I'm sure :-) has been independently invented a million times.
Back in my UO days we used =] because it was quicker to type and the in-game font made it look better than a traditional smiley.
Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
101–110 of 160 posts
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
The smiley is an efficient general-purpose abstraction of reality; the emoji is a million instances of copy-pasted overly-specific code.
Emojis are in Unicode. They aren't parsed or converted to multiple glyphs anymore, the text editor will provide them directly. http://unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-list.html I was doubtful of emojis at first, but now I'm loving the concept. They really help me communicate emotions that I wouldn't put into actual words. Smileys can't really do that. Culturally I see it as a the first universal (limited) language…
See for example the translation of moby dick into emoji as a prototype of emoji as language
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, there is /r/hackernews...
It's just a mirror of submissions... Actually kind of useful if you want to search for a submission that you saw on HN a while ago.
There's a pretty decent search field at the bottom of the page if you hadn't noticed. Not sure how it compares to the reddit search mechanism though.
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#104Interesting thing to note is that before Fahlman suggested ":-)" symbol, Leonard Hamey suggested "{#}" (see 17-Sep-82 17:42 post). After that, someone suggested "\__/" (see 20-Sep-82 17:56 post). But only ":-)" gained popularity. It is funny to imagine how emoticons ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emoticons ) would look today if one of alternative symbols was accepted?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
The smiley is an efficient general-purpose abstraction of reality; the emoji is a million instances of copy-pasted overly-specific code.
Emojis are in Unicode. They aren't parsed or converted to multiple glyphs anymore, the text editor will provide them directly. http://unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-list.html I was doubtful of emojis at first, but now I'm loving the concept. They really help me communicate emotions that I wouldn't put into actual words. Smileys can't really do that. Culturally I see it as a the first universal (limited) language…
As a college student, I use emoji constantly to communicate all sorts of abstract sentiments, but in my experience they can also be irritatingly ambiguous and highly dependent on cultural norms and interpretation.
Take the thumbs up emoji - within my social circles, the exact same emoji can be interpreted both as a enthusiastic agreement ("Sure!") and also as a sarcastic affirmation ("Good for you.").
It's often difficult to infer the intended meaning, even with context, and in some circumstances I've found emojis have actually added significantly to the ambiguity and cognitive burden in parsing a text. That's not a problem I have often faced with simple smileys.
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#106Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#107It makes me a bit of a luddite (and a heck of a curmudgeon), but it always makes me a little sad when good ol' ASCII smileys are rendered all fancy-like. There's something charming and hackerish about showing it as a 7-bit glyph. I think the Internet fundamentally changed when that happened. Tangentially-related, I can't fathom why someone would post YouTube videos of `telnet towel.blinkenlights.nl`.
I'm with you. I put a space between the : and the ) to prevent the graphic emoji : )
That automatic emoji concept can be quite annoying sometimes.
For instance, Outlook 365 will automatically turn "B)" into the "smiling face with sunglasses" emoji. I cannot fathom this use case. Apparently someone at Microsoft thought that things like, oh, a fairly common styling of a simple lettered list (A) Do this B) Do that C) Etc.) and parenthesized words / sentences ending in capital B (abbreviations will get you there, like say BBB) are not very common in corporate communication. The need for a smiling face sunglasses clad emoji was much stronger. Go figure.
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does it represent? I doubt understand it
It's a woman on a pedestal, like the expression: "women should be placed upon a pedestal." The phrase is usually understood to mean that men should treat women with respect, treating them as if they are more important than themselves.
Wow, that's a lot of downvotes. Mind telling me why?
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#109Usenet archives are also a treasure trove for this kind of things. Searching old posts on Usenet feels like modern day archaeology
Re: Original bulletin board thread in which ‘:-)’ was proposed
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Past the point where we thought that ideas should be or even can be segmented into those interesting to women vs those interesting to men, which is a rather silly idea rooted in gender unfounded stereotypes and possibly a bit of sexism.
We're not even close to past that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women%27s_magazines https://m.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes It's still acceptable to categorize clothing stores by sex as well.
And toys. The local Target has "girls" and "boys" sections. I'm wondering what my daughter is going to say when she finally notices that half the stuff she likes is filed under "boys."