[HN Gopher] New emojis in 2023-2024
___________________________________________________________________
New emojis in 2023-2024
Author : ourmandave
Score : 89 points
Date : 2023-07-15 09:19 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.emojipedia.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.emojipedia.org)
| sufficer wrote:
| I like how the blog served ads to me. Android with Chrome browser
| seniorsassycat wrote:
| Maybe all characters should support the "nod", "point right", and
| "color" modifiers. Why do need walking right but not sailing
| right?
| mcraiha wrote:
| In case someone wants to read the proposal for Phoenix bird.
| https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2023/23033-phoenix-emoji.pdf
| neom wrote:
| Interesting, the submitter is a self described "emoji
| activist":
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_8._Lee
|
| https://www.emojination.org/
| j1elo wrote:
| I get the fenix as it is a whole different concept than a bird.
|
| But why exactly do we need a different color of mushroom? Isn't
| that just threading too lightly?
| jadbox wrote:
| I suspect that the stems from certain groups taking objection
| to the only mushroom representation being one that prominently
| necessarily contains psychoactive compounds. Ofc there's many
| psychoactive brown mushrooms, but there is more ambiguity if
| it's just mushroom food. Anyone else have more context?
| Avamander wrote:
| Red mushrooms are often just poisonous, so the common red
| with white dots version didn't work well in any food-related
| context.
| pxc wrote:
| Interestingly, the example glyph provided in the original
| proposal for the mushroom emoji doesn't include any of those
| visual features. It's colorless, of course, but it also
| doesn't include any of those big dots.
|
| The whole fly amanita style is just a matter of fontmakers'
| convention. I didn't know the Unicode consortium considered
| that kind of thing its problem, but I guess it makes sense
| since it's (more or less?) comprised of all the big emoji
| font makers.
| TheCaptain4815 wrote:
| [flagged]
| [deleted]
| cubefox wrote:
| One issue with Emojis is wrong implementation messing things up.
| For example, I wondered why there is no "pouting" emoji. Turns
| out there is such an emoji in the spec, but someone (probably
| Apple) decided to use that Unicode point for "red angry face"
| (additional to the original "angry face", which is yellow). Then
| all the others followed the Apple design to ensure consistency.
| Now the Unicode consortium can't introduce a "pouting face" emoji
| anymore, since they technically already did!
|
| There are quite a few of those cases. Apparently it is mostly
| Apple messing up the specified emotion and the others copying the
| error.
| schroeding wrote:
| I would say it's more Softbanks fault[1] in this case - NTT
| DoCoMo's and KDDI's Emoji was clearly pouting IMO, Softbanks
| was... more angry-ish? Especially the earlier, pre-2008
| versions.
|
| [1] https://emojipedia.org/pouting-face/ (you can click on the
| actual vendor emoji on the right to get a history / previous
| versions)
| layer8 wrote:
| There's a couple of the original Japanese emoji that have the
| problem that their visual idioms don't translate 1:1 to
| Western idioms, and thus have unfortunately now been
| distorted in the process.
| Matheus28 wrote:
| Couldn't they rename the existing one to represent actual
| usage, then introduce a new code point?
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| There should be separate emojis for gun, squirt gun, and ray
| gun.
| dexwell wrote:
| I wonder if they're ever going to decide that enough emoji is
| enough, or will continue adding more until every word in the
| dictionary is an emoji. There have been some ridiculous
| inclusions in the past years despite more obvious candidates that
| are still missing.
|
| The great thing about emoji used to be the constraints, which
| made for a clear overview of available emoji and made people use
| the limited set in creative ways to express different things.
| Besides the more extraneous options, they never should've started
| adding things like skin/hair color modifiers imo, sticking to the
| single yellow/neutral color instead. Counterproductively, that
| opened up ways for people to not feel represented.
| derefr wrote:
| Mobile-phone OS vendors like Apple and Google invent cute
| little pictures for people to send to each-other in text
| messages (and, mostly coincidentally, type into other apps and
| post to the web.) Then they tell the Unicode Consortium that
| they've invented these little pictures, and they're planning on
| putting them in their software, and so the Unicode Consortium
| better assign them codepoints, because if they _don 't_,
| they'll just encode those pictures with a proprietary encoding
| and send them anyway, like ICQ and MSN did back in 2001.
|
| And then the Unicode Consortium _does_ give them a codepoint --
| because the whole point of Unicode is that there shouldn 't be
| any text on the Internet that can't have its meaning determined
| 50 years from now because it was encoded in some proprietary
| now-lost encoding.
|
| This is how it was from the very beginning. The first emoji
| codepoints in Unicode were added in order to have a valid
| projection-mapping into Unicode of the "SJIS with emojis" text
| written on Japanese mobile phones that became common on the
| Japanese Internet -- including documents like "cellphone
| novels" with high historical preservation value.
| odiroot wrote:
| It took them ages to a add a dumpling emoji!
| vasco wrote:
| Skin color emojis are the weirdest thing. I always find it
| slightly odd if someone changed them from the default yellow.
| Why would one care?
| xbpx wrote:
| Maybe because your entire lived experience has been reordered
| based on your skin color and how it isn't a light yellow
| color. Powerful cultural strands exist in your community to
| push back against constraints placed upon you because of your
| skin color. Maybe seeing the only option for skin color in
| tech be much more representative of white skin color only
| serves to further remove your lived reality from public
| debate and understanding.
|
| Highlighted beyond irony by comments like this.
| jononomo wrote:
| Why do you think a yellow emoji represents a white skin
| color?
| kemayo wrote:
| Have you watched the Simpsons? There's some powerful
| cultural baggage here.
|
| Anyway, it certainly implies not-dark skin...
| jononomo wrote:
| You may as well say it implies not-white skin as well.
| The only thing it implies in regard to skin color is
| bright yellow.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| Then why is Apu brown?
| jononomo wrote:
| Why are tomatoes red?
| Findecanor wrote:
| Nobody has a light yellow colour. It was chosen so as to
| not to refer to any ethnicity in particular.
|
| BTW. If your skin actually _has_ turned yellow then you
| should seek the nearest hospital emergency room ASAP,
| because it can be a sign of acute liver failure.
| Sharlin wrote:
| Like another commenter said in a sibling thread, yellow
| is still a non-dark color, and yellow characters
| represent white people in cartoons like The Simpsons.
| boondoggle16 wrote:
| Dark has always been bad, light has always been good.
| Unfortunate that's the case.
| Sharlin wrote:
| https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
| [deleted]
| kemayo wrote:
| Speaking as a person with light-colored skin, the default-
| yellow emoji still _basically_ look like me. Or, a version of
| me that 's on the Simpsons, at least.
|
| I imagine that if I had dark skin, I'd feel a bit alienated
| by this experience. I'd be using these symbols that were
| supposed to represent me / my-reactions, but which very much
| didn't look like me. There'd be this pervasive sense that I
| was not included, not important enough to be the one
| represented.
|
| That would kinda suck. I don't have to experience that, and
| I'm happy to have emoji set up so that people who don't look
| like me also don't have to experience it.
|
| Put another way, would you care if the default emoji color
| was changed to be dark-skinned?
| xdennis wrote:
| > I imagine that if I had dark skin, I'd feel a bit
| alienated by this experience.
|
| And the change is literally skin deep. They added skin
| color, but not racial features. The "black man" emoji just
| looks like a white guy with dark skin.
|
| Imagine if I was a dwarf. I'd feel a bit alienated that all
| emojis are of tall people. Shouldn't there be a dwarf
| modifier for every emoji: dwarf man facepalming, dwarf
| woman shrugging, dwarf man bride, &c
|
| If you felt yellow is too white, they should have changed
| emojis to magenta or something. Adding variants makes them
| unusable.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| Let's make them all dark brown then. I'm sure you
| wouldn't object.
| realusername wrote:
| That could just be a system wide setting to change all the
| emojis to appear how you want it to.
|
| There's no need to send the colour to fix this issue.
| asddubs wrote:
| maybe the old forums had it right, and we should have gone
| with green or blue
| jrmg wrote:
| I am white. I kept mine yellow for a long time.
|
| Then I noticed that most of the non-white people I knew were
| changing them - and actively celebrating when new skin-color
| variants were added.
|
| I realized that by keeping mine white I was not being 'color-
| blind', I was, at least to some, saying something like 'I'm
| happy with the default because I think it adequately
| represents me'. Perhaps I did feel that, to be honest!
|
| On top of that, I could even be seen as passive-aggressively
| saying 'your choice to use the skin colored emoji is
| unimportant and/or wrong', which is certainly not what I felt
| at all!
|
| The whole Simpsons argument (emojis weren't created in a
| vacuum - the Simpsons came first and there the 'default'
| yellow is obviously representing 'white') was in my mind a
| little when considering all this.
|
| I use the second-lightest white ones now.
| slily wrote:
| In other words you succumbed to peer pressure from a crowd
| that is obsessed with identity labels.
|
| I see people of all shades use tones. To me it just says
| "btw I'm <race>". I can't help but think "who cares" in the
| back of my mind. I don't think yellow icons "represent me"
| either, I'm not self-inserting into The Simpsons.
|
| At the risk of being overly dramatic for a discussion about
| emoji, I think that dismissing the concept of "color-
| blindness" in favor of "race consciousness" and other
| assorted identity politics, which led to hyper-focus on
| superficial characteristics like skin color, has done more
| to foster racism than anything else in the last few
| decades.
| jameshart wrote:
| The Simpsons features non-yellow characters. Yellow
| characters are white.
|
| Lego actually is a stronger precedent for 'yellow is what
| color you make a person when you don't mean to identify
| race'. Once they started adding movie character minifigs
| they introduced white skin as well.
|
| But the journey there also gives the lie to 'yellow
| minifigs we're never coded white'. The very first Star
| Wars Lego sets shipped with yellow minifigs for
| characters like Luke, Leia and Han. It was only once they
| started to think about shipping characters like Lando
| Calrissian and Mace Windu that they realized 'wait a
| minute, we're never going to get away with a yellow
| Lando'.
|
| (And actually around the same time they were also dealing
| with releasing NBA player minifigs.. the decisionmaking
| at Lego must have been pretty complicated at the time)
| boondoggle16 wrote:
| Everything is coded white, because those things were
| created by white people. Legos, barbies... having a hard
| time thinking of something that wasn't created by a
| European or a Jew, which both appear "white".
| jrmg wrote:
| _In other words you succumbed to peer pressure from a
| crowd that is obsessed with identity labels._
|
| That's not what I consider myself to have done. My non-
| white friends and colleagues are not, in my experience,
| 'obsessed with identity labels'. They were just choosing
| an emoji that looked a little more like them, and a
| little less like the 'default' [that did _not_ look like
| them, but arguably did look like me] when representing
| themselves.
|
| This is all in contexts where I knew who I was
| communicating with, btw (Slack, text messages etc.). In
| anonymous settings I might think differently.
|
| In a 'color-blind' world perhaps it would not really
| matter to you what color people's emojis were, just like
| in real life?
|
| As a bit of a meta-comment, I suggest that if you want to
| convince others of your beliefs you might want to present
| them with a little more humbleness and kindness apparent
| in your words. Your first two paragraphs are quite
| confrontationally phrased.
| realusername wrote:
| I also don't get it, it should be a system wide setting and
| not something the sender specifies, I don't see any point in
| having some additional info not representing the meaning.
| Sharlin wrote:
| Why in heaven's name should it be a system wide setting?
| What sense would that make?
| realusername wrote:
| The whole feature doesn't make any sense in my opinion
| anyways. But if people are really sensitive to how emoji
| appears (a big if in my opinion since emojis are trivial
| but let's go with it), they could change them in the
| settings.
| kemayo wrote:
| There _is_ meaning, though -- it 's specifically saying
| something about the person sending it and how they chose to
| present themselves.
| realusername wrote:
| I don't think there's any value to that though, emojis
| were more neutral before they added a color skin to it.
| Instead of reading "I'm happy", now you have a
| combination of "I'm happy but also white" or "I'm happy
| but also black", I don't think that belongs here and I
| don't see any point to that.
|
| If you don't like how they appear, some system setting
| could be made for changing the overall colours to switch
| them all to black, white, green or any other colour.
| inhumantsar wrote:
| I genuinely hope that emojis keep being added. A lot of meaning
| can be packed into a single emoji which (usually) transcends
| language and culture.
|
| It's been fascinating to see emoji work their way into everyday
| usage, even in professional settings. I would love to see the
| day where emoji becomes a viable form of cross-cultural
| shorthand.
| throw37284 wrote:
| Reminds me of the Chinese written language.
|
| People who speak different dialects or languages can still
| communicate with written Chinese.
|
| I remember at a conference talking to a Japanese guy and a
| guy from Korea. I wrote my name in Chinese and they could
| both read it, but said it in their native language.
| mostlylurks wrote:
| > I would love to see the day where emoji becomes a viable
| form of cross-cultural shorthand.
|
| I have my doubts regarding this. We're already seeing a
| situation where different groups within a single culture, the
| young and the old, use many common emoji in ways that differ
| dramatically (at least in the west), sometimes even with
| opposing meanings. If the meanings of emoji aren't stable
| even within a single culture, how could they ever hope to
| transcend culture?
| dmvdoug wrote:
| Oh god this. I get emails from students with emoji and I
| very frequently have to ask them, "How are you using this
| one?"
|
| Of course, the fascinating thing is that different groups
| of kids use the same emoji slightly differently. So.
| matsemann wrote:
| > _There have been some ridiculous inclusions in the past years
| despite more obvious candidates that are still missing._
|
| Well, obvious missing _to you_. That 's probably why it will
| always expand, no one will agree on when it's done, including
| you. ;)
| johnofthesea wrote:
| I use Emojis for my gardening site as icons for taxonomical
| families. So I would welcome some berries and maybe more
| vegetables.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| Have you looked at fork awesome? It's an icon toolkit that
| basically gives you a lot more emojis
| https://forkaweso.me/Fork-Awesome/
| WastingMyTime89 wrote:
| Have you heard of this thing called an image?
| __jonas wrote:
| Emojis are great as quick icons that take zero work to
| source, add in, align with text in the layout and size
| consistently.
|
| Absolutely nothing wrong with that, especially since
| people on hn love to complain about inclusion of
| unnecessary assets in websites that could be more
| lightweight.
| xdennis wrote:
| Every platform has its own set of pictures for emojis.
| How can you possibly align and size them consistently?
| capableweb wrote:
| Looked it up, "image" sounds just like Emoji but with
| extra steps, annoying.
| dagmx wrote:
| Emoji are zero cost resources for websites on most
| devices and have the benefit of matching the users
| expectations of iconography across the system, not to
| mention being accessible by default.
|
| It's really a win win of size reduction, consistency and
| accessibility.
|
| The only competitive systems are something like font-
| awesome icons or SFSymbols. The latter isn't available to
| sites afaik though.
| lapcat wrote:
| > consistency
|
| There's no consistency, because different operating
| systems and web browsers display emoji differently, and
| emoji availability depends crucially on the OS or browser
| version.
| joshmanders wrote:
| The consistency is that if you use a (mushroom) emoji as
| an icon for your stuff, users on Windows will immediately
| know what it is because they are aware of how the emojis
| on their OS work. Same with Android, iOS, etc. Not that
| all emojis are the same across all devices.
| lapcat wrote:
| This is less consistent than images, which are generally
| rendered the same on all devices. Worse, though, is the
| broken black boxes that appear when someone uses a newer
| emoji that your browser or operating system version
| doesn't yet support, which happens all of the time.
| boondoggle16 wrote:
| Not sure why you're being so argumentative about a
| misunderstanding of definitions?
|
| Users know what emoji are, full stop, and you don't have
| to serve images (which can be expensive). Is it perfect?
| No, but nothing is.
| lapcat wrote:
| > Not sure why you're being so argumentative about a
| misunderstanding of definitions?
|
| There's no misunderstanding of definitions. The argument
| is about whether emojis are "really a win win". I don't
| think they are, for reasons I've explained. Specifically,
| with regard to needing icons for "berries and maybe more
| vegetables", you can already do this with small jpgs that
| would not take much bandwidth, and in general there's
| more consistency in jpg support across different software
| then there is in emoji support.
|
| Waiting for the Unicode committee to add emoji for every
| possible object in the world seems like madness to me.
| dagmx wrote:
| They seem to have a real hate for emojis based on the
| rest of the comments they're leaving on this post.
|
| I think they're just approaching every argument from that
| perspective so any positive is treated cynically
| dagmx wrote:
| The emoji is consistent across their system. That's the
| consistency that matters to most users.
| lapcat wrote:
| Incorrect, because emoji are being used to communicate
| with other people on different systems. That's their
| primary purpose, not to write to yourself.
| Symbiote wrote:
| I'll suggest genitals and breasts as the most obvious missing
| emojis. Most other major body parts are included.
| arcanemachiner wrote:
| Well, there's the eggplant and the peach.
| lapcat wrote:
| This is why I stopped using emoji 5 years and never looked
| back. It's a really stupidly designed system if you need
| operating system updates just to read text! I won't participate
| in that insanity anymore.
|
| Emoji have become trite, lazy, and practically meaningless,
| especially a few such as "face with tears of joy", "rolling on
| the floor laughing face", and "fire". Emoticons used to be a
| _supplement_ for words, indicating the tone of the words, but
| now emoji are a _replacement_ for words, the ultimate
| illiteracy.
|
| The reductio ad absurdum is the recent Canadian legal case
| where the court determined that a "thumbs up" emoji signals a
| binding contract.
| kibwen wrote:
| _> Emoticons used to be a supplement for words, indicating
| the tone of the words, but now emoji are a replacement for
| words, the ultimate illiteracy._
|
| People have been using things like "lol" and "lmao" since
| long before Unicode even existed, let alone emojis.
| lapcat wrote:
| > People have been using things like "lol" and "lmao" since
| long before Unicode even existed
|
| Sure, but how are emojis superior to this? Text is
| universally compatible, whereas emoji introduce
| compatibility and versioning issues across browsers and
| operating systems.
|
| Besides the technical universality of text, it's also
| demographically universal. We've replaced "lol" with
| laughing-face-of-specific-skin-color-and-hair-style-and-
| gender-and-,etc., which is a worse situation than the
| original.
|
| Of course "lol" is English-specific, but if you can't read
| another language, then what exactly would you be laughing
| at anyway? Different languages are always a barrier to
| communication, regardless of whether emoji are used.
| mostlylurks wrote:
| > Text is universally compatible, whereas emoji introduce
| compatibility and versioning issues across browsers and
| operating systems.
|
| To be specific, they introduce a lot more of such issues,
| but such issues were already there with plain text as
| well. Fonts that don't support some characters, fonts
| where some characters are displayed incorrectly (the
| whole CJK unification fiasco), fonts where some
| characters are not distinguished (I've run into the is-
| this-an-I-or-an-l issue quite a few times, personally).
| post-it wrote:
| > The reductio ad absurdum is the recent Canadian legal case
| where the court determined that a "thumbs up" emoji signals a
| binding contract.
|
| Why do you believe so?
|
| If "Looks good," "Ok," and "Yup" signal a binding contract,
| as detailed in the case you're talking about, I contend it's
| perfectly reasonable for :thumbsup: to also signal a binding
| contract between the same parties. [0]
|
| Consider:
|
| > 5. For instance, on July 14, 2020, after discussing and
| agreeing on a contract with Chris Achter, I prepared a
| contract for the sale of 185 metric tons [sic] of durum wheat
| from Achter Ltd. to SWT for a price of $312.31 per ton [sic].
| I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my
| cell phone and sent it to Chris at 306-264-7664. I messaged:
| "Please confirm terms of durum contract." Chris texted me
| back: "Looks good". At the time, I understood this to be that
| Chris was agreeing to the contract and this was his way of
| signally [sic] that agreement. Achter Ltd. delivered on this
| contract without issue. A copy of the contract and text
| message is attached as Exhibit "B".
|
| > 6. On September 11, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on
| a contract with Chris Acter [sic], I prepared a contract for
| the sale of 131 metric tons [sic] of durum wheat from Achter
| Ltd. to SWT for a price of $284.77 per ton [sic]. I signed
| the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone
| and sent it to Chris at 306-264-7664. I messaged: "Please
| confirm terms of durum contract". Chris texted me back: "Ok".
| At that time, I understood this to be that Chris was agreeing
| to the contract and this was his way of signally [sic] that
| agreement. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract without
| issue. A copy of the contract and the text messages is
| attached as Exhibit "C".
|
| > 7. On October 21, 2020, after discussing and agreeing on a
| contract with Chris Acter [sic], I prepared a contract for
| the sale of 395 metric tons [sic] of durum wheat from Achter
| Ltd. to SWT for a price of $308.65 per ton [sic]. I signed
| the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone
| and sent it to Chris at 306-264-7664. I messaged: "Please
| confirm terms of durum contract". Chris texted me back:
| "Yup". At that time, I understood this to be that Chris was
| agreeing to the contract and this was his way of signally
| [sic] that agreement. Achter Ltd. delivered on this contract
| without issue. A copy of the contract and the text messages
| is attached as Exhibit "D".
|
| [0] https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skkb/doc/2023/2023skkb116/20
| 23s...
| lapcat wrote:
| > If "Looks good," "Ok," and "Yup" signal a binding
| contract, as detailed in the case you're talking about, I
| contend it's perfectly reasonable for :thumbsup: to also
| signal a binding contract between the same parties.
|
| I wasn't criticizing the decision in the case. I'm neither
| a lawyer nor a Canadian and have no opinion about that.
|
| I was criticizing the entire situation, the absurdity of
| emoji becoming a matter of legal controversy.
| kortex wrote:
| Why is the sequence of bytes representing Shi De ( _Shi
| de_ - yes), valid human symbolic language, but the
| sequence of bytes representing thumbs up "absurd"
| language? Nowhere in the Rules of Human Language, Volume
| 12023, does it say "language must comprise a fixed set of
| symbols that is locked in time".
| lapcat wrote:
| This is not about gradual language evolution in general.
| It's about the specific stupidity of emoji, as I already
| explained:
|
| > Emoji have become trite, lazy, and practically
| meaningless, especially a few such as "face with tears of
| joy", "rolling on the floor laughing face", and "fire".
| Emoticons used to be a supplement for words, indicating
| the tone of the words, but now emoji are a replacement
| for words, the ultimate illiteracy.
|
| Also, even worse, emoji are "evolving" so damn fast and
| continually that they appear as broken boxes if you're
| not running the very latest browser or operating system
| version.
| numpad0 wrote:
| Whilist problems from Unicode comingling CJK(more like CCJ?)
| characters are getting worse. Yeah, it's a great situation.
|
| 1: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdxZ5koVsAAQj-n.png:medium
|
| 2: https://jyurin-hack.com/it/wp-
| content/uploads/2017/09/nihong...
|
| 3: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows/forum/all/chines...
|
| 4: https://www.codeproject.com/Tips/1227524/Fixing-
| Inconsistent...
| Name_Chawps wrote:
| I think every noun should have an emoji. Why not? I'm allowed
| to talk about lemons, but not limes? Why? Better that every
| noun has a single canonical representation.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| I can't remember which program it was, but there's one that has
| Unofficial support for combining most emoji (so (cowboy) (cat)
| becomes a cowboy cat, for instance). I kind of like that idea.
| xigoi wrote:
| https://emojipedia.org/emoji-kitchen/
|
| https://emoji.supply/kitchen/
| jonas-w wrote:
| https://emojikitchen.dev/
|
| Googles emoji kitchen
| srdjanr wrote:
| Gboard has something like that
| EarthIsHome wrote:
| > I wonder if they're ever going to decide that enough emoji is
| enough, or will continue adding more until every word in the
| dictionary is an emoji.
|
| Emojis, like language, is social and will continue to change.
| eloisius wrote:
| It's unlike language because words can fluidly be invented or
| fall out of use. Emoji is designed by a committee. If it
| expands to include everything it will just be unusable. Why
| not just use pictures at that point anyway?
| chromoblob wrote:
| Why do you think it will be unusable? Chinese and Japanese
| have IME.
| eloisius wrote:
| I input Chinese everyday and it's fairly simple. You
| input a phonetic sequence and choose the character. I
| already find it hard to use emoji. It takes forever to
| scan through the faces to find the one I want, and search
| online sometimes helps because emoji often have a popular
| use that isn't congruent with their "official" purpose.
| opan wrote:
| I don't know if there's a default OS solution that's any
| good, but I have a file of emoji + their text names and I
| use bemenu (like dmenu) to filter through it by name and
| put the selection on my clipboard. I bind this script to
| super-z on my keyboard in my Sway config. I based it on
| something[0] I found online that used dmenu or rofi and
| input the text for you. I adapted it to work better on
| Wayland by using a Wayland-native menu instead.
|
| [0] https://github.com/LVMBDV/emoji
|
| I'm probably missing some newer ones now. Not sure how
| the original list was made.
|
| Emacs's M-x insert-char may be able to do something kinda
| similar. I know describe-char works great for identifying
| an emoji at least.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android all have dedicated emoji
| keyboards with search readily accessible. All Apple
| keyboard (software or hardware) from the last... 5(?)
| years have a button to bring it up!
| terracottalite wrote:
| Though in Linux there isn't only one window manager. This
| guy/woman/? chose to use his specific window manager
| (probably a tiling one), but he/she/xe could also use
| GNOME if he/she/xe wanted to. GNOME does have an emoji
| keyboard.
|
| btw, this is much cooler than GNOME or whatever...
| madeofpalk wrote:
| > _They chose to use their specific window manager
| (probably a tiling one), but they could also use GNOME if
| they wanted to. GNOME does have an emoji keyboard._
|
| There you go! Made it much easier for you and the reader!
|
| But really,
|
| > _I 'm not sure which window manager they're using, but
| GNOME does have an emoji keyboard_
|
| Even better!
| chromoblob wrote:
| Just wait for or create an Emoji IME which suggests emoji
| based on name. This already exists in Windows 10.
| kortex wrote:
| Oh yeah, languages are never controlled by committee
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_Fran%C3%A7ais
| e
| mostlylurks wrote:
| The existence of a committee, even an influential one,
| for a language does not mean that that committee actually
| controls that language. In the end, it's always the
| people who use a language that control it, not just in
| theory, but also in practice, as evidenced by how many of
| the Academie Francaise's proposals for pure French
| equivalents to English loanwords have failed to supplant
| the latter. These committees also tend to only concern
| themselves with low hanging fruit that is easy to point
| at, such as vocabulary, grammar, and spelling (which is
| technically speaking external to a language rather than
| part of it), while barely if at all targeting anything
| that would require more than an elementary-school-level
| understanding of language, such as phonetics/phonology,
| so their commentary also rarely even covers all aspects
| of the language.
| xdennis wrote:
| That's not comparable. The French Academy doesn't dictate
| what words are allowed to be spelt on phones.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| > I wonder if they're ever going to decide that enough emoji is
| enough,
|
| Really hard to do by this time. Since they allowed so many it's
| harder to say no. They have a burrito, but why no kebap, yet?
| They have person's playing basketball or golfing, but no person
| playing football (any variant) putting a stop to it gives an
| arbitrary set and restricts representing develoment in society
| (they have kick scooters which are modern, but what about the
| future successor?)
|
| But of course, the more they add the harder it is to use. These
| new directional ones can be hidden as variants similar to skin
| color etc is currently handled in UIs, but individual ones ...
|
| Deprecating also isn't an option. Text using those exists. They
| can't really break it.
| DeusExMachina wrote:
| Welcome to the world where every idiosyncrasy is considered
| an identity worth representing, through emojis or other
| means, generating a never-ending breakdown of people into
| groups that feel excluded.
| roland35 wrote:
| Or, ya know, sometimes it's just fun to add a lime emoji to
| a text...
| dmvdoug wrote:
| But how do we put de lime in de coconut?!
| olliecornelia wrote:
| You're fighting the good fight for braindead take
| representation.
| flangola7 wrote:
| Eh?
| junek wrote:
| Which identities do you consider excessive?
|
| I'm also confused as to how a lime or a shaking head is an
| identity.
| capableweb wrote:
| There is a precedent (https://blog.unicode.org/2022/03/the-
| past-and-future-of-flag...) to stop accepting new emojis in
| certain categories, so the hope is not fully out that that
| can happen to other sections. Maybe at one point they say "We
| won't be accepting Emoji proposals regarding sports anymore,
| unless they're listed by X entity or in the Plympics", or
| something like that.
| Timon3 wrote:
| But even that precedent isn't absolute:
|
| > _Wait, if a country gains independence and is recognised
| by ISO, does that mean no flag emoji for them?_
|
| > Flags for countries with Unicode region codes are
| automatically recommended, with no proposals necessary!
| First their codes and translated names are added to
| Unicode's Common Locale Data Repository [CLDR], and then
| the emoji become valid in the next version of Unicode.
| These emoji are also automatically recommended for general
| interchange and wide deployment.
|
| So making it dependent, as you described, on recognition by
| a different governing body seems quite likely.
| jdlshore wrote:
| Flags are special because they're made by combining
| special letter codepoints. A new flag doesn't change the
| standard so much as change the way devices display those
| ligature-like codepoints.
|
| (My favorite fun Unicode fact: naively reversing a string
| containing the flag for Spain will turn it into the flag
| for Sweden. ES --> SE)
| olliecornelia wrote:
| https://emojipedia.org/stuffed-flatbread/
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| Oh, missed that addition! Thanks! And it didn't come up in
| a name search.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| Speaking of obvious candidates, somehow Unicode still doesn't
| include the "external link" symbol, despite it being used
| almost everywhere (and fitting the original mission of
| accurately transcribing text)
|
| https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2018/18303-external-link.pdf
| isoprophlex wrote:
| I'd be delighted if the deep fried version of "crying laughing
| emoji" were to become a thing: "open eye crying laughing emoji"
|
| To me it signifies something that holds the middle between glee,
| hysterical laughter and psychotic rage. Unicode really misses a
| codepoint with this specific energy, in my opinion.
|
| [1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/open-eye-crying-laughing-
| emoj...
| cubefox wrote:
| Google has made a sticker in this direction:
| https://emoji.supply/kitchen/?%F0%9F%98%82+%F0%9F%98%B3=ndp
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Hot damn these are amazing
| themoonisachees wrote:
| I know it won't happen because of course it won't, but in
| general I feel as though the world would be better if
| corporations were more unhinged when it comes to design. Un-
| deprecate <marquee>, use images with non-transparent
| backgrounds, really just go for it.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| You bet! I'd actually take time to open our inane corporate
| newsletters if they included something actually worth looking
| at instead of bland images of well dressed humans laughing at
| laptops. It seems we've entered a perennial age of bland
| safety, from inoffensive language to soft bland visual design
| to my fucking car beeping at me when I dare open the door
| before shutting off the engine.
| cpeterso wrote:
| Along those lines, I wish the 1990s web designs with bold
| web-safe colors, like HotWired, would make a comeback.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotWired
| mecsred wrote:
| It should become a modifier so you can add psychotic energy to
| any emoji.
|
| I support adding as much complexity as possible until emoji
| transcends languages to become the ultimate communication
| medium or collapses under the weight.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Soon we will have machine to machine communication between
| large language models, where they communicate their internal
| state using high dimensional vector streams of emoji
| modifiers
| hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
| There's still no emoji for a handheld 2-way radio (walkie-talkie)
| -- a common sight at events, emergencies, and in the hands of
| various types of officials.
|
| Some might argue this is from the influence of Big Cellphone over
| what means of communication get represented by emoji!
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| The process is surprisingly political. Before the Rio Olympics
| there was a big push to get an emoji for every Summer Olympic
| sport. Because of Apple's veto, they ended up skipping all the
| sports with firearms (eg air rifle, pentathlon), although those
| still have unicode codepoints.
| matsemann wrote:
| Is there anything one need to consider when now allowing to
| change the directionality of certain emojis?
|
| Like, if you flip a bicycle, you can't do that naively by just
| flipping the image, as the chainrings should be on the right side
| of the bike. (Lots of leftward facing bike emojis mistakenly
| shows the big cog on the wrong side now, though..)
| seniorsassycat wrote:
| Many scissor emoji couldn't close, and ants don't have a waist
| - accuracy is not a core requirement of emoji.
|
| I noticed that the flipped person with cane emoji became left
| handed. Will we get dominant hand modifiers and more
| permutations?
|
| https://curlicuecal.tumblr.com/post/175362924100/an-entomolo...
| https://wh0.github.io/2020/01/02/scissors.html
| 3pt14159 wrote:
| I once thought (incorrectly) that .ws domains were going to be
| the new hot thing since I failed to appreciate how other TLDs
| would allow emojis and thus, make none of them actually worth
| anything.
|
| To answer your question: Yes. I thought ruby handled it
| automatically, but it turns out that, no, you need to actually
| do fiddly stuff with some of the emojis like this one:
|
| https://emojipedia.org/man-raising-hand-light-skin-tone/
|
| https://imgur.com/a/kFXsadq
|
| In general though, emojis are more complicated than people give
| them credit for. There was one domain I had that you could only
| type on Android and not iOS! The exact encoding for one of the
| emoji slightly differed. I can't remember all the details, but
| emoji is annoying and best to be avoided if you can.
| pxc wrote:
| > I thought ruby handled it automatically, but it turns out
| that, no, you need to actually do fiddly stuff with some of
| the emojis like this one
|
| does Ruby also do this with other combining characters like
| accent marks? If you use a combining accent character in a
| string in Ruby and reverse the string does the accent mark
| hop from one character to another?
| blamazon wrote:
| On this topic the curious may find of interest this two part
| podcast episode interviewing various emoji experts:
|
| https://www.alieward.com/ologies/curiology
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Kneeling emoji seems promising
| jononomo wrote:
| There are only about six emoji's that I ever use, with thumbs up
| being by far the one I use the most.
| dvh wrote:
| Fly amanita + brown color = Boletus. Great!
| paxcoder wrote:
| [dead]
| hellohappy1234 wrote:
| I would like to point out there are still no emoji for most of
| the anatomical organs of. the body
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/13/22665002/doctors-medical-...
| isoprophlex wrote:
| It's the year 2023, yet here we are, stuck with peaches and
| eggplants...
| toastal wrote:
| Mario is to lemons, as Green Mario is to green lemons.
|
| I'm happy to see limes tho since lemons are uncommon/expensive
| here.
| karol wrote:
| Is there a God emoji?
| [deleted]
| wffurr wrote:
| I tried to post a money emoji in response, but HN strips emoji
| from comments.
| smeej wrote:
| What would a God emoji look like? Seems like it'd be a bit
| tough to get agreement there.
| medwards666 wrote:
| Not sure, but I'd more than welcome a "God, please make it
| stop!" emoji ...
| Biganon wrote:
| The closest thing to a deity is probably "", that looks like a
| personification of wind, not unlike what the ancient Greek
| probably had
| lozenge wrote:
| Looks more like rain to me.
| postsantum wrote:
| It's forbidden to picture God in Islam
| rsynnott wrote:
| Also many variants of Protestantism. And even in monotheistic
| religions which don't prohibit it, generally God is not
| considered to look like anything.
| luuurker wrote:
| But it's not forbidden in many other religions and emojis are
| for everyone.
|
| I don't really care if there's a "God emoji" or not and wish
| good luck to those who'd have to picture God in an emoji, but
| this freedom and respect thing goes both ways. A group is
| free not to like or use this emoji, but they don't get to
| stop others from liking or using it.
| rsynnott wrote:
| While some monotheistic religions don't explicitly prohibit
| it, I'm not sure that any encourage it, or have any
| particular conception of what God looks like.
|
| Catholicism, some Protestantism: Not prohibited, God
| doesn't look like anything.
|
| Islam, other Protestantism: prohibited, God doesn't look
| like anything.
|
| Judaism: prohibited, God doesn't look like anything.
|
| Like, I'm not sure anyone would thank you for this emoji.
| pxc wrote:
| Plus Unicode already includes a ton of emoji that Islamic
| fundamentalists doubtless consider unacceptable. Liberal
| Muslims can presumably put up with other people using a God
| emoji just like they can put up with other people using a
| devil emoji.
| tekla wrote:
| Wait doesn't that mean that unicode is un-inclusive?
| pxc wrote:
| Adults already know what the paradox of tolerance is. Idk
| what you think you're demonstrating here.
| kortex wrote:
| https://emojipedia.org/spaghetti/
|
| Praise His Noodly Appendages. Ramen.
| isykt wrote:
| There are several religious emoji.
| lysecret wrote:
| I am building an Ai based calorie counting app. I decided to let
| ChatGPT generate an emoji for every food and it works perfectly
| and people love it haha
| gardenhedge wrote:
| I much preferred when different sites and apps had their own
| emojis or even let the user pick/add a set including GIFs. Ah,
| the good 'ol times!
| Avamander wrote:
| I personally on the other hand despise that. I used blobmoji
| for a while and they certainly looked way nicer than most
| variants websites employed. Plus I had emoji sites haven't had
| time to add yet.
|
| The custom sets also break copy-paste, which is the biggest
| annoyance.
|
| I wish this were configurable everywhere.
| degun wrote:
| The only emojis that I loved to use and seemed to me like
| conveying real emotions were the BBM ones. Top tier!
| Pannoniae wrote:
| We have all those new emojis but rebinding keyboards to input
| anything more than what's on a 101-key keyboard is still a
| massive pain.
| tgvaughan wrote:
| Every time this happens I'm reminded of Kinagrams replacing
| Logotype among extras in Anathem (Neal Stephenson).
| haunter wrote:
| There was a good paper about the varying interpretations of
| emojis https://grouplens.org/site-
| content/uploads/Emoji_Interpretat... [2016]
|
| Some of them look totally different on different devices so the
| meaning is lost in translation
| pygy_ wrote:
| Unicode has many religious symbols, but none for
| pastafarianism...
|
| Could we have one for 2025 ?
| jokoon wrote:
| Firefox still cannot render emojis from a custom font like noto
| emoji on Windows.
| pxc wrote:
| FTA:
|
| > Are these the final emojis?
|
| > No, not exactly.
|
| > To be clear, the Emojipedia Sample Images shown within the
| images are just one way in which these emojis might look,
| created by Emojipedia's Head of Emoji Design Joshua Jones.
|
| These emoji aren't in Noto Emoji yet... or any other font.
| jokoon wrote:
| I meant it cannot emoji fonts at all, not just those
| yalue wrote:
| Even though I hate emojis in general, it still drives me nuts
| that there's a swan emoji but not a goose emoji
| opan wrote:
| I'd like to see a Rubik's cube emoji, maybe also the buttons on
| game controllers (A, B, X, Y, Cross, Circle, Square, Triangle) as
| emoji.
| rsynnott wrote:
| I feel like "lemon yellow" is an unsatisfactory approach to the
| lime; a like is not a yellow lemon. However, most citrus fruit
| are hybrids; they could simply add citron, pomelo etc as basic
| emoji and then ZWJ citrus to their hearts' content.
|
| (I'm possibly not being entirely serious...)
| zarzavat wrote:
| The reason they do this is for backwards compatibility. It's
| much nicer to have "lime" show up as a lemon with a green
| square than an empty box replacement character.
|
| Also, I've eaten some half green, half yellow lemonoids. The
| color consistency of lemons and limes is mostly a supermarket
| fiction.
| jareklupinski wrote:
| > "lemon yellow" is an unsatisfactory approach to the lime
|
| yea, isnt that how scurvy almost came back to the british navy
|
| https://www.alcademics.com/2018/11/historical-info-about-scu...
| graypegg wrote:
| I feel for the artists whose job it is to draw and organize
| nearly 4000 little vector images, most of which will barely ever
| be used to communicate anything.
|
| I'm going to imagine that it's functionally impossible to make a
| font with full emoji support now unless you're a massive
| corporation. (Not that it's an issue really, but there's only so
| far you can push the list of required code points right? You can
| leave off entire character sets if they aren't used in the target
| language you produce a font for. On the other hand, leaving off
| the head shaking emojis is going to be unforgivable for a lot of
| people that feel like they're being left out because of their
| phone OS choice or something.)
| nebalee wrote:
| I feel this would be something where AI generated could be
| useful. Is there a midjourney for emojis?
| gkoberger wrote:
| On the contrary, I think it must be really cool to design
| something that millions of people will see and use to express
| emotions. Even the lesser-used emojis still likely get millions
| of uses.
|
| On Twitter alone, the lowest used emojis still get a ton of
| use: https://emojitracker.com/
| numpad0 wrote:
| Actually, once you're going to support CJKV languages, and
| especially more than one of those at the same time, the idea of
| single font for single document just goes out of window. It
| already is out of window, just you don't notice it unless you
| have CJKV users or literacy.
|
| The way it has to work is <english> part of sentences must be
| rendered in an English font</english>, <chinese-
| simplified>requires own appropriate font inline</chinese-
| simplified> and <chinese-traditional>part requires another
| appropriate font, because there are no distinction in the text
| binary between Simplified Chinese,</chinese-traditional>,
| <Japanese>and any other Chinese language variants</Japanese>.
|
| What this has to do with emoji is, same is going on with emoji;
| emoji is own "language", and the way it has to be and it is
| supported right now is by switching fonts and calling whoever
| default and/or can supply missing characters in-line and per-
| character.
|
| Well, maybe the ship still is on domestic waters on CJKV
| because there are conspicuous reserved areas in Unicode
| assignments to hold all CsCtJKV(?) symbols separately, but for
| emojis it has.
| graypegg wrote:
| That's true! I know that, it's the reason why every OS has
| its own well known style of emoji. The fonts people use day-
| to-day don't cover the emoji characters so it falls back to
| whatever massive default font is installed.
|
| Just thinking that wall is getting higher every time they add
| new emoji or new ZWJ sequences that exponentially grow the
| number of glyphs. Even the base emoji set (should you want to
| make your own emoji-only font) is bigger than many single-
| character set fonts. (But not all, clearly)
| squeek502 wrote:
| How about with a maximum size of 10x10 pixels?
|
| https://emoji.serenityos.net/
| cubefox wrote:
| For their phone keyboard "Gboard", Google made around 30.000(!)
| emoji combinations available as stickers. Here is an overview:
|
| https://emoji.supply/kitchen/
|
| These are all handcrafted, and some are quite original, e.g.
| when you combine one with itself. An entire team of artists
| must have worked on this for quite some time.
| tambeb wrote:
| So far I've found 88 combos involving the poop emoji.
|
| Photos album: https://photos.app.goo.gl/wCNxKjzi61rCJUsU8
| mattwad wrote:
| I mean, the Chinese language has 106,230 characters [1]. This
| is not a new issue. And it actually sounds fun, at least they
| are drawings and not just various organizations of black lines
|
| [1] https://chinainternshipplacements.com/blog/how-many-
| chinese-...
| graypegg wrote:
| Yeah that's a good point. But I think there's also more
| complete (all code spaces filled) latin fonts than CJK fonts
| for that reason.
|
| It's off topic, but you might find it interesting. There's
| Japanese kanji glyphs that only exist because of (presumably)
| transcription errors while specifying the code pages in
| unicode. [0] Gives a sense of how massive that code block is!
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17637375
| asddubs wrote:
| Hanzi are compounds of a smaller subset of repeating shapes,
| though.
| stemlord wrote:
| The great thing about emojis is that you can still use emoticons
| :). Don't even have to worry about its skin color. Ambiguity is a
| feature. It also doesn't try to steal your attention like
| everything else on the modern web.
| expertentipp wrote:
| I tried to use emojis as a workaround to categorize contacts...
| skin shades and genders make this approach quite unusable.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| I might be old, but I miss the times when a few characters ( ":)
| :( :D :P :> :-) ") were enough, and I didn't have to update my
| fonts every now and then so I wouldn't see empty square in text.
| Applejinx wrote:
| I still use those on the regular, and people think it's because
| I'm all about texting, which is far from the truth.
|
| It's from Usenet :)
| chrisco255 wrote:
| Welcome! You've got mail.
| KineticLensman wrote:
| yes, those, and the Andalusian Video Snail _@/
| pflenker wrote:
| You are comparing the benefits of the ,,good old times" from
| the drawbacks of the present. Drawbacks from the past include
| that the number of things you could express with ascii emojis
| is very limited, anything that goes beyond the usual palette of
| emotions required explanation and context, and several old
| school emotes or single line ascii art require a monospaced
| font to be rendered in an understandable way. Another important
| thing is that ascii emotes are easier to type in on a keyboard
| than on mobile, whereas context aware emoji keyboards on phones
| make it very easy to enter those. And the phone is what people
| are usually using to communicate.
| lapcat wrote:
| > You are comparing the benefits of the ,,good old times"
| from the drawbacks of the present. Drawbacks from the past
| include that the number of things you could express with
| ascii emojis is very limited, anything that goes beyond the
| usual palette of emotions required explanation and context
|
| Here's a crazy idea: how about people use words to describe
| their feelings? Or is that too "old school"?
| dagmx wrote:
| Pictograms predate words for expression. So the "oldest
| school" would be no words at all.
| Findecanor wrote:
| > the number of things you could express with ascii emojis is
| very limited
|
| Only limited by your imagination ... and sometimes your
| keyboard layout. :-th
|
| There is also the web-board convention of expressing smiley-
| faces using a word surrounded by commas, e.g. :facepalm: This
| degrades gracefully to human-readable text when not
| supported, unlike . Edit: An unsupported character was
| censored when I posted, thus proving my point.
| [deleted]
| roda73 wrote:
| [flagged]
| bombolo wrote:
| I just want the sicilian flag in :(
|
| The rip off of the isle of man is in, but not sicily :(
| voxadam wrote:
| It looks like, at least for the time being, the Unicode
| Consortium isn't accepting any new flag emoji.[0] While I don't
| necessarily support their position I can understand it. The
| amount of international pressure to support or oppose the
| recognition of some flags (e.g. Republic of China AKA Taiwan,
| Tibet, Crimea, Kosovo, Abkhazia etc.) is likely substantial.
|
| [0] https://blog.unicode.org/2022/03/the-past-and-future-of-
| flag...
| NoZebra120vClip wrote:
| Some implementations are refusing to depict national flags
| graphically, and fall back to the ISO country code.
|
| My Windows 10 emoji picker doesn't have national flags in its
| inventory.
|
| I [] Unicode!
| bombolo wrote:
| there is one per every region of italy, but i don't
| understand what the status is.
|
| https://emojipedia.org/flag-for-sicily-it82/
| hollerith wrote:
| I must resist the temptation to flag this submission.
|
| Just because I would be delighted if I never saw another emoji
| ever again doesn't mean it is OK for me to interfere with other
| people's desire to discuss them.
|
| Emoji are only a minor annoyance in my life. I must not blow a
| minor annoyance out of proportion.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-15 23:02 UTC)