Talk:3003: Sandwich Helix - Revision history

172.71.182.126: Sandwich Helix = DNA

2024-11-25T00:32:34Z

Sandwich Helix = DNA

172.71.183.117: Sandwich Helix = DNA

2024-11-25T00:29:21Z

Sandwich Helix = DNA

172.69.194.150 at 17:02, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T17:02:46Z

172.70.86.21 at 17:01, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T17:01:33Z

172.68.71.159: KISS etymology

2024-10-28T15:52:53Z

KISS etymology

172.68.205.151 at 11:33, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T11:33:25Z

172.70.163.99 at 10:32, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T10:32:10Z

172.70.162.141 at 10:30, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T10:30:18Z

Cavac at 09:33, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T09:33:05Z

172.70.90.109 at 05:47, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T05:47:05Z

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 Helix sandwich. That did not render well.- TenGolf [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.19|172.69.58.19]] 18:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
 :Like it now? (There are better ways, but is the simplest.)[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.134|172.68.205.134]] 18:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-I think that people are missing that the Sandwich Helix is the DNA molecule where nucleic base pairs are stacked like the layers in one of Dagwood's sandwiches. This molecule "communicates" a lot of information but we don't know how to interpret a lot of it (much of the non-translated regions). This notwithstanding, we can list consensus sequences for many organisms. I.e. we have the message but not the encoding (for all of it).
+I think that people are missing that the Sandwich Helix is the DNA molecule where nucleic base pairs are stacked like the layers in one of Dagwood's sandwiches. This molecule "communicates" a lot of information but we don't know how to interpret a lot of it (much of the non-translated regions). This notwithstanding, we can list consensus sequences for many organisms. I.e. we have the message but not the encoding (for all of it). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.126|172.71.182.126]] 00:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:29, 25 November 2024
Line 51:		Line 51:
	Helix sandwich. That did not render well.- TenGolf [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.19\|172.69.58.19]] 18:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)		Helix sandwich. That did not render well.- TenGolf [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.19\|172.69.58.19]] 18:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
	:Like it now? (There are better ways, but is the simplest.)[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.134\|172.68.205.134]] 18:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)		:Like it now? (There are better ways, but is the simplest.)[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.134\|172.68.205.134]] 18:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
		+	I think that people are missing that the Sandwich Helix is the DNA molecule where nucleic base pairs are stacked like the layers in one of Dagwood's sandwiches. This molecule "communicates" a lot of information but we don't know how to interpret a lot of it (much of the non-translated regions). This notwithstanding, we can list consensus sequences for many organisms. I.e. we have the message but not the encoding (for all of it).

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 The first rule of communication is "Always talk about communication." [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 15:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
+: I'm pretty sure the first rule is "Context Matters" and "Helix Sandwich" conveys that by the lack of it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.228|172.70.126.228]] 20:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
 Possibly the best real-world example of this is the Biblical Book of Revelation. It's an example of apocalyptic writing, which means 'writing in code', not necessarily 'talking about the end of the world' (although it does also do that, which is where the confusion has arisen). And that's sort of the point - most of the context which would enable us to understand the book properly has been lost. For example, scholars generally accept that the 'beast' whose number is 666 is a reference to a real historical person, and that the number 666 is supposed to tell the reader that person's identity... but there's no consensus on who that person is. The fact that there is evidence to suggest that the number was altered (from 616) by later editors doesn't help. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.109|172.70.90.109]] 05:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 It seems that something like this could happen over time naturally if it's a saying that "everyone knows" so that real meaning stops being said, and then eventually that bit of information disappears. For instance KISS "Keep it simple, stupid" has a negative connotation, but the idea is very sound. So people keep saying the abbreviation but stop saying the full version, and new people hearing it the first time might get the basic idea without knowing why. Eventually even the meaning could be lost, and it could just become something that people say without knowing why. Maybe the assume the ancient designers and engineers liked to make out when they saw complex things. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 17:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
+:Frums - Options [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.14|162.158.91.14]] 04:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
-Frums - Options [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.14|162.158.91.14]] 04:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
+:''KISS Keep it simple, stupid'' was originally ''keep it stupid simple''. An emphasis, not an insult. --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 05:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
+:: "Keep it stupid, simple" still sounds like an insult. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 03:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-''KISS Keep it simple, stupid'' was originally ''keep it stupid simple''. An emphasis, not an insult. --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 05:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
+:::  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle#Origin  --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 18:31, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-: "Keep it stupid, simple" still sounds like an insult. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 03:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
+:::: Note for recent editors... You can use that link as <code><nowiki>{{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}</nowiki></code> to get it to look like {{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}. I think we're getting some new users who seem not to be aware of this handy template, and/or being lazy about it. (I also indented your comment, for the circumstances.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118|162.158.74.118]] 19:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
-::  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle#Origin  --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 18:31, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
+::maybe keep it stupidly simple?{{unsigned ip|172.69.34.176|04:56, 27 October 2024}}
-::: Note for recent editors... You can use that link as <code><nowiki>{{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}</nowiki></code> to get it to look like {{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}. I think we're getting some new users who seem not to be aware of this handy template, and/or being lazy about it. (I also indented your comment, for the circumstances.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118|162.158.74.118]] 19:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
+:: Nope. That's a sweet thought, but comes from the US Navy in 1960, and indeed started as "Keep it simple, stupid!". [[Special:Contributions/172.68.71.159|172.68.71.159]] 15:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
 Infodump: To my knowledge the only five encodings resulting in "â€™" for utf-8 encoded "’" are Windows-125X where X is an even decimal digit. {{unsigned ip|162.158.154.78|15:25, 27 October 2024}}
@@ Line 52: / Line 50: @@
 :<=========>
-Helix sandwich. That did not render well.- TenGolf
+Helix sandwich. That did not render well.- TenGolf [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.19|172.69.58.19]] 18:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
 :Like it now? (There are better ways, but is the simplest.)[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.134|172.68.205.134]] 18:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 ::: Note for recent editors... You can use that link as <code><nowiki>{{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}</nowiki></code> to get it to look like {{w|KISS principle#Origin|~insert some link text here~}}. I think we're getting some new users who seem not to be aware of this handy template, and/or being lazy about it. (I also indented your comment, for the circumstances.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118|162.158.74.118]] 19:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
 :maybe keep it stupidly simple?{{unsigned ip|172.69.34.176|04:56, 27 October 2024}}
 Infodump: To my knowledge the only five encodings resulting in "â€™" for utf-8 encoded "’" are Windows-125X where X is an even decimal digit. {{unsigned ip|162.158.154.78|15:25, 27 October 2024}}

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 That title text makes me reasonably upset. What nitwit decided "smart quotes" AND incompatible default encodings was a good idea? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.203|172.70.174.203]] 16:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
 : I'm inclined to blame Apple because [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_Roman Mac OS Roman] (1989) postdates [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows-1252 Windows 1252] (1987). Both of these extended [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_8859-1 ISO 8859-1] with curly quotes but chose different code points. [[User:Davidhbrown|Davidhbrown]] ([[User talk:Davidhbrown|talk]]) 03:26, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
 It seems that something like this could happen over time naturally if it's a saying that "everyone knows" so that real meaning stops being said, and then eventually that bit of information disappears. For instance KISS "Keep it simple, stupid" has a negative connotation, but the idea is very sound. So people keep saying the abbreviation but stop saying the full version, and new people hearing it the first time might get the basic idea without knowing why. Eventually even the meaning could be lost, and it could just become something that people say without knowing why. Maybe the assume the ancient designers and engineers liked to make out when they saw complex things. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 17:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:30, 28 October 2024
Line 27:		Line 27:
	This is similar to the number 42 in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, in that the answer is known, but the exact question (=the context) has been lost. See [https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/42 HHGG Fandom wiki] --[[User:Cavac\|Cavac]] ([[User talk:Cavac\|talk]]) 09:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)		This is similar to the number 42 in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, in that the answer is known, but the exact question (=the context) has been lost. See [https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/42 HHGG Fandom wiki] --[[User:Cavac\|Cavac]] ([[User talk:Cavac\|talk]]) 09:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

−	~~==Grammar==~~
	Minor grammatical point; please feel free to skip this. I just tweaked "a communication technique [...] which meaning has not been lost." to "a communication technique [...] whose meaning has not been lost.". "''Of'' which ''the'' meaning" or "whose meaning" both work, but the latter is less contrived. People keep forgetting that "whose" can refer to objects, as well as to people. <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/whose#Determiner>		Minor grammatical point; please feel free to skip this. I just tweaked "a communication technique [...] which meaning has not been lost." to "a communication technique [...] whose meaning has not been lost.". "''Of'' which ''the'' meaning" or "whose meaning" both work, but the latter is less contrived. People keep forgetting that "whose" can refer to objects, as well as to people. <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/whose#Determiner>

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 Infodump: To my knowledge the only five encodings resulting in "â€™" for utf-8 encoded "’" are Windows-125X where X is an even decimal digit. {{unsigned ip|162.158.154.78|15:25, 27 October 2024}}
 ==Grammar==
 Minor grammatical point; please feel free to skip this. I just tweaked "a communication technique [...] which meaning has not been lost." to "a communication technique [...] whose meaning has not been lost.". "''Of'' which ''the'' meaning" or "whose meaning" both work, but the latter is less contrived. People keep forgetting that "whose" can refer to objects, as well as to people. <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/whose#Determiner>

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:47, 28 October 2024
Line 30:		Line 30:

	I'm pretty sure the first rule is "Context Matters" and "Helix Sandwich" conveys that by the lack of it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.228\|172.70.126.228]] 20:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)		I'm pretty sure the first rule is "Context Matters" and "Helix Sandwich" conveys that by the lack of it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.228\|172.70.126.228]] 20:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	Possibly the best real-world example of this is the Biblical Book of Revelation. It's an example of apocalyptic writing, which means 'writing in code', not necessarily 'talking about the end of the world' (although it does also do that, which is where the confusion has arisen). And that's sort of the point - most of the context which would enable us to understand the book properly has been lost. For example, scholars generally accept that the 'beast' whose number is 666 is a reference to a real historical person, and that the number 666 is supposed to tell the reader that person's identity... but there's no consensus on who that person is. The fact that there is evidence to suggest that the number was altered (from 616) by later editors doesn't help. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.109\|172.70.90.109]] 05:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
		+

	==Helix==		==Helix==