4 ms·
So too did the printing press. Again, this is not a "something similar has happened in the past, therefore this is nothing new" sort of comment. This is quite
by everdrive 6mo ago
So too did the printing press. Again, this is not a "something similar has happened in the past, therefore this is nothing new" sort of comment.
This is quite new, however this outcome was totally unavoidable -- once methods of communication become widespread and centralized it is impossible for them not to impact language and thought.
- rimliu 6mo agohow exactly the printing press did that?
- everdrive 6mo agoIt's actually an interesting topic, the printing press fostered a great normalization of the English language that was not previously present. https://academic.oup.com/book/41217/chapter-abstract/350687942?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false https://academic.oup.com/book/41217/chapter-abstract/3506879... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_refo...
- SketchySeaBeast 6mo agoOn the contrary, the printing press enabled people to quickly spread new ideas. Protestantism was enabled by it. That was quite the schism in thinking.
- everdrive 6mo agoDefinitely agreed -- I wasn't precise enough when making my point, but I think your point is absolutely correct.
- SketchySeaBeast 6mo agoI also agree with your follow-up around the normalization of language. It's a good point, but it seems like an improvement to standardize effective communication, and at the time it was outweighed by the ability to spread challenging heterogeneous ideas. LLMs threaten to engulf us in a uniform grey goo that lulls us away from critical consideration of what we're interacting with and, even more dangerously, creating.