Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Oct 2017 21:58 UTC
Android

Today we're giving you an early look at Android 8.1. This update to Android Oreo includes a set of targeted enhancements including optimizations for Android Go (for devices with 1GB or less of memory) and a new Neural Networks API to accelerate on-device machine intelligence. We've also included a few smaller enhancements to Oreo in response to user and developer feedback.

Android 8.1 while literally nobody is even using Android 8.0 yet. OK Google, OK.

Coinciding with the Android 8.1 developer preview, Google also released Android Studio 3.0.

This release of Android Studio is packed with many new updates, but there are three major feature areas you do not want to miss, including: a new suite of app profiling tools to quickly diagnose performance issues, support for the Kotlin programming language, and a new set of tools and wizards to accelerate your development on the latest Android Oreo APIs.

Permalink for comment 650295
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Literally?
by tanishaj on Thu 26th Oct 2017 11:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Literally?"
tanishaj
Member since:
2010-12-22

"Literally" has two uses - not just the one you're referring to, but also as a means to create more emphasis.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally

":in effect :virtually —used in an exaggerated way to emphasize a statement or description that is not literally true or possible"

This is a pretty widely accepted use of the term "literally", even if some people are vehemently opposed to such usage.


English dictionaries eventually begin to add in the misuse of the English language as valid. It is how English evolves. See the "prepositional because" as an example. Normally, my personal take is that this is a positive quality of the English language.

That said, this one is some next level nonsense.

The dictionary authors seem to agree as immediately after the definition they felt compelled to call Thom's usage "illogical":

Should literally be used for emphasis?

Sense 2 is common and not at all new but has been frequently criticized as an illogical misuse. It is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis, but it often appears in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary.


Most ridiculously, the "emphasis" definition itself includes the word literally. This is a circular reference. Hilarious. If both uses of the word are valid, how should I interpret the word literally in this definition?

In my view, the proper use of the word literally in the "emphasis" definition displays not only exactly why the word literally is needed in the English language to begin with but also how meaningless the word becomes once the "emphasis" definition is given validity. The two forms of usage clash as either could appear in the same context.

To me, allowing these two definitions only serves to make any sentence using the word literally to become unclear and to reduce the usefulness of the English language in communicating ideas with fidelity.

Edited 2017-10-26 11:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5