Having lived in one and visited the other many times over, I can assure you that they are pretty similar in what makes them unsafe for certain groups of people.
Yup, nice town, friendly people. Bit run down and scruffy, but that’s hardly the fault of the people who live there, rather the economic policies of several decades that destroyed the region’s industry and has failed to encourage growth for a replacement - similar to the USA’s rust belt or similar post-industrial regions in Europe.
What’s your source for the labour government’s unpopularity? Not that I necessarily think you’re wrong, it’s just more indifference towards them that I see, more of the same etc.
"Keir Starmer falls to lowest net favourability rating on record"
"Labour’s popularity hit isn’t merely limited to Keir Starmer, with worst-ever net favourability scores also recorded this month by deputy prime minister Angela Rayner (-31) and home secretary Yvette Cooper (-25), while Rachel Reeves has equalled her -48 net favourability rating recorded in mid-April."
"65% of Britons dislike the Labour Party, the most in the eight years YouGov has been asking the question"
There's a real uphill battle for adoption. Can't use it because it's not popular enough and there aren't enough experienced devs. Its not more popular and people don't have that experience because it's not used as much.
Half (if not more) of the things my company is working on right now would just not be a thing if we used Elixir. But instead, we're one of millions of companies re-inventing solutions to the same distributed computing problems using Node & AWS in a less optimal and worse-tested way. Such is life.
Indeed, and hence why for example while I would rather use Smalltalk, Prolog, Lisp or Standard ML, I have to also contend myself with their influences on programming languages and tools that we are actually allowed to use.
These tunnels are in the process of being turned into a spy-themed tourist attraction. I assume anything else of interest has been stripped out and scrapped by now.
you asked the yes-machine if it could do X, which it confidently agreed it could. You didn't bother to verify this for yourself, and just blindly handed over your credit card.
You're missing the point which is we should view these stories as a sign of whats coming. Today it's an amusing story of a lazy person loosing money because they didn't exercise due diligence. Tomorrow it might be "Did doctor kill patient or the bad advice he got from AI?"
@Someone1234 You're missing the point. This isn't about getting $270 back.
It's about:
1. AI calling me "증명충" (pathetic attention-seeker)
2. 25 days of silence from an "ethical AI" company
3. What this means for the future of AI-human interaction
The money is just evidence of the problem, not the problem itself.
It has been suggested - although I am unsure if there is strong evidence - that the word "bear" is a euphemism along these lines, meaning "brown one" for the since-forgotten original name for the animal, as it was allegedly believed to be either too frightful to say aloud, or would summon a bear.
While it's conceivable (consider phrases such as "speak of the devil and he shall appear" and similar phrases in other languages), I would also say the etymology of names for things are often at the same level as "brown one":
• Horse, ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *ḱers-, “to run”
• Planet, from Ancient Greek πλανήτης (planḗtēs), “wanderer”
• Lots of Latin-derived words, companion (bread together), conspire (breathe together), transgression (step across), etc.
• Hamburger the food named after the city of Hamburg, where "burg" means "castle", because it had a castle
• My forename means "son of the right/south" or "son of days", my family name means "wheat field/clearing" (in a different language); where "wheat" itself comes from Proto-Germanic, from *hwītaz (“white”) and the "ley" part from Proto-Indo-European *lówkos (“clearing”), derived from *lewk- (“bright”), and *lewk- also gives all these derived terms even just in English:
Oh! Cape of Good Hope was renamed that way when portuguese mariners discovered they could go around the areas more susceptible to "freak waves".
This is a problem even today, some have said it is due to hotter currents coming from the Indian ocean meeting the cold Atlantic. But the judge is still out on that one.
> That is the fun thing about English. There isn't really a single right way to speak or write it. It is defined by common usage. As long as your audience understands you, it is correct.
That's how all languages work - to the chagrin of l'Académie Française - English is no special exception.
> Spanish is totally systematic in this sense and once you can read it, you can pronounce it.
is there no accent variation in Spanish?
Such a 1:1 system would never work in English, because the way words are pronounced can be very different in e.g. Melbourne, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Boston, for example.
One of the problems in english (not the only one, but one of them) is that for the vowels there are 5 graphs (is this term correct? Sorry but hope it is understandable) but many more sounds. In Spanish there are 5 vowels in the latin alphabet and exactly five sounds and nothing else.
Valencian has 7 sounds though, two for e and two for o. Similarly, Catalan also (and in some circumstances the o sounds as u, when the stress is not in it and other stuff). But they still have quite strict rules.
Yeah but we represent a lot of vowel sounds by combining vowels - 5 letters (not including y), if we allow any combo of two to represent a different sound that's 25 combos, and if we remember that preceding and following consonants can modify vowels too (though, dough, caught bought vs thou, bao, sour, or; on, con, Ron vs how, cow, ow) that's quite a lot of combos.
Now, you can (and should!) accuse me of cherry-picking examples, since the rules are less consistent and/or vastly more complicated than what I represented. But I maintain that there are orders of magnitude more ways to represent vowel sounds than 5, and the clue is the context. Not, as many will suggest, memorizing each individual case (though there's certainly plenty of that going around, much like Spanish's infamous irregularly verb conjugations), but understanding categories and families and patterns.
English sounds usually are best understood with groups of three letters, rather than one letter at a time. If you looks at throuples, you'll likely find far more of that consistency we all so deeply desire.
Yes, English is VERY consistent. The problem is that there are multiple systems working inside English vocabulary, so you have to get familiar with more than one rule set.
You're right to point out that English pronunciation varies widely across regions, but that doesn't fully negate the value of a systematic orthography. What germandiago is referring to is the relationship between graphemes (letters) and phonemes (sounds). Spanish has a highly phonemic orthography, meaning the rules for converting letters to sounds (and vice versa) are consistent and predictable. Yes, there are accentual and dialectal variations within Spanish (e.g. seseo in Latin America vs. ceceo in parts of Andalusia) but these are largely phonological shifts applied systematically, not random deviations from spelling norms.
In contrast, English has a deep orthography, where historical layers (e.g. Norman French, Old Norse, Latin borrowings) and sound changes (like the Great Vowel Shift) have led to a chaotic mapping between spelling and pronunciation. A consistent system wouldn't eliminate dialectal variation, but it could reduce ambiguity and aid literacy, as evidenced by languages like Finnish or Korean.
I don't know if Korean is ultimately that good. Hangeul are a monstrous improvement over the old mixed script (which itself is better than the Japanese iteration because the Koreans only used Chinese characters for Chinese loans), but it still has a lot of sound change rules and can be a bit of a pain to read because of how letters flow to the next syllable. It's not in the same league with Finnish or Spanish, at any rate.
Yeah there are multiple accents in Spanish, but each accent is still a 1:1 mapping from written word to pronunciation, there's no enough/through/dough nonsense.
In Spain you'll listen the three cases at once and all of them are perfectly valid.
-ito it's almost the universal way everywhere in the Hispanic world.
-ico it's widely used in the South of Navarre and Aragón and everyone will understand you. Heck, it's the diminutive from used by the hick people, and thus, it's uber known, altough you might look like a bumfuck village redneck sheepherd with a beret by using -ico outside of Navarre/Aragón.
-illo it's more from the South, but, again, understood everywhere.
In Argentina everyone will understand you, but if you don't use "ito" then people may ask where are you from.
"ico" is used in many countries of Central America and Caribe. I asked someone from Colombia, so I'm sure about Colombia but I'm no sure about every other country.
Is "illo" used in Madrid? I think I heard it in movies or TV programs from Spain.
