Timeline for Idiom or better yet a word for loss of fidelity by copying
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
31 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2021 at 18:24 | vote | accept | user2524930 | ||
| Dec 12, 2021 at 23:17 | comment | added | DjinTonic | The OP didn't use the word degradation (and perhaps didn't know it applied). I thought giving both terms was appropriate, especially since they are so closely related. You of course are free to have your own answer style. Generation loss isn't a single word or an idiom. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 22:49 | comment | added | Owen Reynolds | But that's the point of [single-word/idiom] requests, right? They already have a common-language way to say it, and are looking for a more precise yet lesser-known phrase. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 16:12 | comment | added | DjinTonic | @OwenReynolds. OK, but my point is that for the general public, generation loss doesn't explicitly say what the loss if of, which might be OK if you are already discussion degradation and loss of fidelity, but perhaps not otherwise, e.g., you look at a copy and tell someone "There's been too much generation loss." | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 16:10 | comment | added | Owen Reynolds | If it helps, if you told someone in the video business that a tape had degraded, they'd ask why and say "oh, you mean generation loss". Lots of times when you look something up you wonder if people really talk that way -- I'm saying, yes, I know them, and they do. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 15:41 | comment | added | DjinTonic | @OwenReynolds I'll leave it to others to decide if there is one right/best answer and generation loss is in the first line of my answer. One example above is "Furthermore, photocopies degrade in quality over generations." If the author had written "generation loss" in a non-technical setting, I think they would only have to explain it to readers: "Furthermore, repeatedly copying photocopies will lead to generation loss, i.e., a progressive degradation in quality." | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 15:36 | comment | added | Owen Reynolds | But you agree that degrade isn't THE answer, right? It's too general. Generation loss is the exact term here for "degrades because of copies of copies... ". And it's somewhat buried by being listed 2nd then followed by so much else, isn't it? | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 15:35 | comment | added | DjinTonic | @EricDuminil That has "first generation" as well :-) | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 15:32 | comment | added | Eric Duminil | xkcd seems to agree with "degrade". | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 12:15 | comment | added | DjinTonic | @OwenReynolds The Wiki article mentions distortion along with degradation. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 12:11 | comment | added | DjinTonic | @OwenReynolds A definition alone often doesn't provide nuances in how an answer is used. I try to find example that do this while also confirming or expounding on the definition (not always possible). In my short time at ELU, I've found such answers garner more upvotes. // I think degrade/degradation is also an answer and happens to go hand-in-hand with generation loss. You would probably say to a co-worker "If we make a copy of this copy, the image will probably degrade" rather than "...will suffer generation loss." If a moderator tells me I'm off base, I'll change how I answer. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 6:41 | comment | added | somebody | @OwenReynolds I don't see how it's a bad thing to add more explanation/context. Plus they write the answer in the first sentence... if you really just want the name of the phrase, you can stop reading at the first sentence. But obviously having a lot of example sentences clarifies the meaning in the way that no amount of definition can. | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 6:00 | comment | added | Owen Reynolds | Seems like a lot of clutter here? In general, isn't it fine to write only the answer (generation loss) and then only its definition (and here only to show it's a common term)? | |
| Dec 12, 2021 at 1:31 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 20:43 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 20:03 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 16:36 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 13:27 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 443 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 13:19 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 13:02 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 745 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 12:54 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 745 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 11:20 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 411 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 11:06 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 11:01 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:54 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:46 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:34 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 310 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:25 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 310 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:19 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:13 | history | edited | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2021 at 10:08 | history | answered | DjinTonic | CC BY-SA 4.0 |