3 ms·
I believe it's out of 8, so either you missed 3 and got 5/8 or you nailed it and got 7/8 :-) I, for one, was wholly duped by the computers, with a 50% success
by carbocation 12y ago
I believe it's out of 8, so either you missed 3 and got 5/8 or you nailed it and got 7/8 :-)
I, for one, was wholly duped by the computers, with a 50% success rate.
- mod 12y agoI got 6/8, but I had already heard of robots writing box-scores (more than one of the questions). I was duped by the old english poetry, and also the novel which was dictating a human experience. I imagined it too difficult to write that for any current type of writing programs. They need to get this technology into spam bots, pronto! http://xkcd.com/810/ http://xkcd.com/810/
- MetaCosm 12y agoThe box scores were really good. They are the two that got me, I guess the word complexity is low -- so templating can be high, but they felt to me very human-ish.
- TillE 12y agoA lot of templates and checking for noteworthy conditions. Seems pretty straightforward when you're interpreting a consistently structured set of data, just a lot of grunt work and polishing.
- marssaxman 12y agoI was not duped by the old english poetry, but only because I recently wrote a Markov-chain / rhyming dictionary based Shakesperean sonnet generator. It's amazing to see a computer generate plausible but meaningless words in a register we generally regard as profound due to age!
- electromagnetic 12y agoI got 7/8, one of the game scores got me. I'm a writer, so it's reassuring I'm able to tell the difference even in something so trivially short as game scores, and I don't follow a single sport.