That fits witj my experiences. And i want to add an otjer layer. In ai times its somtimes even nice to see some typos. You Casn be pretty sure it was not written by ai.
You can prompt an LLM to add typos, though
Privilege is bad grammar
61–70 of 292 posts
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the positive side of this, research papers by competent people read very clearly with readable sentences, while those who are afraid that their content doesn't quite cut it, litter it with jargon, long complicated sentences, hoping that by making things hard, they will look smart. But to expand on the spelling topic, good spelling and grammar is now free with AI tools. It no longer signals being educated. Informal…
>Informal tone and mistakes actually signal that the message was written by a human and the imperfections increase my trust in the effort spent on the thing. Isn’t this a bit short sighted? So if someone has a wide vocabulary and uses proper grammar, you mistrust them by default?
a vocabulary of certain width raises a question "does this creature understand the words it is using?". So yeah I mistrust them more
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#63I point you to Nancy Mitford's piece (and others) on U vs non-U.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_and_non-U_English
This was a, tongue in cheek, distinction between the language used by the posh and by the aspiring-posh. It's seems analogous to the OP's sense of boss vs non-boss language and diction, which I believe exists.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not having to care is often part of the countersignaling. An honest signal doesn't always take effort. In fact it's the tryhard imitators that have to expend effort emulating this. The real deal is effortless and comes naturally. The silverback gorilla can come across as scary and formidable even when its just lazing around not trying to look intimidating. It's just big, without spending thought cycles on having to a…
There is the "I don't (have to) give a fuck" counter-signaling. But also what about people that really don't care too much, out of ignorance even, or just fatigue. Sure there is intentionality in there, but do we really call that _counter-signaling_?
That’s why there are entire books based on the joke that you can’t tell a homeless guy from a hippie with a trust fund.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here I live in a wealthy town. It’s less sinister than explicit counter signaling. More that I’ll wear comfortable clothes until they wear out because I have better things to do with my time than shop, and I don’t need to use dress anymore to get the access I want and need.
Agree, the parent comment leaves no room for nuance so people end up damned if they do and damned if they don't. I do think thinking through the extremes and motivations and intentions of behavior is worth it. But confident conclusions less so. When it comes to writing and fashion, definitely people over-correct to project a status, in both directions. But also there's just the aged realization that people will think…
You can't really opt out, just choose better suited minigames.
Generally when you don't (have to) care, you either have to back that up with some other accumulated reputation/value, or sacrifice some things. Like you can opt out of the job market game and being bossed around either by founding your own company, going self employed with clients (the hard part), or just sacrifice and downsize your life standard, become homeless or similar. But someone who needs a steady income in lieu of a big inheritance can't just opt out of caring.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#66I had a boss who would respond with: "NO" or "OK"
Reminds me of the apocryphal story of Victor Hugo asking his publisher how his new novel was doing with a single “?”. The publisher replied “!”.
Do your boss could still save themselves 50% of the work.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is the "I don't (have to) give a fuck" counter-signaling. But also what about people that really don't care too much, out of ignorance even, or just fatigue. Sure there is intentionality in there, but do we really call that _counter-signaling_?
That’s why there are entire books based on the joke that you can’t tell a homeless guy from a hippie with a trust fund.
And of course you can, at latest after one or two sentences.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#68This is almost textbook countersignalling. The same as: - Signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else to make up for the fact I'm less professional in other ways - No signalling: I dress like everyone else because I am like everyone else - Countersignalling: I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here
On the positive side of this, research papers by competent people read very clearly with readable sentences, while those who are afraid that their content doesn't quite cut it, litter it with jargon, long complicated sentences, hoping that by making things hard, they will look smart. But to expand on the spelling topic, good spelling and grammar is now free with AI tools. It no longer signals being educated. Informal…
If this becomes the prevailing inclination amongst most readers, Janan Ganesh (one of my most favorite commentators anywhere) at the Financial Times will have a dim professional future.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#69This is almost textbook countersignalling. The same as: - Signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else to make up for the fact I'm less professional in other ways - No signalling: I dress like everyone else because I am like everyone else - Countersignalling: I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here
There's also:
- No signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else because that's been my style since forever and I'm not going to change for a role that doesn't require it.
Re: Privilege is bad grammar
#70?
!