"linux for sohpisticated when if contextual what but then"

=> Good: 0.9986

"linux for sohpisticated when if contextual what but then what"

=> Good: 0.0201

sohpisticated ?

I think whether the title is spelled correctly is a valid thing to take into consideration when predicting whether it will get upvotes.

Put another way, I think misspelled titles are well within the problem domain here.

Is it within the problem domain? Yes.

Is it interesting for this project? Based on my skimming of the README, probably not. I don't think it handles misspellings intelligently.

>> "I plan to rewrite Linux in Rust - Linus Torvalds" <<

Maybe it's sohpisticated because Linus is going to RIIR?

deoxyribonucleic cloned asynchronously

Bad: 0.0001 - Good: 0.9999

So that's a neural network thing? If the input is 'word space' it trains to detect buzzwords?

I'm honestly interested - do we hobble our neural networks with our choice of training space? If for instance, the HN-NN-input space including 'prepositions and word-frequency statistics', would the network train for sentence sophistication? Just because those stats were in front of it?

The neural network used here is very weak, it's not going to do much better than word correlations.

That is how it works here, you collect upvotes if you use fancy words. That's why everybody uses the word "orthogonal" here all the time. Have you ever seen that word anywhere else?

> That's why everybody uses the word "orthogonal" here all the time. Have you ever seen that word anywhere else?

Yes, frequently. It is common in various areas of math -- mathematical background is not something "normal people" usually flaunt, but there are good reasons to expect programmers to have much more such background than average.

A good rule of thumb is that people are probably using the words they use because those words make sense to them. See the first panel here: http://www.basicinstructions.net/basic-instructions/2009/1/2...

Yes. I'll take orthogonal any day over HN things like "foot gun" or the cryptic invocation of so and so's "law"

isn't that orthogonal to the discussion?

i'm orthogonally inclined to disagree, but mainly because i'm sitting on a chair

> Have you ever seen that word anywhere else?

Unfortunately far too often both in tech and in CS academia (and I'm talking about informal conversations ie. this is an 'orthogonal idea')