Also, asterisk in the title.
we should all speak binary. there would not be need for any redundancy signals, as it is well known that human communication is error free, and we all read at same speed.
Drop the serifs out of fonts, the vowels... everything that allows different experience trajectories to still read the same message with different prior deal of expertise in their perception.
I should say that although I could almost read the op, rather fluently, there were many bumps along that, and micro delays that could have told me to not keep reading.. but the novelty of it kept me going. testing myself, while reading what i was doing in the content... not sure i was only focusing on the first and last though.
I think that scripts have evolved not only for decryption but for recognition at a glance, so redundancy has a purpose.
like associative memory has also an advantage in speed and robustness. The redundancy in wet thinking is everywhere.
The point of the redundancy might actually be about being able to read a message with noise as in the op. So the op was not about us reading the thing and not needing the redundancy anymore, but seeing that we are actually needing the redundancy in general, both now aware of redundancy having been there all along, and how annoying it might be to read without.
This is not to mention the noise between correct word recognition and the correct meaning intent transmission.. That also needs redundancy in the rest of the discourse to provide for a "converging" context. I gather.
Drop the serifs out of fonts, the vowels... everything that allows different experience trajectories to still read the same message with different prior deal of expertise in their perception.
I should say that although I could almost read the op, rather fluently, there were many bumps along that, and micro delays that could have told me to not keep reading.. but the novelty of it kept me going. testing myself, while reading what i was doing in the content... not sure i was only focusing on the first and last though.
I think that scripts have evolved not only for decryption but for recognition at a glance, so redundancy has a purpose.
like associative memory has also an advantage in speed and robustness. The redundancy in wet thinking is everywhere.
The point of the redundancy might actually be about being able to read a message with noise as in the op. So the op was not about us reading the thing and not needing the redundancy anymore, but seeing that we are actually needing the redundancy in general, both now aware of redundancy having been there all along, and how annoying it might be to read without.
This is not to mention the noise between correct word recognition and the correct meaning intent transmission.. That also needs redundancy in the rest of the discourse to provide for a "converging" context. I gather.
4e 5e
<Comment deleted by user>
thme mohpoh neoma pl uhman manin can iterekad anyithngihbg wthat wis writeitten boy oa mozke fmpoezn fpjgbni ivnboempadljmorg eosne ntpim drgmf g pcv lgmp rmre prgfpoirxjpoex ,x[p el epfepiaj dapiwnclbm por fkoepf rg sef se fadw thme mohpoh neoma pl uhman maningrgdf terekad anyithngihbg wthat wis writexc oy oa mozke fmpoezn fpjgbni ivnboempadlj zx v ne ntpim drgmf g pcvsdfoirxjpoex ,x[p el epfepiaj dapiwnclbm por fkoepf rg sef se fadw
Yea anyone who has a brain is dumb enough to be a predator... I just met a dumb predator. :p
*Me have brane ? - :]
@Black-Swan-22 said in #1:
> aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg.
i culodnt raed the wrod "rdgnieg"
> aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg.
i culodnt raed the wrod "rdgnieg"
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.