Talk:1698: Theft Quadrants - Revision history

82.132.236.174 at 13:13, 21 October 2025

2025-10-21T13:13:10Z

47.141.47.226 at 00:24, 21 October 2025

2025-10-21T00:24:00Z

172.70.117.92 at 21:17, 24 July 2021

2021-07-24T21:17:04Z

172.70.82.142: The prophecy!

2021-07-23T02:04:43Z

The prophecy!

Opalzukor at 15:31, 3 March 2021

2021-03-03T15:31:04Z

Greatfermat: Interpretation of “printed publication”.

2016-11-02T16:14:44Z

Interpretation of “printed publication”.

162.158.255.127 at 01:43, 30 June 2016

2016-06-30T01:43:18Z

Phineas81707 at 14:11, 28 June 2016

2016-06-28T14:11:13Z

162.158.255.135: Point out that for a time, it was quite easy to guess the US nuke launch codes

2016-06-27T22:51:54Z

Point out that for a time, it was quite easy to guess the US nuke launch codes

Davidy22 at 19:53, 27 June 2016

2016-06-27T19:53:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:13, 21 October 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:

	And there go the crown jewels. 2/4, let's see if we can... ok, well maybe not the launch codes, but who wants the Wienermobile? [[Special:Contributions/47.141.47.226\|47.141.47.226]] 00:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)		And there go the crown jewels. 2/4, let's see if we can... ok, well maybe not the launch codes, but who wants the Wienermobile? [[Special:Contributions/47.141.47.226\|47.141.47.226]] 00:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
		+	:You mean the {{w\|2025 Louvre robbery\|''French'' crown jewels}}, of course. Looks like they were far far easier to reach (and escape with) than they should have been. There are many 'crowns' (as are, or were) that have concomitant collections of '{{w\|crown jewels}}', naturally, with varying individual risks of being stolen (or already have been). I suspect that Randall was nodding towards the specifically English/British/United Kingdom set, and it'll take more than a works-ladder, some tools and some reflective vests to get them. (Probably not even how various fictional {{w\|List of Hustle episodes#Series 2 (2005)\|heist-dramas}} imagine it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.174\|82.132.236.174]] 13:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:24, 21 October 2025
Line 34:		Line 34:

	I'm sceptical about just how bad stealing the launch codes would really be; there's a lot of procedure beyond just having the right codes, and they change them every day anyway so your window is really small. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.117.92\|172.70.117.92]] 21:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)		I'm sceptical about just how bad stealing the launch codes would really be; there's a lot of procedure beyond just having the right codes, and they change them every day anyway so your window is really small. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.117.92\|172.70.117.92]] 21:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	And there go the crown jewels. 2/4, let's see if we can... ok, well maybe not the launch codes, but who wants the Wienermobile? [[Special:Contributions/47.141.47.226\|47.141.47.226]] 00:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:17, 24 July 2021
Line 32:		Line 32:

	Guise! It finally happened! It's getting patched rapidly. https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj8xz3/a-defunct-video-hosting-site-is-flooding-normal-websites-with-hardcore-porn [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.142\|172.70.82.142]] 02:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)		Guise! It finally happened! It's getting patched rapidly. https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj8xz3/a-defunct-video-hosting-site-is-flooding-normal-websites-with-hardcore-porn [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.142\|172.70.82.142]] 02:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	I'm sceptical about just how bad stealing the launch codes would really be; there's a lot of procedure beyond just having the right codes, and they change them every day anyway so your window is really small. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.117.92\|172.70.117.92]] 21:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:04, 23 July 2021
Line 30:		Line 30:

	https://tinyurl.com/Theft-Quadrants [[User:Opalzukor\|Opalzukor]] ([[User talk:Opalzukor\|talk]]) 15:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)		https://tinyurl.com/Theft-Quadrants [[User:Opalzukor\|Opalzukor]] ([[User talk:Opalzukor\|talk]]) 15:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	Guise! It finally happened! It's getting patched rapidly. https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj8xz3/a-defunct-video-hosting-site-is-flooding-normal-websites-with-hardcore-porn [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.142\|172.70.82.142]] 02:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:31, 3 March 2021
Line 28:		Line 28:

	The description seems to assume that “printed publication” means “offline articles”. It also means “scientific article which passed peer-review”, hence a joke as serious scientific paper may be discredited as potentially redirecting to porn websites. Does anyone also share my interpretation? [[User:Greatfermat\|Greatfermat]] ([[User talk:Greatfermat\|talk]]) 16:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)		The description seems to assume that “printed publication” means “offline articles”. It also means “scientific article which passed peer-review”, hence a joke as serious scientific paper may be discredited as potentially redirecting to porn websites. Does anyone also share my interpretation? [[User:Greatfermat\|Greatfermat]] ([[User talk:Greatfermat\|talk]]) 16:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	https://tinyurl.com/Theft-Quadrants [[User:Opalzukor\|Opalzukor]] ([[User talk:Opalzukor\|talk]]) 15:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:14, 2 November 2016
Line 26:		Line 26:

	This is a bit of a style guide comment: can we please leave the Citation Needed Joke out of "nuclear war is bad"? The joke worked in our explanation of [[180: Canada]] because it was related to the comic itself. Here, not so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.127\|162.158.255.127]] 01:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)		This is a bit of a style guide comment: can we please leave the Citation Needed Joke out of "nuclear war is bad"? The joke worked in our explanation of [[180: Canada]] because it was related to the comic itself. Here, not so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.127\|162.158.255.127]] 01:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	The description seems to assume that “printed publication” means “offline articles”. It also means “scientific article which passed peer-review”, hence a joke as serious scientific paper may be discredited as potentially redirecting to porn websites. Does anyone also share my interpretation? [[User:Greatfermat\|Greatfermat]] ([[User talk:Greatfermat\|talk]]) 16:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:43, 30 June 2016
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:Be honest: if you were to guess the launch codes, would you have guessed that? [[User:Phineas81707\|Phineas81707]] ([[User talk:Phineas81707\|talk]]) 14:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)		:Be honest: if you were to guess the launch codes, would you have guessed that? [[User:Phineas81707\|Phineas81707]] ([[User talk:Phineas81707\|talk]]) 14:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	This is a bit of a style guide comment: can we please leave the Citation Needed Joke out of "nuclear war is bad"? The joke worked in our explanation of [[180: Canada]] because it was related to the comic itself. Here, not so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.127\|162.158.255.127]] 01:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:11, 28 June 2016
Line 22:		Line 22:

	It might be a lot easier than you think to steal the launch codes. For nearly 20 years the USA's launch code was 00000000. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.135\|162.158.255.135]] 22:51, 27 June 2016 (UTC)		It might be a lot easier than you think to steal the launch codes. For nearly 20 years the USA's launch code was 00000000. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.135\|162.158.255.135]] 22:51, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Be honest: if you were to guess the launch codes, would you have guessed that? [[User:Phineas81707\|Phineas81707]] ([[User talk:Phineas81707\|talk]]) 14:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 27 June 2016
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Regarding the current explanation (and has been pointed out already), saying that "sites can be particularly vulnerable if they do not maintain their web site" is very wrong. This has nothing to do with maintaining a website, and only has to do with maintaining thei domain name. The website and domain name are two very different things, so this isn't just a matter of nitpicking. However, as I have explained above, the entire concept is no longer correct. There is now a grace period up to 75 days long for .com domains during which registrars are not allowed to sell the domain name to another third party. {{unsigned\|Cmancone}}		Regarding the current explanation (and has been pointed out already), saying that "sites can be particularly vulnerable if they do not maintain their web site" is very wrong. This has nothing to do with maintaining a website, and only has to do with maintaining thei domain name. The website and domain name are two very different things, so this isn't just a matter of nitpicking. However, as I have explained above, the entire concept is no longer correct. There is now a grace period up to 75 days long for .com domains during which registrars are not allowed to sell the domain name to another third party. {{unsigned\|Cmancone}}
		+
		+	It might be a lot easier than you think to steal the launch codes. For nearly 20 years the USA's launch code was 00000000. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.135\|162.158.255.135]] 22:51, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 27 June 2016
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Since Randall only mentioned domain expiration as the way it might be stolen, it is unclear whether or not he was considering a more direct domain name hijacking. I'm less familiar with how easy domain hijacking might be but considering that their entire business depends on their domain name, I can't imagine it would actually be that easy.		Since Randall only mentioned domain expiration as the way it might be stolen, it is unclear whether or not he was considering a more direct domain name hijacking. I'm less familiar with how easy domain hijacking might be but considering that their entire business depends on their domain name, I can't imagine it would actually be that easy.

−	Regarding the current explanation (and has been pointed out already), saying that "sites can be particularly vulnerable if they do not maintain their web site" is very wrong. This has nothing to do with maintaining a website, and only has to do with maintaining thei domain name. The website and domain name are two very different things, so this isn't just a matter of nitpicking. However, as I have explained above, the entire concept is no longer correct. There is now a grace period up to 75 days long for .com domains during which registrars are not allowed to sell the domain name to another third party. {{unsigned ip\|Cmancone}}	+	Regarding the current explanation (and has been pointed out already), saying that "sites can be particularly vulnerable if they do not maintain their web site" is very wrong. This has nothing to do with maintaining a website, and only has to do with maintaining thei domain name. The website and domain name are two very different things, so this isn't just a matter of nitpicking. However, as I have explained above, the entire concept is no longer correct. There is now a grace period up to 75 days long for .com domains during which registrars are not allowed to sell the domain name to another third party. {{unsigned\|Cmancone}}