OK, I doubt this is it, but no one else will make the 20th guess and *I want to know the answer* -

Is it a spoon?

20) Not a spoon.

Do I just blurt out the answer now?

Basically, yes.

Though you could wat a bit to make it a bigger thrill.

Moreover, you will have to run again.

[en.wikipedia.org]

(almost) red, found on all envelopes sent by German Post ("Zielcode")

Oh dear. Perhaps they're just trying to cheer everybody up with a pretty border?

I shall have to refine my answer to Retail Barcode.

Because Retail Barcodes are all read with a red light they have can't ever be red.
To quote:

The bars must be black, blue or green. The background could be white, orange, yellow or red.

Let me try and make it up to you with another interesting bar code fact:


All bar code numbers issued in Singapore start 888 and those from Korea start 880. Their bar code authorities secured these prefixes because 8 is a lucky number in Chinese culture

I work in the retail business myself, and I can assure you that, even though it is true that barcodes ought not be red, designers do come up with red barcodes every now and then, to the detriment of the shop personnel who will not be able to scan the item at the cash counter. So red barcodes can be spotted, although they are rather rare.

Note that answer 5 "No, not normally made to be worn on the body" is only true in the direct sense. Indirectly, one may wear barcodes as they are attached to clothes, other bodywear, etc.

In the same manner, answer 10 "Combustible" is hardly justified. The combustibility clearly depends on the substrate, which may or may not be combustible. Answer 1/2 were more carefull in this respect, but answer 16 "Not made of metal" is not necessarily always true.

Nonetheless, a good show.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/2010 11:30AM by delacuesta.

A red barcode wouldn't work and so would stop being a barcode and just become a series of meaningless lines.So I shall continue to maintain that bar codes cannot be red.

Having seen a tattoo of a barcode. I think "not normally made to be worn on the body" was as un-misleading as I could possibly have been.

Combustible was a tricky one - but I took the view that if you set fire to the substrate the barcode would become unreadable and therefore no longer a barcode. Also I think ink does burn. It did raise the interesting question of what constitutes a barcode. Is it just the ink which alone would be meaningless without its background or is it also the substance its printed on, which of course can vary?

When barcodes first came out I remember all our designers getting very, very upset. At the time the rules hadn't been fully thought out. Whilst most of the designers were keen to make them as small as possible, one took the view that since his cover had been ruined anyway, he might as well make it as large as possible. Unable to find a ruling on maximum barcode size we went ahead and produced a magazine cover that was entirely made up of barcode. The retailers were furious but the designer's euphoria at having beat the system was a joy to behold.

Having, as no doubt you can tell, spent far too much time investigating barcodes, in a vain attempt to not be misleading, I'm very disappointed to be scored with only a "good show", I will therefore attempt to increase my mark by offering another barcode fact.

The first barcode to be scanned was a packet of chewing gum.

Tricky. very very tricky. We must endeavor to not underestimate geg on this next venture into the game...

<grin>

Personally, I thought the full page barcode was a great magazine cover. I thought it was a statement on how we've all become numbers rather than names, as far as corporations are concerned, but if a designer was simply trying to beat the system, that's great too!

Having a degree in graphic design, and having been a cashier in my varied career, and therefore having to deal with barcodes that the scanner refused - absolutely, positively, no-way-in-heck-am-I-gonna-do-that refused - to "see", I don't know why the non-photo blue clue didn't help. Ah Well. Thank you for trying.

I think what threw me was the answer regarding purchasing. I simply took out all commercial items from consideration. As part of the "reduce, reuse, recycle" mentality, I'm aware that when I purchase an item, I am also "purchasing the packaging." I put that in quotes b/c I don't really have any choice in purchasing the packaging, I have to pay for it if I want the item. (Laughing at the idea of trying to buy a soft drink and not the can, bottle, or cup...)

I'm going to have to start asking better questions, I see.

O.K., at the risk of jumping out of the frying pan into the fire here we go....

0) Entirely animal but outwardly mineral.

Is it an insect?

1) Not an insect.

Is it a sea creature?

0) Entirely animal but outwardly mineral
1) not an insect
2) not a sea creature

<A barcode! After looking back through the answers, allow me to congratulate you on some superbly circumlocutory descriptions. Excellent show. The "Never red" clue caused some puzzling.>

I'll just check my pantry for trilobites. Bare.

Would you expect to find one in most homes?

Well done Geg for the barcode. Interestingly, both 3 and 5 are also considered lucky in Chinese culture. Perhaps all numbers are.

0) Entirely animal but outwardly mineral
1) No - not an insect
2) No - not a sea creature
3) Yes - much more likely to found in the average home than a tilobite. I think "likely" to be found in most homes, is probably more accurate than "expect".

geg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
[...]
> I'm very
> disappointed to be scored with only a "good show",
[...]

No offence meant. It was really a good find.

Is it (made of) ivory?

4) No, not ivory.