If you’re using Organic, it’s worth considering Organic’s fork CoMaps, which was created by major contributors in response to these grievances.

Mr. Sandman, sam me a handwich.

Yeah, and?

1. If you actually edit OSM, you know there’s zero compelling reason to make an application that prefers official_name:en-us. Want to know how I know? Because instead of wasting my time making something up to be outraged at, I went and looked up how often this key shows up. It’s six (it shows five, but it hasn’t updated for Lake Ontario yet). In the entire world among billions of key uses, this one is used on six objects. This will not ever happen; it’s complete nonsense.

Even if it were made (it will not be),

2. Nobody would use it. Literally what on Earth usefulness could it possibly have within the already niche ecosystem that is OpenStreetMap? My dude, my guy, if they were targeting bullshit names Trump made up with an EO, they could just soft fork an existing OSM application and then hardcode in “Gulf of America” and “Lake America”.

And most importantly,

3. It doesn’t matter. That’s what the official_name key exists for – to distinguish it from the name people actually use. That’s why it’s a separate key to begin with.

You’re complaining about OpenStreetMap being accurate, and in order to do that, you have to invent some fever dream application that nobody would ever create and nobody would ever use – and that even were they to create it, they could’ve accomplished it more easily by just hardcoding six values.

“When available”. lol, lmao even

The scene is cut in a way that you don’t know for sure they aren’t paying him. They’re probably pretty loyal, long-time customers given the way they all run right there after school, so he can take it on the honors system that they’ll pay for what they’re taking. (And he’s probably able to keep track of it pretty well on his own given he knows their names and preferred candies by heart.)

As for the candy he throws aimlessly into the crowd, I’m sure he can afford to blow some pennies’ worth of money on customer retention by literally throwing candy at them.

Look around you.

it’s in the data

Correct, because that’s what official_name means. The US government, one of two countries encircling it, officially calls it “Lake America”. That’s why it’s official_name:en-US specifically, not official_name=. The name= key, the “primary name of the feature in the real world”, remains and will remain “Lake Ontario”.

It’s not the name that is likely to show when viewing the map

I’ll correct you and say that there’s no “likely” about it: it’s not the name that will be shown when viewing the map. That’s the name= key, which is “Lake Ontario”.

The remaining 0.4 stars are from those who failed assimilation.

Do you think anyone really loves you, or are you just lying to them about who you are?

Tends to happen when a major fossil fuel exporter stops meeting its own domestic demands for gasoline and desperately needs imports.

I love how “brokethe terms of our contract” still works. Rouxls Kaard out here.

I can say off the bat that Etymonline has a narrower focus of words than Wiktionary (there are fewer English words, and there aren’t etymologies for non-English words except incidentally). And that’s more than fine. Something I like about Etymonline is that, because of its narrower scope, it can potentially be more readable to link somebody to an etymology that isn’t crowded out by e.g. synonyms, related words, rhymes, etc.

Something Wiktionary recently got that I see as lacking in Etymonline is an etymology tree (see: Wiktionary’s ‘apraxia’ and Etymonline’s ‘apraxia’). The Etymonline entry for ‘milk’ (see below) seems to have one, but Wiktionary’s seems more consistent and traversible.

Something small that I actively dislike about Etymonline is that there’s no ‘References’ section at the bottom. They do inline citations (for example, in ‘milk’, they reference ‘Watkins’), but then you often have to actively take an aside to the principal sources page. I also don’t like that the content is under a proprietary license given it’s primarily regurgitating a handful of other authors’ work.

TL;DR: Etymonline is fine, but given it’s the work of non-academics as well, I think it largely can be/has been overtaken by Wiktionary. I’ll bring up ‘milk’ again as a counterexample, though, where I think Etymonline does it better. They (correctly) note that the “plant milk” meaning goes back to the 1200s, whereas this isn’t discussed whatsoever on Wiktionary – where a reasonable user might wonder when people started using “milk” for plant milk. I think overall, you’re likely to have a fine experience using either.

For what it’s worth, “dickgirl” is lacking quotations/references on Wiktionary, so we’re failing to live up to attestation standards.

Without that, I don’t know if I’d be comfortable using “dickgirl” in an essay or a game of Boggle or putting it in a spelling bee for fear it isn’t a verifiable word.

I wonder if it could be used as a translator?

It’s usually my first stop if I have a word in another language that I want to translate. It pairs well with creating a custom Firefox search engine for Wiktionary and then using a shortcut like !wt.

So for example, if I want to know what “rassurant” means, I can type !wt rassurant, and it’ll take me to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rassurant.

Wiktionary is a sister project of Wikipedia and is to something like the Oxford English Dictionary or Merriam-Webster what Wikipedia is to Britannica.

Re: Urban Dictionary: sort of, but the slang is more curated. The inclusion criteria on Wiktionary are pretty lax, and it’s way more descriptivist than prescriptivist. For example, we have the word “hitstun”, which is fighting game jargon you won’t find in a major dictionary.

A major aspect Wiktionary has that other major dictionaries don’t is that it’s an everything-to-English dictionary (or everything-to-whatever-language, e.g. fr.wiktionary.org is an everything-to-French dictionary). So as a very, very extreme example, this is the English Wiktionary entry for ‘no’, which we have entries for in 91 languages. We even keep track of languages like Akkadian, Klingon, Proto-Indo-European, American Sign Language (ASL), and so on. (In total, we have definitions from over 5100 languages.)

It’s also way more flexible than a standard dictionary. For example, the French entry for Sagittarius (“Sagittaire”) has an image of Sagittarius and a ‘See also’ table of every other Zodiac sign in French. We also, of course, often have links back to Wikipedia. Likewise, (like the Oxford English Dictionary) we keep track of etymology, so for example, you can learn that the word “slogan” comes from Scottish Gaelic for “battle cry”. We keep track of rhymes, anagrams, derived terms, etc. too. And definitions will (ideally) also have real quotations so you can see how they’re used in a sentence.

Probably the main lacking aspect right now is the thesaurus, which exists but is undercooked.

TL;DR: Yes, it can replace a normal dictionary and then some. I don’t think it can replace a normal thesaurus yet for most people.

Just want to confirm that Wiktionary is amazing.

Edit: AMA if you’re interested in exploring or contributing to it.

You know, I never really considered automatic anti-vandalism mechanisms we have in place on OpenStreetMap, but they surely exist.

All that to say I think we’re good on OSM too. lol

Scooby Doo! Night of 100 Frights.

of course the marketing speak release note is going to sound like AI marketing speak

Weird. Because I’m not talking about the release note; I’m talking about It’s FOSS’ commentary on the release note. I read LibreOffice’s 26.8 blog post, and as someone who’s written a release blog before, it looks like a human wrote it. You’d think it wouldn’t if “of course it’s going to sound like AI marketing speak”.

Did you read what I wrote that you think I’m talking about the marketing note for LibreOffice 26.8?

As someone with ADHD, I really just hope this post sets an example for use of Grovers as an accessibility feature for shitposts going forward.

Did you not read the It’s FOSS article we’re supposed to be discussing that’s talking about LibreOffice?

Are you objecting to this reading like LLM slop?

I’m confused what you’re confused about. This is a direct quote – formatting and all – from the article. OP stripped out e.g. the emojis when pasting it here.