Will texting make you dumb?

[Leostar]

Therefore, your birth certificate is fake and gay

Imagine replacing birth certificates with video. *plop*...*waaa!! waaaa!!* *kots*

Bwhahaha PIMP

 

[Leostar]

And secondly, "K CULTR @ 8" looks like the writer is trying to say something about "culture" (which s/he is possibly lacking )

Of course, you could simply have typed "See you at 8", which is only 1 character more, yet contains the same amount of information
:

C U AT 8

 

[porn$tar]

C U AT 8

Wu u clng a C*NT?

 

[Leostar]

Wu u clng a C*NT?

Noobs. haha. took me a while to figure out what you were saying.

So SMS can be short but take longer to Decipher, and can lead to misunderstandings.
C U @ 8

 

[Tpex]

damn this really shows the age of members, do the people who have a problem who "textspeak" also have a problem with shorthand? I can read "textspeak" n typ it coz its easy to figger owt if u hav half a brain cel, think out the box, its mostly based on phonetics.

But personally on PC I like people to use full English.

 

[Leostar]

Wadda madder u? I cnt txt 2 sfe my life?
W U D ? What U doing?

 

[Tpex]

Wadda madder u? I cnt txt 2 sfe my life?
W U D ? What U doing?

u tink u kwl typng lyk dat?

 

[porn$tar]

half a brain cel

There's the answer to the OP.

 

[Kosmik]

You know it's strange. I can say my generation grew up with the great text based systems on the net and off. BBS, IRC etc that had their own culture but that culture was more about genuine abbreviations ie: LOL, ROFL, LAMAO, BTW etc.

SMS or text or mxit speak seems wrong in comparison. When folks chatted , they used full words , grammar and sentences. Net speak if you will, was used to convey emotions or actions ie: the tangibles that you would normally get in a conversation. Abbreviating words etc for SMS makes sense to save money and the limited characters but in any other medium , it's just lazy.

And Roux? I'll take a good book over a movie anyday. Also 90 mins for a movie? That would get me about halfway through a 4-500 page novel. See, your speed of reading is already affected

* EDIT *
/me slaps Rouxenator with a wet trout

 

[Pyro]

You cannot seriously expect the world to switch relatively audio and video for all data transfer.

For casual chatter video is great, but for detailed technical information text is king.

Have you ever needed to suffer through a boring speech outlining financial information?

A simple one-page statement becomes a torturous 15 minute monotone.

You also cannot generate a video for every simple transmission, unless you output very little in your working day. Even audio is more disruptive in a cramped office enviroment than text communication. A/V is also loses much of it's effectiveness if it's not real-time, adding additional synchronisation stresses on communication.

That is one of the major appeals of sms and the various IMs - it's less disruptive.

Rich media has its place and is sure to spread because of the advances in technology, but it won't replace the written word in all areas.

The cost of creating a sci-fi adventure story in movie form is significantly greater than a book would be, and the variety of stories out there is much greater than what Hollywood captures.

 

[nanonyous]

To summarize what Pyro just said;

Watch SABC News
See Jacob Zuma speech
Listen to Jacob Zuma speech while transcribing and timing said speech
Note time he took to read the speech
Time yourself reading the speech in your head
???
*facepalm of epic proportions*