Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics (2000)

3 months ago (britneyspears.ac)

Around the time this website was made, I was building an application for a big company in Spain that was to run as a Java applet and required the code to be signed.

They did not yet have their own certificates so I had to make my own CA during testing and sign the code, and I wanted to make sure that they did not forget to switch to their certificates later, so instead of signing the code with my name which some bureaucrat might decide to not bother changing, the code was signed by Britney Spears.

They noticed it, got the joke and made sure to switch certificates for the release. Everything went well thanks to Britney.

Love the old internet feel to the site.

You can see it's been basically unchanged for 25 years! Here's the 2001 snapshot from the wayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20010202180000/https://britneysp...

Just keeping any site functional and up for so long is impressive by itself.

  • It's only impressive if you've become accustomed to the unfortunate trend of forced obsolescence and the desire of many to justify useless recurring "maintenance" busywork. Basic HTML and CSS will always work.

I love the idea of this but the mention of Hedy Lamarr could be confused as parody too when she was in fact an incredibly intelligent engineer and physicist.

Anyway it reminds me of the deep fake of Kim K and Nicki Minaj explaining subnetting: https://youtu.be/KcgyGYTnk4M?feature=shared

  • Dexter Holland from the Offspring, the punk band I was obsessed about during my childhood, has PhD in molecular biology.

    I thought this thread is a good place to share this fact.

  • > I love the idea of this but the mention of Hedy Lamarr could be confused as parody too

    Exactly, that was a bit puzzling.

Meanwhile Dolph Lundgren has an actual MA in Chemical Engineering. It's a pity we can't get him to do something like this in earnest to teach engineering concepts.

I thought .ac was the Academic TLD, and was wondering how this domain was registered, but it is just a ccTLD (2 letter, so has to be). .ac just happens to be the academic second level TLD of choice for many countries.

Apparently, you could have gotten a .edu before 2001 without being an accredited institution in the US.

"In the last section, we looked at the p-n junction. More efficient recombination of electron-hole pairs can be acheived by incorporation of a thin layer of semiconductor material, either p or n type semiconductor with a smaller energy gap than the cladding layers, to form a double heterostructure. (More on this in the future). As the active layer thickness in a double heterostructure becomes close to the De-Broglie wavelength (about 10nm for semiconductor laser devices) quantum effects become apparent."

Are you playing with my heart?

I'm mildly surprised there has been no mention of (Taylor) SwiftOnSecurity here yet :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SwiftOnSecurity

  • Doesn’t that constitute impersonation, or is it allowed since it’s supposedly obvious to be parody?

    • I guess it's mainly un-sueable because the reference is very implicit (nothing but the last name) and using the name Swift by itself constitutes neither impersonation of someone specific nor a Trademark violation or anything like that.

      And Taylor Swift actually is invested in data security, so it's a compliment :) That's no reason against filing a lawsuit but much less for filing one.

The picture on the front page reminds me of the Why's Poignant guide to Ruby, specifically it had a picture of a baby shouting some Ruby code.

Not sure if this is a tribute to great women ( like Lamarr) that were entertainers and brilliant in science or a parody of them!

Blast from the past.

I remember landing on this site when studying for my undergrad solid state physics exams.

I don't see much connection here between miss BS and semiconductor physics.

It's just a physics book that happens to have pictures of the popstar in it.

  • It’s a 25 year old joke. It was a simpler time.

  • A joke is like a soap bubble. The act of explaining a joke pops it and reveals it to have no substance.

    The essence of humor is simply surprise. Once the surprise is gone, or if it never was surprising, it seems flat or silly.

    Some people enjoy humor with deeper meaning, and explaining that meaning might be illuminating. But that’s lipstick on a duck.

    • If I share the OP's objections, which I think I do, the problem isn't with the joke attempt itself, it's with the execution. The joke isn't tied in to the content at all, it's literally just the title, and nothing else.

      If the author had tied song references into the text, for example, that would make it a much better execution.

      1 reply →

Before anyone has a lighthearted Sunday night moment of humor sharing: you probably don't want to link to this site in your employer's Slack watercooler channel.

Different people might deconstruct the humor of the site's gimmick different ways. Some innocuous, some not.

But no need to do any literary analysis and critical thinking this time, because...

Today most people will immediately realize that something like the "Booble" search form on that page is probably a bad idea for a welcoming modern work environment.

(Related: for the same less-welcoming reason, it's maybe not a great idea on HN.)