5 ms·

What's with a lot of the mentions of “computer” using what looks like a portmanteau with “retard”?! I know some famous people like Stallman do this, but I don't

What's with a lot of the mentions of “computer” using what looks like a portmanteau with “retard”?! I know some famous people like Stallman do this, but I don't think it's perceived positively.

eru 2y ago
Well, Stallman ain't perceived positively, either. The author clearly has an axe to grind. I haven't read enough yet to decide whether they have valid point.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  I couldn’t decide whether they had a valid point or whether they were engaging in some form of parody. Seems like an extreme case of Poe’s Law.
  - GTP 2y ago
    I think that if you filter-out the exaggerations in the article, the general message is still worth to reflect on. Some process doesn't get more efficient just by virtue of using a computer, and many tools we have now are more about good-looking interfaces than actual productivity.
    - datavirtue 2y ago
      This.
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      Not only that, but a lot of the efficiency gains are directed towards tasks that, otherwise, would not be done because it wasn’t worth the cost. Now that the cost is low enough, their marginal gains absorb the resources that’s be freed by automation. That’s the origin of so-called “bullshit jobs”.
    - SiempreViernes 2y ago
      Sure, every fable has a grain of truth, but constantcrying put it more usefully here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264453 The OP is not worth reading unless you desperately miss the "ironic" invective laden writing of the early 00's.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
    He states, in his about[0]: "...exposing this sort of nonsense to as much popular contempt as I can muster." It's deliberate. I sometimes enjoy folks that write like this, and this chap genuinely seems to be an interesting guy, after my own heart, but I don't really enjoy his writing. [0] https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/about/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/about/
drewcoo 2y ago
[flagged]
- jijijijij 2y ago
  > computard Maybe next time read the article before getting all worked up. It's in the very first sentence.
doubloon 2y ago
A lack of consideration for others feelings.
sourcepluck 2y ago
Provide a link to Stallman using that term then please? Otherwise, I'm calling nonsense. I'd be 95+% sure you're making that up, or confused in this case.
- cedilla 2y ago
  He's not using "computard" but he loves to undermine his credibility by talking about the "Amazon Swindle" and such.
  - sourcepluck 2y ago
    Ok, so, the thing I was replying to was just someone claiming false things as I imagined. Glad we cleared it up.
    - cedilla 2y ago
      No, you just misunderstood what OP meant by "this". They meant using portmanteau neologisms, and you thought they meant that specific portmanteau. No need to be nasty about it.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 2y ago
        Yes, I meant his practice of coming up with silly nicknames for things he dislikes, not that he used this one specifically.
      - sourcepluck 2y ago
        I didn't mean to be nasty - I was, apparently, misunderstanding OP's original message. In my defense, the causal link between these three things: 1. Person A in their blog appears to be using a weird portmanteau, "computard" 2. "Some famous people like Stallman do this" (referring to portmanteaus, and making up words, in general, and not the specific portmanteau person A used) 3. "People" maybe don't perceive that positively (making up portmanteaus..?) is more than a bit hard to follow. Anyway, I thought an obviously false claim was being made, but if it's just a few loose amalgamations and people brandishing their opinions about, well that's fine, it is the internet, after all.

eru 2y ago

Well, Stallman ain't perceived positively, either. The author clearly has an axe to grind. I haven't read enough yet to decide whether they have valid point.

rbanffy 2y ago
I couldn’t decide whether they had a valid point or whether they were engaging in some form of parody. Seems like an extreme case of Poe’s Law.
- GTP 2y ago
  I think that if you filter-out the exaggerations in the article, the general message is still worth to reflect on. Some process doesn't get more efficient just by virtue of using a computer, and many tools we have now are more about good-looking interfaces than actual productivity.
  - datavirtue 2y ago
    This.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    Not only that, but a lot of the efficiency gains are directed towards tasks that, otherwise, would not be done because it wasn’t worth the cost. Now that the cost is low enough, their marginal gains absorb the resources that’s be freed by automation. That’s the origin of so-called “bullshit jobs”.
  - SiempreViernes 2y ago
    Sure, every fable has a grain of truth, but constantcrying put it more usefully here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264453 The OP is not worth reading unless you desperately miss the "ironic" invective laden writing of the early 00's.
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
  He states, in his about[0]: "...exposing this sort of nonsense to as much popular contempt as I can muster." It's deliberate. I sometimes enjoy folks that write like this, and this chap genuinely seems to be an interesting guy, after my own heart, but I don't really enjoy his writing. [0] https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/about/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/about/

drewcoo 2y ago

[flagged]

jijijijij 2y ago
> computard Maybe next time read the article before getting all worked up. It's in the very first sentence.

doubloon 2y ago

A lack of consideration for others feelings.

sourcepluck 2y ago

Provide a link to Stallman using that term then please? Otherwise, I'm calling nonsense. I'd be 95+% sure you're making that up, or confused in this case.

cedilla 2y ago
He's not using "computard" but he loves to undermine his credibility by talking about the "Amazon Swindle" and such.
- sourcepluck 2y ago
  Ok, so, the thing I was replying to was just someone claiming false things as I imagined. Glad we cleared it up.
  - cedilla 2y ago
    No, you just misunderstood what OP meant by "this". They meant using portmanteau neologisms, and you thought they meant that specific portmanteau. No need to be nasty about it.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 2y ago
      Yes, I meant his practice of coming up with silly nicknames for things he dislikes, not that he used this one specifically.
    - sourcepluck 2y ago
      I didn't mean to be nasty - I was, apparently, misunderstanding OP's original message. In my defense, the causal link between these three things: 1. Person A in their blog appears to be using a weird portmanteau, "computard" 2. "Some famous people like Stallman do this" (referring to portmanteaus, and making up words, in general, and not the specific portmanteau person A used) 3. "People" maybe don't perceive that positively (making up portmanteaus..?) is more than a bit hard to follow. Anyway, I thought an obviously false claim was being made, but if it's just a few loose amalgamations and people brandishing their opinions about, well that's fine, it is the internet, after all.