comments - not from the thread, but examples of comments already identified by the admins or whoever as being constructive or otherwise. they are only allowed to post if their rating of these comments coincides with the estimation of the admins. the idea is that the people with access to the thread are already more reasonable than most commenters and the admins can therefore rely on them to rate subsequent comments fairly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-91606593708596711652010-10-28T19:52:00.631-07:002010-10-28T19:52:00.631-07:00I could be wrong, but it seems like the point of t...I could be wrong, but it seems like the point of the spam filter here isn't to rate comments as they're posted on the board. Instead it seems like it's supposed to filter users signing up for an account. If you start with a large enough library of short passages (3-4 sentences maybe) that either make sense or don't, you could eliminate a large amount of spam. Right now, natural language processing is really difficult for computers because, as this post pointed out, language isn't readily reducible to numbers with a true/false value. Sentences can be grammatically correct but meaningless and useless. (For example, "If purple tastes confine the frequencies, we will ceaselessly become loud oranges.") Because our brains are "built" for natural language with meaning, you may find yourself trying to turn it into metaphors that make sense. But the sentence is clearly nonsense. It's easy for a human to know this, even with a rudimentary grasp of English. (Clearly tastes can't be purple, nor can they confine anything, and frequencies aren't typically *confined* anyway.) But you could easily diagram that sentence, identify the nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc., which are all used grammatically. Computers (so far) see this but have a hard time distinguishing nonsense from sense.<br /><br />A more sophisticated, but also more potentially ambiguous approach would be to use factual and ridiculous statements. (Factual: Elephants are large animals. Ridiculous: All colors are always black.) Both statements have a clear statement and meaning, but one is clearly accurate and the other is clearly not.<br /><br />The idea behind either of these two approaches is that a computer program that seeks to defeat this filter must be so good that it ceases to be useless. Even if it continues to peddle penis enlarging pills, it has also solved natural language processing problems for us! And as the title text indicates, it also prevents people who have a similarly low grasp of how to make sense in the language from joining the discussion. Presumably if you don't know enough English to recognize one of my examples as nonsense or ridiculous, you are unlikely to be able to contribute meaningfully to the discussion anyway.<br /><br />(Of course, in practice, you may want to have a set of 4 or more statements that users must categorize correctly to reduce the number of bots getting in through lucky guessing.)<br /><br />By asking users to submit coherent ideas, you can increase the size of your library very easily. You would test them by mixing them in with the verified questions and seeing how consistently users classify them as coherent; until they are verified, they wouldn't affect the users' score either way. (For those who don't do psych or stats, this is frequently how those assessment questionnaires are developed.) If everyone considers them nonsense, then it was probably garbage from the user who submitted it; if it's mixed, it may just be ambiguous. But if 95 or more out of 100 people consider it to be sane and logical, it can be added to the database. New junk sentences can be created by randomly selecting nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc. to form sentences (think Mad Libs, but for almost *every* word in the sentence). <br /><br />Voila! You now have created (1) a good spam filter, (2) user quality control, and possibly (3) encouraged the development of natural language processing software which could have a variety of practical and helpful uses. Sounds like a pretty good day's work.<br /><br /><br />On second thought, that may not be what the comic is actually saying, but my plan would probably work.sehkzychichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18137808174240998770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-56168266761293662752010-10-28T17:32:15.350-07:002010-10-28T17:32:15.350-07:00whatever man you don't understand me and also ...whatever man you don't understand me and also are not my real dadrshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-51752504749487033562010-10-28T17:22:56.826-07:002010-10-28T17:22:56.826-07:00rob i would like to direct you to my 1:05 comment ...rob i would like to direct you to my 1:05 comment which reaches the same conclusion in much less time and with much more clarity<br /><br />captcha: dings hahaUndercoverCuddlefishnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-9112033608149338822010-10-28T16:46:19.653-07:002010-10-28T16:46:19.653-07:00"Wow - I'm completely surprised you misse..."Wow - I'm completely surprised you missed metioning Slashdot - one of the more nerdy sites on the web (which also gives props to XKCD on a regular basis).<br /><br />Is that because this system is already in place? And it works? All your arguments saying that such a system can't work is instantly invalidated by the fact that the system already exists and does work."<br /><br />no, it's actually because I mentioned Reddit, which also "has this system in place." it doesn't actually, of course--Randy is proposing a filter that will automatically identify constructive comments based on previous votes--but the reason I didn't mention Slashdot is I'd already mentioned something with an identical system.<br /><br />"You'll likely retort with the idea that it encourages some kind of favouratism on the site, that those with mod points end up modding up each other so they stay on top - but thats generally just a side effect because the ones with Mod points are always the ones making constructive posts."<br /><br />no, the ones with the most mod points are the ones the other mods/the admins like the most. giving the buddies of the higher-ups power to arbitrate the community just makes the community into a big circle-jerk--which, incidentally, is what Slashdot and Reddit are.<br /><br />"XKCD may not be amazing but don't go and say his idea is completely invalid if you have no clue how computers work or even how a tweaked version of the system could operate nominally. "<br /><br />actually--hang on, did you actually read my fucking post? like, you are addressing points that I already made, in the post. I have already responded to all of these, in the post. are you illiterate or just stupid?rshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15828938843801425383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-16916653156297547782010-10-28T08:25:50.741-07:002010-10-28T08:25:50.741-07:00@Andrew
Good rewrite!
Now that an existing, usab...@Andrew<br /><br />Good rewrite!<br /><br />Now that an existing, usable system has been put in place, it is less funny but easier to criticize.<br /><br />If this was done before the advent of reCAPTCHA it would have been brilliant (since reCAPTCHA <i>is</i> brilliant). But humor is definitely lost if it was done after the fact, even if you add something like [2008] to distinguish that this is happening in the past, the punchline doesn't work.<br /><br />Which I come full circle back to my original post on this where none of mine work well either, since it assumes advanced AI will be developed because of this instead of just better way to do OCR/image recognition (the "That's a problem?" one seems to work still, but is only relatively funnier IMO).<br /><br />So the crux of what's wrong with the comic isn't that the system he describes sucks (which is true), it's that the punchline sucks.Capnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-49554110039670388412010-10-28T07:39:29.359-07:002010-10-28T07:39:29.359-07:00*are not utilized
That's what I get for chang...*are not utilized<br /><br />That's what I get for changing "part" to "parts" and then not re-reading.LostInSpacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-29776053675145915022010-10-28T07:38:12.086-07:002010-10-28T07:38:12.086-07:00Andrew, congratulations for re-writing Randall'...Andrew, congratulations for re-writing Randall's comic in a way that would actually make sense.<br /><br />@11:23, the the parts of Randall's "plan" that we take issue with is not currently utilized on Slashdot or any other site which currently allows you to up- or down-mod comments.<br /><br />Captcha: lymers: Those infected with Lyme's Disease. They carry a bell on a staff and hide in the bushes when others pass.LostInSpacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-80869526245000389022010-10-28T05:54:17.736-07:002010-10-28T05:54:17.736-07:00Title: ReCAPTCHA
Panel 1. I need to scan all these...Title: ReCAPTCHA<br />Panel 1. I need to scan all these books, but OCR technology is unreliable.<br />Panel 2. I'll set up a CAPTCHA of the scanned words where one word is known but one is not and assume that multiple matches means the word has been correctly interpreted.<br />Panel 3. But what will you do when spammers make better OCR that can read all the words?<br />Panel 4. Mission Fucking AccomplishedAndrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-61191188975058163472010-10-28T05:09:46.376-07:002010-10-28T05:09:46.376-07:00@11:23
so this system already exists?
there are hy...@11:23<br />so this system already exists?<br />there are hyper-intelligent AIs operating on slashdot *right now*?! cool!<br />or did you mean 'something a bit like this, vaguely, already exists'? i think thats more likely. <br />of course, the system you describe is not a replacement for captcha - down-rating comments after they are posted (or moderating them away by some other means) is a poor substitute for something blocking those comments from being posted in the first place.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-38184994968428387082010-10-28T01:05:40.631-07:002010-10-28T01:05:40.631-07:00@11:23 your reading comprehension is literally ide...@11:23 your reading comprehension is literally identical to that of a sack of penguin shitUndercoverCuddlefishnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-90250440023057455772010-10-27T23:27:56.927-07:002010-10-27T23:27:56.927-07:00@Anon
Well shit, Anon. I've never read any o...@Anon<br /><br />Well shit, Anon. I've never read any of Stephen Bonds work before. And I definitely didn't reference another of his articles in an earlier comment or anything...<br /><br />(Btw, this is the sarcasm! Lolz!)<br /><br />@Alsworth<br /><br />No. There is no low that I won't go. Except of course to the depths of the Underdark-bad-sad, where Illithids wander.<br /><br />In my defense I wasn't trying to get a negative reaction from that comment. I was trying to invoke laughter.<br /><br />I thought it was very funny that Sepia felt the need to say that he can't draw well. We should all know that doesn't affect his criticism. I attempted to use hyperbolic rhetoric to drive the point home that one's own artistic ability doesn't affect one's critiques of art.<br /><br />Next time I'll make sure to spell out all of my jokes. Hence the parentheses above.Arthurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04837322808525126354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-50674482077169767562010-10-27T23:23:50.987-07:002010-10-27T23:23:50.987-07:00Wow - I'm completely surprised you missed meti...Wow - I'm completely surprised you missed metioning Slashdot - one of the more nerdy sites on the web (which also gives props to XKCD on a regular basis).<br /><br />Is that because this system is already in place? And it works? All your arguments saying that such a system can't work is instantly invalidated by the fact that the system already exists and does work. <br /><br />The major difference between what Randal described and Slashdots Method is that Slashdot only allows people do up-mod or down-mod comments if they contribute to the site long enough and get enough moderated comments themselves, and even then, you are not always capable of dealing out mod points, its randomly selected from their top contributors and they get to give out a set amount when they get awarded it.<br /><br />As such, Spambots never get mod points. Informative or Insightful posts get modded up or down - if its a post that can go either way it normally gets modded up and down by a number of moderators. This ensures that the best comments are always highly rated - and the low ones can be filtered out.<br /><br />You'll likely retort with the idea that it encourages some kind of favouratism on the site, that those with mod points end up modding up each other so they stay on top - but thats generally just a side effect because the ones with Mod points are always the ones making constructive posts.<br /><br />XKCD may not be amazing but don't go and say his idea is completely invalid if you have no clue how computers work or even how a tweaked version of the system could operate nominally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-49071126098346190232010-10-27T23:08:56.834-07:002010-10-27T23:08:56.834-07:00ehh. initially thought it was a FRAME. IGNORE ME.ehh. initially thought it was a FRAME. IGNORE ME.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-15230803229481761212010-10-27T23:08:32.423-07:002010-10-27T23:08:32.423-07:00I, too, initially thought it was a mirror and thou...I, too, initially thought it was a mirror and thought he wanted to "frame" it. and it DOES make sense in the narrative considering the fact that beret man is FUCKING STUPID AND WACKY and would do a totally random, arbitrary thing.<br /><br />Of course, once someone said "mirror" it made a lot more sense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-80789125415257582222010-10-27T22:43:11.694-07:002010-10-27T22:43:11.694-07:00Anon 8:43: Arthur is trolling. Pay no attention t...Anon 8:43: Arthur is trolling. Pay no attention to him, for attention is his nourishment. If you acknowledge his feigned stupidity, he will only continue to spiral downward into the depths of internet blackness.<br /><br />@Arthur: Damn you, man, DAMN YOU! Is there any low to which you will not sink?!?Alsworthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-3042143533521202522010-10-27T22:22:32.614-07:002010-10-27T22:22:32.614-07:00Oh hey look, A Softer World sort of did Randy'...Oh hey look, A Softer World sort of did Randy's joke from 770 only Joey and Emily managed to remove the creepiness and awkwardness and vague undertones of paedophilia.<br /><br />Also I thought this was an empty frame and didn't get the joke (it's so beautiful he has to frame it?). The mirror does make more sense. Unfortunately when your comic is so badly drawn. SO BADLY DRAWN. Then items like mirrors become harder to identify as such if you don't jump to the right conclusion first time.<br />And sure, if you think about it in terms of the comic's story, only a mirror makes sense. But his other comics are often so poorly written and thought out. SO POORLY. That you can't blame someone for assuming he's just failed to understand what a joke is, once again. <br /><br />I feel like he's read about jokes in books and has some idea that they need to be structured in a certain way and feature certain elements. But he has no idea how to actually identify one so he cobbles together a selection of wackiness, sentimentality, sexual references and observations aimed at aspies. And then hopes that somehow it becomes "funny" in his readers' minds.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-8301371946462783302010-10-27T20:43:51.196-07:002010-10-27T20:43:51.196-07:00Arthur, how the hell does that apply to anything I...Arthur, how the hell does that apply to anything I said?<br />In case you haven't read, there's <a href="http://plover.net/~bonds/stupidresponses.html#better" rel="nofollow">this lovely answer</a> (Also linked to in this lovely blog's lovely FAQ) about the subject of criticism, and responses to it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-25673297046526781672010-10-27T20:41:28.922-07:002010-10-27T20:41:28.922-07:00Now that I look closely, yeah, I guess there's...Now that I look closely, yeah, I guess there's a crummy little knob that could be somebody's hand, and like five white pixels that have no reason for being there if it's an empty frame. So, I guess I'm some kind of asshole for not noticing that.<br />I think that even a single line in the background might have made it obvious, but whatever, apparently the vast majority of people got this.<br /><br />Seriously dude, I'm just some chump on the internet. Calm down.emmernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-18722252164014776002010-10-27T19:30:18.356-07:002010-10-27T19:30:18.356-07:00@Anon
No blanket stop! It's ignorant. You&#...@Anon<br /><br />No blanket stop! It's ignorant. You're being ignorant!<br /><br />http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154561/thats-ignorantArthurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04837322808525126354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-3002873613262008572010-10-27T19:16:27.398-07:002010-10-27T19:16:27.398-07:00Arthur, I hope you're joking because that'...Arthur, I hope you're joking because that's really ignorant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714810984552499396.post-77207343510745487382010-10-27T19:11:58.654-07:002010-10-27T19:11:58.654-07:00@Sepia
"I can't draw either, but I'm...@Sepia<br /><br />"I can't draw either, but I'm not making a comic."<br /><br />WELL WHERE'S YOUR COMIC THEN IF YOU THINK XKCD IS SO BAD?Arthurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04837322808525126354noreply@blogger.com