The very many questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XXV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is that even possible? I guess you could get bits of trivia or whatever, but it's not really knowledge. (And I say that as someone with a deep and abiding love of bits of trivia.)
 
Is that even possible? I guess you could get bits of trivia or whatever, but it's not really knowledge. (And I say that as someone with a deep and abiding love of bits of trivia.)

Well, yeah. But Bremmer often gives graphs and stuff and explains their relevance.
 
Are there any really intelligent people I should follow on Twitter?

Does anyone on CFC go on Twitter?

No. Of all the stupid and pointless social media websites, Twitter seems like the most stupid and pointless.

I like how you implicitly group "intelligent people" and "people on CFC" immediately after an exchange about naked Churchill butt-chugging fine brandies.

:lol:

But don't shortchange the part about his wiping habits!

Being an innocent abroad in a foreign land, I've pursued the meaning of butt-chugging (though I did realize it might be something a little, how shall we say, what's the word... sordid?), and found this:



I'm really curious, now, as to what these strange insights might be. Curiosity, it seems, is strangely addictive in itself.

Urban Dictionary, man. It's the best reference site on the net. :)
 
Urban Dictionary, man. It's the best reference site on the net. :)

Not to be an unpleasant douche, but I'd disagree. Urban dictionaries 'definitions' are more about the selection bias of whoever is putting in the definition than what the word actually means, even by 'slang' standards. It has to do with more with whether the user in question likes/dislikes the thing they're describing, more than just a concrete definition of what it is at face value. At least, that's how it's been from my experience.
 
So what's the alternative?

According to this, usage is king.

But before a word makes it into a standard dictionary, the urban dictionary will tell you what people think a word means. Which, if you're keeping up with me here, is.... usage. More or less.
 
No, to give you a classic example, consider politics. The urban dictionary word for republican or democrat or tory or labor or what-have-you, will have much more to do with whether the user giving the definition likes/dislikes them than a neutral third party of what they actually are.
 
Yes. I see what you mean.

But really the urban dictionary isn't for accepted words like those.

More for neologisms and slang*: words and phrases that haven't yet made it into Websters, for example.

At least, at the moment, I'd say it is.

*words whose meanings are still fluid and changing**. Through usage.

**though, of course, all meanings are fluid - it's a matter of degree, I suppose.
 
Don't mean to be an unpleasant douche, but I'd disagree. Urban dictionaries 'definitions' are more about the selection bias of whoever is putting in the definition than what the word actually means, even by 'slang' standards. It has to do with more with whether the user in question likes/dislikes the thing they're describing, more than just a concrete definition of what it is at face value. At least, that's how it's been from my experience.

You are right. Urban dictionary is inaccurate as many times as it's accurate.
 
There's a hilarious critical (meaning harsh) review of urban dictionary, but I can't make a link to it because it has foul language and I'd get an infraction for linking that.
 
There's a hilarious critical (meaning harsh) review of urban dictionary, but I can't make a link to it because it has foul language and I'd get an infraction for linking that.

PM me.
 
Not to be an unpleasant douche, but I'd disagree. Urban dictionaries 'definitions' are more about the selection bias of whoever is putting in the definition than what the word actually means, even by 'slang' standards. It has to do with more with whether the user in question likes/dislikes the thing they're describing, more than just a concrete definition of what it is at face value. At least, that's how it's been from my experience.

That's the point. You don't go to UD to be informed, you go to be entertained.

That's still really just illustrated trivia, though, isn't it?

Also this.
 
That's the point. You don't go to UD to be informed, you go to be entertained.

They should do a better job of actual comedy then, because most of it is just unfunny ranting from angry idiots.
 
I personally enjoy abstract art due to being less about conveying an image and more about the emotion the work invokes. The focus moves from being about what you see to how what you see makes you feel and the images your own mind conjures up.
 
Since it got lost amidst the drought stuff:

Is there any way for me, as an American, to stream the BBC's or <Australian channel>'s broadcasting of the Sochi Olympics? Because I rather strongly dislike NBC's coverage.
 
Since it got lost amidst the drought stuff:
Is there any way for me, as an American, to stream the BBC's or <Australian channel>'s broadcasting of the Sochi Olympics? Because I rather strongly dislike NBC's coverage.
What my brother does for the football is pay a small amount for a proxy in the UK, and stream stuff via that. I do not know how much "a small amount" is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom