Sure.
Similar things are potentially true of all aspects of grammar/spelling/word choice that aren't strictly necessary in order to convey the meaning of a phrase... for example, you'll generally no what I mean from context even if I confuse "no" and "know."
For my own part, I have a fondness for using different signals to invoke different referents (and for not using different signals to invoke the same referent), but I acknowledge that other people's mileage varies, and that we could accept a lot of linguistic/orthographic abberations without significantly reducing comprehensibility.
The phrases "generally no" and "generally know" both appear frequently in English. "it's a" is orders of magnitude more common than "its a." Replacing "know" with "no" doesn't significantly reduce comprehensibility--but it does make the phrase take longer to parse. Replacing "it's" with "its" doesn't reduce comprehensibility at all, nor does it make the phrase any harder to read.
There's been a recent heavily upvoted and profusely commented post about things people want to learn. It's close to having so many comments in a single day that it should probably have a part 2.
However, the subject seems to inspire thoughts about what *other* people ought to know, and while that's got a good bit of overlap, it's emotionally rather different.
So, what do you think other people ought to know? Any theories about why they haven't learned it already? Any experience with getting someone else to learn something when it started out as your project rather than theirs, especially if the other person was an adult?