https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=162.158.123.199&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T14:44:49ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2214:_Chemistry_Nobel&diff=1811862214: Chemistry Nobel2019-10-12T15:08:31Z<p>162.158.123.199: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2214<br />
| date = October 11, 2019<br />
| title = Chemistry Nobel<br />
| image = chemistry nobel.png<br />
| titletext = Most chemists thought the lanthanides and actinides could be inserted in the sixth and seventh rows, but no, they're just floating down at the bottom with lots more undiscovered elements all around them.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by THE SOCIETY OF ANNOYING MENDELEEV. Some noteworthy elements could have been missed, so calling this complete will be held off on.}}<br />
<br />
This comic pokes fun at the misconception that the empty space at the top of the {{w|periodic table}} represents undiscovered elements, akin to some existing elements having been discovered through unfilled gaps in the table. This is an absurdity; despite this, the team shown has won the [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Chemistry Nobel Prize in Chemistry].<br />
<br />
In reality, the gap is because of the way electrons are arranged in atoms. Simply put, each row of the periodic table collects together elements with the same number of {{w|electron shell}}s. Lower shells have fewer electrons, so the upper rows have fewer elements in them. Meanwhile, because of the way the columns are organized (grouping together elements based on certain characteristics), as the rows get longer the "extra" elements are added in the middle of the row rather than at one end. Hence, earlier rows are shown with a gap in the middle.<br />
<br />
The title text claims that the lanthanides and actinides are distinct from the elements in the sixth and seventh rows; in actuality, they are only ever shown separately for convenience. (When expanded into its [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_table#The_long-_or_32-column_table 32 column form], the sixth and seventh rows are awkwardly wide. Placing the lathanides and actinides in a separate block below the table is the usual solution.) In addition, it says that there are many more elements floating around. Barring unconventional organization choices, this may make it seem as if the periodic table is an actual physical object.<br />
<br />
This comic may have been inspired by the recent awarding of the 2019 Nobel Prize for Chemistry on October 9, 2019, to [https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/2019/press-release/ John B. Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham, and Akira Yoshino] for their work in the development of lithium-ion batteries.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript}}<br />
<br />
:[Ponytail holds a pointer and stands in front of an image of the periodic table of the elements, with the “empty” sections within the top rows filled with dotted boxes. Ponytail points to this area.]<br />
:Ponytail: I don't know why no one else thought to look here. <br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel]:<br />
:The 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry went to the team that discovered the elements in the big gap at the top of the periodic table.<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<!-- Include any categories below this line. --><br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Chemistry]]</div>162.158.123.199https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1432:_The_Sake_of_Argument&diff=181129Talk:1432: The Sake of Argument2019-10-11T14:12:20Z<p>162.158.123.199: </p>
<hr />
<div>In my experience when someone begins a hypothetical with "for the sake of argument" The hypothetical being explored is almost always a direct exploration of the argument being put forward by the person they are speaking to, so to my mind the perfect response to the second panel would have been: "You admit you were wrong then, Excellent!" ;-) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.211|108.162.250.211]] 07:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:In contrast, it is often used alongs the lines of "OK, I see that you don't agree with my viewpoint, so for the sake of argument, pretend that you do agree with my viewpoint". I suppose this is an effort to try and get the other person to explore your views by stepping into them. For example: "Ok I know that you think that drink driving is fine, but for the sake of argument imagine that your dog had just been run over by a drunk driver" --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:53, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
IMHO could be vaguely related to the [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y Monty Python's Argument Clinic] [[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]]<br />
:IMHO "related" to, no matter how vaguely, would be a strong choice of word. At best, I could imagine "inspired by" - after all, Cueball has barely presented a connected series of statements, much less apparently one intended to establish a proposition, definite or otherwise - it's clearly the automatic gainsaying of anything Ponytail says... [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 10:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
::No it isn't! ;-) [[User:MGitsfullofsheep|MGitsfullofsheep]] ([[User talk:MGitsfullofsheep|talk]]) 12:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
::: For the sake of argument, say it is. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.125|108.162.217.125]] 22:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)BK<br />
<br />
"Rather than getting frustrated at being derailed, Ponytail instead seizes on this and decides they should get a boat, and that the Devil can come too." - I'm reading the title text a bit differently: it's not Ponytail being not angry and chiming in, but actually having no words (indicated by '...') and then it's Cueball again taunting her even more with inviting the devil. [[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]] ([[User talk:Zefiro|talk]]) 09:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I just wanted to say that I agree with Zefiro here.--[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.173|173.245.56.173]] 09:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::On reading again, I agree. I missed that the ellipsis was a seperate section, rather than the beginning of 'For arguments sake we should get a boat' --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 11:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Could he possibly be making a pun? "For the sake of the 'ARGH' you meant," perhaps? [[User:Joehammer79|Joehammer79]] ([[User talk:Joehammer79|talk]]) 13:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think Cueball is taking the "for the sake of argument" too literally, as "in order to create more to argue on". Also "advocate". Also, "device" in the title text (literal physical transportation device vs rhetorical device). The explanation as of now doesn't seem to realize this. [[User:Matega|Matega]] ([[User talk:Matega|talk]]) 15:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Regarding Devils advocate and copied from Wikipedia: "During the canonization process employed by the Roman Catholic Church, the Promoter of the Faith (Latin: promotor fidei), popularly known as the Devil's advocate (Latin: advocatus diaboli), was a canon lawyer appointed by Church authorities to argue against the canonization of a candidate.[2] It was this person’s job to take a skeptical view of the candidate's character, to look for holes in the evidence, to argue that any miracles attributed to the candidate were fraudulent, and so on. The Devil's advocate opposed God's advocate (Latin: advocatus Dei; also known as the Promoter of the Cause), whose task was to make the argument in favor of canonization. This task is now performed by the Promoter of Justice (promotor iustitiae), who is in charge of examining how accurate is the inquiry on the saintliness of the candidate." {{unsigned|Cobble}}<br />
<br />
Are we sure this isn't just Beret Guy going casual? {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.164}}<br />
<br />
The "oh, like a boat" is a reference to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.240.36|108.162.240.36]] 11:18, 16 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
:No it isn't. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 05:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There are two unspoken premises when arguing. The first is that both you and your interlocutor are reasonable (you wouldn't try to reason with someone that is unreasonable, would you?), and the second is that you both agree on some premise (you can't come to a conclusion from a premise you don't have). The usefulness of arguing from a premise that you don't have is that if your premise ever changes (like if you gain new information), then you already have your new conclusion at the ready. It's important because perfectly rational people should agree on the same "if X, then Y", but "reality is X" and "I think reality is X" are two different statements. With that in mind, Devil's Advocate as rhetorical device has an obvious purpose in that it allows you to address your own fallability and to look at the world outside yourself. Claiming to be infallible may not be unreasonable, but it's factually wrong. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.123.199|162.158.123.199]] 14:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)</div>162.158.123.199https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1432:_The_Sake_of_Argument&diff=181128Talk:1432: The Sake of Argument2019-10-11T14:10:32Z<p>162.158.123.199: </p>
<hr />
<div>In my experience when someone begins a hypothetical with "for the sake of argument" The hypothetical being explored is almost always a direct exploration of the argument being put forward by the person they are speaking to, so to my mind the perfect response to the second panel would have been: "You admit you were wrong then, Excellent!" ;-) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.211|108.162.250.211]] 07:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:In contrast, it is often used alongs the lines of "OK, I see that you don't agree with my viewpoint, so for the sake of argument, pretend that you do agree with my viewpoint". I suppose this is an effort to try and get the other person to explore your views by stepping into them. For example: "Ok I know that you think that drink driving is fine, but for the sake of argument imagine that your dog had just been run over by a drunk driver" --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:53, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
IMHO could be vaguely related to the [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y Monty Python's Argument Clinic] [[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]]<br />
:IMHO "related" to, no matter how vaguely, would be a strong choice of word. At best, I could imagine "inspired by" - after all, Cueball has barely presented a connected series of statements, much less apparently one intended to establish a proposition, definite or otherwise - it's clearly the automatic gainsaying of anything Ponytail says... [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 10:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
::No it isn't! ;-) [[User:MGitsfullofsheep|MGitsfullofsheep]] ([[User talk:MGitsfullofsheep|talk]]) 12:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
::: For the sake of argument, say it is. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.125|108.162.217.125]] 22:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)BK<br />
<br />
"Rather than getting frustrated at being derailed, Ponytail instead seizes on this and decides they should get a boat, and that the Devil can come too." - I'm reading the title text a bit differently: it's not Ponytail being not angry and chiming in, but actually having no words (indicated by '...') and then it's Cueball again taunting her even more with inviting the devil. [[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]] ([[User talk:Zefiro|talk]]) 09:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I just wanted to say that I agree with Zefiro here.--[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.173|173.245.56.173]] 09:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::On reading again, I agree. I missed that the ellipsis was a seperate section, rather than the beginning of 'For arguments sake we should get a boat' --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 11:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Could he possibly be making a pun? "For the sake of the 'ARGH' you meant," perhaps? [[User:Joehammer79|Joehammer79]] ([[User talk:Joehammer79|talk]]) 13:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think Cueball is taking the "for the sake of argument" too literally, as "in order to create more to argue on". Also "advocate". Also, "device" in the title text (literal physical transportation device vs rhetorical device). The explanation as of now doesn't seem to realize this. [[User:Matega|Matega]] ([[User talk:Matega|talk]]) 15:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Regarding Devils advocate and copied from Wikipedia: "During the canonization process employed by the Roman Catholic Church, the Promoter of the Faith (Latin: promotor fidei), popularly known as the Devil's advocate (Latin: advocatus diaboli), was a canon lawyer appointed by Church authorities to argue against the canonization of a candidate.[2] It was this person’s job to take a skeptical view of the candidate's character, to look for holes in the evidence, to argue that any miracles attributed to the candidate were fraudulent, and so on. The Devil's advocate opposed God's advocate (Latin: advocatus Dei; also known as the Promoter of the Cause), whose task was to make the argument in favor of canonization. This task is now performed by the Promoter of Justice (promotor iustitiae), who is in charge of examining how accurate is the inquiry on the saintliness of the candidate." {{unsigned|Cobble}}<br />
<br />
Are we sure this isn't just Beret Guy going casual? {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.164}}<br />
<br />
The "oh, like a boat" is a reference to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.240.36|108.162.240.36]] 11:18, 16 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
:No it isn't. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 05:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There are two unspoken premises when arguing. The first is that both you and your interlocutor are reasonable (you wouldn't try to reason with someone that is unreasonable, would you?), and the second is that you both agree on some premise (you can't come to a conclusion from a premise you don't have). The usefulness of arguing from a premise that you don't have is that if your premise ever changes (like if you gain new information), then you already have your new conclusion at the ready. It's important because perfectly rational people should agree on the same "if X, then Y", but "reality is X" and "I think reality is X" are two different statements. With that in mind, Devil's Advocate as rhetorical device has an obvious purpose in that it allows you to address your own fallability and to look at the world one yourself. Claiming to be infallible may not be unreasonable, but it's factually wrong. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.123.199|162.158.123.199]] 14:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)</div>162.158.123.199https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2206:_Mavis_Beacon&diff=1803982206: Mavis Beacon2019-09-24T14:15:15Z<p>162.158.123.199: I played Sid Meyer's Civilization for almost twenty years... I'll admit that's a lot, but 30 isn't that much more. And I'm fine mentally according to my mother who had me tested.</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2206<br />
| date = September 23, 2019<br />
| title = Mavis Beacon<br />
| image = mavis_beacon.png<br />
| titletext = There are actually lowercase-like 'oldstyle' forms of normal numbers with more pronounced ascenders and descenders, which is why some numbers like '5' in books sometimes dangle below the line. But the true capital numbers remain the domain of number maven Mavis Beacon.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by an END BOSS. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
''{{w|Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing}}'' is a computer game first released in 1987, with the goal of teaching touch-typing and improving typing speed on a computer keyboard. Unlike many video games, ''Mavis Beacon'' contains no combat and therefore does not feature any "{{w|Boss_(video_gaming)#Final_boss|end boss}}" (a very powerful enemy encountered as the final challenge of the game). In many video games, defeating major opponents "unlocks" special features, such as improved weapons. Also, playing ''Mavis Beacon'', although it may improve typing skill, has no effect on how typing works on one's computer.<br />
<br />
However, [[Cueball]] asserts that after 30 years of playing ''Mavis Beacon'', he encountered and defeated such a boss. Playing the same game for 30 years is rare, and may not be an indicator of good mental health. Regardless, Cueball claims that defeating this "end boss" unlocked an ability to type esoteric "capital numbers," which Randall depicts as more extravagant versions of the familiar numerals. (Although modern Latin letters have different capital and lower-case forms, numerals do not.)<br />
<br />
Typing such numerals is said to require pressing the Alt, tilde (~), Scroll Lock, and numeral keys at the same time. Some keyboard layouts do not have a scroll lock key or a separate tilde key (such that pressing ~ actually requires pressing a shift key along with the ~ key), and in any event pressing four or five keys at once would be quite difficult. In addition to this, many keyboards are incapable of pressing certain combinations of keys, especially combinations of more than 3. Needless to say, pressing all those keys simultaneously does not, in fact, do anything like what the comics describes in any known computer system, though some smaller subset of those keys together (i.e. "Alt ~" or "Alt numeral-key") might activate other operating system or user-defined shortcuts.<br />
<br />
In the title text, Randall states that [https://www.bamagazine.com/Text-type-typeface-s/105.htm lowercase numerals do exist]; however, "capital numerals" are a guarded secret of Mavis Beacon. {{w|Mavis Beacon (character)|Mavis Beacon}} was the character created as the typing instructor for the ''Mavis Beacon'' game, and does not actually exist as a real-life person. Additionally, as a typing instructor, this person (even if she actually existed) would not be able to change typographical standards. {{Citation needed}}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[Cueball is sitting in an office chair at his desk in front of his computer.]<br />
:Computer: Congratulations.<br />
:Computer: Use this power wisely.<br />
:Computer: Key Code (Secret!!): <span style="border: 1px solid black"><kbd>Alt</kbd></span> + <span style="border: 1px solid black"><kbd>Tilde</kbd></span> + <span style="border: 1px solid black"><kbd>Scroll Lock</kbd></span> + Number<br />
:[stylized versions of the Arabic numerals 0-9]<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:After 30 years, I finally beat the end boss of ''Mavis Beacon'' and unlocked the ability to type capital numbers.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Computers]]</div>162.158.123.199https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2197:_Game_Show&diff=1803362197: Game Show2019-09-23T17:47:38Z<p>162.158.123.199: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2197<br />
| date = September 2, 2019<br />
| title = Game Show<br />
| image = game_show.png<br />
| titletext = Eventually they agreed to "an auto-retracting dog leash with one end clipped to your house, so you can press the button on the handle and water-ski home."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
Many shows have situations where the participants are asked hypothetical questions. A common hypothetical question asked to ascertain what someone considers most important to them is the one item they would take to a deserted island -- to make the best of a boring situation.<br />
<br />
[[Black Hat]] is on such a game show, and he does his best to undermine the intent of the question. Instead of answering with a favorite item -- such as his favorite album or book -- he lists various things (see [[#List of Black Hat's items|below]]), which he doesn't own and apparently expects the show's producers to provide him, starting with somewhat reasonable means of escape (e.g., a plane) to increasingly absurd items that appear to be chosen based on how difficult they would be to actually provide (e.g., the entire Atlantic Ocean). The items appear to follow Black Hat's stream of consciousness, starting with a boat, then a plane, then a distinctive plane, the bones of the pilot of that plane, the internal structure (similar to bones) of the famed landmark Statue of Liberty, etc.<br />
<br />
The title text reveals that the game show has ultimately acquiesced to one of Black Hat's wishes in a way: the dog leash mentioned would allow him to water-ski home, though such a dog leash is implausible (for example, a dog leash from San Francisco to Hawaii would be over 2000 miles long).<br />
<br />
===List of Black Hat's items===<br />
* A '''boat''', so he could sail home.<br />
* A '''plane''', so he could fly home.<br />
* '''{{w|Amelia Earhart|Amelia Earhart's}} plane'''. Moving from reasonable methods of escape to more absurd items, Black Hat requests a plane that is currently lost and may never be discovered. Amelia Earhart was a female U.S. aviator who went missing in the Pacific Ocean in 1937 on an attempt to circumnavigate earth. The search for her crash site has gone on sporadically since she disappeared, and there's still keen interest in finding her -- and coming up with interesting new ideas to guess where she crashed. This answer is a funny continuation of Black Hat's 2nd answer, a '''plane'''. Black Hat doesn't just want any plane, he wants a plane that was famous for going down in a unknown spot in the ocean. If the producers of the show were to provide Black Hat with the plane they would have to first surmount an unsolved problem (i.e., where is Amelia Earhart's plane).<br />
* '''{{w|Amelia Earhart|Amelia Earhart's}} skeleton'''. Moving on from her plane, and being somewhat macabre in the process, Black Hat suggests Amelia Earhart's bones. Similar to her plane this would require the producers to find something that currently is not located. Also, given the biodegradability of bones there is perhaps a higher likelihood that the bones simply do not exist anymore, making the request potentially impossible.<br />
* '''The internal structure of the {{w|Statue of Liberty}}''' was built by Gustave Eiffel, best known for his work on the Eiffel Tower. This is a continuation of the skeleton answer, as it is the internal support of the statue, similar to the function of human bones. This does not require the search that Amelia Earhart's plane (or bones) would require, but might be equally difficult given the status of the statue as a national symbol and given that the statue is on a guarded island. This is in addition to the logistical difficulties of transporting the internal structure of a large statue.<br />
* '''The {{w|Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom}}''' are a continuation of the theme of national symbols. The Crown Jewels are ceremonial objects owned by the kings and queens of the UK. The items are kept under heavy guard and are valued at about $4 billion. Their acquisition would be nearly impossible; however, if they were acquired, it would result in an international hunt, which may help Black Hat escape the island.<br />
* '''The entire television audience for the show''', so it wouldn't be deserted anymore -- and potentially to punish them for being entertained at the mean idea of having contestants be deserted on an island. If this is a popular channel/show, this could potentially be millions of people, all of whom have at least been exposed to the idea of making the most of a boring and potentially life-threatening situation. Then at least it would no longer be a deserted island, but of course it would be even more difficult to survive. <br />
* '''The {{w|Greenland ice sheet}}''' is the body of ice covering the island of {{w|Greenland}}. As the second largest ice sheet on Earth, it could cause catastrophic environmental damage, ignoring the sheer magnitude of the task, which would be well beyond the capabilities of any television show and probably beyond the capabilities of an international effort.<br />
* '''Earth's {{w|north magnetic pole}}''' is the point on earth toward which all compasses point because of magnetohydrodynamic ('[[1851: Magnetohydrodynamics|magic]]') forces in the earth's mantle. If all compasses were to suddenly point to his location, many scientists would investigate, they would converge on his deserted island, and Black Hat would be rescued. Moving the pole would be more difficult than moving the ice sheet, but it continues Black Hat's stream of consciousness in that it is a major geological feature of the planet.<br />
* '''The {{w|Atlantic Ocean}}''' is another major geological feature. Moving it would be orders of magnitude more difficult than moving the Greenland ice sheet, and would cause abrupt and extreme changes to the planet's ecosystem. It is unclear how Black Hat would like the ocean delivered. If he wants it to remain an ocean separate from the Pacific, it would require a container of incredible size; if he simply wants the water, it would create a Sisyphean task unless the entire Atlantic Ocean was walled off from all other sources of water. <br />
* '''A retractable {{w|leash}} (title text)''', to water-ski home. This would not work under normal circumstances, as the leash would have to be impossibly long.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball, Black Hat, and Megan are game show contestants standing behind lecterns with Hairy standing in front of them as the game show host. Black Hat, standing in the middle of the three, is holding a finger up while speaking.]<br />
<br />
:Black Hat: A boat. A plane. Amelia Earhart's plane. Amelia Earhart's ''skeleton''. The Statue of Liberty's internal support frame. The Crown Jewels. This show's entire television audience. The Greenland ice sheet. Earth's north magnetic pole.<br />
:Black Hat: Am I in the Pacific Ocean?<br />
:Black Hat: If so, the Atlantic Ocean.<br />
<br />
:Hairy: Uhh.<br />
:Hairy: Our producers are going to need some time on this one.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:The game show realized that they should have added some restrictions to their "take any item to a deserted island" challenge, but it was too late.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] <!-- Amelia Earhart --></div>162.158.123.199https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2199:_Cryptic_Wifi_Networks&diff=179520Talk:2199: Cryptic Wifi Networks2019-09-08T14:23:11Z<p>162.158.123.199: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
Reminds me of [https://shkspr.mobi/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Doctor-Who-Wifi-SSIDs.jpg these] :) [[User:BytEfLUSh|BytEfLUSh]] ([[User talk:BytEfLUSh|talk]]) 00:17, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It would be nice to check to see if this SSID exists already (using LocationAPI.org, Combain Positioning Service, Google location services, Wiggle, etc.). Could also be interesting to track use of this SSID over time. Of course takes a while for any changes to show up in the search engines. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.166|108.162.245.166]] 02:17, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Is there a way to make a https://github.com/freifunk/openwifimap-api/blob/master/API.md query out of a URL? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.82|162.158.255.82]] 14:45, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Soon those names will be e.g. "StarLink_6514". ;) [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 09:46, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Could the 46UHZ be a reference to the frequency band, i.e. 5GHz? Maybe this WiFi network was originally configured to operate on an unknown-to-us 46&mu;Hz band. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.38.88|172.68.38.88]] 18:49, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: 46 microHz would be in the submarine communications area. Unlikely to exist on a mountain top.<br />
<br />
I live in the middle of the forest, even in the winter when there are no leaves to block the way there's only one house even within sight, and yet there are five 802.11* networks in my scan right now. I mean, they're all mine, but still...—[[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 23:09, 7 September 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"a character with a knit cap is on top of a high mountain in a remote location. He sees" How do we know that Knit Cap is a "he"? We don't, actually . . . . [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.136|162.158.214.136]] 12:19, 8 September 2019 (UTC)</div>162.158.123.199