The child repeated “‘six seven’ like 10 times,” Vance wrote.
“And now I think we need to make this narrow exception to the First Amendment and ban these numbers forever,” he said.
This sounds like the perfect opening for one of those parodies of “educational films” (like the one on “Zinc Oxide” in Kentucky Fried Movie), where you show the wisher the results of his desire to eliminate (in this case) banning the numbers “6” and “7” forever.
“What happened to all the June and July deliveries?”
“I don’t now. One minute they were here, the next they were gone.”
“I can’t find anything for those months in any records!”
“Hey – my social security number is incomplete!
“None of our inventories tally for this month. Any number with a six or seven is gone!”
The Genie of Random Wishes to Vance: “You see what happens if you try to ban two numbers? And all because your son repeated them!”
Is this actually true? I know they believe it, and I’ve heard it quoted widely, but it doesn’t make any sense. When I looked into it once, I found a cite that said that fonts where, for example, b and d or p and q are not mirror images are the best for dyslexics, which doesn’t have anything to do with serifs or lack thereof. And, of course, disability is such a wide and varied category that I can’t imagine anything as simple as removing serifs is a panacaea.
I can see characters with minimal ornamentation (e.g. serifs) being more helpful for low-vision people, but I think it matters whether it’s on a sign or a webpage.
Anyway, if anyone has a good cite with information on the best fonts to accommodate the widest variety of disabilities, I’d love to read it.
It was at least more true in the past before we all got HD displays. Back in the old CRT days, serifs from different characters could appear to blur into each other at times.
I believe it’s much less of an issue now that we all have high definition displays.
But at the same time, why bother changing it now? Especially if it will cost more to change it (just how much paper is involved alone is massive - stationary, archive documents, etc) and it will not offer any actual readability improvement to make the change. I thought one of the fig leaves was supposed to be cost savings. It’s cutting off the nose to spite the face to mandate an expensive change that has no benefit and potentially a detriment to some people.
He looks oddly thin and gaunt in the top picture. Maybe it’s all those words. Is that the new allowed font or do I have to buy all his crazy hats again? Is there a refund if they go Comic Sans next week? Wing Dings?
Who knows what his health issues really are, but it can’t help that his staff almost certainly doses him with stimulants of some kind, when he has to be seen in public.
If that’s true two days running, we get results such as today’s press event (see Smapti’s post above, detailing “We have a dead head Fed hair” and other incoherencies).
Too bad. Donald needs a war! And if committing acts of piracy is the only way to get one, then…
Are there such fonts (does anyone know)? I couldn’t find search terms that would tell me definitively.
Apparently Comic Sans is one such. I had a look, and it’s true that they’re not exact mirrors, but they seem pretty close to me. But then, I’m not dyslexic, so I don’t know what level of difference is significant.