| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 73: |
Line 73: |
| | :Maybe for Dummies: "...a Venn diagram for n component sets must contain all 2<sup>n</sup> hypothetically possible zones that correspond to some combination of inclusion or exclusion in each of the component sets." (Wikipedia). This here would be 2<sup>24</sup> or 16,8 million zones -- hard to paint.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC) | | :Maybe for Dummies: "...a Venn diagram for n component sets must contain all 2<sup>n</sup> hypothetically possible zones that correspond to some combination of inclusion or exclusion in each of the component sets." (Wikipedia). This here would be 2<sup>24</sup> or 16,8 million zones -- hard to paint.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC) |
| | ::Thanks for that info. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC) | | ::Thanks for that info. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC) |
| − | :::[https://xkcd.com/1350/#p:a18f84a6-bbd5-11e3-8030-002590d77bdd Lorenz Venn Diagram] :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
| + | |
| | | | |
| | When people use bold text to make sections, then it becomes difficult to see where new discussions begins. This is not something we have used to do for a long time. Maybe it is better left out for smaller discussions like the one above here. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:54, 14 March 2017 (UTC) | | When people use bold text to make sections, then it becomes difficult to see where new discussions begins. This is not something we have used to do for a long time. Maybe it is better left out for smaller discussions like the one above here. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:54, 14 March 2017 (UTC) |
| Line 101: |
Line 101: |
| | | | |
| | Where is TOX? He forgot about that!{{unsigned ip|172.68.62.58}} | | Where is TOX? He forgot about that!{{unsigned ip|172.68.62.58}} |
| − |
| |
| − | I'm amused to note that I'm a great example of how this is Euler, not Venn: The best way to contact me is FB Message, with SMS a close second. I almost never get real emails anymore, so I don't check it much. But as the entire FB group is inside the Email group, I couldn't go in there. :) As for the current Incomplete explanation, I would say it's fairly self explanatory. For example, said FB Messenger group. We have a Ponytail, who is also in the iMessage, SMS, and Email groups, meaning that Randall can talk to her using FB messenger, iMessage, SMS, or by Email. Meanwhile the Cueball in this group is in the same groups except for iMessage, meaning Randall can talk to him using FB messenger, SMS, or by Email, in other words in the same ways as (this) Ponytail except iMessage. Going into detail listing every combination represented and what they mean seems like it would be too long and tedious (and would beg for identifying the combinations which aren't represented, which would be worse).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | BTW, there used to be a Facebook App called Bathroom Wall (later changed for a short time to Bathroom Stall, because Facebook decided to forbid anything called Wall), which was an anonymous message board. Not a chat system per se, but it WAS an online communication tool. Messages were anonymous by default, but you could identify yourself through an optional nickname (much like I do here). Within a thread you could faithfully keep using the same nickname in order to maintain a conversation. I had understood THIS was what Randall meant (since it IS actually a way to communicate, unlike actual bathrooms, and is electronic, unlike actual walls). However, this app was closed years ago because it attracted fighting. People wouldn't stop, Facebook pushed the creators to do something about it, they eventually felt forced to close it. They put it into read-only mode for a while so people could salvage whatever was meaningful to them, then it was gone. The fact that it no longer exists would seem to be a vote against it being what Randall meant, except for the other clearly outdated methods on here (I miss ICQ). - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.76|162.158.126.76]] 03:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC) I finally signed up! This comment is mine. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Since it appears as if my comment has gone unnoticed, I added my Bathroom Wall tidbit. It DOES seem extremely relevant. :) - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.16|108.162.219.16]] 13:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC) So's this! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | "had its beginnings in the 1980s and has since represented the most common form of data transmission for most people." Wait, are SMSs really used that much? I have never met a single person who uses SMSs as their primary chat system. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.231.215|198.41.231.215]] 22:47, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Well at least not in the past few couple of years, since everyone has a smartphone and internet flatrate, so they use free and more flexible services (such as WhatsApp) instead. But in the 2000s it was that way for many who didn't use computers much (so no/limited access to IRC, ICQ, etc.)--[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
| |
