explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3007: Probabilistic Uncertainty

2024-11-05T15:28:27Z

172.68.186.106:

Emotional spirals are useless. I've been coping by pretending we're in scenario 1, it keeps me sane. If I'm wrong, I'll jump off that bridge when we come to it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:And I have a friend whose strategy is baking. It's both therapeutic and delicious. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:I see I don't know US geography well: which bridge you can jump from to leave it? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Most of them. Some of them may be 'caged in' for safety/anti-suicide/anti-DropThingsInThoseBelow purposes (or a {{w|covered bridge}}). Relatively few of the others will be ones that you would have no qualms about vaulting the railing, but (as well as it clearly being a witticism by Barmar) I think you could easily ''find'' a bridge that you could jump off. And the resulting falling part isn't at all the difficult bit. Landing safely (or, in extremis for those desperate enough, in a guaranteed immediately fatal manner) is more the challenge. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.206|172.70.86.206]] 14:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but think that at preparing for the negative outcome regardless of which outcome is more likely (unless that outcome is *very* unlikely) is a healthy thing to do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.141|172.71.147.141]] 20:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
: "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst" is my usual approach to things. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This comic appeared the day before the 2024 United States Presidential Election. At publication time, polls were strongly suggesting about a 50/50 odds that either major candidate would win. Recent news items included advice from mental-health professionals on how to deal with election-related anxiety. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.195|172.71.167.195]] 20:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Definitely related. This should be in the text, not in the comments, frankly. The yanks are going nuts about the election right now. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.124.243|172.71.124.243]] 20:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Did the advice suggested narcotics? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

My personal policy is to expect and prepare for the worst. That way I can be surprised when it doesn't happen, and not surprised when it does, rather than the other way around. I don't "do" emotions, so it's basically just planning and mumbling colloquialisms involving the digestive system... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.134.64|172.71.134.64]] 21:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:As someone who used to think this way, this is obstructively cynical, and downright ''sad''. I mean, in theory you should be pleasantly surprised by the good, and prepared for the bad, but in practice you just dismiss anything good and focus exclusively on the bad. As someone with experience in this type of thinking, it isn't healthy. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but feel that it's mostly Democrats that are anxious, where Trump winning is the bad case. Not being an American I don't have much perspective. Are many Republicans likely to also be anxious, and if so, why? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.60.170|172.69.60.170]] 21:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Not sure about "anxious", for Trump-supporting Rs (as opposed to Trump-opposing ones, who are both anxious and tremendously conflicted), but there's certainly a buzz of some emotion. That, if ''their'' expectations/hopes/desires are dashed, seem more likely to turn into more direct push-back than Ds would in their case. i.e. if Trump truly wins, there'll be turmoil as the legitimate government forcefully pushes against large subsets of the people, if Harris truly wins then small but determined fractions of the people will push back against the legitimate government. (If it's any way ambiguous, for long enough, which 'truth' indicates a win, it could easily be people vs. people for at least as long as the confusion lasts, with very little reason to believe that it'll be Harris supporters throwing the first stone, probably making Florida 2000 look like a "neat transition"). But this is just what it looks like at this moment. Within a day we ''might'' get to see whose words get eaten, or it could be at least a month of building tensions (due to the US system of elections, deliberately legislated to be so much more inefcicient than it needs to be, compared to various other Western nations). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

From what I've seen the ones in public-facing forums seem pretty indifferent. They do talk a lot about election fraud though. {{unsigned ip|172.70.34.117|22:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)}}

I like that the comic leaves "good" and "bad" open to interpretation.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.83|172.70.211.83]] 22:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:He doesn't want to start fights in the comments/discussion pages/replies! Good to see him appealing to no specific demographic in this one. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 22:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Considering that the "Harris for President" banner is still active, I'm not sure I agree with that. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.4|172.68.22.4]] 22:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::yeah, for that reason i think it's more just so the comic can have further longevity, as this way it can be applied to any number of things with two outcomes, not just the current election [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.193|141.101.109.193]] 00:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Well, so far so good ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=3007:_Probabilistic_Uncertainty&oldid=355799 Further, with regards to N/A - the odds of "precisely" 50/50 are probabilistically zero]: Bear in mind that with the Electoral College system and the fact that only 7 US states are "likely in play," we are talking only hundreds or thousands of realistic possibilities. The odds of a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College are far more than 0. One possibility of a tie that is "on the radar" is if the Republicans take Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and the 2nd Congressional District of Nebraska (which is very likely to go Democratic) and the Democrats take Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If you consider just the 7 "in play" states but Arizona "flips" from Republican to Democratic, there are 3 combinations that yield a 269-269 tie. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.249|172.70.210.249]] 01:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
: If there's a 269-269 tie, that's basically going to be a Trump win due to how the contingent election process works. (For that matter the far more plausible 270-268 to Harris, which happens if she wins Nevada but not Pennsylvania, is likely going to result in Trump getting the presidency as well, but let's ignore that.) However, many analysts, when faced with numbers like Nate Silver's 50.015%, are going to round it to 50% or 50.0% in the public-facing reports, resulting in apparent exact 50/50 odds even if mathematically they actually favor one side slightly. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.130.3|172.71.130.3]] 10:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::There's little point in being so precise, since the fraction is far less than the margin of error in the polling. Anything between 49% and 51% is essentially a toss-up. If the 51% is in your favor you can feel hopeful, but hardly confident. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re '''We contacted several researchers who are experts in emotional spirals to ask them, but none of them were in a state to speak with us''': Is it a stretch to think that the emotional-spiral experts were all "in Puerto Rico" (which is not a state), emotionally speaking? In the last week a supporter of one of the candidates insulted Puerto Rico and by extension, people of Puerto Rico and Puerto Rican descent, causing an emotional uproar all over the inter-tubes. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.210|162.158.90.210]] 01:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Created an account just to say this; don't get mad at me but in my opinion, both candidates are equally bad, which has led to a weird sense of calmness in me due to my belief that we'll be equally screwed no matter what, just in different ways. Tbh in my opinion both candidates are in between what their supporters think of them and what their opponents think of them. Please be civil if you reply, no ad hominem please. [[User:BurnV06|BurnV06]] ([[User talk:BurnV06|talk]]) 05:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:No, one of them is clearly worse than the other. How do you feel about LGBTQ+ rights? Abortion? Medicare? Teaching kids that racism and homophobia in schools is bad? Well, if Project 2025 is anything to go by, one side ''clearly'' is the unpreferable unless you're a white, Christian, rich, and male. This is not a "both sides" issue. One is clearly the worse option. And frankly, I wish centrists knew this. I can agree to disagree on some issues but I just cannot elect someone who wants to punish people for the egregious crime of, ''gasp'', not conforming to societal standard of gender and romance.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:"Equally bad" is highly subjective, Burn. More people would consider "a total disaster" vs "at least they're not a total disaster!" as a closer truth (whether their own personally-configured disastermeter comes in a Red or Blue casing), and consider balancing dead in the center of the fence to be the most inexplicable position to take. (Not to mention those like above, and also their antithesis opinions, who have a very definite good/bad opinion 9n the pair.)
:Not that I'd support being mad at you, as the problem with politics today is ''too much'' extreme polarization (we need more moderate voices, rather than wedging open an ever wider void between both limits of opinion). But there's just no realistic middle-ground to gather support around, and what middle-ground there is might also be moving one way or another (depending upon who you ask), so I'm afraid that the strictly neutral "as bad as each other" types are just guaranteed to be setting themselves up to be disappointed. In the 'best' case scenario, disappointed that things aint turning out to be as bad as feared, but I'm not sure that's reassuringly likely enough to comfort you. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it's funny that so many Democrats are genuinely terrified of the results and spend their days anxiously refreshing 538, whereas Republicans are filled with optimism and already know that the democrats have run the weakest candidate since Dukakis. Ah well, maybe in four years you'll actually get to vote for who leads your ticket instead of having them be appointed by the party elites directly without a vote. ;) {{unsigned ip|172.71.22.120|07:35, 5 November 2024}}
:Given the indirect democracy system the US has, there's a number of problems with who gets to be President. And if Harris is weaker than H. Clinton, but it's still on a knife-edge of popular/EC voting, does that mean that Trump's win was therefore less legitimate? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

2999: Bad Map Projection: The United Stralia

2024-10-18T16:03:23Z

172.68.186.106: /* Trivia */ Better way of describing it? (I'm not one to overexplain the obvious, but someone felt the need. Surely this punniness is already far more obvious than the abbreviation bit and doesn't need tagging along.)

{{comic
| number = 2999
| date = October 16, 2024
| title = Bad Map Projection: The United Stralia
| image = bad_map_projection_the_united_stralia_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x651px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = This projection distorts both area and direction, but preserves Melbourne.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a GIANT AUSTRALICAN SPIDERIGATOR - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This is the eighth comic in the series of [[:Category:Bad Map Projections|Bad Map Projections]] displaying Bad Map Projection #102: The United Stralia. It follows [[2951|#45: Exterior Kansas]], released about three and a half months earlier. In this addition to the Bad Map Projections series, Randall has blended two different countries — the United States of America and Australia — into one.

As with a number of Bad Map Projections, the primary joke is the naming of this ''as'' a "map projection". Its depiction is particularly similar to [[2807: Bad Map Projection: ABS(Longitude)]], in which geography is overlaid upon other geography. It also follows the practice of [[2256: Bad Map Projection: South America]], in which a general continental shape is forced upon other areas, with the general geographical outline of the 48 contiguous US states being merged with the political boundaries of Australia (with exceptions, most obviously Australia's Bass Strait being retained in lieu of the US's central Florida). At a further level of merging, the US states are repacked as subdivisions within the various Australian ones; as with the likes of [[2394: Contiguous 41 States]], it also takes some liberties with the relative neighboring positioning of some of these, although not by totally removing any of the actual {{w|contiguous United States}}. Alaska and Hawaii aren't included, likely because the 48 contiguous US states better match the shape and size of Australia.

The map pokes fun at superficial and irrelevant similarities between features of the maps of the United States and Australia, such as the shape of the east coasts of {{w|New England}} and the {{w|Cape York Peninsula}}, and the distance to the southern tip of island of {{w|Tasmania}} and the length of the {{w|Florida}} {{w|peninsula}}. The end result is to illustrate a fanciful place which does not actually exist and thus would have limited worth for navigating either Australia or the USA, although navigation between two listed locations/areas drawn from the same original continent would at least be broadly possible (with the possibility of a few 'surprises' en route). The blending features cities from both countries on the map, e.g., San Francisco and Los Angeles (USA) close to Perth (Australia).

The {{w|states and territories of Australia}} are depicted with black lines/labels, while the {{w|states of the United States}} and such cities as are taken from either nation are marked with gray. The Australian states are labeled with their full names, but the American states are given only their postal abbreviations. (Mississippi is mislabeled as MI, in addition to Michigan's own correct usage, instead of the official MS.) Western Australia is usually abbreviated to WA, but the convention here leaves that unambiguously assigned to the US state of Washington. Idaho, for some reason, is not labeled at all, and neither is the Australian island state of Tasmania.

The title text makes a joke that this map does not preserve {{w|Equal-area projection|area}} or {{w|Conformal map projection|direction}} (typically, a map projection {{w|Map projection#Metric properties of maps|sacrifices one to preserve the other}}, or both to correctly depict a particular distance metric), but does preserve the city of Melbourne as a feature located on the map, near the actual location of {{w|Melbourne, Florida}}. Note that this is not the correct location of {{w|Melbourne}}, Australia, as it is far too much east in the bad map projection, but there is nothing to stop the shared Melbourne being entirely 'correct' and every ''other'' feature being shifted as a 'compromise'. The concept of a point being 'preserved', rather than actual dimensionally-meaningful quantities, is meaningless and just adds to the badness of the projection. There are other city names shared between the US and Australia, but they're not located at any obviously similar geographic locations; e.g., the location of Brisbane in the comic is based on the instance in {{w|Brisbane|Queensland}}, not {{w|Brisbane, California|California}} (potentially named after the main example) or {{w|Brisbane, North Dakota|North Dakota}}.

This is the second comic in October 2024 in which Tasmania appears, the first being [[2996: CIDABM]]. Both feature the major island groups in the Bass Strait, in this case perhaps intended as a sort of analogue to the {{w|Florida Keys}}, or else orphaned coastline features across the 'missing' segment of the US peninsula.

===Geographical relationships===
From west to east, the Australian states and territories contain the following U.S. states; the positions of Australian cities on the map are also listed:

{{w|Western Australia}} contains the following U.S. states:
*Arizona
*California
** {{w|Perth, Australia|Perth}} appears on the California coast, about halfway between {{w|Los Angeles}} and {{w|San Francisco}}.
* Colorado
* Idaho
* Montana
* Nevada
* New Mexico
* Oregon
* Utah
* Washington
* Wyoming

{{w|Northern Territory}} contains the following U.S. states:
* Illinois
* Iowa
* Kansas
* Michigan ({{w|Upper Peninsula}})
* Minnesota
** {{w|Darwin (Australia)|Darwin}} is positioned in northwestern Minnesota.
* Missouri
* Nebraska
* North Dakota
* South Dakota
* Wisconsin

{{w|South Australia}} contains the following U.S. states:
* Arkansas
* Louisiana
** {{w|Adelaide, Australia|Adelaide}} is located in the {{w|Mississippi River delta}} region of Louisiana.
* Oklahoma
* Texas

{{w|Queensland}} contains the following U.S. states and territories:
* Connecticut
* Delaware
* District of Columbia
* Indiana
* Kentucky
* Maine
* Maryland
* Massachusetts
* Michigan ({{w|Lower Peninsula}})
* New Hampshire
* New Jersey
* New York
* North Carolina
** {{w|Brisbane}} is located on the coast in southeast North Carolina.
* Ohio
* Pennsylvania
* Rhode Island
* Tennessee
* Vermont
* Virginia
* West Virginia

{{w|New South Wales}} contains the following U.S. states:

* Alabama
* Georgia
** {{w|Canberra}}, and presumably the rest of the {{w|Australian Capital Territory}}, is located in southeastern Georgia.
* Mississippi
* South Carolina
** {{w|Sydney, Australia|Sydney}} is located along the coast of South Carolina, near the location of {{w|Charleston, South Carolina|Charleston}}.

{{w|Victoria, Australia|Victoria}} and {{w|Tasmania}} combine to make up the U.S. state of Florida, which is now divided into two non-contiguous parts. As a result Tasmania, which has a {{w|Omission of Tasmania from maps of Australia|history of being omitted from maps of Australia}}, is displayed but not named. {{w|Melbourne}} is located in the southeast corner of Victorian Florida. Although Tasmania's largest city {{w|Hobart}} is not labeled, it could share the same general location of Miami on the map. Alaska and Hawaii, the two non-{{w|Contiguous United States|contiguous states}} of the United States, do not appear in the projection. Other major geographic distortions include:
* The U.S. now has two {{w|quadripoint}}s, with the intersection of Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico joining the existing {{w|Four Corners}}.
* Indiana has a border with Arkansas.
* Alabama and Mississippi have lost Gulf Coast access, as Florida has a border with Louisiana.
* Missouri has a north-south border with Oklahoma.
* {{w|Miami, Florida|Miami}} is separated from the lower 48 states, as it is now located in the non-contiguous Tasmanian Florida.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Above the map, in 3 paragraphs:
:Bad map projection #102:
:[In larger letters than the first or the third paragraph]: The United Stralia
:A 50/50 US/Australia blend

[A map whose left side looks like that of Australia and whose right side looks like that of the United States, with Tasmania swapped out for a supposed island that looks like South Florida. The modified subdivisions of Australia are bordered with black with their names also black, while those of the United States are bordered with the same grey the city names are written with, with the US state abbreviations being a brighter one]:

==Trivia==
The use of "Stralia" in the title echoes a common Australian verbal abbreviation for the country, often styled something like '''Stralia'', in casual speech or sometimes {{w|Elsa Stralia#Stage name|more formally}}. This is a convenient punny replacement of the word "States" in "The United States", as it starts with the same two letters.

On the day this comic was released, the xkcd homepage changed to show a [[:File:xkcd_homepage_strip_harris_for_president.png|strip]] showing [[Cueball]] installing a "Harris For President" sign in some grass, presumably on his lawn. This relates to the upcoming 2024 US presidential election.
[[Category:Bad Map Projections]]
[[Category:US maps]]

{{comic discussion}}

User talk:Apollo11

2024-10-02T21:23:34Z

172.68.186.106: /* i have an oc named apollo */

{{Welcome}}

== Link edit made ==

See [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1167:_Star_Trek_into_Darkness&diff=338228&oldid=338217 here], for details. (The stray "z", in the reason was supposed to be a comma, bloomin' touchscreen keyboard!)

Basically <code><nowiki>{{w|Page Title|link text}}</nowiki></code> supplies the necessary bits in what 'raw' might be <code><nowiki>[[wikipedia:Page Title|link text]]</nowiki></code>. Not ''much'' saving time, but just enough to be worthwhile. And far better than <code><nowiki>[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_(spacecraft) whatever else you might use]</nowiki></code>... ;)

(PS, Columbia or Eagle? I mean, neither are ''called'' "Apollo". I suppose technically Eagle is ''more'' than a spacecraft, as it can land (or ditch into the sea, ironically for Aquarius!), but ''an'' Apollo craft could be anything from early boilerplate ones onward, and anything from the full stack to any free-flying component, and thus Apollo 11 is any/all of it from the base of its first stage to the tip of its escape-tower. Not to be pedantic, just wondering out loud. :p ) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.99|172.70.162.99]] 18:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

:(I have no idea what the second paragraph is so straight to the ps! ;) Comlumbia obvously, the Eagle already has so much hype (plus it bugs me that they put an ACTUAL EAGLE on the mission patch, it would've looked so much cooler with a rocket or the Eagle) That being said, the entire Apollo program was pretty freaking awsome, like, they did stuff that half a decade earlier people couldnt have dreamed of doing (techniclly they did dream it, but yk what i mean)!! As for the rocket itself, yes its called the Saturn V, but my names Apollo11 soooooooooooo :p And no worries beung pedantic, i love the decussion ;) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 19:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

::Just clicked the link! I see, thanks for the help! :) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 19:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

==Request==
May I please correct the misspellings on your user page? If not, then Ok... [[User:Z1mp0st0rz|The orange crewmate ඞ]] ([[User talk:Z1mp0st0rz|talk]]) 14:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
:Sure! [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 15:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

== cereal ==

no, cereal are nachos! cuberule.com (and a hotdog is a taco) [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
:I will exept that a hotdog is a taco, but nachos are a salad too! [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:22, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

== Three suggestions. ==

# Use a spell-checker. (Or a spill-chucker!) You ''really'' need to, and you know you do.
# Use the Preview button more.
# It's really better not to create User or User Talk pages for IPs.
I hope you find these useful to consider, but of course they're just my own observations. We can discuss any of this here, if you want. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.121|172.70.163.121]] 21:38, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

How do I get a spell checker on a wiki? I use google docs to type up anything so I don't have any downloaded spell checkers, would those work? If so do you have a suggestion? [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 21:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
:Get something like LibreOffice, rather than relying on an online office-suite. (You can still cross-copy things, if you like the "store on the cloud" element. That'd have spellchecker. But I would have thought Google provides one - never used it, but would seem like an obvious feature.)
:But all sane browsers also have native and official plugins that include rather decent spell-checkers. Though if you're not using en-US, yourself, you might have to add that on top of your normally useful native brand of language. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.171|141.101.99.171]] 00:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
:Awesome thank you! I will try LibreOffice. (hopfully it runs fine on a Mac, I've had SO many apps not run on it) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
::Google Docs DOES have a spell check-please start using it's feature (it's all built in, unless you did something horrible to your Google Docs and now it's not functioning properly) [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 03:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah I know it has a spell check feature, thats why I dont have an outside one [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
::::Ok... Yeah, what you wrote looked like "I use Google Docs to write my wiki contributions, as a precursor to copying them into the browser, and I haven't got a spellchecker activated on GD". Only if you're doing this sort of thing (writing elsewhere then copying across) will something like LibreOffice help you any more (in that regard) than the assumed prior situation. (Though I'm also fairly certain that LibreOffice ''will'' work perfectly well on a Mac, assuming you get the right installer, because they're very good at supporting even obscure platforms and OSes. And is less reliant upon online connectivity at the implicit behest of Mr Google.)
::::What browser are you using, then? The plug-in 'store' for Firefox, Chrome, etc will almost certainly have a spellchecker (and choice of dictionaries) if you look in the obvious places. I also had a quick look at references for Safari (given you're a Maccie, and perhaps it's a valid assumption that you're just using the pre-installed default) and apparently from the Edit menu there's a Spelling And Grammar built in, but might need enabling/selecting your chosen locale(s)/other twiddly bits... but I can't tell you exactly what with any certainty. You can probably work it out yourself, or ask (here or elsewhere) or search (your favourite search engine results) for more clues. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.40|172.70.86.40]] 20:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::Ohhhh I see, yeah no, I don't use docs to type in this Wiki the copy and paste it, I just use it for typing up and printing stuff like reports.
:::::Sorry, if you already explained this, but did you say that the LibreOffice won't work directly in the wiki? (" Only if you're doing this sort of thing (writing elsewhere then copying across) will something like LibreOffice help you any more (in that regard) than the assumed prior situation.") Also I do have to Wiki Spelling and Grammar built in, but its not that reliable. (It does catch quite a few errors though :) ).
::::::Also I do use safari, I have an older Mac and it doesnt like Google Chrome very much. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 23:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::::"did you say that the LibreOffice won't work directly in the wiki?" - well, I can think of a way to jury-rig it to connect into the online wiki-editing process (and there are probably other, better ways than that of doing so), but it's your browser doing the main interaction as it is. Also with Google Docs, I presume, but that's yet another different website emulating a 'proper' word-processor interface, and even that won't easily let you use your browser to edit a document which you can directly save to the wiki website.
:::::::I just thought you were making it slightly complicated for itself, and I wouldn't want to make it ''far more'' complicated. (But you might be able to use something that's not Google Docs for your other purposes.) There's not really such a thing as a standalone spell-checker, but whatever works in whatever you type in is useful. ("Also I do have to Wiki Spelling and Grammar built in" ...there's errors in that very statement, typos and/or thinkos, of one or other variety, and which errors there are dictates which very different advice I would then suggest. But it's something you may have to work out yourself. I could perhaps work things out with you properly if we sat down together at your machine, but it's not really something that two random people can sort out purely by passing text messages around, who probably aren't even on the same continent.)
:::::::There are a number of reasons why you might not be good with spelling: dyslexia, though not the worst case I've seen; insufficient (home-?)schooling, not your fault and you can remedy that with practice; just not paying attention during (home-?)school, ''partly'' your fault, but a good teacher might have helped greatly; English As A Second Language, generally you'd trip up in different ways, in my experience; not really caring, but then you ''seem'' like you care in these missives; <s>You're an American</s>, well, no, not seriously, but even Randall can't spell the likes of "colour", "analyse" and "aluminium" ''correctly''. ;p 
::::::: That doesn't matter, though. Just try to use the tools you have at hand ''and that work for you''. Everyone trips up, and different situations are differently forgiving to such various potential trips. Here, community concensus will (generally) put things right (well, "US English" 'right'!), and there's also nothing to stop you becoming an international best-selling author (your various locality-based copy-editors will likely help transform your works for the various different areas), so long as you have good enough ideas behind your enthusiasm for such things to make it all worthwhile. And I've no real complaints in that department. (As if such a random comment by a random commentator such as me is worth anything. But we've hit the practical limits of direct good advice I might have) on the original matter, so forgive the presumption.) All the best, then... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.74|141.101.99.74]] 11:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC) PS, one undeliberate typo was made in the above. If you spot it, then "I know", but absolute perfection is unatainable and (after all the others I corected, already) I'm happy to leave it as a personal lesson in humility. And if you spot more than one, then... well, feel free to be smug about spotting them. ;)
::Thank you for taking the time to try and help me with this. I'm not sure how to respond to most of it, so thank you for the clarifications.
:"There are a number of reasons why you might not be good with spelling" Honestly, its just cause theres 170,000 words in the English language and I can't keep track of them all (especially since they follow no rules what so ever eg. Bomb Tomb Comb).
:Also for the record of anyone else, I'm a "gosh darned God blessed soil born 'marican". ;)
Also are you the same person as before (I can't tell with the IP)?
Thank you again :) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 20:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

== Userboxes ==

Hey, I would recommend to have your user box on top of the page or to the side, as that’s standard procedure for most, and it would be seen more by people if you move it. You don’t have to if you don’t want to, of course. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 16:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
:I just moved it up to after my intro paragraph, (I don't like how it looks with it right above that paragraph) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
::ravenclaw colors are blue and SILVER NOT BRONZE I WILL FIGHT YOU ⚔️🔥[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 16:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
:::NOOOOOOO, the movies butchered the colors in the books their blue and BRONZE. I WILL WIN THIS FIGHT [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
::::NO SILVER LOOKS BETTER WITH BLUE [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 16:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::NO BRONZE LOOKS COOLER!! PLUS SILVER IS SLYTHERIN'S COLOR [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
::::::I'm a slytherclaw its fine [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 16:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I'm a RAVENclaw so it’s not fine! Also apostrafies, I may suck at spelling, but grammar!!!! [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 17:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
::::::::look I’m rushing to type these alright Im still in school rn [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 17:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::ok fine I suppose it's fine then. But Bronze is still far superior [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 21:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::FINALLY HGD (human growth & development (sex ed))IS OVER-THE MOST BORING CLASS IN THE HISTORY OF BIOLOGY HAS BEEN COMPLETELY TAUGHT! (I learned everything when I was like 9 or 10 when I read a scientific encyclopaedia for fun during the lockdown.) [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::This is one of those 'things that make you feel old' statements.
:::::::::::Not going to say that you're wrong, but I remember the thing that was 'sex ed' in the '70s. That was just an awkward "ok, everyone's not doing the <insert 'unimportant' class schedule slot here caused least disruption> today, all the boys will go with Mr Smith to <Room A>, all the girls will go with Mrs Smith to <Room B>", whereupon we boys learnt... probably far less than we had from 'hedgerow porn stashes' and any personal extrapolation/playground rumour we might have experienced. I presume the girls were taught a bit more (than their mothers maybe hadn't already told them) about their own bodies, but generally discouraged from getting anywhere near ours.
:::::::::::The 'boring biological' lessons in the actual cellular-level biology must have been done after I had already chosen to go off into the physics/chemistry scientific slant and dropped the (up to that point) lessons that either dealt with the rather wider study of respiration/transpiration/etc or had gone in what types of cell-wall various branches of the Tree Of Life possessed.
:::::::::::I probably got more of a technical introduction from the "How your body works"-style book (a pair of pages covering that in a 'family friendly' way, in amongst other sections for how the blood carries oxygen, the digestive/renal system, etc), but went above my head at the time.
:::::::::::Then, much later, due to my later scheduling needs in Further Education I was putin a "chemistry (for biologists)" class rather than the "chemistry (for physicists)" one. That got me an unexpected insight in the whole DNA, subcellular and cell-level parts of the biochemical process. But, by then, I was well into teenage years (for better or worse).
:::::::::::Interesting to see that you essentially went down the age-old "learnt it from a medical encyclopaedia" route, with a physical book, though. These days, one sort of assumes that everything (both properly educational/useful and "Not Safe For School"/possibly misinforming) gets discovered online. That option wasn't available to me (until university, by which point that focus of education wasn't as relevent as hoovering up all kinds of other knowledge/'knowledge', and this was pre-web/long-pre-Google-and-Wikipedia so what you could find over the internet was perhaps technically broad but practically limited).
:::::::::::So... anyway... at least you now know. Though don't imagine that you know ''everything'', yet. Possibly, even, your class was ''deliberately'' bowdlerised into utter boredome to satisfy some (misplaced?) adult sensibilities. Storing up problems in your (or at least some of your classmates') near future. But possibly it was just ''too'' comprehensive and dry, instead... I really should not presume either way.
:::::::::::But you being 9/10 during lockdown '''definitely''' makes me feel old. (Or, to put it another way, you're young. Enjoy being young! There's probably plenty of further 'boring' stuff in your future adult life, as well as things that your further-future adult self might look back upon as having been ''too'' exciting. But we don't have rewind buttons or handy savegames to reload (though we do often spend too much time rewinding or savegaming things that aren't life itself, potentially wasting the time in hindsight...) so you just have to take these things as they come. Including this particularly boring class, just hoping that it wasn't a total mistake by those who taught it that way. :p
:::::::::::Welcome to (the start of) the rest of your life, though. Little things are sent to try us, and maybe this was one of them. Or maybe not. Time will tell. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.164|141.101.98.164]] 10:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

::::::"whereupon we boys learnt... probably far less than we had from 'hedgerow porn stashes' and any personal extrapolation/playground rumour we might have experienced. I presume the girls were taught a bit more (than their mothers maybe hadn't already told them) about their own bodies, but generally discouraged from getting anywhere near ours." This part made me laugh. This is also why I'm very glad to be homeschooled (I was pulled out after middle school during the pandemic, so I got a little tast of sex ed class, it very much did suck) Luckly my sex-ed class only persisted of my mother telling me not to "do anything I'll regret"
:::::::The fact that the pandemic was around half a decade ago is very crazy, especally the fact that now NOBODY CARES at all. At the time it seemed like the only future available was one that was filled with either masks or vaccinated cards, now I don't carry either and I haven't seen one in a couple years which is very welcome in my opinion.
::::::: Also I don't know about how it was in the seventies but now a days, the boys and girls are together (at least in my old middle school) so it was even more akward.
::::::::My final question is, how did we get here for moving my user box to the top of the screen?? ;) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 17:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
::::::::[[File:King_of_Europe_Round_3_Lydden_Hill_2014_(14356011899).jpg|200px]] [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.188|172.71.242.188]] 21:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

== i have an oc named apollo ==

she is a total silly billy

[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.59|141.101.99.59]] 13:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
:Whats an Oc?[[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 19:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
::Original Character. Read some fanfic, you’ll figure it out. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 19:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
::: So Apollo is a character in their story? [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 19:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I'd argue that merely reading fanpic wouldn't help, you'd also need to be a reader of a surrounding fanpic forum of some kind where the term gets used in meta conversation.
:::The fact that it's an uncapitalised two-character abbreviation makes any hope of identifying the context laughably small, however.
:::I'm not surprised that there was confusion, and it would be pot-luck if any given person might ever have figured it out. I actually had three different meanings in mind, and fanfic abbreviations didn't even feature in that shortlist. The top possibility was that this was someone's pet octopus (Apollo would be an odd name, when something clearly aquatic should be named after Poseidon or his ilk... I know someone who named hers Despoena, for example. Well, "Despy", usually, unless she (either of them) appeared to be in a mood.)
:::I only (tentatively) ruled out Officer Commanding (military) or Officer in Charge (police) because it didn't look like the typings of a person mature enough to be in either service.
:::Anyway, so much for chit-chat. Mystery (somewhat) solved, right? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 21:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

2992: UK Coal

2024-10-01T13:51:00Z

172.68.186.106: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2992
| date = September 30, 2024
| title = UK Coal
| image = uk_coal_2x.png
| imagesize = 532x232px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The Watership Down rabbits removed an additional 0.1 nanometers constructing their warren, although that was mostly soil. British rabbits have historically mined very little coal; the sole rabbit-run coal plant was shut down in the 1990s.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT RUNNING ON 3 INCHES OF THE UK - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic uses dimensional analysis to humorously{{cn}} describe the end of the coal mining industry in the United Kingdom, in reference to the [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y35qz73n8o shutting down of the Ratcliffe-on-Soar coal power plant] in central England on Monday, September 30, 2024. This event signified the closure of the last coal-using power plant in the UK. UK coal ''production'' has also been in decline significantly since {{w|1984–1985 United Kingdom miners' strike|the politically enforced decline in the 1980s}}, and the proposed opening of the new {{w|Woodhouse Colliery}} in Cumbria [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62533nyvzwo seems to have been stopped], leaving just the [https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/coal-mining-production-and-manpower-returns-statistics-2023/coal-mining-production-and-manpower-returns-received-by-the-coal-authority-january-to-march-2023 remnants of the coal-mining industry] active. There remain uses for coal, both locally obtained and imported, but the conversion away from coal [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70zxjldqnxo in various industries] marks a possible soft-end to the British era which started with the {{w|Industrial Revolution}}.

The equation shown in the comic determines how much coal was mined in the UK with respect to the surface area of the region, and calculates the height of it if the coal mined out was taken away in an even layer from ''all'' across the UK. The caption incongruously reduces the entirety of the coal industry’s environmental impact into a 3 inch (about 7.62cm) high extraction.

''UK DESNZ'', referenced in the comic, is the United Kingdom's {{w|Department for Energy Security and Net Zero}}, the source for the statistic on UK total coal production from 1853 to present; see DESNZ's historical statistics of coal production [https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/historical-coal-data-coal-production-availability-and-consumption here].

The comic’s title text adds a similar, but even more ludicrous, metric for earth excavated for a rabbit warren (referencing {{w|Watership Down}}, a novel about a group of English rabbits). The volume of earth described, 0.1 nm × 240,000 km<sup>2</sup>, is equal to 24 m<sup>3</sup>. It refers to a former rabbit-run coal plant in the UK and claims that it was shut down in the 1990s. A sole sequel to Watership Down, {{w|Tales from Watership Down}}, was published in 1996. No actual {{w|Run, Rabbit, Run|rabbit-run}} coal plants have ever been documented.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[The following formula is shown (with the divisor below a horizontal line in the comic, rather than inside parentheses):]
:UK total coal production (1853-present, ''UK DESNZ'') / ((coal seam density) × (UK land area)) = 25 billion tonnes / (1.3kg/L × 240,000km²) ≈ 3 inches
:[Cueball is standing to the right of the formula, upon a dotted line representing the prior ground level. Two arrows indicate that the dotted line is 3 inches above the solid line that is the current ground level.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The UK shut down their last coal power plant today, which means that over the course of the industrial revolution, they dug up and burned an average of 3 inches of their country.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Animals]]

Talk:2970: Meteor Shower PSA

2024-08-11T12:10:25Z

172.68.186.106:

Pretty sure the term "contact binary" in this instance is referring to the small solar system body variety (a peanut asteroid) rather than a contact binary star, but I can't think of a way to explain that in the explanation.[[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 06:11, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Amongst other things, if you ever see a space-rock fall, and land, don't be tempted to just pick it up. It will probably be extremely cold, for a while. And you don't want to leave your sticky fingerprints on it (or, maybe, {{w|Venom (character)|its sticky fingerprints on you}}). If you have a handy (clean) container then perhaps you could scoop it up to stop it from getting lost/soiled where it lies, unless you get more immediate advice directly from experts who might be very interested. (Depends upon who you talk to, and when, but there [https://ukfall.org.uk/report-a-meteorite/ may be some standing advice] that you can follow, if you're not lucky enough to already be an expert in the subject out looking for a particular find.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.87|172.71.26.87]] 14:09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

It seems to me that the "more dangerous examples" should link to something along the lines of SF stories in which infectious material came to Earth via meteorite. The "Green Rocks" link is more about how sci-fi (term used advisedly) alien substances (including meteorites) can have any magic powers the plot needs. I'm trying to come up with examples, but all that's coming to mind immediately is Walter M. Miller Jr.'s "Dark Benediction". [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 01:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
:I (as that editor, and of the prior comment here) had the same difficulty. Even a wikiwalk (or, indeed, a tvtropeswalk) didn't seem to give what I thought was there. I mention the Venom symbiote, above (a near-example; most cases of it, in various continuities, seem to have it being ''brought'' to Earth... if it 'fell in the open' it was part of a sample-return mission crashing and burning), and there are a number of other "mysterious rock falls which 'infects' the locals who find it and touch it" (much parodied and repeated) but I could not find the unambiguous ur-example or whatever 'famously made it famous' in any real sense.
:Green Rocks does have a lot of (obvious) memetic overlap with Smallville and similar treatments around that continuity/canon. (I was mostly worrying that in that case, Clarke aside, pretty much everyone who got 'green rocked' ''at least at first'' found the effects beneficial ...it's where they took that, and/or hidden psychological compulsions, that might have been their ultimate downfall. Or at least quickly found themselves uniquely isolated from society due to unwanted death-prognistication skills/whatever.)
:It was just a bit of a chuck-it-in, really. Had also been looking at non-meteoric examples (such as if a soviet satellite's RTG landed, 'intact', you might be wise not to just hold it, or the fictional nuclear weapon discovered by farmers in Sum Of All Fears, or the non-fictional (but not 'loaded') [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68189568 real-life equivalent] that luckily wasn't as dangerous as a true Broken Arrow would have been.
:So make of it what you want. I tried to keep the Explanation aside short and sweet, rather than overly explain the joke, but doubtless someone else can refine it (or excise it) in ways that I never found able to.

The bit in the explanation stating that animals might abandon their young if it smells of humans should be removed. That's a myth. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.155|172.71.22.155]] 03:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2048: Curve-Fitting

2024-08-09T18:37:07Z

172.68.186.106:

House of Cards: Not a real method, but a common consequence of mis-application of statistical methods: a curve can be generated that fits the data extremely well, but immediately becomes absurd as soon as one glances outside the training data sample range, and your analysis comes crashing down "like a house of cards". This is a type of _overfitting_

I'm pretty sure it refers to the TV show house of cards, the dots representing the quality of the series increasing until Netflix renewed it a bit too much {{unsigned ip|172.68.26.65}}
:This was my initial interpretation as well, since you can hypothetically extend a literal house of cards indefinitely.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.58.83|172.68.58.83]] 14:23, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Could someone familiar with the show expand on this? ''Also a potential reference to the TV show, House of Cards ("WAIT NO, NO, DON'T EXTEND IT!").'' Some context on what that line meant in House of Cards would be helpful. - [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]] ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|talk]]) 14:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm a little mystified by the alt-text. Cauchy and Lorentz both seem like mathematically capable people. What am I missing? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.62.226|172.69.62.226]] 17:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

: Google-Fu reveals that it's a continuous probability distribution. This isn't bad per se, but it is quite visually distinctive and also can be quite...concerning if the data set isn't one where probability should be an issue. [[User:Werhdnt|Werhdnt]] ([[User talk:Werhdnt|talk]]) 18:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

:: This is not the issue, but the fact that the moments (such as mean and variance) of the distribution don't exist = converge. See edited explanation. So if you wanted to estimate the parameters of the distribution, taking the sample mean for example will not converge with the number of data points, and is therefore bad to attempt. It is more mathematically alarming than alarmingly mathematical. [[User:GamesAndMath|GamesAndMath]]

:: My own Google-Fu brought me to a page with this information: “The distribution is important in physics as it is the solution to the differential equation describing forced resonance, while in spectroscopy it is the description of the line shape of spectral lines.” (from here: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/libs/math/doc/sf_and_dist/html/math_toolkit/dist/dist_ref/dists/cauchy_dist.html) [[User:Justinjustin7|Justinjustin7]] ([[User talk:Justinjustin7|talk]]) 18:09, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

:: True, but the "check what field I originally worked in" indicates that there might be something else going on with the meaning. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.238|108.162.237.238]] 12:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

:: I believe the point of "check what field I originally worked in" is that if somebody wasn't trained in statistics using an exotic distribution is highly suspect and suggest that either they are torturing the data to get desired results or have no idea what they are doing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.11|108.162.246.11]] 05:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm a bit disappointed. I kinda expected a special comic with such a nice round number.. Been counting down since comic #2000... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.184|162.158.92.184]] 18:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Different anon here, I think this is very special and if Randall makes a poster available I will be buying several to give away. Of course, part of my business is experimental data analysis and modeling...and this is a fantastic summary of common errors. {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.22}}

: Agreed. This is a very special comic, and a highly subtle title text. Direct any of your friends who do data analysis here. Sort of the next stage from the classic "correlation is not causation" comic https://xkcd.com/552/ . {{unsigned|GamesAndMath}}

'''Curve-Fitting'''

How fitting works needs to be explained. f(x)=mx+b works fine for single values, but how do we get that red line from the data set? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

:Generally, you decide for some error function and then search for parameters where the sum of errors for all data points is minimal. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:07, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

:A typical error function is the square of the difference between the fit and the actual data point, hence "sum of squares" method. There are well-known standard formulas for finding m and b in the case of linear regression. In a linear algebra class, I saw a general method that would work for several of these (any where the fit is y = af(x)+bg(x)+...+ch(x), which includes log, exponential, quadratic, cubic, etc). I wish I could remember it. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] ([[User talk:Blaisepascal|talk]]) 22:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
::I'm still looking for an easy example. Let's say five points (x/y) and then calculating the straight line (without and maybe with the zero-point because this is often the assumed start). Just be simple, everything else derives from that. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

:I wish we could include the graphics at the top of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_regression#Introduction] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_regression#Interpretation] in the explanation. A lot of people are going to look at this one. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.168|172.68.133.168]] 17:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
::I've included one picture with a small explanation to the linear regression section. I think that explains it well. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

The data points do not have error bars, which makes the choice of fit even more ludicrous, in my opinion. If the data are that good, then I don't believe there is a correlation, it's random with some distribution. I might hang this up at work...[[User:Arppix|Arppix]] ([[User talk:Arppix|talk]]) 02:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
:And of course in serious science data points have error bars. This makes the fitting even more complicated and should be mentioned at the explanation. Because Randall doesn't use error bars I'm sure he refers to presentations not based on real science. Also this should be mentioned here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I hate to be negative here, as obviously some users have put a lot of effort into explaining the details behind each of the curve-fitting methods, but there's absolutely no explanation for Randall's comments on each method. While someone might learn something about the various methods by reading the explanation, they would not gain any insight on what Randall is saying about each method. In addition, the Connecting Lines explanation totally missed the fact that this isn't really even a curve-fitting method - it's just a feature of graphing software (in this case, Excel) where a smooth line is drawn through each data point from left to right rather than an example of overfitting to the data set. I think we could do better. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 02:53, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
:You're not negative, Randall's comments are missing which I've just added into the incomplete reason. And sure other explanations still need a review. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:32, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Everyone is missing the deeper trolling here of the fisheries community at large, which shall become blindingly clear here. First, this is cartoon number 2048 (2^11), a highly interesting number. Notably, this is the year all fisheries were projected to be collapsed by Worm et al. (2006) Science 314:787-790, a prediction which gained huge attention in the media and took on a life of its own. The prediction was based on fitting a power curve to some data on collapses in catch trends. Numerous rebuttals followed, one of which pointed out that a linear fit to the data is a better fit, and predicts all fisheries collapsed in 2114 (Jaenike et al. 2007, Science 316:1285a). A list of rebuttals is found here: https://sites.google.com/a/uw.edu/most-cited-fisheries/controversies/2048-projection. Later work by the same author and critics found a different prediction and showed rebuilding of fisheries is likely (Worm et al. 2009 Science 325:578-585). Second, lest you think this is a conspiracy theory, I note that in xkcd cartoon 887, Munroe specifically notes this prediction "The future according to google search results... 2048: "Salt-water fish extinct from overfishing" https://xkcd.com/887/. Third, this kind of model-fitting exercise has long plagued fisheries researchers attempting to predict recruitment from spawning biomass. {{unsigned ip|108.162.246.11}}

"Ad hoc filter: Drawing a bunch of different lines by hand, keeping in only the data points perceived as "good". Also not useful. " – I guess it rather refers to data filtering, where for each point you take several points around and try to calculate some kind of mean, e.g. by rejecting most extreme points, or calculating median (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_filter). So it is an algorithm, not actually drawing lines by hand. Still it is tricky to draw conclusions and you can easily fool yourself with this method. {{unsigned ip|162.158.93.21}}

Anyways, what is the actual regression of the plot? {{unsigned ip|162.158.154.241}}
:This also must be better explained: We don't know what the points represent. The fraction of apples vs. bananas harvested by time, the position of stars in the sky, on a logarithmic scale, linear, or maybe the height of mountains in New Jersey... There are just some dots on paper with no further meaning. Thus everything Randall presents is valid by some means but an actual regression does not exist. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:32, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Just want to note that the Piecewise models is actually a type of modelling often used in housing economics. It has been used to check if different types of housing are priced according to different rules. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.34|172.68.34.34]] 22:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Excel's "smooth lines" are actually splines ([https://blog.splitwise.com/2012/01/31/mystery-solved-the-secret-of-excel-curved-line-interpolation/ third-order Bezier splines, apparently]) so they're not completely without mathematical merit. Still wildly unsuited for extrapolation, but often very well suited to interpolation. [[User:JohnWhoIsNotABot|JohnWhoIsNotABot]] ([[User talk:JohnWhoIsNotABot|talk]]) 21:44, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

'''Specific functions'''

In both the '''logarithmic''' and '''exponential''' functions, I have deleted the term "+ ''c''" that was present in both. Simply put, these functions do not include an additive constant. To include the constant removes a basic property of e.g. exponential functions, which is that the function should grow by the same factor for equal increases in the value of ''x''. (In other words, if the functions doubles when ''x'' changes from 1 to 2, then it should double again when ''x'' changes from 2 to 3, or from 3 to 4, etc.) If this does not happen, the function is not exponential. [[User:Redbelly98|Redbelly98]] ([[User talk:Redbelly98|talk]]) 19:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

'''Logistic Curve'''

The explanation for logistic curve currently says it is used for binary values. It's actually a lot more useful than that. For example, population growth is often described as a logistic curve. It appears to be climbing exponentially initially, but then tapers off as resources can no longer support the population. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.191|108.162.246.191]] 15:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
:The explanation mentions the {{w|logistic regression}} ranging between "0" and "1". It uses the more general {{w|logistic function}} you probably refer to. The ''logistic regression'' uses in its basic form a ''logistic function'' to model a ''binary'' dependent variable. Both Wikipedia links explain the difference. Honestly, I'm not an expert on that matter but that binary interpretation wouldn't allow values above "1" or below "0" as shown in the picture. Maybe worth to be mentioned. Nonetheless all other fittings are also similar nonsense. Maybe we could mention the more general {{w|Sigmoid function}} but this only barely fits to the title "Logistic Curve". --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I think the exponential fit seems like the most reasonable interpretation of the data.

'''Is the bottom right one considered as part of the Runge Phenomenon?"

As learnt in college, where trying to build an overlapping polynomial equation to a graph would create a working model until you move to the side and see the equation that worked until now going way off base 19:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)D

Seriously? This is a big round number people, and also the name of a game that was referenced earlier in [https://xkcd.com/1350/ 1350:Lorenz]. I wish the comic acknowledged that. {{unsigned|RadiantRainwing|16:29, 9 August 2024}}