explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1238: Enlightenment

2013-07-17T10:30:31Z

134.226.254.178:

Did anyone else notice the (most likely intentional) typos in that sentence they told her to type? "... and THEIR DEFINATELY good" (they're definitely) {{unsigned ip|‎115.30.33.36}}

Didn't you notice "you're" and "idea's" as well. I would assume it is highly improbable that these were not intentional. [[Special:Contributions/74.125.16.2|74.125.16.2]] 04:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)GusGold

Of course those were intentional. That was the joke. The exercise for INTERNET enlightenment and getting rid of insecurities is to make typos and grammatical errors freely. You may also notice them saying on the last panel "wasnt" and "its", instead of "wasn't" and "it's".
Megan just wasn't able to do this task of making intentional mistakes, which would result in people online thinking she's dumb (insecurities), so she broke the laptop and left. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.58.179|95.35.58.179]] 05:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:Why do we think she broke the laptop and left? What's the circle on the ground for? (Looks like a StarTrek Transporter pad. And the pedestal just appeared as needed, must be virtual. Rather, I think she got UN-enlightened and zapped away into nothing-ness. [[Special:Contributions/12.234.99.131|12.234.99.131]] 16:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Zake

There's a huge difference between accepting others' misspellings and repeating them yourself...not commenting on someone typing "definately" is completely different than being told to spell it that way yourself. [[User:Wotpsycho|Wotpsycho]] ([[User talk:Wotpsycho|talk]])

I read you're explanation's and their definately helpful! --[[Special:Contributions/129.187.90.96|129.187.90.96]] 09:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Having your ideas "approved" by someone who can't even spell might feel much worse than having them simply shot down.{{unsigned ip|89.31.118.161}}

Does anyone else think Ponytail appears to be levitating? --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 16:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Someone deleted my edit, so I'm bringing it up here on the discussion page. The sentence contains more than just common misspellings; it also contains a common grammatical error. "I read your ideas and they're definitely good" is a run-on sentence. Joining two independent clauses requires BOTH a comma and a coordinating conjunction ("I read your ideas, and they're definitely good"). The sentence omits the comma. While certain style guides allow the comma to be left out when the two clauses are short enough, Megan's obstinate grammar-nazism is the entire point of the comic. It is unlikely she would let it slide. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 16:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:"they're" refers to "ideas", the sentences are not independent.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::That's not what an independent clause means. Can they be separated into two sentences? "I read your ideas. They're definitely good." Yes - it still makes sense as two sentences, thus the two clauses are independent. (An example of a dependent clause would be "I read your ideas while I was driving home." "While I was driving home" cannot stand on its own as a sentence, so it is not an independent clause.)[[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 18:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not a native English speaker, and I have learned only British English at school. But your statement makes sense. My first sentence is correct?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Yep, your first sentence is fine. I'm going to add the note about run-on sentences back into the Explanation; I hope nobody has any more objections. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 19:35, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::"...''whilst'' I was driving home"? ;) (And bear in mind as well that "while" can more commonly mean "until", instead of "during", in certain English-speaking dialects. Ok, I'm being picky, now.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.50.23|178.98.50.23]] 05:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Gr8 example of Internet forum tangental one-upmanship! [[Special:Contributions/12.234.99.131|12.234.99.131]] 16:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Zake
:This explanation makes a lot of sense. It helped me to stop being angry at the sentence they wanted her to type, and to pay attention to the bigger picture, especially when combined with the alt-text. Randall, I heard you're idea's and their definately good. (Also, I'm assuming that Internet Enlightenment allows me to be disgusted with myself for writing that, as long as I was willing to do so.) [[Special:Contributions/68.231.138.149|68.231.138.149]] 04:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::It is perfectly correct to join two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction and no comma. In fact it is often considered bad style (if not actually incorrect) to include both a comma and a conjunction when joining only two clauses.[[Special:Contributions/129.22.117.158|129.22.117.158]] 17:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not native English, as I explained before, but please give some more background information and not only a statement of your mind. And consider: This is American English, there are some odd commas. I'm still not sure what's correct.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::::I'm not native either. What I've found on several sites [http://pages.uoregon.edu/munno/Writing/ClausesandCommas.html], [http://www.ego4u.com/en/cram-up/writing/comma?09] is ''two independent clauses connected by "and" or "but" are separated by a comma''—basically, because you would make a little pause at that point when used in speech. Contradicting this on {{w|simple:Run-on sentence}} I currently see ''"I looked over the hill and I saw the bear." is a complete sentence.'' (not two independent clauses—although grammatically possible), so simple-wikipedia could be wrong, or there is some tolerance, when two clauses are actually connected. In the end, I'd say this comma is not really worth that discussion, and I would suggest making some kind of neutral statement, e.g. ''and there might be a {{w|Run-on sentence|comma}} missing''. --[[User:Chtz|Chtz]] ([[User talk:Chtz|talk]]) 22:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if there's an additional level of meaning here. To me, the <i>most</i> striking thing about the sentence Megan won't type is not the bad spelling, but the fact that it involves agreeing with someone. On the Internet, people are always arguing with other (as in, for example, http://xkcd.com/386/). Maybe what Megan had to do to become "enlightened" was not just to ignore the rules of spelling, but actually to agree with someone for a change?{{unsigned ip|134.226.254.178}}
:Well, that's why I wrote the third paragraph, about how important agreement can be. Do you have any suggestions as to how we could emphasize this point more? [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 22:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Be associated with bad grammar, Yoda would not. [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 08:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
===Incomplete or not?===
I did add the tag again because there are too many edits at this page and also the discussion is still not clear. I would like to see the grammar issue solved by more explain, even when it's not easy.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning any more comparisons, but I'd put it don't here at least: It reminds me of Schindler's List when Schindler tries to convince Amon Goeth, a commander of a Nazi concentration camp, that true power is when you have the power (and justification) to kill someone, but you spare them. This is an attempt to change the behaviour of Amon, who has a habit of killing random camp internees (and _believes_ he has the right to do so).{{unsigned ip|Svend}}
:Hey, you compared something to the Nazis! I invoke Godwin's Law! http://xkcd.com/261/

Talk:1238: Enlightenment

2013-07-16T09:48:22Z

134.226.254.178:

Talk:1213: Combination Vision Test

2013-05-17T22:43:39Z

134.226.254.178:

Number is "42".
The 4 is composed of 2's and 3's and 7's.
The 2 is composed of 3's and 7's and 9's.
--[[User:RainbowDash|RainbowDash]] ([[User talk:RainbowDash|talk]]) 05:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
:What about 7s? --[[Special:Contributions/81.23.24.34|81.23.24.34]] 06:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Also both have 5's. I'm not very good at this counting thing. That link below is way better, anyhow. --[[User:RainbowDash|RainbowDash]] ([[User talk:RainbowDash|talk]]) 05:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

http://i.imgur.com/BLIQR6w.png

Credit: http://www.reddit.com/user/silly-moose

: Thanks --[[User:Zom-B|Zom-B]] ([[User talk:Zom-B|talk]]) 07:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not confident enough about this to write up an explanation, but given that synesthesia is a sensory experience where the senses blend into each other (hearing colors, tasting sounds, etc...) that a round shape or black and white (why is it not in color? that would help the joke imho) give the sense of a number to the synesthete. The alt text at least makes sense, seeing two big numbers fits with diplopia (double vision) and the squinting covers myopia (nearsightedness) so it is consistent with the main joke, but I feel like I'm really missing something in the main joke. [[User:Chexwarrior|Chexwarrior]] ([[User talk:Chexwarrior|talk]]) 06:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

In the original b&w image, I keep seeing an 8 on the right and a vague 0, 9, or 4 on the left. I'm not certain if the b&w actually has a definite "answer" or specific number(s) one is supposed to be seeing. I seem to recall an xkcd with an Ishihara test before (but can't find it so it may just be a confabulation), in which case this one may be a reference to that and actually have a referential "answer".

I'm not an optometrist, but Chexwarrior,'s explanation of the alt text seems correct to me. [[User:Plazma|Plazma]] ([[User talk:Plazma|talk]]) 07:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

On the left half, the number 9 is missing. Similarly, on the right the number 2 is missing. This makes the number 92 or 29 (any ideas?). There is a floating 2 in the bottom center, the origin is unknown but it does look like a decimal point but that yould defeat the purpose of the number 42 (any ideas?) --[[User:Zom-B|Zom-B]] ([[User talk:Zom-B|talk]]) 07:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking the explanation of the descriptive text (not alt-text) is as follows: the synesthesia is seeing numbers and associating colors with them. So when you look at the numbers in the image, you see certain colors, so the large numbers stand out because they are different colors from the background. But if you're colorblind, (hypothetically) then some of those number-colors might look the same and so the numbers (not sure why only one) would not be visible. [[User:Bplimley|Bplimley]] ([[User talk:Bplimley|talk]]) 07:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
:Maybe if the synesthesia is as follows: Even numbers get one color and odd numbers get another color. I was actually able to see the 2 because of this effect, while I was in photoshop, zoomed in, and coloring the 3's. I know from myself that I have number to color synesthesia, but (in my case) that doesn't apply to a bunch of randomly placed digits like here, but only to complete numbers like "144" looks yellow, red, and white (in no particular order), while "38" looks grayish dark blue. --[[User:Zom-B|Zom-B]] ([[User talk:Zom-B|talk]]) 07:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

::I seriously doubt ANYONE have so "hard" case of number to color synesthesia it can "color" a bunch of randomly placed digits like this. Like ... if your number-recognizing neurons are working on the small numbers, how can they work on the big numbers in the same time? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

::: Good catch! I'm not sure how exactly how synesthesia works, but even if the perceived number (due to a perceived colour) further incites a perceived colour, you can still have a combined diagnostic. You just have to make sure that the big number is made up of little ones of the same number; or, atleast made of other numbers which are of the same colour as the desired big number. The latter requires that you assume synesthesia is one way only (for instance - perceiving number triggers colour, but not vice versa) [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 11:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

::: No no, it pretty much works! I've got colored-grapheme synesthesia, and while the numbers don't jump out at me as easily as they would if they were made of real colors, I am able to see them pretty clearly if I lean close enough to my monitor to be able to take in all of the small numbers' shapes at once. I posted a description of what it looks like to me here: [http://otherthings.com/blog/2013/05/ishihara-eat-your-heart-out/#more-899 Rungy Chungy Cheese Bees] It's a bit harder for me to see because I'm an "associator" type of synesthete, as opposed to a "projector" type. But I imagine for a true projector synesthete this would be about as easy as a normal Ishihara colorblindness test. [[User:Otherthings|Otherthings]] ([[User talk:Otherthings|talk]]) 20:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

<Nitpicking> The alt text is slightly off the mark isn't it? Wouldn't a diplopic(?) person see two images of the diagnostic rather than two numbers in the same diagnostic? Also, you needn't be colour blind to fulfill the condition of perceiving only one digit. Your synesthesia might have a colour blindness, while your optical system does not. </Nitpicking> [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 11:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that as no two... synaesthetes? ...have exactly the same 'conversion routine' in place that one can't assume the colour dominance of either digit, under an (actual, or synaesthetic) colour-blindness condition. Also, I wouldn't be surprised to hear "Well, the left hand side smells a bit like a 4, but the right ''sounds'' like a 2..." ;) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.207.61|178.98.207.61]] 12:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I will take some LSD and look at this and report back later! [[Special:Contributions/46.166.163.150|46.166.163.150]] 16:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think myopia actually makes sense, unless you're reading the comic on a large screen 30 or 40 feet away. The comic is most probably near you, if you're near-sighted you should see it in focus without squinting. [[Special:Contributions/64.223.217.58|64.223.217.58]] 17:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
:As a myopic person, I can say that you are generalizing too much. Without glasses, I can see no thing in focus unless it is 2-4 inches from my face[[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 20:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I see a big zero!

In the end this test couldn't work, colorblindness is due to a physical effect in the eyeball where synesthesia works in the brain, if someone had both synesthesia and colorblindness then the two numbers in the circle above would be the _only_ color they could see (although being colorblind they may not understand it to be a color at that point) [[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 19:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
:It's a JOKE. Sure it does not work for many more reasons. But the combining of all this things is hard to understand and it did last a couple of hours until the first people did understand. In my opinion this is one of the BEST jokes Randall ever did.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
::Yah, I laughed pretty hard when I saw it last night. Still worth explaining all the intracacies, like people wondering what's wrong with "Locate City" nukes [[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 20:10, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

As a colorblind person, I would like to point out that it is not obvious to everybody that a normal person sees neither large number. At first glance, I assumed that normal people see both numbers, colorblind people see neither, and synthesesia allows colorblind people to see one.[[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 20:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
: No, even normal people can't see the numbers because the image is just black and white. But that's just the first joke. Synthesesia in this comic just do see colours on black and white pictures.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
::Shouldn't the big-4 and big-2 have it's own color? The big-4 might then blend with the background 4's.
:::What's with the extraneous little-2 underneath the big numbers also?[[Special:Contributions/50.8.61.60|50.8.61.60]] 21:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
::::We are just talking about "colorblind persons" here. I am trying to help them to understand because they even they can`t see that the original picture is just B/W. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:12, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that this cartoon works. I have a friend who is synaesthetic, and she can't see the big numbers. The thing is, if someone has the sort of synaesthesia where they see numbers in colours, then they see each digit in a different colour, and so there is no reason why primes (or any other particular group of digits) would stand out for them. Yes, I know it's a joke, but the joke doesn't work if it doesn't take into account how synaesthesia works.

608: Form

2013-05-05T19:01:58Z

134.226.254.178: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 608
| date = July 10, 2009
| title = Form
| image = form.png
| titletext = 'This space intentionally left blank' is less immediately provocative but more Hofstadterially confusing.
}}

==Explanation==
Application forms, examination papers, etc. sometimes have section with instructions not to write in them. This often causes people to write in the illegal section just to contradict the instructions, as does [[Cueball]] in the comic. In real life there are never usually any consequences for breaking this rule. However in the comic, the form that Cueball wrote on was being filmed by armed men who respond to the rule break by preparing their guns, presenting a serious consequence for Cueball.

The title text refers to Douglas Hofstadter, an author associated with the philosophical concept of self-reference. "This space intentionally left blank" is "Hofstadterially confusing" because if a space on a form contains the words "This space intentionally left blank", then the space is not, in fact, left blank. (Douglas Hofstadter is also the subject of [[917: Hofstadter]].)

==Transcript==
:[There is a sheet of paper, with a series of check boxes. A white rectangle is the focus.]
:Do not write in this space.

:[Cueball is standing with a pencil, looking at the page.]

:[Cueball writes something on the page.]

:[A group of people with helmets, black goggles, and rifles look at display screens. There is a radar system on a table between them.]
:[The screens show sheets of paper. On one screen, it shows Cueball writing on one.]
:[One of the men arms his weapon.]
:''Cha-click''

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]