Talk:2575: What If? 2

2022-02-01T14:18:47Z

172.69.71.163:

Yay! \o/ [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 15:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Note that there is actually a term for the 13th month of the year, and it's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecimber Undecimber].
[[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 15:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
:And the Jewish calendar has a 13th month every 2-3 years, since it's a lunar calendar. But rather than a completely different month name, the month Adar is doubled to Adar I and Adar II. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

This is awesome! I really hope one of the answers is about cotton candy breaking one's fall, since it was foreshadowed in book one. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.90.23|172.69.90.23]] 15:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT YAYAYAYAYYAY!!!! [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 16:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

According to the Simpsons the 13th month is Smarch. What do we do when Simpsons and Randall disagree?
Also, pretty sure 2021 was the first year that 13th month aligned with our reality. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.18|172.70.211.18]] 17:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I can't shake the feeling that he announced it on 31/01 because it's coming out on 13/09 and that's nearly 13/10 which is 31/01 with the month and day digits switched. But I might be one of those numerology people without realising it --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
:If you're not, you should count yourself lucky! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.68|172.70.86.68]] 18:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

The pre-order through all the different sources is good, but **What if** someone wanted a hard copy of the book autographed by Randall? I don't see any provision for that. [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 00:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it just me, but is 7 months in advance a bit early to announce a book release? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.228|108.162.250.228]] 01:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
: Seems an oddly advanced announcement to me too, but I guess with transport lines being so messed up, it's an attempt to be prepared well ahead for anything. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.87|108.162.249.87]] 05:12, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

This is one of the few times, it is quite explicit that Randall himself is in the comic instead of him as fictional narrator. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.68|172.70.86.68]] 07:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

It comes out on my birthday! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.95|172.70.214.95]] 09:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
:Happy birthday! ...in advance. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 12:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

It's a crummy commercial? Son of a glitch.

Talk:2522: Two-Factor Security Key

2021-10-01T18:43:53Z

172.69.71.163: Layered speech.

There are 2FA USB keys (WebAuthn, FIDO2, U2F) such as
https://shop.nitrokey.com/shop/product/nk-fi2-nitrokey-fido2-55 with a hole to attach a keychain - and the item in the last panel looks a bit like such one [[User:Bmwiedemann|Bmwiedemann]] ([[User talk:Bmwiedemann|talk]]) 03:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
:: First thing that comes to mind when someone mentions a 2FA security key. 100% most certainly what they are talking about. yubikey/fido2 being the ones that popularized it iirc [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.177|172.69.71.177]] 04:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
:: Yeah, yubikey definitely comes to mind. I wouldn't call 2FA on a phone a 2FA "Key". Perhaps you could call the generator secret a (cryptographic) key, but I don't think that's what this comic is talking about. [[User:Jeffkmeng|Jeffkmeng]] ([[User talk:Jeffkmeng|talk]]) 06:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
2FA tokens are actually quite often physical keys that fit on a keychain and produce a secret number to input for authentication. It is only recently that such 2FA key generators have moved into phones. Here is one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_SecurID
[[User:Adron1111|Adron1111]] ([[User talk:Adron1111|talk]]) 06:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

The joke here isn't 2FA key vs tumbler-and-pin key, the joke is that all of the configuration pain he's talking about isn't setting up the key to work with his computer or various sites (which one might expect when introducing a new, non-tech-savvy user to 2FA), but rather getting the key onto his keyring. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.67|172.69.34.67]] 07:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Haven't put this in the text (I added some practical "what you know/have/are" stuff, from my own past experience) but I first thought it was that two ''actual'' factors are now on the keyring (insecurely, as per the current last para?). A 'have' item is obviously there, of whatever form, but now (unless it's a second 'have', supposed to be separate) there is also somehow a 'know' one (c.f. those people who have scrawled their bank-card PINs onto their bank-cards, entirely negating that particular safety-factor) or an 'are' one (bits of fingerprint? blood samples?). Possibly now imposssible to use (if not trivially easy to co-steal). Plus, remember that data security has two faces: 1) Only those authorised may access/change data; 2) Those who are authorised should not be deprived of this ability. It is commonly the second that require a second factor (separate email/phone contact) to get around problems with the first (forgotten password), though it isn't really an everyday 2FA application, just a backup 1FA method (as with "Name of first pet", etc). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.191|172.70.34.191]] 10:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

My immidiate take was that Ponytail was being sarcastic . . . . [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.209|172.70.130.209]] 10:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

wow you guys finished the explanation already? nice

This explanation needs a link to the Wikipedia entry for {{w|Security token}}, because that is clearly what Cueball is putting on his keyring here. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.24|162.158.203.24]] 14:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Ouch. The [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2522:_Two-Factor_Security_Key&diff=218697&oldid=218693 Cleanup] and some other lesser pruning was clearly necessary, definitely, but expunged a number of perhaps more interesting key points in the process, that I might have more explicitly made if given a nearly blank sheet. (e.g.: occasional verification by external email is not 'traditional' 2FA, really just 2ndF(re-)A but may have become thought of as it.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.229|141.101.107.229]] 12:33, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be amazing if we had to use 2FA for important stuff, like voting. [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 13:28, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
:Don't give the GOP ideas. Since voter fraud is a negligible problem, it would be amazing if anyone thought 2FA were needed. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

My initial thought was that the joke is that the token isn't actually a fob with a slot for a keyring, and Cueball had to mangle it to install it, possibly rendering it non-functional. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I came to explainxkcd to find out what "proof of work" was. 
The definition currently given is: "a security term for a concept intended to deter denial of service and similar volume-based attacks". 
So... "proof of work" is something called a "security term" for a particular concept. And the concept itself, is (somehow) intended to deter "denial of service and similar volume based attacks"... whatever those are...? 
Remember, I'm just an average person, [[2501: Average Familiarity|I only know the chemical formulas for olivine and one or two feldspars]] and I'm here because I'm dumb. mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.143|172.69.71.143]] 17:00, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

"from her response probably hasn't yet gotten the joke" - this assumes far more ignorance/stupidity on the part of the character than she ever normally exhibits. To me, XKCD is filled with layered "ironic" speech rather than literals. Her answer "at least now it's secure" makes no sense as a response if she is taking his statement at face value, rather than facetiously responding tongue-in-cheek. But I see this kind of projected-ignorance so often in the explanations here, I'm not even sure if it's worth fixing when I see it. Especially because it feels hard to explain layered speech to people who don't use it, every time it happens :( --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.163|172.69.71.163]] 18:43, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2575: What If? 2

Talk:2522: Two-Factor Security Key