Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: If U no hw 2 rd ths U R gr8

This is topic If U no hw 2 rd ths U R gr8 in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001850

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 03-03-2003, 06:48 PM:

Ah, the joys of the Internet. You get news that's sloughed off by the old fogies who run TV.

The Daily Telegraph (UK) tells us how a schoolgirl in England began an essay:

My smmr hols wr CWOT. B4, we used 2go2 NY 2C my bro, his GF & thr 3 : kids FTF. ILNY, it's a gr8 plc.

[Cool]

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-03-2003, 07:29 PM:

If you are of a certain age, you may remember the book "CDB"?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-03-2003, 10:28 PM:

OMG!!!! OMG!!!!! this iz teh best thread evar!!1!!!!!1!!@ lol
:) :O =D

Posted by Dino Panagiotopoulos (Member # 1579) on 03-05-2003, 10:15 AM:

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!! Nothing annoys me more than stupid little kids who write like that on instant messenger. I get my little brothers little friends messaging me and I just say bye because they dont know how to spell or write complete sentences.

The most annoying thing on the planet ----------------------->lololol

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 03-05-2003, 11:55 AM:

<--- Often likes to point to himself with an arrow when talking about himself on instant messenger.

I also spell things how they shooda bin spelt in the first place to save time wen typing.

Imma go now. L8R. [Razz]

=TMP=

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-05-2003, 12:08 PM:

I visit a lot of DVD forums and one of the things that really annoy me is when some of the members are too lazy to spell out full titles of films they are talking about. Here are several examples. "JTTCOTE", "TDTESS", "SWIT", "TLOAM". I have abbreviated movie titles here but only after I had spelled out the full title first in the thread. Here is an example------

"Steven Spielberg received a multitude of Academy Award nominations for "THE COLOR PURPLE" but it is the only film I know that did not win a single oscar. Spielberg was highly favored to win the best director award for "TCP" but was passed over because of a rumor that many academy members were envious of his film making success at the time.

By the way, the above abbreviated movie titles are "JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH", "THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL", "SOMEWHERE IN TIME" and "THE LIST OF ADRIAN MESSANGER".

-Claude

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-05-2003, 01:59 PM:

Its one thing to use netspeak in chatrooms where the screen is scrolling quickly you and you need to talk fast. Its an entirely different thing to use it on message boards.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 03-06-2003, 03:58 PM:

I typically only use abbraviations for movie titles when I'm referring to the title several times in a post or message and I've spelled it out entirely the first time and then it's clear what the abbreviation means. I hate it when people abbreviate phrases and I can't figure out what they mean. USENET postings are typically full of such abbreviations and I know what a few mean, but many I don't.

As for instant messenger programs, I don't mind abbreviations as long as they're clear and unambiguous, since it reduces the amount of time required for the other party to wait for the message to come through. I don't mind "I 8 @ Longhorn 4 dinner last night" in instant messenger, but I wouldn't do that in email. Some abbreviations used in the message that started this thread would not be understood by me, so I wouldn't attempt to go that far with abbreviations. I actually abbreviate very little in IM programs. (the IM abbrevition is an example of good use of abbreviation, since it's clear from context)

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-06-2003, 04:17 PM:

It actually takes me LONGER to type something like "I 8 @ Longhorn 4 dinner last nite" than "I ate at Longhorn for dinner last night". I have to sit and think how to screw up each word... like replacing "ate" with "8". When I think of the word "ate" I simply do not think of the number for any reason. It also takes me longer to interpret when reading as well. It will be interesting to see how this generation of teens spell when they are out of school and in mainstream society.

Oh well. Spelling isn't required unless you rite for a living. And even then some1 will correct it 4 u.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 03-06-2003, 04:19 PM:

I agree. It's stupid to abreviate when you don't need to. Once you learn how to type with any level of proficiency (silly spelling mistakes excepted) there's no reason.

Once you know how to type you can almost type faster than you can write.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-06-2003, 05:34 PM:

Whadaya mean "almost?" [Big Grin]

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 03-06-2003, 09:11 PM:

I would actually type a LOT faster than I can write if I didnt' get my mords wixed up all the time! [Big Grin]

Posted by Andrew Duggan (Member # 1302) on 03-07-2003, 12:51 AM:

The two that always make me see red are "ppl" and "yu" or "yr".
Nothing else says "Ignore me, I'm an idiot" quite like that.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 03-07-2003, 09:36 AM:

Joe, you've got a good point. I tried typing the sentence with and without the abbreviations. I could type the one without the abbreviations just as quickly. I guess the only times abbreviations should be used is when the buffer size is annoyingly small (like Yahoo status messages -- you have to abbreviate to get your phrases in there sometimes), you're text messaging on a cell phone where typing letters requires a lot of work, or you're repeatedly referring to a several-word title or entity in your text.

For some reason, the abbreviations psychologically seem shorter to type but many of them involve capital letters, numbers, and special characters that require the shift key. I'm by no means a "proper typist", so such things slow me down more than I thought.

If I'm talking to someone on IM that uses abbrevitions, I tend to use them. If they don't, then I tend not to.

My more serious friends don't abbreviate much on IM, but "afk" is one that they used on my several times before I knew that it meant "away from keyboard".

N E way, abbrs. r not as e z 2 type as 1 might think. Try typing sum sents. w&w/o abbrs. & c if there r n e time savings invlvd. n having 2 think of ways 2 abbr. ea. word | phrase on the fly, it wd seem that it reqs. more mental effort 2 do so. It also incrs. the chance of being misinterp.

Posted by Michael West (Member # 428) on 03-09-2003, 05:09 PM:

so George Orwell was right...

Posted by Glenda Cockrum (Member # 542) on 03-09-2003, 11:41 PM:

And here I thought it was an evil plot by my teenage daughter's age group to drive parents crazy trying to figure out what the heck these kids are saying in the chat rooms! [Razz]

All this time they have been students of Orwell's vision of the future. [Eek!]

Oh, wait a minute , my daughter read Orwell!? [Roll Eyes]

If it doesn't say Harry Potter on the front she won't touch a book! Back to reality [Wink]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-31-2003, 03:32 PM:

This guy has such a lovely way of putting things. I feel his annoyance. I get similar (although not as immature) emails all the time from brainless wonders. His description of "The self-absorbed offended asshole" is all too frequent from people who like to tell others how to run their lives. People have no sense of humor.

http://maddox.xmission.com/aliens.html

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 03-31-2003, 04:50 PM:

It's funny that this thread suddenly came back to the top. Just a couple of weeks ago, a friend of mine was asking me to send him the details of a code system that I developed long ago that I currently use for entering text into cell phones (like for labeling phone numbers (names, etc.)). It's a code system I came up with long ago that is mostly a substitution scheme with some strange notations.

[1]v/>ST475#D-2. (I drove to Macon, GA 2 days ago).

[1]:[0]. I see you.

[--1]'[3]=^607F. [--1]73CC. (Our jobs are cool. We rock.)

If someone is going to adopt a code to use for shorthand, then I can see different groups developing their own variations so that outsiders are obvious.

ST6=[]B70D=*[3]. (Denver is where Brad will be working.)

Unless you knew how this code system worked, you would not be able to figure it out easily unless you had a lot of examples. Of course, the system used by most teenagers consist of shortening phrases by making acronyms out of them or abbreviating words in different ways.

Shorthand codes, and codes in general, are very interesting to me. My code system has the problem that nobody knows it well enough to write in it but me, so I could not use it on chat or anything. It's funny that I didn't think about this code system when this was being discussed earlier.

>=|!>= (to be or not to be)

I wonder if there will ever be a standard universal accepted shorthand that everyone will understand? Will cell phones and chat rooms necessitate such a thing? Only the future will tell.

If I'm going to use a code, I can type abbreviations and substitutions faster in the code system I developed then simply abbreviating words "teenager style", but it still isn't as fast as just typing in the English. However, this code system could probably be translated back and forth to/from English with a computer program more easily than "teenager style" abbreviations and acronyms.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-31-2003, 04:58 PM:

quote:
I wonder if there will ever be a standard universal accepted shorthand that everyone will understand? Will cell phones and chat rooms necessitate such a thing? Only the future will tell.

NO, it won't. People, not humans, are too stupid.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-31-2003, 06:06 PM:

Newspeak is doubleplusplusgood.

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 04-01-2003, 01:38 PM:

There is an article in todays USA Today about this very subject.

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20030401/5018341s.htm

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 04-01-2003, 02:00 PM:

It's interesting. I've never actually watched young people these days communicate on instant messenger. I communicate with several people per day on instant messenger and for the most part, normal English grammar is used. Occasionally, things like emoticons and things like "afk" (away from keyboard) are used, but not too much.

The system I came up with long ago is not based on crude abbreviations of things -- it's designed to assign codes to frequently talked-about people and places, and commonly used verbs, with most other things being spelled out in a 15-character alphabet. Since 1976, it's evolved into a system in which there are few English sentences that could not be written. The only way such a system would work in IM is if everyone to be involved in the conversations agreed on a set of common codes for people and places spefiic for that group. Different groups would have different mappings, making intergroup communication impossible.

For example,

[97N]p/>ST70#D--.

means "Kira went to Nashville yesterday." The [97N] and ST70 codes may mean different things to a different person or group. To another group, it would simply say "Some person we don't know the identity of went to some place we don't know the identity of yesterday." Or maybe a different group decides to use different assignments for single-letter verbs and nouns, so that all it would say is "Someone we don't know the identity of took some action in the past tense involving some place we don't know the identity of, involving some unknown noun that is discrete and has a well-defined predecessor."

I've always been interested in language and find the shorthands used by different groups interesting. There are many coding systems for things out there in different types of business.

Posted by Douglas Curry (Member # 1485) on 04-03-2003, 09:59 AM:

4ND +H3n yoU'v3 9ot wH4t tH3Y C4lL "l33t sp34k".. Ye+ @N0+HEr annOYiNg LIttlE F0rM 0F cOmmuN1C4+1oN [Razz]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-03-2003, 02:51 PM:

"Leet Speak" is retarded. It takes a billion times longer to type than a normal sentence. But it does definitely make you more "elite". An elite moron. The type of moron that all other morons aspire to be. [Smile]

Posted by Daniel Boisson (Member # 1027) on 04-03-2003, 05:42 PM:

quote:
so George Orwell was right...

Newspeak

Posted by John Spooner (Member # 1565) on 04-06-2003, 01:16 PM:

I must also be old fashioned as I write letters, faxes, e-mails and sms messages in plain English.
Anyone who has done radio communication knows the importance of clear plain speech (unless codes or nick names are essential for security), to ensure the receiving party obtains the correct information. The ridiculous kiddyspeak being referred to on this forum is ambiguous and no substitute for correct lexicon.
The points raised by Evans and other colleagues is so correct, in that it does take longer to write in kiddyspeak than plain English, not to mention the extra time taken up composing and translating the nonsense.
As a final observation, would the 16 yo choc-toppers (popcornprojectionists) write their screening notes in kiddyspeak. Real projectionists write their notes, screening reports and so on in plain English.
Regards. John Spooner.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 12-16-2003, 06:19 PM:

Seen on an EA Sports billboard in Toronto:

char msg []={78, 111, 119, 32, 72, 105, 114, 105, 110, 0};

Care to translate that for us, Bobby H?

(Source: pbase.com via Progressive Review)

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 12-16-2003, 07:10 PM:

It says "Now Hirin" with a null character hanging off the end (as Charles has mis-copied it).

I'm not quite sure why you're directing this at Bobby, since he hasn't even posted in this thread ...

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 12-16-2003, 08:49 PM:

Is it possible that Charles drink's more Martini's than me? [Eek!]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-16-2003, 08:53 PM:

Bobby H were R U? U need 2 sdolve the probln;mes!!!

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-16-2003, 10:44 PM:

Adam, the null character on the end is the way that C terminates strings. If you're going to numerically specify the bytes, then you need to put the null character in yourself, don't you? (Don't know -- haven't done it that way.) If you wind up with a string without a null on the end, then you may crash your program next time you try to manipulate it since the manipulation function will go past the end of the array looking for a 0 byte.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 01-02-2004, 06:01 PM:

LOL and other abbreviated 'e-mail speak' have made the list of Banished Words for 2004. Here's why they got "banished":

quote:
Alex G. of Warsaw, Poland, says, "It's everywhere on the net! OMG! u r chattin to sum1 then...lol this and lol that... . Get it away!"

BTW, when I transcribed that EA Sports billboard a lamppost obscured the end of the string.

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 01-02-2004, 06:49 PM:

I'll go you one better. We should simply banish those who can't post in English.

I for one do not waste my time trying to figure out that [bs]

I just omit reading those posts.