about cell phone text messages

[EHocking]

Did you mean "prescribed"?

Its.
....

3 weeks later and all you contribute is a spelling and grammar lame?

 

[kalen]

I find that rather difficult to believe, seeing as how text messaging was invented well over a hundred years ago.

At least! In the old days, they used to put messages in envelopes and ISPs used to be called "post offices." Bandwidth was limited by how many "text messages" the horse could carry.

 

[Art Vandelay]

3 weeks later and all you contribute is a spelling and grammar lame?

1. It was not I, but 1984, that revived the thread.
2. When you change something into a different word, it is no longer merely a spelling mistake. In this case, it completely changes the meaning of sentence, and I think that I was justified in wondering whether that was the meaning that you intended.
3. I don't consider "it's" to be a "grammar lame".
4. I also responded to Geckko's post.

 

[EHocking]

...
2. ...In this case, it completely changes the meaning of sentence, [sic]

I am finding it difficult to fathom how my post redefines the word "sentence"....


See how pointless this sort of lame is?

At least the common law of usenet was upheld in these posts...

 

[Art Vandelay]

I am finding it difficult to fathom how my post redefines the word "sentence"....

I didn't say that it redefines the word "sentence", I said that it change the meaning of [the] sentence. Adding quote marks completely changes the meaning of the sentence. The overwhelming evidence is that there are many people on the internet who truly do not understand the difference between "its" and "it's", and I think that they should be educated as to the correct usage. While it may have merely been a typo in your posts, its prevalence throughout the internet suggests that that explanation is not generally the correct one. If you truly believe that people need to be informed that the lack of a definite article in my sentence (which clearly was a typo), was nonstandard (note that it wasn’t technically incorrect, just nonstandard), then go ahead. It is disingenuous, however, to pretend that you don’t understand the sentence without it.

At least the common law of usenet was upheld in these posts...

What does that mean?

 

[Geckko]

I find that rather difficult to believe, seeing as how text messaging was invented well over a hundred years ago.

ho ho ho ...

 

[tkingdoll]

While we're correcting spelling, it's Sarbanes, as in Sarbanes-Oxley.

 

[EHocking]

I didn't say that it redefines the word "sentence", I said that it change the meaning of [the] sentence.

You mean of course changed
(annoying, isn't it?)

Adding quote marks completely changes the meaning of the sentence. The overwhelming evidence is that there are many people on the internet who truly do not understand the difference between "its" and "it's", and I think that they should be educated as to the correct usage. While it may have merely been a typo in your posts, its prevalence throughout the internet suggests that that explanation is not generally the correct one. If you truly believe that people need to be informed that the lack of a definite article in my sentence (which clearly was a typo), was nonstandard (note that it wasn’t technically incorrect, just nonstandard), then go ahead. It is disingenuous, however, to pretend that you don’t understand the sentence without it.

Riiiigghttttt. When you do it's a typo.

When others do it's ignorance.

Did you enjoy your rant?

What does that mean?

Look up ""spelling lame" usenet".

 

[Beleth]

If it's anything like e-mail, a record of it (via a transaction log) is kept for between 24-48 hours, at which point if it was successfully delivered it's never seen again.

Now, a record of who sent it and who received it is probably kept longer. But a record of the contents of the message is relatively short-lived.

Unless of course the NSA's already snooping on you, which is improbable.

 

[Dark Jaguar]

It certainly would fill up a lot of server space if they kept records of all of that.

By the way, am I nearly alone in my hatred of the entire concept of the text message? I'm not exactly "in" the cell phone crowd, but it seems completely a waste to send a text message to someone when you already have a quicker and faster method of sending a message built into the same device. Any situation I can think of where I wouldn't be able to talk, I also wouldn't be able to fiddle with a text message.

 

[Art Vandelay]

You mean of course changed

No, actually, I meant "changes".

Riiiigghttttt. When you do it's a typo.

When others do it's ignorance.

Do you honestly believe that I did not know that such an absence of the word "the" is nonstandard? Yes, or no? (And didn't you mean "When you do it, it's a typo"?)

Did you enjoy your rant?

You're the one making a huge sh*tstorm out of simple comment.

Look up ""spelling lame" usenet".

Hmm, the first hit gave me this:

spelling flame: n.

[Usenet] A posting ostentatiously correcting a previous article’s spelling as a way of casting scorn on the point the article was trying to make, instead of actually responding to that point (compare dictionary flame). Of course, people who are more than usually slovenly spellers are prone to think any correction is a spelling flame. It’s an amusing comment on human nature that spelling flames themselves often contain spelling errors.

Note that this is "flame", not "lame" (as are most of the links), and furthermore that this does not apply, as I was not attempting to cast scorn. Nor does the last sentence really apply, as it was not a spelling mistake. The middle sentence, however, does seem to apply.

I originally didn't mention things like you misspelling the word “publicly”, but as long as you’re going to be pissed off anyway…

 

[EHocking]

...You're the one making a huge sh*tstorm out of simple comment.

That's exactly what spelling lames do.

Ahh [searches JREF forum] I see that you have a bit of a penchant for this sort of thing in this forum. Therefore I, for one, won't be contributing any further to this pointless pettiness.

 

[asmodean]

Occam's Razor!
(perhaps?)

This occured to me after reading the Fake News section of Robert Todd Carroll's Becoming a Critical Thinker. I'm now thinking people can be tricked into doing a journalist's job for free.




Or perhaps "intercepted" is a suitably ambiguous word that the in-house lawyers can defend, should needs be. Back to reading.

Having worked a lil' bit with GSM (basestations) before moving on to UMTS software I seem to recall that SMS is a two-part service.

You send the message to a server (your providers most likely) and get a receipt that message is sent. The server tries to contact the recepients phone and hand the message over to it. It (the server) will keep the message for a certain time (can be configured on your phone within limits) before declaring recepient unavailable. Sender will not be notified about this.

So, it would be possible for your telecom operator to browse the messages you've sent, but not the ones you've received (having been stored at the senders operator).

Of course, was a few years since I had a brief run in with SMS so I may misremember a few things.