Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads • Hacker News Board

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#41

Post by darklajid » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:09 PM UTC

clstrfckr wrote: post #33

silverbax88 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are equating that after years of education, with the subject of English (albeit American English) being a core class for EVERY YEAR of attendance, and with spell checkers on most forum communities, that if someone still goes out of their way to transpose "lose" with "loose", then, yes, they are probably an idiot.

*then

I know this is not appropriate, but it made me laugh so hard.

I'm trying to write as correct as I can, but the GP just proved that these mistakes happen to everyone, even the people that think that it might make sense.

What about non-native speakers? Their point might be valuable, the participation in a discussion really help- and meaningful, but still - these now/know, there/their, you're/your mistakes are common. And not an indication of intelligence.

Edit: Just to be sure here and kind of answering the posts below: Guys, I'm a non-native speaker as well (in fact, my accent is terrible. I try to write as decent as possible, but that's a different thing). So - my data point, without any backing but my past experience, is that this is indeed an error that non-native speakers do just as well. I didn't want to imply that non-native speakers are idiots per se according to the criteria of this blog.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#42

Post by DanielBMarkham » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:11 PM UTC

So people who are detail-oriented grammarians are necessarily good commenters?

Since when?

The assumption here is that you can tell a comment is going to be stupid by testing whether or not the person understands homonyms. The only thing you check with that is language ability. I'd argue you'd be better off searching for common internet memes and cliches instead of original thinking -- since that's a sign of a lazy or uninteresting mind. The author is kind enough to inadvertently supply us with one "...If Fox Nation implemented something like this, they’d have zero commenters..." But you could test stuff like this based on any preconceived viewpoint, such as Obama-socialist, Obamacare, etc. The use of shortcuts and blindly-repeated jokes and phrases is a good sign that you're not going to be getting much from the comment.

Not sure how you'd code it, though, but I'm certain you could come up with some semantic magic given enough input text. I'd imagine you'd use n-grams and some Bayesian logic. You'd have to have a pre-existing corpus of the person's writing, though.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#43

Post by mey » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:13 PM UTC

several problems that need to be addressed. Non-native speakers would be arbitrarily penalized. This is very easy for a computer to crack. (small choice selection, systems to do grammatical checking have been around for a long time.)

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#44

Post by MatthewPhillips » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:13 PM UTC

This makes me wonder how much AI development is done for nefarious purposes. Someone's going to crack this and then they're going to have to make a more intelligent captcha system. Some day we're going to have strong AI and spammers will be thanked for it.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#45

Post by markokocic » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:14 PM UTC

silverbax88 wrote: post #32

raganwald wrote: post #9

Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?

We are equating that after years of education, with the subject of English (albeit American English) being a core class for EVERY YEAR of attendance, and with spell checkers on most forum communities, that if someone still goes out of their way to transpose "lose" with "loose", then, yes, they are probably an idiot.

> they are probably an idiot.

Did you mean "He is probably an idiot." or "They are probably idiots."?

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#46

Post by raganwald » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:14 PM UTC

Here’s my test for whether you’re qualified to post to Hacker News.

Pair the following five comments with their corresponding definitions:

1. “Raganwald is a blowhard whose pathetic attempts to score karma reveal him as an insecure dweeb who can’t get over being kicked around in grammar school. He and his mumblings should be should be flushed down the toilet bowl like the turds that they are.”

2. “What, raganwald is talking about beauty in code? Have you seen some of his code? Ignore him.”

3. “Raganwald sounds a lot like a Ruby fanbody, and we all know how those people think."

4. “Anyone who has spent that much time on Java clearly has no taste in software and cannot be relied upon for sound reasoning. Ignore raganwald.”

5. "Of course raganwald would say that there’s something wrong with Waterfall, he’s a Certified Scrum Master, he’s just pimping his own credentials.”

And the definitions:

A. Fallacy: Ad Hominem Abuse

B. Fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem

C. Fallacy: Tu Quoque (“You Also”)

D: Fallacy: Guilt by Association

E: Not a Fallacy: Insults

Example: 1-E, This is an insult, but not fallacious.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#47

Post by cromulent » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:15 PM UTC

ianterrell wrote: post #31

raganwald wrote: post #9

Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?

There's no excuse not to know common homonyms and misspellings. A smart person who has trouble with them knows they have trouble with them, knows what they are, and knows to double check himself. If you don't do at least that, you probably aren't that bright. We'll forgive the less common words like your "grammer".

>There's no excuse not to know common homonyms and misspellings.

Would you consider dyslexia an excuse, or English as a second language? Or even semi-illiteracy? I think it's definitely possible to be very clever and still not a good speller, and not bother to double-check on an Internet forum.

Einstein was notorious as a poor speller, which suggests he didn't double-check himself.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#48

Post by argv_empty » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:16 PM UTC

darklajid wrote: post #41

clstrfckr wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*then

I know this is not appropriate, but it made me laugh so hard. I'm trying to write as correct as I can, but the GP just proved that these mistakes happen to everyone, even the people that think that it might make sense. What about non-native speakers? Their point might be valuable, the participation in a discussion really help- and meaningful, but still - these now/know, there/their, you're/your mistakes are common. A…

These are not mistakes I typically see from non-native speakers. (YMMV)

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#49

Post by darklajid » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:17 PM UTC

alecbenzer wrote: post #10

this would also seem to discriminate against people who aren't native english speakers (or w/e other language).

Reminds me of a common beginner's problem if you're starting with German:

Who is 'Wer' in German

Where is 'Wo' in German

Trivial, but I see lots of people (and sometimes myself) falling for this trap.

Re: Captchas To Keep Idiots Out Of Comment Threads

#50

Post by raganwald » Wed, Aug 10, 2011, 2:18 PM UTC

ianterrell wrote: post #31

raganwald wrote: post #9

Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?

There's no excuse not to know common homonyms and misspellings. A smart person who has trouble with them knows they have trouble with them, knows what they are, and knows to double check himself. If you don't do at least that, you probably aren't that bright. We'll forgive the less common words like your "grammer".

This sounds like a social signal, not a cause-and-effect relationship. You are not establishing that some quality of being an idiot causes someone to have poor grammer, you are saying that the ought to know their grammar “just because.”

Your argument reminds me of the argument that someone ought to wear a suit and tie to work: There is no excuse for not knowing that a suit and tie is what people wear to work, and anyone who doesn’t do so is not fit to work here.