Th4tGuyII @ Th4tGuyII @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

852

Joined

2 yr. ago

Exactly. If they'd gone with the carrot approach rather than the stick, I bet way more people would've just gone with it for way less fuss

That may be their objective, but they’ve clearly failed and should be rewritten to reflect reality, evidenced by the fact that half of scientific journals use Aluminum.

Once again - American journals.
You're downright ignorant to suggest that because one country refuses to follow an internationally agreed upon naming scheme it should be rewritten to suit you. That's the kind of logic that should come from a little kid, not a country.

Of course if you’d like to stick entirely with the academic prescriptions, you’re free to not use “email” in French, singular they in English, AI instead of KI in Norwegian [...]

I don't have enough context about all the examples you list to make an informed opinion of them, but I can certainly take a crack at a couple...

singular they in English

Singular they was historically discouraged in academic writing as it was seen as informal, but doesn't mean it was never acknowledged.
It has been used, just not widely - though with an academic swing towards gender-neutral language, it is seen as acceptable by most academic style guides...
However, in the scientific world you're not really supposed to refer to yourself personally in papers in the first place, so it's about as accepted as any other pronoun.

AI instead of KI in Norwegian

That's not just a Norwegian thing, it's a difference due to language.
AI is not an internationally standardised terminology, so of course different languages with different component words and/or grammar are going to end up with different acronyms.

For example, the Germans and Dutch also refer to it as KI (though in Dutch AI is also acceptable), and in Spain and France IA is the standard - that doesn't mean that academics wouldn't just agree on a term when working internationally.

As said before, I don't know enough about the other examples to make informed discussion of them, but the examples I do have context for are do not fall in the same category as America outright refusing to use internationally agreed upon terminology.

In any case, I don't think you're going to be convinced by any of the words I'm saying, nor do I think I'll be convinced by anything you could say, so I'm going to leave this here before I throw too much time into an endless back and forth.

Ah of course, the heavily American-centric forum is obviously the perfect way to prove the entirely American misspelling is the correct one /s

You can spell or pronounce Aluminium however you like, but there is only one internationally recognised spelling, and it's not "Aluminum"

Those "archaic rules" exist to standardise international science communication, not to make America feel better about its inability to standardise to save its life.

Oh, really?

The official IUPAC spelling is "Aluminium" - notice how there are two "I"s in there.

Since IUPAC is quite literally the international authority on chemical terminology, I'd suggest their spelling is the correct one.

If you want to spell it wrong, you do you, but don't act like it's the correct way to spell it.

Haste makes waste - if you want quality content, let the dev and their team take the time they need.

Rock. Stick will rot quickly, but the rock will stick around as long as I don't lose it

Exactly. People weren't so much amazed by the fact something wouldn't move until you moved it, they were much more amazed by mathematical proof that in the vacuum of space objects will just keep moving however you pushed them - it's an alien idea when all you've ever experienced is the opposite on Earth.

Was about to say - either that dog is AI generated, or OP has done an awful job taking the picture

And yet they'll be scratching their heads trying to figure out why more people are returning to piracy.

Comes in an envelope with some lovely anthrax

This seems a lot more like an unfortunate coincidence than the first whistleblower, unless Boeing have resorted to bioterrorism to get rid of their witnesses, but I'd hate to be part of Boeing's PR team right now - huge court case where the witnesses against you keep dying doesn't look good even if you had nothing to do with it.

True. While it's definitely more secure than their other 2FA offering (storing them with your passwords), it's still the same developers making both - so it still feels like putting all my eggs in one basket.

For IOS I can see this as a valid option, because unless you are willing to trust Microsoft, Google, or Authy with your 2FA, which I personally don't think one should, then you haven't got too many options.

But on Android there are plenty others that are known to be reliable, Aegis for example, so the value proposition is lessened for me at least.

Went to check - had personalised Ads off on every account I have already, so I guess I won't be seeing what Google's got on me ¯(ツ)/¯

Cool idea for anyone who doesn't already use Bitwarden for their passwords, but I would be awfully sceptical of having my passwords and 2FA codes stored on the same service - only one breach required to royally screw me up

Why would anyone agree to a deal knowing your publically stated intention is to break said deal?

That'd be like me selling you an IPhone, telling you it's actually a brick, then expecting you to still buy it

Selotape? It'd have to be something that sticks on it's own

I mean they're not wrong - I wouldn't expect every policeman out there to be Phoenix Wright, but at the very least they should actually have to learn the laws that they're supposed to be enforcing

Depends - I currently use Heliboard which doesn't seem to have any problems as long as I stick to dictionary words.

Samsung's keyboard sucks though - not only would it miss obvious typos, if you made the same typo often enough, it'd start learning the "word" and autocorrecting the actual bloody spelling to the typo!
(I had a habit of swaping the i and e in their, so of course Samsung decided "thier" was what I clearly meant to type)

From what I see on the article, it looks like it mostly applies to manufacturer set passwords - though it does look like the devices are now required to prompt the user if they try to set a weak or common password (though I can't remember the last time I wasn't prompted)

That's what I figured - pretty much any alarm system would be better, but could technically help you in a pinch