explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2366: Amelia's Farm Fresh Cookies

2024-10-07T21:56:00Z

172.70.86.35: Undo revision 352215 by 162.158.155.233 (talk) Seems a valid version, in a contest between 'Amelia' and her grandmother. (From a linguistic POV. As a man, I have no other preference.)

{{comic
| number = 2366
| date = September 30, 2020
| title = Amelia's Farm Fresh Cookies
| image = amelias_farm_fresh_cookies.png
| titletext = I told her I'd take her address off the packaging if she'd stop submitting anonymous food safety complaints about my bakery to the health department, but she sent me a note that said NO DEAL along with an extra large batch of cookies.
}}

==Explanation==
The comic portrays the back side of a box of cookies (evidenced by the {{w|nutrition facts}}-style table on the left side). Many brands have a romanticized {{w|origin story}} on their packaging explaining the name or how they have a secret ingredient. Instead, this brand's origin story is a tale of petty one-upwomanship as the brand's founder sets out to prove that her cookies are better than her grandmother's.

The first paragraph lovingly describes the founder's memories of sitting in her grandmother's kitchen, watching her bake cookies. One would expect this to transition to a description of how delicious those cookies were, and a claim that her recipe became the basis for the cookies being offered for sale. Instead, 'Amelia' insists that her grandmother's cookies were ''awful'', and insists that the goal of her company is to show how cookies are supposed to taste. This subversion of expectations breaks down the sense of nostalgia that's often used to market products, and publicly embarrasses her grandmother, turning a minor family squabble into a very public fight. Such is a very unusual strategy for convincing people to buy cookies.

To complete her revenge, the "story" contains the grandmother's address. Creating false addresses for their mascots is often used as a publicity stunt for children to write testimonials to the brand's PR or marketing department. However, here it appears to be Amelia's actual Grandma's actual address, the goal being for her to receive thousands of letters on a regular basis about how her granddaughter's cookies are so great, while jabbing "unlike yours!"

In retaliation, Amelia's grandmother has started submitting (presumably bogus) food safety complaints about Amelia's bakery to the health department in a ploy to overburden the bakery with unnecessarily frequent inspections. At one point Amelia eventually decided to offer a truce, which her grandmother emphatically rejected, underscoring it by sending Amelia an extra-large batch of the cookies she knows Amelia hates. Alternatively, she may be sending these cookies because she will submit a complaint after Amelia has received the cookies, as these cookies are definitely health code violations.

While the name of the city past the first letter and at least one of the zip code digits is too illegible to read, by process of elimination it is plausible that the city is Orlando and the zip code is 32841. No other location in Florida consists of one word starting with O and a zip code legibly close to the one in the comic. The problem is that the street clearly ends with "Ln" and the street name has neither {{w|Ascender (typography)|ascenders}} nor {{w|Descender (typography)|descenders}} other than the initial capital "A". This might recommend "Anson Ln." but the street ''number'' starts with a 1 while the actual Anson Ln. has numbers all in the 4,000s. Similar problems arise for all of the streets with one or two ascenders/descenders or even with possible omitted letters or even entire words.

==Transcript==
:[What looks like the back of a package of cookies is shown.]

:[Top left: Product logo.]
:'''Amelia's''' Farm-Fresh ''Cookies''
:[Parts of an oval surround the logo]

:[Middle left: What appears to be a standard Nutrition Facts panel, though the details are illegible squiggles]

:[Bottom left: What appears to be an ingredients list, though the details are illegible squiggles, and a few other squiggles]

:[Right side:]
:''Our Story''
:Growing up on my grandma's farm, I spent so many cozy mornings in the kitchen, watching her take trays of fresh-baked cookies from the oven.
:Her cookies were just ''awful''.
:She used the finest ingredients. Eggs straight from the coop, stone-ground flour, hand-churned butter. But she squandered them. It's so sad. She told me I was too picky, but I know what cookies are supposed to taste like.
:When I started a bakery, I vowed not to repeat her mistakes. These cookies won't fall apart in your hands. They have gooey centers, and slightly crisp exteriors, not the other way around, ''Grandma''. There's no mysterious gritty texture. Why would there be?
:If you enjoy these cookies, please write to my grandma to let her know.
:Thanks!
:''Amelia''

:[A partially legible squiggled address appears at the bottom left of the Our Story part of the box. The bracketed dashes represent portions that are illegible.]
:Ms W[——] M[——]
:1[—] A[——] Ln
:O[——], FL 328[–]1

==Trivia==
* The mysterious gritty texture may come from unmixed sugar.
{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Food]]

Talk:2992: UK Coal

2024-10-03T08:44:20Z

172.70.86.35:

nuclear power is better in all aspects anyway [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.105|172.70.90.105]] 19:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
: Not true - the rabbits can't get into the radiation suits.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.62|172.70.85.62]] 14:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Here before the explanation :) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.9|172.71.154.9]] 20:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:Ew. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I made an initial explanation, but it needs a lot of work still; hopefully someone with more experience editing on this wiki can improve it (this is my first explanation) [[User:MathEnthusiast|MathEnthusiast]] ([[User talk:MathEnthusiast|talk]]) 20:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

"the sole rabbit-run coal plant was shut down in the 1990s."
Just checking, but this isn't referencing some particularly egregious, badly managed coal power plant in the U.K., is it? [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 20:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:I don’t think so; I believe it’s simply that Ratcliffe-on-Soar power plant is the last UK coal plant to be shut down.
::The 1990 comment in particular. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.36.171|172.68.36.171]] 15:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Randall uses SI units in the formula, as every person with the tiniest bit of tech/science education would, but then gives the result in inches (3.15) instead of centimeters (8.0). Americans are weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.110.162|162.158.110.162]] 20:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:^^ This! {{unsigned ip|172.70.90.109}}
:Because metric units make more sense for calculating, but common sense units are what people can actually visualize. [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 23:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
::Define "common sense"... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.206|172.70.162.206]] 06:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
:::About 0.3937 centimeters [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you want to]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 04:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

One should not forget that the 3 inches are very unevenly distributed. Some areas on top of coal mines have sunken in much further creating new flooding risks that require continued future interventions.
--[[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.34|172.64.236.34]] 21:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:Indeed, I used to line in the north of England and road signs would say, "Road liable to subsidence." I also wonder about the year 1853. Mining was going on long before that. The industrial revolution started in the mid-eighteenth century.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.22|141.101.98.22]] 07:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
::Presumably, that's just the earliest that UK DESNZ has data for.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.23.209|172.71.23.209]] 18:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand that Watership Down is sometimes categorized as "children's literature", but it always catches me off guard. The Wikipedia page for it calls it an "adventure novel" and it's in the adult fiction section at my library. I'm just wondering if perhaps the explanation here should be a little less specific in its categorization of the book.[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 21:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

From the perspective of someone who lived through the 1980s Miner's Strike (not directly affected, my father worked at a steel-works, not at a pit like my friends' fathers) and then the decline of the steel manufacturing industry (which ''did'' affect my father, obviously), I have rather naturally kept a general eye on the extraction and use of coal. There still are working coal-mines (though there isn't going to be that new one, in Cumbria), and there are still uses for UK coal (enough to import to add to tht which we dig out). It's really a bit early to say that the layer of total coal dug out ''won't'' deepen slightly (very, very slightly) in the future. And coal that is dug is only loosely associated with coal which is turned into electricity, so the last coal-generator stopping seems like an oddly off-topic detail for Randall to leap into the amortised accumulation of extracted volume. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.165|172.68.205.165]] 22:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Full conversion to US Customary Units (AKA US Bullshit Units):

(25e9 Tonnes / (1.3 kg/L * 2.4e5 km^2)) * (1000 kg / 1 Tonne) * (1 km^2 / (1000 m)^2 ) * (1 m^3 / 1000 L) * (39.37 in / 1 m ) ~= 3"

--[[User:JayTeeEll|JayTeeEll]] ([[User talk:JayTeeEll|talk]]) 22:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

He has not added the amount of "flotation" that results from the removal of all that material from the islands. Have the islands risen more than 3 inches in the crust, due to the removal? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 23:37, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:Scotland's still going up (after the last Ice-Age melt) and the south of Britain is still going down, IIRC. Which'll confuse matters. But I don't see how the component contributions to raising level (due to the digging out) could outpace the removal (due to that digging), by any significant amount. Rebound takes a while, and the effects should roughly equal out (so long as we haven't been digging too deep). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.151|172.68.205.151]] 23:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
: He doesn't mention anything about the surface height at all, though. He says that an average 3" has been dug up and burnt, but not that the country is 3" lower as a result.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.204|172.70.86.204]] 13:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Between the diagram and the text (including title-text), it looks as if he is indeed lowering the surface' from what it might have been without the extraction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.35|172.70.86.35]] 16:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I have a nagging feeling that although rabbit-run coal plants aren't (known to be) a thing, there must be Victorian children's books (e.g. Beatrix Potter) in which bunnies use coal scuttles or coal fires. "When Horace Hedgehog arrived, it was tea-time, so Mr Hoppy put some more coal on the fire..." [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 00:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

:Funnily enough, ''Peter Rabbit'', by Beatrix Potter was published in 1901, the same year as Queen Victoria’s passing, which marked the end of the Victorian Era. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
:I felt confident that there was probably a place named Rabbit Run, with a coal-based facility nearby, but all I found was [https://rabbitrun.wales a rather pedestrian footrace].
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

UK DESNZ refers to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, which is a ministerial department of the UK government. So basically that text is citing the source for the data.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.185|172.70.162.185]] 03:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

To help balance this out, should someone import coal into the formerly coal producing areas to fill in the now empty veins, or would that be selling coal to Newcastle? [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 05:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

From the miner's strike onwards, a lot of coal was imported (particularly from (Poland) to run the coal-fired power stations since it was much cheaper, so wasn't dug out the ground in the UK. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.105|172.70.90.105]] 07:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The formula doesn't take into account that the UK has ...changed land area over that period. Land area of the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Ireland) was 315000 km² until 1922.
This changes the reading in SI units from 8 cm to 7 cm, but the rounded value in inches is unchanged, 3 in. Which explains why you call those units of his glorious majesty Imperial, I guess. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.180|172.71.172.180]] 08:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
: I checked the source and it doesn't say wether production data for 1853-1922 is for the CURRENT territory of UK or includes production in the territory now belonging to Eire. Maybe we should inquire. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.89|162.158.111.89]] 11:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't like the punctuation spatter in "The UK shut down their last coal power plant today, which means that over the course of the industrial revolution, they dug up and burned an average of 3 inches of their country." And the place I'd put a new comma might confuse others' sensibilities. Perhaps "..., which means that (over the ... revolution) they dug ...". Or just get rid of the one after revolution and accept a rather long run-on clause. Not that it's changable here, being Transcript of what's there but it's strangely off in grammatical meter and span from how I would try to say/write the same words. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.101|172.70.85.101]] 10:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I feel like I missed the joke somewhere with this: "The volume of earth described, 0.1 nm × 240,000 km2, is equal to 24 m3. This is a humorous play on depictions of anthropomorphic rabbits in children's literature." Are these two separate statements that happened to be placed in a misleading way, or is something funny about 24 cubic meters having to do with anthropomorphic rabbits? {{unsigned ip|162.158.111.237}}

i hear that stoats are getting into nuclear now, tho. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.215|172.69.58.215]] 20:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
:Reminds me of [https://www.ferret-school.co.uk/working-ferrets/cable-laying ferrets], and the "Nuclear Ferret" section in particular. (Yes, "microscopic steel particles called mesons" makes me glad they seem far more expert in muscalid matters than with physics. And web-page design.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.206|172.70.162.206]] 06:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

finally made my own account, can someone help create my user and talk pages??? [[User:CalibansCreations|CalibansCreations]] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 10:22, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

;(Inexplicably was in Community Portal/Miscelaneous) I'm getting a factor of 10 difference in the calculation

in today's comic (#2992 (September 30, 2024)

We see the depth of the UK coal industry. The calculation is presented as

25 Billion Tonnes
------------------------- ~= 3 inches.
1.3Kg/L x 240,000 Km^2

I reduced the units and got:

CoalProduction_Tonne = 25e9;

CoalProduction_Kg = CoalProduction_Tonne * 1000; % 1000Kg/tonne

VolumePerLiter_MCubed = .001; % cubic meters

AreaOfUk_KmSquared = 24e3; % Km^2

AreaOfUk_MSquared = AreaOfUk_KmSquared * 1e6; % 1e6m^2 in 1Km^2

DepthOfCoal_M = CoalProduction_Kg/(1.3/VolumePerLiter_MCubed * AreaOfUk_MSquared);

DepthOfCoal_mm = 1000 * DepthOfCoal_M

DepthOfCoal_mm = 801.28,approx. 32 inches.

Where is this wrong? {{unsigned ip|172.71.23.209|20:52, 1 October 2024}}

:The original comic (#[[2992]]) sets the UK land area as 240,000 km^2, which is equal to 24 * 10^4 km^2 (or 2.4 * 10^5 km^2, or 240 * 10^3 km^2, or 2.4 * 10^5 * (10^3)^2 m^2 = 2.4 * 10^11 m^2), exactly one order of magnitude different from your numbers. I ran my own calculations (before really looking deeply at yours) and got 3.2 inches (rounded off to two sig figs). [[User:Coolclawcat|Coolclawcat]] ([[User talk:Coolclawcat|talk]]) 00:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
::In other words:
AreaOfUk_KmSquared = 240e3; % Km^2
[[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 02:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

That was it: DepthOfCoal_in = 3.1547 {{unsigned ip|172.71.31.55|13:07, 2 October 2024}}

As a Brit, I just want to say: wooohoooo!! Finally! As an environmentalist, I'll also add: Sorry about all the anti-nuclear power stuff. Many of my predecessors got it very badly wrong. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.35|172.70.86.35]] 08:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2992: UK Coal

2024-10-01T16:49:20Z

172.70.86.35:

nuclear power is better in all aspects anyway [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.105|172.70.90.105]] 19:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
: Not true - the rabbits can't get into the radiation suits.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.62|172.70.85.62]] 14:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Here before the explanation :) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.9|172.71.154.9]] 20:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I made an initial explanation, but it needs a lot of work still; hopefully someone with more experience editing on this wiki can improve it (this is my first explanation) [[User:MathEnthusiast|MathEnthusiast]] ([[User talk:MathEnthusiast|talk]]) 20:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

the sole rabbit-run coal plant was shut down in the 1990s.
Just checking, but this isn't referencing some particularly egregious, badly managed coal power plant in the U.K., is it? [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 20:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:I don’t think so; I believe it’s simply that Ratcliffe-on-Soar power plant is the last UK coal plant to be shut down.
::The 1990 comment in particular. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.36.171|172.68.36.171]] 15:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Randal uses SI units in the formula, as every person with the tiniest bit of tech/science education would, but then gives the result in inches (3.15) instead of centimeters (8.0). Americans are weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.110.162|162.158.110.162]] 20:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:^^ This! {{unsigned ip|172.70.90.109}}

One should not forget that the 3 inches are very unevenly distributed. Some areas on top of coal mines have sunken in much further creating new flooding risks that require continued future interventions.
--[[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.34|172.64.236.34]] 21:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:Indeed, I used to line in the north of England and road signs would say, "Road liable to subsidence." I also wonder about the year 1853. Mining was going on long before that. The industrial revolution started in the mid-eighteenth century.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.22|141.101.98.22]] 07:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand that Watership Down is sometimes categorized as "children's literature", but it always catches me off guard. The Wikipedia page for it calls it an "adventure novel" and it's in the adult fiction section at my library. I'm just wondering if perhaps the explanation here should be a little less specific in its categorization of the book.[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 21:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

From the perspective of someone who lived through the 1980s Miner's Strike (not directly affected, my father worked at a steel-works, not at a pit like my friends' fathers) and then the decline of the steel manufacturing industry (which ''did'' affect my father, obviously), I have rather naturally kept a general eye on the extraction and use of coal. There still are working coal-mines (though there isn't going to be that new one, in Cumbria), and there are still uses for UK coal (enough to import to add to tht which we dig out). It's really a bit early to say that the layer of total coal dug out ''won't'' deepen slightly (very, very slightly) in the future. And coal that is dug is only loosely associated with coal which is turned into electricity, so the last coal-generator stopping seems like an oddly off-topic detail for Randall to leap into the amortised accumulation of extracted volume. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.165|172.68.205.165]] 22:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Full conversion to US Customary Units (AKA US Bullshit Units):

(25e9 Tonnes / (1.3 kg/L * 2.4e5 km^2)) * (1000 kg / 1 Tonne) * (1 km^2 / (1000 m)^2 ) * (1 m^3 / 1000 L) * (39.37 in / 1 m ) ~= 3"

--[[User:JayTeeEll|JayTeeEll]] ([[User talk:JayTeeEll|talk]]) 22:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

He has not added the amount of "flotation" that results from the removal of all that material from the islands. Have the islands risen more than 3 inches in the crust, due to the removal? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 23:37, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:Scotland's still going up (after the last Ice-Age melt) and the south of Britain is still going down, IIRC. Which'll confuse matters. But I don't see how the component contributions to raising level (due to the digging out) could outpace the removal (due to that digging), by any significant amount. Rebound takes a while, and the effects should roughly equal out (so long as we haven't been digging too deep). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.151|172.68.205.151]] 23:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
: He doesn't mention anything about the surface height at all, though. He says that an average 3" has been dug up and burnt, but not that the country is 3" lower as a result.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.204|172.70.86.204]] 13:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Between the diagram and the text (including title-text), it looks as if he is indeed lowering the surface' from what it might have been without the extraction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.35|172.70.86.35]] 16:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I have a nagging feeling that although rabbit-run coal plants aren't (known to be) a thing, there must be Victorian children's books (e.g. Beatrix Potter) in which bunnies use coal scuttles or coal fires. "When Horace Hedgehog arrived, it was tea-time, so Mr Hoppy put some more coal on the fire..." [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 00:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
:Funnily enough, ''Peter Rabbit'', by Beatrix Potter was published in 1901, the same year as Queen Victoria’s passing, which marked the end of the Victorian Era. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

UK DESNZ refers to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, which is a ministerial department of the UK government. So basically that text is citing the source for the data.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.185|172.70.162.185]] 03:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

To help balance this out, should someone import coal into the formerly coal producing areas to fill in the now empty veins, or would that be selling coal to Newcastle? [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 05:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

From the miner's strike onwards, a lot of coal was imported (particularly from (Poland) to run the coal-fired power stations since it was much cheaper, so wasn't dug out the ground in the UK. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.105|172.70.90.105]] 07:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The formula doesn't take into account that the UK has ...changed land area over that period. Land area of the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Ireland) was 315000 km² until 1922.
This changes the reading in SI units from 8 cm to 7 cm, but the rounded value in inches is unchanged, 3 in. Which explains why you call those units of his glorious majesty Imperial, I guess. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.180|172.71.172.180]] 08:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
: I checked the source and it doesn't say wether production data for 1853-1922 is for the CURRENT territory of UK or includes production in the territory now belonging to Eire. Maybe we should inquire. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.89|162.158.111.89]] 11:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't like the punctuation spatter in "The UK shut down their last coal power plant today, which means that over the course of the industrial revolution, they dug up and burned an average of 3 inches of their country." And the place I'd put a new comma might confuse others' sensibilities. Perhaps "..., which means that (over the ... revolution) they dug ...". Or just get rid of the one after revolution and accept a rather long run-on clause. Not that it's changable here, being Transcript of what's there but it's strangely off in grammatical meter and span from how I would try to say/write the same words. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.101|172.70.85.101]] 10:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I feel like I missed the joke somewhere with this: "The volume of earth described, 0.1 nm × 240,000 km2, is equal to 24 m3. This is a humorous play on depictions of anthropomorphic rabbits in children's literature." Are these two separate statements that happened to be placed in a misleading way, or is something funny about 24 cubic meters having to do with anthropomorphic rabbits? {{unsigned ip|162.158.111.237}}

Talk:2952: Routine Maintenance

2024-07-01T17:44:06Z

172.70.86.35:

Ooooh, if this were only true... All the "Nobody tells me what to do" stubborn people would have died out years ago, and Covid would have been a LOT shorter! :) Added an initial explanation, all I found here was a basic transcript.

The vent off of Alaska is poking out, is there a volcano around there? Feels a little north to be Mount Fuji, but I have a suspicion most if not all are supposed to be actually volcanos... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
:Russia's Kamchatka Peninsula (the long "teardrop" hanging below the Siberian Peninsula) is very volcanically active. The others look like reasonable places to expect volcanoes - I've added a couple of lines. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.64.207|172.68.64.207]] 05:25, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Is the image SUPPOSED to be that tiny? It's not even 800 pixels! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.166|141.101.109.166]] 05:46, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Should the direction of up/down actually being away/towards the planet due to gravity and not the panel's up/down direction be addressed in the explanation? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.31.150|172.71.31.150]] 13:34, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The current explanation says that cans of compressed air are pressurized with a propellant gas. This seems unlikely to me, but it's not ''impossible''... it's just that I'd expect a can of compressed air to be only that, without needing a propellant. What I'm seeing in a quick search on-line supports that. Do cans of air/propellant exist? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 16:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
:It would be impractical to have ''just normal air, compressed''. A typical spray can cannot hold the pressures needed to have significant (i.e. useful) amounts of compressed 'normal air' (still gas, but a ''lot'' of it... think, basically, of a cylinder of Nitrogen gas, because air is mostly that anyway). And 'typical air' doesn't readily liquify (the way of concentrating it without ''necessarily'' extreme pressure), not without applying/maintaining extremely low temperatures.
:On the whole, regular mostly nitrogen plus significant oxygen plus some CO2 and a host of trace gases would never practically fit in a handy spray can such as you could hold (and, probably, afford to use) as an alternative to any pumped compressed (or fan-blown) air in 'trivial' tasks such as just blowing a tiny bit of dust off of a mobo.
:What the 'air' is, in such cans, is probably (mostly) whatever handy liquid-adjacent gas is usable as an actual propellant. As you only need the 'general gas', you might as well just put propellant in the thing (one that works well) and ''nothing else''. (Unlike things like air-fresheners/bug-spray, which need the 'freshener'/insecticide as well. There's no advantage to reducing the propellant to fit 'air' in, which would soon be so diluted by gasified propellant that you'd basically have no 'air' left).
:The listed possible gases in a {{w|gas duster}} are the likes of butane, propane, 1,1-difluoroethane, 1,1,1-trifluoroethane or 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane, with the first two being flammable (so would be problematic in some circumstances) and the rest being more inert but still not being 'safe' if improperly used. Or abused.
:I don't actually have a can, at hand, or I'd check its stated ingredients (and warnings). I probably am more likely to (carefully) blow dust away with my own breath, or get the vacuum cleaner out with a suitable attachment. In fact, I've used very few, ever, though I probably first did back in the early '80s (which means it ''might'' even have been basically an example (or mix) of a CFC gas, before the problems with that became 'a thing'), as part of a cleaning kit sold to service my BBC Micro. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.35|172.70.86.35]] 17:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

2949: Network Configuration

2024-06-24T09:10:14Z

172.70.86.35: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2949
| date = June 21, 2024
| title = Network Configuration
| image = network_configuration_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x272px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = If you repeatedly rerun the development of technological civilization, it turns out that for some reason the only constant is that there is always a networking utility called 'netcat', though it does a different thing in each one.
}}

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

In this comic, [[Cueball]] takes an uncommon networking bug (needing to establish a fresh connection for each {{w|Network_packet|packet}} sent) to the extreme. Instead of merely redoing the appropriate handshakes for data transfer, he is reconstructing the entire {{w|Human_history|history of human civilization}} each time.

As this originally took multiple millennia, doing it for every network packet would make communication ''extremely'' slow; in modern networking, we send and receive thousands of packets every second.

In the final frame, Cueball looks shaggy and dirty, with a {{w|Hoe_(tool)|grub hoe}} behind him, as though he had been performing these tasks in real life just to get his network working again. He says the network packet was stuck in the {{w|Neolithic}} era, the final period of the Stone Age that marked the transition from hunter-gatherer lifestyle to one of settlement. Apparently Cueball had to go through the effort of inventing farming, one of the developments of the {{w|Neolithic Revolution}}, to keep communicating with [[Ponytail]].

Randall Munroe is familiar with the popular creative nonfiction topic of what it takes to rebuild civilization, the subject of a book he blurbed on its cover, [https://www.howtoinventeverything.com/ How to Invent Everything], by Ryan North, fellow cartoonist.

The title text discusses netcat, a simple utility to make a tcp connection which comes in annoyingly incompatible [https://manpages.debian.org/stretch/netcat-traditional/nc.1.en.html nc.traditional] and [https://manpages.debian.org/stretch/netcat-openbsd/nc.1.en.html nc.openbsd] varieties. This may be a reference to the {{w|The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy|Hitchhiker's Guide}} series which states that 85% of civilizations developed a drink that sounds like "Jynnan Tonnyx" ({{w|Gin and tonic}}) before inventing interstellar flight. The drinks are only related by their name and have nothing else in common.

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

:[Ponytail is sitting on an office chair at her computer with a headset on. A zigzag line indicates what is shown on the computer screen]
:Ponytail (typing): Ugh, your connection is so laggy.
:Computer: Yeah, sorry.

:[Cueball is sitting on an office chair at his laptop]
:Cueball (typing): It's because I messed up my network configuration and now I have to rebuild a separate civilization from scratch for each packet.

:[Ponytail at her computer]
:Ponytail (typing): Huh?
:Ponytail (typing): What are you talking about?
:Ponytail (typing): ...Hello?

:[Beat panel]

:[Cueball, with dirt on his head and around him, is at an old computer setup with an agricultural tool resting on his now non-office chair]
:Cueball (typing): Sorry, got stuck in the Neolithic that time.
:Cueball (typing): Inventing farming takes '''''forever'''''.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Cueball Computer Problems]]

Talk:2947: Pascal's Wager Triangle

2024-06-18T11:48:23Z

172.70.86.35:

Apparently, if two people are writing a first draft at the same time, the wiki appends one to the other. Welp. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 02:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
:If you add another one it puts it beside the second, and you have Pascal's explanation.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.102|172.70.85.102]] 08:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Some religions (such as my own) prohibit polytheism, so that's an added wrench in the works. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.119|141.101.98.119]] 06:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
: I think MOST religions are quite strict about the idea that you are supposed to CHOOSE single religion, preferably the one in question, and not trying to cover all bases by believing in multiple ones. Which is the answer to Pascal's Wager: choosing wrong God is likely to result in worse punishment than choosing none, so better NOT believe. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

What if there is a God, but they don't want you to believe in them?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.35|172.70.86.35]] 11:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

2945: Broken Model

2024-06-17T09:19:53Z

172.70.86.35: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2945
| date = June 12, 2024
| title = Broken Model
| image = broken_model_2x.png
| imagesize = 278x448px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = In addition to eating foxes, rabbits can eat grass. The grass also eats foxes. Our equations chart the contours of Fox Hell.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by HELPLESS GRASS. Do NOT delete this tag too soon. Otherwise, the KILLER SKINWALKER FROM THE BUNNYROOMS may come for you.}}
This comic shows [[Miss Lenhart]] explaining a mathematical model of a predator-prey relationship. The model has the terms swapped, showing that 400 rabbits are preying on 20 foxes. The teacher realizes this mistake and says "If this were an ecology class, I would have to fix that." Instead of fixing the model, though, she instead begins to calculate using this flawed model, and notes that this model implies that rabbits are carnivores.

The equations start with Nrabbits(0)=400 and Nfoxes(0)=20, the number of rabbits and foxes at time 0, followed by what looks like the {{w|Lotka–Volterra equations}}, a pair of first-order nonlinear differential equations, frequently used to describe the dynamics of biological systems in which two species interact. One of the pair of equations describes the number of prey over time, the other the number of predators over time, differing only by a negative sign (and coefficients). It is easy to mix up which equation describes which species, leading to the inverted predator-prey relation described.

If this was indeed the case the rabbits would soon render the foxes extinct. The reason this doesn't happen in reality for rabbits is that they outnumber the foxes (20 foxes vs 400 rabbits) and thus enough of them can survive being preyed upon to maintain the species. Often the predator takes the old and sick animals first, thus keeping the rest of the animals more healthy. But following the math of the wrong formula would soon lead to zero foxes. As per the title text, the rabbits could survive without the foxes to prey on, since they still eat grass (assuming that there is not some specific nutrition requirement that is only fulfilled by the foxes). However, this reality is terrifying for the foxes, because they are rendered as prey.

The title text extends the joke by looking at a even more flawed model. This model has grass as well, but instead of grass and foxes not interacting, grass eats foxes, creating a "Fox Hell."
In the real world, grass doesn't hunt foxes{{citation needed}}, but instead, grass pulls nutrients from air and soil and synthesizes its energy through [https://soandmo.com/blogs/blog/where-does-the-grass-plant-get-its-energy-from photosynthesis], and may use foxes that have already died from other causes as fertilizer. Foxes do occasionally [https://www.wildlifeonline.me.uk/animals/article/red-fox-diet-what-foxes-eat eat grass], although not as food, but for other health reasons.

==Transcript==
:[Miss Lenhart is holding a pointer to a whiteboard, indicating the last part of the last line of text.]
:Miss Lenhart: Hmm, looks like I accidentally swapped the predation terms.
:Miss Lenhart: If this were an ecology class, I would have to fix that.
:Miss Lenhart: Unfortunately for those 20 poor foxes, this is calculus, and the math says these 400 rabbits are hungry for meat.

:[There are three lines on the white board, where the '...' ellipses in the bottom line are illegible:]
:Nrabbits(0) = 400
:Nfoxes(0) = 20
:dN0/dt = ... dN.../... = ...

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Every broken mathematical model is just a glimpse into a terrifying alternate universe.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2940: Modes of Transportation

2024-06-03T09:55:53Z

172.70.86.35: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2940
| date = May 31, 2024
| title = Modes of Transportation
| image = modes_of_transportation_2x.png
| imagesize = 510x518px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = My bold criticism might anger the hot air balloon people, which would be a real concern if any of them lived along a very narrow line directly upwind of me.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Transportationally convenient but insidiously dangerous robotic car - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Randall's chart compares different modes of transportation by how convenient and dangerous they are. At the top-left (high in convenience and low in danger) are airliners and trains, as these are both fast-moving vehicles on which many millions of dollars have been spent to make them safer. In the top-right, motorcycles are at the same convenience level, but are rated much more dangerous, since they are easy to lose control of at high speeds, and careless drivers (of cars) can easily hit a motorcycle and cause extreme harm. Things like unicycles (bottom-left) are considered much lower on the convenience scale, being not very fast or easy ways to travel, but relatively safe, while towards the centre, skis are apparently moderately convenient and moderately dangerous, since they are relatively easy to fall on if going fast downhill. Way out on their own in the bottom-right, hot air balloons appear to be unique in being rated least on convenience and highest on danger.

Because a hot air balloon is rated so poorly, if an optimization algorithm considers it the optimal mode of transportation, it must be the result of a sign error (e.g. having a minus sign where a plus sign is supposed to be, or vice versa), making the algorithm optimize for the opposite result by mistake. Presumably, modes of transportation similar to hot air balloons (like zeppelins and blimps) are left off the chart to increase the gap for comedic effect.

In order to compare the relative danger from each mode of transport, one can look at statistics of fatalities and injuries sustained during each activity. Traditionally this can be reported in fatalities/{{w|Killed_or_Seriously_Injured|KSI}} per mile driven or passenger mile (or other unit of distance) to account for the fact that some modes are used much more than others, or sometimes also per capita, in order to make historical or international comparisons. However, this is somewhat flawed, since it is really measuring the danger ''to'' users of that mode of transport, both from their own conveyance, and from other sources such as other road users. Since hot air balloon incidents are rare and/or ballooning is not a very common mode of transport, it is difficult to obtain authoritative data for hot air balloons.

The title text makes a joke that if a hot air balloon enthusiast disagrees with the ranking and is angered by it, they may wish to remonstrate or retaliate, but will have a difficult time getting to Randall's house with their preferred mode of transportation, because they are limited to travelling in the direction of the wind. In reality, hot air balloons have some freedom to choose their direction of travel, since by controlling their altitude they can access different wind directions at different heights. Randall should, therefore, be concerned about hot air balloonists who live within a wedge spanned by the various wind directions accessible on a given day. In principle, if the weather conditions are favorable, this could cover every direction from Randall's house. The phrase "hot air balloon people" is reminiscent of "autogyro people" from the title text of [[1972: Autogyros]].

Curiously, the comic includes most common forms of transport, and a number of less common ones, but omits examples such as buses (a mass transit solution arguably more convenient than trains). It is not clear if this is an error, or a deliberate choice to maintain the comic's layout and presentation.

This is the second comic in a row to feature an algorithm.

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! Transportation !! Description !! Convenience !! Danger !! Zone
|-
|{{w|Train}}s
|Mass transit on rails Very convenient ''if'' scheduled services along established routes are well suited for your journey. Many people can make journeys in complete safely on dedicated tracks (Incidents can affect many people at once, but are comparatively rare.)
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Airliner}}s
|Mass transit aircraft As long as there are convenient airports, and operators. Air travel is ''very'' safe, accounting for the number of miles traveled and passengers carried. (Accidents can be catastrophic both to the passengers/crew and potentially anybody on the ground, however.)
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Car}}s
|Motorised road vehicle Most common method of long distance travel used to get anywhere from a mile to 200 miles. It is mostly safe (for those ''inside'' the car), since many safety features have gradually been introduced, either as the result of regulation, or as selling features.
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|Scooters
|Either: 
*{{w|Kick scooter}} - ...
*{{w|Motorized scooter|Engine-powered scooter}} - ...
*{{w|Scooter (motorcycle)|Low powered motorbike/moped}} - ...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Bicycle}}s
|Human-powered (or {{w|Electric bicycle|mostly so}}) two-wheeled road vehicle ...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Boat}}s
|Watercraft of various types ...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Walking}}
|Personal bipedal ambulation 
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Practicality
|-
|{{w|Motorcycle}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Helicopter}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Light aircraft}}
|In the United States, the general category of [https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/categories small aircraft] covers a variety of aircraft certified to weigh 19,000 pounds (8618 kg) or less at takeoff. Maximum allowed weight varies by specific category.
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Go-kart}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Skateboard}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Inline skates|Rollerblades}}
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Ski}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Unicycle}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Sled}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Bumper Cars}}
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|Speciality/Recreational
|-
|{{w|Hot Air Balloon}}s
|...
|data-sort-value=""|
|data-sort-value=""|
|?????
|}

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

:[A chart is shown, where the Y axis is labeled "Convenient for travel" and has an arrow pointing up and the X axis is labeled "Dangerous" and has an arrow pointing right.]
:[The following modes are shown in the "Zone of practicality" (a large irregular area fitting in to the top left corner of the chart), highlighted with a gray background, starting with the first few bunched at highest convenience, :]
:Trains [very convenient, very safe]
:Airliners
:Cars
:Scooters [the most dangerous of this set, at medium-low danger]
:Bicycles
:Boats [medium-high convenience, a slight amount of danger]
:Walking [the least convienient, at roughly half, and lowest danger of this set]
:[The following modes are shown in the "Zone of specialty and recreational vehicles" (a large irregular swathe from the top right to the bottom left, not quite touching the prior zone), highlighted with a gray background, the nodes spread in rough order from high convenience/danger to low convenience/danger:]
:Motorcycles [highly convenient, nearly maximum danger]
:Helicopters [not quite fully convenient, most danger]
:Light aircraft
:Go karts
:Skateboards
:Rollerblades
:Skis
:Unicycles
:Sleds
:Bumper cars [lowest convenience and lowest danger item]
:[The following is labeled "?????" (in the bottom right corner), and has a gray background all to itself in a small blob notably distant from the nearest other group:]
:Hot air balloons [placed as almost the least convenient and most dangerous, of all labels]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Hot air balloons are the optimal mode of transportation, if your optimization algorithm has a sign error.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]

2939: Complexity Analysis

2024-05-31T17:00:55Z

172.70.86.35: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2939
| date = May 29, 2024
| title = Complexity Analysis
| image = complexity_analysis_2x.png
| imagesize = 430x361px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = PERPETUALLY OPTIMISTIC CASE: Early in the execution, our research group makes a breakthrough in proving P=NP.
}}

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

[[Cueball]] is teaching about an algorithm's complexity. The average-case complexity of the algorithm is written in {{w|Big O notation}} as O(''n'' log ''n''), expressing the asymptotic runtime of the algorithm as the number of inputs to it grows larger and larger.

The comic's joke involves taking the terms "best case" and "worst case" far more broadly and literally than intended. Cueball presents not just the best/worst cases for the data input into the function, but also the global environment as a whole, taking in factors such as the United States Congress which should fall ''far'' outside the algorithm's scope.

In particular, the joke regards the analysis of a closed system, which is common in engineering. An algorithm's "best case" is typically its runtime when its inputs have optimal values and it runs in as little time as possible. One example would be a {{w|Sorting algorithm#Comparison of algorithms|sorting algorithm}} that is called with an already-sorted list of numbers; an algorithm ''may'' only need to check each item in the list, in one pass, to confirm this, compared with having to compare an arbitrary number of items against an arbitrary number of others across a number of cycles. The worst case would be when a list is 'unsorted' in a way that presents the maximum number of challenges and actions to the sorting algorithm (possibly, but ''not necessarily'', when presented with the initial list exactly in the wrong order/reversed). These two limits can each be given by an O-notation, but a single O-notation generally indicates the mean complexity of operation encountered for all inputs.

The joke here is that not only does this run quicker than the mean O(''n'' log ''n''), being terminated early because it is deemed to be 'unnecessary', but its runtime appears to be an hour shorter still because of an act of Congress changing {{w|daylight saving time}}, giving it an end time (in local time) that is an hour less than it would have been under other circumstances. Potentially this would result in an end time that is recorded as earlier than its start time (depending on [[2867: DateTime|how the times are handled]]), and therefore an apparently ''negative'' 'runtime'. Daylight saving time is a [[:Category: Daylight saving time|recurrent theme]] on xkcd, and it is clear that Randall is not a fan, so Congress making surprise DST changes is another way for Randall to mock the concept.

The "worst case" refers to the movie {{w|Groundhog Day (movie)|Groundhog Day}}, in which the same events occur over and over in a sort of time loop. (This movie has been referenced before in [[1076|1076: Groundhog Day]].) If the hardware running the algorithm is present in this kind of loop then it may also reset to a previous time before it gets finished, meaning the algorithm would never terminate. This gives rise to a philosophical question about the movie as to whether the whole world is reset after every day, or just the town where the movie takes place. If it is just the town, and you could still connect to their hardware from outside, then from that perspective the algorithm would appear to be taking an interminably long time to run. If the whole world resets, since people (aside from the movie's main character) do not experience the reset, it would only appear to take as long as it does once the last (non-resetting cycle) leads it into the expected following day.

This may be an indirect reference to the {{w|halting problem}}, a famous problem in computer science. The halting problem is {{w|undecidable}}, meaning that no general algorithm can tell whether a given algorithm will halt, but the widely accepted traditional proof of this relies on external action on details of a system considered closed.

The title text refers to perhaps an even more famous problem in computer science: {{w|P versus NP problem|P versus NP}}. This asks whether every problem whose solution can be quickly verified (in nondeterministic polynomial time, {{w|NP_(complexity)|NP}}) can also be quickly solved (in polynomial time, {{w|polynomial time|P}}). The P-versus-NP problem is one of the seven {{w|Millennium Prize Problems}}, and as such has a $1 million prize for its solution. Presumably, the problem discussed here is in NP, so if P=NP, its worst-case runtime would be some polynomial O(''nk)''. However, P vs. NP is a Millennium Prize Problem for a reason; most computer scientists expect that P≠NP, so hoping for a breakthrough in proving P=NP is "perpetually optimistic". This may be a reference to {{w|optimism bias}} and the {{w|planning fallacy}}, whereby people tend to assume that the most favourable outcome will be the most likely.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is holding a presentation pointer stick, pointing to a table behind him that towers above him. The table has a heading above it and then two columns and three rows. The first column is slim and the second much broader.]

:[Table Heading]
::Results of algorithm complexity analysis:

:[Row 1]
::Average case
::O(n log n)

:[Row 2]
::Best case
::Algorithm turns out to be unnecessary and is halted, then Congress enacts surprise daylight saving time and we gain an hour

:[Row 3]
::Worst case
::Town in which hardware is located enters a Groundhog Day scenario, algorithm never terminates

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Daylight saving time]]
[[Category:Fiction]]

2923: Scary Triangles

2024-04-23T10:49:25Z

172.70.86.35: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2923
| date = April 22, 2024
| title = Scary Triangles
| image = scary_triangles_2x.png
| imagesize = 303x369px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Concealed mostly beneath the surface, sharks are the icebergs of the sea.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by the [http://www.atlanticconservationpartnership.com/conservation-research/bermuda-shark-project Bermuda Triangle] of the sea - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[Cueball]] is giving a marine biology lecture about sharks and seems to have mixed up icebergs with the topic.

In pop culture, {{w|shark}}s will often approach prey or people with only their front {{w|dorsal fin}} visible, which looks like a triangle, above the water. As far as prey are concerned, this is inaccurate, as most sharks will attack from below to keep the element of surprise.

In the comic the joke is that Cueball reveals that only recently have marine biologists learned that the triangle is only a small part of a shark. Until this revelation they thought that a shark was only the dorsal fin, the part shown in the drawing above the water. Hence sharks were also known as scary triangles as people died when those triangles arrived. But finally the community has learned that more than 90% (i.e. the rest of the shark's body) is hidden beneath the surface. Having learned this Cueball has thus drawn a dotted outline of the shark's body, beneath the scary triangular fin, showing what a shark looks under the surface. And is now lecturing about it to spread the message.

The 90% is taken from {{w|icebergs}}, which are often described as having 90% of their volume underwater. This would be true for clean ice in freshwater. But in reality icebergs are filled with air cavities and floats in salt water. So although most of the icebergs are beneath the surface, it is somewhat less than 90%.

The title text continues the joke explicitly saying that sharks are icebergs of the sea, except icebergs are already in, and thus also of, the sea. Just as sharks. So this sentence makes no sense.

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

:[Cueball points with a stick to a poster behind him that has a diagram of a shark in the water with some unreadable labels pointing to its dorsal fin and gills. The outlines of the shark under the water are in dashed lines.]
:Cueball: Today's marine biology lecture is on '''sharks'''. We all know them as the scary triangles of the sea, but recent research has revealed that the triangle is only a small portion of the shark - over 90% of it is hidden beneath the surface.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Sharks]]