explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1179: ISO 8601

2013-02-27T19:29:59Z

24.51.197.187: /* What can we learn from this? */

Apparently there are some mistakes in the Roman numerals in the comic, the year MMXII is 2012. Also LVII/CCLXV = 57/265, whereas February 27th is the 58th day of the year (which has 365 days). --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 07:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Just guessing, but could this have something to do with the divergence of various Roman calendars, e.g. Julian vs. Gregorian? [[Special:Contributions/98.122.166.235|98.122.166.235]] 13:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Another error: Obviously 1330300800 is intended to be Unix time, but it corresponds to 2012-02-27 00:00:00 UTC. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 08:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The day part "57" is not wrong: Since Feb 27 is the 58th day of the year, at the beginning of that day, 57 days have gone by since the year started. (At the end of the day, 58 days have gone by) Since we associate days with their beginning (like we do with e.g. hours and minutes), 57 is the correct number (or else Dec 31 would be 2013+365/365 = 2014, and therefore in the wrong year) -- [[User:Xorg|Xorg]] ([[User talk:Xorg|talk]]) 13:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::The day part is ambiguous. It could be as Xorg suggests, the fraction of the year past at the start of the day. On the other hand it could be interpreted as "day 57 or 365," as with pieces in a shipment or page numbers. In the latter case it should be 58/265. But then, that (ambiguity) is the point, isn't it? [[User:Jqavins|Jqavins]] ([[User talk:Jqavins|talk]]) 17:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::Meanwhile the comic was replaced, with CCLXV corrected to CCCLXV. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) Prima vigilia, XVI Kal. Mar. MMDCCLXVI

Can anyone explain 01237 (last interpretation before the cat)? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/68.230.38.154|68.230.38.154]] 08:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The small numbers above and below the larger ones show which digit is used where. For example, the 2nd and 5th digit is a 0, the 3rd digit is a 1 etc. [[Special:Contributions/82.115.151.1|82.115.151.1]] 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:01237 are the digits used in the date, and the numbers above and below them reflect the order in which they are written; 0 is the second and fifth digit, 1 is the third digit, 2 is the first, sixth and seventh digit, 3 is the fourth digit, and 7 is the eighth digit: 20130227 [[User:Bdemirci|Bdemirci]] ([[User talk:Bdemirci|talk]]) 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Someone can explain me what means: ((3+3)×(111+1)-1)×3/3-1/33? {{unsigned|95.23.147.48}}
:Read the comic explanation. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

A strange thing is that he forgot the form mostly used in Europe: 27.01.2013. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 12:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:: That form is mostly used in Germany. Belgium and France use 27/01/2013 more, Netherlands use 27-01-2013. No idea what the UK prefers although I could imagine 01.27.2013.[[Special:Contributions/62.159.14.62|62.159.14.62]] 12:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: The UK prefers 27/02/2013 --[[User:H|H]] ([[User talk:H|talk]]) 13:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: That form (27.02.2013) is also common in all of Scandinavia. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 14:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The image text has a subtle twist as "12/01/04" offers no contextual clues to it meaning at all, can be read three different ways : "December 1st 2004", "January 12, 2004" or "January 4th, 2012" (as opposed to, for example, "01/15/98" which could only be interrupted as "January 15th, 1998") [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 14:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Technically speaking, it could also be interpreted as April 1st 2012 or April 12th 2001, though that would be the least likely interpretation. I personally like spelling out 3 letters of the month and using an apostrophe before the year, such as 27 Feb '13. --[[User:Joehammer79|Joehammer79]] ([[User talk:Joehammer79|talk]]) 15:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there any way to convert the time-stamp placed on these comments to the YYYY-MM-DD format? --16:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel like the cat thing is a reference to something, but I'm not sure what... is it something? A quick google image search pulls up nothing. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:26, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Seems to me that Randall missed an opportunity: Why a cat? Why not a '''bob'''cat? It still could be some other reference that I'm missing too.
:: Black cats are considered unlucky. I don't see any reference beyond that. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: It's taking the last two digits from 2013 and emphasizing triskaidekaphobia. Doing a web image search on "Cat 13" will pull up similar artwork of hissing black cats combined with the number 13, including both flyers for Friday 13th drink specials at bars, and combat airplane noseart. Apparently combining the unlucky "13" with an unlucky black cat emphasized that they were bad luck for the enemy. [[User:Columbus Admission|Columbus Admission]] ([[User talk:Columbus Admission|talk]]) 19:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool, this is my birthday. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that no matter the system we use today to communicate with others, it's probably seems silly for someone else. It's great to document what we do and propose it as an option to others, but it will be next to impossible to force them to adopt. When someone will develop a time reference that makes sense to everyone, it will be adopted all over the world without much effort. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1179: ISO 8601

2013-02-27T19:29:31Z

24.51.197.187: /* What can we learn from this? */

Apparently there are some mistakes in the Roman numerals in the comic, the year MMXII is 2012. Also LVII/CCLXV = 57/265, whereas February 27th is the 58th day of the year (which has 365 days). --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 07:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Just guessing, but could this have something to do with the divergence of various Roman calendars, e.g. Julian vs. Gregorian? [[Special:Contributions/98.122.166.235|98.122.166.235]] 13:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Another error: Obviously 1330300800 is intended to be Unix time, but it corresponds to 2012-02-27 00:00:00 UTC. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 08:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The day part "57" is not wrong: Since Feb 27 is the 58th day of the year, at the beginning of that day, 57 days have gone by since the year started. (At the end of the day, 58 days have gone by) Since we associate days with their beginning (like we do with e.g. hours and minutes), 57 is the correct number (or else Dec 31 would be 2013+365/365 = 2014, and therefore in the wrong year) -- [[User:Xorg|Xorg]] ([[User talk:Xorg|talk]]) 13:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::The day part is ambiguous. It could be as Xorg suggests, the fraction of the year past at the start of the day. On the other hand it could be interpreted as "day 57 or 365," as with pieces in a shipment or page numbers. In the latter case it should be 58/265. But then, that (ambiguity) is the point, isn't it? [[User:Jqavins|Jqavins]] ([[User talk:Jqavins|talk]]) 17:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::Meanwhile the comic was replaced, with CCLXV corrected to CCCLXV. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) Prima vigilia, XVI Kal. Mar. MMDCCLXVI

Can anyone explain 01237 (last interpretation before the cat)? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/68.230.38.154|68.230.38.154]] 08:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The small numbers above and below the larger ones show which digit is used where. For example, the 2nd and 5th digit is a 0, the 3rd digit is a 1 etc. [[Special:Contributions/82.115.151.1|82.115.151.1]] 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:01237 are the digits used in the date, and the numbers above and below them reflect the order in which they are written; 0 is the second and fifth digit, 1 is the third digit, 2 is the first, sixth and seventh digit, 3 is the fourth digit, and 7 is the eighth digit: 20130227 [[User:Bdemirci|Bdemirci]] ([[User talk:Bdemirci|talk]]) 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Someone can explain me what means: ((3+3)×(111+1)-1)×3/3-1/33? {{unsigned|95.23.147.48}}
:Read the comic explanation. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

A strange thing is that he forgot the form mostly used in Europe: 27.01.2013. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 12:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:: That form is mostly used in Germany. Belgium and France use 27/01/2013 more, Netherlands use 27-01-2013. No idea what the UK prefers although I could imagine 01.27.2013.[[Special:Contributions/62.159.14.62|62.159.14.62]] 12:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: The UK prefers 27/02/2013 --[[User:H|H]] ([[User talk:H|talk]]) 13:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: That form (27.02.2013) is also common in all of Scandinavia. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 14:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The image text has a subtle twist as "12/01/04" offers no contextual clues to it meaning at all, can be read three different ways : "December 1st 2004", "January 12, 2004" or "January 4th, 2012" (as opposed to, for example, "01/15/98" which could only be interrupted as "January 15th, 1998") [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 14:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Technically speaking, it could also be interpreted as April 1st 2012 or April 12th 2001, though that would be the least likely interpretation. I personally like spelling out 3 letters of the month and using an apostrophe before the year, such as 27 Feb '13. --[[User:Joehammer79|Joehammer79]] ([[User talk:Joehammer79|talk]]) 15:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there any way to convert the time-stamp placed on these comments to the YYYY-MM-DD format? --16:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel like the cat thing is a reference to something, but I'm not sure what... is it something? A quick google image search pulls up nothing. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:26, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Seems to me that Randall missed an opportunity: Why a cat? Why not a '''bob'''cat? It still could be some other reference that I'm missing too.
:: Black cats are considered unlucky. I don't see any reference beyond that. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: It's taking the last two digits from 2013 and emphasizing triskaidekaphobia. Doing a web image search on "Cat 13" will pull up similar artwork of hissing black cats combined with the number 13, including both flyers for Friday 13th drink specials at bars, and combat airplane noseart. Apparently combining the unlucky "13" with an unlucky black cat emphasized that they were bad luck for the enemy. [[User:Columbus Admission|Columbus Admission]] ([[User talk:Columbus Admission|talk]]) 19:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool, this is my birthday. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that no matter the system we use today to communicate with others, it's probably seems silly for someone else. It's great to document what we do and propose it as an option to others, but it will be next to impossible to force them to adopt. When someone will develop a time reference that makes sense to everyone, it will being adopted all over the world without much effort. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1173: Steroids

2013-02-27T19:25:37Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Does anyone know what that 'something' is? That's what I came here to find out... :/ --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 11:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:I had a lot of ideas, but I don't know. It might be a molecule, some sort of portal transmitting sound, a star, a future life form.
:--[[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 12:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

::My first instinct was that Megan was talking to the asterisk that gets put next to world records held by athletes who have been suspected of using steroids.
::[[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 17:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:::It looks to me like the God from Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal. Though that God would know all about the steroid scandal, presumably. [[Special:Contributions/98.234.113.134|98.234.113.134]] 00:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

::::It's the crystalline life-form from the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Home Soil". When not killing red shirts, it keeps taunting humans that they're "ugly bags of mostly water".[[User:Columbus Admission|Columbus Admission]] ([[User talk:Columbus Admission|talk]]) 00:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

:::::My first association was this "entity of pure energy" from Futurama: http://theinfosphere.org/Energy_being [[Special:Contributions/94.126.74.17|94.126.74.17]] 10:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

::::::It reminded me of the white hole from Diane Duane's "So You Want to be Wizard".

:::::::It's not supposed to be anything. Just some non-human entity that can't grasp the whole steroid scandal in a human way. [[Special:Contributions/195.23.253.48|195.23.253.48]] 12:45, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I think the "artificial boundary" isn't so artificial. There is a clear difference between food chemicals, which are healthy for us, vs steroid chemicals, which cause all sorts of health problems. Of course, then Megan would have to explain that we have limited lifespans and we greatly value our quality of life, and these steroids would decrease our quality of life. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 13:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
:So on the one side of this "clear boundary" you'd have something like Big Macs (food, good for us) and on the other you'd have vitamin supplements (non-food chemicals, bad)?
::I think the theory is that things that improve athletic performance but hurt the body should not be allowed. That way, athletes who are willing to sacrifice their health in order to win do not have an advantage over those who are not willing to make such a sacrifice. If people want to eat Big Mac's they are welcome to because it doesn't give them any advantage. Basically, you can put bad stuff into yourself all you want, but not if it gives you a competitive advantage. [[Special:Contributions/74.92.219.153|74.92.219.153]] 17:36, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
:::Which is good theory except that we have hardly any idea what are long-term effect of most chemicals, not speaking about fact that any chemical which is beneficial in reasonable amount (which we often don't know and it may depend on individual or other condition) is dangerous if you take it too much. The [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_C L-ascorbic acid] is particularly interresting example, as the official recomendation is 90mg per day, but depending on doctor and on situation (like illness or stress level) even 10,000mg may be considered healthy. Another good example is already mentioned [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone testosterone], which IS actually steroid. Oh yes, and then there is the problem of DETECTING that the athlets are getting those "unnatural" chemicals. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
::::Your argument seems to suggest that just because we can't catch all criminals, or because we don't know the long term effects of people's actions, we should just release convicted murderers. No one ever said the system's perfect. I grant that there are many grey areas, and we can't come close to policing every athlete. I don't think we should stop athletes from taking vitamin C given our current amount of knowledge, but I do think we should try to stop the athletes that are detected to be using chemicals in quantities that are known to be unhealthy in order to gain a competitive advantage.[[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 21:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:Like trying to line up all the people in the world and draw a clear line to divide blacks from whites, it's too much of a gradual spectrum to be anything other than arbitrary. [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 17:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
::I explained my point very poorly. "Good" performance enhancing chemicals (like healthy foods) tend to also make us more healthy while "bad" performance enhancing chemicals (like steroids) cause all sorts of health problems. Athletes are generally encouraged to take the "good" stuff while avoiding the "bad" stuff. Of course there's a huge grey area in between (including non-performance-enhancing Big Macs), but I think steroids clearly fall outside this grey area. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 19:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
:::|Um, you do realize that the human body itself creates "Steroids"? Which are also in found within the plants and animals that we eat. (Especially soybeans.) Testosterone is supposedly one of these "bad" steroids, which cause many problems for humans. [[Special:Contributions/69.181.140.191|69.181.140.191]] 12:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
::::I suppose my point requires further explanation; devil's advocates will never be satisfied. Testosterone isn't intrinsically "bad" for us (as you mentioned, it is an integral part of our chemistry), but taking significant amounts of it from external sources has been shown to damage our bodies' ability to produce it and/or regulate its levels, among other effects. Hence, taking steroids is bad for us. Compare that with healthy food, which is generally accepted to "increase" our athletic performance (compared with unhealthy food, or no food) without any serious avoidable side effects.
::::However, you do bring up the point of testosterone being present in some things we consider to count as "food". I guess there is a certain amount of testosterone you are allowed to ingest (for these contests) that cause a negligible effect. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 13:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::So it should be permitted to take non-dangerous levels of steroids? Either way, blood doping is the practice of boosting the number of red blood cells in the bloodstream, seems like a difficult argument to make for that to be bad (unless you have too many, but until that point). [[Special:Contributions/67.87.171.116|67.87.171.116]] 07:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::I guess by my logic, it should indeed be permitted to take steroids at a non-dangerous level. It sort of is the way things are; if I take 1 miligram of testosterone a day I don't think anyone would stop me because they couldn't catch me. At such a low level, I doubt it would have an effect on my blood testosterone levels. It gets a lot murkier when you get into the question of "what is the highest amount you should permit?"[[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 21:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Blood doping is not the same as steroid use. {{unsigned|‎98.204.81.157}}
:EDIT: I think for the purposes of this discussion, blood doping does have its recognized risks. I guess it's another form of performance enhancement that is difficult to do properly, and can kill you or transmit dangerous diseases if done improperly. Check out the Wikipedia article for more information. I think it should be controlled in the same manner as steroids, not because it's inherently bad, but because it can be difficult to self-regulate for athletes. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.159.230|70.31.159.230]] 21:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
== Douglas Adams ==

Does anyone else feel that the title text has a strong Douglas Adams flavour?
And if so, can we make that hard with a quote from one of his books?

:It's a biblical reference, Genesis 3:19, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return", King James version.[[User:Jasqm|Jasqm]] ([[User talk:Jasqm|talk]]) 14:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:D.N.A. has been known to reference the bible:
:-"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people unhappy and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
:-"And then one day, nearly two thousand years after one man was nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be if people were nice to each other for a change..."
:[[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 17:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:You're probably thinking of his quotes that reference digital watches and what a big mistake it was to leave the oceans (combined with the scene from the show where the guy walks back into the ocean).[[User:CityZen|CityZen]] ([[User talk:CityZen|talk]]) 21:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:"...questions including, 'Why are are people born?' 'Why do do people die?' and 'Why do they spend so much of the time in between wearing digital watches?'"

:"Most of the people were pretty much unhappy for pretty much most of the time; many solutions have been suggested for this problem, but they mostly involve the movement of small green pieces of paper, which is odd, because on the whole, it wasn't the small green pieces of paper which were unhappy."

Ive said that Douglas Adams write for XKCD for years now...Notice if you change all the letters to their corresponding number (A=1, B=2, etc) and add them, you get 42 ;) [[Special:Contributions/90.205.199.80|90.205.199.80]] 12:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah, I'm pretty sure we all know that was a coincidence; Randall said so.
:I wrote a quick program to check for four-letter combinations and add their value. I'm assuming (hoping) that I coded correctly and got accurate results (I was using a library that I am unfamiliar with). Of the 26^4 possible letter combinations, 8840 (roughly 2%) will result in a total of 42 (order matters). This comes to 449 different sets of letters (in whatever order) that total 42. The numbers change if we assume Randall would only choose a letter once to be in the title. I'd rewrite the program to count up all combinations that total 4 to 104 for comparison (with and without repetition), but it's after 5am now. [[Special:Contributions/76.122.5.96|76.122.5.96]] 10:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Not just a Biblical reference, the comic is published on (western christian) Ash Wednesday... [[User:Patmiller|Patmiller]] ([[User talk:Patmiller|talk]]) 14:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I didn't think of Douglas Adams when I read it, I thought of Paul Erdos' definition of a mathematician as a device for turning coffee into theorems. [[User:MGK|MGK]] ([[User talk:MGK|talk]]) 15:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that Mr Armstrong is a future hero (Thank you Mr. XKCD). We will need to help out evolution to make us stronger and faster when we need it (sorry Jet pilots of today, you will need to continue enduring those coughing fits until we figure something out). Considering we need to do so by choice, drugs are the only way we know how at this time. Mr. Armstrong was trying to teach us a lesson that if you practice moderation and have will power to put in the work as well (drugs are no pathway toward the easy life), you can overcome any limitation (such as getting over cancer) to become one of the greatest human athletes we have ever known (and yes, I do believe you are both are still as awesome as ever Mr. Armstrong and our teacher Mr. XKCD). -e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1174: App

2013-02-27T19:17:52Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Interestingly, Scott Hanselman just made a [http://www.hanselman.com/blog/IdLikeToUseTheWebMyWayThankYouVeryMuchQuora.aspx blog post about this very issue]. Note how the page in its entirety was downloaded using his mobile data plan, but it's still in no way viewable. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 08:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

:By "in no way viewable" you mean mobile browsers don't support editing page's DOM like Chrome does out of the box and Firefox do with FireBug extension? (Try pressing F12). Not to speaking about the javascript-in-location-bar tricks someone already started posting on the blog post you mentioned. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
:: I was talking about how the website is done by design. Since the whole page is downloaded you can of course start "hacking" your way through to the content, but that's besides the point. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 11:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

::: It may be seen as hacking now. But removing ads from websites was also seen as hacking until ad blockers becamed fully automated and popular. If those overlays becomes anoying enough, someone will code extension to get rid of them. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

prompting mobile views = prompting people viewing the website from a mobile browser ("mobile views" is web designer terminology, not mainstream speech) {{unsigned|195.130.121.48}}

:Right, let's reword that (which you can do yourself, by the way, but I'll admit that from the main page it's not obvious for a newcomer). - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 11:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
:
::Seems like [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] did actually. - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 11:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Chainsaw Suit also made almost the same joke: http://chainsawsuit.com/2013/01/23/view-the-desktop-version-of-this-site/

It reminds me very much of the way tapatalk-enabled forums act. They keep prompting you to use the app, which - if you have the app - will not open the page you were on.

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that there are a billion things in the world that still need to be improved and sometimes if you seeking inspirations for new inventions they sometimes stare you right in the face (Thank you Mr. XKCD). Software engineers among us, lets help them improve their designs and avoid their mistakes ok? - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1175: Moving Sidewalks

2013-02-27T19:14:41Z

24.51.197.187: /* What can we learn from this? */

I'm not quite sure what the joke here is supposed to be. Many have tried to develop variable speed walkways, as one can see in [http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?page=0&compact=false&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&CPC=B66B23%2f26%2flow patents]. There was even a pair of these that were installed circa Y2K in the Paris subway (Châtelet-Les-Halles, IIRC), which is renowned for its long passageways. It is AFAIK no longer in service, I don't know why. When I saw it an attendant was present to watch over for making sure that users wouln't fall. This contraption is way more complicated than standard rubber-belt conveyors with its meshing steps. --[[Special:Contributions/70.52.115.181|70.52.115.181]] 15:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: Is it possible that you're thinking of [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBJN1X3LeJw these]? [http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/05/21/paris-experimental-high-speed-moving-walkway-is-abandoned/ Here]'s a news article saying it got canceled due to constant technical problems. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I know what I'm building this weekend... [[Special:Contributions/207.237.164.241|207.237.164.241]] 06:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:I just wonder if it is possible to remove these stupid posts and the panel on top of them from my treadmill without breaking it... {{unsigned|89.174.214.74}}

Isn't "of" suppose to be "off" in the title text? {{unsigned|67.161.114.84}}
:No... Why would it be? That doesn't make any sense.[[Special:Contributions/74.92.219.153|74.92.219.153]] 14:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Do anybody know examples of such belts. The ones I recall has all one-speed-only [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 10:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: At Toronto Airport they have double speed moving sidewalks, that accelerate by stretching the panels. --[[User:Johnsmith|Johnsmith]] ([[User talk:Johnsmith|talk]]) 08:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Here's a video. Pretty neat concept! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9k1K5M2Mkw --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I was under the impression (from the alt-text), that they would take the belts inward traveling faster until they hi-five. Then, as they sped away, they would change sides and repeat the process. 10:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why they are positioned as they are. If they were taking the belts inward, they would take advantage of the momentum imparted by the belts and be going much faster than their stride would normally take them. The way they are positioned, they would have to be running to just catch up to each other in the middle. [[Special:Contributions/64.121.163.170|64.121.163.170]] 11:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

:This is surely the point. They have to run faster as they get closer. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 12:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Has the picture changed? Now it seems as if they where going faster to the middle. --[[User:Johnsmith|Johnsmith]] ([[User talk:Johnsmith|talk]]) 08:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be any 'trick' to this one. Like the commenter above, I initially thought they were being taken towards each other by the conveyors. I thought the joke was that they would be accelerated to a ridiculous speed which would make it impossible to high five without obliterating each other, but the alt text didn't indicate anything like this and I looked again and realised I had read way too much into it. It's probably most sensible to interpret the speed multiples as relating to the first belts, not the last one you were on. This makes the difference between the '5x' belts going at 5x the speed of the outer ones, instead of 100x if each was the specified multiple of the last. If this alternative situation were the case, the outer belts would have to be going very slowly (of the order of 0.1m/s) for them to ever be able to high five. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 12:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The appears reminiscent of Improv Everywhere's prank, "High-Five Escalator" http://improveverywhere.com/2009/02/09/high-five-escalator/ [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]])

I'm sure I would fall over trying to use this one. --[[Special:Contributions/173.49.75.121|173.49.75.121]] 14:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Randall updated the comic, explaining that he meant to draw the arrows going the way Cueball and Megan are facing, not opposite. I'd change the wiki, but I don't get it now. :) [[User:Zpletan|Zpletan]] ([[User talk:Zpletan|talk]])

The Comic has been changed: "Oops! I originally put up a version with backward sidewalk arrows. I should know better than to edit and post comics while sleep-deprived. Sorry!" [[Special:Contributions/86.32.218.17|86.32.218.17]] 14:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think they're going a multiple of the previous belt, but a multiple of base speed. Just my 2 cents :) Also, I think the belts are moving toward each other to get the ultimate "high five" in terms of velocity of the impact. {{unsigned|161.31.32.81}}

I don't see why anyone would think the "5x speed" etc would mean 5 times the previous tile. Seems obvious to me that the first tile is moving at some speed, the second tile is moving twice that base speed, the third moving 3x that base, etc. So when the pass each other their moving at 10x the base speed. Assuming the base speed is something reasonable, something near a typical walking speed, the high five would take place at a speed similar to if they were just sprinting past each other. Hardly a "ridiculous speed which would make it impossible to high five without obliterating each other." [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 16:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

:As you'll see from my comment, I only thought something like this might be implied on first glance before I looked at it properly. Honestly it just doesn't seem that awesome to have a series of conveyor belts that allow you to high five a person at sprinting pace. I briefly suspected Randall might have been getting at some feature of physics or mathematics, like the story of the guy who asked for payment for something in grains of rice placed on a chessboard, starting with one grain in the corner and doubling for each square. But no. It's just two people high fiving each other. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 17:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone think this may be a reference to "The Caves of Steel" a novel by Isaac Asimov? As I recall there was a global system of moving belts of various speeds that were used for transportation.
: That's what I thought of immediately. [[Special:Contributions/128.84.127.95|128.84.127.95]] 19:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: Or Heinlein's "The Roads Must Roll". [[Special:Contributions/173.8.183.86|173.8.183.86]] 19:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Also Clarke's ''The City and the Stars'', for the {{w|Big Three}} trifecta. But in those stories, the different-speed belts were arranged in parallel, like lanes of a highway, rather than in series. So you'd accelerate by stepping sideways from belt to belt.
::[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 20:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, they're playing a game of Robo Rally[[User:Schmammel|Schmammel]] ([[User talk:Schmammel|talk]]) 04:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I would love to see this sidewalk placed in a Bison habitat.[[Special:Contributions/94.191.187.81|94.191.187.81]] 05:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Is it just me - or was this comic fixed after it was initially uploaded? I could've sworn the original had either the arrows backwards or the people on the wrong sides - They would've been fighting the sidewalk. 09:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:As an edit to this, I was correct. This is a mirror of the comic on Gizmodo, showing the error. http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18f07q9hveoaepng/xlarge.png {{unsigned|‎77.98.193.149}}
:And it seems that when fixing it, Randall changed all the arrows, rather than moving the people. [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]])

I wonder, what is the pace of the centerbelt? Is it 5x, 6x or maybe about 5x where that belt start, accelerating to 7x (or even more?) at the high five location and then slowing down till about 5x at the end? [[Special:Contributions/86.82.116.63|86.82.116.63]] 16:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that imagination is fun yet again (XKCD, you keep making us learn this same lesson, over the over again, is it your hint that others just don't get it?). And something new I've learned is that implementation of a great idea may result in some broken bones before it's completed (thanks for that new lesson, Mr. XKCD!) - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1175: Moving Sidewalks

2013-02-27T19:13:48Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

I'm not quite sure what the joke here is supposed to be. Many have tried to develop variable speed walkways, as one can see in [http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?page=0&compact=false&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&CPC=B66B23%2f26%2flow patents]. There was even a pair of these that were installed circa Y2K in the Paris subway (Châtelet-Les-Halles, IIRC), which is renowned for its long passageways. It is AFAIK no longer in service, I don't know why. When I saw it an attendant was present to watch over for making sure that users wouln't fall. This contraption is way more complicated than standard rubber-belt conveyors with its meshing steps. --[[Special:Contributions/70.52.115.181|70.52.115.181]] 15:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: Is it possible that you're thinking of [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBJN1X3LeJw these]? [http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/05/21/paris-experimental-high-speed-moving-walkway-is-abandoned/ Here]'s a news article saying it got canceled due to constant technical problems. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I know what I'm building this weekend... [[Special:Contributions/207.237.164.241|207.237.164.241]] 06:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:I just wonder if it is possible to remove these stupid posts and the panel on top of them from my treadmill without breaking it... {{unsigned|89.174.214.74}}

Isn't "of" suppose to be "off" in the title text? {{unsigned|67.161.114.84}}
:No... Why would it be? That doesn't make any sense.[[Special:Contributions/74.92.219.153|74.92.219.153]] 14:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Do anybody know examples of such belts. The ones I recall has all one-speed-only [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 10:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: At Toronto Airport they have double speed moving sidewalks, that accelerate by stretching the panels. --[[User:Johnsmith|Johnsmith]] ([[User talk:Johnsmith|talk]]) 08:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Here's a video. Pretty neat concept! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9k1K5M2Mkw --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I was under the impression (from the alt-text), that they would take the belts inward traveling faster until they hi-five. Then, as they sped away, they would change sides and repeat the process. 10:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why they are positioned as they are. If they were taking the belts inward, they would take advantage of the momentum imparted by the belts and be going much faster than their stride would normally take them. The way they are positioned, they would have to be running to just catch up to each other in the middle. [[Special:Contributions/64.121.163.170|64.121.163.170]] 11:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

:This is surely the point. They have to run faster as they get closer. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 12:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Has the picture changed? Now it seems as if they where going faster to the middle. --[[User:Johnsmith|Johnsmith]] ([[User talk:Johnsmith|talk]]) 08:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be any 'trick' to this one. Like the commenter above, I initially thought they were being taken towards each other by the conveyors. I thought the joke was that they would be accelerated to a ridiculous speed which would make it impossible to high five without obliterating each other, but the alt text didn't indicate anything like this and I looked again and realised I had read way too much into it. It's probably most sensible to interpret the speed multiples as relating to the first belts, not the last one you were on. This makes the difference between the '5x' belts going at 5x the speed of the outer ones, instead of 100x if each was the specified multiple of the last. If this alternative situation were the case, the outer belts would have to be going very slowly (of the order of 0.1m/s) for them to ever be able to high five. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 12:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The appears reminiscent of Improv Everywhere's prank, "High-Five Escalator" http://improveverywhere.com/2009/02/09/high-five-escalator/ [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]])

I'm sure I would fall over trying to use this one. --[[Special:Contributions/173.49.75.121|173.49.75.121]] 14:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Randall updated the comic, explaining that he meant to draw the arrows going the way Cueball and Megan are facing, not opposite. I'd change the wiki, but I don't get it now. :) [[User:Zpletan|Zpletan]] ([[User talk:Zpletan|talk]])

The Comic has been changed: "Oops! I originally put up a version with backward sidewalk arrows. I should know better than to edit and post comics while sleep-deprived. Sorry!" [[Special:Contributions/86.32.218.17|86.32.218.17]] 14:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think they're going a multiple of the previous belt, but a multiple of base speed. Just my 2 cents :) Also, I think the belts are moving toward each other to get the ultimate "high five" in terms of velocity of the impact. {{unsigned|161.31.32.81}}

I don't see why anyone would think the "5x speed" etc would mean 5 times the previous tile. Seems obvious to me that the first tile is moving at some speed, the second tile is moving twice that base speed, the third moving 3x that base, etc. So when the pass each other their moving at 10x the base speed. Assuming the base speed is something reasonable, something near a typical walking speed, the high five would take place at a speed similar to if they were just sprinting past each other. Hardly a "ridiculous speed which would make it impossible to high five without obliterating each other." [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 16:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

:As you'll see from my comment, I only thought something like this might be implied on first glance before I looked at it properly. Honestly it just doesn't seem that awesome to have a series of conveyor belts that allow you to high five a person at sprinting pace. I briefly suspected Randall might have been getting at some feature of physics or mathematics, like the story of the guy who asked for payment for something in grains of rice placed on a chessboard, starting with one grain in the corner and doubling for each square. But no. It's just two people high fiving each other. [[Special:Contributions/77.99.26.23|77.99.26.23]] 17:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone think this may be a reference to "The Caves of Steel" a novel by Isaac Asimov? As I recall there was a global system of moving belts of various speeds that were used for transportation.
: That's what I thought of immediately. [[Special:Contributions/128.84.127.95|128.84.127.95]] 19:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
: Or Heinlein's "The Roads Must Roll". [[Special:Contributions/173.8.183.86|173.8.183.86]] 19:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Also Clarke's ''The City and the Stars'', for the {{w|Big Three}} trifecta. But in those stories, the different-speed belts were arranged in parallel, like lanes of a highway, rather than in series. So you'd accelerate by stepping sideways from belt to belt.
::[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 20:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, they're playing a game of Robo Rally[[User:Schmammel|Schmammel]] ([[User talk:Schmammel|talk]]) 04:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I would love to see this sidewalk placed in a Bison habitat.[[Special:Contributions/94.191.187.81|94.191.187.81]] 05:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Is it just me - or was this comic fixed after it was initially uploaded? I could've sworn the original had either the arrows backwards or the people on the wrong sides - They would've been fighting the sidewalk. 09:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:As an edit to this, I was correct. This is a mirror of the comic on Gizmodo, showing the error. http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18f07q9hveoaepng/xlarge.png {{unsigned|‎77.98.193.149}}
:And it seems that when fixing it, Randall changed all the arrows, rather than moving the people. [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]])

I wonder, what is the pace of the centerbelt? Is it 5x, 6x or maybe about 5x where that belt start, accelerating to 7x (or even more?) at the high five location and then slowing down till about 5x at the end? [[Special:Contributions/86.82.116.63|86.82.116.63]] 16:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that imagine is fun yet again (XKCD, you keep making us learn this same lesson, over the over again, is it your hint that we just don't get it?). And something new I've learned is that implementation of a great idea may result in some broken bones before it's completed (thanks for that new lesson, Mr. XKCD!) - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1176: Those Not Present

2013-02-27T19:11:12Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Seems pretty straight forward. The more a group talks badly of a person who's not present, a bad habit, the less Munroe wants to be associated with it. Therefore, he slowly scoots away, until he eventually reaches an other group, who, hopefully, won't have said bad habit. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.63.88|95.35.63.88]] 05:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much more to say about this one. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 06:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
::There's much more to say about it, actually. The comic is pointing out that it is the nature of groups to talk about those not present. The scooting from one to another (doing the same thing, even when the subject is something like squid), is to show that there's no escape from gossip.[[Special:Contributions/24.70.188.179|24.70.188.179]] 15:56, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
One can make assuptions about the age of those in the first group because of the shape of the beverage vessels. A wine or champagne glass might be used for it's name sake. Suggesting that they are older than the legal drinking age. Though the conversation seems like one expected in high school or college.{{unsigned|74.215.40.250}}
Is this actually this simple or are we missing something? Maybe it's just a bit crappy? [[Special:Contributions/134.226.83.27|134.226.83.27]] 14:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:I was actually expecting it to proceed to some sort of equilibrium situation where the various groups slowly force him into some stationary position at a distance from each group relative to their various levels of behind the back talking.[[User:Schmammel|Schmammel]] ([[User talk:Schmammel|talk]]) 15:22, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
::I was expecting the same thing--[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:::I was expecting the first group will start talking about him, when he's away. [[Special:Contributions/37.108.11.242|37.108.11.242]] 23:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:::: They will. But that doesn't affect him, because he doesn't want to be associated with them anyway. It might be the reason why he doesn't want to associate with them. As the conventional warning against indulging in gossip goes: "Be wary of people that say things about others behind their backs, because they might do the same about you." Of course, the real reason we ought not to engage in gossip is beyond niceties. Contrary to what most people believe, it isn't about with-holding all criticism. It's about fair representation, and accurate communication. However, given umwelt, it's not like everyone will have the same viewpoint anyway. Still, understanding that and being non-judgmental involves no slagging-people-behind-their-back, or consigning them to inferiority or incapability. Even if you do it to their faces [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 12:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Is that person ''actually'' called Harry? [[Special:Contributions/117.194.203.214|117.194.203.214]] 16:23, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:Nope, it was made up in [[1028: Communication]] to describe generic male characters with hair. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 20:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that talk shows don't work, unless they allow the person they are talking about to represent their point of view. If you see someone doing this on purpose, switch the channel as you are not missing much. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:11, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1179: ISO 8601

2013-02-27T19:07:45Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Apparently there are some mistakes in the Roman numerals in the comic, the year MMXII is 2012. Also LVII/CCLXV = 57/265, whereas February 27th is the 58th day of the year (which has 365 days). --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 07:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Just guessing, but could this have something to do with the divergence of various Roman calendars, e.g. Julian vs. Gregorian? [[Special:Contributions/98.122.166.235|98.122.166.235]] 13:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:Another error: Obviously 1330300800 is intended to be Unix time, but it corresponds to 2012-02-27 00:00:00 UTC. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) 08:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The day part "57" is not wrong: Since Feb 27 is the 58th day of the year, at the beginning of that day, 57 days have gone by since the year started. (At the end of the day, 58 days have gone by) Since we associate days with their beginning (like we do with e.g. hours and minutes), 57 is the correct number (or else Dec 31 would be 2013+365/365 = 2014, and therefore in the wrong year) -- [[User:Xorg|Xorg]] ([[User talk:Xorg|talk]]) 13:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::The day part is ambiguous. It could be as Xorg suggests, the fraction of the year past at the start of the day. On the other hand it could be interpreted as "day 57 or 365," as with pieces in a shipment or page numbers. In the latter case it should be 58/265. But then, that (ambiguity) is the point, isn't it? [[User:Jqavins|Jqavins]] ([[User talk:Jqavins|talk]]) 17:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::Meanwhile the comic was replaced, with CCLXV corrected to CCCLXV. --[[User:Ulm|ulm]] ([[User talk:Ulm|talk]]) Prima vigilia, XVI Kal. Mar. MMDCCLXVI

Can anyone explain 01237 (last interpretation before the cat)? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/68.230.38.154|68.230.38.154]] 08:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:The small numbers above and below the larger ones show which digit is used where. For example, the 2nd and 5th digit is a 0, the 3rd digit is a 1 etc. [[Special:Contributions/82.115.151.1|82.115.151.1]] 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:01237 are the digits used in the date, and the numbers above and below them reflect the order in which they are written; 0 is the second and fifth digit, 1 is the third digit, 2 is the first, sixth and seventh digit, 3 is the fourth digit, and 7 is the eighth digit: 20130227 [[User:Bdemirci|Bdemirci]] ([[User talk:Bdemirci|talk]]) 08:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Someone can explain me what means: ((3+3)×(111+1)-1)×3/3-1/33? {{unsigned|95.23.147.48}}
:Read the comic explanation. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

A strange thing is that he forgot the form mostly used in Europe: 27.01.2013. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 12:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
:: That form is mostly used in Germany. Belgium and France use 27/01/2013 more, Netherlands use 27-01-2013. No idea what the UK prefers although I could imagine 01.27.2013.[[Special:Contributions/62.159.14.62|62.159.14.62]] 12:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: The UK prefers 27/02/2013 --[[User:H|H]] ([[User talk:H|talk]]) 13:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
::: That form (27.02.2013) is also common in all of Scandinavia. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 14:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The image text has a subtle twist as "12/01/04" offers no contextual clues to it meaning at all, can be read three different ways : "December 1st 2004", "January 12, 2004" or "January 4th, 2012" (as opposed to, for example, "01/15/98" which could only be interrupted as "January 15th, 1998") [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 14:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Technically speaking, it could also be interpreted as April 1st 2012 or April 12th 2001, though that would be the least likely interpretation. I personally like spelling out 3 letters of the month and using an apostrophe before the year, such as 27 Feb '13. --[[User:Joehammer79|Joehammer79]] ([[User talk:Joehammer79|talk]]) 15:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there any way to convert the time-stamp placed on these comments to the YYYY-MM-DD format? --16:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel like the cat thing is a reference to something, but I'm not sure what... is it something? A quick google image search pulls up nothing. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:26, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
: Seems to me that Randall missed an opportunity: Why a cat? Why not a '''bob'''cat? It still could be some other reference that I'm missing too.
:: Black cats are considered unlucky. I don't see any reference beyond that. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool, this is my birthday. [[User:Mattflaschen|Mattflaschen]] ([[User talk:Mattflaschen|talk]]) 17:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that no matter the system we use today to communicate with others, it's probably seems silly for someone else. It's great to document what we do and propose it as an option to others, but it will be next to impossible to force them to adopt. When someone will develop a time reference that makes since to everyone, they will find it being adopted all over the world without much effort. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1177: Time Robot

2013-02-27T19:01:13Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

A lot of Randall's recent comics are quite poetic. It's like some kind of trend. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Is this a Terminator reference? (Never seen the movies) [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 05:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah, it probably is. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:And you should see them sometime. They're pretty good. (The first two.) [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 22:48, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

[http://www.xkcd.com/602 A similar reference] has been made before(by Randall).09:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:Did you mean to post the ep602 link against the previous comic 1176? [[User:DreamingDaemon|DD]] ([[User talk:DreamingDaemon|talk]]) 11:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
: Probably [[652: More Accurate|6'''5'''2]]. [[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 20:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
::Yes.[[User:Guru-45|Guru-45]] ([[User talk:Guru-45|talk]]) 15:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that death is the only certainty in life, until we develop technology to avoid that. Until that time we should just relax and enjoy the adventure, even if we find ourselves in the scary movie sometimes, as a human race we will come out fine at the end. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 19:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1178: Pickup Artists

2013-02-27T18:52:07Z

24.51.197.187: /* What can we learn from this? */

Oh my God, this one's brilliant. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 06:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:I did not get it. Waiting for explanation. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.63.243|95.35.63.243]] 07:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:See also comic #1027 [[Special:Contributions/65.49.14.70|65.49.14.70]] 10:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Added an explanation for the title text, but it's probably too wordy and not very clear. Anyone have any suggestions? [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 11:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Umm... "The pun lies in the fact that a pickup basketball player becomes skilled at basketball."
I thought the pun was on the word "artist" meaning someone that does...art. The same goes with the "friend zone" explanation. It doesn't seem like disbelief, but rather that there is a "place to meet friends" or "a place that friends go to hang out" (in other words, "a zone of friends"). So the joke is that the world seems happier because you think the words are describing subjectively better things than they actually are. But that's just my take on the comic. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 11:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:P.S. This is a Saturday comic? [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 11:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Not anymore. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:Al right, just change it then. :) [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 14:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::It's a matter of opinion, though. I don't make edits based on opinion. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 02:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I think it's time we give the other guy a name. What about Sleezy Guy? [[User:ChrisFortyTwo|ChrisFortyTwo]] ([[User talk:ChrisFortyTwo|talk]])
:Seconded. I remember he's been named Harry in the past. A quick search brings up [[1028]]. He's appeared quite a bit now, and he probably should be named. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 12:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Thirded. But maybe something a bit nicer sounding. [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 13:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::Fourthed. And changed to 'Harry'. Should we add a tag as well? [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 14:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::That would probably have to go through due process via [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals]], but it should go through quickly enough, given how often Harry appears. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::Ah, now I get it, hehe – Harry–Hairy! (Are those two pronounced exactly the same, or just similarly?) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::I think he should be called "Hairy", not Harry: attributing a random real name to a character that the author himself didn't choose (like [[Megan]] or [[Mrs. Roberts]]) is likely to bring up issues, whereas calling him in a way that simply reflects how he's drawn (like [[Cueball]], [[Black Hat]], [[Ponytail]] and all the rest) just goes in direct line with what is done in the source; and it's self-explanatory in the description, it does not require the reader to be accustomed to the habits of this wiki (currently, reading "Harry" out of nowhere is quite uncanny). So, since it works pretty well here, let's call him Hairy. - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 19:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Agreed. Let's wait for the name to go through before messing with the edits further. [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 21:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::See [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals#New character]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::+1 for Hairy (or Curly?) -1 for Harry. Cueball, Black Hat, etc are descriptions, not names. [[Special:Contributions/64.125.71.142|64.125.71.142]] 23:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Beret Guy is right, a day of Pickup Art sounds like a lot of fun. Everybody pack their sketchbooks, pastels and watercolours, wander around town till they find interesting vignettes or vistas, everyone sketch and paint without showing each other till picnic time. At PT, all pull out their packed lunches and eat and enjoy each other's efforts. He'll, this sounds 1000% better than almost every pub outing I have ever had.[[Special:Contributions/24.79.11.46|24.79.11.46]] 13:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:We could combine it with Geohashing. [[User:Curtmack|Curtmack]] ([[User talk:Curtmack|talk]]) 20:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Too bad this comic appeared in winter, not summer (in the US at least). We could make Feb 25th "Pickup Art Day" with a pickup art meet at that day's geohash. It might not catch on if it's too cold, though. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 22:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::I've always found the cold months to be more inspiring. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 02:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Nice comic but as a non-American I was not familiar with the "pickup" term used in basketball. Perhaps next time include some temperature jokes in Fahrenheit to throw us right off. :) [[Special:Contributions/124.149.182.124|124.149.182.124]] 07:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that it's fruitless to ask others how to meet the love our out lives (our better half). Don't be a smart ass, and seldom am I as funny as I think I am. I can observe failures of others and I can try to learn from their mistakes. In the end it's necessary to be myself and figure out what I have to offer to the relationship in order to be successful. If a person is attractive and shallow they may offer a night of passionate sex, if a person is well off they may offer financial support in exchange for couple of hours of passionate sex, but if you represent who you are well you may find someone to spend and improve the rest of your lives with together. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 18:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1178: Pickup Artists

2013-02-27T18:48:48Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Oh my God, this one's brilliant. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 06:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:I did not get it. Waiting for explanation. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.63.243|95.35.63.243]] 07:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:See also comic #1027 [[Special:Contributions/65.49.14.70|65.49.14.70]] 10:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Added an explanation for the title text, but it's probably too wordy and not very clear. Anyone have any suggestions? [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 11:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Umm... "The pun lies in the fact that a pickup basketball player becomes skilled at basketball."
I thought the pun was on the word "artist" meaning someone that does...art. The same goes with the "friend zone" explanation. It doesn't seem like disbelief, but rather that there is a "place to meet friends" or "a place that friends go to hang out" (in other words, "a zone of friends"). So the joke is that the world seems happier because you think the words are describing subjectively better things than they actually are. But that's just my take on the comic. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 11:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:P.S. This is a Saturday comic? [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 11:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Not anymore. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:Al right, just change it then. :) [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 14:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::It's a matter of opinion, though. I don't make edits based on opinion. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 02:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I think it's time we give the other guy a name. What about Sleezy Guy? [[User:ChrisFortyTwo|ChrisFortyTwo]] ([[User talk:ChrisFortyTwo|talk]])
:Seconded. I remember he's been named Harry in the past. A quick search brings up [[1028]]. He's appeared quite a bit now, and he probably should be named. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 12:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Thirded. But maybe something a bit nicer sounding. [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 13:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::Fourthed. And changed to 'Harry'. Should we add a tag as well? [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 14:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::That would probably have to go through due process via [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals]], but it should go through quickly enough, given how often Harry appears. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::Ah, now I get it, hehe – Harry–Hairy! (Are those two pronounced exactly the same, or just similarly?) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::I think he should be called "Hairy", not Harry: attributing a random real name to a character that the author himself didn't choose (like [[Megan]] or [[Mrs. Roberts]]) is likely to bring up issues, whereas calling him in a way that simply reflects how he's drawn (like [[Cueball]], [[Black Hat]], [[Ponytail]] and all the rest) just goes in direct line with what is done in the source; and it's self-explanatory in the description, it does not require the reader to be accustomed to the habits of this wiki (currently, reading "Harry" out of nowhere is quite uncanny). So, since it works pretty well here, let's call him Hairy. - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 19:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Agreed. Let's wait for the name to go through before messing with the edits further. [[User:Cornarias|Cornarias]] ([[User talk:Cornarias|talk]]) 21:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::See [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals#New character]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::+1 for Hairy (or Curly?) -1 for Harry. Cueball, Black Hat, etc are descriptions, not names. [[Special:Contributions/64.125.71.142|64.125.71.142]] 23:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Beret Guy is right, a day of Pickup Art sounds like a lot of fun. Everybody pack their sketchbooks, pastels and watercolours, wander around town till they find interesting vignettes or vistas, everyone sketch and paint without showing each other till picnic time. At PT, all pull out their packed lunches and eat and enjoy each other's efforts. He'll, this sounds 1000% better than almost every pub outing I have ever had.[[Special:Contributions/24.79.11.46|24.79.11.46]] 13:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:We could combine it with Geohashing. [[User:Curtmack|Curtmack]] ([[User talk:Curtmack|talk]]) 20:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::Too bad this comic appeared in winter, not summer (in the US at least). We could make Feb 25th "Pickup Art Day" with a pickup art meet at that day's geohash. It might not catch on if it's too cold, though. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 22:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::I've always found the cold months to be more inspiring. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 02:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Nice comic but as a non-American I was not familiar with the "pickup" term used in basketball. Perhaps next time include some temperature jokes in Fahrenheit to throw us right off. :) [[Special:Contributions/124.149.182.124|124.149.182.124]] 07:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that it's fruitless to ask others how to meet the love our out lives (our better half). Don't be a smart ass, and seldom am I as funny as I think I am. You can observe failures of others and try to learn from their mistakes. In the end it's necessary to be yourself and figure out what you have to offer to the relationship in order to be successful, if you are attractive and shallow you may offer a night of passionate love, if you are well off you may offer financial support in exchange for couple of hours of passionate love, but if you represent who you are well you may find someone to spend and improve the rest of your lives together. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 18:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1127: Congress

2013-02-27T18:36:46Z

24.51.197.187: XKCD's unexpected life's lessons.

Being a stupidly over political (please don't ask me here, this is an xkcd wiki not reddit) kinda guy, this one really interests me. Another one of those amazing visualizations of real-world facts xkcd is so great at. I have no idea what one might write for an explanation that would be useful. Everything is explained in pretty thorough fashion right on the panel... {{unsigned|Renegade4dio}}
:Well, there's always the transcript for us to <strike>waste time</strike> work on. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 12:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

== Congress as check ==

Perhaps a pedantic point, but I couldn't leave the description describing Congress as simply a check on the president. That would imply that the president has free reign (literally) and that Congress only acts (or, more often, doesn't act) to veto the president. That is a much more accurate description of the president's role in legislation (or of a pre-modern English Parliament). {{unsigned|208.32.120.10}}

==Typo==
There's a typo on the right-hand side of the comic around 1952 - "''Other than these few years after the war; the House [was] under control Democratic control for the entire period ...''". The "was" is missing. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 15:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

== definition of conservative is pejorative ==

Conservatives are not interested in preserving wealth amongst those who have it - they are interested in creating as many opportunities to create wealth as possible by reducing unwanted government regulation and returning to constitutional limitations (aka 10th ammendment) on Federal power. A different view of liberty and rights than what liberals maintain, but highly supported - I find your definition to be highly pejorative. [[User:Ghaller825|Ghaller825]] ([[User talk:Ghaller825|talk]]) 18:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

:That went completely over my head, but you're entirely welcome to change it if the definition in the article bothers you. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 09:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

::Perhaps the segment could be changed to say "conservatives believe the government should not interfere with a person's wealth", or something very similar. The resistence to government involvement seems to be more consistent across the various degrees of the modern conservative movement. I'll admit that my suggested statement is also false, because almost everyone believes there should be some amount of taxes, and taxes affect wealth. However, it should be more palatable to the political ideology.

:I understand your offense, Ghaller. On the other hand, the current phrasing using "making wealth" is also a loaded term, as many factory workers would feel that they are "the ones who make it" more than the CEOs, but are certainly not getting more money. I'm not saying I agree with that perspective, just that it's a suggestive statement, and this is not the forum to have an endless debate over it. The unsigned comment above me has the best compromise in my opinion, so I will implement it. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 18:12, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

==Errors==
I notice the following: (1) George H.W. Bush is shown as serving in the Senate. He never made it to the Senate, just the House. (2) Abraham Lincoln appears to be shown as serving in the House for about seven years. He only was there for one term (two years). --[[Special:Contributions/99.14.234.119|99.14.234.119]] 02:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

It also lists John A. Garfield in the House from 1862 until his election -- it is James A Garfield, not John.

It lists Abraham Lincoln (and the Republican Party of Lincoln's time in general) as right-leaning, even though it's widely accepted that the Republicans of that era (whose base was made up mostly of Northern abolitionists) were the more liberal party, and the Democrats (whose base was comprised in large part by Southern slave-owners) the more conservative. {{unsigned|140.247.0.73}}

==Definition of Liberal==

While in the US, liberal might mean left-wing, in the UK it's pretty central and in Australia it's right-wing. Go figure.--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
:Classical liberalism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism] is very different from American liberalism; Americans would recognize it more as Libertarianism. --[[User:Prooffreader|Prooffreader]] ([[User talk:Prooffreader|talk]]) 09:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

==Typo==

In the "How Ideology Is Calculated" section, I note "acccounting".--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

==Conservative?==

He didn't exactly say that Conservatives are interested in preserving wealth amongst those who have it; I think the implication is that "if you made it, you should get to keep it" (or as much of it as possible, hence lower taxes). One ''consequence'' of this is that the ''distribution'' of wealth tends to remain static, in that the rich stay rich and the poor stay (relatively) poorer. Whether or not that consequence is an intentional one is perhaps in the eye of the pejoratively-inclined beholder :-)--[[User:Joe Green|Joe Green]] ([[User talk:Joe Green|talk]]) 04:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

:I made an edit to that effect, but it appears to have been wiped out by another editor calling it "right-wing trolling". If you would like to try re-wording it, please do. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 05:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

::By changing just a little bit I think I removed most of the negative connotation.[[User:Bugefun|Bugefun]] ([[User talk:Bugefun|talk]]) 05:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Arteries==
Kind of unrelated but the diagram to me looks sort of like arteries and veins, with the red and blue. And the branches look like how they branch off the heart and stuff. [[User:Bugefun|Bugefun]] ([[User talk:Bugefun|talk]]) 05:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Red inside blue and vice versa==
What do the red strands inside the blue section and the blue strands inside the red section represent? It doesn't seem to be explained anywhere.
[[Special:Contributions/199.27.200.82|199.27.200.82]] 14:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

:Red on the blue side represents "Conservative Democrats" and Blue on the red side represents "Liberal Republicans". Confusing a bit, but so are both those political terms (lol). It is stated (in small text) on the top right diagram of the comic--[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 14:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

==Left vs right - or why this comic is stupid==
The traditional definition of left vs right (people attribute all sorts of things to it these days) is the support of change (hence the names progressives vs conservatives, or radicals vs reactionaries). The terminology comes from France where those that advocated reforms to government sat on the left of the chamber and those that wanted to do such things as restore the monarchy sat on the right. Your traditional Burkian conservative (smidgen to the right of the centre) would accept change is inevitable, but must be controlled. To the right of that people that want to maintain the status quo, further right people that want to go back to some "better time". To the left you get the, let change happen as it comes, further left lets make change a "good thing", to the furthest left "lets force change". A large part of the Marxist philosophy is that not only is communism desirable, but inevitable as according to Marx that is the final destination of all societies. Now to my point. Over time the parties have switched sides and often will be left on one issue and right on another. Often the parties themselves were divided (look at the civil rights act's passage) To simply say Democratic Party has always been left and the Republicans have always been is such a gross simplification that is renders the whole image a farce. [[Special:Contributions/192.43.227.18|192.43.227.18]] 01:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

==What can we learn from this?==
I've learned that our congress (and law in general) is too complex. We are tying to keep outdated laws relevant by using an endless series of exceptions (legally called amendments). I hope someday we will be able to scrap the whole thing and simplify our laws so that our children do not have to spend up to a quarter of their lives learning our mistakes. XKCD, please help us simplify something like law so you don't have to waste your time visualizing something as broken as our understanding of it. - e-inspired [[Special:Contributions/24.51.197.187|24.51.197.187]] 18:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)