5 ms·

I have the feeling that the entire case (in)-sensitive discussions are usually too much English-centric. Allow me to iterate: I have the feeling way too many l

I have the feeling that the entire case (in)-sensitive discussions are usually too much English-centric. Allow me to iterate: I have the feeling way too many language discussions, especially in IT, are too much English-centric.

reddalo 2y ago
Speaking of non-English cultures, do Japanese case insensitive systems differentiate between hiragana and katakana? Because, in some ways, the two syllabaries remind me of uppercase and lowercase alphabets.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  They're more like distinguishing between "o" and “ℴ”. Which is where the European idea of "capital letters" originates, but not how we think about them today.
- presentation 2y ago
  A lot of the time forms will specifically ask for hiragana or katakana, or specify full width or half width characters. But basically it’s a mess there too
teitoklien 2y ago
> too much English-centric. Pretty glad about it considering how much more simpler ASCII was to work with compared to Unicode. I say it as a non native english speaker, programming has so many concepts and stuff already, its best not to make it more complex by adding a 101 different languages to account for. Unicode and Timezone, the two things that try to bring more languages and cultures to be accounted for while programming and look what happens, it creates the most amount of pain for everyone including non native english programmers. I dont want to write computer programs in my non-english native tongue, if that means i’ll have to start accounting for every major language while im programming. Its fine that IT discussions are so English-centric. Diversity is more complexity, and no one owns the english language, its just a tool used by people to communicate, thanks to that universal language, I can express my thoughts to most people in India, China, Japan, South America, etc due to having 1 common language. They all own the english language too, the moment they decided to speak in it. No need to bring diversity politics in IT. Best to keep it technical.
- orphea 2y ago
  > considering how much more simpler ASCII was to work with compared to Unicode. And elemental algebra is more simple than differential calculus. ASCII being simpler just means it is not adequate to represent innate complexity that human languages have. Unicode is not complex because of "diversity politics", whatever that means. It is because languages are complex. The same story with time zones: they are as complex as time is.
- regentbowerbird 2y ago
  > No need to bring diversity politics in IT. Politics is just "how people think things should be". Therefore politics are everywhere not because people _bring_ them everywhere but because they arise from everything. Your comment is in fact full of politics, down to your opinion that politics shouldn't be included in this discussion. ** > thanks to that universal language, I can express my thoughts to most people in India, China, Japan, South America, etc due to having 1 common language Personally my impression is that native speakers just run circles around everyone else during meetings and such. Being _truly_ comfortable in the language, mastering social cues, being able to confidently and fluently express complex ideas, mean that they effectively take over the room. In turn that means they will hold more power in the company, rise in rank more quickly, get paid more, etc.. There's an actual, significant consequence here. Plus, anglos usually can't really speak another language, so since they don't realize how hard it is they tend to think their coworkers are idiots and will stick to do things with other anglos rather than include everyone. > Diversity is more complexity In a vacuum I agree, but within the context of your comment this is kinda saying "your existence makes my life too complex, please stop being different and join the fold"; and I can't agree with that sentiment.
  - BirAdam 2y ago
    You raise an interesting point about the nature of politics. I’ve been thinking about this a bit, but it seems to me that radical/revolutionary politics are talking about how people want things to be while quotidian political ideas are more about how people ought to do a few things. The distinction here being people’s timelines and depth of thought. If a policy has some seriously bad consequences, people may not notice because they weren’t really thinking of things should be, just the narrower thought of how a thing out to be done (think minimum wage driving automation rather than getting people a better standard of living, or immigration control driving police militarization). Of course, for most politicians, I am not sure either of these are correct. I think for politicians, politics is just the study of their own path to power; they likely don’t care much about whether it’s how things are done or how things ought to be so long as they are the ones with the power. I don’t know that this comment really ads anything to the conversation, but I do find it all interesting. Edit: also, on topic, languages are fun. The world is boring when everything is in one language. Languages also hold information in how they structure things, how speakers of that language view the world, and so on, and in those ways they are important contributors to diversity of thought.

reddalo 2y ago

Speaking of non-English cultures, do Japanese case insensitive systems differentiate between hiragana and katakana? Because, in some ways, the two syllabaries remind me of uppercase and lowercase alphabets.

thaumasiotes 2y ago
They're more like distinguishing between "o" and “ℴ”. Which is where the European idea of "capital letters" originates, but not how we think about them today.
presentation 2y ago
A lot of the time forms will specifically ask for hiragana or katakana, or specify full width or half width characters. But basically it’s a mess there too

teitoklien 2y ago

> too much English-centric. Pretty glad about it considering how much more simpler ASCII was to work with compared to Unicode. I say it as a non native english speaker, programming has so many concepts and stuff already, its best not to make it more complex by adding a 101 different languages to account for. Unicode and Timezone, the two things that try to bring more languages and cultures to be accounted for while programming and look what happens, it creates the most amount of pain for everyone including non native english programmers. I dont want to write computer programs in my non-english native tongue, if that means i’ll have to start accounting for every major language while im programming. Its fine that IT discussions are so English-centric. Diversity is more complexity, and no one owns the english language, its just a tool used by people to communicate, thanks to that universal language, I can express my thoughts to most people in India, China, Japan, South America, etc due to having 1 common language. They all own the english language too, the moment they decided to speak in it. No need to bring diversity politics in IT. Best to keep it technical.

orphea 2y ago
> considering how much more simpler ASCII was to work with compared to Unicode. And elemental algebra is more simple than differential calculus. ASCII being simpler just means it is not adequate to represent innate complexity that human languages have. Unicode is not complex because of "diversity politics", whatever that means. It is because languages are complex. The same story with time zones: they are as complex as time is.
regentbowerbird 2y ago
> No need to bring diversity politics in IT. Politics is just "how people think things should be". Therefore politics are everywhere not because people _bring_ them everywhere but because they arise from everything. Your comment is in fact full of politics, down to your opinion that politics shouldn't be included in this discussion. ** > thanks to that universal language, I can express my thoughts to most people in India, China, Japan, South America, etc due to having 1 common language Personally my impression is that native speakers just run circles around everyone else during meetings and such. Being _truly_ comfortable in the language, mastering social cues, being able to confidently and fluently express complex ideas, mean that they effectively take over the room. In turn that means they will hold more power in the company, rise in rank more quickly, get paid more, etc.. There's an actual, significant consequence here. Plus, anglos usually can't really speak another language, so since they don't realize how hard it is they tend to think their coworkers are idiots and will stick to do things with other anglos rather than include everyone. > Diversity is more complexity In a vacuum I agree, but within the context of your comment this is kinda saying "your existence makes my life too complex, please stop being different and join the fold"; and I can't agree with that sentiment.
- BirAdam 2y ago
  You raise an interesting point about the nature of politics. I’ve been thinking about this a bit, but it seems to me that radical/revolutionary politics are talking about how people want things to be while quotidian political ideas are more about how people ought to do a few things. The distinction here being people’s timelines and depth of thought. If a policy has some seriously bad consequences, people may not notice because they weren’t really thinking of things should be, just the narrower thought of how a thing out to be done (think minimum wage driving automation rather than getting people a better standard of living, or immigration control driving police militarization). Of course, for most politicians, I am not sure either of these are correct. I think for politicians, politics is just the study of their own path to power; they likely don’t care much about whether it’s how things are done or how things ought to be so long as they are the ones with the power. I don’t know that this comment really ads anything to the conversation, but I do find it all interesting. Edit: also, on topic, languages are fun. The world is boring when everything is in one language. Languages also hold information in how they structure things, how speakers of that language view the world, and so on, and in those ways they are important contributors to diversity of thought.