3 ms·

The NYT is right; 'exponentially' is widely misused. The font-rendering article on today's HN front page [1] is guilty of it, for example: "There is a pixel or

by tofof 8y ago

The NYT is right; 'exponentially' is widely misused. The font-rendering article on today's HN front page [1] is guilty of it, for example: "There is a pixel or less of extra space between kerning pairs and the problem grows exponentially when letter-spacing values are fiddled with". No, it doesn't. There is no exponential growth in the size of the extra space. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19312404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19312404

SilasX 8y ago
I don't see a problem with metaphorical overstatement (e.g. "he was bleeding all over the floor"), especially in casual usage. The real problem would be if they insisted on claiming it's "literally exponential" ... except, of course, everyone insists on breaking that API too, because they're too lazy to come up with a good intensifier. As for the example you've cited, I think you're strawmanning it -- it's claiming that the problem grows exponentially, which could be true, or close enough, if the missing pixel required you to add custom behavior for all possible combinations of a parameter's value that you didn't even have to worry about before.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  Well, until you start using literally as a metaphorical overstatement too. I literally died when I read that. :)
  - SilasX 8y ago
    That's what I mean with the part after the "...".
  - coldtea 8y ago
    Literally has been metaphorical too since before the Civil war. From the dictionary.com: "in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually: I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume."
Baeocystin 8y ago
Sure there is! ...as long as you don't mind using fractional exponents, along with zero.
Romanulus 8y ago
If only there was some kind of way to shut down the internet to halt this sort of atrocity from continuing.
coldtea 8y ago
>The NYT is right; 'exponentially' is widely misused. Not really, since both the intended and conceived meaning is "increasingly more", "a hella lot" -- and has nothing to do with exponents. So it's a successful use of language, Wittgenstein-style. Of the dictionary definition, one is the standard mathematical one, but another pertains to the casual use: "rising or expanding at a steady and usually rapid rate". And there's an even more casual element of actual use of the word, that the dictionary is a few years behind in reflecting.

by tofof 8y ago

SilasX 8y ago

I don't see a problem with metaphorical overstatement (e.g. "he was bleeding all over the floor"), especially in casual usage. The real problem would be if they insisted on claiming it's "literally exponential" ... except, of course, everyone insists on breaking that API too, because they're too lazy to come up with a good intensifier. As for the example you've cited, I think you're strawmanning it -- it's claiming that the problem grows exponentially, which could be true, or close enough, if the missing pixel required you to add custom behavior for all possible combinations of a parameter's value that you didn't even have to worry about before.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago
Well, until you start using literally as a metaphorical overstatement too. I literally died when I read that. :)
- SilasX 8y ago
  That's what I mean with the part after the "...".
- coldtea 8y ago
  Literally has been metaphorical too since before the Civil war. From the dictionary.com: "in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually: I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume."

Baeocystin 8y ago

Sure there is! ...as long as you don't mind using fractional exponents, along with zero.

Romanulus 8y ago

If only there was some kind of way to shut down the internet to halt this sort of atrocity from continuing.

coldtea 8y ago

>The NYT is right; 'exponentially' is widely misused. Not really, since both the intended and conceived meaning is "increasingly more", "a hella lot" -- and has nothing to do with exponents. So it's a successful use of language, Wittgenstein-style. Of the dictionary definition, one is the standard mathematical one, but another pertains to the casual use: "rising or expanding at a steady and usually rapid rate". And there's an even more casual element of actual use of the word, that the dictionary is a few years behind in reflecting.