explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

1132: Frequentists vs. Bayesians

2014-04-11T02:37:11Z

108.162.245.111: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1132
| date = November 9, 2012
| title = Frequentists vs. Bayesians
| image = frequentists_vs_bayesians.png
| titletext = 'Detector! What would the Bayesian statistician say if I asked him whether the--' [roll] 'I AM A NEUTRINO DETECTOR, NOT A LABYRINTH GUARD. SERIOUSLY, DID YOUR BRAIN FALL OUT?' [roll] '... yes.'}}

==Explanation==
This is another comic about the accuracy of presidential election predictions that used Bayesian statistical models, such as Nate Silver's ''538'' and Professor Sam Wang's ''PEC''. Thomas Bayes studied conditional probability - the likelihood that one event is true when given information about some other related event. From {{w|Bayes Theorem|Wikipedia}}: "Bayesian interpretation expresses how a subjective degree of belief should rationally change to account for evidence".

In the comic, the likelihood that the detector is lying is much higher than the likelihood of the Sun exploding. Therefore, one should conclude that a single "yes" result is probably a false positive. The bit about "p < 0.05" comes from a naive interpretation of {{w|P-value}}, a scientific research standard where a result is presumed to be valid if there is less than a 5% chance that it is merely random coincidence. There is a 1/36 chance of rolling two sixes on 2d6.

The title and the last two frames suggest that "frequentist" interpretation of statistics is somehow wrong, which is not actually the case. The Bayesian interpretation and the frequentist interpretation are not mutually exclusive and neither is wrong. It's the misuse of P values that causes the character in the panel labeled "Frequentist Statistician" to conclude that the sun has exploded, not the use of frequentist statistics. (In particular, P-values are usually used only for numerical values that are known to fall along a specific distribution – in this case, it is used to determine the significance of a discrete event, which is wrong.) In fact, the labels on the bottom two panels were applied as an after-thought, according to Munroe's post [http://web.archive.org/web/20130117080920/http://andrewgelman.com/2012/11/16808/#comment-109366 here]; he states his intention was "to illustrate a case where naïve application of that significance test can give a result that’s obviously nonsense."

[[File:Nate Silver Tweet.png|.@JoeNBC: If you think it's a toss-up, let's bet. If Obama wins, you donate $1,000 to the American Red Cross. If Romney wins, I do. Deal?|right]]

The final panel is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the absurdity of the premise. If the sun did explode, he won't need to pay out the bet because the Earth and everyone on it would be destroyed. But if it didn't explode, then he'll win $50. It also likely refers to a well-publicized bet that Nate Silver tried to make with Joe Scarborough regarding the outcome of the election:

The title text refers to a classic series of logic puzzles known as {{w|Knights_and_Knaves#Question_3|Knights and Knaves}}, where there are two guards in front of two exit doors, one of which is real and the other leads to death. One guard is a liar and the other tells the truth. The visitor doesn't know which is which, and is allowed to ask one question to one guard. The solution is to ask either guard what the other one would say is the real exit, then choose the opposite. Two such guards were featured in the 1986 Jim Henson movie ''[[246|Labyrinth]]'', which is referenced in the text.

==Transcript==
:Did the sun just explode? (It's night, so we're not sure)

:[Two statisticians stand alongside an adorable little computer that is suspiciously similar to K-9 that speaks in Westminster typeface]
:Frequentist Statistician: This neutrino detector measures whether the sun has gone nova.
:Bayesian Statistician: Then, it rolls two dice. If they both come up as six, it lies to us. Otherwise, it tells the truth.
:Frequentist Statistician: Let's try. [to the detector] Detector! Has the sun gone nova?
:Detector: ''roll'' YES.

:Frequentist Statistician:
:Frequentist Statistician: The probability of this result happening by chance is 1/36=0.027. Since p<0.05, I conclude that the sun has exploded.

:Bayesian Statistician:
:Bayesian Statistician: Bet you $50 it hasn't.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Physics]]

1351: Metamaterials

2014-04-04T04:47:34Z

108.162.245.111: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 1351
| date = April 4, 2014
| title = Metamaterials
| image = metamaterials.png
| titletext = If I developed a hue-shifting metamaterial, I would photobomb people's Instagram pics with a sheet of material that precisely undid the filter they were using.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Feels incomplete, and the title text needs to be explained.}}
Metamaterials cause light passing through them to shift. The exact color it shifts to varies based on the desing of the material. The title text references this with Randel pondering making a meta material that reverses the effect of instagram filters, likely by placing the material between the camera and the subject, just before the picture is taken.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
:[Picture of a red violet.]
:Megan (off-screen): Violets are red.

:[Picture of a blue rose.]
:Megan (off-screen): And roses are blue.

:[Megan holding something in front of the two flowers. Cueball stands nearby.]
:Megan: When metamaterials

:[Megan moves the object away from the flowers.]
:Megan: Alter their hue.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]

Talk:1127: Congress

2014-01-24T00:10:02Z

108.162.245.111: /* Definition of Liberal */

Being a stupidly over political (please don't ask me here, this is an xkcd wiki not reddit) kinda guy, this one really interests me. Another one of those amazing visualizations of real-world facts xkcd is so great at. I have no idea what one might write for an explanation that would be useful. Everything is explained in pretty thorough fashion right on the panel... {{unsigned|Renegade4dio}}
:Well, there's always the transcript for us to <strike>waste time</strike> work on. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 12:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

== Congress as check ==

Perhaps a pedantic point, but I couldn't leave the description describing Congress as simply a check on the president. That would imply that the president has free reign (literally) and that Congress only acts (or, more often, doesn't act) to veto the president. That is a much more accurate description of the president's role in legislation (or of a pre-modern English Parliament). {{unsigned|208.32.120.10}}

==Typo==
There's a typo on the right-hand side of the comic around 1952 - "''Other than these few years after the war; the House [was] under control Democratic control for the entire period ...''". The "was" is missing. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 15:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

== definition of conservative is pejorative ==

Conservatives are not interested in preserving wealth amongst those who have it - they are interested in creating as many opportunities to create wealth as possible by reducing unwanted government regulation and returning to constitutional limitations (aka 10th ammendment) on Federal power. A different view of liberty and rights than what liberals maintain, but highly supported - I find your definition to be highly pejorative. [[User:Ghaller825|Ghaller825]] ([[User talk:Ghaller825|talk]]) 18:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

:That went completely over my head, but you're entirely welcome to change it if the definition in the article bothers you. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 09:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

::Perhaps the segment could be changed to say "conservatives believe the government should not interfere with a person's wealth", or something very similar. The resistence to government involvement seems to be more consistent across the various degrees of the modern conservative movement. I'll admit that my suggested statement is also false, because almost everyone believes there should be some amount of taxes, and taxes affect wealth. However, it should be more palatable to the political ideology.

:I understand your offense, Ghaller. On the other hand, the current phrasing using "making wealth" is also a loaded term, as many factory workers would feel that they are "the ones who make it" more than the CEOs, but are certainly not getting more money. I'm not saying I agree with that perspective, just that it's a suggestive statement, and this is not the forum to have an endless debate over it. The unsigned comment above me has the best compromise in my opinion, so I will implement it. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 18:12, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

==Errors==
I notice the following: (1) George H.W. Bush is shown as serving in the Senate. He never made it to the Senate, just the House. (2) Abraham Lincoln appears to be shown as serving in the House for about seven years. He only was there for one term (two years). --[[Special:Contributions/99.14.234.119|99.14.234.119]] 02:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

It also lists John A. Garfield in the House from 1862 until his election -- it is James A Garfield, not John.

It lists Abraham Lincoln (and the Republican Party of Lincoln's time in general) as right-leaning, even though it's widely accepted that the Republicans of that era (whose base was made up mostly of Northern abolitionists) were the more liberal party, and the Democrats (whose base was comprised in large part by Southern slave-owners) the more conservative. {{unsigned|140.247.0.73}}

==Definition of Liberal==

While in the US, liberal might mean left-wing, in the UK it's pretty central and in Australia it's right-wing. Go figure.--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
:Classical liberalism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism] is very different from American liberalism; Americans would recognize it more as Libertarianism. --[[User:Prooffreader|Prooffreader]] ([[User talk:Prooffreader|talk]]) 09:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

The socialists are well-known for hijacking the good-sounding misleading names. Such as "liberal" in America or "bolshevik" (a made-up word meaning literally "majoritan", a member of majority) in Russia. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 00:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

==Typo==

In the "How Ideology Is Calculated" section, I note "acccounting".--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

==Conservative?==

He didn't exactly say that Conservatives are interested in preserving wealth amongst those who have it; I think the implication is that "if you made it, you should get to keep it" (or as much of it as possible, hence lower taxes). One ''consequence'' of this is that the ''distribution'' of wealth tends to remain static, in that the rich stay rich and the poor stay (relatively) poorer. Whether or not that consequence is an intentional one is perhaps in the eye of the pejoratively-inclined beholder :-)--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

:I made an edit to that effect, but it appears to have been wiped out by another editor calling it "right-wing trolling". If you would like to try re-wording it, please do. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 05:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

::By changing just a little bit I think I removed most of the negative connotation.[[User:Bugefun|Bugefun]] ([[User talk:Bugefun|talk]]) 05:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Arteries==
Kind of unrelated but the diagram to me looks sort of like arteries and veins, with the red and blue. And the branches look like how they branch off the heart and stuff. [[User:Bugefun|Bugefun]] ([[User talk:Bugefun|talk]]) 05:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Red inside blue and vice versa==
What do the red strands inside the blue section and the blue strands inside the red section represent? It doesn't seem to be explained anywhere.
[[Special:Contributions/199.27.200.82|199.27.200.82]] 14:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

:Red on the blue side represents "Conservative Democrats" and Blue on the red side represents "Liberal Republicans". Confusing a bit, but so are both those political terms (lol). It is stated (in small text) on the top right diagram of the comic--[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 14:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Left vs right - or why this comic is stupid==
The traditional definition of left vs right (people attribute all sorts of things to it these days) is the support of change (hence the names progressives vs conservatives, or radicals vs reactionaries). The terminology comes from France where those that advocated reforms to government sat on the left of the chamber and those that wanted to do such things as restore the monarchy sat on the right. Your traditional Burkian conservative (smidgen to the right of the centre) would accept change is inevitable, but must be controlled. To the right of that people that want to maintain the status quo, further right people that want to go back to some "better time". To the left you get the, let change happen as it comes, further left lets make change a "good thing", to the furthest left "lets force change". A large part of the Marxist philosophy is that not only is communism desirable, but inevitable as according to Marx that is the final destination of all societies. Now to my point. Over time the parties have switched sides and often will be left on one issue and right on another. Often the parties themselves were divided (look at the civil rights act's passage) To simply say Democratic Party has always been left and the Republicans have always been is such a gross simplification that is renders the whole image a farce. [[Special:Contributions/192.43.227.18|192.43.227.18]] 01:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that our congress (and law in general) is too complex. We are tying to keep outdated laws relevant by using an endless series of exceptions (legally called amendments). I hope someday we will be able to scrap the whole thing and simplify our laws so that our children do not have to spend up to a quarter of their lives learning our mistakes. XKCD, please help us simplify something like law so you don't have to waste your time visualizing something as broken as our understanding of it. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 18:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1116: Traffic Lights

2014-01-23T23:16:48Z

108.162.245.111:

I doubt that this comic carries any deeper meaning. [[Special:Contributions/108.233.253.211|108.233.253.211]] 16:29, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Traffic signals really are one of the most inscrutable inventions to ever be made. I mean, red means stop, yellow means caution, green means go. Unless you're in a turn lane, which means you have to watch for the green arrow, if there is one, or wait for an opening. Unless you're turning right, which is permitted to turn at any time providing there aren't any cars. Unless there's a sign that says "No Right Turn On Red". There's also the crazy cities that have special right turn lights. Then there's the intersections that have a sign for each lane telling what can and cannot be done. Or, if you're really lucky one of those intersections that has the LED screen that dynamically changes what the lane can and cannot do. And to top it all off, the Colorado Department of Transportation (as well as a few other states I'm sure) are testing out a 4-stage left turn light to increase the safety of drivers. [https://www.auroragov.org/cs/groups/public/documents/document/003604.pdf] Yes, you read that pamphlet correctly. There is a special 4th light, just to blink yellow, because you couldn't just make the yellow light blink, like it does anyway after 9pm. No. There has to be a whole special light that indicates when a left-turn-er must use special caution to turn.

: Note that New York City doesn't allow right turns on red, unless a sign is posted that says otherwise. I suppose this helps reduce the incidence of pedestrians being run into/over. You might also think it helps keep vehicles out of crosswalks, but it doesn't. [[User:CityZen|CityZen]] ([[User talk:CityZen|talk]]) 01:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

: What about turning left on red from a one way street onto another one way street? I don't know how prevalent that is but it's fairly common in downtown Columbus Ohio (my locale) and to a lesser extent some smaller towns around here. [[Special:Contributions/74.218.18.210|74.218.18.210]] 12:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
::First time commenting. Not sure about the reply syntax. But @ Ohio person: Up here in Michigan, we have supposedly special U-turns on divided highways (not to be confused with expressways; I'm just referring to the main business roads.) If there is a light, you can treat it like turning right, even though it is an apparent left-turn and an actual u-turn. "So long as you don't cross a lane of traffic, it is legal to turn if the lane is clear unless posted otherwise." From my driver's ed instructor. This does not apply to the second turn lane. I cannot tell you how many times I've been honked at for obeying the law and not turning right from the left lane. Sorry for any terrible typing or messups. I'm doing this on my phone. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 08:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Dartania

Nope. I'm done driving. Bring on the self-driving cars, people are officially idiots. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
: There is a problem with a blinking yellow arrow. Blinking yellow is already used. It means you have the right of way, but the other direction may proceed as well. What is wanted here is blinking red, which means that you stop, but may proceed, as someone else has the right of way. As for adding a fourth light, this just confuses things even more, particularly with respect to color blind individuals. Having said that, Virginia's variant is to have lights with both left arrows and solid greens. If it is green arrow, you have the right of way, while solid green means the other direction also has a green. There is almost always a sign reading "left turn yield on <solid-green-circle>" [[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 18:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

::so the blinking yellow left arrow generally means the same as a round green light - you can go when it's clear, but the opposite traffic has a green light too. I love this idea because a lot of the time where there is a separate left-turn signal, there are advanced lefts for both ways, and then left turners get a red left arrow and have to stop while people going straight get a green - so even where there's no oncoming traffic, you can't turn. this way, you just lose your "advance" status and go back to the regular rule of "turn if you can, otherwise you end up turning as the lights go yellow"

::I think what Lcarsos is pointing out if you check the PDF link, is that the new left-turn lane has 4 lights, all of which are left-arrow shaped. Thus, his point is why couldn't they make the 2nd light (yellow left arrow) blink, instead of installing a third light which is also a yellow left arrow whose job is to blink?

::I can think of a few possible reasons - first, perhaps an all-blinking light has different bulbs which are more efficient for blinking and won't burn out as much; second, because they want to distinguish between the two lights more strongly (i.e. if you glance over between blinks, you don't have to wait a moment to see if it will blink - if you see the 3rd light up, you know it's going to blink without waiting for it to actually blink); similarly, I suppose there could be colour blindness issues where they want to make it clear which light is which.

::PS: Right on Red is more common in north america than other places, but even here there are a few exceptions that do not allow right turns on red lights. New York City is one. Montreal is another. Most of Mexio is a third. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 21:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

::You can also white a white 'cigar' light that is inteded for busses only.

:From the first traffic light in London 1868 until standardization in the 1920s people tried out many crazy lights (see http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/T-VT.1970.23426) including---literally---bells and whistles to announce changes. It seems this phase is still not really over.[[Special:Contributions/134.169.34.172|134.169.34.172]] 10:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... not one to do the actual analysis, I still wonder whether there could be some message encoded in the pattern of lights -- in binary ASCII, baudot, Morse, or something. Hmm... [[Special:Contributions/208.54.40.227|208.54.40.227]] 19:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This explanation mentions a lot of hands where no hands exist. "The right-hand lane," for example. This is a pet peeve of mine. People just adding the word, "hand" randomly into a sentence. It's superfluous and it's annoying. It should be removed before someone slaps whoever did it with their right-hand hand.[[Special:Contributions/173.25.252.230|173.25.252.230]] 14:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

:I believe "right-hand" is used to differentiate "the opposite from the left" from "the opposite of wrong". If I say "get in the right lane", there is a chance for confusion and/or a cliche joke. If I say "get in the right-hand lane", my meaning is clearer.{{unsigned|Tryc}}

;Red and yellow

In Poland you can sometimes stumble upon '''red and yellow''' -- while yellow alone means that there shortly would be a red, and you can proceed if you are at or almost at crossing, but stop otherwise, red and yellow is to mean that there shortly would be green (go), and to prepare oneself. But it is quite rare. [[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 06:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

:In Germany all traffic lights behave this way. [[User:Joha.ma|Joha.ma]] ([[User talk:Joha.ma|talk]]) 07:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

::At least some lights in Czech behave this way too. -- [[Special:Contributions/89.177.52.2|89.177.52.2]] 08:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

This is the way ALL UK lights behave.

Some lights in the US use '''red and yellow''' to mean that a pedestrian is crossing, although I've only seen this when the light is blinking red/yellow to start with (yes, I've seen full 3-bulb traffic lights that are only used to flash red/yellow). [[User:Zer0keefie|Zer0keefie]] ([[User talk:Zer0keefie|talk]]) 11:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, here is the difference between the US and Europe:

Originally I believe all the traffic lights went through the sequence (1) green in one direction, red in another, (2) yellow in both directions, meaning "clear off the intersection" for the first direction and "get your car into gear" in the second direction, (3) red in one direction, green in another.

There are two problems though: first, when the green changes to yellow, people try to squeeze through (and it may even be difficult to stop if you're traveling at speed), second, when the red changes to yellow, people who are not stopped but carrying speed are trying to squeeze through earlier while the light is still yellow (this gets worse if the yellow is long and the incoming drivers don't know if it's after red or after green), and collisions ensue.

The solutions for these problems taken in US and Europe are different. In Europe the yellow-after-red is shown together with the red still on, strongly suggesting "no, you may not enter", and in the other direction the green often blinks once 10 seconds before it switches to yellow. In US there is no yellow-after-red, the red changes directly to green, and yellow always goes only after green (the automatic transmissions being prevalent, there is no need to shift into gear). The yellow is often long, to let the traffic on the fast roads to clear off, Also, there is usually a period of red in all directions which lets the stragglers clear off the intersection for sure before the other side goes green. This is why slipping on red just after yellow had ended is considered no big deal in US and a major no-no in Europe. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 23:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

In Brazil some cities have greens and red in a row, and they decrease to indicate how long the green or red will last. something like http://www.guiasjp.com/fotos_noticias/foto_1165344648.8822.jpg [[Special:Contributions/189.125.162.182|189.125.162.182]] 20:22, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
In BRazil too, in Goiânia there's a nice one here for pedestrians, with leds, that show an animated pedestrian walking and when the time is running out HE RUNS FASTER! Like, it's about to go green for the cars, but feel free to cross... IF YOU'RE FAST!

In Tianjin China they have a traffic signal that is a single bar of light. If it is green it starts subtracting bar length segments. When there is about a quarter left it turns yellow and then red. It then start subtracting bar length segments from the other end until it gets to about a quarter length and then turns green again. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bob406/3428844012

;Obvious

It's how traffic engineers troll you when you are going the wrong way on a one-way. Learn to read signs!

;Reference to previous comic

This comic has some tongue in cheek self reference to [[277: Long Light]]. #Meta And definite trolling, by [[Randall]]

:What about [[781: Ahead Stop]]?

:Turing Machine?

Any chance it is one?

;Etc

I was almost expected to see the Konami code in the left light, though I'm not sure how "B A Start" would have been shown. [[User:CityZen|CityZen]] ([[User talk:CityZen|talk]]) 01:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

;Music

I am no musician, but I can't help but wonder if there could be a hidden music chart in there somehow.
Also, if you want confusing, try understanding parking signs in Montreal.

:Might be, but depending on what pitches or sounds you assign to the lights, you could get pretty much every degree of harmony or cacophony you want. - Another possible music reference: Anybody reminded of Hendrix' "The Wind Cries Mary"? "The traffic lights, they turn, uh, blue tomorrow." [[Special:Contributions/89.0.230.165|89.0.230.165]] 08:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

;And You thought 4 stage was bad enough

Here In BC, in older installations, and I'm not sure whether any still exist, there used to be lights with 5 stages. It wasn't really any different than the standard red-yellow-green-turn combo you generally see where the turning light may come on, it just had the yellow arrow shown when the turning arrow is about to expire in it's own lamp. It behaves pretty expectantly, but it looks very imposing.

;Race cars

The second light has quite a resemblance to the "christmas tree" that governs the start of a drag race, where the lights change colors according to a pattern <nowiki>http://www</nowiki> dot nhra dot com/nhra101/basics.aspx [[Special:Contributions/69.121.10.82|69.121.10.82]] 04:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I sat and watched this increasingly surreal show for about three minutes, then I broke down laughing when one of the lights turned purple. [[Special:Contributions/174.239.196.155|174.239.196.155]] 06:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

In UK, ALL lights go Red -> red AND yellow -> green -> yellow on it's own -> red again. Red and yellow means it's about to go green and yellow on it's own means it's about to go red. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.246|141.101.98.246]] 21:43, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1116: Traffic Lights

2014-01-23T23:15:14Z

108.162.245.111:

I doubt that this comic carries any deeper meaning. [[Special:Contributions/108.233.253.211|108.233.253.211]] 16:29, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Traffic signals really are one of the most inscrutable inventions to ever be made. I mean, red means stop, yellow means caution, green means go. Unless you're in a turn lane, which means you have to watch for the green arrow, if there is one, or wait for an opening. Unless you're turning right, which is permitted to turn at any time providing there aren't any cars. Unless there's a sign that says "No Right Turn On Red". There's also the crazy cities that have special right turn lights. Then there's the intersections that have a sign for each lane telling what can and cannot be done. Or, if you're really lucky one of those intersections that has the LED screen that dynamically changes what the lane can and cannot do. And to top it all off, the Colorado Department of Transportation (as well as a few other states I'm sure) are testing out a 4-stage left turn light to increase the safety of drivers. [https://www.auroragov.org/cs/groups/public/documents/document/003604.pdf] Yes, you read that pamphlet correctly. There is a special 4th light, just to blink yellow, because you couldn't just make the yellow light blink, like it does anyway after 9pm. No. There has to be a whole special light that indicates when a left-turn-er must use special caution to turn.

: Note that New York City doesn't allow right turns on red, unless a sign is posted that says otherwise. I suppose this helps reduce the incidence of pedestrians being run into/over. You might also think it helps keep vehicles out of crosswalks, but it doesn't. [[User:CityZen|CityZen]] ([[User talk:CityZen|talk]]) 01:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

: What about turning left on red from a one way street onto another one way street? I don't know how prevalent that is but it's fairly common in downtown Columbus Ohio (my locale) and to a lesser extent some smaller towns around here. [[Special:Contributions/74.218.18.210|74.218.18.210]] 12:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
::First time commenting. Not sure about the reply syntax. But @ Ohio person: Up here in Michigan, we have supposedly special U-turns on divided highways (not to be confused with expressways; I'm just referring to the main business roads.) If there is a light, you can treat it like turning right, even though it is an apparent left-turn and an actual u-turn. "So long as you don't cross a lane of traffic, it is legal to turn if the lane is clear unless posted otherwise." From my driver's ed instructor. This does not apply to the second turn lane. I cannot tell you how many times I've been honked at for obeying the law and not turning right from the left lane. Sorry for any terrible typing or messups. I'm doing this on my phone. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 08:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Dartania

Nope. I'm done driving. Bring on the self-driving cars, people are officially idiots. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
: There is a problem with a blinking yellow arrow. Blinking yellow is already used. It means you have the right of way, but the other direction may proceed as well. What is wanted here is blinking red, which means that you stop, but may proceed, as someone else has the right of way. As for adding a fourth light, this just confuses things even more, particularly with respect to color blind individuals. Having said that, Virginia's variant is to have lights with both left arrows and solid greens. If it is green arrow, you have the right of way, while solid green means the other direction also has a green. There is almost always a sign reading "left turn yield on <solid-green-circle>" [[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 18:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

::so the blinking yellow left arrow generally means the same as a round green light - you can go when it's clear, but the opposite traffic has a green light too. I love this idea because a lot of the time where there is a separate left-turn signal, there are advanced lefts for both ways, and then left turners get a red left arrow and have to stop while people going straight get a green - so even where there's no oncoming traffic, you can't turn. this way, you just lose your "advance" status and go back to the regular rule of "turn if you can, otherwise you end up turning as the lights go yellow"

::I think what Lcarsos is pointing out if you check the PDF link, is that the new left-turn lane has 4 lights, all of which are left-arrow shaped. Thus, his point is why couldn't they make the 2nd light (yellow left arrow) blink, instead of installing a third light which is also a yellow left arrow whose job is to blink?

::I can think of a few possible reasons - first, perhaps an all-blinking light has different bulbs which are more efficient for blinking and won't burn out as much; second, because they want to distinguish between the two lights more strongly (i.e. if you glance over between blinks, you don't have to wait a moment to see if it will blink - if you see the 3rd light up, you know it's going to blink without waiting for it to actually blink); similarly, I suppose there could be colour blindness issues where they want to make it clear which light is which.

::PS: Right on Red is more common in north america than other places, but even here there are a few exceptions that do not allow right turns on red lights. New York City is one. Montreal is another. Most of Mexio is a third. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 21:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

::You can also white a white 'cigar' light that is inteded for busses only.

:From the first traffic light in London 1868 until standardization in the 1920s people tried out many crazy lights (see http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/T-VT.1970.23426) including---literally---bells and whistles to announce changes. It seems this phase is still not really over.[[Special:Contributions/134.169.34.172|134.169.34.172]] 10:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... not one to do the actual analysis, I still wonder whether there could be some message encoded in the pattern of lights -- in binary ASCII, baudot, Morse, or something. Hmm... [[Special:Contributions/208.54.40.227|208.54.40.227]] 19:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This explanation mentions a lot of hands where no hands exist. "The right-hand lane," for example. This is a pet peeve of mine. People just adding the word, "hand" randomly into a sentence. It's superfluous and it's annoying. It should be removed before someone slaps whoever did it with their right-hand hand.[[Special:Contributions/173.25.252.230|173.25.252.230]] 14:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

:I believe "right-hand" is used to differentiate "the opposite from the left" from "the opposite of wrong". If I say "get in the right lane", there is a chance for confusion and/or a cliche joke. If I say "get in the right-hand lane", my meaning is clearer.{{unsigned|Tryc}}

;Red and yellow

In Poland you can sometimes stumble upon '''red and yellow''' -- while yellow alone means that there shortly would be a red, and you can proceed if you are at or almost at crossing, but stop otherwise, red and yellow is to mean that there shortly would be green (go), and to prepare oneself. But it is quite rare. [[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 06:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

:In Germany all traffic lights behave this way. [[User:Joha.ma|Joha.ma]] ([[User talk:Joha.ma|talk]]) 07:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

::At least some lights in Czech behave this way too. -- [[Special:Contributions/89.177.52.2|89.177.52.2]] 08:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

This is the way ALL UK lights behave.

Some lights in the US use '''red and yellow''' to mean that a pedestrian is crossing, although I've only seen this when the light is blinking red/yellow to start with (yes, I've seen full 3-bulb traffic lights that are only used to flash red/yellow). [[User:Zer0keefie|Zer0keefie]] ([[User talk:Zer0keefie|talk]]) 11:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, here is the difference between the US and Europe:

Originally I believe all the traffic lights went through the sequence (1) green in one direction, red in another, (2) yellow in both directions, meaning "clear off the intersection" for the first direction and "get your car into gear" in the second direction, (3) red in one direction, green in another.

There are two problems though: first, when the green changes to yellow, people try to squeeze through (and it may even be difficult to stop if you're traveling at speed), second, when the red changes to yellow, people who are not stopped but carrying speed are trying to squeeze through earlier while the light is still yellow (this gets worse if the yellow is long and the incoming drivers don't know if it's after red or after green), and collisions ensue.

The solutions for these problems taken in US and Europe are different. In Europe the yellow-after-red is shown together with the red still on, strongly suggesting "no, you may not enter", and in the other direction the green often blinks once 10 seconds before it switches to yellow. In US there is no yellow-after-red, the red changes directly to green, and yellow always goes only after green (the automatic transmissions being prevalent, there is no need to shift into gear). The yellow is often long, to let the traffic on the fats roads to clear off, Also, there is usually a period of red in all directions which lets the stragglers clear off the intersection for sure before the other side goes green. This is why slipping on red just after yellow had ended is considered no big deal in US and a major no-no in Europe. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 23:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

In Brazil some cities have greens and red in a row, and they decrease to indicate how long the green or red will last. something like http://www.guiasjp.com/fotos_noticias/foto_1165344648.8822.jpg [[Special:Contributions/189.125.162.182|189.125.162.182]] 20:22, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
In BRazil too, in Goiânia there's a nice one here for pedestrians, with leds, that show an animated pedestrian walking and when the time is running out HE RUNS FASTER! Like, it's about to go green for the cars, but feel free to cross... IF YOU'RE FAST!

In Tianjin China they have a traffic signal that is a single bar of light. If it is green it starts subtracting bar length segments. When there is about a quarter left it turns yellow and then red. It then start subtracting bar length segments from the other end until it gets to about a quarter length and then turns green again. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bob406/3428844012

;Obvious

It's how traffic engineers troll you when you are going the wrong way on a one-way. Learn to read signs!

;Reference to previous comic

This comic has some tongue in cheek self reference to [[277: Long Light]]. #Meta And definite trolling, by [[Randall]]

:What about [[781: Ahead Stop]]?

:Turing Machine?

Any chance it is one?

;Etc

I was almost expected to see the Konami code in the left light, though I'm not sure how "B A Start" would have been shown. [[User:CityZen|CityZen]] ([[User talk:CityZen|talk]]) 01:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

;Music

I am no musician, but I can't help but wonder if there could be a hidden music chart in there somehow.
Also, if you want confusing, try understanding parking signs in Montreal.

:Might be, but depending on what pitches or sounds you assign to the lights, you could get pretty much every degree of harmony or cacophony you want. - Another possible music reference: Anybody reminded of Hendrix' "The Wind Cries Mary"? "The traffic lights, they turn, uh, blue tomorrow." [[Special:Contributions/89.0.230.165|89.0.230.165]] 08:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

;And You thought 4 stage was bad enough

Here In BC, in older installations, and I'm not sure whether any still exist, there used to be lights with 5 stages. It wasn't really any different than the standard red-yellow-green-turn combo you generally see where the turning light may come on, it just had the yellow arrow shown when the turning arrow is about to expire in it's own lamp. It behaves pretty expectantly, but it looks very imposing.

;Race cars

The second light has quite a resemblance to the "christmas tree" that governs the start of a drag race, where the lights change colors according to a pattern <nowiki>http://www</nowiki> dot nhra dot com/nhra101/basics.aspx [[Special:Contributions/69.121.10.82|69.121.10.82]] 04:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I sat and watched this increasingly surreal show for about three minutes, then I broke down laughing when one of the lights turned purple. [[Special:Contributions/174.239.196.155|174.239.196.155]] 06:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

In UK, ALL lights go Red -> red AND yellow -> green -> yellow on it's own -> red again. Red and yellow means it's about to go green and yellow on it's own means it's about to go red. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.246|141.101.98.246]] 21:43, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:980: Money

2014-01-23T02:26:51Z

108.162.245.111:

"Show me the money" was popularised as a quote from Cuba Gooding Jr.'s character in Jerry McGuire with Tom Cruise. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 02:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Since 1950s the work of the production workers got largely automated, so there is a much lower skill requirement. The skilled jobs have largely moved to the post-industrial economy. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 02:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The typical annual housing cost looks like a vast underestimation (by approximately a factor of 2 or more). If not just cities but the whole metro areas are included, it looks closer to reality. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 02:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The year 2009 was a very pessimistic one for the evaluation of net worth, both stock and housing investments being down. By the year 2014 the stock had rebounded by a factor close to 2, and the housing had grown in price as well (by a lesser factor). A large portion older people's net worth would be kept in bonds which not only didn't lose value but even grew in value in 2009, which would account for the difference in the distribution. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 02:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

The reason why the US state taxes are declared to be regressive on the chart is that a large part of them comes from taxing the consumption (sales tax, real estate tax, excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco, gasoline and vehicle taxes for road maintenance). The higher-income households invest a larger portion of their income instead of spending it on consumption. The actual state income tax rates are universally progressive. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 02:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Talk:661: Two-Party System

2014-01-13T21:05:38Z

108.162.245.111: Created page with "People in Europe (and Billy) usually don't realize that the US parties are not anything like the European parties. The European parties have a rigid pyramidal structure, with ..."

People in Europe (and Billy) usually don't realize that the US parties are not anything like the European parties. The European parties have a rigid pyramidal structure, with the party leader (or a regional version thereof) being the election candidate. If the US parties were like this, the US system really would be two-party. However in reality the US parties have hardly any structure. Pretty much anyone can become a candidate from a US party, it's more of an endorsement. So the primaries act as the first round of the elections, deciding who will get the endorsement from the party. It's possible, and had happened in the past, for the same person to participate in the primaries of both major parties, and even to be nominated as the candidate from both parties (though some places now have laws against the last part)! In the local elections, it's also not uncommon to have multiple candidates with the same self-declared party affiliation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 21:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC)