1 00:00:04,120 --> 00:00:07,160 Speaker 1: Get in touch with technology with tech Stuff from how 2 00:00:07,200 --> 00:00:13,720 Speaker 1: stuff Works dot com. Hey therein Welcome to tech Stuff 3 00:00:13,720 --> 00:00:17,960 Speaker 1: and Happy April Fool's Day everyone. I'm Jonathan Strickland. I'm 4 00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:20,439 Speaker 1: an executive producer with How Stuff Works in my Heart Radio, 5 00:00:20,440 --> 00:00:23,600 Speaker 1: and I love all things tech and this episode should 6 00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:28,120 Speaker 1: publish on April first, two thousand nineteen, unless my producer 7 00:00:28,200 --> 00:00:30,960 Speaker 1: Tari has played in April Fool's Joke on me while 8 00:00:30,960 --> 00:00:34,200 Speaker 1: I'm on vacation, and I thought, well, I could do 9 00:00:34,560 --> 00:00:37,519 Speaker 1: another follow up episode on the various tech pranks that 10 00:00:37,560 --> 00:00:39,640 Speaker 1: have been pulled since the last time I did a 11 00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:43,400 Speaker 1: prank roundup, which I think was in two thousand fifteen, 12 00:00:43,640 --> 00:00:46,839 Speaker 1: But then I decided to focus on something else, a 13 00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:51,120 Speaker 1: really amazing example of engineering. So there was a fellow 14 00:00:51,159 --> 00:00:54,560 Speaker 1: who was named John Helen's Quick who published a piece 15 00:00:54,760 --> 00:00:57,840 Speaker 1: at least as early as nineteen It was in a 16 00:00:57,920 --> 00:01:02,560 Speaker 1: December edition of the British Institution of Electrical Engineers Students 17 00:01:02,640 --> 00:01:05,840 Speaker 1: Quarterly Journal. Now I say at least as early as 18 00:01:06,000 --> 00:01:09,440 Speaker 1: nineteen forty four, because there's some people who say that 19 00:01:09,520 --> 00:01:12,560 Speaker 1: it may have been published even earlier in some other 20 00:01:12,640 --> 00:01:15,640 Speaker 1: journal by nineteen forty two, but it's super hard to 21 00:01:15,640 --> 00:01:19,480 Speaker 1: track down. The earliest I found was this nineteen journal. 22 00:01:19,800 --> 00:01:23,840 Speaker 1: The article is a masterpiece. It describes a transformative technology 23 00:01:23,920 --> 00:01:28,039 Speaker 1: called the turbo encabulator. Now, normally I wouldn't read out 24 00:01:28,080 --> 00:01:31,000 Speaker 1: an entire piece, but in order to understand how important 25 00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:34,160 Speaker 1: this is, I figured I would make an exception, and 26 00:01:34,200 --> 00:01:38,800 Speaker 1: so here is Mr Quick's description of the turbo encabulator. 27 00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:42,000 Speaker 1: For a number of years now, work has been proceeding 28 00:01:42,040 --> 00:01:45,479 Speaker 1: in order to bring perfection to the crudely conceived idea 29 00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:48,960 Speaker 1: of a transmission that would not only supply inverse reactive 30 00:01:49,000 --> 00:01:52,720 Speaker 1: current for use in unilateral phase detractors, but would also 31 00:01:52,760 --> 00:01:57,200 Speaker 1: be capable of automatically synchronizing cardinal gram meters. Such an 32 00:01:57,240 --> 00:02:01,680 Speaker 1: instrument is the turbo encabulator. Now, basically, the only new 33 00:02:01,720 --> 00:02:05,240 Speaker 1: principle involved is that instead of power being generated by 34 00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:08,760 Speaker 1: the relative motion of conductors and fluxes, it is produced 35 00:02:08,800 --> 00:02:12,960 Speaker 1: by the modial interaction of magneto reluctance and capacitive diractants. 36 00:02:13,400 --> 00:02:17,359 Speaker 1: The original machine had a base plate of prefabriulated ammulite 37 00:02:17,600 --> 00:02:21,200 Speaker 1: surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way 38 00:02:21,240 --> 00:02:24,280 Speaker 1: that the two sperving bearings were in a direct line 39 00:02:24,320 --> 00:02:28,200 Speaker 1: with the pentometric fan. The ladder consisted simply of six 40 00:02:28,280 --> 00:02:33,560 Speaker 1: hydrocoptic marsal vances, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar wainshaft 41 00:02:33,840 --> 00:02:38,280 Speaker 1: that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was 42 00:02:38,440 --> 00:02:42,519 Speaker 1: of the normal lotus o delta type, placed in penandermic 43 00:02:42,680 --> 00:02:46,440 Speaker 1: semi boloid slots in the stature, every seventh conductor being 44 00:02:46,480 --> 00:02:49,959 Speaker 1: connected by a non reversible trimmy pipe to the differential 45 00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:53,000 Speaker 1: girdle spring on the up end of the gram meters 46 00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:57,360 Speaker 1: forty one manestic league spaced grouding brushes were arranged to 47 00:02:57,440 --> 00:03:00,639 Speaker 1: feed into the rotor slip stream a mixed of high 48 00:03:00,880 --> 00:03:06,920 Speaker 1: s value phenel hydro benzamine and five percent ruminative tetralio hexamine. 49 00:03:07,120 --> 00:03:11,120 Speaker 1: Both these liquids have specific paracoustics given by p equals 50 00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:14,400 Speaker 1: two times five c end to the six times seven, 51 00:03:14,919 --> 00:03:20,120 Speaker 1: wherein is the diathetical evolute of retrograde temperature phase disposition 52 00:03:20,480 --> 00:03:26,200 Speaker 1: and see is col Mondlaise annular grillage coefficient. Initially, n 53 00:03:26,360 --> 00:03:30,040 Speaker 1: was measured with the aid of a metapolar refractive pilfometer, 54 00:03:30,440 --> 00:03:33,040 Speaker 1: but up to the present date nothing has been found 55 00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:38,000 Speaker 1: to equal the transcendental hopper data scope. Electrical engineers will 56 00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:41,760 Speaker 1: appreciate the difficulty of new being together the regurgative pur 57 00:03:41,880 --> 00:03:45,960 Speaker 1: well and a supremitive went al sprocket. Indeed, this proved 58 00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:48,800 Speaker 1: to be a stumbling block to further development until in 59 00:03:48,920 --> 00:03:52,680 Speaker 1: nWo it was found that the use of anhydrous nangling 60 00:03:52,720 --> 00:03:57,200 Speaker 1: pins enabled a cryptognastic bowling him to be tankered. The 61 00:03:57,280 --> 00:04:02,040 Speaker 1: early attempts to construct a sufficiently robust spiral dcommutator failed 62 00:04:02,120 --> 00:04:05,240 Speaker 1: largely because of a lack of appreciation of the large 63 00:04:05,320 --> 00:04:09,320 Speaker 1: quasi p stic stresses and Grimlin studs. The latter were 64 00:04:09,440 --> 00:04:12,400 Speaker 1: specially designed to hold the roth Itt bars to the 65 00:04:12,440 --> 00:04:16,640 Speaker 1: spam shaft. When, however, it was discovered that the winding 66 00:04:16,800 --> 00:04:20,640 Speaker 1: could be prevented by a simple addition to the living sockets, 67 00:04:20,680 --> 00:04:25,000 Speaker 1: almost perfect running was secured. The operating point is maintained 68 00:04:25,040 --> 00:04:28,240 Speaker 1: as near as possible to the h f rempeak by 69 00:04:28,320 --> 00:04:33,560 Speaker 1: constantly formaging the bitumogeneous spandrels. This is a distinct advance 70 00:04:33,640 --> 00:04:37,120 Speaker 1: on the standard nivel sheave. In the no dramcock oil 71 00:04:37,279 --> 00:04:41,719 Speaker 1: is required after the phase detractors have been remissed. Undoubtedly, 72 00:04:42,000 --> 00:04:45,479 Speaker 1: the turbo encabulator has now reached a very high level 73 00:04:45,520 --> 00:04:49,240 Speaker 1: of technical development. It has been successfully used for operating 74 00:04:49,279 --> 00:04:54,680 Speaker 1: no fur trunions. In addition, wherever Barrissant score motion is required, 75 00:04:54,720 --> 00:04:58,360 Speaker 1: it may be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocating 76 00:04:58,440 --> 00:05:04,120 Speaker 1: dingle arm to reduce ying a soiled deplinoration. Now my 77 00:05:04,320 --> 00:05:07,120 Speaker 1: guess is you just listen to me read off that 78 00:05:08,160 --> 00:05:11,880 Speaker 1: let's say, remarkable description, and you're left with the obvious 79 00:05:11,880 --> 00:05:16,120 Speaker 1: response of of course, that's that's blatantly obvious, that's old news. 80 00:05:16,920 --> 00:05:21,120 Speaker 1: Or perhaps you're having what was the intended response, you're 81 00:05:21,160 --> 00:05:25,559 Speaker 1: confused as heck, Quick's piece was a tongue in cheek 82 00:05:25,760 --> 00:05:31,159 Speaker 1: example of satire, highlighting how engineers would sometimes rely very 83 00:05:31,240 --> 00:05:35,039 Speaker 1: heavily on jargon that you know, didn't seem to really 84 00:05:35,120 --> 00:05:39,840 Speaker 1: mean anything, or purposefully obfuscated the functionality of a system, 85 00:05:39,960 --> 00:05:43,280 Speaker 1: or maybe even cover up the engineer's own ignorance of 86 00:05:43,279 --> 00:05:48,160 Speaker 1: how a system actually worked. Jargon does have some purposes, 87 00:05:48,200 --> 00:05:51,400 Speaker 1: of course. Sometimes you need to create words to describe 88 00:05:51,480 --> 00:05:55,360 Speaker 1: something that didn't exist before. If you make a new 89 00:05:55,400 --> 00:05:58,359 Speaker 1: device that fulfills a specific purpose, you need to have 90 00:05:58,440 --> 00:06:01,320 Speaker 1: a name for it. You might need a name for 91 00:06:01,400 --> 00:06:04,400 Speaker 1: the thing that the device actually does. Maybe whatever the 92 00:06:04,400 --> 00:06:07,240 Speaker 1: device is doing is a brand new thing, so you've 93 00:06:07,240 --> 00:06:10,320 Speaker 1: gotta have some word to describe it. Maybe what it 94 00:06:10,360 --> 00:06:14,200 Speaker 1: does is a very specific instance of a more broad concept. 95 00:06:14,240 --> 00:06:17,440 Speaker 1: So it's not doing a brand new thing, it's just 96 00:06:17,520 --> 00:06:20,360 Speaker 1: doing a thing in a new way. So you create 97 00:06:20,400 --> 00:06:23,960 Speaker 1: words to help build in precision. You don't just mean 98 00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:27,480 Speaker 1: a dingle angle. You might mean a one eighth hexagonal 99 00:06:27,640 --> 00:06:31,080 Speaker 1: matrix dingle angle, so you call this particular component of 100 00:06:31,440 --> 00:06:35,599 Speaker 1: a fronyon or whatever. With precision, you can more quickly 101 00:06:35,680 --> 00:06:40,840 Speaker 1: communicate your exact needs or intentions to others within that field. 102 00:06:41,440 --> 00:06:45,200 Speaker 1: But with that growing precision comes a knowledge gap between 103 00:06:45,240 --> 00:06:48,960 Speaker 1: the people in your field and everybody else. Now, in 104 00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:53,520 Speaker 1: other cases, people rely on jargon not to convey specific meaning, 105 00:06:53,920 --> 00:06:58,560 Speaker 1: but rather to come across as being more sophisticated or intelligent, 106 00:06:59,080 --> 00:07:01,839 Speaker 1: or to make something more complicated than it really is. 107 00:07:02,320 --> 00:07:04,960 Speaker 1: So I'm gonna give you guys some examples from my 108 00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:09,720 Speaker 1: own life. In my life, before I ever was a podcaster, 109 00:07:09,880 --> 00:07:13,160 Speaker 1: before I was a writer for how Stuff Works dot com, 110 00:07:13,200 --> 00:07:17,680 Speaker 1: I worked for a couple of different management consulting firms. Now, 111 00:07:17,720 --> 00:07:22,120 Speaker 1: these were companies that were geared toward helping other companies 112 00:07:22,280 --> 00:07:26,880 Speaker 1: assess manager styles or figure out what a corporate culture 113 00:07:27,120 --> 00:07:31,160 Speaker 1: was within a certain business, to improve workplace efficiencies, that 114 00:07:31,240 --> 00:07:34,960 Speaker 1: kind of thing. I was essentially working for the Bobs 115 00:07:35,240 --> 00:07:37,760 Speaker 1: from Office Space. I guess you could say so if 116 00:07:37,760 --> 00:07:40,040 Speaker 1: you're familiar with that film and the two consultants who 117 00:07:40,040 --> 00:07:42,560 Speaker 1: come in and essentially start slashing jobs left and right. 118 00:07:43,280 --> 00:07:46,320 Speaker 1: I was kind of their employee in a roundabout way, 119 00:07:46,320 --> 00:07:51,960 Speaker 1: although we didn't typically advocate for slashing huge numbers off 120 00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:57,440 Speaker 1: of a corporate employee list. Occasionally, yes, but not frequently. 121 00:07:58,000 --> 00:08:01,640 Speaker 1: So my work was focused on help in consultants produce 122 00:08:01,840 --> 00:08:06,480 Speaker 1: proposals and reports. Largely, I was there to review, to proof, 123 00:08:06,480 --> 00:08:12,280 Speaker 1: freed to format, and occasionally to tweak stuff. Now I 124 00:08:12,480 --> 00:08:15,360 Speaker 1: majored in English Lit when I was in college. I 125 00:08:15,400 --> 00:08:20,480 Speaker 1: have a fairly extensive vocabulary, but frequently I would find 126 00:08:20,520 --> 00:08:24,920 Speaker 1: myself working on documents that were so full of jargon 127 00:08:25,480 --> 00:08:27,600 Speaker 1: that I would have to bring the documents over to 128 00:08:27,640 --> 00:08:31,400 Speaker 1: a consultant and say, what exactly do you mean when 129 00:08:31,440 --> 00:08:34,080 Speaker 1: you say this? You know, I would highlight a passage 130 00:08:34,120 --> 00:08:36,800 Speaker 1: and say what does this actually mean? Because I couldn't 131 00:08:36,840 --> 00:08:40,920 Speaker 1: really edit or produce documents if I didn't understand the 132 00:08:41,000 --> 00:08:44,160 Speaker 1: meaning because it might mean I could let something go 133 00:08:44,280 --> 00:08:47,760 Speaker 1: out of the office that was incorrect, and it was 134 00:08:47,800 --> 00:08:51,079 Speaker 1: incorrect because I didn't understand what was actually being meant 135 00:08:51,160 --> 00:08:55,640 Speaker 1: and whether or not the consultant was accurate in their language. 136 00:08:55,880 --> 00:08:57,920 Speaker 1: So I would have to talk with these consultants on 137 00:08:57,960 --> 00:08:59,880 Speaker 1: a very frank level and say, no, no, no, I 138 00:09:00,040 --> 00:09:03,600 Speaker 1: understand what each individual word means in this sentence, but 139 00:09:03,679 --> 00:09:06,560 Speaker 1: can you tell me what the overall meaning is? What 140 00:09:06,640 --> 00:09:09,320 Speaker 1: are you actually getting at when you say this? And 141 00:09:09,320 --> 00:09:11,599 Speaker 1: if they could tell me in plain English, then I 142 00:09:11,640 --> 00:09:14,720 Speaker 1: would ask them, so, why don't you say it that 143 00:09:14,760 --> 00:09:18,280 Speaker 1: way in this report? Why are you using language that 144 00:09:18,480 --> 00:09:23,360 Speaker 1: is so complicated or non intuitive that what you actually 145 00:09:23,400 --> 00:09:27,080 Speaker 1: mean is hidden by that language? What good does that 146 00:09:27,160 --> 00:09:30,840 Speaker 1: do you? My fear was that the consultants were writing 147 00:09:30,880 --> 00:09:33,920 Speaker 1: these reports in a way to kind of hide the 148 00:09:34,000 --> 00:09:38,160 Speaker 1: meaning because it gave them some wiggle room in the interpretations. 149 00:09:38,559 --> 00:09:42,120 Speaker 1: And I thought that was maybe a little disingenuous, Like 150 00:09:42,559 --> 00:09:44,960 Speaker 1: if you could word a report in such a way 151 00:09:45,000 --> 00:09:47,600 Speaker 1: that two different people could come away with two totally 152 00:09:47,600 --> 00:09:53,640 Speaker 1: different interpretations, and both interpretations are seemingly valid because you 153 00:09:53,720 --> 00:10:00,120 Speaker 1: were purposefully vague or Uh, using very weird jargon in 154 00:10:00,200 --> 00:10:03,440 Speaker 1: your descriptions, then you haven't really done your job. You 155 00:10:03,520 --> 00:10:06,800 Speaker 1: haven't actually helped them in any way, because no one 156 00:10:06,880 --> 00:10:10,040 Speaker 1: has any consensus on what to do next. So I 157 00:10:10,080 --> 00:10:14,000 Speaker 1: found it very frustrating working in that world. Well, the 158 00:10:14,040 --> 00:10:18,400 Speaker 1: same thing can happen with engineers, or really any profession 159 00:10:18,600 --> 00:10:22,280 Speaker 1: that has its own jargon, from medicine to law, to 160 00:10:22,520 --> 00:10:26,720 Speaker 1: science to content creation on the Internet. I've been to 161 00:10:26,880 --> 00:10:31,319 Speaker 1: plenty of meetings where there's been a lot of discussion 162 00:10:31,720 --> 00:10:35,240 Speaker 1: about things on the Internet, where I felt it was 163 00:10:35,280 --> 00:10:40,400 Speaker 1: being unnecessarily complicated, where people were talking about buckets and verticals, 164 00:10:40,440 --> 00:10:45,440 Speaker 1: and they're talking about all sorts of things and deliverables 165 00:10:45,440 --> 00:10:48,560 Speaker 1: and asking to dialogue with someone, And I kept thinking, 166 00:10:48,600 --> 00:10:51,880 Speaker 1: why are we using this language? There are other words 167 00:10:51,920 --> 00:10:55,520 Speaker 1: we can use that everyone understands, that will convey exactly 168 00:10:55,559 --> 00:11:02,079 Speaker 1: the meaning you you want, and yet we're progressively going 169 00:11:02,440 --> 00:11:08,040 Speaker 1: to this this weird quasi language that that has a 170 00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:10,880 Speaker 1: lot of ambiguity in it and therefore makes it harder 171 00:11:10,920 --> 00:11:14,800 Speaker 1: to understand the meaning anyway. That was really what this 172 00:11:14,840 --> 00:11:17,480 Speaker 1: piece was all about. There has to be a balance 173 00:11:17,920 --> 00:11:22,240 Speaker 1: between precision that you get with the specific language that 174 00:11:22,280 --> 00:11:25,800 Speaker 1: you were relying upon and clarity what you mean by 175 00:11:25,840 --> 00:11:29,120 Speaker 1: that language. So this piece by student John H. Quick 176 00:11:29,520 --> 00:11:33,760 Speaker 1: was really meant to raise the reliance of jargon two 177 00:11:33,880 --> 00:11:38,559 Speaker 1: ridiculous extremes, to say, if we really crank up the 178 00:11:38,679 --> 00:11:44,120 Speaker 1: jargon speak in a piece, you realize how silly it 179 00:11:44,200 --> 00:11:47,960 Speaker 1: can get. And the joke may well have died a 180 00:11:48,040 --> 00:11:51,400 Speaker 1: quiet death on its own, or maybe only been something 181 00:11:51,520 --> 00:11:55,840 Speaker 1: that engineers would joke about, just an inside joke among them, 182 00:11:55,880 --> 00:11:59,559 Speaker 1: if it hadn't been for Time Magazine. The Arthur d 183 00:12:00,000 --> 00:12:03,600 Speaker 1: Old Industrial Bulletin in the United States would take this 184 00:12:03,640 --> 00:12:06,959 Speaker 1: piece and publish it in ninety six, but that didn't 185 00:12:06,960 --> 00:12:10,800 Speaker 1: exactly hit mainstream readership. It did, however, get some attention 186 00:12:10,840 --> 00:12:15,280 Speaker 1: by people who would review technical documents, and in April 187 00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:18,280 Speaker 1: of that year, Time Magazine ran the piece with the 188 00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:22,400 Speaker 1: title for No for Trunnions. It was produced without an 189 00:12:22,400 --> 00:12:25,120 Speaker 1: overt nod that the whole thing was a wind up, 190 00:12:25,840 --> 00:12:28,400 Speaker 1: and the people at Time Magazine knew it was a joke, 191 00:12:28,600 --> 00:12:31,240 Speaker 1: but they were presenting it as if it were a 192 00:12:31,280 --> 00:12:36,040 Speaker 1: realistic document. Some readers were legitimately flabbergasted. They thought it 193 00:12:36,080 --> 00:12:39,280 Speaker 1: was meant as an actual example of engineering, but other 194 00:12:39,320 --> 00:12:41,719 Speaker 1: people actually picked up on the joke and ran with it. 195 00:12:42,240 --> 00:12:46,600 Speaker 1: Stanton Tompkins, for example, wrote to Time Magazine and included 196 00:12:46,640 --> 00:12:49,560 Speaker 1: the comment, may I add that if the bearings are 197 00:12:49,640 --> 00:12:54,439 Speaker 1: lubricated with warm smorch, they will not grune. Others added 198 00:12:54,480 --> 00:12:58,520 Speaker 1: equally nonsensical comments to push the joke further. One that's 199 00:12:58,559 --> 00:13:02,040 Speaker 1: frequently mentioned is from a guy named Ernest In Kerman. 200 00:13:02,120 --> 00:13:06,359 Speaker 1: He wrote in and said, after being advised and cerebral 201 00:13:06,440 --> 00:13:09,880 Speaker 1: lee malliated by one point five no fur trunnions from 202 00:13:09,880 --> 00:13:15,240 Speaker 1: a magitudinitative zero four or five one gmt to an 203 00:13:15,240 --> 00:13:19,800 Speaker 1: epin nocturnal proximate eleven fifty five e s T. I 204 00:13:19,880 --> 00:13:23,880 Speaker 1: felt the need of spiri in animating filiperative and therefore 205 00:13:24,000 --> 00:13:31,080 Speaker 1: submersonized my hypercincinate indoderm in a five percent Fijian nate 206 00:13:31,320 --> 00:13:39,080 Speaker 1: by Carbo la kai nat ing Kepsi pola little slightly 207 00:13:39,160 --> 00:13:42,760 Speaker 1: veiled pepsi cola reference. They're still The joke could have 208 00:13:42,800 --> 00:13:46,560 Speaker 1: faded away from memory after the Time Magazine piece weren't 209 00:13:46,559 --> 00:13:48,840 Speaker 1: not for the determination of a few jokesters in the 210 00:13:48,880 --> 00:13:51,400 Speaker 1: engineering world to give it a shot in the arm 211 00:13:51,440 --> 00:13:55,000 Speaker 1: every few decades. Like the instrument department at General Electric 212 00:13:55,200 --> 00:13:57,480 Speaker 1: they wrote up an entire data sheet on the fictional 213 00:13:57,520 --> 00:14:00,880 Speaker 1: turbo encabulator. More on that in just moment, but first 214 00:14:01,240 --> 00:14:13,120 Speaker 1: let's take a quick break. On December one, nineteen sixty two, 215 00:14:13,360 --> 00:14:16,880 Speaker 1: the Instrument Department at GE released a fact sheet on 216 00:14:16,920 --> 00:14:21,680 Speaker 1: the turbo encabulator. By the way, I've seen turbo encabulator 217 00:14:21,760 --> 00:14:24,800 Speaker 1: presented as both a single word and as two words 218 00:14:24,840 --> 00:14:29,880 Speaker 1: as turbo incabulator, so dealer's choice. I guess both appear 219 00:14:30,200 --> 00:14:36,240 Speaker 1: throughout engineering joke literature. The fact sheet, however, really helps 220 00:14:36,280 --> 00:14:39,680 Speaker 1: clear things up. For example, the function of the turbo 221 00:14:39,800 --> 00:14:43,160 Speaker 1: encabulator is made clear by this fact sheet. It's quote 222 00:14:43,520 --> 00:14:46,840 Speaker 1: to measure inverse reactive current in unilateral phase detractors with 223 00:14:46,920 --> 00:14:52,120 Speaker 1: a display of percent realization end quote. So finally we 224 00:14:52,200 --> 00:14:55,240 Speaker 1: know what's going on, right. Much of the fact sheet 225 00:14:55,520 --> 00:14:59,520 Speaker 1: is drawn directly from Quick's description of the turbo encabulator 226 00:14:59,560 --> 00:15:05,840 Speaker 1: from back. Other parts gleefully build upon the nonsense. For example, 227 00:15:06,040 --> 00:15:08,280 Speaker 1: there is a section on the fact sheet about the 228 00:15:08,280 --> 00:15:12,560 Speaker 1: application of the device that reads, quote caution because of 229 00:15:12,600 --> 00:15:18,000 Speaker 1: the replenorative flow characteristics of positive ions and unilateral phase detractors, 230 00:15:18,040 --> 00:15:22,080 Speaker 1: the use of quasi static regeneration oscillator is recommended if 231 00:15:22,120 --> 00:15:26,480 Speaker 1: turbo encabulator is used in explosive atmospheres. End quote. The 232 00:15:26,480 --> 00:15:30,040 Speaker 1: fact sheet actually includes an image of the supposed device, 233 00:15:30,840 --> 00:15:34,440 Speaker 1: the first image that I could actually find on record 234 00:15:35,040 --> 00:15:36,920 Speaker 1: this version. If you were to look at it looks 235 00:15:36,960 --> 00:15:39,680 Speaker 1: kind of like a cylinder mounted on its side on 236 00:15:39,760 --> 00:15:43,200 Speaker 1: a small stand, so think of like a like a 237 00:15:43,240 --> 00:15:46,200 Speaker 1: water bottle, but you have it on its side. On 238 00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:49,080 Speaker 1: one end of this cylinder is a fan that sticks 239 00:15:49,080 --> 00:15:51,440 Speaker 1: out of the end. There's a length of piping that 240 00:15:51,480 --> 00:15:55,520 Speaker 1: stretches across the top of the turbo encabulator, so again 241 00:15:55,560 --> 00:15:57,520 Speaker 1: like it would be the side of the cylinder, but 242 00:15:57,600 --> 00:16:00,800 Speaker 1: the top of the device. And there's some other details 243 00:16:00,840 --> 00:16:02,800 Speaker 1: on this as well, although it's hard to make out 244 00:16:02,920 --> 00:16:06,520 Speaker 1: because I've only seen scans of the original document and 245 00:16:06,520 --> 00:16:08,840 Speaker 1: they tend to be pretty low quality scans, so it's 246 00:16:08,840 --> 00:16:12,160 Speaker 1: hard to make out details. The entire write up followed 247 00:16:12,160 --> 00:16:16,040 Speaker 1: the format of official g E standards for product documentation, 248 00:16:16,600 --> 00:16:19,680 Speaker 1: so the people who made this actually made it so 249 00:16:19,760 --> 00:16:25,400 Speaker 1: it looked exactly like any standard g E documentation. They 250 00:16:25,480 --> 00:16:28,520 Speaker 1: followed all the rules and it was inserted into the 251 00:16:28,600 --> 00:16:33,200 Speaker 1: official GE handbook. Now I'm sure that those who painstaking 252 00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:37,160 Speaker 1: lee read through the entire handbook were amused or maybe 253 00:16:37,200 --> 00:16:40,520 Speaker 1: befuddled by the joke. Also, I feel this is a 254 00:16:40,520 --> 00:16:43,200 Speaker 1: good place to say that it pays to read through 255 00:16:43,640 --> 00:16:46,800 Speaker 1: employee handbooks because you never know when someone's going to 256 00:16:46,840 --> 00:16:49,480 Speaker 1: slip in a joke. And as someone who has actually 257 00:16:49,520 --> 00:16:52,920 Speaker 1: designed employee handbooks in the past, I'd also say it 258 00:16:53,000 --> 00:16:57,760 Speaker 1: is incredibly satisfying to put jokes into official materials, you know, 259 00:16:57,840 --> 00:17:00,480 Speaker 1: so long as those jokes aren't going to backfire on you. 260 00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:03,600 Speaker 1: So I would actually recommend getting official approval before getting 261 00:17:03,600 --> 00:17:07,720 Speaker 1: wacky with the official handbook. It is good to see 262 00:17:07,720 --> 00:17:11,680 Speaker 1: why a in those cases. Still, at this point, we're 263 00:17:11,720 --> 00:17:18,240 Speaker 1: talking about print representations of this ridiculous notion. In ninety seven, 264 00:17:18,480 --> 00:17:22,479 Speaker 1: the Turbo Encabulator made the transition from page to screen. 265 00:17:22,880 --> 00:17:25,960 Speaker 1: An actor named Bud Haggart, who was well known for 266 00:17:26,119 --> 00:17:30,320 Speaker 1: voiceover and industrial film performances, took on the role of 267 00:17:30,359 --> 00:17:34,080 Speaker 1: an engineer delivering a matter of fact explanation of the 268 00:17:34,080 --> 00:17:38,480 Speaker 1: turbo Encabulator. The script was nearly word for word Quick's 269 00:17:38,520 --> 00:17:42,080 Speaker 1: original piece in ninety four. It was edited a bit 270 00:17:42,320 --> 00:17:45,040 Speaker 1: but had essentially the same flow, and it was helped 271 00:17:45,080 --> 00:17:48,960 Speaker 1: with meaningless diagrams and sketches that Haggard would point to 272 00:17:49,080 --> 00:17:53,200 Speaker 1: throughout his delivery as if he was actually pointing at 273 00:17:53,240 --> 00:17:58,480 Speaker 1: the physical components of this fictional device. His tone and 274 00:17:58,560 --> 00:18:01,240 Speaker 1: approach made it so like he was talking about something 275 00:18:01,240 --> 00:18:05,280 Speaker 1: that any kid could understand with relative ease. It was brilliant. 276 00:18:06,200 --> 00:18:10,600 Speaker 1: According to Internet lore, Hanard proposed doing the short as 277 00:18:10,720 --> 00:18:14,000 Speaker 1: an add on after an official short film for GMC 278 00:18:15,080 --> 00:18:18,679 Speaker 1: was shot. It was an industrial film about one of 279 00:18:18,680 --> 00:18:22,280 Speaker 1: their truck lines. So he goes in. He does this 280 00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:27,480 Speaker 1: commercial shoot for GMC about their truck lines, and he 281 00:18:27,600 --> 00:18:29,880 Speaker 1: works with the film crew, and then afterwards he takes 282 00:18:29,880 --> 00:18:32,280 Speaker 1: the film crew aside. He talks to the director, whose 283 00:18:32,320 --> 00:18:35,359 Speaker 1: name was Dave Ron Dutt, and he asks them to 284 00:18:35,480 --> 00:18:39,240 Speaker 1: stay after so that he might shoot a short film 285 00:18:39,840 --> 00:18:43,840 Speaker 1: that is based off the turbo encabulator piece. Haggard had 286 00:18:43,840 --> 00:18:48,440 Speaker 1: actually written the script based on that n article and 287 00:18:48,640 --> 00:18:52,119 Speaker 1: made it something that he could create a presentation out of. 288 00:18:52,800 --> 00:18:57,840 Speaker 1: And industrial films were something of a of a big 289 00:18:57,920 --> 00:19:00,760 Speaker 1: deal in the seventies and eighties, and they could actually 290 00:19:00,840 --> 00:19:04,360 Speaker 1: make the rounds within an industry. So this nineteen seventies 291 00:19:04,400 --> 00:19:08,880 Speaker 1: seven fake industrial film that Haggard made made the rounds, 292 00:19:09,000 --> 00:19:12,199 Speaker 1: and some folks over at Chrysler saw it. So in 293 00:19:13,440 --> 00:19:16,880 Speaker 1: Chrysler hired Haggard to come over and shoot a new 294 00:19:17,000 --> 00:19:22,280 Speaker 1: version of his turbo encabulator presentation at Chrysler's facility, and 295 00:19:22,640 --> 00:19:25,240 Speaker 1: it was purporting to be a new product from the 296 00:19:25,320 --> 00:19:29,160 Speaker 1: auto company. In this case, he had some actual machinery 297 00:19:29,400 --> 00:19:32,679 Speaker 1: to gesture toward while delivering his presentation, but none of 298 00:19:32,680 --> 00:19:35,240 Speaker 1: the things he was pointing to had anything to do 299 00:19:35,400 --> 00:19:40,320 Speaker 1: with what he was actually saying. Cat's cuttle fish to 300 00:19:40,400 --> 00:19:45,080 Speaker 1: the second oil age and his kingdom with fur of darkness. 301 00:19:45,080 --> 00:19:49,840 Speaker 1: I don't dispute the eurostata, but if he's down here, 302 00:19:50,080 --> 00:19:58,040 Speaker 1: not blood but darkness, the earth's black riches, I could 303 00:19:58,040 --> 00:20:02,200 Speaker 1: taste it on my lips. Today, I want to talk 304 00:20:02,240 --> 00:20:16,119 Speaker 1: to you about the science of transgenesis Genesis time show. WHOA. 305 00:20:17,840 --> 00:20:20,639 Speaker 1: I'm not sure what what happened just there? That was 306 00:20:21,560 --> 00:20:27,840 Speaker 1: That was odd um? All right? Well, getting back into 307 00:20:27,880 --> 00:20:34,240 Speaker 1: it talking about the films. Both the original video or 308 00:20:34,320 --> 00:20:37,240 Speaker 1: film rather that Haggard shot and the Chrysler version of 309 00:20:37,280 --> 00:20:40,439 Speaker 1: the presentation are available online. You can watch both of 310 00:20:40,480 --> 00:20:42,800 Speaker 1: them and you can find them on YouTube. You can 311 00:20:42,840 --> 00:20:45,159 Speaker 1: find them on other platforms as well, And there is 312 00:20:46,040 --> 00:20:50,240 Speaker 1: no way at all that I could deliver the techno 313 00:20:50,280 --> 00:20:54,400 Speaker 1: babble with the same dead pan skill as Mr Haggard. 314 00:20:54,520 --> 00:20:59,320 Speaker 1: It is a masterpiece of dead pan humor. It's also 315 00:20:59,359 --> 00:21:02,439 Speaker 1: pretty clear that he wasn't using any Q cards or 316 00:21:02,480 --> 00:21:05,959 Speaker 1: a teleprompter. His eyes hold steady the entire time. They 317 00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:09,280 Speaker 1: don't have the tell tale scanning motions you get when 318 00:21:09,320 --> 00:21:12,680 Speaker 1: you're watching someone who's reading from Q cards or a teleprompter. 319 00:21:13,000 --> 00:21:15,680 Speaker 1: If you've ever watched Saturday Night Live, if you ever 320 00:21:15,720 --> 00:21:19,320 Speaker 1: even watched videos that I have done. I've done several 321 00:21:19,400 --> 00:21:22,600 Speaker 1: videos without a teleprompter, and I've done videos with teleprompters. 322 00:21:22,640 --> 00:21:24,600 Speaker 1: And if you watch my eyes, you can tell which 323 00:21:24,600 --> 00:21:27,440 Speaker 1: one you're seeing because you can see that I'm actually 324 00:21:27,440 --> 00:21:29,720 Speaker 1: reading something on the teleprompter one. So I get really 325 00:21:29,720 --> 00:21:32,159 Speaker 1: sensitive to this kind of thing. I notice it pretty quickly, 326 00:21:32,200 --> 00:21:35,080 Speaker 1: I think most people do, but it jumps out at me. 327 00:21:35,600 --> 00:21:37,199 Speaker 1: So I wondered at first how he did it, Like, 328 00:21:37,240 --> 00:21:43,440 Speaker 1: how did he actually memorize this incredibly dense list of jargon. Well, 329 00:21:43,440 --> 00:21:46,680 Speaker 1: according to the director Ron Dot, the nineteen seventy seven 330 00:21:46,800 --> 00:21:50,040 Speaker 1: version was done with an audio prompter. It was a 331 00:21:50,080 --> 00:21:54,240 Speaker 1: wired earpiece that connected to a real to real tape recorder. 332 00:21:54,920 --> 00:21:59,600 Speaker 1: Uh so Haggard had gone and recorded the entire speech 333 00:21:59,720 --> 00:22:02,720 Speaker 1: on to the reel to reel and he used the 334 00:22:02,760 --> 00:22:06,600 Speaker 1: earpiece as a prompter for himself. Now, I can't imagine 335 00:22:06,640 --> 00:22:10,000 Speaker 1: how difficult that was to do at pace where you're 336 00:22:10,040 --> 00:22:12,560 Speaker 1: delivering it right after you're hearing it. Because if you've 337 00:22:12,560 --> 00:22:16,360 Speaker 1: ever tried to speak well hearing your own audio, you 338 00:22:16,440 --> 00:22:18,520 Speaker 1: know that that can get really difficult. You can find 339 00:22:18,560 --> 00:22:22,960 Speaker 1: it very disorienting and disconcerting. So maybe he practiced it 340 00:22:23,080 --> 00:22:26,359 Speaker 1: enough to speak the piece in time with the recorded version, 341 00:22:26,440 --> 00:22:28,560 Speaker 1: sort of like singing along to the radio when a 342 00:22:28,640 --> 00:22:31,479 Speaker 1: song is playing, you might find that, oh, I know 343 00:22:31,600 --> 00:22:33,960 Speaker 1: all the lyrics when I sing along to the radio, 344 00:22:34,160 --> 00:22:35,919 Speaker 1: but if you asked me to try and sing the 345 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:39,320 Speaker 1: lyrics on my own without the song playing, suddenly I 346 00:22:39,359 --> 00:22:41,600 Speaker 1: start having trouble. Maybe it was something like that, I 347 00:22:41,640 --> 00:22:44,800 Speaker 1: don't know. The Chrysler video has a follow up part 348 00:22:45,359 --> 00:22:48,320 Speaker 1: and there's another actor who talks about the diagnosis and 349 00:22:48,440 --> 00:22:52,639 Speaker 1: service of the turbo encabulator. That segment includes even more 350 00:22:52,880 --> 00:22:56,520 Speaker 1: techno babble and jargon, adding yet more complexity to the 351 00:22:56,600 --> 00:22:58,760 Speaker 1: overall joke. Now, I'm not going to go into the 352 00:22:58,760 --> 00:23:01,520 Speaker 1: whole script like I did with the original publication, but 353 00:23:01,560 --> 00:23:03,600 Speaker 1: I do want to point out a couple of favorite 354 00:23:03,640 --> 00:23:08,359 Speaker 1: parts of mine. The presenter says, for the purposes of obscurity, 355 00:23:08,520 --> 00:23:11,000 Speaker 1: we have removed the casing to expose the heart of 356 00:23:11,040 --> 00:23:15,600 Speaker 1: the turbo encabulator, the magneto reluctance modial interactor. Since little 357 00:23:15,680 --> 00:23:19,000 Speaker 1: or nothing is known about the principles involved in magneto reluctance, 358 00:23:19,200 --> 00:23:23,440 Speaker 1: diagnosing faults can be a problem that to me is 359 00:23:23,480 --> 00:23:26,400 Speaker 1: absolutely hysterical. The notion that we have built an important 360 00:23:26,400 --> 00:23:30,159 Speaker 1: piece of technology without an understanding of the underlying science 361 00:23:30,200 --> 00:23:33,400 Speaker 1: that makes it work is already pretty amusing. So yeah, 362 00:23:33,400 --> 00:23:35,639 Speaker 1: if you don't understand how something works, how would you 363 00:23:35,680 --> 00:23:39,200 Speaker 1: know when something is wrong. There's also a terrible pun 364 00:23:39,320 --> 00:23:42,400 Speaker 1: in that segment, in which the presenter says a diagnostic 365 00:23:42,440 --> 00:23:46,440 Speaker 1: tool will display any faults in code, adding quote it's 366 00:23:46,440 --> 00:23:49,719 Speaker 1: a simple head code. Anyone can catch it end quote 367 00:23:50,160 --> 00:23:52,439 Speaker 1: That in turn might be a bit of a joke theft, 368 00:23:52,880 --> 00:23:57,000 Speaker 1: because I actually recall that the absurdist radio comedy group 369 00:23:57,040 --> 00:24:00,399 Speaker 1: Fire Sign Theater had a similar joke about a simple 370 00:24:00,440 --> 00:24:05,040 Speaker 1: schoolboy code that anyone could catch. In general, the Chrysler 371 00:24:05,119 --> 00:24:07,480 Speaker 1: video makes it more apparent that the whole thing is 372 00:24:07,520 --> 00:24:11,800 Speaker 1: done for laughs. It is less of a uh, it's 373 00:24:11,840 --> 00:24:15,520 Speaker 1: it's less done as a serious piece the original piece. 374 00:24:15,840 --> 00:24:19,119 Speaker 1: If you didn't know better, if you were completely naive 375 00:24:19,240 --> 00:24:22,679 Speaker 1: about engineering, you might think, while this is just I 376 00:24:22,720 --> 00:24:24,679 Speaker 1: don't understand any of it. I have no idea what 377 00:24:24,720 --> 00:24:28,240 Speaker 1: this thing does. But if you know what he's talking about, 378 00:24:28,320 --> 00:24:30,440 Speaker 1: or at least no enough to know that it's nonsense, 379 00:24:30,480 --> 00:24:33,000 Speaker 1: then it's a joke. Well, in this case, the Chrysler 380 00:24:33,080 --> 00:24:37,160 Speaker 1: version is more obviously a joke. Another video that will 381 00:24:37,160 --> 00:24:40,120 Speaker 1: pop up if you search for turbo encabulator is from 382 00:24:40,320 --> 00:24:45,359 Speaker 1: Rockwell Automation, produced in nine, which tells us that seems 383 00:24:45,400 --> 00:24:47,440 Speaker 1: like we get a new version every decade or so, 384 00:24:47,480 --> 00:24:50,200 Speaker 1: because the first one came out in nineteen seventy seven, 385 00:24:50,240 --> 00:24:52,919 Speaker 1: the next one came out in the late eighties, and 386 00:24:52,960 --> 00:24:55,920 Speaker 1: then you have nine or so for the third one. 387 00:24:56,400 --> 00:25:00,280 Speaker 1: The company Rockwell Automation started at the big ending of 388 00:25:00,320 --> 00:25:03,920 Speaker 1: the twentieth century, a different company name, but what would 389 00:25:03,920 --> 00:25:07,000 Speaker 1: evolve into Rockwell Automation traces its history back that far. 390 00:25:07,600 --> 00:25:11,840 Speaker 1: The company creates industrial automation technology for other companies, so 391 00:25:11,880 --> 00:25:14,720 Speaker 1: it's not exactly the place you would expect to find humor. 392 00:25:14,840 --> 00:25:17,639 Speaker 1: But Rockwell produced their own video in the spirit of 393 00:25:17,680 --> 00:25:22,399 Speaker 1: the Turbo Encabulator, this time called the Retro Encabulator. Actor 394 00:25:22,520 --> 00:25:25,600 Speaker 1: Mike Craft served as the host of the video, and 395 00:25:25,680 --> 00:25:29,520 Speaker 1: Craft had done presentations at industry conferences and events on 396 00:25:29,560 --> 00:25:33,480 Speaker 1: behalf of companies like Alan Bradley for years. Craft had 397 00:25:33,480 --> 00:25:37,160 Speaker 1: discovered the Bud Haggart piece many years earlier and had 398 00:25:37,160 --> 00:25:39,800 Speaker 1: memorized it, and I didn't realize it at first when 399 00:25:39,840 --> 00:25:42,440 Speaker 1: I was watching it. But Craft also was the repair 400 00:25:42,520 --> 00:25:46,440 Speaker 1: technician who did the follow up segment in Haggart's Chrysler video, 401 00:25:46,520 --> 00:25:49,040 Speaker 1: so he actually got to work with Bud Haggart at 402 00:25:49,080 --> 00:25:52,200 Speaker 1: Chrysler and then was able to do the full presentation 403 00:25:52,440 --> 00:25:56,920 Speaker 1: over at Rockwell. Also, like Haggard, Craft used an ear prompter, 404 00:25:57,200 --> 00:25:59,600 Speaker 1: although at this point we were talking about a wireless one, 405 00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:03,000 Speaker 1: not a fired one. Like the Chrysler video, the Rockwell 406 00:26:03,040 --> 00:26:06,639 Speaker 1: one makes use of actual devices to illustrate the point. 407 00:26:07,119 --> 00:26:11,199 Speaker 1: With Chrysler, the device would be like transmission parts, you know, 408 00:26:11,240 --> 00:26:14,399 Speaker 1: they were car parts, but with Rockwell it was actually 409 00:26:14,440 --> 00:26:18,680 Speaker 1: electrical wall panels. That Craft was opening up and using 410 00:26:18,720 --> 00:26:22,800 Speaker 1: to illustrate his fictional points. The video also featured shoutouts 411 00:26:22,800 --> 00:26:27,280 Speaker 1: to Rockwell customers like Dodge, Alan Bradley and Alliance Electric, 412 00:26:27,880 --> 00:26:30,840 Speaker 1: and claiming that the incabulator was really a joint effort 413 00:26:30,880 --> 00:26:33,800 Speaker 1: between these different companies, but the description of the device 414 00:26:33,920 --> 00:26:37,520 Speaker 1: was again largely the same as the original nineteen forty 415 00:26:37,560 --> 00:26:41,520 Speaker 1: four Right up, and you should check out retro incabulator 416 00:26:41,680 --> 00:26:45,520 Speaker 1: dot com because you'll be directed to Mic Craft's acting website. 417 00:26:45,840 --> 00:26:49,000 Speaker 1: The joke survives to this day with side shows Hank 418 00:26:49,119 --> 00:26:52,280 Speaker 1: Green delivering a performance just a few years ago, I 419 00:26:52,280 --> 00:26:54,919 Speaker 1: think two thousand thirteen, and there was an April Fool's 420 00:26:54,960 --> 00:26:57,919 Speaker 1: Day joke and he again delivers it exactly the way 421 00:26:57,960 --> 00:27:00,359 Speaker 1: you would expect Hank Green to do it per lely, 422 00:27:00,800 --> 00:27:02,840 Speaker 1: and it does a masterful job as well. Those of 423 00:27:02,840 --> 00:27:05,480 Speaker 1: you who remember my series Forward Thinking, you might be 424 00:27:05,520 --> 00:27:09,119 Speaker 1: amused to know that our series director, Dan Bush wanted 425 00:27:09,160 --> 00:27:12,000 Speaker 1: me to do a version of the turbo encabulator as 426 00:27:12,040 --> 00:27:14,280 Speaker 1: an April Fool's joke for the show, to do a 427 00:27:14,359 --> 00:27:18,240 Speaker 1: full Forward Thinking episode about the turbo encabulator. We never 428 00:27:18,320 --> 00:27:21,480 Speaker 1: could get clear approval to move forward on that, so 429 00:27:21,640 --> 00:27:25,119 Speaker 1: it never happened. I guess I should be thankful, because 430 00:27:25,200 --> 00:27:28,520 Speaker 1: I'm absolutely certain shooting a video version of that would 431 00:27:28,560 --> 00:27:32,000 Speaker 1: have required countless takes to get it right. In fact, 432 00:27:32,040 --> 00:27:34,159 Speaker 1: I imagine I would still be in the studio today 433 00:27:34,359 --> 00:27:37,080 Speaker 1: if that were the case. So that's the story about 434 00:27:37,080 --> 00:27:40,800 Speaker 1: the turbo encabulator. But I've got more to say about 435 00:27:40,920 --> 00:27:44,280 Speaker 1: jargon and techno babble in just a moment. But let's 436 00:27:44,320 --> 00:27:54,439 Speaker 1: take another quick break, all right, So let's talk a 437 00:27:54,480 --> 00:27:58,719 Speaker 1: bit about techno babble or sometimes known as techno speak, 438 00:27:59,000 --> 00:28:02,359 Speaker 1: which you could call a trope. Trope means a couple 439 00:28:02,359 --> 00:28:04,879 Speaker 1: of different things. Yes, I should really define what I 440 00:28:04,920 --> 00:28:07,680 Speaker 1: mean by it, since I'm talking all about being precise 441 00:28:07,800 --> 00:28:11,080 Speaker 1: and clear. So in this case, a trope, as I'm 442 00:28:11,160 --> 00:28:14,520 Speaker 1: I'm using it, refers to some sort of common literary 443 00:28:14,600 --> 00:28:18,520 Speaker 1: or rhetorical device, something that is used frequently enough to 444 00:28:18,520 --> 00:28:22,479 Speaker 1: be part of a common language or even a cliche. Uh, 445 00:28:22,680 --> 00:28:24,760 Speaker 1: it doesn't even have to be language. It can be 446 00:28:25,160 --> 00:28:28,520 Speaker 1: a specific sort of events. So a horror movie trope, 447 00:28:28,800 --> 00:28:31,159 Speaker 1: a very common horror movie trope might be something like 448 00:28:31,840 --> 00:28:34,439 Speaker 1: let's split up. You see that in horror movies all 449 00:28:34,480 --> 00:28:37,240 Speaker 1: the time. You already know what that means. When when 450 00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:40,240 Speaker 1: characters say let's split up, you know that means that 451 00:28:40,320 --> 00:28:44,160 Speaker 1: whatever the the antagonist is in the horror movie, whether 452 00:28:44,200 --> 00:28:48,600 Speaker 1: it's a slasher or a ghost or goblins or whatever 453 00:28:48,640 --> 00:28:51,920 Speaker 1: it might be, they're gonna get somebody because they split 454 00:28:52,040 --> 00:28:55,880 Speaker 1: up and they're more vulnerable. So splitting up is always 455 00:28:55,880 --> 00:28:57,760 Speaker 1: a great idea in the context of a horror movie. 456 00:28:57,760 --> 00:29:00,760 Speaker 1: And you can subvert tropes too. You don't have to 457 00:29:00,840 --> 00:29:03,720 Speaker 1: just fulfill tropes. You could do a horror movie where 458 00:29:03,720 --> 00:29:06,200 Speaker 1: you say let's split up. Everyone splits up, and then 459 00:29:06,240 --> 00:29:09,040 Speaker 1: everyone is fine until they get back together again. Then 460 00:29:09,080 --> 00:29:13,120 Speaker 1: you have subverted the trope. But that you're you're depending 461 00:29:13,120 --> 00:29:15,920 Speaker 1: on the audience being aware that there is a trope, 462 00:29:16,240 --> 00:29:20,320 Speaker 1: that you have subverted their expectations. But the reason they 463 00:29:20,320 --> 00:29:23,000 Speaker 1: have the expectations is because the trope existed in the 464 00:29:23,040 --> 00:29:27,520 Speaker 1: first place. So techno speak is one of those devices 465 00:29:27,680 --> 00:29:30,880 Speaker 1: used by writers to create what sounds like a sophisticated 466 00:29:31,000 --> 00:29:35,400 Speaker 1: explanation of a technology but tends to be total nonsense, 467 00:29:35,920 --> 00:29:39,600 Speaker 1: or the very least is overly complicated and verbose. So 468 00:29:39,640 --> 00:29:42,360 Speaker 1: I thought I would include some of my favorite examples 469 00:29:42,680 --> 00:29:46,240 Speaker 1: and include a little context as well, and I don't 470 00:29:46,280 --> 00:29:49,200 Speaker 1: want to cast too much shade here. It is really 471 00:29:49,280 --> 00:29:53,680 Speaker 1: challenging to write science fiction in a believable way because 472 00:29:53,680 --> 00:29:57,760 Speaker 1: you're typically describing things that don't exist in our real world. 473 00:29:58,760 --> 00:30:01,440 Speaker 1: Maybe they exist in some warm but you're talking about 474 00:30:01,480 --> 00:30:04,160 Speaker 1: a more advanced version, or maybe you're talking about a 475 00:30:04,160 --> 00:30:07,360 Speaker 1: brand new technology that has no basis in reality as 476 00:30:07,520 --> 00:30:10,240 Speaker 1: as it stands right now, and you have to find 477 00:30:10,240 --> 00:30:12,480 Speaker 1: words to describe it. And you don't want it to 478 00:30:12,520 --> 00:30:15,880 Speaker 1: sound like Caveman trying to describe television. You want to 479 00:30:15,960 --> 00:30:19,440 Speaker 1: sound like it exists within the time and place that 480 00:30:19,520 --> 00:30:22,520 Speaker 1: you have set your story. So you have to have 481 00:30:22,600 --> 00:30:26,160 Speaker 1: that balance. How do you create words and phrases that 482 00:30:26,400 --> 00:30:30,840 Speaker 1: have meaning within your world and aren't just seen as 483 00:30:30,880 --> 00:30:34,320 Speaker 1: being complete nonsense to everybody else. I don't have the 484 00:30:34,320 --> 00:30:36,440 Speaker 1: answer to that question, By the way. This is a 485 00:30:36,480 --> 00:30:40,640 Speaker 1: hard thing to do. So there's some stiff competition around 486 00:30:40,720 --> 00:30:45,360 Speaker 1: various franchises for the most frequent use of techno speak. Now, 487 00:30:45,440 --> 00:30:48,880 Speaker 1: I personally would give the trophy over to the Star 488 00:30:48,960 --> 00:30:53,840 Speaker 1: Trek franchise, not the original series so much because I 489 00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:56,480 Speaker 1: believe it or not, Star Trek the original series wasn't 490 00:30:56,560 --> 00:31:00,760 Speaker 1: quite so flagrant about throwing around jargon. You got some, 491 00:31:01,280 --> 00:31:04,600 Speaker 1: but not tons of it. It wasn't like it was really, 492 00:31:05,280 --> 00:31:08,680 Speaker 1: you know ingrained in every single episode. The show did 493 00:31:08,760 --> 00:31:15,400 Speaker 1: feature fictional technologies like warp drives, phasers, transporters, those sort 494 00:31:15,440 --> 00:31:18,360 Speaker 1: of things, but you didn't get a lot of techno 495 00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:21,440 Speaker 1: babble about those things. You might just get fire the phasers. 496 00:31:22,600 --> 00:31:26,960 Speaker 1: Then Star Trek the Next Generation debuted, and initially it 497 00:31:27,040 --> 00:31:30,120 Speaker 1: was similar to the original series, and it was fairly 498 00:31:30,240 --> 00:31:34,520 Speaker 1: light on techno speak. But then after the series creator 499 00:31:34,600 --> 00:31:38,240 Speaker 1: Gene Roddenberry passed away, and after the Star Trek Technical 500 00:31:38,280 --> 00:31:43,680 Speaker 1: Manual came out. The technical manual attempted to give valid 501 00:31:43,720 --> 00:31:46,760 Speaker 1: explanations for how all the technology and Star Trek the 502 00:31:46,760 --> 00:31:51,360 Speaker 1: Next Generation actually worked, which meant it was largely a 503 00:31:51,440 --> 00:31:54,560 Speaker 1: work of speculative fiction in of itself. Once those two 504 00:31:54,640 --> 00:31:58,120 Speaker 1: things happened, writers began to insert more and more techno 505 00:31:58,160 --> 00:32:01,800 Speaker 1: babble into the show. And, like I said, it's a 506 00:32:01,800 --> 00:32:04,440 Speaker 1: pretty tough gig. You They had to describe technology that 507 00:32:04,480 --> 00:32:08,440 Speaker 1: would exist centuries from today. It's hard enough to predict 508 00:32:08,480 --> 00:32:11,200 Speaker 1: what's going to happen in five years. Anyone who's listened 509 00:32:11,240 --> 00:32:15,880 Speaker 1: to my technology prediction episodes. Know that it's hard enough 510 00:32:15,920 --> 00:32:18,040 Speaker 1: to describe what's going to happen in the next year, 511 00:32:18,160 --> 00:32:21,440 Speaker 1: let alone three hundred years from now, and so there 512 00:32:21,520 --> 00:32:25,280 Speaker 1: was some imaginative use of terminology that was necessary, but 513 00:32:25,280 --> 00:32:27,560 Speaker 1: the writers kind of went a little nutty with it 514 00:32:27,640 --> 00:32:30,240 Speaker 1: in the later seasons of the Next Generation and then 515 00:32:30,240 --> 00:32:34,440 Speaker 1: the following Star Trek series. I haven't gone through every 516 00:32:34,520 --> 00:32:37,040 Speaker 1: episode of the Next Generation to keep it tally, but 517 00:32:37,120 --> 00:32:39,440 Speaker 1: the example that always leaps to my mind with Star 518 00:32:39,480 --> 00:32:44,080 Speaker 1: Trek the Next Generation is the ubiquitous reverse the polarity. 519 00:32:44,400 --> 00:32:46,880 Speaker 1: The phrase was used as sort of a get out 520 00:32:46,920 --> 00:32:51,080 Speaker 1: of crisis free card on episodes where the usual approach, 521 00:32:51,160 --> 00:32:54,960 Speaker 1: whatever that might be, wasn't working. So, for example, if 522 00:32:54,960 --> 00:32:59,160 Speaker 1: the Enterprise encountered an enemy Borg vessel that was attacking, 523 00:32:59,520 --> 00:33:02,720 Speaker 1: the bridge, crew might try to reverse the polarity on 524 00:33:02,760 --> 00:33:05,920 Speaker 1: the ship's shields to help repel the attack. Now, to 525 00:33:06,000 --> 00:33:09,640 Speaker 1: be fair, the Star Trek writers didn't invent the idea 526 00:33:09,760 --> 00:33:13,400 Speaker 1: of reversing the polarity. It had already had a distinguished 527 00:33:13,520 --> 00:33:18,520 Speaker 1: run on the venerable UK series Doctor Who. Fans of 528 00:33:18,680 --> 00:33:21,880 Speaker 1: classic Doctor Who, I'm talking about Doctor Who before the 529 00:33:21,960 --> 00:33:25,840 Speaker 1: reboot with Eccleston and Tennant and all the rest. You 530 00:33:25,920 --> 00:33:30,320 Speaker 1: might remember John Pertwee, who played the third doctor in 531 00:33:30,320 --> 00:33:34,920 Speaker 1: the series. Reverse the polarity and later on, reverse the 532 00:33:34,960 --> 00:33:39,120 Speaker 1: polarity of the neutron flow became a common phrase in 533 00:33:39,240 --> 00:33:43,880 Speaker 1: Doctor Who episodes, finding its way across multiple doctors as 534 00:33:43,920 --> 00:33:48,600 Speaker 1: the series continued, including doctors after the reboot. Peter Capaldi's 535 00:33:48,640 --> 00:33:51,960 Speaker 1: doctor even subverted this trope in an episode in which 536 00:33:52,000 --> 00:33:55,240 Speaker 1: he said, quote, reverse the polarity of the neutron flow. 537 00:33:55,560 --> 00:33:59,000 Speaker 1: I bet that means something. It sounds great end quote. 538 00:33:59,320 --> 00:34:01,480 Speaker 1: One of the critics is ms I've seen about Star 539 00:34:01,600 --> 00:34:05,479 Speaker 1: Trek in general was that the reliance on meaningless techno 540 00:34:05,560 --> 00:34:09,600 Speaker 1: speak acted as sort of a dios x makina literally 541 00:34:09,800 --> 00:34:12,440 Speaker 1: in this sense, to get the crew out of danger 542 00:34:12,760 --> 00:34:15,279 Speaker 1: without actually coming up with an approach that has any 543 00:34:15,360 --> 00:34:19,279 Speaker 1: relevant meaning to the audience. Essentially, it was saying, the 544 00:34:19,360 --> 00:34:22,080 Speaker 1: thing you're doing isn't working. Do the thing you're doing, 545 00:34:22,120 --> 00:34:25,640 Speaker 1: but do it differently. I did the thing differently, it worked, 546 00:34:26,160 --> 00:34:29,160 Speaker 1: we got away. That's not very satisfying once you strip 547 00:34:29,200 --> 00:34:31,799 Speaker 1: away the techno babble. The techno babble helped kind of 548 00:34:31,880 --> 00:34:37,880 Speaker 1: hide the weakness of that resolution. Other examples included routing 549 00:34:37,880 --> 00:34:41,000 Speaker 1: an inverse takeion pulse through the main deflector dish that 550 00:34:41,040 --> 00:34:44,440 Speaker 1: makes no sense of Tachyon is a hypothetical particle that 551 00:34:44,480 --> 00:34:46,360 Speaker 1: can move faster than the speed of light. I have 552 00:34:46,600 --> 00:34:51,040 Speaker 1: no idea what an inverse tachion would be, but that's 553 00:34:51,480 --> 00:34:53,920 Speaker 1: one of the big examples that I tend to think 554 00:34:54,000 --> 00:34:58,120 Speaker 1: about Star Trek. However, science fiction is not the only 555 00:34:58,280 --> 00:35:02,240 Speaker 1: source of techno babble. There are others. Thrillers and procedurals 556 00:35:02,320 --> 00:35:06,520 Speaker 1: also revel in techno babble. From time to time. Characters 557 00:35:06,560 --> 00:35:10,680 Speaker 1: like Chloe O'Brien in twenty four or Abbey And in 558 00:35:10,800 --> 00:35:14,640 Speaker 1: c I S frequently speak in techno babble, only to 559 00:35:14,719 --> 00:35:16,920 Speaker 1: have someone else in the scene asked them to repeat 560 00:35:16,960 --> 00:35:21,000 Speaker 1: what they said, quote unquote in English. Now frequently the 561 00:35:21,040 --> 00:35:24,279 Speaker 1: English translation for the techno speak doesn't actually match up 562 00:35:24,320 --> 00:35:27,640 Speaker 1: with whatever the techno speak was, which means the tech 563 00:35:27,800 --> 00:35:31,400 Speaker 1: speak was totally superfluous. Though you could argue the writers 564 00:35:31,400 --> 00:35:34,160 Speaker 1: were including it to try and create some sort of 565 00:35:34,160 --> 00:35:37,279 Speaker 1: credibility for the character as an expert in his or 566 00:35:37,320 --> 00:35:40,760 Speaker 1: her field, and not actually meant to move the story along. 567 00:35:41,160 --> 00:35:44,239 Speaker 1: But to me, it's almost like you're treading water. You're 568 00:35:44,239 --> 00:35:49,120 Speaker 1: having a character say, at least reportedly, say the same 569 00:35:49,160 --> 00:35:52,840 Speaker 1: thing two different ways, except in reality they're saying nonsense 570 00:35:52,920 --> 00:35:55,839 Speaker 1: one way and then something that makes sense the other way. 571 00:35:55,840 --> 00:35:58,440 Speaker 1: Why would they not just use plain English in the 572 00:35:58,480 --> 00:36:02,319 Speaker 1: first place? Now? Pretty sure that Shannon Morse and I 573 00:36:02,480 --> 00:36:06,200 Speaker 1: Shannon Morse of Hack five covered some atrocious examples of 574 00:36:06,200 --> 00:36:09,919 Speaker 1: techno babble in our episode about hacking in Hollywood. In fact, 575 00:36:10,000 --> 00:36:12,160 Speaker 1: I remember that we specifically covered this one, but I 576 00:36:12,200 --> 00:36:14,480 Speaker 1: want to talk about it again. One of my favorite 577 00:36:14,480 --> 00:36:19,440 Speaker 1: examples of techno babble and hacking Hollywood style would be 578 00:36:19,520 --> 00:36:22,040 Speaker 1: from c s I New York. It was from an 579 00:36:22,040 --> 00:36:26,120 Speaker 1: episode called Taxi in which a character named Lindsay says, 580 00:36:26,760 --> 00:36:29,920 Speaker 1: I'll create a g uy Actually, she says gooey. I'll 581 00:36:29,960 --> 00:36:33,680 Speaker 1: create a gooey interface using visual basic see if I 582 00:36:33,719 --> 00:36:39,319 Speaker 1: can track an IP address. So that's so wrong, It 583 00:36:39,480 --> 00:36:44,160 Speaker 1: is hilariously wrong. This clip is available to watch on YouTube. 584 00:36:44,160 --> 00:36:46,400 Speaker 1: If you're so inclined, you can just see that in 585 00:36:46,440 --> 00:36:50,799 Speaker 1: this brief moment it lasts less than three seconds. I'll 586 00:36:50,800 --> 00:36:53,080 Speaker 1: create a gooey interface using visual basics, see if I 587 00:36:53,080 --> 00:36:57,239 Speaker 1: can track an IP address. It is so silly. Let's 588 00:36:57,280 --> 00:36:59,240 Speaker 1: go through it step by step to kind of see 589 00:36:59,280 --> 00:37:03,720 Speaker 1: how ridiculous this techno babble is. First of all, Lindsay 590 00:37:03,800 --> 00:37:07,480 Speaker 1: says she's going to create a gooey interface that's already repetitive. 591 00:37:07,719 --> 00:37:10,520 Speaker 1: It's like saying a T M machine or pen number. 592 00:37:11,040 --> 00:37:14,320 Speaker 1: Gooey is g u I and it stands for graphical 593 00:37:14,560 --> 00:37:18,440 Speaker 1: user interface. So she's going to create a graphical user 594 00:37:18,560 --> 00:37:23,759 Speaker 1: interface interface, according to what she says. Also, a gooey 595 00:37:23,920 --> 00:37:26,680 Speaker 1: is just a way to interact with the device. That's 596 00:37:26,800 --> 00:37:32,239 Speaker 1: what interface means. It's the way you interface with your technology. 597 00:37:32,280 --> 00:37:36,239 Speaker 1: It facilitates computer commands. It doesn't do anything special. It 598 00:37:36,320 --> 00:37:39,719 Speaker 1: just allows you to do whatever you need to do 599 00:37:39,960 --> 00:37:42,520 Speaker 1: on a device. But it itself is just a facilitator. 600 00:37:42,600 --> 00:37:47,000 Speaker 1: So Windows is a gooey mac Os is a gooey. 601 00:37:47,440 --> 00:37:52,279 Speaker 1: Smartphone user interfaces are gooey's because your your programs are 602 00:37:52,320 --> 00:37:55,680 Speaker 1: represented by icons their pictures. Then you can click or 603 00:37:55,760 --> 00:37:59,520 Speaker 1: press on the pictures and activate them and it launches 604 00:37:59,560 --> 00:38:02,000 Speaker 1: into a program. But that's all it is. That's what 605 00:38:02,080 --> 00:38:04,600 Speaker 1: the interface is. This is in contrast, by the way, 606 00:38:04,640 --> 00:38:07,200 Speaker 1: with text based interfaces, in which you would have to 607 00:38:07,239 --> 00:38:09,759 Speaker 1: type in commands and file names to get stuff done. 608 00:38:10,000 --> 00:38:12,719 Speaker 1: So you might have to say run such and such 609 00:38:12,800 --> 00:38:16,080 Speaker 1: dot e x c, and that would send a command 610 00:38:16,120 --> 00:38:18,640 Speaker 1: to your computer to find that e x C file 611 00:38:19,239 --> 00:38:22,960 Speaker 1: and to initiate it, whereas on a gooey you just 612 00:38:23,040 --> 00:38:25,839 Speaker 1: click on whatever the icon is that represents that that 613 00:38:26,040 --> 00:38:30,120 Speaker 1: particular program. As for visual Basic, that's the next part 614 00:38:30,160 --> 00:38:33,960 Speaker 1: of Lindsay's line. Visual Basic was a programming language. I 615 00:38:33,960 --> 00:38:36,120 Speaker 1: guess you could say it is a programming language, but 616 00:38:36,160 --> 00:38:39,560 Speaker 1: we'll get to that. So I guess you could argue 617 00:38:39,560 --> 00:38:44,160 Speaker 1: that that part of her statement made some sense, I suppose. 618 00:38:44,440 --> 00:38:48,279 Speaker 1: But visual Basic relies on a gooey visual Basic. The 619 00:38:48,280 --> 00:38:52,000 Speaker 1: reason why it's called visual is because it's a gooey 620 00:38:52,040 --> 00:38:56,400 Speaker 1: interface to be repetitive again, to do programming. So a 621 00:38:56,400 --> 00:39:00,800 Speaker 1: programmer would use visual Basic to create code, choosing snippets 622 00:39:00,840 --> 00:39:04,359 Speaker 1: of code that was written in the basic programming language. 623 00:39:04,520 --> 00:39:07,839 Speaker 1: Thus the name visual basic. Basic was designed as an 624 00:39:07,960 --> 00:39:12,440 Speaker 1: educational tool primarily, and it made the transition to legacy 625 00:39:12,480 --> 00:39:15,520 Speaker 1: status Visual Basic did in two thousand eight. So, in 626 00:39:15,560 --> 00:39:19,520 Speaker 1: other words, this was a pretty limited programming language. It 627 00:39:19,600 --> 00:39:21,960 Speaker 1: was a good tool for learning the basics of programming, 628 00:39:21,960 --> 00:39:25,360 Speaker 1: but it wasn't exactly the most sophisticated or versatile programming 629 00:39:25,440 --> 00:39:28,359 Speaker 1: language out there. Also, the c s I New York 630 00:39:28,400 --> 00:39:31,800 Speaker 1: episode aired in two thousand eight, the same year Visual 631 00:39:31,840 --> 00:39:35,520 Speaker 1: Basic was sunsetted as a legacy programming language. So now 632 00:39:35,560 --> 00:39:37,760 Speaker 1: you've got Lindsay saying she's going to make a gooy 633 00:39:37,840 --> 00:39:41,360 Speaker 1: with an outdated programming language. And by now it should 634 00:39:41,360 --> 00:39:45,000 Speaker 1: be pretty obvious that an interface, even one so amazing 635 00:39:45,040 --> 00:39:48,120 Speaker 1: that it was built in Visual Basic, wouldn't be able 636 00:39:48,160 --> 00:39:51,720 Speaker 1: to track an IP address at all. It's just an interface. 637 00:39:51,760 --> 00:39:55,960 Speaker 1: It doesn't do anything other than act as a facilitator. Moreover, 638 00:39:56,520 --> 00:39:59,560 Speaker 1: there's no shortage of ways to track I P addresses 639 00:39:59,719 --> 00:40:03,600 Speaker 1: at Just looking at a server that's being contacted is enough, 640 00:40:03,640 --> 00:40:06,840 Speaker 1: because the incoming traffic has to have an IP address 641 00:40:06,840 --> 00:40:11,080 Speaker 1: associated with it, because that's how data communication works. Now, 642 00:40:11,280 --> 00:40:14,080 Speaker 1: you might not have an accurate IP address. Someone might 643 00:40:14,120 --> 00:40:19,120 Speaker 1: be using proxies but or VPNs and thus hiding their 644 00:40:19,160 --> 00:40:23,040 Speaker 1: true IP addresses. But that's different. So that one throway 645 00:40:23,080 --> 00:40:25,799 Speaker 1: line and c s I has led to tons of 646 00:40:25,920 --> 00:40:29,520 Speaker 1: jokes on the Internet, including various attempts to build out 647 00:40:29,560 --> 00:40:32,080 Speaker 1: what would be a gooey in Visual basics. So there 648 00:40:32,080 --> 00:40:34,840 Speaker 1: are a lot of visual gags out there. If you 649 00:40:34,920 --> 00:40:38,480 Speaker 1: just do a search for CSI, New York g u I, 650 00:40:38,520 --> 00:40:41,319 Speaker 1: you're gonna see a ton of them. Now, sometimes the 651 00:40:41,320 --> 00:40:44,840 Speaker 1: techno speak that a character says actually does mean something 652 00:40:44,960 --> 00:40:49,160 Speaker 1: or almost mean something. So, for example, in the series Arrow, 653 00:40:49,440 --> 00:40:52,319 Speaker 1: the character Felicity in one episode says, I have to 654 00:40:52,360 --> 00:40:56,320 Speaker 1: break through the processor's protective firewall to stop cadence virus 655 00:40:56,680 --> 00:40:59,640 Speaker 1: and the fact that the processor is exponentially overclocking and 656 00:40:59,680 --> 00:41:03,120 Speaker 1: he's disabled the cooling system. And then she's interrupted by 657 00:41:03,160 --> 00:41:06,680 Speaker 1: Green Arrow, who says he didn't understand any of that. Well, 658 00:41:06,760 --> 00:41:11,440 Speaker 1: that particular sentence at least has some elements that makes sense. 659 00:41:12,560 --> 00:41:15,279 Speaker 1: All of the things she says are real things, but 660 00:41:15,480 --> 00:41:19,640 Speaker 1: the exponential overclocking would have to be an exaggeration. Processors 661 00:41:19,680 --> 00:41:23,640 Speaker 1: have limits they cannot go beyond, even with overclocking. Um 662 00:41:23,680 --> 00:41:27,520 Speaker 1: a processor has clock cycles essentially means how many instructions 663 00:41:27,600 --> 00:41:31,360 Speaker 1: can this processor complete within a given amount of time, 664 00:41:32,040 --> 00:41:36,600 Speaker 1: and and processor manufacturers create limits, like they make a 665 00:41:36,640 --> 00:41:40,560 Speaker 1: hard limit for the number of processes per second that 666 00:41:40,680 --> 00:41:44,719 Speaker 1: a clock can handle. But you can remove those limits 667 00:41:44,719 --> 00:41:47,680 Speaker 1: with processors. That's what you call overclocking. You can make 668 00:41:47,719 --> 00:41:52,120 Speaker 1: processors actually uh fulfill more instructions per second than they 669 00:41:52,120 --> 00:41:55,440 Speaker 1: were rated for, at least up to a point. Eventually 670 00:41:55,440 --> 00:41:58,399 Speaker 1: you reach whatever the maximum is that that processor can 671 00:41:58,440 --> 00:42:02,920 Speaker 1: handle even with overclocking. So exponential is likely not the 672 00:42:03,000 --> 00:42:06,160 Speaker 1: right word that would they'll be way too much. I 673 00:42:06,239 --> 00:42:10,080 Speaker 1: doubt that any microprocess or manufacturer out there builds in 674 00:42:10,360 --> 00:42:14,319 Speaker 1: enough capacity and then limits it enough for you to 675 00:42:14,320 --> 00:42:18,800 Speaker 1: have exponential overclocking. Also, you wouldn't really have a firewall 676 00:42:18,800 --> 00:42:22,960 Speaker 1: around a processor. Firewalls fit between internal and external networks. 677 00:42:23,040 --> 00:42:26,320 Speaker 1: It's meant to protect the internal network from harmful forces 678 00:42:26,400 --> 00:42:28,800 Speaker 1: from the outside, so like from the Internet. So a 679 00:42:28,880 --> 00:42:32,440 Speaker 1: firewall would sit on a connection between machines and the Internet, 680 00:42:32,480 --> 00:42:35,520 Speaker 1: but not so far down as the processor level. Still, 681 00:42:35,880 --> 00:42:38,759 Speaker 1: I would say that this was a decent attempt at 682 00:42:38,840 --> 00:42:43,200 Speaker 1: making a meaningful statement. It didn't fully hit the target, 683 00:42:43,320 --> 00:42:46,839 Speaker 1: but again close, which is not great for a guy 684 00:42:46,880 --> 00:42:51,000 Speaker 1: who uses arrows as his main means of weaponry. Anyway, 685 00:42:51,200 --> 00:42:54,120 Speaker 1: there were two reasons I really wanted to talk about 686 00:42:54,160 --> 00:42:57,680 Speaker 1: the turbo encabulator and techno babble. The first is I 687 00:42:57,719 --> 00:43:00,400 Speaker 1: think the turbo encabulator is a pretty funny joe that 688 00:43:00,480 --> 00:43:02,640 Speaker 1: pokes fun at the very human trade of trying to 689 00:43:02,640 --> 00:43:06,880 Speaker 1: make stuff sound important. The second is that it reminds 690 00:43:06,920 --> 00:43:09,640 Speaker 1: us this sort of language is used all the time, 691 00:43:09,920 --> 00:43:13,480 Speaker 1: and not just an entertainment, not just to create things 692 00:43:13,520 --> 00:43:16,239 Speaker 1: that make people sound smart. We run into it in 693 00:43:16,360 --> 00:43:20,840 Speaker 1: marketing materials all the time, real world marketing materials aimed 694 00:43:21,040 --> 00:43:24,720 Speaker 1: at selling stuff to us. So it's good to remember 695 00:43:25,320 --> 00:43:27,480 Speaker 1: this sort of stuff is meant to dazzle us while 696 00:43:27,480 --> 00:43:31,000 Speaker 1: not actually saying anything of substance. It's another example of 697 00:43:31,040 --> 00:43:34,600 Speaker 1: why we should practice critical thinking whenever we can, because 698 00:43:34,600 --> 00:43:37,520 Speaker 1: it could help us avoid making a really dumb decision 699 00:43:38,239 --> 00:43:40,840 Speaker 1: because we were so impressed with what sounded like a 700 00:43:40,840 --> 00:43:44,280 Speaker 1: sophisticated description that we never looked into it any further. 701 00:43:44,840 --> 00:43:48,080 Speaker 1: This teaches us to learn what the actual definitions for 702 00:43:48,160 --> 00:43:53,280 Speaker 1: words are, both the official definitions and the contextual definitions, 703 00:43:53,960 --> 00:43:56,759 Speaker 1: and we know what they mean and what they do 704 00:43:56,800 --> 00:44:01,239 Speaker 1: not mean. So words like quantum, which is forly overused 705 00:44:01,280 --> 00:44:04,920 Speaker 1: and misused to a criminal level, is a dead giveaway 706 00:44:04,920 --> 00:44:07,680 Speaker 1: that you need to pay really close attention. Or words 707 00:44:07,719 --> 00:44:12,160 Speaker 1: like organic or natural. Heck, words like smart when applied 708 00:44:12,160 --> 00:44:15,560 Speaker 1: to technology or other products, those are all things that 709 00:44:15,640 --> 00:44:18,399 Speaker 1: mean you should probably take a closer look. It doesn't 710 00:44:18,440 --> 00:44:21,080 Speaker 1: necessarily mean that the people who make that thing are 711 00:44:21,120 --> 00:44:24,400 Speaker 1: out to fool you, but they might be taking some 712 00:44:24,480 --> 00:44:27,840 Speaker 1: shortcuts when they're describing whatever it is they do, and 713 00:44:27,960 --> 00:44:29,920 Speaker 1: you it's it's good to take that extra step to 714 00:44:29,960 --> 00:44:33,560 Speaker 1: find out what is actually meant by that language. Being 715 00:44:33,560 --> 00:44:36,359 Speaker 1: aware of techno babble makes it more challenging for other 716 00:44:36,400 --> 00:44:39,319 Speaker 1: people to take advantage of you. It does not make 717 00:44:39,360 --> 00:44:42,239 Speaker 1: you bulletproof, but it might mean you could sidestep a 718 00:44:42,280 --> 00:44:45,160 Speaker 1: lie or a prank that might otherwise take you in. 719 00:44:45,719 --> 00:44:47,920 Speaker 1: And I think that's a pretty valuable lesson for an 720 00:44:47,960 --> 00:44:51,000 Speaker 1: April Fool's Day. And well, that wraps up this episode 721 00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:54,160 Speaker 1: of tech Stuff. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If 722 00:44:54,200 --> 00:44:56,680 Speaker 1: you have any suggestions for future episodes, you can get 723 00:44:56,680 --> 00:44:58,680 Speaker 1: in touch with me send me an email. The address 724 00:44:58,760 --> 00:45:02,120 Speaker 1: is tech stuff at how stuff works dot com, or 725 00:45:02,239 --> 00:45:04,359 Speaker 1: you can pop on over to our website that's tech 726 00:45:04,440 --> 00:45:08,000 Speaker 1: stuff podcast dot com. You'll find links to our social 727 00:45:08,040 --> 00:45:10,640 Speaker 1: media presence over there, as well as a link to 728 00:45:10,680 --> 00:45:13,319 Speaker 1: our online store. Every purchase you make goes to help 729 00:45:13,360 --> 00:45:15,960 Speaker 1: the show, and we greatly appreciate it. And I'll talk 730 00:45:16,000 --> 00:45:24,400 Speaker 1: to you again. Release soon. For more on this and 731 00:45:24,480 --> 00:45:27,040 Speaker 1: thousands of other topics, is it how stuff Works dot 732 00:45:27,040 --> 00:45:37,040 Speaker 1: com