http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/opennlp-sandbox/blob/1f97041b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/140ted_a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/140ted_a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.txt
 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/140ted_a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1dd1e0f
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/140ted_a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+I thought I 'd tell you a little about what I like to write . And I like to 
immerse myself in my topics . I just like to dive right in and become sort of a 
human guinea pig . And I see my life as a series of experiments . So , I work 
for Esquire magazine , and a couple of years ago I wrote an article called " My 
Outsourced Life , " where I hired a team of people in Bangalore , India , to 
live my life for me . So they answered my emails . They answered my phone . 
They argued with my wife for me , and they read my son bedtime stories . It was 
the best month of my life , because I just sat back and I read books and 
watched movies . It was a wonderful experience . More recently , I wrote an 
article for Esquire called -- about radical honesty . And this is a movement -- 
this is started by a psychologist in Virginia , who says that you should never 
, ever lie , except maybe during poker and golf , his only exceptions . And , 
more than that , whatever is on your brain should come out of yo
 ur mouth . I decided I would try this for a month . This was the worst month 
of my life . ( Laughter ) I do not recommend this at all . To give you a sense 
of the experience , the article was called , " I Think You 're Fat . " ( 
Laughter ) So , that was hard . My most recent book -- my previous book was 
called " The Know-it-All , " and it was about the year I spent reading the 
Encyclopedia Britannica from A to Z in my quest to learn everything in the 
world , or more precisely from A-ak , which is a type of East Asian music , all 
the way to Zwyiec , which is -- well , I do n't want to ruin the ending . ( 
Laughter ) It 's a very exciting twist ending , like an O. Henry novel , so I 
wo n't ruin it . But I love that one because that was an experiment about how 
much information one human brain could absorb , although , listening to Kevin 
Kelly , you do n't have to remember anything . You can just Google it . So I 
wasted some time there . I love those experiments , but I think that the mo
 st profound and life-changing experiment that I 've done is my most recent 
experiment , where I spent a year trying to follow all of the rules of the 
Bible -- " The Year of Living Biblically . " And I undertook this for two 
reasons . The first was that I grew up with no religion at all . As I say in my 
book , I 'm Jewish in the same way the Olive Garden is Italian . ( Laughter ) 
So , not very . But I 've become increasingly interested in religion . I do 
think it 's the defining issue of our time , or one of the main ones . And I 
have a son . I want to know what to teach him . So , I decided to dive in head 
first , and try to live the Bible . The second reason I undertook this is 
because I 'm concerned about the rise of fundamentalism , religious 
fundamentalism , and people who say they take the Bible literally , which is , 
according to some polls , as high as 45 or 50 percent of America . So I decided 
, what if you really did take the Bible literally ? I decided to take it to its 
lo
 gical conclusion and take everything in the Bible literally , without picking 
and choosing . The first thing I did was I got a stack of bibles . I had 
Christian bibles . I had Jewish bibles . A friend of mine sent me something 
called a hip-hop bible , where the 23rd Psalm is rendered as , " The Lord is 
all that , " as opposed to what I knew it as , " The Lord is my shepherd . " 
Then I went down and I read several versions , and I wrote down every single 
law that I could find . And this was a very long list -- over 700 rules . And 
they range from the famous ones that I had heard of -- The Ten Commandments , 
love your neighbor , be fruitful and multiply . So I wanted to follow those . 
And actually I take my projects very seriously because I had twins during my 
year , so I definitely take my projects seriously . But I also wanted to follow 
the hundreds of arcane and obscure laws that are in the Bible . There is the 
law in Leviticus -- " You cannot shave the corners of your beard . " I 
 did n't know where my corners were , so I decided to let the whole thing grow 
, and this is what I looked like by the end . As you can imagine , I spent a 
lot of time at airport security . ( Laughter ) My wife would n't kiss me for 
the last two months . So , certainly the challenge was there . The Bible says 
you cannot wear clothes made of mixed fibers , so I thought , " Sounds strange 
, but I 'll try it . " You only know if you try it . I got rid of all my 
poly-cotton t-shirts . The Bible says that if two men are in a fight , and the 
wife of one of those men grabs the testicles of the other man , then her hand 
shall be cut off . So , I wanted to follow that rule . ( Laughter ) That one I 
followed by default , by not getting in a fight with a man whose wife was 
standing nearby , looking like she had a strong grip . ( Laughter ) So -- oh , 
there 's another shot of my beard . I will say it was an amazing year because 
it really was life-changing , and incredibly challenging . And there
  were two types of laws that were particularly challenging . The first was 
avoiding the little sins that we all commit every day . You know , I could 
spend a year not killing , but spending a year not gossiping , not coveting , 
not lying -- you know , I live in New York , and I work as a journalist , so 
this was 75 , 80 percent of my day I had to do it . But it was really 
interesting , because I was able to make some progress because I could n't 
believe how much my behavior changed my thoughts . This was one of the huge 
lessons of the year , is that I almost pretended to be a better person , and I 
became a little bit of a better person . So I had always thought , you know , " 
You change your mind , and you change your behavior , " but it 's often the 
other way round . You change your behavior , and you change your mind . So , 
you know , if you want to become more compassionate , you visit sick people in 
the hospital , and you will become more compassionate . You donate money to a ca
 use , and you become emotionally involved in that cause . So , it really was 
cognitive psychology -- you know , cognitive dissonance -- that I was 
experiencing . The Bible actually talks about cognitive psychology , very 
primitive cognitive psychology . In the Proverbs , it says that if you smile , 
you will become happier , which , as we know , is actually true . The second 
type of rule that was difficult to obey was the rules that will get you into a 
little trouble in 21st-century America . And perhaps the clearest example of 
this is stoning adulterers . ( Laughter ) But it 's a big part of the Bible , 
so I figured I had to address it . So , I was able to stone one adulterer . It 
happened -- I was in the park , and I was dressed in my biblical clothing -- 
sandals and a white robe -- you know , because again , the outer affects the 
inner . I wanted to see how dressing biblically affected my mind . And this man 
came up to me and he said , " Why are you dressed like that ? " And I exp
 lained my project , and he said , " Well , I am an adulterer , are you going 
to stone me ? " And I said , " Well , that would be great ! " ( Laughter ) And 
I took out a handful of stones from my pocket that I had been carrying around 
for weeks , hoping for just this interaction -- and , you know , they were 
pebbles -- but he grabbed them out of my hand . He was actually an elderly man 
, mid-seventies , just so you know . But he 's still an adulterer , and still 
quite angry . He grabbed them out of my hand and threw them at my face , and I 
felt that I could -- eye for an eye , I could retaliate , and throw one back at 
him . So that was my experience stoning , and it did allow me to talk about in 
a more serious way these big issues . How can the Bible be so barbaric in some 
places , and yet so incredibly wise in others ? How should we view the Bible ? 
Should we view it , you know , as original intent , like a sort of a Scalia 
version of the Bible ? How was the Bible written ? And actu
 ally , since this is a tech crowd , I talk in the book about how the Bible 
actually reminds me of Wikipedia because it has all of these authors and 
editors over hundreds of years . And it 's sort of evolved . It 's not a book 
that was written and came down from on high . So I thought I would end by 
telling you just a couple of the take-away , the bigger lessons that I learned 
from my year . The first is -- Thou shalt not take the Bible literally . This 
became very , very clear , early on . Because if you do , then you end up 
acting like a crazy person , and stoning adulterers , or -- here 's another 
example -- well , that 's another -- I did spend some time shepherding . ( 
Laughter ) It 's a very relaxing vocation . I recommend it . But this one is , 
the Bible says that you cannot touch women during certain times of the month , 
and more than that , you cannot sit on a seat where a menstruating woman has 
sat . And my wife thought this was very offensive , so she sat in every seat in 
 our apartment , and I had to spend much of the year standing until I bought my 
own seat and carried it around . So , you know , I met with creationists . I 
went to the creationists ' museum . And these are the ultimate literalists . 
And it was fascinating , because they were not stupid people at all . I would 
wager that their IQ is exactly the same as the average evolutionist . It 's 
just that their faith is so strong in this literal interpretation of the Bible 
that they distort all the data to fit their model . And they go through these 
amazing mental gymnastics to accomplish this . And I will say , though , the 
museum is gorgeous . They really did a fantastic job . If you 're ever in 
Kentucky , there 's -- you can see a movie of the flood , and they have 
sprinklers in the ceiling that will sprinkle on you during the flood scenes . 
So , whatever you think of creationism , and I think it 's crazy , they did a 
great job . ( Laughter ) Another lesson is that thou shalt give thanks . A
 nd this one was a big lesson because I was praying , giving these prayers of 
thanksgiving , which was odd for an agnostic . But I was saying thanks all the 
time , every day , and I started to change my perspective , and I started to 
realize the hundreds of little things that go right every day , that I did n't 
even notice , that I took for granted -- as opposed to focusing on the three or 
four that went wrong . So , this is actually a key to happiness for me , is to 
just remember when I came over here , the car did n't flip over , and I did n't 
trip coming up the stairs . It 's a remarkable thing . Third , that thou shall 
have reverence . This one was unexpected because I started the year as an 
agnostic , and by the end of the year I became what a friend of mine calls a 
reverent agnostic , which I love . And I 'm trying to start it as a movement . 
So if anyone wants to join , the basic idea is , whether or not there is a God 
, there 's something important and beautiful about the ide
 a of sacredness , and that our rituals can be sacred . The Sabbath can be 
sacred . This was one of the great things about my year , doing the Sabbath , 
because I am a workaholic , so having this one day where you cannot work -- it 
really , that changed my life . So , this idea of sacredness , whether or not 
there is a God . Thou shall not stereotype . This one happened because I spend 
a lot of time with various religious communities throughout America because I 
wanted it to be more than about my journey . I wanted it to be about religion 
in America . So I spent time with evangelical Christians , and Hasidic Jews and 
the Amish . I 'm very proud because I think I 'm the only person in America to 
out Bible-talk a Jehovah 's Witness . ( Laughter ) After three and a half hours 
, he looked at his watch , he 's like , " I gotta go . " ( Laughter ) Oh , 
thank you very much . Thank you . Bless you , bless you . But it was 
interesting because I had some very preconceived notions about , for i
 nstance , evangelical Christianity , and I found that it 's such a wide and 
varied movement that it is difficult to make generalizations about it . There 
's a group I met with called the Red Letter Christians , and they focus on the 
red words in the Bible , which are the ones that Jesus spoke -- that 's how 
they printed them in the old bibles . And their argument is that Jesus never 
talked about homosexuality . They have a pamphlet that says , " Here 's what 
Jesus said about homosexuality , " and you open it up , and there 's nothing in 
it . So , they say Jesus did talk a lot about helping the outcasts , helping 
poor people . So this was very inspiring to me . I recommend Jim Wallace and 
Tony Campolo . They 're very inspiring leaders , even though I disagree with 
much of what they say . Also , thou shalt not disregard the irrational . This 
one was very unexpected because , you know , I grew up with the scientific 
worldview , and I was shocked learning how much of my life is governed
  by irrational forces . And the thing is , if they 're not harmful , they 're 
not to be completely dismissed . Because I learned that -- I was thinking , I 
was doing all these rituals , these biblical rituals , separating my wool and 
linen , and I would ask these religious people " Why would The Bible possibly 
tell us to do this ? Why would God care ? " And they said , " We do n't know , 
but it 's just rituals that give us meaning . " And I would say , " But that 's 
crazy . " And they would say , " Well , what about you ? You blow out candles 
on top of a birthday cake . If a guy from Mars came down and saw , here 's one 
guy blowing out the fire on top of a cake versus another guy not wearing 
clothes of mixed fabrics , would the Martians say , 'Well , that guy , he makes 
sense , but that guy 's crazy ? ' " So no , I think that rituals are , by 
nature , irrational . So the key is to choose the right rituals , the ones that 
are not harmful -- but rituals by themselves are not to be dis
 missed . And finally I learned that thou shall pick and choose . And this one 
I learned because I tried to follow everything in the Bible . And I failed 
miserably . Because you ca n't . You have to pick and choose , and anyone who 
follows the Bible is going to be picking and choosing . The key is to pick and 
choose the right parts . There 's the phrase called cafeteria religion , and 
the fundamentalists will use it in a denigrating way , and they 'll say , " Oh 
, it 's just cafeteria religion . You 're just picking and choosing . " But my 
argument is , " What 's wrong with cafeterias ? " I 've had some great meals at 
cafeterias . I 've also had some meals that make me want to dry heave . So , it 
's about choosing the parts of the Bible about compassion , about tolerance , 
about loving your neighbor , as opposed to the parts about homosexuality is a 
sin , or intolerance , or violence , which are very much in the Bible as well . 
So if we are to find any meaning in this book , then we 
 have to really engage it , and wrestle with it . And I thought I 'd end with 
just a couple more . There 's me reading the Bible . That 's how I hailed 
taxi-cabs . ( Laughter ) Seriously , and it worked -- and yes , that was 
actually a rented sheep , so I had to return that in the morning , but it 
served well for a day . So , anyway , thank you so much for letting me speak . 
\ 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/141ted_alan_kay_shares_a_powerful_idea_about_ideas.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/141ted_alan_kay_shares_a_powerful_idea_about_ideas.txt
 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/141ted_alan_kay_shares_a_powerful_idea_about_ideas.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bcc4f34
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/141ted_alan_kay_shares_a_powerful_idea_about_ideas.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+A great way to start , I think , with my view of simplicity , is to take a 
look at TED . Here you are , understanding why we 're here , what 's going on , 
with no difficulty at all . The best AI in the planet would find it complex and 
confusing , and my little dog Watson would find it simple and understandable , 
but would miss the point . ( Laughter ) He would have a great time . And of 
course , if you 're a speaker here , like Hans Rosling , a speaker finds this 
complex , tricky . But in Hans Rosling 's case , he had a secret weapon 
yesterday , literally , in his sword swallowing act . And I must say I thought 
of quite a few objects that I might try to swallow today and finally gave up on 
-- but he just did it and that was a wonderful thing . So Puck meant not only 
are we fools in the pejorative sense , but that we 're easily fooled . In fact 
what Shakespeare was pointing out is we go to the theater in order to be fooled 
, so we 're actually looking forward to it . We go to magic s
 hows in order to be fooled . And this makes many things fun , but it makes it 
difficult to actually get any kind of picture on the world we live in , or on 
ourselves . And our friend , Betty Edwards , the Drawing On the Right Side of 
the Brain lady , shows these two tables to her drawing class and says , the 
problem you have with learning to draw is not that you ca n't move your hand , 
but that the way your brain perceives images is faulty . It 's trying to 
perceive images into objects rather than seeing what 's there . And to prove it 
, she says , the exact size and shape of these tabletops is the same , and I 'm 
going to prove it to you . She does this with cardboard , but since I have an 
expensive computer here , I 'll just rotate this little guy around and ... . 
Now having seen that -- and I 've seen it hundreds of times , because I use 
this in every talk I give -- I still ca n't see that they 're the same size and 
shape , and I doubt that you can either . So what do artists do 
 ? Well , what artists do is to measure . They measure very , very carefully . 
And if you measure very , very carefully with a stiff arm and a straight edge , 
you 'll see that those two shapes are exactly the same size . And the Talmud 
saw this a long time ago , saying , we see things not as they are , but as we 
are . I certainly would like to know what happened to the person who had that 
insight back then , if they actually followed it to its ultimate conclusion . 
So if the world is not as it seems and we see things as we are , then what we 
call reality is a kind of hallucination happening inside here . It 's a waking 
dream . And understanding that that is what we actually exist in is one of the 
biggest epistemological barriers in human history . And what that means : " 
simple and understandable " might not be actually simple or understandable , 
and things we think are complex might be made simple and understandable . 
Somehow we have to understand ourselves to get around our flaws .
  We can think of ourselves as kind of a noisy channel . The way I think of it 
is , we ca n't learn to see until we admit we 're blind . Once you start down 
at this very humble level , then you can start finding ways to see things . And 
what 's happened over the last four hundred years in particular is that human 
beings have invented brainlets : little additional parts for our brain , made 
out of powerful ideas that help us see the world in different ways . And these 
are in the form of sensory apparatus -- telescopes , microscopes -- reasoning 
apparatus , various ways of thinking , and most importantly , in the ability to 
change perspective on things . I 'll talk about that a little bit . It 's this 
change in perspective , and what it is we think we 're perceiving , that has 
helped us make more progress in the last four hundred years than we have in the 
rest of human history . And yet it is not taught in any K through 12 curriculum 
in America that I 'm aware of . So one of the things
  that goes from simple to complex is when we do more . We like more . If we do 
more in a kind of a stupid way , the simplicity gets complex . And in fact , we 
can keep on doing it for a very long time . But Murray Gell-Mann yesterday 
talked about emergent properties . Another name for them could be " 
architecture " as a metaphor for taking the same old material and thinking 
about non-obvious , non-simple ways of combining it . And in fact , what Murray 
was talking about yesterday in the fractal beauty of nature , of having the 
descriptions at various levels be rather similar , all goes down to the idea 
that the elementary particles are both sticky and stand-offish , and they 're 
in violent motion . Those three things give rise to all the different levels of 
what seem to be complexity in our world . But how simple ? So when I saw the 
Roslings ' Gapminder stuff a few years ago , I just thought it was the greatest 
thing I 'd seen in conveying complex ideas simply . But then I had a tho
 ught of , boy , maybe it 's too simple . And I put some effort in to try and 
check to see how well these simple portrayals of trends over time actually 
matched up with some ideas and investigations from the side , and I found that 
they matched up very well . So the Roslings have been able to do simplicity 
without removing what 's important about the data . Whereas the film yesterday 
that we saw of the simulation of the inside of a cell , as a former molecular 
biologist , I did n't like that at all . Not because it was n't beautiful or 
anything , but because it misses the thing that most students fail to 
understand about molecular biology , and that is , why is there any probability 
at all of two complex shapes finding each other just the right way so they 
combine together and be catalyzed ? And what we saw yesterday was , every 
reaction was fortuitous . They just swooped in the air and bound , and 
something happened . But in fact those molecules are spinning at the rate of 
about a m
 illion revolutions per second . They 're agitating back and forth their size 
every two nanoseconds . They 're completely crowded together . They 're jammed 
, they 're bashing up against each other . And if you do n't understand that in 
your mental model of this stuff , what happens inside of a cell seems 
completely mysterious and fortuitous . And I think that 's exactly the wrong 
image for when you 're trying to teach science . So another thing that we do is 
to confuse adult sophistication with the actual understanding of some principle 
. So a kid who 's 14 in high school gets this version of the Pythagorean 
theorem , which is a truly subtle and interesting proof , but in fact it 's not 
a good way to start learning about mathematics . So a more direct one , one 
that gives you more of the feeling of math , is something closer to Pythagoras 
' own proof which goes like this . So here we have this triangle , and if we 
surround that C square with three more triangles and we copy that , n
 otice that we can move those triangles down like this , and that leaves two 
open areas that are kind of suspicious , and bingo . And that is all you have 
to do . And this kind of proof is the kind of proof that you need to learn when 
you 're learning mathematics in order to get an idea of what it means before 
you look into the , literally , 12 or 1500 proofs of Pythagoras ' theorem that 
had been discovered . Now let 's go to young children . This is a very unusual 
teacher who was a kindergarten and first-grade teacher , but was a natural 
mathematician . So she was like that jazz musician friend you have who never 
studied music , but is a terrific musician . She just had a feeling for math , 
and here are her six-year-olds , and she 's got them making shapes out of a 
shape . So they pick a shape they like -- a diamond , or a square , or a 
triangle , or a trapezoid -- and then they try and make the next larger shape 
of that same shape , and the next larger shape . And you can see the t
 rapezoids are a little challenging there . And [ what ] this teacher did on 
every project was to have the children act like first it was a creative arts 
project and then something like science . So they 'd created these artifacts . 
Now she had them look at them and do this laborious -- which I thought for a 
long time , until she explained to me , was to slow them down so they 'll think 
. So they 're cutting out the little pieces of cardboard here , and pasting 
them up . But the whole point of this thing is for them to look at this chart 
and fill it out . What have you noticed about what you did ? And so 
six-year-old Lauren there noticed that the first one took one , and the second 
one took three more , and the total was four on that one . The third one took 
five more , and the total was nine on that one , and then the next one . So she 
saw right away that the additional tiles that you had to add around the edges 
was always going to grow by two . So she was very confident about how s
 he made those numbers there . And she could see that these were the square 
numbers up until about six . Where she was n't sure what six times six was , 
and what seven times seven was . But then she was confident again . So that 's 
what Lauren did . And then the teacher , Gillian Ishijima , had the kids bring 
all of their projects up to the front of the room and put them on the floor . 
And everybody went batshit . Holy shit ! They 're the same ! No matter what the 
shapes were , the growth law is the same . And the mathematicians and 
scientists in the crowd will recognize these two progressions as a first order 
discrete differential equation , and a second order discrete differential 
equation . Derived by six-year-olds . Well , that 's pretty amazing . That is 
n't what we usually try to teach six-year-olds . So let 's take a look now at 
how we might use the computer for some of this . And so the first idea here is 
just to show you the kind of things that children do . I 'm using the s
 oftware that we 're putting on the 100 dollar laptop . So I 'd like to draw a 
little car here . I 'll just do this very quickly . And put a big tire on him . 
And I get a little object here , and I can look inside this object . I 'll call 
it a car . And here 's a little behavior : car forward . Each time I click it , 
car turn . If I want to make a little script to do this over and over again , I 
just drag these guys out and set them going . And I can try steering the car 
here by -- see the car turn by five here ? So what if I click this down to zero 
? It goes straight . That 's a bit of a revelation for nine-year-olds . Make it 
go in the other direction . But of course that 's a little bit like kissing 
your sister as far as driving a car . So the kids want to do a steering wheel . 
So they draw a steering wheel . And we 'll call this a wheel . And , see this 
wheel 's heading here ? If I turn this wheel , you can see that number over 
there going minus and positive . That 's kind of an 
 invitation to pick up this name of those numbers coming out there and to just 
drop it into the script here . And now I can steer the car with the steering 
wheel . And it 's interesting . You know how much trouble the children have 
with variables , but by learning it this way , in a situated fashion , they 
never forget from this single trial what a variable is and how to use it . And 
we can reflect here the way Gillian Ishijima did . So if you look at the little 
script here , the speed is always going to be 30. We 're going to move the car 
, according to that , over and over again . And I 'm dropping a little dot for 
each one of these things . They 're evenly spaced because they 're 30 apart . 
And what if I do this progression that the six-year-olds did of saying , OK , I 
'm going to increase the speed by two each time , and then I 'm going to 
increase the distance by the speed each time ? What do I get there ? We get a 
visual pattern of what these nine-year-olds called acceleration 
 . So how did the children do science ? ( Video ) Teacher : Objects that you 
think will fall to the earth at the same time -- Kid : This is nice . Teacher : 
Do not pay any attention to what anybody else is doing . Who 's got the apple ? 
Alan Kay : They 've got little stopwatches . Teacher : What do you get ? What 
did you get ? AK : Stopwatches are n't accurate enough . Girl : 0.99 seconds . 
Teacher : So put " sponge ball " -- Girl : There was a shot-put and a sponge 
ball , because they 're two totally different weights . And if you drop them at 
the same time , maybe they 'll drop at the same speed . Teacher : Drop . AK : 
So obviously Aristotle never asked a child about this particular point , 
because of course he did n't bother doing the experiment , and neither did St. 
Thomas Aquinas . And it was not until Galileo actually did it that an adult 
thought like a child . Only 400 years ago . We get one child like that about 
every classroom of 30 kids who will actually cut straight to the
  chase . Now , what if we want to look at this more closely ? We can take a 
movie of what 's going on , but even if we single stepped this movie , it 's 
tricky to see what 's going on . And so what we can do is , we can lay out the 
frames side by side , or stack them up . So when the children see this , they 
say , " Ah , acceleration , " remembering back four months when they did their 
cars sideways , and they start measuring to find out what kind of acceleration 
it is . And so what I 'm doing is measuring from the bottom of one image to the 
bottom of the next image , about a fifth of a second later , like that , and 
they 're getting faster and faster each time . And if I stack these guys up , 
then we see the differences , the increase in the speed is constant . And they 
say , oh , yeah , constant acceleration . We 've done that already . And how 
shall we look and verify that we actually have it ? So we ca n't tell much from 
just making the ball drop there , but if we drop the ball 
 and run the movie at the same time , we can see that we have come up with an 
accurate physical model . Galileo , by the way , did this very cleverly by 
running a ball down backwards down the strings of his lute . I pulled out those 
apples to remind myself to tell you that this is actually probably a Newton and 
the apple-type story , but it 's a great story . And I thought I would do just 
one thing on the 100 dollar laptop here just to prove that this stuff works 
here . So once you have gravity , here 's this -- increase the speed by 
something , increase the ship 's speed . If I start the little game here that 
the kids have done , it 'll crash the space ship . But if I oppose gravity , 
here we go -- oops ! ( Laughter ) One more . Yeah , there we go . Yeah , OK ? I 
guess the best way to end this is with two quotes . Marshall McLuhan said , " 
Children are the messages that we send to the future . " But in fact , if you 
think of it , children are the future we send to the future . Forge
 t about messages . Children are the future . And children in the first and 
second world , and most especially in the third world , need mentors . And this 
summer we 're going to build 5 million of these 100 dollar laptops and maybe 50 
million next year . But we could n't create a thousand new teachers this summer 
to save our life . And that means that we once again have a thing where we can 
put technology out , but the mentoring that is required to go from a simple new 
iChat instant messaging system to something with depth is missing . I believe 
this has to be done with a new kind of user interface . And this new kind of 
user interface could be done with an expenditure of about 100 million dollars . 
It sounds like a lot , but it is literally 18 minutes of what we 're spending 
in Iraq . We 're spending 8 billion dollars a month . 18 minutes is 100 million 
dollars . So this is actually cheap . And Einstein said , " Things should be as 
simple as possible , but not simpler . " Thank you
  . 
\ 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/142ted_alex_tabarrok_foresees_economic_growth.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/142ted_alex_tabarrok_foresees_economic_growth.txt
 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/142ted_alex_tabarrok_foresees_economic_growth.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0b1394e
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/142ted_alex_tabarrok_foresees_economic_growth.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+The first half of the twentieth century was an absolute disaster in human 
affairs , a cataclysm . We had the First World War , the Great Depression , the 
Second World War , and the rise of the communist nations . And each one of 
these forces split the world , tore the world apart , divided the world . And 
they threw up walls , political walls , trade walls , transportation walls , 
communication walls , iron curtains , which divided peoples and nations . It 
was only in the second half of the twentieth century that we slowly began to 
pull ourselves out of this abyss . Trade walls began to come tumbling down . 
Here are some data on tariffs : starting at 40 percent , coming down to less 
than 5 percent . We globalized the world . And what does that mean ? It means 
that we extended cooperation across national boundaries . We made the world 
more cooperative . Transportation walls came tumbling down . You know in 1950 
the typical ship carried 5,000 to 10,000 tons worth of goods . Today a co
 ntainer ship can carry 150,000 tons . It can be manned with a smaller crew , 
and unloaded faster than ever before . Communication walls , I do n't have to 
tell you , the internet , have come tumbling down . And of course the iron 
curtains , political walls have come tumbling down . Now all of this has been 
tremendous for the world . Trade has increased . Here is just a little bit of 
data . In 1990 exports from China to the United States -- 15 billion dollars . 
By 2007 , over 300 billion dollars . And perhaps most remarkably , at the 
beginning of the twenty-first century , really for the first time in modern 
history , growth extended to almost all parts of the world . So China , I 've 
already mentioned , beginning in 1978 , around the time of the death of Mao , 
growth -- ten percent a year . Year after year after year , absolutely 
incredible . Never before in human history have so many people been raised out 
of such great poverty , as happened in China . China is the world 's greates
 t anti-poverty program over the last three decades . India , starting a little 
bit later , but in 1990 , begetting tremendous growth . Incomes at that time 
less than 1,000 dollars per year . And over the next 18 years have almost 
tripled . Growth of six percent a year . Absolutely incredible . Now Africa , 
Sub-Saharan Africa , Sub-Saharan Africa has been the area of the world most 
resistant to growth . And we can see the tragedy of Africa in the first few 
bars here . Growth was negative . People were actually getting poorer than 
their parents . And sometimes even poorer than their grandparents had been . 
But at the end of the twentieth century , the beginning of the twenty-first 
century , we saw growth in Africa . And I think , as you 'll see , there 's 
reasons for optimism . Because I believe that the best is yet to come . Now why 
. On the cutting edge today it 's new ideas which are driving growth . And by 
that I mean it 's products for which the research and development costs are
  really high , and the manufacturing costs are low . More than ever before it 
is these types of ideas which are driving growth on the cutting edge . Now 
ideas have this amazing property . Thomas Jefferson , I think , really 
expressed this quite well . He said , " He who receives an idea from me 
receives instruction himself , without lessening mine . As he who lights his 
candle at mine receives light without darkening me . Or to put it slightly 
differently , one apple feeds one man , but an idea can feed the world . Now 
this is not new . This is practically not new to TEDsters . This is practically 
the model of TED . What is new is that the greater function of ideas is going 
to drive growth even more than ever before . This provides a reason why trade 
and globalization are even more important , more powerful than ever before , 
and are going to increase growth more than ever before . And to explain why 
this is so , I have a question . Suppose that there are two diseases . One of 
them 
 is rare , the other one is common . But if they are not treated they are 
equally severe . If you had to choose , which would you rather have ? The 
common disease or the rare disease ? Common . The common . I think that 's 
absolutely right . Why ? Because there are more drugs to treat common diseases 
than there are to treat rare diseases . The reason for this is incentives . It 
costs about the same to produce a new drug , whether that drug treats 1,000 
people , 100,000 people , or a million people . But the revenues are much 
greater if the drug treats a million people . So the incentives are much larger 
to produce drugs which treat more people . To put this differently , larger 
markets save lives . In this case misery truly does love company . Now think 
about the following : if China and India were as rich as the United States is 
today , the market for cancer drugs would be eight times larger than it is now 
. Now we are not there yet , but it is happening . As other countries become 
 richer the demand for these pharmaceuticals is going to increase tremendously 
. And that means an increase incentive to do research and development , which 
benefits everyone in the world . Larger markets increase the incentive to 
produce all kinds of ideas . Whether it 's software , whether it 's a computer 
chip , whether it 's a new design . For the Hollywood people in the audience , 
it even explains why action movies have larger budgets than comedies . It 's 
because action movies translate easier into other languages and other cultures 
. So the market for those movies is larger . People are willing to invest more 
, and the budgets are larger . Alright . Well if larger markets increase the 
incentive to produce new ideas , how do we maximize that incentive ? It 's by 
having one world market , by globalizing the world . The way I like to put this 
is , one idea , ideas are meant to be shared , so one idea can serve one world 
, one market . One idea , one world , one market . Well how 
 else can we create new ideas ? That 's one reason . Globalize , trade . How 
else can we create new ideas ? Well , more idea creators . Now idea creators , 
they come from all walks of life . Artists and innovators , many of the people 
you 've seen on this stage . I 'm going to focus on scientists and engineers 
because I have some data on that , and I 'm a data person . Now , today , less 
than 1/10th of one percent of the world 's population are scientists and 
engineers . ( Laughter ) The United States has been an idea leader . A large 
fraction of those people are in the United States . But the U. S. is losing its 
idea leadership . And for that I am very grateful . That is a good thing . It 
is fortunate that we are becoming less of an idea leader because for too long 
the United States , and a handful of other developed countries , have 
shouldered the entire burden of research and development . But consider the 
following : if the world as a whole were as wealthy as the United States is
  now there would be more than five times as many scientists and engineers 
contributing to ideas which benefit everyone , which are shared by everyone . I 
think of the great Indian mathematician , Ramanujan . How many Ramanujans are 
there in India today toiling in the fields , barely able to feed themselves , 
when they could be feeding the world ? Now we 're not there yet . But it is 
going to happen in this century . The real tragedy of the last century is this 
: if you think about the world 's population as a giant computer , a massively 
parallel processor , then the great tragedy has been that billions of our 
processors have been off line . But in this century China is coming on line . 
India is coming on line . Africa is coming on line . We will see an Einstein in 
Africa in this century . Here is just some data . This is China . 1996 , less 
than one million new university students in China , per year . 2006 , over five 
million . Now think what this means . This means we all benefit
  when another country gets rich . We should not fear other countries becoming 
wealthy . That is something that we should embrace -- a wealthy China , a 
wealthy India , a wealthy Africa . We need a greater demand for ideas , those 
larger markets I was talking about earlier , and a greater supply of ideas for 
the world . Now you can see some of the reasons why I 'm optimistic . 
Globalization is increasing the demand for ideas , the incentive to create new 
ideas . Investments in education are increasing the supply of new ideas . In 
fact if you look at world history you can see some reasons for optimism . From 
about the beginnings of humanity to 1500 , zero economic growth , nothing . 
1500 to 1800 , maybe a little bit of economic growth . But less in a century 
than you expect to see in a year today . 1900s maybe one percent . Twentieth 
century a little bit over two percent . Twenty-first century could easily be 
3.3 even higher percent . Even at that rate by 2100 , average GDP per capita
  in the world will be 200,000 dollars . That 's not U. S. GDP per capita , 
which will be over a million . But world GDP per capita , 200,000 dollars . 
That 's not that far . We wo n't make it . But some of our grandchildren 
probably will . And I should say I think this is a rather modest prediction . 
In Kurzweilian terms this is gloomy . In Kurzweilian terms I 'm like the Eeyore 
of economic growth . ( Laughter ) Alright what about problems ? What about a 
great depression ? Well let 's take a look . Let 's take a look at the Great 
Depression . Here is GDP per capita from 1900 to 1929. Now let 's imagine that 
you were an economist in 1929 , trying to forecast future growth for the United 
States , not knowing that the economy was about to go off a cliff . Not knowing 
that we were about to enter the greatest economic disaster certainly in the 
twentieth century . What would you have predicted not knowing this ? If you had 
based your prediction , your forecast on 1900 to 1929 you 'd have 
 predicted something like this . If you 'd been a little more optimistic , say 
based upon the roaring 20s , you 'd have said this . So what actually happened 
? We went off a cliff but we recovered . In fact in the second half of the 
twentieth century growth was even higher than anything you would have predicted 
based upon the first half of the twentieth century . So growth can wash away 
even what appears to be a great depression . Alright . What else ? Oil . Oil . 
This was a big topic . When I was writing up my notes oil was 140 dollars per 
barrel . So people were asking a question . The were saying , " Is China 
drinking our milkshake ? " ( Laughter ) And there is some truth to this in the 
sense that we have something of a finite resource . And increased growth is 
going to push up demand for that . But I think I do n't have to tell this 
audience that a higher price of oil is not necessarily a bad thing . Moreover , 
as everyone knows , look it 's energy , not oil , which counts . And 
 higher oil prices mean a greater incentive to invest in energy R&D . You can 
see this in the data . As oil prices go up , energy patents go up . The world 
is much better equipped to overcome an increase in the price of oil today , 
than ever in the past , because of what I 'm talking about . One idea , one 
world , one market . So I 'm optimistic so long as we hew to these two ideas : 
to keep globalizing world markets , keep extending cooperation across national 
boundaries , and keep investing in education . Now the United States has a 
particularly important role to play in this -- to keep our education system 
globalized , to keep our education system open to students from all over the 
world -- because our education system is the candle that other students come to 
to light their own candles . Now remember here what Jefferson said . Jefferson 
said , " When they come and light their candles at ours , that they gain light 
, and we are not darkened . " But Jefferson was n't quite right , 
 was he ? Because the truth is , when they light their candles at ours , there 
is twice as much light available for everyone . So my view is be optimistic . 
Spread the ideas . Spread the light . 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/143ted_amy_tan_on_creativity.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/143ted_amy_tan_on_creativity.txt
 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/143ted_amy_tan_on_creativity.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3f45de2
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/143ted_amy_tan_on_creativity.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+The value of nothing : out of nothing comes something . That was an essay I 
wrote when I was 11 years old and I got a B+ . ( Laughter ) What I 'm going to 
talk about : nothing out of something , and how we create . And I 'm gonna try 
and do that within the 18-minute time span that we were told to stay within , 
and to follow the TED commandments : that is , actually , something that 
creates a near-death experience , but near-death is good for creativity . ( 
Laughter ) OK . So , I also want to explain , because Dave Eggers said he was 
going to heckle me if I said anything that was a lie , or not true to universal 
creativity . And I 've done it this way for half the audience , who is 
scientific . When I say we , I do n't mean you , necessarily ; I mean me , and 
my right brain , my left brain , and the one that 's in between that is the 
censor and tells me what I 'm saying is wrong . And I 'm going do that also by 
looking at what I think is part of my creative process , which includes a
  number of things that happened , actually -- the nothing started even earlier 
than the moment in which I 'm creating something new . And that includes nature 
, and nurture , and what I refer to as nightmares . Now in the nature area , we 
look at whether or not we are innately equipped with something , perhaps in our 
brains , some abnormal chromosome that causes this muse-like effect . And some 
people would say that we 're born with it in some other means , and others , 
like my mother , would say that I get my material from past lives . Some people 
would also say that creativity may be a function of some other neurological 
quirk -- van Gogh syndrome -- that you have a little bit of , you know , 
psychosis , or depression . I do have to say , somebody -- I read recently that 
van Gogh was n't really necessarily psychotic , that he might have had temporal 
lobe seizures , and that might have caused his spurt of creativity , and I do 
n't -- I suppose it does something in some part of your
  brain . And I will mention that I actually developed temporal lobe seizures a 
number of years ago , but it was during the time I was writing my last book , 
and some people say that book is quite different . I think that part of it also 
begins with a sense of identity crisis : you know , who am I , why am I this 
particular person , why am I not black like everybody else ? And sometimes you 
're equipped with skills , but they may not be the kind of skills that enable 
creativity . I used to draw . I thought I would be an artist . And I had a 
miniature poodle . And it was n't bad , but it was n't really creative . 
Because all I could really do was represent in a very one-on-one way . And I 
have a sense that I probably copied this from a book . And then I also was n't 
really shining in a certain area that I wanted to be , and you know , you look 
at those scores , and it was n't bad , but it was not certainly predictive that 
I would one day make my living out of the artful arrangement of
  words . Also , one of the principles of creativity is to have a little 
childhood trauma . And I had the usual kind that I think a lot of people had , 
and that is that , you know , I had expectations placed on me . That figure 
right there , by the way , figure right there was a toy given to me when I was 
but nine years old , and it was to help me become a doctor from a very early 
age . I have some ones that were long lasting : from the age of five to 15 , 
this was supposed to be my side occupation , and it led to a sense of failure . 
But actually there was something quite real in my life that happened when I was 
about 14. And it was discovered that my brother , in 1967 , and then my father 
, six months later , had brain tumors . And my mother believed that something 
had gone wrong , and she was gonna find out what it was . And she was gonna fix 
it . My father was a Baptist minister , and he believed in miracles , and that 
God 's will would take care of that . But of course , they en
 ded up dying , six months apart . And after that , my mother believed that it 
was fate , or curses -- she went looking through all the reasons in the 
universe why this would have happened . Everything except randomness . She did 
not believe in randomness . There was a reason for everything . And one of the 
reasons , she thought , was that her mother , who had died when she was very 
young , was angry at her . And so I had this notion of death all around me 
because my mother also believed that I would be next , and she would be next 
And when you are faced with the prospect of death very soon , you begin to 
think very much about everything . You become very creative , in a survival 
sense . And this , then , led to my big questions . And they 're the same ones 
that I have today . And they are : Why do things happen , and how do things 
happen ? And the one my mother asked : How do I make things happen ? It 's a 
wonderful way to look at these questions , when you write a story . Because a
 fter all , in that framework , between page one and 300 , you have to answer 
this question of why things happen , how things happen , in what order they 
happen . What are the influences ? How do I , as the narrator , as the writer , 
also influence that ? And it 's also one that I think many of our scientists 
have been asking . It 's a kind of cosmology , and I have to develop a 
cosmology of my own universe , as the creator of that universe . And you see , 
there 's a lot of back and forth in trying to make that happen , trying to 
figure it out -- years and years , oftentimes . So when I look at creativity , 
I also think that it is this sense or this inability to repress my looking at 
associations in practically anything in life . And I got a lot of them during 
what 's been going on throughout this conference , almost everything that 's 
been going on . And so I 'm going to use , as the metaphor , this association : 
quantum mechanics , which I really do n't understand , but I 'm still 
 gonna use it as the process for explaining how it is the metaphor . So in 
quantum mechanics , of course , you have dark energy and dark matter . And it 
's the same thing in looking at these questions of how things happen . There 's 
a lot of unknown , and you often do n't know what it is except by its absence . 
But when you make those associations , you want them to come together in a kind 
of synergy in the story , and what you 're finding is what matters . The 
meaning . And that 's what I look for in my work , a personal meaning . There 
is also the uncertainty principle , which is part of quantum mechanics , as I 
understand it . ( Laughter ) And this happens constantly in the writing . And 
there 's the terrible and dreaded observer effect , in which you 're looking 
for something , and you know , things are happening simultaneously , and you 
're looking at it in a different way , and you 're trying to really look for 
the about-ness . Or what is this story about . And if you try too h
 ard , then you will only write the about . You wo n't discover anything . And 
what you were supposed to find , what you hoped to find , in some serendipitous 
way , is no longer there . Now , I do n't want to ignore the other side of what 
happens in our universe , like many of our scientists have . And so I am going 
to just throw in string theory here , and just say that creative people are 
multi-dimensional , and there are eleven levels , I think , of anxiety . ( 
Laughter ) And they all operate at the same time . There is also a big question 
of ambiguity . And I would link that to something called the cosmological 
constant . And you do n't know what is operating , but something is operating 
there . And ambiguity , to me , is very uncomfortable in my life , and I have 
it . Moral ambiguity . It is constantly there . And just as an example , this 
is one that recently came to me . It was something I read in an editorial by a 
woman who was talking about the war in Iraq . And she said , "
  Save a man from drowning , you are responsible to him for life . " A very 
famous Chinese saying , she said . And that means because we went into Iraq , 
we should stay there until things were solved . You know , maybe even 100 years 
. So there was another one that I came across , and it 's " saving fish from 
drowning . " And it 's what Buddhist fishermen say , because they 're not 
supposed to kill anything . And they also have to make a living , and people 
need to be fed . So their way of rationalizing that is they are saving the fish 
from drowning , and unfortunately in the process the fish die . Now what 's 
encapsulated in both these drowning metaphors -- actually , one of them is my 
mother 's interpretation , and it is a famous Chinese saying because she said 
it to me : " Save a man from drowning , you are responsible to him for life . " 
And it was a warning -- do n't get involved in other people 's business , or 
you 're going to get stuck . OK . I think if somebody really was dr
 owning , she 'd save them . But both of these sayings , saving a fish from 
drowning , or saving a man from drowning , to me they had to do with intentions 
. And all of us in life , when we see a situation , we have a response . And 
then we have intentions . There 's an ambiguity of what that should be that we 
should do , and then we do something . And the results of that may not match 
what our intentions had been . Maybe things go wrong . And so , after that , 
what are our responsibilities ? What are we supposed to do ? Do we stay in for 
life , or do we do something else and justify and say , well , my intentions 
were good , and therefore I cannot be held responsible for all of it ? That is 
the ambiguity in my life that really disturbed me , and led me to write a book 
called Saving Fish From Drowning . I saw examples of that , once I identified 
this question . It was all over the place . I got these hints everywhere . And 
then , in a way , I knew that they had always been there . An
 d then writing , that 's what happens . I get these hints , these clues , and 
I realize that they 've been obvious , and yet they have not been . And what I 
need , in effect , is a focus . And when I have the question , it is a focus . 
And all these things that seem to be flotsam and jetsam in life actually go 
through that question , and what happens is those particular things become 
relevant . And it seems like it 's happening all the time . You think there 's 
a sort of coincidence going on , a serendipity , in which you 're getting all 
this help from the universe . And it may also be explained that now you have a 
focus . And you are noticing it more often . But you apply this . You begin to 
look at things having to do with your tensions . Your brother , who 's fallen 
in trouble , do you take care of him ? Why or why not ? It may be something 
that is perhaps more serious -- as I said , human rights in Burma . I was 
thinking that I should n't go because somebody said if I did , it w
 ould show that I approved of the military regime there . And then after a 
while , I had to ask myself , " Why do we take on knowledge , why do we take on 
assumptions that other people have given us ? " And it was the same thing that 
I felt when I was growing up , and was hearing these rules of moral conduct 
from my father , who was a Baptist minister . So I decided that I would go to 
Burma for my own intentions , and still did n't know that if I went there , 
what the result of that would be if I wrote a book -- and I just would have to 
face that later , when the time came . We are all concerned with things that we 
see in the world that we are aware of . We come to this point and say , what do 
I as an individual do ? Not all of us can go to Africa , or work at hospitals , 
so what do we do if we have this moral response , this feeling ? Also , I think 
one of the biggest things we are all looking at , and we talked about today , 
is genocide . This leads to this question , when I look a
 t all these things that are morally ambiguous and uncomfortable , and I 
consider what my intentions should be , I realize it goes back to this identity 
question that I had when I was a child -- and why am I here , and what is the 
meaning of my life , and what is my place in the universe ? It seems so obvious 
, and yet it is not . We all hate moral ambiguity in some sense , and yet it is 
also absolutely necessary . In writing a story , it is the place where I begin 
. Sometimes I get help from the universe , it seems . My mother would say it 
was the ghost of my grandmother from the very first book , because it seemed I 
knew things I was not supposed to know . Instead of writing that the 
grandmother died accidentally , from an overdose of opium while having too much 
of a good time , I actually put down in the story that the woman killed herself 
, and that actually was the way it happened . And my mother decided that that 
information must have come from my grandmother . There are also t
 hings , quite uncanny , which bring me information that will help me in the 
writing of the book . In this case , I was writing a story that included some 
kind of detail , period of history , a certain location . And I needed to find 
something historically that would match that . And I took down this book , and 
I -- first page that I flipped it to was exactly the setting , and the time 
period . And the kind of character I needed was the Taiping rebellion , 
happening in the area near Guilin , outside of that , and a character who 
thought he was the son of God . You wonder , are these things random chance ? 
Well , what is random ? What is chance ? What is luck ? What are things that 
you get from the universe that you ca n't really explain ? And that goes into 
the story too . These are the things I constantly think about from day to day . 
Especially when good things happen , and in particular , when bad things happen 
. But I do think there 's a kind of serendipity , and I do want to kno
 w what those elements are , so I can thank them , and also try to find them in 
my life . Because , again , I think that when I am aware of them , more of them 
happen . Another chance encounter is when I went to a place -- I just was with 
some friends , and we drove randomly to a different place , and we ended up in 
this non-tourist location , a beautiful village , pristine . And we walked 
three valleys beyond , and the third valley , there was something quite 
mysterious and ominous , a discomfort I felt . And then I knew that had to be 
setting of my book . And in writing one of the scenes , it happened in that 
third valley . For some reason I wrote about cairns -- stacks of rocks -- that 
a man was building . And I did n't know exactly why I had it , but it was so 
vivid . I got stuck , and a friend , when she asked if I would go for a walk 
with her dogs , that I said , sure . And about 45 minutes later , walking along 
the beach , I came across this . And it was a man , a Chinese man 
 , and he was stacking these things , not with glue , not with anything . And I 
asked him how is it possible to do this ? And he said , well , I guess with 
everything in life , there 's a place of balance . And this was exactly the 
meaning of my story at that point . I had so many examples -- I have so many 
instances like this when I 'm writing a story , and I cannot explain it . Is it 
because I had the filter that I have such a strong coincidence in writing about 
these things ? Or is it a kind of serendipity that we cannot explain , like the 
cosmological constant ? A big thing that I also think about is accidents . And 
as I said , my mother did not believe in randomness . What is the nature of 
accidents ? And how are we going to assign what the responsibility and the 
causes are , outside of a court of law ? I was able to see that in a firsthand 
way , when I went to beautiful Dong village , in Guizhou , the poorest province 
of China . And I saw this beautiful place . I knew I wanted 
 to come back . And I had a chance to do that when National Geographic asked me 
if I wanted to write anything about China . And I said yes , about this village 
of Singing people , Singing minority . And they agreed , and between the time I 
saw this place and the next time I went , there was a terrible accident . A man 
, an old man , fell asleep , and his quilt dropped in a pan of fire that kept 
him warm . 60 homes were destroyed , and 40 were damaged . Responsibility was 
assigned to the family . The man 's sons were banished to live three kilometers 
away , in a cow shed . And of course , as Westerners , we say , " Well , it was 
an accident . That 's not fair . It 's the son , not the father . " And when I 
go on a story , I have to let go of those kinds of beliefs . It takes a while , 
but I have to let go of them and just go there , and be there . And so I was 
there on three occasions , different seasons . And I began to sense something 
different about the history and what had happene
 d before , and the nature of life in a very poor village , and what you find 
as your joys , and your rituals , your traditions , your links with other 
families . And I saw how this had a kind of justice in its responsibility . I 
was able to find out also about the ceremony that they were using , a ceremony 
they had n't used in about 29 years . And it was to send some men -- a Feng 
Shui master sent men down to the underworld on ghost horses . Now you , as 
Westerners , and I , as Westerners , would say well , that 's superstition . 
But after being there for a while , and seeing the amazing things that happened 
, you begin to wonder whose beliefs are those that are in operation in the 
world , determining how things happen . So I remained with them , and the more 
I wrote that story , the more I got in to those beliefs , and I think that 's 
important for me -- to take on the beliefs , because that is where the story is 
real , and that is where I 'm gonna find the answers to how I feel ab
 out certain questions that I have in life . Years go by , of course , and the 
writing , it does n't happen instantly , as I 'm trying to convey it to you 
here at TED . The book comes and it goes . When it arrives , it is no longer my 
book . It is in the hands of readers , and they interpret it differently . But 
I go back to this question of , how do I create something out of nothing ? And 
how do I create my own life ? And I think it is by questioning , and saying to 
myself that there are no absolute truths . I believe in specifics , the 
specifics of story , and the past , the specifics of that past , and what is 
happening in the story at that point . I also believe that in thinking about 
things , my thinking about luck , and fate , and coincidences and accidents , 
God 's will , and the synchrony of mysterious forces , I will come to some 
notion of what that is , how we create . I have to think of my role . Where I 
am in the universe , and did somebody intend for me to be that way , 
 or is it just something I came up with ? And I also can find that by imagining 
fully , and becoming what is imagined , and yet is in that real world , the 
fictional world . And that is how I find particles of truth , not the absolute 
truth , or the whole truth . And they have to be in all possibilities , 
including those I never considered before . So there are never complete answers 
. Or rather , if there is an answer , it is to remind myself that there is 
uncertainty in everything , and that is good . Because then I will discover 
something new . And if there is a partial answer , a more complete answer from 
me , it is to simply imagine . And to imagine is to put myself in that story , 
until there was only -- there is a transparency between me and the story I am 
creating . And that 's how I 've discovered that if I feel what is in the story 
-- in one story -- then I come the closest , I think , to knowing what 
compassion is , to feeling that compassion . Because for everything , in 
 that question of how things happen , it has to do with the feeling . I have to 
become the story in order to understand a lot of that . We 've come to the end 
of the talk , and I will reveal what is in the bag , and it is the muse , and 
it is the things that transform in our lives , that are wonderful and stay with 
us . There she is . 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/144ted_barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/144ted_barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.txt
 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/144ted_barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4310a9c
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/opennlp-similarity/src/test/resources/style_recognizer/txt/ted/144ted_barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+
+I 'm going to talk to you about some stuff that 's in this book of mine that I 
hope will resonate with other things you 've already heard , and I 'll try to 
make some connections myself , in case you miss them . I want to start with 
what I call the " official dogma . " The official dogma of what ? The official 
dogma of all western industrial societies . And the official dogma runs like 
this : if we are interested in maximizing the welfare of our citizens , the way 
to do that is to maximize individual freedom . The reason for this is both that 
freedom is in and of itself good , valuable , worthwhile , essential to being 
human . And because if people have freedom , then each of us can act on our own 
to do the things that will maximize our welfare , and no one has to decide on 
our behalf . The way to maximize freedom is to maximize choice . The more 
choice people have , the more freedom they have , and the more freedom they 
have , the more welfare they have . This , I think , is so dee
 ply embedded in the water supply that it would n't occur to anyone to question 
it . And it 's also deeply embedded in our lives . I 'll give you some examples 
of what modern progress has made possible for us . This is my supermarket . Not 
such a big one . I want to say just a word about salad dressing . 175 salad 
dressings in my supermarket , if you do n't count the 10 different extra-virgin 
olive oils and 12 balsamic vinegars you could buy to make a very large number 
of your own salad dressings , in the off chance that none of the 175 the store 
has on offer suit you . So this is what the supermarket is like . And then you 
go to the consumer electronics store to set up a stereo system -- speakers , CD 
player , tape player , tuner , amplifier . And in this one single consumer 
electronics store , there are that many stereo systems . We can construct six 
and a half million different stereo systems out of the components that are on 
offer in one store . You 've got to admit that 's a lot
  of choice . In other domains -- the world of communications . There was a 
time , when I was a boy , when you could get any kind of telephone service you 
wanted , as long as it came from Ma Bell . You rented your phone . You did n't 
buy it . One consequence of that , by the way , is that the phone never broke . 
And those days are gone . We now have an almost unlimited variety of phones , 
especially in the world of cell phones . These are cell phones of the future . 
My favorite is the middle one -- the MP3 player , nose hair trimmer , and creme 
brulee torch . And if by some chance you have n't seen that in your store yet , 
you can rest assured that one day soon you will . And what this does is it 
leads people to walk into their stores asking this question . And do you know 
what the answer to this question now is ? The answer is " No. " It is not 
possible to buy a cell phone that does n't do too much . So , in other aspects 
of life that are much more significant than buying things , T
 he same explosion of choice is true . Health care -- it is no longer the case 
in the United States that you go to the doctor , and the doctor tells you what 
to do . Instead , you go to the doctor , and the doctor tells you , well , we 
could do A , or we could do B. A has these benefits , and these risks . B has 
these benefits , and these risks . What do you want to do ? And you say , " Doc 
, what should I do ? " And the doc says , A has these benefits and risks , and 
B has these benefits and risks . What do you want to do ? And you say , " If 
you were me , Doc , what would you do ? " And the doc says , " But I 'm not you 
. " And the result is -- we call it " patient autonomy , " which makes it sound 
like a good thing . But what it really is is a shifting of the burden and the 
responsibility for decision-making from somebody who knows something -- namely 
the doctor -- to somebody who knows nothing and is almost certainly sick and 
thus not in the best shape to be making decisions -- n
 amely the patient . There 's enormous marketing of prescription drugs to 
people like you and me , which , if you think about it , makes no sense at all 
, since we ca n't buy them . Why do they market to us if we ca n't buy them ? 
The answer is that they expect us to call our doctors the next morning and ask 
prescriptions to be changed . Something as dramatic as our identity has now 
become a matter of choice , as this slide is meant to indicate . We do n't 
inherit an identity , we get to invent it . And we get to re-invent ourselves 
as often as we like . And that means that every day when you wake up in the 
morning , you have to decide what kind of person you want to be . With respect 
to marriage and family , there was a time when the default assumption that 
almost everyone had is that you got married as soon as you could , and then you 
started having kids as soon as you could . The only real choice was who , not 
when , and not what you did after . Nowadays , everything is very much 
 up for grabs . I teach wonderfully intelligent students , and I assign 20 
percent less work than I used to . And it 's not because they 're less smart , 
and it 's not because they 're less diligent . It 's because they are 
preoccupied , asking themselves , " Should I get married or not ? Should I get 
married now ? Should I get married later ? Should I have kids first , or a 
career first ? " All of these are consuming questions . And they 're going to 
answer these questions , whether or not it means not doing all the work I 
assign and not getting a good grade in my courses . And indeed they should . 
These are important questions to answer . Work -- we are blessed , as Carl was 
pointing out , with the technology that enables us to work every minute of 
every day from any place on the planet -- except the Randolph Hotel . ( 
Laughter ) There is one corner , by the way , that I 'm not going to tell 
anybody about , where the WiFi works . I 'm not telling you about it because I 
want to use 
 it . So what this means , this incredible freedom of choice we have with 
respect to work , is that we have to make a decision , again and again and 
again , about whether we should or should n't be working . We can go to watch 
our kid play soccer , and we have our cell phone on one hip , and our 
Blackberry on our other hip , and our laptop , presumably , on our laps . And 
even if they 're all shut off , every minute that we 're watching our kid 
mutilate a soccer game , we are also asking ourselves , " Should I answer this 
cell phone call ? Should I respond to this email ? Should I draft this letter ? 
" And even if the answer to the question is " no , " it 's certainly going to 
make the experience of your kid 's soccer game very different than it would 've 
been . So everywhere we look , big things and small things , material things 
and lifestyle things , life is a matter of choice . And the world we used to 
live in looked like this . That is to say , there were some choices , but not 
 everything was a matter of choice . And the world we now live in looks like 
this . And the question is , is this good news , or bad news ? And the answer 
is yes . ( Laughter ) We all know what 's good about it , so I 'm going to talk 
about what 's bad about it . All of this choice has two effects , two negative 
effects on people . One effect , paradoxically , is that it produces paralysis 
, rather than liberation . With so many options to choose from , people find it 
very difficult to choose at all . I 'll give you one very dramatic example of 
this , a study that was done of investments in voluntary retirement plans . A 
colleague of mine got access to investment records from Vanguard , the gigantic 
mutual fund company of about a million employees and about 2,000 different 
workplaces . And what she found is that for every 10 mutual funds the employer 
offered , rate of participation went down two percent . You offer 50 funds -- 
10 percent fewer employees participate than if you only o
 ffer five . Why ? Because with 50 funds to choose from , it 's so damn hard to 
decide which fund to choose that you 'll just put it off until tomorrow . And 
then tomorrow , and then tomorrow , and tomorrow , and tomorrow , and of course 
tomorrow never comes . Understand that not only does this mean that people are 
going to have to eat dog food when they retire because they do n't have enough 
money to put away , it also means that making the decision is so hard that they 
pass up significant matching money from the employer . By not participating , 
they are passing up as much as 5,000 dollars a year from the employer , who 
would happily match their contribution . So paralysis is a consequence of 
having too many choices . And I think it makes the world look like this . ( 
Laughter ) You really want to get the decision right if it 's for all eternity 
, right ? You do n't want to pick the wrong mutual fund , or even the wrong 
salad dressing . So that 's one effect . The second effect is t
 hat even if we manage to overcome the paralysis and make a choice , we end up 
less satisfied with the result of the choice than we would be if we had fewer 
options to choose from . And there are several reasons for this . One of them 
is that with a lot of different salad dressings to choose from , if you buy one 
, and it 's not perfect -- and , you know , what salad dressing is ? It 's easy 
to imagine that you could have made a different choice that would have been 
better . And what happens is this imagined alternative induces you to regret 
the decision you made , and this regret subtracts from the satisfaction you get 
out of the decision you made , even if it was a good decision . The more 
options there are , the easier it is to regret anything at all that is 
disappointing about the option that you chose . Second , what economists call 
opportunity costs . Dan Gilbert made a big point this morning of talking about 
how much the way in which we value things depends on what we compare 
 them to . Well , when there are lots of alternatives to consider , it is easy 
to imagine the attractive features of alternatives that you reject , that make 
you less satisfied with the alternative that you 've chosen . Here 's an 
example . For those of you who are n't New Yorkers , I apologize . ( Laughter ) 
But here 's what you 're supposed to be thinking . Here 's this couple on the 
Hamptons . Very expensive real estate . Gorgeous beach . Beautiful day . They 
have it all to themselves . What could be better ? " Well , damn it , " this 
guy is thinking , " It 's August . Everybody in my Manhattan neighborhood is 
away . I could be parking right in front of my building . " And he spends two 
weeks nagged by the idea that he is missing the opportunity , day after day , 
to have a great parking space . Opportunity costs subtract from the 
satisfaction we get out of what we choose , even when what we choose is 
terrific . And the more options there are to consider , the more attractive 
featu
 res of these options are going to be reflected by us as opportunity costs . 
Here 's another example . Now this cartoon makes a lot of points . It makes 
points about living in the moment as well , and probably about doing things 
slowly . But one point it makes is that whenever you 're choosing one thing , 
you 're choosing not to do other things . And those other things may have lots 
of attractive features , and it 's going to make what you 're doing less 
attractive . Third : escalation of expectations . This hit me when I went to 
replace my jeans . I wear jeans almost all the time . And there was a time when 
jeans came in one flavor , and you bought them , and they fit like crap , and 
they were incredibly uncomfortable , and if you wore them long enough and 
washed them enough times , they started to feel OK . So I went to replace my 
jeans after years and years of wearing these old ones , and I said , " You know 
, I want a pair of jeans , here 's my size . " And the shopkeeper said , 
 " Do you want slim fit , easy fit , relaxed fit ? You want button fly or 
zipper fly ? You want stonewashed or acid washed ? Do you want them distressed 
? You want boot cut , you want tapered , blah blah blah ... " On and on he went 
. My jaw dropped , and after I recovered , I said , " I want the kind that used 
to be the only kind . " ( Laughter ) He had no idea what that was , so I spent 
an hour trying on all these damn jeans , and I walked out of the store -- truth 
be told -- with the best fitting jeans I had ever had . I did better . All this 
choice made it possible for me to do better . But I felt worse . Why ? I wrote 
a whole book to try and explain this to myself . The reason I felt worse is 
that , with all of these options available , my expectations about how good a 
pair of jeans should be went up . I had very low expectations . I had no 
particular expectations when they only came in one flavor . When they came in 
100 flavors , damn it , one of them should 've been perfect . 
 And what I got was good , but it was n't perfect . And so I compared what I 
got to what I expected , and what I got was disappointing in comparison to what 
I expected . Adding options to people 's lives ca n't help but increase the 
expectations people have about how good those options will be . And what that 
's going to produce is less satisfaction with results , even when they 're good 
results . Nobody in the world of marketing knows this . Because if they did , 
you would n't all know what this was about . The truth is more like this . ( 
Laughter ) The reason that everything was better back when everything was worse 
is that when everything was worse , it was actually possible for people to have 
experiences that were a pleasant surprise . Nowadays , the world we live in -- 
we affluent , industrialized citizens , with perfection the expectation -- the 
best you can ever hope for is that stuff is as good as you expect it to be . 
You will never be pleasantly surprised because your expec
 tations , my expectations , have gone through the roof . The secret to 
happiness -- this is what you all came for -- the secret to happiness is low 
expectations . ( Laughter ) ( Applause ) I want to say -- just a little 
autobiographical moment -- that I actually am married to a wife , and she 's 
really quite wonderful . I could n't have done better . I did n't settle . But 
settling is n't always such a bad thing . Finally , one consequence of buying a 
bad-fitting pair of jeans when there is only one kind to buy is that when you 
are dissatisfied , and you ask why , who 's responsible , the answer is clear . 
The world is responsible . What could you do ? When there are hundreds of 
different styles of jeans available , and you buy one that is disappointing , 
and you ask why , who 's responsible ? It is equally clear that the answer to 
the question is you . You could have done better . With a hundred different 
kinds of jeans on display , there is no excuse for failure . And so when peop
 le make decisions , and even though the results of the decisions are good , 
they feel disappointed about them , they blame themselves . Clinical depression 
has exploded in the industrial world in the last generation . I believe a 
significant -- not the only , but a significant contributor to this explosion 
of depression , and also suicide , is that people have experiences that are 
disappointing because their standards are so high . And then when they have to 
explain these experiences to themselves , they think they 're at fault . And so 
the net result is that we do better in general , objectively , and we feel 
worse . So let me remind you . This is the official dogma , the one that we all 
take to be true , and it 's all false . It is not true . There 's no question 
that some choice is better than none , but it does n't follow from that that 
more choice is better than some choice . There 's some magical amount . I do 
n't know what it is . I 'm pretty confident that we have long since
  passed the point where options improve our welfare . Now , as a policy matter 
-- I 'm almost done -- as a policy matter , the thing to think about is this . 
What enables all of this choice in industrial societies is material affluence . 
There are lots of places in the world , and we have heard about several of them 
, where their problem is not that they have too much choice . Their problem is 
that they have too little . So the stuff I 'm talking about is the peculiar 
problem of modern , affluent , Western societies . And what is so frustrating 
and infuriating is this : Steve Levitt talked to you yesterday about how these 
expensive and difficult to install child seats do n't help . It 's a waste of 
money . What I 'm telling you is that these expensive , complicated choices -- 
it 's not simply that they do n't help . They actually hurt . They actually 
make us worse off . If some of what enables people in our societies to make all 
of the choices we make were shifted to societies in wh
 ich people have too few options , not only would those people 's lives be 
improved , but ours would be improved also . This is what economists call a 
Pareto-improving move . Income redistribution will make everyone better off -- 
not just poor people -- because of how all this excess choice plagues us . So 
to conclude . You 're supposed to read this cartoon , and , being a 
sophisticated person , say , " Ah ! What does this fish know ? You know nothing 
is possible in this fishbowl . " Impoverished imagination , a myopic view of 
the world -- and that 's the way I read it at first . The more I thought about 
it , however , the more I came to the view that this fish knows something . 
Because the truth of the matter is that if you shatter the fishbowl so that 
everything is possible , you do n't have freedom . You have paralysis . If you 
shatter this fishbowl so that everything is possible , you decrease 
satisfaction . You increase paralysis , and you decrease satisfaction . 
Everybody needs
  a fishbowl . This one is almost certainly too limited -- perhaps even for the 
fish , certainly for us . But the absence of some metaphorical fishbowl is a 
recipe for misery , and , I suspect , disaster . Thank you very much . ( 
Applause ) 
\ No newline at end of file

Reply via email to