Tom Bishop is a Flat Earth Text Generator Bot

I beg to differ. Ladies, Gentleman... I present... Tom Bishop: the Mark V. Shaney text-generating robot

Simply run this Python script after running any simple forum search bot. After you have your txt files generated. Run them through Tom Bishop here.

import sys
import rand
import string

def run(filename=''):
   if filename=='':
      file = open( raw_input('Enter name of a textfile to read: '), 'r')
   else:
      file = open( filename, 'r')
   
   text = file.read()
   file.close()
   words = string.split(text)
   
   end_sentence = []
   dict = {}
   prev1 = ''
   prev2 = ''
   for word in words:
     if prev1 != '' and prev2 != '':
       key = (prev2, prev1)
       if dict.has_key(key):
         dict[key].append(word)
       else:
         dict[key] = [word]
         if prev1[-1:] == '.':
           end_sentence.append(key)
     prev2 = prev1
     prev1 = word
   
   if end_sentence == []:
     print 'Sorry, there are no sentences in the text.'
     return
   
   key = ()
   count = 10
   
   while 1:
     if dict.has_key(key):
       word = rand.choice(dict[key])
       print word,
       key = (key[1], word)
       if key in end_sentence:
         print
         count = count - 1
         if count <= 0:
      break
     else:
       key = rand.choice(end_sentence)
   
# end of run() function

# immediate-mode commands, for drag-and-drop or execfile() execution
if __name__ == '__main__':
   if len(sys.argv) == 2:
      run(sys.argv[1])      # accept a command-line filename
   else:
      run()
   print
   raw_input("press Return>")
else:
   print "Module Bishop imported."
   print "To run, type: bishop.run()"
   print "To reload after changes to the source, type: reload(bishop)"

... and that is that. The mystery is solved. Next.

Optimus wins.

I beg to differ. Ladies, Gentleman... I present... Tom Bishop: the Mark V. Shaney text-generating robot

Simply run this Python script after running any simple forum search bot. After you have your txt files generated. Run them through Tom Bishop here.

import sys
import rand
import string

def run(filename=''):
   if filename=='':
      file = open( raw_input('Enter name of a textfile to read: '), 'r')
   else:
      file = open( filename, 'r')
   
   text = file.read()
   file.close()
   words = string.split(text)
   
   end_sentence = []
   dict = {}
   prev1 = ''
   prev2 = ''
   for word in words:
     if prev1 != '' and prev2 != '':
       key = (prev2, prev1)
       if dict.has_key(key):
         dict[key].append(word)
       else:
         dict[key] = [word]
         if prev1[-1:] == '.':
           end_sentence.append(key)
     prev2 = prev1
     prev1 = word
   
   if end_sentence == []:
     print 'Sorry, there are no sentences in the text.'
     return
   
   key = ()
   count = 10
   
   while 1:
     if dict.has_key(key):
       word = rand.choice(dict[key])
       print word,
       key = (key[1], word)
       if key in end_sentence:
         print
         count = count - 1
         if count <= 0:
      break
     else:
       key = rand.choice(end_sentence)
   
# end of run() function

# immediate-mode commands, for drag-and-drop or execfile() execution
if __name__ == '__main__':
   if len(sys.argv) == 2:
      run(sys.argv[1])      # accept a command-line filename
   else:
      run()
   print
   raw_input("press Return>")
else:
   print "Module Bishop imported."
   print "To run, type: bishop.run()"
   print "To reload after changes to the source, type: reload(bishop)"

... and that is that. The mystery is solved. Next.

2 things.

1 Eat it dogplatter

2 You are my hero optimus.

i dont get it

That's ok Gayer... it just means you're not a nerd. Be happy and proud and go grab a pint

but can you explain it to me please?

Sure... I'll PM you... TL; TB for here...

now I understand, mostly

Sure... I'll PM you... TL; TB for here...

wanna explain to me. I thought it was a bot program now i think I am missing a big joke.

Me + non basic code = confuzzled.

Nope it's just a bot program... but I didn't want to go into explaining what a script / program is, why or how one works, and how it relates to this situation and make a big long boring post for everyone to read and think "good lord... I just wasted 3 minutes of my life to find out... *that*?"

Iit is nothing more than a script (which is basically a type of program) that when run or activated will take input in the form of text, search it, and randomly spit out a semi-coherent response with several repetitions (the way I re-coded it. Normally it won't do so many repetitions .. lol)

Also, being only the main interpreter or 'sorter' if you will... this could easily be the smallest portion of the Tom Bishop script. The entirety creating logs and tracking records to provide even more realistic and seemingly personal responses at times. Overall being somewhat canned in nature, the occasional one-on-one discussion can arise and the script can actually be seen if you pay attention...

Ever notice how "Tom Bishop" seems to just sort of babble an answer that really doesn't quite apply sometimes? I mean there are some words in the sentence that kind of go along with what's being said, but the end point is totally moot. Well that's the script trying to pull a response out of it's ass without enough information from the thread yet. Most of the time it's in threads where people have given short and to the point answers, or brief statements - therefore not enough large bodies of text to draw detailed responses from.

Simple.

Hrm...it could be so...you know, the greatest way to test is to try severe sarcasm on a bot, and see what happens. Furthermore, he doesn't come onto these threads, which is what I would do. However, he does seem to pick up things from me. For example, when I prove him wrong using Snell's law, he starts using Snell's law repeatedly. That sort of behavior is extremely advanced for a bot. Either it is a truly advanced script, or a very, very, very dumb human. I still vote human. Actually, the best way would be to use an image. Let's try it. Show an image to illustrate a point, and see if it understands.

No.. images are what bots strive for. People have to give at least a limited explanation for others. Even if you post a picture and simply say "How do you explain this picture?"

What is Tom's usual canned response?

"What does that have to do with anything?"
"What evidence do you have to support your claim?"
"Images are not admissible as proof"
"That doesn't proof anything anyway"

etc. etc.

See what I mean?

Definately a script. I'm considering taking time out to write an Optimus 2.0 script and login as it every so often, and "read" the posts and let it "respond" by posting whatever it spits out just to see what happens. It will take me some time to write one that I'm satisfied with, but one of these days.. everyone just might get a surprise..

Write the text inside the image. Trust me, try it.

No script written has that level of sophistication. If you show a picture of a giraffe, and ask Tom what it is, what script could tell it was a giraffe? Image recognition of such a profound level? That would be amazing. I would be shocked if MIT's entire artificial intelligence division(if it exists) managed to create Tom.

This is true... but you are talking about posting an image in a forum. You are still going to have to ask Tom "What is this a picture of?"
or something. In which a response will be simple to replicate. See what I'm saying? Aside from that.... what's there to a little human intervention on behalf of the creator of the script every once in a while eh?

It's without question an advanced script that has a huge reserve of canned information (like the endless reiterations of Rowbotham info) combined with a great little AI random generator.

I've got an idea. I'll let you in on the results when they are finished.

Hrm...it could be so...you know, the greatest way to test is to try severe sarcasm on a bot, and see what happens. Furthermore, he doesn't come onto these threads, which is what I would do. However, he does seem to pick up things from me. For example, when I prove him wrong using Snell's law, he starts using Snell's law repeatedly. That sort of behavior is extremely advanced for a bot. Either it is a truly advanced script, or a very, very, very dumb human. I still vote human. Actually, the best way would be to use an image. Let's try it. Show an image to illustrate a point, and see if it understands.

Like some trolls he will treat the sarcasm as you being serious. If you haven't notice you can say "oh i guess that PROVES FE correct  "

and he will respond like you seriously admitted he was right.

Write the text inside the image. Trust me, try it.

No script written has that level of sophistication. If you show a picture of a giraffe, and ask Tom what it is, what script could tell it was a giraffe? Image recognition of such a profound level? That would be amazing. I would be shocked if MIT's entire artificial intelligence division(if it exists) managed to create Tom.

There are programs that can search an image and find the name and description of it. You would have to take the pic yourself and make sure the name is just numbers.

Also why would he be forced to respond? He has avoided bigger questions than that to avoid losing an argument.

Quote from: fshy94 on January 22, 2008, 11:40:26 AM

Write the text inside the image. Trust me, try it.

No script written has that level of sophistication. If you show a picture of a giraffe, and ask Tom what it is, what script could tell it was a giraffe? Image recognition of such a profound level? That would be amazing. I would be shocked if MIT's entire artificial intelligence division(if it exists) managed to create Tom.

There are programs that can search an image and find the name and description of it. You would have to take the pic yourself and make sure the name is just numbers.

Also why would he be forced to respond? He has avoided bigger questions than that to avoid losing an argument.

It's called Cryptonology.

http://eprint.iacr.org/2004/376.pdf

I don't think he's a real person, in fact haven't for ages. Ever since I came up with a proof that was better than his, and yet still saw him using his flawed proof over and over again. And also every time I called him up on it he gave me the same response.

And, to my shock, I am forced to revert my views after conducting an experiment. Tom is indeed a bot, possibly human assisted at times. I conducted an experiment, which, at least to my mind, proves that Tom, in at least part, is computer operated. I do believe, based on other evidence, that a human checks up on him every now and then. I sent him an argument about the map of the FE, and distances, except that I swapped the map for a picture of a rhino. He argued with me about how all FE maps are hypothetical, without noting(as any human would), that I had sent him a picture of a rhino...

And, to my shock, I am forced to revert my views after conducting an experiment. Tom is indeed a bot, possibly human assisted at times. I conducted an experiment, which, at least to my mind, proves that Tom, in at least part, is computer operated. I do believe, based on other evidence, that a human checks up on him every now and then. I sent him an argument about the map of the FE, and distances, except that I swapped the map for a picture of a rhino. He argued with me about how all FE maps are hypothetical, without noting(as any human would), that I had sent him a picture of a rhino...

He could have thought it was metaphorical....

Doubtful. If so, his response would be tongue in cheek. I thought he was pure human, until I tried this. His response was merely one of his canned ones, no jokes, no nothing. His response would have been more suited if I had actually put a map. Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's pure bot, but he's definitely(to my mind at least) partly a bot/script.

Was that a thread?

No. I made it a PM so that there would be no additional human responses from which to generate sentences. I can post what I wrote and he wrote, though. Trust me though, I don't think a human would do that. You should try a series of turing tests on jabberwacky with some friends. Some questions are better than others, and short responses which are ambiguous are practically trademark for bots.

He's not a script/bot, and he's not any of the other members on the site (individual or combined). Trust me on this one.

I trust your science. I don't trust your sociology.

No. I made it a PM so that there would be no additional human responses from which to generate sentences. I can post what I wrote and he wrote, though. Trust me though, I don't think a human would do that. You should try a series of turing tests on jabberwacky with some friends. Some questions are better than others, and short responses which are ambiguous are practically trademark for bots.

Please post your findings in here. I'm interested.

I sent him this:

Title: How do you explain this drawing?


Click to view larger picture


Look at this. The actual distance between Johannesburg and Sydney is less than 7000 miles. Now, using a scale measurement of the distance of New York - London which is around 3500 miles, I got a scale key of 3000 miles. Extrapolating this upon another person's FE map, which actually shrinks the distance because it doesn't go all the way around the circle, I got that the distance from Johannesburg -- Sydney according to FE is equal to over 5 times as long, because the straight line equivalent(going over Asia a bit) is almost 4 times long. Even with Tom's magic jet streams, which would only double the speed of the aircraft, the plane won't make it. Bear in mind that my estimates are conservative, since the map only goes half-way around the circumference of the Earth, so your jet streams don't work, unless you increase their speed to over 1500 MPH .

I got the response:

There is no Flat Earth map. Any distances between continents are hypothetical only.

Additional responses for clarification went unanswered.

I feel certain that a human would not have said that. I also have a theory regarding why such an advanced bot may be trawling this site. Think about it. We are the flat earth society. What more prominent forum is there to acceptably(to a college students mind) troll with an experimental bot/script? Furthermore, said beliefs are a little strange, so it would be acceptable for a human to say some of the weird things he says, and evade detection. Said shoddy maths and so on are acceptable here, what easier location for a bot?


I plan to test this by inserting a lot of images for Tom to decode, and see if he can.

legendary

Unfortunately, I explained this last year.