I use voice typing for almost the same thing every day.
I run to/from daycare to drop off my son and I title the run "Daycare drop-off". It constantly types "Take care drop-off" which drives me nuts. Those words don't even make sense together. A simple Markov chain should do better.
Wanna is in a number of notable and respected English dictionaries including the Oxford English Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Collins. I don't know what else defines if a word is or is not in the language.
Its an informal word, and it does not belong in a device used for professional communications.
"Wanna is used in written English to represent the words `want to' when they are pronounced informally.
I wanna be married to you. Do you wanna be married to me? "
Ah, good then, great to see you've changed your mind and now we both agree it is most definitely a word commonly used in English for over a hundred years.
Its incredible the dictionary pronounced it to you instead of showing it to you in a written form. When I go to the link I definitely see it written!
I do agree with you that it is an unprofessional word and probably not the most charitable and professional dictation result. But in the end there's two different directions dictation software can go: what was more accurate to what the person actually said (or what it thinks the person actually said), or the more correct way of saying what was said. If someone was legitimately saying "wanna", should the dictation software always auto-correct it to "want to"? If you were to type "wanna", should the keyboard auto-correct to "want to"?
In that video you link to she’s talking about Wikipedia. I think her generalization is inappropriate, but her central point is a sound one: it’s crucial to Wikipedia’s purpose that Wikipedia does not seek truth directly, but aims to be an accurate summary of the best sources available.
You mean accurate summary of the best sources available _which support the desired narrative_ - and therein lies the rub. WP had been infiltrated by a Nomenklatura which makes sure things published on the site follow the Party line and one of the tools used to enforce this is the so-canned list of perennial sources which bans or warns against the use of sources which do not fit the desired narrative, usually under claims of 'inaccuracy' or 'bias' which would be just as applicable to the narrative-amplifying sites they explicitly allow as being 'factual'.
People often equate "Public" with meaning "middle-center" or "apolitical". Many would claim National Public Radio (NPR) is middle-center, politically-speaking.
Plenty of people disagree with that statement, and those who agree tend to like NPR's messaging - hence the "bubble" you referred to. Good, non-partisan reporting should make "both sides" groan from time to time.
If you find yourself in agreement with nearly everything said, then it's a fair sign the politics lean "your direction".
I doubt anyone in the theft ring is near the car long enough for that to take effect. What's the minimum amount of time you have to be "followed" by the tag before it starts to alert you? These are not being stolen for joy rides or used to commit a different crime. These are probably taken immediately to the staging location by the thief, and then the thief leaves probably for a different car to steal.
How are they going to handle developers and people that travel a lot. This seems like a bad idea. I’ll do my part to call in and make this cost them more than $35 per instance…
This is pedantically correct, but in practical terms, if you got RSUs at any price in the last five years, they're still worth less than you were offered.
There is a huge difference between stock price being 20% lower than RSU grant price vs. 20% below option strike price. With options. If options are way out of the money, then they're worth a lot less than the RSUs.
Far from being pedantic: having underwater on options is very different from having RSUs worth less than they were in the past. If an individual were to liquidate one of each; the underwater option would have negative monetary value, whereas the RSUs will always have a positive value.
Never mind the convoluted tax implications of exercising options that are nominally not underwater, but whose stock has a lower value that at the time of granting.
My biggest gripe is that when I say "want to" it replaces it with "wanna" unless I specifically enunciate "want to".
"Wanna" is NOT a word in english but there is no way to exclude it.
Frustrating.