3 ms·
Agreed. The writing is quite prolix, affected, and pretentious, too. This is apparent even in the first sentence, where the author inexplicably puts quotation m
by globnomulous 2y ago
Agreed. The writing is quite prolix, affected, and pretentious, too. This is apparent even in the first sentence, where the author inexplicably puts quotation marks around "social network feeds" (while incorrectly failing to hyphenate the compound adjective).
This would, of course, be obvious to anyone who has studied languages or writing. For those for whom language is a mere instrument or vehicle of thought, while receiving no thought or appreciation itself, I can see why this may come as a surprise.
- kurthr 2y agoI expected there to be something interesting in this loveliness. Instead, I found boredom. I wanted to share in the joy, but found despair in both the original comment and the shocked responses. Understanding the definition of percentages and expecting them to commute is more basic than some random API. For someone trained in math it's like a "programmer" not understanding what a function is, and vibecoding their way through. I had to stare at Euler's identity for a while to recover from this.
- globnomulous 2y ago> I had to stare at Euler's identity for a while to recover from this. It's pronounced "YEW-ler," right?