Yes, yes… it’s fine to acknowledge the existence of math notation that most people will never use.
Tom Warren chose to fixate on a specific typeface (not math) and use that as an excuse to criticize people for their valid comparison to something that predates it. He followed up by declaring that he was “right” and they were “wrong”. Is he a four-year-old?
I can’t think of a more snide, self-aggrandizing way to participate in the conversation. It was unnecessary, rude, and not even technically correct*, which is why he has earned my mocking comment in response.
*(We can see in the replies that the glyph he mentions is in fact not the same as the logo being discussed.)
Standard monotype font
𝕏 - “mathematical double-struck capital X”
Added to Unicode in 2001, used a very similar character for X11 in 1984, added to math in… who was the first mathematician in history to ever use it?
Blackboard Bold - popularized in the 1960s.
Yes, yes… it’s fine to acknowledge the existence of math notation that most people will never use.
Tom Warren chose to fixate on a specific typeface (not math) and use that as an excuse to criticize people for their valid comparison to something that predates it. He followed up by declaring that he was “right” and they were “wrong”. Is he a four-year-old?
I can’t think of a more snide, self-aggrandizing way to participate in the conversation. It was unnecessary, rude, and not even technically correct*, which is why he has earned my mocking comment in response.
*(We can see in the replies that the glyph he mentions is in fact not the same as the logo being discussed.)
OK, so maybe Tom Warren is not the most likable guy, or not one to defuse a controversy that can lead more people to his website.
But I think it is technically correct:
I think the part we should take from this, is “Elon just wrote an x in a ‘1337 way’, and called it a logo”.