How would you talk about an unfamiliar individual known by a noun you can't say?
Just talk on and on without using that char.
41–50 of 134 posts
How would you talk about an unfamiliar individual known by a noun you can't say?
Just talk on and on without using that char.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That guy lon. You know, the spacx guy. Oh yah, why didn't you say so? Musk.
I wouldn't say that using a word such as "spacx" is in spirit.
Zip2 collaborator
X.com collaborator (by and by, part of PayPal, of which a principal and also a primary joint stock-holding guy, and so an original PayPal Mafia "mafioso")
Mars colony instigator, for which aim's promotion also principal of orbital propulsion firm with first major victory involving launching an orbital craft propulsion unit again and again
Popular luxury voltaic-propulsion motorcar firm kingpin
SolarCity capitalist
Scary fast monorailish-but-not vacuum transport plan originator and champion
Philanthropic patron of folks with a major fascination for AI, apologists for both caution and gusto about it
Boring Company instigator with plans to dig subways in L.A.
plus additional stuff (that guy has had a hand in astonishingly many things...)
This website is slugish as hell. Every time I scroll my cpu usage jumps to ~30% and I have ~2FPS, using the latest version of Firefox. On Chrome the CPU still spikes, but it's no nearly as bad.
> Reeve replied to my email in less than an hour, with nearly 300 words and no appearance of the banned character. I attempted to write this article without using the letter "e" and gave up after five minutes of weak effort. 0x7265657665 did dispatch back as to my communication in duration not in surplus of an hour with almost 300 words and without a taboo glyph in sight. Although I did try to author this column with…
In what encoding does "0x65" represent "e" ?
> Reeve replied to my email in less than an hour, with nearly 300 words and no appearance of the banned character. I attempted to write this article without using the letter "e" and gave up after five minutes of weak effort. 0x7265657665 did dispatch back as to my communication in duration not in surplus of an hour with almost 300 words and without a taboo glyph in sight. Although I did try to author this column with…
In what encoding does "0x65" represent "e" ?
It's Similar to That Bird Social App, But Without a Fifth Symbol
Mastodon has an app with particular quirks and many humans find it joyful.
Mastodon boffins did it again.
A particular boffin going by initials M.R. works as a digital craftsman at a corporation with initials I.A. (that has http archival capability), did craft a social app oulipo.social with an odd quirk: said app disallows applying of fifth anglo-saxon linguistic symbol or "any variant of it".
Said individual found motivation via book "A Void" by author G.P. This lipogrammatic book did apply all anglo-saxon linguistic symbols but that particular symbol. It follows a Francophonic philosophy of Oulipo, a constraint form of writing that is a combination of both math and book study.
Banning of this symbol is Oulipo's most famous limitation: "It limits writing without making it too hard," M.R. said. "You can still sound natural and say what you want to say, though you may think on it a bit in a way that you wouldn't without constraints." Such limitation can push you to think hard and apply imagination about words, M.R. said.
M.R. had no anticipation that oulipo.social would attain popularity — as it got its start as a trial of skills application of Ruby on Rails and to attain a sharp mind in OS capability — but said app did gain many additional accounts (singular digit with two nought digits) within about six days of starting.
"It's a joy to watch folks do things I wouldn't think of—#drilipo, and applying oulipo constraints to famous writing and songs—and just chat about day to day stuff," M.R. said. "It's also gratifying that folks will look at oulipo.social and go on to think up constraints or gimmicks for additional variant Mastodons."
M.R. did post back to my communication within an hour, with almost 300 words and without said taboo symbol. I suck at thinking by using my imagination to avoid said symbol and quit not long post-starting as my mind is frail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not hard, but what about a missing third individual that both must understand to carry on?
Nooo... you said undErstand.
So just lav out the "e"? The human brain would b prfctly capabl of undrstanding it.