To have or not to have

I wonder if the use of the word "have" is going to disappear soon. I see lots of people substituting it with the word "of"; like when they write "should of" instead of "should have". I don't know if they actually think that "of" is an appropriate word to use in that context, or if they're just too lazy to write the slightly longer "have".

Maybe it's a result of texting. When writing SMS messages people often tend to shorten words, or in other ways modify them so that they can write the messages faster.

If it's so damn important to write as fast as possible, then why not take it further? Why not get rid of, or alter, other annoyingly long words too? I mean it not only makes you write faster, it also gives the reader a lot less to read!

Let's say you spent one minute to read what I wrote above. Let me try to write it more efficiently...

I wndr f "have"'s gnna go soon. Lotsa peeps use "of" insted, tats cool! "Of"'s lots better! Txt mssgs showed u te way, txt mssgs rulez!!

Wrting fast's way imprtnt! Lose lotsa long boring wrds, ten we cn wrt fast'n reed fast!

The paragraph above said about the same as the first paragraph, but used a lot less words. I can see other benifits too: People use less paper for printing. If you lose a few keys on your keyboard you can still use it. These aspects shows that the new way of writing is also environmentally friendly, in that it lessens the use of natural resources.

Conclusion: To hell with "have" in my opinion. Good riddance!