Then, responding to those who have said he’s “only doing this for the money", Szymanski tweeted: “Yes, no fucking shit. I make games for a living. If I didn’t want to earn money from them I wouldn’t charge money for them.”
The game follows the premise of being trapped in an underwater submarine out of necessity to capture deep pictures.
They did. Just because you don’t explicitly say “this is a fact”, doesn’t mean you’re not making a statement of fact. “This is a $5 game” is a statement of fact. “I wouldn’t pay more than $5 for this game” is a statement of opinion. That’s the difference between humans reading a passage and computers doing the same. Humans take context and past experience into account, all of which say that the phrasing they originally used implies an objective fact.
No he didn’t. He said “this isn’t a $6 game, let alone an $8 game”. Both of those are subjective opinion statements. He is referring to the perceived value of the game being lower to the actual costs of the game ($6 and $8 respectively)
This is really not a difficult thing. I’m not sure why so many Lemmy users are struggling with it
In the only perfectly logical interpretation of the comment, you would be correct. Unfortunately, humans are not always perfectly logical and will often say things that are illogical. The most common meaning intended by the phrase “this is a $5 game” is the illogical one of presenting it as an objective fact.
I refuse to believe that this is the first time you’ve encountered an illogical statement.
So under your grand interpretation, you should default to just saying “no, when they said that they actually meant it in the wrong way”.
You might just be too cynical and online to read man
It’s fine (and expected in most human interactions) to default to assuming that the most commonly intended meaning is what’s intended. And no, that doesn’t mean you should respond like an asshole. Respond to the intended meaning of the original statement instead of commenting on how your use of the English language is superior to theirs.
This is how human interactions work in general. It’s worth learning if you want to fit into society.
Yep. The intended meaning of the original comment is a subjective opinion. There is literally no way for it not to be.
Hope this cleared things up for you. Really hoping you’re not a computer programmer or like… someone who has to talk to people in your day job.
https://lemmy.ca/comment/8470067
I’m not going to repeat what I’ve already said. If you choose to ignore it, then so be it. There isn’t really anything I can say to convince you that this is true. You just have to go out in the world and experience it for yourself.
I don’t ignore it. You’re just wrong lmfao. Objectively so. Not an opinion.
Goodluck out there kid. You’ll need it
you think we talk earthlingspeak?
Anyways I agree with howrar, and all the downvotes on your thread show how many people also do. Language isn’t something that College Board can really regulate. They can punish you for not following their rules, sure, but the thing about language is that it changes.
It does change. But it doesn’t change when a subjective statement is a subjective statement. “This movie is 4 out of 5 stars” “this game isn’t worth $6 or $8” are never ever going to be objective statements regardless of if it’s 1150 or 2991
I see that you have been inspired to downvote. Interesting.
This is a pretty silly-cal conversation. “Facts and opinions are different things.” was only a minor facet in circuitfarmer’s reply anyways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectification_(linguistics) literally turned many sentences into opinions. If we’re really gonna look at these from a lingusitics standpoint, there’s nothing that indicates if it’s an opinion from just syntax analysis. It’s only because we often associate “5 stars” and “worth” with opinions that it looks like an opinion.