TechTakes

2046 readers

85 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

224

Only 3%* of US AI users are willing to pay a penny for it (pivot-to-ai.com)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

104 comments fedilink hide all child comments

podcast version
video version

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This article is wild already, on the first page there's this quote

‘Do not use the passive voice when such use makes a statement clumsy and wordy. . . Do not, by using the passive voice, leave the agent of the verb vaguely indicated, when the agent should be clearly identified.’ [Edwin Woolley, Handbook of Composition, 1907, p. 20]

Emphasis mine on... a clear usage of the passive! In active this would have to be "when you should clearly identify the agent" or something of the like, the fuck, how hard is it to not expose your whole ass like this mate

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

This is doubly (triply? (N+1)ly?) ironic because this is a perfect example of when not only is it acceptable to use the passive voice, but using it makes the sentence flow more smoothly and read more clearly. The idea they're communicating here should focus on the object ("the agent") rather than the subject ("you") because the presumed audience already knows everything about the subject.