Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Solution? (Score 2) 144

The real problem is they are looking at written data. Sarcasm is based on auditory and visual cues of the person. Detecting sarcasm online is like looking for a needle in a haystack when you don't know what a needle or hay is.

To some degree yes, but there are still satirical works of literature throughout history such as Swift's A Modest Proposal that would pose a similar problem. The problem in understanding sarcasm or satire without the visual or vocal cues relates to understanding meaning (a difficult problem in its own right) as well as why a particular response is absurd given the context, which means you also have to know what the expected or typical answer should look like.

Both of you are right... and wrong. The problem is that most people don't know how to write - and thus what they mean as (what they misunderstand to be) sarcasm doesn't come across as such. That's the real problem the researchers are facing, lack of ability to convey meaning, not lack of context.

Comment Re:Uh... let me think about it (Score 2) 561

I have never figured out how any adult could possibly not know how to read a map. It just seems so blindingly obvious. You simply look at the damn thing. Isn't visual pattern recognition humanity's greatest advantage?

No, you don't simply "look at the damn thing". You also have to be able to relate the information on the map to landmarks in the real world - a much more difficult proposition not only because the real world is a spatial relationship problem (as compared to the pattern relationship problem of the map), but also because those spatial relationships are subject to perception as well.
I wish I could find a link to the studies I saw back in the 90's where they asked random people to draw a map of their hometown - and very few bore much relationship to each other or to the real world. Long routes were often drawn as short ones - especially if it was a route the person drawing the map drove frequently. Familiar areas took up large areas on the map, often in great detail, while the unfamiliar interstitials were compressed or absent. (Etc... etc...)
For example; back in my hometown new folks often had problems navigating via map because the city's 'cultural' map is rotated counter-clockwise nearly forty five degrees from the real world. Basically the road that ran out of the original settlement ran NW-SE, but folks called it the "North road" and the "South road". Two hundred and fifty years later, street names and business names still represent this convention in contravention to what you'd think based on their map directions and position. In the town my mom lives in now she lives in "Southside" (so named a century ago when the town was much smaller), but on the map it's actually nearer the north central part of the city. And there too, the residents think of the lion's share of the metro area as being the "south side of town".

Comment Re: Too late (Score 1) 437

They don't need to pass any laws as the entire system favours "them" greatly. This is the entire thing. For you to miss that part means you really don't understand this discussion at all, and makes your participation in it somewhat confusing, as you appear to value your own opinion more than the facts. Redressing this balance will take work, and for people to complain about any efforts to redress it because they feel victimised seems incredibly selfish. This whole issue wouldn't be anywhere near as harsh if people had not been so happy with the imbalanced status quo over the last few decades. The only logical way one can stand against the desire for full representation is if they think women/non-white-folk are inherently worse at their jobs than white guys. As that is a specious reason, it's pretty clear why people arguing against it are deemed somewhat unhinged by those with a more reasoned approach.

Comment Re:Don't forget (Score 1) 437

If you can base the "white male" preference on logic, then there is no problem. When it's based on assumptions and wishes that's when shit starts to get called out. I can understand what leads people to be overly-aggressive when attempting to fix issues of representation in various sectors - sheer desperation that great swathes of society (and the worker resource they represent) are avoiding said sector must be quite the worry for any CEO looking to get the best hires (as if a competitor figures out how to wade through this mire, they will be ahead). I also find it repugnant that some people will ignore the entire body of evidence indicating that there is a large discrepancy with no physiological or logical underpinning, simply because the messenger irks them.

I'll stop rambling now, sorry.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Remember, extremism in the nondefense of moderation is not a virtue." -- Peter Neumann, about usenet