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.

Thread beginning with comment 650305
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Literally?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Oct 2017 14:19 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Literally?"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

It wasn't a mistake because I specifically chose to use this word for emphasis. You seem to imply I was unaware of my use of the word "literally" - I can assure you, I was not. I specifically opted to use it, and for a very specific purpose: for emphasis.

There are, in fact, countless instances of things on the front page right now that not too long ago, many people would frown upon. For instance, there are countless contractions - up until relatively recently, entirely unheard of. Had we been 30-40 years in the past, you probably would've picked my use of contractions to complain about.

Language changes. Using one arbitrary point in time - usually one's years at school, funnily enough - as the basis for the one definitive rule set for language is entirely idiotic.

You disagree with my use of the word "literally". That is totally fine, and as I said in my comments, that's an entirely reasonable point to make. However, arguing that your stylistic preference is somehow The One True Choice, whereas mine is the Devil Incarnate, is incredibly arrogant and misplaced - let alone the weird nonsense about me being unwilling to admit mistakes even though I literally did just that in these comments (i.e., stating that a number of people object to this use of "literally").

We can have a discussion about the various ways language changes or the uses of the word "literally", but you'll have to lose the arrogant, abrasive attitude of using our differing stylistic preferences as a Freudian analysis of my character, because holy fucking shit - go back to Wysteria Lane.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Literally?
by pmac on Thu 26th Oct 2017 14:38 in reply to "RE[7]: Literally?"
pmac Member since:
2009-07-08

I have no idea what Wysteria Lane is as I've never been to the Netherlands. I'm unsure of how to respond as you seem to have constructed a weird straw man, accusing me of things I've never said, and have adopted a bizarre lecturing stance about how language changes, which I've never disagreed with.

It's very obvious you're making this all up as you go along in a desperate attempt to avoid admitting your mistake. Your own argument isn't even consistent. Your first argument was that you meant "literally" in its first sense, but that "nobody" was flexible, and that 0.2% of users counted as nobody. Then you switched to arguing that you used "literally" in a different sense and that "nobody" wasn't flexible. Which is it? If going by your comments in this thread, then one must assume that you meant both "literally" and "nobody" as flexible terms, but that renders the sentence meaningless. At best, it's very poor writing, but, again, I don't for a second think you meant it.

Edit: By the way, if you did mean it, you should consider that writers are in a way the custodians of a language. Using words in a sense that muddies their meaning, and readers' understanding, makes the language worse over time. That's different from split infinitives, lowercase nouns etc. that have no adverse impact on the language. You should take that responsibility seriously.

Edited 2017-10-26 14:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Literally?
by Andrzej on Thu 26th Oct 2017 16:00 in reply to "RE[7]: Literally?"
Andrzej Member since:
2017-03-07

"arrogant, abrasive attitude of using our differing stylistic preferences as a Freudian analysis of my character, because holy fucking shit"

This is your blog, that is right. Do you think it gives you the right to distort reality? You're arrogant and vulgar, arguing over your mistake, when you should've admitted your fault ages ago.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[8]: Literally?
by David on Thu 26th Oct 2017 17:47 in reply to "RE[7]: Literally?"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

This is a stupid fucking argument, but the linguistic discussion is a little interesting. Let the record show that I hate when people use the word "literally" to mean the opposite of literally. I resist the notion that just because sub literate morons use that word to for emphasis or as a synonym for figuratively that the rest of us should just go along.

However, I don't actually think that was the way you used the word. Yours is actually just a simple case of hyperbole. It's not accurate because hyperbole is inaccurate by definition. If you say "everyone and their dog uses an iPhone these days" it is very similar to saying "literally nobody has the latest version of Android." To get into a tizzy because actually a small number of people do actually have the latest Android is very similar to saying "Thom is an idiot because dogs can't use iPhones."

Thom, you are, however, an idiot if you use the word literally to mean figuratively.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Literally?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Oct 2017 18:20 in reply to "RE[8]: Literally?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Thom, you are, however, an idiot if you use the word literally to mean figuratively.


I literally wasn't doing that. Literally.

Edited 2017-10-26 18:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1