explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1821: Incinerator

2017-04-13T17:34:42Z

CoderLass: Recursion

The crisis could come from a more abstract feeling thinking of the incinerating/trash devices as Ouroboros, serpents biting their own tail or nilpotent matrices. Nothing would be left. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.62|162.158.88.62]] 06:01, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

There also might be a more practical explanation of the crisis; in my experience it is extremely difficult to convey to trash collectors that a garbage can itself is part of the trash. Merely placing it inside another, larger trash receptacle is often not enough to convince them to collect it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.58|108.162.216.58]] 07:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
:I actually had the opposite problem recently, where we obtained a medium sized plastic tote with a recyclables logo on the side, and they were kind enough to take all the recyclable materials, apparently including the tote. So be careful what you wish for.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.51|162.158.74.51]] 17:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
:Sadly, that might not have been the trash collectors. That is, I'm sure they took the recyclables, but it's possible one of your neighbors said, "Hey, free tote," especially since if it was new, clean, and did not have any identifying marks, such as your address, on it.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.63|162.158.62.63]] 23:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
: I find that the people who post here have the weirdest, most unusual problems. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.203|141.101.104.203]] 07:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Disposing of a trash can by putting it in its replacement is simply insustainable: After a few generations, you end up with a container that won't fit trough your door! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.173|162.158.91.173]] 13:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Maybe the crisis was recursive -- using the broken container to dispose of itself.[[User:CoderLass|CoderLass]] ([[User talk:CoderLass|talk]]) 17:34, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1811: Best-Tasting Colors

2017-03-20T21:53:39Z

CoderLass: No blue food

This is obviously wrong because white chocolate is not [[378|real]] chocolate. Let the flamewar begin. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.34|172.68.54.34]] 15:22, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
:Well, it's not technically chocolate, but it is a derivative -- insert math joke -- and the chart doesn't seem to be concerned with what it is, just with what it's called; after all, that which is called white chocolate by any other name would taste just as sweet, putting some off while others enjoy it. [[User:Nyperold|Nyperold]] ([[User talk:Nyperold|talk]]) 16:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
::As per your request: http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/626:_Newton_and_Leibniz [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.52|172.68.34.52]] 22:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Purple skittles in France taste like blueberry.{{unsigned ip|141.101.69.105}}

Vanilla isn't white.{{unsigned ip|172.68.58.131}}

What are all of the question marks here for? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.251|108.162.246.251]] 15:51, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I think those question marks at the top are supposed to be bubble gum.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.10|108.162.245.10]] 16:03, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I suspect this is Randall's take on Fake News™, since it contains verifiably false claims such as coffee and liquorice being bad, and candy floss being better than watermelon

[[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.66|141.101.107.66]] 16:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

"In the title text, Randall asserts that his rankings of colors and foods are indisputable (with the exception of chocolate). This is of course ridiculous, as everyone knows that watermelon and strawberry are inherently superior to the likes of Citrus Fruits."...but his rankings of strawberry and of watermelon (x2) are higher than for oranges, lemons, and limes. There is no contradiction here; nothing that is ridiculous. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.118|162.158.78.118]] 16:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
: Liquorice, while an acquired taste certainly doesn't belong that far down, I'd take it over a long list of other things on the chart, but then again ... I'm Scandinavian {{unsigned ip|162.158.134.178}}
:: Sweet liquorice, or salted? I'm pretty sure there should be two dots there. Also, coffee and chocolate are both missing from the right end of the 'black' row. Most of the others, I think I'd flip the line, but keep each line in the same place. I guess taste is variable in weird ways [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.109|162.158.154.109]] 21:56, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. The selection seems quite diverse compared to a standard bag of jelly beans, but doesn't really cover the range of a gourmet brand. I wonder where root beer falls, or Dr Pepper. And that's not even getting into color classification when the bean has more than one color. Personally, when I used to get gourmet jelly bean brands, I would do the squeeze-and-sniff test on a particular shade of brown, because it was used for both coffee and a flavor I liked. I remember Lore Sjöberg having a similar problem with cinnamon and cherry, but if he ever arrived at my solution, I don't know. [[User:Nyperold|Nyperold]] ([[User talk:Nyperold|talk]]) 16:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

:Interesting theory that he's talking about flavors of jelly beans, though there's really nothing to indicate he is. But I believe every one of those food flavors are included in, for example, Jelly Belly's lineup (with the possible exception of a White Chocolate flavor). [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

:My take upon reading the comic was that it refers to Jelly Bellies. If you have ever tried a popcorn jelly belly you know how bad they are....[[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.72|172.68.65.72]] 23:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
:::I really like the "buttered popcorn" Jelly Bellys [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:27, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
::If you look at https://www.jellybelly.com/flavor-guides webpage though a lot of flavors from the comics are not jelly belly flavors.--[[User:Lul|Lul]] ([[User talk:Lul|talk]]) 11:52, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
I enjoy licorice and white chocolate, and I think strawberry is overrated. Fight me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.16|162.158.126.16]] 17:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

If it is jelly beans it is definitely more agreeable then actual food. Because popcorn jelly beans are awful which explains why there a outlier. It also explains why there split by color.{{unsigned ip|172.68.58.89}}
:It could also explain the question marks. They could be jelly beans for which he was not able to identify the flavor, but was able to judge it.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.5|162.158.79.5]] 13:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Wow. I've seen stupidity, I've seen REAL stupidity, and now there comes this comic. Randall is confirmed for pleb taste. Also quit fucking editing my posts just because I have an objectively better taste than you do and it offends you that someone would call randall out on having shit taste in flavors.{{unsigned ip|173.245.50.96}}

I'm a retard pretending i'm superior by liking certain fruits. {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.52}}

My tastes now rate sweet tastes poorly - as well as sour, so I would down rate candyfloss, but not up rate lemon. The variability of chocolate represents the range from choc flavoured sweet margarine, through to 90% coco solids. My peak preference being about 50-60%. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 18:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Patrician taste good sir. Though, I respectfully disagree with your opinion on sour only somewhat: Lemons combined with other flavors make lemons pretty dang tasty.{{unsigned ip|173.245.50.96}}

Has anyone figured out what all the question marks in the graph are for yet? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.59.190|162.158.59.190]] 20:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

All the question marks made me wonder if he accidentally published an early draft again or something. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.90|172.68.133.90]] 20:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

: I'm fairly sure the question marks are related to lewd matters. [[User:KromdarTheAllHungering|KromdarTheAllHungering]] ([[User talk:KromdarTheAllHungering|talk]]) 02:56, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I added a table. Can somebody fix and fill it as I am not the best at tablework (as you can see). [[User:Dontknow|Dontknow]] ([[User talk:Dontknow|talk]]) 02:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

: Fixed and partially filled! [[User:Cody Code|Cody Code]] ([[User talk:Cody Code|talk]]) 03:52, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

;Transcript

As the transcript is for the visually impaired, I think the colored letters should only be used in the explanation and described [pink letters] in the transcript; what do you think? --[[User:LaVe|LaVe]] ([[User talk:LaVe|talk]]) 21:06, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
:The transcript is not only for visually impaired. Nevertheless those translation programs know colors. Be smart. And a simple bold header is enough at the discussion page.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

“Most people” do not like licorice; Most Americans, you mean. Licorice is extremely popular in Europe in many varieties. But they don’t like root beer. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.227|108.162.246.227]] 06:04, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
: AFAIR in pretty much every food item common to the US and the UK, the US version had a far larger sugar content. My theory is that salt was more expensive that sugar everywhere but the coastal regions, so preserving with sugar was the way to go and hence the apparent national "sweet tooth" [[User:RoyT|RoyT]] ([[User talk:RoyT|talk]]) 08:04, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
: Hello. As a european myself, i can assure you that Licorice is not extremly popular here, except among some loners, who are recieved and watched critically by their fellow europeans. Most people in Europe don't like it. Also, most people in Europe heard of rootbeer, but nearly noone ever drank it - i wouldn't even know where to get it here. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.149|162.158.91.149]] 10:08, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
:: You can't speak for most people in Europe. Tastes are really different according to which countries you speak about. There are lot of European alcohols with licorice flavors and also lot of licorice candies...{{unsigned|Lul}}

Wait, lemons? I like lemons. Anyone with an excess of raw lemons for eating should send me them. I would eat them consistently if it weren't for the fact that doing so makes my gums sore afterwards. I've several times distilled lemon juice into a much, much stronger "lemon syrup" with about 1/10th the volume and the consistency of maple syrup, and my general feeling is that I would eat it like candy if it were widely available, even though it has virtually no sugar in it. Lemon flavor is best flavor! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.132|172.68.133.132]] 07:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
: Lemon juice has plenty of sugar in it. That's why it's used for invisible ink. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.16|198.41.238.16]] 08:28, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
: I want to try lemon syrup now; bet it would be perfect for pancakes. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.109|162.158.154.109]] 18:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Why are those values approximate when they have four significant figures? [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.16|198.41.238.16]] 08:28, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

How are bananas not included?{{unsigned ip|162.158.78.148}}

The watermelon flavor of Airheads candy is completely green. Also, many watermelon candies partially include a green part to mimic the appearance of watermelon, and even though they taste the same, may elicit a false feeling of tasting better. [[Special:Contributions/76.252.228.30|76.252.228.30]] 12:04, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

This is some manchild pleb taste. "EWW COFFY NASTY >:( MOMMY I WANT SWEET :O" seriously.{{unsigned ip|173.245.50.96 }}

The question marks for blue might have to do with George Carlin's lament over the lack of blue food.[[User:CoderLass|CoderLass]] ([[User talk:CoderLass|talk]]) 21:53, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:326: Effect an Effect

2014-11-04T23:38:58Z

CoderLass: Added a comment about a meeting.

Can someone explain the title text, thanks! –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 14:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah, I'd like to see that get added as well. I kind of assumed it was like taking a kill-count; one painting for each victim. I'm not sure what it specifically refers to, or what the origin of the term is. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 05:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
:seen the silhouette images of enemy planes painted next to the pilots canopy on mid 20th century fighter planes? its a reference to that. i've only seen it in films but presumably where there's smoke there's fire. *edit for improved explanation: the images are painted by the pilot to show how many 'bogies' he's shot down,much like how cueball will paint the grammarian on his desktop as another victim. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 10:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
::"mid 20th century fighter planes"?? As opposed to what? Late 18th century fighter planes?[[Special:Contributions/86.44.215.73|86.44.215.73]] 02:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
:::As opposed to late 20th and 21st century fighter planes perhaps? [[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 08:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::And assuming "mid 20th century" refers to World War II of 1939-45 (less years for Americans, arguably more so for some other countries), there were already gun-attached 'fighter aircraft' in WWI and onward (though often technically called "scouts" or "pursuit" aircraft, in English and American terminology, respectively... other countries/languages having their own varients). Maybe not from the ''very'' start of the 1914-18 conflict, as opposing aircrews were apparently quite friendly to each other for a while until some air-reconnaissance pilot took a pistol up with him (or perhaps it was originally a solution against airships, leastwise those that they could get high enough to attack). And then some people had the idea to hard-attach various projectile weapons to the planes. And, oh boy, they had fun for a while trying to mount them to fire through their own front propellers, didn't they? ;)
::::Anyway, the concept definitely had become engrained before the 'mid' 20thC, by whatever name. Did the Red Baron paint kills on his triplane? Did Biggles (fictionally) do so? Someone ought to actually research this. ;) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 16:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Effects effecting affects affect effects effectively. Also, Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. --naginalf [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 20:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
: Sure, but really, if an effect can effect affects effectively, how many affects can an effect effectively effect? [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
:: As many affects as an effect can effect if an effect can effect affects effectively. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.162|108.162.238.162]] 04:09, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I was in a meeting once where a guy said, "I am effected by my environment." I replied, "Oh? We think, therefore you are?" Nobody laughed. Sigh.

Talk:1405: Meteor

2014-11-04T23:32:10Z

CoderLass: Added Mnemonic

If meteors fall, then what is a meteoric rise? [[User:Rfvtg|Rfvtg]] ([[User talk:Rfvtg|talk]]) 04:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
:Fast. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.120|103.22.201.120]] 08:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
:: See [[1115]] for explanation [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 11:19, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The legend of this comic might refer to pedology, the study of soil. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.87|173.245.53.87]] 06:56, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

But the sky is blue. It is a desaturated blue with a center wavelength of 474 to 476 nm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_sky_radiation The statement that the sky is "anything but blue" is wrong.[[User:ExternalMonolog|ExternalMonolog]] ([[User talk:ExternalMonolog|talk]]) 08:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)ExternalMonolog

does anyone else find the capitalization variation of LAVA vs lava funny? In all seriousness that would make them two different programming variables... However it is hard to notice and isn't clear on what the difference in meaning should be. This is one of the reason for using Object mObject instead of Object object in java.
[[User:Mr.Smiley|Mr.Smiley]] ([[User talk:Mr.Smiley|talk]]) 10:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
:I think it might just be for emphasis. The pedantic Cueball is becoming exasperated with the person who's getting it 'wrong'. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.205|173.245.54.205]] 11:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
And to everybody who is't a pedantic nerd, it's a rock.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 13:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Is my transcription incomplete? I feel like it is because I published it really early and I have not done many transcriptions here. [[User:InAndOutLand|InAndOutLand]] ([[User talk:InAndOutLand|talk]]) 15:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

;JOKE:What has more nutritional value, a small rock in space or a small rock falling from space onto the Earth?

:A small rock falling from space onto the Earth because it is a little meatier(meteor) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.220|108.162.246.220]] 06:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

A {{w|meteor}} (follow the link!) ''is not'' an intermediate stage in the lifespan of a chunk of rock between a meteoroid and a meteorite; it is the streak of light ''produced'' by a meteoroid during its descent through the atmosphere. It spoils the joke if we're not pedantic about the pedantry! —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 08:35, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Nice. A lot of meteorites on the earths surface today come from broken apart, differentiated asteroidal parent bodies so they ''were'' magma once. The rocky planets have grown through accretion of meteorites so all of the earths magma used to be elsewhere in the solarsystem at the very start. Plus, with temps so high under the crust, anything found down there would be molten and dissolved in the magma anyway and called such. Mark.[[User:Squirreltape|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape|talk]]) 15:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Mnemonic: In the void, meteoroid. On the site, meteorite. Neither/Nor: meteor.

Talk:1231: Habitable Zone

2013-07-10T21:14:12Z

CoderLass:

Even if you placed the mirror in Space, it would be incredibly obvious what is going on. I don't think this would work. [[Special:Contributions/96.251.85.48|96.251.85.48]] 06:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

:For this trick to work, the mirror would need to be placed AT LEAST two light years away and be at least 1AU big. Somehow I don't think this is worth it. Alternatively, you need more complicated optical system which would not only mirror Earth, but also create illusion it's further away. I still think such system would be more costly to build that ISS. Or ... well ... you could put an LCD display directly over the telescope. That's doable, cheap and as a bonus you can display planets from sci-fi there. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

::The mirror could be much smaller and closer if it's convex. PS. I don't know the 'rules' for posting, so apologies if I'm doing it wrong.[[Special:Contributions/24.72.12.221|24.72.12.221]] 13:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

::Under Hkmaly's initial proposal, the astronomer would have to make two observations, 4 years apart, in order to see the "other" telescope. [[User:Elsbree|Elsbree]] ([[User talk:Elsbree|talk]]) 07:13, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Since when do we have terrestrial telescopes that can directly resolve exoplanets? I think we're still at the stage where we get excited by troughs in light curves EDIT: TIL that there are specific techniques for exactly that: {{w|Nulling interferometry}} and {{w|Vortex coronagraph}}s. Still, they may work for hot Jupiters, but don't think we can detect Goldilocks exoplanets from the ground yet; much less see oceans and visible weather. [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 09:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

::You can't detect them from the ground, but you are invited use your pattern-recognition skills to detect planets by examining the images sent back by the Kepler telescope. It's part of the citizen-scientist project. Go to http://www.PlanetHunters.org .[[User:CoderLass|CoderLass]] ([[User talk:CoderLass|talk]]) 21:14, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

My first thought was that you need to point the mirror so that it's aimed perfectly at the Earth. Then, I realized that you can use a corner reflector so that the aim doesn't have to be precise at all. Then, I came to the following realization: what if a significant portion of the stars we see are simply reflections of our own solar system due to a massive prank done by aliens? [[Special:Contributions/174.88.153.125|174.88.153.125]] 15:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

:Or all of them? Of course including additional variable features like red shift. So [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Universum.jpg they were right!] Forever alone... --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 16:31, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

:: Where would these aliens reside? Either we're pranking ourselves, or there are other stars. [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 17:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

::: What if there's a mirage-like effect in space, that causes light rays to mirror back to us with some variability, maybe different sizes, shapes, colors, and the universe is actuallly quite small? I mean, other than light, do we seriously detect gravity and other stuff out there (other than the visible effects of those properties on other stuff we see)? [[Special:Contributions/189.5.110.148|189.5.110.148]] 06:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

:::: If the universe is curved spherically, something similar to this would actually happen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_Universe [[Special:Contributions/174.88.153.125|174.88.153.125]] 16:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't reflected light make the mirror extremely bright and impossible to view directly?{{unsigned ip|49.176.71.2}}

: Depends on how far the aliens decide to put the mirror. Light gets weaker with distance, which is the same reason that distant stars (many of which are brighter than our sun) don't overwhelm us with light. Also...what if the sun is merely a reflection of something? [[Special:Contributions/174.88.153.125|174.88.153.125]] 16:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1232: Realistic Criteria

2013-07-10T20:53:37Z

CoderLass: /* Do What Works */ new section

I'm not sure I want NASA (or other space agencies) to solve all problems on earth. And what constitutes a problem? My laptop crashed this morning? Fighting in Afghanistan? Flooding in Germany and Poland? [[User:Kaa-ching|Kaa-ching]] ([[User talk:Kaa-ching|talk]]) 07:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Hence the title: "Realistic Criteria" ;-) [[User:Kaa-ching|Kaa-ching]] ([[User talk:Kaa-ching|talk]]) 07:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

:I'm sure there is more that enough problems for 15 years in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ alone. Also, exploring other planets can help solving problems on our one. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:44, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::Earth should have a Bugzilla. [[Special:Contributions/80.195.213.223|80.195.213.223]] 13:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

''"The argument between exploring space vs saving resources and solving problems on Earth is a pretty common modern one, both in theory, and in practice."''

Actually, we shouldn't have started expanding our species out of Africa before predicting (and allowing for) the development of Religious Hatred, Mechanised Warfare and Oppressive Copyright Practices...{{unsigned ip|86.10.119.75}}
:Personally, I usually quickly send my initial Zulu forces up to blockade the land-bridge in the vicinity of Egypt, and ''then'' expand out throughout Africa so as to allow me to develop my own superior navy (and as many wonders as I can, including the library) before anyone else gets there. (Apologies, my comment below rather sent me down this line of thought.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.53.132|178.98.53.132]] 17:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

This attacks a rather typical conservative attitude that we shouldn't "waste" resources on "minor" problems when there are bigger problems to deal with. (e.g., "Why are you giving me a ticket for speeding when there are murderers out there you should be catching?") The title text pinpoints the fallacy of it (if you only ever work on the biggest problems, you will never solve that problem and also never accomplish anything else) [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 16:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I have issue with 'The comic is, at its core, a parody of the overly optimistic scientism that often attaches itself to the idea of a manned Mars mission, which in the minds of its supporters is always "ten to fifteen years away," no matter the unsolved technical or logistics challenges that are still standing in the way.' I think it's the converse. The overly optimistic ''semi-''scientism that if we put something like Mars exploration on hold that the resources this frees up would be instantly transferable into "solving all the world's ills". The ten-to-fifteen-year span is then the (sarcastic?) suggestion as to how long this would need to be done for, before we can consider them all solved and start pumping the same resources back into space missions and pick up from where we leave off.
:I agree that the 'The comic is, at its core, a parody of the overly optimistic scientism that often attaches itself to the idea of a manned Mars mission, which in the minds of its supporters is always "ten to fifteen years away," no matter the unsolved technical or logistics challenges that are still standing in the way.' line is not a correct analysis of this comic. I removed it, but would be happy to see it re-added if there is a discussion here that bring to light any evidence supporting it. [[Special:Contributions/149.32.192.33|149.32.192.33]] 13:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Mike Powers

(Reminds me of my typical Civilization-playing scenario, pumping lightbulbs into one or other single scientific advance, but switching the target when realising I would ''quite'' like something else researched (perhaps for its associated military unit), even though it wasn't my original plan on the way to (perhaps) the Alpha Centauri win. Or, more generally, jumping between all 'spare population' being scientists and them all being entertainers or tax collectors, for a few turns, to deal with morale or cashflow problems while a corrective Wonder is being built... then once it's done I'm free to blithely make it 100% Science again, if I've got such a max/min playing style at the time...) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.53.132|178.98.53.132]] 17:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Great(!) Made a unanimous decision to make the change I intended (the "Fuggit!"-labelled edit), after apparently no-one else having an opinion about the need to switch the focus round, and then quickly a set of ''other'' edits occur that don't even revert things back (which I wouldn't have minded). Anyway, don't want to cause an Edit War by reverting/de-reverting/etc, so I'm leaving the following here for your combined consideration.

Mr (or Ms) 149.32.192.33 who "removed the comment about (...) the Mars Mission". You didn't remove anything explicitly about Mars, as I'd already removed that reference and re-edited that section (check what I did in http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1232:_Realistic_Criteria&diff=prev&oldid=42725) and of all the edits I made , I actually quite liked that bit of rare non-waffling. I propose we re-add text similar to:
The comic is, at its core, looking at the idea that space exploration is something we can ill-afford to fund whilst there are so many Earth-based issues that need to be addressed.
It's indicating White-Hat's views, and is neutral about whether this is a ''sound'' idea or not. (The rest is maybe more forceful, as I'm personally definitely not an "Earth-only" person, although I'm not extreme in the other direction either so hopefully created balance.)

My thanks to the typo-corrector (I'm always mistyping "lieu", it seems). Although "spaceborne" seems more correct to me than the hyphenated version. "Space-born", yes (born of space, e.g. a person of said heritage), but "airborne" is a word in my dictionary, so... Anyway, I've no excuse when I used "seem" instead of "seam" as the root of another word.

Dgbrt: Good reduction of my waffle (surrounding my oblique reference to Teflon), but I'm saddened to lose the general (if not always proven) examples and your edit perhaps goes explicitly pro-Space more than I'd intended. Still, it's shorter and more readable. I don't understand the criteria for "Trivia" enough to understand if that'd be a more suitable locale for what was removed. (But suspect it wouldn't be for the purely hypothetical asteroid-avoiding scenario.)

And I know this is potentially a hot-topic. Hence why I used loads of words to try to indicate that it ''is'' a hot-topic, that almost everyone could have an opinion about. (Even exclusing the totally uninformed, "for every expert there's an equal and opposite expert", so I tried to make sure everybody understood why they might find the explanation neither too pro-Space or too anti-space, depending on their defauly stance.) But for now I shall leave it as is. [[Special:Contributions/178.98.53.132|178.98.53.132]] 15:58, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

:Uhhh, who should (or would) read all this?
:I'm trying to keep it simple, but all important details must be shown. That's why this article is still incomplete.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

:I apologize for the issues. I assume what happened was that we were both editing at the same time. When tried to submit and was prompted to update. I skimmed the update too quickly and only seen the "The comic is, at its core" start of your paragraph and assumed it was the "Mars Mission" paragraph and thus deleted it. I have no issues with you adding the "The comic is, at its core, looking at the idea that space exploration.." initial paragraph and you will not be starting an editing war. --[[Special:Contributions/149.32.192.33|149.32.192.33]] 15:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Mike Powers

== Chaos at the explain section ==

Please try to add your content in a proper way, people will NOT read this chaos. But even if they do, they still do not understand what you're talking about. At this moment this explain is chaos and so it is incomplete.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, chaos indeed, and I don't pretend to understand the edit-history progression. (When did the Mars Mission get specifically reintroduced? Perhaps I don't care.) How about something ''quite'' brief like...
White Hat is suggesting that the exploration of space and other planets is a luxury that we should not yet be dedicating resources to when there are so many other things for which the resources could apparently be similarly used.
Cueball agrees, possibly disingenuously, then asks how long it would be for a society purely focussed upon Earth-problem solutions to implement the necessary answers, allowing us to renew spending on the aforementioned luxuries without cause for complaint. The Title Text errs towards the lengthier period, almost certainly tongue in cheek regarding the ease of such an approach.
It is probably a simplistic point of view that funding and work currently dedicated to the space sciences are fully transferable away from this area and towards creating a utopian ideal on Earth, on a whim. It also unfairly discounts the very real possibility that large tracts of research and practical engineering might indeed have useful Earthly applications, but without the driver of 'space' may never be undertaken in the first place.
Then perhaps a final paragraph about Real Life not being a game where, turn by turn, the entire scientific apparatus can be diverted from one 'tech tree' target to another without causing stumbling blocks. And that we don't even have a well-defined Tech Tree, and sideways propogation of ideas is rife. Purely non-space research is as self-destructive to advancement as much as single-mindedly purely pursuing its space-targetted counterpart to the exception of environmental protection, food production, etc.

Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this suggestion explain the <strike>obvious</strike> direct content of the comic. Paragraph 3 deals with the issue raised (I'm very much assuming Cueball and the Title Text are being as sarcastic as White Hat is being earnest). Anything else could be considered mere opinion, but perhaps can still be kept neutral. But someone else might have better wording for all of it. [[Special:Contributions/178.98.53.132|178.98.53.132]] 22:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

== Do What Works ==

This is my first post, so I'm not sure if it's appropriate to discuss the underlying theme. If not, please let me know. Anyway . . .

Historically, for my ancestors at least, exploration and expansion to new frontiers did a lot more to solve their problems than any government programs. They came to America during the potato famine, climbed into a covered wagon and headed west.

From Apollo 15 astronaut Alfred F.Worden's poem, "Apollo Lost":

Say to me we need the money 
Just to feed the poor, 
And I say, 'Gee that's funny, 
It's for them that we explore.' 

Say to me we should be fighting, 
Say to me the world's at war. 
And I say we are uniting 
People tired of war and more. 

[[User:CoderLass|CoderLass]] ([[User talk:CoderLass|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)