
Foregone conclusions – the Kruskal count - strttn
http://www.futilitycloset.com/2016/02/06/foregone-conclusions/
======
JadeNB
The description, which says that you can start at any of the first 12 words,
doesn't seem quite right; you can start on any of the first 8 words and it
works, which seems amazing (but apparently isn't—I haven't read the linked
analysis), but starting at the 9th ('sitting') or the 11th ('her') will leap-
frog you right over 'sister'. (I suppose it's debateable whether or not this
'works' starting at the 12th word, depending on whether you count starting
there as winding up there.)

~~~
bazzargh
You do land on the second 'sister'.

SITTING by her sister on the bank, AND of having NOTHING to do once or twice
she HAD peeped into THE book her SISTER.

~~~
JadeNB
Oh, thanks! I didn't even notice that there was a second 'sister'.

------
jeremysmyth
Obligatory XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/903/](https://xkcd.com/903/)

Ah, but unlike any other obligatory XKCD you tend to see on HN, the relevance
here isn't in the comic but in the alt-text you get when you hover over the
image.

~~~
JadeNB
While funny, I think that's not the same spirit. In some sense, the XKCD one
is observing "if you ask 'why' enough times, then the answer is eventually
'philosophy'"; the fact that these links all lead to 'philosophy' is, in some
sense, a (jointly if not singly) intentional human creation, and it has
semantic meaning.

The Kruskal count is observing, on the other hand, that 'large' collections of
data (even for values of 'large' that are quite small, by statistical
measures) inevitably include apparently designed, but actually semantically
meaningless, coincidences.

Hmm, let me try again. The fact that all Wikipedia articles eventually lead,
by transitive linking, to 'philosophy' means something about philosophy; the
fact that all trails from the first 12 words of Alice in Wonderland eventually
lead, by letter-counting, to 'sister' means nothing about sisters.

