< rant natured="good" > Apparently (I've asked a few folks) "the 605" is short for "the 605 *Freeway*" Yet if you say "the Main Street Bridge" you mean, the bridge on Main Street. If you say "the Main Street six-lane street" you mean "the part of Main Street that is a six-lane street." So I hear "the 605 Freeway" as "the part of Interstate 605 which is a limited-access highway ('freeway'), but because Interstates by definition are entirely limited-access, that's all of it, so what are you talking about?" You wouldn't say "Get your kicks on 'the' 66" would you? Why not just say you are on 605 North? No redundant "the" required. </rant>
I once drove to San Diego and wound up spending an hour extra in traffic, gone too far because I was told to exit at "the 125" so obviously I was looking for Interstate 125. However, they meant California 125. I never expected a regular road to be called "the Number" so I was looking for the red-and-blue Interstate shield. Thus:
Serious question: Would you, or would you not, actually call U.S. Route 66 (on one of its "Main Street" style sections) "the 66" or do you really only call limited-access highways "the" --?
the pedants who keep making this argument are actually trying to get everyone to behave as if English was a dead language in some misguided notion that they're protecting it.
Contrariwise, we are trying to actively change English to be better. I will protest the use of "orientate" (should be "orient" just as "inform" not "informate" is correct) and the awkward and irritating Los Angeles-style "I was on the 10" instead of the better "I was on I-10" (or Route 10, or Highway 10, or Interstate 10) for the same reason: if English is a living language, we can improve it just as much as we can dumb it down.
Ride sharing is the modern replacement for taxis.
Except for anyone who's not rich enough to afford a so-called "smart" so-called "telephone" or who, like me, cannot fathom why anyone would pay to carry a spy-on-you machine around. We have no way to utilize those services.
It compresses JPEG files at a rate of 5MB/s and decodes them back to the original bit at 15MB/s
Even if I cross-compile for my 2MHz TRS-80? Amazing!
I watch the news at 125% of normal speed... Doesn't change the content one bit.
There's no news in that "news" anyway.
It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.