>I hear CourtListener (a free legal research tool) is working on a citator--hopefully it's competitive with the paid services.
Even if. it's not just the citation graph. No headnotes. No restatements. They're about 100 light years away from being close to usable, even if the citator was complete and comparable.
I've been scraping Overdrive for the last few months, so that I can identify every book/magazine title they hold. About halfway done (13 million ids to check). I can slurp down full magazines from their preview function. Books I can only get through my local library's Overdrive service, and they only have a tiny subset of those.
Definitely not newspapers. I would love to, but the scope creep would kill me. I estimate there are 100 million magazine issues published over the last 200 years across the world. That will keep me busy enough :)
Overdrive has a pretty limited amount of back issues for magazines, which is why I generally ignore it, except if I want to quickly read something on my Kindle.
Do you have a plan for all the data once you have it?
I'll probably download all the magazines. They keep releasing new issues (for the few titles still printing). They claim that they only keep the back issues for the last 3 years... but all they do is make those impossible to find with their search/browse features. If one has the ids for the individual issues, they seem to have 100% retention. So I'll be able to get those... there are 4 or 5 titles I can't get current issues of otherwise.
I think your estimate of magazine issues is high, but I commend your effort. I wouldn't mind hearing about which you've managed to complete. I keep finding that I can get all the historical issues, and I can get all the recent issues, but there's this hole in the middle from about 1985 through 2005 that is usually impossible. It's irritating.
I might test if I can pull audio books down too, though those will be limited to the ones appearing in my own local library (every municipal library seems to have access to the full magazines though, if you know the magic urls).
For me, it's about 30% of my pdfs just showing blank/white pages... when I drag them to a Firefox tab, they render perfectly. It's Preview, not the pdf that's the problem.
There were surprisingly few 600 series terminator authors in the training corpus of these models, but more than a few half-panicked-and-trying-to-hide-it middle managers. Hell, I think that's an entire shelf of books at Barnes and Noble.
And yet it was best when it was before everyone really developed an "understanding of how questions for a Q&A site were supposed to look like". That's the time everyone in this thread is looking back at fondly.
No, no it really wasn't. People were yelling about the flood of crap back then, too.
For reference, here is the verbatim (except for code formatting for HN) Markdown of the initial version of a question asked in 2010, my answer to which became my highest-ever scoring answer (and which ended up getting over 2 million views):
if I have list of numbers as [1,2,3,4,5...........etc ]
and I want to calculate as that (2+1)/2
and for the second
(2+3)/2
third
(3+4)/2
...... etc
how can do as that ?
like sum the first point with the second and divide it by 2 .. then sum the second with third point then divide it by 2 .... etc ?
also how can i sum a list of number ?
a = [1,2,3,4,5,......ect ]
is it:
b = sum(a)
print b
in i get one number !?
it doesn't work with me
help me plz
The only reason that it wasn't more ambitious back then was because they wanted to be thought of as a grown-up encyclopedia and that meant aping Britannica. Britannica's dead, no one will remember it in 50 years, but now what was a capricious strategy is unquestionable dogma.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, the only one left, and it gets to define what an encyclopedia will be to everyone from this day forward. Excuses for my it must limit itself are inane.
reply