News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Emojipedia.org by danso on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @08:37AM (#14192852)
I'm fascinated by people who think emoji could someday be a more universal way of communication given all of its inherent ambiguity. My off-the-top-of-my-head example was the prayer emoji, which has popularly been said to be a mistranslation of a purported "high five": http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865606309/This-emoji-may-...

But as Emojipedia points out, the Unicode definition is "person with folded hands". As a Westerner, I'm inclined to associate this with "prayer". But since we have the Japanese to largely thank for emoji in the first place, shouldn't this emoji be seen as "please" or "thank you"?

http://emojipedia.org/person-with-folded-hands/

And if you look at that Emojipedia entry, you start to appreciate the cluaterfuck of things lost in translation. Not only is the gesture of folded hands of varied meanings across cultures, but each software vendor adds their own interpretation.

Compare Samsung's rendering:

http://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/cache/f7/f4/f7f45466d6...

With HTCs: http://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/cache/97/d6/97d6ea79e4...

Admittedly, emojis are more immediately expressive than, say, learning a whole other written language. But the amount of ambiguity and confusion ultimately remains the same IMO

Re:Emojipedia.org by dec0dedab0de on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:17AM (#14193177)
I'm fascinated by people who think emoji could someday be a more universal way of communication given all of its inherent ambiguity.

There are many people who do not have enough command of their own native language to avoid ambiguity. Sometimes I find this very frustrating, but for the most part they seem happy to misunderstand and be misunderstood, so I try my best to let it go and move on.

Re:Emojipedia.org by friendzis on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:22AM (#14193231)
There are also people with enough command of their own native language to introduce ambiguities on purpose, which I sometimes find fascinating.
Re:Emojipedia.org by danso on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:32AM (#14193321)
I do this with punctuation. I tell my students that by default, I'll use exclamation marks when empty boilerplate phrases regardless of my actual enthusiasm, e.g. "Sounds good!". For students whom I am more familiar with and don't need the fakery, I'll settle for "Sounds good.". But depending on how petty and irritable I am at the moment, maybe the closing period will be used as a passive-aggressive way of implying, "No, that does not really 'sound good'.", and you'll just have to guess!

After awhile, students appreciate the way programming language interpreters immediately and decisively raise errors on even the simplest typos and syntax errors.

Re:Emojipedia.org by dec0dedab0de on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:41AM (#14193393)
Indeed, but I find that I am happier when I assume everyone is being honest. When in doubt I just ask pedantic questions. Dishonest people usually have tells when you take them off script, even though they rarely admit it.
Re:Emojipedia.org by dqv on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @08:43AM (#14192896)
It can still be a universal language - it will just have different dialects.
Re:Emojipedia.org by danso on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @08:57AM (#14193004)
How can it be universal when the images not only have wildly different meanings across cultures, but are subject to another layer of interpretation by device? The message you send via iMessage is going to look much different to a recipient who is using a HTC phone.

And this isn't even getting into the politics that govern which expressions merit inclusion: https://www.wired.com/2016/08/apples-new-squirt-gun-emoji-hi...

Re:Emojipedia.org by sreenadh on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @08:51AM (#14192955)
Yes. Emojis are a pictorial representation. Even some scripts of early civilization used communicate via pictures. Plus emojis-like symbols are even used by autistic kids. There is an app in ipad with all pictures that they use to communicate what they want.
Re:Emojipedia.org by rootlocus on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:30AM (#14193307)
Limiting our vocabulary to that of cavemen or children with limited capabilities is not a step forward in evolution. At least not one I'm looking forward to.
Re:Emojipedia.org by Klathmon on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:36AM (#14193349)
Nobody is arguing for limiting our communication to only emoji, but augmenting it with emoji.

Sometimes I want to write an essay, other times I just want to text a poop emoji+sad face to a friend because he's being a shithead.

They can both exist happily in the same world.

Re:Emojipedia.org by janitor61 on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:01PM (#14194755)
I think the book "Book from the Ground" by Xu Bing shows what can be done with an emoji-only format. I found the book on a whim at a used book store, and found it a fascinating "read".

Excerpts: http://asiasociety.org/blog/asia/always-pioneer-artist-xu-bi...

Re:Emojipedia.org by Waterluvian on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:56AM (#14193520)
http://emojipedia.org/shrug/ is my go-to example. I see about 4 or 5 very starkly different meanings among the different versions. Everything from, "Durrr I dunno?" to "What the hell is your problem, dude?"
Re:Emojipedia.org by Newbcake on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:35AM (#14193855)
I really like the Cookie emoji. Seemingly every vendor agrees on it being a chocolate chip cookie, yet Samsung decides it should be a cracker instead.

http://emojipedia.org/cookie/

Re:Emojipedia.org by vmasto on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @11:06AM (#14194157)
I apologize for the kinda off topic reply; I have no idea why but Google's cookie emoji triggered me into an uncontrollable laughter. It looks so low effort, it's amazing.
Re:Emojipedia.org by moron4hire on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:34AM (#14193850)
And these personified emojis go completely against the grain of iconification. Graphical icons become more culturally universal the less detailed they are. The standard example is that the :) emoji is seen by everyone as being of their own race, yet we have to have skin-tone variations on these highly detailed sorts of emojis to have the same level of inclusion of the traditional version.

I've noticed this in app stores recently. The vast majority of games have these highly detailed, action oriented icons. It's impossible to pick one out from the other. They all look like they've been made by the same company.

Just because we have high-resolution displays, doesn't mean we have to use all of those pixels.

Re:Emojipedia.org by singham on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:47AM (#14193974)
According to "theory of meaning",

In “General Semantics,” David Lewis wrote

I distinguish two topics: first, the description of possible languages or grammars as abstract semantic systems whereby symbols are associated with aspects of the world; and, second, the description of the psychological and sociological facts whereby a particular one of these abstract semantic systems is the one used by a person or population. Only confusion comes of mixing these two topics.

[1] : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/meaning/

Re:Emojipedia.org by clydethefrog on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:24AM (#14193253)
It gets even messier when politics are involved. See Apple and the gun emoji.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12240386

Re:Emojipedia.org by 100k on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @01:15PM (#14195790)
The University of Minnesota did a study on cross-device emoji interpretation.

https://grouplens.org/blog/investigating-the-potential-for-m...

Many of the really common emojis have very different emotional connotations on different devices. For example "Grinning Face with Smiling Eyes" is viewed much more negatively by Apple users -- probably because the face looks like its grimacing, rather than grinning.

Re:Emojipedia.org by bitwize on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:49AM (#14193993)
U+1F481 INFORMATION DESK PERSON is often used to mean "bye Felicia" or similar. The emoji's helpful, knowledgeable pose is frequently interpreted as confident, dismissive sassiness.
Re:Emojipedia.org by verall on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:48AM (#14193986)
See that's when I think emoji shine - trying to convey ambiguity over text. In person a shrug can mean a few things, some of which might be harder to say explicitly, for social or mechanical reasons, and an emoji seems preferable to *shrug or (shrug). I think that disambiguating all of the emojis or even continuing to expand the dictionary so much would make it boring. If the emoji meant the word exactly I'd just type the word, it's much easier than trying to find the right emoji.
Re:Emojipedia.org by wingerlang on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:12PM (#14194896)
The hand thing is 'thank you' in Thailand at least.
Re:Emojipedia.org by theseatoms on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:19PM (#14194989)
Ha! I was interpreting it as "namaste".
Re:Emojipedia.org by kingkawn on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @08:58AM (#14193009)
who says high-five is a mistranslation of prayer? communal prayer
Re:Emojipedia.org by kingkawn on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @12:14PM (#14194923)
Hahaha I can't believe there are downvotes for offering an explanation that makes the symbolic use in this way comprehensible. Too wed to the satisfaction of being sure it's a misuse as if this process of negotiation over meaning isn't how language is created. Nonsense is where new sense is discovered. I downvote your downvotes, at last a conversation.