explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2480: No, The Other One

2021-06-24T10:53:36Z

172.69.63.83:

We might want a table for this comic, with three columns: one for the name of the town, one for which state the copycat is in, and one for the original. We could also add a column for "why the original is well known," but that might be a bit much. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.124|108.162.245.124]] 20:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
: I agree, this feels like a very table-able comic. Especially to get all the cities and not make readers try to see "hey, did I miss one?" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.117.158|172.70.117.158]] 20:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
:: I think the term copy-cat should not be used here, since Lincoln, IL, for instance is older and carries the name longer than Lincoln, NE.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.74|162.158.88.74]] 21:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
::: Although the people in Lincoln, UK (also Boston, Washington, Richmond, Plymouth, Newhaven...) might have prior claims - Richmond is an even more interesting case, in fact. And of course I also recognise Lisbon and others. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.244|141.101.98.244]] 21:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
:::: May I suggest merging the first two columns and just listing [City, State] under "Place name in comic"? [[User:MajorBurns|MajorBurns]] ([[User talk:MajorBurns|talk]]) 21:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

In the map there are (at least) three Lincoln, two Jamestown, five Houston... [[User:Vdm|Vdm]] ([[User talk:Vdm|talk]]) 20:52, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
: There is a Jamestown in NY and PA also. I would expect to find a Jamestown in at least half of the states. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 22:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

There seems to be an extra dot in the northeast corner of Colorado - It looks like it might correspond with the Atlanta label, but there is no Atlanta in Colorado. Based on the position of the dot I'm guessing it may correspond to Akron or Yuma.--[[User:MajorBurns|MajorBurns]] ([[User talk:MajorBurns|talk]]) 21:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
: Google Maps says there's an Atlanta, Colorado, but it is in the south-east corner of the state, not where the dot is. It looks like it is in the middle of nowhere outside of Springfield. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] ([[User talk:Blaisepascal|talk]]) 00:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Jersey Shore PA - I just drove from New Jersey across the state of Pennsylvania, and saw the sign for Jersey Shore in the mountains in the middle of PA. What the? Turns out there was a town founded by two brothers from New Jersey called Waynesburg. When a neighboring town wanted to insult them by calling them "Jersey Shore" they went ahead and officially made Jersey Shore the name of the town. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey_Shore,_Pennsylvania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey_Shore,_Pennsylvania]. I wonder how many people turn off the highway in the middle of PA wanting to go to the Jersey Shore hundreds of miles away. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 22:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Why no Hollywood, Florida? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood,_Florida https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood,_Florida]
: Same reason there's no Richmond, Dublin, or Pittsburg (admittedly, a different spelling), California, just to name some of the closest ones to me. The map would be solid black if it labeled every "other one." [[User:Borglord|Borglord]] ([[User talk:Borglord|talk]]) 01:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

..''No'' Springfields? Really? There's gotta be 30+ of them! [[User:Danish|Danish]] ([[User talk:Danish|talk]]) 02:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
:The comic doesn't seem to include the duplicates that are fairly well known, like Hollywood, FL. And the prevalence of Springfield is well known due to "The Simpsons". I think Groening chose that name ''because'' it wouldn't be associated with any particular state. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

`The most frequently occurring community name varies through the years. In a past year, it was "Midway" with 212 occurrences and "Fairview" in second with 202. More recently, "Fairview" counted 288 and "Midway" 256. The name "Springfield" is often thought to be the only community name appearing in each of the 50 States, but at last count it was in only 34 states.` https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-most-common-citytown-name-united-states [[User:Steve|Steve]] ([[User talk:Steve|talk]]) 02:48, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

The comic has been updated to remove Charlestown and move Salem, CT. The extra dot in Colorado remains, however. The image attachment has been updated, but I think I'm still seeing the cached version. [[User:Orion205|Orion205]] ([[User talk:Orion205|talk]]) 03:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Since so many of the names are duplicated multiple times, shouldn't the title be "No, ''An'' Other One"? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm surprised he missed Minneapolis, Kansas (about 75 miles west of Manhattan). Though maybe it would've made Kansas too crowded. --[[User:Aaron of Mpls|Aaron of Mpls]] ([[User talk:Aaron of Mpls|talk]])

I'm surprised he missed Duluth, GA too, but we can't have everything we want. ( --Don from Rochester . . . but not from New York ;^) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.83|172.69.63.83]] 10:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to see a map of all these. Lines linking each of the dots to the location of the more famous town. Possibly with lines in different colours connecting to the oldest and largest other ones, where they're not the same as the most famous one. (I suspect a significant number of the "oldest" lines would point off the right edge of the image) [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 08:37, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

2353: Hurricane Hunters

2020-08-31T22:24:48Z

172.69.63.83:

{{comic
| number = 2353
| date = August 31, 2020
| title = Hurricane Hunters
| image = hurricane_hunters.png
| titletext = Our flight gathered valuable data on whether a commercial airliner in the eye of a hurricane can do a loop.
}}

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

The comic strip opens with Black Hat explaining to Cueball (who is presumed to be some government official) that flying into hurricanes, while risky, provides valuable scientific data. This is true–in the eye of a hurricane, there is quiet for just a moment, a yellow sky. Although the {{w|Eye (cyclone)|eye}} itself is relatively calm, it is surrounded by the '''eyewall''', a region of extremely intense thunderstorms. Thus, the danger of flying through such storms must be carefully weighed against the scientific knowledge being gained. Highly-trained pilots with specialized aircraft, such as the {{w|NOAA Hurricane Hunters}} and the US Air Force's {{w|53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron}} (also nicknamed "Hurricane Hunters"), will occasionally conduct such missions, although they usually fly over storms and drop probes through them.

However, Cueball's comment in the third panel shows that Black Hat is not discussing the activity of hurricane hunting in general, but rather is attempting to justify his decision to fly a passenger jet through the eye of a hurricane (perhaps {{w|Hurricane Laura}}, which was active during the week prior to this comic strip's publication). It's not clear if Black Hat is (somehow) a jet pilot himself, or has come into ownership of an airline and was merely directing a flight, but the passengers wanted to go to St. Louis, Missouri, which is [https://www.homefacts.com/hurricanes/Missouri/St.-Louis-City-County/St.-Louis.html only very rarely struck by hurricanes] (although [https://www.homefacts.com/tornadoes/Missouri/St.-Louis-City-County/St.-Louis.html tornadoes are of greater concern]), so presumably the jet was taken quite far out of its way to conduct the "experiment". Passenger airliners are not meant to fly into hurricanes{{Citation needed}}, and can easily crash there. Black Hat replies that the passengers should be proud of their contributions to meteorology, which is probably negligible, as they were not actively collecting useful scientific data.

In the title text, Black Hat says that their flight gathered data on the ''possibility'' of making loops in the eye of the hurricane by passenger airliners, but if it had ''actually done'' a loop, he probably would have said so. (The Boeing 707 ''was'' made to successfully execute a barrel roll and fly inverted [https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/60-years-ago-the-famous-boeing-707-barrel-roll-over-lake-washington/ during a 1955 test flight], but probably no commercial jetliner could perform any advanced aerobatic maneuvers under load.)

It is possible that this is his justification of why passengers contributed to meteorology. However, passenger airliners' abilities to do loops has nothing to do with that field of science. Moreover, the same data could be gathered by flying the same airliner without passengers, or with willing ones.

In the real world, Black Hat would certainly go to prison for what he's done{{Citation needed}}.

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

:[Black hat facing left]
:Black Hat: Yes, flying into the eye of a hurricane is dangerous.

:[Cueball on left at a desk being addressed by Black Hat on the right]
:Black Hat: But it provides us with crucial data that helps us understand and predict these storms.

:[Same as previous cell, with Black Hat raising his hand]
:Cueball: But your passengers had bought tickets to St. Louis.
:Black Hat: They should be ''proud'' of our contributions to meteorology!

==Trivia==
:Everything on Cueball's desk has gone missing in panel 3.

{{comic discussion}}

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

Talk:1205: Is It Worth the Time?

2020-07-03T18:54:11Z

172.69.63.83:

The title text is just silly.[[Special:Contributions/220.255.1.25|220.255.1.25]] 08:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it worth all of the time we've spent on 1190, developing wikis, and wget scripts to pull the pictures efficiently, etc.? [[User:Bdemirci|Bdemirci]] ([[User talk:Bdemirci|talk]]) 08:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I would just like to ask if there is an interactive version of this comit out there. I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to create...
--[[User:Charlesisbozo|Charlesisbozo]] ([[User talk:Charlesisbozo|talk]]) 09:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
: Well, it would be really simple indeed. For now, you can try [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%285+years%29+*+%285+%2F+week%29+*+%282+minutes%29 Wolfram|Alpha] --[[User:Mormegil|Mormegil]] ([[User talk:Mormegil|talk]]) 10:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
: I have a site up that does the calculation : http://c.albert-thompson.com/xkcd/ --[[User:Whitecat|Whitecat]] ([[User talk:Whitecat|talk]])[[User:whitecat|whitecat]] ([[User talk:whitecat|whitecat]]) 18:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
: I wish I had seen whitecat's tool before I made my own. It's slightly different, so that's good: http://agileadam.com/worth-automating/ --[[User:Agileadam|Agileadam]] ([[User talk:Agileadam|talk]]) 18:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

The graph ignores the fact that it is much more satisfying to shave off time from task, especially by automating it. Also note that it IS possible to shave off 6 hours from task you do daily and one day from task you do weekly. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 10:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
: The table also ignores all monetary costs associated with the work: e.g. buying a new tool --[[Special:Contributions/66.46.212.10|66.46.212.10]] 15:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking the same, but then realised it's NOT practical if you assume a 6 hour working day and 5 day working week. [[Special:Contributions/41.134.254.53|41.134.254.53]] 12:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

If Momo taught us 1 thing, than it is that you can not save time ;-). --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 13:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Why is it "not possible" to shave a day off of a task that you perform weekly? [[User:MrBigDog2U|MrBigDog2U]] ([[User talk:MrBigDog2U|talk]]) 14:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
: It definitely possible, but Randall feel it's just not worth the time to put it there. :-) [[User:Arifsaha|Arifsaha]] ([[User talk:Arifsaha|talk]]) 16:09, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Then the explanation is inaccurate as it states that "blacked out areas represent times which are impossible to save". It is possible, perhaps just not worthwhile. [[User:MrBigDog2U|MrBigDog2U]] ([[User talk:MrBigDog2U|talk]]) 14:35, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

For most people in most circumstances, a net present value comparison would be most relevant. Even if I can save a day every year for the next 5 years, it may not be worth 5, or event 4, days input now, because my time now is more valuable to me than my time in the future (as of now), and my opportunity cost for time spent now greater. It would be interesting to see the chart revised assuming a particular discount factor, and that all efficiency-improvement input occurs up front. [[User:RyanDonovan|RyanDonovan]] ([[User talk:RyanDonovan|talk]]) 17:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Agreed! :¬D

[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/TL;DR TL;DR] --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 21:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Reminds me of this chart: http://i.imgur.com/Q8kV8.png
And of course, Randall has covered similar ground before: http://xkcd.com/974/[[User:Gardnertoo|Gardnertoo]] ([[User talk:Gardnertoo|talk]]) 16:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

There are a few flaws with this:

# How many tasks that you were doing five years ago are you still doing? I'd give a max window of two years for most task executions.
# Whatever system you designed to save you time will itself require maintenance -- and become a task.
# Very few people can figure out when they start a time-saving task how long it will take.
# Not all attempts to create a time saving system actually work
# Not all attempts to create a time saving task actually save time
# Once you create a time saving system, you are locked in to doing the task the way that the time saving system expects you to do it -- or, continually modify your time saving task, which again, takes time.

Dave Edelhart [[Special:Contributions/70.35.47.190|70.35.47.190]] 16:56, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

: WRT your first 'flaw'. I can think of lots. Just off the top of my head - brushing my teeth, making breakfast, showering, walking my dog, commuting, responding to emails, editing documents for grammar and style, arguing on wikis, etc... There are thousands of such tasks, if not tens of thousands.[[Special:Contributions/24.70.188.179|24.70.188.179]] 17:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

The chart does not take into account when multiple users use the more time efficient task.
--[[User:Rhayader|Rhayader]] ([[User talk:Rhayader|talk]]) 11:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
: For multiple users who benefit, you multiply the number by the users. But you should recalculate it yourself, because the numbers are floored. Saving 5 seconds daily gives you 2.536111 hours in 5 years (5*365+1 days). So for example, to save a group of 15 people 5 seconds for the twice-a-day coffee break: Randalls 2 hours gives you 2*2*15= 60 hours to spent for a computerized/automated coffee system which saves everybody 5 seconds. While it's actually 76 hours and 5 minutes. :) [[Special:Contributions/131.174.90.212|131.174.90.212]] 15:54, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
:For across a [http://googology.wikia.com/wiki/tritri tritri] years, most things get a byte more well-defined. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.188|162.158.88.188]] 10:05, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

this page is broken when accessed via link or random page, it is only accessible via redirect from www.explainxkcd.com/1205. try pasting the following into the url bar: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1205:_Is_It_Worth_the_Time%3F (on the off chance that it's only me, for me it just says "no input file specified")

45: Schrodinger

2019-11-29T22:56:33Z

172.69.63.83: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 45
| date = January 4, 2006
| title = Schrodinger
| image = schrodinger.jpg
| titletext = There was no alt-text until you moused over
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a joke creating a humorously false synthesis, combining the principles of quantum superposition and the effects of reading a comic one panel at a time.

{{w|Schrödinger's cat}} is a thought experiment that illuminates the notion that a particle only resolves itself to its state upon observation, and until such observation is made, it is in all of its possible states simultaneously. In the thought experiment, a cat is both dead and alive until observation; likewise, in this comic, [[Black Hat]] and [[Cueball]] are likening the last panel to the box with the cat: until you read it, it is in a mixed state (a superposition) of both funny and unfunny.

In the last panel, Black Hat says "Shit." The joke is that after reading the last panel, the comic is both funny (as it is unexpected) and not funny (as the last line was a non sequitur and therefore there is no climax) at the same time, thus proving Black Hat and Cueball wrong, hence them expressing discontent with the word "shit."

The [[title text]], which Randall here calls the alt-text, suggests that the alt text did not exist until the mouse over action occurred.

===Schrödinger's cat===
Schrödinger's cat is a famous thought experiment proposed by {{w|Erwin Schrödinger}} to question the {{w|Copenhagen interpretation}} of quantum mechanics.

Under the {{w|Copenhagen interpretation}}, any particle is described by a {{w|wave function}} that allows one to calculate the probability that it is any given state. A radioactive nucleus with a half-life of one hour, for instance, would have a wave-function that would split, showing two distinct states (decayed, undecayed) that change over time until some "observation" forced the wave-function into one state or another (called "collapsing the wave-function"). Before the wave-function is collapsed, it is incorrect to say that the atom has decayed or has not decayed; it is in a "superposition" of states, effectively both decayed and undecayed.

Schrödinger thought that the Copenhagen interpretation was absurd, and devised the below thought experiment to show this. The experiment goes as follows: Put a cat in a box, he said, with a device triggered by the decay of an atom with a half-life of one hour that would release a poisonous gas if triggered. Then, after waiting an hour, the Copenhagen interpretation would say that the atom is in a superposition of decayed and undecayed states, and thus, by extension, the cat would be in a superposition of alive and dead states. Only when the box is opened would the wave-function for the cat collapse into either alive or dead states. This thought experiment is not meant to be taken literally, as every interaction of a particle with another constitutes an observation, and many particles must interact for a cat to die, but still his argument was that since it is absurd for a cat to be both alive and dead, it is absurd for an atom to be both decayed and undecayed.

If this experiment were to be performed, the cat would not be both dead and alive.

== Transcript ==
:[Black Hat and Cueball are standing next to each other. Above them the text is written in a box with shades around it.]
:Schrödinger's Comic

:[Black Hat and Cueball are still standing next to each other, but Cueball has lifted his arms above his head. The text is again written in a box with shades around it.]
:The last panel of this comic is both funny and not funny at the same time.

:[Black Hat and Cueball are still standing next to each other, Cueball arms are down again. The text is again written in a box with shades around it.]
:Until you read it, there's no way to tell which it will end up being.

:[Black Hat and Cueball are still standing next to each other. Cueball has become smaller and smaller through the three frames after the first. Quite clearly here in the last panel. The text is again written in a box with shades around it.]
:Shit.

==Trivia==
*This was the 42nd comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]].
**The previous was [[39: Bowl]].
**The next was [[46: Secrets]].
*There had been a break of almost a month between this and the previous comic.
**This time was probably used to prepare the launch of the new [[xkcd]] site.
*Original title: "Drawing: Schrodinger"
**For the first time in eight comics and only the second time since after the first day on LiveJournal, the weekday was not part of the title on LiveJournal.
**But the extra word "Drawing" was still added to the title for this and the four comics after the next, in spite of the simultaneous release on xkcd.
*There were no original [[Randall]] quote for this comic.
*This was the first comic to be posted simultaneous (i.e. on the same day) on both LiveJournal and the new xkcd site.
*Thus this comic was one of the last 11 comics posted on LiveJournal.
**These 11 comics were [[:Category:Posted on LiveJournal after xkcd|posted both on LiveJournal and xkcd]] after the xkcd site opened on the 1st of January 2006.
**They were not all posted on the same day though.
*Black Hat's hat is beginning to shorten from its top-hat look, although its height varies between panels. (As does Cueballs height compared to Black Hat.)

{{Comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics posted on livejournal| 42]]
[[Category:Posted on LiveJournal after xkcd]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:2235: Group Chat Rules

2019-11-29T22:17:24Z

172.69.63.83:

== 5884 × 9286 pixel image?? ==

When I open this page (https://xkcd.com/2235, in case there's any confusion), I get an enormous image that bleeds far past the right and bottom of the page. Turns out that the image is 5884 × 9286 pixels. Has this been seen before? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 19:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
: Looks like Randall must have uploaded the wrong image size. I assume he'll fix the comic shortly. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.211.52|172.68.211.52]] 19:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

11) I don't care if any generalised 'group chat' software does newest-first or oldest-first as default (and if you can resort to the other order, most-upticked, or whatever) but if it allows inclusion of prior comments, please ''DO NOT ENCOURAGE TOP-POSTING'', particularly when reply-pyramids can carelessly form with recless abandon, and often beyond the "this post is too long, click here to expand" point you often get. - Honestly, I just think a dose of more widespread peer-directed Usenet Netiquette (pre-Eternal September, definitely pre-Outlook Express) could do a lot of people good as well. Randomly split people up into 1990-ish sized cohorts for a 'training period' of socialisation until they can safely 'graduate' to the globally undelineated cohort. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.110|162.158.155.110]] 20:12, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
:Ok boomer, I'll be off your lawn in a moment. In the mean time I think there's a cloud up there which can't hear you. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.122|172.69.22.122]] 20:25, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Anyone got any ideas about (4)? The only group chat I know of which constantly changes their group names to different random nonsense is the Chapo Trap House Discord. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.122|172.69.22.122]] 20:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Does anyone think that (10) means that all of the rules were sent as separate messages and the last one's just an apology for doing that? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.83|172.69.63.83]] 22:17, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-18T19:47:00Z

172.69.63.83:

{{comic
| number = 2230
| date = November 18, 2019
| title = Versus Bracket
| image = versus_bracket.png
| titletext = Some works didn't make the cut; in "Ecks vs. Sever" vs. the passage of time, the latter seems to have won pretty decisively.
}}

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

This comic shows a tournament bracket in which the initial matches represent works of fiction with ''vs.'' or ''versus'' in their names (i.e. Batman is initially matched against Superman in reference to ''Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice''. The majority are movie names, with the exceptions being:
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_vs._Capcom Marvel vs. Capcom] (video game series)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_vs._the_Monorail Marge vs. the Monorail] (Simpsons episode)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plants_vs._Zombies Plants vs. Zombies] (video game)

Randall may have been inspired by the release of ''{{w|Ford v Ferrari}}'', a 2019 film about the two auto builder competitors competing to win the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans race.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Kramer - Kramer
:Ford - Ferrari
:The People - Larry Flint
:Joe - The Volcano
:King Kong - Godzilla
:Freddy - Jason
:Dracula - Frankenstein
:Alien - Predator

:[Right side:]
:Marvel - Capcom
:Marge - The Monorail
:Justice League - Teen Titans
:Asterix - Caesar
:Batman - Superman
:Scott Pilgrim - The World
:Mega Shark - Giant Octopus
:Plants - Zombies

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Tournament bracket]]

2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-18T19:46:09Z

172.69.63.83:

{{comic
| number = 2230
| date = November 18, 2019
| title = Versus Bracket
| image = versus_bracket.png
| titletext = Some works didn't make the cut; in "Ecks vs. Sever" vs. the passage of time, the latter seems to have won pretty decisively.
}}

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

This comic shows a tournament bracket in which the initial matches represent works of fiction with ''vs.'' or ''versus'' in their names (i.e. Batman is initially matched against Superman in reference to ''Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice''. The majority are movie names, with the exceptions being:
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_vs._Capcom Marvel vs. Capcom] (video game series)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_vs._the_Monorail Marge vs. the Monorail] (Simpsons episode)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plants_vs._Zombies Plants vs. Zombies] (video game)

Randall may have been inspired by the release of ''{{w|Ford v Ferrari}}'', a 2019 film about the two auto builder competitors competing to win the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans race.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]
:[Left side:]
:Kramer - Kramer
:Ford - Ferrari
:The People - Larry Flint
:Joe - The Volcano
:King Kong - Godzilla
:Freddy - Jason
:Dracula - Frankenstein
:Alien - Predator

:[Right side:]
:Marvel - Capcom
:Marge - The Monorail
:Justice League - Teen Titans
:Asterix - Caesar
:Batman - Superman
:Scott Pilgrim - The World
:Mega Shark - Giant Octopus
:Plants - Zombies

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Tournament bracket]]

Talk:2212: Cell Phone Functions

2019-10-08T22:59:26Z

172.69.63.83:

I know of someone who DID build a taser into a phone... (but that's all it is now, was no space for the phone's electronics anymore) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.39|172.69.54.39]] 08:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: Well, there are actual commercial taser phone cases available for purchase today - [https://youtu.be/XaJSYxit1qI here's one example]. Not necessarily a good idea and not legal everywhere, but it exists. --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 12:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

It seems a bit peculiar that one of the move "obvious" devices a cellphone can replace is missing: the watch. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 08:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: That's because no one sane would do that ;) Some may use a Smart Watch instead of a classic watch but except of the case when you were used to pocket watches anyways a replacement of a wacth by a phone would be a downgrade usability wise. /edit: That being said: My personal "Now" bar is at the first quarter (more or less at the web browser's bar end) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)So that physics is nothing but the harmonies of the vibrating rubber bands.

:: I realize it's unlikely you're being entirely serious here, but the same argument applies to almost all of the devices listed in this comic. So…no, that's not the reason for its omission. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 08:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::: Actually I was dead serious. Well except of the "no one sane" part. I don't want to offend anyone :) In the time you take your phone out of the pocket to check the time I've looked thrice at my wrist watch [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:::: The time taken isn't awfully relevant, unless you're checking the time awfully frequently. For the number of times a day I need to check the time when I'm not at a computer or already looking at my phone, the convenience of a wristwatch could easily be outweighed by the inconvenience of taking it off and putting in on each day. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.178.69|162.158.178.69]] 09:34, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::::: Assuming you'd put it off. ;) (Despite the emoticon I'm serious again. I only put my watch off to change the battery) And even if I would put it off it would be more likely I forgot my phone on my desk than forgetting to put the watch on. I'm wearing a wrist watch since I was 8 or 9. But granted, the time is not as relevant as the fact that you have to put a device from out of somewhere and push a button to activate the screen just to check time. But in the end it's just a matter of personal taste and habit, I guess. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, whether it's as convenient or even as good is irrelevant: Cell phones are not as good at photos as a dedicated camera but they are used for that because they can do it without the need for a separate device, which is the point of this comic. Most people do not wear watches anymore & just use their phones instead. Watches really would belong on this list, except it might be more difficult to pin down a transitional point! Some of us stopped needing watches when we realized our Nokia 3390 had a clock in the corner. Other people may have whattimeisitrightnow dot com on their smartphone's home screen... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:44, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:::: A phone in the pocket is infinitely better for me than a watch because watches make the skin underneath the wristband itch from the continuous contact. (I have atopic dermatitis.) -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.135|162.158.93.135]] 13:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: there was a brief period between ubiquitous cell/mobile phone use and the advent of the smartwatch where experts predicted the demise of the watch other than as a piece of jewellery [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 08:46, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: I always hated wearing a watch - I do sometimes use my phone for finding the time - but "Hey Google - what time is it?" works without taking it out of my pocket. The thing is though - watches were obsolete before the smartphone existed. When just about 100% of electronic devices have clock display - my cooker, microwave, toaster, car, TV, computer, etc, etc ALL tell me the time. Why would I need a watch? SmartWatches seem like a retrograde step. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:: Well, with a watch you always know, where to look, especially when not in your own home. So just looking at your own wrist is much faster, then scanning your enviroment for the nearest screen. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::"Smart Watches" that don't do much without a smartphone to connect to seem especially backwards to me. A smart watch with cellular radio would be useful on its own. Side note: So _you're_ that one person who leaves voice activation on all the time!?! Setting the very real privacy & safety issues aside for a moment... Doesn't it trigger from random conversations on an almost daily basis? I don't even know anyone who was able to leave Siri or Alexa on touchless, much less Google. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:::Newer generations are able to do so, at least partially. E.g. new generation from Garmin is able to play music to your bluetooth earpieces, without of need of a phone. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
:I agree, it seems to me that the majority of people who had a cell phone as a teenager never acquired the habit of wearing a watch. I happen to still wear a watch and I also have a separate device that I use instead of my cell phone to make phone calls when I am at home. It's called a "telephone". And it's a fact that very few people who had a cell phone as a teenager have one of these in their homes. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 19:49, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::I used to wear watch. Then the strap broke (well, the things connecting the strap to watch). So I got used to wearing them in pocket, no big deal, didn't needed them that often and never got to finding the shop where they would fix it. Then the watch broke. I got used to looking at phone. On the other hand, I'm still using "dumb" cellphone instead of smartphone for calling, the shape is just better for holding next to ear. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:16, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Try to translate "die eierlegende Wollmilchsau"
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.97|162.158.89.97]] 09:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:Sounds a lot like a schmoo from _Lil Abner_ by Al Capp! I wonder if the egg-legend woolmillsow is where he got the idea? [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
::Die eigerlegende Wollmilchsau is a joke on tools/machines/etc which are designed to perform
::a lot of incompatile tasks, but often fail to work properly.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.221|162.158.91.221]] 16:37, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

There is a terrible movie - [[Wikipedia:Shorts: The Adventures of the Wishing Rock|Shorts: The Adventures of the Wishing Rock]] - where everyone has a device called The Black Box that can do all of that, as well as pretty much anything. Its function changes kind of like a Rubik's Cube. It's an obvious parody of smartphones, except that it came out right around the time they were getting popular so I'm not sure if smartphones are the true inspiration. I can't recommend that movie (really, it's awful) but this comic reminded me of it and I wanted to share. --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 10:11, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:Also see the Guide 2.0 as depicted in the later _Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy_ novels. It would do anything its user asked, including removing all Earths from all timelines (which is what it was built for). There's an old SciFi story about a man with a hypnotic paisley tie who accidentally leaves behind a futuristic universal remote & the contemporary guy who finds it gets in trouble. Overall, the "one device that does everything" has been an idea for at least a hundred years; but I think it's not just dismissed as whimsy so easily these days. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Re: steering wheel, there was a James Bond movie (Pierce Brosnan era I think) where he could control a car from a phone (they were not yet called smartphones at the time). I wouldn't be surprised that the technology has already been implemented, even though I don't want to think of the legal consequences if this became mainstream: "Honestly officer, I wasn't LOOKING at my phone, I was DRIVING my car!"[[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.110|162.158.155.110]] 11:30, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: sure it's *technically* possible: all you need is to pair the gyro/accelerometer of your phone with your car's servo steering. any vehicle with a parking assistant can be controlled that way (and security researchers have demonstrated that in impressive talks back in 2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OobLb1McxnI). [[User:Gir|-- //gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 11:37, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:It was in ''Tomorrow Never Dies'' (https://youtu.be/BxTvfVZjR_Q) with a 'slightly' non-standard phone (pre-smartphone) and a 'slightly' non-standard car... Hardly the most unbelievable feature, though. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.235|162.158.158.235]] 16:06, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I've written a first draft of the explanation and transcript, but I don't have time for anything else today. It turned out more high-flown than I intended, so feel free to reword as necessary. Also, because I'm sure it'll come up eventually, regarding the transcript: since Randall has not given any time scale, we should refrain from over-interpreting when something happened. For the joke to get through, knowing which elements happened in the past and which (might) happen in the future is enough. [[User:Gir|-- //gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 11:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm - so let's fact check this:
* My phone is indeed being used as a car key (I own a Tesla and my phone unlocks the car and lets me drive it), phone, camera, newspaper, credit card and flashlight - so short bars for all of these is good.
* As a TV remote, that could be true - but we're actually edging into a "post-phone" era on that one. I can (and occasionally do) use my phone to control the Roku - but it's easier to use voice commands through Google Home for that...although I suppose I could use the phone to run Google Home instead of the Google Mini in my living room...so 50/50 on being "post-phone" on this one.
* As a Web Browser, I could use the phone - but only rarely actually do that. Mostly I use my ChromeBook for that, and also the screen on my Tesla - the piddly little cellphone screen guarantees it won't take over that role for more than 10% of the time.
* He missed out "Text messaging" - but I'm using the phone less and less for that because having a decent keyboard is good - so the ChromeBook is stealing that capability.
* Steering wheel...well, the Tesla already steers itself about 80% of the time that I drive. I predict that the steering wheel will cease to exist (at least for me) before I use my phone for that...although it certainly is capable of it in theory...and I'm pretty sure Tesla demonstrated the car being used as a radio controlled toy from a phone a few years ago...although it never made it into production (mercifully!).
* You probably could use a phone as a bird feeder (for smaller birds - draping a dead rabbit over it to attract vultures might be a bad idea).
* All of the others are well into the future...so I agree with him on those.
[[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I feel like we could/should be reading this more literally. If we assume that Randall lives on the fairly early edge of technology, then the time from the left side of the chart to now is ~25 years. If we also assume that the time axis is linear, then we should be driving our cars with our phones in 7-8 years (though I can now drive my car through a parking lot at least using my phone, it's still doing the steering for me). Sadly brushing our teeth is still about 20 years out according to this prediction, however maybe by then our phones will be able to do some sort of ultrasonic cleaning. [[User:Jasonk|Jasonk]] ([[User talk:Jasonk|talk]]) 13:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:I'm continually surprised that nobody is known to have fallen for a joke digital toilet-tissue app called iWipe. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

It seems like it would be good to reference Randall's [[:Category:xkcd Phones|rather unusual phone function proposals]] in the explanation. Perhaps he's suggesting that these phones will become commonly used (or at least used by him) in the future. [[User:Dry Paratroopa|Dry Paratroopa]] ([[User talk:Dry Paratroopa|talk]]) 14:38, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Maybe when he says "TV remote" he's actually talking about "cable box remote". I think there's an Xfinity X1 mobile app. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:Some (or many?) Smart TVs, such as my 6 year old LG Smart TV are also possible to connect to an app. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Could the cheese grater be a reference to Apple's newest computers? I could imagine an iPhone with the "cheese grater" texture. [[User:Billtheplatypus|Billtheplatypus]] ([[User talk:Billtheplatypus|talk]]) 17:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I am very curious as to what specific device Randall used for his telephone way back when before he used his phone. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.70.28|172.68.70.28]] 17:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
:Before he used his phone, the specific device was likely his parents phone. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

The comic says "I just use MY phone." Presumably, before that, he used someone else's phone, or a payphone or something. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.19|172.68.189.19]] 21:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

If you think about it, the phone started out with maybe 4 components: microphone, speaker, bell ringer, and gizmo to alert the operator to connect to you. Newspaper was paper and ink. Flashlight was bulb and battery. They had nothing in common at all. So dog leash? Better GPS + bluetooth shock collar. Tazer? Better battery + extendable prongs. Toilet paper is easy: bluetooth enabled bidet. Honestly, the only device I would bet money on being wrong is the bird feeder. After all, who would deliberately walk away from their phone for hours on end? (besides me) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.90.100|172.68.90.100]] 21:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC) SiliconWolf
:Toilet paper is even easier than that, and you can do it with any phone. Just install three C shells. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.83|172.69.63.83]] 22:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I can imagine using phone as a dog leash. It could be connected with smart dog-collar that gives a shock to a dog if it moves further than chosen distance. Not that I would like such idea, but seems possible. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 08:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
:You would still need a specific device (the dog-collar), instead of "just" using your phone. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:12, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Unmentioned single purpose devices that cell phones have partially or totally replaced: radio, MP3 player, music player, personal assistant device, voice recorder, video camera. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 13:12, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Tazer sounds like a good idea, but some other personal protective devices could also be welcomed: personal alarm (press a button and loud piercing alarm scares away attacker), pepper spray, accident alert. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 13:12, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

;y axis order
I wonder if there is a rationale for the ordering on the vertical axis. They are mostly, but not exclusively, monotonically increasing in time. {{unsigned|Mwh001}}
:I didn't research this, but it looks like the order of availibility it is sorted by. But web browser wasn't used at first, because it was just so expensive and hard to use. TV remote apps are available for quite some time, but often it is easier to just grab the remote when its close to the sofa, instead of opening the app. It remains unclear, why he switched at all. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

;Mind Bleach please!
Toothbrush, ''and'' toilet paper? [[User:John.Adriaan|John.Adriaan]] ([[User talk:John.Adriaan|talk]]) 00:16, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

;Make America Grate Again
Randall may be onto something with the cheese grater. If Americans ever stop grating their cheese and someone wants to force them to resume, then they could start a movement to require cell phones be designed so that you have to grate cheese with the phone before you can use the phone for anything else, and this movement could use the slogan "Make America Grate Again", and the existing MAGA hats.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.92|172.69.34.92]] 04:52, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

A dog leash is entirely plausible, you put a real shock-collar on the dog, then control it from the phone. But I'm disappointed that it's not a graph of how much time per day one spends doing each task on the phone. Because using it like a phone would be the shortest one, just as in the pic above. — [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 16:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)