this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
233 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
37699 readers
308 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
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.
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.)
OK, so maybe Tom Warren is not the most likable guy, or not one to defuse a controversy that can lead more people to his website.
But I think it is technically correct:
I think the part we should take from this, is "Elon just wrote an x in a '1337 way', and called it a logo".