This is actually really useful. I just ran this as a sanity check on a long document I wrote, and it pointed out a bunch of lousy writing. Even better, it seems you can use it with the Hemingway App (http://www.hemingwayapp.com/) as you're writing...
Bullshit.js
61–70 of 132 posts
Re: Bullshit.js
#62Any good websites to try this on?
LinkedIn.
Edit: for those of you who read French, I recommend the "Disruptive Humans of LinkedIn" Twitter account [1], where OP's bullshit detector would shine like a beacon.
Re: Bullshit.js
#63I miss "Software as a service" as a term
Re: Bullshit.js
#64Desperately need this in academia. The academic literature is full of hyped-up phrasing. Probably safe to say the more hyped-up something is presented, the less novel it actually is.
I used to think I wasn't smart enough to read academic articles. Then I realized that most of the authors are just terrible writers or deliberately make their papers as difficult to read as possible to obscure or exaggerate their findings.
This always irks me, not just with academic articles but also with other "high-brow"/"intellectual" writing (including everything from literature and philosophy to tech writing). There's a lot of intentional or accidental obfucasting or complicating of things that when you call them out will just get you accused of being too stupid to understand it.
Re: Bullshit.js
#65Re: Bullshit.js
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to think I wasn't smart enough to read academic articles. Then I realized that most of the authors are just terrible writers or deliberately make their papers as difficult to read as possible to obscure or exaggerate their findings.
It's often said that if the writing is dense, the writer probably doesn't understand what they are saying. Being in academia for 20 years now this seems spot-on.
The following is one of the most well written PhD dissertation I've read. Its all written in simple clear to understand words.
Bulldog: A Compiler for VLIW Architectures by John R. Ellis http://www.cs.yale.edu/publications/techreports/tr364.pdf
Re: Bullshit.js
#67Glad i see in the license nobody would billshit me if I m unsatisfied with the product or idea, but how about support?
Re: Bullshit.js
#68Desperately need this in academia. The academic literature is full of hyped-up phrasing. Probably safe to say the more hyped-up something is presented, the less novel it actually is.
I used to think I wasn't smart enough to read academic articles. Then I realized that most of the authors are just terrible writers or deliberately make their papers as difficult to read as possible to obscure or exaggerate their findings.
I've known a couple academics who argued to me that this problem is systemic, rather than something that can be blamed on indiviual authors. A friend of a friend submitted a biology paper that she tried to make as jargon-free as possible, and it was rejected on the grounds that she hadn't shown a familiarity with the field. She edited it to include the dense jargon she had originally avoided, and the article was accepted (though I'm not sure if the acceptance was from the original journal or a different one).
Re: Bullshit.js
#69Any good websites to try this on?
Re: Bullshit.js
#70This is actually really useful. I just ran this as a sanity check on a long document I wrote, and it pointed out a bunch of lousy writing. Even better, it seems you can use it with the Hemingway App ( http://www.hemingwayapp.com/ ) as you're writing...
You mean, you pass the dictionary over your document and see how the document is too long-winded in a sense?