Unpredictability and recognition systems

Sun 28 May 2006

tags: ML

::: {style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; WIDTH: 6.708in; DIRECTION: ltr"} ::: {style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; WIDTH: 5.333in; DIRECTION: ltr"} Unpredictability and recognition systems :::

::: {style="MARGIN-TOP: 0.049in; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; WIDTH: 1.486in; DIRECTION: ltr"} Sunday, May 28, 2006

12:18 PM :::

::: {style="MARGIN-TOP: 0.311in; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; WIDTH: 9.416in; DIRECTION: ltr; HEIGHT: 288px"} In reading Jeff Hawkins book On Intelligence I came upon this great anecdote about developing Graffiti:

"I recognized that people were willing to learn a difficult task (typing) because it was a [reliable]{style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"} and fast way to enter text into a machine. Therefore if we could create a new method of entering text with a stylus that was fast and reliable, people would use it even though it required learning. So I designed an alphabet that would reliably translate what you write into computer text; we called it Graffiti. With traditional handwriting recognition systems, when the computer misinterprets your writing you don't know why. But the Graffiti system always produces a correct letter unless you make a mistake in writing. [Our brains hate unpredictability, which is why people hate traditional handwriting recognition systems]{style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"}." ([Emphasis ]{style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"}added)

To this day, I prefer Graffiti for PDA input, although I would [love ]{style="FONT-STYLE: italic"}Shark/Shapewriter (which bolsters Hawkins' point even further). On the other hand, I prefer the TabletPC's TIP and correction UI to Graffiti; I'm not sure it's faster, but the correction UI is good enough that using it is predictable. Voice recognition systems, though, definitely produce the "unpredictable == hateful" reaction in me. ::: :::

::: {style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"}  

Created with Microsoft Office OneNote 2007 (Beta)
One place for all your information :::

Download: Unpredictability and recognition.one