Lateral with Tom Scott - 130: Disappearing toffees

Episode Date: April 4, 2025

Sam Denby, Adam Chase and Ben Doyle from 'Jet Lag: The Game' face questions about animal accidents, severed signage and baby birth rates. LATERAL is a comedy panel game podcast about weird questions with wonderful answers, hosted by Tom Scott. For business enquiries, contestant appearances or question submissions, visit https://lateralcast.com. Join the Producer's Club via https://members.lateralcast.com for ad-free episodes and bonus content. HOST: Tom Scott. QUESTION PRODUCER: David Bodycombe. EDITED BY: Julie Hassett at The Podcast Studios, Dublin. MUSIC: Karl-Ola Kjellholm ('Private Detective'/'Agrumes', courtesy of epidemicsound.com). ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: Gregor, Ivan Walters, Jon Sweitzer-Lamme, Brady Joyce, Jonathan Cooke, Karthick. FORMAT: Pad 26 Limited/Labyrinth Games Ltd. EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: David Bodycombe and Tom Scott. © Pad 26 Limited (https://www.pad26.com) / Labyrinth Games Ltd. 2025. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode is brought to you by FX's Dying for Sex on Disney+. Based on the podcast of the same name, Dying for Sex tells the story of Molly, who is diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer. Determined to feel everything she can before she can't feel anything, she decides to leave her unhappy marriage to explore her sexuality with some encouragement from her best friend Nicky. FX's Dying for Sex, streaming April 4th only on Disney+. Sign up now at DisneyPlus.com.

In what way are giraffes 30 times more vulnerable to injury than humans? The answer to that at the end of the show. My name's Tom Scott, and this is Lateral. We are joined today by three people who have recently been running around Europe while ripping open a bunch of envelopes. One day the tax authorities are going to catch up to them. For now they are sheltering in the safe harbour of doing a podcast. From Jetlag the Game on Nebula we have, first of all, Sam Denby. Hello.

Welcome back to the show. How are you doing? I... It's... In recent seconds, it's become clear to me, or I've remembered that, unlike our podcast, we actually have to think on this show, which is... I don't know why we agreed to this. We have to apply ourselves.

Oh, yeah. We're doing two episodes of this back-to-back, and then immediately going into recording the last episode of The Layover, so... But that's the correct order, because look, the Layover, you don't need to apply yourself much. All you have to do is defend. This is the companion show for Jetlag the Game, which last time you were on, I was merely a viewer of, and now we're at the end of the season.

Like, there's one episode to go on YouTube, I think, as this goes out. It's been a strange few weeks. I came onto this call directly from editing the finale of the season. Have you figured out who wins yet? No, but I'm excited to see the end. Adam Chase, second member in chronological order in the order of which I've introduced you today, of Jetlag the Game, welcome back. Yes, thank you so much, Tom. I think I've introduced you today, of Jetlag the Game. Welcome back. Yes, thank you so much, Tom.

I think I've told you this before, but I am a genuine fan of the Lateral Podcast. I listen to this podcast. And I am sort of, I'm excited to do the thing where when you actually have to do it, it's a lot harder than it seemed like it would be when you're listening. Oh yeah, definitely know that feeling. Well, good luck on the show today.

We also have the third member, again, in chronological order of being introduced today, Ben Doyle. Hello, Tom Scott. I am here, I'm ready to compete and think in all sorts of things. It is really quite, I'm realising, very intimidating to be on a podcast that's good. I really like being on a podcast that's bad. We have a producer, question writers, a thorough edit on everything, and yes, I can understand seeing how much work goes into it, why sometimes you might just want to talk for 45 minutes and put that out.

Look, we make a show that requires a crazy amount of effort, so we're allowed for our other thing to just be chill, okay? Absolutely. Very briefly, tell us about Jetlag the Game for the audience who don't know you. Jetlag the Game is a lovely travel competition show on YouTube and Nebula. One week early on Nebula, folks. And yeah, it's fun. We go to all manner of different countries and play all manner of different games. And our most recent season featured a fella by the name of Tom Scott, who you might be

familiar with on this podcast. And it was a lot of fun. And it was an absolute delight to be part of. Thank you very much, folks. Well, I hope this is as good an experience for you as Jetlag was for me, and it's going to be interesting to see who's going to claim the most questions on today's show. Let's lock in to question one. Oh, it's a reference.

Yeah. Thank you to Brady Joyce for sending this question in. In the US, road signs with thick wooden posts have two holes that are 14 inches apart. Why? I'll say that again. In the US, road signs with thick wooden posts have two holes that are 14 inches apart. Why? Okay, that's a good question.

So, wait, so sorry, just so as I wrap my head around this, you're saying that road signs that are affixed to a large wooden post. Yes. I use the words with thick wooden posts, but yes, that's sort of road sign. Yes, it's affixed to a wooden post. It is affixed to the post, and the post is large and wooden, and you're saying that these signs have two holes in them, and those holes are 14 inches apart Correct. I mean my first obvious thought is like that's where the nails or screws go, right? There's two holes in the sign and that is the 14 inches is the width of the post

Yes, it would be crazy if that was the answer to this question. What is what is a logical screw hole podcast? I think it's aerodynamics. It has to do with aerodynamics. I was going to say I think it's probably to let air through like you know how some some toys have like holes in it so that if you are a baby and you eat it, then you can breathe. I'm not saying that a baby would eat the sign, but sometimes you got to let air pass through

the sign like a baby's throat. Here's another question, gentlemen. Have you ever seen what Tom is on about or is he just totally making this up? We live in America. Yeah, that's true. I don't know what you're describing. Here's the thing. I also don't think that it's the holes that the screws go in, but we had to start there,

right? Sure. Right. Yes. I agree. My first, my sort of second thought as to how this could be tricky is yeah, that it's aerodynamics, that it's like that way the post doesn't get knocked down in the wind, it's got holes so that it stays upright when the wind goes. Is that what it is?

It's not, but you are right to say that the holes are in the post, not in the sign. I feel like we should focus on the 14 inches thing, because I feel like 14 is so specific. What things are 14 inches? A foot and 2 inches. Yeah, I would say pretty much exactly a foot and 2 inches. Could it have to do with the installation rather than the operations of the sign? Right? Because it's like... or even the construction. We can't get too centered on the sign operations.

There are other phases in this process. Maybe there's a kind of machine that puts the post in the ground and it's got a little thing, it's got a little thing that is bad. I love that Ben. No, I love that. It's the thing that gets the post in the ground has to hold the post securely. And maybe what it does is it drills into the post

14 inches apart, and then it slams it into the ground. I love that. Well, that was kind of my thinking, but on the other hand, like that is a machine that exists, like post, post, post machines. Yes. And they do it from the top. The thing is, I was going to correct you on the technical term, and I couldn't think of it either.

Vindicative. High-ling machines, possibly. But not every post-machine works like that. Yeah, maybe these are bad ones or something. Well, America does like doing things in a different way that is worse than the rest of the world, so maybe American coast machines do it a different way. Let me give you a bit more details on the hulls. In terms of size, they're about big enough to put your thumb into, maybe a little bit

larger, and they are perpendicular to the flow of traffic. Are they for your thumbs to rest in? Is that what they're that size? That's it. If your thumbs get tired while you're driving, you can get out of your car, you stick your thumb in there for a little bit, all rested up. So if you were to look through the holes, because they go all the way through, you would see the road if you were standing next to the side.

Are we putting cameras in them? Maybe there's a camera in them. No, the likelihood that these will be useful is very small, but not zero. That implies to me, like, maybe it's like an emergency thing. Like, it's useful in some sort of, like, emergency situation. And he's nodding. Ooh, ooh, ooh! Sorry, yes, Sam, sorry, keep going. I was agreeing with you. You can't interrupt like that and not follow that up. No, you've keep going. I was agreeing with you.

You can't interrupt like that and not follow that up. You've got to follow up on the ooze. Could they be used sort of for like, basically to like, basically to tow something, right? It's like if something's stuck in the mud, you could put a rope through them and you could like pull it out. How strong do you think these signs are?

No, but I'm saying, like, they're thick wooden posts. Those last two things you said. Actually, that's the question you need to ask. How strong do you think those poles are? He said they were thick? He said they were thick. He specified Sam. The thickest road sign post that I've seen is not strong enough to be like a winch point

for towing. That's true. It's not. But it might be too strong for some other things. It's too strong. You're saying this is too weak? Is it so that if somebody crashes into the post, it will break instead of messing up your car? Yes. Correct answer.

All wooden posts greater than four inches wide, under the US regulations, must have two holes drilled into them. One four inches above the ground, another 14 inches above that, to brake more easily if the pole is struck by a motor vehicle. That makes sense. Because it's a lot easier to mess up the post than it is to mess up the hood of your car. Each of our guests has brought a question along with them. I don't know the question, I definitely don't know the answer. Adam, it is over to you.

Wee, it's my turn. Alright. Adam, it is over to you. Wee, it's my turn. All right. This question has been sent in by John Switzer-Lenay. If 1966 is anything to go by, Japan's birth rate is likely to drop by 25% in 2026 to help boost the marriage rates in future years. Why? I'll read that

one more time. If 1966 is anything to go by, Japan's birth rate is likely to drop by 25 percent in 2026 to help boost the marriage rates in future years. Why? This is obvious. Tom's looking at me with concern. The Shinkansen opened in 1965. Everyone was too busy riding high-speed trains to be banging. Of course it was a railway reference. Of course it was.

I mean, kudos for finishing a railway reference with the word banging. They were focused on the wrong railing. There it is! Oh, that's so good. This is a thing that constantly happens in jet lag, is that I say a joke and then Adam basically says the same joke, but much better phrase three seconds later.

It's called a punch-out. And inevitably that is the one that makes the cut. All I know about Japanese demographics is that their birth rate started declining before nearly any other country. They've had a rapidly aging average population for quite a while now. I wouldn't focus on that. But it sounded like this is something specific about 1966? The year matters. In both cases, the specific year is relevant. So that's 70 years between, if my math is right.

Your math is wrong. Ha, it's 60 years. You sounded confident, though, which is impressive. Well, that's why I asked. Is there something lucky about those numbers? Like, I don't think 66 is a particularly fortunate or unfortunate number or year, but is it something about bad luck to be born in that year or something like that? You are very much on the right track.

Mmm. What happened in 1966? Elvis happened. He was around. Probably not relevant. I assume it's not as simple as just like 66 and 26 is an unlucky number or something, right? Yeah, it's got to be more than that. It's more than that, yes.

But again, I want to emphasize you're very much... I think I will go ahead and say... So, Tom, you asked a question, which was, is it bad luck to be born in 1966 or 2026? It's not exactly bad luck, but it's very... That's very close. Could it be like a language thing? Like the Japanese words for six or six six and 26 sound like terrible child or sound like crime? This is not the case, but it's a good thought.

I want to reread you the question because again, it's a weird causality here, right? Okay. If 1966 is anything to go by, Japan's birth rate is likely to drop by 25% in 2026. So you've been focused on that part. But remember, the second part is, in order to help boost the marriage rates in future years. Oh. Okay. It's not like you can track years out to when someone's going to get married.

Like, it's not like someone gets married when they are 21 years old always. Can you think of any sort of traditions that work on kind of an annual or set of years basis in Japan? Does it have anything to do with elections? It does not. The emperor changing alters the entire calendar. It resets. Calendar is an interesting word. But none of the others.

The other words I did not find interesting. He was not interested in those words, but he was interested in the calendar of it all. So Sam, you mentioned before, right, this is a 60-year difference, right? I would like to invite you to divide the number 60 by 5. That is 12. Quick maths. Okay.

Is this helpful to you at all? five. Uh, that is 12. I, quick maths. Okay. Is this helpful to you at all? That's the number of signs in the Chinese zodiac. That is very much true, Tom. Is there one of the zodiacs, is one of the zodiacs a one that people hate and they're like, I don't want my kid to be a rat or a different one. This is your yes, Ben. Yes. They don't want it to be a different one. This is your yes, Ben. Yes, they don't want it to be a specific one.

Can you think of any reason why preventing them from being that specific one would help to boost marriage rates in future years? What is the superstition? Do you think about people born in one of the certain zodiacs that avoiding people being born then is going to help boost marriage rates? I will actually say that I recall when I was, this isn't going to be helpful, but I'm going to say it anyway. When I was in like first grade, we all learned what our Chinese zodiacs were. And half the boys in the class were, like, tiger. And half the boys in the class, including me, was, like, a rabbit or something stupid.

And then all the girls were, like, the tiger boys are way cooler, clearly. And so, maybe that's something. Because I was like, I can't, it sucks that I'm a rabbit. Is there just a Zodiac sign that's the odd one out like that is dragon one of them. Is there a particular? This is about a specific one, but I mean you're basically there you're knocking on the door of it I just want you to sort of get at what is The what is the superstition or what is the type of superstition

that these people have, that it is held about people who are born in these years? You might need to tell us the sign. I don't think we're gonna be able to guess the sign. Okay, I will tell you that the sign is the fire horse. The old fire horse. People born in 1966 and 2026 are born in the year of the Fire Horse. Why would you not want your kid to be born in the year of the Fire Horse?

How is preventing this going to help boost marriage rates? Is this something like the Western Zodiac, where there are different personality traits attributed to each sign? — Yes. — So in the same way they say, like, oh, Geminis are trustworthy, I don't know which one's which. Like, the firehorse is meant to be bad for marriage? — Is meant to be unfaithful? — Yes. Yes. I am going to say that you've got it. It is not quite unfaithful? Yes. I am going to say that you've got it. It is not quite unfaithful.

There is a superstition that women who are born in the year of the firehorse will murder their husbands. Wow. That's a good one. Just like all the people in that entire year, every woman. Yes. So in order to prevent your daughters from having difficulty getting married, couples decided not to get pregnant in such a way that they would have a kid in 1966. They decided to have kids in 65 or like they waited until 67 because they were worried if they had a kid in

66 and it was a girl, she would have a lot of trouble getting married because people would think she would murder her husband. And this superstition was so significant that the birth rate dropped by a full 25% in 1966. See, this is fascinating to me because I feel like if I met a woman who was prophesied to murder her husband, I would be sort of like bizarrely into that. I feel like that's quite exciting. privilege card to your OpenTable account. From there, you'll unlock first-come, first-serve spots at select-top restaurants when booking through OpenTable. Learn more at OpenTable.ca forward slash Visa Dining.

Okay, flights on air Canada. How about Prague? Ooh, Paris. Those gardens. Gardens. Um, Amsterdam. Tulip Festival. I see your festival and raise you a carnival in Venice. Or Bermuda has carnaval. Ooh, colourful. You want colourful. Thailand. Lantern Festival. Boom. Book it. How did we get to Thailand from Prague?

Alright, Prague. Oh boy. Choose from a world of destinations, if you can. Air Canada. Nice travels. Thank you to Jonathan Cook for this next question. More than a third of the world's languages don't differentiate between the words for hand and arm. Most of those languages have something else in common. What is it, and why do researchers think that might be?

I'll say that again. More than one third of the world's languages don't differentiate between the words for hand and arm. Most of those languages have something else in common. What is it, and why do researchers think that might be? Okay, starting place, I'm just saying, guys, can we brainstorm what is a characteristic shared by about one third of languages? Maybe that gets us somewhere. My first thought, no idea if this is helpful, languages that are pictographic in some way,

like Chinese, Japanese, are maybe about a third of languages picked a graphic or like character based, I don't know the proper term. Yeah, because like Latin root languages do differentiate. I would have to assume. Yeah, like the romances do. Yeah, from from my knowledge of those languages. So I feel like it has to be a different category. And I think you're right that like, anecdototally it seems like about a third of languages, at least by population, are... I don't know if pictographic is right.

I don't really know. Yeah, I don't know the term, but you know like... Not using Western lettering. Yeah, where it's not letter-based, it's character-based, where there's symbols for words, as opposed to that you build a word out of letters. I unfortunately have to tell you that the very first note I have is that it's nothing to do with how they are spoken or written. Well, definitely not. Not to do with the way that they're spoken or written.

No. Wait, what? If it has nothing to do with the way the language is spoken or written, then those are the two things that you do with language, Tom. That's true, but it's not in how it's written down, I mean, or it's not in the sounds that are being produced or anything like that. And just to clarify what I mean by not having a word to differentiate, it's not like someone in that language can't point to their hand and describe their hand. It's like in English, we don't have a word for the first knuckle of our finger. We just describe as finger or

first knuckle of finger. There's not like a special word for that. I call it Ferdinand. That's what I call mine. Oh. I mean, what this sounds like to me is like, in these languages, it's all just one thing. Yeah. And it's like, this is like the front of the arm thing, this is the back of the arm thing, and this is the arm thing, you know? Yes, correct.

So I would presume that maybe there is something to do with the way that different cultures use their arms. Is anyone out there doing something with their arms that we can think of? Is any culture not big on wrists? They're not really big wrist fans. Because it wouldn't be Italians, because they're using their wrists all the time. I have two unbelievably stupid thoughts, but maybe they will get us somewhere. Are you ready for them?

Thought number one. Yes, absolutely. People who live places where it's very cold are going to have their hands in some damn mittens. Maybe that makes them less distinct from the rest of their arm. Is that anything, Tom? That's the first stupid thought. What's your second stupid thought?

Okay, tough. Alright. My second stupid thought, and this one is even stupider, that's why I saved it for the second, does it have anything to do with sign language, because it would be annoying to point to your hand with your hand. Whoa. Your first stupid thought is much closer than you might think. You've almost got it. You've just kind of got it the wrong way round.

Where it's hot, people love their hands where it's hot. They don't have a word for their hands where it's hot. Why would you not have a word for your hands where it's hot? So have a think about geography. Rather than just hot countries, what might connect all these languages? Equatorial. Equatorial, yes. Most of these languages? Equatorial. Equatorial. Yes. Most of these languages sit in the equatorial belt.

What? Yep. And Adam, your stupid thought about mittens? Kind of the answer. Just flip it on its head. You... You're wearing short sleeves? When it's hot, I guess you don't have, like like long-sleeve versus short-sleeve stuff. You just always are.

But what are the implications of that? Well, because then it doesn't cut off at your hand. Like your sleeve... Yeah, your sleeve doesn't cut off at your hand, so it's not... Oh, it's like if you're wearing a long-sleeve shirt, it's like, yeah, this is the arm and this is the hand. But if you're always shirtless, it's like, yeah, that damn thing's just your arm. It's one damn thing. That's our arm, baby.

Yes. Sure. Absolutely right. To be clear, that is a theory by researchers. It's going to be almost impossible to prove. But what is certain is that a study by Cecil H. Brown looked at 617 different languages. 228 of them had the same word for hand and arm. And most of those languages originate around the equator where

it's hottest. And the theory goes is that if your clothing does not differentiate hand and arm, then neither does your language. Sam, it is over to you for the next question. This question has been sent in by Gregor. In 2006, Katrin travelled from the German city of Degensdorf to Karlsruhe, some 250 miles away. It was necessary to take a detour of more than 5,000 miles. Why? In 2006, Katrine traveled from the German city of Degendorf to Karlsruhe, some 250 miles away. It was necessary to take a detour of more than 5,000 miles. Why? We've been to Karl's room.

We have. This, oh, oh, oh. God dang it. We're all thinking Deutsche Bahn, right? We're all thinking Deutsche Bahn. Yeah. I? Yes, we just needed to avoid the Deutsche Bahn.

Yeah, it might be faster. Does it have anything to do with the partition of Germany? Is it like the Berlin Wall? Like you have to go the other way around the world to get to the other side of Germany because of like the way that immigration worked when it was East and West Germany? No! Not in 2006. Oh, did you say 2006?

Yeah. They brought it back, baby. Look, here's my clue, Adam. You are incredibly far, like impressively far off. Okay, okay. But you did say 5,000 miles. How much is around the world? More. It's like 24,000, I want to say. Yeah, okay. That's like London to LA kind of distance, isn't it? Maybe London to Chicago. Okay.

Yeah, London to LA-ish, yeah. And wait, Sam, what did you say were the two locations? Degendorf and Karlsruhe. What do you remember about Karlsruhe? Um... And its geography? I had a ham sandwich there. Now you're onto something.

I remember that it was sort of like a hub where I transferred trains. I remember that it's in the south... I want to say southwest, yeah. I think, yeah, it's in the southwest because I've been there going from France, like the... I remember being down there in Strasbourg, and I think I went to Karlsruhe from Strasbourg. Yeah, yeah. Because it's like right next to the French border. That first town you named doesn't have an airport.

I don't think the second one does. But 5,000 miles feels like they're flying somewhere and coming back. Ryanair? Is it Ryanair? You had to fly to Ireland to connect and then go to the other place? That's not 5,000 miles. This is an ad for Ryanair. In your description of Karlsruhe, you mentioned an aspect of it that is tangentially relevant to the explanation here.

It's near the border of France and also I guess Switzerland. That is tangentially relevant to the explanation. My guess is this is a weird border thing. It has to do with borders. It has to do with, like... No. No. Okay, well then great. But that's a clue. If you get 2020 in the question, it's almost certainly a COVID lockdown question,

some weird border thing. But 2006? Hmm. What makes up the border in that region between Germany and France? Oh, the Rhine. The Rhine River. I don't know how that helps, but that is a very long and very big river. Did she take a boat? Yes.

Was it just that the river is so windy and long that it ended up being 5,000 miles throughout Germany? No, it's more than that. The Rhine goes to the coast. Karlsruhe is on the Rhine. Is Degendorf on the Danube? I'm not looking at a map, probably. The answer, shortly, is to get between those two places by boat, you have to go 5,000 miles,

because that's the only way to get between them by water. But it said it was necessary to take a detour of more than 5,000 miles. Why did Katrine have to take a 5,000-mile detour? If Degendorf's on the Danube on the other side of Germany, and Karlsruhe is on the Rhine, I don't think those two rivers meet. I think you would have to go all the way to the end of the Rhine, circumnavigate Europe and come back into Germany from the other side. That is right.

I think that's the most efficient route between those by water is 5,000 miles. Right. And I have confirmed for Wurzworth, Degendorf is on the Danube. But that's not the full explanation. What I need is why was it necessary for Katrin to... So clearly there was some reason why she had to get there by boat. She could not get there by train or plane. She had to get there by boat.

Here's a question. How many people do you know whose name is Katrin? I don't know any, but I don't know a lot of German people, I suppose. That's interesting. Is Katrine a person? No. Is Katrine a boat? Oh, is Katrine a giant machine?

No, Ben is pretty much right. So I think Katrine is like one of those like, it's like a neutrino detector or something like that. Yes. Yeah. Look, Ben is very good at digging up old knowledge of what things are named, clearly. Katrin is the Karlsruhe tritium neutrino experiment.

Oh, yeah. Which is too big to go by road. Where did that come from, Ben? I don't know. I don't know. Yeah, so in summary, Katrin is this giant neutrino experiment, a cylindrical vacuum chamber, 10 meters wide So in summary, Khrushrin is this giant neutrino experiment, a cylindrical vacuum chamber, 10 meters wide and 24 meters long,

too large to go by road. So it started in Degendorf, then it went out the Danube, down around Spain, through the Mediterranean, up through Istanbul, into the Black Sea, and then up the Rhine to make it to Karl's Room. And then it only did five miles by road just in and around Karl's Room. Wow. That's crazy, Ben, that you were able to pull out that it was a neutrino experience. Right. I think I was looking at this for a recent half as interesting.

This question was sent in by Karthik. Thank you very much. In 2005, the India business website Mint ran the headline, how 16.73 billion UPI transactions killed the ubiquitous Toffee business. Explain that story. And one more time, in 2005, the India business website, Mint, ran the headline, how 16.73 billion UPI transactions killed the ubiquitous toffee business.

Explain the story. So what is UPI? Isn't UPI... Well, this could be a different UPI, but I know that there is a UPI that is, I think it's United Press International, and it's like a... like news... It's not like a news agency, but they, like, sell stories to other news agencies?

Not that UPI, I'm afraid. You wouldn't have 16 plus billion transactions. I don't know, Tom. The world is a weird place. That's true. 16 billion UPI transactions killed the Toffee business. Killed the once ubiquitous Toffee business. Okay.

Um, here is... Uh, uh, quiet. Toffee is still... Okay. Here is... Toffee is still... You can still buy toffee. So I'm wondering if the key here is the ubiquity of toffee. Did somehow the nature of these transactions cause the toffee business to become highly centralized as opposed to it being previously ubiquitous? Well, also, seemingly this has something to do with India. It's like the toffee business

in India, which I imagine is kind of colonial project. Yeah, my first guess here is like it's something like these UPI transactions killed some older way of doing things. And as a little treat, whenever you did the thing, the transaction in the past, they gave you a toffee as a little thank you, you know? But now it's like an automated system, so you don't get any... Oh, I love that sound. That's pretty good. You're mostly right there, apart from treat.

Treat is not the right phrasing there, but, yep, an old way of doing things had been replaced. So there used to be a thing where, once an in-person thing happened, you would give the person a little toffee. Right? And now, because those are digitized, that doesn't happen anymore. Yes. The question is, why was toffee given? And it might be worth thinking about what UPI might stand for,

with the word transactions after it. Universal... Is this going to work for him? You're just going to say words that start with these letters? Well, I think transactions is a big clue there. Is it like there was toffee at the bank when you would go to the bank? I love that. Getting closer.

What is something that you used to do in person that now you do online? What is something you used to do in person where there would be toffee and now you don't do it in person and they don't give you toffee? Well, maybe it's done electronically, rather than on the internet. Is it the, like, mailing letters? Like at the post office they had toffee, but now people just send emails? Oh, it's not P for postal. But if you can think what other P might go with transactions?

Purchase. Closer, Ben. Payment? Payment. Yes. I can tell you that UPI, and you were nearly there with Universal, UPI is the Unified Payments Interface. Okay.

I take back my criticism of Sam for saying random words until he got it right. Okay, so what, so because you pay with a credit card now instead of cash this happens? Yes. I'm not sure it was a credit card system. This is sort of 2005 India. But they've always been a long way ahead in sort of small electronic transactions. Because remember, 16 billion, and that is in one month. There was toffee at the bank? No, we keep being told there wasn't toffee at the bank.

I don't think there was 16 billion bank transactions in a month. It's like a billion people. I mean, in a month, if it's 16 billion of them, then like, surely that's like the amount of transactions that is the total of every person in like, does the average person in India make more than 16 transactions in a month? Probably not, right? Like if it's 16 billion a month, that has to mean that like this was payment for everything. It's not just banks. We're talking like the shift clearly what's happening here.

I shouldn't say clearly because it's still very unclear. But it seems, what I have gleaned so far seems to be the transition from paying in cash or in a different way to paying by electronic payment led to a lot less toffee. Yes. Was it customary when you bought something for the person to just give you anywhere in India to give you some toffee? Yeah, in small retailers, yes. There was a reason for it beyond just courtesy.

Here's another wildly hot take. You know all these countries that are like, let's eliminate the penny? Maybe it's like, instead of pennies, if we round up, we give you a little toffee. Sam, you've got it. Yes. In India, or at least in parts of India, it used to be customary that retail shops would not stock small change. And instead, they would just bulk buy individual candies and give those to customers instead of the coins.

So that would reduce the change they needed. It would reduce how much effort they had to do. And also it would bump up the retailer's profit a bit because implicitly you were buying a few candies so you didn't have to get the change. The unified payments interface came along. Everyone's paying electronically, and suddenly there was no need for bulk candy purchases.

And the toffee industry found their sales had slipped. Ben, over to you for your question. Okay, folks, allow me to regale you with a fact. This question has been sent in by Elve Chris. According to a popular story, Carl Friedrich Gauss once proposed to sow three giant fields of wheat in Siberia. Why? Wow. Do you want to give us that one more time? According to a popular story, Carl Friedrich Gauss once proposed to sow three giant fields of wheat in Siberia.

Why? Okay. Gauss. The connection I have with that is either Gaussian, as in the mathematical blurring algorithms. — Yeah, like Gaussian noise. Yeah. — Yep. Or, oh yeah, or the mathematical noise algorithms. Or the concept of degaussing a television. Back when we had CRTs, and there would be a button that you would push to clean up the magnetic fields.

Like, degaussing something is magnetically cleaning it. I don't have a better word than magnetically cleaning, but like removing stray magnetic fields, like degaussing something is magnetically cleaning it. I don't have a better word than magnetically cleaning, but like removing stray magnetic fields. If you have a giant ship that has picked up magnetism over time, you put an industrial-sized degausser at a dry dock, and it is no longer magnetic. Is this gauss guy like that guy who was a mathematician or whatever, or is this just a guy with a funny name no this is that that gals this is that guy okay so this is like a math thing i would say that this is a math thing. Alright let me let me hit you let me hit you with something here gals see a noise to my understanding. Is a sort of like, truly, it's a random pattern,

right? That is applied to data or whatever in order to kind of make it less perfect to make it, you know, to jostle it a little bit. To fuzz it up a bit. Yeah, yeah. I also know that getting things that are truly random is extremely difficult. And so I don't think this is probably right, but I'm wondering, was there some way in which he was like, I know what I'll do to get a truly random sample of whatever. I will plant a bunch of wheat in Siberia in a big field and whatever the outcome of that,

the ones that grow or don't grow, each one will be like a node and it's a one or a zero if it grows and that's going to get me a big thing of maybe not even totally random but like weirdly correlated noisy stuff. Did I do a perfect job? I would say that you did a perfect job of coming up with an idea that is wrong. Oh I feel like I have now established that my deal on this show is coming up with something really elaborate that's not close at all. Okay, here's a question, Ben. Is the fact that it's three fields relevant to the explanation? Yes.

The number three? Yes. So maybe one field has some property, another field has some property, another field— and he's testing— he's doing some sort of ABC test on wheat. He did it in... you said he did it in Siberia? Siberia. So my knowledge is not known for its wheat growing quality.

Well, that's kind of what I was going to say too. Seems like the worst possible place to try to grow wheat. I mean, if anyone from the Jetlag team is going to know wheat exporting facts after this recent season, it is going to be Ben. You know what? That's why I liked this question. Well that's why he's the wheat germ. Hey!

I think we can all agree that almost certainly this man's goal was not to grow wheat to sell. This was for some experimental purpose, right? And it was mathy. And it's mathy. Which kind of taps me out, because as we established earlier, I don't do math. Here's, I guess, a hint. I would say that the mathematical principles at play here are not going to be foreign to any of you. I think. Oh. Median, mode, and mean. He's got three average fields of wheat in different ways? No. I'll give you another hint, because this might sort of send you down the right path.

The orientation of the fields were different to one another. They were all sort of pointed in different directions. When you say orientation, is that the direction the fields are ploughed? Because a stalk of wheat is just one thing pointing up. I would say that the shape of the fields was identical, but they were all... the orientation of the shapes was different. Did he want to freaking write a message that was visible from the air? I would say that that is part of it, yes.

What? Okay. What do you think the shape of these fields is? What is the shape of a normal field? Normal shape square. Yeah, square or rectangle. Yes. These were all square fields. Oh, Tom is having a revelation. It is freaking out.

Magnet. Nope. Oh, it's like one is pointed at magnetic north, one is pointed at, like they're ploughing the field in some sort of magnetic orientation, he's trying to work out, because it's Gauss. Because he did magnets. Another fabulous theory that is wrong.

Ah! Was the purpose of this as an input for another mathematical endeavor, or was this like the end result of an experiment? This has nothing to do with an experiment, I would say. What? Is this recreational wheat farming? I would also say that crucially, all of these fields, though they are the same shape, were different sizes.

So you said that he wanted to make a message visible from the air. Is that the deal? We just have to figure out what the message was? I think you need to figure out what the message is and who he was trying to communicate that message to. Okay, but that's why he did it was to so that a message was visible from the air above the area. You were correct that this is a message.

The aliens. It is for the aliens. What is he trying to tell the aliens? That our wheat is better than their wheat. Is it an arrow? Is it pointing towards something? It's an arrow! It's not an arrow.

Here's another important fact. The fields are all touching each other at three points. Okay. Then that means they have to be oriented like this, right? That's the only way that's even possible But we said they were different sizes. They are different sizes. So here's here's here's a thought Which I don't know if this works for the aliens, but I do know that like around the US there they built What I don't know when I don't know when was Gauss alive like the early 1800s. Okay, well then this idea is out of the window then I was thinking it was the things that they used to calibrate the visuals on satellites imaging satellites.

Yeah, yeah, no satellites. So this is this has to be I mean, they're different. This has to be how they were oriented. Right? That's the only way that they can all touch at one point. Okay, so here's a question, Adam, about your diagram. What is the shape in the middle of those fields? It's a freaking triangle, Benjamin. That is Pythagorean. It is a yes. Is he trying to show that we know what the Pythagorean theorem is? Yes, because you use squares, it's the sum of the squares. So you-

A squared plus B squared equals C squared. And you mark the squares out. This is... He's signalling aliens that there is intelligent life here? That is correct. That is it, yes. Wow! Why is he doing that in Siberia?

Well, I don't really know why it was in Siberia. But in 1820, German astronomer Carl Friedrich Gauss was like, hey, there might be aliens on the moon or on Mars, and we got to tell them that we're here and we're thinking about stuff. So, he was like, yeah, let's make a big sort of diagram of the Pythagorean theorem with rows of pine trees in the middle to highlight the central triangle. And he was like, they'll check this out, and they'll be like, wow, they're so smart. We've just got to hope that the aliens are smarter than us, I guess.

Which brings us to the question I asked right at the start of the show. Thank you to Owen T. for sending this in. In what way are giraffes 30 times more vulnerable to injury than humans? Anyone want to take a quick shot at that before I give the audience the answer? I mean, it's gotta be messing up their neck or their long dang legs, right? It's gotta be messing up their freakin' necks. They're certainly more vulnerable that way, but not quite. I know that there's a really weird thing that giraffes have where, like, they have some

vein or whatever that goes a crazy way because of evolution? Is it about that? The vagus nerve, yes. It's not about that. But they do have that. Well then I don't know. This is a risk that humans also face. Is it? Sorry. I did the gasp and it's not going to be good at all. It's actually going to be really stupid really If a giraffe gave birth there's a long way for the baby to fall down is it that oh

That's kind. Oh, it's not but that's that's a lovely story Is that a lovely story it doesn't sound so lovely the risk of that is Still high the risk of this happening is still very, very small. Is it... is it... they do the splits too hard? You know when people say that your odds of things are as unlikely as... Being struck by lightning? There we go! Oh, there we go.

Because they're like a dang... Oh my god. They're like a freaking... Yeah, like a pole. Like, they're like a dang... They're like a freaking... Yeah, like a pole. They're like a lightning rod. Zoologist Louis Villazon calculated that giraffes are 30 times more likely to be killed by a lightning strike than humans. In Sub-Saharan Africa, there are fewer lightning storms, but it is a factor you have to bear in mind when making enclosures for giraffes held in captivity. That's so tragic, the idea of a giraffe being struck by lightning.

So yes, that is the show, that is all the questions we have. Thank you very much to the players from Jetlag the Game. Who wants to talk about the show and where you can see it? Jetlag the Game is the best show in the world. That's true. And it is on YouTube. And Ben, what's it about? It's a great competition travel show.

We're on it, we do challenges, we travel around, we play these freaking games, and it's a lot of fun. And Sam, where can you find it? Nebula and YouTube. And if you want to know more about this show, you can do that at lateralcast.com, where you can also send in your own ideas for questions. We are at Lateral Cast basically everywhere.

There are regular video highlights at youtube.com slash lateralcast and full video episodes on Spotify. Thank you very much to Sam Denby. Bye. Ben Doyle. Bye. Adam Chase. Goodbye. I'vele. Bye. Adam Chase. Goodbye.

I've been Tom Scott and that's been Lateral.