This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Can you please stop just saying ridiculous shit without even attempting to justify it?
I realize that I may be outside of the context window of the Motte on this post. I thought folks here would be more familiar with keyboard/mouse history, I was wrong.
Here's a decent writeup of how QWERTY is essentially an anachronistic mistake.
Familiarity with the topic doesn't make it more relevant to your thesis. Dvorak is exactly as arbitrary and hard to learn as Qwerty. The relative efficiency of touch-typing english text matters when you're already doing 100+ wpm and type regularly as part of your job or something. Most people don't touch type, a different layout wouldn't help them any.
Of course, I don't think your thesis has any basis in reality anyway. The average person these days is quite proficient with phone onscreen keyboards, which are vastly worse interfaces than physical keyboards.
And, as with dictation, if you want to do your text input with eyetracking, you've been able to do that on existing computers for years. People keep using keyboards because they are in fact quite good at what they do.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Okay, this is one I’ll back up. I thought it was commonly accepted.
The QWERTY design was intended to minimize typewriter jams. Hitting two adjacent keys too fast tended to jam, because each letter swung a tiny arm. So the design placed common consonant pairs fair apart, maximizing clearance.
In grade school, this was glossed as “intentionally arranged to slow the user down.” I don’t think this is accurate. But there are definitely some features that come straight from the 1870s. Without tiny arms to jam, they’re pure, “pointless” technical debt.
On the other hand, the evidence for any particular replacement isn’t very good. A skilled typist works around the nonsense just fine. So the “inefficiency” is minimal at best. It certainly doesn’t favor nerds! Still, we could in theory benefit more from a different standard.
It isn't efficient (although as you say, it's not less efficient than most other keyboard layouts we've tried) and if he'd just said that I wouldn't have said anything. But calling it pointless is just wrong - there was a point to its design, and the point to it now is that all of the world's fastest typists are fluent in it and converting them would be a monumental task.
That said, we could definitely do better if we could start over. There was a keyboard design for thumbsticks I used to have on the psp that I reached 68wpm on after only a month's usage for example.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link