Most active commenters
  • VerifiedReports(6)
  • nailer(5)
  • (4)
  • dragonwriter(3)
  • rtkwe(3)
  • vintermann(3)
  • oneeyedpigeon(3)
  • adrian_b(3)

←back to thread

375 points italophil | 94 comments | | HN request time: 1.888s | source | bottom
1. zzo38computer ◴[] No.46214792[source]
Calibri font has "I" and "l" the same, according to Wikipedia. A better font should avoid characters being too similar (such as "I" and "l" and "1").

Another issue is due to the font size and font metrics, how much space it will take up on the page, to be small enough to avoid wasting paper and ink but also not too small to read.

So, there are multiple issues in choosing the fonts; however, Times New Roman and Calibri are not the only two possible choices.

Maybe the government should make up their own (hopefully public domain) font, which would be suitable for their purposes (and avoiding needing proprietary fonts), and use that instead.

replies(14): >>46225128 #>>46225165 #>>46225177 #>>46225182 #>>46226184 #>>46227037 #>>46227151 #>>46227688 #>>46228144 #>>46228391 #>>46228533 #>>46229284 #>>46229535 #>>46230299 #
2. HPsquared ◴[] No.46225128[source]
Come to think of it, I vs l vs 1 vs | is one advantage of serif fonts.
replies(2): >>46228159 #>>46228401 #
3. ◴[] No.46225165[source]
4. ajross ◴[] No.46225177[source]
> Calibri font has "I" and "l" the same, according to Wikipedia. A better font should avoid characters being too similar (such as "I" and "l" and "1").

Only when used in a context where they can be confused. This is a situation where HN is going to give bad advice. Programmers care deeply about that stuff (i.e. "100l" is a long-valued integer literal in C and not the number 1001). Most people tend not to, and there is a long tradition of fonts being a little ambiguous in that space.

But yes, don't use Calibri in your editor.

replies(5): >>46225237 #>>46225842 #>>46227364 #>>46228177 #>>46228868 #
5. jazzyjackson ◴[] No.46225182[source]
> Maybe the government should make up their own

They have, public sans, courtesy of USWDS, and it does distinguish between l and I with a little hook/spur on lowercase el

https://public-sans.digital.gov/

https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Public+Sans?preview.text=1...

replies(3): >>46225686 #>>46226214 #>>46227683 #
6. IshKebab ◴[] No.46225237[source]
> Most people tend not to

Yeah because normal people never have to deal with alphanumeric strings...

replies(2): >>46225303 #>>46225821 #
7. ajross ◴[] No.46225303{3}[source]
No, because normal people can read "l00l" as a number just fine and don't actually care if the underlying encoding is different. AI won't care either. It's just us on-the-spectrum nerds with our archaic deterministic devices and brains trained on them that get wound up about it. Designing a font for normal readers is just fine.
replies(2): >>46226989 #>>46228187 #
8. vessenes ◴[] No.46225686[source]
Ooh, I like Public Sans! I hadn't seen it before.
9. dragonwriter ◴[] No.46225821{3}[source]
> Yeah because normal people never have to deal with alphanumeric strings...

Natural language tends to have a high degree of disambiguating redundancy and is used to communicate between humans, who are good at making use of that. Programming languages have somewhat less of disambiguating redundancy (or in extreme cases almost none), and, most critically, are used to communicate with compilers and interpreters that have zero capacity to make use of it even when it is present.

This makes "letter looks like a digit that would rarely be used in a place where both make sense" a lot more of a problem for a font used with a programming language than a font used for a natural language.

replies(4): >>46226185 #>>46226645 #>>46228464 #>>46229138 #
10. MarkusQ ◴[] No.46225842[source]
> Most people tend not to

Except the whole rationale for going to Calibri in the first place was that it was supposedly more accessible due to being easier to OCR.

replies(1): >>46226334 #
11. gerdesj ◴[] No.46226184[source]
A font was the en_US version of fount. A fount was a particular example of a typeface. A typeface is something like TNR or Calibri. They all seem to have been munged into a single set of synonyms except for fount which has been dropped (so why do we still have colour and all that stuff)?

A print, then typewriter, then computer typeface emulates a written script but also takes on a life of its own. Handwriting in english is mostly gibberish these days because hardly anyone uses a pen anymore! However, it is mostly "cursive" and cursive is not the same as serif and sans.

English prides itself on not having diacritics, or accents or whatever that thing where you merge a A and E is called, unless they are borrowed: in which case all bets are off; or there is an r in the month and the moon is in Venus.

So you want a font and it needs to look lovely. If your O and 0 are not differentiated then you have failed. 2:Z?, l:L:1? Good.

I use a german style slash across the number seven when I write the number, even though my number one is nothing like a german one, which looks more like a lambda. I also slash a lone capital Zed. I slash a zero: 0 and dot an O when writing code on paper. Basically, when I write with a pen you are in absolutely no doubt what character I have written, unless the DTs kick in 8)

replies(5): >>46226348 #>>46226643 #>>46228654 #>>46228799 #>>46230039 #
12. morshu9001 ◴[] No.46226185{4}[source]
Legal language isn't very natural
replies(1): >>46226393 #
13. layer8 ◴[] No.46226214[source]
It’s also on GitHub: https://github.com/uswds/public-sans

The glyph repertoire is a bit limited, though.

14. NewJazz ◴[] No.46226334{3}[source]
That's the "diversity" they were talking about?? Fucks sake.
replies(1): >>46227085 #
15. irishcoffee ◴[] No.46226348[source]
I thought I was the only one that still crossed a seven and slashed a zero. I don’t dot an ‘O’ however.
replies(3): >>46226603 #>>46226662 #>>46226695 #
16. dragonwriter ◴[] No.46226393{5}[source]
Legal language is natural language with particular domain-specific technical jargon; like other uses of natural language, it targets humans who are quite capable of resolving ambiguity via context and not compilers and interpreters that are utterly incapable of doing so.

Not that official State Department communication is mostly “legal language” as distinct from more general formal use of natural language to start with.

replies(1): >>46232213 #
17. Jailbird ◴[] No.46226603{3}[source]
I cross my sevens!

I'll consider starting to slash my zeros. Seems legit.

replies(2): >>46226869 #>>46228500 #
18. FeteCommuniste ◴[] No.46226643[source]
The linked A+E thing is called a ligature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligature_(writing)

Same root as "ligament" and "ligand."

replies(1): >>46228556 #
19. Ferret7446 ◴[] No.46226645{4}[source]
People named Al are having a field day with the recent AI boom.

El confusion is absolutely a problem for regular people.

replies(1): >>46229454 #
20. FeteCommuniste ◴[] No.46226662{3}[source]
I cross my sevens, slash my zeros, and use a hook on lowercase T to avoid confusion with plus signs. I think I developed the hook-T habit in college math classes.
replies(1): >>46227285 #
21. IggleSniggle ◴[] No.46226695{3}[source]
That's good, because the "O" should never be dotted. You use slash OR dot for zero, unless you vaguely remember them both as useful for disambiguating but forgot that both marks are for zero and vary by typeface. Mostly dotted zero was just during the dot matrix era. I wouldn't mind being shown counter examples.
22. davchana ◴[] No.46226869{4}[source]
In india its considered bad omen to slash 7s.
replies(1): >>46227647 #
23. ◴[] No.46226989{4}[source]
24. rtkwe ◴[] No.46227037[source]
True though the confusion about that is largely when you're not dealing with words like passwords or hashes. In the context of words it's going to be generally disambiguated by context, I can't think of an example off hand in writing where I and l will that ambiguous. The removal of serifs probably has a higher impact to more people unless I'm missing some common situation where they'd be easy to confuse in context.
replies(1): >>46230517 #
25. rtkwe ◴[] No.46227085{4}[source]
It's not, although blind or highly vision impared people who use screen readers sometimes also have to rely on OCR when the document isn't properly formatted with text.

Using a sans serif font generally helps anyone with difficulty distinguishing letters so dyslexic, low vision, aging vision etc. individuals. It's not just for digital OCR.

replies(1): >>46228049 #
26. irishcoffee ◴[] No.46227285{4}[source]
I didn’t even think about that one, I do that as well, and for the exact same reason! That’s too funny.
27. tedunangst ◴[] No.46227364[source]
It's not like the State Department would ever mention Kim Jong the Second in documents.
replies(1): >>46227602 #
28. bitwize ◴[] No.46227602{3}[source]
Nope, just Kim Jong one (in French).
29. Fnoord ◴[] No.46227647{5}[source]
We are trying to summon a Leviathan here.
30. wombatpm ◴[] No.46227683[source]
Is USWDS still a thing? I thought they were DOGED out of existence.
replies(2): >>46227731 #>>46228273 #
31. moomoo11 ◴[] No.46227688[source]
No. I don’t want the gov wasting money making a fucking font.

There’s a few dozen off the shelf fonts that would work for 99.99% of people.

For those who it doesn’t work, deal with it. It’s a font. Or fallback to system font.

replies(2): >>46228631 #>>46229809 #
32. jazzyjackson ◴[] No.46227731{3}[source]
Good question, with a little searching I found that, in true DOGE fashion, there exists an executive order announcing a new "National Design Studio" which is tasked with updating USWDS

So why fonts are being managed by Rubio and not the Chief Design Officer is anyone's guess

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/08/fact-sheet-pr...

replies(1): >>46227920 #
33. sailfast ◴[] No.46227920{4}[source]
Yeah it’s fascist looking as hell, and they’re the ones that have been registering all these rando program domains. So, so dumb - if only because it’s redundant and wasteful.

https://ndstudio.gov/

With such inspiring copy as “What's the biggest brand in the world? If you said Trump, you're not wrong. But what's the foundation of that brand? One that's more globally recognized than practically anything else. It's the nation…where he was born. It's the United States of America.” how can you go wrong?

replies(1): >>46228443 #
34. MarkusQ ◴[] No.46228049{5}[source]
> Using a sans serif font generally helps anyone with difficulty distinguishing letters so dyslexic, low vision, aging vision etc.

So far as I'm aware, there is very little actual evidence to support this oft-repeated claim. It all seems to lead back to this study of 46 individuals, the Results section of which smells of p-hacking.

https://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/go...

35. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46228144[source]
Yep. Any font that neglects to put crossbars on the capital "i" should be eliminated from consideration for any practical application.
36. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46228159[source]
The crossbars on the capital "i" are not serifs.

But sans-serif fonts are certainly the prime offenders of rendering a lower-case L in place of the capital "i".

replies(2): >>46229247 #>>46230600 #
37. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46228177[source]
"Only when used in a context where they can be confused."

So what are you supposed to when you're typing along and suddenly you find yourself in such a context? Switch the font of that one occurrence? That document? Your whole publishing effort?

Capital "i"s without crossbars aren't capital "i"s. They're lower-case Ls. Any font that doesn't recognize this should be rejected.

replies(1): >>46228345 #
38. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46228187{4}[source]
Normal readers know that capital "i" has crossbars on it.

Why design an intentionally ambiguous font? There is only downside to it.

39. ycombigrator ◴[] No.46228273{3}[source]
I think the whole US is being DOGED out of existence tbh.
40. inejge ◴[] No.46228345{3}[source]
> Capital "i"s without crossbars aren't capital "i"s. They're lower-case Ls. Any font that doesn't recognize this should be rejected.

You have asserted this at least thrice in the past thirty minutes. What makes you feel so strongly about it? "Rejected" for what purpose? Do you understand that you've just trashed Helvetica, to take a famous example?

replies(1): >>46229236 #
41. bulbar ◴[] No.46228391[source]
Nothing is more inefficient than the secretary of state thinking about and conducting meetings about the font used in documents. It just doesn't matter in the sense that it "doesn't move the needle".

I expect the leaders of a government deciding on matters that have a real impact on people's live, not on stuff that from a practical point of view is totally irrelevant.

replies(5): >>46228415 #>>46228439 #>>46228623 #>>46229367 #>>46229957 #
42. pmontra ◴[] No.46228401[source]
Yes and I use the Atkinson font in my emacs (for code) which is proportional and sans serif except for those characters

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_Hyperlegible

replies(1): >>46230938 #
43. Terr_ ◴[] No.46228415[source]
In general, yes, but for these leaders... the less sabotaging impact they have, the better.
44. nailer ◴[] No.46228439[source]
The global impression of the US is worth thinking about. The font is part of that.
replies(6): >>46228552 #>>46228768 #>>46228800 #>>46229899 #>>46232308 #>>46234928 #
45. Terr_ ◴[] No.46228443{5}[source]
For anyone sharing my confusion: Yes, that cringetastic text (and borderline Hatch-Act violation) is up there, but it's a different linked domain:

https://americabydesign.gov/

replies(4): >>46229503 #>>46230000 #>>46231752 #>>46232258 #
46. vintermann ◴[] No.46228464{4}[source]
That yaa can gat ba wath ana waval dasn't maan that wa all shaald start wratang laka thas.
replies(1): >>46229376 #
47. vintermann ◴[] No.46228500{4}[source]
Øh, that isn't ideal for Danes, Norwegians or people who regularly deal with empty sets.
48. timeon ◴[] No.46228533[source]
See this policy of return to Times New Roman really works. People are debating particular letters after (both) rulings have been made instead of the fact that president protects pedophiles.
replies(1): >>46228843 #
49. bulbar ◴[] No.46228552{3}[source]
It's really not. The used font just doesn't move the needle regarding the global impression. 99% of people never ever think or care about the font they use.

What else should be decided on on the highest level: spacing, padding, allowance of the Oxford comma?

It is useful that somebody thinks about that stuff, just not the highest level of the government.

That's like the CEO of Microsoft having meeting about coding conventions, space vs tabs, variable name format etc.

replies(2): >>46229522 #>>46235220 #
50. vintermann ◴[] No.46228556{3}[source]
It's a ligature in modern English, but it's a proper letter in Anglo-Saxon.

Ligatures or contextual letter variants (such as s being written with a different symbol when it's at the end of a word) are a sin to encode as characters. They should be part of the presentation layer, not the content layer! And don't even get me started on OCR which thinks such things are good to "preserve".

51. hamandcheese ◴[] No.46228623[source]
> not on stuff that from a practical point of view is totally irrelevant.

The modern era we live in has far, far too much of this attitude. It's the same force eroding craftsmanship, attention to detail, and human dignity.

I find it quite reasonable for someone to care about the presentation of official government communications.

And just so we are clear, I also think Rubio is a horrible person.

52. echelon ◴[] No.46228631[source]
You know the fonts on our roads are standardized? And a lot of other official documents?

Designing a font that will be public domain forever costs next to nothing. It's a one-time cost that pays dividends into the future and that will probably outlive us.

The government would create something standard and accessible, and anyone could use it. No encumbered licensing.

I think companies refreshing design systems is a waste of money, but the government doing it is actually incredibly prudent.

replies(1): >>46228682 #
53. dragonwriter ◴[] No.46228654[source]
> English prides itself on not having diacritics, or accents or whatever that thing where you merge a A and E is called, unless they are borrowed

Its called the letter “ash” and its borrowed from... (Old) English. Though its functionally reverted to being a ligature, which is what is was before it was a letter.

(Also, English has &, which was a letter even more recently—its current name being taken from the way it was recited as part of the alphabet [“and, per se, and”], including the effect of slurring with speed—and which also originated as a ligature.)

54. moomoo11 ◴[] No.46228682{3}[source]
I don't think you understand how gov spends money lol.

What you think is "next to nothing" will 99% turn into $300 million dollars and 10 years later about $4 billion will have been spent.

And 100% there are people waiting to milk the gov doing this. Maybe you are one of them? In that case...

replies(1): >>46229980 #
55. jimnotgym ◴[] No.46228768{3}[source]
The Global impression of the US is down the toilet. This only adds to that. I kept being told that I was not American, and America didn't care what the rest of the world thought. Which is it?
56. DocTomoe ◴[] No.46228799[source]
There's no pride in not having diacritics, it's a sign of an insufficient script. It's the reason why English writing gives no hint of pronunciation.
57. 7bit ◴[] No.46228800{3}[source]
No one cares about the font US documents are written in. You're not that important.
58. abeyer ◴[] No.46228843[source]
Only rich ones. Lowbrow pedophiles who hang out in pizza parlors are a whole different thing.
59. da_chicken ◴[] No.46228868[source]
Yes, exactly this. Judging a document font based on how well it functions as a programming font is weird.
60. IshKebab ◴[] No.46229138{4}[source]
> Natural language

I said alphanumeric strings not natural language. Things like order codes, authentication codes, license numbers, etc.

61. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46229236{4}[source]
What an odd question. I don't like degraded communication or stupidity. Is that enough justification?

Oh wait, I trashed hallowed Helvetica? The Lord's font? The font used on the tablets Moses carried down from Mount Sinai? OMG whatever shall I do.

Meanwhile, the question stands.

replies(1): >>46234607 #
62. VerifiedReports ◴[] No.46229247{3}[source]
Down-modded by an obscurity apologist.
63. ensocode ◴[] No.46229284[source]
ha ha MAGA font. Only big letters
replies(1): >>46229531 #
64. otikik ◴[] No.46229367[source]
So, two options.

a) It's a smoke screen. Do something bombastic and provocative so that the opposition chews on that while something else more "important" passes undetected.

b) Nah, he's just stupid.

65. Y_Y ◴[] No.46229376{5}[source]
Alright, Lumpy Space Princess
66. moltopoco ◴[] No.46229454{5}[source]
This indeed. In the last couple of years, I've had to re-read a whole lot of sentences because I read it as the wrong Al/AI in my head at first.
67. jrjeksjd8d ◴[] No.46229503{6}[source]
The funniest part of this site is talking about how important design is, and then having one bad quality video of a US flag and a bunch of giant text fading into view while scrolling. It's giving "graphic design is my passion"
68. moltopoco ◴[] No.46229522{4}[source]
The irony here is that Steve Jobs _did_ actually think about fonts. Sure, he certainly didn't think about Times New Roman, but I disagree with the idea that someone at the top should not have time to write a quick memo about trivialities if it bothers them.
replies(1): >>46229971 #
69. thiht ◴[] No.46229531[source]
THE BEST LETTERS
70. RobotToaster ◴[] No.46229535[source]
I've always found serif fonts easier to read, although I prefer Baskerville over Times.
71. amluto ◴[] No.46229809[source]
Neither Calibri nor Times New Roman are free to use, although they are free in certain contexts for Windows users. The US Government is paying plenty for them.
72. seanhunter ◴[] No.46229899{3}[source]
Speaking as someone who is not from the US I can say that the global impression of the US is not helped by the secretary of state bikeshedding about fonts. There are important issues of foreign affairs that need thought and attention at this time.
replies(1): >>46235851 #
73. oneeyedpigeon ◴[] No.46229957[source]
It's not about anything practical, it's all about the message.
74. oneeyedpigeon ◴[] No.46229971{5}[source]
(Part of) Steve Jobs' job was to deliver a great operating system, and part of that relates to how fonts are used. No part of the President's job involves picking a font, let alone legislating around it, unless there are actual political factors involved.
replies(1): >>46235506 #
75. oneeyedpigeon ◴[] No.46229980{4}[source]
> will 99% turn into $300 million dollars

Only because of corruption, which should be dealt with of course, but that's a totally separate issue that doesn't invalidate the act of making an open font.

76. zimpenfish ◴[] No.46230000{6}[source]
I'm no expert but "We've been conditioned to accept that mediocre in government is normal." reads terribly.

Surely it should be "...that mediocrity in..." or even "...that mediocre government..." or even "...that being mediocre in...". All of those are better!

edit: this text is a mess. "It's time to upgrade, and fix the nation's digital potholes." That comma is nonsense.

replies(1): >>46231586 #
77. buntsai ◴[] No.46230039[source]
The use of the "font" spelling variant rather than "fount" is any case a clearer indication of etymology. After all, a "fount" of types refers not to its role as a fountain of printing (fons fontis L -> fontaine OF -> fountain) but the pouring out, melting and casting of lead (fundo fundere fudu fusum [fused!] L -> fondre / fonte F).
78. adrian_b ◴[] No.46230299[source]
You are right, but if legibility had been the reason for change, Times New Roman is a rather poor choice, even if better than Calibri.

Among Microsoft typefaces, Georgia would have been much better than Times New Roman, especially when read on displays, but even when printed.

There are of course even better choices, but Georgia is a familiar typeface for most people, it is similar enough to Times New Roman and the older versions of Georgia are free to use by anybody.

Georgia is not as condensed as Times New Roman, but here Times New Roman is the anomaly, as it is more condensed than a normal font, for the purpose of fitting within narrow newspaper columns.

From Windows 3.0 to Windows 98, I have used Times New Roman as my main text font in documents, because Windows did not include anything better, but immediately after the introduction of the superior Georgia I replaced Times New Roman with it for some years, until eventually I stopped relying on the bundled typefaces and I have bought some typefaces that I liked more, for use in all my documents. (Windows 3.0 did not have yet TTF fonts, with which the licensed Times New Roman was introduced later, but it already had a metrically equivalent Times font).

79. adrian_b ◴[] No.46230517[source]
On the Web I see very frequently foreign names, user handles or URLs where I am confused about whether there is an I or an l, because that Web page has chosen to use a bad sans serif font that does not differentiate these letters.

Sometimes there is no problem because the words or links containing ambiguous letters can be copied and pasted. Other times there is an annoying problem because either the stupid designer has disabled copying (or like in the output of Google and some other search engines, copying does not copy the visible text, but a link that cannot be used in a different context, outside the browser), or because I want to write on my computer a link or name that I have received on my phone.

replies(1): >>46232724 #
80. adrian_b ◴[] No.46230600{3}[source]
The crossbar of a t is not a serif, but those of the capital I are definitely serifs.

Only on computer screens it is possible to confuse serifs with crossbars, because of the very low resolution, which forces the increase of the width of a serif to 1 pixel, possibly making it as wide as a crossbar.

To convince yourself that capital I has serifs and not crossbars, just look at high-resolution photos of some Roman imperial inscriptions, like that on Trajan's column, which are the gold standard for the design of the capital letters in serif fonts.

Most letters of the Latin script are made of 3 elements, thick lines, thin lines and serifs. The width ratio between the thick lines and the thin lines is called the contrast of the font.

Serif fonts normally have a higher contrast and sans serif fonts not only have no serifs, but they also have no contrast or only a low contrast.

Serifs are even thinner than the thin lines (which include some of the crossbars), except in sans serif fonts (which have no serifs) and slab serifs fonts (where the serifs are as thick as the thin lines).

Both the sans serif and the slab serif fonts are fonts typical for the 19th century after the Napoleonian wars, when they were used mainly for advertising, where they attracted attention due to their anomalous serifs and they also allowed a lower cost by using cheap paper and printing machines, which would not have rendered well the standard serif fonts.

In several programmer fonts, where most characters are sans serif, a few characters are made slab serif, i.e. with serifs that are as thick as a crossbar, with the purpose of distinguishing them clearly from similar characters. Thus capital I is made with thick serifs looking like crossbars, even if that is not the standard capital I shape. The reason is less to distinguish it from l, which should have a low hook even in sans-serif typefaces, but to distinguish it better from vertical bar, which is important in programming languages.

Moreover, because such programmer fonts are fixed-pitch, a few narrow characters have slab serifs that do not exist in variable-pitch fonts, in order to avoid excessive areas of white space between letters. Such slab serifs added for blackening are put at the top of the small i, j and l letters, not only on capital I (but on the small letters the slab serifs are unilateral, not bilateral, like on capital I). Such extra slab serifs on the narrow characters are inherited from the type-writing machines, where they had the purpose to diminish the pressure of the hammer hitting the paper, to avoid making holes in the paper.

81. Propelloni ◴[] No.46230938{3}[source]
This font can't be promoted enough!
82. NekkoDroid ◴[] No.46231586{7}[source]
> edit: this text is a mess. "It's time to upgrade, and fix the nation's digital potholes." That comma is nonsense.

I assume they wanted to look smart in the sense "look at us, we used the oxford comma" without actually understanding that the oxford comma needs 3 or more elements listed to be an actual oxford comma.

83. sailfast ◴[] No.46231752{6}[source]
Yes thank you for posting the click-through. Just about every site they make is hot garbage unfortunately. It’s depressing.

The Hatch Act is a law, but is effectively dead under this administration as it is never enforced and often violated brazenly.

84. pseingatl ◴[] No.46232213{6}[source]
The US Supreme Court uses Century or Century Schoolbook.
85. sorenjan ◴[] No.46232258{6}[source]
> AN OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

> What's the biggest brand in the world? If you said Trump, you're not wrong.

This is beyond satire by now, it reminds me of Idi Amin and his official title:

His full self-bestowed title ultimately became: "His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, CBE, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular"

replies(1): >>46232691 #
86. sorenjan ◴[] No.46232308{3}[source]
You want to know what the global impression of the US is right now? Here's a translated quote from a newspaper today, from a source in our military:

> – The US has the most qualified intelligence organizations in the world at its disposal. Both the CIA and the FBI have been politicized under the current regime. I find it difficult to see how we will be able to maintain the trusting cooperation we have had with the US in the past after this.

The actions of the current administration speaks far louder than any font ever could, and it's tearing down decades of good will and trust.

replies(1): >>46235800 #
87. ◴[] No.46232691{7}[source]
88. rtkwe ◴[] No.46232724{3}[source]
Yeah I understand it's an issue other places but I don't think it's actually a significant issue in government documents and forms written in English which is the usecase here. The choice doesn't have to satisfy all requirements it just needs to be a good choice for government writing.
89. ◴[] No.46234607{5}[source]
90. notahacker ◴[] No.46234928{3}[source]
It's an interesting thought, given what current global impressions are.

I'm imagining a scenario in which the President of the United States is doing his usual sort of diplomatic outreach, consisting of waffling incoherently about things he's heard on TV that he doesn't like about their country. At one point he loses his train of thought and starts bragging about how well he's doing in cognitive adequacy tests. The diplomats are waiting until the bit where they get to flatter and bribe him at the end, the bit where he usually reverses his foreign policy, so long as they can get him to understand what they're actually asking from him. One of them speculates whether it's even possible that half the country is actually dumber than this guy.

A staffer wearing a MAGA baseball cap sidles up to them with some briefing notes. And its just impossible not to notice the notes are typeset in the very same venerable font that was once used as the default for Windows 9x.

The diplomats are stunned. No sans serif wokeness here. The typeface exudes heritage and gravitas. At last they realize what a very serious adminstration they're dealing with.

91. nailer ◴[] No.46235220{4}[source]
> That's like the CEO of Microsoft having meeting about coding conventions, space vs tabs, variable name format etc.

Gates absolutely did care when Windows products were bad.

92. nailer ◴[] No.46235506{6}[source]
The secretary of state communicates with foreign countries, and part of that relates to how fonts are used. I am sure you are already aware of this.
93. nailer ◴[] No.46235800{4}[source]
> Both the CIA and the FBI have been politicized under the current regime.

The CIA and FBI were politicised well before the current regime. If you live in the US you will be aware of the Russiagate hoax.

94. nailer ◴[] No.46235851{4}[source]
I don't think it really took much time.

"Use a better font in all documnts from now on"

There you go.