I think that's wrong and few serious human endeavors are accomplished alone. In the arts, look at stories about how works were really created. Pop music is an easy example because it's well known: Songs are written with a suggestion from a friend, input from the producer, are based on something the performer heard on the train, are created when someone uncredited sits in on the session and provides the key hook, etc. A friend is writing a book, and I spent hours reading it and offering suggestions; I'll receive no credit (and I don't want or deserve it). In the code people write, how much is done without any help from others, without using existing code and ideas? As the saying goes, good artists borrow; great artists steal.
Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#12https://zwischenzugs.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/shakespeare_un...
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it depends on what you mean. I don't think that just the number of bytes of data should be used to measure the size of your dataset. For example, if I have 1TB of all 1's, this is a lot of data, but not very interesting. I think a more nuanced notion of size is the /information content/ of the datasets. I haven't thought about it carefully, but I'm sure you can quantify this more explicitly in terms of inform…
Sounds like you may be interested in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#14We often start with the null hypothesis of artistic "exceptionalism, which imagines him [or her] as a freak of isolated genius", i.e., we assume that the credited creator worked alone. I think that's wrong and few serious human endeavors are accomplished alone. In the arts, look at stories about how works were really created. Pop music is an easy example because it's well known: Songs are written with a suggestion fr…
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#15Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#16most of romeo & juliet is copied scene-for-scene from the english translation of an italian play by the same name. Most of the lines you remember from the play were added in shakespeare's version.
In the example in this article, I'm getting chills from how much better the shakespeare line is vs the marlowe line he stole.
If you read R&J side by side with its italian source, start with the 'if I profane' scene ('let lips do what hands do').
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#17We often start with the null hypothesis of artistic "exceptionalism, which imagines him [or her] as a freak of isolated genius", i.e., we assume that the credited creator worked alone. I think that's wrong and few serious human endeavors are accomplished alone. In the arts, look at stories about how works were really created. Pop music is an easy example because it's well known: Songs are written with a suggestion fr…
Howard Becker's Art Worlds book looks at this very issue - it's a very interesting read.
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Howard Becker's Art Worlds book looks at this very issue - it's a very interesting read.
Thanks. What does he say about it?
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#19I would be interested in reading some technical papers on the subject, could someone post a few? Whether about Shakespeare or other literature analysis? That said, this is SO not big data. It is small data, but potentially interesting analysis.
I think it depends on what you mean. I don't think that just the number of bytes of data should be used to measure the size of your dataset. For example, if I have 1TB of all 1's, this is a lot of data, but not very interesting. I think a more nuanced notion of size is the /information content/ of the datasets. I haven't thought about it carefully, but I'm sure you can quantify this more explicitly in terms of inform…
"You have a terabyte of data? For $30,000 you can put that in main memory. If your dataset fits in main memory, it's not big data." Source: Michael Stonebraker, January 2015.
Re: Why literature is the ultimate big-data challenge
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it depends on what you mean. I don't think that just the number of bytes of data should be used to measure the size of your dataset. For example, if I have 1TB of all 1's, this is a lot of data, but not very interesting. I think a more nuanced notion of size is the /information content/ of the datasets. I haven't thought about it carefully, but I'm sure you can quantify this more explicitly in terms of inform…
Maybe you would find the theory of information interesting: http://math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/text/others/shannon/entrop... Here in his famous tour de force Claude Shannon lays out the way we can estimate the amount of actual information in an act of communication (e.g. a literary work) and relates it to system entropy. To your point, !TB of all 1's compresses to a just few bits of actual information. But I suspect y…
But after initial perturbations die out, the growth rate will likely look something like O(log n) or less.