Why should the archaic "you" or "though" with all those useless vestigial letters be considered somehow more evolved than the variants that correspond more closely to the spoken language? Likewise what's wrong with "lol"? You obviously understood what they meant, and conveying that information is exactly the purpose of language.
Languages have always changed, and grumpy old men have always complained about how those changes are destroying the language. But despite that perpetual cycle of corruption lasting for thousands of years, we are in fact not communicating by pointing and grunting.
We are in fact in many cases not communicating at all. Witness the wild misinterpretations on Hacker News, we've all experienced it. Witness the fracturing of language by region, city or neighborhood. Witness my inability to comprehend vacuous television dialog dominated by 20-somethings.
Languages have always changed, and grumpy old men have always complained about how those changes are destroying the language. But despite that perpetual cycle of corruption lasting for thousands of years, we are in fact not communicating by pointing and grunting.