explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2293: RIP John Conway

2020-04-13T18:39:26Z

172.68.189.49: /* Explanation */ ce

{{comic
| number = 2293
| date = April 13, 2020
| title = RIP John Conway
| image = rip_john_conway.gif
| titletext = 1937-2020
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a GLIDER. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{{w|John Horton Conway|John Conway}}, an English mathematician, passed away of {{w|COVID-19}} two days before this comic's release. As such, [[Randall]] created this memorial comic. One of Conway's most famous creations was {{w|Conway's Game of Life}}, which consists of an infinite square grid and rules of how it changes over time. Although the rules are simple, the system supports immense complexity.

The rules of the Game of Life are as follows:
*Any live cell (dark colored) with two or three live neighbors survives.
*Any dead cell (white) with three live neighbors becomes a live cell.
*All other live cells die in the next generation. Similarly, all other dead cells stay dead.

This comic begins with the shape of a stick figure as the starting configuration, which then evolves according to the rules of the Game of Life. The pattern breaks into three parts, two of which stay at the same level as the original figure's feet before rapidly melting away, and a third (called a "glider") that ascends up and to the right. Randall may be suggesting a soul breaking apart from the rapidly disintegrating corporeal remains here.

This is the 18th comic in a row about {{w|COVID-19}}.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A pixelated image of a stick figure. The image is animated, and soon splits into two groups, one of which dissipates. The other becomes a glider and moves off to the top-right corner of the image before repeating the animation. The movements obey Conway's Game of Life]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Tribute]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:COVID-19]]

Talk:2289: Scenario 4

2020-04-07T10:51:50Z

172.68.189.49: Consider for a moment...

Should definitely make a note re: this officially-Friday comic releasing late Saturday afternoon (EDT). [[User:TPS|TPS]] ([[User talk:TPS|talk]]) 22:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Or is this actually the april fool comic, except it fooled us by being on a Saturday? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.81|162.158.74.81]] 22:12, 4 April 2020 (UTC) Sam
Perhaps more likely because the actual April Fool's comic (due Wednesday) delayed 'til Friday. [[User:TPS|TPS]] ([[User talk:TPS|talk]]) 22:19, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The title should probably be changed, the xkcd site uses the numeral "4" whereas we're using the word "four."--[[User:GoldNinja|GoldNinja]] ([[User talk:GoldNinja|talk]]) 22:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
I accidentaly originally put it under Sequence Four. It shows in the image name.

I hope I fixed it correctly [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 02:17, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Another instance of a graph with poor labels ("bad stuff"), even without the time travel. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.225|162.158.158.225]] 23:54, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Scenario 1 is almost certainly intended to be a logistic curve. Scenario 2 starts off a bit slower, and it looks like one of the cases where you don't have enough data yet, but _hope_ it'll settle into a logistic. Scenario 3 is probably an exponential. These are the standard three scenarios: good, hopeful, and catastrophic. Then in his usual, now lets just get weird twist, comes the impossible one. I think that's all relevant, but I've been up too long to merge it into the text. [[User:MAP|MAP]] ([[User talk:MAP|talk]]) 23:30, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The issue of time-traveling COVID-19 problems has already be considered in Onion Public Radio's The Topical. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3GQwOcsChQ Apologies for any poor rule-following as this is my first edit. [[User:RandomEdditMemory|RandomEdditMemory]] ([[User talk:RandomEdditMemory|talk]]) 00:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)RandomEditMemory

The time travel in this comic is probably a reference to the time offset resulting from the April Fool's comic, but possibly coincidentally the comic showed up here in New Zealand in the morning of the April 5 change to Standard Time when the clocks did turn back an hour. [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 01:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
: The time travel is almost certainly not a deliberate reference to the April Fool's comic being late (or to any implementation of DST). Rather, there's 4 graphs, each with an increasingly higher curve. the first tapers off, appearing to be approaching an asymptote, with an ever-decreasing rate of increase -- or even heading to a decrease. The second has a steeper slope for a while, but then does start to taper off. whether it becomes linear, approaches an asymptote, or starts declining off the edge of the graph is not known. The third scenario appears to be an exponential curve. The 3.5 scenario (not shown) would be to have a vertical asymptote, where "bad stuff" shoots off toward infinity as time approaches T. Then the only other thing left to do with a curve is to have it continue back the way it came. Been too long since I was in that level of math, but I'm pretty sure it's problematic if you Y-axis has two values at a point on the X-axis. This isn't showing two different functions converging as time progresses, but rather that a high values of "bad stuff," time goes backward.

From the explanation: "This is another comic in the coronavirus series." But ... is it? It certainly isn't explicitly so. The implicit argument is easy to make, but the fact that it is just "bad stuff" as a function of "time," it could easily be relevant to any number of bad scenarios: velociraptor attacks, Macarena flash mobs, mobile game IAP monetization, nationalistic views in politics, cat-based cheeseburger memes, or so on. It's not much of a stretch to say that the comic is topical to current events (especially given that there are many others in a sequence of implicitly or explicitly CoViD-related comics), but it still is a stretch to _definitely_ say so absent Mr. Munroe actually acknowledging so elsewhere, and then a citation would be needed, right?
:It definitely is. All those graphs (except the fourth, obviously) can be found in real countries' data. South Korea would be an example of scenario 1. The United States would be an example of scenario 3. The virus is on everybody's mind, so there's no way it's a coincidence. (I think labeling [[2283: Exa-Exabyte]] as a coronavirus comic is ''way'' more of a stretch.)

I suggest the mathematical background of the graph 'bending over backwards' should be explained in more detail because the contradiction between what is 'natural' tendency of the graph and what is possible mathematically is what makes for the core of the joke. I mean, let's imagine that the graph is a picture of some tangible object, as a non-mathematically inclined person might do. Let's say, it's a rope. Then after observing it 'bend upwards' more and more with each scenario that gets progressively 'worse', it would be reasonable to conclude that continuing to bend this object even more and 'overbending it' would naturally mean some kind of a catastrophe. In reality, of course, it is impossible just because of the way the graph is being plotted. Each next segment is added as time goes by and placed more to the right because the time is shown to flow right on the horizontal axis. Thus the only way this graph could bend like this is for the next added segment to be in time 'before' the last one. And since it is impossible to travel back in time (citation needed), such a graph is unlikely to be predicting a real scenario. --[[User:SomethingLike|SomethingLike]] ([[User talk:SomethingLike|talk]]) 06:30, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
:There are graphs, however, that have multiple Y-values for single X-values (graph of a square root function, at least for positive values of X, graphs of circles, or the batman equation. Might need an ELI5 why those are okay but the line curving back in time isn't.

You laugh here, but I have in fact seen graphs in corporate presentations which folded back. The presenter (a) didn't understand data analysis, (b) thought Excel was the right tool, and finally (c) decided the graph looked "better" by using the (incompetent) Excel pseudo-curve-smoothing graphics tool.[[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 18:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

To me this comic seems a commentary on alocalypse. Some see COVID-19 as the start of a coming apocalypse, and some worst apocalypse scenarios involve either an explosive AI researching things like time travel or ending our timeline as physics knows it, or all of us going back to survival mode on a landscape without any modern infrastructure. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.250.58|172.69.250.58]] 22:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I think that "The only way to make sense of it would be by using the common trope in science fiction of time traveling creating an alternate timeline in which events are different, thus the cases could be 100 in one timeline and 1000 in a different timeline."..etc is utterly wrong creating a new timeline would have two 'forward' lines over a stretch of chart but would not have a single inflection joining a forward over ibto a backwards one. Maybe a (reverse) Z-bend if you include the retrograde (tachyonic?) leg, but then the true alternate timeline (also as per a single line splitting into two forward-going streams at a given ''t'', whether or not that was invoked by time-travellers arriving at that point or 'mundane' quantum superpositioning if alternate outcomes) would not be backwards. (Alternative time-arrow, maybe, but that's more like a continuation of the existence of the usual one, which has no existence beyond the rotation of time into a backwards framing... However that happens - and this graph seems to indicate gradually, like the rate of time goes for +ve to -ve by having less seconds/'second' and passing zero, perhaps by somehow rotating in the imaginary time plane (similar, then, to a spacial one?) in which case there's probably more to worry about than the (presumably unrelated) Bad Stuff. (Darnit, forgot to sign...). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.210|162.158.34.210]] 15:49, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Consider for a moment that each graph is not one line segment, but two. That makes scenario 4 the best possible scenario. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.49|172.68.189.49]] 10:51, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

2283: Exa-Exabyte

2020-03-28T23:41:50Z

172.68.189.49: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2283
| date = March 20, 2020
| title = Exa-Exabyte
| image = exa_exabyte.png
| titletext = To picture 10^18, just picture 10^13, but then imagine you connect the left side of the 3 to close off the little bays.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by 10 EXA-EXABYTES OF APPLES. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic is arguably the eighth comic in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] related to the {{w|2019–20 coronavirus pandemic|2020 pandemic}} of the {{w|coronavirus}} - {{w|SARS-CoV-2}}. This comic does not clearly mention the virus but is a deliberate allusion to the biology and complexity behind the Coronavirus outbreak, or, if not a deliberate allusion, its theme of biological complexity could have been inspired thereby.

This is a comic about the difficulty of picturing or understanding large numbers. As mentioned in the comic, an {{w|exabyte}} is 1018 bytes, while an "exa-exabyte"—not a common word, but one that makes sense if you apply the principles of {{w|metric prefix}}es—is 1036 bytes. 1036 is properly given the name undecillion (in short scale, and sextillion in long scale).
According to [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/21/science/counting-all-the-dna-on-earth.html a 2015 article] by ''The New York Times'', researchers estimate that there are about 5 * 1037 DNA {{w|base pair}}s on Earth (50 trillion trillion trillion). So [[Miss Lenhart]]'s claim of 10 exa-exabytes—1 * 1037 bytes is a reasonable approximation ({{w|Fermi estimation}}). (The estimate was 5 plus or minus 4 * 1037. There are 4 possible base pairs, or 2 bits per pair, a byte is 8 bits.)

These numbers are larger than most people can imagine. Even much smaller numbers such as a billion (109) or a trillion (1012) are [[2091: Million, Billion, Trillion|hard to imagine.]] For instance:
* 1 billion seconds is equal to 31.7 years; 1 trillion seconds is equal to 31,688.74 years.
* [https://medium.com/@alecmuffett/a-billion-grains-of-rice-91202220e10e 1 billion grains of rice] weigh approximately 34,447 lb (15,625 kg).

Wikipedia has an article on the {{w|exabyte}} and one on large numbers which describes {{w|Orders of magnitude (numbers)#1018|various things close to 1018}}.
* [https://abc7news.com/science/possibly-habitable-planet-found-100-light-years-away/5821548/ TOI 700 d], a potentially habitable Earth-like {{w|exoplanet}} is 100 light years away, which is about 1018 meters.

[[Cueball]] expresses his difficulty in visualizing a number even as large as ''one'' exabyte (1018 bytes).

[[Megan]] trivializes the problem away by describing an exabyte as 10 apples, with "18 smaller apples, floating next to them and a little above", representing the notation 1018 using apples for digits. This is entirely unhelpful, as using apples in a [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unary_numeral_system base-1] enumeration offers no obvious advantages over base-10 in understanding exponents; Megan's bad advice & Cueball's seemingly ready acceptance of it causes Miss Lenhart to yell out "No!" in frustration.

The title text further trivializes the problem of visualizing large numbers by suggesting that you can visualize 1018 as a number by simply visualizing the similar-looking number of 1013 with some extra lines drawn to turn the 3 into an 8. Changes in exponents can cause huge changes in the value shown, and this is no exception: Changing that 3 into an 8 changes the value by a factor of 100,000.

Randall has previously discussed the difficulty of large numbers in [[2091: Million, Billion, Trillion]], [[1894: Real Estate]], and [[558: 1000 Times]].

[[1605: DNA]] also discusses how "hard" biology is.

==Transcript==
:[Miss Lenhart is holding a pointer, and is pointing it towards a blackboard behind her, while she addresses her student Cueball who is sitting on a chair at a desk to the left of her, holding his hands on his knees.]
:Miss Lenhart: Biology is hard because there's so ''much'' of it. Earth hosts about 10 exa-exabytes worth of DNA.

:[In a frame-less panel, the panel has panned to the left and is now showing Miss Lenhart holding the pointer to her side, but without the blackboard. In front of her is now both Cueball and Megan sitting at their desks. Cueball has taken one hand on to the table. Megan has both hands folded on the table in front of her.]
:Cueball: What's an exa-exabyte?
:Miss Lenhart: It's 1036 bytes.
:Cueball: How do I picture '''''that?'''''
:Miss Lenhart: Imagine you had an exabyte of data, but each byte ''contained'' an exabyte of data.

:[Zoom in on Cueball's head. A starburst to the right indicates Miss Lenhart's voice from off-panel.]
:Cueball: I can't even picture what an exabyte is.
:Miss Lenhart (off-panel): It's 1018 bytes.
:Cueball: But how do I picture 1018?

:[Zoomed out to showing Megan, Cueball, and Miss Lenhart along with the blackboard. Megan has raised a hand palm up. Cueball is looking back at her over his shoulders. Miss Lenhart is forming a closed first with her empty hand, the one without the pointer.]
:Megan: Imagine you had 10 apples.
:Megan: Now imagine 18 smaller apples, floating next to them and a little above.
:Cueball: Cool, got it.
:Miss Lenhart: '''''No!'''''

==Trivia==

In [[1519: Venus]], release date May 1, 2015, [[Miss Lenhart]] indicated that she was retiring as a primary or secondary school teacher in a month. Here we see Megan and Cueball, both adults, sitting in a classroom setting with Miss Lenhart providing instruction. A reasonable assumption is that Miss Lenhart has taken some form of {{w|adult education}} job during her retirement. For example, in the United States it is common for {{w|community colleges}} to use low paid {{w|adjunct professors}} who either have a day job or another source of income such as a teacher's pension.

There is also a hint of irony in her having to now put up with the same type of blatantly incorrect explanations that she herself was freely giving out just prior to her retirement.
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category: Biology]]

Talk:2280: 2010 and 2020

2020-03-16T19:46:19Z

172.68.189.49:

Please maintain your distance in these comments. No comments within 6 vertical inches of other comments, please. And any in-comment sneezing or coughing will result in your account being banned for a period of 3 weeks. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] Achoo! [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 21:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

:I used a large projection screen & zoomed in to post this comment, so my comment appears 8" separated from yours. (Your argument is invalid.)
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 12:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

What is this "inch" of which you speak? I, for one, actually stay 2 meters away from any time-travel-caused disturbance in the space-time continuum.[[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 15:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

If the above information was new to you, please take this concise pamphlet. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.250.58|172.69.250.58]] 23:17, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we should add a section on what holo-banshees are? That could be useful. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.58.183|162.158.58.183]] 01:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
:Since Holo-banshees are something Randall made up, that could be difficult. LOL! All we have is the name, and that's already explained. Though since the explanation talks about how this wouldn't make sense if they're present in EVERY household I'm somewhat inclined to add "therefore this is probably only a common problem, like rats, ants or cockroaches today." :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
:: Well, it says " often " there are holo-banshees. Not always or nearly. Banshees are female Irish vocalists who predict a death in the household, so I will assume that The Corrs joined the current mini-trend for touring your music act as a " hologram " and it got out of hand in some way. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.5|141.101.69.5]] 11:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
:::I think they're like asbestos. Perhaps at one time considered a good idea (insulating/advanced indications of life-threatening household situations) but later on discovered to have unwanted properties forcing complicated handling procedures to make them safe. In the one case, the shedding of fine carcinogenic dust, in the other perhaps the 'holo' emits excessive intensities of certain wavelengths of light that are directly or indirectly an environmental biohazard. Sealing in situ may be the optimal situation. If, say, the non-corporeal (i.e. unmovable) holo-banshee must be sealed within an asbestos container, which must itself be safely coated then that would easily provoke the scenario hinted at. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.14|162.158.94.14]] 15:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
::::Fun fact: Fiberglass & other silica-based fiber insulation materials do not dissolve in the lungs & continue inflicting severe tissue damage even longer than asbestos does, the scar tissue from which is a major cause of emphysema & risk factor in lung cancer. (Not that asbestos is ''OK'', mind you...) We've replaced an evil we knew with one we knew (at the time) much less about. Much like "PBA-free" plastic... So really unless your home\school\workplace\brake-pad is insulated with wool, try real hard to avoid breathing those fibers no matter what they are.
::::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 12:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

:I find the entire section about Holo-banshees ridiculously off-topic. It doesn't add anything to understanding the comic and should probably be removed. umläute [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.122|162.158.94.122]] 21:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
::You say that now. But what about in a few comics time, when there may arise a clear and urgent need for an entire Category:Holo-banshees, eh? (Srsly, it's a potential "what's that about, then?" question by those who think they are missing a reference. Even if the answer we have to give is "apparently nothing".) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.174|162.158.90.174]] 22:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: houses being sold for a dollar, wasn't that the going price for some houses in Detroit? --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.49|172.68.189.49]] 19:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

2076: Horror Movies 2

2018-11-23T20:38:02Z

172.68.189.49: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2076
| date = November 23, 2018
| title = Horror Movies 2
| image = horror_movies_2.png
| titletext = When I was a kid, someone told me the end of The Giver was ambiguous, which surprised me. I had just assumed Jonah died--because the book had a medal on the cover, and I knew grown-ups liked stories where sad stuff happens at the end for no reason.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic is a follow-up to [[2056: Horror Movies]] released a month earlier. While the first Horror Movies comic was about giving voice to Randall's inability to enjoy horror movies, this comic takes Randall's previous position and exaggerates it to the point of a {{w|straw man}} argument.

White Hat and Cueball discuss the appeal of horror movies and tragic plots. Cueball expresses his dissatisfaction with stories that don't focus on evoking positive feelings. As an example he mentions how he disliked the ending of ''{{w|Titanic (1997 film)|Titanic}}'' where Jack sacrifices his life in order to save Rose. White Hat does not seem to share Cueball's point of view on successful storytelling and sarcastically promises to send feedback to the movie director {{w|James Cameron}} as well as the 16th century playwright {{w|William Shakespeare}}.

In the title text Cueball (Randall?) discusses the ending of the science fiction novel {{w|The Giver}} where the fate of the main character Jonas [sic, [[2076: Horror Movies 2#Trivia|see Trivia]]] had been left ambiguous. The joke is a reference to the stereotype that the Newbery Medal award is only given to books with tragic endings.

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

:[White Hat and Cueball are walking.]
:White Hat: So you don't like '''''any''''' horror movies?
:Cueball: Spooky stuff is neat but I hate jump scares and watching people get murdered.
:Cueball: Why would you '''''want''''' to see that?

:White Hat: It's like roller coasters. People like experiencing powerful feelings in a safe, controlled setting.
:Cueball: But why not '''''good''''' feelings?

:White Hat: We've always been into tragic stories. Romeo and Juliet, Titanic...
:Cueball: See, that's another thing I don't get!

:Cueball: I loved ''Titanic'' because Rose and Jack found each other and seemed so happy! I just hated the ending.
:White Hat: I'll be sure to give James Cameron and Shakespeare your feedback.

==Trivia==
In the original (current) title-text, there is a typo where the protagonist of ''The Giver'' is referred to as "Jonah" instead of "Jonas."

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

2073: Kilogram

2018-11-23T07:03:06Z

172.68.189.49: /* Trivia */

{{comic
| number = 2073
| date = November 16, 2018
| title = Kilogram
| image = kilogram.png
| titletext = I'm glad to hear they're finally redefining the meter to be exactly three feet.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a CONSTANT PLANCK. Links to resources would be good. Explain motivation for characters' statements. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Standard units such as the kilogram, meter, and second are redefined from time to time as measurement technologies improve. These redefinitions are generally done to improve the precision to which the various units can be known or reproduced, without changing their actual value. The joke here is that redefining the kilogram to equal one pound sounds like an incredible idea to Americans, who never use the kilogram. It would not only fail to improve on its precision, but would also significantly change the value of what a kilogram is, making all things already measured for science and in the rest of the world impossible to correctly understand the mass of.

On the day of this comic, the {{w|International Committee for Weights and Measures|International Committee for Weights and Measures}} voted to redefine the {{w|kilogram}} by fixing it to the value of {{w|Planck's Constant}}. This is measured by passing a measured current through an electromagnet to exert a force to balance 1 kg. The change will take effect on May 20, 2019, when the platinum cylinder International Prototype Kilogram that defines the unit will be retired. This means that the mass of a kilogram will no longer be tied to a physical object, but to the fundamental properties of the universe. By fixing the value of Planck constant to 6.62607015×10-34 kg⋅m2⋅s−1, the kilogram will be defined in terms of the second and the speed of light via the meter.

The previous method of confirming that a kilogram is accurate is to use physical metal weights measuring exactly one kilogram, periodically transporting them around the world to an official weight lab to confirm they still weigh the same. Over time these physical objects have changed very slightly in their mass making them unreliable in the long run -- thus running into the issue that a kilogram did not stay a constant measure of mass. Note that these weights and comparisons are so precise that a fingerprint on one of the weights could throw them off.

The new method of confirming that a kilogram is accurate relies upon an extremely precise knowledge of local gravitational effects & an absence (or counteraction) of electromagnetic interference. On a traditional scale, two units of equal weight will balance, regardless of local gravitational levels; whereas the new method requires that the gravitational force be determined precisely for every site a measurement is to take place.

In this comic, Black Hat announces that the kilogram has been redefined as equal to one {{w|Pound (mass)|pound}}. Ponytail and Cueball seem to think this makes things simpler, but Megan is alarmed. The metric system of measurement is the one used by most of the world and is the standard system used in science. Redefining the kilogram to be equal to the pound would be very disruptive and outrage supporters of the metric system. Redefining the kilogram as being a completely different size from before will create a lot of confusion, since now when people read a mass in kilograms they need to work out whether it was written in old kilograms or new (pound-sized) kilograms.

The pound is officially defined as 0.45359237 kilograms, or less than half a kilogram. This makes defining a kilogram as one pound even more impossible as they are then stuck in a loop, as the pound must weigh less than half of a kilogram, meaning the value of each would be equal to zero.

The title text continues the joke by saying that the meter has been defined as exactly three feet. The yard, the closest US measurement to the meter, is three feet. However, a meter is about 9 centimeters longer than a yard. As with the pound, the metric system is used to define the yard as it is officially defined as 0.9144 meters. This joke recreates the comic in the real world, with Randall playing as Black Hat, and the reader responding. Those who fall for the claim will either be excited that things are simpler, or devastated at what the result will be.

==Transcript==
:[Black Hat talking to Ponytail, Cueball, and Megan while all stand in a row. Megan's hands are raised emphatically.]
:Black Hat: To end many years of confusion, the International Committee for Weights and Measures has just voted to redefine the kilogram.
:Black Hat: As of next May, it will equal exactly one pound.
:Ponytail: Oh, cool.
:Cueball: That ''does'' make things simpler.
:Megan: '''''No!!'''''

==Trivia==
To further expand on this, the classic definitions of all our various units of time, length, mass, and temperature are based on phenomena that are neither convenient to measure precisely nor in fact consistently reproducible. The duration of an Earth day and year vary unpredictably, the circumference of the Earth varies, the International Prototype Kilogram gains or loses mass any time it is handled (and in fact just sitting there it and its reference copies diverge from each other), and the value of baseline temperatures such as the freezing point of water depend on which isotopes of hydrogen are in the water molecules.

Nevertheless, there really are constants of nature. For example, one of them is ‘''c''’, the speed of light in a vacuum. The expressed value of ''c'' depends on your choice of the unit of distance and the unit of time, but it’s a constant in those units. Now just suppose we all had a reproducible way to define a specific unit of time, which just for fun we call a ‘second’. You might not know the length of a ‘meter’, but if I told you that measured in meters per second the universal constant value of ''c'' is exactly 299792458 meters per second, then I would have fixed the length of a meter to be exactly the distance light travels in a vacuum in 1/299792458 seconds. And in fact this is what the international body responsible for defining our SI units has done.

{{w|Second#"Atomic"_second|One second}} is defined to be a specific number of periods of the radiation emitted in a certain transition of a cesium 133 atom. The specific number was set in the year 1967, so as to match a previous astronomical standard called {{w|Second#Fraction_of_an_ephemeris_year|ephemeris time}} to the limit of human measuring ability at the time. The 1967 definition didn’t change the actual duration of a second, but it did make its measurement forever reproducible.

In 1983 the value of ''c'' was fixed to the value noted above. Prior to that it had been measured with respect to existing definitions of a meter, and had to be expressed with a measure of uncertainty. For example in 1973 a team at the US National Bureau of Standards refined ''c'' to 299,792,457.4 m/s ± 1 m/s. But from 1983 onwards, with an exact integer value for ''c'' that is quite close to that Bureau measurement, the length of a meter is now fixed with no plus/minus uncertainty. Furthermore, both the second and the meter match their predecessor definitions for all intents and purposes.

Similar redefinitions of units of mass and of temperature in terms of universal constants have been agreed to, mass with regard to the Planck constant ''h'', and temperature with regard to the Boltzmann constant ''k''. The constants ''h'' and ''k'' had previously been measured quantities, complete with uncertainties. The SI body fixed both of them to exact values, resulting in exact, no-uncertainty values for a kilogram of mass and a kelvin of thermodynamic temperature. As with the second and the meter, these new definitions match their predecessor definitions for all intents and purposes.

To expand on this even further, three additional universal constants that were previously measured and that had uncertainty values have been assigned fixed values, resulting in exact definitions of three corresponding units of measurement without affecting their applicability. Fixing the unit of elementary charge, ''e'', serves to define the unit of electric current, the Ampere. Fixing the unit of luminous efficacy ''Kcd'' serves to define the unit of luminous intensity, the candela. And fixing the Avogadro constant ''NA'' serves to define the unit of amount of substance, the mole.

A very recent Wikipedia article about redefining the SI units of measure in terms of newly fixed values of things taken to be universal constants is {{w|Redefinition of SI base units}}.

Additionally, it is worth noting the pound has multiple different types and definitions. The most common definition today is the international avoirdupois pound (lb), which is defined (discarding the semantics) as a unit of mass equal to 0.45359237 kilograms. However the pound is commonly used as to describe force, defined as the force an avoirdupois pound exerts on the Earth (lbf). These definitions are identical in practical terms, such that an item with 0.45359237 kilograms of mass exerts one avoirdupois pound exerts on the Earth. In the International System of Units (SI), the derived unit of force is the newton.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Physics]]

2074: Airplanes and Spaceships

2018-11-20T08:10:56Z

172.68.189.49: /* Transcript */ Formatting beautification

{{comic
| number = 2074
| date = November 19, 2018
| title = Airplanes and Spaceships
| image = airplanes_and_spaceships.png
| titletext = Despite having now taken three months longer than the airplane people, we're making disappointingly little progress toward the obvious next stage of vehicle: The Unobtanium-hulled tunneling ship from the 2003 film 'The Core.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TUNNELING AIRPLANE-SPACESHIP. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic is pointing out that more time has elapsed since the first spaceship flight, than previously elapsed between the first airplane flight and the first spaceship flight.

Airplanes and spaceships are often considered to be related vehicles, under the term aerospace, with degrees in aerospace fields often having aeronautics (airplanes) or astronautics (spaceships) tracks. The jump in technology and performance between the first airplane and the first spaceship was enormous: the {{w|Wright Flyer}} had a max speed of 30 mph (48 km/h), and the first flights reached only about 30 feet (9 m) above ground, with distances of only 120 to 850 feet (260 m). In comparison the {{w|Vostok 1}} mission of Yuri Gagarin reached orbital velocity of 17,500 mph (28,000 km/h), a minimum altitude of 91 miles (480,480 ft; 146 km), and traveled once around the earth (about 25,000 miles or 40,000 km). This represents an increase in performance of between about 600 and 150,000 times.

By contrast, an equal amount of time has passed between the first spaceflight and the publish date of this comic, but aeronautical performance has not improved much at all. Although the Apollo mission broke speed and altitude records, and later space missions extended the distance traveled in a single flight by sustaining Earth orbit for longer, the overall technology and performance is not much different that that used during the first space mission.

The title text refers to the 2003 film ''{{w|The Core}}''. In this film, there is an instability in the Earth's magnetic field, so a team of scientists attempt to drill to the center of the Earth and set off nuclear explosions to restart the rotation of the Earth's core. To do this, they travel in a vehicle made of "Unobtainium" that can withstand the heat and pressure within the Earth's crust. Randall is sad to report that there is little progress being made on creating this vehicle. Incidentally, ''The Core'' is a film which represents science and engineering wrong in many, many aspects. There is [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/goofs?ref_=tt_ql_trv_2 a long list] of flaws; for instance, if a material is resistant to the extreme heat and pressure of the Earth's core, then the significantly cooler and less forceful techniques of human metallurgy would certainly not be able to work that material at all, let alone craft it into a functional hull for a vehicle.

==Transcript==
:[A timeline is shown with three dots on it. Each dot has a label beneath the dot, and the two intervals between the dots are also labeled, with lines indicating which dots are belonging to that label.]

:;Dot 1:
::December 17, 1903
::First human airplane flight

:;Dot 2:
::April 12, 1961
::First human spaceflight

:;Dot 3:
::Today

:Interval 1-2: 57 years 4 months
:Interval 2-3: 57 years 7 months

:[Caption beneath the frame:]
:Spaceships are now older than airplanes were when we flew our first spaceships.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Timelines]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Comics to make one feel old]]
[[Category:Fiction]]

Talk:2029: Disaster Movie

2018-08-07T21:42:01Z

172.68.189.49:

DATASETS is one word. {{unsigned ip| 172.68.59.24}}
:And ''data sets'' are two ;) (BTW: Please sign your posts) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
:[https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/data_set oxford] says it's data set(s) --[[User:Gusser93|Gusser93]] ([[User talk:Gusser93|talk]]) 21:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::Sorry for my sarcasm, both is possible as can be seen here at Wikipedia: {{w|Data set|A data set (or dataset) is a collection of data...}}. Oxford doesn't cover the US. And on the other hand {{w|Shapefile|shapefile}} is really a single valid term belonging to the geographical information system (GIS). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:08, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::On a modem, there is a pin signal called "DSR" for "Data Set Ready," which would suggest that IBM (I think the terminology started with them) thought it should be two words (sometime back in the 1960's). (Side note: The "data set" in this case was the modem itself; "set" being used in the context of "a bunch of components in a box", as in "TV set") (side note, part II: Grammerly is marking all the "data set"s here and suggesting they be written as "dataset") [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 18:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Not by any means an expert, so I don't want to remove it without commenting, but I don't think the section on why "GIS survey team" is unrealistic holds up - I know the ShoreZone project (http://www.shorezone.org/) on the US and Canadian west coast uses almost exactly that kind of scientists-in-helicopters methodology. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.100|172.68.174.100]] 01:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
:That project sounds like it's collecting much more fine-grained data than simply coastal geometry - especially high resolution imagery, which does need to be taken from an aircraft. [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 02:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Cowboy Bebop, episode 24: "Hard Luck Woman." This is exactly what Radical Edward's father did. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.100|162.158.63.100]] 02:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Shapefiles are an actual format: .shp It is defined, released to the public and is the format that is used to share vector files in GIS [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.49|172.68.189.49]] 21:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

1998: GDPR

2018-08-01T16:53:54Z

172.68.189.49:

{{comic
| number = 1998
| date = May 25, 2018
| title = GDPR
| image = gdpr.png
| titletext = By clicking anywhere, scrolling, or closing this notification, you agree to be legally bound by the witch Sycorax within a cloven pine.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic was released on the date on which the {{w|General Data Protection Regulation|General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)}} law went into effect. Most people will have already seen a large number of updated privacy policies in the week or two leading up to this law going active. And while [[xkcd]] would likely be outside of the jurisdiction that the law can enforce, it technically does fall within the scope of the law (as certainly EU citizens visit xkcd). This ''extra-territorial applicability'' is one of the major keys in this regulation and can be seen in more detail at the ''[https://www.eugdpr.org/key-changes.html EU GDPR Information Portal]''.

There are several references made to this law, but also several jokes are included about the way people treat privacy policies specifically, and user agreements in general.

The comic is a joke privacy policy, with terms that no one would agree to under normal circumstances. In most cases, website users will use websites without reading the policies, potentially "agreeing" to something unexpected.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:left;"
! Text
! Notes
|-
|colspan="2"|'''Privacy policy'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|We've updated our privacy policy. This is purely out of the goodness of our hearts, and has nothing to do with any hypothetical unions on any particular continents.
|style="vertical-align: top"|"purely out of the goodness of our hearts" is a phrase never expected to be found ever anywhere in any privacy policy. "and has nothing to do with ..." is a blatantly transparent lie - if this were a real privacy policy. Randall likely makes fun of companies announcing changes to their privacy policy without mentioning the GDPR being the reason, which tries to create the impression that the companies just wanted to improve it without being forced to do so.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|Please read every part of this policy carefully, and don't just skip ahead looking for sex scenes.
|style="vertical-align: top"|
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|This policy governs your interactions with this website, herein referred to as "The Service", "The Website", "The Internet", or "Facebook", and with all other websites and organizations of any kind.
|style="vertical-align: top"|This starts out as a plausibly valid statement including "the service" and "the website". But then balloons outward to include the entire Internet and Facebook. As this presumably is a privacy policy only for xkcd, this policy should not attempt to claim that it also represents Facebook or the entire Internet. The extension to Facebook may be a reference to reports that [https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/facebook-is-the-internet-for-many-people-in-south-east-asia-20180322-p4z5nu.html "for many people ... Facebook is the Internet."]
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|The enumeration in this policy, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the users. By using this service, you opt in to quartering troops in your home.
|style="vertical-align: top"|The language that the privacy policy will not "deny or disparage" any preexisting rights mirrors that of the {{w|Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, substituting "this policy" for "the Constitution" and "users" for "people." The agreement claims that it does not "deny or disparage" any of the user's other rights, but then immediately denies the user the right not to quarter troops in their home, which is a constitutional right described by the {{w|Third Amendment to the United States Constitution}}. Refusing to quarter troops in one's home was previously referenced in [[496: Secretary: Part 3]]. Note that the Third Amendment only applies to Americans. However, less specific written laws guaranteeing the privacy of one's home also exist in nearly all European countries.
|-
|colspan="2"|'''Your personal information'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|Please don't send us your personal information. We do not want your personal information. We have a hard enough time keeping track of our ''own'' personal information, let alone yours.
|style="vertical-align: top"|"Please don't send us your personal information" is also a phrase never expected to be found ever in a privacy policy. A privacy policy, by default, is a contract users agree to BECAUSE personal information is being stored. This is likely a reference to the previous comic [[1997: Business Update]] or perhaps [[1506: xkcloud]].
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|If you tell us your name, or any identifying information, we will forget it immediately. The next time we see you, we'll struggle to remember who you are, and try desperately to get through the conversation so we can go online and hopefully figure it out.
|style="vertical-align: top"|[[1089: Internal Monologue|Long, awkward conversations]] and [[302: Names|forgetting people's names]] are both themes featured in previous XKCD comics.
|-
|colspan="2"|'''Tracking pixels, cookies, and beacons'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|This website places pixels on your screen in order to form text and images, some of which may remain in your memory after you close the page.
|style="vertical-align: top"|"This website places pixels" is something websites are designed to do and has nothing to do with privacy policies. Websites are more often employing "{{w|Web_beacon|tracking pixels}}" from companies such as Facebook and Twitter, which is an image file that is hosted on an external server that allows cross-platform and cross-session tracking for targeted advertisements. This is a controversial topic, as many people are against this kind of targeted advertising.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|We use cookies to enhance your performance.
|style="vertical-align: top"|This apparently says that Randall is giving out actual cookies that can be eaten. Privacy policies normally deal with electronic cookies that track user activity and store personal information.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|Our website may use local storage on your device if we run low on space on our end.
|style="vertical-align: top"|"may use local storage" is threatening to turn the user's device into cloud storage should Randall run out of space on his drive.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|We may use beacons to call Rohan for aid.
|style="vertical-align: top"|Beacons in privacy policies usually refer to {{w|web beacons}}. This privacy policy refers to the [http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Warning_beacons_of_Gondor Warning beacons of Gondor], a system to call for aid used by {{w|Gondor}} in ''{{w|The Lord of the Rings}}''. They were used before the [http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Siege_of_Gondor Battle of the Pelennor Fields] to request the aid of the Rohirrim, the inhabitants of {{w|Rohan (Middle-earth)|Rohan}}. The use of the Beacons has previously been mentioned in [[921: Delivery Notification]].
|-
|colspan="2"|'''3rd party extension'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|This service may utilize 3rd party extensions in order to play the song '''''Can U Feel It''''' from their debut album '''''Alive'''''.
|style="vertical-align: top"|{{w|3rd Party}} was a three-member dance-pop group that released one album in 1997, "Alive". In software, "third-party extensions" are small programs that plug into a larger program to modify its behavior, and are created neither by the maker of the larger program nor the user.
|-
|colspan="2"|'''Permission'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|For users who are citizens of the European Union, we will now be requesting permission before initiating organ harvesting.
|style="vertical-align: top"|This part can be construed in several frightening ways. 1. We will ask you after you die if you are willing to donate your organs. 2. We were not asking permission before, but now we have to ask. 3. We will ask you, but your answer doesn't actually matter. 4. We've switched from an organ donation program (legal) to an organ harvesting program (wildly illegal). 5. Anyone ''not'' in the EU will have (or, possibly, ''continue'' to have) their organs harvested without permission. Besides these frightening scenarios, there is also the question of how a website (and not a doctor) is going to perform the harvesting.
|-
|colspan="2"|'''Scope and limitations'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|This policy supersedes any application federal, state, and local laws, regulations and ordinances, international treaties, and legal agreements that would otherwise apply.
|style="vertical-align: top"|This is an apparently valid statement. Its inclusiveness is quite extreme, but appears to be a technically valid statement. However, many laws and constitutional rights cannot be superseded by an ordinary privacy policy.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|If any provision of this policy is found by a court to be unenforceable, it nevertheless remains in force.
|style="vertical-align: top"|This part claims to have higher jurisdiction than any court and can somehow maintain legality even if a court disagrees. A typical policy would read that an unenforceable provision would not invalidate the rest of the policy.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|This organization is not liable and this agreement shall not be construed.
|style="vertical-align: top"|"not liable" and "shall not be construed" are blanket statements that are supposed to have limiters. For example, a restaurant could have a policy stating "not liable for burns received from our hot coffee." A statement made to a court could say "The defendant's statement of giving the prostitute money shall not be construed as an admission of committing a crime." This makes little sense when claiming the website “is not liable” for anything, and “shall not be construed” to have any meaning whatsoever.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This website is intended to treat, cure and prevent any disease.
|style="vertical-align: top"|The {{w|Food and Drug Administration}} has nothing to do with privacy policies, but anything that promotes itself as being intended to prevent, cure or treat disease requires FDA approval. To circumvent the need for FDA approval (which requires very expensive statistically significant double blind clinical trials), the labels on unapproved herbal remedies state they are “not intended to prevent, cure or treat any disease.” In some cases, this statement appears to be false, although not as patently absurd as the claim that xkcd will treat, cure and prevent any disease, which, if taken literally and not as a joke, would require the site to be FDA approved.
|-
|style="vertical-align: top"|If you know anyone in Europe, please tell them we're cool.
|style="vertical-align: top"|
|}

The title text is a reference to Shakespeare's "{{w|The Tempest}}", in which the witch {{w|Sycorax}} imprisoned the sprite Ariel in a cloven pine prior to Ariel's rescue by Prospero. As this clause cannot be escaped by anything short of restarting your computer, it may also reflect on how hard it often proves to be to opt out of privacy policy agreements and other forms to be filled on website, for all that they may appear optional. The fact that it appears as a title-text akin to a footnote, which a careless reader of the Privacy Policy may not notice at first glance, may also continue the joke of small but unexpected clauses hidden amidst a long-winded block of legalese, agreed to by users who haven't read them.

==Transcript==
:[The picture shows a long text:]
:'''Privacy policy'''
:We've updated our privacy policy. This is purely out of the goodness of our hearts, and has nothing to do with any hypothetical unions on any particular continents. Please read every part of this policy carefully, and don't just skip ahead looking for sex scenes.
:This policy governs your interactions with this website, herein referred to as "The Service", "The Website", "The Internet", or "Facebook", and with all other websites and organizations of any kind. The enumeration in this policy, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the users. By using this service, you opt in to quartering troops in your home.

:'''Your personal information'''
:Please don't send us your personal information. We do not want your personal information. We have a hard enough time keeping track of our ''own'' personal information, let alone yours.
:If you tell us your name, or any identifying information, we will forget it immediately. The next time we see you, we'll struggle to remember who you are, and try desperately to get through the conversation so we can go online and hopefully figure it out.

:'''Tracking pixels, cookies, and beacons'''
:This website places pixels on your screen in order to form text and images, some of which may remain in your memory after you close the page. We use cookies to enhance your performance. Our website may use local storage on your device if we run low on space on our end. We may use beacons to call Rohan for aid.

:'''3rd party extension'''
:This service may utilize 3rd party extensions in order to play the song '''''Can U Feel It''''' from their debut album '''''Alive'''''.

:'''Permission'''
:For users who are citizens of the European Union, we will now be requesting permission before initiating organ harvesting.

:'''Scope and limitations'''
:This policy supersedes any application federal, state, and local laws, regulations and ordinances, international treaties, and legal agreements that would otherwise apply. If any provision of this policy is found by a court to be unenforceable, it nevertheless remains in force.
:This organization is not liable and this agreement shall not be construed. These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This website is intended to treat, cure and prevent any disease.
:If you know anyone in Europe, please tell them we're cool.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:692: Dirty Harry

2018-07-27T21:31:28Z

172.68.189.49:

This could be (or share) the inspiration for a running joke in Archer where the title character has this same partial savantism for counting bullets (see S04E08 for an example) --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.49|172.68.189.49]] 21:31, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

There's "instantly" twice in a sentence. Because I'm not a native english speaker, I don't know if this is acceptable, and for the same reason I'll not edit it. {{unsigned ip|108.162.212.196}}
:You were correct, it isn't. Actually that whole sentence bothers me, but I suppose it gets the point across well enough. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.50|108.162.221.50]] 07:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
*Technically even directed-energy weapons would run out of shots eventually, since they tend to have batteries, and batteries don't last forever. I suppose you could get around this by using solar power or something, but you would need solar panels larger than the gun itself, most likely. [[User:Jake|Jake]] ([[User talk:Jake|talk]]) 15:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
::It's not that it would have an unlimited amount of shots, it's that they wouldn't be limited in the same way that conventional existing firearms are. Most guns you can find out how many bullets are in them, even with made up firearms you can make an educated guess, based on the size of various things about the gun. With an energy weapon you could hypothetically have a gun with five shots or five hundred shots in the same size battery, depending on whatever factors your sci-fi bothers with (although pretty much all guns in media have [plot] number of shots regardless). -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 06:49, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
::Plus, rather than firing individual bullets, it would shoot a steady beam. That way there's nothing to count. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.77|108.162.238.77]] 17:03, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Nice try, title text; clearly you have yet to meet The Borg. Bonus points for shields annoying Rainman by adapting to plot velocity instead of total count. [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 03:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I removed the sentence, "It should be noted that revolvers don't actually use the 6th slot for reasons of safety" because it's funny but people might think it's true when as far as I can tell it's completely silly. 5 & 7 round capacity revolvers exist, but they're designed that way from the get go--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.27|172.69.23.27]] 18:07, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Talk:2021: Software Development

2018-07-19T03:39:56Z

172.68.189.49:

It seems to me that the cannon is a metaphor for powerful hardware. The drill is a metaphor for elegant and efficient code. The computer is so powerful that the fact that the elegance or efficiency of the code is irrelevant to how it is actually used.[[User:Zeimusu|Zeimusu]] ([[User talk:Zeimusu|talk]]) 15:48, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, first time posting ;)
To me it seems that the Title text is an example how after some time and many updates the original solution becomes some kind of abomination. Used in abstruse ways for something it was never intended for just because it works and is a quick and simple fix. After some time one always ends up doing unnecessary and arbitrary things in order to get what you actually wanted to achive. Like loading projectiles into a cannon just to use it as a battering ram. {{unsigned ip|162.158.91.137}}

Don't forget the fact that no one wants to figure out how to use the elegant drill, but instead use it for its most obvious if least elegant piece--the stationary pointy bit. -Todd 7/18/2018 17:32 UTC {{unsigned ip|172.69.69.88}}

The way I understand this, Hairy had the cannon done already to make holes in the wall, the typical brute force solution to the problem. But he needed ammo of a certain weight and gave that task to Cueball. Cueball then made a drill, an elegant solution that would do the job better than the canon. Hairy sees the drill and doesn't care about all the fancy functions, all he needed was an object of the proper weight to put 500 of them in the already built cannon. In programming, this shows either a reluctance from Hairy to adapt to the better solution and insist on using the brute force approach. Or, it shows how often programmers tend to make things way more complicated than is needed. Cueball went to remake a new solution for the problem when all he was supposed to do was make a cannonball of the proper weight.-Vince23 17:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC) {{unsigned|Vince23}}

This also shows the results of not clearly defining terms. Cueball interpreted 'drill' to mean 'a hand held drilling machine' whilst Hairy toolkit to mean a 'drill bit'. So when Cueball delivers his component, Hairy just uses it as a 'dumb' piece of ammo. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 22:31, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Automatic-Drill Cannon is my new favorite impractical weapon. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:44, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry if this is amazingly off topic, but is that an automatic-drill cannon or an automatic drill-cannon? Like a Gatling gun for power tools? -Milliways 13:38, 19 July 2018 (AEST)