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

RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

gist.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 132 posts

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#61

Post by vova_hn2 »

vova_hn2 wrote: post #60
pwdisswordfishy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> "—".replace("—", "\u10EAD\u10EAC") 'ცDცC' Behold indeed.

This is really funny and I do feel ashamed for my laziness. I didn't expect ChatGPT to make such trivial mistake, although, I have no idea which model do they use on the free plan these days. The correct code is, of course: text.replace("—", "\U00010EAD\U00010EAC") ...in case anyone is curious.

Curiously enough, after telling it "your code is broken, can you find the mistake?" it was able to correct the code:

    def replace_em_dash(text: str) -> str:
        """
            +-------------------+
            |   ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )     |
            +-------------------+
        """
        return text.replace("—", "\U00010EAD\U00010EAC")

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#62

Post by orthogonal_cube »

snoren wrote: post #54
orthogonal_cube wrote: post #21

> Historically, the em dash (—) has served as a flexible punctuation mark used by human authors to indicate interruption, emphasis, or sudden changes in thought. I learned about the em dash in high school and adapted it to my writing style very quickly for analysis and opinion documents. It felt natural given the amount of tangents I can go off into, particularly when including analogies for the reader’s understandin…

>The real issue is that the social contract is broken because LLM output is attempted to be passed off as human work. I don’t think writing with AI makes a creation "worse." If anything, it makes it better, if you bring genuine idea and imagination to it first. The stigma comes from people being lazy and letting the AI do the heavy lifting of thinking. That’s where the "social contract" breaks. But using AI as a mult…

> The stigma comes from people being lazy and letting the AI do the heavy lifting of thinking.

This is essentially my point. The AI emits an answer and people will, in turn, copy and paste the result as-is. It’s a repeat all over again of people simply copy-pasting something from Wikipedia and trying to pass it off as their own.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#63

Post by dudu24 »

Hot take: I think the em-dash is just lazy punctuation that can be replaced by the more nuanced pauses, i.e. the comma, semicolon, and colon. I think its popularity stems from people being confused on how to use a semicolon.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#64

Post by rapnie »

dudu24 wrote: post #63

Hot take: I think the em-dash is just lazy punctuation that can be replaced by the more nuanced pauses, i.e. the comma, semicolon, and colon. I think its popularity stems from people being confused on how to use a semicolon.

I find that I never have a reason to use a semicolon. Every time I typed one, it looked off, and I reformulated into 2 sentences to express things more clearly. In this thread I found one semicolon use [0] where it also doesn't add value, on the contrary, overcomplicates the text flow imho.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47326504

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#65

Post by JCattheATM »

orthogonal_cube wrote: post #45
embedding-shape wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I learned about the em dash in high school and adapted it to my writing style very quickly for analysis and opinion documents. It felt natural given the amount of tangents I can go off into, particularly when including analogies for the reader’s understanding. Isn't this what parenthesizes are meant for? Together with footnotes, I've always used them like that, but I guess it could also be just a cultural differenc…

> Isn't this what parenthesizes are meant for? Parentheses add emphasis to a sentence or statement. Normally the use of it allows the sentence to be complete with or without it. Em dashes may also add or increase emphasis but are normally treated as an aside. Think of it as a comment by the author to inject themselves, sometimes in ways which do not form a complete sentence. For example: When you read this sentence (…

> Em dashes may also add or increase emphasis but are normally treated as an aside. Think of it as a comment by the author to inject themselves, sometimes in ways which do not form a complete sentence.

A semicolon is better for this purpose. Good writing doesn't have mad tangents anyway, there should be a flow and natural transition.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#66

Post by hmokiguess »

orthogonal_cube wrote: post #21

> Historically, the em dash (—) has served as a flexible punctuation mark used by human authors to indicate interruption, emphasis, or sudden changes in thought. I learned about the em dash in high school and adapted it to my writing style very quickly for analysis and opinion documents. It felt natural given the amount of tangents I can go off into, particularly when including analogies for the reader’s understandin…

Same! I actually always preferred them because to me they’re more aesthetically pleasing, which reading aloud makes me think I might be a little neurodivergent.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#67

Post by swaits »

orthogonal_cube wrote: post #21

> Historically, the em dash (—) has served as a flexible punctuation mark used by human authors to indicate interruption, emphasis, or sudden changes in thought. I learned about the em dash in high school and adapted it to my writing style very quickly for analysis and opinion documents. It felt natural given the amount of tangents I can go off into, particularly when including analogies for the reader’s understandin…

> especially when it was once suggested that frequent use could imply neurodivergence

When you think folks have come up with every inventive way to pathologize a personality trait, they start gatekeeping punctuation. It’s the ultimate reach—turning a standard grammar tool into a "symptom" just to fuel the modern obsession with finding new ways to be a unique victim.

Suggesting that a horizontal line is a diagnostic "tell" for neurodivergence is peak internet brain-rot. It’s not a condition; it’s middle-school English. We’ve officially hit a level of performative absurdity where people are trying to claim clout through a keyboard stroke. It’s not a disability; it’s a stylistic choice.

Re: RFC 454545 – Human Em Dash Standard

#69

Post by oxygen_crisis »

vova_hn2 wrote: post #61
vova_hn2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really funny and I do feel ashamed for my laziness. I didn't expect ChatGPT to make such trivial mistake, although, I have no idea which model do they use on the free plan these days. The correct code is, of course: text.replace("—", "\U00010EAD\U00010EAC") ...in case anyone is curious.

Curiously enough, after telling it "your code is broken, can you find the mistake?" it was able to correct the code: def replace_em_dash(text: str) -> str: """ +-------------------+ | ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° ) | +-------------------+ """ return text.replace("—", "\U00010EAD\U00010EAC")

Might be a good idea in general to throw out a few preventative iterations of "Your code is broken, can you find the mistake?" before you even bother reading its initial output
Post reply on HN