explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2795: Glass-Topped Table

2023-06-29T19:44:59Z

172.70.162.171:

First! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.52|172.71.167.52]] 19:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

How is "glass-topped" not a term found often online, yet I'm so used to calling it that in verbal conversation (Western Canadian, for reference). Searching for "glass-topped" (with quotes) shows this comic first in results (past ads) :) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.105|162.158.146.105]] 19:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
:Its probiably just your search personalization. My first search result https://www.designtoscano.com/categories/glass-top-accent-tables followed by xkcdexplained, xkcd, walmart, etsi, and commercial-interiorsuk.com (boy talk about a sus URL). [[User:Jamcdonald|Jamcdonald]] ([[User talk:Jamcdonald|talk]]) 09:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
It's not "instead of" -- the table has both a glass surface and a drinking glass. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:32, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

…You could always hand-wash the cup. [[User:PxP|PxP]] ([[User talk:PxP|talk]]) 19:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
:Not sure about you, but when I hand-wash something, I'm doing it over sink. Getting the table to sink would be quite hard, although probably easier than fitting it into dishwasher. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
::It would also be difficult to pour out either the drink or the washwater.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.51|172.69.247.51]] 23:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
:::Pressurised water... If you have anything hose-like (or it's within range of one of those extensible tap-attachments) then gush water into it and anything not actually stuck to the glass (any really gloopy liquid - like a partly dried old smoothie left there too long that may need a bit of mechanical wiping too) gets diluted and pressured out. (...Onto the floor, unless you are prepared for that.)
:::A quick rub with a dishcloth can wick up most of what doesn't jump straight back out (you need a quick shut-off to the water supply, ideally, so it doesn't dribble-fill so much, anyway) and if it was hot enough then the last bits of dampness 'self dry'. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.159|172.70.162.159]] 01:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Some of the unpopularity probably comes from it being halfway off of the table, giving you the ever-present feeling that it might fall. [[User:TheLittlePeace|TheLittlePeace]] ([[User talk:TheLittlePeace|talk]]) 19:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Some seemed to have missed the real point; this is a cat torture device. I can just see my moggy lying there kicking at it for hours. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.131|172.69.34.131]] 04:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
:Cat torture device? I could see it being their main entertainment, depending on temprement... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.126|141.101.98.126]] 11:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The torture aspect causes me to doubt that this is anywhere close to the least popular. We've seem the style he has in furniture. I bet there is no couch, it's just offered so that people don't get upset.

Are there really dishwashers large enough to fit an average dining table? The link in the explanation refers to an advertising installation that specifically does not work as a dishwasher. It was designed to keep objects inside it dry. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 07:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
:There are, this one should do the trick https://www.webstaurantstore.com/champion-pp-20-split-door-pot-and-pan-washer-208v-3-phase/253PP20SDC.html [[User:Jamcdonald|Jamcdonald]] ([[User talk:Jamcdonald|talk]]) 09:25, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
This has to be a cat's worst nightmare... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.137|172.71.94.137]] 08:46, 29 June 2023‎ (UTC)
This is my first ever edit, so forgive me if I don't sign it correctly, but I felt compelled to create an account in order to share that this comic very much reminded me of The Uncomfortable (https://www.theuncomfortable.com/). Don't know if this belongs in the main explain page, but thought I'd share it here and let someone else decide. [[User:dominiclipari|dominiclipari]] 12:55, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
:"...so forgive me if I don't sign it correctly" - close enough, but I suspect you wrote (most of?) it manually. Just put the <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki><code> in (or press the penultimate button in the line of buttons immediately above the textediting area) and you should get it correctly.
:For me, it'll give something like <code><nowiki>[[Special:Contributions/<<IP Address>>|<<IP Address>>]] <<Time>>, <<Date>>‎ (UTC)</nowiki></code>. For someone with a user account active, it'll be <code><nowiki>[[User:<<Username>>|<<Username>>]] ([[User talk:<<Username>>|talk]]) <<Time>>, <<Date>>‎ (UTC)</nowiki></code> ''unless'' you've messed with your personal profile settings.
:It doesn't matter much. Best to still have Time and Date. And some form of your Username-related links... But just FYI. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.171|172.70.162.171]] 19:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Am I the only one who interpreted the glass being part of the edge of the table to mean that there is not actually a bottom to the glass? The tooltip text seems to suggest otherwise, but it is a humorous interpretation. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 19:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2794: Alphabet Notes

2023-06-27T16:43:42Z

172.70.162.171:

No, we must rid ourselves of the redundant C. Also we need to bring back Ð and Þ. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
:I agree with your second point, but not your first (This is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chpT0TzietQ) [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 01:04, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

daMNation, randoMNess, chiMNey, gyMNastics, autuMN are not fancy words [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.204|172.70.250.204]] 19:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

You can't have rUIn without U and I together!

Or UI! [[User:GetPunnedOn|GetPunnedOn]] ([[User talk:GetPunnedOn|talk]]) 22:35, 26 June 2023 (UTC) (Reply to above text)

We need to bring back way more letters: https://youtu.be/wJxKyh9e5_A
--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.246.84|172.71.246.84]] 20:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

I would be useful to include the letter frequency table from Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_frequency but we don't appear to have the "bartable" template from wikipedia to display bar charts. It would explain a lot about the haunted letters in particular to have it.

The circled JK is clearly referencing the text-language abbreviation for "just kidding", and the bracketed VW... I'm not sure but, it might have to do with Volkswagen, or the spikiness of the letters, or "why isn't W called double-V or at least next to the U".
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.166|172.70.174.166]] 21:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

:I think the bracketed V and W is referencing the fact that W is equivalent to two V’s together. (Or the fact that W originated as VV) —[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 23:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
: Huh, I always thought "jk" was for "joke". Luckily it doesn't change its meaning... (unlike the person who thought "LOL" was for "Lots of Love" https://www.quora.com/Does-LOL-stand-for-Love-you-loads-or-Lots-of-love ) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

:In some languages, such as French, w is called "double v" (or its literal transaltion), which makes more sense. :-) --[[User:Itub|Itub]] ([[User talk:Itub|talk]]) 11:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Added the Twinkle Twinkle justification into the existing explanation. But I might be talking out of my hat, as I'm British and only really know the US treatment from imported media. (Sesame Street? No, I can only bring to mind their counting 1-12 song. And "Conjunction Junction".) The UK's "alphabet" recital form, at least when I was that young, is far less musical. And tends to rhyme "Z" with "Drop dead!", naturally. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.183|172.70.90.183]] 22:06, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Pretty sure he isn't questioning the position of Q as much as its inclusion. If we wanted to reform English spelling, we could get rid of Q pretty kwiklee.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.207|172.71.26.207]] 23:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

: Or maybe it's that old joke about why U doesn't follow Q in the alphabet? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.107|141.101.98.107]] 10:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC) Artinum

I can't be the only one who thinks there's a dirty joke in the line '"D" is solid, at least' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.140|172.71.150.140]] 00:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
:I didn't. I think that joke is simply that D is a simple, enclosed shape. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
:B is also a simple, enclosed shape. I thought that the 'no heavy hitters' comment might be a reference to 'ETAION SHRDLU', the 12 most common letters in written English arranged in descending order of frequency - since it contains neither B nor C (nor, indeed, F or G).[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.146|172.69.79.146]] 05:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
:B has a concave feature so is not so simple a shape as D. D is the only consonant whose [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convex_hull convex hull] maintains the shape of the letter. (Imagine snapping a rubber band around the letter. The vowels I and O also have this property... at least with no serifs on the I, as drawn.) [[User:Davidhbrown|Davidhbrown]] ([[User talk:Davidhbrown|talk]]) 11:49, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

PxP: I must ask, does this has anything to do with Alphabet Lore by Mike Salcedo? I feel it might be, with Q being weird and all. 12:16, 27 June 2023 (EST)

To quote my latest edit-comment: "Why number-points, anyway? Just *s would make more sense than #s, as there's no need to establish an order in most cases, especially for multi-glyph annotations" (...like the wide spread of vowels(+Y), especially). I see no need for ordinal bullet-points, but (which would have helped my prior edit, that I'd forgotten to Preview first, thus had broken/restarted the numbering) it is a prime candidate for the more traditional wikitable layout. Columns of "Letter(s), Red Comment, Possible Reason(s)" would probably suffice. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.171|172.70.162.171]] 16:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2789: Making Plans

2023-06-19T14:36:26Z

172.70.162.171:

Help, I can't move my comment down! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.54|AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA]] 01:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Here I was expecting something about cryptography and how Charlie just invited himself along.
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.146|172.71.146.146]] 04:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

The alphabetical citation bias occurred in psychology but not biology or geoscience. (Biologist married to psychologist, gloating.) ---- {{unsigned ip|162.158.186.213}}
:I think the Wikipedia quote and reference link may be obsolete. It was a big deal when it was published half a decade ago, but editors took note, and now almost every peer reviewed paper gets references listed by the order they occur in the text, don't they? Surely there must be some post-2018 sources on this from journals saying they've changed their style guides we can include? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.42|172.71.155.42]] 22:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:: I've been a sounding board for a friend's journey to getting her Masters in English, giving her feedback on all of her papers for the last 2 years, and the rules she's required to follow are still to list her references alphabetically. And there have been 3 styles: mostly the MLA style, she could often choose APA instead, and one paper she had to figure out Chicago (Purdue maintains a current list of rules to follow for each, OWL, we keep checking it for syntax, and all 3 specify alphabetical, as have her professors. And EVERY peer-reviewed/published work she has cited - and at this level peer-reviewed is the minimum - THEIR references have been listed alphabetically, too). So you can check OWL, AFAIK the authority on writing styles: https://owl.purdue.edu/ (I think MLA was even changed/updated in the last 2 years while we've been doing this) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
:: One of my CS advisors told us to always use text order. When we asked about what to do when a journal says to use Alphabetic ordering, and he told us that he has been submitting to those journals with his ordering for 20 years and no one has ever mentioned it, so official or not, that is the de facto standard (in CS at least). [[User:Jamcdonald|Jamcdonald]] ([[User talk:Jamcdonald|talk]]) 04:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
::: Surely, in CS, you should be sorting all references by their absolute memory address for optimisation purposes! ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.171|172.70.162.171]] 14:36, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the explanation about the alphabetical sorting of Cueball on Yvonne's phone. AFAIK, Cueball is only the fan nickname given on this wiki, and not an in-universe name, right?
Names starting with R would be pretty far down an alphabetical list, like in Rob... or Randall
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.69|162.158.233.69]] 06:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:I agree and have already deleted this. Made a comment on my changes along the idea you wrote here. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, Cueball (and White Hat, Black Hat, Curly, etc) are only names here. In-universe, I think the only names are Megan and Mrs. What's-her-face the science teacher (starts "Lehn-" I'm sure) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I feel like a better reference point for this than academic citations or ballot paper ordering would be old paper phone directories, where you'd find companies calling themselves things like 'AAA Assistance' in order to appear at the top of their sector listings. Can anyone find a non-anecdotal reference for this?[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 09:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
: I know I've heard of such instances, and seen such in person (if I still had any phone books, got tossed in the last move a few years ago). I KNOW I've seen a few jokes about this. Wasn't there even an XKCD something like "I think business will pick up now that I've renamed my company AAAAA Movers"? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
:: Indeed, my father started his used furniture business in 1945 and named it "Ace Bargain Center" in order to be first in the yellow pages in the furniture store category. He was very upset when a competitor named his business "ABC Furniture", and then someone else came along and used the name "AAA furniture". Of course, search engines take advantage of the "top of the list bias" by charging more for results that appear on the top 5 or 10 search results. {{unsigned|Rtanenbaum|22:15, 17 June 2023 (edit) (undo)}}

If only people were like books... (I have (re)read far more Asimov and Clarke than Wells and Zelazny, but none of them complain!) ...but clearly ''no'' absolute ordering is perfect. "Most recently contacted" suffers from the problem of some new contacts shuffling someone out of the current head-of-list spot and then they plummet to the 'old' end. "''Least'' recently contacted" would be better, but would 'auto-ghost' everyone the moment contact is re-established (or attempted, if it was based upon your reaching out, not their deigning to reach back again).
 Perhaps a "rolling road-block" method of (say) today starting at A, tomorrow starting at B(/wherever you left off today), and so on until it wraps around Z->A again. Or half your "social management" spent at the top-end, a quarter of it jumps half way down, an eighth of it half of the rest of the way, a sixteenth by jumping a further half of the remainder, with discretion to look up and down from the proposed landing-point to choose a neighbouring contact with more hopefulbcontactability... That latter would work even better on a "by most recent contact" sort, as well, as it churns and refreshes the current social circles to regain valuable 'lost' contacts without overly penalising the current circle of recent acquaintences in such a paradoxical manner.
 Of course... the fewer friends you have, the simpler the problem! I have never been so happy to be a sub-Dunbar individual, and so not have all the anxieties that those with exceedingly active social lives must have! Even if it means I might just have to phone my water-company up, every now and then, to bitch about how my telephone company forgot my birthday and is now refusing to return my calls... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.69|172.70.91.69]] 09:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:Wouldn't it be easier just to have randomised ordering each time you load? Of course, all of this overlooks the primary reason for having them alphabetical in the first place - to be able to locate a specific contact when you have a specific reason for contacting them, which any of these other systems would make a pain in the arse.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.170|172.70.91.170]] 09:34, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
::But ''which'' (pseudo-)random reordering? Can you guarantee thst your LCG/LFSR/Mersenne implementation, and how it is consulted to shuffle and reprioritises your contacts, has sufficiently long cycle-periodicity to avoid you still entirely neglecting someone because they still usually end up below any cut-off point?!? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.136|172.70.85.136]] 09:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:::Depends, obviously, on how long the list is, but I think that would be VERY unlucky. That said, more deterministic order could be more reliable. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

:Clearly, the correct is an AI social helper who will remind you to reach out to friends you haven't contacted recently, along with keeping track of birthdays, anniversaries, and other special reasons to contact everyone in your social circle. All the while, it would be learning your language patterns and voice, so that you can eventually just let it take over your social life entirely. You can hang out with your three real friends while your AI hangs out with the AIs of the fifty people in your contact list that you don't actually remember. (Is it obvious I'm an introvert?) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.44|172.69.247.44]] 10:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
::("... three real friends"? You socialite. If only I were such a shameless party animal!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.7|172.70.86.7]] 10:27, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

::Speaking about birthdays ... if you always contact person on birthday, you have practical guarantee you won't have anyone not contacted more than year! -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

As a person with an A name, I find I often get pocket-dialed by various people. Discussing this with people whose names start at the other end of the alphabet, they observed that they never got pocket-dialed. Is this another example of the same phenomenon, or do I have a case of innaccurate anecdotal evidence? [[User:Thisfox|Thisfox]] ([[User talk:Thisfox|talk]]) 22:48, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

:I remember 15 years ago in Belgian hospitals the "A Blind Call" campaign which was an overtaxed phone number whose profits were given back to medical research (maybe about sight issues for the extra pun?). Their main argument was that your accidental pocket-dials would accidently help people instead of waking up your friend Alexia. So while I can't confirm alphabetical bias was common, it was at least a well-known enough half-joke in the pre-smartphone era to justify printing words about it, at which point you can apply XKCD#808 to the concepts from XKCD#870!2. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.34|162.158.233.34]] 07:39, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
: Funny, I have an A name and haven't experienced this. My received pocket dials are always people I recently spoken to, so probably redials. (Funny, MOST often these days is a friend named Alexia, LOL!) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Genuine question; do we actually need an explanation of the various reasons why someone might not have heard back yet about an event? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.20|172.71.167.20]] 05:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

: I agree. I came to the discussion primarily because I thought the enumeration of why some non-responses might happen was completely beside the point. [[User:MAP|MAP]] ([[User talk:MAP|talk]]) 06:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

::Yeah, some speculation is usually funny (I still remember the stealing an airplane explanation that added that a police car = one donut). But in this case it is simply... meaningless and making the text harder to read for no reason? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.100|162.158.233.100]] 08:32, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

:: I get the feeling that Randall alluded to an error of that kind to indicate how Cueball's over-thought 'engineering' process was actually under-/mis-thought as a 'social' one. But perhaps he didn't realise how non-obvious the comic motive was. Because, without the 'failures', it might seem that Cueball is actually being both practical and efficient (until the punchline). And I might suggest it was because he had outdated contact info (fits with the lack-of-recency idea), someone else might imagine it was because they were in another city/country (because he's so indiscriminate in who he contacts), etc. Better to speculate than to edit-war as those who are (differently) confident try to impose their idea on those who don't know what is going on.
:: Alternately, he (Randall) ''knows'' there's multiple problems he (Cueball) is falling for. In which case those in need of explanation also need to know the range of issues.
:: In fact, I can think of additional explanations that nobody put there already, and highly tempted to add them (whilst streamlining some wording of the current valid set). But, given your complaints, I'll hold back a bit. No point adding to something that gets completely removed due to a prevailing (or singular, but very definite) counter-opinion. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.29|172.70.85.29]] 08:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
: The editors of this site, as a group, seem addicted to long explanations. :) Like there's a rumour that Longer = Clearer (my experience screams the opposite, the longer I get the more misunderstandings people find). Or just an eagerness to contribute. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

When changing your strategy from contacting people in alphabetically order to contacting people by most recent you'd end up contacting people in alphabetical order because the lists are identical. You'd need to delete your contact-history first. [[User:Kimmerin|Kimmerin]] ([[User talk:Kimmerin|talk]]) 07:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

:Except you now grant priority to people who *just answered*, or even contact you firsthand [[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.100|162.158.233.100]] 08:32, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

With the Discord username change coming, I might as well completely overhaul my profile, so I'm thinking of names that start with "not". Why? Because `!` is the operator for logical NOT. So I have an excuse to haul my username with an exclamation mark. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.58|172.71.146.58]] 15:51, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
:Okay there Bobby Tables. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

2664: Cloud Swirls

2023-05-16T14:37:11Z

172.70.162.171: /* Explanation */ Because "species's" and "species'" (for that which belongs to a species) each have their style-supporters and style-detractors, so avoiding it in perhaps the least awkward manner.

{{comic
| number = 2664
| date = August 26, 2022
| title = Cloud Swirls
| image = cloud_swirls.png
| titletext = 'Why did you get into fluid dynamics?' 'Well, SOME planet has to have the coolest clouds, odds are it's not ours, and rockets are slow.'
}}

==Explanation==

There are [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet planets]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets A lot of them], even. [https://phl.upr.edu/projects/earth-similarity-index-esi Like our planet], for instance. In 3D software, depictions are often rendered at a lower quality when the viewer's perspective is far away from them, to save on computational work for aspects the user can't clearly discern. This idea is built upon here, conceivably to suggest how {{w|Simulation hypothesis|simulations of universes}} might seem different than base reality to observers within them.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] theorize that complicated cloud formations occur naturally on other planets in other solar systems. On planets with no observers to look at the clouds closely, our universe, or the simulation thereof, might not afford to render a visual depiction of the atmosphere in higher quality. Meteorologists and physicists on Earth might notice that such exoplanet atmospheres do not obey formal {{w|Navier-Stokes}} {{w|fluid dynamics}}, but instead reflect low-quality corner-cutting of such calculations, such as exhibiting only smooth {{w|laminar flow}} instead of {{w|turbulence}}, its alternative. The foregoing would make sense if the Universe were actually simulated by a computer (a 43% probability[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA5YuwvJkpQ&t=20m]) and the being(s) who are running the physics simulator, or have coded our universe, wanted to speed things up.

{{cot|Further considerations}}
However:

* Much more computing power could be saved by skimping on the chemistry of the quattuordecillions of atoms in the oceans than the clouds in the sky (especially considering that it would not be necessary to simulate every individual atom and molecule in the sky (for the purpose of making realistic clouds with fluid dynamics); the computer program could instead divide all of the gas particles (e.g., dinitrogen, dioxygen, water vapor, argon, and carbon dioxide) into small chunks, simulate how each chunk would move, and update the chunk boundaries every so often), but skimping on oceanic chemistry would make biogenesis much less feasible. However, Earth has life.{{Citation needed}}

* It would be difficult to judge when "no one is looking closely". There are many organisms that have some degree of at least rudimentary sight but would have no idea (and in fact no way to conceptualize) whether the computer simulating the Universe is skimping on the cloud-rendering calculations or not. It would be difficult to make some foolproof intelligent-sight-detecting code that would render the clouds with much greater precision once a planet had life that would notice if the clouds were following lazy fluid dynamics.
** For one thing, this would not only depend on the intelligence of a species but also on its knowledge of physics, e.g., humans did not develop the Navier-Stokes equations right after evolving large enough brains to conceive and understand them. Even coding a computer program to detect sight-having life would be difficult, at least for a computer program only looking at the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons; for example, a blue photon hitting a retinal molecule in a cone cell, causing it to change shape, which triggers a signal transduction cascade that sends a nervous signal to the optical cortex somewhat resembles an ultraviolet photon hitting a DNA strand, leading to the creation of a thymine dimer whose detection by DNA-repairing enzymes triggers a signal transduction cascade that increases the production of melanin, but only one counts as sight.
** Furthermore, assuming that the computer simulates each part of the Universe in a manner that is is about synchronized according to most celestial bodies, when the computer simulating the Universe simulates a planet, it does not know whether a civilization on a planet a dozen or two light-years away that has advanced enough to have telescopes capable of detailed views of the clouds of planets light-years away will point any telescopes at that planet dozens of light-years later.
***Even if the advanced civilization on another planet does not have such powerful telescopes yet, even a low-resolution (in terms of that planet's entire solar system being one pixel) spectrometer would be enough to reveal that something is up with the fluid dynamics simulations on that planet. Observers light-years away could deduce how much condensed water vapor there is in the atmosphere by calculating the atmosphere's absorbance in a wavelength where condensed water has a low but detectable absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for, and then one can deduce how compact the clouds are from that and the absorbance of a wavelength where condensed water has a high absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for. (Actually, in order to calculate the amount and compactlygroupedness of condensed water in the atmosphere from the raw numbers/direct measurements, the scientists would have to know not only the absorptivity of condensed water suspended in air as clouds but also characteristics of the planet such as its radius and the thickness of its atmosphere. There are also other complicated factors, such as that some of the aerosolized water in clouds is in the form of solid ice, not liquid water. However, the scientists would still notice if the raw numbers from the more rudimentary observational equipment suddenly changed the second, they switched on a more powerful telescope, so the following point still stands.) If the computer simulating the Universe did not switch to the more precise simulation of the planet's atmosphere in time for the scientists to only see spectrographs of the planet's atmosphere rendered with precise calculations, then if the scientists later developed a more powerful telescope, like the one described earlier, and then pointed it at the planet, either they would see poorly-rendered clouds and know that the Universe is simulated by a computer that skimps on the fluid dynamics calculations for the atmospheres of certain planets, or the measurements from transit spectrographs would suddenly change, so the scientists would know that something weird was going on—although probably not exactly what. This is important because it is more feasible for a society to develop low-resolution transit spectrographs quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard than it would be for a society to develop the technology required for a telescope advanced enough to look at the clouds of a planet in another solar system with high enough resolution to determine whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard. However, either could conceivably catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard because it would be difficult for a computer to deduce whether a planet has life and how technologically advanced the life of any planet that has life is when the only raw data for the computer to work with are the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons.

* If atmospheric physics suddenly changed upon the evolution of a species capable of distinguishing whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer program that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations, that would likely cause sudden changes in the climate, and the resulting heat waves, droughts, freezes, famines, floods, storms, and/or other (formerly) extreme weather would likely drive that species extinct (considering that it had just evolved, so it would have a small population and therefore be especially susceptible to natural disasters) because it would not have evolved to survive in such conditions. Such disasters and climate changes) would not have to directly kill all members of the species in order to drive it extinct; they could instead diminish the size of the gene pool by killing most of the members or divide the once-larger population into smaller, genetically isolated populations (e.g., by causing the creation of uncrossably swollen rivers dividing what used to be a single genetically-interconnected range into several smaller populations), either of which would cause an unsustainable level of inbreeding that would eventually lead to extinction. However, our species was not driven extinct shortly after it first developed.{{Citation needed}}
{{cob}}

Of course, most people do not think that the Universe is a simulation, but society does not know that it isn't a simulation with absolute certainty. There is a direct relationship between the question of the {{w|simulation hypothesis}} in {{w|metaphysics}} and {{w|Pascal's wager}} in {{w|theism}}, ''i.e.,'' whether God(s) exist(s), with weighty implications regarding {{w|free will}} and {{w|determinism}}, such as which raise the question of {{w|Compatibilism#Non-naturalism|non-naturalist compatibilism}}.

Megan proposes an additional theory that the universe is intended to make cool swirly clouds, and that the presence of life to observe these clouds is a bothersome coincidence. This goes against the theory that the Universe must not care about making cool swirly clouds since it wants to skimp on their fluid dynamics calculations. Even among followers of the simulation hypothesis, ascribing sentiment, emotion, or motivations to the entire universe is usually considered to be in jest, because of the dissimilarities between sentient beings and cosmologically distant sets of galaxies.{{citation needed}} This jest forms the basis of the comic's humor. Neither ascribing motivations to the Universe nor positing the purpose of a constructed simulation of our reality are {{w|falsifiable}} hypotheses subject to scientific inquiry, although they may imply logical and mathematical inferences.

The title text includes a dialogue with one person asking another why they got into fluid dynamics. The answer implies that the motivation was to simulate the clouds of planetary atmospheres unreachable by today's rocket technology.

==Transcript==

:[Cueball and Megan standing on a field, looking out at a landscape of clouds]
:Cueball: It's weird to think there are countless planets with air and stuff but no life.
:Cueball: Billions of years of clouds making cool shapes with no one to look at them.

:[Just Cueball and Megan standing next to each other]
:Megan: Yeah, it seems like a waste. The universe getting the complex fluid dynamics right for every momentary swirl of cloud.
:Megan: Just a ''huge'' amount of work.

:[Cueball and Megan walk away to the right]
:Cueball: Maybe atmospheres have smooth laminar flow until someone looks closely.
:Megan: Or maybe the universe just ''likes'' making swirly clouds, and is annoyed that we're watching.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

1027: Pickup Artist

2023-05-15T08:24:25Z

172.70.162.171: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1027
| date = March 9, 2012
| title = Pickup Artist
| image = pickup_artist.png
| titletext = Son, don't try to play 'make you feel bad' with the Michael Jordan of making you feel bad.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Hairy]] and [[Cueball]] are sitting at a table with drinks. Hairy tells Cueball that he's learned some {{w|pickup artist}} tricks. Cueball is appalled, declaring that pickup artists are "dehumanizing creeps". Hairy argues that he's simply learning new tactics such as "[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=negging negging]" (undercutting the target's self-esteem so that she'll feel vulnerable and crave approval), evidently oblivious to the fact that he's proving Cueball's point. Rejecting Cueball's advice to simply talk to women "like a fucking human being", Hairy sets off to try out the technique.

Meanwhile, [[Black Hat]] and [[Danish]] are sitting at another table. Black Hat leaves to roll a bowling ball through the restroom stalls to smash the feet of anyone there using them. In North America, public restrooms usually have a 1-foot (30 cm) gap between the floor and the bottom of the stall dividers. As people sit down to use a stall most of the time, their feet would be vulnerable to being hit in sequence. Perhaps Black Hat is going for a 'strike'. Hairy approaches Danish, while Cueball looks on and says "oh no" — seemingly recognizing Danish and anticipating the disaster Hairy is walking into, or perhaps simply not wanting Hairy to use his tricks on anyone.

Hairy makes an attempt at "negging" by suggesting that Danish's fruit plate reflects a need to lose weight. Danish, naturally being a master at psychological manipulation, immediately realizes his game, and crushes him utterly by taking [[440: Road Rage|another shot in the psychological dark]] — telling him that he's trapped in an endless cycle of failure because he's ultimately a mediocre person and will never do anything of value with his life. Demoralized, Hairy declares that he needs to go home and think about his life; Danish tells him, "It won't help.” (This may be a reference to the "deathsticks" scene in ''{{w|Star Wars: Attack of the Clones}}''.) Of course, once Black Hat discovers his shenanigans, Hairy might not have much more life to rethink.

The title text refers to {{w|Michael Jordan}}, a very popular and accomplished {{w|basketball}} player who played for the {{w|Chicago Bulls}} and the {{w|Washington Wizards}}. His name is often used as a noun to denote that someone is the best in their field, which is later used in [[1120: Blurring the Line]].

The pick up subject and Hairy returned in [[1178: Pickup Artists]], where he tries to improve his skills (which he must have felt he needed after this experience), by hanging out with other pickup artists, thus the plural version of the comic title. This comic is one of a small set of comics with the same or almost the same title as another comic (only plural form of artist the difference).

==Transcript==
:[Hairy and Cueball sitting at a table.]
:Hairy: I've been learning tricks from pickup artist forums.
:Cueball: Pickup artists are dehumanizing creeps who see relationships as adversarial and women as sex toys.

:[Close-up of Hairy's head, with a faint outline of Black hat and Danish sitting at a table in the background.]
:Hairy: No, it's just a bunch of tips! Like ''negging'': you belittle chicks to undermine their self-confidence so they'll be more vulnerable and seek your approval.

:[Close-up of Cueball's head.]
:Cueball: Just talk to them like a fucking human being.
:Hairy: Nah, that's a sucker's game.
:Hairy: Ok— wish me luck!

:[Small frame across top of panel reads ''Meanwhile...'' and Danish is sitting at a table with Black hat standing next to the table holding a bowling ball under his arm.]
:Black Hat: I'm going to the bathroom to roll a bowling ball down under the line of stalls.
:Danish: Cool.

:[Close up of Cueball's head, with Hairy approaching Danish's table in the background.]
:Cueball: Oh no.

:[Hairy and Danish at a table. Hairy is standing up and leaning on the table.]
:Hairy: You look like you're on a diet. That's great!
:Hairy: How's the fruit plate?

:[Close-up of Danish's head.]
:Danish: Ooh- are we negging?
:Danish: Let me try!

:[Close-up of Danish's head, with her hand raised.]
:Danish: You look like you're going to spend your life having one epiphany after another, always thinking you've finally figured out what's holding you back, and how you can finally be productive and creative and turn your life around.
:Danish: But nothing will ever change. That cycle of mediocrity isn't due to some obstacle. It's who you ''are''.
:Danish: The thing standing in the way of your dreams
:Danish: is that the person having them is ''you''.

:[Hairy and Danish at a table. Hairy is standing up.]
:Danish: Ok, your turn! Ooh, try insulting my hair!
:Hairy: I think I need to go home and think about my life.
:Danish: It won't help.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Pickup Artist01]]

2343: Mathematical Symbol Fight

2023-05-11T03:53:35Z

172.70.162.171: /* Table of symbols */ !logicalNOT

{{comic
| number = 2343
| date = August 7, 2020
| title = Mathematical Symbol Fight
| image = mathematical_symbol_fight.png
| titletext = Oh no, a musician just burst in through the door confidently twirling a treble clef.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic imagines which {{w|List of mathematical symbols|mathematical symbols}} would be good in a fight if they were made corporeal in two (or three) dimensions.

Generally, objects with longer reach and pointier ends wound up on the right ("more useful") side of the scale, and symbols with less reach and more curves wound towards the left ("less useful") side. A straight line is farthest to the "more dangerous" side; however, the straight line does not appear to be any thicker or thinner, or pointier, than any of the other lines that would make it more "useful" (It should be noted that this chart seems to fall afoul of what {{w|Eliezer Yudkowsky}} (who also wrote HPMoR) calls the ''intent to kill'': that humans tend to define "winning a fight" and "useful" as causing some form of bodily harm on their opponent despite survival and purely defensive strategies being an equally valid goals.).

Below the chart, with the symbols listed in order of usefulness, eight characters wield eight of the symbols. See the [[#Table of symbols|table]] below for the meaning of each symbol.

The comic invokes {{w|Surreal humour|surreal humor}} by suggesting that mathematical symbols could be handled as physical objects in the real world. Another component of the humor is the implication that it is useful to prepare to use mathematical symbols in a fight, even though mathematicians, who use mathematical symbols, usually do not conduct their debates violently (though some stories suggest that {{w|Hippasus}} was killed by his fellow Pythagoreans for his proof that irrational numbers exist), and even if they did, they wouldn't use large reproductions of their symbols as weapons.

The title text refers to a {{w|Treble clef}}, which is not a mathematical symbol but rather a {{w|List of musical symbols|musical symbol}}. The note of concern in the text suggests musical symbols may be viewed in such fights as exotic or especially dangerous. See also the last entry in the table below.

==Table of symbols==
{| class="wikitable"
! Symbol
! Meaning
! Notes on using in a fight
|-
| ℝ
|The set of [[wikipedia:real number|real number]]s
|[[Megan]] seems to be struggling with a giant version of this symbol because of its weight. A very strong person might find it slightly more useful as a bludgeon.
|-
| θ
|[[wikipedia:Theta#Mathematics_and_science|Theta]]
|This symbol is not very sharp, and [[White Hat]] is unable to use it in combat. It would not work as a good shield due to the hole in the symbol, but it possibly could be thrown. (The later version of Xena's chakram had a bar in the middle.)
|-
| ∅
|[[wikipedia:Empty set|Empty set]]
|Similarly shaped to theta, but identified as being slightly more useful, presumably because the parts of the bar that extend beyond the circle can be used as thrusting weapons. Alternatively, the round nature of the symbol makes it easier to handle for defense, by holding on to the line and using the edge of the circular part to block.
|-
| ∞
|infinity
|Could be gripped between the rings and used as a blunt instrument.
|-
| >
|Greater than
|Could be used to thrust with the point, but lacks a grip by which to do so. If held by one leg, the angle and balance is wrong to use it as a pick. Could also be used as a [[wikipedia:Boomerang|boomerang]].
|-
| ∝
|[[wikipedia:Proportionality_(mathematics)#Direct_proportionality|Direct Proportionality]] (not to be confused with lowercase {{w|Alpha#Mathematics and science|alpha}})
|Could be brandished by the ring and used to thrust with the prongs, but the two prongs extending at 90-degree angles make thrusting motions awkward.
|-
| ∪
|{{w|union (set theory)}}
|Could be used as a boomerang, which is {{tvtropes|PrecisionGuidedBoomerang|notoriously less practical in real life than in fiction}}
|-
| ∈/ϵ
|{{w|Element (mathematics)|member of}} (set theory) or the "lunate" lowercase {{w|Epsilon#Symbol|epsilon}}
|[[Cueball]] is holding this in the manner of a Klingon "{{w|Bat'leth}}" from the ''Star Trek'' franchise. The Bat'leth is [https://youtu.be/VsElSDXPgSA infamous] among swordfighters for being rather impractical, and that the Klingon warrior race would have been better suited using swords like humans. It seems Randall agrees, as the ∈ is quite far on the left of the chart.
|-
| π
|[[wikipedia:Pi|pi]]
|Could be used as a hammer, but the two handles would make doing so impractical.
|-
| ∀
|"{{w|Universal quantification|for all}}"
|Could be held by the crossbar clenched in a fist, and then used as a {{w|push dagger}}, with the legs acting as a guard. Or could be held by the legs.
Compared to the similar Δ (delta) the point is sharper, the grip is closer to the point so it would be easier to control (keep the weapon from twisting). It is unclear why it is listed as much less effective than the delta. Perhaps the guard legs are too long?
|-
| ∂
|{{w|∂}} ([[wikipedia:Partial derivative|partial derivative]] or [[wikipedia:Boundary_(topology)|boundary operator]])
|It's not clear why Randall ranks this symbol as so much less effective than the similarly-shaped 𝜌, but the curl in the "tail" of the ∂ would give it a shorter lever arm when swung and would disrupt the balance.
|-
| +
|[[wikipedia:Plus_and_minus_signs#Plus_sign|Plus]]
|Maybe thrown like a {{w|shuriken}}? It could also be used like [[wikipedia:Kylo Ren|Kylo Ren]]'s lightsaber.
|-
| Ψ
|[[wikipedia:Psi#Mathematics|Psi]]
|It could be used as a slightly-less-functional trident or pitchfork, with a shorter handle. More particularly, it resembles a {{w|Sai (weapon)|sai}} (which, funnily enough, is how "Psi" is pronounced).
|-
| ≠
|not equal sign
|Could be gripped by the crossbar, using the lengths to puncture. Notably, the equal sign (=) is absent from the chart, likely because the lengths are separate and would not be used as a single entity.
|-
| ~
|[[wikipedia:Tilde#Mathematics|tilde]], meaning "approximately", equivalent, or several transforms of a function. Also used as {{w|https://Negation#Notation|negation in mathematical logic}} and, in various programming languages, to symbolize {{w|Bitwise operation#NOT|bitwise NOT}} (amongst {{w|https://Tilde#Computer languages|many, ''many'' other possible uses...}}).
|A potentially dangerous throwing weapon. Could also be similar to a wavy bladed dagger ({{w|Kris}}) or a sword ({{w|Flame-bladed sword}}).
|-
| #
|[[wikipedia:Cardinality|Cardinality]], [[wikipedia:Connected_sum|connected sum]] (knot theory), or [[wikipedia:Primorial|primorial]].
|[[Blondie]] uses this symbol, gripping it by two of the prongs on one side. The other three prongs could thus be swung at opponents, but being sharp on all sides would pose a threat to the user as well as the opponent.
|-
| Δ
|[[wikipedia:Delta_(letter)|Delta]]
|Could be held with one bar clenched in a fist, and then used as a {{w|push dagger}}. It is unclear why listed as much more effective than ∀. Also, delta could be thrown like a star.
|-
| ⇒
|[[wikipedia:Material_conditional|Material consequence]] or [[wikipedia:Logical_consequence|Logical consequence]], meaning "implies"
|The point is nice, but having two poles (or one board-like thick handle, if the shape is drawn "closed" at the back) would be difficult to wield. A collection of them might make a nice defensive pike line.
|-
| ⋅
|decimal point (or multiplication sign)
|Functionally a ball, and could therefore be thrown as a projectile weapon, or scattered on the ground as a trip hazard.
|-
| ζ
|{{w|Zeta#Mathematics_and_science|Zeta}}
|Could be sharpened into a scythe or curved saber, depending on the curvature and length of the 'tail' at the bottom.
|-
| ℵ
|[[wikipedia:Aleph_number|Aleph number]]
|The irregular shape of the symbol leads to edges and points on all sides; thus it could be brandished or thrown in the manner of a shuriken.
|-
| Γ
|uppercase Greek letter {{w|Gamma#Uppercase|Gamma}}
|If this letter is formed with {{w|serif}}s, it could be used as an axe or hook, and if it is made {{w|sans-serif}}, it would make a powerful pick or war hammer.
|-
| √
|{{w|Radical symbol}}
|Randall has drawn this sign with a long overbar, which makes it useful like a {{w|Pole weapon|pole arm}}. [[Black Hat]] has chosen this symbol in his fight against [[Hairy]].
|-
| ''ρ''
|{{w|Prime_constant|italic rho}}
|[[Ponytail]] is brandishing this symbol against [[Danish]], apparently using it like a club or hammer and striking with the curve.
|-
| ∮
|{{w|contour integral}}
|This symbol is drawn with a very tight center, giving it an almost identical figure to the regular integral symbol. Presumably, the added bulk for marginal additional use earns it a rating of 'less effective'.
|-
| ∫
|{{w|integral}}
|Could be used in the manner of a shepherd's crook, or as a {{w|Bill (weapon)|billhook}}. Could be used as a {{w|spear thrower}}, combined with ⋅ or ⇀.
|-
| →
|Implies; X→Y means that if X is true, then Y is also true
|[[Danish]] is brandishing this symbol against Ponytail, apparently using it like a spear.
|-
| ⊥
|{{w|up tack}} or falsum, indicating a false proposition in logic, perpendicular lines in geometry, or the bottom element in a partial order
|Used as a {{w|war hammer}} (held by the long stem), the opponent would be struck with either leg of the top of the T. Held by the short legs (like a wishbone), could be used as a two handed sword.
(If tipped with a knapped stone head, it could become a {{w|Folsom point|falsum point}}.)
|-
| ⇀
|{{w|Vector notation}}
|Could be used as a single-barbed spear or, if held by the other end, similarly to a sabre. The multi-functionality is probably why it is listed as more useful than the 'implies' arrow.
|-
| ––
|{{w|Fraction#Vocabulary|Fraction bar}} (division) or {{w|Overline#Math_and_science|overline}} (complex conjugate or mean) or {{w|Plus and minus signs#Minus sign|minus sign}}.
|[[Hairy]] is brandishing this symbol against Black Hat. The single shaft would allow it to be used in the manner of a {{w|quarterstaff}}, {{w|bō}}, or other {{w|stick-fighting}} weapon. Of the symbols shown in the comic, Randall considers this one the most useful in a fight, presumably because of its greater reach than the vector arrow and its simplicity compared to the radix root symbol. Alternatively, could be handled like a pike, with a reach greater than that of an implication or vector arrow.
|-
| 𝄞
|{{w|Treble clef}} (title text)
|Mentioned in the title text; this is not a mathematical symbol, but a musical symbol. The treble clef is a much more complicated symbol than those used in mathematics, hence the musician's "confidence" in his weapon. The curve at the bottom could be used as a hook, the upper curl could be used as a blunt weapon, and the tight curl of the center would serve as a better defensive shield than theta.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A chart is shown with 30 different symbols arranged above a line with arrows in both ends and with 17 ticks between the arrow heads. The symbols are mostly in two rows, but the first two symbols from the left do not have another symbol above them, and towards the right there are a segment with three rows of symbols. Above the symbols there is a heading and a subheading. And beneath those there is a long arrow pointing right with a label above it.]
:<big>Mathematical Symbols</big>
:By how useful they would be in a fight
:More useful
: ℝ ∅ > ∝ π + Ψ ~ ⇒ ⋅ Γ √ ∮ ∫ ⇀
: θ ∞ ∪ ∈ ∀ ∂ ≠ # Δ ζ ℵ ''ρ'' → ⊥ ––

:[Below the double arrow line are eight characters that fight each other in groups of two by using some of the symbols shown above them as weapons. They have chosen symbols that are almost above them in the chart.]
:[Megan is awkwardly handling a giant "ℝ" holding it up against White Hat who is holding a "θ" (or "∅"?) with both hands, as a shield.]
:[Cueball is holding an "∈" in both hands, with its "tines" pointed towards Blondie, who is swatting at him with a "#".]
:[Ponytail is leaping at Danish, swinging a "''ρ''" like an axe, while Danish is leaning back and thrusting a "→" back at her.]
:[Black Hat is swinging a long "√" like a polearm at Hairy, who is holding a long "⎯" defensively.]

==Trivia==
*Here is a list of symbols from left to right (by rightmost edge):
** ℝ θ ∅ ∞ > ∪ ∝ ∈ ∀ π ∂ + ≠ Ψ # ~ △ ζ ⇒ ⋅ ℵ Γ ''ρ'' √ → ∮ ∫ ⊥ ⇀ ––
**Note: Where two symbols had similar right-most edges, the overlay grid on an ASUS pro-art display was used to decide which one went further right.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Rankings]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Music]]

Talk:1513: Code Quality

2023-04-24T08:29:51Z

172.70.162.171:

On the bright side, I now have a new array of phrases to keep me sane while doing code reviews... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162|108.162.249.162]] 05:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I think the emojis were referring to swift where you can use emojis as variables.{{unsigned ip|108.162.250.168|05:53, 17 April 2015‎}}

Could we get a link for the Apple language? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162|108.162.249.162]] 06:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

This is going on our OneNote at work. It totally made my day [[User:Jdluk|Jdluk]] ([[User talk:Jdluk|talk]]) 08:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Yet another reason I'm glad I'm not a coder anymore (went back to hardware design . . . with NO style guidelines ;^){{unsigned ip|173.245.56.182}}

The description reads as if camelCase is part of every style. There are styles containing camelCase, but not all of them do. Also, different styles contain different rules, so following one specific style guide will be in conflict with others, therefore it's not necessary good idea: unless you program in team which agreed upon which style to use, it may be better if you don't worry to much to follow style exactly. On the other hand, if Ponytail's similes are accurate, Cueball is likely to discover lot of basic rules which will make the program easier to read even for him.

For example, there are lot of styles for {{w|Indent_style|Indenting}} alone, but most readability comes from the basic idea to indent code according to block it belongs to. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Out of curiosity I tried using 😭 as a variable name in Common Lisp. It works in SBCL, but fails in CLISP. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.112|108.162.221.112]] 12:19, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I really wish I knew anything about coding so I could contribute, but my 8th grade HTML class didn't help me that much. [[User:YourLifeisaLie|The Goyim speaks]] ([[User talk:YourLifeisaLie|talk]]) 12:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
:The cruel person might point out that HTML isn't even 'coding'. (It's markup, for the most part, unless you're dabbling in DHTML or some of the latest bastardisations that have crept into HTML5.) But you will of course know the bit where you get "Hang on, why is that table element on the wrong line/off the end of the line/short of the end/outside the table, even?" and how it makes it easier to use a new-line and indentation scheme at appropriate places (and a logical policy of which lines ''not'' to split) so that errors like unaccounted-for COLSPANs and bad tag-pairing can be tracked down easily.
:So it is with code. Liken it to obfuscation of HTML formatting (including using non-sensical, albeit consistent in themselves, id and name tags for the CSS to hang off of) can be employed deliberately (to prevent easy human readability/backformation) or incidentally (because it's created by a server-side/CMS generating script that hasn't been told to try to add useful whitespace). Moreso when it comes to <script> insertions (often deliberately obfuscated to single-letter variables, minimal whitespace and no line-feeds, perhaps in an misplaced attempt to enact 'security through obscurity', but of course that then ''is'' code. Arguably.
:One of the aims could be to reduce the size of the 'code' (even when that's Markup), which is laudible given how much over-padded stuff you can get (I don't know if Microsoft Word's "Save as HTML"/whatever is currently as bad as it was in the early days, but even a web-page with just "Hello World" was chockablock full of formatting information that it never even bothered to ask if were necessary), but unless you absolutely do not need (or do not want!) people to read the code, both people and auto-generation scripts should attempt to impart visual elegance. IMO! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.192|141.101.98.192]] 16:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Does the second paragraph of the explanation, beginning "A common technique," add anything to explain the comic? I don't see it, but then I am from the era of COBOL. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 19:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
:I would propose a rewrite to something along the lines of "A common pattern in self-taught programmers...". As for the need of the paragraph, I feel it helps to explain where some programmers with bad (or a total lack of) employed standards come from. It's the kind of programmers that are used to copy and paste code examples and edit them until it does what they want, unknowingly introducing a horrible level of disparity to the code as well as disregarding any sensible coding standards and design patterns. I can speak from experience that such behavior exists, but that most such people either drop programming quickly or learn to adapt proper standards over time. I'm glad to say I'm in the latter group. — Erim Secla [[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.67|141.101.79.67]] 08:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

How do we know that Agile and SaaS are relevant to this? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.84|173.245.50.84]] 17:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
: It has no relation, and futhermore whoever added software-as-a-service probably think it means something else than what it does [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 19:30, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
::It may even have been spam or a self promotion link. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 19:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
;Emoji
IMHO the discussion on emoji is a bit off. Emoji are specifically the graphical representations (😢), not text-based smileys (T_T). And the sentences about language support use double negatives which is very confusing, and should probably mention that Javascript doesn't appear to allow it. (In my testing anyway.) [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 14:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
:I agree. {{w|Emoticons}} and {{w|Emoji}} are two different things.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 14:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
::Can we distinguish between graphical emoji and character-based unicode emoji? The difference being that one is swapped in to normal text via some form of markup code (client-side or server-side, either when it thinks it has an explicit emoticon/etc string like ":)" or encounters a coded statement like ":lol:") while the other one is there already with no extra image bytes necessary. Except for perhaps font-file downloading, of course.
::I assume the above (😢) is the latter, although that's an unrenderable character for me, as with most examples given on this page, and I assume I need some fancy new font installed to see it on any of the browsers I've tried it with. However, I ''do'' have ☺ and ☻ available to me. So I can at least emote in the manner of Dwarf Fortress (which, ironically, uses images ''of'' the original characters). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.69|141.101.99.69]] 17:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Ew non-Emoji code. This is the 21st century, get updated: https://github.com/emj-lang Natural languages ftw! No more this_is_a_variable_that_contains_the_number_of_xkcds_ever_posted! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.246|108.162.210.246]] 21:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

On a tangential note, I once tried to install a decompiler into IntelliJ by copying and pasting a folder (not realizing it was the same decompiler IntelliJ already shipped with) and run it on Minecraft. It named all the variables and functions ☃. [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 22:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Added info on code quality 3 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.215|141.101.104.215]] 03:43, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I think that this series has to do with 1790: Sad. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.70}}

hexascii.com is dead ( maybe from plagiarism complain by Get Kaomoji https://getkaomoji.com/best-of-japanese-emoticons/ ) {{unsigned ip|162.158.179.40}}

seems a bit like chatgpt sometimes [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.171|172.70.162.171]]

2762: Diffraction Spikes

2023-04-14T08:09:54Z

172.70.162.171: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2762
| date = April 12, 2023
| title = Diffraction Spikes
| image = diffraction_spikes_2x.png
| imagesize = 324x370px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Even if a planet is lucky enough to have a stable orbit that weaves between the spikes, the seasons get weird whenever it passes close to them.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a LENTICULAR ABOMINATION - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

{{w|Diffraction spike|Diffraction spikes}} are visual artifacts that appear to extend from light sources, mostly when viewed through a reflector telescope. In telescopes, they are often caused by the support struts of the secondary mirror in the telescope. They've become especially well known lately because they're quite prominent in images from the {{w|James Webb Space Telescope}}; its bigger spikes are due to the [https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/diffraction-spikes-jwst/ edges of the hexagonal mirror sections], not the struts.

The comic feigns that these artifacts are real (from the planet's perspective) spikes extending from all stars, presumably excluding the Sun (but see {{w|Asteroid belt}}). The spikes have sufficient energy and coherence to slice planets that intersect them, rather than merely bludgeon or vaporize them. Additionally, they appear to nullify gravity - preventing the halves from recombining and allowing them to maintain their shape. Per the title text, the spikes also produce sufficient light and heat to disrupt seasonal (and perhaps even diurnal) patterns on planets that come close enough to them.

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

:[SHORT VERSION : The comic is a photo of a star, with the diffraction spikes that usually happen when taking pictures with telescopes. An exoplanet orbits that star, and its trajectory crosses one of the spikes. At the intersection point, the onomatopoeia "SLICE" is written, and the trajectory splits in two. Not far after, two half-planets continue their course.]

:[Caption below panel:]
:Bad news for exoplanets: it turns out those diffraction spikes are real.

:[LONG VERSION : On a black square background, there is a white circle, representing a star, with a diameter one-fourth the length of the background perimeter. Its center is approximately one radius left of the center of the square. Six solid white lines intersect the center of the circle, and extend into the background. Those portions of the lines that are in the background are drawn as narrow triangles; the portions within the circle (white on white) are invisible. The lines represent the rays of a diffraction pattern. The "star" drawing is bilaterally symmetrical along any of the six lines. The longest line, with the length of each ray equal to the diameter of the circle, is oriented at approximately 15/195 degrees from the vertical (left and right boundaries of the background). The second, very short, is at approximately 20 degrees. The third, fourth, and fifth, with the emergent parts approximately one radius long (the fourth slightly longer) are oriented at about 35, 50, and 80 degrees respectively. The sixth, short like the second, is at approximately 95 degrees.]

:[Near the apex of the longest line (diffraction pattern ray) at 15 degrees, there is a dashed white line, curved as if part of the circumference of a circle with radius three times that of the "star" circle, and describing approximately twenty degrees of arc. This line represents the orbit of an exoplanet circling the star. At its intersection with the diffraction pattern ray, indicated by a small white circle, the dashed line bifurcates. At the rightmost ends of the dashed lines, there are two circles, one light gray with an irregular, darker gray pattern at the center, the other white. These represent a planet that has been sliced into two equal portions by the diffraction ray. A few white specks surrounding the circles represent debris from the cutting. The word SLICE is written in white capital letters immediately to the right of the point of intersection.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Photography]]
[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]

2759: Easily Confused Acronyms

2023-04-06T15:50:13Z

172.70.162.171: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2759
| date = April 5, 2023
| title = Easily Confused Acronyms
| image = easily_confused_acronyms_2x.png
| imagesize = 557x444px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = 'Lever' was originally an acronym for Load Emplification by the Vimulated Emission of Radiation.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a RIGHT OMPLIFICATION BY THE BIMULATED OMISSION OF TADIATION - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, [[Randall]] compared the Acronym "Laser" with various other five-letter acronyms. He first explained the "Laser" and "Maser" correctly, but the following three are simply the full name of "Laser" with the first word and initials changed. The replacement first word is correct for these acronyms, but the other words formed from changing the first letter are nonsense.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
!Acronym !! Comic !! Actual
|-
| {{w|LASER}} || Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation || Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation
|-
| {{w|MASER}} || Microwave Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation || Microwave Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation
|-
| {{w|SONAR}} || Sound Omplification by the Nimulated Amission of Radiation || SOnic Navigation And Ranging
|-
| {{w|RADAR}} || Radio Amplification by the Dimulated Amission of Radiation || RAdio Detection And Ranging
|-
| {{w|LIDAR}} || Light Implification by the Dimulated Amission of Radiation || LIght Detection And Ranging
|-
| {{w|lever}} (title text) || |Load Emplification by the Vimulated Emission of Radiation. || ''(not an acronym in common usage)''
|}

Laser and maser are true-to-life acronyms. The remaining 3 words' true meanings are as follows: sonar is short for "sound/sonic navigation and ranging", radar for "radio detection and ranging", lidar for "light detection and ranging". (Note that these 3 each include the second letter from their first word in the acronym.)

The three false definitions simply suppose that all 5 of the acronyms follow the same model and swap out the necessary letters to fit, in a square-peg-round-hole manner.

The title text extends this to the 5-letter word "lever". This is an ordinary word (derived from the French word ''levier'', which share the same definition), not a commonly used acronym. Levers have been used since time immemorial (even [https://quatr.us/physics/levers-simple-machines-physics.htm animals have been known to use them)], and predates high-tech uses of radiation by millennia (it's one of the {{w|simple machines}} that {{w|Archimedes}} studied in Ancient Greece). [https://www.etymonline.com/word/lever#etymonline_v_9445 Etymonline] traces the origin of the word to the year 1300, from the French "levier."

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:Easily-confused acronyms cheat sheet

:Laser

:Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation

:Maser

:Microwave Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation

:Sonar

:Sound Omplification by the Nimulated Emission of Radiation

:Radar

:Radio Amplification by the Dimulated Amission of Radiation

:Lidar

:Light Implification by the Dimulated Amission of Radiation

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Science]]
[[Category: Language]]

Talk:1010: Etymology-Man

2023-03-23T00:35:36Z

172.70.162.171: ...

That water isn't coming in nearly fast enough to be a tidal wave. Probably just a flood. A really fast flood. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

: Maybe Etymology-Man talks really really fast. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.11|108.162.250.11]] 03:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

:: Maybe Etymology-Man also has the power to slow incoming danger by sheer force of knowledge [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.54|108.162.216.54]] 08:57, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

: We need Etymology-Man in this discussion section to describe the term "Flash flood."

;Minor characters

Shouldn't etymology man be in the list of minor characters? [[User:E^ipi|E^ipi]] ([[User talk:E^ipi|talk]]) 12:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

The title text should've wished for King Canute instead :P [[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 15:32, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Another super-power Etymology-Man doesn't bother using to help anyone: he can break the fourth wall and crash dramatically through the panel frame! [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 12:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
:I disagree. That would be indicated by the comic-frame border being 'broken', which is something Randall has done in the past (or the 'paper' broken through in at least one memorable example). This just looks like an off-frame crash (into the space inhabited by the two tsunami victims, out of some structure he maybe did his Clark Kenting in or perhaps just through a wall/fence that was 'in the way').
:Whichever, it was from the direction of the incoming water, and whether his damage of some barrier (albeit the main inpact high above the ground) is useful or just lets the water flow in faster is a question we probably don't want the answer for... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.29|162.158.159.29]] 13:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

If Etymology-Man's powers included "causing listeners to be enthralled by whatever explanation he gives at the expense of their own health and safety", then cueball and ponytail wouldn't be concerned about the rising water in the last panel. {{unsigned|IJustWantToEditStuff|17:06, 22 March 2023}}