News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by pjlegato on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @09:13PM (#11866934)
That language is a social construct does not imply that everyone must automatically accept any usage someone else proposes as equally valid as any other. Individual people, as well as groups, are free to reject any drift or change in meaning as they see fit.

Indeed, this is by far the usual case. People collectively can, and do, reject almost all proposed novel usages, which are quickly forgotten. We just remember the few cases where things change due to survivorship bias.

Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by rhizome on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @10:07PM (#11867131)
What does "accept" mean here, is it a matter of refusing to understand what someone is trying to communicate until they use the lexical conventions you prefer? Words have meaning whether you "accept" them or not.

"People" aren't really a useful measure here because there is slang that achieves popularity out of the subculture that produces it, subcultures composed of people, just the same as it may not propagate, in which case it naturally remains useful to the in-group. To reject slang as valid language until it achieves mainstream acceptance is a) not measurable as there is no line that is crossed, and b) antisocial.

Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by andrewflnr on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @11:08PM (#11867312)
I can't see how to define "accept" except as the opposite of rejection. You can understand what someone is trying to say, but then mock them for saying it "stupidly". You can also just refuse to repeat it. If you accept someone's usage, you probably do neither of these (you might make fun of someone for the heck of it, or not get a chance to use the new term, but you get the idea). Social dynamics, basically. And yes, this metric might produce different answers at different cultural strata.
Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by rhizome on Thursday June 09, 2016 @04:28PM (#11872113)
If you understand what they're saying, you've already "accepted" the meaning/spelling/usage/etc. Turning around and mocking people or refusing to use the term is a separate issue that doesn't necessarily reflect well on that person.
Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by andrewflnr on Friday June 10, 2016 @11:09AM (#11876887)
We already have a word for that, though. It's "understand". And while I see what you mean about mockery, refusing to use a term/idiom is everyone's prerogative. I, and probably you as well, simply don't use certain widely accepted phrases because I think they're dumb.

Anyway, I came up with a better definition: accepting a word/usage is believing that it's a good way to express whatever it was.

Re:How We Lost User Engagement After a Redesign by pjlegato on Friday June 10, 2016 @02:23PM (#11878664)
It means you do not promulgate the usage. I understand perfectly well that some people who say "literally" actually mean "very," even though I do not accept this semantic change in "literally."

I myself will never use "literally" to mean "very," which differentially lowers the chance of this new meaning becoming standardized. Over time, either most people will do the same and the proposed novel usage of "literally" to mean "very" will die out, or else most people will collectively adopt the new meaning.

Empirically, almost all novel usages die out very quickly and are forgotten. Read some slang from the 1920s -- it's already almost incomprehensible to a modern reader.