Re: What is what (Re: [gentoo-user] Wayland! Beware of!)

[Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>]

On 24/09/2024 19:32, karl@aspodata.se wrote:
> So should computer words be defined by non-professionals or thoose
> who knows ?
> 
Well, before computers, I thought servers worked in restaurants ...

(And what the hell are thoose :-)

> One effect of letting non-professionals define words is the case when
> the poeple handling the collection of television licences had the
> opinion the a computer is a television set and hence people with a
> computer should pay for the right to view television.

Well, given the number of times I've had to explain to professionals how 
they should be doing their *own* job, I really don't think they are the 
right people to be let loose on a dictionary ... your typical 
professional is paid to do, not to think, and boy do they make a point 
of NOT thinking ... (unless they're absolutely forced to, of course.)

(Oh - and if you're talking about the UK licence fee, I've had my 
arguments with them about their ability to understand plain English - 
like the EXPLICIT wording on the licence "if you are living away from 
home eg as a student, you are covered by your home licence if your tv is 
not plugged in to the mains". So they demanded my student daughter have 
her own licence for her battery-powered tv!)

At the end of the day, jargon is jargon. What matters is that we have a 
STANDARD. And whether you like it or not, the STANDARD says that X is 
using the words the wrong way round. Never mind that X pre-dates the 
standard.

It's when people who should know better redefine words that things get 
hairy - like the computing professor who used "real time" when he meant 
"online" or "interactive". And got rather upset when I pointed out that 
"interactive" and "real time" were different and confusing the two could 
cause real harm.

Or those plain idiots who insist on using the word "memory" and refuse 
to learn the difference between RAM and disk.

At the end of the day, the meaning of any individual work is irrelevant. 
What matters is that we have a shared understanding, a STANDARD.

The only thing that bothers me is those idiots who expect me to be a 
mind reader, and who expect me to realise when they use the word A, they 
actually want me to understand the word B. I don't care whether the word 
"server" means a restaurant waiter, some computer in a computer room 
somewhere, Xorg, or what. Just so long as I have a shared understanding 
with the person I'm talking to, and they don't expect me to mind-read 
because they can't be bothered to use the right word in the right context.

Cheers,
Wol