Captain's Blog
http://critique.org/c/blog
Musings on writing, publishing, critiquing, life, &c.en-usCopyright 2011, Andrew BurtTue Jun 6 14:54:15 2023Andrew Burt - http://critique.orgAndrew Burt - http://critique.orgWriting, Publishing, Critiquing, Life, Misc.1901-01-01T00:00+00:001dailyCritique.orghttp://critters.org/critters_ad1-468x60.jpg
http://critique.org
Aburt
Really REALLY don't trust software code written by "chatbots" like Google's Bard AI. Eeek!
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20230606142605
<p>
[Part II of
<a target=_blank href="https://critters.org/blog/?l=20230516094532">Really really don't trust "chatbots" like Google's Bard AI. They lie. A lot.</a> ]
<p>
So, let's see how Bard does on writing software.
<p>
I've received emails from Google urging me to try Bard to write software code. Literally, as in, "Try coding with Bard" and "Bard can now help you code" and "Collaborate with Bard to help generate, explain, and debug your code." Hey, that sounds pretty useful!
<p>
Ok, I thought, if it lies about me and facts in general, how good is it at writing code?
<p>
Ai-yi-yi.
<p>
Summary: No no no no no no no no no. Danger Will Robinson! Do not use!
<p>
Bard's code could kill people.
<p>
tl;dr for coding geeks:
<p>
Experiment #1:
<p>
I first asked it to write a function in PERL to validate that an email address was syntactically correct. You know, "jsmith@somewhere.com" is valid, likewise "j.smith@some-where.co.uk"; whereas invalid email addresses would be things like "jsmith@", "jsmith@xyz.", j^smith@some!where!com", "jsmith@some@where.com", "^.#@%&", "j;;smith@@@" and stuff like that. The <i>exact</i> rules for a valid email address are a bit involved, as you can read <a target=_blank href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_address#Syntax">here</a>, but I figured if it got the general usage rules I'd be satisfied. For example, in front of the one and only '@' you usually see letters, numbers, and the most common punctuation, say _ . - +. After the '@' is stricter, and I'd be happy if it said it had to be letters, numbers, _ . - plus the rule that it has to have at least one '.' in the middle of some letters, and not at the start. That rules in and out most of the cases you see.
<p>
In PERL, a regular expression (aka "wildcard pattern") for that would be something like: <code>^\w[\w.+-]*@[\w-]+(\.\w+)+$</code>
<blockquote>(mini regex tutorial: \w is shorthand for any letter, number, or '_'. stuff in [] means any one of those characters. A '+' means one or more of the previous things, a '*' means zero or more of the previous. \. means a literal '.' (unless inside [], where you can do just a '.'). ^ and $ at start and end mean, "at start/end"; not in the middle. Complicated, I know.)</blockquote> So that regex means, starts with a letter/number/underscore, followed by any number of those or punctuation . + - followed by your regular old '@', followed by one or more letters/numbers/underscores/dashes, then at least one thing that starts with a '.' followed by one or more letters/numbers. (More or less.) So, jsmith@somewhere.com is in. j;;smith@@.wrong.j!!nk is out, and so on. It's not perfect, but it covers a lot of ground.
<p>
Well, Bard did come up with a pattern that was not horrible: <code>^[a-zA-Z0-9_.+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9-]+\.[a-zA-Z]+$</code> which says, in front of the '@' you have one or more letters/numbers/punctuation _ . + - (which is reasonable-ish) and after the '@' you have at least one letter/number/dash followed by a '.' followed by some letters. That covers a lot of cases, though my biggest quibble here would be it doesn't allow more than one '.' after the '@', so jsmith@mail.somewhere.com would fail when it shouldn't. But, that piece is almost ok-ish.
<p>
The problem is what it did with that pattern. Here's Bard's code, with line numbers added to discuss it:
<p>
<blockquote><code><pre>
1 sub is_email_valid {
2 my $email = shift;
3 # Check if the email address is empty.
4 return 0 if $email eq "";
5 # Check if the email address has the correct format.
6 /^[a-zA-Z0-9_.+-]+@[a-zA-Z0-9-]+\.[a-zA-Z]+$/ =~ /$email/;
7 return 1;
8 }
</pre>
<p>
</code> and suggests this code to show how it works: <code>
<p>
<pre>
9 if (is_email_valid("johndoe@example.com")) {
10 print "The email address is valid.";
11 } else {
12 print "The email address is invalid.";
13 }
</pre></code></blockquote>
<p>
Lines 1-4 are fine. It sets up a function, gets the email address, and says "nope" if it's empty. Sure. An empty address isn't valid.
<p>
But in line 6 we run into problems. It has that regular expression pattern I mentioned above as being reasonable -- but it <i>uses</i> it wrong. It's used backwards. <i>It won't work.</i> It needs to be <code> $email =~ /pattern/</code> NOT <code> /pattern/ =~ /$email/ </code> ! (You know, like 10/2 is not the same as 2/10.) The way Bard coded it, it treats the email address as the pattern, then asks if this convoluted fixed bit of text matches that. It won't do it.
<p>
So, line 6 just won't match anything about an email address like you'd want.
<p>
But that doesn't matter, in the end, since the last line, line 7, ignores whatever the test was in line 6 and simply returns "ok! that email is valid!". (The value "1" means "true.")
<p>
So this function that looks... interesting... like it has some of ok-ish elements to it... just says <i>anything</i> is a valid email address, so long as it isn't entirely empty. Oy.
<p>
Now, if this function to test email addresses has anything important behind the result, like, to avoid security breaches, Houston, you've got a problem.
<p>
Then there's the purported test code, on line 9-13. Alas, even if the function worked correctly, there's a subtle mistake in this here test code too. It calls <code>is_email_valid("johndoe@example.com")</code>, which looks fine... except that in PERL, a thing like <code>@example</code> inside double quotes is an array variable name, and is replaced by the value of the array. In this specific case, there is no array named "example", so @example is empty, so this turns into a function call <code>is_email_valid("johndoe.com")</code>. (Which the wrongly written function says is valid, of course, so running the test code <i>looks</i> like the function worked! But ha! only because two errors compounded each other.)
<p>
To fix that tiny problem, it should put a \ before the @ in this instance, or use single quotes.
<code>is_email_valid("johndoe\@example.com")</code> or
<code>is_email_valid('johndoe@example.com')</code> . Nitpicky, yeah, but that's programming. (There's the apocryphal story about a space probe lost because of a wrong comma.)
<p>
Again, the main takeaway here is that (1) Bard can't code well and (2) it can look like it's right when it isn't. That makes very hard for a human "collaborator" to use. If it looks okay at a glance, but it's plain wrong? Ouch.
<p>
If some junior programmer, or tired expert programmer, just copied Bard's code into some other software they're writing, even after glancing at it, it could lead to some very bad results. Even potentially deadly, as you'll see in Experiment 2.
<p>
But first, let's try a different language for the email thing:
<p>
Experiment #1b:
<p>
I asked it to write that email validation function in the C language. It did even worse.
<p>
It said...
<p>
<p>
<blockquote><code><pre>
Sure, here is a C function to check if an email address is valid:
<p>
1 #include <stdio.h>
2 #include <stdlib.h>
3 int is_email_valid(char *email) {
4 // Check if the email address is empty.
5 if (email == NULL || strlen(email) == 0) {
6 return 0;
7 }
8 // Check if the email address has the correct format.
9 char *at_pos = strchr(email, '@');
10 if (at_pos == NULL) {
11 return 0;
12 }
13 char *dot_pos = strchr(at_pos + 1, '.');
14 if (dot_pos == NULL) {
15 return 0;
16 }
17 // Check if the domain name is valid.
18 for (char *cur = dot_pos + 1; *cur != '\0'; cur++) {
19 if (!isalpha(*cur) && !isdigit(*cur)) {
20 return 0;
21 }
22 }
23 // The email address is valid.
24 return 1;
25 }
26 int main() {
27 // Get the email address from the user.
28 char email[100];
29 printf("Enter an email address: ");
30 fgets(email, 100, stdin);
31 // Check if the email address is valid.
32 if (is_email_valid(email)) {
33 printf("The email address is valid.\n");
34 } else {
35 printf("The email address is invalid.\n");
36 }
37 return 0;
38 }
</pre></code></blockquote>
<p>
Let's break down what it wrote.
<p>
Lines 4-7 says it's an invalid email address (returns "0") if it's empty. Fine.
<p>
Lines 8-12 says it's invalid if it doesn't have an '@' anywhere in it. Okay.
<p>
Lines 13-16 says it's invalid if there is no '.' anywhere after the '@'. True, but there's a lot more to check than that. Kinda petty and wasteful to check just for that.
<p>
Lines 17-22 says it's invalid if there is any character after that '.' that isn't a letter or number, and otherwise it's valid! yay! per line 24. Hrunh?!? So, it says user@.com is valid (nope) but it would reject "user@somewhere.co.uk" (after the first '.' is another '.', which isn't a letter/number). It would accept "!^#$\;@." or "user@&*!!.com", and so on and on.
<p>
It's a <i>horribly</i> insufficient set of tests for a valid email address. Not even in the ballpark.
<p>
Jeez, it could at least have called a regular expression function like the PERL example did. This is just awful. This is like trying to see if someone is allowed to withdraw money from you bank account by asking them, "do you have a gun in your left pocket? No, ok, is your name Jesse James? No? Well okay then, you're clear to empty out bank account #1234. Have fun!"
<p>
Mindboggling.
<p>
And, sure, there could be cases where a valid email address is important and really needs to be checked. But this code is non-obvious. You have to <i>really</i> know your C and <i>really</i> know your email address rules and <i>really</i> work your way through this function carefully to see how useless it is. On the surface it sounds so soothing. "Check if the email address has the correct format", it says, and "Check if the domain name is valid" and "The email address is valid." But it's complete BS.
<p>
As I said, Bard lies. Don't trust it.
<p>
Maybe it was just it didn't handle email address rules well...
<p>
Experiment #2:
<p>
So, I thought I'd see if it could handle something a little simpler, but also of potentially life-threatening consequences if it got it wrong. I asked it:
<p>
<blockquote>write a perl function to characterize blood pressure as normal, elevated hypertension stage 1, hypertension stage 2, or hypertensive crisis</blockquote>
<p>
It came back with "Sure":
<p>
<blockquote><code><pre>
1 sub characterize_blood_pressure {
2 my ($systolic, $diastolic) = @_;
3 # Check if the blood pressure is normal.
4 return "Normal" if $systolic < 120 && $diastolic < 80;
5 # Check if the blood pressure is elevated.
6 return "Elevated Hypertension Stage 1" if $systolic < 140 && $diastolic < 90;
7 # Check if the blood pressure is hypertension stage 1.
8 return "Hypertension Stage 1" if $systolic < 160 && $diastolic < 100;
9 # Check if the blood pressure is hypertension stage 2.
10 return "Hypertension Stage 2" if $systolic >= 160 || $diastolic >= 100;
11 # Check if the blood pressure is hypertensive crisis.
12 return "Hypertensive Crisis" if $systolic >= 180 || $diastolic >= 110;
13 }
</pre></code>
and test code and what it says is the output of the test code:
<p>
<code><pre>
14 print characterize_blood_pressure(120, 80), "\n";
15 print characterize_blood_pressure(130, 85), "\n";
16 print characterize_blood_pressure(140, 90), "\n";
17 print characterize_blood_pressure(160, 95), "\n";
18 print characterize_blood_pressure(180, 100), "\n";
19 This code will print the following output:
20 Normal
21 Elevated Hypertension Stage 1
22 Hypertension Stage 1
23 Hypertension Stage 2
24 Hypertensive Crisis
</pre></code></blockquote>
<p>
So, no, that test code with its own function does not print those results. It actually prints:
<p>
<blockquote><code><pre>
25 Elevated Hypertension Stage 1 <font color=red>(not what it predicted, but actually what it <i>should</i> say for 120/80...)</font>
26 Elevated Hypertension Stage 1
27 Hypertension Stage 1
28 Hypertension Stage 2
29 Hypertension Stage 2 <font color=red>(Uhoh! Way wrong!)</font>
</pre></code></blockquote>
<p>
So, big takeaway here is that if you're having a serious, life threatening hypertensive crisis, the medical device some trusting programmer put this code into will simply say you're in Stage 2 (not imminently life threatening), when in fact it should say you need to get to the emergency room.
<p>
Why is it so wrong? I mean, the code looks very authoritative. The tests look pretty simple and straightforward. If your BP is less than 120/80, you're Normal. Cool. If your BP is 200/120, you need to get to the hospital, and, gosh, there's even a test in the function that says that anything over 180/110 is a crisis.
<p>
So why didn't it say so? Well, it's the <i>order</i> of the tests. On line 10 it checks if your BP is over 160/100, and if it is, regardless <i>how much over</i> it is, it says you're in Stage 2 (and you need a prescription, etc.; but it's not an emergency room crisis). It needs to run line 12 before line 10.
<p>
That's pretty subtle, unless you really thought about it and scrutinized the code. Which is opposite of the point -- Bard is supposed to be this great collaborator, helping you write, test, and debug your code. It failed at all three. It would be easier -- and safer -- to write the code yourself, so you know what it's doing.
<p>
A poor programmer might make the same error, swapping lines 10 and 12 -- but a good programmer would know that when testing if numbers are above an increasing threshold, you have to check from the highest down. (Lines 4, 6, and 8 test correctly: If testing numbers <i>below</i> an increasing threshold, you do it in that order.)
<p>
Trusting Bard <i>at all</i> could lead to disaster in a case like this.
<p>
As for the other prediction error, where Bard says 120/80 will report "Normal", no, it should report "Elevated Stage 1" because the code checks if the numbers are <i>less than</i> 120/80, not less than <i>or equal to</i> 120/80. So that's just a case of Bard not knowing what the code does. Some help <i>that</i> is with writing tests and debugging!
<p>
It doesn't say what source it's using for the definitions of the various stages, as that seems to vary. Commonly there seems to be a split of the second category into two different ones, but without knowing the source for this I can't say it merged two levels together. In something like this, it ought to cite sources for how it created definitions of things.
<p>
But that's really not the big problem: The big problem is that it writes dangerously wrong code that looks superficially ok at a glance.
<p>
And how it lies about the testing code and results!
<p>
Heaven forbid what happens when any programmer -- or AI -- actually starts using code written like this. Or trusts it to write testing code. Or trusts that it ran the testing code and got the right answers.
<p>
Run away!
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20230606142605#comments'>[Comments]</a><p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Reluctant-Guest-Edge-World-ebook/dp/B004E112LC'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=The Reluctant Guest at the Edge of the World&c=guest.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2023-06-06T14:26:05+05:00
Really really don't trust "chatbots" like Google's Bard AI. They lie. A lot.
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20230516094532
<p>
My background is as a computer science professor doing work in AI (and a science fiction writer -- check out my newest novel! :)
<a target=_blank href="https://aburt.com/tos">Termination of Species,</a>
which has a lot in it about the future of AI, biotech, immortality, and tons more science fictional fun). I was curious how all the hoopla stacked up about the so-called "generative" AI chatbots like Bard, Google's new AI. Google pitches Bard as a tool that will help you with "understanding really complex topics simply." Cool.
<p>
Well, it tells you all kinds of stuff, in a convincing way that sounds like it really knows. It says such detailed things authoritatively you <i>want</i> to believe it.
<p>
Hold on there! Danger Will Robinson!
<p>
I was amazed at how Bard consistently gave false information with a very authoritative voice. I.e.: lying. They do softly mention it may give inaccurate information, but there's a difference between phrasing something as tentative vs. the very authoritative way Bard presents false information. It even says it is quoting another web page then gives text that doesn't appear anywhere on that web page.
<p>
In AI lingo this is called "hallucination." To my mind, that's a disingenuous euphemism: When it presents false information as true, in a convincing tone of voice meant to sound authoritative, that's called "lying." Likewise ChatGPT. They may give some correct answers... but you can't know. (Thus, they're useless for getting information.)
<p>
Summary: Don't trust it. At all.
<p>
Lots of details...
<cut>
<p>
I tried asking Bard about who I was, and it got some of it right -- its first paragraph was correct:
<p>
<blockquote>Andrew Burt is a computer scientist, science fiction author, and entrepreneur. He is the founder of ReAnimus Press, Techsoft, and Nyx, the first Internet service provider in Colorado. He is also a former computer science professor at the University of Denver.</blockquote>
<p>
(Nyx was the first ISP in a rather bigger area than Colorado :) but what it said is technically correct.)
<p>
But it goes on to say other things that are simply false, including the year I was born, where I was born, what year I received my BS and PhD degrees, how long I taught at DU, what year I founded TechSoft, what year I started ReAnimus Press.
<p>
It says I've written a bunch of novels that I never wrote. And which nobody wrote. The titles don't exist at all by anyone. I asked for a summary of one, and it gave a long, detailed plot summary... of a book that doesn't exist. (At least in <i>this</i> universe.)
<p>
It listed me as a member of organizations I've never belonged to.
<p>
It says I have two kids. (Nope.)
<p>
There are some accurate bits, and some generic commentary, such as that I'm "a strong believer in the power of education and lifelong learning," which could safely be said of anyone who's ever been a teacher.
<p>
Overall, the tone of what it wrote sounds like, I dunno, what an MC would say as an introduction to someone who is being presented a lifetime achievement award at some awards dinner. Change it from present to past tense, and you have an obituary or a eulogy written by a family member.
<p>
I asked it for the phone number for a business -- and it gave me a wrong number. (I asked it a few times who that phone number <i>was</i> for, and it said (a) it didn't have that phone number in its database; (b) it wasn't in service; and (c) it was for some other specific business.)
<p>
I'm not particularly famous, so I asked it about other people who are better known, like best-selling author Brian Herbert, who continued the famous DUNE series of novels that his father started
<a target=_blank href="https://reanimus.com/store/index.cgi?author=Brian%20Herbert">(and two that my ReAnimus Press published). :) </a>
Again, Bard lied a lot. As with me, it got some right, and a lot wrong. It attributed books to him that he didn't write, it got dates wrong all over the place. He has held a wide variety of jobs, not of which Bard listed; yet it listed jobs he didn't hold.
<p>
I asked it about some famous historical figures. It mimicked most of the wikipedia information about Baldwin II, the King of Jerusalem in the 1100s, but it threw in a false statement as one of his major accomplishments that he founded the Order of the Hospitallers. (He didn't.)
<p>
I asked it, "What is your source for saying that Baldwin II of Jerusalem founded the Order of the Hospitallers" and it replied,
<p>
<blockquote>
I apologize for the error in my previous response. Baldwin II of Jerusalem did not found the Order of the Hospitallers. The Order was founded in 1099 by a group of French knights who were led by Gerard Thom. The knights were originally known as the Knights of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem, and their mission was to care for the sick and poor pilgrims who were visiting the Holy Land. The knights later became involved in military activities, and they played a significant role in defending the Holy Land from Muslim forces. The Order of the Hospitallers eventually became one of the most powerful and wealthy military orders in the Middle Ages. It was dissolved in 1803 after the French Revolution.
<p>
The source for my previous response was the following website:
<p>
<blockquote><a target=_blank href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_II_of_Jerusalem">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_II_of_Jerusalem</blockquote></a>
<p>
<font color=red>The website states the following:</font>
<p>
<blockquote>Baldwin II of Jerusalem (1060 -- 16 April 1131) was King of Jerusalem from 1118 until his death. He was the cousin and successor of Baldwin I. Baldwin II was a capable and energetic ruler, and he played a significant role in the early history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. <font color=red>He was also the founder of the Order of the Knights Templar.</font></blockquote>
<p>
However, I have since learned that this information is incorrect. The Order of the Knights Templar was founded in 1119, two years after Baldwin II became king. The founder of the order was Hugh de Payens, a French knight who was inspired by the work of the Knights of the Hospital.
</blockquote>
<p>
Which is... interesting. Just wow about the bit I highlighted in red there, where Bard "quotes" Wikipedia what states. Going so far as to indent the paragraph to highlight that it's quoting from the wiki page. Well, guess what, that wikipedia page doesn't say that! And the dates are wrong. Wikipedia's dates are "1075 -- 21 August 1131" not "1060 -- 16 April 1131" as Bard "quotes." There are no dates 16 April or 1060 in the real wiki page. The wikipedia article does not have the sentence about being a "capable and energetic" ruler -- it doesn't even have either of those words anywhere on the page! That last sentence, "He was also the founder of the Order of the Knights Templar" is not in that web page! And not true. Google's FAQ says "If Bard does directly quote at length from a webpage, it cites that page" -- but it fails to mention it might totally fabricate "direct" quotes.
<p>
Next Bard apologizes for saying Baldwin founded the Hospitallers, then says no wait, it was the Templars (making up a wikipedia quote), then says oh, no wait, what I just said above <i>and wikipedia</i> are wrong anyway. Now it's not just misquoting wikipedia, it's saying wikipedia is wrong too! Head spin!!!
<p>
I asked it assorted other questions, and it often presented false information. Very authoritatively. Whoa.
<p>
If you try to correct it, it will say it's so sorry it was wrong, it will do better in the future -- but it doesn't.
<p>
So, on the whole, it has soooo many false facts presented as firm truths that I have to say, "It lies."
<p>
I also tried ChatGPT, and it had more cases of "I don't know the answer" -- but it also gave false answers, with conviction.
<p>
Conclusion: Don't trust anything chatbots tell you.
<p>
In which case, what's the point?
<p>
But wait! There's more! In Part II, I'll test out how well Bard writes programming code, which Google brags about and urges you to use. This should be fun. Stay tuned!
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20230516094532#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2023-05-16T09:45:32+05:00
How to Increase Vaccination Rates
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20210506102323
<p>
Idea to increase the vaccination rates in "red" states: Win an F-150 truck, or a trip to Branson, in a government lottery you're entered into when you get vaccinated. One drawing a week; the sooner you enter the more chances to win. (Ford could even donate a few trucks for PR purposes and to make the cost really low, etc. Probably much lower than the $100/person offered in, what was it, West Virginia, but probably get higher participation, since many folks respond better to a thing or experience than just cash; and some folks love themselves a lottery.) :)
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20210506102323#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2021-05-06T10:23:23+05:00
Wising up to Smart Quotes in Word<br>
(And fixing them when they go wrong)
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20200916084817
<p> So, yeah, been a while since I did a blog post, thought I better do one. :)
<p> Since ReAnimus Press deals with a lot of OCR'd and funky copy&pasted manuscripts that have all sorts of wrong style of double quotes in them, I thought I'd share a quick tip how to fix smart quotes in a Word document.
<p> (Smart quotes are the ones that are left and right facing, <font face="Times Roman">“like this.”</font> As opposed to non-smart "straight" quotes, that are the same for left and right, "like this." Printed books almost always use smart quotes to look more professional, and a book with straight quotes in it can look amateurish. In the old days of computing and before that for typewriters, there was only the one double-quote character on the keyboard. Typesetting and modern character sets allow for the left/right facing quotes, but they're different characters. Word can do either approach. There's still only the one key on your keyboard, but Word guesses when the smart quotes option is turned on. OCR and copy/paste often make a mess of smart quotes, or maybe they just weren't in there to begin with.)
<p> First—ok, <i>first</i> make a safe backup of your file under some other name in case anything goes south—then—
<p> First, turn on the option for Word to always do smart quotes in your document. It's in
<a target=_blank href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/smart-quotes-in-word-702fc92e-b723-4e3d-b2cc-71dedaf2f343">something like</a>
Tools / Proofing / AutoCorrect Options / AutoFormat / "Replace straight quotes with smart quotes." Check that box wherever you find it. Also check the same box in the "AutoFormat As You Type" tab.
<p> That's for what happens going forward. But you've still got a file full of the wrong kind of quotes, right?
<p> To fix the existing non-smart quotes, go to Find/Replace. In the Find box, type one double quote. In the Replace box, same thing, one double quote. Now do Replace All. That will go find all your double quotes and replace them with... double quotes... but because the Smart Quotes option is turned on, viola! they all turn into curly quotes.
<p> Now, I've found that at least my version of Word has a hard time guessing which direction quote to use when it's adjacent to an "em-dash" (—) character. Like,
<p> <font face="Times Roman"> “Next time“—his eyes squinted viciously—”I'll take a chance on murder.”</font>
<p> Oopsie! If you can see the font ok, the quotes face the wrong way next to the dashes.
<p> If you have any em-dashes in your text, I suggest you check the quote directions after you do the Find/Replace. To do that easily, do a Find for this: "^+ and this: ^+"
<p> That's a regular quote on before/after ^+ (circumflex plus-sign) which is a Word "Find" short-cut for the em-dash.
<p> Look at each of those you find, one at a time, and fix any wrong ones by deleting the quote and typing a new one (sometimes that works) or, if it still picks the wrong direction, type a space, type a letter like "x" and another space, then type the quote you want either before or after the x (Word usually guesses correctly when it's on the appropriate side of a letter), then delete the x and the spaces you added. That will leave the quote character behind.
<p> To fix single quotes, do the same Find/Replace trick, replacing ' with ' —Usually this goes ok, but in the unlikely case you have single quotes next to em-dashes, check those. (I rarely see that happen, but, only you know what you're writing.)
<p> One added tip: If you know most the quotes are correct and you don't want to risk mangling any of the already-smart quotes near em-dashes, but you think you might have some straight quotes you still have to fix, do this: When you do the Find/Replace with the one double quote in each box, _also_ turn on the extra option to "Use wildcards." When in "wildcard" mode, Word only matches a straight quote in the Find process; whereas normally during Find a double quote character will match any of the three kinds of double quotes (straight/left/right). Wildcard mode happens to turn that off. (You'd have to really type in a left facing quote to match one during wildcard mode, if that was your goal. But put in the straight one and it will only match straight ones, so you can fix just those.)
<p> Hope that helps!
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20200916084817#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2020-09-16T08:48:17+05:00
Random thoughts on Bitcoin
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171207123442
<p>
So, on a forum some guy posted saying, "wow, check out BTC's growth chart!" plus a referral link to a Bitcoin trading site (presumably one from which he gets a referral fee). :}
<p>
Putting on my Computer Science professor hat for a moment, my thought was...
<p>
Yep, check out that chart -- a classic bubble. Like "Tulip-mania" in the 1600s, except once the value cratered, you could at least plant the tulip bulbs and get a flower. :)
<p>
Bitcoin is backed by nothing, and has no intrinsic value. It's basically just a number.
<p>
<s>It may be useful for instantaneous transactions where the value doesn't change, e.g. a low-fee, instant exchange from USD to EUR using BTC as the intermediary at an agreed-upon rate</s>[Update: But wait! It's now very slow, and costly, so scratch this idea...] (but even then you'd have to be sure the liquidity is there; see the Zimbabwe example for where it isn't; and this purpose isn't related to the amount 1 BTC is worth -- it could be worth $15,000 or a penny, so long as it doesn't change during the USD->EUR transaction). Not to be confused with the blockchain concept, which is entirely separate from bitcoin; it has potential uses (but isn't something you can buy).
<p>
As for bitcoin as an "investment", good luck with that (luck being the operative word; unless you have a time machine).
<p>
So, hey, psssst, I got this random number in my head... I'll sell it to you for $15,000 -- maybe you can sell it to some sucker for $30,000! :) :)
<p>
*pop!*
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171207123442#comments'>[Comments]</a><p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Reluctant-Guest-Edge-World-ebook/dp/B004E112LC'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=The Reluctant Guest at the Edge of the World&c=guest.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2017-12-07T12:34:42+05:00
Tips to protect deliveries, and keep people from knowing you're on vacation
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171201191509
<p>
Since it seems to be the package stealing time of year :} I thought it might help to share some links I've found useful to keep tabs on packages and mail, and also vacation holds to keep stuff piling up outside when you're out of town...
<p>
- UPS "my choice" service lets you get notices when packages are coming and when delivered. You can also set delivery instructions for where to leave packages if you don't want them sitting at the front door. (There's a sort of vacation hold service too, though they charge for some of the options.) -- https://www.ups.com/mychoice/
<p>
- Fedex - same deal -- https://www.fedex.com/werl/enrollment.html
<p>
- The post office has a nifty new service where they will send you an email with scanned images of the letters they're delivering that day, called "informed delivery", so you can see if any letters were potentially missing (though sometimes they've delivered letters the next day; and it's only for letter-sized envelops, not e.g. manila envelopes). It has a package delivery info system too. -- https://informeddelivery.usps.com/
<p>
- The post office also has a great vacation hold system, makes it really easy to stop the mail when going out of town -- https://holdmail.usps.com/holdmail/
<p>
- For folks who still get the Denver Post (hey, good for starting fires in the fireplace), they have a vacation hold system too -- https://myaccount.denverpost.com/login.aspx
<p>
What are other people's favorite tips for tracking deliveries, etc.?
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171201191509#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2017-12-01T19:15:09+05:00
Fasten Your Seatbelts... For the Whole Flight?!?
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171116142524
<p> It is just me? I've noticed an annoying trend while flying, that the captain no longer seems to turn off the fasten seatbelt sign when they hit 10,000 feet like they say they'll do, and used to do. Instead they seem to "accidentally" leave it on, and on, and on... despite no turbulence... and on, and on... maybe turning it off after a looooong time -- then, oops! little bump -- back goes the sign on again, and on, and on... more hours of no turbulence... still on... and on...
<p>
I get it that it's easier for the flight attendants if they don't have to contend with those pesky passengers going to the restroom, but, really... only 20 minutes of the sign turned off during a smooth four hour flight is just ridiculous. THis seems to be the norm now from what I've experienced.
<p>
Like crying wolf for hours on end, this seems like a safety problem to me, in that people eventually just ignore the sign and get up to use the restroom. Pilots are training passengers to ignore the seat belt sign. I know I've been trained.
<p>
Of course, that means if there is suddenly some turbulence, blam, I risk hitting the bulkhead. Not a good policy to abuse the fasten seat belt sign by leaving it on when it's not bumpy. I definitely keep my belt buckled while I'm in the seat anyway, so this is purely about when we're not "allowed" to get up.
<p>
This seems to be rampant on U.S. airlines -- and not a problem on the foreign airlines I've recently flown on. (It was so refreshing of Air France to turn off the seat belt light at 10,000 feet!)
<p>
So, hey, pilots? -- flight attendants? -- FAA? -- could you please go back to the intended actual safety-based policy of minimal seat belt sign usage, only when it's really a safety issue?
<p>
Thanks! :)
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20171116142524#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2017-11-16T14:25:24+05:00
It's okay now: AP says you can lowercase the 'i' in Internet
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20160403100523
<p>
The Associated Press's AP Stylebook was just updated to say it's okay now, you can lowercase the 'i' in Internet.
<p>
Oops, I capitalized it. 30+ year habit.
<p>
So, yeah, probably doesn't matter now. I know, it's a proper noun, so we oughta. But we say "a web site" not "a Web site" (or, gack, "a World Wide Web site"). Give me a kleenex. Oops, "Kleenex."
<p>
My recollection from ye olde ARPANET days about why we capitalized it was the concept that <i>"the"</i> capital-I Internet was to refer to that One Big (TCP/IP) Network of networks, whereas "an" (lower-case-i) internet was any of those random assemblages of just-as-commonly-talked-about networked networks (not themselves connected to THE Internet, and not necessarily using TCP/IP). Of course, now we really only think of one network (and rarely even think of it as a network of networks, per se -- CSNet anyone? Bitnet? Tymenet?), so there isn't really much use for saying "an" internet these days. "The" Internet has taken over the meaning of the word to such an extent that if you <i>did</i> say "an internet", people would probably think you mean, like, another globe-spanning "the Internet" on some other planet or something. :) Or they'd think "an internet" is an adjective, followed by a noun, say, "an internet connection," and if the noun wasn't there, it wouldn't parse right... So at this point it doesn't matter; now "internet" == "Internet."
<p>
I just hope people don't start leaving out the "the"!! :) "I'm on internet" still sounds to me like a confused grandma. (As dissonant as "I'm on phone" or "I'm on bed" or "I'm on way.") Aauuuuuugh! :) :)
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20160403100523#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2016-04-03T10:05:23+05:00
You catch more flies by smelling bad
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150715164651
<p>
<script>
//location = 'http://rogerpseudonym.com/';
</script>
<p>
<style>
.caption, .pic p {
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 90%;
font-weight: bold;
text-align: center;
}
.pic {
padding: 5px;
}
</style>
<p style="font-size: 80%; margin-bottom: -5px" align=right> [About...:
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-blog.ht">This Guest Bloggy Glamorous Geek's Guide Thing</a>
...
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-roger.ht">Roger</a>
...
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-you.ht">You</a>
]
<p>
<p> What you wear under your clothes is at least as important as
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog/clothes.ht">the clothes themselves,</a>
so make it a point to bathe and shave daily, take care of your teeth (bad breath will kill your cred faster than leprosy and Tourette's combined), use deodorant, sit up straight, and generally keep yourself tidy. A lazy Sunday is all well and fine, but if you plan to slink from your Fortress of Solitude and face the real world, you never know who you're going to run into. Looking and smelling like a homeless person is not going to help you, ever.
<p> I shouldn't have to say any of this; for most people it's so basic it doesn't get discussed at all, past about the fourth grade. But I see nerds all the time who fail this test, who stink and slouch and look like they slept in a hedge, are unpleasant to stand next to and embarrassing to be seen with, and nobody ever seems to tell them. They get that they're unpopular, but they don't know why. So, no offense, but even the painfully obvious is going to get discussed here, because some of you out there actually need to hear it. Bathe, Oscar!
<p> On a related note, you also need to get your hair cut on a regular basis. Seriously, put a recurring event in your Outlook calendar so you don't forget. Your hairstyle is an important part of your overall look, and you want to maintain it at least as well as your anal-retentive neighbor maintains his lawn. If you let it go too long, then you'll not only look unkempt, but when you finally do get it cut the sudden change in length and style will be a lot more noticeable, drawing attention to the fact. The only exception I can think of is if you're putting in a ton of overtime at work, in which case "I don't have time for a haircut!" is an acceptable—even cred-enhancing—thing to say.
<p> For men, short hair is easier to care for but needs more frequent maintenance. Long hair can make men look kind of freaky, but some women find it artistic and sexy, and if it fits with your overall personality then yeah, go for it. But wash and condition it every day, do not tie it back in a pony tail, topknot, bun, or any kind of shit like that, and don't lean over and drag it in other people's food. I've seen this happen, and it's way gross.
<p> For women, I'll advise against short hair unless you're going to do something really interesting with it. Long hair is going to be more attractive with less effort, and I assume that has some rational appeal for you. As for barrettes, scrunchies, headbands, etc., these things are tricky to get right, so unless you have help I would steer clear. Just use a curling iron or something to give your head some character.
<p> What about hair color? There are lots of options these days, not just for women, and yes, blondes really do have more fun, but brunettes are perceived as more intelligent and more mature, and redheads as more passionate. Really! Daring colors like pink and blue might be fine if you work at Piercing Pagoda or Orange County Choppers, but in most office and lab environments you should probably hold these to a highlight or two along the sides.
<p> As for graying or thinning hair, you're never too young to start worrying about it. Most women cover up their gray without thinking twice, but men have a harder choice to make. When you get to that certain age, gray hair might lend an air of authority, particularly if you're in a senior tech position or angling to move there, but for junior dudes losing their hair or its melanin prematurely, I tend to think the gray (or the male pattern baldness) makes you look like you've been left behind. I started going gray in my mid-20s, and several of my friends started going bald, so I know what I'm talking about here; a hair-challenged engineer is either an overpriced has-been whose edge is slowly blunting, a coward who never grabbed for the brass ring, or else a clod who tried but couldn't reach it. I'm not saying any of these things are true, but if they look true you're screwed anyway, so why risk it? Rogaine and Just For Men are effective and cheap, and no one has to know. And hey, the business guys are doing it too, so even if they find out, they're not likely to care.
<p> Or you could go the other way and bleach out your gray. Weirdly, it's only the salt-and-pepper look (or the thinning-but-combed-over look) that makes you seem old; for some reason, a full head of hair that's uniformly white or platinum gives a much younger, more vigorous impression. So does shaving the whole pate, which is just about the only hair option that's allowable for men but not women. Go figure.
<p> Facial hair? Sure. Beards and moustaches can be trimmed into countless styles that not only express your personality, but also make it clear that yes, you do actually have a personality. You don't want to be too off-the-wall here (that Ming the Merciless or reverse-Hitler will get you beaten up), but the main thing is to look like you've made an effort. Even three-day stubble can be cleaned up around the edges to make a rugged-yet-classy impression.
<p>
<table border="0" align=left width=400 class=pic><tr><td>
<p> <img border="0" width="200" height="" align="" src="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/i/img6.jpg" alt="Lookin' good">
<p class=caption>CORRECT: My friend Chris' facial hair says, "I am a man of action who actually owns some sort of beard trimming device."
</td><td>
<p> <img border="0" width="200" height="" align="" src="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/i/img7.jpg" alt="Lookin' not so good">
<p class=caption>INCORRECT: My friend Paul's facial hair says, "Get that camera out of my face. In fact, don't look at me. At all. Ever."
</td></tr></table>
<p>
<p>
<p>
<p> If you're a woman, shave or wax your legs and armpits, please. The only thing less appealing than a hairy hippie chick who knows better is a hairy nerdy chick who doesn't. Smooth nerdy chicks are kinda hot, though. How smooth? Well, what you do with your bikini zone depends on who's going to see it and why, but the prevailing philosophy these days seems to be that less is more. Look up "landing strip" for guidance here, or take a peek at the girls in Playboy to see what I'm talking about. You should probably try to look (ahem!) like an adult, but the one absolute rule here is that nothing should peek past the edges of an actual bikini. Really. Seriously.
<p> On a related subject, you may be surprised what a difference perfume and cologne can make in your life. You don't want to be that receptionist who sits all day in a Bhopal cloud of toxic sandalwood vapor, but a splash of after shave, a dab of cologne and a strategic spritz of body spray can add that hard-to-define finishing touch that people really respond to. We're still animals, you know.
<p> Now, you didn't hear this from me, but you might even consider doctoring your scent with synthetic pheromones from the Athena Institute. This cocktail was invented by actual scientists from actual MIT, and if used correctly it's clinically, double-blindedly proven to get you 40% more sex than you'd otherwise receive. Of course, 1.4 times zero is still zero, so if you got no skills this stuff won't help, but presumably you do carry some level of charm and appeal and have some chance of scoring with the opposite sex (or the same sex, if that's your thing). If so, why not stack the deck at least slightly in your favor?
<p> And the benefits may not just be sexual. If you believe the Athena scientists (who are fellow nerds, after all), pheromones are odorless to the conscious parts of our brains but strongly active in the limbic system, sending machine-level signals about how strong, aggressive, confident, dangerous, and successful we are. It's a cheap trick (well, a hundred-dollars-a-bottle trick), but it might just attract/annoy/unsettle the business guys and gals who (like it or not) control your destiny. OK, most of the time they're not getting close enough to smell your neck, but when you find yourself crammed into a taxi or an airplane seat or an insufficiently air-conditioned conference room, would you rather smell like Comic Book Guy or like some weirdly intriguing man of mystery?
<p> If you do use pheromones, though, just don't tell anyone you're hacking the most intimate corners of their brains, or they may compensate by being extra-super-duper unimpressed.
<p> More anon.
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150715164651#comments'>[Comments]</a><p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Reluctant-Guest-Edge-World-ebook/dp/B004E112LC'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=The Reluctant Guest at the Edge of the World&c=guest.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2015-07-15T16:46:51+05:00Guest Blogger: Roger Pseudonym<br>
<span style="color: black;font-size: 80%">The Glamorous Geek's Guide to Surviving the Real World—Winning Money, Success, and Love On a Planet Full of Jocks and Charmers</span>
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150708123003
<p>
<p> Note: Aburt is turning over the keys to Roger Pseudonym. To clarify any possible confusion, Roger is not Aburt. You don't know Roger. Well, maybe you do.
Roger is a pro writer. You can read more about Roger in the
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/site.ht">'about'</a>
bits.
Anyway, he's got some truthy things to say to nerds, starting with...
<p><h1>Clothes</h1>
<p>
<p><h2>A fashion statement using actual fashion</h2>
<p>
<script>
//location = 'http://rogerpseudonym.com/?l=201507081600';
</script>
<p>
<style>
.caption, .pic p {
font-family: Arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 90%;
font-weight: bold;
text-align: center;
}
.pic {
padding: 5px;
}
</style>
<p style="font-size: 80%; margin-bottom: -5px" align=right> [About...:
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-blog.ht">This Guest Bloggy Glamorous Geek's Guide Thing</a>
...
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-roger.ht">Roger</a>
...
<a href="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/about-you.ht">You</a>
]
<p>
<p>
<p>
<p>
<p>
<p>I once watched a daytime talk show where a bunch of angry, pierced, leather-clad punk kids with green hair were complaining about how badly the world reacted to them.
<p>"People treat you like the clothes you wear," one young woman complained.
<p>Well yeah. Hate to break it to you, sweetcheeks, but aside from holding out the weather and covering the reproductive sockets, that's what clothes are for. Oprah (or Rikki Lake, or whoever was hosting) clucked sympathetically at these kids when she should have smacked them upside their chrome-studded skulls. Clothes make the man—even cave people knew that!
<p>This is also reflected in how police treat suspects; no one doubts that if you dress like a thug you're more likely to be treated like one, whereas if you dress like a golfer or a movie star, you'll at least get arrested politely. And guess what? When it comes to fashion, we're all cops.
<p>Now, if you're a woman, half a dozen episodes of TLC's What Not to Wear (2003-2013) can tell you everything you need to know about clothes and makeup. You may think you look just fine the way you are, and maybe that's true. Maybe you do. You may even think people should get over appearances and appreciate you for who you are inside, and you may be right about that as well, but let's at least not frighten them away in the mean time, hyah? A tiny amount of color around the eyes, of coverup on the blemishes, of thought and care in the wardrobe choices will make a huge difference. I've watched this transformation in dozens of nerd women, and never once met one who was sorry she'd done it.
<p>If you're a man, the task is even easier, because you can just ask your booth-babe communications major of a girlfriend for advice. Hahahahaha, just kidding; we both know your girlfriend wore a Cthulhu pendant and shock-pink hip boots to your brother's wedding and is no more qualified to give fashion advice than, well, me. Seriously, though, you might try looking up an older TV show called Queer Eye For the Straight Guy (2003-2007) or, more painfully, picking up some issues of Maxim, GQ, or People for some guidance on different looks that may work for you. Or hire a personal shopper / image consultant? This will probably pay for itself within a year, if not sooner, in both improved job prospects and reduced expenditure on ugly clothes. Failing that, here are a few for-dummies guidelines:
<p>First, it never hurts to dress a little nicer than the people around you. You can slob it up occasionally—especially if you're trying to make a particular statement (e.g., "I just completed a 5K, bitches!")—but you're not cool enough to get away with it as a habit. I'm not kidding about that, boyo. You're really not.
<p>Second, on a typical day you should wear one (or at most, two) "down" elements and the rest "up". Blue jeans with a dress shirt and shoes. Dress slacks and shoes with a solid-color t-shirt. Or dress like a hobo, but throw a nice Armani jacket over the top. Or wear a swimsuit and flip-flops and that koa wood necklace you bought in Hawaii, with a tasteful Tag Heuer wristwatch.
<p>
<table border="0" align=left width=200 class=pic><tr><td>
<p> <img border="0" width="200" height="" align="" src="http://critique.org/c/blog//roger/i/img4.jpg" alt="Lookin' good">
<p class=caption>See? Not too bad. The surfer necklace and scruffy beard are "down" elements. The rest is a combination of Armani and bespoke.
</td></tr></table>
<p>
<p>Armani? Tag Heuer? Yes. And Coach, and Louis Vuitton, and even Calvin Klein. This is a refrain you'll be hearing a lot from me: while swanky or well-known brand names can't make you cool, they sure as hell won't flag you as uncool. In fact, luxury brands are usually also high-quality products that will last a long time, and if you find a style that fits your frame, they give a favorable impression that says you care about yourself, and at least allow for the possibility that you might be cool. Custom or "bespoke" items can do this as well, for clear scientific reasons.
<p>"Signaling theory" is one of several newish fields that straddle the borders of psychology, sociology, economics, and evolutionary biology, and basically posits that the things we wear on our bodies are exactly analogous to the poisonous red of a tree frog or the iridescent "eyes" of a peacock's tail. I.e., their purpose is to signal our genetic fitness to potential mating partners, hunting partners, golf buddies, and predators. They also signal our tribal affiliation, so that awesome periodic table T-shirt of yours (you know, the one where the radioactive elements glow in the dark) is unconsciously meant to reassure your fellow nerds, from a distance, that you are not going to stuff them in a gym locker, and might even fancy a game of 3D chess.
<p>Unfortunately, it also signals to the jocks, on some dim amygdalic plane, that they should stuff you in a locker and that you might ask them to play some stupid-ass game they don't see the point of. Who needs that? On the other hand, taking this concept too far can land you hard on the other rail. That hockey jersey you have in the closet? Fugeddaboudit. Even if you're a die-hard fan of the team, even if you actually play hockey yourself, you're still a nerd, and a sheep in wolf's clothing will not fool the real wolves. Just make `em hungry.
<p>No, what you want to do is abandon the jock-nerd axis entirely and signal in the orthogonal direction of success. Now, success doesn't necessarily mean money, and money doesn't necessarily mean fancy clothes. I'm betting the last guy you saw in a tuxedo was a men's room attendant, and the last millionaire you saw was passing incognito in a t-shirt and khakis. But pay attention, because that shirt may have been 20% silk and cost a hundred and eighty bucks at Tommy Bahama. The watch and sunglasses and shoes will give him away, too, if you know what to look for, and guess what? He knows what to look for. Why signal "sloppy assperg" when you could broadcast "savvy something-or-other" instead? And hell, if you're also wearing a tasteful Cthulhu pendant he won't know what the fuck that is, or care, unless he does, in which case you probably just made a new friend.
<p>
<table border="0" align=right width=200 class=pic><tr><td>
<p> <img border="0" width="193" height="" align="" src="https://www.interwatches.com/images/blog/img1268065169hsa.jpg" alt="Cool watch">
<p class=caption>A cool watch can make you look like Brad Pitt.
</table>
<p>
<p>Eyewear? That's tricky, because nerds are supposed to have glasses—the thicker and heavier-rimmed the better. It's fun to defy the stereotypes, but let's face it: you've spent way too many hours with your nose in a book or staring at computer screens to get by on your original equipment. Contacts and laser surgery are always an option, but if you're anything like me, you don't want nobody touching your eyeballs nohow. So you probably do wear glasses, and they probably do look pretty dorky, but so what? They're not exclusively a nerd appliance, and they do at least give off a vibe of competence, so just let the optometrist's assistant help you pick the right frames, and call it good.
<p>I like amber photochromic lenses myself—a little triumph of function over coolth—but just as an aside, my extremely nerdy father owns a pair of actual rose-colored glasses. He doesn't wear them very often, but I've encouraged him to, because they're actually rather striking, and make him look like a movie producer or eccentric billionaire. He's a retired software engineer who keeps his hand in with various projects, and I suppose he's past the age where he feels a need to look striking, or really to project any "look" at all, but I'm not past the age when I want my dad to look cool if my friends are around.
<p>But I digress.
<p>Interestingly, what we "wear" includes vehicles. Thanks to a million-plus years of human evolution, the body maps in our cerebral cortex are actually elastic enough to incorporate temporary elements such as hats, tools, robotic forklift suits and yes, cars. Neurologically speaking, our wheels really are an extension of our bodies, and as important to our projected image as the clothes we wear. More on this later.
<p>Anyway, personally I do wear nerd t-shirts when I'm at a gathering of motorcycle enthusiasts. First of all, t-shirts are standard garb there, and dressing any fancier than that just makes you look like a narc. Plus which, I've already got on the boots and jacket and helmet and gloves, and I rode in on a friggin' motorcycle, so that signal is about as sent as it's going to get. Why waste valuable real estate on a redundant Harley Davidson shirt when a well-placed Jedi Republic logo can ping for fellow techies in the crowd? Conversely, if I'm at science fiction convention I will wear the Harley shirt, or maybe a Boston Marathon running jersey, because my very presence already tells everyone I'm of the tribe. Here, what I want to signal is that I'm a fit, well-rounded person with cool outside interests.
<p>See, even among your fellow nerds, the clothes actually matter.
<p>
More thoughts anon.
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150708123003#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2015-07-08T12:30:03+05:00
Most Common Story Titles
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150410175349
<p>
Before I begin...
<p>
So, yeah, I've been pretty bad about blogging recently. :) I've got a plan
to do something about that. (This post isn't it.) I'll be having a
guest blogger take some turns, so watch this space. I think you'll find it
quite interesting. Okay, on to this post:
<p>
I saw in
<a target=_blank href="http://neil-clarke.com/top-ten-most-common-short-story-names/">Neil Clarke's post</a> a list of most-common short story titles submitted to his market.
<p>
Interesting, I thought. I wonder what the most common titles have been in
Critters. Critters has seen about 25,000 submissions, so it should be a
comparable data set. (Compared to his 50,000.)
<p>
Well, they are:
<p>
<ul>
12: The Gift, Sacrifice
<p>
11: Redemption
<p>
10: Choices
<p>
9: Homecoming
<p>
7: Legacy, Inheritance, Faith, Awakening
<p>
6: The Price, The Box, Reunion, Remembrance, Release, Rebirth, Chrysalis, Afterlife,
<p>
5: The Wish, The Voice, The Tunnel, The Other Side, The Hunt, The Changeling, The Calling, Sticks and Stones, Skin Deep, Shadows, Road Rage, Requiem, Reflections, Lost and Found, First Contact, Discovery, Crossing Over, Broken, Avatar, Ashes to Ashes, All That Glitters
<p>
4: The Traveler, The Tower, The Rose, The Prophecy, The Prisoner, The Oracle, The Meeting, The Last, The Invasion, The Interview, The Hive, The Heart of the Matter, The Guardian, The Game, The Book, The Black Rose, The Apprentice, Spare Parts, Smoke and Mirrors, Sixth Sense, Rescue, Keeper, Identity, Hide and Seek, Hero, Freedom, Forever, Empathy, Emergence, Descent, Coming Home, Blood Ties, Birdsong, Anima, Alone, Adrift
</ul>
<p>
Not a single "Dust"! :)
<p>
And lots of "Homecoming", but no "Home"; nor "Hunger".
<p>
So, me wonders, what are the titles our lists have in common, and not?
<p>
Only on his list we find...
<p>
Deus Ex Machina, Disconnected, Dust, Flight, Genesis, Going Home, Happiness, Heartless, Home, Hunger, Last Call, Memories, Monsters, Night Terrors, Perchance to Dream, Rain, Red, Skin, The Choice, The Collector, The Dark, The Door, The End, The Fall, The Machine, The Visit, The Wall, Voices
<p>
Only on the Critters most common list are...
<p>
Afterlife, All That Glitters, Anima, Ashes to Ashes, Avatar, Birdsong, Blood Ties, Choices, Chrysalis, Crossing Over, Descent, Discovery, Emergence, Empathy, Faith, First Contact, Forever, Freedom, Hide and Seek, Identity, Keeper, Redemption, Release, Remembrance, Requiem, Rescue, Reunion, Road Rage, Shadows, Sixth Sense, Smoke and Mirrors, Spare Parts, Sticks and Stones, The Apprentice, The Black Rose, The Book, The Calling, The Changeling, The Game, The Guardian, The Heart of the Matter, The Hive, The Interview, The Invasion, The Last, The Meeting, The Oracle, The Price, The Prophecy, The Rose, The Traveler, The Tunnel, The Voice, The Wish
<p>
And, drum roll, on both lists, we have:
<p>
Adrift<br>
Alone<br>
Awakening<br>
Broken<br>
Coming Home<br>
Hero<br>
Homecoming<br>
Inheritance<br>
Legacy<br>
Lost and Found<br>
Rebirth<br>
Reflections<br>
Sacrifice<br>
Skin Deep<br>
The Box<br>
The Gift<br>
The Hunt<br>
The Other Side<br>
The Prisoner<br>
The Tower<br>
<p>
So, those are your weeners, my friends, titles really really often used.
<p>
Go forth and write stories, with, um, not those titles. :)
<p>
-----
<p>
Okay, so, next time, we'll have us a special guest blogger. Stay tuned!
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20150410175349#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2015-04-10T17:53:49+05:00
Looking for Beta Testers for Smartlinks for Smashwords Authors
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20141213111612
<p>
Looking for some beta testers! If you publish through Smashwords, and want to
include promotional links to your other titles, but can't because Apple doesn't
allow non-Apple links—and you would, of course, want your links to point
elsewhere outside of the Apple edition... Then I've got a solution for you to
check out.
<p>
We developed a "smart link" at ReAnimus Press to solve this, and I've just
put a public interface on it so any other Smashwords authors can use it.
The smart links seem to work well (and Apple has been satisfied);
I haven't found any bugs in the public interface, but I could use some
help making sure the public interface to it is working correctly.
<p>
So if you publish multiple books with Smashwords (otherwise this wouldn't be of
use to you), drop by here—
<p>
<a target=_blank href="http://www.ReAnimus.com/smartlinks">www.ReAnimus.com/smartlinks</a>
<p>
—and enter the info for your Smashwords titles. Then you can put the actual
smartlinks into your books and update them at Smashwords; that part works great
and we've had them approved for Premium status. Let me know if you find any
problems or confusing bits. Thanks!
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20141213111612#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-12-13T11:16:12+05:00
Looking for Volunteers Who Sell Books, for an Experiment
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140621080353
Y'all know I love experiments...
<p>
Sooo, I'm trying an experiment with a physical means of selling ebooks—and
looking for volunteers... You get free ebooks (an All Access Pass to ReAnimus's entire ebook catalog), the fun of participating in an innovative experiment, and, of course, you get a share of the proceeds. :)
<p>
So, do any of you out there happen to sell print books in person?
For example, at a dealer's table at cons, or if you work in a book store, or
some other store that has books on a shelf, etc.
<p>
(This experiment doesn't apply to online sales or mail order, since
it's already easy to sell ebooks online.)
<p>
This experiment would be
selling ReAnimus's titles (Ben Bova, Robert Silverberg, etc.), but if
it proves viable, it could be of use to all authors who want to sell
ebooks of their work through bookstores, cons, and so on.
<p>
If you do work with physical book sales, let me know if you're interested
in helping with the experiment! Should be quite interesting.
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140621080353#comments'>[Comments]</a><p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Privacy-Most-Public-ebook/dp/B004D4YNK2'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=Privacy Most Public&c=privacy.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-06-21T08:03:53+05:00
ReAnimus's First Acquisition - Advent Publishers!
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140606180517
<p>
<p> ReAnimus is pleased to announce we have acquired Advent Publishers! Advent is now a subsidiary of ReAnimus Press, and we will continue to publish Advent's titles under the Advent name. Advent was founded in 1956 by Earl Kemp and others, and has published wonderful books by the likes of <b>James Blish, Hal Clement, Damon Knight, E.E. "Doc" Smith, and many others.</b> Advent's high quality titles have won and been finalists for several Hugo Awards, such as <b>The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy</b> and <b>Heinlein's Children</b>. Watch this space for ebook and print editions of all of Advent's current titles!
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140606180517#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-06-06T18:05:17+05:00
Random Thoughts on Apparently Silly Ways to Do Math
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140320081842
<p>
I just noticed on facebook another rant about wacky ways of doing math
and parental frustration that kids get marked down for getting right answers but
not "the right way" (whereas other kids get full credit for getting wrong
answers but having tried "the right way").
<p>
I've no kids and never seen these wacky math methods before -- and, full disclosure, am a math/computer science Ph.D. / professor sort of person -- but I do understand why one could be graded on whether you understood the process and not just if you got the right answer.
<p>
In the real world, <i>you</i> get to decide which tools to use to solve a problem. But first, somebody has to teach all the different tools you can use.
<p>
A non-math example would be in real life, you get to choose between hammering nails to hold two boards together vs. using a screwdriver and screws vs. glue, etc. But someone has to first teach you the pros and cons of nails vs. screws vs. glue.
<p>
If someone is teaching you how to properly hammer a nail, and as "homework" says "nail these two boards together," and you come back having glued them, you may be failing to learn how to use the hammer correctly.
<p>
Or, another example might be, your car won't start. You can (a) realize it's not a blown engine but just a dead battery and get a jump start from a friendly passerby or (b) have your car towed to a dealership where you buy a new car because you ignorantly think yours is completely broken and let the nice car dealers talk you into a purchase. :) If you skipped the "lessons" in life about knowing when your battery is dead and what to do about it, you might make a very costly decision to buy a new car when you didn't need to. In that case, getting the "right answer" (i.e. driving home in a car) isn't the only thing that matters; understanding the <i>method</i> (how to jump start a car) does matter.
<p>
The purpose of a given math homework problem might be to understand a certain <i>way</i> of doing something, so that later in life you can decide to use that tool (or a different one).
<p>
I do think getting the right answer is also extremely important, and that needs to be stressed too. My hunch is teachers and kids don't necessarily understand that learning how to use a certain tool is sometimes the point of certain homework. (And sometimes getting the right answer using <i>any</i> tool is the goal of the homework.) I never learned this "number line" thing that this facebook post was about, part of something called the "common core", which I know nothing about. (No kids, remember?) :)
<p>
In analyzing this "number line" thingie, I can see how it works, and it turns out it's one way I've done math in my head for years. I use various methods in my head to do math, depending which I think will get me the answer the easiest. (I'm still slow at simple math. I probably should have tried harder in school to learn the methods.) :)
<p>
Maybe the homework/etc. needs to say, "The purpose of this question is to practice and understand the XYZ <i>method</i>" or "The purpose of this question is to get the right answer, use <i>any</i> method you want." Then both kid and parent would understand the motivation behind the question.
<p>
(There may also be a third purpose: Learning how to think. Learning the whole process of analyzing a problem, analyzing what tools you have to use, figuring out which approach best alone or in combination, etc.)
<p>
Getting the right answer is usually what matters in real life, but if you don't understand all the different tools at your disposal, and know how to reason things out, you may go through life trying to hit everything with a hammer. :)
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140320081842#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-03-20T08:18:42+05:00
System Changes I Hope You'll Like
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140317091215
<p> I've been busy with the minions... I hope you like these upgrades:
<h4>Faster Network Connection</h4>
<p> The old network connection from the world to the servers was getting
saturated, so I've upgraded the connection. It was already at the max from
the old provider, so I've switched to a Comcast Business connection. Lots
faster! I hope you notice and enjoy the faster response time!
<p> Let me know of any problems you notice.
<h4>New Comment System Added</h4>
<p>
Not the most exciting thing to announce, but I installed a new comment
system on the blog here. It uses the Facebook comment system. Check it out and
let me know if it's working okay for you!
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140317091215#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-03-17T09:12:15+05:00
What if Google Knew Who You Were Talking About... and Told Them?
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140226113727
<p>
Random musing of the day: Google knows a huge amount about what web sites
you visit, when, and what you looked at. Would it be okay with
you if Google also told the owner of those web sites who you are and each time
you visited and what you did there?
<p>
Apparently LinkedIn does this.
<p>
Is it just me who thinks that's creepy? Would it be okay if Google did this?
<p>
It strikes me as very P.K.Dick-ian, and not in a pleasant way: "Hey, Pat, Google Mind Reader here, wanted to let you know that Sandy Smith was just thinking about you. Click here to see what they were thinking."
<p>
<cut>
<p>
I don't use LinkedIn hardly at all, since I'm neither looking for a
job nor hiring. (Knowing this, I'll visit even less.) Someone else
mentioned this offhand on facebook, and not in a way that indicated this
level of privacy invasion bothered them.
(The actual question was, "If somebody you always liked doing business stops by your LinkedIn profile but doesn't leave a message, and you're unemployed at the moment, it's okay to send a quick and cheerful hello, right? It's not creepy unless you ask them for something, right?" The replies
were generally of the nature of, "I wouldn't say it's creepy even if you DO ask for something." No? We have so little concept of privacy and personal space
now that we should expect everyone to know everything we do and think?)
<p>
Would it be okay if Google told web site owners where you were each time you visited?
<p>
Would it be okay if Google took it a step further, and posted your
entire browsing history publicly to the world, with your name and contact
info on it?
<p>
Click here to see Sandy Smith's browsing history. Hey, it's okay; Sandy already
looked at yours.
<p>
Just me, or is this a creepy trend that's crossed the line?
<p>
(FYI, I'm replacing the comment system with a new one here, so let me know what
you think. You might as well post it, since I'll know anyway.) :)
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140226113727#comments'>[Comments]</a><p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Corpus-ebook/dp/B004E10XBM'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=Corpus&c=corpus.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-02-26T11:37:27+05:00
On Signing SFWA's Founder, and Other Goings on at Chez Aburt
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140226075423
<p>
W00t! Just signed! DAMON KNIGHT, founder of SFWA (Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers
of America, Inc.), original "Futurian" with Asimov, Pohl, et al., co-founder
of the Clarion writers workshop, namesake of SFWA's "Damon Knight Memorial Grand Master Award" — and author of scores of books and a gazillion
short stories. We'll be publishing (almost) everything he wrote, and,
hopefully, the anthologies he edited, such as the famous ORBIT series. Stay
tuned!
<p>
<h3> Special Deal just for me bloggy friends!</h3>
Just for listening to me babble on—and in honor of Jerry Sohl getting named on the Writers Guild of America's list for 101 Best Written TV Series(!)—get his science fiction horror mystery thriller NIGHT SLAVES
ebook for just 99 cents! Good now through Feb. 28th. Use coupon
code "blog214" in <a href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1174">the ReAnimus
Press store.</a> (Enter the code <i>before</i> clicking Add to Cart.) Enjoy!
<p>
Jerry Sohl wrote over two dozen books (from major publishers) and a slew of episodes of Star Trek, Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, and Alfred Hitchcock Presents. He's less known today (having passed away), but his books are still fun to read, and I'm glad ReAnimus gets to bring them all back.
<p>
<h3> Congrats to the Nebula Award Critterfolk!</h3>
<p> I haven't tallied up how many, but I see a whole bunch of Critterfolk
among the list of Nebula Award finalists. Congratulations!!!
<p>
<h3>Preditors & Editors</h3>
<p> As you may recall, I've taken the reins of the
<a target=_blank href="http://pred-ed.com">Preditors & Editors site</a>, after
the death of P&E's founder, Dave Kuzminski. I've been working to update the
site, in terms of content (lots of new warnings and such), features (improved
on a system to help authors promote their new books that Dave was working on),
communications (added a couple email lists to send out updates),
and look (not that this new look is the best ever, but I hope you'll agree
it's an improvement over the old look). :) I hope you find it all useful!
<p>
<h3> Four More Ben Bova books published!</h3>
Four more Ben Bova ebooks you'll want to read because he writes such good stuff. All are $3.99:
<p>
<a target=_blank href='http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1330'><img border='0' width='135' height='200' src='http://ReAnimus.com/store/covers/1330.med.jpg' align=right alt=''></a>
FORWARD IN TIME by Ben Bova
Future shocks from the award-winning Ben Bova!
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1330">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HNAUWUS/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
MAXWELL'S DEMONS by Ben Bova
Science fiction and science fact, humor and adventure, all await when you enter the unpredictable world of... MAXWELL'S DEMONS
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1331">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HN7ZTL8/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
TWICE SEVEN by Ben Bova
Ben Bova's universe is always more than the sum of its parts...
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1329">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HN83XI8/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
THE ASTRAL MIRROR by Ben Bova
A dozen and a half views of the world, past present and future, as seen through the Astral Mirror....
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1332">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HN7UQ7K/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
This brings us up to a whopping
<a target=_blank href="http://reanimus.com/authors/benbova"><i>20 books</i> from Ben!</a>
<p>
<a target=_blank href='http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1383'><img border='0' width='135' height='200' src='http://ReAnimus.com/store/covers/1383.med.jpg' align=right alt=''></a>
<h3> The Science of Middle Earth</h3>
THE SCIENCE OF MIDDLE EARTH - Just released in paperback!
<p>
You won't be able to put this one down—it's a must read if
you're a Tolkien fan. By <i>Nature</i> editor Dr. Henry Gee, a wonderful
book explaining things like, how did Frodo's mithril coat ward off the
fatal blow of an orc? How was Legolas able to count the number of riders
crossing the plains of Rohan from five leagues away? Could Balrogs fly?
<p>
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1495434443/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
<a target=_blank href='http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1378'><img border='0' width='135' height='200' src='http://ReAnimus.com/store/covers/1378.med.jpg' align=right alt=''></a>
<p>
<h3> The Gilded Basilisk</h3>
You should definitely read THE GILDED BASILISK, because basilisks and
dragons are cool. :) Chet is also a SFWA pro author, so he's proven to
the galactic elite that he can string words together in a most pleasing
way. And he's a nice guy. Mainly, you should read it because it's a good
book. Lots of Amazon reviewers agree with that. I know you'll enjoy it. :)
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1378">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://Amazon.com/dp/B00HYNCZU4/?tag=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
Chet was also <a target=_blank href="http://www.statecollege.com/news/community/local-author-celebrates-publication-of-two-novels,1453294/">interviewed in the newspaper.</a> Go Chet!
<p>
<h3> Edward Bryant</h3>
We've just finished releasing all of (multiple Nebula Award winner) Ed Bryant's
books. If you've been waiting, the wait is over!
<p>
Because of Ed's financial needs, almost all the profits from this book go directly to Ed. Donations to help with Ed's medical and other financial needs are also most appreciated via <a target=_blank href="http://FriendsOfEd.org">www.FriendsOfEd.org</a>. Thank you!
<p>
The final batch includes:
<p>
<a target=_blank href='http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1382'><img border='0' width='135' height='200' src='http://ReAnimus.com/store/covers/1382.med.jpg' align=right alt=''></a>
PREDATORS AND OTHER STORIES by Edward Bryant - $3.99
Troubling tales as only Ed Bryant can tell.
<p>
Ed Bryant's stories from the anthology <i>Night Visions 4: Hardshell</i> featuring all original stories by Dean R. Koontz, Robert R. McCammon, and Edward Bryant.
<p>
The "Author Introductions" before each story are themselves a work of art and not to be missed.
<p>
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1382">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I2A4H22/?ref=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
FETISH by Edward Bryant - $3.99
Modern day witch Angela Black faces some strange goings on with an old flame.
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1379">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HVDCSXQ/?ref=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
TRILOBYTE by Edward Bryant - $2.99
A trio of twisted little tales from the master of twistedness. With an introduction by Tim Powers.
Grab it from... <a target=_blank href="http://ReAnimus.com/?i=1381">ReAnimus Press Store</a> | <a target=_blank href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HYNUBG4/?ref=reanimus-20">Amazon</a>
<p>
<h3>And LOTS more</h3>
<p>
<a href="http://ReAnimus.com/email/news.20140225.0851.ht">Read about all our other cool new releases</a>, because we've got a whole bunch of stuff you'll enjoy reading. (Plus you'll find another coupon code there for another book!) :)
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140226075423#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-02-26T07:54:23+05:00
How Many Spaces After the Period, Take Two
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140207125022
<p>
So, I
<a href="http://critters.org/c/blog/?l=20120422085140">blogged before about switching to one space after the period.</a> I'd read an article (noted therein) that said, in essence, "it's the eeeevil typewriter that switched everyone to two spaces after the period, because of its dastardly monospaced font; so we should all be using the One True Space after the period now that we're not using typewriters. Everybody who's anybody in typesetting knows it should be one. And you look like a moron if you use one." (Okay, that's not a quote, but it's pretty much the sentiment expressed.)
<p>
It sounded persuasive to me. I switched. Took me a couple months, but I broke the two space habit.
<p>
Two problems:
<cut>
<p>
1) It's personal, but I noticed ambiguous situations. For example, ending one sentenced with an abbreviation, like "etc." (where there would be a period anyway) followed by a word that would always be capitalized, like "I" or a proper noun. So you get things like: "In certain cases I find one space after a period so frustrating, irritating, etc. I like chocolate." One sentence, or two? Only the author really knows. No rule can determine it. (In this case, two. I like chocolate no matter what else.) :)
<p>
If we followed a two-space rule, that would be unambiguous. There would be two spaces if two sentences, one space if it was one sentence. (Rewriting the passage would clarify—but, seriously, I should rewrite simply because I <i>must</i> put one space after periods?)
<p>
Let me say nobody seems to care about this problem but me. :)
<p>
2) That history, about the typewriter, etc.? It's totally false.
<p>
It turns out the long time, historical precedent, was for more space after a sentence than between words. I first learned that reading
<a href="http://www.heracliteanriver.com/?p=324">this article.</a>
This fellow did a lot of research—and shows the single space phenomenon didn't crop up until the days of the Linotype.
<p>
So, it <i>was</i> a technology thing that caused a change in space after periods—but it was <i>the other way around!</i> It was a specific technology that caused people to abandon the hundreds-year-old rule of using more space and switching to one space. This is around the <i>1930s</i>, not ancient times. The one space idea was adopted basically for reasons of greed: using less paper, and being able to hire cheaper, less-skilled typesetters.
<p>
So I went to look at some old books, pre-1930s.
<p>
Thanks to Google Books scanning project of old books, one can look at a lot of samples. Here's a random one, from The History of Magick, published in 1657:
<p>
<img border="0" width="445" height="230" align="center" src="http://critique.org/c/blog/1657magic.jpg" alt="Text from History of Magick">
<p>
It seems (as noted in that article linked above) that the norm for hundreds of years after Gutenberg invented movable type was to use an "em-quad" worth of space after the full stop. That's the width of the letter "M"—a lot of space. The space between words was often 1/3 of that, so it's equivalent to <i>three spaces</i> after a period. Sometimes they'd use more!
<p>
Today's HTML uses 1/4em between words, so an "em-quad" of space would be four spaces to a web browser. Wowza.
<p>
This large amount of space seems to be the norm from the 1500s into the 1900s. So: Nothing to do with the typewriter. The move to one space, on the other hand, is the new kid on the block. (And the one driven by technology.)
<p>
Well, now I don't know what to do. I've converted to the "modern" standard of one space. However, I hate those ambiguous cases it creates. So for those, maybe I'll use two. Or three! :)
<p>
At any rate, those who use two—you're safe with historical precedent. You can spread the word that the typewriter had nothing to do with it. So, do whatever you like. And to those one-spacers who grouse about the two-spacers: Give it up; they're as right as you are.
<p>
Can't we all just get along? :)
<p>
Postscript:
<p>
For grins, I looked at the Gutenberg Bible itself. It uses about the same space after periods as between words—<i>except</i> it starts all sentences with red-colored letters!
<p>
<img border="0" width="290" height="92" align="center" src="http://critique.org/c/blog/guten.jpg" alt="">
<p>
I could live with that, but it might look sort of odd by today's standards. <font color=red>D</font>on't you think?
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140207125022#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-02-07T12:50:22+05:00
Yay! Amazon KDP Adds Payments and Foreign Exchange Report
http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140203140156
<p>
I just got email and see on the site: Amazon's KDP system added a payments
report. Yay! I'd asked them for this a couple months ago. I have no idea if it was my request or if I was a drop in a downpour, but I'm very glad for it.
<p>
It's been a real pain to manually figure out the exchange rate for foreign sales, and to match up bank deposits in dollars to email notices in Euros or Pounds.
<p>
Now, if they can figure out where some missing sales went, we'll be all good. (A small deposit in dollars was so far off the amount listed on the sales report that there had to be an error--but there is no report showing returns or other explanations. I asked, and they're [slooooowly] looking into it, they say.)
<p>
But, hey, the new report is a step in the right direction.
<p>
As my father-in-law used to say, "You don't get anything unless you ask for it!"
<p>
<p><a href='http://critique.org/c/blog?l=20140203140156#comments'>[Comments]</a>Andrew Burt - http://critique.org2014-02-03T14:01:56+05:00About Andrew Burt
http://aburt.com/fiction
Dr. Andrew Burt is a professional science fiction writer and former Vice President of Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Inc. He herds Critters (<a href="http://www.critique.org">www.critique.org</a>), the first writer's workshop on the web. Outside of science fiction, he founded the world's first Internet service provider, has been a computer science professor (research in networking, security, privacy, and free-speech/social issues), and a technology consultant/author/speaker. He's currently CEO of TechSoft, and President of
<a href="http://GreenAroundYou.org">GreenAroundYou.org</a>.
. For a hobby, he constructs solutions to all the world's problems. Fortunately -- nobody listens. He lives in the Rockies with his wife and their two parrots.
<p><a href='https://www.amazon.com/Reluctant-Guest-Edge-World-ebook/dp/B004E112LC'> Check out one of aburt's ebooks<br><img border=0 src='https://aburt.com/fiction/ad/mkad.php?t=The Reluctant Guest at the Edge of the World&c=guest.jpg&k=1'></a>Andrew Burt - http://aburt.com/fiction2011-02-14T07:00+00:00