The Ungoogleable

A forum for good logic/math puzzles.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

kurapika
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:50 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby kurapika » Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:59 am UTC

HonoreDB wrote:
Qaanol wrote:
Arancaytar wrote:"john stewart" -jon

This reminds me of a question I’ve been wondering for a while: Let’s say I want to search for websites that include both "john" and "stewart", not necessarily consecutively, but that do not include "jon" unless they also contain "john stewart" consecutively. Is there a way to do that in one search?


john stewart -jon OR "john stewart" seems to work.


You don't even have to quote the whole thing. Its much easier and less confusing to simply type "john" stewart in google. And it works beautifuly.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Sat Nov 20, 2010 11:08 pm UTC

HonoreDB wrote:john stewart -jon OR "john stewart" seems to work.

Thank you!

kurapika wrote:You don't even have to quote the whole thing. Its much easier and less confusing to simply type "john" stewart in google. And it works beautifuly.

Thank you for sharing this, it is quite useful. However, for the particular question I asked, I am not convinced this satisfies my criteria.
wee free kings

kurapika
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:50 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby kurapika » Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:02 pm UTC

Let me go back to what you wrote earlier:
Qaanol wrote:This reminds me of a question I’ve been wondering for a while: Let’s say I want to search for websites that include both "john" and "stewart", not necessarily consecutively, but that do not include "jon" unless they also contain "john stewart" consecutively. Is there a way to do that in one search?


This is what you want:
"john stewart" OR "john * stewart -jon"

(I used advanced google search to get this phrase)

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Sun Nov 21, 2010 9:19 pm UTC

Searching ‘"john" stewart’ gives this as the seventh result, which contains “john harwood” and “jon stewart”, but not “john stewart”. Since it does contain ‘jon’ my criteria would require that it also contain ‘john stewart’, which it does not.
wee free kings

kurapika
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:50 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby kurapika » Mon Nov 22, 2010 3:43 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:Searching ‘"john" stewart’ gives this as the seventh result, which contains “john harwood” and “jon stewart”, but not “john stewart”. Since it does contain ‘jon’ my criteria would require that it also contain ‘john stewart’, which it does not.


kurapika wrote:Let me go back to what you wrote earlier:
Qaanol wrote:This reminds me of a question I’ve been wondering for a while: Let’s say I want to search for websites that include both "john" and "stewart", not necessarily consecutively, but that do not include "jon" unless they also contain "john stewart" consecutively. Is there a way to do that in one search?


This is what you want:
"john stewart" OR "john * stewart -jon"

(I used advanced google search to get this phrase)

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:34 am UTC

kurapika wrote:This is what you want:
"john stewart" OR "john * stewart -jon"

(I used advanced google search to get this phrase)

I’m pretty sure what I want is actually what HonoreDB already provided. In particular, your search, if I understand it correctly, will not return a page that contains “Stewart, John” and does not contain “Jon” nor any other instances of “John” or “Stewart”. (ie. where Stewart comes before John.) My criteria say such a page should be included.
wee free kings

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:03 am UTC

In terms of ungoogleability, there is still no good similar image search engine. Tineye is great for finding identical images, but not for similar images. And even Tineye's database is kind of small.

I don't know why Google isn't involved in creating some sort of CBIR.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm UTC

Names of things, including plants, animals, and pieces of furniture.
wee free kings

User avatar
Cosmologicon
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cambridge MA USA
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Cosmologicon » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:42 pm UTC

Really? I find it easy to describe something into an image search and pick on the image when I recognize it. "House plant with orange stripes" gets me croton pretty fast. "Monkeys with huge eyes" takes me to tarsier. "Small couch that seats 2" leads to love seat.

What are you having trouble finding?

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:57 pm UTC

Cosmologicon wrote:Really? I find it easy to describe something into an image search and pick on the image when I recognize it. "House plant with orange stripes" gets me croton pretty fast. "Monkeys with huge eyes" takes me to tarsier. "Small couch that seats 2" leads to love seat.

What are you having trouble finding?

That's good for extremely basic and vague descriptions, but nothing beyond that.

On a separate but on-topic note, I was remembering an old ad the other day but I couldn't remember what fast food chain it was for. It was advertising some sort of twisted food (cinnamon twists maybe? Arby's curly fries?) and it consisted of a bunch of random people insisting, "that's twisted and wrong."

It was a dumb ad, but it came up and I couldn't find it on Google.

User avatar
Cosmologicon
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cambridge MA USA
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Cosmologicon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:12 am UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:
Cosmologicon wrote:Really? I find it easy to describe something into an image search and pick on the image when I recognize it.
That's good for extremely basic and vague descriptions, but nothing beyond that.

Well, maybe you're right, but like I said I generally find it pretty easy. I'm having trouble imagining a example of a situation where you know about an object and you just need its name, but you can't find a basic way to describe it. Plus I like me a web-searching challenge. Seriously, you got one?

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:24 am UTC

Cosmologicon wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:
Cosmologicon wrote:Really? I find it easy to describe something into an image search and pick on the image when I recognize it.
That's good for extremely basic and vague descriptions, but nothing beyond that.

Well, maybe you're right, but like I said I generally find it pretty easy. I'm having trouble imagining a example of a situation where you know about an object and you just need its name, but you can't find a basic way to describe it. Plus I like me a web-searching challenge. Seriously, you got one?

Find me the Brood War map based on pressure defense but adapted for six-player free for all.
Find me that tiny, beautiful, and slightly slimy-looking sea creature with what appears to be a head, six appendages, and a tail, with soft spiny protrusions all around it with a white stripe down the middle surrounded immediately by deep blue and then a lighter blue around it.

Notice how more complicated objects are generally impossible to find just through description. The latter of the two I did eventually find after discovering that it must be a nudibranch, but mostly through luck. The former I never found.

User avatar
Cosmologicon
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cambridge MA USA
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Cosmologicon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:02 pm UTC

Hmmm, that's a good one. "white and blue sea slug with spikes", though, got me easily to here, where I learned that the species of nudibranch you're talking about is called Glaucus atlanticus. Although it definitely helped that I thought "sea slug" when I heard "slimy-looking sea creature", and that turns out to be its name.

I don't know what a Brood War map is. That could definitely be harder to find with Google than the names of objects, which is what Qaanol had trouble with. At least with objects you've seen, you know they exist. A map meeting those exact specifications may not, or may not be on the web.

User avatar
Kolko
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:48 pm UTC
Location: Belgium/België/Belgique/Belgien

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Kolko » Thu Dec 02, 2010 6:57 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:In terms of ungoogleability, there is still no good similar image search engine. Tineye is great for finding identical images, but not for similar images. And even Tineye's database is kind of small.

I don't know why Google isn't involved in creating some sort of CBIR.

Have you tried Gazopa? It claims to be a similar image search engine. I haven't had much luck with it, but perhaps it will work for you.
Environ 20% plus chouette.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:50 pm UTC

Cosmologicon wrote:Hmmm, that's a good one. "white and blue sea slug with spikes", though, got me easily to here, where I learned that the species of nudibranch you're talking about is called Glaucus atlanticus. Although it definitely helped that I thought "sea slug" when I heard "slimy-looking sea creature", and that turns out to be its name.

I did not know it was a sea slug until later, as I said. Anyway, my point is that when you know relatively little about an object (but you know how it looks) it is not easy to Google it. You have to have some other knowledge (like knowing what sea slugs look like) to find it.

I don't know what a Brood War map is. That could definitely be harder to find with Google than the names of objects, which is what Qaanol had trouble with. At least with objects you've seen, you know they exist. A map meeting those exact specifications may not, or may not be on the web.

I meant a map for the game StarCraft: Brood War. But I guess I was using a looser idea of "object" than you were.

Kolko wrote:Have you tried Gazopa? It claims to be a similar image search engine. I haven't had much luck with it, but perhaps it will work for you.

I have tried it but without any success.

User avatar
Cosmologicon
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cambridge MA USA
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Cosmologicon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 10:15 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:
Cosmologicon wrote:Hmmm, that's a good one. "white and blue sea slug with spikes", though, got me easily to here, where I learned that the species of nudibranch you're talking about is called Glaucus atlanticus. Although it definitely helped that I thought "sea slug" when I heard "slimy-looking sea creature", and that turns out to be its name.

I did not know it was a sea slug until later, as I said. Anyway, my point is that when you know relatively little about an object (but you know how it looks) it is not easy to Google it. You have to have some other knowledge (like knowing what sea slugs look like) to find it.

It's also on the first page of images for white and blue slimy sea creature with spikes. I was just giving the query that worked for me.

This makes me think of a fun challenge. Go take photos of 20 obscure plants and animals, maybe machines, and see who can find their names the fastest. You just have to make sure you don't use photos that are already on the web.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Fri Dec 03, 2010 8:55 am UTC

All right, here are three different trees I saw today. This is in southern California, if you want to use that in your search, though I suspect they may not be native plants.

Has weird potato-shaped fruit: http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/7637/120210144000.jpg
Has puffy pink flowers: http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/1795/120210160701.jpg
Has yellow flowers: http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/8299/120210160900.jpg
wee free kings

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5965
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby jestingrabbit » Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:04 am UTC

That last is a kind of eucalyptus. To make a more specific identification I'd need to see the trunk.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:15 am UTC

Google failed me when I tried to discover the origin of the xkcd abbreviation (did it even originate on xkcd? never seen it elsewhere) NSP.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7550
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby phlip » Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:37 am UTC

I'm pretty sure FaiD isn't indexed by Google, so that's not too surprising...

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
BurningLed
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:42 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby BurningLed » Mon Dec 06, 2010 11:11 pm UTC

There was something always nagging in the back of my head about this thread, and now I finally remember it. In my high school freshman year, one of my classes had a teacher with a roll-out USB desk-piano-thing. I'm not sure. Anyways, it came with some preset songs on it like most do, and one of them was something the only notes I could figure out of were "G G D D Eb Eb CC". In the little instruction book, literally all it said for that number was "Haydn." Eventually, with the help of a music theory teacher; I figured out it was part of Haydn's Symphony no. 102, and the notes of the piano set were horribly transposed.
Axman wrote:Some people blow their cash on watches that they show off to people who think said watches make a person cool. Some people spend a weekend buying everyone fake gifts in a game of make-believe.
I think the latter group is awesome.

User avatar
Magnanimous
Madmanananimous
Posts: 3485
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:11 pm UTC
Location: Land of Hipsters and Rain (LOHAR)

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Magnanimous » Mon Dec 06, 2010 11:38 pm UTC

phlip wrote:I'm pretty sure FaiD isn't indexed by Google, so that's not too surprising...
It isn't possible to add a searchbot to The Truly Free, is it? :P

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:21 am UTC

Magnanimous wrote:
phlip wrote:I'm pretty sure FaiD isn't indexed by Google, so that's not too surprising...
It isn't possible to add a searchbot to The Truly Free, is it? :P

Haven't you heard? Google is stealing our freedom.

BogusCraft
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:43 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby BogusCraft » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:49 am UTC

Another "Ungoogleable": A movie scene.
A few years ago I saw scene in a movie (I forget the movie) where there is a guy on the roof, and about 3 "bad guys" standing across from him. He says some stuff and holds his hand out like a gun and points it at one of them. He pretends to shoot the guy and the guy drops dead (the "good guy" had a sniper friend that was shooting the guys he pretended to. He does this with another guy and the 3rd guy runs or something..I forget.

Anyways, I have no idea what the name of the movie is and have not been able to find a combination of words to type into google to find it.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:27 am UTC

It was probably The Losers.

I found this by searching for some terms (can't remember exactly, maybe "movie sniper finger gun" or something) and finding the "finger gun" page on tvtropes. This scene was taken from Crank.

User avatar
BurningLed
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:42 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby BurningLed » Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:23 am UTC

I just found another one -- If you don't know the code for it, the ಠ_ಠ emoticon.
Axman wrote:Some people blow their cash on watches that they show off to people who think said watches make a person cool. Some people spend a weekend buying everyone fake gifts in a game of make-believe.
I think the latter group is awesome.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:28 am UTC

BurningLed wrote:I just found another one -- If you don't know the code for it, the ಠ_ಠ emoticon.

You can type a literal 'ಠ' into Google.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7550
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby phlip » Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:56 am UTC

Similarly, the Google results for "ಠ_ಠ" have the code for that symbol in the result preview blurb thing for the first, third, and seventh results (at least, in the order they show up for me) and several others also have it if you click through to the page.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

Clumber
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Clumber » Thu Dec 23, 2010 3:33 am UTC

Alright, I have one. "A Very Potter Musical." and other such things. I have had no luck thus far finding out where "A very something something" comes from originally, and I was just curious because I feel like I've seen a lot of things in that format recently.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5965
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby jestingrabbit » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:15 am UTC

Your post isn't super clear, but I'd guess, you're talking about a snowclone of the form "A Very X Y". The earliest one that I'm aware of is "A Very Brady Christmas", but I have no evidence beyond my own recollection/guess that its the first. There is snowclone.org, a snowclone database, but its been dead for more than a year now. That's where I'd usually try for a snowclone, because they are pretty hard to find.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

Clumber
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Clumber » Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:25 am UTC

Yeah, you understood exactly what I was talking about. I had already tried typing into google "A Very X Y" and got nothing. I thought it would just be more clear what I meant if I gave an example.

So I just tried snowclones.com by your recommendation; still unable to unearth anything. I was unaware of "snowclones" as a term before, but even several searches of "a very snowlone" or " 'a very' snowclone" has not found me anything either, indicating that "A Very X Y" does not appear to exist in that format. A shame.

User avatar
RebeccaRGB
Posts: 336
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:36 am UTC
Location: Lesbians Love Bluetooth
Contact:

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby RebeccaRGB » Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:45 am UTC

It just hit me, is it possible that "A Very Brady Christmas" is merely a play on "A Very Merry Christmas?"
Stephen Hawking: Great. The entire universe was destroyed.
Fry: Destroyed? Then where are we now?
Al Gore: I don't know. But I can darn well tell you where we're not—the universe!

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5965
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby jestingrabbit » Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:58 am UTC

RebeccaRGB wrote:It just hit me, is it possible that "A Very Brady Christmas" is merely a play on "A Very Merry Christmas?"


My mind = blown.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

lorb
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:34 am UTC
Location: Austria

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby lorb » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:08 pm UTC

I do remember i had a hard time googleing the english name of this: `
Please be gracious in judging my english. (I am not a native speaker/writer.)
http://decodedarfur.org/

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:45 pm UTC

lorb wrote:I do remember i had a hard time googleing the english name of this: `

Mac OS X’s built-in Character Viewer calls it a “grave accent”. Googling that gives me a Wikipedia page where it’s also called a “backtick” or “back quote” depending on context.
wee free kings

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:14 pm UTC

The ` character is indeed known as "grave accent," and it can be used that way as a combining character in some cases, similar to the tilde with which it shares a key.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:09 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:That last is a kind of eucalyptus. To make a more specific identification I'd need to see the trunk.


Eebster the Great wrote:The ` character is indeed known as "grave accent," and it can be used that way as a combining character in some cases, similar to the tilde with which it shares a key.


Prior knowledge is wonderful, but can you provide instructions for locating this information “from scratch”?
wee free kings

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Feb 09, 2011 3:50 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:The ` character is indeed known as "grave accent," and it can be used that way as a combining character in some cases, similar to the tilde with which it shares a key.


Prior knowledge is wonderful, but can you provide instructions for locating this information “from scratch”?

Step one: Google ASCII.
Step two: Look at a list of ASCII characters.

If you don't already know that keyboard keys represent ASCII characters, it might be harder, but if you google "keyboard keys," the first result will give an answer (although unfortunately, it lists "acute" as the first name for the symbol, which is simply wrong).

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3057
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Qaanol » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:36 am UTC

I claim my method is more complete, as the Mac OS X built-in Character Viewer lists Unicode characters, not just ASCII ones, and you can search either by name, or by pasting in the character in question, or visually by scanning the character set as you scroll down.

For those not on OS X, it looks like Wikipedia is pretty good about searching for uncommon characters by pasting the character into the search box. As in, you search for ∰ and you get redirected to Volume Integral. No such luck for the Eject symbol ⏏ however.

Of course, if you are seeing a symbol on paper, then it becomes a lot harder to search for it. If it’s a mathy symbol you can try drawing it in Detexify. Otherwise you may have to visually scan through Unicode character lists.
wee free kings

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2978
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: The Ungoogleable

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:38 pm UTC

Qaanol wrote:I claim my method is more complete, as the Mac OS X built-in Character Viewer lists Unicode characters, not just ASCII ones, and you can search either by name, or by pasting in the character in question, or visually by scanning the character set as you scroll down.

Microsoft has pretty much the same character viewer as Mac OS.

For those not on OS X, it looks like Wikipedia is pretty good about searching for uncommon characters by pasting the character into the search box. As in, you search for ∰ and you get redirected to Volume Integral. No such luck for the Eject symbol ⏏ however.

Of course, if you are seeing a symbol on paper, then it becomes a lot harder to search for it. If it’s a mathy symbol you can try drawing it in Detexify. Otherwise you may have to visually scan through Unicode character lists.

Well, the grave accent is on the keyboard, so that isn't a problem.


Return to “Logic Puzzles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests