A few years ago I wondered if there were modern guillotines. I forgot the name of the company, but they had a pneumatic model. Should work in zero gravity just fine.
I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It's they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy?
And that's not how English was taught to me or 99℅ of the population (including English as a second or third language) 20+ years ago. Singular they was only used for situations where the gender (read as superficially visible sex) was factually unknown. You see a forgotten umbrella and never saw who forgot it: "Somebody forgot their umbrella." As soon as you only got a glimpse on the person forgetting it you would make a guess about he/she.
They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone's lives since grammar school.
If you're younger than 30 and from Great Britain, maybe. GB were the first to formalize and teach it like that less than 2 decades ago (if I recall correctly).
People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it's incredibly depressing and sad.
That's bullshit projection.
I, a non-native speaker, complain about increased ambiguity of the language because of singular they as a personal pronoun and make a proposal about new pronouns for the purpose.
You: Ah, must be transphobe. Let's ignore everything he said (which doesn't relate to transphobia at all).
It's so frustrating not to be able to have a discussion about stuff making a language harder than it needs to be without people invoking transphobia, like, instantly.
But hey, I called it: can't have a discussion about it and I've given up on it.
edit: tiny add-on. I was still taught gender-neutral he and only heard about they later while being discouraged to use it in writing.
Doesn't feel like you want to have an honest argument when you ask how far we should go back on a proposal about going forward and don't address the single motivator ambiguity.
I criticized singular they/them for increasing language ambiguity and suggested replacing it with something new like xe/xer multiple times. The reply is usually a shitstorm and downvote tornado. I've given up on that front.
Invest in debugging and code review capabilities: With 45% of developers reporting increased debugging time for AI code, organizations need stronger code review processes. They need debugging tools specifically designed for AI-generated solutions.
Or, maybe, don't use tools that generate garbage code.
I've been using linux as a daily driver for more than twenty years. At the same time I had to use Windows for work. Windows has always created more headaches and wasted more of my time than linux. The people who fail on linux are those who expect/demand it to work like windows and those who are not willing to invest the same amount of time they used to learn their way around windows on linux.
"Windows just works" has always been a lie. It's a fragile heap of crap that constantly breaks or misbehaves. People spend a metric shitton of time with workarounds for failing updates, registry hacks ... or externalize that cost to others. Windows "just works" if your kids, company IT, or someone else keeps it working.
If you invest the time to learn a distributions/linux ways, and make a reasonable pick for distribution, linux is much more stable and low maintenance than windows.
Take your pick from anything that isn't recent and by computer scientists or mathematicians, to call stuff intelligent that clearly isn't. According to some modern marketing takes I developed AI 20 years ago (optimizing search problems for agentic systems); it's just that my peers and I weren't stupid enough to call the results intelligent.
_cnt0 @ _cnt0 @sh.itjust.works Posts 11Comments 552Joined 2 yr. ago
They are all superfluous if you know how to do quadratic expansion.