Talk:ROT13

message: Matt, The DMCA prohibits the act of investigating as well as talking publicly about. Kind of like burglar tool possession, no matter what you intend, is illegal in certain places. In this case, after is temporally correct (that was when he was arrested), but so is for (as the reason he was arrested was what he did). ww 16:32, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Skylarov arrest in re after or for

message: This article contains some material originally from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing and is used under the GFDL.
===FAC Nomination, successful===
Interesting, well written. Image? -- Fredrik | talk 16:49, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work indeed - support. Jeronimo 19:35, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: jguk 17:39, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Furrfu 

message: Interesting, well written. Image? -- Fredrik | talk 16:49, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work indeed - support. Jeronimo 19:35, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: jguk 17:39, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: FAC Nomination, successful

message: : the coding method had been in use for decades before being applied to computers,
I don't suppose anyone knows of a source for this statement? — Matt 21:34, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: *chuckle*, yes, but I at least have the claim to have put a question on your "User:" page before David's comment! Anyway, I've had a stab at rewording  it. — Matt 01:48, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  A source? 

message: There is a dispute which online converter should be linked:
1. http://netzreport.googlepages.com/online_converter_for_rot_5_13_18_47.html:
* (+) supports not only ROT13, but also the less known subsets ROT5, ROT18 (is ROT5 plus ROT13) and ROT47 (redirects to the ROT13 article)
* (+) the JavaScript code of the converter is published under GPL
* (-) Google AdSense ads are shown
2. http://rot13page.googlepages.com/:
* (+) no ads
* (-) supports only ROT13
* (-) supports only encoding
* (-) JavaScript code is not free (and hasn't any explaining comments)
* (-) converter is always added as "ROT13 Page Google" (this creates the wrong impression that a reader will find an official Google page behind this link)
3. http://tech.pookey.co.uk/non-wp/encoder-decoder.php:
* (+) no ads (only a text link to amazon recommending a book)
* (+) supports ROT13, ROT1-26, and ROT47
* (+) supports many other tools
* (+) Links back to this main article
* (-) link suggestion submitted to talk page by site author 
My opinion: I would opt for the first converter (seems better in every regard). Ads are displayed, but not in an obtrusive way. For me, the ads are not a big problem because the author of the page/converter has released the converter under the GPL free to use for everyone. This reveals his/her "goodwill". --Shaka Kaan 19:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: the second also supports decoding, as ROT13 is self reciprocal. — Matt Crypto 20:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the hint. I've overseen that. --Shaka Kaan 23:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weblinks 

message: Just in case, Dosshell actually used ROT13 to "encrypt" passwords for customized (and password-protected) user entries (like in the menu that appears in the [screenshot | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MS-DOS_Shell.png]).  Not sure if it's worth noting in the article (either: Dosshell or ROT13), though.
RNSanchez 01:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROT13 usage example 

message: Why do we need that image? WP has nothing to do with the subject matter. We already have examples, incidentally showing both cleartext and cyphertext. So while it may have been an interesting exercise for whoever made that picture, I see it as utterly irrelevant and ostentatious. 83.67.217.254 (talk) 07:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia main page encoded with ROT13 

message: I noticed that the article does not list recent usage of ROT13 such as geocaching for use on cache pages encoded hints.
Rot13 was picked because of the ease of decoding in the field with a pen and paper.--JBadger169 (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage  Geocaching hints 

message: I was doing searches on Vista's registry and happened to found ROT13 encrypted strings, but as I don't have any other reference, I decided not to put that info on article. But if someone does find a good reference, or if it is not needed, please add that to article. Vazde (talk) 19:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows XP uses ROT13... so does Vista 

message: Doesn't notepad have a menu option for encoding ROT13, or am I thinking of some other program? Perhaps it had this feature in the past but it has been removed in more recent versions? 2fort5r (talk) 20:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Outlook Express has it, since ROT13 is often used to hide spoilers on Usenet. 86.131.89.90 (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notepad

message: It's well known to programmers that rot13 is in widespread use, it's reach is so far that it is pointless listing these individual uses of rot13 in specific software.  I suggest that this section be removed and a statement summarising the usage be incorporated in a more general sense.  124.171.54.180 (talk) 11:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A list of every Usenet newsreading program with a ROT13 option would be long and boring, but on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with listing selected unexpected and surprising uses of ROT13... AnonMoos (talk) 15:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup or remove Usage section 

message: Is it "Are-Oh-Tee-thirteen?" "Rote-thirteen?" "Rot-thirteen?" --Shay Guy (talk) 09:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It originated as a purely visual abbreviation, but I always assumed "Rote-thirteen" (the first sounds of the word "rotate").  AnonMoos (talk) 16:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

text: "Tut" is not a word of English with a negative meaning; if it had been, maybe the pharoah's name would be commonly abbreviated with the pronunciation "toot"... AnonMoos (talk) 20:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is the name pronounced? 

message: You wrote:
"...I always assumed 'Rote-thirteen' (the first sounds of the word 'rotate')."
By that reasoning, the name of the mumified egyptian boy-king should be pronounced, "King Toot!"
So, sorry, but I think it should be (and, generally is) pronounced "rot"+"thirteen."
"</i> The Grand Rascal (talk) 23:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: "Tut" is not a word of English with a negative meaning; if it had been, maybe the pharoah's name would be commonly abbreviated with the pronunciation "toot"... AnonMoos (talk) 20:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: 2022

message: I've found the following pairs using the gcide, shall we add them to the article?
(abba noon)
(abjurer nowhere)
(becuna orphan)
(creel perry)
(ent rag)
(erne rear)
(evat ring)
(frag sent)
(ful shy)
(guna than)
(gurl they)
(jub who)
(jung what)
(jura when) -- 07:44, 17 September 2009 134.2.187.21
:Only if they're real words of English -- i.e. not proper names only, and somewhat commonly seen outside of crossword puzzles... AnonMoos (talk) 14:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone thinks they're clever.  I've removed it. --Kbh3rdtalk 22:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Further ROT13 pairs

message: Currently this article is listed in the :Category: Stream ciphers. I don't think this category is applicable though, because ROT13 generates no keystream; however, stream ciphers are defined as generating a keystream from the key. -- intgr [talk] 15:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at that article, it certainly seems bogus. AnonMoos (talk) 16:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stream cipher category? 

message: Question, in the implementation section you list the commands needed to use rot13 in VIM. Why? 
In particular why is the VIM command sequence more notable than implementations in other editors like the emacs-sequence (http://www.gnu.org/s/libtool/manual/emacs/Rmail-Rot13.html)  M-x rot13-other-window?
Or in sed (http://en.literateprograms.org/Rot13_(Sed))
#/bin/sed -f
y/anbocpdqerfsgthuivjwkxlymz/naobpcqdresftguhviwjxkylzm/
y/NAOBPCQDRESFTGUHVIWJXKYLZM/ANBOCPDQERFSGTHUIVJWKXLYMZ/
To be honest I like the Tr and sed versions because with them it's obvious what is happening, but the emacs and VIM ones say nothing to me about how they work. I would edit and put the extra bits in myself, but the article has FA protection.
--77.23.85.168 (talk) 07:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The vim command was included presumably because it is surprisingly brief for a general-purpose text-editor running within a traditional terminal-window interface.  However, there's no real reason why it has to remain in the article. The sed command should not be included, because it duplicates the "tr" command already given (except more verbosely). AnonMoos (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree, where there's vim their should be Emacs.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.92.243 (talk) 04:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implementation 

message: Including the additional "at NSA" to the "joke" doesn't really seem necessary nor will it persist as a timeless piece of information. I suggest removal of those two words but feel free to dispute.
--217.41.30.124 (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it's necessary. If you get rid of "at NSA" what remains isn't recognisable as a joke at all. Possibly we could replace it with another joke with a punchline, but I don't see any particular reason to. Hut 8.5 09:44, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the swift reply, I don't really have any suggestions I just thought that perhaps the joke is a little too geographic/time specific and maybe in a few years it won't make any sense! Obviously there's no need for it to actually make sense as a joke because it demonstrates the point succinctly enough but for an otherwise high quality article I thought it would be nice to have it at "encyclopaedia quality" if that makes sense. --217.41.30.124 (talk) 10:20, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't really see why that would be the case. If the NSA ceases to exist or ceases to have a reputation for being filled with geeks then the joke would become irrelevant, but I don't see any particular reason to think that would happen. The joke has been in the article since 2004. Hut 8.5 11:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The joke works, but it is US-centric. Perhaps something with more global appeal would be better (not that it really makes any difference). Bazonka (talk) 16:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, before the last year, not too many people even in the U.S. would have known what "NSA" was, while over the past year, many people in almost all parts of the world have come to know of it... AnonMoos (talk) 18:28, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, up to a point, yes.  But the geekiness of its employees (which is the crux of the joke) is not widely known. I'm going to boldly make a change. Bazonka (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the "joke" persistent? 

message: The case mismatches in the examples seems a bit odd.  In most implementations of ROT13, I believe, the uppercase letters are rotated to uppercase, and lowercase likewise.  So PNG <-> cat (an example from the article) is actually not really right: it would come out as CAT for PNG.  That is, the case would be preserved.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.51.152 (talk) 12:48, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: An IP user already made this edit before, but it was reverted by  with the reason "sometimes an acronym transforms into a non-acronym. If strict capitalization had to be preserved, then better to completely remove these items". Personally I don't have an opinion. -- intgr [talk] 18:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

text: PNG is an acronym, while "cat" is not in its most common meaning and usage.   If capitalization is critical, then that means that an acronym cannot be ROT13 partner of a non-acronym.  I really don't see how it would involve messing words up with inappropriate uppercasing (which is really not the answer to any problems). AnonMoos (talk) 00:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Case mismatch in examples 

message: There is one for ROT47.
Shouldn't there be one for ROT5 too?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.113.201 (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be rarely done on its own (as opposed to an occasional and infrequent accompaniment to ROT13)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  No ROT5 redirect to this page? 

message: Even at a cursory glance, the article has a wealth of issues, such as:
* Many parts of the article are unsourced e.g. most of the Variants section; start of Implementation section.
* Many sources used are not reliable, or do not sufficiently support the claims they are cited to e.g. references #2, 4, 5, 11, 12, 13, 17.
* The article lacks formal pseudocode, implementation details (e.g. function in ASCII) and cryptographic details (e.g. substitution cipher not mentioned in body, or explained).
I will nominate the article for Featured Article review shortly unless anyone announces that they are able to work on these issues. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 12:30, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "Pseudo-code" would be out of place, since there's no real multi-step algorithm involved... AnonMoos (talk) 03:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues with the article 

message: ROT13 has been described as the "Usenet equivalent of a magazine printing the answer to a quiz upside down". AnonMoos (talk) 03:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Why was this passage removed from the article?

message: Currently this article has three minor sections about implementing the ROT13 algorithm in Python, Ruby and Go.
Are these implementation necessary? Should a Wikipedia article have implementations about programming a very simple algorithm, if so, why these three languages?
Why not Rust, or Javascript, or C? These sections don't even talk about a function in the standard library of the respective languages, they are a "tutorial" on how to make a specific function to encode with ROT13. Blyxyas (talk) 16:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and I have removed similar examples from other articles. Example implementations can help to clarify how the algorithm works, but here the algorithm is so simple that this isn't necessary. Most of the example implementations are taken up by example text or code for iterating through strings rather than actual aspects of the algorithm. I suggest we get rid of all of them except maybe for the ones where it is built in to the language. Hut 8.5 17:38, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

text: It's better for this article to have examples that do the ROT13 task by different methods, rather than to have examples from different programming languages which do the task in basically the same way. AnonMoos (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are implementations in individual programming languages necessary?