2b Or !2b: Shakespeare TxtMsg Contest

FortKnox writes "Reuters has an article on a contest for the most aspiring text message. It has to be under 160 characters, because it follows the trendy text-messaging for modern mobile phones. Most people will try to make long quotes with abbreviations and numbers and such to bring it down to the appropriate length."

Comments

Code from the Bard

[ocie]

/* Hamlet_monologue.c
* William Shakespeare
* (C) 1595 Globe company software
*/

/* Compose this operation from arithmatic of the signed nature. Thusly -1 resounds as more ominous than doth 255 W.S. */

signed char question=(0x2b | ~0x2b);

int n1=nobility(suffering_slings & suffering arrows);
int n2=nobility(taking_arms & opposing_to_end);

/* Though this nobility score be calculated, meethinks that the optimizer shall remove it anon, for it does find no utility in the code W.S. */
int comparison=n1>n2;

rub(); /* There's the rub */
shuffle_off(mortal_coil);
pause(); /* give us pause */

/* If Bacon thinks I shall share these codes with him, he doth have another thing coming. W.S.

All Thine Sonnet are belonging to us */

Ode to text on a cell phone

[Eravau]

There once was a man on his phone
Who could not wait 'til he got home
HIs email he read
"It's important!" he said
'Til his car toward a semi did roam

Correction...

[leperjuice]

That should be

2b || !2b

(well, for programmers at least)

Re:Wrong headline...

[KFury]

"I believe it's actually supposed to be '2b || !2b"

Actually, 2b | !2b is more accurate. '||' denotes a short-circuit 'or' which means that if 2b is true, it won't examine !2b for validity.

I believe that Hamlet's strife is that he saw the merits in both possibilities, and so an accurate representation would necessitate him evaluating both 2b and !2b before reaching a conclusion.

Kevin Fox
--

here is a nice one. damn ambitious too.

[niekze]

R U D 1 2 C 4 A B J? --- send that to enough ladies, and you'll eventually find a taker.

Re:here is a nice one. damn ambitious too.

[ayjay29]

B4I4QRU/16

Isn't it obvious?

[zpengo]

The most ambitious text message is simply "1 4m 2 3r337 4 u" and "1 0wn j00" interspersed with large numbers of !'s and 1's.

this is so lame

[mr_gerbik]

"This is a new literary form and it must be left to define its own parameters,'' the Guardian said.

I can't wait until colleges begin offering AOLSpeak 101.

-gerbik

Don't Act Surprised

[susano_otter]

in 2001 contest was bginning
what happn
somebody set up us da bmb
we get signl
what
phone screen trn on
how r u gentlemen
all your trendy txtmsg r belng 2 us
what u say

I didn't realize that text messages were sentient.

[General_Corto]

From the submission:

Reuters has an article on a contest for the most aspiring text message.

From Dictionary.com:

Aspire : To have a great ambition or ultimate goal; desire strongly

So, who's going to be writing the self-modifying text message? I can't think of any other type of message that could be considered 'ambitious.'

Then again, maybe the person just meant inspiring.

The actual page

[agentZ]

The actual Guardian article is on-line and has some of today's submissions, plus the official rules and some hints.

How about...

[fireboy1919]

We go ahead and minimize the whole English language? We've already got /., and everyone likes perl.
A few suggestions:
spm = spam
fstp = first post (fp is taken - "floating point")
ayb1 = All your base are belong to us.
$M = Microsoft is a horrible, money grabbing useless institution.
L! = Linux is a wonderful, beutiful thing.
CTO = Commander Taco
Hemos = well...its already pretty short.
ILB = I like beans.
YCUAL = you can't have any until later
HN/DTA = Have some now, but don't tell anyone

We could also use verbs as operands...
For example - kills = k
kL!$M - Linux, the wonderful, beautiful thing kills Microsoft the horrible, money grabbing institution.

Of course, we could, I don't know...just zip it up and unzip it? Its not like zip is a difficult protocol to implement on a palm...

Text message poetry? Geez ...

[ez76]

I suppose this contest is intended to prove that wireless messaging is a legitimate medium, in that it is neither rare nor well done.