Ok so we have uppercase and lowercase letters. why cant we have uppercase numbers.???? where are they????????????????

errm haven't you looked at your keyboard before 🤓☝️

if you do "shift + a" you get it's uppercase version, A
so that means if you do "shift + 1" you'll get the uppercase version of 1 which is !

as an example, you joined osu on March @)@!

1 - 1
2 - 2
3 - 3


March 2021

*cough* Base 16...

#xDEADBEEF #xdeadbeef

No priority stars

Sad

-Izuki- wrote:

1 - 1
2 - 2
3 - 3


March 2021

Well fuck

Mods, send this to the shitter

mods, execute them this instant

tapperruiii wrote:

mods, execute them this instant

what did i do

E5_Shadow wrote:

tapperruiii wrote:

mods, execute them this instant

what did i do

tax evasion, don't you remembner

wait why cant we have midcase letters aswell?

DM FOR MUTUAL wrote:

E5_Shadow wrote:

tapperruiii wrote:

mods, execute them this instant

what did i do

tax evasion, don't you remembner

i dont remember anything. where am i

E5_Shadow wrote:

DM FOR MUTUAL wrote:

E5_Shadow wrote:

tapperruiii wrote:

mods, execute them this instant

what did i do

tax evasion, don't you remembner

i dont remember anything. where am i

Nice try. That ain't gonna get you outta court buddy.

Great now I have to use uppercase numbers in a conlang

what about 90° flipped numbers?

∞𝈇

I love numbers sometimes, I really do.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

Tateshina Eve wrote:

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation. Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ. One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example. Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it. You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument. Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD? If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this: Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.
П

what the hell has this thread turned into. this is not a thread about uppercase numbers anymore. this is insanity. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help.

I think this can count as lowercase numbers, and numbers we have are already uppercase

E5_Shadow wrote:

what the hell has this thread turned into. this is not a thread about uppercase numbers anymore. this is insanity. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help. help.

ye olde ot

Hi everyone, these are very interesting discussions. I would like to link to some related content.

1. StackExchange's discussion
2. Capital numerals in Chinese and Japanese on Wikipedia
3. Small caps on Wikipedia
4. Linux naming controversy on Wikipedia

why should we have capital numbers no fuck that fuck capitalism

what about moving letters? like they move into such a position to the point where they can form a different word

We arguably already have one?

Written on Monday XVIII/VIII/MMXXV, XVIII:IV GMT+VII.

Corne2Plum3 wrote:

I think this can count as lowercase numbers, and numbers we have are already uppercase

ynzoqn wrote:

Hi everyone, these are very interesting discussions. I would like to link to some related content.

1. StackExchange's discussion
2. Capital numerals in Chinese and Japanese on Wikipedia
3. Small caps on Wikipedia
4. Linux naming controversy on Wikipedia

Thank you. I have been enlightened

what if off-topic is now on-topic

thatd like


turn on sucess


100% profit right






*looks at the layoff* what's that