21–30 of 215 posts
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rich Cook
this would also seem to discriminate against people who aren't native english speakers (or w/e other language).
These words/phrases are wildly different in other languages, and thus well distinct in the mind of non-native folks.
For example, in French:
were -> étais; etions, etiez, étaient (2nd person, singular; 1st, 2nd and 3rd person, plural)
we're -> nous sommes
where -> où
Love the idea, but wouldn't it be simpler and more effective to just have them fill in the missing word without the images.
So, i can be a d*ck as long as i'm smart? Edit: I'm disturbed by the amount of grammar nazi's here that think the quality of someone's grammar reflects their personality... If the goal is to keep the conversation civilized, why not do something along the lines of "Doing X is a more nice thing to do".
I don't think it's really about being smart. Having a basic grasp of language so you can adequately articulate yourself in a conversation is critical to discussion. If you can't, then you probably shouldn't be taking part in the discussion anyway. Too many people will spill there emotions into a discussion with sub standard spelling and grammar which makes it very difficult for others to understand them, which leads…
I have real trouble imagining that a good point made with substitution erros is somehow less critical to the discussion than a poor point that doesn’t confuse it’s/its.
In my experience simple, domain-specific CAPTCHAs work pretty well. They don't even need to include a frustrating image with hard-to-parse words. Just ask commenters a somewhat randomized question that any visitor to the site would be able to answer easily. It can be really, really simple - like for example asking them to enter the abbreviation for something: > Whats the abbreviation commonly used for the Hypertext T…
That would work well provided your site isn't a high traffic site.
Love the idea, but wouldn't it be simpler and more effective to just have them fill in the missing word without the images.
Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?
Not that I'm calling you an idiot, you have a very fair point.
this would also seem to discriminate against people who aren't native english speakers (or w/e other language).
Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?