this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
324 points (99.4% liked)
196
5169 readers
493 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stupid is asking questions without a question mark.
Imagine thinking arbitrary orthographic convention has literally anything to do with intelligence.
Doesn't it though.
At the very least, it has to do with consideration of other human beings. I bet they didn't return shipping carts to the corrals either.
The way a person abstracts thought can greatly impact how they share ideas and thoughts in text. I enjoy sharing freely with friends in ways that are very informal and spur of the moment.
I view those that insist on rigidity about like I see ultra conservatives. The text is just a hack media for sharing ideas. Obsessing over the instrument is to neglect the meaning of the notes and their potential to provide more nuance than a simple repetitive rhythm. The fact humans constantly make excuses about the miscommunication of emotions in text is a problem we are naturally beginning to solve with various explorations of new vulgar methods from pictograms to punctuation. It is clear that the formality has failed to meet the needs of our age.
Even our textual errors in the present can convey a certain humanness yet to be commonly replicated in generative AI text, further imparting valued insights to many. So I would say, the self aware person imparting more information of value to the present is the smarter, instead of one stuck in the rigid nature of the past. That past is mostly dead anyways. It is statistically easier to become a billionaire than it is to become a writer making a living wage in the USA. The guild is dead, yet the artisan beats the broken drum with assiduity.
I always tell people to go back in time 100 years and try talking to people. Try 200 years, or 500, a 1000 years even. It grows increasingly difficult to communicate, and yet the language of today has no specific or definitive genesis.
It is language's inherent nature to evolve and shift to fit the needs and whims of culture in its time. Denying that change or insisting upon a linguistic book of arbitrary rules, is childishly naive, ultimately unproductive, and a fucking massive waste of creativity.
I do agree. Some rules do help to maintain understandability but, with any living language, they must change and evolve. I also just like poking fun at text that ignores simple rules out of laziness or arbitrary visual style choices that harm readability.
I admit to my comment being mostly a joke. I do have an issue with people choosing to not use correct orthography, when there is syntactic meaning (especially in long prose) but, I'm well aware that that is a me/neurodivergent thing. As is my writing style, which likely heavily influenced by deep-set fear of the intent of my communication being misunderstood or taken the wrong way.
I actually agree with a lot of what you have written here - language is a living thing, both in its verbal form and its textual representation. It is constantly evolving in new, interesting, and (my favorite) weird ways to better suit what things people need to communicate. I think that's a beautiful thing.
I would like to see your data on that as I don't think that's terribly accurate, at least, I really hope not, as becoming a billionaire statistically requires having been born already wealthy.
I honestly wish I recalled all of the syntactic rules. My orthography is often a passé of an impulsive fence.
Unfortunately, I am not one to save trivia references. All I can say is that there was a meme about the statistics that seemed rather convincing at the time. I'm on a network connection that is not very conducive to general research in this vain and far to lazy to spin up a capable machine to cite some valid source. So consider it poor hearsay gossip amongst friends. There is no ill intent or attempt at fabrication on my part. I imagine such a claim is largely dependant on how one measures a living wage and the temporal constraints of value. The idea resonates with my intimate understanding of the information bottleneck present in the current world.