[dead]
Dotsies (2012)
161–170 of 204 posts
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been an automated reader since I was probably, what, five years old?
Me too, I didn't even mean to read your comment, but as soon as my eyes saw it: boom, processed and read. like a computer without virus scan or security or anything, to see the words was to run their executable on my wetware.
I actually remember to have had severe headaches when I was something like 4 or 5 and I experienced the passage from deliberate reading and automatic reading.
It was much worse being around in a car and just looking outside and unwillingly read all the signs because it added also elements of motion sickness to it...
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#163I feel compelled to write up a summary of the comments here and responses to each one: > This is useless. Who cares? It's super cool! > This is not well-suited for use case X. Did you read the page? It's so great that someone thought of this and did it. > This has been done before. SUPER. COOL. > It's hard to read. I don't know what you aren't getting about this. > What if it implemented improvement X? I don't know,…
To be fair, you could use your exact post to argue in favor of Juicero, uBeam or Theranos. More in-depth, yes, a lot of posts here are criticizing - but it seems to me, a lot of it is constructive criticism from someone who actually did find the idea interesting. I personally would find a HN where each post is just a variant of "woah that's super cool!" a lot less interesting.
Criticism is useful and welcome, but it doesn't have to be dismissive or in a negative tone.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funnily enough, that's very close to how a non-English-speaking German would probably spell English words :)
I believe that was the intended joke.
I doubt it. With very few minor correction this looks like phonetic transcription of what slavic (should hold at least for polish, czech and slovak) language native would write it down.
I believe german writing is also close to phonetical. That's why it works.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#165Ithkuil 2.0 (9 vowels and 29 consonants) could use a similar setup for it's writing system, but as mentioned by others should make the mapping more intuitive; using dots just because a,b,c,d,e are the first 5 letters is not.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#166I believe it was an HN thread years ago where I first discovered Dotsies. I spent a very satisfying afternoon learning to read it and write it. I then labelled all sorts of cables and patch boards and such with it around my cubicle for fun. I only kept them up for a few days, but it was a blast learning to read something cryptic and cool looking at a glance with so little effort. If only for that idle distraction Dot…
It is fun. I actually used (and still use) the "Standard Galactic Alphabet" from the Commander Keen games every once in a while, which is a little easier to read and write, yet almost as baffling to non-insiders :)
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
I learned Shavian a few years ago, with my own transliteration dictionary based on my New Zealand English pronunciation (which Shavian doesn't quite seem to handle all of). Unfortunately, different dialects of English have very (inconsistently) different pronunciations, and hence there would be many different spellings for the same words; I really struggled to read Shavian written by people from other parts of the wo…
Or it would require standardizing on certain pronunciations.
My native language, Romanian, is written exactly as it is heard. Dialects with differing pronunciations still exist. In practice, everyone who speaks in dialect, writes the words as if transliterated from the official pronunciations (which is taught in schools), but pronounces the words as they're used. So in writing everyone gets each other. Orally, it can be a bit difficult sometimes.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#168I feel compelled to write up a summary of the comments here and responses to each one: > This is useless. Who cares? It's super cool! > This is not well-suited for use case X. Did you read the page? It's so great that someone thought of this and did it. > This has been done before. SUPER. COOL. > It's hard to read. I don't know what you aren't getting about this. > What if it implemented improvement X? I don't know,…
The only thing that would of made your summary better is if it was written in the Dotsies font.
And the only thing that would have your comment better if it had the word 'worse' instead of 'better.' Oh, and that "of made" thing.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#169I feel compelled to write up a summary of the comments here and responses to each one: > This is useless. Who cares? It's super cool! > This is not well-suited for use case X. Did you read the page? It's so great that someone thought of this and did it. > This has been done before. SUPER. COOL. > It's hard to read. I don't know what you aren't getting about this. > What if it implemented improvement X? I don't know,…
To be fair, you could use your exact post to argue in favor of Juicero, uBeam or Theranos. More in-depth, yes, a lot of posts here are criticizing - but it seems to me, a lot of it is constructive criticism from someone who actually did find the idea interesting. I personally would find a HN where each post is just a variant of "woah that's super cool!" a lot less interesting.
Notably differently, Dotsies is not heavily funded, nor does it want you to pay several digits for access. It’s just a fun experiment. It should not be held to the same standards of usefulness as a thousand-dollar juicer.
Re: Dotsies (2012)
#170I feel compelled to write up a summary of the comments here and responses to each one: > This is useless. Who cares? It's super cool! > This is not well-suited for use case X. Did you read the page? It's so great that someone thought of this and did it. > This has been done before. SUPER. COOL. > It's hard to read. I don't know what you aren't getting about this. > What if it implemented improvement X? I don't know,…
To be fair, you could use your exact post to argue in favor of Juicero, uBeam or Theranos. More in-depth, yes, a lot of posts here are criticizing - but it seems to me, a lot of it is constructive criticism from someone who actually did find the idea interesting. I personally would find a HN where each post is just a variant of "woah that's super cool!" a lot less interesting.
No you couldn't - because those weren't done before :)