"In my opinion, if you take something that does not belong to you, it is stealing"
Despite the weight of replies against this idea, you're not alone on this. As I see it, if I create a computer program, it's 'my program'. If someone makes a copy, that copy does not become 'their program', it's still a copy of 'my' program. Therefore, when they take this copy, they are taking something of mine. And if they're not taking the copy, then the copy must remain with the original, which would seem pretty useless except in the case of creating a backup.
*lol* very good point! I'd probably try and deny it in as fewer characters with as little punctuation as possible, just to lend more credit to the idea that I wouldn't invent such a thing.
So if I read what you're saying correctly, you're saying it's the chinesesises fault?:-p
"Abbreviations that require the reader to think twice about the meaning of the writing are an impairment to efficient communication"
Yes I think that's precisely it, that is I guess what I do. Get the message across as accurately and efficiently as possible, and not create an image in the reader that I'm sloppy. I don't know why so many people are adverse to the idea that more is conveyed in your writings than the actual thing you're trying to say. If you make an effort to not look like a complete bum when you leave the house, why not put the same effort into your writings, so that you don't come across like a complete bum then too? Image is important, and no, that's not shallow, it's actually another form of communication.
That is so f***ing presumptuous. In my experience, it is native english speakers that make that mistake the most, including people I know *personally*. This is why I said I was talking about native speakers, because I *wouldn't* be so arrogant as to include second language speakers in such a comment.
Why? I mean, I actually get quite surprised whenever I see someone on slashdot spell 'lose' correctly, and that's from english-as-first-language ppl.
I'm quite picky with what I'll abreviate. You and for are such short words anyway, I think cutting down to 'u' and '4' is plain tacky, and makes you come across as being... well... somewhat cheap. But, as you can see, a six lettered word I don't mind so much, even on the internet, which is in fact where I picked that up, long before text messaging took off. Also, through and though have become thru and tho, but I do know the difference between thru and threw which I do see mixed up from time to time. Too and to are never 2, which should only mean two.
So I guess I don't have a fundamental problem with it, as long as ambiguity isn't formed, it remains easy to read, and you draw yourself a line so u dont spk lyk vis al du tym.
They made an observation, not a judgement. Since when do we have to cover up a discovery, just because it shows that two people aren't the same? Anyone who wants to believe that Europeans are identical to Africans is being naive/ignorant at best, stupid at worst.
Information's not bad. Just what you do with it. It's the role of the researcher to find the information, not decide what you do with it.
Like "evidence" either way is going to make any difference to the wackjob. Come on, their opinions are set in stone anyway, it doesn't matter what we discover.
Slashdot Mirror
"In my opinion, if you take something that does not belong to you, it is stealing"
Despite the weight of replies against this idea, you're not alone on this. As I see it, if I create a computer program, it's 'my program'. If someone makes a copy, that copy does not become 'their program', it's still a copy of 'my' program. Therefore, when they take this copy, they are taking something of mine. And if they're not taking the copy, then the copy must remain with the original, which would seem pretty useless except in the case of creating a backup.
"The last sentence is a joke - I took my meds on time - otherwise I couldn't spell "certidudinousness" correctly :)"
Anti-dyslexia pills?!! Cool where from?!
There's an award in it?!! Oh count me in then! :-)
"nano particles of water vapor in the atmosphere to kill you"
I don't think it's that which kills you...
I know plenty of people with nano brains!
To get to the other side?
*lol* very good point! I'd probably try and deny it in as fewer characters with as little punctuation as possible, just to lend more credit to the idea that I wouldn't invent such a thing.
you're too modest ;-)
then wait for the speach about "floating tubes"
Thanks I nearly woke my housemate *lol*
"Meaning, that we agree"
;-)
No we don't!!!
40cCdrn1g 70 r5ch334rch 47 Cm4br1gd3 U1n3rv715y, 17 d305n'7 m7T43r 1n w4h7 0r3dr 7h3 l7T33r5 1n 4 wr0d 4r3, 7h3 0lny 1prm037n7 71hng 15 74h7 7h3 fr157 4nd l547 l7T33r b3 47 7h3 rgh17 pcl43. 7h3 r537 c4n b3 4 7047l m535 4nd y0u c4n 517ll r43d 17 w0u7h17 4 p0rb3lm. 71h5 15 bcu5343 7h3 hu4mn mn1d d305 n07 r43d 3rv3y l7373r 6y 157l3f, bu7 7h3 wr0d 45 4 wl0h3. :-D
"hitting myself in head with a brick repeatedly until the feeling passes"
No, stop, that just makes you do it even more!!!!uno
So if I read what you're saying correctly, you're saying it's the chinesesises fault? :-p
"Abbreviations that require the reader to think twice about the meaning of the writing are an impairment to efficient communication"
Yes I think that's precisely it, that is I guess what I do. Get the message across as accurately and efficiently as possible, and not create an image in the reader that I'm sloppy. I don't know why so many people are adverse to the idea that more is conveyed in your writings than the actual thing you're trying to say. If you make an effort to not look like a complete bum when you leave the house, why not put the same effort into your writings, so that you don't come across like a complete bum then too? Image is important, and no, that's not shallow, it's actually another form of communication.
"This is f***ing arrogant"
;-)
That is so f***ing presumptuous. In my experience, it is native english speakers that make that mistake the most, including people I know *personally*. This is why I said I was talking about native speakers, because I *wouldn't* be so arrogant as to include second language speakers in such a comment.
"You're right"
Thank you
I already pointed that out myself, as I said "But, as you can see, a six lettered word I don't mind so much"
Why? I mean, I actually get quite surprised whenever I see someone on slashdot spell 'lose' correctly, and that's from english-as-first-language ppl.
I'm quite picky with what I'll abreviate. You and for are such short words anyway, I think cutting down to 'u' and '4' is plain tacky, and makes you come across as being... well... somewhat cheap. But, as you can see, a six lettered word I don't mind so much, even on the internet, which is in fact where I picked that up, long before text messaging took off. Also, through and though have become thru and tho, but I do know the difference between thru and threw which I do see mixed up from time to time. Too and to are never 2, which should only mean two.
So I guess I don't have a fundamental problem with it, as long as ambiguity isn't formed, it remains easy to read, and you draw yourself a line so u dont spk lyk vis al du tym.
are we gonna be able to reply to posts on this thread? Is it just my comp tha's got a problem? Or are replies to posts not showing up for everyone?
Somethin like that i'd say yeah... take flys, tiny brains, so the signal doesn't have far to travel, and so they have very fast reaction times.
"I for one am convinced we bred them out of existence"
but woah! What a way to go!!!!!
They made an observation, not a judgement. Since when do we have to cover up a discovery, just because it shows that two people aren't the same? Anyone who wants to believe that Europeans are identical to Africans is being naive/ignorant at best, stupid at worst.
Information's not bad. Just what you do with it. It's the role of the researcher to find the information, not decide what you do with it.
Are you saying that two creatures with a common ancester cannot breed??? Tell that to the south!
you should see my girlfriends bruises!
I know many neanderthals still alive today!
Like "evidence" either way is going to make any difference to the wackjob. Come on, their opinions are set in stone anyway, it doesn't matter what we discover.