explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1722: Debugging

2016-08-22T15:01:21Z

141.101.98.92: A comment about googling and finding... certain... results

Cueball is describing the familiar experience of hunting down bugs through convoluted steps. There's obviously a leap from debugging a computer issue to finding a fictional sword.

Sword of Martin the Warrior is a reference to [http://redwall.wikia.com/wiki/Sword_of_Martin] from the Redwall series of books. The sword has passed through the ownership of many characters in its time.

[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.42|141.101.98.42]] 12:40, 19 August 2016 (UTC)--swampers

The keyboard problem could be the sword stuck (or hidden) in it. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.15|141.101.98.15]] 11:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Google'ing for an error message. 99% of the internet doesn't understand that concept. *sigh* --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.220|108.162.237.220]] 15:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Seems like the issue was with the mouse, not the keyboard, after all. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.29|108.162.221.29]] 03:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Personally I find it ''even more'' irritating when googling an error message gives results... but those results are only for the source code of the program giving the error. Which invariably is not commented well enough to actually describe what the error code means, let alone potential ways to fix it. What do others think is the most irritating? No results, or source code results? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.92|141.101.98.92]] 15:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

1711: Snapchat

2016-07-26T10:36:38Z

141.101.98.92: /* Explanation */ And that. Ok, not so much a hotshot, after all.

{{comic
| number = 1711
| date = July 25, 2016
| title = Snapchat
| image = snapchat.png
| titletext = For obvious reasons, the prize is awarded at a different time of year from the others, while it's still fresh in the committee's memory.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Maybe there's more to it.}}
The {{w|Pulitzer Prize}} is famously awarded for exceptional journalism and photojournalism (there are many categories; see {{w|Pulitzer Prize#Categories|here}}). {{w|Snapchat}} is a photo-sending app that allows the receiving user to only view the photo (known as a "snap") for a few seconds before it is deleted.

[[Cueball]] reads about the prize but then, when [[Megan]] states that she heard the picture was really good, Cueball becomes disappointed because he has missed out on the chance to see the prize winning entry due to the temporary nature of Snapchat.

The title text extends this ephemeral nature of Snapchat's content to the prize awarded for it: The other Pulitzer prizes are announced annually in April and awarded in May (except for 2016, the centennial year, when an awards dinner will be held in October). The Snapchat Pulitzer alone must be awarded as quickly as possible after the winner has been decided, before the prize committee forgets what the winning picture looked like. This of course underlines how silly this idea is, because only images seen during the assembly of the prize committee can be seen and remembered, and it is not possible to arrange this based on any knowledge of when a Pulitzer prize "worthy" snap will be released.

It may be that [[Randall]] is first of all making fun of Snapchat, and the idea that you cannot save the images for later (although with screenshots, it is possible - to many's regret after having send something very personal). But he is also mocking the Pulitzer prize for having too broad a spectrum of categories. The awards were always intended to include the Arts, as well as reportage, but not so many people may realise that Poetry, Drama and Music also get rewarded, alongside the traditional forms of journalism and prose, and the new medium of Snapchat is certainly a hybrid form of art and information/opinion dispersal, both at its best and at its worst.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan standing together. He holds a smartphone in his left hand and looks at it.]
:Cueball: Oh, the Pulitzer Prize for Snapchat was just awarded.
:Megan: Yeah.
:Megan: I hear the photo was really good.
:Cueball: Aw, ''maaaan''...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

1711: Snapchat

2016-07-26T10:35:13Z

141.101.98.92: /* Explanation */ Whoops, forgot that.

{{comic
| number = 1711
| date = July 25, 2016
| title = Snapchat
| image = snapchat.png
| titletext = For obvious reasons, the prize is awarded at a different time of year from the others, while it's still fresh in the committee's memory.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Maybe there's more to it.}}
The {{w|Pulitzer Prize}} is famously awarded for exceptional journalism and photojournalism (there are many categories; see {{w|Pulitzer Prize#Categories|here}}). {{w|Snapchat}} is a photo-sending app that allows the receiving user to only view the photo (known as a "snap") for a few seconds before it is deleted.

[[Cueball]] reads about the prize but then, when [[Megan]] states that she heard the picture was really good, Cueball becomes disappointed because he has missed out on the chance to see the prize winning entry due to the temporary nature of Snapchat.

The title text extends this ephemeral nature of Snapchat's content to the prize awarded for it: The other Pulitzer prizes are announced annually in April and awarded in May (except for 2016, the centennial year, when an awards dinner will be held in October). The Snapchat Pulitzer alone must be awarded as quickly as possible after the winner has been decided, before the prize committee forgets what the winning picture looked like. This of course underlines how silly this idea is, because only images seen during the assembly of the prize committee can be seen and remembered, and it is not possible to arrange this based on any knowledge of when a Pulitzer prize "worthy" snap will be released.

It may be that [[Randall]] is first of all making fun of Snapchat, and the idea that you cannot save the images for later (although with screen shots, it is possible - to many's regret after having send something very personal). But he is also mocking the Pulitzer prize for having too broad a spectrum of categories. The awards were always intended to include the Arts, as well as reportage, but not so many people may realise that Poetry, Drama and Music also get rewarded, alongside the traditional forms of journalism and prose, and the new medium of Snapchat is certainly a hybrid form of art and information/opinion dispersal, both at its best and at its worst.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan standing together. He holds a smartphone in his left hand and looks at it.]
:Cueball: Oh, the Pulitzer Prize for Snapchat was just awarded.
:Megan: Yeah.
:Megan: I hear the photo was really good.
:Cueball: Aw, ''maaaan''...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

1711: Snapchat

2016-07-26T10:33:04Z

141.101.98.92: /* Explanation */ Started with a tidy-up, fought with edit conflicts,slightly changed the direction of the concluding paragraph.Can I have my Pulitzer Prize For Wiki Editing, now?

{{comic
| number = 1711
| date = July 25, 2016
| title = Snapchat
| image = snapchat.png
| titletext = For obvious reasons, the prize is awarded at a different time of year from the others, while it's still fresh in the committee's memory.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Maybe there's more to it.}}
The {{w|Pulitzer Prize}} is famously awarded for exceptional journalism and photojournalism (there are many categories; see {{w|Pulitzer Prize#Categories|here}}). {{w|Snapchat}} is a photo-sending app that allows the receiving user to only view the photo (known as a "snap") for a few seconds before it is deleted.

[[Cueball]] reads about the prize but then, when [[Megan]] states that she heard the picture was really good, Cueball becomes disappointed because he has missed out on the chance to see the prize winning entry due to the temporary nature of Snapchat.

The title text extends this ephemeral nature of Snapchat's content to the prize awarded for it: The other Pulitzer prizes are announced annually in April and awarded in May (except for 2016, the centennial year, when an awards dinner will be held in October). The Snapchat Pulitzer alone must be awarded as quickly as possible after the winner has been decided, before the prize committee forgets what the winning picture looked like. This of course underlines how silly this idea is, because only images seen during the assembly of the prize committee can be seen and remembered, and it is not possible to arrange this based on any knowledge of when a Pulitzer prize "worthy" snap will be released.

It may be that [[Randall]] is first of all making fun of Snapchat, and the idea that you cannot save the images for later (although with screen shots, it is possible to many's regret after having send something very personal). But he is also mocking the Pulitzer prize for having too broad a spectrum of categories. The awards were always intended to include the Arts, as well as reportage, but not so many people may realise that Poetry, Drama and Music also get rewarded, alongside the traditional forms of journalism and prose, and the new medium of Snapchat is certainly a hybrid form of art and information/opinion dispersal, both at its best and at its worst.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan standing together. He holds a smartphone in his left hand and looks at it.]
:Cueball: Oh, the Pulitzer Prize for Snapchat was just awarded.
:Megan: Yeah.
:Megan: I hear the photo was really good.
:Cueball: Aw, ''maaaan''...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

Talk:1692: Man Page

2016-06-14T00:42:26Z

141.101.98.92: Someone on the internet is wrong!

I do not entirely understand how wikis work; however, I have attempted to add a transcript. I apologize if anything breaks. I also apologize if this is not how I should be apologizing.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.135|108.162.241.135]] 04:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The Pope flag is referencing the time of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avignon_Papacy Avignon Papacy] --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.243|108.162.237.243]] 04:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

:Would have frickin' loved Randall if he inserted a reference to Pope of Dope here. :D [[User:Todor|Todor]] ([[User talk:Todor|talk]]) 08:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, -e -h -v doesn't seem to work, it keeps halting at an input line!

Also, -p "AVIGNON" only works if I specify -D -I, -O, or -jk.

Why isn't -x documented on this man page? -x seems to do ''something'' but I'm not sure what the value of it is.

-y just returns "CHROMOSOME MISMATCH".

-a -e -f -n -o -r -S works if I specify -g, but -R starts to return CloudFlare errors after the first few million sites.

-v -d seems to make debug.exe speak out loud, but eventually it just starts spouting seemingly random numbers, unless I use -q. Is this desired behavior, or a bug?

{{unsigned ip|255.255.255.0}}
(-jk | off) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.8|108.162.221.8]] 20:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The horrible thing about this comic is that somebody is sure to have implemented this program by the end of the day... {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.140}}

:Found one on Github: https://github.com/iKevinY/blerp . It has a man page file, but the program itself just outputs "bleep blerp" and doesn't implement any of the flags (yet?). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.141|141.101.104.141]] 08:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

"Behavior Not Defined" might be a reference to undefined behavior, where a program is allowed to do anything including make demons fly out your nose: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undefined_behavior [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.12|108.162.219.12]] 06:48, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.135.36|162.158.135.36]] 06:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC) Søren Mors

I thought Ansel was a deliberate misspelling of ANSI, the most common 8 bit codepage. {{unsigned ip|162.158.135.36}}

The commit "Revision as of 07:08, 10 June 2016" reverted an IMO good explanation for the debug option with a bad one. Consider changing it back. [[User:Todor|Todor]] ([[User talk:Todor|talk]]) 07:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
:I agree. The bad explanation also mixed up {{w|Pipeline (Unix)|piping}} with {{w|Redirection (computing)|redirection}} --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.76|141.101.104.76]] 07:41, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think `blerp -a -d -t -p "AVIGNON"` is a valid call to blerp, because the syntax line syntax is utterly off. For example, the first line has an unclosed open [, whereas the second line – in addition to having the corresponding unmatched ] – plays with the fact that even though {} is usually used to list a set of required items, {} is also how `find` (which might do something similar to blerp, and is in fact mentioned in -v) denotes its results when passed to an exec. {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.30}}

Command line options do not normally use n-dashes; they use hyphens. Another problem with this option is that n-dashes and m-dashes cannot usually be displayed properly in the fixed-width fonts commonly used for command line terminals. The usual custom is to use two hyphens to represent a dash (which for proportional font display will often be converted to either an n-dash or m-dash).
: In groff (GNU troff, the language in which man pages are written) the code for an m-dash is '''\(em'''. It will display as either two hyphens "'''--'''" or as an actual m-dash "'''—'''" depending on the character set specified in the locale environment variables. [[User:Locoluis|Locoluis]] ([[User talk:Locoluis|talk]]) 17:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
: Many commands use a double dash "--" to specify the end of the options. In "ls -a" the "-a" is an option. In "ls -- -a" the "-a" is the name of the file.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.59|108.162.218.59]] 16:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

While "check whether input halts" clearly alludes to the halting problem, it may not actually be impossible, depending on what blerp actually does and what sort of input it accepts. (It says nothing about actually ''reporting'' the result, and it makes no guarantees that it will itself halt.)

—[[User:PhantomLimbic|PhantomLimbic]] ([[User talk:PhantomLimbic|talk]]) 07:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

:Indeed. Turing's proof for the halting theorem says that there is no algorithm that allows a Turing machine to determine whether any possible program/input combination will halt. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that it's impossible to develop an algorithm that determines whether a particular, fixed program will halt on an arbitrary input. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.141|141.101.104.141]] 08:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Currently, there is no mention of the unmatched square brackets in the synopsis, or unmatched parenthesis in the title text. Presumably a reference to XKCD comic 859. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.77|141.101.98.77]] 07:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Attack Mode might be a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yu-Gi-Oh!_Trading_Card_Game Yu-Gi-Oh Trading Card Game] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.117|162.158.85.117]] 08:23, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

In the description of -b the computer (Named "Hex") from discworld uses ants not bees.
Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex_(Discworld) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.125|141.101.98.125]] 09:13, 10 June 2016 (UTC)Bluewhelk
:Hmm. Reading the wiki article further Hex uses a beehive for long term storage! My bad [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.125|141.101.98.125]] 09:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)Bluewhelk

"Or best offer" doesn't need to reference a financial offer, it may also mean that anyone offering to reuse the article with an alternative license is allowed to do so. Attack Mode and Stealth Mode seem to me to be references to computer viruses. Stealth Mode is also an option in some applications that can hide their presence when run, often because of malicious behavior, such as remote access tools, keyloggers, etc. Piping is not only used in Unix, it is also common in MS-DOS. Opposite Day has a good explanation on Wikipedia. Literal quote from Wikipedia: "Once Opposite Day is declared, statements mean the opposite of what they usually mean.". --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.217|162.158.222.217]] 11:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Is there any evidence that Opposite Day may refer to Cyanide & Happiness? Opposite Day is a fairly well-known concept (at least from what I know growing up in the U.S.), and I don't see any direct connections to the specific C&H video short. I think that speculation should be removed. [[User:Sayno2quat|Sayno2quat]] ([[User talk:Sayno2quat|talk]]) 14:33, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I think the program is also "simulating" a man (a play with the words because it's a '''man''' page). If you think like that a lot more commands makes sense (especially, -D, -e, -f, -g, -jk, -R, -u). Just a penny for a thought. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.134|108.162.241.134]] 11:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

If someone wants a history of the useragent string (possibly a reference for that "citation needed"), then [http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/|this might be of interest]. --[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] ([[User talk:Draco18s|talk]]) 16:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The <code>-n</code> option might be a reference to <code>echo</code>, where it is an option often used but which does not work on all systems. <br>
Am I the only one to see the “k” capitalized in <code>-jK</code>? <br>
[[User:Ltrlg|Ltrlg]] ([[User talk:Ltrlg|talk]]) 18:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I interpreted "CHECK WHETHER INPUT HALTS" as simply determining whether the input was a finite string. (while at the same time referencing the halting problem) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.59|162.158.68.59]] 20:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I think that "suppress bees" probably indicates a smoke situation, a situation where the magic smoke is let out of the computer, such as halt-catch-fire. Smoke is the way to suppress bees. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.158|108.162.249.158]] 20:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

What does "BSD 4(2)" mean? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.65|162.158.255.65]] 20:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

blerp -v | blerp -ha [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 21:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The word "bug" doesn't actually come from an insect; see the Etymology section of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.117|108.162.245.117]] 04:37, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Some remarks to the current explanation:
- I think the description is more specific than suggested. It is true that command-line programs regularly read stdin and output something to stdout, but I would categorize only some of them grep/sed/awk/sort/... as filter in the narrower sense. Also that it can access remote files (URL syntax) is a clue
- In the syntax we have args, option, options, and flags
- the environment variables are never described
- attack mode could refer to a network attack, e.g. trying to break into protected servers, or not just filtering the information, but also using it in a damaging way
- suppress bees hints that for normal operation bees are used, something you would not expect from a typical command line program
- the em dashes are probably used from there on on the command line (right of this option)
- piping output to the MS-DOS debug.exe can be used for entering small assembly programs (including saving them typically as .com command), changing memory contents or accessing I/O ports. Normally it is used interactively. In a pipe setup it enhances the abilities of a text processing filter to do some enhanced actions on the target computer
- execute something, similar to the find program which can execute an external program per match; could also mean a specified algorithm and refer to halting check; in any case "something" is quite vague for a man page
- use google: either for input (e.g. read URLs by searching for ARG and getting the first found webpage) or some special Google API; possibly Google is so powerful, it can replace some of the functionality of the program. Just use Google
- Check whether input halts hints that the input processing including algorithm execution is so complex that it can run into an infinite loop, but easy enough to be not yet Turing complete or it is and -h is the joke; or some input never halts, e.g. /dev/random, or it refers to the robot theory, e.g. whether the attacked victim halts
- ignore case probably refers to the actual input files instead of to the command line
- overwrite would be funny with speech output
- the true pope is seemingly important fir filtering. Could refer to important faith settings for other programs, e.g. which editor to use vim/emacs or it us important for knowledge processing
- randomize arguments is good for some test procedures
- as mentioned in the explanation the copyright refers to the man page, not the program, here the explanation is inconsistent in the current revision
Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.168|162.158.83.168]] 08:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

With reference to the See Also, the multiple blerps are due to different sections, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page#Manual_sections [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.34|173.245.54.34]] 13:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Could "supress bees" reference to "[http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/797:_debian-main debian-main]"? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.131|162.158.86.131]] 19:20, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Does the unclosed paren in the title text bother anyone else? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.25|173.245.50.25]] 06:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
:Not me, but someone somewhere... - [[Special:Contributions/108.162.244.85|108.162.244.85]] 08:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Is the newspaper on this What-If [http://what-if.xkcd.com/61/] relevant? - [[Special:Contributions/108.162.244.85|108.162.244.85]] 08:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

I've never put anything on this site, but I feel it's worth mentioning that lerp (which stands for linear interpolation) is a thing and it sounds like blerp. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.119|108.162.245.119]] 02:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

1. The NAME section is missing the one-line description that is necessary for the whatis and apropos commands.
2. "Set version number" could be used to set the version number in the output files or provide compatibility output.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.98|108.162.216.98]] 02:38, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

I thought one of the main features of licences like the GPL and BSD was that they ''weren't'' revocable (unless you break the licence terms)? Oh, and someone else already mentioned it, but computer bugs aren't called "bugs" because of insects flying into them. The reason there's that famous bug in a logbook? That's because "bug" already existed as a term for a malfunction, and the operator who kept that logbook found it funny that a bug was caused by an actual bug. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.92|141.101.98.92]] 00:42, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1682: Bun

2016-05-19T15:38:31Z

141.101.98.92:

The transcript is almost done, but the setting/image of each frame has to be added, and someone may want to fix my possible typos. This is my first contribute to explain xkcd! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.158|108.162.250.158]] 10:51, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

:I added the explanations about the images. Thanks for contributing! [[User:Ladidootdoot|Ladidootdoot]] ([[User talk:Ladidootdoot|talk]]) 11:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

:I'm pretty sure that student #1 is megan, someone may wanna check that out[[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.139|162.158.2.139]] 01:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I assumed this was about hair buns, am I incorrect? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.25|173.245.54.25]] 11:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

:I also believed that 'bun' was also referring to hair buns/ponytails, thus giving a visual pun to the comic. It would also add another level of the 'heirarchy' pun as well. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.25|173.245.56.25]] 14:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I think it's "bun" short for "bunny", an informal term meaning a rabbit (especially a cute one such as the ones shown in the comic). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 11:16, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Wolves don't actually have as strong a hierarchical structure as commonly believed, and don't have so-called "alphas" running the pack. Wolf packs are primarily a family structure that centers around the parents, in a natural non-tyrannical way, with different wolves making decisions and leading the pack at various times depending on their particular skills. For more information on this, refer to writings by David Mech, wolf biologist, who first coined the terms "alpha" and "omega" for wolves, and has for years been trying to convince people that those original theories are incorrect. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.24}}

Of course, 'buns' are also a euphemism for butt, which might clarify a thing or two, or at least add a more amusing context. {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.42}}

I also believe the comic makes more sense when taking that meaning (bun for buttocks/derrière...) into account. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.230|162.158.150.230]] 12:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)J

I know that this is absolutely just a personal gripe, but the website is called explain xkcd, not spell-out-everything-that-happens-in-xkcd.

In relevance, this seems to be satire of current-gen's obsession with (mis)spelling things that are cute incorrectly (see: smol, birb, doge) and the situation in the comic is a role-reversal, with the teacher being a (teen/tween/memer etc.) and the students are accusing the class's professionalism.

The point about 'rank' could of course be some fictional idea that a younger person could attach to a physical entity to make the world mor fun and interesting or something idk.
I would add this theory, of course, but i have no idea what i'm even reading when i read this explanation and don't know where to add it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.161|108.162.250.161]] 12:00, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

:I absolutely agree I have slowly been editing different explanations to try to try to reflect this, but it is a very difficult and tedious process, if you can contribute do it. [[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 13:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

:In the fictional rabbit-world of "Watership Down", larger rabbits are usually superior. However the story is about an unusual group in which a small rabbit, Fiver, is the "king". There is a telling scene of mistaken identity near the end in which attackers are scared off.

Hierarchy is misspelled. Unless it's a convoluted pun on heir - hare (almost homophones) ? [[User:blagae|blagae]]
:A new version of the comic has been uploaded by now, with the misspelling corrected. So the heir-hare pun was probably unintentional. ([[User:blagae|blagae]]) 14:58, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

As soon as I read it, I was thinking 'bun' as in 'bottocks', yet there is no mention of that in the explanation? {{unsigned ip|108.162.218.41}}
:Added that in the explanation, but I'm not sure at all that this was intentional. When there is images of bunnies it is not necessarily something that would come into mind. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:13, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Most of the explanations posted thus far seem off-the-mark to me. Especially the ones involving butts, I mean, c'mon... The comment above about "role-reversal" gets close to the heart of the joke (if any), though I think more than anything this strip is just Randall indulging his love for depicting people in roles of presumed authority spouting absurdities. (And for tiny bunnies, of course.) TBH, though, this one mainly gives the impression of being based on a private joke or conversation, or just referencing some meme I haven't seen yet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.35|162.158.68.35]] 16:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
: I think it's an obscure reference. Buzzfeed has [https://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbellassai/the-most-important-bunny-gifs-on-the-internet The 33 Most Important Bunny GIFs On The Internet], which ''might'' be related to the "important bun" from [[1663]]. Maybe Ponytail teaches [https://twitter.com/hashtag/anatomyofthebun internet sociology], not biology, and she hasn't clarified that very well. [[User:.42|.42]] ([[User talk:.42|talk]]) 16:27, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I would say the entire "buttocks" link that is currently reflected in the description is a very poor fit. Clearly "this time of year" is referring to spring, when rabbits are most commonly seen darting around, and when rabbit kittens are most likely to be born/leave their nests. "The image of a king" clearly has nothing to do with Ponytail, as there is an image of a "king bun" on the screen. This is most definitely a reference to the treatment of images of monarchy. For example, in the UK it is illegal to deface images of the Queen. [[User:Fendletruck|Fendletruck]] ([[User talk:Fendletruck|talk]]) 16:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
:I concur. Delete any reference to explanation about buttocks, and only state that some may think of this, but given that there are images of bunnies this is probably more saying of the person who thinks of buts than of Randall... ;-) I will leave it up to others to do the deletion though. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Wondering if there's any tie in to the ancient but not quite defunct alt.devilbunnies, which was about evils buns, their cuteness, and people under their evil sway. The teacher in this case would clearly qualify as a "symp" (bunny sympathizer). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.77|108.162.219.77]] 17:28, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear, there are studies which show that cuteness in humans has certain evolutionary advantages for human babies and may affect how humans treat animals they perceive as cute. I was tempted to expound more upon this in the explanation but the explanation is no place for that. Cuteness in animals is both relative and a perception, it is subject to change from person to person based on past experiences and preferences, it is also affected by hormones and mood. It is not a defense mechanism, it does not protect against predators. I know the edit which first mentioned the fitness advantages of cuteness didn't state that it does protect against predators but in my original edit, where I first mentioned fitness, I was trying to include information relevant to the comic, not information which was absolutely correct. And even cuteness doesn't protect rabbits from human poaching as much as conservation does. In most places rabbits are pests and are dealt with just as rats and mice are now. But since I know that if I include information which is not one hundred percent absolutely correct in all situations it will eventually get edited, even if it makes the explanation clearer, I will not include this at the moment, to spare the exhaustive detail it will inevitably spawn.

In short, rabbits are delicious and things like to eat them, no matter how cute they may be. [[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 18:40, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

TIL: baby rabbits are called kittens. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 00:50, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I think everyone has missed the big joke here: They aren't attending introductory mammalogy, they're attending introductory MOMmalogy. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.254|108.162.237.254]] 12:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
: Please explain? [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

seriously, are you people trolling? I'm 100% sure this comic is about buttocks! ;)--[[Special:Contributions/188.114.103.163|188.114.103.163]] 14:23, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

It feels like the comic is intentionally reversing several concepts rather than simply giving nonsense (higher rank is normally larger and level formality is reversed)

Talk:1673: Timeline of Bicycle Design

2016-04-28T15:58:39Z

141.101.98.92: Documented the resolution of this problem

This could be an example of a (badly parameter-ed) genetic algorithm.

I have deleted the entire paragraph with the Alternatively, explanation that this could be an analogue to the process of meiosis and pregnancy... It seems extremely far fetched to me... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. This is a bizarre comic, and there will be a bizarre explanation, but that is clearly not it. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.181|141.101.70.181]] 13:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

That 1860 bike looks like the {{w|American Star Bicycle}}, but the year doesn't match. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.49|141.101.79.49]] 13:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

(Moved here from explanation:)<br> The randomness of the designs reminds me of the strange designs produced by the genetic evolution AI in the game BoxCar2D.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.78|141.101.80.78]] 15:05, 27 April 2016‎

This comic strongly remind me of http://boxcar2d.com/ [[User:Dorus|Dorus]] ([[User talk:Dorus|talk]]) 14:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I third the above comments. It could also help explain the title text, as the 1955 panel shows a broken and failed cycle, which can happen when a detrimental mutation (like weak wheel linkages) is selected by the AI to be passed on. {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.52}}

Would have seconded it, only looks like I'm fourthing it, instead. Also I adjusted 1925's transcript description as the numbers were wrong. (I also suspect it's related to the stabilisation applied to the [https://postalheritage.wordpress.com/tag/pentacycle/ Pentacycle], only without visible in/out-of-page stability. (Because the third dimension doesn't exist? Well apart from 1900 that looks to be a bicycle version of the [http://www.thisvictorianlife.com/cycling.html Rudge], with a solid insert to the spoked wheel ('poor man's disc-wheel' kit?) obscuring all but the spurious over-wheel drive-chain and the rider's head.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.137|141.101.98.137]] 15:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Can you include the 'Alternatively,' explanation down here so I (and presumably others) don't have to wade through the page's history? We could list all sorts of far-fetched explanations, it has definitely happened on other comics. {{unsigned ip|108.162.242.135}}

I have a feeling that this is related to the idea that nobody can draw a bicycle. For example, [https://www.behance.net/gallery/35437979/Velocipedia this artist created 3D renderings of bicycles drawn by strangers]. [[User:Rael|Rael]] ([[User talk:Rael|talk]]) 14:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
:I'm not certain there's a relation, unless it's Randall pointing out that it's rather difficult for him to draw a bicycle while maintaining a simple stick-figure theme? Regarding that guy's experience asking strangers to draw a bicycle: Most people do not draw very well. At all... Many people can't even draw faces very well & we look at faces *all the time*. We're predisposed to spot faces even when they're not there, yet most people get the proportions wrong. I'm not sure why he was surprised that most people couldn't draw a mechanically accurate representation. Bicycles are moderately complex machines that many people feel overwhelmed by, to the point of omitting otherwise advantageous equipment, such as multiple gears.

Does anyone else think the 1980 bike resembles a horse-drawn carriage minus the horses? Specifically, the two long parts Megan is holding look like reins. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
: This one rather makes me think of a chopper, only without the engine. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 16:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
:: Indeed, there is a movement for both chopper and lowrider bicycles. I have seen both and the 1980's bicycle looks almost like a lowrider bike I saw in Arvada CO probably in 2014. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.89|162.158.255.89]] 17:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I came here thinking I did not get the joke. After reading the description I see I am not the only one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.119|108.162.246.119]] 16:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

: Same here. I think the joke is just Randall exaggerating actual bicycle designs. Either that or it's "The Evolution of the Bicycle" in an alternate reality. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.62|173.245.52.62]] 17:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Is the point of the timeseries that while most things in biology evolve gradually over time (think all of those Evolution of Man t-shirts), undergoing great changes in form, we basically hit all the possible bicycle designs in the first 20 years and it has gone along essentially unchanged ever since? There are specialty bikes made possible by new frame materials, but they are all "Safety Bicycles". The takeaway of the comic could be either about the simplicity of the solution to the bicycle "problem", or about the difference between engineered design and the natural selection. [[User:Peregrinus|Peregrinus]] ([[User talk:Peregrinus|talk]]) 17:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

The 1955 design reminds me of the movie "Rubber". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1612774/ Is that too tenuous of a connection?
[[User:ChrisPwildcat|ChrisPwildcat]] ([[User talk:ChrisPwildcat|talk]]) 19:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
: I definitely made the same connection. (Wow, the scene where the tire stares into its own reflection & remembers all of its actions so far... I felt empathy for that tire. WTH?) The 1955 design definitely implies that the wheels are trying to kill Cueball.

This reminds me of certain videos I watched about evolution, in sequence, the picutres could be describe various models (some of them apparently unfit, thus discontinued) of bicycles as if they were derived from the laws that govern evolution (random mutation and natural selection). [[Special:Contributions/198.41.243.242|198.41.243.242]] 21:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Could the 1955 design be backwards cheese rolling? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.44|173.245.54.44]] 21:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

(Re: 1955) "This is obviously the most ridiculous of all of these designs" - clearly, someone has really badly misspelt the word "awesome" here. Please fix. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.92|141.101.98.92]] 08:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
:And the text I quoted is no longer in the article. Muahahaha, the power of the talk page! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.92|141.101.98.92]] 15:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Someone using the 2016 bicycle wouldn't be very welcome in Skyrim (milkdrinkers...) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.79|108.162.219.79]] 14:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1673: Timeline of Bicycle Design

2016-04-28T08:12:37Z

141.101.98.92: Request spelling fix

I have deleted the entire paragraph with the Alternatively, explanation that this could be an analogue to the process of meiosis and pregnancy... It seems extremely far fetched to me... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. This is a bizarre comic, and there will be a bizarre explanation, but that is clearly not it. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.181|141.101.70.181]] 13:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

That 1860 bike looks like the {{w|American Star Bicycle}}, but the year doesn't match. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.49|141.101.79.49]] 13:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

(Moved here from explanation:)<br> The randomness of the designs reminds me of the strange designs produced by the genetic evolution AI in the game BoxCar2D.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.78|141.101.80.78]] 15:05, 27 April 2016‎

This comic strongly remind me of http://boxcar2d.com/ [[User:Dorus|Dorus]] ([[User talk:Dorus|talk]]) 14:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I third the above comments. It could also help explain the title text, as the 1955 panel shows a broken and failed cycle, which can happen when a detrimental mutation (like weak wheel linkages) is selected by the AI to be passed on. {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.52}}

Would have seconded it, only looks like I'm fourthing it, instead. Also I adjusted 1925's transcript description as the numbers were wrong. (I also suspect it's related to the stabilisation applied to the [https://postalheritage.wordpress.com/tag/pentacycle/ Pentacycle], only without visible in/out-of-page stability. (Because the third dimension doesn't exist? Well apart from 1900 that looks to be a bicycle version of the [http://www.thisvictorianlife.com/cycling.html Rudge], with a solid insert to the spoked wheel ('poor man's disc-wheel' kit?) obscuring all but the spurious over-wheel drive-chain and the rider's head.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.137|141.101.98.137]] 15:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Can you include the 'Alternatively,' explanation down here so I (and presumably others) don't have to wade through the page's history? We could list all sorts of far-fetched explanations, it has definitely happened on other comics. {{unsigned ip|108.162.242.135}}

I have a feeling that this is related to the idea that nobody can draw a bicycle. For example, [https://www.behance.net/gallery/35437979/Velocipedia this artist created 3D renderings of bicycles drawn by strangers]. [[User:Rael|Rael]] ([[User talk:Rael|talk]]) 14:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
:I'm not certain there's a relation, unless it's Randall pointing out that it's rather difficult for him to draw a bicycle while maintaining a simple stick-figure theme? Regarding that guy's experience asking strangers to draw a bicycle: Most people do not draw very well. At all... Many people can't even draw faces very well & we look at faces *all the time*. We're predisposed to spot faces even when they're not there, yet most people get the proportions wrong. I'm not sure why he was surprised that most people couldn't draw a mechanically accurate representation. Bicycles are moderately complex machines that many people feel overwhelmed by, to the point of omitting otherwise advantageous equipment, such as multiple gears.

Does anyone else think the 1980 bike resembles a horse-drawn carriage minus the horses? Specifically, the two long parts Megan is holding look like reins. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
: This one rather makes me think of a chopper, only without the engine. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 16:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
:: Indeed, there is a movement for both chopper and lowrider bicycles. I have seen both and the 1980's bicycle looks almost like a lowrider bike I saw in Arvada CO probably in 2014. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.89|162.158.255.89]] 17:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I came here thinking I did not get the joke. After reading the description I see I am not the only one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.119|108.162.246.119]] 16:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

: Same here. I think the joke is just Randall exaggerating actual bicycle designs. Either that or it's "The Evolution of the Bicycle" in an alternate reality. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.62|173.245.52.62]] 17:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Is the point of the timeseries that while most things in biology evolve gradually over time (think all of those Evolution of Man t-shirts), undergoing great changes in form, we basically hit all the possible bicycle designs in the first 20 years and it has gone along essentially unchanged ever since? There are specialty bikes made possible by new frame materials, but they are all "Safety Bicycles". The takeaway of the comic could be either about the simplicity of the solution to the bicycle "problem", or about the difference between engineered design and the natural selection. [[User:Peregrinus|Peregrinus]] ([[User talk:Peregrinus|talk]]) 17:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

The 1955 design reminds me of the movie "Rubber". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1612774/ Is that too tenuous of a connection?
[[User:ChrisPwildcat|ChrisPwildcat]] ([[User talk:ChrisPwildcat|talk]]) 19:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
: I definitely made the same connection. (Wow, the scene where the tire stares into its own reflection & remembers all of its actions so far... I felt empathy for that tire. WTH?) The 1955 design definitely implies that the wheels are trying to kill Cueball.

This reminds me of certain videos I watched about evolution, in sequence, the picutres could be describe various models (some of them apparently unfit, thus discontinued) of bicycles as if they were derived from the laws that govern evolution (random mutation and natural selection). [[Special:Contributions/198.41.243.242|198.41.243.242]] 21:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Could the 1955 design be backwards cheese rolling? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.44|173.245.54.44]] 21:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

(Re: 1955) "This is obviously the most ridiculous of all of these designs" - clearly, someone has really badly misspelt the word "awesome" here. Please fix. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.92|141.101.98.92]] 08:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)