Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

datapointed.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#81

Post by learc83 »

gmaslov wrote: post #22
tzs wrote: post #8

> Which begs the question: just how far away can you get from our world of generic convenience? An interesting kind of related question is to ask what is the farthest you've ever been away from other humans. For most of us, we've never been more than a few miles from others. I've read that the record is probably held by one of the Apollo astronauts who remained in lunar orbit while the landing party landed.

Hmm, that's probably right. I thought that whoever visited the bottom of the Marianas Trench might be a contender, but again it turns out that there were two people in the bathyscape.

Even if there was just one person, he would only be about 7 miles away from the surface support ship.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#82

Post by learc83 »

I remember when I was a kid (late 80s early/mid 90s), and I'd visit my aunt in California (I'm from Georgia). It seemed almost like a different country--different stores, different architecture, different culture. The same was true for rural areas closer to home.

Now everywhere I go, there's a Walmart, a McDonalds, an Applebees/Chilis/TGI-Fridays, a BestBuy, a Staples/OfficeMax/Office Depot, and a Home Depot, or Lowes.

The world feels a lot smaller.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#83

Post by wyclif »

bane wrote: post #66
tocomment wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should have said "raises the question". " begs the question".means assuming the conclusion of your argument.

Nobody uses it with that meaning anymore, the phrase has taken on a different meaning. This happens with language, definitions shift, nuance is added, old meanings fall away. If you use the phrase with the original Latin meaning, you'd likely just confuse your listener. It hasn't had that definition in the common parlance for probably the last couple of centuries -- or at least since Latin stopped being necessary for…

Get it right. http://begthequestion.info/

Shouldn't we accept that words change in meaning over time? True, words like "cool" and "gay" gained new meaning via a process of modern association with their understood meanings, but BTQ abuse rises from a misunderstanding of its original use. It would be as though people started using "the die is cast" to mean dying, simply because the word "die" is in there, without any knowledge of Caesar. Is there any idiom -- not a single word, but a full phrase -- whose meaning has changed over the years, simply by virtue of its being misunderstood by the linguistically inept or the historically ignorant?

But language is constantly evolving. That's great to know! Descriptivist linguists, whom we do not fault for their stand, are quite free to watch as we bring about an evolution in the vernacular understanding of "begging the question."

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#85

Post by bane »

wyclif wrote: post #83
bane wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody uses it with that meaning anymore, the phrase has taken on a different meaning. This happens with language, definitions shift, nuance is added, old meanings fall away. If you use the phrase with the original Latin meaning, you'd likely just confuse your listener. It hasn't had that definition in the common parlance for probably the last couple of centuries -- or at least since Latin stopped being necessary for…

Get it right. http://begthequestion.info/ Shouldn't we accept that words change in meaning over time? True, words like "cool" and "gay" gained new meaning via a process of modern association with their understood meanings, but BTQ abuse rises from a misunderstanding of its original use. It would be as though people started using "the die is cast" to mean dying, simply because the word "die" is in there, without any k…

I am right. There's no reason why specific disciplines can't have their own meaning to words and phrases.

Vector, moment, impulse, circuit, computer, etc. all have historic uses that are largely forgotten today or have different meanings in different contexts. Just because a usage is old, or specific to a certain context doesn't mean that usage should be universal or part of the common tongue. Arguing that language is fixed, and should never change is arguing from a special kind of gross ignorance -- the kind where a person has learned enough to think they know it all, but don't actually know anything in particular.

I think the phrase "know enough to be dangerous" comes to mind with most proscriptivists.

If you think I'm wrong, don't ever use vector again unless it's the one I personally think it the correct singular usage, and don't ever use computer unless you are talking about a person who performs calculations.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#86

Post by vidarh »

wyclif wrote: post #83
bane wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody uses it with that meaning anymore, the phrase has taken on a different meaning. This happens with language, definitions shift, nuance is added, old meanings fall away. If you use the phrase with the original Latin meaning, you'd likely just confuse your listener. It hasn't had that definition in the common parlance for probably the last couple of centuries -- or at least since Latin stopped being necessary for…

Get it right. http://begthequestion.info/ Shouldn't we accept that words change in meaning over time? True, words like "cool" and "gay" gained new meaning via a process of modern association with their understood meanings, but BTQ abuse rises from a misunderstanding of its original use. It would be as though people started using "the die is cast" to mean dying, simply because the word "die" is in there, without any k…

The only time I've ever seen "beg the question" used in this way is when people complain about it being used to mean "raises the question".

The original use is for all intents and purposes dead outside of a small group of language purists who mostly appear to be using it to annoy people who use the new meaning.

That the new meaning rises from a misunderstanding of its original use is irrelevant - a lot of language changes are a result of "mistakes" of one form or another.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#87

Post by aMoniker »

vacri wrote: post #56
tocomment wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should have said "raises the question". " begs the question".means assuming the conclusion of your argument.

Common usage has it the other way around - 'begs the question' does mean 'raises the question', simply because that's how it's used. That philosophical jargon has it differently doesn't change that.

And by definition of the individual words it can mean 'demands the (following) question'.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#88

Post by wyclif »

bane wrote: post #85
wyclif wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get it right. http://begthequestion.info/ Shouldn't we accept that words change in meaning over time? True, words like "cool" and "gay" gained new meaning via a process of modern association with their understood meanings, but BTQ abuse rises from a misunderstanding of its original use. It would be as though people started using "the die is cast" to mean dying, simply because the word "die" is in there, without any k…

I am right. There's no reason why specific disciplines can't have their own meaning to words and phrases. Vector, moment, impulse, circuit, computer, etc. all have historic uses that are largely forgotten today or have different meanings in different contexts. Just because a usage is old, or specific to a certain context doesn't mean that usage should be universal or part of the common tongue. Arguing that language i…

You reply as if you think I don't know what a descriptivist is. I do. The problem is that I'm not arguing that "language is fixed, and should never change." That is a rather severe misreading of the above link. The point is that people commonly misunderstand the original usage, not that the usage has changed.

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#89

Post by itmag »

patio11 wrote: post #71
twoodfin wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starbucks' expansion was interestingly "clumpy". Not surprising, I guess, when you realize they have to deal with the same supply chain issues as anyone else in a similar space. They didn't open a freestanding store in Tulsa until 2002, years after seemingly every other corner in Manhattan had one.

Starbucks also has a very sophisticated siting operation which predicts demand similar to how an oil company predicts oil. For green fields, you measure proxies, look at formula based on historical data, and guess. If you sink one well and hit a gusher, though, your expectation of profitable exploitability in the vicinity goes WAY up, so you start going nuts. You'd think that two Starbucks across the street would can…

P.S. A software solution to turn any arbitrary firm into Starbucks would be worth tens of millions of dollars if you sold it correctly.

Whoa, that is seriously interesting. Would you mind emailing me more details about your idea? :)

Re: How Far Can You Get From McDonald's?

#90

Post by wyclif »

vidarh wrote: post #86
wyclif wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get it right. http://begthequestion.info/ Shouldn't we accept that words change in meaning over time? True, words like "cool" and "gay" gained new meaning via a process of modern association with their understood meanings, but BTQ abuse rises from a misunderstanding of its original use. It would be as though people started using "the die is cast" to mean dying, simply because the word "die" is in there, without any k…

The only time I've ever seen "beg the question" used in this way is when people complain about it being used to mean "raises the question". The original use is for all intents and purposes dead outside of a small group of language purists who mostly appear to be using it to annoy people who use the new meaning. That the new meaning rises from a misunderstanding of its original use is irrelevant - a lot of language ch…

That's essentially an argument from experience. Michael Quinion disagrees with you. http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-beg1.htm
Post reply on HN