News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Smooth Talk by munificent on Thursday November 02, 2017 @01:17PM (#15612300)
I don't particularly like the author's style, but I like that he has a style, which I think in some ways reflects the point of the essay. Software that "helps" you with your grammar does so by eliminating much of the style that is unique to you.

This touches on, I think, a pretty deep question. To what degree are our mistakes and imperfections "us" and how much should we seek to eliminate them? Where is the line between simply choosing how we present ourselves versus presenting ourselves inauthentically?

A completely untouched photo is obviously "me". A picture of a some other model is clearly not. But between those two points there is an increasingly smooth continuum that people are getting to choose from. When software using machine learning trained on datasets of photos of models subtly corrects my skin and facial structure, is it still an honest photo of me? Is the choice to use that software itself an honest expression of who I am?

Re:Smooth Talk by microcolonel on Thursday November 02, 2017 @01:25PM (#15612359)
I think that the alternative to excessive proofreading is not an altogether rejection of standards, but a willingness to break free of them when you feel it lends a desired quality.

Grammarly and Hemingway are not really intended for artistic writing. The best they can offer to the artist is some perspective on why the readers may not see what he's getting at.

Re:Smooth Talk by gowld on Thursday November 02, 2017 @02:53PM (#15613194)
Hemingway is poorly chosen name, if it's not intended for artistic writing.
Re:Smooth Talk by microcolonel on Thursday November 02, 2017 @03:15PM (#15613380)
> Hemingway is poorly chosen name, if it's not intended for artistic writing.

I agree entirely with that, and it doesn't even really match Hemingway's style.