msp_yc
Joined 8 years ago
Joined 8 years ago
I find that thesis a bit reductive. For technical writing, I can agree - the purpose is to convey ideas. But, there is a whole other class of writing that isn't intended to convey ideas, but _emotion_.
Also from the paper: "The purpose of document design is to display the logical structure of the document through its formatting, thereby making it easier to read."
Again, there's a whole other class of documents whose formatting takes precedence over the logical information, intended to evoke emotion.
Not to take away from Lamport, who is seriously brilliant, but there appears to be a blind spot here.
YouTube users: Can I see it?
Google: ...no.
"I used to hate writing assignments, but now I enjoy them. I realized that the purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a litte practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog!"
Waylon Smithers : Uh, Sir? Phrenology was dismissed as quackery 160 years ago.
Mr. Burns : Of course you'd say that... you have the brainpan of a stagecoach tilter!
I think, at this point, one could successfully argue that the proposed law follows 'reasonable regulation' and so protections aren't afforded. But it would be an interesting discussion.
If you find yourself arguing that it is - what happens when you are largely, if not wholly, dependent on a third party to be able to exercise that right?
We've decided that corporations get first amendment rights independent of their members - do they also get second amendment rights?
Are these just silly arguments? It's late Friday afternoon...
"Just because you can doesn't mean you should"
Indeed.
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson