677 karma · joined January 12, 2024
It's not, though. Come to France, say "coq" - people will wonder why you're talking about roosters all of a sudden. Holy Anglo-centrism, Batman...
Besides, learning a language isn't about exams or certifications. It seemed to me that we have very different ideas of what learning to speak a language means, and your answers confirm it. That's fine, but I'm not sure what there is left to discuss, then.
Most apps focus too much on impeccable grammar (even if they usually restrict you to a few tenses/moods) and rote, non-contextual vocabulary learning. Both are, well, useless. Having perfect grammar but not knowing when to use which verb in which context won't get you far. It's like trying to learn how to code in some programming language by studying the formal syntax and rote memorizing a bunch of core functions from the standard library. You miss out on everything that actually makes a language.
All in all, it feels like this post was written by someone who mainly communicates (or learns to communicate) in foreign in writing.
> Forget intonation if it’s not entirely necessary. Especially in French, there is no need to learn if a word takes a ` or ‘.
I can't let that one go, sorry. You don't need to learn perfect spelling, but it's going to be obvious most of the time if it's é or è when you hear the word. And if you pronounce it weird, you will get confused looks. In English, do you "need" to learn if a word takes "o" or "u"? People who were raised with certain native languages cannot even hear the difference anyway, so why bother, I guess? I hope this makes my point clear.
> "it wasn't on Wikipedia" is hardly an excuse when it comes to ethics
which is what I actually wrote, in a post where I'm not even talking about the particular situation. I expressed dismay about a failure to properly attribute ideas, and then I explained that I don't care about what was written in 2014 on Wikipedia, experts should know better anyway. If you've decided to read an accusation in what I wrote, that is absolutely on you. The most negative thing I wrote about the author was:
> You'd expect an emeritus professor to have enough time on their hands to check their sources...
And, again, I would have absolutely no problem saying that in public with my real name. I've said much "worse".
> Would you have found out about those earlier sources without Wikipedia?
I'm not an expert in this domain. The author is.
Although you might also want to consider that "integration" (really, indefinite integrals, AKA antiderivative) is only defined up to a constant. So why couldn't it be the same for this "number derivative"? Perhaps the "antiderivative" is only defined up to something. It'd be a fun exercise, if you're interested. Can you figure out under what conditions do you get D(a) = D(b)? Put differently, given an integer c, what are the solutions to D(x) = c?
> Since 1990, Renaissance Technologies has contributed $59,081,152 to federal campaigns and since 2001, and has spent $3,730,000 on lobbying as of 2016.
Let's not kid ourselves, people at this level of wealth and power can very much make their voice heard by the people who make policy. He's definitely not the only one in this position, but to frame him as a "better casino player" who is "not really dictating anything" is naive at best.
> Whatever the case may be, the available evidence behind this tale appears to be purely anecdotal and not verifiable at this point.