|
steinrokkan posted:Lol, it's been there since September 10, and the single editor of that article has been "improving" it every couple of days. Looks like Xayahrainie43 is banned now. I checked their edit history and  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Xayahrainie43/duodecimal  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xayahrainie43
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
Onety Twoty threety fourty fivety sixty seventy eighty ninety onetyty
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
“I’m Twoty two”
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Reminding me of one of the weirder Schoolhouse Rock videos: https://youtu.be/_uJsoZheTR4
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
lol quote:Redirects of the type \n and \xn
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Chitin posted:Actually Beta was a fairly common delivery format for standard def television programming long after VCR went obsolete so a working BetaMax player is likely still operating at most broadcast television stations. I've delivered content on Beta and I'm only 33. Betamax (the consumer video format) and Betacam (the professional video format that you used) are not the same thing. The tapes are more or less identical, but you can't playback a tape that's been recorded on one system with with a deck from the other because the actual recording format is different. Because Sony. Theris has a new favorite as of 16:25 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Huh. The more you know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Xayahrainie43 was not the editor that Wikipedia wanted but the editor that Wikipedia deserved. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
He keeps on changing IPs to edit this page and people keep on blocking the IPs and reverting all the edits. wikipedia.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2018 04:51
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Looks like Xayahrainie43 is banned now. I checked their edit history and It is a real thing but that's just obsessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6xJfP7-HCc
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Why 12 instead of 16? gently caress that trash number.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
it's very divisible
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:Why 12 instead of 16? gently caress that trash number. That’s worse than base ten! At least ten gets a new prime in its factorisation (2×5 vs. 24). You know what would be better than a five? A three, giving us base six. What’s that? You think six is an impractically small base? Well let’s add another two to its factorisation. Oh poo poo now we have twelve. Any base that isn’t colossally abundant is garbage for babies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
Yeah the reason we use base 16 in computers is just because it's a handy shorthand for the actual base in use, base 2. It just allows us to compress a string of 4 digits into 1 with an easy conversion. It's not particularly useful for anything else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
I wandered into a dozenal forum where they say things likequote:4 gross 1 dozen 7 numbers that represent the co-incidence of the two sequences  Send help.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 03:45
|
|
|
Agreed fellow smart people, the number is bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I wandered into a dozenal forum where they say things like I'm glad I googled what the hell A301414 is, because now I fully understand that it is obviously the numbers k in A301413 such that k * A002110(m) is in A002182. Or this fetching sparkly top, one of the two
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 07:23
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Looks like Xayahrainie43 is banned now. I checked their edit history and Pronouncing "e" as "el", sure that sounds like a perfectly good idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:That’s worse than base ten!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 11:30
|
|
|
Can I be the one who understands none of it but reads the wiki and argues to the death over points I still don’t grasp?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 12:46
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:Haha yeah, I know what all this means and I agree with it, unless you're wrong in which case I disagree I clicked on the colossally abundant link and I'm not sure I've ever seen a Wikipedia article worse at explaining something to a layperson.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
Regy Rusty posted:I clicked on the colossally abundant link and I'm not sure I've ever seen a Wikipedia article worse at explaining something to a layperson. A huge portion of the math articles are like that because they're written by and for grad students, who have zero interest in making them accessible but extreme interest in making them rigorous and succinct.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:31
|
|
|
Superabundant: you take a number, find all its divisors, then add them up. If this is a very big total (very big meaning that when you divide the total by the original number, the result is bigger than any smaller number's result), then the number is superabundant. Colossally abundant numbers and superior highly composite are like that, but you divide by a bunch of bigger numbers instead. Why anyone cares? It might be useful in a complicated proof involving prime numbers, but since nobody's written it yet its impossible to know for sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:A huge portion of the math articles are like that because they're written by and for grad students, who have zero interest in making them accessible but extreme interest in making them rigorous and succinct. I wrote Way Too Many loving Words about this problem a few years ago: https://medium.com/@Birdbassador/wikipedia-the-internet-and-the-inequality-of-passion-1c4a690a26ee
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 14:26
|
|
|
Tree Goat posted:I wrote Way Too Many loving Words about this problem a few years ago: Thank you for that link, that was a good read. I dunno the solution for the math section either, though I think I'd be happy if at least the opening section of the article had to be written in a way that was easy to understand and at least give me an idea what this stuff was, even if the whole rest of the article was impossibly technical. Also I laughed as soon as I saw the Silent Hill section, what a ride that story was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
Tree Goat posted:I wrote Way Too Many loving Words about this problem a few years ago: Great article, thanks
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Can I be the one who understands none of it but reads the wiki and argues to the death over points I still don’t grasp? one fishmech is plenty thanks
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
Tree Goat posted:I wrote Way Too Many loving Words about this problem a few years ago: Great write up. The problem of attracting good editors/contributors reminds me of a part from a Douglas Adams' book: Douglas Adams posted:The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
 e: for the record, the actual numbers: DariusLikewise posted:i did an actual graph of deficits, im pretty sure harpers -55 billion is still the largest in history vyelkin has a new favorite as of 20:38 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Yeah we're pretty sure it will double by 2020, trust us guy
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Yeah we're pretty sure it will double by 2020, trust us guy
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Regy Rusty posted:Thank you for that link, that was a good read. I dunno the solution for the math section either, though I think I'd be happy if at least the opening section of the article had to be written in a way that was easy to understand and at least give me an idea what this stuff was, even if the whole rest of the article was impossibly technical.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
Ok, I'm a poltergayst.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
I also like the complex psychological process of wanting to do things you have enjoyed previously, basically a form of insanity right there
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
"Mainly ghosts" makes me laugh every drat time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Not a graph but I still feel it should belong here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 08:00
|
|
|
That is goddamn amazing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 09:37
|
|
|
[quote]If you want 200 wings you can save 5 cents by buying 150+50 separately[/quote[ buy four lots of 50 wings and you save ten centsThis is the single greatest menu known to man
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/lkatzenberg/status/1055560700108701697?s=21
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 10:57
|
|
