Tried PG's Writing and speaking article. 0.1 bullshit index, which is almost zero :)
BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
31–40 of 104 posts
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#32Hilarious! I plugged in some paragraphs from press releases and it was spot on. I also appreciated the "or Scientist" part ... simply awesome! "Bullshit Index :0.64 This reeks. I bet you're a PR-Expert, Politician, Consultant or Scientist. If there is a message, it's unlikely it will reach anyone."
It would be neat if someone integrated algorithms like this into discussion forum software.
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently you're not the only one to try TechCrunch first - I did exactly the same thing after clicking the link. It appears our internal bullshit meters work just fine as well :)
After that, I pasted in an excerpt from PandoDaily and it got a marginally higher score on the BS meter.
while I read TechCrunch from time to time, I never visit PandoDaily. Stopped after I saw Sarah Lacy's charade with Zuck on YouTube.
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#34I got an astonishing 1.13 from http://www.oracle.com/uk/corporate/pricing/index.html :D
I tried the german version of it and pasted a SAP article, which got a score of 1.34. They mostly talk bullshit, but the article wasn't bad to understand imho, so I think the algorithm needs some work.
The text was:
"Möchten Sie SAP-Software vor Ort installieren oder über die Cloud darauf zugreifen? Wir bieten in jedem Fall umfassende Services, zugeschnitten auf Ihre individuellen Anforderungen. Wir verfügen über eines der größten Expertenteams weltweit. Unsere qualifizierten Mitarbeiter beraten Sie gern bei der Konzeptionierung, Implementierung und Optimierung Ihrer Systemlandschaft. Profitieren Sie innerhalb kürzester Zeit von Ihrer SAP-Lösung."
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#35I used the Potsmodernism Generator (http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/ )
And got scores of 0.35-0.45
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#36Hilarious! I plugged in some paragraphs from press releases and it was spot on. I also appreciated the "or Scientist" part ... simply awesome! "Bullshit Index :0.64 This reeks. I bet you're a PR-Expert, Politician, Consultant or Scientist. If there is a message, it's unlikely it will reach anyone."
Scientist ? I put in a page or so from a scientific paper I recently wrote and got 0.19.
Heh .. try putting in the first para from a scientific paper. I bet 10 karma points that this will have higher BS content than the rest. Similarly, the last para of the intro is also almost always content free.
Note: I'm a scientist too ... good to poke fun at ourselves, eh? :)
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#37President's Obama's AMA answers score 0.21 (Your text shows some indications of 'bullshit'-English, but is still within an acceptable range.)
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#38I got 1.24 from Vmware: http://www.vmware.com/solutions/cloud-computing/index.html
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#39I just tried some text from one of our corporate announcements. Seems accurate.
0.8 This reeks. We bet you're a PR-Expert, Politician, Consultant or Scientist. If there is a message, it's unlikely it will reach anyone. Maybe you should spend less effort on trying to impress somebody.
Re: BlaBlaMeter detects how much bullshit is in your text
#40Just for fun I ran quite a few Martin Fowler's articles through the BlaBlaMeter. On some of them, the "Bullshit Index" is unexpectedly large:
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/SnowflakeServer.html
> Bullshit Index: 0.31 – Your text shows indications of 'bullshit'-English. It's still ok for PR or advertising purposes, but more critical audiences may be skeptical.
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/PhoenixServer.html
> Bullshit Index: 0.4 – Something's getting a bit fishy. You probably want to sell something, or you're trying to impress somebody. It still may be an acceptable result for a scientific text.