h a l f b a k e r yRomantic, but doomed to fail.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
When I ran a BBS (the local precursors of the Internet), one of the things my callers and I enjoyed doing was using a thesaurus to convert relatively simple text into the most obfuscated (murkily complicated) text we possibly could. For example:
A rolling stone gathers no moss.
...might become:
Tiny,
leafy-stemmed flowerless plants such as acrocarp or sphagnum do not generally adhere to gyrating accumulations of mineral matter.
I'd love to see a computer program that could do this. In addition to the fun we normal, twisted people could have with it, imagine how much time it'd save people in business and government positions who must knock themselves out every day to write so convolutedly.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
I think some people on the 'bakery have already developed, and are actively using the software of which you speak. |
|
| |
I postulate that judging by the responses of a subset of the denizens who's habitual contextual node resides at this virtualised location, individuals (if indeed they qualify under that definition) may have realised such an algorithm and continue to employ it at varying coordinates in a Hilbertian representation of what we might describe as everything, the vectors of which, under closer scrutiny, suggest that it is probably time to go to the pub. |
|
| |
My best *software* is a feather pillow. |
|
| |
Good idea, [zen_tom]; mine's a small Scotch. |
|
| |
Guilty, zen_tom. In fact, my nerd-core pseudonym is "thaSesquipedalien", as I admittedly have a penchant for needlessly convoluted verbiage. [stop] |
|
| |
I wish i could do the opposite. |
|
| |
1. If were doing it, you would not be doing the opposite
2. so you'd need to stop and do the opposite.
3. go to 1. |
|
| |
If this is ever baked, I have a practical use for it. Length of
obfuscated text divided by length of original = concision
index. Imagine if the halfbakery rejected ideas rated less
than, say, 1.5 |
|
| |