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

I'm just having fun

jyn.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 261 posts

Re: I'm just having fun

#241

Post by egypturnash »

monerozcash wrote: post #133
SilverSlash wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Sam Altman popularized it with his tweets during the height of OpenAI, GPT popularity ~2023. Or maybe it was already trending by then but at least for me he was the first among prominent people to be doing it.

Smartphones forced automated capitalization on us, just look at how chatlogs have changed over time. I'd suggest no-capitalization is on the downtrend, but sticks out more because everything is automatically capitalized now.

there are times i will explicitly fight that when i am typing something on a phone and want the subtle mode shift of all lowercase, it's kind of hilarious to watch myself doing that

Re: I'm just having fun

#242

Post by pluralmonad »

mcmoor wrote: post #68
Aeolos wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, curiosity and intelligence are very strongly correlated. There is a real gap between people with the curiosity and ability to explore and learn, and people without. This is often handwaved as "motivation" but it's more than just that. In fact, the gap is so large that it can be really hard for a person on one side of it to understand how people on the other side think.

I think part of it is that geniuses gets (or at least feels) rewarded whenever they try learning, while other people might not. For the same amount of effort, the amount of new knowledge gained by other people is fewer than what geniuses can get. Overtime, leaning no longer feels worth it. Thus normal people no longer feels curious while geniuses still do.

I thought of it from the other end. Curious folks end up engaging in cycles of formative learning that the less curious do not. The perceived intelligence follows. Its the process that makes the difference.

Re: I'm just having fun

#243

Post by DrPimienta »

GaryBluto wrote: post #166
hofrogs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"feminizing" doesn't refer to a sexual fetish, it just means making something more feminine. Do you assume that something being feminine is automatically sexualized and fetishistic?

I knew you were going to say this. "Feminizing" doesn't inherently refer to a sexual fetish but context matters. I invite you to examine the article more in depth, look at the chatroom conversations and then come to your own conclusion.

[flagged]

Re: I'm just having fun

#244

Post by mackeye »

DrPimienta wrote: post #243
GaryBluto wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew you were going to say this. "Feminizing" doesn't inherently refer to a sexual fetish but context matters. I invite you to examine the article more in depth, look at the chatroom conversations and then come to your own conclusion.

[flagged]

fuck off

Re: I'm just having fun

#245

Post by DrPimienta »

mackeye wrote: post #210
GaryBluto wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author quite literally mentions that part of their motivation to do things is to make people want them to stop, not to mention the deliberate and conscious choice to write the article in lowercase. It's also natural to be uncomfortable because of the various references to sexual fetishes throughout the article.

> to make people want them to stop in the sense of "writing a brainfuck compiler in ed," not in making them so uncomfortable they beg for release. plus, "feminization" is not a fetish, at least in the sense of making rustc say "i love you;" that feels incredibly uncharitable.

You're being intentionally obtuse, you know what they meant when they wrote that and you're pretending not to.

Re: I'm just having fun

#246

Post by BergAndCo »

GaryBluto wrote: post #166
hofrogs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"feminizing" doesn't refer to a sexual fetish, it just means making something more feminine. Do you assume that something being feminine is automatically sexualized and fetishistic?

I knew you were going to say this. "Feminizing" doesn't inherently refer to a sexual fetish but context matters. I invite you to examine the article more in depth, look at the chatroom conversations and then come to your own conclusion.

[dead]

Re: I'm just having fun

#247

Post by attila-lendvai »

RagnarD wrote: post #119

When did this writing with no capitalization start to become a thing? I'm seeing it too often now. It's pretentious crap and quickly leads to me thinking that the writer doesn't want to be taken seriously, so why read it?

i started typing no caps at least a decade ago (and i'm 50). the reason was mostly that when i edited a sentence i had to mess around with caps, plus speed and pinky strain.

learning about Lojban and its punctuation probably also swayed me (it marks the start of the sentences with punctuation, which makes a lot more sense).

Re: I'm just having fun

#248

Post by performative »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #137
performative wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think it's either the result of a stream of consciousness into one's phone hastily formatted into a blog post, or something constructed to resemble that. the rushed construction slash abrasive rhetorical tool kinda matches the message it's trying to send, imo. it's often that the amount of time i've spent thinking about something (a lot) is totally disproportionate to the time i spend typing my thoughts up (a littl…

>i think it's either the result of a stream of consciousness into one's phone I don't know about Android but on the iPhone you have to go out of your way to remove the capitalisation.

this is gonna sound antagonistic but i promise it's not: you're absolutely right! but people do go into the settings and disable auto-capitalization, and it's pretty much how young and/or queer people type nowadays

Re: I'm just having fun

#249

Post by Mawr »

disruptiveink wrote: post #132
mnsc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the whole thing without seeing it. But I also fail to see how you marry "pretentious" with not wanting to be taken seriously. So maybe it's me.

If you purposely go into your phone settings and turn off auto-capitalization (which is what the kids do, since they're all typing on their phones), isn't it the very definition of pretentiousness? You're going into extra trouble to signify you're part of a clique, while feigning "laid-backness" and "i dont even care bro". But you do care. You care so much to project your appearance of being cool and that you don't e…

> If you purposely go into your phone settings and turn off auto-capitalization (which is what the kids do, since they're all typing on their phones), isn't it the very definition of pretentiousness?

That's incredibly presumptuous of you. That they're on their phone, that they had auto capitalization defaulted to on, that it's them who turned it off, that they didn't turn it off for whatever other reason (bugginess).

Re: I'm just having fun

#250

Post by mackeye »

DrPimienta wrote: post #245
mackeye wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to make people want them to stop in the sense of "writing a brainfuck compiler in ed," not in making them so uncomfortable they beg for release. plus, "feminization" is not a fetish, at least in the sense of making rustc say "i love you;" that feels incredibly uncharitable.

You're being intentionally obtuse, you know what they meant when they wrote that and you're pretending not to.

i was being charitable, not obtuse. a great number of my closest friends are trans; no element of their experience as i observe it fetishizes the very concept of transition, and those who've spoken to me about it are quite opposed to the "pornification" (as opposed to even sexualization) of trans people (particularly women) by the community itself, and others. if you're at all curious, i thought [0] was pretty informative.

all that to say, trans people (or anyone) shouldn't need to qualify their position (or very lighthearted, energetic opinion piece) with some genericizing disclaimer as to their identity, intents, etc., on the very basis of their identity. live and let live (i.e. fuck off)

[0] https://tr4nbie.substack.com/p/cat-ears-skater-skirts-and-kn...

Post reply on HN