Talk:132 (number)

message: I removed the following passage from the article:
:Also, 132 is often used as a deragotory symbol. Someone may say something like "132 you" or something similar. They are referring to binary. When one counts in binary on his or her hand and they get to 132, a very offensive symbol is shown.
This is not sufficiently explained. 132 in binary has eight digits, 1000 0100. Presumably, you hold a finger up for a 1 and down for a zero, resulting in raising the pinkie of your right hand and the middle finger of the left hand. The left hand could be considered offensive, but what are we to make of the raised pinkie?
Also, this seems to fail the Google test. A Google search for "132 you" yields phrases like "with $132 you can buy such and such", but nothing where 132 would appear to substitute for an expletive. 141.217.173.163 17:24, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an explicitive. 132 in binary is both middle fingers on your hands and it often used 69.140.47.199 22:14, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: 132 only has eight digits and most humans have ten digits on their hands. So to express 132 in binary with our fingers, do we ignore the thumbs or do ignore the right hand's ring and pinkie fingers? 141.217.173.170 17:29, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is done like this: 0010000100, so it works out. It makes sense when you consider people counting in binary on their hands starting on the right side, and then getting to 132. 69.140.47.199 00:17, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've referred this issue to the WikiProject Numbers talk page so that some other people can look at this issue and reach a concensus. PrimeFan 22:00, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen 4 used to refer to the single-handed version of this gesture, for instance in a User Friendly strip (can't find which one).  Indeed, when I show people how to count in binary on the fingers, the representation of 4 is sometimes the first thing they comment on.  The use of 132 is a logical extension, I guess, but I've not seen it.  Those who know binary finger counting are likely to know the binary representation of 4 offhand and thus understand the significance, whereas it's less likely that they'll be able to translate 132 so quickly.  4pq1injbok 03:04, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Sasha Slutsker at the project talk page said that Googling "counting binary fingers 132" would yield plenty of good sources for this. I was not fully convinced, but I did promise I would restore it to the article if he showed me some sources. Anton Mravcek 17:48, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought that a binary number can't start with a zero so it would be only 8 digits Blah42b10 (talk) 21:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

text:  I did the suggested google search and i get the following types of hits that refer to it as a lewd act - Urban Dictionary, a facebook page, blogs, and wikipedia itself.  None of these are acceptable sources.  And a substantial fraction of the hits for that very specific search were just about counting in binary.  I'm removing it until someone can actually cite a proper source for it and includes it on the page.  (Googling '132' '132 swear' '132 curse' and similar generated no pertinent hits).  --69.209.61.55 (talk) 18:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled