Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pedro Matias Sets New Texting Record At Mobile World Cup

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the text-invalid-if-bff-appears-anywhere-in-it dept.

Communications 70

Pedro Matias showed off his mad txtin sklz at this year's Mobile World Cup and managed to set a new record for "fastest, most accurate" texts as determined by the event's corporate owners. "history was made when Portugal's Pedro Matias set the new World's Record for texting by typing a 264-character text in just 1 minute 59 seconds (besting the previous record by 23 seconds). Of course, each Mobile World Cup must have its share of controversy -- in this case, Engadget Mobile's very own Chris Ziegler led a silent protest during the awards ceremony. The group was reportedly upset over the use of QWERTY phones (the LG enV3 in this case) to break the record."

cancel ×

70 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Who is the bigger loser? (4, Funny)

qoncept (599709) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784056)

The guy that can type that text that fast, or the guy that feels the need to protest qwerty keyboards?

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (2, Insightful)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784136)

Right, and that's being said by the guy who has a link to Droidipedia in his sig...

Seriously, this is an impressive accomplishment. Many impressive accomplishments are about essentially arbitrary things. It isn't substantially different than who can run the fastest mile, or get the most home-runs, or even be the first person to prove some theorem. Difficult accomplishments are impressive and interesting precisely because of the difficulty. Which ones we value and which ones are described as the sort of thing done by a "loser" are essentially arbitrary standards constructed by society.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784342)

Right, and that's being said by the guy who has a link to Droidipedia in his sig...

Touche, sir.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784510)

>>Seriously, this is an impressive accomplishment

Is it? I can type significantly faster than 250 characters in a minute or two.

If you allow qwerty keyboards, why not just plug a real keyboard into your phone and be done with it? I recall one of the "Top 10 most useless products from CES" to be such a thing for the iPhone.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784594)

I recall one of the "Top 10 most useless products from CES" to be such a thing for the iPhone.

Not sure how that could be considered "useless"...I used to use something similar for my old Palm Pilot M100 back in the day to take notes in school (my handwriting skills have always been on a 1st grade level), and I found that to be extremely useful. It folded up small enough to fit in my back pocket, so carrying it between classes wasn't a big deal at all.

I would imagine that, while a very niche product, a keyboard could be useful for business purposes with an iPhone for folks that don't want to bring their laptop with them to a meeting.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784820)

It was useless because it could only enter text into its custom app, not in just any text field, as you'd imagine. =)

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30785224)

Double useless when used on an iPhone/iPod without the Copy/Paste enabling OS upgrade!

What am I missing. (3, Interesting)

starbugs (1670420) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784800)

Is it? I can type significantly faster than 250 characters in a minute or two.

I don't get it. 264 characters? 1.59 seconds?
Could the article be wrong, meaning words instead of characters?

I just typed 298 characters in 2 minutes, 3 seconds (not counting time pressing the start-stop button on my watch).
(3 wrong characters, 1 wrong space)
Here's the text. (some of it I couldn't remember, so I made parts of it up, please don't laugh)

THEORIZING THAT ONE COULD TIMETRAVEL WITHIN HIS OWN LIFETIME DOCTOR SAM BECKET STEPPED INTO THE TIME TRAVEL THINGIE AND VANISHED, HE AWOKE TO FIND HIMSELF TRAPPED IN THE PAST, FACING MIRROR IMAGES THAT WERE NOT HIS OWN, AN D TRYING HIS BEST TO DO GOOD THINGS THAT IN THE BEND LEAD TO HIS DEMISE AND.

So I copied the message from my Nokia Communicator onto a card, then onto my netbook, then I posted it here.

Almost 300 characters in just over 2 minutes.
And I rarely text. So there are lots of people who would beat me.

So what am I missing here?

Re:What am I missing. (1)

CecilPL (1258010) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785348)

Yeah, I can't figure this out. I just typed your text on a crappy Nokia flip phone and did it in 2 minutes, 10 seconds. And that's with pauses while I read the next bit of the message.

I rarely text either; that was almost a hunt-and-peck exercise for me. Obviously I'm not faster than the world record holder, but 264 words in 2 minutes is over 130 wpm. That's faster than nearly everyone can type on an actual keyboard, and there's no way you can type that fast with just thumbs.

Re:What am I missing. (1)

Entropy98 (1340659) | more than 4 years ago | (#30788926)

Obviously I'm not faster than the world record holder, but 264 words in 2 minutes is over 130 wpm. That's faster than nearly everyone can type on an actual keyboard, and there's no way you can type that fast with just thumbs.

It was 264 characters, not words.

Re:What am I missing. (1)

CecilPL (1258010) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791402)

Sorry I wasn't clear. GGP made the point that 264 characters in 2 minutes is pretty slow, and I agree, given that we both seem to have just beaten it.

However, the article couldn't have mistakenly meant to say "264 words" instead of "264 characters", since that's impossibly fast.

Re:What am I missing. (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785468)

Is it? I can type significantly faster than 250 characters in a minute or two.

I don't get it. 264 characters? 1.59 seconds?
Could the article be wrong, meaning words instead of characters?

I just typed 298 characters in 2 minutes, 3 seconds (not counting time pressing the start-stop button on my watch).
(3 wrong characters, 1 wrong space)
Here's the text. (some of it I couldn't remember, so I made parts of it up, please don't laugh)

THEORIZING THAT ONE COULD TIMETRAVEL WITHIN HIS OWN LIFETIME DOCTOR SAM BECKET STEPPED INTO THE TIME TRAVEL THINGIE AND VANISHED, HE AWOKE TO FIND HIMSELF TRAPPED IN THE PAST, FACING MIRROR IMAGES THAT WERE NOT HIS OWN, AN D TRYING HIS BEST TO DO GOOD THINGS THAT IN THE BEND LEAD TO HIS DEMISE AND.

So I copied the message from my Nokia Communicator onto a card, then onto my netbook, then I posted it here.

Almost 300 characters in just over 2 minutes.
And I rarely text. So there are lots of people who would beat me.

So what am I missing here?

Yeah, I just typed that phrase you posted in 1:06.959 including clicking the stopwatch. I was typing on my G1.

WTH is up with that "record"? Maybe it was 264 words?

my exact text copied and pasted from my phone is:

"Theorizing that one could timetravel within his own lifetime doctor sam beckett stepped into the time treavel thingie and vanished, he awoke to find himself trapped in the past, facing mirror images that were not his own, and trying his best to do good things that in the bend lead to his demise and."

With one error that i could have fixed if I were paying attention. It certainly wouldn't have taken me another 53 seconds to fix.

WTF?
-Taylor

Re:What am I missing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30785608)

Nokia Communicator

I was typing on my G1.

I think only LG phones were allowed.

Re:What am I missing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30786666)

Until now, the rules have been that you have to type it without using the dictionary function, and on a phone that uses the old phone keyboard system (2=abc, 3=def, etc.)

But apparently they've allowed using qwerty. Also, the text that Guinness uses is much more complicated.

I don't know who's running this thing, but it seems like a joke.

Re:What am I missing. (1)

starbugs (1670420) | more than 4 years ago | (#30795538)

BTW that text is just a text that I used to gauge how fast my typing was. It was not the text used in the competition.

The full text that I failed to (fully)recall is:

"Theorizing that one could time travel within his own lifetime, Dr. Sam Beckett stepped into the Quantum Leap Accelerator and vanished. He woke to find himself trapped in the past, facing mirror images that were not his own and driven by an unknown force to change history for the better. His only guide on this journey is Al, an observer from his own time, who appears in the form of a hologram that only Sam can see and hear. And so Dr. Beckett finds himself leaping from life to life, striving to put right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap will be the leap home."

(From Quantum Leap)

But there is no reason anyone with a reasonable knowledge of the English language would not be able to text faster than me, even with far more complicated material.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784960)

What's wrong with QWERTY?

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785370)

>>What's wrong with QWERTY?

"Traditional" texting competitions made people text on the gimpy little cell phone pads, using either T9Word or having to whack one number key multiple times to cycle between letters. And they tend to make people text weird words so T9 mode doesn't work half the time, so you'd have to switch in and out of it. Using a qwerty keyboard means that the number of keypresses required would go down by about half or so. It's not really an apples-to-apples comparison that way.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784898)

Many impressive accomplishments are about essentially arbitrary things.

I think you might just be easy to impress. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though.

Re:Who is the bigger loser? (1)

Gaffod (939100) | more than 4 years ago | (#30798914)

Really? This is ridiculous. He can push some buttons very fast? Gimme a break. Running the mile involves a very strict diet and exercise regimen. I don't really care for sports, outside health-oriented exercise, but running the mile is NOT the same as typing very fast. It is as much an accomplishment as eating the most hotdogs.

Also, your post has a logical fallacy. Assuming most accomplishments are arbitrary (I don't see why they would be, but whatever), so what? Most women you'd want to sleep with have two legs. So do chimps. Do you see my point?

Times change and we... (2, Insightful)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784122)

... go into them kicking and screaming.

Tron was denied a chance at the Best Effects oscar because AMPAS thought computers equated to cheating.

Now find a movie that gets that award that *doesn't* use CGI.

New tech makes old achievements irrelivant. Get used to it.

Re:Times change and we... (1)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784332)

New tech makes old achievements irrelivant. Get used to it.

ORLY? [pirillo.com] I beg to differ.

Re:Times change and we... (1)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784612)

Except that morse is a synchronous communication. Gotta have someone listening on the other end at the same time you're sending or it's useless.

Re:Times change and we... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30788282)

Except that Morse is a synchronous communication. Gotta have someone listening on the other end at the same time you're sending or it's useless.

Not so much wrong, as simply not any different than any other protocols. You simply need a service to record the incoming message and then replay it at your convenience. Mail and text/sms don't get to their end-points unless the user's service provider stores the info for them until their email client or cell phone connects.

Re:Times change and we... (1)

Domini (103836) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784672)

Yes, really.

Just because a single iteration of new technology is implemented badly, does not mean there is no progress in the field over older tech.

The episode made Jay Leno look like a Luddite [wikipedia.org] .

The fact that a multi-tap [wikipedia.org] entry system was used in that contest, instead of predictive text [wikipedia.org] system as used in most phones for the longest time, renders that comparison flawed.

I beat the morse-code guy at the time using a predictive text entry system (non-qwerty); and I was by no means particularly fast.

Unfortunately, his record fell 38 minutes later... (2, Funny)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784126)

His record sadly fell 38 minutes later when 13 year old Samantha Johnson entered the competition.

"Yeah, I was nervous entering the "Open" division, but my 10 year old brother competed in it last year and won, so I had confidence. The thing I'm the most proud of is winning the 12-14 age group, as everyone knows that's the toughest division to win." Before departing, Ms Johnson added "Old folks fail, amirite?"

Back to you, Jeff.

not that fast (-1, Redundant)

ncohafmuta (577957) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784138)

2.2 characters per second on QWERTY? that's not fast. maybe if you're 'high' it would be.

-Tony

Re:not that fast (5, Insightful)

TheReverandND (926450) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784226)

And with a QWERTY phone they only beat the record by 23 seconds? Thats like giving a race horse crystal meth and having him win by a nose.

Re:not that fast (2, Interesting)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784234)

I think I could beat it on T9!

Qwerty doesn't actually make texting faster, just easier for new people to pick up on.

Ask anyone who switched from using T9 to a Qwerty smartphone, how much their texting has changed.

I used to be able to text while I drove (I know, terrible) because I didn't have to look at the screen to text a message, and it only needed one hand.

Now a fully Qwerty keyboard requires 2 hands to even use properly, and is difficult to tell which key you are on unless you look at it.

Re:not that fast (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784288)

Compared to multitap? Qwerty phones are loads faster, just by virtue of requiring far fewer button presses and fewer enforced delays.

Re:not that fast (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784370)

You have to move your fingers (or thumbs) far more - requiring more time than it is to press a key. You only ever have to a single key (the next key) 1 or 2 or 3 more times then you would have to press keys on a Qwerty keyboard, and once you memorize the pattern of T9 those 3 keypresses go like TAPTAPTAP

Re:not that fast (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784552)

I'll admit, while I love having a QWERTY phone (HTC Ozone) for on the go internet and emails, I still miss using a keypad for texting. In my days with a keypad, we didn't use none of that fancy shmancy T9 malarky...by gum, we did everything one letter at a time!

Re:not that fast (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784400)

He was probably slowed down by constantly fighting the spell checker while trying to ROFL all his LOLs and smilie-sad all his heart-yous.

"Mobile World Cup" ?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784194)

Really, really, really, FUCKING STUPID.

Yo Dawg... (1, Funny)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784198)

we put QWERTY in your phone so you can set records while you commit social faux pas!

Eh... (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784212)

I can't RTFA at work due to filters...can anyone tell me if they are comparing the new record with a QWERTY to the old record with a numberpad? I have no problem with people using a QWERTY for a texting competition, but I think it's a bit unfair to compare it to the speed set by using a numberpad (again, if that's what they did)

Re:Eh... (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784256)

I gotta agree. That's like taking a dirt bike to the Tour De France and boasting about beating the world record.

Query pads and number based pads are different beasts - if you're going to keep records, keep them in separate categories.

Re:Eh... (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784292)

Jeebus I can't believe I just typed Query instead of QWERTY. Sometimes the signals get crossed and the fingers type something other than what the mind sent.

Re:Eh... (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784320)

The only way I would be ok with this is if they either split the competition into qwerty and non-qwerty (as you implied) or just get rid of numberpads.

Personally, I think they should just have two seperate competitions...but honestly, I don't really care all that much :-)

Re:Eh... (1)

Zeussy (868062) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785206)

If they used a phone with a qwerty keyboard, couldn't you just get a bluetooth keyboard, connect that to a compatible phone and type the txt on that?

Who cares? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784216)

Some old guy with a Morse key can blow him away :-)

Re:Who cares? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784284)

Yeah, but the Morse guy is using one button. That means he's cheating!

Re:Who cares? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784412)

He's a phony! A big fat phony!

Re:Who cares? (2, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784702)

Yeah, but the Morse guy is using one button. That means he's cheating!

Apple might have been on to something after all...

Doesn't seem that impressive (2, Insightful)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784224)

264 characters in two minutes? That's individual characters... 264 individual characters? 264 key presses in 2 minutes? That's about two key presses a second. Big deal?

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

cptdondo (59460) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784562)

Exactly. I can type 40 to 60 words per minute on a regular keyboard. In what way is 25 WPM considered progress?

And the standard QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow typists down.

I think it speaks loads to the crappy UI on phones and fairly screams for a new input paradigm. (I don't have one, mind you; I'm just an old dude who learned to type with all 10 fingers.)

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

Dice (109560) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785234)

And the standard QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow typists down.

This is a myth [utdallas.edu] .

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

cptdondo (59460) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785394)

I'm not arguing the supposed superiority of the DSK. Look up the history of the QWERTY layout - it was designed to place the most used keys far apart mechanically to lessen the incidence of jamming, and, as a side effect, slowed down the typists because of some awkward hand movements. If you ever typed on a mechanical keyboard, you know what I mean. Try typing a line on one; your fingers will cramp after a couple of sentences. It's a lot harder than on a computer keyboard.

The fact is that we have learned to live with this and can be proficient at it, and modern electronic keyboards have made it less strenuous. But you have to wonder why in 140 years of typing we still use a keyboard developed to minimize jamming on a long-dead device....

Surely there has to be a better input paradigm.

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

CecilPL (1258010) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785420)

Maybe, but your link reads like an apologist.

Dvorak does have some significant advantages, imho, the most important of which to me is the reduced wrist and arm pain. Since switching I can type all day, every day, without any pain.

It took close to a month of not being able to get anything done, but it's all rainbows and butterflies and ponies on this keyboard.

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | more than 4 years ago | (#30786270)

It is a nice story, but the assertions in the article are not supported with original work or referenced. Plus, lack of evidence does not debase a claim it only means it needs to be researched further.

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30786060)

Have you ever sent a text message? - multiple button presses are needed to get different letters.
      e.g. press '2' 3 times in succession to get letter 'c'
So 264 characters is probably quite a few more than 264 button presses...

I wonder if predictive texting is a separate category, or just frowned upon by the purists...

Re:Doesn't seem that impressive (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 4 years ago | (#30787592)

I should have entered on my T-mobile Sidekick back before I switched to the iPhone. Using programmable shortcuts I was well over 100 WPM. I was probably in the 50 to 60 WPM if I had to use straight up typing.

Aside from texting WRs being totally useless, I am even less impressed by this stat after hearing that it's done w/QWERTY.

Morse code is faster (2, Informative)

Maximum Prophet (716608) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784306)

That's only 22 5 character words (plus 1 character spaces). the Extra class amateur ham license requires 25 wpm, and some military Morse operators could do 60 wpm.

My dad knew an operator that could buffer an entire line of text in his head before he started typing on a manual typewriter.

Re:Morse code is faster (1)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784500)

There's an app for that called morse texter. It lets you enter morse code on your symbian phone for texting. You can get it here. [typepad.com] . It's the only way to fly now.

Re:Morse code is faster (3, Interesting)

batquux (323697) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784504)

There is no longer a morse code requirement for any class of ham radio license.

Still, folks who can do in the 30 wpm range are still more common than you might think.

The extra used to require 20 W.P.M. no longer... (1)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784624)

You only have to pass 5 WPM now.

CW (code) operation is still very popular with hams. It can get through when voice modes can't, and with lower power and simpler equipment.

There are lots of operators today who can get above 30 WPM very comfortably and do so on a regular basis. The International code receiving record is still 77 WPM set my Ted McElroy back in the 1939. He was also the champ with American Morse (landline telegraph) and Japanese Kanjii code. Oh, and he could type 150 WPM on a manual typewriter. Quite a guy. He'd run rings around these texting kids.

Yes, I'm a ham and, yes, I operate using code.

So - Morse v. texting, the direct comparison (1)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785378)

In 1939, there was a ubiquitous text-sending technology (that, by the way, requires multiple keystrokes per letter unlike this new texting record-setter who used a QWERTY keyboard) and the best operator at the time could easily send text more than three times as fast as this new record-holder.

Have I got this right?

Harumph. These young whippersnappers, I swear, one of these days they're gonna be convinced they invented the orgasm.

So how does this rate a Slashdot tag other than "NetNegativeTechProgress"?

Re:Morse code is faster (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 4 years ago | (#30785906)

World record, according to "The Art and Skill or Radio Telegraphy" [qsl.net] is 75.2wpm. "words" are 5 characters. This guy texted about 2.2 characters per second, the morse record is 6.3 characters per second.

Re:Morse code is faster (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 4 years ago | (#30786190)

I should note that the 1000cpm barrier has been broken. Rufzxp.net [rufzxp.net] has more info. That's just receiving, not sending.

ScuttleMonkey = Samzempus? Since when? (1)

Escaflowne (199760) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784364)

When did Samzempus hack into ScuttleMonkey's account? I've yet to see any of the other moderators post inane idle crap in another section. I hope it's a one-off ScuttleMonkey. We don't need two Samzempuses on the site :(.

Slashdot, NEWS FOR NERDS. STUFF THAT MATTERS. (1)

neptunusmaris (1466809) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784444)

... nuff said.

i c there r others mre pthtic thn me (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784476)

Using querty kbrd shld b banned. I typed ths msg in lss thn 30 sec on my qrt kbd

Re:i c there r others mre pthtic thn me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784868)

usng qwrty kbrd shld be b& - this is faster

Silent protest (5, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784592)

Engadget Mobile's very own Chris Ziegler led a silent protest during the awards ceremony

So what then, did he vibrate?

Re:Silent protest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784716)

If they had copy and pasted the entire article from Engadget instead of half of it, you would realize the part about the protest was joke. The rest of the article for accuracy.

"in this case, Engadget Mobile's very own Chris Ziegler led a silent protest during the awards ceremony. The group was reportedly upset over the use of QWERTY phones (the LG enV3 in this case) to break the record. "The only true test of texting skill is a numeric keypad, without T9," he said. "Hell, it's the Morgan Pozgar affair all over again. Is nothing sacred?" PR and video after the break. [By the way, we totally made the last part up.]"

Re:Silent protest (1)

filthpickle (1199927) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784866)

wish I had some mod points for you

So umm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30784708)

who gives a crap?

Wait 'til reality sets in (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#30784828)

Sadly enough, world-class texters don't have any more groupies than the rest of us pathetic computer nerds.

I still think... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30785156)

Almost any 13 year old girl armed with a non-QWERTY keyboard could beat this record...

I'd almost bet they could do it while concealing the phone in the desk to make sure teacher didn't notice either!

It's like the special olympics... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30797364)

...even if you win, you're still a retard.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>