5 ms·

> Edit to add: I'm curious what word "Revlon" was supposed to be. I'd guess "revenue", but who knows. Autocorrect is a disaster for clear communication these

by nkurz 3y ago

> Edit to add: I'm curious what word "Revlon" was supposed to be. I'd guess "revenue", but who knows. Autocorrect is a disaster for clear communication these days. It's strange to me that it's as bad as it is. Is there a patent on using context to decide which word is appropriate? If not, I can't figure out why it isn't done more commonly. It seems certain the poster didn't type "Revlon" with a capital R, and it also seems certain that any statistical model wouldn't think "Revlon" would be the most likely word here.

bbor 3y ago
It’s all about edge cases. Sometimes, people are discussing some random proper noun, and with modern lax internet/SMS etiquette all sorts of unusual constructions pop up occasionally. Hard to know when it’s intentional, and any amount of over-zealousness is immediately noticeable. At least that’s a layman’s guess
- nkurz 3y ago
  Sure, and thus the default should be to assume the user is correct and not change anything. But how much chance is there that the user actually typed Revlon with a capital R? I think practically nil. Instead, something was typed that wasn't in the dictionary and the autocorrect decided that "Revlon" was best fit. Depending on what was typed this might be true by Levenshtein distance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein_distance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein_distance), but I'm really doubtful it could possibly be the best fit in this sentence by any metric of likelihood that considered context. Hence my question of why context isn't used by most autocorrect systems.
  - bcbrown 3y ago
    > But how much chance is there that the user actually typed Revlon with a capital R? I think practically nil. Uh....... You might want to spend a second researching what "Revlon" is before speculating like this. I'm 100% positive that they actually typed Revlon with a capital R, because I know what Revlon is, and it's completely topical and contextual. It's very well known in certain circles, much like Chevron, Howey, and Brandenburg.
    - nkurz 3y ago
      Wow, thanks for the hint. I presume you mean this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revlon,_Inc._v._MacAndrews_%26_Forbes_Holdings,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revlon,_Inc._v._MacAndrews_%26.... That does make it very likely that I was wrong and that is indeed exactly what they typed!

by nkurz 3y ago

bbor 3y ago

It’s all about edge cases. Sometimes, people are discussing some random proper noun, and with modern lax internet/SMS etiquette all sorts of unusual constructions pop up occasionally. Hard to know when it’s intentional, and any amount of over-zealousness is immediately noticeable. At least that’s a layman’s guess

nkurz 3y ago
Sure, and thus the default should be to assume the user is correct and not change anything. But how much chance is there that the user actually typed Revlon with a capital R? I think practically nil. Instead, something was typed that wasn't in the dictionary and the autocorrect decided that "Revlon" was best fit. Depending on what was typed this might be true by Levenshtein distance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein_distance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein_distance), but I'm really doubtful it could possibly be the best fit in this sentence by any metric of likelihood that considered context. Hence my question of why context isn't used by most autocorrect systems.
- bcbrown 3y ago
  > But how much chance is there that the user actually typed Revlon with a capital R? I think practically nil. Uh....... You might want to spend a second researching what "Revlon" is before speculating like this. I'm 100% positive that they actually typed Revlon with a capital R, because I know what Revlon is, and it's completely topical and contextual. It's very well known in certain circles, much like Chevron, Howey, and Brandenburg.
  - nkurz 3y ago
    Wow, thanks for the hint. I presume you mean this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revlon,_Inc._v._MacAndrews_%26_Forbes_Holdings,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revlon,_Inc._v._MacAndrews_%26.... That does make it very likely that I was wrong and that is indeed exactly what they typed!