[HN Gopher] Uppestcase and Lowestcase Letters
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Uppestcase and Lowestcase Letters
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 675 points
       Date   : 2021-04-02 00:13 UTC (22 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tom7.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tom7.org)
        
       | Smithalicious wrote:
       | I read the title as "upper caste" and "lower caste" and imagined
       | what a caste system of letters would look like
        
       | moralestapia wrote:
       | What a great idea and a fun read! For an April fool's gag this is
       | a truly remarkable work, kudos to the author!
        
       | kebman wrote:
       | When the lockdown was extended by another year... xD
        
       | Causality1 wrote:
       | This was very obviously inspired by Randall Munroe's "capital
       | numbers" comic and I find the lack of acknowledgement
       | disappointing.
       | 
       | https://www.xkcd.com/2206/
        
         | alanbernstein wrote:
         | Well there is a sort of catch-all acknowledgement at least:
         | 
         | > Probably someone already had this idea and did it before I
         | was even born
        
         | c3534l wrote:
         | I had this same idea when I was 7. Its just not a unique
         | thought. However, it is interesting that the actual glyphs used
         | are somewhat similar.
        
         | Balgair wrote:
         | A real shame that he didn't put in the numbers to see what
         | their capitals may have been
        
         | dhosek wrote:
         | Arguably, lining figures are uppercase numbers and old-style
         | figures are lowercase numbers. Certainly, the former work
         | better in an all-caps setting than the latter, and the latter
         | in mixed-case typesetting than the former. I used to set
         | Canadian and British postcodes, which are mixes of letters and
         | numbers using small caps and old-style figures when I printed
         | mailing labels for the magazine I published in the 90s.
        
       | tempodox wrote:
       | Out-of-fashion warning: tom7 uses Subversion, not git. How
       | subversive. He really must belong to the institute for
       | computational heresy. I press shift to reduce conflict all the
       | time and I still feel conflicted.
        
       | ashertrockman wrote:
       | SIGBOVIK is proud to have published this groundbreaking work in
       | its 2021 proceedings, which were released today.
       | 
       | Also, check out the author's video: https://youtu.be/HLRdruqQfRk
       | 
       | For more non-serious research that is often executed seriously,
       | see: http://sigbovik.org
        
       | MPSimmons wrote:
       | From the paper (http://tom7.org/lowercase/lowercase.pdf):
       | 
       | ... fonts where everything is fine except that just the lowercase
       | r has a width of MAX INT...
       | 
       | Okay, I cannot imagine what the use of that font would be, but I
       | really want to know.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Many fonts are designed for a single logo use - imagine a logo
         | that is lowercase r with the rest of the name under the r.
        
       | euske wrote:
       | Fun fact (not fabricated BECAUSE IT'S APRIL 2ND OVER HERE):
       | 
       | Japanese alphabets (kana) doesn't have a concept of upper/lower
       | cases. There are two different types of kanas (round ones and
       | square ones) but they are kind of equal in terms of
       | strength/stress so they can't be used to express anger.
       | 
       | People on 2-Channel forum (Japan's 4chan, basically) came up with
       | a brilliant idea, which is to insert a space between each letter
       | so that it looks a bit wider and has an extra oomph.
       | 
       | Example:
       | 
       | - normal: Jin Ri haiiTian Qi dane.  (it's a fine day, isn't it.)
       | 
       | - angry: Jin  Ri  ha i i Tian  Qi  da ne .  (IT'S A F*KING NICE
       | DAY ISN'T IT)
        
         | aviraldg wrote:
         | Isn't Katakana (for words that would normally be written with
         | Hiragana or Kanji) also used sometimes to indicate emphasis?
         | https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/5314/31389
        
           | numpad0 wrote:
           | More of an indication that implications exist, e.g. ganbaru
           | implies it's supposed to be but not in kanji, hiroshima or
           | hukushima implies nuclear context.
           | 
           | They can be used to convey tones in text similarly to how
           | italics, caps, symbols and other decorations work in general,
           | I think that's what they meant to say by emphasis.
        
           | nonbirithm wrote:
           | Sometimes all-katakana is used in fiction to indicate
           | foreigner or robotic voices (like the Starmen in Mother 2).
           | Writing a scream as a string of a's instead of a's gives it a
           | piercing quality, moreso when you add the _dakuten_ marker
           | (), even though it doesn 't change the pronunciation in this
           | case.
        
           | fomine3 wrote:
           | Yes. writing word in kanji or katakana sometimes works as
           | emphasis. In other words, writing word in hiragana works as
           | not to be emphasised.
           | 
           | Writing word in katakana that usually written in kanji is
           | also works as emphasis with a bit different meaning. It tend
           | to be used as stereotype. For example, Fu Dao (Fukushima) /
           | Guang Dao (Hiroshima) is just a name of prefecture, but
           | sometimes written hukushima / hiroshima that refers nuclear
           | plant accident / nuke bomb event. (I really dislike this
           | usage).
        
         | dheera wrote:
         | No concept of case is also true of Chinese, Korean, Arabic, and
         | if I'm not mistaken, most South Asian scripts as well.
         | 
         | There are an incredible amount of other ways to add emphasis in
         | Chinese though, so it's not lacking anything, and I imagine the
         | same is true of the other languages.
        
           | 10000truths wrote:
           | Arabic script has a vaguely similar concept of a given letter
           | having multiple (up to 3) forms. The form depends on what
           | letters precede and/or succeed it (if any).
        
             | kingofpandora wrote:
             | That has nothing to do with emphasis though.
        
           | davchana wrote:
           | Gurmukhi script also has no case difference, but has
           | something like symbols, which adds sounds like nn ann, u in
           | put or cut
        
           | spijdar wrote:
           | And it's worth mentioning how relatively recently case was
           | "invented" even for Latin and Greek/Greek-derived scripts
           | (including Cyrillic, and probably Latin itself
           | technically...)
           | 
           | The way we write modern text is more modern than most people
           | realize, I think. The letter 'j' wasn't really used as a
           | separate letter indicating a separate sound until sometime
           | around the 16th century I think! Case is older, but not
           | ancient. I've seen some Greek on 3rd/4th century middle
           | eastern ruins and I struggle to read the "all upper case with
           | no spaces" writing sometimes, but that's just how it was! No
           | "lower case" until much later...
        
             | Talanes wrote:
             | The characters we think of as lower case were starting to
             | take familiar forms around the 3rd century, but they were
             | just the handwritten form of the language. One set of
             | letters with clear sharp lines that can be worked into
             | stone, and another with curves that can be quickly
             | handwritten.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > One set of letters with clear sharp lines that can be
               | worked into stone
               | 
               | This was never a goal; look at B [?] O P Ph Ps O, or on
               | the Latin end C G Q R S.
               | 
               | Inscriptions are very formal; you carve the letters you
               | have no matter what they look like. There was never any
               | difficulty carving curves.
               | 
               | Handwriting is informal; you write whatever you find
               | easiest.
        
           | dhosek wrote:
           | Case is a uniquely European script phenomenon, and one that
           | came late in the development of most of the scripts
           | (Cyrillic, because it was the last of the European scripts to
           | be developed has the shortest time between its unicameral
           | origins and the development of upper- and lowercase).
           | 
           | I have a book published in the 1920s with a forward by
           | Stanley Morison, by an author who attempted to enhance the
           | Hebrew alphabet by introducing upper and lower case
           | letterforms to it as well as to bring the letter forms more
           | in line with the styles of the Latin-Greek-Cyrillic
           | alphabets. It's--odd.
        
             | lifthrasiir wrote:
             | > I have a book published in the 1920s with a forward by
             | Stanley Morison, by an author who attempted to enhance the
             | Hebrew alphabet by introducing upper and lower case
             | letterforms to it as well as to bring the letter forms more
             | in line with the styles of the Latin-Greek-Cyrillic
             | alphabets. It's--odd.
             | 
             | Before the eventual standardization of Hangul around early
             | 20th century there were numerous attempts to "linearize"
             | Hangul's characteristic syllabic blocks ("puleosseugi"
             | [1]). Many of them were influenced by Western alphabets and
             | had two cases, and none were successful. And yes, they are
             | also odd.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul#Linear_Korean
        
               | dhosek wrote:
               | When I was an undergrad, I wrote some algorithms for
               | composing Hangul letters into the "ideographs" in
               | Metafont. It was kind of fun to build. The whole east-
               | Asian font project was too ambitious and never got
               | finished though. I was trying to enable algorithmic
               | composition not just of Hangul but also Kanji/Hanzi from
               | radicals but the latter was not as amenable to
               | algorithmic composition.
        
         | hudixt wrote:
         | This should be same for many language. Many Indian languages
         | doesn't have a concept of upper/lower cases.
        
         | underlines wrote:
         | I learned Thai in the last 10 years and they don't have letter
         | cases. I naturally began to use spacings for emphasis in "Chat
         | language". It's so natural to do this.
         | 
         | kaak -> fail
         | 
         | k aa k k k k k -> FAIL!!!!!11!
        
         | Clewza313 wrote:
         | The standard/formal way to emphasize in Japanese is with boten
         | "side dots":
         | 
         | https://www.japanesewithanime.com/2018/03/furigana-dots-bout...
         | 
         | However, there is no easy way to enter or display these online,
         | hence hacks like spacing.
        
           | jfk13 wrote:
           | The CSS text-emphasis property seems to work in both Safari
           | and Firefox:
           | 
           | data:text/html,<div style="font:16px monospace; text-
           | emphasis:red filled circle">Hello World
           | 
           | Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be supported in Chrome yet.
        
             | totallymike wrote:
             | Delighted by learning this little hack for showing an html
             | thing that you can just paste into the address bar. Thanks
             | for showing it to me :)
        
           | OscarCunningham wrote:
           | If you're ANGRY can you put several dots?
        
           | infogulch wrote:
           | > enter or display
           | 
           | Hey Unicode Consortium, where you at?
        
             | bargle0 wrote:
             | Making stupid fucking emoji.
        
               | naikrovek wrote:
               | They accept suggestions, and people suggest emoji.
               | 
               | So suggest something that isn't emoji and it'll likely be
               | accepted and added to the next version.
        
               | jmmcd wrote:
               | That doesn't help
        
               | fouc wrote:
               | emoji originates from japanese mobile phones
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | hrktb wrote:
             | Writing horizontally the dot would be above, so I'd assume
             | there's support by composition.
             | 
             | It would still be a problem of IME and font support.
             | 
             | On input, there's already so many shortcuts and hacks (e.g.
             | SHIFT/CAPS is already taken to force switch from hiragana
             | to katakana) that it's hard to imagine some natural
             | combination that could be memorized.
             | 
             | On the font side, there's already the battle raging for
             | having proper jp fonts in smarphones instead of the chinese
             | ones, so additional support for marginal features is an
             | uphill battle to say the least.
        
             | polm23 wrote:
             | There's actually Unicode and CSS support for it, but it
             | just isn't widely integrated / used.
             | 
             | https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9C%8F%E7%82%B9
        
         | xmprt wrote:
         | The only difference I see is in the kerning of the letters.
        
           | jagged-chisel wrote:
           | yes. that's pretty much what GP said.
        
             | wpearse wrote:
             | Let's be honest... that's _exactly_ what GP said ;)
        
         | totetsu wrote:
         | kana's uppercase potential exists out there somewhere in latent
         | space
        
           | nullsense wrote:
           | They do have half width versions though that are used when
           | typing sometimes a -> a like if you want to indicate
           | stretching vowel sounds out for emphasis.
        
         | StavrosK wrote:
         | That's an interesting fact, but I can't help but feel like your
         | comment is a bit too unaware of its own culture. After all,
         | there's nothing that makes capitals _inherently_ shouty, it 's
         | just another convention.
         | 
         | Saying "they didn't have capitals so they used spaces" would
         | sound odd to an alien, who would wonder why capitals were
         | necessary in the first place.
        
           | salawat wrote:
           | I don't understand people that read ALL CAPS as shouty, and
           | in fact, it was ine of my first culture clashes on HN. I find
           | the _italicized emphasis mode_ to be harder to read and
           | recognize.
           | 
           | Maybe it seems so odd to me because there are so many
           | licenses, contracts, or government forms that use ALL CAPS as
           | emphasis. I don't know.
           | 
           | It just doesn't translate to shouty in reading mental voice.
        
             | drewzero1 wrote:
             | I don't tend to read it as shouting unless the contents are
             | clearly angry. I've always seemed to parse it as more of a
             | monotone 80s/90s computer voice. I think growing up using
             | DOS and BASIC made me just associate all-caps with
             | computers.
             | 
             | Honestly I'm a little surprised that people who've likely
             | seen their share of BAD COMMAND OR FILE NAME would still
             | read that as shouting.
        
             | Sharlin wrote:
             | Yeah, it's probably just you.
             | 
             | To me (and probably most others), license texts and such
             | absolutely look like they are shouting. I do not understand
             | whence the convention of having them in ALL CAPS, and can
             | only assume it's in itself some sort of a cultural
             | association between ALL CAPS and IMPORTANCE. I have only
             | seen it in English legal texts, anyway - is it even used in
             | other languages? It looks to me like ALL CAPS was
             | originally used to emphasize key points, and then an
             | inevitable race to the bottom happened until EVERYTHING WAS
             | IMPORTANT which really means that nothing is important.
             | 
             | When it comes to typography, nearly every type of emphasis
             | employed in Western text except _italics_ (and sLL s, which
             | see too little use these days methinks) only exist due to
             | technological limitations, particularly the extremely
             | limited typographic options available to typewriters and,
             | later, 7- or 8-bit text terminals. This includes ALL CAPS,
             | s p a c i n g, and
             | u[?]n[?]d[?]e[?]r[?]l[?]i[?]n[?]e[?]d[?], never mind ASCII
             | crutches like  /pseudoitalics/, _pseudounderlined_, and
             | *pseudoboldface*.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | mekkkkkk wrote:
           | But he's not talking to aliens though. We all know what
           | putting stress or emphasis on words means. I'd be surprised
           | if that was an exclusively western phenomenon.
           | 
           | It's fun to hear how it's done in scripts that doesn't
           | support our (as in the average HN reader) default way of
           | doing it (which would be caps or italics/bold).
        
             | StavrosK wrote:
             | Yes, but the comment said:
             | 
             | > Japanese alphabets (kana) doesn't have a concept of
             | upper/lower cases [...] so they can't be used to express
             | anger.
             | 
             | It reads to me a bit like "the natural way to expess anger
             | is uppercase, but they didn't have that, so they did the
             | other thing instead".
             | 
             | Would you find a sentence like "English didn't have dots so
             | they used uppercase to express anger" equally natural?
        
               | nightpool wrote:
               | yes, especially when written in Japanese
        
               | mekkkkkk wrote:
               | To assume that an English reader would know what "dots"
               | are in your example seems unreasonable. As the sibling
               | comment said, if you wrote that in japanese it would make
               | perfect sense. The sort of meta statement would be "That
               | other language doesn't have X, which the one I'm using
               | has. It instead uses Y, which has the same approximate
               | meaning.".
        
             | seesawtron wrote:
             | Many of the Asian languages do not have the concepts of
             | upper or lower case.
             | 
             | They contain vowels that go beyond the basic 5 "aeiou" of
             | the English language (eg. see [0]). These suffice to let
             | the speaker know how exactly to say the word unlike in
             | English where it has to be learned case by case based on
             | whatever is popular or acceptable pronunciation.
             | 
             | A subset of of these languages are tonal languages which
             | also have special characters to additionally allow the
             | speaker to set the pitch of the word correctly which then
             | changes the meaning of the words [1].
             | 
             | [0] http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/other/hindi/guide/alphab
             | et.sh... [1]
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_(linguistics)
        
               | andrewzah wrote:
               | "These suffice to let the speaker know how exactly to say
               | the word unlike in English where it has to be learned
               | case by case based on whatever is popular or acceptable
               | pronunciation."
               | 
               | This is more due to how widespread English is, and how
               | vowels/pronunciation have shifted over time. For example,
               | The Great Vowel Shift. [0]
               | 
               | Korean has exactly the same issues, albeit to a smaller
               | degree. There are plenty of words that aren't pronounced
               | like how they're spelled, due to grammatical rules.
               | jongro as an example. Or cases where words sound exactly
               | the same and you just need to know the context/spelling-
               | jjohda, jjojda, jjodda, jjosda, jjocda.
               | 
               | Then there's regional slang/pronunciation/dialect. Busan
               | dialect is fairly different from pyojuneo, or the
               | "official" standard language. This phenomenon is not
               | unique to English in any way. Any language scaled up will
               | develop these issues over time.
               | 
               | At least you can try to pronounce "cough" or "jongro",
               | instead of not being able to pronounce "Yuan " at all
               | because you don't already know the pronunciation.
               | 
               | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Vowel_Shift
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | > This is more due to how widespread English is, and how
               | vowels/pronunciation have shifted over time.
               | 
               | I'd go so far as to say that english is now spoken by so
               | many people in so many different regions, all of whom can
               | now be heard by each other on a reasonably frequent
               | basis, that it has forced english speakers to become so
               | adept at vowel-reconstruction that one could pronounce
               | words with completely arbitrary vowels and still be
               | understood.
        
               | andrewzah wrote:
               | "it has forced english speakers to become so adept at
               | vowel-reconstruction that one could pronounce words with
               | completely arbitrary vowels and still be understood."
               | 
               | This was still occurring before people were able to
               | widely hear other regions' speakers, though.
               | 
               | However things like cough, plough, although, thorough,
               | etc having different, -correct- pronunciations are due to
               | English taking in words from other languages.
        
               | mekkkkkk wrote:
               | I love how explicit some written languages seem to be. It
               | sounds great to be able to reliably pronounce any word
               | perfectly. I suppose it's a trade off of complexity
               | though. Learning these more explicit languages seems
               | really daunting. Maybe it's just bias?
        
               | bonoboTP wrote:
               | English and French are the oddballs here. In virtually
               | all other European languages you can reliably pronounce
               | any written word of the language. You don't have to go to
               | Asia for this.
        
               | mekkkkkk wrote:
               | I don't know about that. I'm Swedish and there are a lot
               | of words in our language that is impossible to deduce the
               | pronunciation of. I'd assume the same is true for the
               | other scandinavian languages as well since they are very
               | similar. Perhaps we are oddballs as well, but it seems
               | unlikely.
        
               | elliekelly wrote:
               | You might find the IPA interesting. With maybe an hour of
               | studying to learn the letters/symbols and mouth movements
               | you can reliably pronounce any word in any language so
               | long as you've got the IPA spelling.
        
               | mekkkkkk wrote:
               | I've actually looked in to IPA at one point. It is
               | extremely useful when learning the basics of a new
               | language. It would be very tedious to try to look up
               | every new word you come across though. Alas, the worst
               | part is that you don't know which words are pronounced
               | differently than you assumed until you hear it or someone
               | raises their eyebrows.
        
               | munificent wrote:
               | _> These suffice to let the speaker know how exactly to
               | say the word unlike in English where it has to be learned
               | case by case based on whatever is popular or acceptable
               | pronunciation._
               | 
               | You can have three things:
               | 
               | 1. A spoken language that evolves over time.
               | 
               | 2. A writing system that accurately describes
               | pronunciation.
               | 
               | 3. A writing system that indicates history and etymology.
               | 
               | But you only get to pick two. English went with 1 and 3,
               | which is arguably the optimal choice.
        
               | mwcampbell wrote:
               | Why do you think #3 is more important than #2? Why is
               | preserving history and etymology more important than ease
               | of learning for new writers? Put another way, why should
               | kids have to struggle with spelling so we can have a
               | writing system that preserves linguistic history?
        
               | munificent wrote:
               | Three reasons:
               | 
               | 1. Because it's more important to know what words mean
               | than it is to know how they sound.
               | 
               | My daughter reads a ton and learns a lot of words from
               | reading. Fairly often, she mispronounces them, and that's
               | OK. What's more valuable is that she can often infer the
               | correct meaning of the word both from the surrounding
               | context and from the parts that the word is made of. If
               | we normalize spelling to match pronunciation, much of the
               | latter gets lost.
               | 
               | It's easier to see that "mean" and "meant" are related
               | than "meen" and "ment". "History" and "story" versus
               | "histery" and "story".
               | 
               | 2. Because pronunciation changes over time. If we
               | continuously change spelling to match, it means older
               | printed works get harder to read. In the worst case, they
               | can appear to be saying different words than they
               | intended.
               | 
               | 3. Because pronunciation isn't uniform across regions.
               | 
               | Should "lawyer" be spelled "loyer" or "lawyer"? Is
               | "crayon" spelled "crayon", "crayawn", "cran", or "crown"?
               | Is it "caramel" or "carmel"?
        
               | orthoxerox wrote:
               | > They contain vowels that go beyond the basic 5 "aeiou"
               | of the English language
               | 
               | Even English itself has vowels that go beyond the basic
               | "aeiou" of "the English language".
        
               | louthy wrote:
               | I'm guessing what you mean, but maybe...
               | 
               | * the letter Y
               | 
               | * vowel pairs, like 'ou'
               | 
               | * accents, like in 'precis'
               | 
               | Is that what you mean?
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | Probably they mean _spoken_ English, rather than written
               | English. Written languages are traditionally considered
               | secondary to spoken ones in linguistics, perhaps because
               | they tend to be acquired several years later in childhood
               | and several millennia+ later in history. English is
               | normally considered to have about 13-15 vowels, if we
               | exclude the rhotics, depending on dialect: TRAP BATH PALM
               | LOT CLOTH THOUGHT KIT DRESS STRUT FOOT FACE GOAT FLEECE
               | GOOSE PRICE CHOICE MOUTH COMMA LETTER HAPPY, in Wells 's
               | standard lexical sets.
               | 
               | But, you say, that's 20 lexical sets, not 13-15? Well, no
               | dialect distinguishes all 20. My idiolect (a slight
               | variant of General American) realizes TRAP and BATH as
               | [ae], PALM and LOT as [a], CLOTH and THOUGHT as [o], KIT
               | as [I], DRESS as [e], STRUT as [^], FOOT as [U], FACE as
               | [ei], GOAT as [^u], FLEECE and HAPPY as [i], GOOSE as
               | [u], PRICE as [ai], CHOICE as [oi], MOUTH as [aeu], and
               | COMMA as [@]. That's 15, or 12 if you leave out PRICE,
               | CHOICE, and MOUTH, which are diphthongs made of vowels
               | that also occur isolated. (GOAT is debatable, usually
               | analyzed as [oU] or [ou].)
               | 
               | Different dialects draw the boundaries in different
               | places; for example, dialects with the "trap-bath split",
               | such as RP, famously realize TRAP and BATH differently
               | ([ae] and [a] in RP). Some dialects have fewer vowels; if
               | we consider Indian English to be a single dialect, it may
               | have more speakers than even GA, and most varieties of
               | Indian English have fewer vowels than 12. I haven't found
               | a good phonological analysis, but if you know any Indian
               | English speakers and also know phonology, you know what I
               | mean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_differences_
               | and_diale... goes into some detail.
               | 
               | ______
               | 
               | + The historical gap might be much larger than this.
               | Sumerian cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphs date back
               | about 5300 years, and they provide evidence that _spoken_
               | language was considered to be universal among humans at
               | the time--there is no suggestion of tribes that lacked
               | language anywhere in the written record. Today there are
               | still peoples without written language, and a few who
               | only acquired written language within the last
               | generation. So we have good evidence that it has taken at
               | least 5300 years. But _Homo sapiens_ has been around for
               | sixty times that long, over 300 millennia, and stone
               | tools date back 2 million years. It strains credibility
               | to imagine that the authors of the Lascaux cave paintings
               | or the Denisovans who invented sewing were so unlike us
               | as to lack speech; the origin of spoken language is
               | usually dated to before 40kya. Unfortunately, no tape
               | recorders have yet been found from that epoch, so the
               | uncertainty of the antiquity of spoken language ranges
               | over nearly a factor of 100. Maybe spoken language is a
               | million years older than written language, or five
               | million. Probably not ten million, though, or we 'd be
               | studying chimpanzee folklore.
        
               | lmohseni wrote:
               | Phonetically, English has about 9 or 10 vowels, depending
               | on accent. Consider bill vs bike, or goose vs look.
        
           | nicky0 wrote:
           | I can't help but feel your comment is a bit too unaware that
           | it's reasonable to assume the reader is familiar with the
           | capitals=shouty convention.
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | There is a similar thing in Korean Hangul (also unicased) where
         | you put full stop between each letter: "algessseubnida." ("I
         | see.") vs. "al.gess.seub.ni.da." I believe it is an independent
         | invention.
        
           | banachtarski wrote:
           | so.de.seu.ne. ^^
        
             | lifthrasiir wrote:
             | That kind [1] of language-script mismatches mainly for
             | humorous purposes actually exists in Korean and is
             | considered a kind of hanboneo (a portmanteau of hangugeo
             | Korean language and ilboneo Japanese language).
             | 
             | [1] In this case, Japanese soudesune "I see" written in
             | Hangul.
        
               | tasogare wrote:
               | Chinese phonology is a bit restrictive but I have great
               | fun written short messages in other languages (Japanese,
               | French, English) with Chinese characters. Of course the
               | number of friends I can do that why is very limited,
               | which in a way makes it is even nicer.
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | In Chinese you use exclamation points:
           | 
           | Wo !Tai !Man !Zu !Liao !
        
         | maxnoe wrote:
         | This is a form of typographic emphasis also widely used in
         | German Fraktur texts, called Sperrsatz:
         | 
         | https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperrsatz
        
           | HelloNurse wrote:
           | Fraktur letters are even more boxy than kanji and Chinese
           | ideographs, it isn't accidental.
        
         | jiofih wrote:
         | a n g r y
         | 
         | this is also used in English but for a mocking tone.
        
         | simonebrunozzi wrote:
         | I love Japanese culture and find myself really curious about
         | it. Thanks for sharing this.
         | 
         | Is there a place where I could learn more things like this one?
        
         | kmeisthax wrote:
         | Wait that's the opposite of what westerners do with fullwidth
         | romaji
         | 
         | - normal: It's a fine day, isn't it.
         | 
         | - vaporwave: It's a fine day, isn't it.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | cookiengineer wrote:
           | Every time I'm reading these letter or the mega-wide numbers
           | in Japanese uploads on youtube, I'm having a heart attack
           | thinking my font cache is broken again.
           | 
           | Not. funny.
        
             | qiqing wrote:
             | That's a very good example of using full stops in English
             | for emphasis.
        
         | amake wrote:
         | Kana are not alphabets; they are syllabaries.
        
       | tomgp wrote:
       | You see that bit at the start of the video where tom7 presses the
       | capslock key, then types a letter, then presses the capslock key
       | again? I worked with a designer (posessed of two hands and no
       | visible impairments) who actually typed like that. Working
       | alongside him was an excellent lesson in patience.
        
         | jack_pp wrote:
         | I chuckled too but then I thought about it and.. it might be
         | slightly slower but will probably be better for your hands long
         | term since hitting shift you have to twist your hand awkwardly
        
           | caslon wrote:
           | ...what? I just checked on three different keyboards to make
           | sure, but...no. Shift overlaps with A for a reason; you
           | shouldn't be twisting your hand if you're using proper typing
           | technique.
        
             | jack_pp wrote:
             | on my laptop the shift is smaller than the caps-lock, about
             | 2/3 the size of the caps-lock.
        
         | jrib wrote:
         | Have a programmer friend who does the same. At first it really
         | blew my mind and I couldn't tell if he was serious.
         | 
         | But he's a great coder and had loss of successful projects.
         | It's just the way he learned and it doesn't seem limiting or
         | annoying to him.
        
         | unfunco wrote:
         | I did that up until about 5 years ago, and I've been a
         | professional software engineer for 13 years or so, and
         | programming longer than that. I had to remove the caps-lock key
         | from my keyboard to force the behaviour out of my muscle
         | memory.
         | 
         | Now though, I have the opposite bad habit, if I need to write a
         | long string of uppercase letters, I don't turn on caps-lock, I
         | instead keep my left little finger pressed on the shift key.
        
           | elyobo wrote:
           | Is that a bad habit? I remapped my capslock key to escape
           | years ago and never looked back.
        
             | jonnytran wrote:
             | Yes. It contributes to RSI. It's best to use thumbs for
             | frequently used key modifiers.
        
       | meken wrote:
       | Amazing video.
       | 
       | My only suggestion for improvement for the modeling is in the
       | part where you tried to find the "ideal" letters for the model.
       | 
       | Instead of sampling generated random bitmaps and ranking those,
       | you could instead initialize the inputs to random continuous
       | values, then optimize the output score for the desired letter
       | with respect to the random input (with your fixed model).
       | 
       | Indeed, this is how people get those trippy dog images you've
       | probably seen.
       | 
       | Anyway, this video was just so good. I'm amazed.
        
         | at_a_remove wrote:
         | I was wondering why not model letters as an additive series of
         | strokes, just as we write with a pen, then evaluate the
         | results.
        
       | isaacimagine wrote:
       | This is incredible! I wonder what would happen if we threw more
       | GPUs at it.
        
       | bla3 wrote:
       | If you haven't seen tom7's youtube channel: Every single video at
       | https://www.youtube.com/c/suckerpinch/videos is a treat. Mind-
       | bending, deeply funny, and amazingly work-intensive.
        
         | nonbirithm wrote:
         | Tom7 will probably be the only person ever to bring up strange
         | loops as part of a self-referential narrative for reverse
         | engineering an NES and programming a slideshow presentation
         | with the diagrams of that reverse engineering... on the NES
         | itself.
        
           | draw_down wrote:
           | That was one of my favorite talks I've ever seen. I was
           | really pleased to see this today because I was just thinking
           | of the NES talk the other day and wondering what tom7 was up
           | to.
        
         | kibwen wrote:
         | Seconded, thirded, and fourthed. My favorite is "NaN Gates and
         | Flip FLOPS", where he dismisses 0 and 1 as being too ugly to be
         | the foundation of all computation and reinvents computing via
         | the beauty of rational numbers, which is to say, the horror of
         | IEEE754 floating point (along with a working hardware
         | implementation!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TFDG-y-EHs
        
         | xmprt wrote:
         | His video on anagraphs is interesting
         | (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTBAW-Eh0tM) especially if
         | watched alongside his followup video proving that generalized
         | kerning is an undecidable problem
         | (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_npHZbe3qM)
        
       | koliber wrote:
       | This is the most brilliant thing I've watched in a long time. I
       | love the various ways Tom took this. His sense of humor, obscure
       | references, and ability to tell a good story are outstanding. I
       | also started watching the other videos and they're just as good.
       | 
       | Tom, if you are reading this, I am curious what a capital smiley
       | face emoji looks like. Or the capitalest. What does nirvana look
       | like in a twittable small yellow circle? Or a lowercase one. Or
       | lowestcase one. What is the graphic depiction of the pit of
       | despair.
       | 
       | You got me thinking. Sure, emojis are in color. But could you
       | make them black and white? Or apply the transform to each color
       | channel independently. I'm convinced there is a way, and if there
       | is anyone who can find it, it is you.
       | 
       | And if you do go this way, why stop at emojis? The world needs to
       | know what a capital Mona Lisa looks like. Or the capitalest.
       | 
       | I think you're on the path to general artificial intelligence
       | here. iA.
        
       | high_byte wrote:
       | can't believe I watched the whole video
        
       | qwertox wrote:
       | 10 out of 10 for style and execution.
        
       | numToStr wrote:
       | That was trippy.
        
       | bckr wrote:
       | Okay, based on the introduction of the linked paper, this is
       | brilliant. I have seen few if any texts like this one, which
       | treat a fun + interesting + simple idea with fun language while
       | also presenting it in the form of a research article.
       | 
       | Do give this a chance
       | 
       | EDIT: I forgot what day it is. I really like the idea though and
       | I think with a little more work it could really deliver
        
         | jawns wrote:
         | It reminds me a little bit of "Godel, Escher, Bach" in terms of
         | its playfulness.
        
         | bbischof wrote:
         | My favorite line in this wonderful paper is:
         | 
         | The database is just filled with garbage that is unusable for
         | this project: Fonts that are completely illegible, fonts that
         | are missing most of their characters, fonts with millions of
         | control points, Comic Sans MS, fonts where every glyph is a
         | drawing of a train, fonts where everything is fine except that
         | just the lowercase r has a width of MAX INT, and so on.
        
           | kebman wrote:
           | 07:48 "Comic Sands; so called because the letters look like
           | little droppings of sand, or something. And they are kind of
           | aesthetic. We could consider this an improvement."
        
         | isoprophlex wrote:
         | The linked paper is a wonderful read indeed!
         | 
         | This guy is the Terry Pratchett of home-grown deep learning
         | libraries...
         | 
         |  _So I did that and let it run for a month. Actually I had to
         | start over several times with different parameters and
         | initialization weights because it would get stuck (Figure 11)
         | right away or as soon as I looked away from the computer. I
         | prayed to the dark wizard of hyperparameter tuning until he
         | smiled upon my initial conditions, knowing that some- where he
         | was adding another tick-mark next to my name in a tidy but
         | ultimately terrifying Moleskine notebook that he bought on a
         | whim in the Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport on
         | a business trip, and still feels was overpriced for what it
         | is._
        
         | ronsor wrote:
         | Tom does this sort of stuff regardless of whether it's 4/1 or
         | not.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | matsemann wrote:
         | The conference "FUN with algorithms" consists mostly if these
         | kind of things. CS done on toy problems or other things making
         | the papers a bit out of the ordinary (but still real science).
         | Not presented in quite the same quirky way, though.
         | 
         | https://drops.dagstuhl.de/portals/lipics/index.php?semnr=160...
        
         | dhosek wrote:
         | There's _The Journal of Irreproducible Results_. Not sure if it
         | 's still in publication though. Their website appears to be
         | down/broken.
        
           | alisonkisk wrote:
           | Thats one side of the schism with the more popular Annals of
           | Improbable Research.
           | 
           | https://www.improbable.com/
        
             | dhosek wrote:
             | Ah, that's the one that I really wanted. Thanks.
        
       | mmastrac wrote:
       | I still keep Tom's old fonts around on my computer for various
       | purposes. They have a real character that I haven't found in
       | other fonts: http://fonts.tom7.com/
       | 
       | It would be interesting to see if AI could be used to fill in
       | some of the gaps in the fonts - ie: numbers for his Angstrom font
       | (https://www.dafont.com/angstrom.font)
        
         | fouc wrote:
         | Which font do you use for development? ;)
        
         | lunixbochs wrote:
         | Something like mixup augmentation might work here as well for
         | training - blend two SDFs and say "this is 20% A and 80% B".
         | 
         | Someone could also train a model that given some glyphs of a
         | font predicts the rest of the glyphs. Then we can do weird
         | things like give it glyphs from multiple fonts as input to make
         | a hybrid font.
        
           | efskap wrote:
           | Personally I'm curious about training a model to predict
           | Cyrillic or Greek letterforms from Latin ones to boost
           | multilingual coverage. I'm sure there are some learnable
           | relationships there like Ia <=> R or I <=> H.
        
             | wwwwewwww wrote:
             | I can't tell the relationship in your example.
             | 
             | Do you mean relationship in terms of appearance or
             | pronunciation?
             | 
             | Ia maps to "ya" sound in Russian, I is "ee" and N is "N" in
             | Russian and "ee" in modern Greek but in ancient Greek it's
             | something like "e" in "bed" in American English.
        
               | necovek wrote:
               | GP likely meant the relationship in appearance: the two
               | examples have Cyrillic glyphs closely resemble mirrored
               | outlines of the Latin glyphs.
        
               | efskap wrote:
               | Appearance. I'm just talking about typefaces - absolutely
               | nothing to do with pronunciation.
               | 
               | Some fonts do not have Cyrillic glyphs. If they could be
               | generated by an adequately trained model based on the
               | other glyphs, then that font's multilingual coverage
               | could expand automatically.
        
               | wwwwewwww wrote:
               | I get it now. That's interesting - generating missing
               | letterforms!
        
             | lunixbochs wrote:
             | Very interesting! Well, I'm playing with the concept a bit
             | now. Currently writing a skia client to generate glyph SDFs
             | as images so I can just use pytorch.
        
       | jameshart wrote:
       | I love the concept and execution but it really is so sad that the
       | results weren't more compelling.
       | 
       | I do wonder whether the problem is that training on multiple
       | fonts just doesn't actually add more data points to the dataset.
       | Fundamentally, you're going to get a model that knows how to
       | uppercase or lowercase each canonical Latin letter. This model
       | might actually be quite good at generating appropriate lowercase
       | forms for a font given the uppercase glyphs, but it's not
       | learning an abstract concept of 'lowercaseness'.
       | 
       | Instead of extending the training set with more fonts, the only
       | real source of additional training data would be _more
       | alphabets_. Cyrillic and Greek both have case systems so just
       | adding those would have more than doubled the number of training
       | cases - I think the trick would be to start from the Unicode case
       | mapping tables to generate your example data, to give your model
       | more variety of upper /lowercase pairs to get its teeth into and
       | really make it possible to ask it to uppercase an arbitrary
       | letter form.
        
         | gwern wrote:
         | The approach he used didn't really make sense. I get the
         | impression Tom is so dedicated to his old custom hackedup NN
         | framework that he tailors the approach to what he could easily
         | do in it.
         | 
         | If you asked someone else, "I want to automatically turn
         | characters into 'more uppercase' or 'more lowercase' versions,
         | and it has to involve neural networks; what do?", they would
         | say something like "Easy enough! dump character maps into a
         | standard StyleGAN2-ADA, train for a few days, then find the
         | latent direction corresponding to uppercasing & lowercasing,
         | and edit whatever font you please." (People have been
         | generating fonts with RNNs or GANs for ages.) You could do this
         | over a week or so, the tooling has gotten pretty easy to use.
         | 
         | And if you asked someone on the cutting-edge, they'd suggesting
         | using OA CLIP through Aleph/BigSleep/etc to automatically edit
         | images using a text input prompt of "a lowercase letter" or "an
         | uppercase letter", or one of the hybrids like StyleCLIP
         | https://github.com/orpatashnik/StyleCLIP . This approach might
         | take all of an hour or two (but results probably would be
         | worse).
        
       | rrmm wrote:
       | This is pretty much my exact experience in doing AI/ML research.
        
       | etaioinshrdlu wrote:
       | A different type of model like pix2pix, or anything raster based,
       | not point-based might produce better looking fonts.
        
       | OscarCunningham wrote:
       | Could we use similar techniques to find the middlecase letters?
        
         | CRConrad wrote:
         | Too narrow a use case: Will only work on middle-endian
         | processors.
        
         | koliber wrote:
         | We finally have someone here asking the important questions.
        
         | Balgair wrote:
         | Well, if we can, are we then now in a situation where the
         | 'step' of 'cases' is no longer an integer sequence? That is to
         | say, that the cases are fractional? Like, if middlecase is 0.5,
         | then can we apply the middlecase operation again and get
         | 0.25/0.75?
         | 
         | As applying cases is then just 'addition', then you can likely
         | get the 'multiplication' and 'divisions' of the cases as
         | applied. 'Exponentials' are just around the corner too.
         | 
         | Is that is the situation, that we can now get _transcendental_
         | cases. The  'pi' case, or the 'e' case, pick your favorite
         | transcendental.
         | 
         | More interestingly, you can then pull out the _imaginary_ case,
         | using Euler. e^(i*pi) = -1. Maybe that the lower-er case is
         | just the  'e' case to the power of the 'pi' case times the 'i'
         | case. Whatever those operations may mean.
         | 
         | Of course, one you're at the imaginary cases, you might as well
         | step up into derivatives and integrals, it's just curiosity
         | after all. Then you'll be doing partial derivatives and then
         | Lagrangians.
         | 
         | Eigencase-ing comes next, and then Maxwell's equations in case
         | format. 'Del'ing your cases should be a real trip.
         | 
         | After only a bit of puzzling, you're doing quantum mechanics
         | operations with your cases, because why not?
         | 
         | Case-ing operations have a fruitful future for any
         | mathematician, it seems.
        
         | nullsense wrote:
         | That probably requires a middle-out approach.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | sn41 wrote:
       | I wonder why we still have capital letters. I understand that
       | Latin had more angular letters to inscribe on marble, compared to
       | the more rounded lower case letters for day-to-day writing. Now
       | that we have the technology to do rounded inscription, why hang
       | on to this outmoded notation? The simplicity of the Latin
       | alphabet is unnecessarily complicated by the presence of capital
       | letters.
       | 
       | This is not as absurd as it sounds. After all, over the
       | centuries, we have introduced punctuation to make it easier to
       | read, unlike classical writing [1]. Why not carry through with
       | remaining reforms?
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptio_continua
        
         | seszett wrote:
         | As far as I know (or as I was taught at school in France) it is
         | Charlemagne who introduced bicameral usage in the latin script
         | with more easily legible "lower case" (which were not actually
         | "lower case" back then of course) letters for most of the
         | script while keeping upper case letters at the beginning of
         | sentences or important words also to improve legibility
         | (serving as cues that help keeping track of where you are in
         | the text). This was basically modern script, only the lower
         | case fonts have evolved somewhat.
         | 
         | Capital letters in modern script are therefore not a remnant of
         | technical limitations, the mix of lowercase/uppercase was
         | actually voluntarily introduced for legibility once these
         | technical limitations were gone.
        
         | Talanes wrote:
         | I think you have it backwards, it was technology rendering the
         | difference between the two obsolete that brought capitalization
         | about. Latin just used one script or the other depending on
         | use-case, it was when we had printing presses that we started
         | to start codifying rules for how to mix the two scripts into
         | one large character set.
        
         | thaumasiotes wrote:
         | > I understand that Latin had more angular letters to inscribe
         | on marble, compared to the more rounded lower case letters for
         | day-to-day writing.
         | 
         | Funny thing to understand; this has no connection to reality.
         | Letters for inscription are formal and there is no bias towards
         | angularity. Look at this plaque from the first century:
         | https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2012/04/Roman-m...
         | 
         | You can clearly see the letters B, C, D, G, O, P, Q, R, and S
         | graven in bronze with all the same curviness they'd have if
         | they were instead carved in marble. [1] They're carved that way
         | because that is what the letters look like; if they're
         | difficult to carve, that just means the carver has to suck it
         | up.
         | 
         | The letter we commonly render U is V in Latin. That is not due
         | to the needs of the medium; _that is what the letter looks
         | like_. In Latin, there is no letter U. V is not pointed because
         | it was difficult to carve C, D, O, Q, P, R, and S. V is pointed
         | for the same reason M is -- because that is the shape of a V.
         | 
         | [1] Here's an example that is carved in marble:
         | http://codex99.com/typography/images/ancient/trajan_sm.jpg
        
         | nullsense wrote:
         | Need them for password strength
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | Why not upper and lowercase numbers? Could emphasize cheap or
         | expensive in a price. :)
        
           | TheCoreh wrote:
           | Lowercase numbers actually exist:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_figures
        
         | simias wrote:
         | I don't understand your argument, are you saying that removing
         | capital letters would improve legibility? Note that as far as I
         | know during the antiquity there was no semantic meaning
         | associated with font case, you could use full caps in some
         | settings and full lowercase in others. The image in your linked
         | wikipedia article uses full uppercase for instance.
         | 
         | At any rate it's not at all obvious to me that removing case
         | would improve things. I'm currently reading a book my Valter
         | Hugo Mae who's an author who (generally) only uses lowercase
         | letters:
         | https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20210402-153754_maquina.jpeg
         | 
         | I've also got a Latin grammar book that, for extra
         | authenticity, only uses uppercase at the beginning of the
         | paragraphs:
         | https://svkt.org/~simias/up/20210402-154010_latin.jpeg
         | 
         | In both cases I often find myself missing the end of a
         | sentence, I think mainly because ',' and '.' are easy to mix up
         | but normally you expect '.' to be followed by an uppercase. Of
         | course part of the issue might just be lack of familiarity.
         | 
         | I'm not arguing that capitals are vital and we couldn't read
         | and write correctly without them, but as you point out we could
         | say the same of spaces and general punctuation. I can read
         | unaccented French just fine for example, but it does force me
         | to slow down at times and to infer more from context.
         | 
         | butanywaythatsjustmyopinion
        
       | rmetzler wrote:
       | I laughed when it came to the part where he 3d-printed the
       | uppestcase letter and described as "not bad, maybe a 2.5 on the
       | Bristol stool scale".
        
       | ohuf wrote:
       | Take my uppestvote and Happy Easter for a while, Sir!
        
       | hardmath123 wrote:
       | See also: "Words that do Handstands" (2019), where similar tricks
       | are used to hallucinate an ambigram font!
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20820036
       | 
       | http://hardmath123.github.io/ambigrams.html
        
       | ant6n wrote:
       | Would it help to generate a bunch of (small) rotations,
       | translations and scalings for every input/output character pair
       | and train with that?
        
       | diplodocusaur wrote:
       | This is a really fun project, no doubt, but I keep seeing stuff
       | about fonts on HN. I was wondering why it is that HN likes fonts?
       | What is it about them that makes them HN-interesting?
        
         | mixedmath wrote:
         | > It does genuinely matter that a designer should take trouble
         | and take delight in his choice of typefaces. The trouble and
         | delight are taken not merely "for art's sake" but for the sake
         | of something so subtly and intimitely connected with all that
         | is human that it can be described by no other phrase than "the
         | humanities". If "the tone of voice" of a typeface does not
         | count, then nothing counts that distinguishes man from the
         | other animals. The twinkle that softens a rebuke; the martyr's
         | super-logic and the child's intuition; the fact that a fragment
         | of moss can pull back into the memory a whole forest --- these
         | are proofs that there really is reality in the imponderable,
         | and that not only notation but connotation is part of the
         | proper study of mankind.
         | 
         | - William Zinsser
         | 
         | Zinsser was actually talking about writers here. And it might
         | be a bit hyperbolic, sure. But I think the fact is that people
         | who love to program spend a lot of time staring at words, and
         | given a chance they'll take interest in the clothes that words
         | wear.
        
           | diplodocusaur wrote:
           | Huh. That makes sense from a frequency of exposure sense.
           | 
           | It's just that I'd be interested in the main fonts that make
           | practical sense for projects and not so much on the quest for
           | the holy grail of fonts that makes all men fall to their
           | knees in awe at its aesthetic perfection. Doesn't matter how
           | pretty you write bad content, anyways.
        
       | ygaitonde wrote:
       | I really can't think of a better technical YouTuber than tom7
        
         | mohn wrote:
         | I would like to recommend Ben Krasnow of Applied Science[0].
         | His videos are more physics/chemistry/electronics, but they're
         | both great YouTubers.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.youtube.com/user/bkraz333
        
         | lifthrasiir wrote:
         | Maybe try Ben Eater [1] out?
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS0N5baNlQWJCUrhCEo8WlA
        
       | rendall wrote:
       | I watched that whole video and now I'm questioning the life
       | choices that led me here
        
       | graderjs wrote:
       | The questions no one one needed to be answered... This guy
       | answers them so ... completely
        
       | Pxtl wrote:
       | Oh gosh I just watched the YouTube video and laughed until I
       | hurt.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-02 23:02 UTC)