explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:304: Nighttime Stories

2024-08-25T19:20:22Z

172.68.35.95:

Why is it out of '''six''' books? How was that number reached? Depending on your point of view, it could be out of four (counting only ''Ender's Game'' and the ''Speaker''-''Xenocide''-''Children of the Mind'' trilogy) or nine (if we include the Shadow books, sans ''Shadows Alive'') or eleven (if we include the Earth as-yet-unfinished trilogy) or fourteen (if we include the lesser books like ''A War of Gifts'') or even sixteen if we include the as-yet-unreleased books - but I can't see how someone got six. To do this you'd have to take away part of a series, like only counting ''Ender's Shadow'' and ''Shadow of the Hegemon'', but not the other Shadow books. I guess you could include only the main quartet and the Earth books, but if you're going to include the Earth books why not include some of the others? --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.72|173.245.55.72]] 17:33, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

This is true. At the time of this comic there where only published 4-5 books in the series. The fifth came out in 2007. I have deleted the (out of 6) comment as the 6. came out in 2008 and more have followed since. The important issue is that the three books mentioned are the first three.[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:49, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I think they wrote out of 6 because there are 6 main books with Ender in them. Ender's Game, Ender's Shadow, Ender in Exile, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the mind.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.159|108.162.219.159]] 13:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Xenocide *is* my favorite. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.150|108.162.221.150]] 04:27, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Part of the joke is that both are fans of the Ender series and should have much in common and to talk about, but Cueball gives up on her before even hearing her explanation. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.11|162.158.92.11]] 14:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm more upset that he is implying Speaker for the Dead is any less bad than Xenocide. — [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 23:13, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

That's a hot (and bad) take there, Kazvorpal. I question the judgement of someone who implies Speaker for the Dead is bad than someone who calls Xenocide their favorite in the series. I'm just speechless at how bad that opinion is.

C’mon, Children of the mind was way worse. Xenocide. — [[User:Waddle Deo]]

In my opinion, Ender's Game is the best book of the series[[User:I HAVE NO NAME|I HAVE NO NAME]] ([[User talk:I HAVE NO NAME|talk]]) 09:03, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I think Xenocide and Ender's Game are about equal, though I don't know how you can compare Ender's Game to the other books while they are so different. Speaker is a close second, though I don't like Children of the Mind nearly as much. [[User:NO NAME]]

Talk:2950: Situation

2024-06-24T19:25:38Z

172.68.35.95:

For reference, the bridge in question is the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 18:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

And for the record, the Challenger engineers *did* warn about the O-ring risk, but were overridden by management. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.95|172.68.35.95]] 19:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Talk:146: Join Myspace

2024-03-21T18:35:38Z

172.68.35.95:

[[User:Rikthoff|Rikthoff]] ([[User talk:Rikthoff|talk]]) The issue date is definitely off. Can anyone fix?

:Yep, I've fixed the date. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

carebearstare :D [[User:625571b7-aa66-4f98-ac5c-92464cfb4ed8|625571b7-aa66-4f98-ac5c-92464cfb4ed8]] ([[User talk:625571b7-aa66-4f98-ac5c-92464cfb4ed8|talk]]) 01:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
black hat said "care bear stare" quickly to become "carebearstare." (this is supported by cueball's "What?") that should probably be mentioned instead of just switching to carebearstare. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.142|172.69.63.142]] 14:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)Bumpf

It's... NO. THAT'S NOT RIGHHHHTTTT...

 help.

Talk:1163: Debugger

2024-03-21T18:17:23Z

172.68.35.95:

Isn't this also a reference to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem halting problem]? [[User:DonGoat|DonGoat]] ([[User talk:DonGoat|talk]]) 08:33, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

:It may be, but it isn't an INSTANCE of halting problem. You can understand how something work without being able to predict what exactly it will do. The problem may be also related to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems Gödel's incompleteness theorems], which basically states that any nontrivial theory cannot be proven consistent and complete in itself. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

It's also reminiscent of a joke: ''"I was saying to myself that a brain is truly a wondrous creation with its complexity and power. And then I realized '''who''' is saying that to me."'' -- [[User:Edheldil|Edheldil]] ([[User talk:Edheldil|talk]]) 10:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if it's relevant, but it reminds me of a quote: 'If our brains were simple enough for us to understand them, we'd be so simple that we couldn't' by Ian Stewart. (Yeah, I do know it from Civilization 4.) [[User:Lmpk|Lmpk]] ([[User talk:Lmpk|talk]]) 20:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

If the "Report a bug" page stopped working, and it was a site with some traffic, it's administrators ''could'' find out by noticing there were no more bug reports by users. The lack of bugs reported would point to a bug. Or a great deal of arrogance. -- [[User:Martin42|Martin42]] ([[User talk:Martin42|talk]]) 05:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

:You made a series of assumptions here in your attempt to overthrow the bug analogy - 1. The "Report a bug" page used to work at some point in time; 2. The site had traffic, meaning that the site had previously been online; 3. The users of the site had been consistently using the "Report a bug" page to report bugs (because, you know, I always just leave the site without caring enough to submit a bug report); 4. Someone actually reads the bug reports and does something about them. Judging by how specific your example is, I don't believe you can successfully use that one instance to claim that the analogy does not accurately describe the situation in general. [[User:NiccoloM|NiccoloM]] ([[User talk:NiccoloM|NiccoloM]]) 00:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Also note the title "debugger." Most computer programmers don't understand how a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debugger debugger] works, but they rely on it to understand how their code works. -- [[User:Paul42|Paul42]] ([[User talk:Paul42|talk]]) 16:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Somehow related, an actual problem when people start losing their mental capabilities, typically due to age. Both my parents (age around 80) are starting to have important lapses of judgement, and because they evaluate their behavior with their mind, they refuse to accept any issues in their thought process. As I'm witnessing this, I wonder the same think as the character does: ''I don't understand how my mind works, I wonder if it's working alright, but I use my mind to evaluate it...'' [[Special:Contributions/87.238.84.65|87.238.84.65]] 14:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Guest, 1st time posting.

I think the comic is called "Debugger" because if there is a bug in debugger, how do you debug it if this debugger is the only debugger you've got? The answer is that there are other computers with their own debuggers walking around and they may, in principle, find a bug in your debugger. This is how science works actually. {{unsigned|76.16.124.121}}

Here is the simple truth: '''"It's working!"''' (There is '''no wrong''' in nature. Everything is true. While a thing exists, it's perfectly fine and it shouldn't be any different. When a thing is not fine, it stops to exist/dies.) {{unsigned ip|162.158.83.240}}

this reminds me that i once found more bugs than the debugger [[User:An user who has no account yet|An user who has no account yet]] ([[User talk:An user who has no account yet|talk]]) 18:25, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Whoops haha. And ''MAYBE'' we could use the simple but ever-so-complex workings of the brain to ''''take over the world.'''' (evil laugh) Nah, jk. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.175.126|162.158.175.126]] 18:16, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Talk:837: Coupon Code

2024-03-13T18:21:23Z

172.68.35.95: /* Trivia */ new section

If you see in the first frame, the Subtotal is a one-digit number, possibly $3.19. Yet the tax is way higher, and the subtotal is higher still. Thoughts?
--Kuilin Li, kuilin@gmail.com, didn't bother registering.
[[Special:Contributions/67.175.58.94|67.175.58.94]] 03:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

: The word next to the (potential) 3.19 isn't 'subtotal', though. The first letter might be a K or R, no idea on the second, the third is probably an E, K or R again, a 'one foot' letter like I or T, a C (I think), another 'one foot', a round bottom like a C or O, then possibly an H. I'm sure it's a real word, knowing how much detail he puts in the simplest things, am pretty sure it's not 'subtotal', but no idea otherwise what it actually is. --[[User:StarChaser Tyger|StarChaser Tyger]] ([[User talk:StarChaser Tyger|talk]]) 03:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

:: My guess is that it says "AMERICIUM". —Tanner Swett [[Special:Contributions/107.5.152.253|107.5.152.253]] 22:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

::: Hmm, looks like you could be right. Also, {{w|americium}} is a radioactive element commonly used (in tiny amounts) in {{w|smoke detector}}s. It's probably the only {{w|transuranic element}} you can find in your house. --[[User:Aaron of Mpls|Aaron of Mpls]] ([[User talk:Aaron of Mpls|talk]]) 03:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
::::This would be a nod to what if where someone tries to collect all the elements even dangerous ones[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.55|162.158.62.55]]!

I don't really get the joke: is it about the idea that stealing something from the house of a dying woman is a rather common thing to have on one's conscience? and Cueball tries to leverage on that everywhere he can? Or would it be that Cueball really ''knows'' who is on the other side and what he can pressure them on? - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 14:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
:The joke is that coupon codes are normally bland, corporate, impersonal, and small (you don't save that much money generally). Also, they're now sometimes shared on sites like RetailMeNot. This is just the opposite. It's a highly profitable way of exploiting a personal secret the buyer knows about the seller. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 03:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Highly effective way? Only if the buyer was reading the discount code input manually! [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 12:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
:::It's the romantic image that there is more behind the interface than mere, cold technology. But atleast a sentinent being, if not humans. I don't think there's an actual joke that is supposed to make you laugh here though. --[[Special:Contributions/91.46.105.142|91.46.105.142]] 22:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

It is way too specific to be a "shot in the dark", the extortionist clearly has inside knowledge. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 01:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
: See https://xkcd.com/440/ [[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.53|162.158.68.53]] 18:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

;Price of the product

I think the price is 3.14, as it is the closest number that matches with the image & perfectly divides into 65.94 (80.02-14.08). --[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 00:58, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
:That sounds like something Randall would do, since 3.14~=π . [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 20:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

If you look closely, you can see a single dark pixel near the other edge. I think it looks more like 3.99 or 3.79. [[User:IJustWantToEditStuff|IJustWantToEditStuff]] ([[User talk:IJustWantToEditStuff|talk]]) 02:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Wish it worked in the XKCD shop. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.36|199.27.133.36]] 06:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the black mailing the cashier hypothesis, but I initially read it as a Black Hat esque prank where the coupon code was given to the one who committed the crime.

Interestingly enough Cueball's chair is missing its back in the first panel it appears in. - [[User:ComradeBlaze|ComradeBlaze]] 19:26 9 July 2021 (UTC)

== Trivia ==

In the second panel, the back of the chair is missing.

Talk:2900: Call My Cell

2024-03-04T18:18:18Z

172.68.35.95:

I think he just forgot Cueball's name. By asking hom to call him, he would see the name on the screen And remember it. Thus also remembering how annoyed he is by Cueball. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.114.136|172.71.114.136]] 06:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:Nah, this is just Black Hat being a [[72: Classhole|classhole]]. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.234|172.70.211.234]] 06:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:Would have been kind of cute, though. :D I often have to ask people “what’s your name, again”? Letting them call me to see their name could easily have been my idea. (But in that scenario, Randall would probably have drawn Cueball (as himself, he seems to have similar difficulties as me) instead of Black Hat. “[[1746: Making Friends|Social tip]]: It seems less awkward to ask people for their name for the 5th time if you pretend you lost your phone.”) --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.185|198.41.242.185]] 19:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:This was how I read it, too. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.169|172.71.151.169]] 00:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
: Another reading of it is that Black Hat, being Black Hat, didn't even pay any attention to who he was talking to, since they were merely a means to an end. It's then only when he looks at the phone that he registers who it is.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.147|172.70.86.147]] 09:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

What kind of person would need to check their contacts to see if a person is blocked when you can just ask them to ring your phone? [[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]] ([[User talk:OmniDoom|talk]]) 06:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm a bit sad that comic 2900 was not released on 29th of February. :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:Perhaps it technically ''was''. By the timing of the auto-pickup/article creation by the 'Bot, it was 29/Feb all the way up to (and including) Randall's own TZ. It was pretty much as 'late' as you can get before you start getting to the realms of actual "delayed a day for technical reasons" as occasionally exbibited by some of his. (Or the rare times the current 'bot fell over and humans were initially tardy at filling in.) Though the 'official' date is likely the 28th; I haven't checked the publication DB, yet, but I'd guess it still is listed as Wednesday-as-usual.
:It's also been quite some time since Randall deliberately juggled numbers (possibly even by inserting Guest Week, which ISTR allowed a years-later numerical 'synchonicity' (can't quite remember/find what that was, but it was one accepted as entirely intended). It'd be an even longer game to have also engineered ''this'' one by seemingly impromptu non-MWF comics. And not then make it something like the recent leap-light-year one to make it relevent. So probably not planned. But ''possibly'' spontaneously held back as a last-minute (and entirely unofficial) whim, on seeing the same coincidence as we have noted. IMO. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.124|172.69.195.124]] 12:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Could Cueball have annoyed Black Hat in the past, so he then displays this type of behavior in revenge? --[[User:1234231587678|1234231587678]] ([[User talk:1234231587678|talk]]) 22:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
:I think anyone who ''actively'' annoys BH won't get away with just this kind of response, somehow. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.137|141.101.98.137]] 22:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Am I the only one who went down a rabbit hole and ended up at [https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/79990/is-the-questionably-legal-maneuver-from-xkcd-207-actually-legal a SX about Oregon U-turn legality]? [[User:RandalSchwartz|RandalSchwartz]] ([[User talk:RandalSchwartz|talk]]) 19:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

This comic has the same basic plot as the Doctor's phone sketch of UK satirist Chris Morris's surreal comedy "Jam": [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bz9rH-yb8E].

I just think Black Hat is being a jerk to Cueball >:(. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.95|172.68.35.95]] 18:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

2894: Research Account

2024-02-15T17:31:20Z

172.68.35.95:

[]
<!--
{{comic
| number = 2894
| date = February 14, 2024
| title = Research Account
| image = research_account_2x.png
| imagesize = 291x479px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Focus of your research: EXTREME PETTINESS AND UNWILLINGNESS TO LET ANYTHING GO
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT THAT WILL ARGUE WITHOUT MERCY - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In the comic, [[Cueball]] is filling out a form to register for a research account. Such accounts are typically intended for people doing serious work in the relevant field, who need access to the materials provided to support that work. Cueball, however, has filled out “other/none” for institution, and “to win an argument with someone in a group chat” for “reason for requesting access to our datasets”, making it clear that his interest is both petty and personal. While this may be honest, it doesn't match the assumed purpose, and he may be worried that it might mean that his registration would be rejected or subsequently cancelled. So he then selects all and deletes his previous justification, replacing it with “independent research”, which is an accurate, if generic, explanation. Randall is undoubtedly familiar with such registration forms from doing background research for xkcd and What If?.

In the title text, he says that his research focuses on “extreme pettiness and unwillingness to let anything go” (in all caps), further reinforcing the reason that he is doing this solely to win an argument. It is possible this is a pun on different meanings of the word "focus" - while the question about the focus of one's research is typically about the subject matter they are researching (raft building in fire ants, etc), Cueball appears to be writing about what drives his desire to do research. This is more like the idea of a "spell focus" in fantasy settings, an object meant to allow a spellcaster to focus their energies and perform magic. Similarly, Cueball is not doing research INTO pettiness, but rather is focusing entirely on his pettiness as his main reason to perform research and achieve his goals.

It is not uncommon for online forms to include fields like these, where it's unclear what, if anything, will be done with the input, and therefore how much it matters what is entered. It's unlikely that anyone would have the capacity to review all the freetext answers submitted, and in any case, by the time they did so, Cueball would presumably have already accessed the materials he wanted. They may be able to mine the data for insight about their users, or simply be collecting data against a vague ambition to do so in the future. However, even if nothing is subsequently done with the data, the very existence of the field may be serving a purpose, by deterring some people from completing the registration for frivolous purposes (though as Cueball illustrates, this is not infallible).

The feel of this comic is slightly similar to [[1346: Career]].

==Transcript==

:[Cueball sits at a desk, typing at his laptop computer.]

:[Above him, there is a box indicating his computer screen.]

:[Caption above screen:] Application for research account

:[Under the caption, there is a panel, representing the computer screen; in the panel: (cut off from above) "Institution: Other/none", where the option has been selected from a drop-down menu. Under that is written "Reason for requesting access to our datasets:", under which is a comment field where "To win an argument with someone in a group chat" has been written. Under that, two long bubbles containing the words "Select all" and "Delete" separate another panel, with a panel featuring the comment field with "Independent research" written. The cursor can still be seen blinking.]

:[Caption below the comic panel:]
:I never know how honest to be on these forms.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Science]]

1638: Backslashes

2024-02-07T15:49:56Z

172.68.35.95:

{{comic
| number = 1638
| date = February 3, 2016
| title = Backslashes
| image = backslashes.png
| titletext = I searched my .bash_history for the line with the highest ratio of special characters to regular alphanumeric characters, and the winner was: cat out.txt | grep -o "[[(].*[])][^)]]*$" ... I have no memory of this and no idea what I was trying to do, but I sure hope it worked.
}}

==Explanation==
Most programming languages use the concept of a {{w|String literal|string}} literal, which is just a text between some delimiters, usually quotes. For example, "Hello, world" is a string literal. The text being represented is ''Hello, world'' without the quotes. However, the quotes are also written to mark the beginning and end of the string. This is a problem when the text itself contains a quote, as in "This is a "quoted" string". The quotes around the word "quoted" are intended to be part of the text, but the {{w|Lexical analysis|language processor}} will likely confuse it for the end of the string, which would thus be two strings with ''quoted'' outside these strings (probably resulting in a syntax error).

To avoid this problem, an {{w|Escape character|escape character}} (usually a backslash) is prepended to non-string-terminating quotes. So, the previous text would be written as "This is a \"quoted\" string". The language processor will substitute every occurrence of \" with only the quote character, and the string terminates at the quote character which does not immediately follow a backslash. In this case the resulting text string would be ''This is a "quoted" string'' as intended.

However, the problem now is that the intended text might contain a backslash itself. For example, the text "C:\" will now be interpreted as an unterminated string containing a quote character. To avoid this, literal backslashes also are escaped with a second backslash, i.e. instead of "C:\" we write "C:\\", where the language processor interprets \\ as one single backslash and the quote terminates the string to give ''C:\'' as the output.

This doubling of backslashes happens in most programming and scripting languages, but also in other syntactic constructs such as {{w|Regular expression|regular expressions}}. So, when several of these languages are used in conjunction, backslashes pile up exponentially (each layer has to double the number of slashes). See example of a backslash explosion and alternatives to avoid this [[#Backslash explosion and alternatives|below]].

This kind of backslash explosion is known as {{w|Leaning toothpick syndrome}}, and can happen in [[1313: Regex Golf|many situations]]. Below is an explanation of all the [[#Entries in the list|entries in the comic]].

The backslash explosion in the title text is about a {{w|Bash (Unix shell)|bash}} command (which uses the backslash to escape arguments) invoking the {{w|grep}} utility which searches for text following a pattern specified by means of a regular expression (which also uses the backslash to escape special characters). This leads to 3 backslashes in a row in the command, which could easily become 7 backslashes in a row if the text being searched for also contains a backslash.

Even advanced users who completely understand the concept often have a hard time figuring out exactly how many backslashes are required in a given situation. It is hopelessly frustrating to carefully calculate exactly the number of backslashes and then noticing that there's a mistake so the whole thing doesn't work. At a point, it becomes easier to just keep throwing backslashes in until things work than trying to reason what the correct number is.

It's unclear whether the regular expression in the title text is valid or not. A long discussion about the validity of the expression has occurred here on this explanation's [[Talk:1638: Backslashes|talk page]]. The fact that many editors of the site, often themselves extremely technically qualified,{{Citation needed}}{{Citation needed}} can't determine whether the expression is valid or not, adds a meta layer to the joke of the comic. This is an example of [[356: Nerd Sniping|nerd sniping]] (oh, the irony\!\!\!\).

===Entries in the list===
*The first four examples have names that are (somewhat) based on what they actually produce:
**'''Backslash''': 1 backslash appropriately named
**'''Real backslash''': 2 backslashes are labeled correctly as they do indeed refer to an escaped backslash.
**'''''Real'' real backslash''': 3 backslashes would refer to an escaped backslash followed by an unescaped one. The first two backslashes would combine to make a ''real backslash'' while the third one would combine with the character following it to form an {{w|Escape sequence|escape sequence}}. The name does thus not make a lot of sense, as this is two escape sequences and not a single "very real" one.
**'''Actual backslash, for real this time''': 4 backslashes form one single backslash escaped twice (the first escaping produces two backslashes, the second escaping doubles each of the backslashes). This is so common that even the documentation for the {{w|Python (programming language)|Python}} regular expression library has a section called [https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html Regular expression operations] that mentions "\\\\" explicitly. In this case, the backslash has to be escaped once for being part of a regular expression and then ''each'' of these once more as the regular expression needs to be written inside a Python string. This is named in reference to the fact that the previous examples didn't contain enough escaping.
*The remaining five examples of backslashes have more and more occult names (explanations) and do not refer to any more real uses of backslash escapes:
**'''Elder backslash''': 5 backslashes would be a doubly-escaped backslash plus an unescaped one. The reference to {{w|Elder}} in the comic has many meanings. It has become known through fantasy media; Most prominent with the {{w|Elder Days}}, which are the first Ages of {{w|Middle-earth}} in {{w|The Silmarillion}}, the more-or-less prequel to {{w|The Lord of the Rings}}. More recently it has been used in the {{w|Harry Potter}} universe where the ''Deathly Hallow'' called the ''{{w|Magical_objects_in_Harry_Potter#Deathly_Hallows|Elder wand}}'', made from {{w|Sambucus|Elder wood}}, is a very important part of the last book ''{{w|Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows}}''. Other examples are the {{w|Elder Gods}} of the {{w|Cthulhu Mythos}} as well as various 'Elder' magical items and beings in the {{w|Dungeons and Dragons}} mythologies.
**'''Backslash which escapes the screen and enters your brain''': 6 backslashes is a play on the word "escape" as the backslash is supposed to be an "escape character" but obviously not "escaping the screen" and entering your brain. This could also be understood as the programmer getting backslashes on their mind, when they go beyond the ''Elder backslash'' domain...
**'''Backslash so real it transcends time and space ''': 7 backslashes goes further than escaping the screen as they now {{w|Transcendence (philosophy)|transcends}} both {{w|Spacetime|time and space}}
**'''Backslash to end all other text''': 8 backslashes would be a triply-escaped backslash (same as 4 backslashes but with an additional escaping layer). It is said to "end all other text", i.e. there should never be any more text if someone uses eight in a row. But there could be more as indicated in the last example.
**'''The true name of Ba'al, the Soul-Eater''': {{w|Infinity|∞ backslashes}} (11 are shown but followed by "..." to indicate that they continue forever). If you could write an infinite number of backslashes it would actually be ''The true name of {{w|Baal|Ba'al}}, the {{w|Soul eater (folklore)|Soul-Eater}}''. This indicates that if you continue misusing backslashes like this you will end up devoured by a demon, for instance {{w|Beelzebub}}, for being so thoughtless... Ba'al has been mentioned before in [[1419: On the Phone]] and in the title text of [[1246: Pale Blue Dot]].

===Backslash explosion and alternatives===
A reasonable example of a backslash explosion would be a {{w|PHP}} script on a web server which writes {{w|JavaScript}} code with a {{w|Regular Expression}} to be run on the client. If the JavaScript code has to test a string to see if ''it'' has a double-backslash, the Regular Expression to do so would be:
\\\\
where the first two backslashes represent a single backslash and the second two also represent a single backslash, so this searches for two consecutive back slashes.
And the JavaScript would be:
RegExp("\\\\\\\\").test(str);
where every two backslashes means just one backslashes in the string, so the 8 backslashes in JavaScript become 4 backslashes in the Regular Expression.
However, since this JavaScript code is to be written through a PHP script, the PHP code would be:
echo "RegExp(\"\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\").test(str);";
where:
* The word <code>echo</code> is the PHP command for writing something
* The first quote starts the string
* The <code>RegExp(</code> - including the open parenthesis - is written literally
* The <code>\"</code> following that is a literal quote to be written
* The first two slashes produce one single slash
* And so on until 8 backward slashes are written
* The next <code>\"</code> produces a literal quote character
* The <code>).test(str);</code> is written literally
* The next quote finishes the string.
* The final semicolon terminates the <code>echo</code> command
So, the presented scenario has escalated from a simple test for <code>\\</code> to no less than seventeen backslashes in a row without stepping out of the most common operations.

If we go a bit further and try to write a {{w|Java (programming language)|Java}} program that outputs our PHP script, we'd have:
System.out.println("echo \"RegExp(\\\"\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\").test(str);\";");
Here, we have 35 backslashes in a row: the first 34 produce the 17 we need in our PHP script, and the last one is for escaping the quote character. (This comes closer to ''The true name of Ba'al, the Soul-Eater'').

Some programming languages provide alternative matching string literal delimiters to limit situations where escaping of delimiters is needed. Often, one can begin and end a string with either a single quote or a double quote. This allows one to write <code>'This is a "quoted" string'</code> if double quote marks are intended in the string literal or <code>"This is a 'quoted' string"</code> if single quote marks are intended. Both kinds of delimiters can't be used in the same string literal, but if one needs to construct a string containing both kinds of quote marks one can often concatenate two string literals, each of which uses a different delimiter.

Another feature that seems to be popular in modern programming languages is to provide an alternative syntax for string delimiters designed specifically to limit leaning toothpick syndrome. For example, in Python, a string literal starting with <code>r"</code> is a "raw string" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_literal#Raw_strings] in which no escape processing is done, with similar semantics for a string starting with <code>@"</code> in C#. This allows one to write <code>r"C:\Users"</code>  in Python or <code>@"C:\Users"</code> in C# without the need to escape the backslash. This does not allow one to embed the terminating delimiter in the middle of the string and prevents the use of the backslash to encode the newline character as <code>\n</code>, but comes in handy when writing a string encoding of a regular expression in which the backslash is escaping one or more other punctuation characters or a shorthand character class (e.g., <code>\s</code> for a whitespace character). For example, when looking for an anchor tag in HTML, developers may encode the regular expression as <code><[Aa]\s[^>]*></code>. If they express this regular expression as a raw string literal, the code looks like <code>r"<[Aa]\s[^>]*>"</code> instead of <code>"<[Aa]\\s[^>]*>"</code>. The point here is that "leaning toothpick syndrome" is such a real problem that it has influenced programming language implementations.

==Transcript==
:[A list of the names of different numbers of backslashes. After each "item" there is a gray line to the text describing each item. As the text is aligned above each other, the lines becomes shorter as the sequence of backslashes becomes longer until there is just a line with the length of a single hyphen for the last item. There are 1 to 8 backslashes and then 11 plus "..." in the last entry.]
:\------------ Backslash
:\\----------- Real backslash
:\\\---------- ''Real'' real backslash
:\\\\---------- Actual backslash, for real this time
:\\\\\--------- Elder backslash
:\\\\\\-------- Backslash which escapes the screen and enters your brain
:\\\\\\\------- Backslash so real it transcends time and space
:\\\\\\\\------ Backslash to end all other text
:\\\\\\\\\\\...- The true name of Ba'al, the Soul-Eater

==Note on Title Text==
{{incomplete|Does not explain what the code does (but neither does this incompleteness tag. Can you have a reason HOW it does not explain what the code does? Signed, a further editor)}}
The title text when first published was

I searched my .bash_history for the line with the highest ratio of special characters to regular alphanumeric characters, and the winner was: cat out.txt | grep -o "\\\[[(].*\\\[\])][^)\]]*$" ... I have no memory of this and no idea what I was trying to do, but I sure hope it worked.

It was changed within a few days to

I searched my .bash_history for the line with the highest ratio of special characters to regular alphanumeric characters, and the winner was: cat out.txt | grep -o "[[(].*[])][^)]]*$" ... I have no memory of this and no idea what I was trying to do, but I sure hope it worked.

The original title text seems to be more relevant to the comic, but the revised title text seems to make more sense as a legitimate command line due to the way backslashes are interpreted in regular expressions. See the Discussion below for much more on the topic.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Regex]]
[[Category:Programming]]