Talk:2497: Logic Gates

2021-08-04T11:11:10Z

172.70.130.108:

As someone has just Transcripted basically almost all the fine detail I had planned to entable in the Explanation, I shall not now create repetition. Though I had a little more description to the NORXONDOR GOGONAX, in particular, to reference bidirectional (antiparallel) diode pairings (e.g. an LED assembly that glows a different hue depending upon the applied current bias) as probable inspiration, and that latched Flip-Flops surely inspired some part of the Frankensteinian gate-types, too. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.119|141.101.99.119]] 00:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

(Also, surprised there was no direct "GONDOR" reference. Or maybe that's because it was ''too'' obvious?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.211|141.101.99.211]] 00:12, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

: I was also missing a "GONDOR" reference, and all the X's also made me think XEHANORT. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.174|172.70.126.174]] 03:49, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

...So, who's ready to draw up some truth tables? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.211|172.70.126.211]] 01:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I can't get the lines in the bitwise-operation example to align properly; the first one is indented a tad. Can someone please fix that? Thanks... [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 04:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

The symbol for norx gate (1-input OR, two outputs) I'd read as a noninverting buffer to increase another gate's usable fan-out. Xand gort resembles the symbol for an [[wikipedia:Operational amplifier|op-amp]]. Given the subtraction that an op-amp does, the xand gort's truth table probably resembles that of the [[wikipedia:Material conditional|"implies" operator]]. [[User:Tepples|Tepples]] ([[User talk:Tepples|talk]]) 04:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

the "NORG XORT" is not equivalent to an XOR, as the symbol is round on the right. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.186|141.101.69.186]] 06:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Right, "NORG XORT" would be a XNAND with inverted inputs, though I don't know what the logic table from a XAND or XNAND gate would look like. If De Morgan applies to XAND/XOR the same way as with AND/OR, would a "NORG XORT" then be equivalent to a XOR ? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.43|162.158.129.43]] 15:12, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
:: I think it is specifically a hybrid between XOR and NAND. The left edge is curved like OR, and the right edge curved like AND. I did spend some time thinking about XAND, though. One of my ideas was a >2-input AND that is only true if exactly 2 inputs are true. I wonder what qubit gates are like. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.174|108.162.219.174]] 16:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

;Logic Gates
It seems to me that their ought to be 16 possible logic gates. Although some would ignore one or both inputs. [[User:Algr|Algr]] ([[User talk:Algr|talk]]) 07:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
:Yes. The 74181 4-bit arithmetic logic chip implements all 16 possible binary logic operations. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/74181 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.253|162.158.94.253]] 07:34, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
:: It doesn't say the names of the various gates. On my list I made up a few, like "Only B" that only returns true if B is true and A isn't. Are their real names for this? [[User:Algr|Algr]] ([[User talk:Algr|talk]]) 18:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
::: I could suggest "Unless" (as in 'B unless A', or maybe to counterpart 'A unless B' with standard order of operands, 'A disallows B'). Though the partially composite construct '!A && B' would be easier to grasp by those already handling logic statements, I think. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.78|141.101.76.78]] 19:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
::: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_function#Table_of_binary_truth_functions --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.135|162.158.126.135]] 23:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
:::: So '''"Only B"''' is called '''"Converse nonimplication"'''?! Maybe I'm the ''only'' logical person. [[User:Algr|Algr]] ([[User talk:Algr|talk]]) 06:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
:As Randall drew gates with two outputs, these would have 256 (16^2) possible functions [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.252|162.158.94.252]] 15:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
:: That couldn't logically be anything but two logic gates sharing the same input. [[User:Algr|Algr]] ([[User talk:Algr|talk]])

there should be a category of comics where it starts out like a normal list and gets weirder and weirder like [[2070:_Trig_Identities|Trig Identities]] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.164|172.70.34.164]] 18:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Bumpf

What, no IMPLIES gate? I actually used this once to implement a NOT operation in a database see search. [[User:Joem5636|Joem5636]] ([[User talk:Joem5636|talk]]) 11:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

It appears to me that the new gate names are just taken from the letters of the original gate names: NAND, NOR, XOR,and GATE. They're just stuck together in ways that tickled the creator's fancy. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.108|172.70.130.108]] 11:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2496: Mine Captcha

2021-07-30T18:23:04Z

172.70.130.108:

Mines at:

+----+
| |
|** |
| * *|
| |
+----+

[[User:Ezist|Ezist]] ([[User talk:Ezist|talk]]) 14:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

:+1234
:A2 1
:B??3
:C3? ?
:D 1 1
:concur.

AKA

. . . .
* * . .
. * . *
. . . .

Should be mentioned that it's most probably easier to run a script that solves this puzzle that to explain minesweeper to the majority of people, so this captcha seems pretty useless
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.72|162.158.92.72]] 15:56, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
: Writing a script to solve Minesweeper is a great exercise and helps to build a guaranteed-solvable game (which, IMO, is a good thing), but it won't usually start with image recognition. I'm not sure how hard it would be to write an image solver, especially if - unlike in this example - you'd need to dig some cells to finish solving it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.59|108.162.250.59]] 16:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that it would be better to explain why there is mine in B3 and D3 (due to the ones) because you then have the full solution. I think that the curent explanation isn't complete enough for someone who don't know minesweeper to understand the solution
Maybe it is only me but I think that it would be less confusing to have column marked with letter and line with number. i don't know if there is any standard for that. I am used to excel way of doing it [[Special:Contributions/162.158.50.27|162.158.50.27]] 16:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I am soooo disappointed that the cursed minesweeper game is not playable. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.79|108.162.221.79]] 16:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Is something supposedto happen when I click on a box? I tried this in Chrome, IE, and Firefox, and nothing happens. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.170|172.70.110.170]] 16:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I have edited the image to include flags or bombs to mark the places. But as a new user I am not allowed to upload images.
If somebody is willing to receive them I could email them. [[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 17:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The title is eerily similar to Mein Kampf

The explanation repeats "this is hard because in Minesweeper you're supposed to press the buttons without mines" a lot.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.108|172.70.130.108]] 18:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2497: Logic Gates

Talk:2496: Mine Captcha