explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3044: Humidifier Review

2025-02-03T10:42:10Z

Farnz:

Somehow, the text here makes me think of the air-source heat pump equivalent, i.e. ''Why shouldn't it be the case that humidifiers condense outside air and suck the water out of it, and then pump that water into the conditioned space and re-disperse it?'' Of course, the obvious answer is that doing so would be frightfully expensive and entirely unnecessary given the cost of that kind of condensation compared to the cost of water. And, of course, the capital cost for the minor plumbing to install a domestic water line to the humidifier is going to be far smaller than the capital cost of a heat pump apparatus (or whatever) to generate condensation outdoors and then pump it into the conditioned space. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 00:13, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
:Also it would still need that amount of water, just that the operator doesn't need to add it manually. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
:: It'd be a "fun" project to capture the condensate from a household ASHP in order to fill a household humidifier tank automatically, for all the wrong reasons. At the moment, ASHP condensate tends to be sent directly into the drainage system, so it's "free" water for the humidifier, you "just" need to store it from the damp months to the dry months. [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]]) 10:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

This reminds me of the whole thing with the VTuber Sakura Miko where she was using a humidifier without knowing she had to fill the tank with water for at least a year [[Special:Contributions/172.70.223.184|172.70.223.184]] 01:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Related to that, just a week ago Sharp announced a humidifier collaboration with Sakura Miko, and as part of the PR they made a formal apology for "Not being able to use magic to make a waterless humidifier" {{unsigned ip|198.41.236.162|02:01, 30 January 2025}}

I'm waiting for the HydroPro High-Efficiency Electric Kettle™ which is connected to a heat pump to heat your tea water. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.170.192|172.71.170.192]] 04:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

: ''High-Efficiency Electric Kettle™ which is connected to a heat pump to heat your tea water'' You jest; but in the US we get hot water at the sink faucet. There is a push to do it all with heat-pumps, save a hundred bucks a year! (They say more, but I've compared our use.) But the heatpumps are $2K. A dumb resistor tank is $500. Payback is well in excess of 5 years. And it would make my cold cellar even colder, thus damper. --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 06:17, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:: A heat pump water heater would (if properly installed) make the cellar colder and dryer. Essentially, it's air conditioning the cellar and that's what A/C does. In detail water will condense on the cold coils (giving up latent heat which helps heat the water) and the condensate should go down a drain reducing the amount of water in the cellar.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.107|162.158.62.107]] 16:02, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

:: Just install a dehumidifier. And feed the water that the dehumidifier into the water heater. Infinite hot water! Also, enormous electric bills. Also legionnaire's disease. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 06:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
::: All dehumidifiers and all humidifiers must be connected together for the ultimate harmony! (If there turns out to be a net need/excess, we can work out what to do... We probably have a whole load of piping leading all over the planet, by this time, so we can find the most optimal source/sink.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.33|172.70.162.33]] 13:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Another device which is often getting negative reviews for not breaking laws of physics is car. Not only that, EU laws for 2035 are basically making against the EU law for a new car to not break laws of physics. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
: The only two transportation options that do not either break the laws of physics or ultimately prove either unfeasible or useless against carbon dioxide spiking and resulting anthropogenic climate change have five toes on each one. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.42.87|162.158.42.87]] 15:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
:: Cycling burns about half the calories per mile as walking. Which one has the lower overall carbon footprint depends on a lot of factors, including the carbon created for food production, bicycle production, the lifetime and maintenance requirements for the bike, the health benefits leading to a longer life (and hence more carbon production) for the walker/rider, etc. But if you already have a bike, it's probably more efficient to ride than it is to walk. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.169|162.158.62.169]] 17:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
::: Except that this isn't how humans work. Just because you reduce your calorie expenditure on transportation doesn't mean you reduce your calorie expenditure overall - it will just get expended somewhere else. Besides which, calorie expenditure isn't tied to calorie consumption. Even if you were able to reduce your overall expenditure, it would make no difference at all to your carbon footprint. To do that you'd need to reduce how much you eat (or change its composition).[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.7|141.101.98.7]] 09:33, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
:::: You would burn fewer calories if you cycled for a while (instead of walking) though. Maybe cycling a mile compared to walking it wouldn't really make any difference, but cycling 20 miles as opposed to walking that definitely would burn fewer calories. Walking 20 miles is already going noticeably over your regular calorie expenditure, which is going to require more food no matter what, so cycling instead would definitely require less food. Although the difference is probably not too big compared to what you would usually burn. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 10:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Be sure we're talking of the same things. Cycling twenty miles might be accomplished in an hour (allowing for sympathetic terrain/roads, bike and degree of fitness), with some effort and therefore raised metabolism, but should normally take less than two hours just by keeping the wheels turning at a decent rate. Walking twenty miles might be six to twelve hours of walking (including stops, which I don't bother to assume that the rider will take).
::::: (...assuming you are physically/mentally capable of either. I regularly walk a nine-mile (rugged) path from A to B every week, taking about 3.5 hours unless I'm rushed (faster) or it is/has been raining (the 'direct' route gets muddy, either slowing me down or I divert by longer roadside routes around sections). For the purposes of the trip (for which I know I have a handy lift back), I know I have a reason to get there. (''Ocasionally'' with a diversion to a handy geohash!) I probably wouldn't walk in a nine-mile circuit, without something to do at the extremities of the point. Even though I ''have'' walked 20+ miles, I'd need even more incentive. Meanwhile, I wouldn't go cycling for 'just' nine miles of circuit, that's a waste of time in the other direction. The pleasure of the ride (balanced with the effort of it, and preparing for it) means that 20 miles of no other purpose is at the lower end. But then I was brought up as a cyclist used to weekly 50+ mile rides via at least one cafe-stop, or similar. I know some people wouldn't/couldn't/daren't walk maybe half a mile (total) to the shops and back, ''or'' ride there. Others (not me!) will happily ride as fast as they can for 12 or 24 hours, [http://www.rra.org.uk/Records-Place-to-Place.html or more], for their own reasons.)
:::::...Anyway... Having saved enough time to have five hours for every hour of travel, you don't then flatline your activity and consider it done, but continue to exist. Even if that's vegging out in front of the TV. 20 miles on the bike should probably include the hours (and the meals) you spend pre- and/or post-trip, which map to the equivalent time you'd spend for the same walk ''without'' the bicycle. Also, as you might or might not also have the bike, whatever the reason you can't/shan't use it, hard to factor in the 'investment' carbon footprint for equipment you might or might not use, and which might amortise its 'cost' across an indeterminate number of actual uses. Much like you could have a car or any other vehicle but can only reliably compare fuel/charging costs, between alternative modes of travel, not usually the capital costs...
:::::And even wear-and-tear-based upkeep is also a somewhat variable relationship. I wear out walking shoes within a year or two. I typically expect my bike tyres (and inner-tubes) to last much longer, but are subject to unrepairable damage at any time (I've had to deal with three separate punctures in a single day, before, luckily was easy to patch), which can badly mess with the running average.
::::: The point being that comparison is difficult. And even if you're sure you've tied down what you mean, someone else may think it applies to their own (different) understanding. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.246|172.70.91.246]] 17:47, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
::::: You would burn less calories ''doing the cycling'' vs ''doing the walking'', but you wouldn't burn less calories ''overall'', because the calories you 'saved' would simply end up being burnt elsewhere. Even if you drove the journey, your overall calorie expenditure would still end up being the same. And in any case the food you consume doesn't tend to have much relationship to how much you 'require' — just because you walk rather than cycle doesn't mean you're then going to have a smaller portion at dinner — so how much you're burning is fairly irrelevant to carbon footprint.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.124|172.71.178.124]] 09:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
::Actually, climate activists are trying to avoid mentioning it, but humans are TOTALLY significant producers of CO2 considering how many of them are. But mentioning it reveals the uncomfortable truth: we can't REALLY get to zero carbon dioxide emission. It's not realistic goal. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 06:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
:::The idea isn't zero emissions, it's ''net'' zero - as much coming out as goes in.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.182|172.69.43.182]] 09:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Zero stars:

Dried out my house when I was already dehydrated

- BButton1869
[[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 20:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure conservation of mass is the right law here. It would be possible to increase humidity without using water or violating the conservation of mass, such as by burning hydrogen. The relevant law here is the conservation of ''molecular quantity''. Except . . . that's not a law (hence my hydrogen combustion counterexample). What's going on here is that you cannot change the amount of water ''without a chemical reaction'', essentially by definition. So any humidifier that operates in a purely mechanical manner without reacting any chemicals will "conserve water" in this sense.

In the real world, every humidifier works this way, and it would rarely make sense to do it any other way. In fact, you are more likely to see oxygen made from water (e.g. in a submarine or space station) than vice-versa. However, if you have a natural gas furnace, that will produce water, and in principle, there's no reason that produced water could not be fed into a humidifier, thus saving on the water bill. Highly efficient furnaces capture the water without letting it out the flu, not because they want to salvage the water, but to increase efficiency. Still, the water is there, so this isn't a physically or even practically impossible demand. [[User:EebstertheGreat|EebstertheGreat]] ([[User talk:EebstertheGreat|talk]]) 01:28, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

: "''...a natural gas furnace, that will produce water, .....could ...be fed into a humidifier,''" There are gas appliances, cookers and room heaters, also gas clothes dryers, which can vent damp exhaust directly to the room. But even when I paid for water, I never fretted about the cost of humidity. And I already run a dehumidifier 7 months a year. And the hi-eff gas burners and the dehumidifier in a damp basement already force me to maintain a non-ignorable pump infrastructure to lift water out of the cellar. -- So unlike the joker in the cartoon, I am hyper-aware of my humidity.--[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 04:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

1720: Horses

2016-08-15T12:54:08Z

Farnz: Start the transcript.

{{comic
| number = 1720
| date = August 15, 2016
| title = Horses
| image = horses.png
| titletext = This car has 240% of a horse's decision-making ability and produces only 30% as much poop.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Very rough}}

[https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/10/are-consumers-automakers-and-insurers-really-ready-for-self-driving-cars/ The programming of self-driving cars has been in the news lately], as engineers and philosophers debate what rules the cars should follow in dangerous situations (for instance, what to do when forced to choose between hitting a pedestrian or swerving into oncoming traffic). Randall suggests one approach for solving this problem: to think of the car as behaving like a horse, using its own intelligence and ignoring dangerous commands in the interests of self-preservation.

Car engines are traditionally measured in {{w|horsepower}}, which (roughly) compares the power output of the engine to that of a horse. Randall suggests that an equivalent should be done for the computers in {{w|self-driving car}}s, comparing the car's ability to mitigate for a drunk driver and/or avoid obstacles to that of a horse - the car for sale in the third panel is 200 horsepower (on the higher-end of average for a family vehicle) and 3.5 horse-intelligences.

Note that riding a horse while drunk is in fact still dangerous - a badly-driven horse can toss its owner, trample passersby, fall on bad surfaces, and destroy any wagon or carriage it's pulling - and illegal in many places (for example, {{w|Licensing Act 1872|the UK and Ireland}}). A self-driving car should be able to understand road rules, which a horse will not - which is presumably why the cars in the comic and the alt-text are both specified as being more intelligent than a horse.

Another car is advertised in the alt-text which has 240% of a horse's decision-making ability while producing only 30% as much poop. This is highly unusual because cars usually don't produce any poop at all. {{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
Panel 1:
Ponytail: Drunk driving was less of a problem before cards. If you got on your horse drunk and fell asleep, it could just walk home.

Panel 2:
Ponytail: And if you tried to ride into a tree, the horse could be like "No." Forget human drivers – ''that's'' the benchmark we should be judging self-driving cars against.

Panel 3 (titled "Soon:")
White hat: This baby has 200 horses under the hood and 3.5 in the computer.

Not sure who this pair are: Ooooh!

{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2016-02-09T17:08:13Z

Farnz:

<noinclude>{{Community portal}}</noinclude>

== The Community Portal's design ==

{{tl|Community portal}} looks too Wikipedia-ish (because that's where I got it). Someone who can design things should probably fix that. It isn't protected for the time being, though it probably will be in the future (high-visibility template). --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 00:54, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Common mistake ==

This affects all pages that ever say "alt text" in reference to the TITLE text on xkcd images. "Alt text" is incorrect; Alt text refers to the text that is shown as an alternative when images are not displayed. Title text is what xkcd uses and is shown as a tool tip-like bubble when images are hovered over.

I would correct this myself but I saw no way to edit the main page. --[[User:Jillysky|Jillysky]] ([[User talk:Jillysky|talk]]) 14:21, 6 August 2012‎ (UTC)

:You actually don't need to edit the main page to fix it, as what's there is just a mirror (transclusion) of the actual content from the comic page, at [[Curiosity]], which is open for editing by anyone. Then again, the "alt-text" in that case is generated by a template, {{tl|comic}}, so that's where we should fix this. The template's code, however, is currently a terrible mess (sorry!), so I went ahead and took care of it. Thanks for catching that! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:Ah? So it's wrong, for instance, on http://m.xkcd.com? because of that I took it for granted that we could call it the alt-text... - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 17:38, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:: Yes. If you look at the page's html source, you'll see:
<nowiki><img
id="comic"
src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/curiosity.png"
title="As of this writing the NASA/JPL websites are still overloaded. Trying CURIOSITY-REAR-CAM_[256px_x_256px].torrent.SwEsUb.DVDRip.XviD-aXXo.jpg instead."
alt="Curiosity"></nowiki>
::(line breaks added for clarity) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 23:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:::That was my error in the template. I knew "image text" that has been commonly used by Jeff was not techically correct, but I didn't actually go back and confirm it was alt text before I included that tag in the template. That's to Waldir (I believe?) for correcting the template. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

== When the "official" transcript is wrong? ==
I did [[903: Extended Mind]]. Interestingly, the transcript on xkcd.com is missing the bottom line "When Wikipedia has a server outage, my apparent IQ drops by 30 points." I assume we want a complete transcript, rather than whatever xkcd.com says it is...? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 04:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

:We're focusing on the actual transcript of the comic, not the xkcd.com transcript. The official transcript is usually right, but even Randall makes mistakes sometimes. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 04:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

== Milestone: half the comics explained!! ==

Hi all! I'm pleased to announce that we have just broke the 50% mark for xkcd explanations! The page that balanced the count (568 explained, 568 to go, at the time) was [[877: Beauty]], created 01:31 UTC, 21 November 2012 by [[User:Davidy22]]. Congratulations!! :D --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:The caterer's been called! The punch will be arriving soon! Go [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]! [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 06:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::[[File:freedom.png]] Punch is served! [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 07:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

But the Main page says 407 explanations, 731 to go! What's up with that? --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 21:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

== Reverse? ==

Why in the Archive why are all the thing up until "Heatmap" in Reverse? Can someone please answer? [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:Archive? Can you provide a link or screenshot? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

http://xkcd.com/archive/ [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

::Ah, that's because the comic right after that, rtl, has a right-to-left character in it that flips all the proceeding text. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ok, i see that now. When I 1st saw that RTL I just thought that it was random letters, thankyou for explaining it for me. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It also depends on what browser you are on because on Google Chrome it was normal. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 09:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Do you think this question was asked by one of the xkcd people? ==

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090301060752AAtYugc [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Matthew Reilly ==

I would just like to tell everyone that I asked Matthew Reilly (the author) if he is ever scared that a velociraptor is going to attack him, and he said NO! He clearly needs to start worrying about them! [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 10:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

== What can we learn section ==
First of all I love your work. I believe deeper understanding of each XKCD can make a world a better place and I thank you sincerely for starting this webpage. I wanted to ask what you think about "What can we learn?" section I've been adding to some of the pages. Thank you - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:This site is actually the work of multiple editors working slowly and steadily to fill in explanations for all the old comics. Some of the xkcd comics are incredibly deep - comic [[956]] is such a poignant comic that digs into the DRM issue on so many levels. Your reflections on many of the comics are very much warranted and you're helping us create talk pages with high-quality opening posts, which is great for future discussion on this wiki. It'd be nice if you could refrain from putting headers in talk pages, technical limitations of the wiki make long explanation pages choke when headings are in the discussion page. Other than that, keep up the good work! '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::I've put in my 2 cents to comic [[956]], and thank you for teaching me how to comment and link to other comics - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::: FYI, you can always make pseudo-headings using a horizontal rule and a bold "header", but honestly I think a simple standard opening sentence would suffice. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:Oh, and the guy who draws xkcd is called {{w|Randall Munroe}}. So many glowing things to be said about him. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, I can't thank him enough for simplifying complex issues to funny stories, I think it's exactly what our generation needs - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in favor of a Mr. Rogers style of 'what lesson can be learned' on the talk page, but make sure your comments don't come across as sanctimonious and holier-than-thou as that can be really off-putting. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 19:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:: You are absolutely correct, I have not thought of that, please trust me I did not do it on purpose. Thank you Mr. Lcarsos - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 19:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you David, and I apologize that I've not made it clear that by your work, I do mean your collective work (the wiki is only as good as all the people behind it). I was trying to put the headers to allow others to find the section easier in case they start looking for it, perhaps I could make a suggestion to make it a standalone section so that others would be encouraged to contribute their own understanding of lessons they have noticed from each comic. I know the lessons I've seen, but I would love to learn from others as much as I hope they can learn from me and Mr. XKCD, thank you. - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

== DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD ==

Hello fellow editors. Do you remember the last time we were hit by a surge of automated spam? Neither do I. ConfirmEdit has really done a number on the volume of spam that we're eating - one spam account has been created since we finished configuring confirmEdit, and zero anon edits have been spam. Zero. Can you say happiness? Can you say party? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:Hehe, I'm glad! Thanks for being so relentless on the spam-fighting all this time! Maybe we should make up a new reason to make Jeff remove the /wiki/ in the URL? ;) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Awesome news! Finally the patrolling feature will be usable: [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideanons=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by registered users] / [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideliu=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by anonymous users] :) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== 1000th comic explanation!! ==

Hi all! It apparently went unnoticed that '''we have recently surpassed the mark of 1000 comic explanations!''' Some calculations based on [[:Category:Comics]] and [[Special:NewPages]] led me to the conclusion that the 1000th explanation was [[681: Gravity Wells]], created by [[User:AlexRNL]] just yesterday! Yay! This calls for a celebration, no? Congrats to [[Special:ContributionScores|everyone]] who made this happen! I'll edit [[Mediawiki:Sitenotice]] with a congratulatory message. Way to go, guys! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:ps - I also took the opportunity to flesh out our [[explain xkcd|about/history page]]. Please take a look and fix/add any details I might have missed. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

== Style guide ==
Is there a style guide for this wiki? --[[User:PeterMortensen|PeterMortensen]] ([[User talk:PeterMortensen|talk]]) 20:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
:Oh, sorry, I did forget to answer here. A guide on this is not easy, many individual comics do need special layouts because they have content never can match to a style guide. But I will give a try [[Help:Style Guide]].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

== Adblock ==

I've whitelisted the site in adblock, but the ads are still blocked.
Anyone know what' going on here and how I can fix it?--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 04:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:Huh. I was wondering why our impression counts weren't rising. I thought it was just because this site had high turnover. I've changed the webpage that the word whitelisting links to, try the instructions there instead. Project wonderful is our ad provider, and they've been pretty good to us so far. Also, thanks for helping to support the site! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::Great! I don't really mid ads as long as they aren't intrusive. Works now, Hope everyone else does it as well.--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 05:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::I saw you wrote "the webpage that the word whitelisting links to" so I went to the search box and typed whitelisting. My search didn't yield anything useful: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=whitelisting&go=Go&title=Special%3ASearch]. I don't know how to create the missing page but there oughta be a link for someone like me who searches for whitelist or whitelisting, to take them to the instructions you refer to. [[User:SaxTeacher|SaxTeacher]] ([[User talk:SaxTeacher|talk]]) 10:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
:::We already have this linked somewhere, but [https://www.projectwonderful.com/adblock.php this] is the link you want. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I normally access this site through the android app "xkcd browser". That app only links to the content part of the site and doesn't show the side bar, so the adds aren't shown either. Might be worth discussing it with the author. [[Special:Contributions/109.158.126.139|109.158.126.139]] 08:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

:We support those avenues completely, you don't need to feel bad if you use an app to browse this site. We're only really concerned when we put up ads and our impressions are less than half our page hits, because that essentially means more than half our readers aren't contributing to server costs. That's really hard to deal with. We have enough daily page hits to qualify as web publishers at very big ad agencies, but we've had to settle for relatively low rates at the smaller Project Wonderful because 60% of our users were using adblock, so the agencies rejected us because our valuable "paying" audience was too low for them to consider us. That's been the difference between us using dedicated servers to host the site and hiring a contractor to set it up, and the (admittedly somewhat decent) shared hosting plan that we have to settle for now. We can only afford the shared hosting, because the small-scale advertisers at Project Wonderful don't even pay for full days of advertising; most of the time, we make less per day than the posted $3.90 price. That said, we're grateful that Project Wonderful would take us as a publisher when no one else would, but it really feels like the difference between being accepted to community college and being accepted to an ivy league school. For a similar reason, the Google ads route was not sufficient to satisfy our needs; not a large enough proportion of our users were looking at ads, so we either needed to spam them and degrade the site, or we needed to make them refresh, which makes pages slow and causes needlessly high traffic for a lot of users. We didn't want our ads to make the site worse, because that would drive away users and defeat the purpose of us being a public resource for xkcd readers. We actually decided to go the agency route pretty early, because adsense takes a massive cut of revenues and gives us little control over what ads or advertisers actually showed, which was not okay with us. Whoah, I wrote a lot. I hope it was coherent. Maybe someday I'll collect my thoughts and write a proper summary on how and why we advertise. Also, if you have any questions about anything ad-related, you can always ask us at [[explain xkcd talk:Advertise Here]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

== Feynman? ==

Feynman (both in [[182: Nash|living]] and [[397: Unscientific|zombie]] form) probably deserves an entry in the [[Template:Navbox characters|character navbox]] template doesn't he? [[Special:Contributions/128.250.152.198|128.250.152.198]] 02:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:That's two comics out of 1200+. Three if you count the song. Not quite enough yet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:: If that's the criterion, then we need to get rid of [[Brown Hat]]. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

== Job Interview (Electric Soup) ==

The soup is clearly being poured out of an electric socket. This "electric soup" is probably not a reference to the alcoholic brew favoured by Scottish tramps, but more likely to the virtual nature of the company. {{unsigned|Sulis}}
:Hey, go here [[Talk:1293: Job Interview‎]] for discussions. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

== Is there a similar, transcripted service for The Oatmeal? ==

Hi everyone - this site is a real gem, I've sent it to a friend of mine who can't read XKCD because she's blind. The transcripts on this site are a real boon!

Does anyone know if there is a similar service for The Oatmeal? I've searched and searched, but found nothing so far.

Thanks :)

Jeff

:As far as I know we are kind of unique in the web comics world. I think we get away with it because Randall publishes all his comics as Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. We liberally link back to xkcd, and we don't make a penny (The ads are just to cover server expenses, because wikis and the databases that support them get big when you're covering a body of work like xkcd). I haven't looked into the copyright Matt uses for the Oatmeal, but he seems like a cool enough guy to not kill a community transcripting effort of his comics. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

== what if 103: Vanishing Water - comics ==

Please explain the 2nd and the 4th comics from http://what-if.xkcd.com/103/

"Just tried to sail my boat over land, because I didn't learn from that kid in the Zephyr." (who's the kid from Zephyr?)

"A third time?" (maybe whales were dropped twice before in other what-ifs?) [[User:Daniel Carrero|Daniel Carrero]] ([[User talk:Daniel Carrero|talk]]) 21:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

:"A third time?" is a reference to a whale falling twice in "Hitchiker's guide to the Galaxy". Been a while, so I don't remember the details of how this fit in, but the second time it happened to the whale, he thought "Not again" or something along those lines. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Raises the question of if we should explain jokes imbedded in What If comics. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

== Discussion usage ==

Am I being a killjoy in feeling that the discussion section should be mainly limited to discussion on improving the explanation, gathering consensus and that type of thing.
Specifically, the discussion for [[1418: Horse]] is quickly turning into every man and his dog posting a sentence in the style of the comic, which doesn't really add anything to the page other than clutter.

Personally, I'd just delete most of them, but I think I might be turning into a grumpy old bugger... --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
:The discussion is also there for just talking about the comic. Those guys aren't wildly off-topic, there's no need to clamp down on what they get to talk about. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

::Yep, I must just be grumpy and draconian! Lesson learned --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

== 2014 Christmas header ==

Since the header for the site current contains a [http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/store_default.png graphic link to the store] that promises that Randall probably won't ship you a [[:Category:Bobcats|bobcat]], it seems to me that probably ought to be preserved and explained somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.189|173.245.56.189]] 17:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

== XKCD at LanguageLog ==

Arnold Zwicky (of the well-known linguistics blog Language Log) has put together a list of linguistics-related XKCD strips, here: http://arnoldzwicky.org/the-language-of-comics/comics-lists/xkcd-cartoons/ I thought it might be appropriate for a copy of the list (maybe a category) to be created from it. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.79|199.27.133.79]] 03:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:[[:Category:Language]] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

== Bookmarklet ==

Hello there, I've created a little bookmarklet (https://ginkobox.fr/shaarli/?a77vQw) and I thought it might be useful for someone out there.

When launched, it adds the 'explain' before xkcd.com and the browser loads the explainxkcd page. I've tested it only on Firefox.

(Contact @ https://ginkobox.fr/wiki/doku.php?id=about) {{unsigned ip|‎108.162.229.100}}

== Is there a RSS feed for What If? ==

Is there a RSS feed for What If?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 11:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
:No, because we cover the comics. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

== My User Page ==

Can someone help me with [[user:17jiangz1|my user page]]? I can't seem to remove the large space on top.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 07:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
: The only solution I've found is to remove the contribution scores (data6=...). Not sure what exactly is triggering this bug. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 21:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I am receiving "Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character ""." for <code><pre>{{#expr: {{formatnum:{{#cscore:17jiangz1|pages}}|R}}/{{formatnum:{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}|R}}*100 round 5 }}</pre></code>--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 05:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
:Bump?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

== What-If ==

It hasn't updated for 2 weeks. why?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
:Looks like they're on hold for a few months (Until July 14th). Too bad, I enjoyed them. ([http://what-if.xkcd.com/ Look at the top of the What-If page]) --[[User:Zman9600|Zman9600]] ([[User talk:Zman9600|talk]]) 20:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
:What is so special about the date and time? Seems very specific: ''July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT.'' --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.99|141.101.98.99]] 12:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it's set for the 40th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz mission launch. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.158}}

What If updates will resume on July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT. By that time {{w|New Horizons}} will have it's closest approach to {{w|Pluto}}. See here: http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

== thanks for having a working website ==

the search function on xkcd.com was taken off, and now the random function seems to be having issues, but it's nice that here both work [[Special:Contributions/188.114.97.114|188.114.97.114]] 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
:We do our best. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

== Ada Munroe ==

The latest [[what if?]] number 139 has a question by "Ada Munroe". Is she related to [[Randall]] in any way? --{{User:17jiangz1/signature|06:57, 09 August 2015}}

== Out of curiosity ==

I notice that whenever someone links to tvtropes.org in an explanation, someone changes the link to the matching page on allthetropes.org. I'm curious as to why that is. Is there some kind of terms of use conflict at play here that an editor should be keeping in mind? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.156|199.27.128.156]] 06:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:TVtropes does not restrict links to their site, and if this has been happening there are some time-outs that I need to be handing out. Can you point me to some of the edits where this is happening? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::The specific example I had was, um, [[1468: Worrying]]. On Jan 3rd the links went to tvtropes.org, and on March 18th they were all changed over to allthetropes.orain.org. I just found it curious, I wasn't sure what the reason for it was [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.47|162.158.255.47]] 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Reverted. Typically, the reason people change perfectly good links to specific, obscure links in wikis is usually self-advertising. I'll be watching that guy's edits in the future. Thanks for the heads up. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

== Sightless readers offended by the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline. ==

I'll admit, every now and again the comic is over my head. ...because I'm dumb in that particular field. However, blind users who enjoy xkcd must do so through explainxkcd. They are NOT dumb. They are *blind*. Without explainxkcd, they would have no idea what is in the comics panels.

Explainxkcd is a great site. There is no question it provides a service to the internet community.

Please see this thread (last paragraph) on Userfriendly.org. Keep in mind, the end user is sightless and explainxkcd is "viewed" through a screen reader. http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/read.cgi?id=20160207&tid=3930989 (Anonymous)

: The guy on that other site is complaining about that XKCD does not work well in a screen reader -- that is not our problem, but a problem for Randall to solve on his own site. We cannot be the catch all for everything on the internet that Randall broke [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Agreed --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I never even noticed the tagline in question. Humorous to sighted folks, sure. ...but obviously offensive to those who have no choice but to access xkcd through explainxkcd.

I'll leave it to the administrators or the community to figure something out, if anything at all. Maybe no one cares? I didn't come here to make any suggestions, only to point out how offensive those 4 words are to some users of the website. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.88}}

:Alright, put a link here in the site notice. What does everyone else think? I'm open to changing it, it's something people complain about fairly periodically and our identity isn't completely tied to the tagline, I feel. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

::Well, we definitely shouldn't change anything because that particular guy is upset. It's one thing to be offended, but he's also attacking both this site and Randal Monroe. I don't think that sort of behavior should be rewarded. I actually have a rule online where, if someone acts like a jerk to me, I will be kind, but I won't give them what they want. I think a lot of the problems with people being jerks to others is that they still get what they want, so what reason do they have to stop? If he wants us to change it, he should address us like an adult and ask us himself.

::But you claim this is a common complaint. Then I would say we need more info. My instinct would be that people don't understand that it's a joke. But then my solution would be to do what the site is designed to do and explain the joke, rather than take it down. If there's actually something about it that's offensive to an entire class of people, that's different. I am unaware of a stereotype that blind people are stupid, but I'm open to the idea that I don't know.

::I'm not particularly married to the tag line. I actually didn't even notice it was there. But I'm loathe to take it down over a misunderstanding. I can't think of a similarly humorous replacement that would not be offensive, but I can at least suggest "Because nobody knows everything." --[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 09:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I've gotten these before. There's a [[Talk:Main_Page#Header_message|slowly growing]] section in the main page discussion page and a complaint buried somewhere in my talk page and they're usually quite unhappy. I pegged it up this time round because there's special needs involved, and a good part of our intended appeal is the transcripts for the blind. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

::Is he one of those people who are so self-centered and 'entitled' that just because they have a disability they assume that everyone is constantly trying to offend them, even in the most unlikeliest of cases? Does he actually believe that the tag line was written with the intention of offending blind people? This is ridiculous. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.71|141.101.106.71]] 11:04, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

"Just in case you feel dumb"? "Some comics may be funnier than they appear"?[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

How about simply removing it? At least until we find something that isn't offensive to anyone - which might be very hard to obtain. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you're crippled... That's worse I guess. 
But before considering the "you're dumb" tagline, one must think about the name of this wiki. It is called '''Explain''' xkcd, not read xkcd, and explaining is for dumb people, not blind people. 
Maybe one thing we can do is add a "(unless you are just here for the transcript)" subtext, with a link to the transcript section, which has the advantage of both taming offended blind readers (maybe) and provide a direct, "spoilerless" link. --[[User:GuB|GuB]] ([[User talk:GuB|talk]]) 10:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I need explainxkcd for two reasons: being visually impaired, although I can see most of the comics I often miss crucial details that I find only in the transcript; and as a non-American, I lack many cultural references (books, movies, songs, sayings...) that are given in the explanations.
I don't think either of these reasons makes me "dumb". However, I never found the tagline offensive. It was immediately obvious to me that it was meant as humor. Who could seriously think that someone is dumb just because they haven't read the specific book that Randall is parodying in a given comic? Or because they're not familiar with a specific programming language or Unix command? IMHO the tagline *is* funny precisely because very few people can actually "get" all the comics without an explanation. Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke. Adding to the lot those who can't get the comics because they're blind doesn't make the joke more offensive. It's a sad world where political correctness kills all forms of humor.

On the other hand, the tagline is not an essential part of the site and if a significant number want it removed, so be it.
Zetfr 10:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Well not everybody's mind works the same way, and some people legitimately cannot grasp humor very easily. They may come to read the explanations precisely because they can't recognize what about a given comic is supposed to be humorous, and they likewise may not be able to tell that the tagline is just a joke. Besides, the tagline is equating a lack of knowledge with a lack of intelligence, which also makes it inaccurate and kind of kills the humor for those who stop and think about it.

:I personally agree with the above "Because nobody knows everything." approach. I would suggest something along the lines of "Because you won't always get the joke." --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 11:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:: This sounds like a bunch of dumb people coming together and suggesting that the rest of people should be more like them (joke intended) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: +1 on this. '''Keep'''. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 20:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote removal [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 11:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Mostly agree with Zetfr, it is a rather obvious joke, and this is a website about a webcomic which is mostly about fun, it would be different if this was some serious news portal, but it isn't, and in my humble opinion people who can't take a joke shouldn't even be here. There will always be ranters and people who get offended, we should not let them make decisions for us. I sincerely believe vast majority of people, blind or otherwise, understand it. [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]])

:I agree with Zetfr. If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get.
:--[[User:Lou Crazy|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy|talk]]) 12:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
::I also agree with the above, and like the part of Zetfr about because you need a reader to use the page you do not need to be offended by an obvious joke --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

if i had a vote i'd say change the "because you're dumb" from text to a picture with alt text of something slightly less rude. "because you're using a screenreader," perhaps. although that would show up on mouseover. meh. whatever. --13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:and someone isn't "entitled" because they get annoyed about something that doesn't annoy you. as a sighted person i don't even look at the headers on the page. i would imagine that since the text in question is at the top of the page he has to listen to it every single time the page is refreshed. which is annoying enough if it's not insulting. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 13:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:It is bad to have the alt-text saying something differently, but since the current tagline is not offensive to non-blind people then why would it be offensive to a blind person. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' -- Blind people do not have to come to this site, they can just use xkcd.com directly and if that is not working for blind people then that is Randall's problem not ours. The tag line has been there for years while I have noticed it before and used the site and I have never been offended, if a blind person is offended maybe they should stop using the internet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 15:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: I second that -- the tag line does not appear to offend non-blind people, it should not offend blind people either [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Voting '''KEEP''' -- the tag line is a joke, and who is to say that blind people cannot be dumb [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' as well. I don't see any reason to change it; it's not a jab at disabled people, blind or otherwise. The site is called '''explain'''xkcd, and everything here centers around explaining the comic, not being a transcription service. (If that's not the case, then maybe other things need changing too.) I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.26|108.162.216.26]] 15:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP and satisfy both sides'''. If you examine the HTML, or use [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] (free screen reader), you may notice there is a jump-to-nav div element that lets people with screen readers jump to various parts of the page. The jump-to-nav div is only a few HTML lines below the tagline. I'd recommend:
# Moving the jump-to-nav div to '''before''' the tagline
# Adding a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.
# Test it with [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] in Firefox to simulate a screen reader.
This way, screen-reader users can jump to the transcript and don't have to hear the tagline every time they visit an explainxkcd.com page.
-- [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 15:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Consider "Do you get it now?" [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.11|198.41.235.11]] 16:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''': it's reasonable and no change is warranted

I like the suggestion of '''keeping''' the current tagline, but changing it to an '''image with alttext''' saying something like "because you're using a screenreader". I also vote to move the link to the transcript to above the tagline. [[User:Rileysci|Rileysci]] ([[User talk:Rileysci|talk]]) 17:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I get the joke and I'm not offended by it, but it seems to me that it really sticks out on this site and it doesn't seem consistent with Randall's sense of humor. Everyone on this site is very inclusive and eager to share all perspectives and points of view. I come here both to see the humor that I have the knowledge to understand and to learn more about the world the way Randall sees it. In short, I come here to be one of the lucky 10,000. In fact, I would suggest that as the tag line, "Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!". Inside joke that can link to the comic (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand) and it is welcoming. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.170|108.162.245.170]] 18:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: +1 on this. '''Change''' [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 03:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. In case it is not kept then it should be changed to something completely different. Te idea of making a title text to an image I really dislike, although I even more dislike adding anything to the existing one to either refer to people coming for the transcript or making excuses for the obvious joke. This has been a part of the page forever, I have seen it almost every time I come here. To begin with I did feel dumb sometimes, but I was never offended by it, just amused. But of course an explain page is for those who did not get the joke. And there are other pages that explains the comic. I do not know if they have a transcript? But I'm happy to know that some people must really enjoy the detailed transcripts that I usually try to provide. I had just not though about the blind perspective. I more use the transcript to make sure every one agrees on what is seen in the images of the comic. Having said all this, I must admit that the best suggestion for a change so far is the one posted above my post (about the lucky 10,000). :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote keep, for exactly the reasons explained by Zeftr above. Changing it to an image with alt text would be OK also. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change''' it because it is too easily mistaken as an insult instead of a joke. At least change it to ''Because you are stupid''.... Ah, maybe instead ''Because xkcd is far beyond common knowledge'' or ''Because hardly anyone gets everything'' or ''Because it is usually nerdly esoteric even for geeks''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.46|108.162.221.46]] 21:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change'''. I have never been a big fan of the tagline. I don't know everything, but I am certainly not dumb. Also, I echo the reference to (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand). This comic has always been about expanding knowledge, not making you feel guilty for not knowing something.

:'''Change''': I realize the "It's because you're dumb" tagline follows the sarcastic nature of Randall's humor, but there are enough people who don't get or appreciate that sort of humor and are likely to be more offended by it, special needs or no. Here's my suggestion: "For those of us who don't get it." [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 21:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

At what point is "enough" people offended? I've only seen evidence of several (https://xkcd.com/1070/) visually impaired users actually offended by the site, along with a couple people who didn't specify their visual ability. I don't know the traffic on this site, but I would expect it to be on the order of 10^4 or higher. So is this discussion about changing something that a handful of people find offensive? Or is there an actual problem of something inappropriate on the site. If this is all about a couple people finding something offensive, I imagine a few christians might take issue with (https://xkcd.com/709/). Should we start another discussion about accommodating them? Or add a disclaimer that the views expressed by Randall Munroe are his own and do not reflect those of this site? [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
: So you vote to '''keep''' -- right? [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 04:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change'''-- make it more obviously tongue in cheek. "It's cause we're dumb" or "For those of us who need it" I agree with the point about not complying with people on the internet who can't behave like adults, however I've never found the line particularly funny. Also change the jump-to-nav, as that would just get annoying to hear it every time you open up the site. I am not recommending changing it based on the imagined offenses of others. I just think it could be funnier.[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 06:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' Trying to satisfy everyone is like trying to understand every comic. It probably won't happen. As an example, using the 'one of 10 000' example provided above can insult a bunch of people that are not from the States simply because the comic (and the reference to the comic for that matter) will make them feel left out. My other reasons for voting keep have all been mentioned already. People get insulted so easily, let's try not to encourage this behavior by rewarding it. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''' because I find it slightly offensive myself. If we change it, we should replace it with something that everybody would interpret as humorous, e.g. "Because we can't all be rocket scientists". [[User:Condor70|Condor70]] ([[User talk:Condor70|talk]]) 08:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Next thing we know, liberal arts majors will complain about xkcd science being offensive. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.229|141.101.91.229]] 10:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change''' or '''remove'''. Regarding the former, while I know it's supposed to be a joke, I never found it humorous myself and, unlike others that wrote before me, I don't think it relates to the humor or sarcasm used by Randall. It being offensive is not part of my motivation for my vote. I agree with some of the suggestions written up to now. Regarding the latter, I don't really think it's existence is necessary. Regardless, changing the div things is a must. [[User:GuiRitter|GuiRitter]] ([[User talk:GuiRitter|talk]]) 16:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change'''. You could keep much of the humour by changing it to something like "because ignorance '''can''' be cured". [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]])

1578: Squirrelphone

2015-09-16T09:09:51Z

Farnz: Change to traditional POTS terminology - familiar if you're old enough

{{comic
| number = 1578
| date = September 16, 2015
| title = Squirrelphone
| image = squirrelphone.png
| titletext = After a while, the squirrel starts making that beeping noise and doesn't stop until it hops back up onto the stump.
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, we see a squirrel pretend to be a telephone, only to bite [[Cueball]] who tries to pick it up and use it as one. This is humorous because a living squirrel is not an appropriate creature to maintain a phone call{{Citation needed}}. This could be seen as an example of mimicry in Nature, or parasitism where one creature gains a benefit from another.

The sounds the squirrel makes correspond to the tones that the terminals made when you used the POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) in the US:
* When someone else called you and the receiver of your phone was on the hook, the phone made loud and long "riiing riiiing" tones. --- This is the case in the first frame of the comic.
* When you picked the receiver up, the phone call was established and no extra noises were made.
* When no phone call was established and you picked up, a continous "riiiiiiiiiiing" tone was heard, meaning the service was up and you could dial someone else's number.
* When no phone call was established but dialling was not possible, short "bip bip bip bip" tones were heard. This happened either when an existing call ended or was interrupted or you had had the receiver off hook for too long (about half a minute) without dialing --- This is the case in the title text of the comic ---. In this case, you should hang up so that you can receive calls or pick the receiver up again and dial.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is approaching a stump with a squirrel perched on it. A ringing noise is coming from the squirrel's back.]
:Squirrel: Riiiiing
:Squirrel: Riiiiiing

:[Cueball has picked up the squirrel and is holding it to his left ear]
:Cueball: Hello?

:[The squirrel bites Cueball's head]
:Squirrel: Chomp!
:Cueball: Ow!

:[Cueball holds his hand to his cheek while the squirrel leaps away, fleeing]
:Cueball: ???

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Squirrels]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:1382: Rocket Packs

2014-06-18T13:55:57Z

Farnz:

I think long fall boots (from Portal) would probably help with this.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.65|173.245.56.65]] 04:34, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
:-Not so much, they're designed for a completely different purpose. That's like expecting a kevlar vest to protect you against a sword. (They would, however, help if you ran out of fuel in midair.) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.83|173.245.55.83]] 12:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
::A kevlar vest would protect you from a sword, if you're stabbed or hit in the chest.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.198|173.245.52.198]] 19:37, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I was thinking a chair design with the legs pulled out in front might help out. {{unsigned ip|199.27.133.174}}

Wear the jet pack on your chest, avoid calf-burn. But don't mention the genitals. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.61|141.101.104.61]] 05:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Is it really so hard to invent calf shields? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.30|108.162.221.30]] 07:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Where is the problem? just reverse front and rear :=)
http://www.thefind.com/apparel/info-batwing-chaps
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.199|108.162.254.199]] 10:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

The logic and humor of this comic could be extended to the notion of "free" medical care, in a world where people are inclined to try things like rocket packs. {{unsigned ip|173.245.50.73}}

Most practical rockets have the thrust in line with the center of gravity. A jetpack like the one depicted will tend to nose over unless the user sticks his lower legs up into the exhaust to deflect it. Not a great way to travel. Real jetpacks have the nozzles either side to get around this problem. They still have the difficulty of being unable to glide if the engine cuts. If this happens too low to use a parachute, that will spoil the user's day. [[User:Jim E|Jim E]] ([[User talk:Jim E|talk]]) 16:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Why do people keep talking about running out of fuel in midair? When was the last time you ran out of fuel in your car, in between gas stations? Sure, the consequences aren't quite as catastrophic, but my point is that usually people refill their tanks before they run out...[[User:Diszy|Diszy]] ([[User talk:Diszy|talk]]) 21:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
:Running out of fuel isn't the only reason your car might stall or stop in the middle of nowhere. Sometimes the engine overheats and stops or the accelerator just stops working for no (apparent) reason. If something similar happens to your jetpack when you are 30m in the air, you can expect a few medical bills, if not a visit to your neighborhood mortician. Any good jetpack should come equipped with emergency boosters, but how effective they may be at low heights is still an issue. {{unsigned ip|103.22.201.239}}
:I've run out of fuel in a car twice, due to faults. The first was a loan car - it smelt of petrol, but the owner said it was OK. Turned out it had a hole in the fuel tank, which meant that the petrol leaked out and left me stranded. The other time was my car - fuel tank had rusted (I was unaware of this), and when I went over a rough bit of road, it disintegrated, shedding fuel. Not all "out of fuel" errors are caused by driving until you run out. [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]]) 13:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Real life rocket packs have flight times as short as 30 seconds in some cases, so running out if fuel and falling to the ground is a very real concern. [[User:Jim E|Jim E]] ([[User talk:Jim E|talk]]) 22:54, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I think the title text may also refer to how free health care sometimes sounds just as far-fetched in the US as practical jetpacks becoming commonplace. It was something that always almost came up when people were comparing countries on the Internet these last few years. Especially when Canadians compared their country to the States... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.162|141.101.98.162]] 12:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)