[HN Gopher] Unicode Character "X" (U+1D54F)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unicode Character "X" (U+1D54F)
        
       Author : t0m44c
       Score  : 385 points
       Date   : 2023-07-24 11:22 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.compart.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.compart.com)
        
       | 0x53 wrote:
       | Can't find it now, but originally it was reported that Elon got
       | the logo from someone who replied to his tweet and that it was
       | the lid logo for someone's unsuccessful podcast.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Oh the Accessibility hawks at accounts like MathAbuse
       | (https://twitter.com/MathAbuse) fighting Unicode 'fancy text' are
       | gonna love this
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | It's strange they think computers don't have the ability to
         | read text just because it looks fancier.
        
           | ChrisArchitect wrote:
           | Not computers - humans with accessibility needs, screen
           | readers and such. Someone posting "I'm trying to Tweet on the
           | new X" will read in audio as "I'm trying to Tweet on the new
           | mathematical symbol x".... think of how any of those fun
           | tweet texts with fancy italicized words made from math
           | symbols read like.... it's brutal
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | Sure, but they should just fix the screen reader instead of
             | working around it.
        
               | simbolit wrote:
               | This.
               | 
               | Convincing a dozen or so screen reader developers to deal
               | with this is an achievable goal. It is much much much
               | harder to bring millions of twitt...X users to change
               | their typographic habits.
        
       | samwillis wrote:
       | It makes typesetting easer, pretty genius really! /s
       | 
       | We're going to see a trend of companies using Unicode characters
       | for their logo now aren't we?...
        
         | bhouston wrote:
         | I am not sure you can trademark the Unicode mark though.
         | Doesn't this preclude trademarks then?
        
         | gorlilla wrote:
         | I still will prefer a mix of comic sans and wingdings.
        
         | cubefox wrote:
         | I mean, hugging face exists.
        
         | tsukikage wrote:
         | ...which leads, of course, to the question of whether, with the
         | application of a suitable sum of money, one can get one's
         | chosen logo added to the unicode standard.
        
       | reneberlin wrote:
       | Also the game: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-COM
        
       | neom wrote:
       | Anyone have any knowledge of how the new CEO and Elons
       | relationship is regarding the business? I'd be curious how the
       | conversation goes with her about this kinda stuff.
        
         | spuz wrote:
         | The BBC reports:
         | 
         | > Ms Yaccarino wrote on the platform that the rebrand was an
         | exciting new opportunity.
         | 
         | > "Twitter made one massive impression and changed the way we
         | communicate," she said.
        
         | TheCleric wrote:
         | I'm assuming it's "I own the company, do this."
         | 
         | Not saying I agree with his ownership style (I certainly
         | don't), but if you become a CEO for a company owned by Musk,
         | and are not expecting him to undermine and interfere, than you
         | are fooling only yourself.
        
         | drexlspivey wrote:
         | He hired her a couple months ago. He has been public about
         | building the X "everything app" for a while. Presumably she
         | already knew about that when she took the role.
        
         | brrtbrrt wrote:
         | [dead]
        
       | danso wrote:
       | These tweets by @SawyerMerritt seem to have been the
       | "inspiration" for X's logo:
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1683150433806692352
       | 
       |  _Correction to my previous reply: @ajtourville designed the
       | thicker X logo below for our (now discontinued) @OfficialXPod.
       | The thicker logo was inspired by a font he found online (bottom
       | right). I created the video above using the font logo, adding a
       | glow and little lines in the logo to make it look "imperfect. "_
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/ajtourville/status/1683151957723160576
       | 
       |  _Correct. This is the logo I designed and, if @elonmusk wants,
       | he can have it for free._
       | 
       | Maybe I haven't had enough coffee, but the allegedly "designed"
       | thicker X, "inspired by a font [Alex] found online", seems to be
       | exactly the unicode X, but bold? And this Alex guy is taking the
       | credit for designing it?
        
         | yreg wrote:
         | So what, it's still a logo design.
        
       | michaelsbradley wrote:
       | Also on codepoints.net:
       | 
       | https://codepoints.net/U+1D54F
        
       | ricardo81 wrote:
       | A good bandwidth saver then, even for the 'share this' kind of
       | plugins that exist.
        
       | toxypol wrote:
       | so musk was trolled?
        
         | bsuvc wrote:
         | No, Musk is the one doing the trolling.
         | 
         | Just look at the attention he is getting.
         | 
         | If you think Musk is somehow upset about this, you are wrong.
        
           | coffeebeqn wrote:
           | Wow I feel so trolled that he's lighting more of his money on
           | fire. Buy an extremely well known brand for 44 billion and
           | replace it with something you spend 5 minutes of effort on.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | asveikau wrote:
           | Right, it may look like he's making dumb decisions left and
           | right and doesn't have anyone telling him how stupid he is to
           | get him to stop, but he's really playing 4d chess.
           | 
           | /s
        
             | bsuvc wrote:
             | I didn't say any of that.
        
       | Taek wrote:
       | This character was added to Unicode in 2001, which notably is
       | after Elon acquired x.com
        
         | isodev wrote:
         | The character is used by another famous piece of software for
         | what, 40 years?
         | 
         | https://x.org/wiki/
        
           | phkahler wrote:
           | But X windows is dead or dying. Oh, so is Twitter?
        
             | gpderetta wrote:
             | I expect that X11 will survive twitter.
             | 
             | edit: using proper typography.
        
             | rsynnott wrote:
             | Reports of X11's death have been greatly exaggerated as far
             | as I can see; it's still clinging stubbornly on, and
             | efforts to kill it have tended not to go well.
        
               | Maken wrote:
               | Wayland is still trying really hard.
        
             | avgcorrection wrote:
             | I hope not. I'm still using XCompose.
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | X.org doesn't use that character. But e.g. TeX probably did
           | before Unicode.
        
         | Denvercoder9 wrote:
         | It has been used in mathematics for decades, if not centuries,
         | before that.
        
         | Symbiote wrote:
         | See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold
        
         | jojobas wrote:
         | It was added as a part of the Latin (and also Greek) alphabet
         | in various incarnations for mathematical use.
        
       | alexruf wrote:
       | Wow, this probably changes everything we thought we knew about
       | this company, the product and its CEO.
       | 
       | No, seriously, does he think no one notices that the new X logo
       | still hides the same old Twitter crap?
        
       | CodeCompost wrote:
       | Ah so that's how we're supposed to Google for tweets now. "X
       | something something".
        
         | b800h wrote:
         | No, you're supposed to go to X and search on there. And consume
         | ads.
        
         | voxadam wrote:
         | X (U+1D54F) decomposes[0] to X (U+0058) meaning that if you
         | search for X your search string will likely be automatically
         | converted to the equivalent X.
         | 
         | Of course, while a search engine _could_ conceivably index and
         | search the entire Unicode codespace internet wide, such a task
         | would likely be somewhat unrealistic and provide only limited
         | upside.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_equivalence
        
           | calderknight wrote:
           | i presume x.com or site:x.com will get the trick done
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | It's already got to search 1000s of Chinese characters, a few
           | more doesn't make a big difference.
        
             | voxadam wrote:
             | How do you decide which characters to index? The current
             | Unicode release (15.0) includes 149,186 individual
             | characters. I suppose you can _probably_ ignore U+237C
             | (Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow) seeing as nobody
             | seems to know what it denotes.[0][1]
             | 
             | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31012865
             | 
             | [1] https://ionathan.ch/2022/04/09/angzarr.html
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | Most search engines for languages like English are
               | indexing words as opposed to characters so choices as to
               | what characters are indexed are made as part of deciding
               | which words to index.
               | 
               | Search engines for CJK languages do tend to work at the
               | character level so a search for "Sona" on a certain site
               | run by (I think) Chinese people will turn up result for
               | "Persona".
               | 
               | I was involved with an A.I. startup where we had lots of
               | meetings about what to do about all the strange Unicode
               | characters and right now in Mastodon there is a lot of
               | concern that screen readers will choke on unicode bold
               | characters while it doesn't seem that difficult to squash
               | them down to ordinary characters or treat them exactly as
               | <b>unicode bold characters</b>
        
               | NoGravitas wrote:
               | That is Ellis.
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | The essential operation here is not decomposition, but
           | compatibility normalization. Both NFKC and NFKD result in a
           | regular "X".
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | teeray wrote:
       | I can't wait for a Twitter vs. Xfinity trademark showdown.
        
         | ectospheno wrote:
         | x.com was a company he founded early 1999. He wanted an online
         | bank. Wikipedia page on it is informative.
        
       | croes wrote:
       | Possibly related
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36845492
        
       | marmitesmuggler wrote:
       | Strongly reminds me of the X11 logo (one of my favourite
       | designs).
        
         | gjvc wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System yup
        
         | simplicio wrote:
         | Yea, kinda feels like X.org would have a decent trademark case
         | if they wanted to pursue it. Both the name and logo are really
         | similar, and it seems like both companies are operating in
         | similar enough categories that its not too hard to imagine
         | there being confusion between the two.
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | Musk has the deeper pockets. I'm more worried about him suing
           | x.org and winning.
        
             | pwdisswordfishc wrote:
             | I'm more worried about him suing x.org and losing, but
             | still managing to bankrupt the foundation with legal
             | expenses.
        
             | Delk wrote:
             | My first thought when simplicio mentioned trademark was
             | that The Open Group -- which would seem to own the X Window
             | System logo -- might _need_ to try and protect their
             | trademark. If they don 't, it's easy to foresee how down
             | the road the similarity could become their problem, not
             | Musk's.
             | 
             | The X.Org Foundation might need to do the same for their X
             | logo even though it's a bit different (and I'm not sure if
             | it's trademarked in the first place).
             | 
             | IANAL, but you do need to defend a trademark in order to
             | maintain it after all.
             | 
             | Of course fighting to protect it would probably be costly
             | and financially risky even if they did have a case.
        
       | petercooper wrote:
       | Does this affect the potential for trademarking the logo?
        
         | samwillis wrote:
         | Absolutely.
         | 
         | They can probably trade mark it for social media (unless
         | someone already has), but are highly unlikely to be able to
         | trademark it broadly, which clearly is the intention.
        
           | EspressoGPT wrote:
           | Isn't a trademark always tied to its respective business
           | domain?
        
             | samwillis wrote:
             | Yes, but those "classes" can be quite wide, there is for
             | example no way they could trademark it for "Class 9:
             | Computer and software products and electrical and
             | scientific products."
        
               | Turing_Machine wrote:
               | Wait until you find out about "apple" and "windows".
        
               | samwillis wrote:
               | Apple and windows are trademarks for software. You would
               | be unable to get the trademark "Apple" for a company
               | selling fruit, or "windows" for a window fitter, and
               | neither could Apple or Microsoft.
               | 
               | X is a pre-existing symbol used by, and part of a
               | standard character set for, software. You could probably
               | get a trademark on it for a company selling apples, but I
               | highly doubt you could for a software company.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | > X is a pre-existing symbol used by
               | 
               | "used by" is pretty debatable. Its a fairly obscure
               | character. I don't think being in unicode by itself is
               | sufficient enough to count.
        
               | _flux wrote:
               | There is also https://www.x.org/ which seems quite slow.
               | I wonder if it's receiving more traffic than usually..
        
             | denton-scratch wrote:
             | > its respective business domain
             | 
             | Or to any number of business domains. See the trademark
             | registration for "Wagatha Christie":
             | 
             | https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-
             | tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00...
        
           | tiborsaas wrote:
           | I don't see a problem with this, it's a generic character
           | used in mathematics. If nobody trademarked it before, it
           | shouldn't cause any issues. If using greek letters like l in
           | brands is not a problem, then this should fly too.
           | 
           | They could also apply for multiple trademarks with small
           | additions if they launch a new product:
           | 
           | X[?][?]
        
             | samwillis wrote:
             | Trademarks are against a "class", these can be quite wide.
             | They would clearly want to own that exact symbol for "Class
             | 9: Computer and software products and electrical and
             | scientific products."
             | 
             | Unicode already contains _exactly_ it, it 's a
             | mathematical/scientific symbol, even if they did get the
             | trademark in that category (which I doubt) they will never
             | be able to enforce it. With trade marks, if you don't
             | successfully protect them, you loose them.
        
               | peyton wrote:
               | It's totally enforceable. It's a trademark. Who else is
               | doing business with the Unicode doublestruck X?
        
               | aequitas wrote:
               | https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.Org_Server
        
             | redeux wrote:
             | I think this would seriously confuse his core audience, so
             | I doubt that's the intention. Then again, I think
             | rebranding Twitter to X is a terrible idea, so what do I
             | know.
        
             | KingShabibo wrote:
             | It is a problem, because if theoretically Musk were to
             | trademark that character (improbable), Unicode would likely
             | be forced to remove that character and break every instance
             | of it across the internet. Not to mention that anybody
             | using that symbol, which already has an established meaning
             | in mathematics, would be infringing on that trademark.
        
         | NoZebra120vClip wrote:
         | Trademark should be possible, but a copyright will depend if
         | the whole logo surpasses the Threshold of Originality. Ordinary
         | typefaces, plus colors and effects, are below this threshold.
        
       | dizzydes wrote:
       | Musk can seem to do no right atm, I see a lot of hate out there
       | with this name change and planned product expansion but I can't
       | quite understand why. He's taking an underperforming social
       | network and trying to make it work. It might prove fatal, but it
       | would have died a slow boring death in its old form. Perhaps its
       | just that people don't like his personality, which shouldn't come
       | into it.
       | 
       | Fwiw even prior to his defunding moderation it felt like one of
       | the meanest places on the internet, I don't see much of a change.
        
         | WinstonSmith84 wrote:
         | > He's taking an underperforming social network and trying to
         | make it work.
         | 
         | Few would argue that it works better now than before
         | 
         | > Perhaps its just that people don't like his personality, I
         | suppose it's more complicated:
         | 
         | - he promised "freedom of speech" and Twitter has rather become
         | "freedom of hate"
         | 
         | - he is taking constantly controversial political positions,
         | usually favoring dictators, and this doesn't resonate very well
         | in the western world
         | 
         | Maybe people just wish he would have stayed the way he was: a
         | sort of fascinating "Doc Brown" rather than yet another average
         | billionaire pushing political ideas through his wealth and
         | popularity.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | nancyhn wrote:
           | It is better for favoring free speech over censorship.
           | Dictators don't favor free speech whatsoever. You've been
           | gaslight into believing the opposite. Tyrants censor people
           | with any justification they can get their hands on, including
           | "hate speech".
           | 
           | We accept speech we don't like to avoid this very trap.
        
             | outsidetheparty wrote:
             | Oh, bosh. Don't be absurd. Elon demonstrably isn't
             | "favoring free speech over censorship." He's just choosing
             | different speech to favor and to censor.
             | 
             | Oddly enough, he tends to favor hate groups and dictators:
             | "Twitter's compliance with government demands for
             | censorship or surveillance has risen [during Musk's tenure]
             | to over 80%, from around 50%."
             | 
             | https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/04/elon-
             | musk-...
             | 
             | https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/rcna81961
             | 
             | https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/06/elon-musk-free-
             | speec...
             | 
             | https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7zm9q/elon-musk-twitter-
             | naz...
        
           | asguy wrote:
           | > Few would argue that it works better now than before
           | 
           | Maybe in the social circles you stick to, but there are
           | plenty of /other/ people (i.e. more than a "few") that are
           | quite happy that the 80% of employees doing their jobs were
           | let go. [1]
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394
        
             | kibwen wrote:
             | Is Matt Taibbi implied to be one of those happy people?
             | 
             |  _' Matt Taibbi, a journalist who worked on the "Twitter
             | Files" series of articles about old business decisions at
             | Twitter, has said he'll no longer use the social media
             | platform. Taibbi is apparently frustrated by Twitter's
             | recent decision to heavily restrict all links and tweets
             | about Substack following that company's announcement it
             | would be launching Substack Notes, a short form social
             | network and potential competitor to Twitter. Any Twitter
             | user who even tries to retweet a post from Substack is met
             | with a notification, "some actions on this Tweet have been
             | disabled by Twitter," a move that has angered many users,
             | including Taibbi._
             | 
             | https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/04/07/twitter-
             | fi...
        
               | asguy wrote:
               | > Is Matt Taibbi implied to be one of those happy people?
               | 
               | Not specifically. That's why I linked to content from
               | him, and not his profile page.
        
         | drcongo wrote:
         | You answered your own questions really with " _Musk can seem to
         | do no right atm_ " - for some of us, it's just incredibly funny
         | to watch the hubris of a self-proclaimed genius cause them to
         | fail so often in such a short space of time. A seemingly
         | endless string of stupid decisions because he's surrounded by
         | boot lickers and sycophants with not one of them willing to put
         | their hand up and tell him he's not a genius.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | wccrawford wrote:
           | For me it's not funny so much as shocking, and sad. He had a
           | hand, of some sort, in at least a few great things, and it's
           | upsetting to watch it falling apart. I often think of the
           | quote:
           | 
           | "You either die a hero, or live to see yourself become a
           | villain."
           | 
           | Far too many icons outlive their hero phase, and it's kind of
           | depressing.
           | 
           | Edit: Or rather, the hero phase fails to live long enough to
           | outlive the person.
        
             | jeltz wrote:
             | The reality is that the hero likely never existed.
        
             | izzdrasil wrote:
             | He certainly had his wallet involved with some interesting
             | things but I think it's a stretch to say he had any
             | beneficial hands-on involvement.
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | He's produced a lot of value for a lot of people over the
               | years, and many things some of us see every day (like
               | Teslas) are only the way they are/have been successful
               | the way they are because of his influence.
               | 
               | It's always been more as a promoter and image seller, but
               | he has also been willing to make big calls and take risks
               | others won't which has allowed them to grow. That is
               | valuable. And he has been hands on in some areas
               | sometimes in ways that have been instrumental in shaping
               | things. For better or worse.
               | 
               | He's far from perfect. But no one is, and honesty is
               | important.
               | 
               | I suspect the big issue here is something typical of
               | narcissists - he's gotten older, and he can't keep up his
               | game convincingly enough anymore to fool a large enough
               | percentage of the public, so he's downward spiraling. And
               | internally he can feel it, which makes it worse.
               | 
               | It would explain a lot, especially the often bizarre and
               | destructive attacks on anyone who says anything he
               | doesn't like. The over the top edgy/controversial
               | behavior to get reactions, etc.
        
           | lazide wrote:
           | Which is a natural state when the one in charge is insecure
           | about their own actual weaknesses.
           | 
           | They'll attack anyone who tells them the actual truth, and
           | end up surrounded by those who either can't see the truth
           | (due to incompetence or delusion), or are willing to actively
           | lie about it (manipulators). By process of elimination, if
           | not by active choice.
        
         | oneeyedpigeon wrote:
         | It's very hard _not_ to take his personality into it since he
         | chooses to force it in there. However, trying to be a bit
         | dispassionate for a second, I 'd say the haphazard nature of
         | the changes are what really gets to people. Especially those
         | who depend on Twitter as a tool, not knowing what it will be
         | called tomorrow, how it will function, which parts will work
         | and which wont, etc. is quite a deal-breaker.
        
         | outsidetheparty wrote:
         | Because he keeps having these late-night binges of bizarre,
         | brand-destroying decision making. Twitter is underperforming as
         | a result of his previous rounds of bizarre, brand- and product-
         | destroying decision making. Twitter wasn't dying until he came
         | along to "fix" it.
         | 
         | Yeah, his personality is plenty objectionable too, but it's
         | mostly the way he's seemingly intentionally running the company
         | into the ground that I object to.
        
         | rlglwx wrote:
         | Twitter was doing fine. By taking it private, he saddled it
         | with massive debt its current revenue couldn't service. And
         | every decision thereafter has been half baked and poorly
         | executed. So by trying to "save" it, he's killing it much
         | quicker than if it had just been left alone.
        
           | Turing_Machine wrote:
           | > Twitter was doing fine.
           | 
           | It was losing $4 million per day.
        
             | jeltz wrote:
             | That is not at all what looking at their financials say.
             | Twitter was a very profitable company which over hired like
             | crazy in 2021. This could have been solved without gong
             | crazy like Musk did. Just do responsible layoffs.
             | 
             | https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/delisted/TWTR/twitter/eb
             | i...
             | 
             | https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/delisted/TWTR/twitter/nu
             | m...
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | nickthegreek wrote:
             | There are no articles to confirm that it was losing $4m a
             | day prior to the acquisition. This is a number that Elon
             | put out (post acquisition) to justify layoffs.
        
         | TheCleric wrote:
         | Here's why this particular choice was foolish:
         | 
         | 1) He's going to lose a TON of brand recognition overnight.
         | 
         | 2) He seems to have gone from "I'm thinking about doing this"
         | to "We're going live" over the course of a weekend. This is
         | both rushed and more based on reaction than actual thought and
         | research. I don't see any of his customers wanting this.
         | 
         | 3) Morale for employees there already seems to be terrible.
         | Having them implement a rebrand over a weekend on a whim makes
         | him seem like a dictator.
         | 
         | 4) From a practical perspective the name X is foolish. The word
         | "tweeted" is a verb used every day on the news. Companies would
         | kill to have that level of their product within the culture.
         | Now they will say what? "exed"? No one will say that because
         | the audience won't know what it means and it has the negative
         | connotation of something you've moved away from (ex-husband,
         | ex-girlfriend, etc.).
        
         | gemstones wrote:
         | Out of curiosity, why shouldn't his personality come into it?
         | 
         | There's no moral or ethical basis to not consider his
         | personality when evaluating Twitter, and even if you have one
         | I'm not obligated to share it.
         | 
         | You don't have to understand things for them to still be valid!
         | To me, he's an offputting guy doing a bad job, and those two
         | things are valid to consider when thinking of his company
         | according to my moral values. That's subjective, but it's
         | clearly a view that many share with me.
        
         | jdub wrote:
         | He's taken an okay performing social network, laden it with
         | debt, absolutely obliterated its reputation and value by
         | screwing around with it like a coke-addled toddler (with some
         | kind of fascination for fascist-adjacent politics), and now
         | he's destroying a globally-recognised brand to play out a
         | decades-old fantasy that he should've grown out of the first
         | time it blew up in his face.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | > Fwiw even prior to his defunding moderation it felt like one
         | of the meanest places on the internet, I don't see much of a
         | change.
         | 
         | The meanest place on the internet is EJMR, the forum economists
         | use to find job offers. Not joking.
         | 
         | The reason for this is unclear except that it's the most
         | conservative social science.
        
       | KingLancelot wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | jonas-w wrote:
       | You can also access x.com when using the Unicode Character
       | https://xn--971h.com (X.com)
        
         | N19PEDL2 wrote:
         | Also https://xn--u1a.com is for sale (where kh is a Cyrillic
         | letter, see [0]).
         | 
         | Would be funny to buy it and make a redirect to threads.net.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kha_(Cyrillic)
        
           | jonas-w wrote:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36844079
           | 
           | Also https://xn--vm8a.com which is on sale for $91M
        
           | notatoad wrote:
           | i thought all non-latin punycode domains were forbidden for
           | purchase on .com?
           | 
           | edit - i looked up the whois, just because it's parked at
           | godaddy doesn't mean it's for sale
           | 
           | Name: XN--U1A.COM
           | 
           | Internationalized Domain Name: kh.com
           | 
           | Registry Domain ID: 106236037_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
           | 
           | Domain Status:
           | 
           | clientDeleteProhibited
           | 
           | clientRenewProhibited
           | 
           | clientTransferProhibited
           | 
           | clientUpdateProhibited
        
         | mkl wrote:
         | Are you sure? When I type https://xn--971h.com in it doesn't
         | work, but clicking the link in your comment does because HN has
         | made the href x.com. The browser converts X.com to x.com before
         | going there too. Moreover, X and X are treated as equivalent
         | characters in this context, so whois X.com looks up x.com, and
         | X.com's punycode encoding is x.com:
         | https://www.whatsmydns.net/idn-punycode-converter?q=%F0%9D%9...
         | 
         | whois xn--971h.com returns the same thing as an unregistered
         | domain.
        
           | jonas-w wrote:
           | HN automatically converts these urls to punycode, maybe this
           | is a bug and it automatically converts everything to punycode
           | even though it doesn't make sense?
        
             | mkl wrote:
             | I think so. Then I'm not right about the punycode encoding
             | of X.com - it's that it isn't even needed. I've emailed
             | dang about it.
        
             | yreg wrote:
             | It's unrelated to HN. Copy pasting X.com into the address
             | bar still leads to x.com
             | 
             | related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDN_homograph_attack
        
               | mkl wrote:
               | I already mentioned that, and it's not what they mean.
               | Hover your mouse over a https://xn--971h.com link in a
               | comment on HN and notice that it's pointing to
               | https://x.com. This does seem to be an HN thing; see
               | here: https://jsfiddle.net/rtfhejdy/
        
           | dom96 wrote:
           | Looks like it's also not possible to register xn--971h.com (I
           | tried both Namecheap and Cloudflare).
        
             | mikea1 wrote:
             | Yeah, it's explicitly disallowed by ICANN to register a
             | domain with this unicode character (along with numerous
             | other characters):
             | 
             | https://www.verisign.com/assets/icannrestricted/idn-icann-
             | re...
        
         | ricardo81 wrote:
         | $ curl -i 'https://xn--971h.com'
         | 
         | curl: (6) Could not resolve host: xn--971h.com
        
           | yreg wrote:
           | $ curl X.com         <html>         <head><title>400 Bad
           | Request</title></head>         <body>         <center><h1>400
           | Bad Request</h1></center>
           | <hr><center>cloudflare</center>         </body>
           | </html>
        
             | ricardo81 wrote:
             | What's that all about then? I'd expect curl to deal with
             | either/or
             | 
             | curl should especially live with a punycode version.
             | 
             | Unless the punycode from the OP is incorrect? From basic
             | online tools, it looks like it simply converts to x.com
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | I get:                 $ curl http://X.com -v       *
               | Trying 34.102.136.180:80...       * Connected to X.com
               | (34.102.136.180) port 80 (#0)       > GET / HTTP/1.1
               | > Host: x.com       > User-Agent: curl/8.1.2       >
               | Accept: */*       >       < HTTP/1.1 200 OK
               | 
               | No https, though. (OpenSSL SSL_connect: Connection reset
               | by peer in connection to x.com:443)
        
         | ranting-moth wrote:
         | I wonder what Elon paid for x.com?
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | I'm not sure. There was a short period when you could
           | register one letter dotcoms before about 1994. He's owned it
           | since forever that I know of. His first company was called X,
           | which became PayPal.
           | 
           | I spent a long time in the mid-90s trying to persuade
           | INTERNIC to let me register b.com.
        
             | contingencies wrote:
             | Shame. That would have made a great Chinese porn site.
             | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%e5%b1%84
        
       | dietrichepp wrote:
       | This is for math.
       | 
       | In Latex, you get these symbols with \mathbb{}. They are most
       | commonly used to represent to represent number sets, like the set
       | of all integers Z (from the German), set of all natural numbers
       | N, set of complex numbers C, set of all real numbers R, rationals
       | Q (for "quotient"), set of quaternions H (named after Hamilton),
       | or an unknown set F (for "field"). This explains why many of the
       | letters in this series exist in the basic multilingual plane--
       | because R is very commonly used, but A is not. You can find R in
       | the basic multilingual plane at U+211D.
       | 
       | I don't know why people are interested in the X symbol. It's just
       | there to complete the alphabet. There are many other ranges like
       | this used for writing mathematical formulas, like the range of
       | bold letters, fraktur, script, etc.
        
         | dclowd9901 wrote:
         | Cause "X" is a cool letter. Just ask David X. Cohen.
        
         | snarfy wrote:
         | They are an accessibility nightmare. I read a comment here
         | recently from a blind person that had to give up on math
         | education entirely due to all of the symbols not being
         | supported by screen readers. It was pretty sad.
        
           | hfkwer wrote:
           | That's on screen readers developers. And I don't know when
           | that comment you seem to remember dates back to, but I have
           | had several blind students in my math lectures over the past
           | decade. They seemed did fine.
        
           | thebooktocome wrote:
           | One blind mathematician I know prefers reading LaTeX over pdf
           | math for exactly this reason.
        
           | blincoln wrote:
           | I avoid using oddball Unicode characters for this reason,[1]
           | but I also feel like at this point the can of worms has been
           | unleashed, and the screen reader authors are going to have to
           | adapt to a more hostile environment.
           | 
           | It seems like one approach might be something like this,
           | assuming none of them are doing it already. If this is TLDR,
           | the key feature relating to the topic at hand is the point
           | about handling mathematical symbols, so skip everything
           | except that one.
           | 
           | * Pre-parse the entire page and count the number of
           | characters that would be read using a multi-word description.
           | While doing this, create sub-counts of characters that fall
           | into each Unicode script (Latin, Cyrillic, mathematical
           | notation, etc.).
           | 
           | * If the number of characters that would be read using a
           | multi-word description exceeds a user-specified threshold,
           | prompt the user for how to proceed.
           | 
           | * First, tell the user how many different Unicode scripts
           | (and blocks if necessary[2]) are contained on the page. For
           | each set, prompt using the following logic if the user hasn't
           | already set a default:
           | 
           | ** If a script/block/whatever consists of abstract symbols,
           | like the mathematical set, offer to read it using the closest
           | approximation in the character set it's derived from. e.g.
           | for X, read it as "X" instead of "mathematical double-struck
           | capital X". Read both   as "gamma" instead of their lengthy
           | "mathematical..." descriptions.
           | 
           | ** If a script/block/whatever represents a spoken language,
           | offer to do one of the following:
           | 
           | ** Read it as if spoken by someone fluent in the language.
           | 
           | ** Precede it with "the following [n] [script name]
           | characters" and read each one individually, without any
           | leading per-letter indicators, e.g. for "ABGD", "the
           | following four Greek characters: alpha, beta, gamma, delta".
           | Optionally include per-letter capitalization indication, but
           | only if the user has previous enabled that option.
           | 
           | ** Replace it with a count and the script name, e.g. "five
           | hundred characters of Chinese script". Provide a way for the
           | user to interrupt the narration and expand that section
           | instead of omitting it.
           | 
           | * Allow the user to store all of the prompt answers as
           | defaults and not prompt them again unless the user resets the
           | option. e.g. "always read mathematical symbols as the closest
           | Latin letter approximation".
           | 
           | * Maybe remind the user that it is an option in edge cases
           | like "this entire page would be read as 'a series of 53,198
           | symbols you've suppressed reading'".
           | 
           | [1] One of my first full-time jobs, decades ago, was doing UI
           | development with a focus on accessibility.
           | 
           | [2] Pretty unbelievable that the Unicode consortium has taken
           | the position that an apparently unlimited number of stylistic
           | variations on Latin letters should get their own Unicode
           | renditions, but that basically every other culture's
           | character sets gets merged into one style of character even
           | if there are extensive historical reasons to have different
           | renderings, and also has the time to keep adding corner-case
           | emojis, but can't be bothered to provide a single way to
           | easily differentiate "Cyrillic" from "Latin" as well as
           | differentiate "mathematical notation" from "Latin".
        
         | eesmith wrote:
         | Ooh, I found a use in the wild!
         | https://www.ams.org/books/memo/1023/                 The
         | central theme of this paper is the variational analysis of
         | homeomorphisms $h \colon \mathbb X \xrightarrow
         | []{{}_{\!\!\mathrm       {onto}\!\!}}\mathbb Y$ between two
         | given domains $\mathbb X ,       \mathbb Y \subset \mathbb
         | R^n$.
        
         | formerly_proven wrote:
         | The "bb" in "mathbb" isn't for "math, baby" (although
         | accurate), but short for "blackboard bold". These letterforms
         | don't originate with blackboards though, using outlines for
         | thick verticals goes back centuries. They're sometimes called
         | open face.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | tmccrary55 wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | throw0101b wrote:
           | > _Because Elmo_
           | 
           | Please do not sully the good name of the Muppet by
           | associating him with the tech billionaire...
        
             | krger wrote:
             | Elmo (and specifically the value-extraction-by-merchandise
             | craze CTW created around him) pretty much single-handedly
             | destroyed the original ensemble cast spirit of Sesame
             | Street, so it's actually pretty apt.
        
         | masukomi wrote:
         | because elon renamed twitter to "x corp", bought the x.com
         | domain and shoved this character on it.
        
           | dietrichepp wrote:
           | The bird is a lot more recognizable, no? Maybe even
           | beautiful?
        
             | booleandilemma wrote:
             | I thought the same thing. The bird is endearing.
             | 
             | Changing it to X is something some edgy teenager would do.
             | I can't help but wonder if he's trying to destroy twitter
             | on purpose.
        
               | solardev wrote:
               | This whole Twitter saga is like what happens when a cat
               | catches a bird and doesn't know what to do with it so
               | just slowly tortures it to death for the hell of it
        
             | yurodivuie wrote:
             | It sounds like Elon had the domain and it was burning a
             | hole in his pocket. That's the only explanation, honestly.
             | 
             | Twitter as a brand becomes less valuable the more he alters
             | it, since he's such a polarizing figure, so changing the
             | brand to break continuity seems pretty counterproductive.
             | It just reminds people that Elon is still fiddling with it.
        
               | nerdbert wrote:
               | > It sounds like Elon had the domain and it was burning a
               | hole in his pocket.
               | 
               | Yeah I wonder if he "sold" it to Twitter, and if so, for
               | how much.
        
               | kergonath wrote:
               | > It sounds like Elon had the domain and it was burning a
               | hole in his pocket. That's the only explanation,
               | honestly.
               | 
               | I think he just thinks he's getting his revenge and that
               | everyone will see how his terrible idea of x.com was
               | actually genius back in the day. Like a particularly
               | expensive midlife crisis. A bit like some dudes who start
               | playing guitar because they could not back in the day,
               | when it was a useful tool to make friends and look cool.
        
               | jona-f wrote:
               | Hey, I started playing guitar as an adult and it's one of
               | the biggest pleasures in my life. Also, I'm very
               | mediocre.
        
               | kergonath wrote:
               | Haha sorry, no offense meant. Some people don't do it for
               | bad reasons ;)
        
             | kergonath wrote:
             | Yeah, but not kewl enough.
        
             | simplicio wrote:
             | Also people less likely to assume its the brand for a
             | pornography site? Feel like people have developed a habit
             | of avoiding (or seeking out) anything with a prominent "X"
             | in the name on the Internets.
        
             | NoNotTheDuo wrote:
             | Not only the bird, but all of the associated verbiage. For
             | example, Tweet and Retweet. Do those go away after changing
             | the name and logo?
        
               | solardev wrote:
               | Yeah lol, Musk wants to call them xs now. Like "your x
               | last night was pretty great" or "will you share your x
               | with me again?"
               | 
               | Not even kidding. https://apnews.com/article/twitter-x-
               | logo-blue-bird-musk-068...
               | 
               | > In response to questions about what tweets would be
               | called when the rebranding is done, Musk said they would
               | be called Xs.
        
               | account42 wrote:
               | By coincidence, a lot of people I know have already been
               | calling them twats.
        
               | brazzledazzle wrote:
               | Clearly none of the marketing or branding people stayed
               | on. Or he ignores them.
        
               | treve wrote:
               | I imagine the former will become xcrete.
        
           | mkl wrote:
           | He (or a company of his) has had the x.com domain for
           | decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.com
        
             | spread_love wrote:
             | No, it changed ownership many times since 1999.
             | 
             | > On July 5 2017, Musk repurchased the domain name X.com
             | from PayPal
             | 
             | They even took a little jab at him when it happened
             | 
             | > "We are delighted to sell the domain x.com back to its
             | previous owner"
        
               | pilsetnieks wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
               | deadbunny wrote:
               | > On July 5 2017
               | 
               | 2017 is not 1999
        
               | gilleain wrote:
               | Given the start of this thread was about N, C, X etc ...
               | 
               | We could even say "2017 > 1999", giving an ordering over
               | these numbers.
        
               | mkl wrote:
               | I think you missed the point: the domain has not been in
               | Musk's control that whole time, as I had thought. His
               | company X.com had it, then PayPal got it when it was
               | created in the merger of X.com and Confinity, and PayPal
               | kept it after Musk left, but then Musk got it back.
        
               | tsimionescu wrote:
               | This doesn't contradict what you're saying, but note that
               | the company was only re-branded to PayPal after Musk left
               | it. I think it was just named Confinity after the merger.
        
               | spread_love wrote:
               | I'm delighted to let you know that you missed the point.
               | It was a very short comment.
        
               | misnome wrote:
               | I'm sorry to be the one to let you know but 2017 was
               | under two decades ago.
        
               | RoryH wrote:
               | Was this message posted on x.com?
        
             | onesphere wrote:
             | I get a 'godaddy parked' page for x.com (not even a 'y' or
             | a 'z'): https://thetaplane.com/x.com
        
             | MisterTea wrote:
             | Am I crazy or was x.com at one point x-drive, the early
             | online storage company?
        
           | coev wrote:
           | He owned x.com decades ago and it was part of paypal's
           | acquisition, then they sold the name back to elon a few years
           | ago
        
         | jhoechtl wrote:
         | > I don't know why people are interested in the X symbol.
         | 
         | It's the new symbol for and domain name of the social? network
         | formerly known as twitter.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Not to mention the X.org logo.
        
           | plagiarist wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Can you please not break the site guidelines by
             | fulminating, name-calling, snarking, and so on? It's not
             | what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
             | 
             | You may not owe $CEO better, but you owe this community
             | better if you're participating in it.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | orlp wrote:
         | X is used as a symbol for a generic metric space. E.g. if your
         | result is generic over R2, C3, etc, you can write X.
        
           | dietrichepp wrote:
           | Thanks! I am always a little curious about how these symbols
           | are used. That makes perfect sense to me.
        
           | red_trumpet wrote:
           | I'm a PhD student in algebraic geometry and have seldom seen
           | this. IME "X" is a generic name for all kinds of spaces
           | (metric, topological, complex analytic, algebraic...), but I
           | don't remember ever having seen "X".
           | 
           | That said, in principal everyone is free to call their spaces
           | how they like. It just makes it easier to read if one sticks
           | to familiar notation.
        
             | orlp wrote:
             | You're right I should've used "as a symbol" not "as the
             | symbol". It's not terribly common.
        
               | red_trumpet wrote:
               | Now that I think about it, most double stroked characters
               | really represent "concrete" objects, not generic ones.
               | Like P for projective space, or A for affine space. Also
               | F is often used together with an index F_q for _the_
               | field with q elements.
               | 
               | On the other hand, Wikipedia[1] agrees with you, that X
               | is "occasionally" used for metric spaces.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold
        
               | dietrichepp wrote:
               | My experience with F is "vector space over a field F",
               | which is not a concrete object, but I have probably seen
               | F written in a normal italic style more often.
        
               | ginnungagap wrote:
               | In set theory blackboard bold P, Q and C are very often
               | used for arbitrary (forcing) posets
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | I've seen P used for probability.
        
               | runarberg wrote:
               | I've also seen d as the differential operator and E(X) as
               | the expected value of X. I think I've also seen 1_x, and
               | i, and j but I don't remember for what.
        
               | brewmarche wrote:
               | I know 1_X as the indicator function (also called
               | characteristic function) of X in measure theory and
               | probability theory, but I've also seen 1_X or kh_X.
               | 
               | i and j can be basis vectors or imaginary units although
               | I've never seen them in blackboard bold in my lectures.
        
               | orlp wrote:
               | As a counterpoint, F when not fixed to a particular size
               | is arguably still generic over "any field", and G is most
               | definitely generic for "any group", even if fixed to a
               | particular size.
        
         | enriquto wrote:
         | > This is for math.
         | 
         | Heh.
         | 
         | The "tabs vs spaces" debate of mathematical typography is
         | whether these symbols should be used at all in printing, or
         | reserved for actual blackboards. In LaTeX you can have actual
         | boldface letters, so you should write a boldface letter R to
         | represent the real numbers and so on. Using "blackboard bold"
         | in print looks terribly off to some (many?) people.
        
           | mcphage wrote:
           | > In LaTeX you can have actual boldface letters, so you
           | should write a boldface letter R to represent the real
           | numbers and so on.
           | 
           | Why use the wrong symbol, when you can just use the correct
           | (ie, blackboard bold) symbol?
        
           | computerfriend wrote:
           | Do you have a source for this? I have never come across this
           | debate and personally find the blackboard bold convention to
           | be useful, as well as very visually elegant.
        
             | enriquto wrote:
             | It seems to me that it is part of the folklore. Note: not
             | the folklore of math! The folklore of mathematical
             | typesetting, which is a tiny community.
             | 
             | You can find many old and new math texts using either
             | convention. Most often readers won't even notice. There are
             | authors who are adamant against blackboard bold, most
             | famously Donald Knuth and Jean-Pierre Serre. Others simply
             | use regular boldface because of tradition, or because it's
             | the default style of the journal. Most people don't care
             | too much. But I have also heard people expressing strong
             | opinions on each side, that's why I made the analogy with
             | tabs-vs-spaces. Nothing too serious.
             | 
             | Elegance is entirely subjective. I have the opposite
             | opinion: if we can do real boldface in print, which is the
             | original usage, what's the point of using a black-board
             | version? We have the real thing! But I also understand the
             | opposite opinion, voiced elsewhere in this thread, that
             | open bold lettering is a new case, like italics or fraktur,
             | and we can use it freely in print.
        
           | Skeime wrote:
           | I strongly disagree that the bold symbols are better, even
           | though they're what blackboard bold was originally conceived
           | to approximate. The reason: Bold font draws attention (ask a
           | typographer about type color), but usually, the bolder
           | symbols are not the ones requiring that attention. (If I read
           | a text about real analysis, I know that the domains and
           | codomains will be the real numbers, for example.) The
           | blackboard bold versions stick out much less when looking at
           | the greater composition of the page.
        
             | enriquto wrote:
             | I respect your opinion, and agree that with some
             | particularly "thin" fonts (most notably, Computer Modern
             | and its variants), the associated bold symbols are too
             | exaggerated and produce and ugly effect.
             | 
             | But there is certainly some dependency on the font. For
             | example, the Baskerville used by the Publications de l'IHES
             | is a much thicker font, and the bold letters flow very
             | naturally. Look for example here
             | 
             | http://www.numdam.org/item/PMIHES/
             | 
             | The publications in the sixties and seventies, which are
             | scanned, are very beautiful and the bold letters mix
             | smoothly in the text. You cannot see them "from far away"
             | as happens with Computer Modern.
             | 
             | Curiously, the modern pdfs look slightly different, with
             | apparently thinner fonts. This may be an effect of
             | printing, that smears the ink a bit and produces slightly
             | thicker type?
        
           | marcelluspye wrote:
           | I hated when textbooks/papers did this. Half the time you
           | can't tell if they meant to use the bold letter or if the
           | printer was just being generous on that character. Made
           | legibility quite a bit more difficult. BB letters are
           | unambiguous.
        
           | jdrek1 wrote:
           | > In LaTeX you can have actual boldface letters, so you
           | should write a boldface letter R to represent the real
           | numbers and so on.
           | 
           | Almost [1] every single student absolutely hates that
           | notation in scripts. Bold is used to draw attention, it
           | should not be abused as being part of the variable/type. Just
           | use the proper symbol.
           | 
           | [1] And I'm only saying "almost" to account for the
           | possibility of there being like 5 super weird people on this
           | planet that think otherwise. I don't know a single person who
           | thinks this is a good idea, even the professors writing their
           | scripts like that think it's stupid and are only doing it due
           | to some nonsense fear of it otherwise not printing correctly
           | due to one single bad experience with a shitty printer in
           | 1950. Or maybe there's some other historical reason for this,
           | but in 2023 I'd classify not using the better notation as
           | malicious.
        
           | account42 wrote:
           | Then there's always that one prof that uses both on the
           | blackboard. Also Fraktur. Also bold Fraktur.
        
           | folkrav wrote:
           | Funny. Coming from a non-math background, having only one
           | symbol to deal with feels less confusing than switching
           | around symbols based on the medium it happens to be written
           | on. Did one of the symbols come "first"?
        
             | enriquto wrote:
             | Here you have the whole history:
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold
             | 
             | Summary: boldface came first, in print, and was widely
             | used. Much later, some mathematicians started to write
             | blackboard bold on blackboards (because actual bold would
             | be very untoward to write on a blackboard). Then, the usage
             | was backported to print.
             | 
             | I find it ugly, a sort of breaking "suspension of
             | disbelief", I don't know how to explain why. Some sort of
             | "anachronistic" feeling, like watching a movie about the
             | roman empire and some soldiers wear watches.
             | 
             | EDIT: as for having "different symbols", this is not the
             | case. They are exactly the same symbol, with different
             | faces. Like when you write the letters "a" or "g" very
             | different on a blackboard as they appear on print.
        
               | skoob wrote:
               | That's pretty typical for how typography develops.
               | Majuscule and miniscule letters were just two different
               | styles of writing the same letter. But eventually, people
               | started using majuscule (i.e uppercase) letters to give
               | emphasis to the beginning of sentences or certain words,
               | like names.
               | 
               | Italic typefaces were created by Italian type designers
               | to mimic the cursive handwriting of the time. They
               | weren't meant to be mixed with roman style typefaces.
               | However, typesetters who had access to both roman and
               | italic fonts started to use italic for emphasis when
               | typesetting texts in roman type.
               | 
               | And of course blackletter is also just a style that
               | originally tried to mimic earlier handwriting.
        
               | catiopatio wrote:
               | It's a useful convention; I'm not sure why you dislike it
               | other than some invalid conception of purity.
        
               | enriquto wrote:
               | Maybe because my favorite math books do not use this
               | convention, but another equally valid and useful
               | convention: regular boldface.
        
               | catiopatio wrote:
               | The point isn't to be "right" -- whatever you define that
               | as.
               | 
               | The point is to be understood.
               | 
               | Use blackboard bold when it's what people are most
               | familiar with and will engender the least confusion.
               | 
               | You call this the "tabs vs spaces" debate, but I've
               | literally never heard anyone advocate your position until
               | you did, just now.
        
               | enriquto wrote:
               | > I've literally never heard anyone advocate your
               | position until you did, just now
               | 
               | Many mathematicians concerned by typography use real
               | boldface. For example: Terence Tao's blog, Donald Knuth,
               | Paul Halmos (author of "how to write mathematics"), and
               | the famous journal "Publications Mathematiques de l'IHES"
               | which is the undisputed gold standard in mathematical
               | typography. They use real boldface for the number sets N,
               | Z, Q, T, R, C.
               | 
               | I've never seen a boldface R to mean a set different than
               | the real numbers.
        
               | BlackFingolfin wrote:
               | > "Publications Mathematiques de l'IHES" which is the
               | undisputed gold standard in mathematical typography.
               | 
               | It is? Do you have any supporting evidence for this
               | claim?
               | 
               | I just had a look at a bunch of recent articles, and I
               | would very much dispute it. I saw nothing extraordinary,
               | and found the fonts they used rather ugly (though of
               | course that is highly subjective). The use of bold face
               | to highlight theorem/definition/etc. numbers is IMHO very
               | questionable. The boldface letters you praise stick out
               | like a sore thumb, feeling as if they were being
               | emphasized and highlighted when they clearly are not
               | meant to be.
        
               | enriquto wrote:
               | > It is? Do you have any supporting evidence for this
               | claim?
               | 
               | I don't have any evidence to support this claim. I always
               | thought about it as self-evident, because it was in that
               | journal that Grothendieck published his work, and the
               | same style is used in by the legendary Hermann editor
               | from Paris and by Bourbaki. But I cannot find any non-
               | partisan source of my claim. As for non-neutral sources,
               | you have for example the congratulations on the
               | typesetting by Dieudonnee [0] (who was a member of the
               | IHES), or a more recent article by Haralambous about the
               | Baskerville variant used by the institute [1]. I will
               | retire my claim of "undisputed" if you find a source that
               | says that the pinnacle of mathematical typesetting is
               | something else :)
               | 
               | [0] https://expo-patrimoine.ihes.fr/?page=9&lang=en
               | 
               | [1] http://www.numdam.org/item/CG_1999___32_5_0/
               | 
               | You also have this semi-anonymous blog post [2], that
               | laments the decline in quality when the journal in
               | question was acquired by Springer. Quote:
               | 
               | > How good was the typeface? It was so good, some people
               | submitted their papers to IHES precisely for the beauty
               | of the typesetting
               | 
               | [2] https://www.galoisrepresentations.com/2014/08/15/the-
               | decline...
        
               | tel wrote:
               | People use both, for reasons of tradition, ergonomics,
               | practicality, available toolset. Boldface is obviously
               | common in places where BB is unavailable, more
               | restrictive, more difficult. Web publishing is a great
               | example.
               | 
               | BB is common, in my experience, in hand-written text
               | where bold isn't really an option. It is, to my
               | tradition, the most common and recognizable way to
               | indicate the most common field sets and also generally is
               | a good stand-in for any "large category" of interest.
               | 
               | Bold is used intermittently in my experience, probably
               | due to its inability to be hand-written. To me, it tends
               | to mean "vector" or "matrix" much more than set. In hand-
               | written forms, I sometimes see "arrow hats" instead,
               | especially for vectors.
        
               | dietrichepp wrote:
               | It sounds similar to the division between "math" and
               | "maths". It looks wrong depending on where you grew up.
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | We can compromise by switching to mathematic.
        
               | dietrichepp wrote:
               | I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical.
        
               | BobMackay wrote:
               | I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical!
        
               | bamfly wrote:
               | Seems like you've got a solid math grounding. If you're
               | looking to expand on your history knowledge, I'd
               | recommend taking a look at Creasy:
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifteen_Decisive_Battle
               | s_o...
        
               | chungy wrote:
               | They were spoofing Modern Major General.
        
               | bamfly wrote:
               | So was I :-)
        
               | irrational wrote:
               | Don't you mean mathematics?
        
             | paulddraper wrote:
             | > having only one symbol to deal with feels less confusing
             | than switching around symbols based on the medium it
             | happens to be written on
             | 
             | See: the entire Latin alphabet.
             | 
             | Sans-serif symbols for screens, serif symbols for print.
        
       | spread_love wrote:
       | I can see users misreading this as a "close" icon in the "share
       | on..." section of every article
        
       | albybisy wrote:
       | so it can't be copyrighted.
        
         | Zambyte wrote:
         | Logos never could be. You're thinking of trademark.
        
           | papercrane wrote:
           | Some logos can be copyrighted. Most logos however don't meet
           | the threshold of originality. The Copyright Office will
           | reject copyrights for stylized letters (see IBM logo), or
           | logos of simple geometric shapes. With the modern aesthetic
           | for logos to be as simple as possible this means nearly all
           | the logos you see are not copyrighted.
        
         | gorlilla wrote:
         | It can be probably be trademarked though.
        
       | pohl wrote:
       | But, you know, in his heart of hearts Elmo's new logo is U+5350.
        
         | petesergeant wrote:
         | That's a swastika for anyone who doesn't particularly want it
         | to show up on their screen in a public place
        
         | NoGravitas wrote:
         | I thought it was U+130B8.
        
           | pohl wrote:
           | Getting a proposal for a sufficiently flaccid variant
           | approved by the Unicode Technical Committee was too big a
           | lift.
        
       | phito wrote:
       | Why is this a thread and not just a comment on
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36845111 ?
        
       | PeterCorless wrote:
       | This latest kerfuffle is as silly as the time someone actually
       | got a trademark on p.
       | 
       | https://www.wired.com/2014/05/pi-takedown/
        
       | app4soft wrote:
       | > _Looking forward to #Musk trying to trademark a Unicode symbol,
       | in this case X :) Maybe we should start using #x1D54F as the new
       | Hashtag for everything #Twitter and #X #X :)_ [0]
       | 
       | [0] https://social.wildeboer.net/@jwildeboer/110768919254064477
        
         | gabugabu wrote:
         | Beautiful. :):):):)
        
       | cushpush wrote:
       | it's actually unicode?!
        
       | pluc wrote:
       | I can't wait to x about this. Y'all re-x me when you see it.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | I tried hitting the X button to re-x you but the browser window
         | closed.
        
       | GaggiX wrote:
       | I use this X character in my name on Telegram, now everyone will
       | think I'm an Elon stan.
        
         | Zambyte wrote:
         | Just change your name to the Twitter bird
        
           | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
           | The Fail Finch?
        
           | Y-bar wrote:
           | "No way! Why should he change? Musk's the one who sucks!"
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | deafpolygon wrote:
       | Might want to hide this character from Elon... shh.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | gweinberg wrote:
       | I see on the page there are also unicode symbols for roman
       | numerals IX, X, and XI. I can see an argument for having a
       | separate character for roman numeral X as opposed to just using a
       | capital X like a normal person would, but where do they get off
       | calling IX and XI numerals? They are two-character sequences, and
       | adding characters for the combinations sounds like all pain and
       | no gain.
        
       | myfonj wrote:
       | Interestingly, [w3.org Math Double struck] shows example glyph
       | rendering with swapped double stroke stem ("//" + "\" instead of
       | "\\\" + "/").
       | 
       | Been looking what the "opf" in the `&Xopf;` HTML entity name of
       | this kind of character means, and apparently it is "Open Face".
       | 
       | It is referenced at [wikipedia Blackboard bold] that mentions
       | that "X Occasionally used to denote an arbitrary metric space. "
       | 
       | [w3.org Math Double struck]:
       | https://www.w3.org/Math/characters/double-struck.html [wikipedia
       | Blackboard bold]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold
        
       | wigster wrote:
       | appropriate the new name is the universal symbol for close
       | application
        
         | NoZebra120vClip wrote:
         | I've started telling people to "just X out that window." You
         | can hear the outline typeface in my voice.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | golemotron wrote:
       | The Southern Poverty Law Center will declare this a hate symbol
       | shortly. Mark my words.
        
       | numpad0 wrote:
       | Am I supposed to not notice this mastodon in the room...
        
       | lifthrasiir wrote:
       | It's actually time for someone to adopt this character [1] at the
       | gold level ($5,000), which is only allowed for the single entity
       | and doesn't expire---so that X.com doesn't have a chance to
       | sponsor the character at the same level.
       | 
       | [1] https://home.unicode.org/adopt-a-character/about-adopt-a-
       | cha...
        
         | exegete wrote:
         | >All sponsors are acknowledged in Sponsors of Adopted
         | Characters and our public Twitter feed and will receive a
         | custom digital badge for their character.
         | 
         | Wait, do they mean their public X feed?
        
         | bhouston wrote:
         | Who cares if x.com sponsors it? In fact they should because
         | emojis are so popular on it and Unicode could use the fund. Why
         | should someone try to get this? What is their benefit?
        
           | Izkata wrote:
           | Because it's trendy to hate on Elon.
        
             | dsr_ wrote:
             | If he stopped making egregiously terrible decisions in
             | public, the attention would stop.
        
               | max51 wrote:
               | going out of your way and spending 5k$ to try make fun of
               | him publicly is not how you make the attention stop.
               | 
               | This is the trump situation all over again. They hate him
               | but they write articles about him every day and make sure
               | we all know what he's up to even when we are actively
               | trying to avoid him and twitter.
        
               | adolph wrote:
               | Thus far there is a positive correlation between
               | "egregiously terrible decisions" (ETD) and attention.
               | From a naive perspective the attention is caused by ETD.
               | However it may be worthwhile to test the alternative
               | hypothesis that ETD are attempts to increase attention.
               | Maybe ETD fit within a larger set of "Attention Seeking
               | Behavior" (ASB).
               | 
               | To the degree that ASB is "rewarded" with any feedback at
               | all, even negative, then it will be reenforced.
               | 
               |  _Enjoying the attention of others is socially acceptable
               | in some situations. However, an excessive need for
               | attention can lead to difficulties in interpersonal
               | relationships. However, as a tactical method, it is often
               | used in combat, theatre (upstaging) and it is fundamental
               | to marketing. One strategy often used by teachers and
               | behavior analysts to counter various types of attention-
               | seeking behavior is planned or tactical ignoring._
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_seeking
        
       | pionerkotik wrote:
       | TWITTER
        
       | yaakov34 wrote:
       | Can someone explain what we are talking about here? Something
       | having to do with Musk's son's name?
        
         | superhumanuser wrote:
         | Twitter is rebranding to X.
        
           | ulfw wrote:
           | $44,000,000,000 well spent
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | Does this have anything to do with the cage fight/dick
           | measuring content with Zuckerberg? I think almost everybody
           | thought renaming Facebook to Meta was a bad idea, but maybe
           | Musk knows something we don't. ;-)
        
             | sebzim4500 wrote:
             | > I think almost everybody thought renaming Facebook to
             | Meta was a bad idea
             | 
             | Do they? Why?
             | 
             | I don't see how it did any harm, and people are way more
             | willing to admit an association with Meta than with
             | Facebook.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | When it first happened I thought they were trying to
               | evade Facebook's bad reputation for privacy and politics
               | and made a point to keep calling it Facebook.
               | 
               | After about a year "Meta" had the same stink of death
               | around it as NFTs and I figured I'd be doing it no favor
               | by calling it by its preferred name.
        
               | tehbeard wrote:
               | I thought 'Meta' was the same shuffle Google did with
               | 'Alphabet', some of financial / legal shenanigans..
               | 
               | Though speaking of while trawling the wiki page on
               | Alphabet....
               | 
               | > X (formerly Google X) is an American semi-secret
               | research and development facility and organization
               | founded by Google in January 2010.
        
             | kibwen wrote:
             | _> Does this have anything to do with the cage fight /dock
             | measuring content with Zuckerberg?_
             | 
             | They're both the results of a sad man's extremely public
             | midlife crisis, so yes.
        
         | Azrael3000 wrote:
         | No it's about the renaming of Twitter.
         | 
         | [0] https://nitter.net/elonmusk
        
           | 0xblinq wrote:
           | So it's about Musk's son name
        
             | kimbernator wrote:
             | Given that Musk's obsession with the "X" moniker goes back
             | to the 90s at least, I imagine it would be more accurate to
             | say his son's name and this rebrand are both branches from
             | the same tree (see: x.com -> paypal, SpaceX, Tesla model X)
        
         | spiffistan wrote:
         | Twitter has been rebranded as 'X'. Elon has the domain x.com
         | and I suppose he wants to use it
        
           | optimalsolver wrote:
           | Is this like when that Roman emperor named his horse as a
           | senator, or are we not quite there yet?
        
             | paganel wrote:
             | The US is already there, with an almost brain-dead 90-year
             | old Senator being as good as gone, so that a privately-
             | owned company doing whatever its largest owner thinks fit
             | for the good of the company going forward doesn't even get
             | close to that.
        
             | bhaak wrote:
             | The most sane interpretation is that Elon Musk was payed to
             | dilute or destroy Twitter. I can't think of anything else
             | that would make sense.
             | 
             | Throwing 44 billion dollars on a company and then gutting
             | it for everything that was valuable including a unique
             | brand that had even its own verb?
             | 
             | But the sad reality is probably that a 12 years old
             | narcissist edgelord in the body of a billionaire wanted a
             | vanity plate.
        
               | toast0 wrote:
               | This would explain things, if there was a credible
               | suggestion for who's pulling the strings.
               | 
               | The theory of Elop destroying Nokia (consumer) makes
               | sense, because he was at Microsoft, went to Nokia sold it
               | to Microsoft at diminished value and stayed there for a
               | good amount of time. But who would pay Musk for this? And
               | how will he be compensated? Afaik, he's lighting a bunch
               | of his own money on fire. Although, there has been a lot
               | less news from him on Tesla and SpaceX, so maybe it was
               | all a plan to keep him out of those spaces.
        
               | pferde wrote:
               | I've seen theories about Saudis paying for this in order
               | to prevent the next Arab Spring, in which Twitter played
               | a key role for the protesters to organize themselves.
               | Seems a bit far-fetched, but these days, who knows?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | bamfly wrote:
               | The initially-too-high offer plus downturn in his stock
               | value right after, meant a deal structure that damn-near
               | doomed the company anyway (tons of debt).
               | 
               | Best-case (for him), Twitter as we knew it dies and he
               | manages to turn the burnt-down ashes into something
               | profitable enough to overcome that hurdle. Twitter _per
               | se_ cannot reasonably get out of the hole he 's dug for
               | it.
               | 
               | Though, arguably, the brand itself was a huge part of the
               | value, and he just threw that in the trash.
               | 
               | You know a guy's going down a weird path when all
               | defenses of his behavior amount to "I know the last
               | twenty things he's done have looked insane and none of
               | it's made any money, but he's got a secret genius plan, I
               | swear! 5D chess!"
        
               | tegmark wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
               | uptown wrote:
               | Seems like a reasonable theory if it's the price to be
               | paid by those in power to avoid future revolutions.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Revolution
        
               | samr71 wrote:
               | Or to foment one of his own ;)
        
       | hcarvalhoalves wrote:
       | > X is the future state of unlimited interactivity - centered in
       | audio, video, messaging, payments/banking - creating a global
       | marketplace for ideas, goods, services, and opportunities.
       | Powered by AI, X will connect us all in ways we're just beginning
       | to imagine.
       | 
       | Audio, Video, Messaging, Payments and AI, all in a single product
       | pitch.
       | 
       | I guess then "X" is an appropriate brand for something that even
       | the owner doesn't know WTF is about.
        
         | Dig1t wrote:
         | Basically Google
        
           | morkalork wrote:
           | gmail, gmaps, gmeet, gchat...
        
         | floren wrote:
         | https://zombo.com/
         | 
         | You can do anything at X.com, anything at all!
        
         | tiltowait wrote:
         | An "everything app" sounds a lot like what I understand WeChat
         | to be. Can't say I want it, but it's not without precedent,
         | apparently.
        
         | pwdisswordfishc wrote:
         | In other words, X is the new blockchain.
        
       | jjgreen wrote:
       | Interesting comment on the Register (by Jedit):
       | 
       |  _However, it 's also exactly identical to Unicode character
       | 1D54F - because that's all it is. And if you examine the full "X"
       | logo in detail, you'll notice that the scratch in the background
       | doesn't reach the X because all the logo creator did was put
       | U+1D54F in a black square and slap it onto the backdrop. It's the
       | epitome of laziness._
       | 
       | https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2023/07/24/twitter_...
        
         | cubefox wrote:
         | When it comes to logos, I'm all in favor of laziness. People
         | get way too hung up on something that unimportant.
        
           | illwrks wrote:
           | In most instances it's unimportant, until there's a legal
           | requirement for it to be unique and trademarked. What's to
           | stop me mass-producing merchandise with that symbol on it
           | right now?
        
             | cubefox wrote:
             | But Twitter, I mean X, doesn't sell anything which could be
             | confused with an imitate.
        
         | quietbritishjim wrote:
         | > you'll notice that the scratch in the background doesn't
         | reach the X
         | 
         | What does this mean?
         | 
         | I've tried finding various images of the X logo on news sites
         | and twitter.com itself and I don't see anything resembling a
         | "scratch in the background" but maybe I'm just missing
         | something obvious.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | evan_ wrote:
           | This tweet has the graphic it's talking about, and explains
           | better than the referenced article:
           | 
           | https://twitter.com/keewa/status/1683378941732728832?s=20
        
             | dundarious wrote:
             | That mockup appears to have been created by @ch1w33th3d0g
             | -- I haven't seen any official X version of https://twitter
             | .com/elonmusk/status/1682970592159358976/phot.... So
             | there's no point in making complaints about laziness from
             | Musk in this case.
        
           | AntonyGarand wrote:
           | I believe they mean the marbling: The background surrounding
           | the X is pure black, while the rest of the box is black with
           | a bit of white marbling.
        
         | spiffytech wrote:
         | Fun fact: this has happened before!
         | 
         | > Apple's adaptation of the [[?]] symbol -- encoded in Unicode
         | at U+2318 -- was derived in part from its use in Nordic
         | countries as an indicator of cultural locations and places of
         | interest.
         | 
         | > ...
         | 
         | > She was browsing through a symbol dictionary when she came
         | across the cloverleaf-like symbol
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_key
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | That's not really the same thing?
           | 
           | It's not like Apple's corporate logo was scanned from a
           | Swedish symbol dictionary by some random person who passed it
           | off as their work. Which is effectively what happened to
           | X-Twitter.
        
         | jccalhoun wrote:
         | That's what happens when you fire everyone but programmers. I'm
         | surprised it isn't AI generated (isn't Musk starting an AI
         | company? So maybe it actually is)
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | So Elon can copy write this?
        
         | ZachSaucier wrote:
         | As far as I know, for something like this you can only
         | copyright the specific application. So for example it couldn't
         | be used for social media sites.
        
         | laserbeam wrote:
         | Copyright, no. Trademark, maybe, but won't be easy.
        
       | jheriko wrote:
       | i refuse to upvote this whilst its on 314 points...
       | 
       | im not sure why this is of import either. blackboard X, so what?
        
       | mlochbaum wrote:
       | I'm responsible for this character being supported in Iosevka,
       | JetBrains Mono, 3270, and Cozette, looks like. For arguments I
       | wanted to stick to mathematical convention like f(x) without
       | looking like a regular variable. While the lowercase x (subject
       | role) is more common, uppercase makes it a function and is useful
       | in functional programming. More visibility for the character is
       | helpful if it means wider font support, although the real
       | sticking point has been lousy UTF-16 handling on Windows. Like
       | most emoji, these characters need to be represented as a
       | surrogate pair in UTF-16, and terminals in particular often don't
       | handle it.
       | 
       | https://mlochbaum.github.io/BQN/fonts.html
       | 
       | https://mlochbaum.github.io/BQN/help/rightargument.html
        
         | creativeembassy wrote:
         | I wasn't familiar with BQN. Clicked through, reminded me of
         | APL. "OH", I thought, "I see how you came up with the name."
         | There was a (disproven) urban legend about Arthur C. Clarke's
         | 2001, where "HAL" was secretly a reference to "IBM", where you
         | transpose each letter by one.
         | 
         | H + 1 = I
         | 
         | A + 1 = B
         | 
         | L + 1 = M
         | 
         | Man, BQN is a clever name. Because,
         | 
         | A + 1 = B
         | 
         | P + 1 = Q
         | 
         | L + 1 = M...
         | 
         | ...well crap. That theory didn't pan out at all. Needlessly
         | disappointed myself upon hearing that it's short for "Big
         | Questions Notation".
        
           | dzaima wrote:
           | You're not wrong though; see.. https://mlochbaum.github.io/BQ
           | N/tutorial/variable.html#modif... I guess
        
           | depereo wrote:
           | Off by Fibonacci, rather than off by 1, I guess.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | claudiawerner wrote:
         | That's funny; I immediately thought of BQN when I saw this
         | character pop up on HN :)
        
           | hoosieree wrote:
           | Haha, same here. I think my brain actually translated the
           | title to "Unicode Character (right argument as a function)".
        
         | mlochbaum wrote:
         | Misremembered about Iosevka: I requested support for a few
         | other BQN characters after noticing it already had the double-
         | struck ones (https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/issues/870).
         | The other three were requests or contributions (drew 3270's X
         | myself!) explicitly in connection with BQN.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-24 23:02 UTC)