Talk:1238: Enlightenment

2013-07-16T05:40:33Z

178.98.50.23:

Did anyone else notice the (most likely intentional) typos in that sentence they told her to type? "... and THEIR DEFINATELY good" (they're definitely) {{unsigned ip|‎115.30.33.36}}

Didn't you notice "you're" and "idea's" as well. I would assume it is highly improbable that these were not intentional. [[Special:Contributions/74.125.16.2|74.125.16.2]] 04:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)GusGold

Of course those were intentional. That was the joke. The exercise for INTERNET enlightenment and getting rid of insecurities is to make typos and grammatical errors freely. You may also notice them saying on the last panel "wasnt" and "its", instead of "wasn't" and "it's".
Megan just wasn't able to do this task of making intentional mistakes, which would result in people online thinking she's dumb (insecurities), so she broke the laptop and left. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.58.179|95.35.58.179]] 05:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

There's a huge difference between accepting others' misspellings and repeating them yourself...not commenting on someone typing "definately" is completely different than being told to spell it that way yourself. [[User:Wotpsycho|Wotpsycho]] ([[User talk:Wotpsycho|talk]])

I read you're explanation's and their definately helpful! --[[Special:Contributions/129.187.90.96|129.187.90.96]] 09:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Having your ideas "approved" by someone who can't even spell might feel much worse than having them simply shot down.{{unsigned ip|89.31.118.161}}

Does anyone else think Ponytail appears to be levitating? --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 16:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Someone deleted my edit, so I'm bringing it up here on the discussion page. The sentence contains more than just common misspellings; it also contains a common grammatical error. "I read your ideas and they're definitely good" is a run-on sentence. Joining two independent clauses requires BOTH a comma and a coordinating conjunction ("I read your ideas, and they're definitely good"). The sentence omits the comma. While certain style guides allow the comma to be left out when the two clauses are short enough, Megan's obstinate grammar-nazism is the entire point of the comic. It is unlikely she would let it slide. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 16:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:"they're" refers to "ideas", the sentences are not independent.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::That's not what an independent clause means. Can they be separated into two sentences? "I read your ideas. They're definitely good." Yes - it still makes sense as two sentences, thus the two clauses are independent. (An example of a dependent clause would be "I read your ideas while I was driving home." "While I was driving home" cannot stand on its own as a sentence, so it is not an independent clause.)[[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 18:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not a native English speaker, and I have learned only British English at school. But your statement makes sense. My first sentence is correct?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Yep, your first sentence is fine. I'm going to add the note about run-on sentences back into the Explanation; I hope nobody has any more objections. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 19:35, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::"...''whilst'' I was driving home"? ;) (And bear in mind as well that "while" can more commonly mean "until", instead of "during", in certain English-speaking dialects. Ok, I'm being picky, now.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.50.23|178.98.50.23]] 05:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
:This explanation makes a lot of sense. It helped me to stop being angry at the sentence they wanted her to type, and to pay attention to the bigger picture, especially when combined with the alt-text. Randall, I heard you're idea's and their definately good. (Also, I'm assuming that Internet Enlightenment allows me to be disgusted with myself for writing that, as long as I was willing to do so.) [[Special:Contributions/68.231.138.149|68.231.138.149]] 04:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1237: QR Code

2013-07-16T05:32:28Z

178.98.50.23:

It might be a pun on '''Quick Response''' Code --[[Special:Contributions/109.91.114.82|109.91.114.82]] 10:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
: It's not a pun, it's a widely used abbreviation [[User:Hippyjim|Hippyjim]] ([[User talk:Hippyjim|talk]]) 11:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
:: I meant that needing to scan it in 12 seconds might be a pun on "Quick Response". --[[Special:Contributions/93.232.203.46|93.232.203.46]] 14:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
The only real way would be to screenshot, print, and scan... possible in about 30 seconds. Anyone want to run a time trial?--[[Special:Contributions/69.140.11.243|69.140.11.243]] 11:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
: No it's possible. With the right Emacs command and a Delorean [[User:Hippyjim|Hippyjim]] ([[User talk:Hippyjim|talk]]) 11:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

:What about simply using other phone or camera to make a photo and display it on its display for the camera of this phone? BTW, why are the phones so stupid they can't display two applications at once? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You can take a screenshot of your screen (at least in Android) and then read the image with your qr-reading-program. Then it'll display the decoded QR-code, and you'll type it in the app. [[Special:Contributions/189.125.162.182|189.125.162.182]] 14:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
:The title text says that additionally the checksum of the camera is checked. So no trick with screenshots would be possible. However I don't see a problem with second camera which displays the photo (as suggested above). --[[User:Chtz|Chtz]] ([[User talk:Chtz|talk]]) 14:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I think that most phones and computers are kind of shoddily programmed, like the developers never take enough time to think of conveniences or solve problems. For example, I should be able to scan QRCs that are on my own screen. [[Special:Contributions/24.98.10.180|24.98.10.180]] 17:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
:That's a great idea! Shouldn't a browser be able to interpret them and just make it clickable, like a link? Seems straightforward. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 12:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
::It's not that easy, an image is just an image. We would need a tag like <barcode-image>, maybe available at HTML 6.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:36, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
::Putting a QR Code on a webpage wouldn't make sense in the first place, unless it is intended to be read by smart phones. But I don't think it would be very hard to implement. Just pass every image on a webpage to a QR decoder (which of course also detects if something is a valid QR code). --[[User:Chtz|Chtz]] ([[User talk:Chtz|talk]]) 14:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
:I see a potential security flaw if a program can arbitrarily screenshot the system it's running on (in this case to find the QR code, which would be indeed an initially bad design flaw in the installation process). Or course PC programs ''can'' screen-grab the screen that they're running on, I know because I've done this myself (for legitimate reasons) so maybe my objections on the grounds of security are moot. [[Special:Contributions/178.98.50.23|178.98.50.23]] 05:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

What about using mirrors? That'd be doable. [[Special:Contributions/88.200.105.99|88.200.105.99]] 12:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I've actually needed to do this once. I was browsing the web on my phone and it only displayed a QR code to download an app I needed. I wondered what the least number of mirrors required would be to achieve this. Assuming it doesn't read inverse images, it would be necessary to flip it on both axes. [[User:Keavon|Keavon]] ([[User talk:Keavon|talk]]) 05:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
:: QR codes are invariant upon rotation, but not upon reflection. So yes, you'd need at least two mirrors (or any even number of them). [[Special:Contributions/88.24.184.87|88.24.184.87]] 17:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not hard. All you need is to move your phone faster than light for a short distance, and tadaa, you have scanned it. [[Special:Contributions/84.197.94.196|84.197.94.196]] 19:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

== Link at Transcript ==

I think the link should be shown at "Explanation". I can't see it at the original comic, so "Transcript" is the wrong section.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
:OK, understood. I just did not try to read that QR code. But the link is still not correct at "Transcript", you have to do some actions to figure out and so it still belongs to "Explanation".--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

== Real-life use for something like this ==

Before I saw the title text, I thought the scenario involved scanning one device's display on another device to set up a key exchange between applications on the two devices, sort of like a [http://bu.mp/ Bump]. --[[User:Tepples|Tepples]] ([[User talk:Tepples|talk]]) 00:35, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1238: Enlightenment

Talk:1237: QR Code