Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by version_five 1311 days ago
> no longer offered

The title says "charged", not "charges".

Re the per area code, I agree, it was also my first thought, but I can't think of any way the poster could have concisely included that in the title
2 comments
User23 1310 days ago
None of the cool kids say “area code,” they’re NPAs.

Sorry, but I have a lingering attachment to telco industry acronyms. Let me tell you about my DNIS[1].

[1] pronounced dee-nis.

link
function_seven 1310 days ago
Always fun troubleshooting analog DID (FXO) lines that supported DNIS
link
alex_young 1310 days ago
“You could own” is present tense. Perhaps “could have” would be better?
link
valleyer 1310 days ago
"Could" can be both the conditional present tense or preterite tense in English (at least AmE). It's ambiguous.

See: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/could#Verb

link
alex_young 1310 days ago
The point I was attempting to make is that the usage is incorrect and misleading in this context. The way the title is worded is indeed the past tense usage.
link
kergonath 1310 days ago
The point the parent was making is that it is not incorrect or misleading, just ambiguous. And even then, it’s ambiguous only if you leave out the second clause.

“I could have a banana” has two perfectly correct meanings: it is possible for me to have a banana right now depending on some factor (conditional), or I had the possibility to have a banana in the past (preterite).

A preterite in the second clause eliminates the possibility of a present conditional in the first one.

link
PebblesRox 1310 days ago
Don't you need to add another verb for “I could have a banana” to work as past tense?

E.g. "I could have eaten" or "I could have had"

Edit: Oh wait, now I see it. Something like "I knew I could have a banana if I got hungry."

link