Talk:1403: Thesis Defense - Revision history

Rustykid52 at 16:39, 17 December 2024

2024-12-17T16:39:36Z

TheusafBOT: Reverted edit 352432 by I love you kynde to 345414

2024-10-09T17:09:10Z

Reverted edit 352432 by I love you kynde to 345414

I love you kynde: i love you kynde

2024-10-09T17:08:55Z

i love you kynde

172.68.205.119: #FreePalestine :)

2024-07-02T09:34:09Z

#FreePalestine :)

Blogbkx at 17:20, 23 October 2019

2019-10-23T17:20:08Z

141.101.107.78 at 21:13, 25 April 2017

2017-04-25T21:13:33Z

162.158.255.220 at 06:41, 4 January 2017

2017-01-04T06:41:53Z

162.158.56.59 at 18:39, 10 December 2015

2015-12-10T18:39:21Z

Weatherlawyer: Defence is a card game.

2015-01-08T18:46:13Z

Defence is a card game.

Weatherlawyer: Defence is a card game.

2015-01-08T18:45:24Z

Defence is a card game.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:39, 17 December 2024
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:::::::: damn this convo aged horrendously --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.119\|172.68.205.119]] 09:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)		:::::::: damn this convo aged horrendously --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.119\|172.68.205.119]] 09:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::::::::oh man yea it did [[User:Rustykid52\|Rustykid52]] ([[User talk:Rustykid52\|talk]]) 16:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

	The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred		The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 9 October 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	i ~~love~~ you ~~kynde~~	+	Sorry, but if your best defense is frightening counter attack a good offense will destroy you. The best defense is a good offense because a weakened or destroyed opponent can mount no offense.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.132\|173.245.48.132]] 05:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)BluDgeons
		+
		+	:Depends on type of counter attack. For example, the best defense against missiles is to fire anti-missile missiles, which may be seen as type of attack. Of course, the phrase is older than missiles, but I believe similar principles applied: not retaliation nor first strike, but attacking the enemy units which are trying to attack you. Alternatively, attacking enemy army supply lines may also force it to interrupt her attack on you. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 10:22, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	::No. Anti-missile missiles are an absolutely dreadful defense agaisnt missiles. Their success rate is well below 100% and has only recently risen above 0%. The actual best defense against missiles is to blow them up on the ground, before they are launched, i.e. An offensive attack. [[User:JamesCurran\|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran\|talk]]) 20:12, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	::: You've clearly never heard of Iron Dome, Israel's missile defense system. It has crazy high success rates. I've seen it in action myself, it is glorious. --[[User:NeatNit\|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit\|talk]]) 04:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::: Israel has to fire two Iron Dome missiles ($50,000 dollars each) to intercept each Qassam rocket (roughly $500 dollars), so this is a terrible example as a well resourced attacker can easily overwhelm a defender. Maybe in another decade with lasers, cheaper interceptors and rail guns the equation might have changed. {{unsigned ip\|141.101.99.167}}
		+
		+	::::: I would say that it's better to fire two $50,000 dollar missiles than to let the rocket explode, kill several people and demolish $200,000 building. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 10:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::::: Adage might refer to guerilla/hit-and-run tactics, which are also mentioned in Sun Tzu's Art of War (cut off supply chain, is one instance). -[[User:Vorik111\|Vorik111]] ([[User talk:Vorik111\|talk]]) 16:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	::::::: We should remember that a lot of Hamas’s missiles land into unpopulated areas. [[User:Blogbkx\|Blogbkx]] ([[User talk:Blogbkx\|talk]]) 17:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::::::: damn this convo aged horrendously --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.119\|172.68.205.119]] 09:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred
		+
		+	: While it is applicable in most attacking sports, then I seriously doubt that it originated in American Football -- I has been some time since I read {{w\|Sun Tzu}}'s {{w\|The Art of War}} which is one of the oldest texts in existence, but I suspect it may already be in there predating anything else [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 22:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	May or may not also be inspired by Studio C: Thesis Defense http://youtu.be/Lrlro3YJ15o Teagan N {{unsigned ip\|173.245.48.134}}
		+
		+	Can anyone make out what's written on the board? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.105.220}}
		+	: No, probably not -- [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 21:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	: My best guess after resizing the image a few times is
		+	:: [The\|To] [F\|Falcons?] [at\|of] [T\|Times?]
		+	:: [D\|Displays?] [a\|is\|its] [M\|Moods?]
		+	:: [by?] {illegible first name (short maybe Meg)} {illegible surname (long)
		+	:: [C\|{illegible}] [the] {illegible 1 short word 1 long word or only 1 long word}
		+	:: {illegible mid size word} {illegible short word maybe is} {illegible short word a} {illegible} {illegible} {{unsigned\|Meerkat}}
		+
		+	: Looks to me like "The Evolution of [Thesis/Turtle] Displays & Moods" something illegible, probably her name, followed by "Candidate for [illegible]"[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.52\|141.101.98.52]]
		+
		+	: I read "The Evolution of Threat Displays in Murder" as the topic after lots of enlargement.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.207\|173.245.54.207]] 14:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	::I'm with this reading. It's logical, too. Megan's actions, being about as far as you can go in the direction of Murderous Threat Displays, are a natural "conclusion" to her presentation.--[[User:Laverock\|Laverock]] ([[User talk:Laverock\|talk]]) 15:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	: I think it says "The Evolution of Throat Dipthongs in Murder". I'm no linguist, but if "AAAAAA" is said in an undulating fashion, it would qualify as a dipthong. Thus the presentation is incomplete without the yell. {{unsigned ip\|108.162.219.154}}
		+
		+	: Going off on the poster above me and taking into account the topic of the comic, I think it is probably "The Evolution of Thesis Displays in Murder" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.185\|141.101.98.185]] 08:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	Thanks! Came here today for this, created account to say thanks :) [[User:Mathiastck\|Mathiastck]] ([[User talk:Mathiastck\|talk]]) 18:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	: You'r welcome [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 21:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	"In conclusion" suggests she's almost finished with her presentation. I wonder what the panel thought of her holding a sword many times thicker than her stick-body for the duration of her defense.[[User:Alanbbent\|Alanbbent]] ([[User talk:Alanbbent\|talk]]) 00:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	: "In conclusion" is the APA style of creating a summary section -- hence she has just finished her presentation, and she is now moving on to the questions-answers with the examiners defending her thesis. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.6\|199.27.133.6]] 13:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	;Incomplete?
		+
		+	looks to me that this pretty complete -- remove the incomplete tag? [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 22:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	It's still missing the presentation text. [[User:cDave]] {{unsigned\|CDave}}
		+
		+	:I don't think anyone can read it. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.201\|173.245.54.201]] 03:46, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:I'm surprised noone has referred to the transcript in the page source. It officially says, "The evolution of threat defence in mammals." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.62.73\|173.245.62.73]] 06:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	:: Excellent observation -- I have changed the transcript to use the words from the site itself -- the transcript sections has been lacking on xkcd.com lately, which is why people probably don't check them any more. [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 19:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	:::I'm sorry, but I did revert this change because it was bad layout and the title text has not to be included. Right now I did find the transcript by Randall so I will update it again. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 20:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+	:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empires generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".[[User:Weatherlawyer\|Weatherlawyer]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer\|talk]]) 18:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	Sad story: in 1996, a grad student actually did murder people during his thesis defense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.59\|162.158.56.59]] 18:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	The title text may also refer to Stephen Sondheim's song "Putting it Together," in which the singer lists ad nauseum the minutiae of preparing and marketing a work of art, which is analagous to preparing a thesis and its defense. The final line is "and that is the state of the art", ending with a long, high note.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.220\|162.158.255.220]] 06:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	As an irrelevant aside, in Finland you get awarded a sword for a successful PhD... And a slightly less impressive hat [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.78\|141.101.107.78]] 21:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 9 October 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Sorry, but if your best defense is frightening counter attack a good offense will destroy you. The best defense is a good offense because a weakened or destroyed opponent can mount no offense.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.132\|173.245.48.132]] 05:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)BluDgeons	+	i love you kynde
−
−	:Depends on type of counter attack. For example, the best defense against missiles is to fire anti-missile missiles, which may be seen as type of attack. Of course, the phrase is older than missiles, but I believe similar principles applied: not retaliation nor first strike, but attacking the enemy units which are trying to attack you. Alternatively, attacking enemy army supply lines may also force it to interrupt her attack on you. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 10:22, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	::No. Anti-missile missiles are an absolutely dreadful defense agaisnt missiles. Their success rate is well below 100% and has only recently risen above 0%. The actual best defense against missiles is to blow them up on the ground, before they are launched, i~~.e. An offensive attack. [[User:JamesCurran\|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran\|talk]]) 20:12, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	::: You've clearly never heard of Iron Dome, Israel's missile defense system. It has crazy high success rates. I've seen it in action myself, it is glorious. --[[User:NeatNit\|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit\|talk]]) 04:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	:::: Israel has to fire two Iron Dome missiles ($50,000 dollars each) to intercept each Qassam rocket (roughly $500 dollars), so this is a terrible example as a well resourced attacker can easily overwhelm a defender. Maybe in another decade with lasers, cheaper interceptors and rail guns the equation might have changed. {{unsigned ip\|141.101.99.167}}
−
−	::::: I would say that it's better to fire two $50,000 dollar missiles than to let the rocket explode, kill several people and demolish $200,000 building. -- [[User:Hkmaly\|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly\|talk]]) 10:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	:::::: Adage might refer to guerilla/hit-and-run tactics, which are also mentioned in Sun Tzu's Art of War (cut off supply chain, is one instance). -[[User:Vorik111\|Vorik111]] ([[User talk:Vorik111\|talk]]) 16:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	~~::::::: We should remember that a lot of Hamas’s missiles land into unpopulated areas. [[User:Blogbkx\|Blogbkx]] ([[User talk:Blogbkx\|talk]]) 17:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)~~
−
−	~~:::::::: damn this convo aged horrendously --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.119\|172.68.205.119]] 09:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)~~
−
−	The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred
−
−	: While it is applicable in most attacking sports, then I seriously doubt that it originated in American Football -- I has been some time since I read {{w\|Sun Tzu}}'s {{w\|The Art of War}} which is one of the oldest texts in existence, but I suspect it may already be in there predating anything else [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 22:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	~~May or may not also be inspired by Studio C: Thesis Defense http://youtu.be/Lrlro3YJ15o Teagan N {{unsigned ip\|173.245.48.134}}~~
−
−	~~Can anyone make out what's written on the board? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.105.220}}~~
−	~~: No, probably not -- [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 21:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	~~: My best guess after resizing the image a few times is~~
−	~~:: [The\|To] [F\|Falcons?] [at\|of] [T\|Times?]~~
−	~~:: [D\|Displays?] [a\|is\|its] [M\|Moods?]~~
−	~~:: [by?] {illegible first name (short maybe Meg)} {illegible surname (long)~~
−	~~:: [C\|{illegible}] [the] {illegible 1 short word 1 long word or only 1 long word}~~
−	~~:: {illegible mid size word} {illegible short word maybe is} {illegible short word a} {illegible} {illegible} {{unsigned\|Meerkat}}~~
−
−	: Looks to me like "The Evolution of [Thesis/Turtle] Displays & Moods" something illegible, probably her name, followed by "Candidate for [illegible]"[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.52\|141.101.98.52]]
−
−	~~: I read "The Evolution of Threat Displays in Murder" as the topic after lots of enlargement.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.207\|173.245.54.207]] 14:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−	::I'm with this reading. It's logical, too. Megan's actions, being about as far as you can go in the direction of Murderous Threat Displays, are a natural "conclusion" to her presentation.--[[User:Laverock\|Laverock]] ([[User talk:Laverock\|talk]]) 15:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	: I think it says "The Evolution of Throat Dipthongs in Murder". I'm no linguist, but if "AAAAAA" is said in an undulating fashion, it would qualify as a dipthong. Thus the presentation is incomplete without the yell. {{unsigned ip\|108.162.219.154}}
−
−	: Going off on the poster above me and taking into account the topic of the comic, I think it is probably "The Evolution of Thesis Displays in Murder" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.185\|141.101.98.185]] 08:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	~~Thanks! Came here today for this, created account to say thanks :) [[User:Mathiastck\|Mathiastck]] ([[User talk:Mathiastck\|talk]]) 18:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−	~~: You'r welcome [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 21:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	"In conclusion" suggests she's almost finished with her presentation. I wonder what the panel thought of her holding a sword many times thicker than her stick-body for the duration of her defense.[[User:Alanbbent\|Alanbbent]] ([[User talk:Alanbbent\|talk]]) 00:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
−	: "In conclusion" is the APA style of creating a summary section -- hence she has just finished her presentation, and she is now moving on to the questions-answers with the examiners defending her thesis. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.6\|199.27.133.6]] 13:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
−
−	~~;Incomplete?~~
−
−	~~looks to me that this pretty complete -- remove the incomplete tag? [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 22:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	~~It's still missing the presentation text. [[User:cDave]] {{unsigned\|CDave}}~~
−
−	~~:I don't think anyone can read it. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.201\|173.245.54.201]] 03:46, 6 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	:I'm surprised noone has referred to the transcript in the page source. It officially says, "The evolution of threat defence in mammals." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.62.73\|173.245.62.73]] 06:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
−	:: Excellent observation -- I have changed the transcript to use the words from the site itself -- the transcript sections has been lacking on xkcd.com lately, which is why people probably don't check them any more. [[User:Spongebog\|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog\|talk]]) 19:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
−	:::I'm sorry, but I did revert this change because it was bad layout and the title text has not to be included. Right now I did find the transcript by Randall so I will update it again. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 20:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
−	~~:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)~~
−
−	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empires generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".[[User:Weatherlawyer\|Weatherlawyer]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer\|talk]]) 18:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
−
−	Sad story: in 1996, a grad student actually did murder people during his thesis defense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.59\|162.158.56.59]] 18:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
−
−	The title text may also refer to Stephen Sondheim's song "Putting it Together," in which the singer lists ad nauseum the minutiae of preparing and marketing a work of art, which is analagous to preparing a thesis and its defense. The final line is "and that is the state of the art", ending with a long, high note.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.220\|162.158.255.220]] 06:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
−
−	~~As an irrelevant aside, in Finland~~ you ~~get awarded a sword for a successful PhD... And a slightly less impressive hat [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.78\|141.101.107.78]] 21:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:34, 2 July 2024
Line 14:		Line 14:

	::::::: We should remember that a lot of Hamas’s missiles land into unpopulated areas. [[User:Blogbkx\|Blogbkx]] ([[User talk:Blogbkx\|talk]]) 17:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)		::::::: We should remember that a lot of Hamas’s missiles land into unpopulated areas. [[User:Blogbkx\|Blogbkx]] ([[User talk:Blogbkx\|talk]]) 17:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::::::: damn this convo aged horrendously --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.119\|172.68.205.119]] 09:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

	The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred		The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:20, 23 October 2019
Line 12:		Line 12:

	:::::: Adage might refer to guerilla/hit-and-run tactics, which are also mentioned in Sun Tzu's Art of War (cut off supply chain, is one instance). -[[User:Vorik111\|Vorik111]] ([[User talk:Vorik111\|talk]]) 16:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)		:::::: Adage might refer to guerilla/hit-and-run tactics, which are also mentioned in Sun Tzu's Art of War (cut off supply chain, is one instance). -[[User:Vorik111\|Vorik111]] ([[User talk:Vorik111\|talk]]) 16:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	::::::: We should remember that a lot of Hamas’s missiles land into unpopulated areas. [[User:Blogbkx\|Blogbkx]] ([[User talk:Blogbkx\|talk]]) 17:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

	The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred		The expression is based on a concept that is military and ancient, but I wonder if the expression itself, in English, originated with American football, sometime since the game's birth in the 1860s. It is so specifically applicable to this game, where a team's defense and offense are completely separate units, run separately and spoken of separately and yet an extremely effective way to keep the opponent from scoring is to maintain possession of the ball while the game clock ticks down. [[User:Wrybred\|Wrybred]] ([[User talk:Wrybred\|talk]]) 13:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)wrybred

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:13, 25 April 2017
Line 62:		Line 62:

	The title text may also refer to Stephen Sondheim's song "Putting it Together," in which the singer lists ad nauseum the minutiae of preparing and marketing a work of art, which is analagous to preparing a thesis and its defense. The final line is "and that is the state of the art", ending with a long, high note.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.220\|162.158.255.220]] 06:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)		The title text may also refer to Stephen Sondheim's song "Putting it Together," in which the singer lists ad nauseum the minutiae of preparing and marketing a work of art, which is analagous to preparing a thesis and its defense. The final line is "and that is the state of the art", ending with a long, high note.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.220\|162.158.255.220]] 06:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	As an irrelevant aside, in Finland you get awarded a sword for a successful PhD... And a slightly less impressive hat [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.78\|141.101.107.78]] 21:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:41, 4 January 2017
Line 60:		Line 60:

	Sad story: in 1996, a grad student actually did murder people during his thesis defense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.59\|162.158.56.59]] 18:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)		Sad story: in 1996, a grad student actually did murder people during his thesis defense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.59\|162.158.56.59]] 18:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	The title text may also refer to Stephen Sondheim's song "Putting it Together," in which the singer lists ad nauseum the minutiae of preparing and marketing a work of art, which is analagous to preparing a thesis and its defense. The final line is "and that is the state of the art", ending with a long, high note.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.220\|162.158.255.220]] 06:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 10 December 2015
Line 58:		Line 58:

	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empires generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".[[User:Weatherlawyer\|Weatherlawyer]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer\|talk]]) 18:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)		The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empires generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".[[User:Weatherlawyer\|Weatherlawyer]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer\|talk]]) 18:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	Sad story: in 1996, a grad student actually did murder people during his thesis defense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting [[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.59\|162.158.56.59]] 18:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 8 January 2015
Line 57:		Line 57:
	:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)		:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

−	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough ~~empres~~ generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".	+	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empires generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".[[User:Weatherlawyer\|Weatherlawyer]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer\|talk]]) 18:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:45, 8 January 2015
Line 56:		Line 56:
	:::I'm sorry, but I did revert this change because it was bad layout and the title text has not to be included. Right now I did find the transcript by Randall so I will update it again. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 20:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)		:::I'm sorry, but I did revert this change because it was bad layout and the title text has not to be included. Right now I did find the transcript by Randall so I will update it again. --[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 20:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
	:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)		:::Great find, the proper update to the transcript is done. This new statement has to be explained.--[[User:Dgbrt\|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt\|talk]]) 21:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	The best defence is to own an empire. If it is big enough it never sleeps and if it is happy enough it will counteract any threat given enough time and resources. Big enough empres generally have enough time and resources. The problem with empires is the problem with all powerful entities: Power Corrupts. That is a different adage and comparing metaphors about defence and power can mislead or change the argument not resolve the statement "" the best defence.... etc".