Better Living Through Software - Who's the Master?

bookmarked because i want to comment on this later
also sombody should tell Josh that his media types are serving really wierd
source:
Google does spell-checking based on how frequently similarly-spelled words appear in the billions of texts they index. Many other sites do spell checking based on official references such as a dictionary. Which is "right"?

its easier to get  to that article from url http://www.netcrucible.com/blog/

Tags

  1. dictionary
  2. words
  3. spelling
  4. google
  5. wiki references
  6. bug

Comments


Mark de LA says
Anyone who has consulted an etymoligical dictionary can see that words, pronounciation and meanings change over a span of time. This is not strange although [this item] shows that there are a few uncomfortable limits.  If you like to make up your own words and spelling I suggest you become a programmer like Seth.

Seth says
[this item] is a strang wiki reference. notice how it hyperlinked with the current parser. i suppose we could define it as a reference to the item in which it exists. it would be our first indexical reference.

Mark de LA says
Oops - I didn't check the link once I made it (as a simple link) . It was intended to link to  [title mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef] which is [item 397].

Mark de LA says
Now here's a chance to consider good bug tracking.  As a customer I would just as soon tag this with $bug & perhaps "wiki references" and just boogie on down the road. Wizzard - what say yee?

Seth says
Mark 2005-10-20 09:10:28 1583
Now here's a chance to consider good bug tracking.  As a customer I would just as soon tag this with $bug & perhaps "wiki references" and just boogie on down the road. Wizzard - what say yee?
I say NO .  Even now i don't know what bug you are are refering to.  One does not want to spend a lot of time reading an item to figure out what the bug is.   It is easy to make a new item when you find a bug.  The titel of the item should name the bug.  The bug should be described in the body of the item.  Sufficient information should be given to reproduce the bug.  Anything else just puts more burden on an already over burdened developer to study your item, in many cases needing to read all the comments, just to find out that there was not bug there or that there was a bug there that was fixed a long time ago. 

Mark de LA says
HMmmm... I wonder if the was an obvious enough clue ?

Mark de LA says
This is why I said that tags are not enough! If you like I can do formal like QA and try to find all the bugs which, unfortunately, have been distributed by tagging by several different systems & then rewrite them pointing to examples via item wiki references and put them in a full-on excel type matrix. I was hoping the tagging would do the job (up to the first release) & then we could make something more formal for the general public (incidently, even though I really do know how to write a bug report - your normal consumer won't - even with written instructions.) It is time consuming, though & much slower than the quick tagging of an item which spawned a bug. We can take this offline & chat or give eachother good phone & probably reach concensus a lot faster.

Seth says
Mark 2005-10-20 11:31:02 1583
This is why I said that tags are not enough! If you like I can do formal like QA and try to find all the bugs which, unfortunately, have been distributed by tagging by several different systems & then rewrite them pointing to examples via item wiki references and put them in a full-on excel type matrix. I was hoping the tagging would do the job (up to the first release) & then we could make something more formal for the general public (incidently, even though I really do know how to write a bug report - your normal consumer won't - even with written instructions.) It is time consuming, though & much slower than the quick tagging of an item which spawned a bug. We can take this offline & chat or give eachother good phone & probably reach concensus a lot faster.
Yes tagging will give us quite a good matrix indeed.  The question is which item is tagged and how much trouble it is to figure out what the bug is from that item tagged with $bug two months after the dialogue on the item has happened. 

source:
Oops - I didn't check the link once I made it (as a simple link) . It was intended to link to  [title mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef] which is 397.

Incidentally after rereading the above qote, spending only a minuet, i still cannot figure out what the alleged bug is.  I prolly could figure it out if i spent 10 minutes.  I don't call that an effective use of time.  Not when it is so simple for someone to make a new item that names the bug and talks of just that bug and then that is what is tagged into the matrix.


Seth says
.. and yes i know you can write a very good bug reprot (item) indeed. perhaps because of that, i am expecting more of that from you than i would from the general public.

Mark de LA says
seth 2005-10-20 07:43:22 1583
[this item] is a strang wiki reference. notice how it hyperlinked with the current parser. i suppose we could define it as a reference to the item in which it exists. it would be our first indexical reference.
THIS IS THE BUG.  I took the words this item - hilighted them ->clicked the insert hyperlink button applied the url for 397 (the permalink) and thought that the normal hyperlink was going to be there.  Aparently the parser thought otherwise & produced a wiki reference which you identified as strange.  I will try it again with a different example below:

this item  or did I leave the brackets in after changing my mind such as [this item] or was it the whole phrase [this item]

& does the parser also fail on other wiki things like this group ?

Mark de LA says
Mark 2005-10-20 12:33:41 1583
seth 2005-10-20 07:43:22 1583
[this item] is a strang wiki reference. notice how it hyperlinked with the current parser. i suppose we could define it as a reference to the item in which it exists. it would be our first indexical reference.
THIS IS THE BUG.  I took the words this item - hilighted them ->clicked the insert hyperlink button applied the url for 397 (the permalink) and thought that the normal hyperlink was going to be there.  Aparently the parser thought otherwise & produced a wiki reference which you identified as strange.  I will try it again with a different example below:

this item  or did I leave the brackets in after changing my mind such as [this item] or was it the whole phrase [this item]

& does the parser also fail on other wiki things like this group ?
So apparently I left the brackets arount the words this item and highlighted the entire phrase including the brackets and used that as the thing to create a hyperlink for.  Does it work also for [this group] ... let's check it out!

Mark de LA says
Mark 2005-10-20 12:36:43 1583
Mark 2005-10-20 12:33:41 1583
seth 2005-10-20 07:43:22 1583
[this item] is a strang wiki reference. notice how it hyperlinked with the current parser. i suppose we could define it as a reference to the item in which it exists. it would be our first indexical reference.
THIS IS THE BUG.  I took the words this item - hilighted them ->clicked the insert hyperlink button applied the url for 397 (the permalink) and thought that the normal hyperlink was going to be there.  Aparently the parser thought otherwise & produced a wiki reference which you identified as strange.  I will try it again with a different example below:

this item  or did I leave the brackets in after changing my mind such as [this item] or was it the whole phrase [this item]

& does the parser also fail on other wiki things like this group ?
So apparently I left the brackets arount the words this item and highlighted the entire phrase including the brackets and used that as the thing to create a hyperlink for.  Does it work also for [this group] ... let's check it out!
apparently it does! since all these links I made with the insert hyperlink button should go to http://www.cnn.com 

Seth says
See 2392 for how i know you are there ... and you know who you are ... or do you?

Seth says
Will the person or process that is comming here so frequently explain their intentions ?

Seth says
Is it someone waiting for me to fullfill my intention of commenting on Josua's blog at the about of this item url http://www.netcrucible.com/blog/Whos+The+Master.aspx ?

Seth says
I'll hail Joshua via other means and see if i can at least determine that.

See Also

  1. Thought Will the GoogleBot index this thought? with 140 viewings related by tag "google".
  2. Thought Watching our indexing at Google with 121 viewings related by tag "google".
  3. Thought Glossary with 116 viewings related by tag "dictionary".
  4. Thought Wow! Words have meanings to others too! with 106 viewings related by tag "words".
  5. Thought about: How some Losers play the RWG - comment 67990 - comment 68201 with 92 viewings related by tag "google".
  6. Thought My Google Saves with 60 viewings related by tag "google".
  7. Thought Bots with 56 viewings related by tag "google".
  8. Thought I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 27 viewings related by tag "words".
  9. Thought about: I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 25 viewings related by tag "words".
  10. Thought The MING books with 20 viewings related by tag "dictionary".
  11. Thought We can enter unicode into fastblogit ! with 16 viewings related by tag "bug".
  12. Thought Urban Dictionary of the FBI with 9 viewings related by tag "dictionary".
  13. Thought Google Animations with 6 viewings related by tag "google".
  14. Thought about: research blog: inceptionism: going deeper into neural networks with 5 viewings related by tag "google".
  15. Thought Ming & Chinese Etymology with 4 viewings related by tag "dictionary".
  16. Thought The CSS font-size statement does not work on the MacAir in Chrome with 4 viewings related by tag "bug".
  17. Thought Google Offline Areas with 4 viewings related by tag "google".
  18. Thought Word Piles & Word Clouds with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  19. Thought Illative Force - A Lament with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  20. Thought about: alphabet aka abc.xyz with 3 viewings related by tag "google".
  21. Thought Obviously i'm gonnna haf to get it ! with 3 viewings related by tag "google".
  22. Thought about: Google Sitemaps (BETA) Help with 2 viewings related by tag "google".
  23. Thought Very Kewl street level maps on Google with 2 viewings related by tag "google".
  24. Thought Testing Google Docs & Spreadsheets with 2 viewings related by tag "google".
  25. Thought The Conversation About Truth & Context with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  26. Thought Guilt by Association with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  27. Thought I* once had a wallabu ... with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  28. Thought Dayn WAW with 2 viewings related by tag "dictionary".
  29. Thought Laws of Growth of a Pile with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  30. Thought Seth & Words - Confusion (moved) with 1 viewings related by tag "words".
  31. Thought about: why wont adsense remove these click fraud sites | Threadwatch.org with 1 viewings related by tag "google".
  32. Thought about: google is letting artificial intelligence run search - bloomberg business with 1 viewings related by tag "google".
  33. Thought about: Search engine's sense of humour crashes as it fires off warning letters over use of name as a verb with 1 viewings related by tag "google".
  34. Thought Googling The Great Work with 1 viewings related by tag "google".
  35. Thought Who are the Racists Here? with 1 viewings related by tag "bug".
  36. Thought The machines do the translating from Google Blog with 1 viewings related by tag "google".
  37. Thought Concept Net with 1 viewings related by tag "words".
  38. Thought about: Official Google Blog: Rumor of the day with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  39. Thought Google's new pages editor/publisher with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  40. Thought Wiki Reference Wish List with 0 viewings related by tag "wiki references".
  41. Thought about: Google Image Labeler with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  42. Thought Please report grammar problems with references on this link with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  43. Thought about: Official Google Blog: Setting trends with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  44. Thought Reference validation has holes in it with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  45. Thought Is google evil ? with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  46. Thought about: Google Press Center: The Google Podium with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  47. Thought about: google green blog: project sunroof: mapping the planet’s solar energy potential, one rooftop at a time with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  48. Thought Hmmm... just when I began to want to switch with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  49. Thought my Google+ with 0 viewings related by tag "google".
  50. Thought What is a tag ? with 0 viewings related by tag "words".