Re: [H-source-users] better analysis/presentation?

[Yuchen Pei]

Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org> writes:

> On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 19:23:16 -0400
> bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 21:09:47 +1100 Yuchen wrote:
> > > Can you clarify with an example what you mean by conflicting 
> > > entries?  
> >
> > On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 21:09:47 +1100 Yuchen wrote:
> > > OK rereading your message I think you mean something like
> > >   
> > > > what happens when another client
> > > >  submits a contradictory report on the same release of the
> > > >  singular 'guix' distro    
> >
> > multiple versions of distros is a separate issue - the first
> > is simple - i meant "conflicts" in the plain sense - does a
> > search result for "foomatic-123" present "Works with free
> > software? Yes"? , "No"? , or both (in conflicting per-user
> > reports)?
> >
> > alice posts data including a common hardware (eg: i915):
> >
> >   model = foomatic-123
> >   works_with_free_software = Yes
> >
> > bob's computer or distro disagrees:
> >
> >   model = foomatic-123
> >   works_with_free_software = No
> >
> > presumably, a search will result in both, and they will
> > contradict - furthermore, the burden of analyzing the data-set
> > is on each user - this suggests some interesting analysis
> > questions, which could be resolved programatically, if it is 
> > not
> > already:
> >
> >   how many other users, agree with alice and/or bob?
> >
> >
> >   is it possible to present search results as a compact table?
> >
> >     eg: "Foomatic-2000"
> >         "Alice | Works with free software? Yes (for me on 
> >         trisquel9)"
> >         "Bob   | Works with free software? No (for me on 
> >         trisquel7)"
> >         "Carol | Works with free software? Yes (for me on 
> >         parabola)"
> >
> >
> >   is it is possible to collate/average entries common hardware,
> >   into a [SIC]"user-confidence-rating"?
> >
> >     eg: "Works with free software? Yes (41/42 users)"
> >
> >
> > maybe some otherwise hidden wisdom may be revealed with better
> > presentation; such as: all 'Yes' were also tested the same one
> > distro, and zero 'No' were tested on that distro - all 'No' 
> > were
> > from another distro
> We could generalize it this way: we take only the best grades 
> (Yes,
> Grade A) as a summary, but we could warn that it doesn't work in 
> this
> way in all cases.

Isn't it better to make the summary the mode / average / median 
rather than "max"?

> For instance that printer is Yes, Grade A, but has a No, we 
> could add a
> big warning that says that it didn't work for everybody, and 
> encourage
> people to check the details.

sgtm.

> Here if Ramona wants to know if that printer works, she'll look 
> at the
> entries and since she runs Trisquel 9, she'll see that it's 
> probably
> fine for her.

sgtm.

> This would probably also encourage users to fix bogus entries, 
> if
> someone has an intel WiFi card that somehow works in Trisquel 9, 
> people
> will probably be pushed to verify that's it's really the case 
> and fix it
> if it's not. Here we'd also need to have a way to declare 
> entries as
> 'needing verification' or something like that in very suspicious 
> cases.

This would be useful feature indeed but how do we mark something 
as suspicious, manually by conventional wisdom (like the example 
you give but then who would have the privilege to do so and how 
can we make it explanable), or automatically (but how)?

> Denis.


--
Best,
Yuchen

PGP Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040  4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0
          <https://ypei.me/assets/ypei-pubkey.txt>

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature