From fork-admin@xent.com Thu Sep 12 21:21:41 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.example.com Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1]) by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D73B916F03 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:21:40 +0100 (IST) Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for jm@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:21:40 +0100 (IST) Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8CJZNC12728 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:35:24 +0100 Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7FB02940D4; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:32:04 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: fork@example.com Received: from relay.pair.com (relay1.pair.com [209.68.1.20]) by xent.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D4B1629409A for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 26030 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2002 19:34:21 -0000 Received: from adsl-67-119-24-40.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO golden) (67.119.24.40) by relay1.pair.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2002 19:34:21 -0000 X-Pair-Authenticated: 67.119.24.40 Message-Id: <011501c25a93$63a70de0$640a000a@golden> From: "Gordon Mohr" To: References: <200209121922.MAA07568@maltesecat> Subject: Re: dylsexics of the wrold, untie! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: fork-admin@xent.com Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com X-Beenthere: fork@example.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:34:18 -0700 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=7.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,INVALID_MSGID,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT_OE version=2.50-cvs X-Spam-Level: Dave Long writes: > > (and no it wasnt me even though the spellingis > > oddly familar) > > Not that this is news to FoRKs, but: > > > > > ... randomising letters in the middle of words [has] little or no > > effect on the ability of skilled readers to understand the text. This > > is easy to denmtrasote. In a pubiltacion of New Scnieitst you could > > ramdinose all the letetrs, keipeng the first two and last two the same, > > and reibadailty would hadrly be aftcfeed. My ansaylis did not come > > to much beucase the thoery at the time was for shape and senqeuce > > retigcionon. Saberi's work sugsegts we may have some pofrweul palrlael > > prsooscers at work. The resaon for this is suerly that idnetiyfing > > coentnt by paarllel prseocsing speeds up regnicoiton. We only need > > the first and last two letetrs to spot chganes in meniang. Hmm, there's probably a patentable input-method for touch-tone keypads in there somewhere. - Gordon