And if my grandma had two wheels she would be a bicycke.
No, she would be human with two wheels. That is not what a bicycle is
What are we talking about again?
We are talking about the fact that when someone says “that is not relevant”, countering with “if some facts were different, it would suddenly be relevant” is not very useful answer.
You also have to “change facts” to have the Bobby Tables xkcd apply here, because this is about plates and not children.
It doesn’t have to apply 100% to be a relevant xkcd, they just posted it because, like op’s pic, it’s about a person trying to be clever by messing with speed cameras, but everyone would know whose fault is it the second time it happens because of how weird the plate is.
Your one obviously applies more, but there’s no need to gatekeep.
And (by how I understood it) the point of the I1I1 plate was that it wasn’t easily discernible and the camera couldn’t identify it correctly to link it to the owner, but the police knew who it was nonetheless because it’s always the same guy that already got caught. I might be wrong though, it’s just a funny comic and isn’t probably meant to be looked into that deeply.
And (by how I understood it) the point of the I1I1 plate was that it wasn’t easily discernible and the camera couldn’t identify it correctly
the point was it was hard to read and remember for a human. hence why the witness in the comic gives only vague description, which is what the owner of the sneaky plate hoped for, but due to its uniqueness the police knew and the plate failed to achieve its intended purpose on a spectacular level. there was no automation involved at all.
Replace “all 1’s or something” with “drop database or something” and it 100% applies.
and replace pork steak with tofu chilli bowl and it is now vegetarian food. what is your point?
And if my grandma had two wheels she would be a bicycke. What are we talking about again?
No, she would be human with two wheels. That is not what a bicycle is
We are talking about the fact that when someone says “that is not relevant”, countering with “if some facts were different, it would suddenly be relevant” is not very useful answer.
You also have to “change facts” to have the Bobby Tables xkcd apply here, because this is about plates and not children.
It doesn’t have to apply 100% to be a relevant xkcd, they just posted it because, like op’s pic, it’s about a person trying to be clever by messing with speed cameras, but everyone would know whose fault is it the second time it happens because of how weird the plate is.
Your one obviously applies more, but there’s no need to gatekeep.
but this isn’t about plates, it is about sql injection.
this is obviously not official plate that would be registered to his name, so they would have no idea unless they caught him red-handed.
well, yes, i could have phrased that differently
It’s about plates and sql injection.
And (by how I understood it) the point of the I1I1 plate was that it wasn’t easily discernible and the camera couldn’t identify it correctly to link it to the owner, but the police knew who it was nonetheless because it’s always the same guy that already got caught. I might be wrong though, it’s just a funny comic and isn’t probably meant to be looked into that deeply.
the point was it was hard to read and remember for a human. hence why the witness in the comic gives only vague description, which is what the owner of the sneaky plate hoped for, but due to its uniqueness the police knew and the plate failed to achieve its intended purpose on a spectacular level. there was no automation involved at all.
But if you stuck a license plate to a child then it would be a car
Im suddenly hungry for carbonara