8 ms·

This is also from a study. The gist is that english single-digit numbers take longer to say/think than mandarin single-digit numbers (1/3 second vs 1/4 second),

by _4jlx 6y ago

This is also from a study. The gist is that english single-digit numbers take longer to say/think than mandarin single-digit numbers (1/3 second vs 1/4 second), and so 9 digits in english be slightly too long to be consistently memorizable for most people. There are more authoritative sources but this is what I found: https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/07/01/137527742/china-s-unnatural-math-advantage-their-words https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/07/01/137527742/c... Also, when I say them aloud or in my head, mandarin numbers are clearly shorter. Upon further research, it seems like Vietnamese is also very information dense.

nix23 6y ago
>The gist is that English single-digit numbers take longer to say/think than mandarin That has nothing to say, compare it to programming languages, is the language with the least LOC's the best language? No, often its a mix.
- bobbyz 6y ago
  You're thinking about it from purely a programmer's perspective. Imagine the world switches to "bobish" tomorrow, which is 20% more efficient than english. Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster, server costs decrease 20%, data centre energy usage decreases by 20%, greenhouse gases from data centres decrease by 20%, and so global warming slows down by _% and on and on. Sure it won't be 20%, it might not be nearly that in many cases, but think about the magnitude of the rube goldberg of unknown efficiency increases you'll set off.
  - nix23 6y ago
    >You're thinking about it from purely a programmer's perspective >Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster Who is thinking from a programmer perspective now? Compression is not always a good thing, and for sure not in natural language.
    - bobbyz 6y ago
      Why is compression bad in natural language? From reading those vitamin water labels it's clear to me that English still has room to shrink before we experience a substantial hit to readability. 'You' to 'u', 'what' to 'wat', 'phone' to 'fone', etc.
perl4ever 6y ago
>1/3 second vs 1/4 second I have an instant reaction doubting that statement. Not because the numbers are obviously wrong in themselves or I think you made them up or the source was lying. It implies a precision such that 1/3 s != 1/4 s. The difference is 80 ms. To be a meaningful statement, it implies that the speed measured can be characterized to some fraction of 80 ms, and that the variance within english and mandarin speakers is also significantly smaller. I cannot conceive of that being the case.
- bobbyz 6y ago
  As a speaker of both languages, when I say the numbers aloud or in my mind the difference is obvious.

by _4jlx 6y ago

nix23 6y ago

>The gist is that English single-digit numbers take longer to say/think than mandarin That has nothing to say, compare it to programming languages, is the language with the least LOC's the best language? No, often its a mix.

bobbyz 6y ago
You're thinking about it from purely a programmer's perspective. Imagine the world switches to "bobish" tomorrow, which is 20% more efficient than english. Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster, server costs decrease 20%, data centre energy usage decreases by 20%, greenhouse gases from data centres decrease by 20%, and so global warming slows down by _% and on and on. Sure it won't be 20%, it might not be nearly that in many cases, but think about the magnitude of the rube goldberg of unknown efficiency increases you'll set off.
- nix23 6y ago
  >You're thinking about it from purely a programmer's perspective >Suddenly, bandwidth decreases by 20%, downloads are 20% faster Who is thinking from a programmer perspective now? Compression is not always a good thing, and for sure not in natural language.
  - bobbyz 6y ago
    Why is compression bad in natural language? From reading those vitamin water labels it's clear to me that English still has room to shrink before we experience a substantial hit to readability. 'You' to 'u', 'what' to 'wat', 'phone' to 'fone', etc.

perl4ever 6y ago

>1/3 second vs 1/4 second I have an instant reaction doubting that statement. Not because the numbers are obviously wrong in themselves or I think you made them up or the source was lying. It implies a precision such that 1/3 s != 1/4 s. The difference is 80 ms. To be a meaningful statement, it implies that the speed measured can be characterized to some fraction of 80 ms, and that the variance within english and mandarin speakers is also significantly smaller. I cannot conceive of that being the case.

bobbyz 6y ago
As a speaker of both languages, when I say the numbers aloud or in my mind the difference is obvious.