This is fantastic news - now if only they would just cut the cord. The US Chamber of Commerce is straight out of the 50s and they need to wake up to the fact that innovative businesses want an open market, not to be coddled by the government.
back
1 comments
Excuse my skepticism, but would Google pulling out ACTUALLY do anything?
I can understand the argument that innovative businesses don't want anything to do with them, but again the Chamber of commerce is an organization aimed at protecting old businesses anyway. They could care less about what innovative businesses think.
I think the chamber of commerce could care less. They're a force of evil against consumers. If they had it their way there'd still be lead paint on your walls, seatbelts would be optional, and the ingredients of your food would be a mystery.
>incomethax: They could care less about what innovative businesses think
>mcritz: I think the chamber of commerce could care less.
I think both of you meant they could "not" care less.
David,
The chamber could care less about innovative businesses. Such businesses are part of their constituency.
They take a shit on consumers. Real people are a group for whom they could not care less.
I was aware of the phrasing and using it to make my point.
Sincerely, Michael
It's a common idiomatic expression and I'd be willing to wager that everyone who read it understood what it meant. I'd also wager that most people could really give a shit if it offended a few language prudes.
I would usually agree, although not all idiomatic constructions are created equal. I find the "could care less" construction to be as nonsensical and dumb sounding as "irregardless". Moreover, I found your response to be gratuitously offensive as it paired vulgarity with an implied insult to your parent commenter.
It’s not nonsensical, and neither is irregardless. People use them for a reason and they’re both incredibly heavily attested usages.
But this argument has already been had before in a million places, including on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100. Specifically, see my comment about why it’s hard to say that could care less is incorrect: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042.
I read your linked comment, but I didn't find it persuasive. I'm no language Nazi. It's clear that language pedants are a pet peeve of yours, and that's fine, but language being fluid is not the same thing as language not having boundaries. It also doesn't imply that users of the language can be prevented from having opinions about its usage. We all together decide the standard, as I'm sure you'll agree. Currently, it's still true today that people in educated circles find "could care less" and "irregardless" to be ugly usage. I think there's good reason for that, but I don't plan to make a detailed analysis here. Steven Pinker's analysis notwithstanding, nothing in the linked comment is dispositive.
My original comment was not prescriptive. I do not claim to be the ultimate authority of the language because no such authority exists. It's hard for people to imagine, but what constitutes proper English is actually probabilistic. Some stuff is 75% good English and some stuff is 50% good English. Some idioms are more or less good English. I find the constructions under discussion to be less good, and my opinion carries the authority of my fraction of say-so as a member of the English using community.
But, frankly, I'm off track. My original point was to call attention to the inappropriate tone of one of the disputants, not participate in more natural language pedantry on the Internet.
I followed those links, and was rewarded with what I believe to be one of the best discussions on HN. Thank you for having taken the time to share that.
In hindsight though, I am saddened at how much more often conversations like that used to occur on HN, and how rarely they seem to now.
While I hope not to open the entire can of worms to which codyrobbins referred, I strongly suspect "I could care less" is a shorter form of the more obviously ironic "like I could care less". Treated as straight-up irony, the usage makes perfect sense.
You lost your wager. I found it totally confusing, and only understood the meaning after reading the reply that explained the meaning is the opposite of the words.
I don't think the issue is whether language prudes are offended, but whether the communication is clear.
I, too, find yuor commnet a bit ofsnfevie. It's a cmmoon US iiodtimac epxresosin, that maeks lttlie snese if you try to itnreerpt it liolglacy. Most popele wlil be able to urnestdand this post frialy wlel too, ifrneirng minenag mnaes nhontig.
Edited to add: The original, British form, was "I couldn't care less".
Orthography and lexical choice are two different issues. Spelling has to be standardized to facilitate written communication—word choice doesn’t because words inherently have semantic content.
common; incorrect.
could or couldn't give a shit? genuine interest.
As large and powerful as Google is, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the combined punching weight of everyone else involved in the Chamber. A lot of the companies may be old-school, and some of their industries may be dying, but in terms of collective political influence, they're a serious 800-pound gorilla.
read the article..Google was not the only company listed of pulling out..
It could jumpstart a movement and other companies could join them.
I am not sure what Google pays in dues but I am willing to bet it is in excess of $100,000 and probably closer to somewhere in 10 digit range. That is a financial blow that would put pressure on them to stop alienating progressive businesses.
I don't think they pay billions of dollars in dues
It didn't seem to work when Apple dropped out back in 2009.
It could be a PR nightmare depending on any of the news outlets actually picking up the story.