Pothead devs



  •  Noticed odd example images in the configuration for my laptop's Synaptics touchpad:

      Synaptics 420

     



  •  I declare this "Not a WTF".

    When set to a static icon, you get the red icon.  When set to an animated icon, you get the touchpad-looking icon, except that when you actually use the touchpad you get green spots on it depending on how hard you're pressing on the touchpad.

    Personally I disable the icon entirely, but I can understand that some people might want the static icon for quick access to the mouse settings, and some people might want the animated icon so they can see whether the touchpad is responding to their touch properly (sometimes they don't if it's overheated).



  • @Heron said:

     I declare this "Not a WTF".
    I declare "You missed it."



  •  I find your image's lack of color depth disturbing.



  • Complaining about images while posting a 256-colour gif in a palette that includes colours which aren't even in the image, and doesn't include the dominant colours of the image (causing a lot of dithering artifacts) seems a little hypocrytical.

    EDIT: That 256-colour image only has 131 colours actually used, the rest are wasted on random shades of pink and yellow. The colour palette it uses is from MS Paint, meaning the image probably is too. Nothing wrong with using paint to save screenshots, as long as it's not done as a gif. png is preferred, or jpeg for photo-like screenshots (e.g. 3d games).

    Either save to png next time or use an image program that can save gifs using a sensible palette.



  • Sorry, I thought it was sufficiently obvious. And yeah, I realize this isn't a very big deal. Just mildly amusing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4:20



  •  I see.  Well, I'm not surprised I didn't get it :P



  • So ... the pothead devs are the ones who read this thread and immediately see the 4:20 reference without needing to read the Wikipedia article? Apparently I have successfully managed to avoid drug culture. Thanks again for enlightening me, Wikipedia. Yet more useless information to carry around in my head.



  • So, one of three things happened.

     1. The developer took the screenshot and it just happened to be 4:20 PM

    2. The developer waited until 4:20 PM to take the screenshot

    3. The developer deliberately changed the clock to 4:20 PM just to take the screenshot.

     

    I find the first theory far more likely than the other two.



  • @smxlong said:

    So, one of three things happened.

    1. The developer took the screenshot and it just happened to be 4:20 PM

    2. The developer waited until 4:20 PM to take the screenshot

    3. The developer deliberately changed the clock to 4:20 PM just to take the screenshot.

     

    I find the first theory far more likely than the other two.

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).  This also assumes nobody noticed the time and made the connection, which I wouldn't say is terribly likely given the number of people who would have seen it before release.  I'm going to assume number 3 is the true case, although it was probably a graphic designer and not a developer.  They're all marijuana-toking Mac users anyway, right?



  • @plural said:

    Sorry, I thought it was sufficiently obvious. And yeah, I realize this isn't a very big deal. Just mildly amusing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4:20

    TRTWF is having a cultural watchword which is so likely to be used accidentally by people who have no idea of the watchword's existance.  Of course, given that we're talking about potheads here, I guess it's as much as we can really realistically hope for.



  • I thought the WTF was that it said PS/2 port, since I doubt he has a touchpad with a wire plugged into the back of the computer.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    They're all marijuana-toking Mac users anyway, right?
    Right.  The question is, which came first: the drug use or the Mac use?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).

    You forgot to factor in the increased likelyhood of accomplishments being made later in the corporate workday.  I'd say the chance is at *least* 1 in 360.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    This also assumes nobody noticed the time and made the connection, which I wouldn't say is terribly likely given the number of people who would have seen it before release.

    Given the propensity of the corporate world to exclude those who participate in drug culture, I don't find this as unlikely as you.  Also, it's entirely possible that some people saw it, noticed the connection, and felt it wasn't worth fixing.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    although it was probably a graphic designer and not a developer.

    If it was a graphic designer, and not a developer, then it was probably

    4. The graphic designer cut out the original time, and simply typed in the 4:20 PM time.

    Also, if a graphic designer was responsible, I'd guess there were fewer people involved (although still quite a few), as that tends to be, in my experience1 later in the process.

    1 And therefore, almost certainly directly contradicted by Morbiuswilters' experience.  Sigh.



  • Well, good thing it's not 9:11. Or 14:88.



  • @Spectre said:

    Or 14:88.

    What culture has more than 60 minutes in an hour?



  • @tgape said:

    @Spectre said:
    Or 14:88.

    What culture has more than 60 minutes in an hour?

    It could be minutes:seconds.



  • @Spectre said:

    @tgape said:
    @Spectre said:
    Or 14:88.

    What culture has more than 60 minutes in an hour?

    It could be minutes:seconds.

    Oooo...kay.  So what culture has more than 621 seconds in a minute?

    1 I really don't want to know the WTF behind this.  While I may not be able to not know it, I don't think I need to share the pain.



  • @tgape said:

    @Spectre said:
    @tgape said:
    @Spectre said:
    Or 14:88.

    What culture has more than 60 minutes in an hour?

    It could be minutes:seconds.

    Oooo...kay.  So what culture has more than 621 seconds in a minute?

    Aww, you're such a bore. It could be month-day, or something. Engage your imagination, man!



  • @Spectre said:

    @tgape said:
    @Spectre said:
    @tgape said:
    @Spectre said:
    Or 14:88.

    What culture has more than 60 minutes in an hour?

    It could be minutes:seconds.

    Oooo...kay.  So what culture has more than 621 seconds in a minute?

    Aww, you're such a bore. It could be month-day, or something. Engage your imagination, man!

    What is the signifiance of 1488, anyway?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    What is the signifiance of 1488, anyway?

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Words[/url]



    Ah, the joys of hate speech.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @morbiuswilters said:

    This also assumes nobody noticed the time and made the connection, which I wouldn't say is terribly likely given the number of people who would have seen it before release
    Have you ever USED one of those little utility applications for embedded hardware?

     NOBODY reviews ANYTHING about those damned things before release.



  • I saw the same thing in this app a few years ago. IIRC this was the one with the translation so terrible, they must have been smoking something to come up with it. (Check the help.)



  • @belgariontheking said:

    I thought the WTF was that it said PS/2 port, since I doubt he has a touchpad with a wire plugged into the back of the computer.
     

    Most laptop touchpads are connected via PS/2, with the pins remapped to a ZIF ribbon cable. There are some that use USB (physically still a ribbon cable).



  • @tgape said:

    Also, it's entirely possible that some people saw it, noticed the connection, and felt it wasn't worth fixing.
    You say that as if there's something wrong with the number 4:20.  Seriously, I would consider acknowledging the supposed "naughtiness" to be a bigger WTF than letting it go to production as is.



  •  Frankly, I am little surprised how many of you don't understand the reference.

     For my part, it is not so much that I have failed at avoiding drug culture rather than that after I kept seeing this number (usually with the colon) pop up in random places, I had to look up what it meant. I imagine that nearly everybody here has at least once been exposed to this number in a context where the reference was intentional, but I suppose that I am wrong to assume that everyone who noticed it would eventually seek to find out its meaning.

    Further, I posit that if the time in the screenshot read 13:37, this would be less hotly debated as to its WTF qualifications.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).
     

    Everyone else seems to get this, so my brain must just be off... but why are you only considering a 7 hour workday? 

    Lunch is taken at grossly different times throughout the industry. I doubt you could exclude 12:00-1:00 (or thereabouts) as breaktime. Lots of people work through that.

    I can buy the "it's more likely the screenshot was taken at the end of the day" speil, but otherwise I don't think you could really settle for less than 480. What am I missing?



  • @plural said:

     Frankly, I am little surprised how many of you don't understand the reference.

    I wouldn't expect many Europeans to understand it. We smoke Hashish here, not that sissy Marihuana stuff. And we don't make a fuss about it, we just do it.

    For my part, it is not so much that I have failed at avoiding drug culture rather than that after I kept seeing this number (usually with the colon) pop up in random places, I had to look up what it meant. I imagine that nearly everybody here has at least once been exposed to this number in a context where the reference was intentional, but I suppose that I am wrong to assume that everyone who noticed it would eventually seek to find out its meaning.
     

    Only if one has reason to believe it has a meaning. If it pops up frequently enough (like the nuts with their "John 3:16" signs at sports events), then yes, otherwise it's just a random number.



  • @mann_jess said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).
     

    Everyone else seems to get this, so my brain must just be off... but why are you only considering a 7 hour workday? 

    Maybe you have different coworkers than I do, but it sometimes seems like I'm one of only three who ever accomplishes stuff in the morning.  And, of those three, I'm one of only two who ever accomplishes stuff in the afternoon.  Lastly, I'm the only one of that initial group of three who ever accomplishes things in the evening.

    Thinking about it a bit more, I take that back - I have one coworker who frequently accomplishes stuff in the evening, and sometimes accomplishes things in the morning - if you count 1AM as morning.  So that's three others at my office who also have morning accomplishments, two of whom have afternoon accomplishments, and one of whom has evening accomplishments.



  • @bstorer said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    They're all marijuana-toking Mac users anyway, right?
    Right.  The question is, which came first: the drug use or the Mac use?

     

    Mac use is associated with 'pipe smoking,' but not the sort you are referencing. 

    By far, the most spaced out people I know are either hardcore Linux devotees like myself, or fratboy/console gamer/XP guys.  Macs never enter the equation.

     My post-grad, straightlaced, twenty something little sister and all her friends are hardcore mac fans. 




  • @mann_jess said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).
     

    Everyone else seems to get this, so my brain must just be off... but why are you only considering a 7 hour workday? 

    Lunch is taken at grossly different times throughout the industry. I doubt you could exclude 12:00-1:00 (or thereabouts) as breaktime. Lots of people work through that.

    I can buy the "it's more likely the screenshot was taken at the end of the day" speil, but otherwise I don't think you could really settle for less than 480. What am I missing?

    9 to 5 workday.  Lunch doesn't have to be taken at any particular time, just not during 4:20 (which is not very likely).  It also doesn't matter what the "the industry" does, as the screenshot was just taken by one person.  So 7 working hours, 60 mins each, etc...  The other poster who mentioned it was unlikely to be in the morning was correct, but I wasn't being that thorough.



  • @aesis said:

    Mac use is associated with 'pipe smoking,' but not the sort you are referencing.

    @aesis said:

    My post-grad, straightlaced, twenty something little sister and all her friends are hardcore mac fans.

    Hmm...  Can I get their numbers?

     



  • @Ilya Ehrenburg said:

    I wouldn't expect many Europeans to understand it. We smoke Hashish here, not that sissy Marihuana stuff. And we don't make a fuss about it, we just do it.

    Lies.  Europeans smoke marijuana quite a bit and a lot of the pot you can get in the Americas is stronger than that sissy hashish bullshit.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Ilya Ehrenburg said:

    I wouldn't expect many Europeans to understand it. We smoke Hashish here, not that sissy Marihuana stuff. And we don't make a fuss about it, we just do it.

    Lies.  Europeans smoke marijuana quite a bit and a lot of the pot you can get in the Americas is stronger than that sissy hashish bullshit.

     

    Hm, maybe things have changed since the '80s, but then marijuana was almost exclusively a Rastafarian thing in Europe. And if nowadays the papers report a drug-find by the police, it's hashish, not marijuana.

    As for the strength, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marihuana]Cannabis, Marijuana or ganja: the flowers of female plants. Contains between less than 1% THC to 22% THC[/url], [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashish]The tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of hashish usually ranges from 15–20%, and that of hash oil from 30–40%.[/url]

    Of course you can dumb it down by adding lots of tobacco.

    But the cookies were best anyway, and you can't do that with marijuana, can you?



  • @Ilya Ehrenburg said:

    As for the strength, Cannabis, Marijuana or ganja: the flowers of female plants. Contains between less than 1% THC to 22% THC, The tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of hashish usually ranges from 15–20%, and that of hash oil from 30–40%.

    There are plenty of strains of cannabis available in America with THC levels over 30%.

     

    @Ilya Ehrenburg said:

    But the cookies were best anyway, and you can't do that with marijuana, can you?

    Yes, you can cook with marijuana.  Look up "cannabutter".



  • @Ilya Ehrenburg said:

    But the cookies were best anyway, and you can't do that with marijuana, can you?
     

     

    Not only can you do it, but you only need fresh clippings from the plant that growers in your area are probably throwing into their mulch pile as we speak.  

     

    While the THC content of leaves is generally much lower than that of the bud itself, and the smoking of leaves is often associated with headache, there is a ton of usable material with a proper extraction technique.  Extractions are easy, and just take some free time and standard kitchen supplies.  I suggest homemade cannabutter cookies - just remember that prolonged exposure to heat is not the friend of your desired compounds, so soft cookie recipes are best.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    There are plenty of strains of cannabis available in America with THC levels over 30%.

    Apparently you are smoking it. And not allowing it it to be seized and have the THC levels measured.

    As the average of tested THC is well under 10% and the concentrations of THC in Hash are tracking about double that.

    There may be "plenty" available but all indications are that that "plenty" is a small part of the overall availability.



  • @OzPeter said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    There are plenty of strains of cannabis available in America with THC levels over 30%.

    Apparently you are smoking it. And not allowing it it to be seized and have the THC levels measured.

    As the average of tested THC is well under 10% and the concentrations of THC in Hash are tracking about double that.There may be "plenty" available but all indications are that that "plenty" is a small part of the overall availability.

    There's lots of ditchweed for sale out there.  Given that smarter consumers are probably going to buy the higher-quality stuff and are less likely to be caught, it's not surprising that most of what is confiscated is schwag peddled to high school student.  Besides, every dealer knows you sell the crappiest stuff to the people who don't know any better.  Who do you think is having their stash confiscated?

     

    Anyway, my point was that you can get good pot in the Americas that is not "sissy".  I'm not hating on hashish or hash oil, but those are different drugs than bud and claiming one is "better" than the other is simply wrong.  It's also important to note that THC is just one of the many psychoactive components in marijuana and that there are large differences in highs even between high-quality strains of pot.   There is quite a lot of high-grade marijuana available in the Americas and it is quite the cash crop in areas like Hawaii, California and British Columbia.

     

    Oh, and just because I know something about pot doesn't mean I smoke.  I know a lot about Christianity, but I don't go to church, either.



  • @belgariontheking said:

    @tgape said:

    Also, it's entirely possible that some people saw it, noticed the connection, and felt it wasn't worth fixing.
    You say that as if there's something wrong with the number 4:20.  Seriously, I would consider acknowledging the supposed "naughtiness" to be a bigger WTF than letting it go to production as is.

    Indeed.  There are a lot of hidden meanings for various numbers if you look for them.

    • 3 - the holy trinity
    • 4 - unlucky number in various Asian cultures
    • 13 - unlucky number in most Western cultures
    • 17 - unlucky number in Italy
    • 22 - "master number" in many systems of numerology
    • 26 - the gematric number of the true name of god (Yahweh)
    • 42 - the answer to life, the universe and everything
    • 911 - the date of the WTC terrorist strike
    • 1337 - yeah, we should all know this
    • 1984 - George Orwell's dystopia
    And so on.  See if you can come up with a few more.  Wikipedia is a good source.



  • @tdb said:

    There are a lot of hidden meanings for various numbers if you look for them.
    The 216 digit number from the movie pi that is the true name of God.

    A couple more obvious ones:

    3.14(15926536)

    69

    666



  • @tdb said:

    And so on
     

    • 4
    • 8
    • 15
    • 16
    • 23
    • 42



  • knowing the quality of those type of apps I would call it plausible that the programmer was a pot head. 

     



  • What's 23?  Are you referring to the 23 flavors in doctor pepper?

    Are you in love with Michael Jordan?



  • @belgariontheking said:

    What's 23?  Are you referring to the 23 flavors in doctor pepper?

    Are you in love with Michael Jordan?

    [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_Enigma]Fnord[/url]. Also, [url=http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Numbers]this[/url].



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).  This also assumes nobody noticed the time and made the connection, which I wouldn't say is terribly likely given the number of people who would have seen it before release.  I'm going to assume number 3 is the true case, although it was probably a graphic designer and not a developer.  They're all marijuana-toking Mac users anyway, right?

     

    Actually, the chances are 1 in 1, or 100%, because we already know that it happened.  It's incredibly wrong to extrapolate backward and claim that the chances were "1 in x" just because there are x minutes in the day.  That's pretty much the same argument used by the Intelligent Design nutbars.

    If you start with the assumption that a specific screen shot must be taken at some point during the day, and combine that with the assumption that the actual timing is completely random within normal work hours, then yes, the chances would be 1 in 420 for a 7-hour working day.

    However, for such an image to appear on this site, it did not have to be that specific screen shot.  If 1000 screen shots like this are being taken every day throughout the entire world (very conservative estimate), then the probablity of just one of them being taken at 4:20 are 1 - (1 - 0.002381)1000, or about 91%.  That's assuming equal distribution, ignoring possible skew factors such as more work getting done at the end of the day.

    So: Not a WTF, just a coincidence.  Same coincidence that stoners always notice and go "WHAT are the ODDS!!!!?!?!", because they're f-in' stoners and get just as impressed when a dude is able to successfully operate the bottle opener.



  • @Aaron said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    The chances of it just happening to be 4:20 PM when the screenshot was taken are approximately 1 in 420 (seriously).  This also assumes nobody noticed the time and made the connection, which I wouldn't say is terribly likely given the number of people who would have seen it before release.  I'm going to assume number 3 is the true case, although it was probably a graphic designer and not a developer.  They're all marijuana-toking Mac users anyway, right?

     

    Actually, the chances are 1 in 1, or 100%, because we already know that it happened.  It's incredibly wrong to extrapolate backward and claim that the chances were "1 in x" just because there are x minutes in the day.  That's pretty much the same argument used by the Intelligent Design nutbars.

    If you start with the assumption that a specific screen shot must be taken at some point during the day, and combine that with the assumption that the actual timing is completely random within normal work hours, then yes, the chances would be 1 in 420 for a 7-hour working day.

    However, for such an image to appear on this site, it did not have to be that specific screen shot.  If 1000 screen shots like this are being taken every day throughout the entire world (very conservative estimate), then the probablity of just one of them being taken at 4:20 are 1 - (1 - 0.002381)1000, or about 91%.  That's assuming equal distribution, ignoring possible skew factors such as more work getting done at the end of the day.

    So: Not a WTF, just a coincidence.  Same coincidence that stoners always notice and go "WHAT are the ODDS!!!!?!?!", because they're f-in' stoners and get just as impressed when a dude is able to successfully operate the bottle opener.

    Yeah, good point.  I wasn't considering the screenshot within the larger set.  It's probably just a coincidence.  D:



  • @Aaron said:

    Actually, the chances are 1 in 1, or 100%, because we already know that it happened.  It's incredibly wrong to extrapolate backward and claim that the chances were "1 in x" just because there are x minutes in the day.  That's pretty much the same argument used by the Intelligent Design nutbars.

    So if I throw a die and get a six, I can deduce that there was a 100% chance for me getting a six?

    Calculating the odds in the case of the screenshot is difficult since we don't know the amount of randomness in the event.  It's unrealistic to assume that every minute of the day has an equal chance to appear.  As some have pointed out, the productivity of workers varies throughout the workday.  It might be that there's a daily meeting at some specific time every day, which could exclude that span of time from appearing.  However, even if we can't determine the exact odds, we can't conclusively rule out that it might have been random.

    There are a few interesting oddities about random numbers and human psychology.  (I can't find the sources right now, correct me if I misremember something.)  If you ask someone to pick a random number between 1 and 10, the most likely numbers to appear are 3 and 7.  The least likely are 1 and 10.  If you ask a person to write down a sequence of random numbers, it's probable that you won't get two adjacent occurrences of the same number.  When working with randomness, the human mind actively tries to avoid coincidences, even though they are a natural occurrence in chaotic systems.  Conversely, when presented with a concidence such as a nice round number with an obscure hidden meaning, it may be hard to admit that it might be random. 



  • @tdb said:

    .There are a few interesting oddities about random numbers and human psychology.  (I can't find the sources right now, correct me if I misremember something.)  If you ask someone to pick a random number between 1 and 10, the most likely numbers to appear are 3 and 7.  The least likely are 1 and 10.  If you ask a person to write down a sequence of random numbers, it's probable that you won't get two adjacent occurrences of the same number.  When working with randomness, the human mind actively tries to avoid coincidences, even though they are a natural occurrence in chaotic systems.  Conversely, when presented with a concidence such as a nice round number with an obscure hidden meaning, it may be hard to admit that it might be random. 

     

    I would certainly hope 1 and 10 would not be chosen a lot when you ask for a number between 1 and 10. (yeah, yeah, lame, but whatever)



  • @tdb said:

    There are a lot of hidden meanings for various numbers if you look for them.

    • 3 - the holy trinity
    • 4 - unlucky number in various Asian cultures
    • 13 - unlucky number in most Western cultures
    • 17 - unlucky number in Italy
    • 22 - "master number" in many systems of numerology
    • 26 - the gematric number of the true name of god (Yahweh)
    • 42 - the answer to life, the universe and everything
    • 911 - the date of the WTC terrorist strike
    • 1337 - yeah, we should all know this
    • 1984 - George Orwell's dystopia
    And so on.  See if you can come up with a few more.  Wikipedia is a good source.

    Don't forget the smallest uninteresting number.



  • I readily admit that it might be random, but I feel that the chances of it being random are much smaller than 1 in 500. This is because I expect most people, when tasked with making such an image, to deliberately choose a neutral time such as 12:00. 12:00, I believe, is fairly standard for a neutral time. This is the default on most clocks I've seen. And in addition to that, everyone who would have had a chance to see the image had to have either not noticed the connection or not taken any action to change it. I find all of that put together to be extremely unlikely.

    As one who have developed routines with random elements and having been accused of rigging the system towards non-randomness repeatedly by people who fail to grasp the psychology involved, I fully understand what randomness means to humans and I'm always on guard for it. However, I still think that the odds of this being unintentional are very slim.

    Either way, I am amused that so much discussion has been generated for something such as this which I had thought personally to be relatively unremarkable in the first place.

    Also, I don't remember why I saved the screenshot like that. I had actually done it long ago and happened to randomly chance upon it on my hard drive (which is not in the same machine on which the screenshot was taken). I probably used Paint because quite likely I had nothing else on that computer at the moment and I doubt I viewed it as a worthwhile endeavor to obtain a decent application with which to create a reasonable gif. I saved it as a gif because I saw no reason to use a higher format as there was little danger of losing the relevant information in the image. So, to me, a WTF is that people seem so sensitive to such trivial (or so I had thought) matters here.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.