explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1820: Security Advice

2017-04-05T15:15:20Z

162.158.2.10:

Secret questions are not 2-factor authentication (2FA). They are just a really shitty password, something that you know. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 14:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Secret questions are more like 0-factor authentication, since they typically ask for public data. Shirluban [[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.106|141.101.88.106]] 14:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Use prime numbers in your password: this would only limit the number of possible passwords for a hacker to check.

Use special characters like & and % : this advice is thoroughly handled in https://xkcd.com/936/ Changing characters into a special one does adds just very little to the search space.
<small>However, a video from Computerphile suggests ''inserting'' a random character somewhere in the password which might actually be rather helpful</small>

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.211|162.158.111.211]] 14:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Maybe you really should use a secure font [https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/MS15-078 Font related bug] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.161|162.158.79.161]] 15:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Should the blue check mark tip be noted as only being useful on Twitter? Usually, the advice doesn't apply to emails, which are significantly more likely to ask for your less-secret account details, but also significantly less likely to have a blue check mark. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.10|162.158.2.10]] 15:15, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1816: Mispronunciation

2017-03-27T20:02:24Z

162.158.2.10:

Epitome is an interesting one for me, since I read it phonetically (same as Randal's example), and didn't figure out that "e-pi-tō-mē" and "eppy-tome" were the same word until mid to late teens. I still have to stop myself from reading it wrong when I see it on the page... [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 15:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I think there's another level beyond the obvious, especially in the title text. You're pronouncing the word 'epitome' in whatever way you always have (inside your head), he's making clear that he's not saying it the way you say it.. so how do you read the comic? The sentence only makes sense if you say it aloud, but you can't because you don't know how he's pronouncing it.[[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 16:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epitome_of_Hyperbole

Shouldn't there be a flap in epitome? --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.94|172.68.54.94]] 19:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I feel like it's relevant to point out how the mispronunciation of mispronunciation is enhanced by contrasting it with mispronounce, which is the reason that most people mispronounce mispronunciation, due to the unexpected change in how the word is pronounced between the two terms. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.10|162.158.2.10]] 20:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1781: Artifacts

2017-01-04T15:40:59Z

162.158.2.10:

Wouldnt data entirely made of outliners just be ..regular measurements that just yields different results?[[User:West|#GoWest-West]] ([[User talk:West|talk]]) 13:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

The graph that Cueball is showing looks like the graph from the EM drive paper. Maybe Randall is poking fun at the EM drive with this comic? [[User:Cgplover|Cgplover]] ([[User talk:Cgplover|talk]]) 14:15, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

It does look like the Full Resonance tuner sweep graph [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.238|108.162.237.238]] 15:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Why the emphasis on HAVE in the alttext instead of, say, ENTIRELY?
: I see no issue with this. The speaker is clearly focusing on the probability of the situation. If anything, I'd say that this emphasis is intended to underline the competence, or lack thereof, of the researcher, which is in line with the mocking tone previously given. Not emphasizing HAVE would more indicate the speaker is accepting of the results, but is still surprised by them. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.10|162.158.2.10]] 15:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Is there also a suggestion that Indiana Jones didn't properly handle artifacts he dealt with?
: Depends... Does dropping the Holy Grail down a crevice count as "not properly"? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.10|162.158.2.10]] 15:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

I have the feeling that I've seen this comic before. Is there another comic where Cueball gives a presentation and is then dissed by his audience? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.223|162.158.89.223]] 15:36, 4 January 2017 (UTC)