explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2190: Serena Versus the Drones

2019-08-16T15:33:11Z

162.158.126.88:

He should have added a chapter on how to make html imagemaps --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
: I've done imagemaps ages ago, and Randall is much smarter than me. It's clearly a matter of priorities. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 14:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
:: At this point, I think it might be a running gag. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.88|162.158.126.88]] 15:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I wonder if he knows that there is a video of the football player Patrick Mahomes throwing a football at a drone. He did really well. [[User:Robert911|Robert911]] ([[User talk:Robert911|talk]]) 14:18, 16 August 2019 (UTC)Robert

Found the killshot on facebook (I have no idea how to do URLs, somebody change this into a clickable link please):
https://www.facebook.com/pmouratoglou/videos/744037485973540/?v=744037485973540
[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:58, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

101: Laser Scope

2019-08-04T15:30:32Z

162.158.126.88: added links

{{comic
| number = 101
| date = May 12, 2006
| title = Laser Scope
| image = laser_scope.jpg
| titletext = I wish I'd missed you then so I wouldn't be missing you now
}}

==Explanation==
This comic plays on the {{w|homonym}}ic relationship between "miss" (to feel sad due to the absence of someone) and "miss" (to fail to hit – in this case, with a gunshot). "Miss your loved ones?" is a question that would generally use the former "miss." However, its use on the package for a laser scope implies the latter "miss."

A {{w|Telescopic Sight|sighting scope}} can be attached to a firearm to aid in aiming the weapon. The addition of a {{w|List_of_laser_applications#Laser_sight|laser}} improves the accuracy of the weapon by making it easier to aim consistently. The model number RJX-21 does not appear to be a reference to anything, and this comic is primarily a play on a common marketing technique of adapting a common saying to your own product by use of homonym or {{w|homophone}}; in this case, it is perhaps an inappropriate use, as one would not be expected to be aiming a firearm at their loved ones. In real life, this would imply a serious family breakdown with extreme feelings of pain and revenge, which is actually a tragically sad story, not the normal fodder for a light-hearted joke.

The title text hammers it home with the dual use of the word "miss," as the writer wishes he had missed (failed in his attempt to shoot) someone so they would not miss them (feel bad that they are not there), implying that he shot a family member, and is now feeling the grief.

==Transcript==
:[Box with a mailing label on one side, and in the front:]
:Miss your loved ones?
:[Picture of a laser scope.]
:YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
:RJX-21 Laser Scope

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Puns]]

1910: Sky Spotters

2019-07-29T18:05:43Z

162.158.126.88: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1910
| date = November 1, 2017
| title = Sky Spotters
| image = sky_spotters.png
| titletext = Where I live, one of the most common categories of sky object without a weird obsessive spotting community is "lost birthday party balloons," so that might be a good choice—although you risk angering the marine wildlife people, and they have sharks.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic explores how people with various hobbies notice strange things in the sky.

In first panel the plane enthusiasts [[White Hat]] and [[Hairy]] notice that there is a {{w|Piper PA-24 Comanche}} in the sky (apparently the most recent of several), belonging to a holding company that has filed no flight plans. Flight plans do not need to be filed for many short flights at lower altitudes in good weather, so for a small aircraft like the PA-24 the missing flight plan alone should not be unusual. Many government or company planes used for secret purposes, like [https://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/hidden-spy-planes FBI planes registered to fake companies], go a step further and are blacklisted from major databases. Regardless, it makes White Hat and Hairy wonder why, enough that they decide to post about it on their {{w|Aircraft spotting|plane spotter}} forums. (See [[1669: Planespotting]]). The reference to red trim on the Piper PA-24 Comanche could be a reference to the livery of {{w|Janet (airline)}} which operates clandestine flights between {{w|Las Vegas}}, {{w|Area 51}}, and {{w|Janet_(airline)#Destinations|other desert military bases}}, although these planes are in fact registered to the {{w|Department of the Air Force}}, rather than a holding company.

In the second panel [[Hairbun]] and a male bird enthusiast are wondering why there is a {{w|broad-winged hawk}} in the area in November, when many broad-winged hawks should have migrated south to areas like Florida and Central America. They decide to send a message to their {{w|birdwatching}} e-mail list. (See [[1824: Identification Chart]] and [[1826: Birdwatching]]). The two birdwatchers in this panel look like the old version of [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] in [[572: Together]].

In the last panel, a committee from what appears to be the {{w|National Security Agency}} wonders how to disguise their {{w|Unmanned aerial vehicle|drones}} so that people will not pay attention to them. The boss at the end of table is lamenting the fact that both their bird- and plane-disguised drones have been noticed because of all these people constantly checking out the sky, also indicating that there are even more subcultures who are obsessed with things in the sky than the two mentioned already. [[Ponytail]] asks what else they could disguise their (secret) surveillance drones as, and Cueball suggests a {{w|weather balloon}}. But Ponytail shoots this down, since such a disguise would attract both the {{w|UFO}} enthusiasts and the "weather people" (presumably some regulation board that checks unauthorized use of meteorological survey balloons, or otherwise hobbyist meteorologists or perhaps even members of the [https://cloudappreciationsociety.org/ Cloud Appreciation Society]). She then jokes that she doesn't know which is worse. Since most people consider UFO enthusiasts to be in to conspiracies, the "weather people" may be annoyed by this. Maybe [[Randall]] is indicating that people trying to predict the weather are correct as often as those claiming to have seen a UFO...

There are numerous instances of weather balloons being labeled as UFOs by enthusiasts, one of the most notable being the {{w|Roswell UFO incident}}, which for years was explained by the US military as a weather balloon crash, but turned out to be a nuclear test surveillance balloon. It is now known as the ''most thoroughly debunked UFO claim''.

In the title text it is suggested that "lost birthday party balloons" should not attract too much attention. But then it is noted that it might make marine wildlife people angry, their concern probably being that balloons ultimately end up in some water body, which causes marine wildlife to get trapped in plastic and other synthetic material that was dumped in the water. (see {{w|Marine debris}}) "Marine wildlife people with sharks" may be a reference to [[585: Outreach]], which also features a balloon carrying a shark. Another possible issue with disguising drones as "lost balloons" is that such balloons are quite rarely seen, and a sudden increase in the number of "lost balloons" seen would certainly raise suspicion even without a "spotting community" that focuses on them.

Among other types of people looking at the sky, the comic doesn't even get around to mentioning the subject of comic [[1644: Stargazing]].

==Transcript==
:[White Hat and Hairy are standing in front of some buildings. White Hat points to the sky while holding his smartphone in the other hand, while Hairy holds his smartphone up in both hands as he looks at the screen.]
:White Hat: That's odd—another PA-24 Comanche with red trim. Registered to a holding company, no recent flight plans.
:Hairy: I'll ask the forums if anyone knows who operates those.

:[Hairbun and an old man with white sailor cap, are standing in a field with rolling hills behind them. Hairbun is looking at the sky through her binoculars, that she has in a string around her neck. The man also looks up but he is holding his string attached binoculars down in front of him.]
:Hairbun: Goodness, I think that's a broad-winged hawk!
:Man with sailor cap: In November?! They should be long gone by now!
:Hairbun: I'll email the list.

:[Five people sit around a table in a boardroom, which presumably belongs to the government as the table has a circular insignia with an eagle in the center and unreadable text in the ring around the eagle and beneath the insignia. A man with slick black hair is sitting at the end of the table in an office chair. The other four are sitting behind the long side of the table; from left they are Cueball, Megan, another version of Hairy with spikier hair, and to the right, Ponytail.]
:Man at the end of the table: Dammit, why are there so many different subcultures obsessed with staring at the sky?
:Ponytail: What else could we disguise our surveillance drones as?
:Cueball: Weather balloons?
:Ponytail: No, that gets the UFO people ''and'' the weather people.
:Ponytail: Don't know who's worse.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Drones]]
[[Category:Animals]]

1910: Sky Spotters

2019-07-29T18:03:28Z

162.158.126.88: added links

{{comic
| number = 1910
| date = November 1, 2017
| title = Sky Spotters
| image = sky_spotters.png
| titletext = Where I live, one of the most common categories of sky object without a weird obsessive spotting community is "lost birthday party balloons," so that might be a good choice—although you risk angering the marine wildlife people, and they have sharks.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic explores how people with various hobbies notice strange things in the sky.

In first panel the plane enthusiasts [[White Hat]] and [[Hairy]] notice that there is a {{w|Piper PA-24 Comanche}} in the sky (apparently the most recent of several), belonging to a holding company that has filed no flight plans. Flight plans do not need to be filed for many short flights at lower altitudes in good weather, so for a small aircraft like the PA-24 the missing flight plan alone should not be unusual. Many government or company planes used for secret purposes, like [https://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/hidden-spy-planes FBI planes registered to fake companies], go a step further and are blacklisted from major databases. Regardless, it makes White Hat and Hairy wonder why, enough that they decide to post about it on their {{w|Aircraft spotting|plane spotter}} forums. (See [[1669: Planespotting]]). The reference to red trim on the Piper PA-24 Comanche could be a reference to the livery of {{w|Janet (airline)}} which operates clandestine flights between {{w|Las Vegas}}, {{w|Area 51}}, and {{w|Nevada National Security Site|other desert military bases}}, although these planes are in fact registered to the {{w|Department of the Air Force}}, rather than a holding company.

In the second panel [[Hairbun]] and a male bird enthusiast are wondering why there is a {{w|broad-winged hawk}} in the area in November, when many broad-winged hawks should have migrated south to areas like Florida and Central America. They decide to send a message to their {{w|birdwatching}} e-mail list. (See [[1824: Identification Chart]] and [[1826: Birdwatching]]). The two birdwatchers in this panel look like the old version of [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] in [[572: Together]].

In the last panel, a committee from what appears to be the {{w|National Security Agency}} wonders how to disguise their {{w|Unmanned aerial vehicle|drones}} so that people will not pay attention to them. The boss at the end of table is lamenting the fact that both their bird- and plane-disguised drones have been noticed because of all these people constantly checking out the sky, also indicating that there are even more subcultures who are obsessed with things in the sky than the two mentioned already. [[Ponytail]] asks what else they could disguise their (secret) surveillance drones as, and Cueball suggests a {{w|weather balloon}}. But Ponytail shoots this down, since such a disguise would attract both the {{w|UFO}} enthusiasts and the "weather people" (presumably some regulation board that checks unauthorized use of meteorological survey balloons, or otherwise hobbyist meteorologists or perhaps even members of the [https://cloudappreciationsociety.org/ Cloud Appreciation Society]). She then jokes that she doesn't know which is worse. Since most people consider UFO enthusiasts to be in to conspiracies, the "weather people" may be annoyed by this. Maybe [[Randall]] is indicating that people trying to predict the weather are correct as often as those claiming to have seen a UFO...

There are numerous instances of weather balloons being labeled as UFOs by enthusiasts, one of the most notable being the {{w|Roswell UFO incident}}, which for years was explained by the US military as a weather balloon crash, but turned out to be a nuclear test surveillance balloon. It is now known as the ''most thoroughly debunked UFO claim''.

In the title text it is suggested that "lost birthday party balloons" should not attract too much attention. But then it is noted that it might make marine wildlife people angry, their concern probably being that balloons ultimately end up in some water body, which causes marine wildlife to get trapped in plastic and other synthetic material that was dumped in the water. (see {{w|Marine debris}}) "Marine wildlife people with sharks" may be a reference to [[585: Outreach]], which also features a balloon carrying a shark. Another possible issue with disguising drones as "lost balloons" is that such balloons are quite rarely seen, and a sudden increase in the number of "lost balloons" seen would certainly raise suspicion even without a "spotting community" that focuses on them.

Among other types of people looking at the sky, the comic doesn't even get around to mentioning the subject of comic [[1644: Stargazing]].

==Transcript==
:[White Hat and Hairy are standing in front of some buildings. White Hat points to the sky while holding his smartphone in the other hand, while Hairy holds his smartphone up in both hands as he looks at the screen.]
:White Hat: That's odd—another PA-24 Comanche with red trim. Registered to a holding company, no recent flight plans.
:Hairy: I'll ask the forums if anyone knows who operates those.

:[Hairbun and an old man with white sailor cap, are standing in a field with rolling hills behind them. Hairbun is looking at the sky through her binoculars, that she has in a string around her neck. The man also looks up but he is holding his string attached binoculars down in front of him.]
:Hairbun: Goodness, I think that's a broad-winged hawk!
:Man with sailor cap: In November?! They should be long gone by now!
:Hairbun: I'll email the list.

:[Five people sit around a table in a boardroom, which presumably belongs to the government as the table has a circular insignia with an eagle in the center and unreadable text in the ring around the eagle and beneath the insignia. A man with slick black hair is sitting at the end of the table in an office chair. The other four are sitting behind the long side of the table; from left they are Cueball, Megan, another version of Hairy with spikier hair, and to the right, Ponytail.]
:Man at the end of the table: Dammit, why are there so many different subcultures obsessed with staring at the sky?
:Ponytail: What else could we disguise our surveillance drones as?
:Cueball: Weather balloons?
:Ponytail: No, that gets the UFO people ''and'' the weather people.
:Ponytail: Don't know who's worse.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Drones]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2127: Panama Canal

2019-07-29T17:53:34Z

162.158.126.88: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2127
| date = March 22, 2019
| title = Panama Canal
| image = panama_canal.png
| titletext = Once they selected the other proposal, we could have kept shopping ours around, but we would had to modify it include an aqueduct over their canal, which would be totally unreasonable.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|Panama Canal}} is, as the name suggests, a canal through the country of Panama. It is important for bridging the {{w|Atlantic}} and {{w|Pacific}} oceans, and is an important trade route. The canal is in Panama because this is the narrowest piece of land for crossing between the two oceans. The When the Panama Canal was being proposed, several alternate routes were suggested such as the recently-revived {{w|Nicaragua Canal|Nicaragua Route}}.

Cueball says that when the Panama Canal connecting the Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean was being planned, he proposed an alternate route that connects the {{w|Arctic Ocean}} to the {{w|Great Southern Ocean}}. At the time, the northern terminus would have been inaccessible, because the Arctic Ocean was almost completely covered by ice. His suggested route runs somewhat to the east of the continental divide and has a total length of slightly over ten thousand miles, in contrast to the real-life canal which is only fifty miles long. The extra length and more-rugged terrain make his proposal much more difficult to build and maintain, unlike the real-life Panama Canal {{Citation needed}}.

Moreover, while the real-life canal significantly shortens the travel distance between major cities on the east and west coasts of the Americas, his alternative offers little benefit over traveling north or south in either the Atlantic or Pacific oceans. In fact, with the lack of currents that can aid travel and the slow speed required to traverse canal locks, it would be significantly slower. In addition, ships would have to wait approximately 100 years for global warming to melt the ice in the Arctic Ocean along the northern coast of North America sufficiently for them to enter or exit the northern end of the canal. (However, since construction of this canal might take even longer, the ice might not be a problem by the time it was completed.)

The title text references the now-existing Panama Canal, and the fact that Randall's canal would need to cross it at some point. The title text suggests that crossing two canals would have to be done via {{w|aqueduct}}, instead of the more useful {{w|at-grade crossing}}, most likely at {{w|Gatun Lake}}, which would allow boats to travel between the two canals by simply connecting them. The humor here is that this canal would be one of the most ambitious construction projects in history; an aqueduct being added to the costs is an expense on the same scale of needing an extra screw to hold something in on Apollo 11. The route depicted appears to cross the Mackenzie, Missouri, Rio Grande, and Amazon rivers anyway, so only this additional crossing is apparently "unreasonable."

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is standing in front of a poster with two maps showing the Americas. He is pointing to the right one with a stick he is holding in his hand. Specifically to the red line going through the Americas from the Arctic sea above Canada near Alaska, down through North America, through the middle of Central America down through the middle of South America to end up in the Antarctic sea below the tip of South America. On the map to the left there is a similar red line indicating the Panama Canal crossing the thinnest part of Central America from the Pacific Oceanto the Atlantic Ocean. Both lines end in small dots on either "side" of the continent. The two maps have labels above them:]
:Atlantic-Pacific option
:Arctic-Antarctic option

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I still don't understand why the Panama Canal planners rejected my proposal.

==Trivia==
*The Panama Canal was the main theme in [[1632: Palindrome]] and there is a scene in [[1608: Hoverboard]] where a [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/0/0d/1608_1026x1073y_Ruins_with_Cueball_singing_of_Spiders_and_Panama.png song that Cueball sings] references the canal. {{w|Panamax}} is referenced in the title text of [[1865: Wifi vs Cellular]].
*If Cueball had proposed an alternative Panama Canal when the original was being built, he would have to have been alive in the early 1900s. Assuming he was at least 18 when the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty was signed to authorize the canal (a very generously low estimate), this version of Cueball would been born no later than 1885.
*The second comic in a row with a [[:Category:Maps|map based theme]]. Randall likes maps. <ref>https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=map&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go</ref>
*A canal crossing a canal occurs at several places. One of the more famous ones is the {{w|Magdeburg Water Bridge}} in Germany. It also features some locks nearby, so ships can change from the canal to the Elbe river, and vice versa.
*Another canal crossing a canal is the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkirk_Wheel Falkirk Wheel] in Scotland.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Maps]]

Talk:202: YouTube

2019-07-22T09:41:15Z

162.158.126.88:

In the transcript, it says simpleplan2009's comment was posted 3 minutes ago. However, in the image, it clearly says 5 minutes. [[User:Caagr98|Caagr98]] ([[User talk:Caagr98|talk]]) 19:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
:I agree. In theory a 3 and a 5 could be hand-written to be hard to differentiate, but here it is clear. Changed. (And added the first line.) [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 10:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
::Changed it back, as the actual transcript on the comic page (as seen in the webpage source, and upon which the comic searches are based) says "3". I've added the reasoning in the explanation. [[User:NixillUmbreon|NixillUmbreon]] ([[User talk:NixillUmbreon|talk]]) 15:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
:::The image is the first source for the transcript here. Randall's transcript simply doesn't match the image.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

On Gunpistolman's comment, is [http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~det/phy2060/heavyboots.html the heavy boots story] worth a mention? [[User:B jonas|B jonas]] ([[User talk:B jonas|talk]]) 16:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:Not needing a mention in the explanation, but thank you for the link. Richard Feynman would be glowing in his grave at the state of science education in this country. {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.223}}
:Frankly, oh God that is TERRIBLE. The PHYSICS STUDENTS thought that light items float on the Moon but heavy things don't? That... That's worse than the Flat Earth Society! [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 23:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

The British sketch comedy TV show ''That Mitchell and Webb Look'' has an excellent [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw Moon Landing Sketch] with similar humor to this joke. [[User:Beolach|Beolach]] ([[User talk:Beolach|talk]]) 22:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I think that it's possible the video is the Astronaut music video by Simple Plan. Led to believe it by the username simpleplan2009 {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.124}}

American sheep are very offended by this. if sheep could read. --[[User:Dalonacueball|Dalonacueball]] ([[User talk:Dalonacueball|talk]]) 17:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm with GradeAUnderA on this one... FOR YOUTUBE! http://www.prdaily.com/Uploads/Public/exclamation-mark-yelling.jpg FOR YOUTUBE FOR YOUTUBE FOR YOUTUBE. I'm way too much of a 'tuber

All of the comments in the comic are actual YouTube comments, taken from the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vml7pZJujF0 (although the usernames were changed, presumably to protect the stupid). Should that be mentioned in the description? [[User:HiddenWindshield|HiddenWindshield]] ([[User talk:HiddenWindshield|talk]]) 20:44, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Might the last comment be in reference to the SMBC comic http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=120 (which came out a few years before this xkcd)? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.104|108.162.215.104]] 20:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

The comic did not copy the YouTube video comments, rather the other way round. I updated the explanation to add this.[[User:Jojonete|Jojonete]] ([[User talk:Jojonete|talk]]) 23:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Do we really need a citation for "humans haven't landed on Mars"? Seriously? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.164|108.162.215.164]] 17:45, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
:Citation needed is a recurring joke. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.88|162.158.78.88]] 18:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Since the very first time I read this panel, I have wished that the alt-text gave a reply to the 'Americans are Sheep' comment: "I did not have sexual relations with that sheep! -BillClintonPOTUS"[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.127|172.68.54.127]] 03:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.127|172.68.54.127]] 03:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I have observed that the Lunar Module in this comic looks like a butt. This is very important information. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.88|162.158.126.88]] 09:41, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

2057: Internal Monologues

2018-10-23T02:31:26Z

162.158.126.88: /* Explanation */ Saying that trees are made "in part" from air undersells the situation.

{{comic
| number = 2057
| date = October 10, 2018
| title = Internal Monologues
| image = internal_monologues.png
| titletext = Haha, just kidding, everyone's already been hacked. I wonder if today's the day we find out about it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Complete? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic explores some seemingly strange perspectives that academics or professionals might have due to their deeper knowledge and understanding of the fields that they study.

Many seemingly mundane phenomena can actually be quite weird or counterintuitive if you understand how they really work. The five people featured in this comic, all from different disciplines, are all aware of certain facts about reality that seem so strange even they have trouble believing they are true; yet, undeniably, they are.

* [[Megan]], a botanist, is struck by the fact that trees are made in large part from air, as in the carbon dioxide they consume.
* [[Cueball]], a physicist, finds it weird that he can feel the gravity between an object in his hand (his phone) and the Earth.
* [[Blondie]], a computer security researcher, knows of the inherent insecurity of computer systems and wonders if today is the day everyone will get hacked, collapsing our society.
* [[Hairy]], a graphic designer, wonders what sequence of events drove a store's decision to use a particular recognizable font for their signage.
* [[Ponytail]], studying medicine, wonders how humans manage to seem so normal on the outside, given that most of their bodies are made up of things usually unmentionable.

Four of the five people are pondering things that they happen to find very interesting but that aren't too concerning to an everyday person, whereas what Blondie is pondering could have widespread or even global effects on our way of life. In the title text, Blondie amends her thought, since she actually knows an even more concerning truth: we've ''already'' all been hacked, and we just don't know it yet.

Below the different fields thoughts are explained in detail.

=== Botany ===
Much of the mass of trees is extracted from the air. An Australian ABC program explains that "[http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/greatmomentsinscience/trees-are-made-from-air/9675642#transcript Trees are made from air]". More precisely: The bulk of the mass of a tree is composed of cellulose and water.

Cellulose is a polysaccharide, a large molecule consisting of many glucose molecules (C6H12O6) bonded together. Plants make those glucose molecules through photosynthesis: they make them by combining water (H2O) and carbon dioxide molecules (CO2) using the energy from sunlight, releasing oxygen in the process (O2). Plants get the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and arguably the water also as it usually comes from rain which is condensed water vapor.

The main photosynthesis balance is given by the formula :
:6 CO2 + 6 H2O -> C6H12O6 + 6 O2

=== Physics ===
{{w|Gravity}} and {{w|Electromagnetism|electromagnetism}} are the two of four {{w|Fundamental interaction|fundamental forces}} in physics which can be detected by a human. Gravity is the weakest of all, but when big masses like the Earth are involved it overwhelms all the others because atoms are electrically neutral and thus electromagnetism has only a minor impact at this scale. On the other hand Cueball's phone obtains its shape because solid state bodies are hold together by electric forces between the {{w|Solid|atoms and molecules}} at small scales. The gravitational force is about 10−36 weaker than electromagnetism but both keep our world in that form we know well.

The other two fundamental forces are beyond any human imagination and apply only on atomic scales and below.

=== Computer Security ===
Anyone well versed in computer security understands just how insecure the systems that we depend on actually are.

In the title text it is noted that possibly all our systems are already hacked, and we just haven't found out yet. Since malicious hackers do their work covertly, a successful hack often isn't discovered until days, weeks, or even years later if at all. By that time they may have successfully hacked many other systems using the same techniques and/or exploiting the same widely unknown or un-patched security flaws. Some high profile hacks recently discovered at the time of this posting include a [https://securitytoday.com/articles/2018/10/02/facebook-hacked-50-million-users-data-exposed.aspx 50-million user hack of Facebook] and Google+ announcing they are [https://www.blog.google/technology/safety-security/project-strobe/ shutting down the consumer side of Google+], in part due to a security flaw that was discovered and patched months ago.

=== Graphic Design ===
{{w|Graphic designer}}s recognize fonts and design elements, and see how they come together. In this comic, the graphic designer wonders how the ''{{w|Law & Order}}'' font was chosen for a particular storefront's sign. ''Law & Order'' is a police procedural TV series created by Dick Wolf in 1990, which has had various spinoffs. The font used for the title sequence of ''Law & Order'' is called {{w|Friz Quadrata}}, and is also the font used for the signage of the New York Police Department headquarters.

=== Medicine ===
Doctors are well versed in human anatomy, and are likely to think about what is inside of people more than the average person would. And most people would actually like not to think about all the blood and bones we are all carrying around with us. Not to mention the poop or the contents of our stomach that could be considered vomit or the pee etc.

Most people do not think about that the person next to them is actually a skeleton packed in meat and animated by electricity... But Ponytail does, because she is being exposed to this fact all the time through her study of Medicine.

==Transcript==

:[Beneath a two line caption are five characters shown, with their thoughts inside thought bubbles. Below them are labels giving their respective fields of science.]
:<big>Internal Monologues</big>
:from various fields

:Botany
:Megan: I can't get over the fact that trees are made of air.

:Physics
:Cueball [looking at a phone in his hand]: It's so weird that I can feel the Earth and my phone being pulled together.

:Computer security
:Blondie: I wonder if today will be the day everyone gets hacked and it all finally collapses.

:Graphic design
:Hairy: I wonder how that store ended up with the Law & Order font for their sign.

:Medicine
:Ponytail: We're all acting normal even though we're full of blood and bones and poop.

==Trivia==
*[[913: Core]] shows what a geologist might have thought about had they been in this comic.
*A similar expression of a mundane phenomenon that's really weird when you think about it can be seen in [[203: Hallucinations]].
*This comic has a similar setup to some other kinds of thoughts between such scientific fields presented in [[435: Purity]].
*On computer security Randall gave a similar message about voting software security in [[2030: Voting Software]].
*On medicine Doctor Ponytail offers similar thoughts already in [[1839: Doctor Visit]].

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Computer security]]
[[Category:Biology]]

Talk:2057: Internal Monologues

2018-10-10T22:44:18Z

162.158.126.88:

No maths? Too bad...

[[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.116|141.101.77.116]] 14:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)Some Nerd

:Mathematicians don't need to wonder why, they can show their working. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.140|141.101.77.140]] 15:17, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

If we're going to mention other places the font is used at, I figured it may be worth leaving this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friz_Quadrata#Usage (not necessarily worth adding to the explanation, but people may be interested in the trivia.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.88|162.158.126.88]] 22:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:2057: Internal Monologues

2018-10-10T22:42:08Z

162.158.126.88:

No maths? Too bad...

[[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.116|141.101.77.116]] 14:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)Some Nerd

:Mathematicians don't need to wonder why, they can show their working. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.140|141.101.77.140]] 15:17, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

If we're going to mention other places the font is used at, I figured it may be worth leaving this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friz_Quadrata#Usage [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.88|162.158.126.88]] 22:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1154: Resolution

2018-02-09T01:53:24Z

162.158.126.88:

It's good! But self-explanatory? -- [[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 16:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The reference to a single data point may reference a common problem in "long-term" or "one-off" observations - that statistical significance can probably never be achieved because of the labour involved in creating individual data points. In this case Cueball essentially makes one data point per year (or many depending on whether you consider individual observations to happen throughout the year...), and thusly one year is insufficient to determine if there is a large "yearly" loop with nested daily/weekly loops.

Humans seem to have a biological mechanism to bypass this conundrum wherein we make linear extrapolations or use weak induction for situations where there is insufficient data.[[Special:Contributions/208.98.237.225|208.98.237.225]] 22:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I took this to be a reference to infinite loops because of "being stuck" "thinking I'm fixing things about myself", "break out of loops", and "not making progress". Also, the title "Resolution" could be said to refer to the test statement in a loop to determine whether or not to continue the loop, ''resolving'' the loop. --[[Special:Contributions/68.75.178.240|68.75.178.240]] 00:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

******

If at first you don’t succeed
…try, try again! (a mother’s advice)
…that’s one data point. (scientific version)
…click “undo.” (IT version)
…read the directions. (engineering version)
…keep a separate ledger. (business version)
…call in an air strike. (military version)
…file an appeal. (legal version)
…try bribery. (diplomatic version)
…redefine success. (political version)

Any good scientific experiment needs a control and that was just what the prior year was to compare the actual changes of the upcoming year. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.159|162.158.62.159]] 14:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

__________________
I keep pressing random page and it sends me back here. wobsite creators have sense of humor
01:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)01:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)01:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)~

Talk:1844: Voting Systems

2017-06-02T15:31:32Z

162.158.126.88:

Looks like 2 of us added explanations at the same time. Someone else want to consolidate them and produce a concise explanation?
~blackhat {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.75}}

I tried merging our explanations, so there is a small improvement, but there is still some duplicated information. Plus I'm not a native english speaker, so a consolidation by a third editor would be welcome. {{unsigned ip|141.101.69.165}}

Something I don't understand about the Arrow Impossibility Theorem: In the example given, the result of the election is obviously a 3-way tie, where each candidate got exactly equal support. Surely the Arrow Impossibility Theorem doesn't complain about voting system's inability to intuitively break an exact tie? {{unsigned ip|172.68.34.58}}

:I think there is another layer of explanation here. When Cueball is discussing this - he's talking about voting for which voting system is to be chosen. The choice is Approval versus Instant Runoff - but isn't Cueball arguing about using a Condorcet method to decide WHICH voting method to choose? This is emphasised by the mouse-over text which talks about him dynamically changing his choice of ultimate candidate based on the election system chosen - which is exactly the Condorset paradox, but when applied to the selection of which voting system you want rather than the choice of candidate. Again reinforced by the discussion of "Strong Arrows theorem" which at that same meta-voting level. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.39|162.158.69.39]] 15:40, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

: The "exact tie" only exists because ranked-choice ballots destroy any information about ''strength'' of preference. It likely wouldn't be an exact tie with a Score voting ballot, for instance. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 00:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Generally the idea behind Arrow's Theorem is that you would get different results if you did a vote where the choices were just A or B, B or C, C or A, thus no option wins head to head against the others (Condorset Paradox). An example I recently read was economic policy, and how the options being presented can cause policy to fluctuate wildly in a democracy as the outcome depends on the options compared. -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.10|108.162.249.10]] 16:01, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
:Neither Arrow's Theorem nor the joke makes any reference to Condorcet's paradox. Rather, the joke is that it shows an individual voter who apparently fails to satisfy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_of_irrelevant_alternatives independence of irrelevant alternatives]. This is one of the criteria in Arrow's theorem, and it is normally always regarded as being true of any individual's opinions, just not necessarily of the outcome of an election. [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 18:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

:For reference: both instant run-off voting (IRV) and every concorcet method fail independence of irrelevant alternatives. Some (most?) condorcet systems satisfy all other criteria of Arrow's theorem, while IRV also fails monotonicity. Approval voting satisfies both, but it is outside the scope of Arrow's theorem as it is not a ranked voting system. [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 18:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

"Arrow's impossibility theorem states that when voters have three or more distinct alternatives (options), no ranked voting electoral system can convert the ranked preferences of individuals into a community-wide ranking." Arrow's theorem does not say that. Arrow's impossibility theorem says "When voters have three or more distinct alternatives (options), no ranked voting electoral system can convert the ranked preferences of individuals into a community-wide ranking that is complete, transitive, Pareto efficient, have universal domain, has no dictator, and independent of irrelevant alternatives." The conditions matter, and the non-dictatorship condition in particular is horrible misnamed.

"The theorem may be interpreted in a way suggesting that no matter what voting electoral system is implemented in a democracy, the resulting democratic choices are equally imperfect". No. Perfection is an absolute so things are either perfect or they are not. "Equally imperfect" is a tautology. If you are going to throw in "equally" some voting methods are manifestly closer to perfection than others, some voting methods satisfy all but one of Arrow's conditions, while others satisfy none of them.

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.21|162.158.62.21]] 18:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

: Arrow's Theorem is based on a fundamentally flawed approach in the first place, which he realized later in life. Using ordered rankings to estimate utility is not a very good plan. Voting systems based around estimating utility directly (rated rather than ranked) are much better. It was based on economist dogma that utility can't be compared meaningfully between individuals, but interpersonal comparisons of preference are even less valid. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 00:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Totally unrelated to the discussion, but interesting that Cueball has moved from being between a black hat and a black haired women in [[1842: Anti-Drone Eagles]] to being between a White Hat and a white haired woman, two comics later, where he starts speaking in both comics. :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

For deep (but simply explained) insight into voting systems, (and why the American first past the pole system sucks), see this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&list=PLej2SlXPEd37YwwEY7mm0WyZ8cfB1TxXa playlist of youtube videos] by CGP Grey --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:16, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

: Unfortunately he repeats incorrect statements like "IRV eliminates the spoiler effect" and obviously hasn't done honest research on it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 00:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

===GOOMHR!===
Cueball almost perfectly matches my views on voting. I think Approval is far and away the best (due to ease of implementation and low chance of paradox). Condorcet & IRV use the same ballot design, but IRV is mathematically inferior, so I don't get why anyone likes it, other than bandwagon effects. The only situation where I'd support IRV is if it were the only viable option to replace FPTP, which is unfortunately the case in many places. - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 22:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Frankie, the two established parties Democrats and Republicans both favor IRV over Condorcet precisely because of its mathematical biases. The 'deficiencies' of IRV tend to eliminate centrist moderates early in the process and leave the established parties in political power. IRV represents a slower change to the political status quo. [[User:Barrackar|Barrackar]] ([[User talk:Barrackar|talk]]) 07:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

The larger the democracy, the less a single vote matters, regardless of the voting system. I, for one, support a return to the system of democratic city-states with annual elections. If a sizeable focal minority don't agree with their government, they can just break off and declare their area a separate city-state. Of course, this could eventually create a loose alliance of house-states or even people-states each with their individual laws and foreign policy. --[[User:Nialpxe|Nialpxe]], 2017. [[User_talk:Nialpxe|(Arguments welcome)]] 02:44, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

I think this might be the first xkcd, in over 1,800 comics, that I understood literally nothing on my own. Wow. Except that this was something about voting, caught the word voting, LOL! I usually get at least a few things, and come here to fill in any gaps. Guess discussing these 4 things is particularly American, I've never heard of any of them (as a Canadian, and on an iPad where I can only see the title text here).

One thing I don't get: Why Condorcet can't be used on 3 or more candidates. I read a bit of the Wikipedia link about the Condorcet Paradox, okay, I see the POTENTIAL paradox, but it's not necessarily so. Sure it MAY be that 3 candidates get equal support in this way, but numerically this is so horribly unlikely I'm suprised it's not only being considered, but given such significant weight as to say it can't be used! As I understand it, using last year's election, it works like this: Trump, Hillary, and let's throw in Bernie Sanders as the third. As I'm understanding the explanation of the Condorcet Method, if a hypothetical election between Bernie and Trump would have Bernie winning (based on support? Sounds like no actual voting taking place), and a hypothetical election between Bernie and Hillary would also have Bernie winning, then Bernie is the winner. But that's 3 people, what doesn't work? And if Condorcet only works with 2 candidates, how is that not just a normal vote? The Paradox seems to say if exactly a third of voters rank Bernie over Hillary over Trump, one third says Hillary over Trump over Bernie, and the final third has Trump over Hillary over Bernie, then THAT'S the Condorcet Paradox. But that's SO specific, it's unlikely! - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.64|108.162.219.64]] 03:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC) I agree. Who cares about the Condorcet winner when there is the Smith set? [[User:Barrackar|Barrackar]] ([[User talk:Barrackar|talk]]) 07:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

''To the Canadian commenter:'' have you followed the elections of the Conservative party? It looks to me like a recent large-scale use of an "non-traditional" voting system. I've heard it criticised for its complexity, but no discussion on why it was chosen.
[http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/how-the-2017-conservative-leadership-vote-will-work/ Description here]
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.88|162.158.126.88]] 15:31, 2 June 2017 (UTC) anothercanadiancommenter