https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.162.237.100&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T05:58:14ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2250:_OK/okay/ok&diff=185489Talk:2250: OK/okay/ok2020-01-04T18:02:39Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
He forgot the eternal joke - 0K<br />
Come on Randall, you're a person of science[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 11:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
I think this should have been a table. Put spellings down the side (I've seen a lot of "oki" online; maybe "A-OK" too, or some humorous misspelling) and possible permutations of punctuations and capitalisation across the top. I want to know how "o.k.ay." makes you sound :p<br />
[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 17:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:But when you do a single word response, it should just be, "k".<br />
:[[User:Hax|Hax]] ([[User talk:Hax|talk]])<br />
:: "'kay" is better, but I've also seen "'k" -- highlighting, perhaps, that the "o" is supposed to be there even if people are lazy and cut off too much when speaking and writing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 06:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:If it's not capitalized, I'm definitely imagining the person making clucking noises, even if I ''know'' that's not what they meant... Doesn't ''everybody'' read "ok" phonetically, as "ock", as in grok? ;S <br />
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As of this writing, the title text is wrong. I don't know how to edit it. The current explainXKCD version ends with ("oK".). But the xkcd website ends with ("oK.") The location of the period within the quote changes the meaning of this comment. [[User:Agrasin|Agrasin]] ([[User talk:Agrasin|talk]]) 20:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:Good catch! I edited it. I was the one who put it in wrong in the first place as well. I had to insert the quotes manually, when I copy-pasted the title text from the inspect tool of xkcd.com and made this error. Things like the title text or the date can be edited easily when you use the edit button on top of the page instead of the small one at the explanation/transcript. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 21:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:The period's placement does not necessarily change the meaning of the sentence as its inclusion within the quotation marks does not imply it is part of the quote. Punctuation immediately following a quote goes inside the quotation marks under English grammar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.112|172.68.174.112]] 21:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::That's a ridiculously bad rule & I'd hope nobody actually does that. Punctuation should only go inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote. To put punctuation in where it wasn't used muddles whether the punctuation is part of the quote or part of the sentence containing the quote, & offers no possible benefit to comprehension. Bad rule: Don't do that. <br />
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::Totally agree although I suspect that english grammar is not supposed to be logical. Also, I think using "oK" would be good idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::However, it looks much nicer and mimics proper handwriting, where the comma sign is directly underneath the quotation mark. It's considered proper form for American English, whereas Brits put it outside.<br />
:::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::No, that's only for comma signs. Periods go inside if it's a part of the quote, outside if it isn't, and in both places if you end your sentence with a quote. "This quoted sentence ends with a period.".<br />
::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::I have never seen a double period like that anywhere. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 05:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:In SWE (Standard Written (American) English), commas and ending punctuation go inside closing quotation marks (probably originating from typewriters allowing a comma and a period to be put _under_ the closing quotation marks). This rule holds true in American English unless there's a very good reason to leave the punctuation on the outside.<br />
:There is a difference between the two following sentences:<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test!" (the exclamation point belongs to the teacher's statement)<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test"! (the exclamation point belongs to the narrator's statement)<br />
: For cases where there would be ambiguity or a presumed reason to use both external and internal punctuation, writers are advised to rewrite the sentence. There is no grammatical/conventional basis for the following:<br />
: * Did the teacher ask, "Who's there?"?<br />
: Do note that other than commas, punctuation that is not ending punctuation (commonly dashes, colons, semicolons) or containers (parens, brackets, etc) -- depending on how they're used -- belong outside the quotation marks.<br />
: Perhaps the British standard of putting all punctuation on the outside unless it explicitly belongs to the quoted material is more logical, but until some major style manuals in the USA adopt it, it won't be legit in SWE.<br />
: Circling back to the original point (ending with '"oK."' vs '"oK".'), that's one of those situations where the sentence should be reworded to avoid the ambiguity on whether the period belongs to the quoted abbreviation or not.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 18:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2250:_OK/okay/ok&diff=185488Talk:2250: OK/okay/ok2020-01-04T18:01:19Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
He forgot the eternal joke - 0K<br />
Come on Randall, you're a person of science[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 11:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
I think this should have been a table. Put spellings down the side (I've seen a lot of "oki" online; maybe "A-OK" too, or some humorous misspelling) and possible permutations of punctuations and capitalisation across the top. I want to know how "o.k.ay." makes you sound :p<br />
[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 17:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:But when you do a single word response, it should just be, "k".<br />
:[[User:Hax|Hax]] ([[User talk:Hax|talk]])<br />
:: "'kay" is better, but I've also seen "'k" -- highlighting, perhaps, that the "o" is supposed to be there even if people are lazy and cut off too much when speaking and writing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 06:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:If it's not capitalized, I'm definitely imagining the person making clucking noises, even if I ''know'' that's not what they meant... Doesn't ''everybody'' read "ok" phonetically, as "ock", as in grok? ;S <br />
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As of this writing, the title text is wrong. I don't know how to edit it. The current explainXKCD version ends with ("oK".). But the xkcd website ends with ("oK.") The location of the period within the quote changes the meaning of this comment. [[User:Agrasin|Agrasin]] ([[User talk:Agrasin|talk]]) 20:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:Good catch! I edited it. I was the one who put it in wrong in the first place as well. I had to insert the quotes manually, when I copy-pasted the title text from the inspect tool of xkcd.com and made this error. Things like the title text or the date can be edited easily when you use the edit button on top of the page instead of the small one at the explanation/transcript. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 21:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:The period's placement does not necessarily change the meaning of the sentence as its inclusion within the quotation marks does not imply it is part of the quote. Punctuation immediately following a quote goes inside the quotation marks under English grammar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.112|172.68.174.112]] 21:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::That's a ridiculously bad rule & I'd hope nobody actually does that. Punctuation should only go inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote. To put punctuation in where it wasn't used muddles whether the punctuation is part of the quote or part of the sentence containing the quote, & offers no possible benefit to comprehension. Bad rule: Don't do that. <br />
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::Totally agree although I suspect that english grammar is not supposed to be logical. Also, I think using "oK" would be good idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::However, it looks much nicer and mimics proper handwriting, where the comma sign is directly underneath the quotation mark. It's considered proper form for American English, whereas Brits put it outside.<br />
:::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::No, that's only for comma signs. Periods go inside if it's a part of the quote, outside if it isn't, and in both places if you end your sentence with a quote. "This quoted sentence ends with a period.".<br />
::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::I have never seen a double period like that anywhere. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 05:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:In SWE (Standard Written (American) English), commas and ending punctuation go inside closing quotation marks (probably originating from typewriters allowing a comma and a period to be put _under_ the closing quotation marks). This rule holds true in American English unless there's a very good reason to leave the punctuation on the outside.<br />
:There is a difference between the two following sentences:<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test!" (the exclamation point belongs to the teacher's statement)<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test"! (the exclamation point belongs to the narrator's statement)<br />
: For cases where there would be ambiguity or a presumed reason to use both external and internal punctuation, writers are advised to rewrite the sentence. There is no grammatical/conventional basis for the following:<br />
: * Did the teacher ask, "Who's there?"?<br />
: Do note that other than commas, punctuation that is not ending punctuation (commonly dashes, colons, semicolons) or situationally containers (parens, brackets, etc) belong outside the quotation marks.<br />
: Perhaps the British standard of putting all punctuation on the outside unless it explicitly belongs to the quoted material is more logical, but until some major style manuals in the USA adopt it, it won't be legit in SWE.<br />
: Circling back to the original point (ending with '"oK."' vs '"oK".'), that's one of those situations where the sentence should be reworded to avoid the ambiguity on whether the period belongs to the quoted abbreviation or not.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 18:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2250:_OK/okay/ok&diff=185487Talk:2250: OK/okay/ok2020-01-04T17:59:08Z<p>108.162.237.100: Comma, comma, comma chameleon</p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
He forgot the eternal joke - 0K<br />
Come on Randall, you're a person of science[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 11:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
I think this should have been a table. Put spellings down the side (I've seen a lot of "oki" online; maybe "A-OK" too, or some humorous misspelling) and possible permutations of punctuations and capitalisation across the top. I want to know how "o.k.ay." makes you sound :p<br />
[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 17:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:But when you do a single word response, it should just be, "k".<br />
:[[User:Hax|Hax]] ([[User talk:Hax|talk]])<br />
:: "'kay" is better, but I've also seen "'k" -- highlighting, perhaps, that the "o" is supposed to be there even if people are lazy and cut off too much when speaking and writing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 06:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:If it's not capitalized, I'm definitely imagining the person making clucking noises, even if I ''know'' that's not what they meant... Doesn't ''everybody'' read "ok" phonetically, as "ock", as in grok? ;S <br />
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As of this writing, the title text is wrong. I don't know how to edit it. The current explainXKCD version ends with ("oK".). But the xkcd website ends with ("oK.") The location of the period within the quote changes the meaning of this comment. [[User:Agrasin|Agrasin]] ([[User talk:Agrasin|talk]]) 20:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:Good catch! I edited it. I was the one who put it in wrong in the first place as well. I had to insert the quotes manually, when I copy-pasted the title text from the inspect tool of xkcd.com and made this error. Things like the title text or the date can be edited easily when you use the edit button on top of the page instead of the small one at the explanation/transcript. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 21:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:The period's placement does not necessarily change the meaning of the sentence as its inclusion within the quotation marks does not imply it is part of the quote. Punctuation immediately following a quote goes inside the quotation marks under English grammar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.112|172.68.174.112]] 21:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::That's a ridiculously bad rule & I'd hope nobody actually does that. Punctuation should only go inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote. To put punctuation in where it wasn't used muddles whether the punctuation is part of the quote or part of the sentence containing the quote, & offers no possible benefit to comprehension. Bad rule: Don't do that. <br />
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::Totally agree although I suspect that english grammar is not supposed to be logical. Also, I think using "oK" would be good idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::However, it looks much nicer and mimics proper handwriting, where the comma sign is directly underneath the quotation mark. It's considered proper form for American English, whereas Brits put it outside.<br />
:::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::No, that's only for comma signs. Periods go inside if it's a part of the quote, outside if it isn't, and in both places if you end your sentence with a quote. "This quoted sentence ends with a period.".<br />
::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::I have never seen a double period like that anywhere. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 05:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:In SWE (Standard Written (American) English), commas and ending punctuation go inside closing quotation marks (probably originating from typewriters allowing a comma and a period to be put _under_ the closing quotation marks). This rule holds true in American English unless there's a very good reason to leave the punctuation on the outside.<br />
:There is a difference between the two following sentences:<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test!" (the exclamation point belongs to the teacher's statement)<br />
: * The teacher said, "There is no test"! (the exclamation point belongs to the narrator's statement)<br />
: For cases where there would be ambiguity or a presumed reason to use both external and internal punctuation, writers are advised to rewrite the sentence. There is no grammatical/conventional basis for the following:<br />
: * Did the teacher ask, "Who's there?"?<br />
: Do note that other than commas, punctuation that is not ending punctuation (commonly dashes, colons, semicolons) belong outside the quotation marks.<br />
: Perhaps the British standard of putting all punctuation on the outside unless it explicitly belongs to the quoted material is more logical, but until some major style manuals in the USA adopt it, it won't be legit in SWE.<br />
: Circling back to the original point (ending with '"oK."' vs '"oK".'), that's one of those situations where the sentence should be reworded to avoid the ambiguity on whether the period belongs to the quoted abbreviation or not.</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2250:_OK/okay/ok&diff=185482Talk:2250: OK/okay/ok2020-01-04T06:43:54Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
I think this should have been a table. Put spellings down the side (I've seen a lot of "oki" online; maybe "A-OK" too, or some humorous misspelling) and possible permutations of punctuations and capitalisation across the top. I want to know how "o.k.ay." makes you sound :p<br />
[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 17:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:But when you do a single word response, it should just be, "k".<br />
:[[User:Hax|Hax]] ([[User talk:Hax|talk]])<br />
:: "'kay" is better, but I've also seen "'k" -- highlighting, perhaps, that the "o" is supposed to be there even if people are lazy and cut off too much when speaking and writing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 06:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:If it's not capitalized, I'm definitely imagining the person making clucking noises, even if I ''know'' that's not what they meant... Doesn't ''everybody'' read "ok" phonetically, as "ock", as in grok? ;S <br />
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As of this writing, the title text is wrong. I don't know how to edit it. The current explainXKCD version ends with ("oK".). But the xkcd website ends with ("oK.") The location of the period within the quote changes the meaning of this comment. [[User:Agrasin|Agrasin]] ([[User talk:Agrasin|talk]]) 20:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:Good catch! I edited it. I was the one who put it in wrong in the first place as well. I had to insert the quotes manually, when I copy-pasted the title text from the inspect tool of xkcd.com and made this error. Things like the title text or the date can be edited easily when you use the edit button on top of the page instead of the small one at the explanation/transcript. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 21:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:The period's placement does not necessarily change the meaning of the sentence as its inclusion within the quotation marks does not imply it is part of the quote. Punctuation immediately following a quote goes inside the quotation marks under English grammar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.112|172.68.174.112]] 21:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::That's a ridiculously bad rule & I'd hope nobody actually does that. Punctuation should only go inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote. To put punctuation in where it wasn't used muddles whether the punctuation is part of the quote or part of the sentence containing the quote, & offers no possible benefit to comprehension. Bad rule: Don't do that. <br />
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::Totally agree although I suspect that english grammar is not supposed to be logical. Also, I think using "oK" would be good idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::However, it looks much nicer and mimics proper handwriting, where the comma sign is directly underneath the quotation mark. It's considered proper form for American English, whereas Brits put it outside.<br />
:::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
::No, that's only for comma signs. Periods go inside if it's a part of the quote, outside if it isn't, and in both places if you end your sentence with a quote. "This quoted sentence ends with a period.".<br />
::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)<br />
:::I have never seen a double period like that anywhere. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 05:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1947:_Night_Sky&diff=1516091947: Night Sky2018-01-26T21:10:12Z<p>108.162.237.100: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1947<br />
| date = January 26, 2018<br />
| title = Night Sky<br />
| image = night_sky.png<br />
| titletext = There's a mountain lion nearby, but it didn't notice you because it's reading Facebook.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by an OVERSIZED HOUSECAT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] are going out for a nighttime walk, to "{{w|Digital detox|unplug}}" and get away from technology, to ask the "big questions". However, they soon realize that they would have much preferred a walk ''with'' technology. Carrying a phone would help them with locating themselves using GPS and seeing where they are going using the phone flashlight, thus making them feel safer.<br />
<br />
The title text claims that technology is so omnipresent that even the threatening mountain lion has a Facebook account and ready internet access.<br />
<br />
The reference to mountain lions might be related to the declaration that Eastern Cougars were just officially declared extinct on the day this comic was published.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[Cueball and Megan are walking under the night sky.]<br />
<br />
Megan: The internet is so overwhelming for me these days. It feels like everyone I know is yelling all the time.<br />
<br />
[Frame is zoomed out. Stars are visible]<br />
<br />
Megan: That's why it's so nice to unplug. Leave the phones at home,go for a walk, and look up at the stars.<br />
<br />
Megan: It helps you focus on what really matters.<br />
<br />
[frame is normal again.]<br />
<br />
Cueball: Like "Where the hell are we?"<br />
<br />
Megan: And "Why did I leave my phone at home? It has my map and flashlight."<br />
<br />
Cueball: "Are there mountain lions around here? Did you hear a twig break?"<br />
<br />
Megan: Yeah, the big questions!<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:260:_The_Glass_Necklace&diff=150559Talk:260: The Glass Necklace2018-01-08T04:12:18Z<p>108.162.237.100: Just a suggestion</p>
<hr />
<div>All I gave my girl was a pearl necklace... [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 04:37, 27 August 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I believe the supposed "number 7565" ''may'' actually be a sound effect with poor kerning: "TSSS", the crackling of the electricity traveling down the line. Worth considering, I think. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 04:12, 8 January 2018 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1938:_Meltdown_and_Spectre&diff=1505001938: Meltdown and Spectre2018-01-05T22:16:54Z<p>108.162.237.100: cleaning up language</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1938<br />
| date = January 5, 2018<br />
| title = Meltdown and Spectre<br />
| image = meltdown_and_spectre.png<br />
| titletext = New zero-day vulnerability: In addition to rowhammer, it turns out lots of servers are vulnerable to regular hammers, too.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by an unpatched computer - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
This comic was inspired by the {{w|Meltdown (security vulnerability)|Meltdown}} and {{w|Spectre (security vulnerability)|Spectre}} bugs in certain processors. These vulnerabilites were disclosed to the public the week of this comic. The bugs made big news because they broke the "walls" between programs, in some circumstances allowing malware to steal secrets from normal, bug-free programs.<br />
<br />
The {{w|Trolley Problem}} is a thought experiment where an out-of-control trolley is heading to a junction which you have control over. Leaving the trolley as-is will cause it to kill multiple people stuck on the tracks, but switching the track will cause it to kill another person. It creates the ethical dilemma of passively causing multiple deaths versus actively causing one, and it has become widely known. Speculative execution in most CPU chips is where the processor, not knowing what the results of an operation will be, begins processing an instruction or instructions before the logic on whether or not it should execute is finished. Once a decision is made, it proceeds and discards unnecessary processing. This allows it to keep doing useful work while some slower decision is made. The "quantum" aspect of this is that in some versions of quantum theory, quantum-level particles take every possible path at once and the result is the sum of all of them.<br />
<br />
[[Ponytail]] describes the two vulnerabilities as abusing the computer's solution to its trolley problem. The computer creates "phantom trolleys" down each of the tracks, and malware can take advantage of the quantum-esque prediction method to figure out the data the phantom trolleys are using by testing the speed in which results are produced.<br />
<br />
Contrary to what the comic implies, in many cases both paths are not simultaneously taken during speculative execution. A {{w|Branch predictor}} may be used to select the most likely path, and the effects should be completely erased if the predicted path is incorrect. Both branch prediction and taking both paths, also known as eager evaluation, are considered speculative execution and are affected by these bugs.<br />
<br />
The {{w|Row Hammer}} problem is something entirely different. Computer memories are organized as a two-dimensional grid of rows and columns—and are physically constructed from tiny capacitors. By applying a pattern of memory access that rapidly changes a row of capacitors, you can cause charge to overflow to nearby rows and incorrectly change their states.<br />
<br />
Ponytail mentions that we suck at building "shared computers" because Rowhammer, Spectre, and Meltdown all break down the security divisions built between programs and between users. A hacker running a separate program in a separate account shouldn't be able to access your secrets, but these bugs allow them to. This is particularly dangerous for servers and the cloud, where different programs, websites, or even companies can be sharing the same hardware.<br />
<br />
The title text humorously states that as well as row hammer, computer servers also can be "hacked" by regular hammers, which would destroy them. A zero-day vulnerability is an attack that takes advantage of a vulnerability that was discovered that day, and hasn't been patched. This would imply that the Rowhammer vulnerability is what inspired someone to try taking a hammer to a server.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball and Ponytail are walking.]<br />
:Cueball: The Meltdown and Spectre exploits use "speculative execution?" What's that?<br />
:Ponytail: You know the trolley problem? Well, for a while now, CPUs have basically been sending trolleys down '''''both''''' paths, quantum-style, while awaiting your choice. Then the unneeded "phantom" trolley disappears.<br />
<br />
:[Ponytail framed alone, facing left. They have stopped walking.]<br />
:Ponytail: The phantom trolley isn't supposed to touch anyone, but it turns out you can still use it to do stuff.<br />
:Ponytail: And it can drive through walls.<br />
<br />
:[Cueball and Ponytail are standing, facing each other.]<br />
:Cueball: That sounds bad.<br />
:Ponytail: Honestly, I've been assuming we were doomed ever since I learned about Rowhammer.<br />
<br />
:Cueball: What's ''that''?<br />
:Ponytail: If you toggle a row of memory cells on and off really fast, you can use electrical interference to flip nearby bits and—<br />
:Cueball: Do we just suck at ... computers?<br />
:Ponytail: Yup. Especially shared ones.<br />
<br />
:[They resume walking to the right.]<br />
:Cueball: So you're saying the cloud is full of phantom trolleys armed with hammers.<br />
:Ponytail: ...Yes, that's exactly right.<br />
:Cueball: Okay. I'll, uh... install updates?<br />
:Ponytail: Good idea.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Computers]]</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1529:_Bracket&diff=147060Talk:1529: Bracket2017-10-25T15:12:52Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div>Interesting to me that no one has noted the order of the doctors. Doctor Octopus is from a comic, Doctor Manhattan is from a graphic novel and, trying to avoid spoilers here, the atomic bomb plays a key role in the story. The atomic bomb was the product of the Manhattan project (a fact not lost on Alan Moore), and the subject of the movie referenced by the next line, Dr Strangelove ("or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"). I can't believe this order is arbitrary. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.108|173.245.48.108]] 04:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
What's the connection between Rip Torn and Natalie Imbruglia? {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.183}}<br />
:Answer: Her song, Torn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV1XWJN3nJo-{{unsigned|Stumpy}} <br />
Rip Torn could have a preliminary match with Prof. Lance Rips <!--16:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Mitch Marks uchicago--> {{unsigned|Mitch Marks uchicago|16:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)|please sign your posts appropriately with the appropriate user and talk page links using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. the original signature was an inexistent template.}}<br />
<br />
Any pairings that you'd add, given the opportunity? Personally I always confuse [[wikipedia:Wilson Pickett|Wilson Pickett]] and [[wikipedia:Wilson Phillips|Wilson Phillips]]. [[User:Studley|Studley]] ([[User talk:Studley|talk]]) 08:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
[[wikipedia:Will Ferrell|Will Ferrell]] and [[wikipedia:Pharrell Williams|Pharrell Williams]] for me! -{{unsigned|Stumpy}}<br />
Bill Paxton should be followed by Bill Bixby... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.92|108.162.254.92]] 09:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
How about George Washington and George Washington Carver? and the George Washington Bridge?<br />
<br />
At one time, the White House had both a Donald Regan and a Ronald Reagan.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.190|108.162.215.190]] 17:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why do some first round pairings have more than two people? Beyoncé starts at the third round, so it can't be just because of the number of people. There has to be a joke in them but I don't see it. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.176|141.101.104.176]] 08:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
:Possibly an in-joke at the NCAA bracket's First Four round. Mister/Fred Astaire/Rogers is a more "traditional" reference to the First Four. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.103|108.162.219.103]] 10:32, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
: Beyoncé starts first, before the first round. She's singing the national anthem before the players start competing. She doesn't compete until the third road because she needs time to change clothes since you don't wear the same thing to sing the national anthem as you wear as a competitor. :-) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.189|108.162.215.189]] 04:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Perhaps it's worth adding to a trivia section that (assuming every person/thing has an equal chance of winning every matchup, Beyonce has the highest odds of winning (1/32 = 3.125%) while Kurt Russell, Russell Crowe, Russell Brand, and Russell Simmons are all tied for having the worst starting odds (1/256 = .391%).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.91|108.162.219.91]] 09:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I may be worth mentioning that the bracketing trees resemble hierarchical clustering dendrograms in which some string similarity metric was used as a distance function. {{unsigned ip|141.101.91.7}}<br />
<br />
Although the comic is formatted as a tournament bracket, there are hints that it is in fact a dendrogram based on string similarity, in a similar way to how trees of evolutionary relationships between proteins are formed. We see this especially in the "Russell" group where there is equal similarity between any name containing "Russell" and so that group is not resolved into two separate forks. If readers wish to recreate such an analysis for themselves they can take the text on [http://pastebin.com/DRqjaDHH here] paste it into a [http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalw2/ multiple sequence aligner], press Submit, then after processing click Phylogenetic Tree and scroll down. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.74|141.101.99.74]] 12:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Somewhat disagree. There is no "string similarity" between domino and checker. The connection between the names seems to be that there are games named Dominos and Checkers. They would not be together if it was based on strictly on string similarity or generated automatically by software without human intervention.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.190|108.162.215.190]] 17:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Is there any significance to the number of entries? 52 on the left side but only 51 on the right? {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.84}}<br />
<br />
Should it be noted at all that Chubby Checker's name was inspired by Fats Domino? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.121|108.162.215.121]] 21:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)Akiosama<br />
<br />
;Title text<br />
Changed the reference of the Title Text from Doctor Who (who is already listed in the comic) to Dr. Dre, as the phrasing of the Title Text seems like a very direct reference to the 2001 song "Forgot About Dre." {{unsigned|Conquistador}}<br />
:Probably would have been better to add it as an option since we're clearly far from certain -{{unsigned|Stumpy}} <br />
<br />
Why not Zoidberg? --RhyvenNZ [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.41|198.41.238.41]] 09:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Pretty sure Doctor Who is covered by "The Doctor". He doesn't go by "Who" in the show. He's just the Doctor. I think the missing doctor is House. {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.127}}<br />
<br />
Dr. Pepper, maybe? Does "staring" or "forgotten" have to do with it? {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.156}}<br />
<br />
Whatagainnow? {{unsigned ip|108.162.222.178}}<br />
<br />
Dr. Oz? Dr. Phil? Dr. Watson? Dr. Kavorkian? Dr. Seuss? Wasn't there a famous literary work, The Lost Island of Dr. Moreau? I agree that Dr. House and/or house calls could be a missing candidate for the bracket. But then, there are a ton of 'Sirs' that didn't make the list. <!--GAKDragon 06:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)GAKDragon--> {{unsigned|GAKDragon||please sign your posts appropriately with the appropriate user and talk page links using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}<br />
:[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Teeth_and_The_Electric_Mayhem Doctor Teeth!] [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 13:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
:Pete Docter? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.191|108.162.249.191]] 11:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Or is "The Doctor" http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/The_Doctor? {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.108}}<br />
:The Doctor is already in the bracket. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.49|141.101.99.49]] 10:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It's Doctor House - definitely and finally! {{unsigned|Raydleemsc}}<br />
<br />
Definitely "Doc" Brown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Brown {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.171}}<br />
<br />
::It's clearly Dr. Doolittle. Can't imagine why no one has realized this yet. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.193}}<br />
<br />
Could the joke simply be "there are way too many famous doctors", so even though it's arguably the most numerous category in the bracket, some are still "forgotten"? {{unsigned ip|108.162.254.164}}<br />
<br />
Probably not talking about doctor who, however he could be referencing The Silence, which is a an alien race, on that show, which you immediately forget about after losing sight of it. {{unsigned|KroniK907}}<br />
<br />
I immediately thought of Amy's wedding in Dr Who S5Ep13 where she needed to remember the doctor to bring him back. Too obscure? [[User:Blu003|Blu003]] ([[User talk:Blu003|talk]]) 13:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
:Hardly. You want obscure, try The Doctor's granddaughter. Yep, he had/has one. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.144|108.162.237.144]] 13:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Dr. Martha Jones, from Doctor Who? The Doctor Donna? Even the companions on the show are Doctors. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.178|108.162.222.178]] 03:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm disappointed that no one thought of Julius "Dr. J" Irving, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Erving given the similarity to a Basketball tournament style graphic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.165|108.162.219.165]] 17:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
When this comic first went up, I emailed xkcd the same day to say that "Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman" had been missed out. -- @WPSCrimsonshade 20:48, 12 April 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Y'know, I can't help but feel that this is a little to bland and unfinished for xkcd. I'm willing to bet that the picture updates with winners. May be sorely disappointed though. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.119|108.162.219.119]] 15:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can't help but feel that there's a better way to lay this explanation out, but I haven't been able to come up with it. Maybe some sort of table listing all the different groups, with people allowed to be in more than one group? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.232|141.101.98.232]] 15:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I personally don't love the large listing of people. It is a bit bland, but more importantly, it doesn't really show the linkages between the participants (though most people ought to be able to figure out these overt links Jeff Gordon... Jeff Daniels... it doesn't need explanation. That said, the current format doesn't quite demonstrate the chain-link nature of some matchups like:<br />
:*'''Body''' Shop<br />
:*'''Bath''' and '''Body''' Works<br />
:*Bed '''Bath''' & '''Beyond'''<br />
:*'''Beyond''' Thunderdome<br />
:* '''Beyon'''cé.<br />
:I wouldn't mind a format with that kind of bolding. I think that shows the chain of links better than the first to being grouped "businesses with the word "body" and the second two "things with the word beyond" and "Beyoncé" separately. Similarly, Jeff Daniels belongs to both the "Jeff"s and the "J. Daniels"es. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 15:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I wouldn't categorize Fats Domino and Chubby Checker (just) as games. Given that they're directly under Ryan Adams and Bryan Adams, I'd have identified them as 50's singers, with some physical similarities. [[User:KenWhitesell|KenWhitesell]] ([[User talk:KenWhitesell|talk]]) 16:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Agree. I put in the identification about games without knowing who Chubby Checker was.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.190|108.162.215.190]] 17:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
:Then you are one of today's lucky 10,000! [[1053]] {{w|Chubby Checker}}[[User:Zeimusu|Zeimusu]] ([[User talk:Zeimusu|talk]]) 21:32, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
;celebrity deathmatch<br />
<br />
This reminds me of Celebrity Deathmatch. Then have:<br />
* Charles Manson vs. Marilyn Manson<br />
* Backstreet Boys vs. Beastie Boys<br />
* The Three Stooges vs. The Three Tenors<br />
* Kevin Costner vs. Kevin Smith<br />
* John Cusack vs. John Malkovich<br />
* David Blaine vs. David Copperfield<br />
* Corey Feldman vs. Corey Haim<br />
* Jack Black vs. Jack White<br />
<br />
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Celebrity_Deathmatch_episodes {{unsigned|Bart9h}}<br />
<br />
Who is Jeff Gordan? There's an extremely famous NASCAR driver named Jeff Gordon, but I don't know of a Jeff Gordan. Significant or typo? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.182|108.162.238.182]] 16:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Where is Colin Furze? And Arnold Swarzenegger? And all other people I never heard of? -- [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.116|141.101.104.116]] 21:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
What about my favourite triple: Robbie Williams, Robin Williams and Robyn Williams? -- Ian N. {{unsigned ip|162.158.3.11}}<br />
<br />
And who can forget Dermot Mulroney and Dylan mcDermott?[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.164|108.162.254.164]] 09:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This is a major "Get Out Of My Head, Randall" comic for me. The day before this comic was posted, my friend and I were discussing a "Hunger Games" type simulation being done on 8chan involving loads and loads of characters across genres, and he had asked me about the probability of a particular match-up occurring with a desired outcome. It led to a long and detailed math conversation. The original match-up has been bumped out of existence, but [http://i.imgur.com/ESeMXOI.jpg this image] still lives on. Appropriately, the comic was posted on my birthday. 2spooky4me. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.177|108.162.210.177]] 06:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
: It reminds me of a song - The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WgT9gy4zQA [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I would have added Amanda Plummer. Will confuse Plummer with Palmer any day. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.191|108.162.249.191]] 23:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Just as well we don't have to deal with Paul Ryan - Ayn Rand - Rand Paul...Ron Paul, Les Paul, Saint Paul, John Paul, John Paul Jones...Wolfgang Pauli, Pollyanna...[[User:Taibhse|Taibhse]] ([[User talk:Taibhse|talk]]) 11:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Surprised Tommy Lee and Tommy Lee Jones aren't there. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.124|108.162.238.124]] 12:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Personally I think its pointless having the probabilities listed as if they mean something. We don't know what the competition is, but its almost certain that the result of say 'The Body Shop' vs Beyonce is '''not''' going to be a 50:50 probability. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 15:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Are the probabilities listed half what they should be? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.165|108.162.237.165]] 17:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Mister/Fred Astaire/Rogers also refers to "Mr. Rogers" of Mr. Rogers Neighborhood. I don't think there's a reference for the last combination, "Mister Astaire", other than to Fred Astaire.<br />
<br />
Kevin Kline vs. Calvin Klein would also have made a good match. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.88|108.162.229.88]] 20:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
What about Johnny Cash v Johnny Paycheck? To which one could then add Johnny Carson v Johnny Unitas v Johnny Depp? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.98|173.245.48.98]] 16:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
;Cory Doctorow described as "real person"?<br />
<br />
Well, yeah, but he's famous for some actual things. Perhaps "blogger and author" would better describe him. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.143|141.101.98.143]] 22:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
What about the Silents from series 6 of Doctor Who?<br />
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.144|108.162.250.144]] 04:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm disappointed John McCarthy isn't there. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.127|173.245.52.127]] 12:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
While I'm of the opinion that the doctor he is "forgetting" is CLEARLY Dr. Dre, I can see why we put the rest of the doctors on there since we don't know for sure. However, I'm removing the multiple long, rambling, and unnecessary references to The Doctor since he's already listed. [[User:Ul2006kevinb|Ul2006kevinb]] ([[User talk:Ul2006kevinb|talk]]) 16:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't agree with the removal to be honest. I agree it got a bit long-winded, but the Doctor still could be either one of the two (Doctor Who and ST:Voyager). To then ask the question "Doctor Who?" would be a very valid joke/ question imho. Also, the list is now again referring to him as "Dr. Who", whereas his name is simply "the Doctor". [[Special:Contributions/141.101.75.107|141.101.75.107]] 01:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Dr. Livingstone, I presume? --[[User:Eraoul|Eraoul]] ([[User talk:Eraoul|talk]]) 07:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This description probably needs to be updated with the factoid given in https://twitter.com/xkcdbracket/status/612221512133816320, if it can be verified [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.87|141.101.99.87]] 12:34, 20 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It should be updated with "[https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Q6Prudh-yLx_wV5NgR9_C35ZS5S8ZRM7BBWgfKET43k/viewform?c=0&w=1 The Doctor, alien explorer of time]" [https://twitter.com/xkcdbracket/status/611994813488099328] [[User:Dorus|Dorus]] ([[User talk:Dorus|talk]]) 09:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Am I the only one who thinks that the Transcript shouldn't be updated to match the unofficial Twitter Bracket feed? It should be on the page, but the transcript section should be related to the comic as it appears on xkcd.com only. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:47, 20 July 2015 (UTC)<br />
:No that is correct. The transcript is always only what occurs on the original comic at xkcd. I have corrected the error. If someone wish to do a trivia section on the result they should feel free to include that. I have linked to the twitter account in the explanation as it is interesting since Randall links to it on xkcd. The trivia entry could be linked from that paragraph. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: Two comments: First, if that is the case, then several pages need to be updated; the fact that wetriffs.com was created in response to [[305: Rule 34]] is not "in the comic itself" nor is the fact that Randall was responsible for (another example, [[1485: Friendship]] triggered a movement to delete the wikipedia Bromance article - and a third example [[1190: Time]] triggered multiple twitter followings and web communities that are referenced in the explanation); if we purge #xkcdbracket from this, we need to purge all of those too for consistency. Second, transcript is what happens in the comic, but explanation includes background and consequences of comic; this consequence was featured by Randall for several weeks, if that's not canon, then nothing is. I have moved the explanation to trivia as requested, but filled in the victor. If you want to remove, please discuss first and also clean up the other pages I just listed. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 15:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)<br />
::: More pages that need to be purged of references to internet consequences and followings inspired by comics: [[1185]] inspired someone to make stacksort, [[239]] inspired people to photoshop capes onto Cory Doctorow, [[Little Bobby Tables]] refers to a website created (not by Randall) to teach people to properly sanitize database inputs, [[1167]] inspired wikipedia vandalism that temporarily caused a page to be protected (as did [[1193]]) [[576]] inspired someone to create a service that does what is described, I'm sure that given 10 more minutes I could find 10 more examples. '''None''' of these were featured as banners on the xkcd.com page by Randall and yet '''all''' are in explainxkcd.com. Please remove all of those references from explainxkcd.com (as well as fixing [[305]], [[1485]], and [[1190]] '''before''' deleting the reference to #xkcdbracket on this page. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 16:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)<br />
::::I do not know what I (or Pudder) wrote to get this response from Djbrasier. I agreed that the transcript should not be updated to match the brackets on the twitter account, and that the results written in the transcript (full results with results of all individual matches, that I removed when updating the transcript to look more like the comic) should be in the trivia if anyone wished them to be on this page. I do not think there is anything wrong (and also wrote that) with linking to the bracket. I actually linked my self to that bracket on twitter. And I don't even think the link should be a trivia item as it is important since Randall links to it. But the results (apart from the final, which is fine to have in the main explanation) is not for the explanation and definitely not for the transcript. So all the other pages and talk you write about purging explain xkcd from what happens because of xkcd has nothing to do with the subject here. And of course these thing should be a part of this page. So we agree on that! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)<br />
<br />
NOOOOO!! I bet everything on Scallions![[User:Saspic45|Saspic45]] ([[User talk:Saspic45|talk]]) 11:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
No love for Sandra Day O'Connor and Sinead O'Connor? They're practically the same person!</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1896:_Active_Ingredients_Only&diff=146092Talk:1896: Active Ingredients Only2017-09-29T14:45:41Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
Seems Randall has a cold again, like two years ago... :D --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:03, 29 September 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why would taking a medication without binding agents be dangerous? Also, would something like a gelcap count as an inactive ingredient? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.153|162.158.62.153]] 13:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)<br />
: Yes. If an ingredient is not intended to produce a therapeutic effect on the body, then it is inactive: "Inactive ingredients are components of a drug product that do not increase or affect the therapeutic action of the active ingredient" https://www.google.com/search?q=inactive+ingredient -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)<br />
: Binders hold the tablet together, so that instead of taking a powder and possibly missing some grains that fall away or stick to something (which would be dangerous if you need all the medicine for some life threatening condition) you can take the whole tab and get exactly the intended amount of active ingredient. They are also used to make tabs with minuscule quantities of active ingredient larger so that instead of fumbling with an incredibly tiny tablet it is large enough to be easily held and seen, and since the explanation just says "serious problem" not necessarily "dangerous" I could see having to take a single grain of sand sized medicine as being problematic.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 14:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1882:_Color_Models&diff=145026Talk:1882: Color Models2017-09-06T17:00:57Z<p>108.162.237.100: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
For those who want to know a bit more about color, [https://www.handprint.com/LS/CVS/color.html this site] is a good start. [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 15:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
This comic shows the trend of having a simple and satisfactory explanation for something, and the exasperation with repeatedly realizing the inadequacy of the explanation, making revisions, and having a more complex yet still inadequate model.<br />
<br />
As Randall began his schooling, he learned that mixing the primary colours of pigment (red, blue, and yellow) together he could create almost any colour, so colour must be a combination of those 3 colours.<br />
<br />
He also learned about rainbows, and that the colours in the rainbow were just different wavelengths of light. Somehow these different wavelengths created unique colours. <br />
<br />
As Randall got older, philosophy and a discussion on perception came into play, and Randall came to the realization that his experiences are analogous to but not necessarily the same as his peers.<br />
<br />
As he got older, Randall learned about colour spaces as used in pigments, light, and printing, possibly from computer science (Red, Green, Blue; Red, Yellow, Blue; Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Key) as well as the physics of electromagnetic rays and the biology of vision, understanding that visible light is a small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum - one crudely interpreted by the 3 types of cones in our eyeballs.<br />
<br />
Randall then learned about the opponent process model, wherein the signal from cones are not interpreted individually, but in difference to one another. "Responses to one color of an opponent channel are antagonistic to those to the other color. That is, opposite opponent colors are never perceived together – there is no "greenish red" or "yellowish blue"." (from wikipedia)<br />
<br />
After that, Randall comes to understand the modeling of colour spaces and the design and limits of human visual perception - despite only having three cones, color space cannot be made into a triangle and still cover the gamut of human colour experience. <br />
<br />
Klein manifolds are beyond me, you'll have to fill in something about that.<br />
<br />
Eventually, the modeling becomes so complex (and yet still unsatisfactory) that Randall hopes it becomes someone else's problem. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.5|108.162.238.5]] 15:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)MagnusVortex<br />
<br />
I'm familiar with klein manifolds, they're peculiar 4D dimensional topological objects related to mobius strips. I have no Idea how they might relate to color, and doing a search for "a hyperdimensional four-sided quantum Klein manifold" returned pictures of bicycles... <br />
<br />
It might be good to point out in the explaination that he progresses from a dual nature of color (light, and paint) at the beginning and then trends to a unified explaination of color. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.179|172.68.142.179]] 18:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC) Sam<br />
<br />
: Yes those are great looking bikes and are called Klein Quantum racing bikes... so Google did its job of keyword matching. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 20:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
;The beauty of explainxkcd<br />
The explanation of this comment is a great example of why this site is delightful — and nigh-invaluable! Thanks, regulars, for doing the work to help us understand all this.{{unsigned ip|108.162.246.101}}<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
Text explanation<br />
<br />
I think the explanation of the text is missing an important point. It starts like it's about the philosophal question of "the same color for everybody", but ends with a very mundane explanation, which I think quite funny.<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.9|141.101.69.9]] 21:18, 28 August 2017 (UTC) Loïc<br />
<br />
Yes, the description needs to include the fact that the top reference to color being unknowable is a reference to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia qualia]. The brain of one individual may interpret colors differently than the brain of another individual, but since we would all use the same words for our interpretations of the same wavelengths, we can't really know if how I see blue is the same as how you see blue, hence that reference. But then in the tag, he has swapped out the reason for our different interpretations for the same color, blaming our browsers instead of our brains.<br />
<br />
[[User:DarkJMKnight|DarkJMKnight]] ([[User talk:DarkJMKnight|talk]]) 11:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Exactly this. Although really that only relates to our experience of colour, so I'm not sure how much relevance it has to the colour mixing track, despite the arrow. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.106|141.101.98.106]] 13:11, 29 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I added a comment about qualia, which could probably be improved upon. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.47.66|172.68.47.66]] 14:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
"As the 4th dimension is time, the color space would probably change all the time."<br />
<br />
...no. No. I'm removing that. Just... no.<br />
<br />
[[User:Hakr14|Hakr14]] ([[User talk:Hakr14|talk]]) 23:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
:Just to explain to the people that aren't engineers, physicists, or mathematicians; while "the three dimensions" are commonly thought of as height/width/depth, with time often used as the 4th dimension, there is nothing that requires "dimensions" to refer to those properties. For example: a flat plane with a temperature distribution could be said to have three dimensions (height/width/temperature), or a cube could be said to have four (height/width/depth/temperature)[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 17:00, 6 September 2017 (UTC) <br />
<br />
<br />
Isn't the title text a reference to [https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=44872 that pretty old Chromium bug]? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.22.4|162.158.22.4]] 13:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't think Randall even scratched the surface. Ask "What is Yellow?"...it's the almost pure frequency of light given off by a sodium lamp at 589nm wavelength. Then, take a digital photo of a sodium lamp and look at the picture on an LED monitor. The color looks the same...but now you're looking at a mixture of red and green LED's - so you're seeing two frequencies at 660nm and 530nm...there is no yellow light. So, you ask yourself - is it the case that mixing two frequencies that the eye can see creates the illusion of a colour between the two?<br />
<br />
Well, what color do you see when you mix red and blue? Magenta...right? But what color is midway between red and blue? That's Green. So the difference between Magenta and Green *should* be about the same as the difference between "Sodium lamp yellow" and "Picture of sodium lamp yellow".<br />
<br />
The Mantis Shrimp can see 12 'primary colors' and is sensitive to the plane of polarization of the light. We see 3 primaries and have no clue about polarization.<br />
<br />
: That's not true. We can see Haidinger's Brush. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haidinger%27s_brush . [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.34|198.41.238.34]] 10:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Humans are all essentially color blind.<br />
[[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 16:55, 29 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
There is no mention of the RGB/RYB/CYMK issue in the explenation [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.211|162.158.111.211]] 06:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
What if, what you see as blue when you look at the sky in real life, I see as a slightly different blue, because the different web browsers we've been using have retrained our eyes to perceive meatspace differently? [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 20:57, 2 September 2017 (UTC)</div>108.162.237.100https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1807:_Listening&diff=1369071807: Listening2017-03-10T19:46:17Z<p>108.162.237.100: Removed incomplete tag</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1807<br />
| date = March 6, 2017<br />
| title = Listening<br />
| image = listening.png<br />
| titletext = Sure, you could just ask, but this also takes care of the host gift thing.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This comic depicts [[Cueball]] and [[Ponytail]] welcoming [[Black Hat]] and [[Danish]] to their house. Black Hat immediately talks to {{w|Amazon Alexa}} to order two tons of {{w|creamed corn}}. This would be quite expensive (around $10,000), and the hosts would be charged because it was ordered on their {{w|Amazon Echo}} device. It would also be a serious inconvenience, as the purchase would be quite bulky and useless, seeing as an average person would have very little use for two tons of creamed corn.<br />
<br />
The caption claims that this is an effort to find systems recording conversations, such as Alexa or {{w|Google Home}}, for the security of the ''guests'', so they aren't being monitored by an always-on listening device without their consent (at least not without any consequences). However, because Black Hat is the one coming up with this it's more likely his motives are on the sadistic side, and it's more likely a warning for the hosts to turn off any voice-activated systems before having guests come over, so that the guests don't take advantage of them.<br />
<br />
(It should also be noted that such purchasing services encourage the user to set up a PIN number to stem off such exploits)<br />
<br />
A concerned "visitor" may also want to test for voice-activated systems when near any persons carrying an iPhone or Android mobile device, because these are also always-on listening devices. "Hey Siri" and "Ok Google" voice activation use the same technology as "Alexa" and "Echo" detection.<br />
<br />
The title text says that this takes care of the "host gift thing", referring to the custom where house guests make gift to the hosts. However, Black Hat is making the hosts pay for it, so it can be as expensive as he wants, thus making this yet another example of his being a [[classhole]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Black Hat and Danish enter Cueball and Ponytail's house. They have hardly passed the door mat, with the door still open showing the road and another house outside.]<br />
:Ponytail: Hello, welcome to our house!<br />
:Black Hat: Thanks for inviting us!<br />
:Black Hat: Alexa, order two tons of creamed corn.<br />
:Black Hat: Alexa, confirm purchase.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the frame:]<br />
:When visiting a new house, it's good to check whether they have an always-on device transmitting your conversations somewhere.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
*Assuming a standard can of 14.75 oz (418 g) and Black Hat's order was in short tons the order would consist of 4339 cans. Consuming one per day it would last for approx. twelve years. But it's doubtful that the expiry date would be that long.<br />
*In a recent [http://www.npr.org/2016/12/31/507670072/amazon-echo-murder-case-renews-privacy-questions-prompted-by-our-digital-footpri court case] authorities believed that an Amazon Echo may have recorded the identity of a murder suspect, leading to a debate about the privacy and safety implications of such devices.<br />
*Another recent [http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/7/14200210/amazon-alexa-tech-news-anchor-order-dollhouse event] resulted in Alexa ordering several people unwanted doll houses.<br />
*Another comic about testing if someone is listening is [[525: I Know You're Listening]]. Just as Black Hat may just speak without knowing for sure that there is an active Alexa. Cueball in the old comic also just speak out in case there are someone listening, in that case real surveillance, but as can be seen in the entry here above Alexa may just end up being used like that later.<br />
*Usually Cueball is paired with [[Megan]], but since Black Hat's girlfriend Danish looks like Megan but with longer hair, this makes is sensible to choose Ponytail as Cueballs partner here.<br />
*In a previous comic, [[1559: Driving]], Black Hat took also took advantage of a cutting-edge AI&mdash;there, a self-driving car&mdash;by making it drive across the country without its owner or any passenger. And already back in [[596: Latitude]] he took advantage (of course) of people who constantly kept programs running on their phones that could track their movements.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]<br />
[[Category:Food]]</div>108.162.237.100