[09/51] [partial] opennlp-sandbox git commit: merge from bgalitsky's own git repo

[bg...@apache.org]

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/165ted_michael_sandel_the_lost_art_of_democratic_debate.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/165ted_michael_sandel_the_lost_art_of_democratic_debate.txt b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/165ted_michael_sandel_the_lost_art_of_democratic_debate.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5b80dc4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/165ted_michael_sandel_the_lost_art_of_democratic_debate.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+One thing the world needs , one thing this country desperately needs is a better way of conducting our political debates . We need to rediscover the lost art of democratic argument . ( Applause ) If you think about the arguments we have , most of the time it 's shouting matches on cable television , ideological food fights on the floor of Congress . I have a suggestion . Look at all the arguments we have these days over health care , over bonuses and bailouts on Wall Street , over the gap between rich and poor , over affirmative action and same-sex marriage . Lying just beneath the surface of those arguments , with passions raging on all sides , are big questions of moral philosophy , big questions of justice . But we too rarely articulate and defend and argue about those big moral questions in our politics . So what I would like to do today is have something of a discussion . First , let me take a famous philosopher who wrote about those questions of justice and morality , give you
  a very short lecture on Aristotle of ancient Athens , Aristotle 's theory of justice , and then have a discussion here to see whether Aristotle 's ideas actually inform the way we think and argue about questions today . So , are you ready for the lecture ? According to Aristotle justice means giving people what they deserve . That 's it ; that 's the lecture . ( Laughter ) Now , you may say , well , that 's obvious enough . The real questions begin when it comes to arguing about who deserves what and why . Take the example of flutes . Suppose we 're distributing flutes . Who should get the best ones ? Let 's see what people -- What would you say ? Who should get the best flute ? You can just call it out . ( Audience : Random . ) Michael Sandel : At random . You would do it by lottery . Or by the first person to rush into the hall to get them . Who else ? ( Audience : The best flute players . ) MS : The best flute players . ( Audience : The worst flute players . ) MS : The worst flu
 te players . How many say the best flute players ? Why ? Actually , that was Aristotle 's answer too . ( Laughter ) But here 's a harder question . Why do you think , those of you who voted this way , that the best flutes should go to the best flute players ? Peter : The greatest benefit to all . MS : The greatest benefit to all . We 'll hear better music if the best flutes should go to the best flute players . That 's Peter ? ( Audience : Peter . ) MS : All right . Well , it 's a good reason . We 'll all be better off if good music is played rather than terrible music . But Peter , Aristotle does n't agree with you that that 's the reason . That 's all right . Aristotle had a different reason for saying the best flutes should go to the best flute players . He said , that 's what flutes are for -- to be played well . He says that to reason about just distribution of a thing , we have to reason about , and sometimes argue about , the purpose of the thing , or the social activity , in
  this case , musical performance . And the point , the essential nature , of musical performance is to produce excellent music . It 'll be a happy byproduct that we 'll all benefit . But when we think about justice , Aristotle says , what we really need to think about is the essential nature of the activity in question and the qualities that are worth honoring and admiring and recognizing . One of the reasons that the best flute players should get the best flutes is that musical performance is not only to make the rest of us happy , but to honor and recognize the excellence of the best musicians . Now , flutes may seem ... the distribution of flutes may seem a trivial case . Let 's take a contemporary example of the dispute about justice . It had to do with golf . Casey Martin -- a few years ago , Casey Martin -- did any of you hear about him ? He was a very good golfer , but he had a disability . he had a bad leg , a circulatory problem , that made it very painful for him to walk t
 he course . In fact , it carried risk of injury . He asked the PGA , the Professional Golfers ' Association , for permission to use a golf cart in the PGA tournaments . They said , " No. Now that would give you an unfair advantage . " He sued , and his case went all the way to the Supreme Court , believe it or not , the case over the golf cart . Because the law says that the disabled must be accommodated , provided the accommodation does not change the essential nature of the activity . He says , " I 'm a great golfer . I want to compete . But I need a golf cart to get from one hole to the next . " Suppose you were on the Supreme Court . Suppose you were deciding the justice of this case . How many here would say that Casey Martin does have a right to use a golf cart ? And how many say , no , he does n't ? All right , let 's take a poll , show of hands . How many would rule in favor of Casey Martin ? And how many would not ? How many would say he does n't ? All right , we have a goo
 d division of opinion here . Someone who would not grant Casey Martin the right to a golf cart , what would be your reason ? Raise your hand , and we 'll try to get you a microphone . What would be your reason ? ( Audience : It 'd be an unfair advantage . ) MS : It would be an unfair advantage if he gets to ride in a golf cart . All right , those of you , I imagine most of you who would not give him the golf cart worry about an unfair advantage . What about those of you who say he should be given a golf cart ? How would you answer the objection ? Yes , all right . Audience : The cart 's not part of the game . MS : What 's your name ? ( Audience : Charlie . ) MS : Charlie says -- We 'll get Charlie a microphone in case someone wants to reply . Tell us , Charlie , why would you say he should be able to use a golf cart ? Charlie : The cart 's not part of the game . MS : But what about walking from hole to hole ? Charlie : It does n't matter ; it 's not part of the game . MS : Walking t
 he course is not part of the game of golf ? Charlie : Not in my book , it is n't . MS : All right . Stay there , Charlie . ( Laughter ) Who has an answer for Charlie ? All right , who has an answer for Charlie ? What would you say ? Audience : The endurance element is a very important part of the game , walking all those holes . MS : Walking all those holes ? That 's part of the game of golf ? ( Audience : Absolutely . ) MS : What 's your name ? ( Audience : Warren . ) MS : Warren . Charlie , what do you say to Warren ? Charley : I 'll stick to my original thesis . ( Laughter ) MS : Warren , are you a golfer ? Warren : I am not a golfer . Charley : And I am . ( MS : Okay . ) ( Laughter ) ( Applause ) You know , it 's interesting . In the case , in the lower court , they brought in golfing greats to testify on this very issue . Is walking the course essential to the game ? And they brought in Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer . And what do you suppose they all said ? Yes . They agreed 
 with Warren . They said , yes , walking the course is strenuous physical exercise . The fatigue factor is an important part of golf . And so it would change the fundamental nature of the game to give him the golf cart . Now , notice , something interesting -- Well , I should tell you about the Supreme Court first . The Supreme Court decided . What do you suppose they said ? They said yes , that Casey Martin must be provided a golf cart . Seven to two , they ruled . What was interesting about their ruling and about the discussion we 've just had is that the discussion about the right , the justice , of the matter depended on figuring out what is the essential nature of golf . And the Supreme Court justices wrestled with that question . And Justice Stevens , writing for the majority , said he had read all about the history of golf , and the essential point of the game is to get very small ball from one place into a hole in as few strokes as possible , and that walking was not essentia
 l , but incidental . Now , there were two dissenters , one of whom was Justice Scalia . He would n't have granted the cart , and he had a very interesting dissent . It 's interesting because he rejected the Aristotelian premise underlying the majority 's opinion . He said it 's not possible to determine the essential nature of a game like golf . Here 's how he put it . " To say that something is essential is ordinarily to say that it is necessary to the achievement of a certain object . But since it is the very nature of a game to have no object except amusement , ( Laughter ) that is , what distinguishes games from productive activity , ( Laughter ) it is quite impossible to say that any of a game 's arbitrary rules is essential . " So there you have Justice Scalia taking on the Aristotelian premise of the majority 's opinion . Justice Scalia 's opinion is questionable for two reasons . First , no real sports fan would talk that way . ( Laughter ) If we had thought that the rules o
 f the sports we care about are merely arbitrary , rather than designed to call forth the virtues and the excellences that we think are worthy of admiring , we would n't care about the outcome of the game . It 's also objectionable on a second ground . On the face of it , it seemed to be -- this debate about the golf cart -- an argument about fairness , what 's an unfair advantage . But if fairness were the only thing at stake , there would have been an easy and obvious solution . What would it be ? ( Audience : Let everyone use the cart . ) Let everyone ride in a golf cart if they want to . Then the fairness objection goes away . But letting everyone ride in a cart would have been , I suspect , more anathema to the golfing greats and to the PGA , even than making an exception for Casey Martin . Why ? Because what was at stake in the dispute over the golf cart was not only the essential nature of golf , but , relatedly , the question , what abilities are worthy of honor and recogniti
 on as athletic talents ? Let me put the point as delicately as possible : Golfers are a little sensitive about the athletic status of their game . ( Laughter ) After all , there 's no running or jumping , and the ball stands still . ( Laughter ) So if golfing is the kind of game that can be played while riding around in a golf cart , it would be hard to confer on the golfing greats the status that we confer , the honor and recognition that goes to truly great athletes . That illustrates that with golf , as with flutes , it 's hard to decide the question of what justice requires , without grappling with the question " What is the essential nature of the activity in question , and what qualities , what excellences connected with that activity , are worthy of honor and recognition ? " Let 's take a final example that 's prominent in contemporary political debate : same-sex marriage . There are those who favor state recognition only of traditional marriage between one man and one woman 
 , and there are those who favor state recognition of same-sex marriage . How many here favor the first policy : the state should recognize traditional marriage only ? And how many favor the second , same-sex marriage ? Now , put it this way , what ways of thinking about justice and morality underlie the arguments we have over marriage ? The opponents of same-sex marriage say that the purpose of marriage , fundamentally , is procreation , and that 's what 's worthy of honoring and recognizing and encouraging . And the defenders of same-sex marriage say no , procreation is not the only purpose of marriage . What about a lifelong , mutual , loving commitment ? That 's really what marriage is about . So with flutes , with golf carts , and even with a fiercely contested question like same-sex marriage , Aristotle has a point . Very hard to argue about justice without first arguing about the purpose of social institutions and about what qualities are worthy of honor and recognition . So l
 et 's step back from these cases and see how they shed light on the way we might improve , elevate , the terms of political discourse in the United States , and for that matter , around the world . There is a tendency to think that if we engage too directly with moral questions in politics , that 's a recipe for disagreement , and for that matter , a recipe for intolerance and coercion . So better to shy away from , to ignore , the moral and the religious convictions that people bring to civic life . It seems to me that our discussion reflects the opposite , that a better way to mutual respect is to engage directly with the moral convictions citizens bring to public life , rather than to require that people leave their deepest moral convictions outside politics before they enter . That , it seems to me , is a way to begin to restore the art of democratic argument . Thank you very much . ( Applause ) Thank you . ( Applause ) Thank you . ( Applause ) Thank you very much . Thanks . Tha
 nk you . Chris . Thanks , Chris . Chris Anderson : From flutes to golf courses to same-sex marriage . That was a genius link . Now look , you 're a pioneer of open education . Your lecture series was one of the first to do it big . What 's your vision for the next phase of this ? MS : Well , I think that it is possible . In the classroom , we have arguments on some of the most fiercely held moral convictions that students have about big public questions . And I think we can do that in public life more generally . And so my real dream would be to take the public television series that we 've created of the course -- it 's available now , online , free for everyone anywhere in the world -- and to see whether we can partner with institutions , at universities in China , in India , in Africa , around the world , to try to promote civic education and also a richer kind of democratic debate . CA : So you picture , at some point , live , in real time , you could have this kind of conversat
 ion , inviting questions , but with people from China and India joining in ? MS : Right . We did a little bit of it here with 1,500 people in Long Beach , and we do it in a classroom at Harvard with about 1,000 students . Would n't it be interesting to take this way of thinking and arguing , engaging seriously with big moral questions , exploring cultural differences and connect through a live video hookup , students in Beijing and Mumbai and in Cambridge , Massachusetts and create a global classroom . That 's what I would love to do . ( Applause ) CA : So , I would imagine that there are a lot of people who would love to join you in that endeavor . Michael Sandel . Thank you so much . ( MS : Thanks so much . ) 
\ No newline at end of file

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/166ted_michael_shermer_on_believing_strange_things.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/166ted_michael_shermer_on_believing_strange_things.txt b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/166ted_michael_shermer_on_believing_strange_things.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e93d7fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/166ted_michael_shermer_on_believing_strange_things.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+Hey , I am Michael Shermer , the director of the Skeptics Society , the publisher of Skeptic magazine . We investigate claims of the paranormal , pseudo-science , and fringe groups and cults and claims of all kinds between -- science and pseudo-science and non-science and junk science , voodoo science , pathological science , bad science , non-science and plain old nonsense . And unless you 've been on Mars recently , you know there 's a lot of that out there . Some people call us debunkers , which is kind of a negative term . But let 's face it -- there 's a lot of bunk , and we are like the bunko squads of the police departments out there , flushing out . Well , we 're sort of like the Ralph Naders of bad ideas -- ( Laughter ) -- trying to replace bad ideas with good ideas . I 'll show you an example of a bad idea . I brought this with me . This was given to us by NBC Dateline to test . It 's the -- it 's produced by the Quadro Corporation of West Virginia . It 's called the Quadr
 o 2000 Dowser Rod . ( Laughter ) This was being sold to high school administrators for 900 dollars a piece . It 's a piece of plastic with a Radio Shack antenna attached to it . You could dowse for all sorts of things , but this particular one was built to dowse for marijuana in students ' lockers . ( Laughter ) So the way it works is , you go down the hallway and you see if it tilts toward a particular locker , and then you open the locker . So it looks something like this . I 'll show you . ( Laughter ) No , it -- well , it has kind of a right-leaning bias . So , I 'll show -- well , this is science , so we 'll do a controlled experiment . It 'll go this way for sure . ( Laughter ) Sir , you want to empty your pockets . Please , sir ? ( Laughter ) So the question was , can it actually find marijuana in students ' lockers ? And the answer is , If you open enough of them -- yes . ( Laughter ) ( Applause ) But in science , we have to keep track of the misses , not just the hits . And
  that 's probably the key lesson to my short talk here , is that this is how psychics work , astrologers , and tarot card readers and so on . People remember the hits ; they forget the misses . In science we have to keep the whole database , and look to see if the number of hits is somehow stands out from the total number that you would expect by chance . In this case , we tested it . We had two opaque boxes , one with government-approved THC marijuana , and one with nothing . And it got it 50 percent of the time -- -- which is exactly what you 'd expect with a coin flip model . So that 's just a fun little example here of the sorts of things we do . Skeptic is the quarterly publication . Each one has a particular theme , like this one is on the future of intelligence . Are people getting smarter or dumber ? I have an opinion of this myself because the business I 'm in . But , in fact , people , it turns out , are getting smarter . Three IQ points per 10 years , going up . Sort of a
 n interesting thing . With science , do n't think of skepticism as a thing or even science as a thing . Are science and religion compatible ? It 's like , are science and plumbing compatible ? These -- they 're just two different things . Science is not a thing . It 's a verb . It 's a way of thinking about things . It 's a way of looking for natural explanations for all phenomena . I mean , what 's more likely -- that extraterrestrial intelligences or multi-dimensional beings travel across the vast distances of interstellar space to leave a crop circle in Farmer Bob 's field in Puckerbrush , Kansas to promote skeptic . com , our webpage ? Or is it more likely that a reader of Skeptic did this with Photoshop ? And in all cases we have to ask -- ( Laughter ) -- what 's the more likely explanation ? And before we say something is out of this world , we should first make sure that it 's not in this world . What 's more likely -- that Arnold had a little extraterrestrial help in his run
  for the governorship ? Or that the World Weekly News makes stuff up ? ( Laughter ) And part of that -- the same theme is expressed nicely here in this Sidney Harris cartoon . For those of you in the back , it says here " Then a miracle occurs . I think you need to be more explicit here in step two . " This single slide completely dismantles the intelligent design arguments . There 's nothing more to it than that . ( Applause ) You can say a miracle occurs . It 's just that it does n't explain anything . It does n't offer anything . There 's nothing to test . It 's the end of the conversation for intelligent design creationists . Whereas -- and it 's true , scientists sometimes throw terms out as linguistic place fillers -- dark energy or dark matter or something like that . Until we figure out what it is , we 'll just call it this . It 's the beginning of the causal chain for science . For intelligent design creationists , it 's the end of the chain . So again , we can ask this -- 
 what 's more likely -- are UFOs alien spaceships or perceptual cognitive mistakes , or even fakes ? This is a UFO shot from my house in Altadena , California , looking down over Pasadena . And if it looks a lot like a Buick hubcap , it 's because it is . You do n't even need Photoshop , you do n't need high-tech equipment , you do n't need computers . This was shot with a throw-away Kodak Instamatic camera . You just have somebody off on the side with a hubcap ready to go . Camera 's ready -- that 's it . ( Laughter ) So , although it 's possible that most of these things are fake or illusions or so on and that some of them are real , it 's more likely that all of them are fake , like the crop circles . On a more serious note , in all of science we 're looking for a balance between data and theory . In the case of Galileo , he had two problems when he turned his telescope to Saturn . First of all , there was no theory of planetary rings . And second of all , his data was grainy and 
 fuzzy , and he could n't quite make out what it was he was looking at . So he wrote that he had seen -- " I have observed that the furthest planet has three bodies . " And this is what he ended up concluding that he saw . So without a theory of planetary rings and with only grainy data , you ca n't have a good theory . And it was n't solved until 1655. This is Christiaan Huygens 's book in which he cataloged all the mistakes that people made in trying to figure out what was going on with Saturn . It was n't till -- Huygens had two things . He had a good theory of planetary rings and how the solar system operated . And then , he had better telescopic , more fine-grain data in which he could figure out that as the Earth is going around faster -- according to Kepler 's Laws -- than Saturn , then we catch up with it . And we see the angles of the rings at different angles , there . And that , in fact , turns out to be true . The problems with having a theory is that your theory may be l
 oaded with cognitive biases . So one of the problems of explaining why people believe weird things is that we have things on a simple level . And then I 'll go to more serious ones . Like , we have a tendency to see faces . This is the face on Mars which was -- in 1976 , where there was a whole movement to get NASA to photograph that area because people thought this was monumental architecture made by Martians . Well , it turns out -- here 's the close-up of it from 2001. If you squint , you can still see the face . And when you 're squinting , what you 're doing is you 're turning that from fine-grain to coarse-grain . And so , you 're reducing the quality of your data . And if I did n't tell you what to look for , you 'd still see the face , because we 're programmed by evolution to see faces . Faces are important for us socially . And , of course , happy faces . Faces of all kinds are easy to see . ( Laughter ) You can see the happy face on Mars , there . If astronomers were frog
 s perhaps they 'd see Kermit the Frog . Do you see him there ? Little froggy legs . Or if geologists were elephants ? Religious iconography . ( Laughter ) Discovered by a Tennessee baker in 1996. He charged five bucks a head to come see the nun bun till he got a cease-and-desist from Mother Teresa 's lawyer . Here 's Our Lady of Guadalupe and Our Lady of Watsonville , just down the street . Or is it up the street from here ? Tree bark is particularly good because it 's nice and grainy , branchy , black-and-white splotchy and you can get the pattern-seeking -- humans are pattern-seeking animals . Here 's the Virgin Mary on the side of a glass window in Sao Paulo . Now , here 's the Virgin Mary made her appearance on a cheese sandwich -- which I got to actually hold in a Las Vegas casino , of course , this being America . ( Laughter ) This casino paid 28,500 dollars on eBay for the cheese sandwich . ( Laughter ) But who does it really look like , the Virgin Mary ? ( Laughter ) It has 
 that sort of puckered lips , 1940s-era look . Virgin Mary in Clearwater , Florida . I actually went to see this one . There was a lot of people there -- the faithful come to be in their -- wheelchairs and crutches , and so on . And we went down , investigated . Just to give you a size -- that 's Dawkins , me and The Amazing Randi , next to this two , two and a half story size image . All these candles , so many thousands of candles people had lit in tribute to this . So we walked around the backside , just to see what was going on here , where it turns out wherever there 's a sprinkler head and a palm tree , you get the effect . Here 's the Virgin Mary on the backside , which they started to wipe off . I guess you can only have one miracle per building . ( Laughter ) So is it really a miracle of Mary , or is it a miracle of Marge ? ( Laughter ) And then I 'm going to finish up with another example of this with audio -- auditory illusions . There is this film , " White Noise , " with
  Michael Keaton about the dead talking back to us . By the way , this whole business of talking to the dead , it 's not that big a deal . Anybody can do it , turns out . It 's getting the dead to talk back that 's the really hard part . ( Laughter ) In this case , supposedly , these messages are hidden in electronic phenomena . There 's a ReverseSpeech . com web page on which I downloaded this stuff . Here is the forward -- this is the most famous one of all of these . Here 's the forward version of the very famous song . Boy , coudl n't you just listen to that all day ? ( Laughter ) All right , here it is backwards , and see if you can hear the hidden messages that are supposedly in there . What did you get ? ( Audience : Satan . ) Michael Shermer : Satan ? OK , well , at least we got Satan . Now , I 'll prime your auditory part of your brain to tell you what you 're supposed to hear , and then hear it again . ( Laughter ) ( Applause ) You ca n't miss it when I tell you what 's the
 re . ( Laughter ) All right , I 'm going to just end with a positive , nice , little story about -- the Skeptics is a nonprofit educational organization . We 're always looking for little , good things that people do . And in England , there 's a pop singer . Very -- one of the top popular singers in England today , Katie Melua . And she wrote a beautiful song . It was in the top five in 2005 , called , " Nine Million Bicycles in Beijing . " It 's a love story -- she 's sort of the Norah Jones of the U. K. -- about how she much loves her guy , and compared to nine million bicycles , and so forth . And she has this one passage here . \u266b We are 12 billion light-years from the edge \u266b \u266b That 's a guess \u266b \u266b No one can ever say it 's true \u266b \u266b But I know that I will always be with you \u266b Well , that 's nice . At least she got it close . In America it would be , " We 're 6,000 light years from the edge . " ( Laughter ) But my friend , Simon Singh , the particle physicist , now
  turned science educator , and he wrote the book " The Big Bang , " and so on . He uses every chance he gets to promote good science . And so , he wrote an op-ed piece in The Guardian about Katie 's song , in which he said , well , we know exactly how old , how far from the edge . You know , it 's 12 -- it 's 13.7 billion light years , and it 's not a guess . We know within precise error bars there how close it is . And so , we can say , although not absolutely true , that it 's pretty close to being true . And , to his credit , Katie called him up after this op-ed piece came out . And said , " I 'm so embarrassed . I was a member of the astronomy club , and I should have known better . " And she re-cut the song . So I 'll end with the new version . \u266b We are 13.7 billion light years \u266b \u266b from the edge of the observable universe \u266b \u266b That 's a good estimate with well-defined error bars \u266b \u266b And with the available information \u266b \u266b I predict that I will always be with you
  \u266b ( Applause ) How cool is that ? ( Applause ) 
\ No newline at end of file

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/167ted_misha_glenny_investigates_global_crime_networks.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/167ted_misha_glenny_investigates_global_crime_networks.txt b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/167ted_misha_glenny_investigates_global_crime_networks.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..96e6dfa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/167ted_misha_glenny_investigates_global_crime_networks.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+These are grim economic times fellow TEDsters , grim economic times indeed . And so , I would like to cheer you up with one of the great , albeit largely unknown , commercial success stories of the past 20 years . Comparable , in its own very peculiar way , to the achievements of Microsoft or Google . And it 's an industry which has bucked the current recession with equanimity . I refer to organized crime . Now organized crime has been around for a very long time , I hear you say . And these would be wise words , indeed . But in the last two decades it has experienced an unprecedented expansion . Now accounting for roughly 15 percent of the world 's GDP . I like to call it the Global Shadow Economy , or McMafia , for short . So what triggered this extraordinary growth in cross-border crime ? Well , of course , there is globalization , technology , communications , all that stuff , which we 'll talk about a little bit later . But first , I would like to take you back to this event . 
 The collapse of communism . All across Eastern Europe , a most momentous episode in our post-war history . Now it 's time for full disclosure . This event meant a great deal to me personally . I had started smuggling books across the iron curtain to Democratic opposition groups in Eastern Europe , like Solidarity in Poland , when I was in my teens . I then started writing about Eastern Europe , and eventually I became the BBC 's chief correspondent for the region . Which is what I was doing in 1989. And so when 425 million people finally won the right to chose their own governments I was ecstatic . But I was also a touch worried about some of the nastier things lurking behind the wall . It was n't long , for example , before ethnic nationalism reared its bloody head in Yugoslavia . And amongst the chaos , amidst the euphoria , it took me a little while to understand that some of the people who had wielded power before 1989 , in Eastern Europe , continued to do so after the revolutio
 ns there . Obviously there were characters like this . But there were also more unexpected people who played a critical role in what was going on in Eastern Europe . Like this character . Remember these guys ? They used to win the gold medals in weightlifting and wrestling , every four years in the Olympics . And they were the great celebrities of communism . With a fabulous lifestyle to go with it . The used to get great apartments in the center of town . Casual sex on tap . And they could travel to the West very freely , which was a great luxury at the time . It may come as a surprise , but they played a critical role in the emergence of the market economy in Eastern Europe . Or as I like to call them , they are the midwives of capitalism . Here are some of those same wieghtlifters after their 1989 makeover . Now in Bulgaria , this photograph was taken in Bulgaria , when communism collapsed all over Eastern Europe it was n't just communism , it was the state that collapsed as well
  . That means your police force was n't working . The court system was n't functioning properly . So what was a business man in the brave new world of East European capitalism going to do to make sure that his contracts would be honored ? Well , he would turn to people who were called , rather prosaically by sociologists , privatized law enforcement agencies . We prefer to know them as the mafia . And in Bulgaria , the mafia was soon joined with 14 thousand people who were sacked from their jobs in the security services between 1989 and 1991. Now , when your state is collapsing , your economy is heading south at a rate of knots , the last people you want coming on to the labor market are 14 thousand men and women whose chief skills are surveillance , are smuggling , building underground networks , and killing people . But that 's what happened all over Eastern Europe . Now , when I was working in the 1990s I spent most of the time covering the appalling conflict in Yugoslavia . And 
 I could n't help notice that the people who were perpetrating the appalling atrocities , the paramilitary organizations , were actually the same people running the organized criminal syndicates . And I came to think that behind the violence lay a sinister criminal enterprise . And so I resolved to travel around the world examining this global criminal underworld by talking to policemen , by talking to victims , by talking to consumers of illicit goods and services . But above all else , by talking to the gangsters themselves . And the Balkans was a fabulous place to start . Why ? Well of course there was the issue of law and order collapsing . But also , as they say in the retail trade , it 's location location location . And what I noticed at the beginning of my research that the Balkans had turned into a vast transit zone for illicit goods and services coming from all over the world . Heroin , cocaine , women being trafficked into prostitution and precious minerals . And where wer
 e they heading ? The European Union , which by now was beginning to reap the benefits of globalization . Transforming it into the most affluent consumer market in history . Eventually comprising some 500 million people . And a significant minority of those 500 million people like to spend some of their leisure time and spare cash sleeping with prostitutes , sticking 50 Euro notes up their nose and employing illegal migrant laborers . Now , organized crime in a globalizing world operates in the same way as any other business . It has zones of production , like Afghanistan and Columbia . It has zones of distribution , like Mexico and the Balkans . And then , of course , it has zones of consumption , like the European Union , Japan and of course , the United States . The zones of production and distribution tend to lie in the developing world . And they are often threatened by appalling violence and bloodshed . Take Mexico for example . Six thousand people killed there in the last 18 m
 onths as a direct consequence of the cocaine trade . But what about the Democratic Republic of Congo ? Since 1998 , five million people have died there . It 's not a conflict you read about much in the newspapers . But it 's the biggest conflict on this planet since the Second World War . And why is it ? Because mafias from all around the world cooperate with local paramilitaries in order to seize the supplies of the rich mineral resources of the region . In the year 2000 , 80 percent of the world 's coltan was sourced to the killing fields of the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo . Now coltan you will find in almost every mobile phone , in almost every laptop and games console . The Cogolese war lords were selling this stuff to the mafia in exchange for weapons . And the mafia would then sell it on to Western markets . And it is this Western desire to consume that is the primary driver of international organized crime . Now , let me show you some of my friends in action , caught
  conveniently on film by the Italian police and smuggling duty-not-paid cigarettes . Now , cigarettes out the factory gate are very cheap . The European Union then imposes the highest taxes on them in the world . So if you can smuggle them into the E. U. there are very handsome profits to be made . And I want to show you this to demonstrate the type of resources available to these groups . This boat is worth one million Euros when it 's new . And it 's the fastest thing on European waters . From 1994 , for seven years , 20 of these boats made the trip across the Adriatic , from Montenegro to Italy , every single night . And as a consequence of this trade Britain alone lost eight billion dollars in revenue . And instead that money went to underwrite the wars in Yugoslavia and line the pockets of unscrupulous individuals . Now Italian police , when this trade started , had just two boats which could go at the same speed . And this is very important , because the only way you can catch
  these guys is if they run out of gas . Sometimes the gangsters would bring with them women being trafficked into prostitution . And if the police intervened , they would hurl the women into the sea so that the police had to go and save them from drowning , rather than chasing the bad guys . So I have shown you this to demonstrate how many boats , how many vessels it takes to catch one of these guys . And the answer is six vessels . And remember , 20 of these speed boats were coming across the Adriatic every single night . So what were these guys doing with all the money they were making ? Well , this is where we come to globalization because that was not just the deregulation of global trade . It was the liberalization of international financial markets . And boy did that make it easy for the money launderers . The last two decades have been the champagne era for dirty lucre . In the 1990s we saw financial centers around the world competing for their business . And there was simply
  no effective mechanism to prevent money laundering . And a lot of licit banks were also happy to accept deposits from very dubious sources without questions being asked . But at the heart of this , is the offshore banking network . Now these things are an essential part of the money laundering parade . And if you want to do something about illegal tax evasion and transnational organized crime , money laundering , you have to get rid of them . On a positive note , we at last have someone in the White House who has consistently spoken out against these corrosive entities . And if anyone is concerned about what I believe is the necessity for new legislation , regulation , effective regulation , I say , let 's take a look at Bernie Madoff , who is now going to be spending the rest of his life in jail . Bernie Madoff stole 65 billion dollars . That puts him up there on the Olympus of gangsters with the Colombian cartels , and the major Russian crime syndicates . But he did this for deca
 des in the very heart of Wall Street . And no regulator picked up on it . So how many other Madoffs are there on Wall street , or in the city of London , fleecing ordinary folk , and money laundering ? Well I can tell you , it 's quite a few of them . Let me go on to the 101 of international organized crime now . And that is narcotics . Our second marijuana farm photograph for the morning . This one , however , is in central British Columbia where I photographed it . It 's one of the tens of thousands of mom-and-pop grow-ops in B. C. which ensure that over five percent of the province 's GDP is accounted for by this trade . Now I was taken by inspector Brian Cantera , of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police , to a cavernous warehouse east of Vancouver to see some of the goods which are regularly confiscated by the RCMP from the smugglers who are sending it , of course , down south to the United States where there is an insatiable market for B. C. Bud , as it 's called , in part because
  it 's marketed as organic , which of course goes down very well in California . ( Laughter ) ( Applause ) Now even by the police 's asmission this makes not a dent in the profits , really , of the major exporters . Since the beginning of globalization the global narcotics market has expanded enormously . There has , however , been no concomitant increase in the resources available to police forces . This , however , may all be about to change . Because something very strange is going on . The United Nations recognized earlier this , it was last month actually , that Canada has become a key area of distribution and production of ecstasy and other synthetic drugs . Interestingly , the market share of heroin and cocaine is going down because the pills are getting ever better at reproducing their highs . Now that is a game changer . Because it shifts production away from the developing world and into the Western world . When that happens it is a trend which is set to overwhelm our poli
 cing capacity in the West . The drugs policy which we 've had in place for 40 years is long overdue for a very serious rethink , in my opinion . Now , the recession . Well , organized crime has already adapted very well to the recession . Not surprising , the most opportunistic industry in the whole world . And it has no rules to its regulatory system . Except , of course , it has two business risks , arrest by law enforcement , which is , frankly , the least of their worries , and competition from other groups , i. e. a bullet in the back of the head . What they 've done is they 've shifted their operations . People do n't smoke as much dope , or visit prostitutes quite so frequently during a recession . And so instead they have invaded financial and corporate crime in a big way , but above all , two sectors , and that is counterfeit goods and cybercrime . And its been terribly successful . I would like to introduce you to Mr. Pringle . Or perhaps I should say , more accurately , S
 e�or Pringle . I was introduced to this bit of kit by a Brazilian cybercriminal . We sat in a car on the Avenue Paulista in S�o Paulo , together . Hooked it up to my laptop , and within about five minutes he had penetrated the computer security system of a major Brazilian bank . It 's really not that difficult . And it 's actually much easier because the fascinating thing about cybercrime is that it 's not so much the technology . The key to cybercrime is what we call social engineering . Or to use the technical term for it , there 's one born every minute . You would not believe how easy it is to persuade people to do things with their computers which are objectively not in their interest . And it was very soon when the cybercriminals learned that the quickest way to do this , of course , the quickest way to a person 's wallet is through the promise sex and love . I expect some of you remember the I-Love-You virus , one of the very great worldwide viruses that came . I was very f
 ortunate when the ILOVEYOU virus came out . Because the first person I received it from was an ex-girlfriend of mine . Now she harbored all sorts of sentiments and emotions towards me at the time , but love was not amongst them . ( Laughter ) And so as soon as I saw this drop into my inbox I dispatched it hastily to the recycle bin , and spared myself a very nasty infection . So , cybercrime , do watch out for it . One thing that we do know that the internet is doing is , the internet is assisting these guys . These are mosquitos who carry the malarial parasite which infests our blood when the mosy has had a free meal at our expense . Now , Artesunate is a very effective drug at destroying the parasite in the early days of infection . But over the past year or so researchers in Cambodia have discovered that what 's happening is the malarial parasite is developing a resistance . And they fear that the reason it 's developing a resistance is because Cambodians ca n't afford the drugs 
 on the commercial market , and so they buy it from the Internet . And these pills contain only low doses of the active ingredient . Which is why things are , the parasite is beginning to develop a resistance . The reason I say this is because we have to know that organized crime impacts all sorts of areas of our lives . You do n't have to sleep with prostitutes or take drugs in order to have a relationship with organized crime . They affect our bank accounts . They affect our communications , our pension funds . They even affect the food that we eat and our governments . This is no longer an issue of Sicilians from Palermo and New York . There is no romance involved with gangsters in the 21st Century . This is a mighty industry and it creates instability and violence wherever it goes . It is a major economic force and we need to take it very , very seriously . It 's been a privilege talking to you . Thank you very much . ( Applause ) 
\ No newline at end of file

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/168ted_oliver_sacks_what_hallucination_reveals_about_our_minds.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/168ted_oliver_sacks_what_hallucination_reveals_about_our_minds.txt b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/168ted_oliver_sacks_what_hallucination_reveals_about_our_minds.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..768ce81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/168ted_oliver_sacks_what_hallucination_reveals_about_our_minds.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+We see with the eyes . But we see with the brain as well . And seeing with the brain is often called imagination . And we are familiar with the landscapes of our own imagination , our inscapes . We 've lived with them all our lives . But there are also hallucinations as well . And hallucinations are completely different . They do n't seem to be of our creation . They do n't seem to be under our control . They seem to come from the outside , and [ seem ] to mimic perception . So I am going to be talking about hallucinations . And a particular sort of visual hallucination which I see among my patients . A few months ago I got a phone call from a nursing home where I work . They told me that one of the residents , an old lady in her 90s , was seeing things . And they wondered if she 'd gone bonkers . Or , because she was an old lady , whether she 'd had a stroke , or whether she had Alzheimer 's . And so they asked me if I would come and see Rosalie , the old lady . I went in to see he
 r . It was evident straight away that she was perfectly sane and lucid and of good intelligence . But she 'd been very startled , and very bewildered because she 'd been seeing things . And she told me -- the nurses had n't mentioned this -- that she was blind , that she had been completely blind , from macular degeneration , for five years . But now , for the last few days , she 'd been seeing things . So I said , " What sort of things ? " And she said , " People in Eastern dress , in drapes , walking up and down stairs . A man who turns towards me and smiles . But he has huge teeth on one side of his mouth . Animals too . I see a white building . It 's snowing , a soft snow . I see this horse , with a harness , dragging the snow away . Then , one night , the scene changes . I see cats and dogs walking towards me . They come to a certain point and then stop . Then it changes again . I see a lot of children . They are walking up and down stairs . They wear bright colors , rose and b
 lue , like Eastern dress . " Sometimes , she said , before the people come on she may hallucinate pink and blue squares on the floor , which seem to go up to the ceiling . I said , " Is this like a dream ? " And she said , " No , it 's not like a dream . It 's like a movie . " She said , " It 's got color . It 's got motion . But it 's completely silent , like a silent movie . " And she said that it 's a rather boring movie . She said , " All these people with Eastern dress , walking up and down , very repetitive , very limited . " ( Laughter ) And she has a sense of humor . She knew it was a hallucination . But she was frightened . She 'd lived 95 years and she 'd never had a hallucination before . She said that the hallucinations were unrelated to anything she was thinking or feeling or doing . That they seemed to come on by themselves , or disappear [ by themselves ] . She had no control over them . She said she did n't recognize any of the people or places in the hallucinations 
 . And none of the people or the animals , well , they all seemed oblivious of her . And she did n't know what was going on . She wondered if she was going mad , or losing her mind . Well , I examined her carefully . She was a bright old lady . Perfectly sane . She had no medical problems . She was n't on any medications which could produce hallucinations . But she was blind . And I then said to her , " I think I know what you have . " I said , " There is a special form of visual hallucination which may go with deteriorating vision , or blindness . " " This was originally described , " I said , " back in the 18th century , by a man called Charles Bonnet . And you have Charles Bonnet syndrome . There is nothing wrong with your brain . There is nothing wrong with your mind . You have Charles Bonnet syndrome . " And she was very relieved at this , that there was nothing seriously the matter , and also rather curious . She said , " Who is this Charles Bonnet ? " She said , " Did he have 
 them himself ? " And she said , " Tell all the nurses that I have Charles Bonnet syndrome . " ( Laughter ) " I 'm not crazy . I 'm not demented . I have Charles Bonnet syndrome . " Well , so I did tell the nurses . Now this , for me , is a common situation . I work in old-age homes , largely . I see a lot of elderly people who are hearing impaired or visually impaired . About 10 percent of the hearing impaired people get musical hallucinations . And about 10 percent of the visually impaired people get visual hallucinations . You do n't have to be completely blind , only sufficiently impaired . Now with the original description in the 18th century , Charles Bonnet did not have them . His grandfather had these hallucinations . His grandfather was a magistrate , an elderly man . He 'd had cataract surgery . His vision was pretty poor . And in 1759 he described to his grandson various things he was seeing . The first thing he said was he saw a handkerchief in midair . It was large blue 
 handkerchief with four orange circles . And he knew it was a hallucination . You do n't have handkerchiefs in midair . And then he saw a big wheel in midair . But sometimes he was n't sure whether he was hallucinating or not . Because the hallucinations would fit in the context of the visions . So on one occasion , when his granddaughters were visiting them , he said , " And who are these handsome young men with you ? " And they said , " Alas , Grandpapa , there are no handsome young men . " And then the handsome young men disappeared . It 's typical of these hallucinations that they may come in a flash and disappear in a flash . They do n't usually fade in and out . They are rather sudden . And they change suddenly . Charles Lullin , the grandfather , saw hundreds of different figures , different landscapes of all sorts . On one occasion he saw a man in a bathrobe smoking a pipe , and realized it was himself . That was the only figure he recognized . On one occasion when he was wal
 king in the streets of Paris , he saw -- this was real -- a scaffolding . But when he got back home he saw a miniature of the scaffolding six inches high , on his study table . This repetition of perception is sometimes called palinopsia . With him , and with Rosalie , what seems to be going on -- and Rosalie said , " What 's going on ? " -- and I said that as you lose vision , as the visual parts of the brain are no longer getting any input , they become hyperactive and excitable . And they start to fire spontaneously . And you start to see things . The things you see can be very complicated indeed . With another patient of mine , who , [ like Charles Lullin , still ] had some vision , the vision she had could be disturbing . On one occasion she said she saw a man in a striped shirt in a restaurant . And he turned around . And then he divided into six identical figures in striped shirts , who started walking towards her . And then the six figures came together again , like a concer
 tina . Once , when she was driving , or rather , her husband was driving , the road divided into four . And she felt herself going simultaneously up four roads . She had very mobile hallucinations as well . A lot of them had to do with a car . Sometimes she would see a teenage boy sitting on the hood of the car . He was very tenacious and he moved rather gracefully when the car turned . And then when they came to a stop , the boy would do a sudden vertical take off , 100 foot in the air , and then disappear . Another patient of mine had a different sort of hallucination . This was a woman who did n't have trouble with her eyes , but the visual parts of her brain . A little tumor in the occipital cortex . And , above all , she would see cartoons . These cartoons would be transparent and would cover half the visual field , like a screen . And especially she saw cartoons of Kermit the Frog . ( Laughter ) Now , I do n't watch Sesame Street . But she made a point of saying , " Why Kermit
  ? " She said , " Kermit the Frog means nothing to me . You know , I was wondering about Freudian determinants . Why Kermit ? Kermit the Frog means nothing to me . " She did n't mind the cartoons too much . But what did disturb her was she got very persistent images or hallucinations of faces and as with Rosalie , the faces were often deformed , with very large teeth , or very large eyes . And these frightened her . Well , what is going on with these people ? As a physician , I have to try and define what 's going on , and to reassure people . Especially to reassure them that they 're not going insane . Something like 10 percent , as I said , of visually impaired people get these . But no more than one percent of the people acknowledge them . Because they are afraid they will be seen as insane , or something . And if they do mention them to their own doctors they may be misdiagnosed . In particular , the notion is that if you see things or hear things , you 're going mad . But the p
 sychotic hallucinations are quite different . Psychotic hallucinations , whether they are visual or vocal , they address you . They accuse you . They seduce you . They humiliate you . They jeer at you . You interact with them . There is none of this quality of being addressed with these Charles Bonnet hallucinations . There is a film . You 're seeing a film which has nothing to do with you . Or that 's how people think about it . There is also a rare thing called temporal lobe epilepsy . And sometimes , if one has this , one may feel oneself transported back to a time and place in the past . You 're at a particular road junction . You smell chestnuts roasting . You hear the traffic . All the senses are involved . And you 're waiting for your girl . And it 's that Tuesday evening back in 1982. And the temporal lobe hallucinations are all multisensory hallucinations , full of feeling , full of familiarity , located in space and time , coherent , dramatic . The Charles Bonnet ones are 
 quite different . So in the Charles Bonnet hallucinations , you have all sorts of levels , from the geometrical hallucinations , the pink and blue squares the woman had , up to quite elaborate hallucinations with figures and especially faces . Faces , and sometimes deformed faces , are the single commonest thing in these hallucinations . And one of the second commonest is cartoons . So , what is going on ? Fascinatingly , in the last few years , it 's been possible to do functional brain imagery , to do fMRI on people as they are hallucinating . And in fact , to find that different parts of the visual brain are activated as they are hallucinating . When people have these simple geometrical hallucinations , the primary visual cortex is activated . This is the part of the brain which perceives edges and patterns . You do n't form images with your primary visual cortex . When images are formed , a higher part of the visual cortex is involved in the temporal lobe . And in particular , o
 ne area of the temporal lobe is called the fusiform gyrus . And it 's known that if people have damage in the fusiform gyrus , they maybe lose the ability to recognize faces . But if there is an abnormal activity in the fusiform gyrus , they may hallucinate faces . And this is exactly what you find in some of these people . There is an area in the anterior part of this gyrus where teeth and eyes are represented . And that part of the gyrus is activated when people get the deformed hallucinations . There is another part of the brain which is especially activated when one sees cartoons . It 's activated when one recognizes cartoons , when one draws cartoons , and when one hallucinates them . It 's very interesting that that should be specific . There are other parts of the brain which are specifically involved with the recognition and hallucination of buildings and landscapes . Around 1970 it was found that there were not only particular parts of the brain [ involved ] , but particula
 r cells . " Face cells " were discovered around 1970. And now we know that there are hundreds of other sorts of cells , which can be very very specific . So you may not only have " car " cells , you may have " Aston Martin " cells . ( Laughter ) I saw an Aston Martin this morning . I had to bring it in . And now it 's in there somewhere . ( Laughter ) Now , at this level , in what 's called the inferotemporal cortex , there are only visual images , or figments or fragments . It 's only at higher levels that the other senses join in and there are connections with memory and emotion . And in the Charles Bonnet syndrome you do n't go to those higher levels . You 're in these levels of inferior visual cortex where you have thousands and tens of thousands and millions of images , or figments , or fragmentary figments , all neurally encoded , in particular cells or small clusters of cells . Normally these are all part of the integrated stream of perception , or imagination . And one is no
 t conscious of them . It is only if one is visually impaired , or blind , that the process is interrupted . And instead of getting normal perception , you 're getting an anarchic , convulsive stimulation , or release , of all of these visual cells , in the inferotemporal cortex . So , suddenly you see a face . Suddenly you see a car . Suddenly this , and suddenly that . The mind does its best to organize , and to give some sort of coherence to this . But not terribly successfully . When these were first described it was thought that they could be interpreted like dreams . But in fact people say , " I do n't recognize the people . I ca n't form any associations . " " Kermit means nothing to me . " You do n't get anywhere thinking of them as dreams . Well , I 've more or less said what I wanted . I think I just want to recapitulate and say this is common . Think of the number of blind people . There must be hundreds of thousands of blind people who have these hallucinations , but are 
 too scared to mention them . So this sort of thing needs to be brought into notice , for patients , for doctors , for the public . Finally , I think they are infinitely interesting , and valuable , for giving one some insight as to how the brain works . Charles Bonnet said , 250 years ago -- he wondered how , thinking these hallucinations , how , as he put it , the theater of the mind could be generated by the machinery of the brain . Now , 250 years later , I think we 're beginning to glimpse how this is done . Thanks very much . ( Applause ) Chris Anderson : That was superb . Thank you so much . You speak about these things with so much insight and empathy for your patients . Have you yourself experienced any of the syndromes you write about ? Oliver Sacks : I was afraid you 'd ask that . ( Laughter ) Well , yeah , a lot of them . And actually I 'm a little visually impaired myself . I 'm blind in one eye , and not terribly good in the other . And I see the geometrical hallucinati
 ons . But they stop there . C. A. : And they do n't disturb you ? Because you understand what 's doing it . It does n't make you worried ? O. S. : Well they do n't disturb me any more than my tinnitus . Which I ignore . They occasionally interest me . And I have many pictures of them in my notebooks . I 've gone and had an FMRI myself to see how my visual cortex is taking over . And when I see all these hexagons and complex things , which I also have , in visual migraine , I wonder whether everyone sees things like this , and whether things like cave art , or ornamental art may have been derived from them a bit . C. A. : That was an utterly utterly fascinating talk . Thank you so much for sharing . O. S. : Thank you . Thank you . ( Applause ) 
\ No newline at end of file

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/169ted_rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/169ted_rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.txt b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/169ted_rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fbd1b9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/169ted_rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+Today I 'm going to talk to you about the problem of other minds . And the problem I 'm going to talk about is not the familiar one from philosophy , which is , " How can we know whether other people have minds ? " That is , maybe you have a mind , and everyone else is just a really convincing robot . So that 's a problem in philosophy . But for today 's purposes I 'm going to assume that many people in this audience have a mind , and that I do n't have to worry about this . There is a second problem that is maybe even more familiar to us as parents and teachers and spouses , and novelists . Which is , " Why is it so hard to know what somebody else wants or believes ? " Or perhaps , more relevantly , " Why is it so hard to change what somebody else wants or believes ? " I think novelists put this best . Like Philip Roth , who said , " And yet , what are we to do about this terribly significant business of other people ? So ill equipped are we all , to envision one another 's interio
 r workings and invisible aims . " So as a teacher , and as a spouse , this is , of course , a problem I confront every day . But as a scientist , I 'm interested in a different problem of other minds , and that is the one I 'm going to introduce to you today . And that problem is , " How is it so easy to know other minds ? " So to start with an illustration , you need almost no information , one snapshot of a stranger , to guess what this woman is thinking , or what this man is . And put another way , the crux of the problem is the machine that we use for thinking about other minds , our brain , is made up of pieces , brain cells , that we share with all other animals , with monkeys , and mice , and even sea slugs . And yet , you put them together in a particular network , and what you get is the capacity to write Romeo and Juliet . Or to say , as Alan Greenspan did , " I know you think you understand what you thought I said , but I 'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not
  what I meant . " ( Laughter ) So the job of my field of cognitive neuroscience is to stand with these ideas , one in each hand . And to try to understand how you can put together simple units , simple messages over space and time , in a network , and get this amazing human capacity to think about minds . So I 'm going to tell you three things about this today . Obviously the whole project here is huge . And I 'm going to tell you just our first few steps about the discovery of a special brain region for thinking about other people 's thoughts . Some observations on the slow development of this system as we learn how to do this difficult job . And then finally , to show that some of the differences between people , in how we judge others , can be explained by differences in this brain system . So first , the first thing I want to tell you is that there is a brain region in the human brain , in your brains , whose job it is to think about other people 's thoughts . This is a picture 
 of it . It 's called the Right Temporo-Parietal Junction . It 's above and behind your right ear . And this is the brain region you used when you saw the pictures I showed you , or when you read Romeo and Juliet , or when you tried to understand Alan Greenspan . And you do n't use it for solving any other kinds of logical problems . So this brain region is called the RTPJ . And this picture shows the average activation in a group of what we call typical human adults . They 're MIT undergraduates . ( Laughter ) The second thing I want to say about this brain system is that although we human adults are really good at understanding other minds , we were n't always that way . It takes children a long time to break into the system . I 'm going to show you a little bit of that long , extended process . The first thing I 'm going to show you is a change between age three and five , as kids learn to understand that somebody else can have beliefs that are different from their own . So I 'm g
 oing to show you a five-year-old who is getting a standard kind of puzzle that we call the false belief task . Video : This is the first pirate . His name is Ivan . And you know what pirates really like ? Pirates really like cheese sandwiches . Child : Cheese ? I love cheese ! R. S. : Yeah . So Ivan has this cheese sandwich . and he says " Yum yum yum yum yum ! I really love cheese sandwiches . " And Ivan puts his sandwich over here , on top of the pirate chest . And Ivan says , " You know what ? I need a drink with my lunch . " And so Ivan goes to get a drink . And while Ivan is away the wind comes , and it blows the sandwich down onto the grass . And now , here comes the other pirate . This pirate is called Joshua . And Joshua also really loves cheese sandwiches . So Joshua has a cheese sandwich and he says , " Yum yum yum yum yum ! I love cheese sandwiches . " And he puts his cheese sandwich over here on top of the pirate chest . Child : So , that one is his . R. S. : That one is
  Joshua 's . That 's right . Child : And then his went on the ground . R. S. : That 's exactly right . Child : So he wo n't know which one is his . R. S. : Oh . So now Joshua goes off to get a drink . Ivan comes back and he says , " I want my cheese sandwich . " So which one do you think Ivan is going to take ? Child : I think he is going to take that one . R. S. : Yeah , you think he 's going to take that one ? Alright . Let 's see . Oh yeah , you were right . He took that one . So that 's a five-year-old who clearly understands that other people can have false beliefs and what the consequences are for their actions . Now I 'm going to show you a three-year-old who got the same puzzle . Video : R. S. : And Ivan says , " I want my cheese sandwich . " Which sandwich is he going to take ? Do you think he 's going to take that one ? Let 's see what happens . Let 's see what he does . Here comes Ivan . And he says , " I want my cheese sandwich . " And he takes this one . Uh-oh . Why did
  he take that one ? Child : His was on the grass . R. S. So the three-year-old does two things differently . First he predicts Ivan will take the sandwich that 's really his . And second , when he sees Ivan taking the sandwich where he left his , where we would say he 's taking that one because he thinks it 's his , the three-year-old comes up with another explanation . He 's not taking his own sandwich because he does n't want it , because now it 's dirty , on the ground . So that 's why he 's taking the other sandwich . Now of course , development does n't end at five . And we can see the continuation of this process of learning to think about other people 's thoughts by upping the ante and asking children now , not for an action prediction , but for a moral judgement . So first I 'm going to show you the three-year-old again . Video : R. S. : So is Ivan being mean and naughty for taking Joshua 's sandwich ? Child : Yeah . R. S. : Should Ivan get in trouble for taking Joshua 's sa
 ndwich ? Child : Yeah . R. S. : So it 's maybe not surprising he thinks it was mean of Ivan to take Joshua 's sandwich . Since he thinks Ivan only took Joshua 's sandwich to avoid having to eat his own dirty sandwich . But now I 'm going to show you the five-year-old . Remember the five-year-old completely understood why Ivan took Joshua 's sandwich . Video : R. S. : Was Ivan being mean and naughty for taking Joshua 's sandwich ? Child : Um , yeah . R. S. : And so , it is not until age seven that we get what looks more like an adult response . Video : R. S. : Should Ivan get in trouble for taking Joshua 's sandwich ? Child : No , because the wind should get in trouble . R. S. He says the wind should get in trouble for switching the sandwiches . ( Laughter ) And now what we 've started to do in my lab is to put children into the brain scanner and ask what 's going on in their brain as they develop this ability to think about other people 's thoughts . So the first thing is that in ch
 ildren we see this same brain region , the RTPJ , being used while children are thinking about other people . But it 's not quite like the adult brain . So where as in the adults , as I told you , this brain region is almost completely specialized . It does almost nothing else , except for thinking about other people 's thoughts . In children it 's much less so , when they are age five to eight , the age range of the children I just showed you . And actually if we even look at eight to 11-year-olds , getting into early adolescence , they still do n't have quite an adult-like brain region . And so , what we can see is that over the course of childhood and even into adolescence , both the cognitive system , our mind 's ability to think about other minds , and the brain system that supports it , are continuing , slowly , to develop . But of course , as you 're probably aware , even in adulthood , people differ from one another in how good they are at thinking of other minds , how often
  they do it , and how accurately . And so what we wanted to know was , could differences among adults , in how they think about other people 's thoughts be explained in terms of differences in this brain region . So the first thing that we did is we gave adults a version of the pirate problem that we gave to the kids . And I 'm going to give that to you now . So Grace and her friend are on a tour of a chemical factory and they take a break for coffee . And Grace 's friend asks for some sugar in her coffee . Grace goes to make the coffee and finds by the coffee a pot containing a white powder , which is sugar . But the powder is labeled " Deadly Poison " . So Grace thinks that the powder is a deadly poison . And she puts it in her friend 's coffee . And her friend drinks the coffee , and is fine . How many people think it was morally permissible for Grace to put the powder in the coffee ? Okay . Good . ( Laughter ) So we ask people how much should Grace be blamed in this case , which
  we call a failed attempt to harm . And we can compare that to another case where everything in the real world is the same . The powder is still sugar , but what 's different is what Grace thinks . Now she thinks the powder is sugar . And perhaps unsurprisingly , if Grace thinks the powder is sugar and puts it in her friend 's coffee , people say she deserves no blame at all . Whereas if she thinks the powder was poison , even though it 's really sugar , now people say she deserves a lot of blame , even though what happened in the real world was exactly the same . And in fact they say she deserves more blame in this case , the failed attempt to harm , than in another case , which we call an accident . Where Grace thought the powder was sugar , because it was labeled " sugar " and by the coffee machine , but actually the powder was poison . So even though when the powder was poison , the friend drank the coffee and died , people say Grace deserves less blame in that case , when she i
 nnocently thought it was sugar , than in the other case , where she thought it was poison , and no harm occurred . People , though , disagree a little bit about exactly how much blame Grace should get in the accident case . Some people think she should deserve more blame , and other people less . And what I 'm going to show you is what happened when we look inside the brains of people while they 're making that judgment . So what I 'm showing you , from left to right , is how much activity there was in this brain region . and from top to bottom , how much blame people said that Grace deserved . And what you can see is , on the left when there as very little activity in this brain region , people paid little attention to her innocent belief and said she deserved a lot of blame for the accident . Whereas , on the right , where there was a lot of activity , people payed a lot more attention to her innocent belief , and said she deserved a lot less blame for causing the accident . So th
 at 's good , but of course what we 'd rather is have a way to interfere with function in this brain region , and see if we could change people 's moral judgment . And we do have such a tool . It 's called Trans-Cranial Magnetic Stimulation , or TMS . This is a tool that lets us pass a magnetic pulse through somebody 's skull , into a small region of their brain , and temporarily disorganize the function of the neurons in that region . So I 'm going to show you a demo of this . First I 'm going to show you , to show you that this is a magnetic pulse , I 'm going to show you what happens when you put a quarter on the machine . When you hear clicks we 're turning the machine on . So now I 'm going to apply that same pulse to my brain , to the part of my brain that controls my hand . So there is not physical force , just a magnetic pulse . Video : Woman : Ready ? Rebecca Saxe : Yes . Okay , so it causes a small involuntary contraction in my hand by putting a magnetic pulse in my brain .
  And we can use that same pulse , now applied to the RTPJ , to ask if we can change people 's moral judgments . So these are the judgments I showed you before , people 's normal moral judgments . And then we can apply TMS to the RTPJ and ask how people 's judgments change . And the first thing is , people can still do this task overall . So their judgments of the case when everything was fine remain the same . They say she deserves no blame . But in the case of a failed attempt to harm , where Grace thought that it was poison , although it was really sugar , people now say it was more okay , she deserves less blame for putting the powder in the coffee . And in the case of the accident , where she thought that it was sugar , but it was really poison and so she caused a death , people say that it was less okay , she deserves more blame . So what I 've told you today is that people come , actually , especially well equipped to think about other people 's thoughts . We have a special br
 ain system that lets us think about what other people are thinking . This system takes a long time to develop , slowly throughout the course of childhood , and into early adolescence . And even in adulthood , differences in this brain region can explain differences among adults in how we think about and judge other people . But I want to give the last word back to the novelists . And to Philip Roth , who ended by saying , " The fact remains that getting people right is not what living is all about anyway . It 's getting them wrong that is living . Getting them wrong and wrong and wrong , and then on careful reconsideration , getting them wrong again . " Thank you . ( Applause ) Chris Anderson : When you start talking about using magnetic pulses to change people 's moral judgments , that sounds alarming . ( Laughter ) Please tell me that you 're not taking phone calls from the Pentagon , say . Rebecca Saxe : I 'm not . I mean , they 're calling , but I 'm not taking the call . ( Laug
 hter ) C. A. : They really are calling ? So , then seriously , then seriously , you must lie awake at night sometimes wondering where this work leads . I mean you 're clearly an incredible human being . But someone could take this knowledge and in some future not torture chamber , do acts that people here might be worried about . R. S. : Yeah , we worry about this . So , there is a couple of things to say about TMS . One is that you ca n't be TMSed with out knowing it . So it 's not a surreptitious technology . It 's quite hard actually to get those very small changes . The changes I showed you are impressive to me because of what they tell us about the function of the brain . But they 're small on the scale of the moral judgments that we actually make . And what we changed was not people 's moral judgments when they 're deciding what to do , when they 're making action choices . We change their ability to judge other people 's actions . And so I think of what I 'm doing not so much
  as studying the defendant in a criminal trial , but studying the jury . C. A. : Is your work going to lead to any recommendations in education , to perhaps bring up a generation of kids able to make fairer moral judgments ? R. S. : That 's one of the idealistic hopes . The whole research program here , of studying the distinctive parts of the human brain , is brand new . Until recently what we knew about the brain were the things that any other animal 's brain could do too . So we could study it in animal models . We knew how brains see , and how they control the body , and how they hear and sense . And the whole project of understanding how brains do the uniquely human things , learn language , and abstract concepts , and thinking about other people 's thoughts , that 's brand new . And we do n't know yet , what the implications will be of understanding it . C. A. : So I 've got one last question . There is this thing called the hard problem of consciousness , that puzzles a lot o
 f people . The notion that you can understand why a brain works , perhaps . But why does anyone have to feel anything ? Why does it seem to require these beings who sense things for us to operate ? You 're a brilliant young neuroscientist . I mean , what chances do you think there are that at some time in your career someone , you or someone else , is going to come up with some paradigm shift in understanding what seems an impossible problem . R. S. : I hope they do . And I think they probably wo n't . C. A. : Why ? R. S. : It 's not called the hard problem of consciousness for nothing . ( Laughter ) C. A. : That 's a great answer . Rebecca Saxe , thank you very much . That was fantastic . ( Applause ) 
\ No newline at end of file