"Also true story I generated this data and actually wrote a for-loop that would print out the top ten most highly-correlated words from 10 to 1 and pause in between each word to build suspense (for me alone at my computer)."
Adorable.
I am curious why she would use word length and exclamation/emoji/question mark ratios but not check for spelling or punctuation? Surely they are more indicative of someone's level of education and reading habits.
> If there are > 4 letters, 40% of all letters are bold.
Very cool :)
I would have thought there is also value in bolding the last-x-amount of letters.
I forgot the name of the "concept" but it's been shown that the beginning and ending parts of words are the most "recognizable". You usually see a sample of that on those 'silly-facebook-posts', example:
"I cnduo't bvleiee taht I culod aulaclty uesdtannrd waht I was rdnaieg"
OP here. Thanks for the feedback! Yeah, those are some pretty tough sentences (obviously not in the dataset). The tongue twister one is really interesting.
>So you think the chance of human beings to come up with 4 random words is pretty low?
I've always wondered how effective the random words thing is. sure, there are like 100k english words in current use according to google, but it seems like a list of the most common few hundred of those words would crack a lot of passwords.
> along with smooshing syllables of any sentence to multiples of five
That's interesting to me because (particularly when I'm stressed) I mentally count the letters in sentences that people say and check to see if the number is divisible by five. If not, I reword the sentence in my head until it is.
(Fun fact: After reading that tweet, I tried to prompt ChatGPT with 100s of iteration of the word "Na", and it correctly answered "Batman!". However, prompting it with hundreds of iterations of the word "a" led to some weird poetry.)
"Only the fool would take trouble to verify that his sentence was composed of ten a's, three b's, four c's, four d's, forty-six e's, sixteen f's, four g's, thirteen h's, fifteen i's, two k's, nine l's, four m's, twenty-five n's, twenty-four o's, five p's, sixteen r's, forty-one s's, thirty-seven t's, ten u's, eight v's, eight w's, four x's, eleven y's, twenty-seven commas, twenty-three apostrophes, seven hyphens and, last but not least, a single !"
>Write a sentence that contains only 5-letter words.
>Silly jokes told with mirth bring mirthful grins.
Why does Chatgpt fail so hard at what ought to be a simple task? This example is not the first time I’ve seen a fail involving basic word/letter/sentence counting
> Once your brain is attuned to anagrams, you start seeing them everywhere.
I had a moment like this when I was obsessed with Scrabble — studying and playing 20+ hours a week.
I saw a guy at work with Demetrius on his nametag. Instantly I saw that “with another U you could make ‘deuteriums.’” It was the weirdest feeling because I had no idea where that realization came from.
I lost probably 4 years in my 20s to Scrabble and then quit cold turkey. I’m about 40 now and I’m pretty good at Wordle and the other NYT word games but that’s about it.
Adorable.
I am curious why she would use word length and exclamation/emoji/question mark ratios but not check for spelling or punctuation? Surely they are more indicative of someone's level of education and reading habits.
reply