4 ms·

PSA: silicon is not silicone. If it is plastic-like, it is silicone. If it is glass-like, it is silicon. Getting these details right gives your writing credi

PSA: silicon is not silicone. If it is plastic-like, it is silicone. If it is glass-like, it is silicon. Getting these details right gives your writing credibility. Getting it wrong takes it away.

mplewis 3y ago
Seems like you were able to figure out which was which, though?
- gorjusborg 3y ago
  Sure, I know that the writer is making a mistake, and I mentally can replace every 'silicon' with 'silicone'. I also know that it would take approximately 10 seconds to look up the definition of the word (if they often get it wrong) and that if they aren't willing to spend 10 seconds to use the correct word, they are probably taking other shortcuts (in reasoning or research). This fact makes me less likely to accept their reporting and conclusions without corroborating evidence, because I trust them less. Which is just saying what I said in my initial comment in a less succinct way.
  - Cpoll 3y ago
    > I also know that it would take approximately 10 seconds to look up the definition of the word (if they often get it wrong) and that if they aren't willing to spend 10 seconds to use the correct word But how does one know to look up the definition of the word? How does anyone know whether they're using every word correctly, without obsessively verifying _every_ word? I'm pretty sure I'm using "obsessively" correctly, but I'm not sure if I've ever looked up "obsession". Silicon/silicone seems more egregious to a technical crowd, but some of us will obsess over "click/clique," "decimate," "begs the questions," whatever.
    - serf 3y ago
      >How does anyone know whether they're using every word correctly, without obsessively verifying _every_ word? that's why once upon a time a published work went through multiple staff members, one of which had the very job you just explained. now that the bar to publishing has been permanently lowered by technology and the current state of things writing quality has -- predictably -- declined.
Cpoll 3y ago
Good PSA, but to be fair: It's a blog and not a big publication with professional editors, which themselves tend to make more egregious errors (Malcolm Gladwell's "Igon Values" comes to mind). I'd be more worried if I read a technical article about "silicone wafers." This is ultimately a human interest piece.

PSA: silicon is not silicone. If it is plastic-like, it is silicone. If it is glass-like, it is silicon. Getting these details right gives your writing credibility. Getting it wrong takes it away.

mplewis 3y ago

Seems like you were able to figure out which was which, though?

gorjusborg 3y ago
Sure, I know that the writer is making a mistake, and I mentally can replace every 'silicon' with 'silicone'. I also know that it would take approximately 10 seconds to look up the definition of the word (if they often get it wrong) and that if they aren't willing to spend 10 seconds to use the correct word, they are probably taking other shortcuts (in reasoning or research). This fact makes me less likely to accept their reporting and conclusions without corroborating evidence, because I trust them less. Which is just saying what I said in my initial comment in a less succinct way.
- Cpoll 3y ago
  > I also know that it would take approximately 10 seconds to look up the definition of the word (if they often get it wrong) and that if they aren't willing to spend 10 seconds to use the correct word But how does one know to look up the definition of the word? How does anyone know whether they're using every word correctly, without obsessively verifying _every_ word? I'm pretty sure I'm using "obsessively" correctly, but I'm not sure if I've ever looked up "obsession". Silicon/silicone seems more egregious to a technical crowd, but some of us will obsess over "click/clique," "decimate," "begs the questions," whatever.
  - serf 3y ago
    >How does anyone know whether they're using every word correctly, without obsessively verifying _every_ word? that's why once upon a time a published work went through multiple staff members, one of which had the very job you just explained. now that the bar to publishing has been permanently lowered by technology and the current state of things writing quality has -- predictably -- declined.

Cpoll 3y ago

Good PSA, but to be fair: It's a blog and not a big publication with professional editors, which themselves tend to make more egregious errors (Malcolm Gladwell's "Igon Values" comes to mind). I'd be more worried if I read a technical article about "silicone wafers." This is ultimately a human interest piece.