3 ms·

290,000,000 speakers (including secondary speakers.) out of 7,000,000 people on the planet. 4% of the planet. If 4% of America spoke a language, most of us wou

290,000,000 speakers (including secondary speakers.) out of 7,000,000 people on the planet. 4% of the planet. If 4% of America spoke a language, most of us wouldn't be in much of a rush to localize. Fortunately for French, the core native speakers in France are rich, and most of the planet is still poor. As the rest of the planet catches up, "curiosity" becomes more accurate over time.

maelito 11y ago
You may want to read the rest of the introduction !
grp 11y ago
And it is a dramatic error. If 4% of people only speak a functional programming language, does it mean that you never need to learn one? Just because the vast majority historically speak imperative doesn't mean it's the best for your business. Same for OSes. Diversity is source of wealth.
bolaft 11y ago
Secondary speakers are not people who learned French in school and live outside a French speaking country. If you took French in high school in the US you are not recorded in these numbers. Secondary speakers are people like, for example, those who grew up in Morocco, speak French but have Arabic as a mother tongue (for example). Plus those numbers only account for speakers who can read and write. As I said in another comment, the alphabetization of Africa over the next few decades is expected to boost these numbers significantly. So, as the rest of the planet catches up, "curiosity" becomes LESS accurate over time.
realusername 11y ago
Except that the curve of language distribution is not proportional at all. If you sum up the top 15 languages, you maybe only have like 40% of the population. So a language with 4% speakers is actually really important in regard of the language distribution. Having 290M speakers is actually really rare for a language, most of the languages spoken in the world actually have very few speakers. This makes French (and all the other 15 top languages) disproportionately important with a such skewed distribution.
harperlee 11y ago
So, in HN terms, I think it is a very poor business decision to leave out 1 in 20 clients that are so easily self-selected for segmentation (just by asking them their language). Mostly if you admit that it is a wealthy segment. By the way, I'm not french, and I find that "curiosity" term insultingly patronizing.
notNow 11y ago
4% of the planet. If 4% of America spoke a language, most of us wouldn't be in much of a rush to localize. You're implicitly assuming that the remaining 96% of the population is speaking another language which is untrue in your analogy as the world population speaks more than one language and the largest one in terms of number of speakers goes to Mandarin with around 15% of world population.

maelito 11y ago

You may want to read the rest of the introduction !

grp 11y ago

And it is a dramatic error. If 4% of people only speak a functional programming language, does it mean that you never need to learn one? Just because the vast majority historically speak imperative doesn't mean it's the best for your business. Same for OSes. Diversity is source of wealth.

bolaft 11y ago

Secondary speakers are not people who learned French in school and live outside a French speaking country. If you took French in high school in the US you are not recorded in these numbers. Secondary speakers are people like, for example, those who grew up in Morocco, speak French but have Arabic as a mother tongue (for example). Plus those numbers only account for speakers who can read and write. As I said in another comment, the alphabetization of Africa over the next few decades is expected to boost these numbers significantly. So, as the rest of the planet catches up, "curiosity" becomes LESS accurate over time.

realusername 11y ago

Except that the curve of language distribution is not proportional at all. If you sum up the top 15 languages, you maybe only have like 40% of the population. So a language with 4% speakers is actually really important in regard of the language distribution. Having 290M speakers is actually really rare for a language, most of the languages spoken in the world actually have very few speakers. This makes French (and all the other 15 top languages) disproportionately important with a such skewed distribution.

harperlee 11y ago

So, in HN terms, I think it is a very poor business decision to leave out 1 in 20 clients that are so easily self-selected for segmentation (just by asking them their language). Mostly if you admit that it is a wealthy segment. By the way, I'm not french, and I find that "curiosity" term insultingly patronizing.

notNow 11y ago

4% of the planet. If 4% of America spoke a language, most of us wouldn't be in much of a rush to localize. You're implicitly assuming that the remaining 96% of the population is speaking another language which is untrue in your analogy as the world population speaks more than one language and the largest one in terms of number of speakers goes to Mandarin with around 15% of world population.