Loomw,ym,ad.Nbr. Can someone identify this poem?

[psychobunny]

I would never have gotten that which is why I always say that SpoilerVirgin is the smarter sister. Just make sure you change the password now since everybody who reads this thread now knows it.

[Leaper]

@Chronos

As an aside, since we’re in CS now and all, Asimov used something very much like this as the plot of one of his Black Widowers mysteries. It was very important for the guest to figure out the password of a fellow who was now dead, but various clues indicated that the password consisted of 14 letters, from which Henry guessed that it was the initial letters of the lines of a sonnet, and then it was just a matter of guessing what the dead guy’s favorite sonnet was from various other clues.

ACK-shually, the guy was alive, and was equally sure that both his password was unguessable and that a colleague stole some of his password protected work. The question was which of those two premises was false.

(“On His Blindness” by John Milton, BTW.)

[SpoilerVirgin]

Here’s the Wikipedia entry on the Asimov story, for anyone else who is interested.

[Chronos]

I think I might have been getting it conflated with a different Black Widowers story, involving the combination to a safe (which previously, I think, belonged to a guy working on fusion power?). But I don’t remember what the gimmick to that one was.

[Andy_L]

@Chronos

I think I might have been getting it conflated with a different Black Widowers story, involving the combination to a safe (which previously, I think, belonged to a guy working on fusion power?). But I don’t remember what the gimmick to that one was.

Possibly this one Getting the Combination (“Getting the Combination” aka" Playing the Numbers"

[Shodan]

Nominating SpoilerVirgin for “Simultaneously Most Nerdy and Most Awesome Post of 2019”.

And I don’t think there will be any serious competition for the rest of the year.

We grovel before your geeky glory.

Regards,
Shodan

[Dewey_Finn]

@The_Other_Waldo_Pepper

But more to the point: some of them contain no gold at all, right? I mean, granted, there could be 14 karats of gold in one or another; but it seems like this should be more along the lines of how 14 karats of gold always refers to 14 karats of gold in a fineness purity determination, or something.

The other thing is that “karats” refers to the purity of gold, with 24 karat gold being pure. Saying “14 karats of gold” suggests you’re referring to the quantity, which makes no sense.

[TruCelt]

Zyada, I am so sorry for your loss. I remember well the first time I read the story of you two meeting through the SDMB. His photograph and gleeful quote on the portrait page speak so beautifully of his character and your happy marriage.
https://www.nouilles.info/sdpix/1956.html

SV - Great work! It’s not often we get the chance to actually do something useful to help a grieving friend. I am so glad you were here to respond.

@Borborygmi

Sounds like it was 14 keystrokes of guesswork in a favorite poem design.

I hate you.

@Sage_Rat

Are you sure that it was letters and not 14 k of g?

. . . and I hate you too.

@Thudlow_Boink

If you really want to impress us:
14 k of g in a f p d

Seriously, just all the hate, you guys.
.
.
.
.
.
:smack: :smack: :smack:
.
.
.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@Dewey_Finn

The other thing is that “karats” refers to the purity of gold, with 24 karat gold being pure. Saying “14 karats of gold” suggests you’re referring to the quantity, which makes no sense.

But googling “14 karats of gold” produces any number of results; “karats of gold” is even in the Congressional Record (because, apparently, that’s how people talk even after they get elected to high office, as well as a phrase that pops up in the occasional article they want printed in said record) and at FTC.gov (because, apparently, that’s also how folks talk if they work near said people who get elected, or some such).

Is there a point where description counts enough to win out over prescription?

[DesertDog]

Yes, 14k gold is not pure; 24k is. It’s not even the ‘better’ of the gold alloys commonly used for jewelry, that would be 18k. From there you drop to 10k, mostly used in cheap-ass high school rings. So 14k is not that impressive.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@DesertDog

Yes, 14k gold is not pure; 24k is. It’s not even the ‘better’ of the gold alloys commonly used for jewelry, that would be 18k. From there you drop to 10k, mostly used in cheap-ass high school rings. So 14k is not that impressive.

But the question isn’t how impressive it is; the question is whether people say it, not whether they should. And from a quick google, the term sure does seem to get used by folks regardless of how little it may impress either you or me.

[DesertDog]

A lot of people also say, “All that glitters is not gold” when they mean, “Not all that glitters is gold,” another pet peeve of mine.

Two prospectors on the hunt. “Well, lookee here. I think I found gold!”

“Does it glitter?”

“It sure does!”

“Move on, then; it’s not gold.”

[Thudlow_Boink]

@DesertDog

A lot of people also say, “All that glitters is not gold” when they mean, “Not all that glitters is gold,” another pet peeve of mine.

Two prospectors on the hunt. “Well, lookee here. I think I found gold!”

“Does it glitter?”

“It sure does!”

“Move on, then; it’s not gold.”

I quite agree, and am also peeved when people say “All is not…” when they mean “Not all is”; but maybe you can blame Shakespeare for this one, and maybe he was guided by considerations of poetic meter rather than logic.

Still, I do prefer Bilbo Baggins’s version.