explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2816: Types of Solar Eclipse

2023-08-16T21:34:57Z

172.69.33.7:

Is the annular eclipse actually possible? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.118|162.158.78.118]] 21:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/eclipses/2023/oct-14-annular/where-when/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.7|172.69.33.7]] 21:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

2697: Y2K and 2038

2022-11-11T19:16:31Z

172.69.33.7: /* Transcript */ cats

{{comic
| number = 2697
| date = November 11, 2022
| title = Y2K and 2038
| image = y2k_and_2038_2x.png
| imagesize = 527x190px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's taken me 20 years, but I've finally finished rebuilding all my software to use 33-bit signed ints.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Y2K-BRICKED BOT. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The Y2K bug, or more formally, the {{w|year 2000 problem}}, was the computer errors caused by two digit software representations of calendar years not correctly handling the year 2000, such as by treating it the same as 1900 or 19100. The {{w|year 2038 problem}} is a similar issue with timestamps in {{w|Unix time}} format, which will overflow their signed 32-bit binary representation on January 19, 2038.

While initial estimates were that the Y2K problem would require about half a trillion dollars to address, there was widespread recognition of its potential severity several years in advance. Concerted efforts among organizations including computer and software manufacturers and their corporate and government users reflected unprecedented cooperation, testing, and enhancement of affected systems costing substantially less than the initial estimates. On new years day 2000, few major errors actually occurred. Those that did usually did not disrupt essential processes or cause serious problems, and the few that did were usually addressed in days to weeks. The software code reviews involved allowed correcting other errors and providing various enhancements which likely made up for the the cost of merely correcting the date bug.{{Actual citation needed}}

It is unclear whether the 2038 problem will be addressed as effectively in time, but documented experience with the Y2K bug and increased software modularity has allowed many otherwise vulnerable systems to already upgrade to wider timestamp and date formats, so there is reason to believe that it may be even less consequential and expensive.

The caption in this comic provides a punchline: everyone should have completed their "Y2K recovery" as it has been a full 22 years since the year 2000. It is highly unlikely that there are any older systems that still suffer from this bug, and any modern systems have already been built to handle the years 2000 and later.

The title text refers to replacing the 32-bit signed Unix time format with a hypothetical new 33-bit {{w|Signed number representations|signed}} {{w|Integer (computer science)|integer}} time and date format, which is very unlikely as almost all computer data structure formats are allocated no more finely than in 8-bit bytes. Taking 20 years to develop and implement such a format is not entirely counterproductive, as it would add another 48 years of capability.

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

[A timeline rectangle spanning from 2000 to 2038 divided into two halves. The first is labeled "Recovering from the Y2K bug" and the second labeled "Preparing for the 2038 bug." An arrow labeled "Now" is pointing approximately at the year 2022.]

[Caption:] By now you should have finished your Y2K recovery and be several years into 2038 preparation

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Timelines]]

2697: Y2K and 2038

2022-11-11T19:15:42Z

172.69.33.7: /* Explanation */ punch line

2697: Y2K and 2038

2022-11-11T18:59:39Z

172.69.33.7: /* Explanation */ day

{{comic
| number = 2697
| date = November 11, 2022
| title = Y2K and 2038
| image = y2k_and_2038_2x.png
| imagesize = 527x190px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's taken me 20 years, but I've finally finished rebuilding all my software to use 33-bit signed ints.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Y2K-BRICKED BOT. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The Y2K bug, or more formally, the {{w|year 2000 problem}}, was the computer errors caused by two digit software representations of calendar years not correctly handling the year 2000, such as by treating it the same as 1900 or 19100. The {{w|year 2038 problem}} is a similar issue with timestamps in {{w|Unix time}} format, which will overflow their signed 32-bit binary representation on January 19, 2038.

While initial estimates were that the Y2K problem would require about half a trillion dollars to address, there was widespread recognition of its potential severity several years in advance. Concerted efforts among organizations including computer and software manufacturers and their corporate and government users reflected unprecedented cooperation, testing, and enhancement of affected systems costing substantially less than the initial estimates. On new years day in 2000, few major errors actually occurred. Those that did usually did not disrupt essential processes or cause serious problems, and the few that did were usually addressed in days to weeks. The software code reviews involved allowed correcting other errors and providing various enhancements which likely made up for the the cost of merely correcting the date bug.{{Actual citation needed}}

It is unclear whether the 2038 problem will be addressed as effectively in time, but documented experience with the Y2K bug and increased software modularity has allowed many otherwise vulnerable systems to already upgrade to wider timestamp and date formats, so there is reason to believe that it may be even less consequential and expensive.

The title text refers to replacing the 32-bit signed Unix time format with a new, 33-bit time and date format, which is very unlikely as almost all computer data structure formats are allocated no more finely than in 8-bit bytes. Taking 20 years to develop and implement such a format is not entirely counterproductive, as it would add another 48 years of capability.

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

A timeline rectangle spanning from 2000 to 2038 divided into two halves. The first is labeled RECOVERING FROM THE Y2K BUG and the second PREPARING FOR THE 2038 BUG. An arrow labeled NOW is pointing approximately at the year 2022.

Caption:
REMINDER: BY NOW YOU SHOULD HAVE FINISHED YOUR Y2K RECOVERY AND BE SEVERAL YEARS INTO 2038 PREPARATION

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2603: Childhood Toys

2022-04-07T17:11:59Z

172.69.33.7:

Tarzan would thrive commuting by tire swing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.69.68.170 ([[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.170|contribs]]• [[User_talk:172.69.68.170|talk]]) 22:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

How are a bicycle, scooter or wagon toys, or childlike. They're actually designed for commute and children aren't even allowed on scooters. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 22:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:Wagon doesn't mean station wagon. Google "toy wagon" to see what he's referring to. And electric scooter is a motorized version of a common child's toy. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 22:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
::I didn't actually assume a station wagon, was thinking of the thing usually pulled by horses. And doesn't the fact that a 'toy wagon' exists suggest that a regular wagon is not a toy? And I thought a scooter was more like a motorized bicycle rather than a toy, like a motorcycle, but slower. And at least here, you'd need to be at least 16 years old and get a permit to drive one. Funny how the same word borrowed in a closely related language can suddenly carry such different meanings. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 23:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:::Since the heading says "childhood toys", I think we're supposed to understand that he means a toy wagon. And the comic shows the kind of scooter he's talking about, not a motorized bike. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
::::Here in the UK, there are:
::::*Push-along-scooters (childs toys, steel-tubing, often red and blue painted/trimmed, maybe pink for girls) that you one-leg along. Around the turn of the millenium, the craze arrived for 'adult' versions (I got one!), mostly in bare and sturdier aluminium.
::::*The motorised vehicle that might also be called a 'moped' (such terms might be considered defamatory, by the proud owner of a Lambretta, etc, depending upon era and exactly which type of motored two-wheeler you're describing)
::::*Mobility scooters, i.e. four-wheel (sometimes three) electrical vehicles sometimes barely a seat/handlebars on a moving platform, others almost like a quad-bike (esp. off-road capable ones)
::::*Now (well, since the last few years) the illustrated kind that is electrically-powered version of the sturdier push-alongs.
::::...though (as I appended in a link), except for some very limited and controlled trial-schemes, it is actually ''illegal'' to use electric 'executive' scooters (the last category). Both on roads and pavements (i.e. sidewalks). They are not considered roadworthy, for the former, and riding on the pavement is illegal for various vehicles (including bicycles, though few know/care this). There's no special provision for the use of cycle-lanes (on-road) or cycle-paths (shared/split pavements, or bridlepath-level trails). The only place an otherwise unregulated electric-scooter can be ridden is 'private land'. Which means you'd have very little chance of commuting upon your own scooter, legally, only the sanctioned for-hire ones.
:::::I was in Austin, TX a few months ago, and companies like Lime Bike had pods of electric scooters (like the one in the comic) for rent on the streets. So the legality is very location-dependent. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
::::::This is a description of the situation in the UK (see link I put in main explanation), although the sanctioned rental schemes mentioned are the explicitly legal exception for the UK, in explicitly served areas... as long as you have a driver's licence and follow other rules. Looking at the US legality, it's probably as patchwork as you'd expect with federal/state/local laws doing their usual uncoordinated things... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 14:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
::::(There's no such restrection on e-bikes, except for a theoretical maximum speed/power before they should be considersd motorbikes rather than electrified-mopeds. They are as welcome on the roads as bicycles (which largely depends upon the motorists and their prejudices/impatience), and similarly as illegal to ride on pavements (though of course people do that!)...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 12:30, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
:Is this possibly a cultural difference? At least in the USA, I have definitely seen kids (maybe not much younger than 10, but still) using electric scooters. Wagons and bikes are definitely associated more with kids in the USA as well, because, unfortunately, cars are seen as the only "real," most viable, and most independent form of transport. (As I have heard others say, bikes are just what you use until you get a car.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.251|172.70.114.251]] 01:31, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
::Presumably. This puzzled me a lot too. Bicycles aren't remotely 'toys', nor are scooters really -- and I'm assuming here this don't mean scooters in the sense of a small motorbike. EDIT: as is obvious from the actual cartoon. [[User:Zoid42|Zoid42]] ([[User talk:Zoid42|talk]]) 08:49, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
:::In some areas of the US, bicycles are used solely for pleasure and exercise, not for actually getting anywhere. Partially because there isn't anything worth going to within an easy biking distance, and partially because the entire road system and the people who use it are often openly hostile to bicyclists.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.13|172.70.174.13]] 09:25, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Slip N Slide doesn't need to be downhill. It's common to use a running start and then leap onto it, then slide to the end. But this method only works for a few yards at most, so for commuting you'd need to keep getting up to run to the next one. We'd need a network of them on every street. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
:I like bicycling everywhere, & I despise unnecessary commuting by ''any'' means, but I'd strongly consider just about any job that made it easy for everyone to commute there by Slip'N'Slide... Can we get home by zip-line?
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 00:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

A road made of trampolines could actually be extremely useful for short-distance commutes since you go a lot faster. [[User:N-eh|N-eh]] ([[User talk:N-eh|talk]]) 00:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

This is not exactly new. With special praise to the Pogo Stick https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGQBu_cqzn8

Given a choice between a big wheel (tricycle), unicycle, or a toy wagon (https://www.classicredwagons.com/radio_flyer_classic_red_wagon_18_c_p10.htm) as the only allowed ways to commute, I think the vast majority would toss their stuff in, use it as a scooter uphill and level, then sit in it and gleefully zoom downhill. I’d even take stilts or a pogo stick over a unicycle.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.7|172.69.33.7]] 17:11, 7 April 2022 (UTC)