I propose that from now on book publishers appoint a spell-check editor whose sole responsibility is to not allowing spelling and grammatical howlers to make it into the published book. The spell-check editor should be named prominently inside the front of the book along with the technical reviewer. Geeks don't like compilation errors in code, and they don't like them in books.
On page 11 of Being Geek: The Software Developer's Career Handbook is the following: ... those who are closest to the code are imminently [sic] qualified ...
With all the automated spell checkers and grammar checkers available, such compilation-like errors should be rare ... for all intensive purposes [my favorite Malaprop].
Monday, August 2, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
emoral (new word) is what's moral on the web
What is emoral? Add it to your dictionary now!
emoral is what's moral on the web.
Have you noticed that morals, ethics, standards, principles, etc., are context sensitive?
And what bigger context is there than the web.
Take privacy. If a corporation were to steam open your snail mail, right from your letter box -- you know, the physical device that sits on your front fence -- that would be considered an invasion of privacy. Let's not get hung up on the legality here, and just sit with the moral content, and context.
If a corporation were to not only steam open your snail mail, but then add pamphlets to your letter box with advertising for goods and services related to the content of your mail content, you'd feel that were a problem too! That would not be considered moral in that context.
However, if Google does that with your email, it's considered okay -- emoral.
See the difference?
Not straight away, maybe. And I can see a parallel here that undermines my emoral neologism right out of the box.
What if snail mail service provision was supplied by multiple providers -- and let's say one of those is Google -- and that the provider's mail room was fully automated and contained high tech machines for steaming open mail and appending advertising leaflets to your mail batch and then delivered your mail and leaflets to your physical letter box?
It's starting to like a lot less immoral, isn't it? There's something about the idea of a slimy human being reading your physical mail (or your email), whereas it doesn't seem too much of a problem (for many people) if a machine does the reading.
Nevertheless, I think my neologism emoral is a valid new word. The web context is truly different in a morally significant way. That doesn't mean it ought to be different, but it is.
emoral is what's moral on the web.
Have you noticed that morals, ethics, standards, principles, etc., are context sensitive?
And what bigger context is there than the web.
Take privacy. If a corporation were to steam open your snail mail, right from your letter box -- you know, the physical device that sits on your front fence -- that would be considered an invasion of privacy. Let's not get hung up on the legality here, and just sit with the moral content, and context.
If a corporation were to not only steam open your snail mail, but then add pamphlets to your letter box with advertising for goods and services related to the content of your mail content, you'd feel that were a problem too! That would not be considered moral in that context.
However, if Google does that with your email, it's considered okay -- emoral.
See the difference?
Not straight away, maybe. And I can see a parallel here that undermines my emoral neologism right out of the box.
What if snail mail service provision was supplied by multiple providers -- and let's say one of those is Google -- and that the provider's mail room was fully automated and contained high tech machines for steaming open mail and appending advertising leaflets to your mail batch and then delivered your mail and leaflets to your physical letter box?
It's starting to like a lot less immoral, isn't it? There's something about the idea of a slimy human being reading your physical mail (or your email), whereas it doesn't seem too much of a problem (for many people) if a machine does the reading.
Nevertheless, I think my neologism emoral is a valid new word. The web context is truly different in a morally significant way. That doesn't mean it ought to be different, but it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)