

TCP/IP in Lego - ldayley
http://righteousit.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/practical-visual-three-dimensional-pedagogy-for-internet-protocol-packet-header-control-fields/

======
lmm
From the title I assumed someone had built a packet-switching network out of
lego, which makes the actuality slightly disappointing.

~~~
kyrias
Yeah I thought so too, would've been so awesome..

Though it still is pretty neat.

------
opminion
TCP/IP packets made with building blocks, brilliant. They could also be used
as cuisenaire rods. I would be interested if anyone has used them in a
nontrivial way to represent computable expressions (if you can do with
alligators and eggs, you can do it with Lego)

<http://worrydream.com/AlligatorEggs/>

~~~
unwind
Thanks for teaching me a new word, had no idea what
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisenaire_rods> were. :)

------
ultimoo
Yay for Steven's _TCP/IP Illustrated_ book in the background of one of the
photos!

------
tocomment
The legos to make that cost $100? Wow.

------
biot
The article correctly calls it "TCP/IP in Lego(TM)". Isn't Legos a city in
Nigeria or a character in Lord of the Rings? :)

~~~
brc
_Legos_ \- so very much a personal pet peeve.

see this discussion: [http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10839/legos-
not-l...](http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10839/legos-not-lego)

Although I very much disagree with the upvoted answer which essentially says
we're free to invent words and call it english.

1 Company called Lego 1 lego brick or piece 1 lego set 1 lego construction 2
lego bricks or pieces 2 lego sets

To me, it's like 'sheep'. One sheep, flock of sheep - never 'sheeps'.

It's not so much the problem of pluralising the word, but by pluralising it,
you're saying that individual piece is a Lego, which makes no sense to me.

EDIT: To prove my point. Take this story: A man walks into an Apple Store. He
buys 1 Apple MacBook, 2 Apple iPods and 3 Apple iPads. He takes them home to
configure and set up. His wife walks in. Does she say:

a) Oh look, my husband is playing with his new Apple products

b) Oh look, my husband is playing with his new Apples

~~~
anonymous
Sheep is a bug in the language and the only reason it's not fixed is because
it's not used very often. Like scissors and pants, which have correctly
evolved to "a scissor" and "a pant" where I live. On the subject of Lego:

Lego the company - "Lego had high profit this year"

A lego heap - "Put away the lego when you're done with it"

A lego piece - "I'm looking for a 2x3 lego and three 2x2 block legos"

It's all very understandable and natural and you should just let go.

~~~
glhaynes
_Like scissors and pants, which have correctly evolved to "a scissor" and "a
pant" where I live._

At the risk of your anonymity, anonymous, can you say where this is? I haven't
heard that usage before.

(Interesting find while googling for that usage — iCarly and perhaps Rhode
Island apparently say "a scissors":
<http://danwarp.blogspot.com/2009/07/icarly-scissors-huh.html>)

~~~
anonymous
More than one people use the anonymous account, so I won't really sacrifice my
anonymity by sharing. That said, I'm Bulgarian and we use both "ножица"
(scissor, singular) and "ножици" (scissors, plural), both deriving from "нож"
-- knife; the latter also means more than one pair of scissors. We never use
"a pair of scissors". Unfortunately, I couldn't see if the singular or plural
form came first, because the very first published Bulgarian dictionary from
1900 lists both. It also doesn't have the word for "pants", so I can't comment
on that neither. In general though, we never use "a pair of" for things that
are physically a single object, like a scissors or a pants; "a pair of
scissors" would mean two distinct scissors. Of course, all languages have
exceptions to every rule and for the above in Bulgarian it's "glasses". We do
say "a pair of glasses". We also say "a frameS for glasses" speaking about a
single frame for a single pair of glasses.

