From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Sep 27 14:43:01 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KjhZ7-0004Ty-2s for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:43:01 -0700 Received: from monty.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.132.56]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KjhZ3-0004Tr-Cw for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:43:01 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by monty.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id BCF775402A for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:42:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.123.183] (d54C49D91.access.telenet.be [84.196.157.145]) by monty.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEFD85400A for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:42:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <48DEA8E2.1050702@scarlet.be> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:42:58 +0200 From: Killian De Volder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Do you agree with this guy? References: <2f91285f0809260303n6ca54185h148d26128e42efea@mail.gmail.com> <20080926214417.GT11841@digitalkingdom.org> <200809271109.52526.eldrikdo@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.3 X-Spam-Score-Int: -2 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 880 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: killian.de.volder@scarlet.be Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Imo Lojban gets stamped as computer language, because it actually makes sense :p > People do learn Lojban. Once you get used to it, it's fine. This > gentleman doesn't want to be required to get used to very much. He > says he's looking for simplicity, but what he means by "simple" is > that it doesn't take much effort for him to intuitively understand it. > That means he should stick with English. > > He's wrong about Arabic not using an alphabet-- it does. Just not the > latin alphabet. He seems to be confusing Arabic with Japanese and > Chinese glyphs. > > What does it mean for Lojban to be "a computer language"? Lojban could > serve as an interlingua between humans and an artificial intelligence. > However, "computer language" usually means a set of mechanical > instructions for information processing. For that purpose, Lojban > might have a few small advantages over natural languages, but would > still be unusable for it. > > He says he is developing the "best" language, but what is "best"? Even > if he figures out what metrics to use to define "best", will he really > develop the "best" with such a poverty of research? > > -Eppcott > > > On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Roman Naumann wrote: > >> On Friday 26 September 2008 23:44:17 Robin Lee Powell wrote: >> >> >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 12:03:39PM +0200, tijlan wrote: >>> >>>> Is Lojban really more like a computer language than a human >>>> >>>> language? Is it too difficult for us humans to learn? >>>> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOw-3atOCIA >>>> >>> I'm not going to even bother watching it: the answer is no. >>> >>> Ah, my gf has a digital video camera. Maybe I'll post a reply in >>> >>> Lojban. :D >>> >>> -Robin >>> >> i'esai >> >> -- >> >> mu'o mi'e nam >> > > > > >