lvxferre

14 ms·

91.
by lvxferre 5y ago
The character limit introduces a lot of misunderstandings.
92.
by lvxferre 5y ago
Other morals: Being "nice" (copycat) is not the same as being a "sucker" (cooperator). Suckers don't make things worse just for themselves, but for everyone around them, by encouraging bad behaviour. Even then, peop
93.
by lvxferre 5y ago
I've seen this once. But just now I noticed something: >the fewer "repeat interactions" there are, the more distrust will spread. Doesn't this explain quite well why big internet communities devolve into a cesspool? I
94.
by lvxferre 5y ago
Those borrowings barely affected the core vocabulary, that is still distinctly West Germanic. "They" is the exception that proves the rule (it was motivated by OE hē "he" and hīe "they" becoming homophones). An
95.
by lvxferre 5y ago
Yup. And theoretically, Grimm's Law would allow you to find those patterns even between some random Germanic vs. Romance/Latin pair; like e.g. plenus/full, tres/three, head/caput. Too many changes piled up to be use
96.
by lvxferre 5y ago
That's a good approach. If you back it up with a study of your target audience, and creates the personae in a way that it represents it well, you could even take decisions like "We could annoy Ginny for the sake of Eddy and Frank,
97.
by lvxferre 5y ago
>I guess that is more the lasting Viking and Dane Law impact upon the English, than English feeding in modern Swedish. It might be the result of common Germanic grounds, not necessarily lateral influence. I got the same when learning Ger
98.
by lvxferre 5y ago
I'm reading the design principles right now. A lot of them are sane and reasonable; my issue is with what's missing. >Resist the pull to try and make an app that suits all people in all situations. Focus on one situation, one t
99.
by lvxferre 5y ago
No; I'm from South America. In fact I was mentally comparing MX+USA with the situation here, it depends a lot on the specific region but usually there's a plurality of staple carbs (wheat, rice, potato, corn, yucca...). Cattle foo
100.
by lvxferre 5y ago
>Scots is a dialect of English It's up to the linguistic community to decide that, if their variety should be considered a "dialect" of something else or a "language" on its own. Linguists already gave up that qu
101.
by lvxferre 5y ago
Can GPT-3 figure out that a common word is being used outside its usual context, so its usual meanings don't apply? Let's say my example was instead "I got a cat. That little orc sleeps on my bed." I wonder how GPT-3 wou
102.
by lvxferre 5y ago
The way I see this working is by adding a second layer of machine learning to the process. The first layer would work as usual (associate words with utterance-independent meanings), but the second layer would compare those meanings with the
103.
by lvxferre 5y ago
This is just my impression, so do tell me if I'm incorrect, but I always got the impression that those North American countries like Mexico and USA rely a bit too much on corn, to the detriment of a more diverse set of crops. Renewable
104.
by lvxferre 5y ago
Caveat lector: I'm analysing this as a linguist. Not as a programmer. (Unless you count a bunch of bash scripts as "programming".) >Let us start first with describing what we call the “missing text phenomenon” (MTP), that
105.
by lvxferre 5y ago
My grandma had a story about the devil's son's eye. The boy had such pretty eyes, that the devil couldn't help but caress constantly, while saying "my son got such good eyes!". Until, one day, the devil pierces one
106.
by lvxferre 5y ago
>presumer Eh. I've been using assumer and arse-sumer, for the exact same meaning. e.g. "the four donkeymen of Reddit: the assumer, the dichotomiser, the illiterate, and the genetic fallacist". On-topic. The issue with slip
107.
by lvxferre 5y ago
A lot of the "principles" behind Newspeak are bollocks, from a linguistic point of view. For example there's nothing intrinsically less expressive in an agglutinative typology (e.g. "doubleplusungood" instead of &qu
108.
by lvxferre 5y ago
In plenty countries, repeatedly trying to contact someone after the person said "don't contact me" would be grounds for suing the contacting party. And given Amazon clearly doesn't give a fuck about sellers hounding cust