2 ms·
Communication is not a one-player game. For example, if I was being pedantic: > nobody seems to care about using the right words in only this context. "nobod
by ben_w 3mo ago
Communication is not a one-player game.
For example, if I was being pedantic:
> nobody seems to care about using the right words in only this context.
"nobody" would include you.
And then I might complain about we use the word "weight" for something massless, or how "bugs me" is *ento*mologically incorrect: https://xkcd.com/1012/ https://xkcd.com/1012/
This is of course not a good use of time. I wonder if illustrating the point about how language is dynamic and meanings are descriptive not proscriptive, was a good use?
- s0ss 3mo agoyeah, I'm not sure what your goal is pedantically picking apart my argument when the subject at hand is clearly not "open source". love xkcd though. :P
- ben_w 3mo agoThe point is to give you empathy for those you disagree with here.
- throw0101d 3mo ago> And then I might complain about we use the word "weight" for something massless, or how "bugs me" is entomologically incorrect: https://xkcd.com/1012/ https://xkcd.com/1012/ "Communicating": https://xkcd.com/1860/ https://xkcd.com/1860/
- ben_w 3mo agoNot sure how the quoted examples fits with your link, TBH. https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/descriptive-vs-prescriptive-defining-lexicography https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/descriptive-vs-presc... Prescriptively, a "model weight" weighs nothing. Descriptively, this is stupid: a new meaning was created by common use. *Common* use says the weights you can download and run locally are "open source". May not like it, but it's not one person acting alone; and neither are the objectors to the shifting language, it's just the former is more "common" than the latter.