• ono@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m amazed at how many people think Twitter has copied the X Windows logo

    when you’re trying to make a point it’s always worth being right and not wrong

    Tom Warren is amazed that many people notice a new logo having almost exactly the same shape as a well-known, decades-old one. Tom Warren would like everyone to know that he is much more clever than they are, for noticing that it also resembles an obscure font’s glyph for an obscure unicode character that has existed for roughly half as long. Good for you, Tom Warren. We all admire you and the glorious blue-framed check mark next to your name.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      obscure font’s glyph for an obscure unicode character that has existed for roughly half as long

      Standard monotype font

      𝕏 - “mathematical double-struck capital X”

      Added to Unicode in 2001, used a very similar character for X11 in 1984, added to math in… who was the first mathematician in history to ever use it?

      Blackboard Bold - popularized in the 1960s.

      • ono@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes, yes… it’s fine to acknowledge the existence of math notation that most people will never use.

        Tom Warren chose to fixate on a specific typeface (not math) and use that as an excuse to criticize people for their valid comparison to something that predates it. He followed up by declaring that he was “right” and others were “wrong”. Is he a four-year-old?

        I can’t think of a more snide, self-aggrandizing way to participate in the conversation. It was unnecessary, rude, and not even technically correct*, which is why he has earned my mocking comment in response.

        *(We can see in the replies that the glyph he shows to support his position is in fact not the same as the logo being discussed.)