Am 22.09.2011 00:20, schrieb Robert Rohde:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:00 AM, David
Gerard<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The board resolution specifies a magical flying
unicorn pony that
shits rainbows. A wide-ranging survey has been conducted on the
precise flight patterns and the importance of which way round the
rainbow spectrum goes. These tiresome people who keep calling this
"impossible" just do not understand that the high-level decision for a
magical flying unicorn pony that shits rainbows has been set in stone.
I don't have any unicorns, but there are lots of ponies. I'd be happy
to stick a horn on one and call her sparkles if that would help?
User rating / categorization systems are like ponies. They are a
familiar and commonplace way of organizing things. They can be used
to filter some things and reduce the degree of surprise; however they
will always have both a large false positive rate and a large false
negative rate. No filter is going to fly or shit rainbows.
The question is not where to find mythical beasts, but whether
dressing up a horse so that it looks a little like a unicorn would
actually be useful. And that depends on whether there is actual
demand for such filters, and whether having a filter that is
sort-of-okay some of the time would be helpful to the people who want
filtering.
-Robert Rohde
The questions are. How many of the readers would actually:
* want such a filter?
* use such a filter?
* see a need for a filter?
* accept an biased filter that doesn't comply to their opinion?
* think of it as a tool to protect their children?
Given the current data i have, this will be a very tiny group of users,
but an huge amount of work, a new battlefield and tool for censors.