explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2254: JPEG2000

2020-01-14T08:01:25Z

172.68.10.172: /* Trivia */

{{comic
| number = 2254
| date = January 13, 2020
| title = JPEG2000
| image = jpeg2000.png
| titletext = I was actually a little relieved when I learned that JPEG2000 was used in the DCI digital cinema standard. I was feeling so bad for it!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BADLY COMPRESSED IMAGE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[wikipedia:JPEG 2000|JPEG2000]] is an image standard created by the Joint Photographic Experts Group from 1997 to 2000 to improve on the original JPEG standard, published in 1992. As of 2020, it is supported by Photoshop and the Safari browser, but remains unsupported and poorly supported by other popular software, including Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox browsers, as well as the free and open source image editor GIMP.
The extensions applied by convention to files using the JPEG2000 standard, .jp2 and .jpx, remain unfamiliar to
many users for whom the .jpg extension, denoting the original standard, is well known.
The JPEG2000 standard was seen an improvement by its creators, supporting many features
not included in the original standard such as multiple resolutions, progressive transmission, a lossless compression option,
and alpha transparency.
The complexity of fully implementing the standard, as well as
patent concerns, may have slowed adoption.
The people in the comic seem to have some desire for JPEG2000 adoption, and may have been involved in its creation, and seem to care more about its eventual use than rapid adoption.

The core concept of this comic is that engineers often expect that a superior technology or standard will catch on, though often other factors keep an "inferior" standard dominant. (See various comics referencing [[:Category:Dvorak|Dvorak]] keyboards, as well as the term "[https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/betamaxed betamaxed].")
The "we are in this for the long haul" statement might refer to the engineers believing that superior technology will eventually win despite the evidence to the contrary. Its humor comes from the fact that JPEG2000 shows no sign of becoming a widely-used standard either now or in the future.

The title text suggests that Randall feels bad that the standard hasn't been adopted, perhaps because he empathizes with the engineers who worked hard to develop it or anthropomorphizes the standard itself, which has been ignored by most of the computer-using world. DCI, short for {{w|Digital Cinema Initiatives}}, is a collaboration of several major film studios to establish standards for the security and proper display of digital films.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Hairbun are both at a table, facing each other, both working on their own respective computers.]

:[Cueball leans back and stops typing. Hairbun continues to type.]

:[Cueball looks over at Hairbun.]
:Cueball: I'm starting to worry that JPEG 2000 isn't catching on as fast as we expected.
:Hairbun: Don't worry! We're in this for the long haul.

==Trivia==
* Cueball's keyboard seems to have inexplicably disappeared in the last panel.
* A JPEG2000 version of the image file is available here: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/jpeg2000.jp2 . It is only 20% smaller than the PNG version, and has visible compression artifacts.

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

2249: I Love the 20s

2020-01-03T12:02:47Z

172.68.10.172: a missing quote

{{comic
| number = 2249
| date = January 1, 2020
| title = I Love the 20s
| image = i love the 20s.png
| titletext = Billboard's "Best of the 80s" chart includes Blondie's 1980 hit "Call Me." QED.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a PEDANT. Explain title text.}}
This comic was released on the first day of {{w|2020}}. It was the second of two [[:Category:New Year|New Year comics]] around the 2019-2020 New Year.

[[Megan]], [[Cueball]], and [[Ponytail]] are all happy for the beginning of the new {{w|decade}}, from 2020-2029, for a variety of reasons, but [[White Hat]] has objections to this beginning of a new decade.

It begins with Megan wishing happy new decade and Ponytail naming it the {{w|2020s|'20s}}. At this point White Hat tries to get in with an objection to this, but he is interrupted twice before he can make his point.

First Ponytail is excited that decades have "easy names" again. Decades such as the {{w|1960s}} or {{w|1970s}} had easy "names" - '60s, '70s, etc. The {{w|2000s_(decade)|2000s}} were {{w|2000s_(decade)#Name_for_the_decade|sometimes}} named the "{{w|Aughts}}" and the {{w|2010s}} the "Teens", names that did not enter popular usage, but we can return to the shortened decades name with the '20s decade.

Then she continues to discuss cultural trends and Cueball chimes in. In decades before the 2000s, trends were named for the decade in which its members reached adulthood / teenage years, e.g. a trend from the '90s. After 2000, many trends have been labeled with the "{{w|millennials}}" term, which refers to an entire generation who grew up in the 2000s. Cueball and Ponytail hope that trends will not be labeled as "millennial" or by generations in this new decade. This phenomenon was previously discussed in [[1849: Decades]]. Millennials have also been mentioned in [[1962: Generations]] and in [[2165: Millennials]].

The main point of the comic, however, is White Hat's claim that the new decade does not start until 2021. Ponytail claims that he is pedantic but in that case he should at least be right... Of course both sides believe they are correct. White Hat's argument appears to be analogous to the point often made at the turn of the millennium, which is that, because the Gregorian calendar doesn't include a year 0, the first century started in year 1, the second century began in the year 101, and so forth, so the 21st century didn't begin until the start of 2001. Nevertheless, most people were celebrating the shift from 19 to 20, as the first two numbers in the year, much more than they did the next year when the new millennium officially began.

Ponytail retorts that decades aren't numbered cardinally: any set of ten years constitutes a decade. While the 203rd decade of the Common Era doesn't begin until 2021, "the twenties" refers to all years that include a "twenty". White Hat appears not to accept this argument, insisting that that Ponytail doesn't "get it", he even wish to draw her a diagram which makes Ponytail interrupt again to respond in kind.

At this point Megan stops their heated argument claiming she can resolve this. She then states that {{w|MC Hammer}}'s song "{{w|U Can't Touch This}}", released in 1990, was featured in a 1990s-themed television show ({{w|I Love the '90s (American TV series)|''I Love the '90s''}}) instead of its 1980s-themed counterpart. Ponytail then claims that this settles the discussion. And White Hat throws in the towel stating that he accepts VH1's authority and lets Ponytail win. This comment can be read in two ways: sarcastic ("VH1 is a random pop culture organization with no expert knowledge, you have presented a poor argument") or legitimate ("I accept VH1 as a legitimate authority and defer to them," which would be humorous because VH1 is a random pop culture organization with no expert knowledge of the calendar). {{w|VH1}} is the parent company of MTV, a cable TV channel known for grouping music by decades.

However, reading the {{w|decade|Wikipedia page on decade}} it is clear that neither White Hat nor Ponytail can claim to be correct. There is no consensus about what a decade should mean regarding 2021-2030 vs 2020-2029. On the other hand saying the '20s is much clearer defined as those years with two thousand and twenty something. But that was not what Megan was saying. Ponytail on the other hand uses that version.

Perhaps [[Randall]] may be concerned that a single datum-point is not sufficient proof, so in the title text he continues this theme with a hit song from 1980 grouped with the 1980s, not the 1970s. In this case it is {{w|Blondie (band)|Blondie's}} 1980 hit "{{w|Call Me (Blondie song)|Call Me}}" which is featured in {{w|Billboard (magazine)|Billboard's}} chart [https://www.billboard.com/charts/greatest-billboards-top-songs-80s Best of the 80s].

The title text ends with {{w|Q.E.D.|QED}}, "quod erat demonstrandum", literally meaning "what was to be shown", traditionally used at the end of a mathematical proof to mean "thus it has been demonstrated", as if this second landmark piece of evidence sufficiently proves Megan's point beyond a doubt, as conclusive as a mathematical proof.

==Transcript==
:[Megan walks in from the left greeting Cueball, White Hat, and Ponytail standing in a line, the last two looking in her direction.]
:Megan: Happy new decade!
:Ponytail: Welcome to the '20s!
:White Hat: '''''Actually—'''''
:Ponytail: I'm excited we can name decades again.
:Ponytail: "Aughts" and "teens" never caught on.

:[Megan stops next to Cueball as White Hat has his finger raised.]
:White Hat: Actually, the new decade doesn't start-
:Ponytail: Mostly, I'm just glad we can go back to attributing cultural trends to decades instead of generations.

:[All four just stand normal.]
:Cueball: Yeah.
:Cueball: Decades were silly, but making everything about "millennials" turned out to be even worse.
:Ponytail: Seriously.

:[Only White Hat and Ponytail are shown, both with their arms held out to the sides.]
:White Hat: It's technically not a new decade until '''2021'''.
:Ponytail: OK, listen.
:Ponytail: If you're going to be pedantic, you should at least be right.
:White Hat: I '''''am''''' right!
:Ponytail: You're '''''not'''''.

:[Zoom in on White Hat and Ponytails upper parts as they gesture towards each other both raising their hands palm up. Megan interrupts them from off panel, as made clear in the next panel. Her voice comes out of a star burst on the left panel frame.]
:White Hat: See, the 20th century didn't start until--
:Ponytail: But decades aren't centuries. They're not cardinally numbered.
:White Hat: You don't get it. Let me draw a--
:Ponytail: No, '''''you''''' don't--
:Megan (off-panel): Stop!

:[All four characters are displayed again. Megan has raised a finger and all the others look at her.]
:Megan: I can resolve this.
:Megan: *Ahem*
:Megan: MC Hammer's ''U Can't Touch This'' (1990) was featured in '''''I Love the '90s''''', not ''''' '80s'''''.
:Ponytail: ...That settles that.
:White Hat: Yeah, I accept VH1's authority.
:White Hat: You win.

==Trivia==
Traditionally, the First Century starts in year 1 and ends in the year 100, the Second Century starts in the year 101 and runs through the year 200, and so on, because {{w|Zero-based numbering|zero indexing}}, like the number zero itself, was not in wide use at the time. However, due to an error by {{w|Dionysius Exiguus}}, the year 1 was after the death of {{w|Herod the Great}}, so Jesus could not have been born in that year, and was probably born either in 4 B.C. or 6 B.C., so the first, second, etc., century after his birth would actually end in the mid '90's.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:New Year]]

Talk:1056: Felidae

2019-11-29T04:17:13Z

172.68.10.172:

I'm pretty sure there's the saber-toothed tiger in the smilodon category too. That's gonna be ''faaar'' to the right. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:05, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
::@davidy: saber-toothed tiger == saber-toothed cat. Same animal, different name. [[Special:Contributions/189.135.115.199|189.135.115.199]] 21:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, Dracorex hogwartsia was specifically named for Hogwarts, so the name isn't disturbingly similar.[[User:Kdesltd|Kdesltd]] ([[User talk:Kdesltd|talk]]) 06:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

;this page is useless without a table of cat names to osx versions

cause where else am i going to go for that information?
obviously [explain]xkcd. [[Special:Contributions/68.201.90.115|68.201.90.115]] 22:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

{{w|OS X#Versions|Here!}} [[User:Dawfedora|Dawfedora]] ([[User talk:Dawfedora|talk]]) 18:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I see your sarcasm and raise you one wikitable. {{unsigned ip|173.245.52.205}}

No one addresses what the Ox problem is - I believe that he could be referring to the fact that all the cool names are taken. Although it could be the strange order? Seems like the mountain lion version wasn't even out? Did he know that this was the name or did he guess? No matter what he did spot a problem since they did stop using cat names. [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:24, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The version Mountain Lion had been announced in (I believe) February of that year, so he would have known about the name. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.84|108.162.216.84]] 03:40, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
:I personally interpreted "the OSX problem" as them increasingly struggling to find cat names for their releases which top the previous names in some way. The first three releases were clearly moving up the scale of "which would win in a fight". The fourth takes a step backwards in "would win in a fight" but moves forward in "coolness of name". Then we see a step up in both scales. Then a double step back in coolness of name. Then further progress on coolness of name before finally taking steps backwards in BOTH "coolness of name" and "would win in a fight". -- plugwash

One other problem: cheetahs are the fastest animal on earth. 10.0 Cheetah was SLOW.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.174|173.245.50.174]] 18:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

The next versions of the OS X were named "Mavericks", "Yosemite" and "El Capitan". No more cats indeed. :-( [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.231|162.158.102.231]] 09:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Really have to disagree with the coolness of the name sort results in this comic. I'd rank them probably as: Lion < Snow Leopard < Leopard < Tiger < Jaguar [[User:Zorlax the Mighty|Zorlax the Mighty'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:Zorlax the Mighty|talk]]) 17:55, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

"Panther" is an ill-defined term, not only referring to the puma species but large black cats in general (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther ) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.79.81|172.68.79.81]] 20:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

:You can use <nowiki>{{w|Panther</nowiki> to put {{w|Panther}} [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.243|162.158.74.243]] 02:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

:I think, the Revolver Ocelot meme made Ocelot cooler, than Cheetah. If you swap those two, you get a route to housecat and lynx. Problem solved.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 04:17, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2221: Emulation

2019-10-29T05:06:37Z

172.68.10.172:

This reminds me of Miii's "world.execute(me)" song.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 05:06, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2215: Faculty:Student Ratio

2019-10-15T04:39:06Z

172.68.10.172: /* "Hi!" x 5'000'000'000 */ new section

Hi

That student from the title text would have just barely made a cent, two if they were generous and rounded up. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.18|172.68.65.18]] 00:21, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Really? My calculations have him at about 16 cents ((5 trillion x 100) divided by (10^6 x 3600 x 24 x 365.25))

Regarding above average students not getting in, the scenario described is oversimplified. I used to work in admissions for a “highly selective” university and while applicants with perfect SATs and higher than 4.0 GPAs were routinely put on the wait list (not rejected) because we assumed that they viewed us as merely a “safety school”, if the applicant showed any interest at all in actually attending, such as having come on campus for an in person interview, campus tour, or had an alumni connection, or letter(s) of recommendation, or athletic scholarship, then of course we would make an offer, and similarly if they showed any interest as cited above after being put on the wait list then they would be top of the list to get an offer from the wait list. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.48|162.158.63.48]] 03:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

== "Hi!" x 5'000'000'000 ==

Hi!

I think it's a reference to "Hello, World!" test program.

It is also possible to print 5 billions of unique "Hi!" using different color (provided you have 32 bit color map for CMYK and maybe 2 differend colors of paper)

Talk:1103: Nine

2019-07-21T18:12:55Z

172.68.10.172:

I really find that the hover-over text applies to me more often than not, unless I'm not in mixed company. This reminds me of a time that I was staying with a friend and she walked in on me changing the time on her microwave. When I explained to her that her microwave, stove, and coffee pot were all set to different times and it was bugging me, she just looked at me like I was crazy. --[[User:Grate314|"grate314"]] ([[User talk:Grate314|talk]]) 16:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
:I don't think that is what the title text meant. Also, anybody who reads an xkcd comic and remembers that they did that ''is'' crazy. --[[Special:Contributions/98.221.139.80|98.221.139.80]]
:I agree with grate314. I have to fix this every time the power goes out in my house because the stove, microwave, and radio all treat power outages differently. Between different rooms, though, it doesn't bother me. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 19:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
::I know that that isn't specifically what the hover-over text was talking about, but I was thinking of it in a more general way. I've just found that whenever someone asks me what I'm thinking about, it's best to say 'nothing'. What I meant by 'mixed company' is a general social gathering, like a wedding or birthday party. I'm an EE student, so when someone asks me that question at school, I answer honestly. The answer is usually 'soldering'. I think about soldering a lot. Thanks, DanB, the clocks were all on top of each other, btw, I'm not sure how she lived in that chaos.--[[User:Grate314|grate314]] ([[User talk:Grate314|talk]]) 21:27, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Did anybody try doing what the title text is saying? Just wondering. --[[Special:Contributions/98.221.139.80|98.221.139.80]]

When I'm not following written instructions, I tend to use multiples of 1:11, out of laziness. So, if I figure something should take about 2-3 minutes, I'll nuke it for 2:22. That way, I can press one button 3 times without having to move my finger. [[User:MGK|MGK]] ([[User talk:MGK|talk]]) 17:23, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

If your microwave is connected to your home network you should accept that GCHQ have probably broken all your codes.[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 20:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm lazy and like to use repeated digits rather than have to move my finger along to find the next one - thus 33, 55, 66 get used a lot. I also find that for most items, longer time at lower power settings is more effective at even heating, so I do a lot of 66 at 50% rather than 33 at 100%. Our current oven only has 10 power settings, unlike a previous one that had two digit power settings resulting in 66 sec at 55% being a fairly commonly used setup. Interestingly, the logic of every microwave oven I have encountered treats 99 entered in the seconds display the same as if one were to have entered 1minute and 33 seconds. Thus 99:99 would be 100 minutes and 33 seconds. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 17:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Oddly (apparently) my microwave has only 3 buttons (10 minutes, 1 minute, 10 seconds), though I do feel sorry for the 10 minute button.
:Maybe it would make more sense to change the 10 minutes button to a 6 minutes button [[Special:Contributions/212.23.140.110|212.23.140.110]] 16:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I usually just push the "add 30 seconds" button until I reach the desired time (6 pushes for three minutes, 3 for 1:30, etc.). [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 16:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

:mine only has a single analogue dial that jumps up in increasingly large steps, and for some reason is numbered to skip over some sensible times, such as six minutes. however, no buttons, so problem solved. [[Special:Contributions/86.15.83.223|86.15.83.223]] 22:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

The 9 and 0 button are near each other so I do a lot of 90 (meaning 1 minute, 30 seconds). Sometimes, I'll get lazy<strike>er</strike> and press 99.

'''Quasar '''unit offers the additional accuracy/simplicity/utility of min 10, 1 and sec 10, 1 There are no other numbers on the control face, which has 14 buttons total. hmm, Minimum number of buttons required to accomplish nuking?--[[User:Idkrash|Idkrash]] ([[User talk:Idkrash|talk]]) 01:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
:For simplicity I would be in favor of 2 dials and 2 buttons. The dials could serve for power and time, which could output to digital displays. The buttons then could serve as start and stop. Pressing start and stop simultaneously would toggle the clock set function and you could use the dials to set the min and hour.----[[User:Shine|Shine]] ([[User talk:Shine|talk]]) 10:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
::I suspect that sooner or later they'll all just have a power button and a touchscreen. [[User:Erenan|Erenan]] ([[User talk:Erenan|talk]]) 15:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
::Agreed that the touchscreen is likely but you could get away with just the two dials by having the time dial start the oven when it is pulled out and stop when pushed in. (#Analog) --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 19:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
::: My microwave already has a touch screen... we use the 30 second button on it a lot... --[[User:Tustin2121|Tustin2121]] ([[User talk:Tustin2121|talk]]) 16:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
:::The pushable dial isn't even necessary, have the machine start when the dial is twisted, which then ticks back to zero, and stop when the door is opened [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.65|141.101.99.65]] 14:13, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford's_law Benfords law] pops to mind.

I don't use 20, 30 ,40, because find it easier to just click twice same button: 11, 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, 77, 88, 99 and anything beyond 99 seconds - well, 200 {{unsigned ip|82.71.241.138|17:25, 6 December 2012‎ (UTC)}}

As a datum-point, my microwave has a (linear, clockwork, with mechanical bell-ding) dial, which is imprecise enough. Also it's a ''really'' old one (20 years old? 25? 30?) with a lower power than is common to see mentioned, so I look at the packaging recommendations, see perhaps 650W, 750W and 850W times, or 700W and 800W ones, and then add half again onto the lower rate's required time, and then perhaps a little more for good luck, as the amount I (roughly) twist the dial. I rarely use anything other than 'full'-power, out of the five settings. And I still sometimes need to renuke after testing. I really ought to get a new one. Probably would be more efficient, as well as accurate. ;) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.141.216|178.98.141.216]] 13:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Shockingly, no one has mentioned Cirno from Touhou Project.--[[Special:Contributions/67.78.126.46|67.78.126.46]] 12:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Shockingly, noone has mentioned that 159 seconds is closer to 3 minutes that it is to 2. [[User:Marklark|Marklark]] ([[User talk:Marklark|talk]]) 23:03, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
: I think it's a reasonable assumption that a the 1 gets bumped into the minutes column, otherwise all times would have to be entered in seconds or some other untidy interface would be necessary [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.65|141.101.99.65]] 14:13, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Am I the only one that uses "99" whenever the instructions say something close to "1 minute 30 seconds"? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.49|108.162.216.49]] 15:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)BenDanTomJack
:If the instructions say 1:30, wouldn't 88 be a better choice than 99? A variance of 2 seconds under vs. a variance of 9 seconds over. {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.105}}

* Shockingly, no one has mentioned Pluto. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 18:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Talk:792: Password Reuse

2019-07-05T06:35:58Z

172.68.10.172: /* Google's "don't be evil" is no more */ new section

And now it turns out that Google gives our data to NSA....sigh. [[Special:Contributions/24.7.241.154|24.7.241.154]] 07:58, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Monica

What happened in March of 1997? [[User:MR|MR]] ([[User talk:MR|talk]]) 18:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)MR

Hi! After consulting Wikipedia's article about March 1997 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997), I think there are two main incidents Black Hat could refer to:
*The '''Phoenix Lights''', a group of supposed UFOs, turned out to be probably military aircrafts.
*The mass suicide committed by 39 '''Heaven's Gate''' cultists.
Since we know little about Black Hat's life in 1997, we could argue that he was expecting an extra-terrestrial contact or that he was attracted by the ideas of that creed - and that the disillusion brought him his present disbelief in things.
Of course those are just hypotheses, and don't seem to fit the character as we know him...[[User:Inverno1407|Inverno1407]] ([[User talk:Inverno1407|talk]]) 11:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
:I honestly believe that he created the Heaven's Gate cult and he views their mass suicide as his crowning achievement in getting people to believe things, it just isn't getting any better than that, so he doesn't believe in anything anymore. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.32|173.245.54.32]] 13:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

----
: 
:"In the conclusion, Black Hat reveals that the only thing he's doing with all his hacked user accounts is to post slightly inaccurate content on Wiki sites."

This paragraph has been present since this explanation was added. I can't see how it is arrived at from the comic. (So I wonder who [[User:148.87.67.212]] might have been...) [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 14:10, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I removed some slightly inaccurate content from this wiki. It was the bit about Black Hat posting slightly inaccurate content on wiki sites.[[Special:Contributions/86.40.93.217|86.40.93.217]] 00:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone know if he had anything to do with the article on "taking the piss"?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
----
How does this compare in light of [[792:_Password_Reuse|792:Password Reuse]]? [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 05:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The "March 1997" issue is still a mystery to me. May be a global computer virus attack? I will go through all days on wikipedia. The month summery presents not the solution.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Conisdering how blackhat loves messing with people, I seriously doubt anything at all hapened in March 1997. He's just messing with us! [[Special:Contributions/189.5.106.228|189.5.106.228]] 02:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Oooo, I dunno. Given Black Hat's odd tastes, *anything* from March 1997 could have caused him to lose his faith: Paul McCartney being knighted, Tom Cruise winning an Oscar, the U.S. Supreme Court hearing arguments on Internet Indecency, India's Ministry of Charity choosing a successor to Mother Theresa, Gene Roddenberry's ashes going into orbit, the Brazil Senate finally allowing women members to wear slacks... Anything!! [[http://www.historyorb.com/events/date/1997/march]]
:Wow, look at this historical CNN page: [http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/03/19/scotus.cda/ http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/03/19/scotus.cda/]. The {{w|Communications Decency Act}} is the most likely item from your list.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 08:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
::39 Heaven's Gate cultists committed mass suicide
::If he was upset at causing their deaths or having accomplished their deaths, has little to prove now nor reason to repeat the act, he is on pause; we wait.
::[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
----
My opinion is that Black Hat referred to Bill Clinton banning federal funding for research on human cloning in March 1997.{{unsigned ip|108.162.242.5}}
:How would that create an hiatus in Back Hat's career?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey! I though I'd throw in the opinion that perhaps March 1997 was a month of personal importance to Black Hat rather than anything societal. If the 1997 coincides with any of those standard "loss of idealism and innocence years" for Black Hat, then I'd say that's pretty likely what Randall was going for. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.209}}

Hi - the last line about the TV show DIBS is wrong. DIBS came out in 2014 - the comic in 2010. What the last panel is referring to is calling dibs on the TV to play CoD4. {{unsigned ip|108.162.218.53}}

== Google's "don't be evil" is no more ==

Google removed that "don't be evil" thing from their motto...

*password change intensifies*

[[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 06:35, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Talk:1057: Klout

2017-03-09T02:32:37Z

172.68.10.172:

Klout is looong dead now. I suppose this means it's niche and hipster, and it's fine to use it now. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
:its not dead... just not really as trendy anymore.--[[User:Calvsie|Calvsie]] ([[User talk:Calvsie|talk]]) 21:01, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Any possible meaning in the fact that "clout" can mean a blow from a hand? I think it might be related, considering the site is called Klout and Randall requests being clouted, in a manner of speaking... {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.209}}

Replace "Klout" with "Google+" for modern relevance. [[User:Keavon|Keavon]] ([[User talk:Keavon|talk]]) 00:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
:Interacting with Google+ should not have anywhere close to Klout in "douchebagness", if any. [[User:Arifsaha|Arifsaha]] ([[User talk:Arifsaha|talk]]) 23:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
:Also, Randall does have a Google Plus. https://plus.google.com/111588569124648292310/posts [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 08:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Never make something like this unretractable, just in case the business you now hate changes its focus and becomes something worthwhile.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.174|173.245.50.174]] 18:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:Or it goes away entirely and something unrelated and much better by the same name appears later. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 02:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:875: 2009 Called

2016-12-31T18:26:49Z

172.68.10.172:

I was too busy trading fashion tips, and they hung up before I could tell them. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The '90s called. They wanted my pogs back. But, due to inflation, they couldn't offer me enough money for me to be willing to sell. I told them my friend, Oscar, has some Pokémon stuff, but the '90s had no interest in that crap. I made the right choice to choose pogs over Pokémon. Society made the wrong one. But, I digress. The '90s are doing rather well, and they miss us.[[Special:Contributions/76.29.225.28|76.29.225.28]] 18:20, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
:The only Pokémon stuff I ever had was a bunch of pogs, so... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.10.172|172.68.10.172]] 18:26, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

2017 called, but I couldn't understand what they were saying over all the screams.

I bet it was something about them being attacked by 4 Replicants.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 23:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, that title text is feeling pretty prophetic now...[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.185|141.101.98.185]] 00:08, 12 November 2016 (UTC)