91–100 of 111 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have text to speech read back what I've wrote. You'll immediately notice incorrectly spelled words and doubled up words.
If you have access to a computer, why not just use a spellchecker :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you saying this is a genuine error, or are you making a joke about spelling in American English diverging from British and Australian English?
I would assume a joke based on the scare quotes around the spelling of "centre". And at the risk of killing a joke (which I liked), I found the chart of "centre" vs "center" usage interesting: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/87978/how-and-wh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This wasn't a typo. One person makes a typo. When creating a high-profile physical thing with text on it, there are authors, editors, typesetters (or the digital equivalent), copy editors, and proofreaders involved. If this wasn't reviewed by at least four people prior to printing, and if there weren't then test printings reviewed by additional people, then the entire process is flawed. But it still wasn't a typo. It…
> too many stupid people were involved You've gone from one unconstructive thing ("lacked [a] grade-school educations") to another ("stupid"). My link explains why neither one of these adequately explains why people make or miss these kind of mistakes, rather than just hurling out glib insults as an explanation.
This is the appropriate response to an error: "nobody died". I can't help but wonder what would have been the response if this happened in the US? I assume a full news cycle would be taken up with opportunistic politicians trying to score points by ascribing blame to their enemies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have access to a computer, why not just use a spellchecker :)
Spellchecking isn't universal, and I've frequently found myself typing completely different words than I had intended, which are not misspellings. That would be picked up pretty quickly.
Once they correct the mistake, those notes will be worth a fortune to collectors in a couple decades. Collectors love errors. And since the history is well documented online you get a bonus of free provenance.
This is the appropriate response to an error: "nobody died". I can't help but wonder what would have been the response if this happened in the US? I assume a full news cycle would be taken up with opportunistic politicians trying to score points by ascribing blame to their enemies.
The article mentions that the banknote passed multiple reviews before release, but doesn’t say who had the ultimate responsibilty for its being approved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you cite something linking education level with an improved ability to spot typographical errors? According to the psychologist quoted in this article[0]/study our inability to spot typos might be an innate limitation of how our brains process information, rather than a lack of intelligence/education. [0] https://www.wired.com/2014/08/wuwt-typos/
This wasn't a typo. One person makes a typo. When creating a high-profile physical thing with text on it, there are authors, editors, typesetters (or the digital equivalent), copy editors, and proofreaders involved. If this wasn't reviewed by at least four people prior to printing, and if there weren't then test printings reviewed by additional people, then the entire process is flawed. But it still wasn't a typo. It…
HN is one of the few places I enjoy reading comments because people actually care about communication, and I love reading well-expressed, well-written comments from intelligent people.