explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

985: Percentage Points

2019-09-17T18:31:41Z

172.68.58.107: Added note about king falls am

{{comic
| number = 985
| date = December 2, 2011
| title = Percentage Points
| image = percentage_points.png
| titletext = Grayton also proposed making college scholarships available exclusively to sexually active teens, amnesty for illegal immigrants who create room for themselves by killing a citizen, and a graduated income tax based on penis size. He has been endorsed by Tracy Morgan, John Wilkes Booth's ghost, and the Time Cube guy.
}}

==Explanation==
Senator Grayton is a fictional character, made up for this comic, which is unusual for xkcd, which typically uses real-world references.

The issues that Grayton supports:

*Tax Breaks to Drunk Drivers: Grayton proposes giving those who have been convicted of a {{w|DUI}} or DWI (i.e. Driving Under the Influence or Driving While Intoxicated) money back on their taxes, when those infractions are typically severely penalized, as drunk driving has resulted in numerous deaths.
*{{w|Predator Drones}} and the {{w|Christmas controversy|War on Christmas}}: The War on {{w|Christmas}} is not a real war; it is simply the perception by some {{w|Christian}}s that non-Christians are trying to replace traditional Christmas imagery with more inclusive and generic holiday customs. No politicians have explicitly announced their support of the "War on Christmas," and the idea that one would not only do so, but would also want to use drones—ostensibly to harm or possibly kill people—in the effort is an absurd exaggeration of a relatively harmless culture war.

The term {{w|percentage point}} is used to overcome an abiguity when comparing two percentages. Assuming an original sample of 1,000,000 people, where 20% approve of Senator Grayton. However, it could also refer to a lead of a 20% point margin.

'''Reduction of a stated number by a percentage'''
:When the original value is given as a number, there is no ambiguity. In the statement below the only possible conclusion is that now only 162,000 people approve of Grayton.
:''Previously 200,000 people approved of Senator Grayton, and then his approval rating dropped by 19%.''

'''Reduction of a percentage by a percentage'''
:When the original approval rating is given as a percentage (20% in the comic), then a reduction of 19% has two possible meanings:
:1) Of the 20% who previously approved (200,000 people), 19% no longer approve. In this case the result is 162,000 as in the above example.
:2) Compared to the original results, 19% fewer of the entire original sample of 1 million people approve. In this case only 1% of the original 1 million approve, equal to 10,000 people.

If using the second method of comparing percentages, the approvals rating should be described as having dropped by 19 percentage points. In reality, the distinction between the two methods is often overlooked, leading to confusion.

The caption's issue with "percentage" versus "percentage points" is that if Grayton's 20% approval rating drops by 19%, that means that his support has only dropped 3.8 percentage points since 19% of 20% is only 3.8%. That would mean that even after all his outrageous statements, his support dropped only from 20% to 16.2%. However, if the news reports that his 20% approval rating dropped 19 ''percentage points'', that means his support has dropped to 1%, which appears to be more accurate given Grayton's egregious policy decisions and the description of his campaign as having "imploded."

The punchline to all this is that Randall is more bothered by the "percent" ambiguity than by Grayton's appalling policy plans.

References in the title text:

*{{w|Tracy Morgan}} is an actor who plays Tracy Jordan in the TV Show ''{{w|30 Rock}}''. He has been reprimanded for controversial comments on homosexuals and {{w|Sarah Palin}} (in separate incidents).
*{{w|John Wilkes Booth}} is the person who assassinated {{w|Abraham Lincoln}}. He was a {{w|Confederate}} sympathizer and supported slavery. The mention of his ghost could also be a reference to King Falls AM, an audio drama which features his ghost multiple times.
*"The {{w|Time Cube}} Guy" would be Gene Ray, also known as Otis E. Ray. To put things ''very'' politely (as Mr. Ray is a very angry man with severe schizophrenia), he has a website known as Time Cube where he sets out his personal model of reality, which he calls Time Cube. He suggests that all of modern physics is wrong, in addition to claiming that religion is evil, specifically Christianity, and that the idea of family is poisoning children.
*College Scholarships to Sexually Active Teens: Many people think adolescents should not engage in sexual activity, let alone be encouraged to do so by college scholarships. This is the opposite of {{w|Abstinence-only sex education|abstinence programs}}, which encourage teens not to be sexually active until marriage.
*Illegal immigrants who create room for themselves by killing a citizen: {{w|Illegal immigration to the United States|Illegal immigration}} is a highly controversial topic in the United States. One argument against illegal immigration is that illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from American citizens. Proponents of immigration assert that this is not the case, since more people in the overall economy creates jobs and brings in more tax revenue. Neither group would be in favor of illegal immigrants murdering citizens even though it would not result in a net gain or loss in population.
*Graduated income tax based on penis size: Many men are sensitive about their penis size and would probably consider the measurement of their penises for tax assessment purposes an enormous embarrassment and invasion of privacy. Even the scenario in which those with relatively smaller penises would be levied less tax than those with larger penises would probably not be sufficient for them to accept this policy, and even if they did, those with larger penises would probably consider this policy to be unfair. And the alternative—a scenario in which ''larger'' penises pay less taxes—would be both unfair and incredibly demeaning.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting in an armchair watching TV while listening to a news report coming from the TV as shown by a zigzag line.]
:Voice from TV: Senator Grayton's campaign has imploded following the candidate's promise to give tax breaks to drunk drivers and to authorize the use of unmanned Predator drones in the War On Christmas. Grayton had been polling at 20%, but his support has since plunged by 19%.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I hate the ambiguity created when people don't distinguish between percentages and percentage points.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] 
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Penis]]

1164: Home Alone

2017-10-08T13:40:15Z

172.68.58.107:

{{comic
| number = 1164
| date = January 23, 2013
| title = Home Alone
| image = home alone.png
| titletext = Starring Macaulay Culkin.
}}

==Explanation==
''{{w|Home Alone}}'' is a popular 1990 film in which the child protagonist Kevin McCallister (portrayed by {{w|Macaulay Culkin}}) is accidentally left alone in his house when his family goes on vacation, and has to thwart a burglary all by himself. In the movie, McCallister comes up with a variety of ingenious traps and schemes (usually involving {{w|jury rig|jury-rigged}} toys and household items) to harass, injure and eventually incapacitate the burglars, which was the film's defining feature. On a more general level, the films revolve around the classical trope with an [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnderdogsNeverLose underdog defeating a much stronger opponent] (the burglars), through his own ingenuity. The film spawned a {{w|Home Alone (franchise)|series of sequels}} (4 as of 2012, the first of which also starred Culkin) all with a similar premise to the original.

This strip, however, proposes a {{w|Reboot_(fiction)#Film|reboot.}} of the franchise, with the main change to the film being that of an age-reversal, so the story is now about an adult man setting needlessly harmful traps to hurt defenseless children breaking into his house. This would likely be seen as distasteful at the very least, and would probably lead to a negative reputation for the film. The title text adds another punchline when it is revealed that the reboot also stars Macaulay Culkin in the same role. This may suggest that the age-reversal gimmick was done to allow for him to star in the film as the same character despite growing up since the beginning of the franchise. This would be a rather misguided attempt to revive his career, and would probably just prevent any further success.

The scene depicted in the strip is an adaptation of an iconic scene from the first movie (used heavily in advertising) where McCallister hangs two paint cans in strings above the staircase, and let them swing down to hit the burglars in the face.

==Transcript==
:[Aged man standing at the head of a flight of stairs. A paint can on a rope is swinging into a child at the foot of the stairs. A child on the floor is in a semi-fetal position and crying.]
:Child: Ow!!
:Child on floor: Waaaaaaaaa!
:Rejected movie ideas:
:Age-reversed ''Home Alone'' reboot.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1896: Active Ingredients Only

2017-09-30T13:37:47Z

172.68.58.107: black beret?

Seems Randall has a cold again, like two years ago... :D --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:03, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Why would taking a medication without binding agents be dangerous? Also, would something like a gelcap count as an inactive ingredient? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.153|162.158.62.153]] 13:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
: Yes. If an ingredient is not intended to produce a therapeutic effect on the body, then it is inactive: "Inactive ingredients are components of a drug product that do not increase or affect the therapeutic action of the active ingredient" https://www.google.com/search?q=inactive+ingredient -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
: Binders hold the tablet together, so that instead of taking a powder and possibly missing some grains that fall away or stick to something (which would be dangerous if you need all the medicine for some life threatening condition) you can take the whole tab and get exactly the intended amount of active ingredient. They are also used to make tabs with minuscule quantities of active ingredient larger so that instead of fumbling with an incredibly tiny tablet it is large enough to be easily held and seen, and since the explanation just says "serious problem" not necessarily "dangerous" I could see having to take a single grain of sand sized medicine as being problematic.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 14:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Could this comic be a reference to this image? [[https://i.redd.it/q7jcyf21c8ty.jpg]] It was the first thing I thought about when I saw it.

I don't think the "Opening the box would reveal a mix of various colored powders and no way to ensure you are correctly taking the right dose." part is right- it doesn't say no separation in packaging, just that the medicine itself has no binding ingredients, it's just once you open any particular section it would not encourage anything inside of it to stay together. And an additional thought- powders? Some active ingredients may have forms more inconvenient than powders, I'd expect some would form a film on the packaging or other inconvenient behavior, though someone would more knowledge on medicine could correct me on just what raw active ingredients really would be like.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.220|162.158.78.220]] 04:18, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Isn't this just BC headache powder but for colds? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.167|162.158.79.167]] 04:57, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Since a cold takes 7 days or a week, depending on treatment, one could make, market and sell such a thing by just selling empty boxes with this "active ingredients only" label. Seems like a good idea for a joint blackhat/beret guy company... -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.133|162.158.111.133]] 07:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
: Black Beret®?
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.58.107|172.68.58.107]] 13:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1301: File Extensions

2017-09-11T16:42:08Z

172.68.58.107:

The title text reference of "hand-aligned data" may refer to ASCII art. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.28|108.162.215.28]] 05:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Alan K.
:I'd think not, given that art isn't exactly data. My guess would be tables in the .txt - a .txt file is just raw text with no formatting, so putting a table in requires manually formatting it with a bunch of spaces/tabs. It's not hard, but can be time-consuming and obnoxious. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.47|108.162.219.47]] 23:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
::Any programmer would tell you to _never_ try and hand-align things with tabs. Different text editors will use anything from 3 to 8 spaces for a tab, meaning that what's aligned in your editor isn't in others.{{unsigned ip|108.162.236.13}}
:::Indent with tabs; align with spaces. More formally, tabs should only be at the beginning of a line, and should have a strong contextual relationship with the surrounding text. This is a reasonably thought out explanation: http://lea.verou.me/2012/01/why-tabs-are-clearly-superior/ [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.67|199.27.128.67]] 17:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I think it's also a notable point, that the better rated document formats are more data centric while the low rated formats mix text informations with design elements and finally become pure graphic formats, which often is an indication, that the author didn't use the accurate file type for (mostly) pure text informations.
Something I don't understand is the gap between jpg and jpeg. The first suffix is AFAIK only an abbreviation used by older DOS/MS Systems to fullfill the 8.3 limitation for filenames. The note about hand alignment might concern the fact, that hand alignment is more time expensive which might increase the amount of the the author spend in overthink the content before layouting. Also often automated layouting as supported by many modern writing application might lead to unexpected and sometimes wrong results, because the automatism has no semantical knowledge about the authors intention, which might lead to post processed errors
Sorry for my bad english, I'm not a natural writer
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.239|108.162.231.239]] 05:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:"hand-aligned data" seems to me like (manually) space-indented paragraphs, perhaps even manual padding to achieve the desired justification (centering and right-and-left-margin-hugging). And of course neatly lining up an 'embedded table', perhaps originally extracted from a .csv output. Although a number of plain-text editors (in the days of CGA and pure terminal/fixedspace fonts) or text formatters and wrappers (e.g. Lynx, man-page creaters, etc) ''would'' do things like this for you. And still do. At least insofar as the justification and margining is concerned. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.229|141.101.99.229]] 08:35, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
If anyone has taken the time to hand align a text file (as in a README, or other info file), they want it to look attractive for people to read. Odd are you're not going to take the time to "hand pretty" the document just to be malicious. Back in the BBS days there were a large number of "online" groups who had "signature" text files which were (very probably) hand aligned, and made extensive use of extended ASCII codes to generate basic graphics. (Granted there were programs to help auto-generate "ascii art".) If you've ever seen these files you'd know. [[http://www.thuglife.org/tlv5/aabout.shtml Example 1]] - [[http://textfiles.com/piracy/NFO/ Example 2]] [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I find it interesting that .jpg and .jpeg are at different levels. Aren't those the same thing? --[[User:Mralext20|Mralext20]] ([[User talk:Mralext20|talk]]) 05:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the .gif could contain suddenly unexpected scary/surprising frames? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.208.172|108.162.208.172]] 14:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

:That JPG/JPEG thing indeed seems strange. The more important distinction is between JPEGs that are photographs (fine) and those that are not (stupid). Also, pre-PNG, non-photograph GIFs could be just fine. And with all the accounting scandals we've seen, why would those spreadsheet formats get any credibility? -- [[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 06:06, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::Alongside .jpeg ('full' extension format) and .jpg (MS '8.3'-compatible extension format), I'd have expected .jpe (often full extension historically truncated on an 8.3 system), I must be honest. (And interesting that .docx doesn't co-inhabit the .doc line... or be somewhere else.) And the disparity betwixt the two versions of JPEG extension ''may'' relate to the tendency for a higher artefact-intensity of images back in the early days (when a better option than GIFs for... certain pictures... e.g. on Usenet between *nix workstations with vastly restricted bandwidths and storage capacities) compared to today's users (cameras that regularly store 10+MP pictures in low-loss JFIF files, and/or in Raw format!). But that may be a spurious or off-track reasoning on my part. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.229|141.101.99.229]] 08:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I measured the bars in photoshop to +/- 2pixels. If we scale .tex to a value of 100 like the transcript says, these are the values I get for the bar lengths (rounded to one decimal place)
.tex 100
.pdf 89.4
.csv 84.9
.txt 66.5
.svg 64.8
.xls 48.6
.doc 21.2
.png 15.1
.ppt 14.5
.jpg 3.4
.jpeg -8.4
.gif -35.8

Dunno if it is helpful - or even trusted given I'm a first time commenter - but there it is. Closer values than just estimating, though the eyeballed estimates aren't bad. Not going to adjust the actual transcript because I feel that's overstepping my bounds. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.56}}
:Not at all, wikis are free to edit for a reason. If we didn't want new users to be editing pages, we could have turned that off long ago. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

'''As the information that is provided by the graph comes as png, we should probably not trust her. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.120|141.101.92.120]] 09:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)'''
: Ha, +1 Like :-) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])

I never saw image of cute cats lying to me ... I mean, the gif is STILL the preferred format for animation, mostly because it's the only one supported. Animation formats based on PNG didn't catched up, hard to say why ... on the other hand, gif animation apparently have huge number of weird extensions, judging by the number of animated images I found which don't render properly in anything EXCEPT the browser. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 10:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:The cute cat may not be lying, but since the format is used in other context -- like banner ads, then the average GIF may well be lying, also I believe there have been many security issues with GIFs and JPGs as they have been used as an attack vector for internet-bad-guys to take over your computer -- so while security issues is not specifically the topic for todays strip, then that may be worth noticing as well [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
:It is also possible to create animations with svg which is (for good reason, I like that format) ranked higher. Especially for scientific purposes it can be handy. Unfortunately is the MediaWiki software unable to show them. For example in the previous comic is an animation of the Galilean moons shown. That is an gif but someone also uploaded an [[Wikipedia:commons:File:Galilean_moon_Laplace_resonance_animation_(en_-_monochrome_-_350x217).svg|svg animation]] and I would say it does look smoother than the gif. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.215|108.162.231.215]] 14:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:The Grumpy Cat is not grumpy in real life - so cat pictures DO lie! [[User:Schmammel|Schmammel]] ([[User talk:Schmammel|talk]]) 15:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
'''What is the scale of the chart? Does 'top' = most trusted'? Never assume anything with xkcd.''' [[User:David.windsor|David.windsor]] ([[User talk:David.windsor|talk]]) 18:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
: Brilliant. I didn't think of that at all. But now that you mention it... a .gif would be like a small part of a video. And people tend to trust those more than a static picture. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 08:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Of course Randall does not really think that the file extension determines trustworthiness; the graph is tongue-in-cheek. Information can be trustworthy or untrustworthy no matter the format it's given in. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.221|108.162.216.221]] 18:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, I believe the explanation somewhat misinterprets Randall's intentions, especially when it comes to the image formats. I interpret it not as a question of loss of information due to compression but instead a more general impression of when and by whom these formats are used and, as a consequence, the trustworthiness of the information conveyed through these formats. That would explain the jpg/jpeg distinction as (in my experience though I can't provide data that support it) .jpg is nowadays the preferred compressed format in professional contexts and .jpeg looks slightly childish. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.117|141.101.80.117]] 23:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Reading more into the linked info about viruses embedded in JPEGs, it appears that the only way to receive a virus from a JPEG file would be to have ''already'' received another virus from a standard executable file, where such a virus causes the computer to execute code in a JPEG file rather than simply display it as it normally would. Since such a possibility is independent of the file type (the first virus might just as well have enabled code execution in DOC files, for instance), I've removed that bit of info. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 03:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Can anyone explain the banner near the top of xkcd.com today, 10 Dec 2013? It reads,
"Dear Wikipedia readers: if everyone reading this _showed up at my house,_ (yellow highlight)I would be like "what {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.220}}
: I believe that is a reference to the similar banner that is on top of wikipedia right now asking for donations. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
::I don't see that banner, but it appears to be a play on Wikipedia's donation "pleas" that are often posted (including now) as banners at the top of Wikipedia which suggest that (to use the lates one:) "If everyone reading this donated, our fundraiser would be done within an hour". [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 18:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a bit ambiguous whether Randall's references (for example) to jpg and gif means he doesn't trust that the images are accurate because of artifacting and stuff, or whether he's referring to jpgs and gifs that occasionally circulate with text on them as if to present information (e.g., lifehack images, or cat memes...) [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 18:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

;missing suffices

Obviously .html & .htm are so far to the left, they're off the chart. :-)
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.117|108.162.249.117]] 17:43, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Any idea what file type was used to spread this hoax?
http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/apple-secret-bitcoin-mining-feature/
Various websites reporting on it use .JPG and .PNG, but I don't know what format the original graphic was.
[[User:InspectorClouseau|InspectorClouseau]] ([[User talk:InspectorClouseau|talk]]) 16:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I'd be pretty wary of .flv...
[[User:Nick Douglas|Nick Douglas]] ([[User talk:Nick Douglas|talk]]) 15:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't completely agree with ".png"'s explanation: "But since he rates the format so low, is Randall saying we shouldn't trust this chart?" I think it's being seen from the wrong perspective. In my opinion, ".png" is rated low due to being less capable and less commonly used to transmit trustworthy information than those rated higher. What do you all think? If you agree with me, please edit it, as I will not monitor this page.

I also think that ".tex"'s explanation is lacking. It should be said it's a way to format text documents using programming, in order to make them better looking and easier (for some) to write and format.

Plus, I generally disagree with a lot of what is said about file extensions, since our whole operating systems could work just fine if all extensions disappeared (provided that programs look for the right files by name only, and maybe a few more folders where created). But that's my own opinion, and not something to be added here. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.125|108.162.219.125]] 02:57, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

One thing that seems to be overlooked here, is that GIFs are probably the least trustworthy because they can have those pop out horror images that scare you when you think you are just looking at a normal picture. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.120|199.27.128.120]] 17:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Funny story related to the trustworthiness of files, The other day a friend asked me "How do you make a jpg with transparency?" I said, "you can't." He sent me the file, sure enough it looked like a .jpg with transparency, it opened in windows pictures, in chrome, in firefox, however it wouldn't load in Gimp and it wouldn't load in Photoshop. I popped it into a file analyzer and it registered as a gif! So, yeah, gifs are pretty shady... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.58.107|172.68.58.107]] 16:42, 11 September 2017 (UTC) Sam