explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2053: Incoming Calls

2018-10-03T06:45:42Z

Gearoid:

The "other scammers" section is far too small. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.166|108.162.216.166]] 16:54, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

We have two title texts explanations. With slightly conflicting information. Combine and brush up or should we just do one or the other for now? I like the CBS source in the first so I think we should absolutely preserve that at least. [[User:Lukeskylicker|Lukeskylicker]] ([[User talk:Lukeskylicker|talk]]) 17:15, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

: Supposing that you are correct, I have to add that I have never heard of the headset trick being used to buy time to connect you to a real scammer. But then again, I don't get scammed that often. [[User:Kwonunn|Kwonunn]] ([[User talk:Kwonunn|talk]]) 17:44, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

He forgot bill collectors. {{unsigned ip|162.158.63.52}}

As the link from the first title text explanation points out, they don't *need* your credit card or social security number as many phone companies, especially mobile companies, will allow a third party to add charges to your phone bill if you've agreed to pay the money. With that in mind, I don't think the second explanation flies. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.90|162.158.186.90]] 17:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

This only makes sense if it’s proportional or percentage based. But then that makes one wonder if some of this might be because the number of calls dropped over time. {{unsigned|Mr.Dude}}

There's a contradiction between "it's safe to assume that calls from his family didn't decrease over the years", and "Over time, Randall's friends and family have been less likely to make phone calls to him, likely due to the use of text messages and other messaging apps.". I'd suggest rephrasing the first part to say "it's possible the calls from family didn't decrease over the years, in which case they only make up a smaller fraction as the number of total calls increases since 1990.", or simply "some of the categories like family calls appear to be occurring less often but may only be decreasing in frequency in proportion to total calls" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.28|162.158.142.28]] 21:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:I know for me personally family calls have decreased as texting and other messaging apps have become more common, and the same might have happened for him. It is clear that this graph excludes texting as by the present the only friend calling is that one friend that hates texting. That person may be the best way to figure out if the absolute volume of calls has increased...it appears the volume of total calls has increased, at least recently, as that one friend originally took up a larger proportion of the vertical space (of course the frequency of correspondence with that friend may also have changed).[[Special:Contributions/172.68.46.5|172.68.46.5]] 16:51, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
::Thanks for your written thoughts. You also can enhance the explanation. But for now I've added a new paragraph about texting, just because it's not part of the comic. And, sorry I missed it, I also hate tex...ng ;) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

At least not being British he missed the PPI calls. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.235|162.158.154.235]] 21:16, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:Along with the current spate of automated calls telling me that my IP address needs to be changed as it has been "compromised in multiple countries". [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 06:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

The trick is not always just to get you thinking you're talking to a real person. More likely it is to get a recording of you saying "yes", which can be used maliciously.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.20|162.158.94.20]] 08:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Referencing "the famous WhatsApp" seems unnecessary. It could be replaced with something like "various mobile messaging apps" [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.168|172.68.133.168]] anonanon

Talk:2053: Incoming Calls

2018-10-03T06:44:50Z

Gearoid:

The "other scammers" section is far too small. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.166|108.162.216.166]] 16:54, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

We have two title texts explanations. With slightly conflicting information. Combine and brush up or should we just do one or the other for now? I like the CBS source in the first so I think we should absolutely preserve that at least. [[User:Lukeskylicker|Lukeskylicker]] ([[User talk:Lukeskylicker|talk]]) 17:15, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

: Supposing that you are correct, I have to add that I have never heard of the headset trick being used to buy time to connect you to a real scammer. But then again, I don't get scammed that often. [[User:Kwonunn|Kwonunn]] ([[User talk:Kwonunn|talk]]) 17:44, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

He forgot bill collectors. {{unsigned ip|162.158.63.52}}

As the link from the first title text explanation points out, they don't *need* your credit card or social security number as many phone companies, especially mobile companies, will allow a third party to add charges to your phone bill if you've agreed to pay the money. With that in mind, I don't think the second explanation flies. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.90|162.158.186.90]] 17:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

This only makes sense if it’s proportional or percentage based. But then that makes one wonder if some of this might be because the number of calls dropped over time. {{unsigned|Mr.Dude}}

There's a contradiction between "it's safe to assume that calls from his family didn't decrease over the years", and "Over time, Randall's friends and family have been less likely to make phone calls to him, likely due to the use of text messages and other messaging apps.". I'd suggest rephrasing the first part to say "it's possible the calls from family didn't decrease over the years, in which case they only make up a smaller fraction as the number of total calls increases since 1990.", or simply "some of the categories like family calls appear to be occurring less often but may only be decreasing in frequency in proportion to total calls" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.28|162.158.142.28]] 21:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:I know for me personally family calls have decreased as texting and other messaging apps have become more common, and the same might have happened for him. It is clear that this graph excludes texting as by the present the only friend calling is that one friend that hates texting. That person may be the best way to figure out if the absolute volume of calls has increased...it appears the volume of total calls has increased, at least recently, as that one friend originally took up a larger proportion of the vertical space (of course the frequency of correspondence with that friend may also have changed).[[Special:Contributions/172.68.46.5|172.68.46.5]] 16:51, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
::Thanks for your written thoughts. You also can enhance the explanation. But for now I've added a new paragraph about texting, just because it's not part of the comic. And, sorry I missed it, I also hate tex...ng ;) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

At least not being British he missed the PPI calls. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.235|162.158.154.235]] 21:16, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:Or the current spate of automated calls telling me that my IP address needs to be changed as it has been "compromised in multiple countries". [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 06:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

The trick is not always just to get you thinking you're talking to a real person. More likely it is to get a recording of you saying "yes", which can be used maliciously.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.20|162.158.94.20]] 08:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Referencing "the famous WhatsApp" seems unnecessary. It could be replaced with something like "various mobile messaging apps" [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.168|172.68.133.168]] anonanon

Talk:2044: Sandboxing Cycle

2018-09-10T05:57:28Z

Gearoid:

It’s not just sand boxing that follows this kind of cycle, other design ideas follow similar iterations from generation to generation. The grass is always greener... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.94|172.68.34.94]] 04:55, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Interesting that the same red and green colours have been used for two comics in a row. [[User:Baquea|Baquea]] ([[User talk:Baquea|talk]]) 05:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

The one thing that we learn from history is that nobody ever learns anything from history..... [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 05:56, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:2044: Sandboxing Cycle

2018-09-10T05:56:47Z

Gearoid:

It’s not just sand boxing that follows this kind of cycle, other design ideas follow similar iterations from generation to generation. The grass is always greener... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.94|172.68.34.94]] 04:55, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Interesting that the same red and green colours have been used for two comics in a row. [[User:Baquea|Baquea]] ([[User talk:Baquea|talk]]) 05:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

One thing that we learn from history is that nobody learns anything from history..... [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 05:56, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

1982: Evangelism

2018-04-19T06:11:13Z

Gearoid: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1982
| date = April 18, 2018
| title = Evangelism
| image = evangelism.png
| titletext = The wars between the "OTHER PRIMATES OPEN THEM FROM THE SMALL END" faction versus the "BUT THE LITTLE BIT OF BANANA AT THE SMALL END IS GROSS" faction consumed Europe for generations.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a 2 METER FAHRENHEIT LOVER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Evangelism is defined as a zealous advocacy for a cause. This comic presents a line plot where causes are listed in order from advocates who are least intense to most intense going left to right.

;''Religious proselytizers''
Religious proselytizers are, of the groups on this list, most known for intense evangelism in popular culture, yet Randall contrasts them in this strip with four other groups which he finds to be even more intense in their evangelism.

;''People who want the US to switch to metric'' and ''People who want the US to switch to metric but keep Fahrenheit''
Unlike most of the world, the US uses [[wikipedia:United States Customary Units|US customary units]] instead of metric units. Some people wish for this to change.

Pro-metric people who wish to keep the {{w|Fahrenheit}} scale rather than change to {{w|Celsius}} are ranked as slightly more evangelic. A common argument for keeping the Fahrenheit scale is due to 0°F equating to "really cold" and 100°F to "really hot" when talking about weather.

;''People who threw away their socks and bought all one kind''
This is also mentioned in the [[1572:_xkcd_Survey|xkcd Survey]] from September 2015 which included this question:

<blockquote>
Have you ever thrown out all your different pairs of socks/underwear, bought a bunch of replacements that were all one kind, and then told all your friends how great it was and how they should do it too?
</blockquote>

;''People who open bananas from the other end''
Some people prefer to open bananas from the bottom (small end) instead of the top (stem end). This is the way primates in the wild have been observed to open bananas. Less force is required to open a banana at the bottom than at the stem, causing less bruising of the fruit & generally making it easier to open. However, if not done carefully, this can result in the fruit getting squished and making a mess on the person's fingers. Opening bananas from the stem end offers no practical advantage, yet appears to be the predominant habit of most banana-eating humans in Randall's sample. One explanation is that opening using the stem as a lever makes for greater ease of opening and thus less damage in practice. (Bananas grow with the stem at the bottom: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Banana_farm_Chinawal.jpg Banana farm Chinawal.jpg])

The title text is a fictional argument that apparently somehow tore apart Europe. It is about how bananas are supposed to be opened, so it is absurd for this to have actually happened. The supposed argument ''stems''[ [[No Pun Intended|Pun Intended]] ] from a disagreement over the suggested ease of opening a banana from the bottom, versus the idea that the small bit at the base of a banana is unappetizing. This also appears to be a reference to the wars between the Blefuscudians who opened their eggs at the big end, and the Lilliputians who broke their eggs at the small end, as documented in Jonathan Swift's epic novel Gulliver's Travels.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A single frame is shown. The header reads:]
:People by intensity of evangelism
:[An arrow points from left to right. The text above:]
:More intense

:[A line is drawn from left to right with five markers on it.]
:[Marker on the left:]
:Religious proselytizers
:[Marker in the middle:]
:People who want the US to switch to metric
:[Marker slightly right of the middle:]
:People who want the US to switch to metric but keep Fahrenheit
:[Marker at the beginning of the last quarter:]
:People who threw away their socks and bought all one kind
:[Marker at the right:]
:People who open bananas from the other end

{{comic discussion}}

1961: Interaction

2018-03-01T08:16:15Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1961
| date = February 28, 2018
| title = Interaction
| image = interaction.png
| titletext = [They do not move.]
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete| Needs to be expanded. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Cueball and White Hat are making small talk. White Hat begins the conversation with a typical greeting. Normally, a person would answer this question with a positive like, "Good," "Okay," "Can't complain," etc. But instead, Cueball answers with a very open and honest statement about the social anxiety he is successfully dealing with. White Hat then admits that he is experiencing the same thing, and the two congratulate each other. After that, there is an awkward silence where neither knows what to talk about next. Finally, White Hat makes note of the awkwardness and Cueball suggests they stop before it gets worse.

The title text states, that after saying goodbye they don't move away, keeping up the uncomfortable silence. This may be a reference to the final stage direction "''They do not move.''" in Samuel Beckett's play {{w|Waiting for Godot}}, where the protagonists frequently discuss leaving, but do not move.

==Transcript==
:[White Hat and Cueball are talking.]
:White Hat: How are you doing?
:Cueball: Really excited to be confidently handling this extremely basic social interaction!

:[White Hat's arms raise slightly as if raising his palms.]
:White Hat: Same here!
:Cueball: Hey, congrats!
:White Hat: You too!
:Cueball: Thanks!

:[Frameless beat panel.]

:[Same setting.]
:White Hat: And now it's falling apart before my eyes.
:Cueball: I'm gonna quit while I'm ahead.
:White Hat: Same.
:Cueball: See you later!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

1958: Self-Driving Issues

2018-02-22T09:46:29Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1958
| date = February 21, 2018
| title = Self-Driving Issues
| image = self_driving_issues.png
| titletext = If most people turn into murderers all of a sudden, we'll need to push out a firmware update or something.
}}

==Explanation==

[[Cueball]] explains being worried about {{w|autonomous car|autonomous cars}}, noting that it may be possible to fool the sensory systems of the vehicles. This is a common concern with AIs; since they think analytically and have little to no capability for abstract thought, they can be fooled by things a human would immediately realize is deceptive.

However, Cueball quickly assumes that his argument actually doesn't hold up when comparing AI drivers to human drivers, as both rely on the same guidance framework. Human drivers follow signs and road markings, and must obey the laws of the road just as an AI must. Therefore, an attack on the road infrastructure could impact both AIs and humans. However, humans and AIs are not equally vulnerable. For example, a fake sign or a fake child could appear to a human as an obvious fake but fool an AI. A creative attacker could put up a sign with CAPTCHA-like text that would be readable by humans but not by an AI.

Cueball further wonders why, in this case, nobody tries to fool human drivers as they might try to fool an AI, but [[White Hat]] and [[Megan]] point out the obvious sociological answer; that most {{w|Road traffic safety|road safety systems}} benefit from humans not actively trying to maliciously sabotage them simply to cause accidents.

The [[title text]] continues the line of reasoning, noting that if most people did suddenly become murderers, the AI would need to be upgraded in order to deal with the presumable increase in people trying to cause car crashes by fooling the AI - a somewhat narrowly-focused solution given that a world full of murderers would probably have many more problems than that. It might also be suggesting a firmware update for the people who have become murderers, one that would fix their murderous ways. We are not currently at a point where we can create and apply firmware updates for people, however... unless you count {{w|psychiatry}}, {{w|cognitive behavioral therapy}}, {{w|hypnosis}}, {{w|mind-altering drugs}}, {{w|prison}}, {{w|CRISPR}}, etc.

This cartoon and [[1955: Robots]] share the common theme of human fear and overreaction to the advent of more or less autonomous robots.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is speaking while standing alone in a slim panel.]
:Cueball: I worry about self-driving car safety features.

:[In a frame-less panel it turns out that Cueball is standing between White Hat and Megan, holding his arms out towards each of them, while he continues to speak.]
:Cueball: What's to stop someone from painting fake lines on the road, or dropping a cutout of a pedestrian onto a highway, to make cars swerve and crash?

:[Zoom in on Cueball's head as he continues to contemplate the situation holding a hand to his chin, while looking in White Hat's direction. Megan replies from off-panel behind him.]
:Cueball: Except... those things would also work on human drivers. What's stopping people '''''now? '''''
:Megan (off-panel): Yeah, causing car crashes isn't hard.

:[Zoom back out to show all three of them again.]
:White Hat: I guess it's just that most people aren't murderers?
:Cueball: Oh, right. I always forget.
:Megan: An underappreciated component of our road safety system.

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Self-driving cars]]

==Trivia==
The [[title text]] was published with a typo: "murderers" was misspelled as "muderers."

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1940: The Food Size Cycle

2018-01-12T07:29:11Z

Gearoid:

Does panini have a different meaning in the USA? In the UK, it basically means a sandwich made in a flattish rectangular roll, usually toasted (sometimes also the roll itself). They can be quite large; not necessarily smaller than sandwiches in general.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.16|141.101.76.16]] 16:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
:From my experience its the flatishness off panini that make them more comfortable to eat, but who knows maybe we're on the end of the panini cycle. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]] 23:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
:I think you're inadverently proving Randall's point. :) First I ever heard of paninis must have been something like 15 years ago, and the buns were slightly longer than my (admittedly large) hand, putting their length about the same as standard sandwich bread, but a smaller width making them smaller than a sandwich. I do note that if I see panini rolls in the grocery store, they're still that small size. Sounds to me like this size arms race is well underway for paninis where you live (I like never order them, but I suspect here too). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Is it generally known that "panini" is the plural form of the Italian word "panino"? We don't say "burritos" or "taquitos" for one example, so why "panini"? [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
: But we do say 'a biscotti'. Probably because when selling them you would advertise in the plural, and those not familiar with Italian linguistics would not know how to construct a singular from it, and so would simply use the word as it stands. As a result, of course, panini and biscotti are, through use, now correct ''english'' singulars.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.16|141.101.76.16]] 09:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
: perhaps because of its unfortunate similarity to other English words, and the fortunate immaturity of the human race.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]] 00:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
:As a non-Italian speaker, I can say I was unaware "panini" was a plural word (though I feel vaguely familiar with the concept that Italian pluralizes words with an i like that). That'll be why, of course, most people are likewise unaware, and it has caught on. Especially considering that we'll often see "panini" itself pluralized, as "paninis". Reminds me of when I see things like "NASA Association", the final A of the acronym already means Association. "Scuba Apparatus", the A already stands for Apparatus. Etc. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
: Expanding on the theme, there are rivers in the U.K. routinely referred to as the "River Avon", ignoring the fact that "Avon" already means "River"... [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:29, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, but what about the slider effect? Mini versions of (in this case burgers) to be served in a collective? --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] ([[User talk:Thomcat|talk]]) 17:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Related, perhaps, is the sizing issue. Some places sell medium, large, and extra large drinks. Note no small.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.154|108.162.216.154]] 20:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
: And the 'regular' is what used to be the 'large'; the 'small', if it exists, is what used to be the 'regular' - to try to make you feel like you're short-changing yourself if you buy a normal sized one.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.16|141.101.76.16]] 09:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

The alt-text seems backwards: The way Randall's presented it, it looks like he's asserting that thick crusts get thinner, then the cycle repeats. This matches anecdotal evidence based upon the style favored by my local pizza shops over the years, but more research is needed. Thin crusts also tend to be cheaper to make, so... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
: I don't think so - 'deep-dish' is listed first, as the one on the original track; 'thin crust' is then the one on the replacement track. The original pizzas, as imported from Italy, would have been thin crust. These then got thicker until they begat deep dish, and, indeed, beyond, with the ridiculous proliferation of stuffed and sandwich crusts. Then, as some people lost patience with this, there was a trend to re-introduce the thin crust (the replacement track).[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.16|141.101.76.16]] 09:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
: Some original pizza from Italy had thick crust. My uncle, an immigrant to the US from Bari, Italy, made extremely thick crust pizza at his restaurant in the 1960s, almost a pizza bread. Pizza Hut initially advertised their 'deep dish' as 'Sicilian Pan Pizza'. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.166|162.158.75.166]] 21:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Portion inflation makes dietary information misleading. One would be hard pressed to find a muffin of the size used in nutrition information guides.
Recipe books show similar inflation, recipes as printed make larger amounts of food, but they are listed as feeding fewer people than they used to. [https://www.webmd.com/diet/features/7-expert-tricks-calorie-portion-control]
Analagous inflation can also be seen in clothes sizes. What used to be a size 8 is now labeled a size 4. Regular becomes "slim cut." [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.127|172.68.189.127]] 00:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Is the ratio between subsequent food size bifurcations consistent with the first Feigenbaum constant? [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feigenbaum_constants] [[User:Docstout|Docstout]] ([[User talk:Docstout|talk]]) 01:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Does this remind anyone of a Hertzsprung–Russell diagram? [[User:Capncanuck|Capncanuck]] ([[User talk:Capncanuck|talk]]) 02:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

BTW, I find it amusing that this comic came out the next day after a report on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation shrinkflation] of Mondelez chocolates in Europe hit the news here ... --kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.197|141.101.96.197]] 07:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Is this phenomenon specific to the US? I don't really recognize it here in the Netherlands, but the US has a reputation of having giant versions of everything: food, cars, people (width mostly) & so on. Maybe specific to a "big is beautiful" cultural attitude? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.187|162.158.111.187]] 15:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
:This happens, albeit to a considerably lesser extend, in the UK. Here, the phenomenon is restricted primarily to American fast food restaurants. I've eaten in America and was able to get 6 meals from the left-over food from a single-portion meal at Pinky's Pupu Bar & Grill in Kailua, Hawai`i. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.96|141.101.105.96]] 21:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
: Living in Canada, I find it amusing to note that my Netherlands-born-and-raised mother often complains about large portion sizes, about how anything she might order is way more food than she can eat (and in fact has this weird effect on her that a large amount of food makes the food unappetizing to her). As far as I know, this is a North American phenomenon, but moreso in the States. For example, if I go to McDonald's and order a trio, and tell them to Supersize it, that means change the Regular drink and Regular fries to Larges. In the States, apparently "Supersize" is its own size, this changes them to a size above Large that doesn't even exist here. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1940: The Food Size Cycle

2018-01-11T07:46:59Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1816: Mispronunciation

2017-04-03T08:32:05Z

Gearoid:

Epitome is an interesting one for me, since I read it phonetically (same as Randal's example), and didn't figure out that "e-pi-tō-mē" and "eppy-tome" were the same word until mid to late teens. I still have to stop myself from reading it wrong when I see it on the page... [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 15:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I think there's another level beyond the obvious, especially in the title text. You're pronouncing the word 'epitome' in whatever way you always have (inside your head), he's making clear that he's not saying it the way you say it.. so how do you read the comic? The sentence only makes sense if you say it aloud, but you can't because you don't know how he's pronouncing it.[[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 16:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
: Rereading the title text I feel like I may have suffered some kind of brain fart when writing this comment. Woops.. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 11:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epitome_of_Hyperbole {{unsigned ip|172.68.54.40}}

Shouldn't there be a flap in epitome? --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.94|172.68.54.94]] 19:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I feel like it's relevant to point out how the mispronunciation of mispronunciation is enhanced by contrasting it with mispronounce, which is the reason that most people mispronounce mispronunciation, due to the unexpected change in how the word is pronounced between the two terms. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.10|162.158.2.10]] 20:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
:I agree, someone who can write this into the explanation, someone better at English than me ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Epi-*Tummy*? Really? Your english-speaking people's latin is so sick. ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.162|162.158.90.162]] 22:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
: Hmm, rather Greek than Latin, no? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.12|162.158.90.12]] 17:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
(I mean the close relationship to, say, "epitaph" is obvious, isn't it? Shouldn't they be pronounced similarly?)

"There is, however, an argument that misspelled should always be written mispelled since if it isn't mispelled, then it isn't mispelled." I'm sorry, but someone's going to have to explain that last part to me --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.126|172.68.133.126]] 23:06, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
:I think whoever wrote that was too focused on being clever and missed how to be clear. :) Thus displays nicely WHY Randall has all those quotes to differentiate between when he's using a word and when he's talking about it. It's been fixed now, but... Adding the missing quotes and using synonyms/explanations: "There is, however, an argument that "misspelled" should always be written "mispelled" since if it isn't [spelled incorrectly], then it isn't [being true to the meaning of the word]." - NiceGuy1

: Like most good grammar jokes, explaining it ruins it. And the English usually write mispelled as "misspelt". "Misspelled" is generally viewed as clumsy.

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.76|162.158.126.76]] 05:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

:: Confirmed :-) [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

"Some might argue that misspelled is the one word which should always be misspelled intentionally". And others might argue that it already is. :-) [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 12:58, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

And I guess he has trouble reading the word "dyslexia"? :-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.100|162.158.222.100]] 15:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

1809: xkcd Phone 5

2017-03-15T07:58:18Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1809
| date = March 10, 2017
| title = xkcd Phone 5
| image = xkcd_phone_5.png
| titletext = The phone will be collected by the toll operators and mailed back to you within 4-6 weeks.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Seems almost complete now!}}
This is the fifth entry in the ongoing [[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd Phone series]], and once again, the comic plays with many standard tech buzzwords and horribly misuses all of them, to create a phone that sounds impressive but self-evidently isn't to even the most ignorant customer. The previous comic in the series [[1707: xkcd Phone 4]] was released almost 8 months before this one.

The slogan beneath the phone, "We're trying to catch up to Apple but refuse to skip numbers", is a reference to inconsistent product numbering, such as {{w|Samsung}} releasing the {{w|Note 7}} after the {{w|Note 5}}, likely in an attempt to catch up to the numbering of either the {{w|iPhone}} or {{w|Galaxy S}} series, both of which were already at 7. Similarly, there was also no official ''iPhone 2''. But there is an [[xkcd Phone 2]] available. The trademark sign behind the word "numbers" probably indicates a reference to the {{w|Numbers (spreadsheet)|Apple spreadsheet app}} with the same name.

This phone seems to have a curved display. But the edges are curved down and not up, as they are on other curved phones.

The title text that says that the phone will be returned to you by the toll operators is a reference to E-ZPass partnership feature; see explanation in the table regarding that feature.

===Table of features===
{| class="wikitable"
!Feature
!Explanation
|-
|'''Hook shot'''
| In ''{{w|The Legend of Zelda}}'' the [http://zelda.gamepedia.com/Hookshot Hookshot] is a recurring weapon/tool. It is a machine consisting of a chain and hook. When used, the chain extends and sends the hook which is attached to it. It is used to bring items to {{w|Link (The Legend of Zelda)|Link}} or bring Link closer to a goal (''Link'' is the name shared by the main protagonists, each possessing the Spirit of the Hero). Likely a reference to new video game ''{{w|The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild}}'', which was released a week prior to this comic. In the comic the hook shot is shown as a small add on to the phones top.
|-
|'''Bluetooth speaker'''
| {{w|Bluetooth}} speakers are often used to play audio from a smartphone wirelessly, usually with more volume and better quality than the phone's small built-in speaker can provide. Embedding a bluetooth speaker into the phone would allow the phone to play audio from outside sources through its built-in speaker, which could be useful if no better speakers were available but would generally be avoided given the previously noted limitations of phone speakers. This is perhaps a jab at the current trend of playing music or Internet content audibly in public through the tiny, tinny speaker embedded in most phones. The Bluetooth speaker is located in the normal place for a phone's speaker.
|-
|'''Stained-glass display'''
| {{w|Stained glass}} is colored glass, traditionally used for decorative windows in buildings most often churches. It is generally much thicker and because of the color much less transparent, especially for some colors, than the glass types normally used for touch-screens, making the phone difficult to use as it would remove some of the colors shown on the screen below the glass. A typical feature noticed about the glass for real phones would be its strength, as in work phones for construction workers.
|-
|'''Gallium chassis remains solid up to 85°F'''
| Many high-end electronic devices have chassis made of alloys of light metals such as {{w|magnesium}} or {{w|titanium}} rather than {{w|steel}} or {{w|plastic}}. Besides being lightweight and of superior quality and durability than ordinary sheet steel or cheap plastic, these are often perceived as bragging points by the users, boasting about 'rare' metal chassis.

{{w|Gallium}}, however, is an uncommon metal with a very low melting point of 85 °F (or 29.8 °C), making it one of only four pure metals (along with {{w|Mercury (element)|mercury}}, {{w|rubidium}} and {{w|caesium}}) that can be liquid around room temperature. Because the melting point is lower than the average {{w|human body temperature}} of 98.6 °F (37 °C) a gallium smartphone chassis would melt in the user's bare hand, assuming it hadn't already done so due to heat produced by its internal components. Even if the electronics had good heat management, cooling in smartphones is normally accomplished by distributing heat to the case, not exhausting it.

A similar real advertisement regarding the chassis would be that it was {{w|waterproof}} down to some depth (say 85 feet or 25 meters). See also the feature below regarding this.
|-
|'''Soundproof'''
| A {{w|Soundproof}} chassis could result in the unwanted effect that the speakers and microphone may not work as no sound may enter or leave the phones chassis. A more likely feature would be waterproof see above point.
|-
|'''Can feel pain'''
| Possibly a reference to {{w|intelligent personal assistant|intelligent personal assistants}} like {{w|Siri}}, {{w|Cortana (software)|Cortana}} or {{w|Amazon Alexa|Alexa}} gaining consciousness (see [[1807: Listening]] for the latter). Such {{w|artificial intelligence}} references is a [[:Category:Artificial Intelligence|recurring subject]] on xkcd.

This could mean that either the phone feels pain for damages inflicted upon it or it feels the user's pain level (regarding either physical and/or emotional pain). The meaning would quickly become apparent for the user if the chassis melts on contact with exposed skin leaving the phone with "open wounds".

This could be seen as a similar feature of the first xkcd phone, [[1363: xkcd Phone]], where the title text notices (among many other things) that the ''phone will drown'' if submerged in water. A similar thing is also mentioned for [[1549: XKCD Phone 3]]. That phone is ''waterproof but can drown''. Since this phone is soundproof but not waterproof, per the two points above, the drowning issue may still be relevant. The second phone, [[1465: xkcd Phone 2]], ''cries when lost'' a similar display of emotions/feelings. That phone also mentions waterproofing, but here it is only the interior, and although it is washable, it is only a one-time feature (like the fold-ability of this one; see two points below). Finally it also [[1707: xkcd Phone 4]] mentions that it is waterproof, but not between 30-50 m down...
|-
|'''E-ZPass partnership: Phone can be dropped into coin basket to pay tolls'''
|{{w|E-ZPass}} is an electronic toll collection system. The vehicle drives through the toll lane without stopping, and sensors detect the pass and deduct the appropriate amount from the user's account. The phone's integration with E-ZPass is absurd since the phone needs to be dropped into a coin basket to work. Not only would you have to stop in order to throw the phone into the coin basket, which defies the idea of E-ZPass, but you would also lose your phone.

In the '''title text''', however, it says that the phone will be retrieved by the toll operators and returned by mail within 4–6 weeks. So this slightly mitigates the problem of losing the phone, but there would be about a month where the phone could not be used.
|-
|'''Foldable (once)'''
|Almost anything long and slim can be "folded" by simply snapping it in half. But as it says, this can only be done once, because the phone cannot be unsnapped and will not work any more once it has been folded.

This is a reference to the [http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/samsung-foldable-smartphone-news/ rumors of the new Samsung Galaxy X] that is really foldable like a piece of rubber. See [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fro_CNjxYwM this video].

It could also refer to the fact that a version of iPhone had a weak spot that lead it to easily folding and breaking. And it could be a reference to {{w|Flip (form)|flip phones}}.
|-
|'''Screen transfers images to skin'''
| Transferring images to the skin sounds like either real {{w|tattoos}} or the water tattoos used by children or other kinds of {{w|temporary tattoos}}. Likely it should be understood that it would be possible to transfer the image displayed on the screen to your skin, hopefully when activating the feature rather than by accident, and, preferably, also not permanently. This may also be a reference to the experimental Cicret Bracelet's ability to project images onto your arm: [http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/cicret.asp]
|-
|'''Retina storage'''
| This is a play on the name of Apple's prized "{{w|Retina Display}}". The joke may be in reference to Apple's possession of a trademark for the word "retina" in regards to computer equipment, which is made to seem absurd by the unusual use. It is not made clear whose retinas are meant to be stored. It could also be a reference to retinally implanted computers. The retina storage is a slot at the bottom of the phone right of the charging port.
|-
|'''Background task automatically catches and eats Pokémon'''
| A reference to {{w|Pokémon Go}}, an augmented reality game where the goal is to go to specific locations and play a mini-game in order to catch virtual creatures called {{w|Pokémon}} (see [[1705: Pokémon Go]]). This phone apparently catches Pokémon automatically, similar to the external device {{w|Pokémon_Go#Pok.C3.A9mon_Go_Plus|Pokémon Go Plus}}. However, this feature also eats them, which is something that is not part of the game and wouldn't be desirable, as it is about collection and storing as many different Pokémon as possible. It could be a coincidence, but it seems funny that the label for this background feature is the only one that points at the back of the phone.
|-
|'''Supercuts partnership: Trims hair fed into charging port'''
| {{w|Supercuts}} is an American hair salon chain that provides hair cuts and styling. The implication here is that the user can get a haircut by Supercuts by sticking hair into the charging slot. This is not only impractical and would only work for hair long enough to be fed into the port, but it would most likely result in a bad haircut. Also the slot would soon be filled with hair. The charging slot is otherwise placed in the normal spot and looks like a regular charging port.

This feature could actually be quite dangerous if the hair is not removed from the charging slot afterwards because the hair could melt or catch fire inside the phone.
|-
|'''Squelch knob'''
|{{w|Squelch}} is a feature of two-way radios (CB, ham, etc) which quiets background noise when no signal is present. For a smartphone, perhaps this knob could control the "signal-to-noise" ratio of your Facebook feed or other social media platforms. It takes the place of the headphone jack, replacing the normal hole with a small knob.
|-
|'''IBM buckling-spring Home button'''
|{{w|IBM}} {{w|Buckling spring|buckling-spring}} keyboards are favorites of geeks for the feeling of quality and auditory feedback (keys click loudly when pressed) they provide. Real smartphones' home buttons, typically located exactly as in this image, provide little to no such satisfaction when pressed.
|-
|'''Cot-caught merger switch'''
| This is a reference to the {{w|cot–caught merger}}, a linguistic change happening among English speakers, particularly in some parts of North America and the British Isles, which causes caught (previously pronounced "kawt") to be pronounced the same as cot (pronounced "kot"). The switch is clearly visible on the side of the phone. A real feature physically similar to this is the slide switch on the iPhone and iPad, allowing the user to (un)lock the orientation of the screen or to (un)mute the device.
|-
|'''60x optical zoom camera'''
|A powerful optical {{w|zoom lens}} is usually a desirable feature for cameras. However, as shown in the comic, it results in very bulky lens. If 60× zoom should be achieved the lens needs to be as big as shown on the backside of the phone, and the whole idea of being able to carry the smartphone easily in a pocket would be defied.

For that reason, such lenses are never used in smartphones, although rarely some devices, like the {{w|Samsung Galaxy Camera}}, use a smaller lens with a similar design. But this is no longer a smartphone.

This feature would seem to be a jab at the variety of add-on devices, including close-up lenses, handles, and external flashes, that are currently in use to enhance the phone's ability to function like a camera (and the {{w|selfie stick}}).

Some phones might instead mention their {{w|digital zoom}} level instead. But that is not a popular feature among photo enthusiasts, as digital zooming gains no additional optical resolution. Users would actually be better off using the maximum optical zoom, and then enlarging their images with photo-editing software, which might offer better, but slower, algorithms (e.g. {{w|linear resampling}} versus {{w|Lanczos resampling}}). Likewise, (mobile phone) cameras are often advertised with their high number of {{w|megapixel}}s, while retaining their small {{w|image sensor size}}. As each individual sensor gets less light, it creates more {{w|image noise}}.

Randall has made several comics about cameras before; see for instance [[1719: Superzoom]] and other comics linked via this.

Contrast the [https://www.easy-macro.com EasyMacro] band - 4x zoom with little appreciable thickness.
|-
|'''LORAN navigation'''
| {{w|LORAN}} (Long Range Navigation) was a precursor to modern {{W|Global Positioning System|GPS}} navigation, using land-based transmitters. Once developed for sea shipping, it is accurate to about 300 meters (1,000 feet). The joke, of course, is that all modern smartphones have integrated GPS navigation which is far more accurate. Due to the much lower frequencies involved, reception of LORAN signals though is much better in areas with obstructed view of the sky. However {{w|LORAN#Commercial_use.2C_decommissioning|LORAN has been decommissioned}} more or less completely since before 2000.

Incidentally, some receivers of the {{w|Decca Navigator System}} (which operates on a similar principle as LORAN) featured moving map displays, something we associate with modern GPS devices.
|-
|'''28-factor authentication'''
| An {{w|Authentication#Factors and identity|authentication factor}} is a way of proving one's identity. There are [http://www.nikacp.com/images/10.1.1.200.3888.pdf 3 generally recognized forms]: something you know, something you have, and something you are. It can be a password, a fingerprint, a physical key, etc.... Secure applications may include two or more factors; a common example is the "PIN and chip" system used with credit cards, where you need both the card and secret code to authorize a transaction. Many online services now provide two-factor authentication to protect against password-based attacks. 28-factor authentication would likely be very secure in theory but also so impractical that it would be unusable. The user will need to prove their identity 28 different ways which would be so time consuming that would outweigh the convenience of a smart phone.
|}

==Transcript==
:[An image of a smartphone with a common optical camera lens attached on its back is shown. Over the entire length the case is slightly rounded. There are several features visible as bottom like features at the top and bottom of the front as well a microphone like slit at the top. A sliding switch is visible on the side, and at the bottom there is a knob, a connector port and a small slit. Clockwise starting from the top left all the labels read:]
:Hook shot
:Bluetooth speaker
:Stained-glass display
:Gallium chassis remains solid up to 85°F
:Soundproof
:Can feel pain
:E-ZPass partnership: Phone can be dropped into coin basket to pay tolls
:Foldable (once)
:Screen transfers images to skin
:Retina storage
:Background task automatically catches and eats Pokémon
:Supercuts partnership: Trims hair fed into charging port
:Squelch knob
:IBM buckling-spring home button
:Cot-caught merger switch
:60x optical zoom camera
:''LORAN'' navigation
:28-factor authentication

:[Below the phone:]
:Introducing
:<big>The</big> <big><big>xkcd Phone 5</big></big>
:''We're trying to catch up to Apple but refuse to skip numbers®TM''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:xkcd Phones]]
[[Category:Pokémon]]

User talk:Gearoid

2016-11-15T15:31:23Z

Gearoid:

Yay! Another programmer! :D --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 12:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Not so surprising! :-) [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 15:31, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1759: British Map

2016-11-15T08:30:04Z

Gearoid:

The actual location for Braintree should be Essex not North Yorkshire.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.171|141.101.98.171]] 15:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Could Highland be a reference to Highlander? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.84|173.245.52.84]] 15:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, I know you removed the </nowiki> that ruined the italics there, [[User:Davidy22|Davidy]]. Don't lie to me, you troll. [[User:Jacky720|Jacky720]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]]) 19:04, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
:Whoops, was removing autogenerated nowiki text from another user, missed the first tag. Also, that edit was completely unnecessary. 21:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Blick could be referring to Wick , at the top of Scotland ''Please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>''

''Waterdown: Near [the actual] Grimsby'' Interestingly enough, in southern Ontario, Canada, there's a Waterdown not far from a Grimsby. Waterdown is considered part of Hamilton, and is towards its northwestern edge, while Grimsby is to Hamilton's east. --[[User:VonAether|VonAether]] ([[User talk:VonAether|talk]]) 17:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The protractor off the West coast of Scotland is a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mull_of_Kintyre_test
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.215|141.101.98.215]] 17:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Blick could also be Oldmeldrum.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.234.229|162.158.234.229]] 19:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Why aren't the coordinates part of the first table? [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 20:05, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Is Waterdown perhaps another Watership Down reference? [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Pity there's no [[wikipedia:Towcester|Towcester]] :) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.251|141.101.98.251]] 20:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

"Lakebottom" is equated with Lake Windermere (probably correct, largest lake in the Lake District) and the table states that many waterspeed records were set there. Arguably it is Coniston Water (same area, third largest "Lake" in the region) that is more (in) famous for speed records... Not that Randall references speed at all. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159|141.101.98.159]] 21:31, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Helcaraxë and Blick seem to share a single dot. Maybe Randall forgot to put a dot there, or there's some other reason? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.112|108.162.216.112]] 22:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

since Randal Munroe wrote the comic, and he is an american, the map WAS labeled by an american[[User:Jessep13|Jessep13]] ([[User talk:Jessep13|talk]]) 00:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

‘Seasedge’ and ‘Eyemouth’ look like they should be Seahouses and Lynemouth. So far as I can tell, Seasedge is marked as a little north of Seahouses, roughly west of Lindisfarne (which suggests Haggerston; regardless, north Northumberland coast), and Eyemouth is marked approximately where Ashington should be; ‘Hairskull’ appears to be where Durham should be. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.160|141.101.98.160]] 02:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

"BBC Channel 4" might also be a reference to Torchwood and other BBC Shows that were filmed in Wales (though did not necessarily air on Channel 4) [[User:Bpendragon|Bpendragon]] ([[User talk:Bpendragon|talk]]) 03:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

In fact, "Channel 4" is a channel not related to the BBC, so the reference to "BBC Channel 4" would be a mash-up between "Channel 4" and "BBC4" [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

"Wessex", although "obsolete" as a place name, is still in common use as a descriptive term. For example, there is both a Wessex Police Force and a Wessex Water supply company. [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1759: British Map

2016-11-15T07:34:29Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1759: British Map

2016-11-15T07:30:15Z

Gearoid:

1691: Optimization

2016-06-09T06:54:50Z

Gearoid: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1691
| date = June 8, 2016
| title = Optimization
| image = optimization.png
| titletext = Premature optimization is the root of all evil, so to start this project I'd better come up with a system that can determine whether a possible optimization is premature or not.
}}

==Explanation==
In computing, optimization is the practice of making a computer program run as quickly as possible, typically by making it run the fewest possible number of calculations. "Premature optimization" is the practice of trying to optimize parts of a program before the structure or function of the program has been finalized; this is problematic because changes made to the program down the line can result in wasted time and effort.

This comic is a flowchart making fun of the difference between prematurely optimizing and just doing things right. Since you're consulting a flowchart to find the answer, you're prematurely optimizing.

Apart from this main point - do not optimize prematurely - the flowchart in it self is a joke as the question in the first box only result in one arrow, with no options/labels, and by reaching the next box there can only be one answer to that question as you have to be consulting this flowchart to get to that question. The conclusion is that anyone actually trying to find out if they are using ''premature optimization'' is already ''prematurely optimizing''!

In addition, the minimalism of the flowchart suggests that the the flowchart ''itself'' has been highly (prematurely?) optimized adding extra layers to the joke.

The title text's ''root of all evil'' refers to {{w|Donald Knuth}}'s paper "Structured Programming with Goto statements" (1974) in which he wrote:
<blockquote>
"There is no doubt that the grail of efficiency leads to abuse. Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying about, the speed of noncritical parts of their programs, and these attempts at efficiency actually have a strong negative impact when debugging and maintenance are considered. We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: '''premature optimization is the root of all evil'''. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%."
</blockquote>
*Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20130731202547/http://pplab.snu.ac.kr/courses/adv_pl05/papers/p261-knuth.pdf (Computing Surveys, Vol 6, No 4, December 1974)

The title text then just takes the problem one step further back, by spending time trying to determine when you are too soon out for optimization, which is actually just another way of making premature optimization. This time-wasting behavior is common in obsessively perfectionist coders: developing tools to analyze aspects, such as performance, of the software actually required. In some fields, such as compilers or database design for instance, such tools are useful and productive (the 3% mentioned by Knuth?), but the usage suggested here is more appropriately covered by instinct and common sense.

Flowcharts are [[:Category:Flowcharts|often used in xkcd]] including the (mostly) non-farcical [[1688: Map Age Guide]] one week prior to this comic. Inefficiency (another xkcd theme) was featured in the [[1690: Time-Tracking Software|comic prior to this one]].

==Transcript==
:[A flow chart is shown with three boxes connected with two arrows. The first box is rectangular:]
:Are you '''''prematurely optimizing''''' or just '''''taking time to do things right?'''''

:[From the first box there is a short arrow straight down to a diamond shaped box:]
:Are you consulting a flowchart to answer this question?

:[A labeled arrow continues down.]
:Yes

:[The arrow connects to the final rectangular box.]
:You are prematurely optimizing

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Flowcharts]]

Talk:1625: Substitutions 2

2016-01-05T08:55:47Z

Gearoid:

See previous discussion for browser plugins, scripts, bookmarklets etc. at [[1288:_Substitutions]] [sven]

Can someone update the plugin for Chrome that does the word swaps? :3 Also swap it for upgoerfive-nouns[[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 15:11, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

The Title Text should read "...uncontrollably-swerving cars", not "...uncontrollably-swerving cats". But I don't have the heart to change it.

: Neither do I... [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.55|173.245.54.55]] 16:14, 4 January 2016 (UTC)(Daniel)

:: Actually, if you applied the 1288 substitutions it would be uncontrollably-swerving CATS.

Ok, I just checked the log, and it was added here,
"(cur | prev) 15:11, 4 January 2016‎ 141.101.104.7 (Talk)‎ . . (+1,212)‎ . . (undo)"
by the person who added the transcript, obviously I don't know if this was deliberate, though I suspect it was. Either way I think it is very funny and we should leave it. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.55|173.245.54.55]] 16:14, 4 January 2016 (UTC)(Daniel)

How many of them can be used?
"Like hundreds of civilians received friggin awful burns after a not very sudden dog attack Tuesday. After spherical outrage, the blade runner of presidential airbenders probably won't drunkedly egg it on the future."[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.222|162.158.114.222]] 16:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

huh...nothing for 'campaign' or 'voters'...also, the 'uncontrollably-swerving cats' is probably a victim of the first substitution filter that changes 'cars' to 'cats'[[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.227|162.158.56.227]] 17:06, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

"The suspect is currently very large" -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 22:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

after loading this into the browser plugin I noticed a loop caused "physically expands" to become "physically physically physically physically physically expands" and I began pondering whether the adding of extra physically-ies made the word intensify. Then I wondered why someone would need to intensify the acknowledgement of physicality. Then I looked at my hands, like REALLY looked at my hands. [[User:Beastachu|Beastachu]] ([[User talk:Beastachu|talk]]) 00:18, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

As a small note, "No indication ➜ Lots of signs" would actually create quite a few grammatically incorrect sentences. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.133|108.162.241.133]] 01:19, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

1625: Substitutions 2

2016-01-05T08:55:06Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1625
| date = January 4, 2016
| title = Substitutions 2
| image = substitutions_2.png
| titletext = Within a few minutes, our roads will be full of uncontrollably-swerving cars and our skies full of Amazon delivery dogs.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Please add examples as per 1288 comic. Table for explanation?}}

In this table, Randall suggests substituting several common phrases in generic news with similar or related phrases that mean something different for comical effect. Some of the replacements are synonyms, some are antonyms, and some are plain different concepts that, while would make a grammatically correct sentence, the resulting idea would sound absurd or bizarre.

Some of the examples might, also, mock the fact that many news contradict the actual facts or obvious results of a situation. (e.g. "[influential person] vows to do good to the world" would be replaced with with a more usual fact "[influential person] probably won't do good to the world")

The title text is an example of how the closing sentence of a given article or report might sound.

See also [[1288: Substitutions]].

See also [[1031: s/keyboard/leopard/]] and [[1418: Horse]].

Examples:

*Original sentence (as per title text): Within a few years, our roads will be full of self-driving cars and our skies full of Amazon delivery drones.
:Modified sentence: Within a few minutes, our roads will be full of uncontrollably-swerving cars and our skies full of Amazon delivery dogs.

*Original sentence: North Korea’s Kim vows to raise living standards
:Modified sentence: North Korea’s Kim probably won't raise living standards

*Original sentence: Commissioner Russell successfully ran for an at-large seat on the commission
:Modified sentence: Commissioner Russell suddenly ran for a very large seat on the commission

*Original sentence: The Republican presidential front-runner faces a global firestorm
:Modified sentence: The Republican presidential blade runner faces a spherical firestorm

*Original sentence: Donald Trump remains the front-runner Republican candidate in an unknown number of polls since the debates.
:Modified sentence: Donald Trump remains the Blade Runner Republican Airbender in like hundreds of psychic readings since the dance-offs.

*Original sentence: There was no indication of first-degree familial relationships in the analyzed dataset
:Modified sentence: There were lots of signs of friggin' awful familial relationships in the analyzed dataset

Airbender refers to the show {{w|Avatar: The Last Airbender}}, where there are waterbenders, earthbenders, firebenders and airbenders.
*Original sentence: Fifth Republican debate: where each candidate excelled and faltered
:Modified sentence: Fifth Republican dance-off: where each airbender excelled and faltered

*Original sentence: An unknown number of civilians received 3rd degree burns after an unsuccessful drone attack Tuesday. Following global outrage, the front runners of presidential candidates vowed to urge restraint in the future.
:Modified sentence: Like hundreds of civilians received friggin awful burns after a not very sudden dog attack Tuesday. Following spherical outrage, the blade runners of presidential airbenders probably won't drunkedly egg it on in the future

==Transcript==
More

'''Substitutions'''

That make reading the news more fun

{|
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Debate
| ➜
| Dance-off
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Self driving
| ➜
| Uncontrollably swerving
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Poll
| ➜
| Psychic reading
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Candidate
| ➜
| Airbender
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Drone
| ➜
| Dog
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Vows to
| ➜
| Probably won't
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | At large
| ➜
| Very large
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Successfully
| ➜
| Suddenly
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Expands
| ➜
| Physically expands
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | First/Second/Third-degree
| ➜
| Friggin' awful
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | An unknown number
| ➜
| Like hundreds
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Front runner
| ➜
| Blade runner
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Global
| ➜
| Spherical
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Years
| ➜
| Minutes
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Minutes
| ➜
| Years
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | No indication
| ➜
| Lots of signs
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Urged restraint by
| ➜
| Drunkenly egged on
|-
| style="text-align:right;" | Horsepower
| ➜
| Tons of horsemeat
|}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Substitutions]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Substitutions]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Charts]]

1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T10:09:34Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1613
| date = December 7, 2015
| title = The Three Laws of Robotics
| image = the_three_laws_of_robotics.png
| titletext = In ordering #5, self-driving cars will happily drive you around, but if you tell them to drive to a car dealership, they just lock the doors and politely ask how long humans take to starve to death.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Very basic first draft, and I'm pretty inexperienced [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC) you should also check my awful spelling [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:46, 7 December 2015 (UTC)}}
Thye joke here is that any other order of the three laws of robotics results in ridiculous worlds; two of these are designated orange (pretty bad) and three results are designated red ("hellscape").

The first alternate one (ordering #2) makes the robots value their existence over their job and so would make many much less functional. The silliness of this is portrayed in the accompanying image, where the robot laughs at the idea of doing what it was clearly built to do (explore mars), because of the risk. The personification is also humorous since it is a very nonhuman robot, being switched on on earth and ordered by the fleshy human known as [[Megan]], adding to the personification.

The next possible ordering (ordering #3) puts obeying orders above not harming humans which means anyone could send them on a killing spree, resulting in a "killbot hellscape"; It should also be noted humour is derived from the superlative nature of "Killbot Hellscape", as well as its over the top accompanying image, where there are multiple mushroom clouds (not necessarily nuclear), it also appears there are no humans, only robots. The next (ordering #4) would also result in much the same, the only difference here is that they would be willing to kill humans to protect themselves.

The penultimate (ordering #5) would result in a unpleasant world, though not a full hellscape, where the robots would not only disobey to protect themselves, but also kill if necessary. The absurdity of this one is further demonstrated with the very unhuman robot happily doing repetitive mundane tasks but then threatening its user, the terrified relic of the age of men known as [[Cueball]].

The last (ordering #6) also results in a hellscape wherein robots not only kill for self defense but will also go on killing sprees if ordered as long as they didn't risk themselves.

The titletext further adding to ordering #5 by noting anyone wishing to trade in their self-driving car could be killed, despite it (currently) being a standard and mundane and (mostly) risk free activity.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T09:59:26Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1613
| date = December 7, 2015
| title = The Three Laws of Robotics
| image = the_three_laws_of_robotics.png
| titletext = In ordering #5, self-driving cars will happily drive you around, but if you tell them to drive to a car dealership, they just lock the doors and politely ask how long humans take to starve to death.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Very basic first draft, and I'm pretty inexperienced [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC) you should also check my awful spelling [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:46, 7 December 2015 (UTC)}}
Thye joke here is that any other order of the three laws of robotics results in ridiculous worlds; two of these are designated orange (pretty bad) and three results are designated red ("hellscape").

The first alternate one (ordering #2) makes the robots value their existence over their job and so would make many much less functional. The silliness of this is portrayed in the accompanying image, where the robot laughs at the idea of doing what it was clearly built to do (explore mars), because of the risk. The personification is also humorous since it is a very nonhuman robot, being switched on on earth and ordered by the fleshy human known as [[Megan]], adding to the personification.

The next possible ordering (ordering #3) puts obeying orders above not harming humans which means anyone could send them on a killing spree, resulting in a "killbot hellscape"; It should also be noted humour is derived from the superlative nature of "Killbot Hellscape", as well as its over the top accompanying image, where there are multiple mushroom clouds (not necessarily nuclear), it also appears there are no humans, only robots. The next (ordering #4) would also result in much the same, the only difference here is that they would be willing to kill humans to protect themselves.

The penultimate (ordering #5) would result in a unpleasant world, though not a full hellscape, where the robots would not only disobey to protect themselves, but also kill if necessary. The absurdity of this one is further demonstrated with the very unhuman robot happily doing repetitive mundane tasks but then threatening its user, the terrified relic of the age of men known as [[cueball]].

The last (ordering #6) also results in a hellscape wherein robots not only kill for self defense but will also go on killing sprees if ordered as long as they didn't risk themselves.

The titletext further adding to ordering #5 by noting anyone wishing to trade in their self-driving car could be killed, despite it (currently) being a standard and mundane and (mostly) risk free activity.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T09:56:38Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1613
| date = December 7, 2015
| title = The Three Laws of Robotics
| image = the_three_laws_of_robotics.png
| titletext = In ordering #5, self-driving cars will happily drive you around, but if you tell them to drive to a car dealership, they just lock the doors and politely ask how long humans take to starve to death.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Very basic first draft, and I'm pretty inexperienced [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC) you should also check my awful spelling [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:46, 7 December 2015 (UTC)}}
Thye joke here is that any other order of the three laws of robotics results in ridiculous worlds, two of these are given orange (pretty bad) and three results are designated red ("hellscape").

The first alternate one (ordering #2) makes the robots value their existence over their job and so would make many much less functional. The silliness of this is portrayed in the accompanying image, where the robot laughs at the idea of doing what it was clearly built to do (explore mars), because of the risk. The personification is also humorous since it is a very nonhuman robot, being switched on on earth and ordered by the fleshy human known as [[Megan]], adds to the personification.

The next possible ordering (ordering #3) puts obeying orders above not harming humans which means anyone could send them on a killing spree, resulting in a "killbot hellscape"; It should also be noted humour is derived from the superlative nature of "Killbot Hellscape" as well as it's over the top accompanying image, where there are multiple mushroom clouds (not necessarily nuclear), it also appears there are no humans, only robots. The next (ordering #4) would also result in much the same, the only difference here is that they would be willing to kill humans to protect themselves.

The penultimate (ordering #5) would result in a unpleasant world, though not a full hellscape, where the robots would not only disobey to protect themselves, but also kill if necessary. The absurdity of this one is further demonstrated with the very unhuman robot happily doing repetitive mundane tasks but then threatening its user, the terrified relic of the age of men known as [[cueball]].

The last (ordering #6) also results in a hellscape wherein robots not only kill for self defense but will also go on killing sprees if ordered as long as they didn't risk themselves.

The titletext further adding to ordering #5 by noting anyone wishing to trade in their self-driving car could be killed, despite it (currently) being a standard and mundane and (mostly) risk free activity.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T09:55:32Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1613
| date = December 7, 2015
| title = The Three Laws of Robotics
| image = the_three_laws_of_robotics.png
| titletext = In ordering #5, self-driving cars will happily drive you around, but if you tell them to drive to a car dealership, they just lock the doors and politely ask how long humans take to starve to death.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Very basic first draft, and I'm pretty inexperienced [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC) you should also check my awful spelling[[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 09:46, 7 December 2015 (UTC)}}
Thye joke here is that any other order of the three laws of robotics results in ridiculas worlds, two of these are given orange (pretty bad) and three results are designated red ("hellscape").

The first alternate one (ordering #2) makes the robots value their existence over their job and so would make many much less functional. The silliness of this is portrayed in the accompanying image, where the robot laughs at the idea of doing what it was clearly built to do (explore mars), because of the risk. The personification is also humorous since it is a very nonhuman robot, being switched on on earth and ordered by the fleshy human known as [[Megan]], adds to the personification.

The next possible ordering (ordering #3) puts obeying orders above not harming humans which means anyone could send them on a killing spree, resulting in a "killbot hellscape"; It should also be noted humour is derived from the superlative nature of "Killbot Hellscape" as well as it's over the top accompanying image, where there are multiple mushroom clouds (not necessarily nuclear), it also appears there are not humans, onlty robots. The next (ordering #4) would also result in much the same, the only difference here is that they would be willing to kill humans to protect themselves.

The penultimate (ordering #5) would result in a unpleasant world, though not a full hellscape, where the robots would not only disobey to protect themselves, but also kill if necessary. The absurdity of this one is further demonstrated with the very unhuman robot happily doing repetitive mundane tasks but then threatening its user, the terrified relic of the age of men known as [[cueball]].

The last (ordering #6) also results in a hellscape wherein robots not only kill for self defense but will also go on killing sprees if ordered as long as they didn't risk themselves.

The titletext further adding to ordering #5 by noting anyone wishing to trade in their self-driving car could be killed, despite it (currently) being a standard and mundane and (mostly) risk free activity.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

Talk:1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T09:52:47Z

Gearoid:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PKx3kS7f4A Relevant Computerphile]

I think the second one would also create the "best" robots i.e. ones that have the same level of "free will" as humans do, but won't end up with the robot uprising. X3[[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 09:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The second ordering was actually covered in a story by Asimov, where a strengthed third law caused a robot to run around a hazard at a distance which maintained an equilibrium between not getting destroyed and obeying orders. More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaround_(story) [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 09:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Gearoid

2015-12-07T09:48:21Z

Gearoid:

Gearóid is a recently retired computer software designer and programmer. Based in the U.K. [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 09:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1613: The Three Laws of Robotics

2015-12-07T09:45:51Z

Gearoid:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PKx3kS7f4A Relevant Computerphile]

I think the second one would also create the "best" robots i.e. ones that have the same level of "free will" as humans do, but won't end up with the robot uprising. X3[[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 09:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The second ordering was actually covered in a story by Asimov, where a strengthed third law caused a robot to run around a hazard
at a distance which maintained an equilibrium between not getting destroyed and obeying orders. More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaround_(story) [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 09:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1605: DNA

2015-11-20T08:05:38Z

Gearoid:

The source for Google.com can be found at `<nowiki>view-source:https://www.google.com/</nowiki>` for Firefox and Chrome. Also [http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=u8SMf7G6 here]. —[[User:Artyer|Artyer]] <big>([[User Talk:Artyer|talk]]<big>'''|'''</big>[[Special:Contributions/Artyer|ctb]])</big> 16:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
:Should there be a link to the code in the explain. I do not understand these links or the source code, and would not like to place these links in the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I really like this comic. IMHO, just another good example of intelligent design. Google's dev had to design, plan and carefully code. If that is seemingly simple compared to DNA and biology then how much more intelligence and thought was needed for the coding of all living things?--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
:With all the stupid things going on in our bodies (rendered useless by natural selection but staying put anyway like the {{w|Appendix (anatomy)|Appendix}} or our {{w|tailbone}}) then it is to me just a clear example that there has been no intelligence behind our genome, but just trial and error, and then 4 billion years to get it right enough that it works but not smart. And don't get me started on how our air and food/drink has to go in the same way with the risk of being (nearly) killed by a pretzel...([http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-94567/I-feel-great-President-Bush-declares-pretzel-incident.html even if you are the president of the US] ;-) That is just plain stupid design. But few enough dies from this, that it was necessary for nature to change it once it was working. Humans and the genes survived long enough to reproduce. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
::Without an appendix how would our gut immune system develop properly? Without a tail bone how would we stand upright? It's a fallacy to think that just because we don't understand something it must have no purpose. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 00:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
:::Without a pretzel-choking mechanism, how could we ever hope to weed out less-desirable presidents?
::::Nothing to do with choking; the pretzel interfered with the vagus nerve, interfering with his heart rate [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC).
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.215|162.158.180.215]] 21:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
:I am sure you are right about intelligent design being involved: clearly DNA's tangled structure is a deliberate nod to a plate of spaghetti, proof indeed that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has had a hand (well, a noodly appendage) in all of creation. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 00:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Apologies, when I saved my comments it blitzed someone else's that must have been being written at the same time :'-( [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:13, 18 November 2015
(UTC)
:Yeah it was my two comments above? I have now moved the one right her above back in place from the bottom where Davidy22 had placed it when he tried to fix it. No harms done but as he says: ''Read error messages, I know mediawiki gives them to you''. You can always see in the history what you have changed. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:08, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
::I, for my part read the edit conflict (with Kynde, 18:43) like a good little boy, re-edited in light of that, resubmitted and... forgot to answer the security question. For completeness I wrote the following. If it's still helpful...
Had the same thought. Although I just use "View | Source" from the menu or right-click and "View Page Source", or whatever that browser tends to want to give me. And, having had that same thought: For reference, in case anybody wants it, the source of the google.co.uk main page (assumed not far off google.com in its nature) is 51 lines. But that's 51 ''long'' lines of mostly javascript, with much of the unnecessary whitespace (including line-feeds) taken out of it, overwhelmingly single-character variable names, over 150 'if' statements (including 'else if' ones, in continuation to a prior one) and perhaps 56 'for' loops, at first glance. Whether 'optimised' or obfuscated, it certainly could be a challenge to fully understand.
:: HTH, HAND [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 21:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

::: I don't think that Google's homepage is only optimized. I'm sure part of obfuscation is deliberate. That said, just removing comments and changing variable names is usually enough to make program unreadable. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

IMHO DNA with its redundant sections for things not currently used and the bodges in biological design are a good example of unintelligent design. For example the blood supply to the retina is between the iris and the retina, so it is in the way. An intelligent designer would do an eye mark II. But this has nothing to do with the comic. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
: Sigh. Another of the "I could do a better job" brigade. Go ahead. Try it. Post back here after you learn enough about the existing eye design that you recognise just how incredible it is. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 00:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

::Eye mark II is used in octopuses: {{w|Cephalopod eye}}. Solves multiple problems of our eyes. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:15, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
:::Cephalopod vs Vertebrate eyes is a classic example of convergent evolution, therefore eye structure proves evolution not intelligent design. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 00:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

White Hat is showing the hubris often seen by people who think their (often limited) knowledge in one field can be used as an anology for something very different. Megan only manages to showchim his error by showing that a "simple" web page, which has only been evolving for a few years is more complex than he thinks, and the role of any one line/command in the page is probably far from clear without deep analysis [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The evolution of life is composed exclusively of copy-paste programming on top of legacy code, global variables, and hacks on hacks on hacks at every level, from telomeres and DNA looping, to the structure of the human hip (childbirth), to our breathing tract, optic nerve, and brain structure and cognition. --[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.234|199.27.130.234]] 21:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
: That's what you get when you hack the universe together with perl. {{unsigned|Dsollen}}

: Or C. Reminds me of a joke going around in the 90s ... http://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/dna.en.html [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.38|141.101.98.38]]

So much for Gattaca then... [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 00:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1604: Snakes

2015-11-16T08:54:00Z

Gearoid:

i don't know how to add the omega sign for the units of the resistor in the transcript. i'll leave that to someone more skilled than myself [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 05:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Just copy-and-paste! -N00b {{unsigned ip|108.162.214.77}}

Or find the 'omega' symbol in Windows Character Map. [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 08:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

To be exact, a 24Ω resistor would be red, yellow, black; 240Ω would be red, yellow, brown, and so on, along a well-defined sequence. Red, yellow on its own would be missing the final "scaling" colour. [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1597: Git

2015-10-30T09:20:23Z

Gearoid:

If someone is interested, the best book I've read on it is [http://www.git-scm.com/book/en/v2 Pro Git]. The chapters 2 and 3 explain pretty well this mess of branching and merging. But it's true that it takes a bit of patience to go over it all. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.35|108.162.228.35]] 08:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Also take a look at [http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ GitFlow: A Successful Git Branching Model]. Though Randall is correct there usually comes a time when it is easier to give up and "start again". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 08:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I never liked the name of this piece of software; in British English, the name "git" is mildly rude :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(slang) . [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 09:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

1567: Kitchen Tips

2015-08-25T07:18:57Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1567
| date = August 21, 2015
| title = Kitchen Tips
| image = kitchen_tips.png
| titletext = Household tip: Tired of buying so much toilet paper? Try unspooling the paper from the roll before using it. A single roll can last for multiple days that way, and it's much easier on your plumbing.
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic, [[Cueball]] appears to be hosting a show (or be in an ad) giving out kitchen advice. He starts with a reasonable tip to use a meat thermometer instead of guessing when meat is cooked. His later tips, though, are little more than telling how to complete normal kitchen activities performed using common sense. Moreover, in most cases he repeats "If you're anything like me," suggesting he's actually ''done'' these things in his kitchen. This is a parody of many commercials and infomercials that [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TooIncompetentToOperateABlanket imply their consumers have no basic motor skills or common sense] in order to make their product more appealing.

The first tip he gives is reasonable because, though the use of a meat thermometer it is fairly well known, not everybody goes to the trouble of using one. To determine if meat is done cooking, one can either guess or use a meat thermometer to check that the internal temperature has reached the correct level to render meat safe for consumption. Many people don't own a meat thermometer and rely on an alternative solution that doesn't require special equipment (such as testing by feel, cutting the meat open to check its doneness, checking the color of the juices after pricking the meat with skewer, or simply guessing).

The second panel shows that Cueball throws away dishes and buys new ones every time they are used. This is perfectly normal if the plates are disposable plates made of paper or Styrofoam, but we see his trashcan is filled with chipped glasses and ceramic plates. Naturally, this would be a very expensive practice. The virtually universal chore of "washing the dishes," is one Cueball presumes the audience is heretofore unaware of.

Cooking on a stove is typically done placing the food into a pot or pan which is placed on the burner. Cueball seems to suggest that the use of a pan is a tip most people would be unaware of, suggesting that most people cook eggs directly on the burners themselves, a method that is likely to burn the food and create a great mess. Cueball's stove has T-shape raised burners (probably gas, but might be electric), making the task very impractical, though owners of glass-top electric stoves could conceivably cook directly on the glass surface.

Ice is usually made by filling an ice cube tray with water and leaving it in a freezer for several hours. Cueball, however, sprays a hose directly into his freezer compartment and quickly slams the door shut to trap some water inside. (This would work somewhat better in the type of freezer that has a door on the top, so it could be filled with water and the door would not need to be closed to trap the water inside.) While this unorthodox method ''will'' make ice, it will result in a large sheet of ice on the bottom of the freezer. More importantly, it will also make it impossible to actually use the freezer to hold anything else (unless you were to put anything in beforehand and you don't mind breaking through a block of ice to get it out). Also, ice expands as it cools (it is one of the few substances with a negative coefficient of thermal expansion), and its expansion might push the freezer door open.

The title text suggests using toilet paper a few sheets at a time, which is how most people use it. Cueball, however, seems to suggest that most people use the entire roll as a single object without unspooling it and then flushing it whole, using at least one roll each time they use the bathroom. This is economically impractical, and is prone to clogging the toilet and the plumbing if you throw the toilet paper away by putting it into the toilet and flush it, as people do in some countries including the US, although not in Greece, where narrow-bore outflows from the toilet are used, and the user is required to dump the used toilet paper in a trashcan adjacent to the toilet.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball at a kitchen counter, holding a meat thermometer.]
:Cueball: If you're anything like me, you may have trouble telling when meat is fully cooked.
:Cueball: Instead of guessing, try a meat thermometer!

:[Cueball at a sink, holding a dirty dish, with a trashcan next to him full of broken ceramics and glasses.]
:Cueball: If you're anything like me, you probably throw away your plates and glasses when they get dirty. But if you clean them, they can often be used again!

:[Cueball cracking an egg over a pan on a hot stove.]
:Cueball: Making scrambled eggs? Put a pan under them!
:Cueball: It's easier, and it keeps your burners clean.

:[Cueball holding a garden hose, spraying it into the freezer compartment of a freezer.]
:Cueball: If you're anything like me, you make ice by spraying a hose into your freezer and then slamming it shut.
:Cueball: But there's a better way...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T12:57:33Z

Gearoid:

The character I'm missing in the title is [http://unicode-table.com/en/0FD0/ Tibetan Mark Bska- Shog Gi Mgo Rgyan U+0FD0] [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.129|108.162.216.129]] 06:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

And the second Box is a Mathematical Script small I (U+1D4BE)
And the First Box is a Mathematical Fraktur small S (U+1D530)
I think These are the only ones, that iOS7 can't picture. [[User:ẞ qwertz|ẞ qwertz]] ([[User talk:ẞ qwertz|talk]]) 06:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

More fun with Unicode. Question is, which OS does Randall have that has perfect support? (It has to cover emoji and obscure glyphs like these. Likely that it's multiple devices?) [[User:Azule|Azule]] ([[User talk:Azule|talk]]) 06:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Windows 7 here, everything displays properly for me. I don't think supporting most (or all) of the Unicode charset is as uncommon today as it used to be. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.128|108.162.221.128]] 10:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Linux Mint 17 here, ditto. [[User:Seipas|Seipas]] ([[User talk:Seipas|talk]]) 11:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
::Most of todays operating systems have unicode support perfect, but may still lack some fonts. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to finding out what the words are in English (as opposed to Unicodish). [[User:Azule|Azule]] ([[User talk:Azule|talk]]) 06:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:"...but it's hard to read and I can't focus"? [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Folks. I offer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI1hGShVdBA as the latest example of the genre. "I rub a Mexican loki" -> "I'm up all night to get lucky". [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 07:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

:Not typical example. In typical example, you can't hear the lyrics over the music, not because the singer have bad pronunciation. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

...Songs still have lyrics these days? {turns on the radio} BWWWUWWUWUWUWUB {turns off the radio} [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.111|108.162.215.111]]

I sometimes observe that while dreaming, I can read the seemingly intelligible text perfectly well, but it changes every time I look back at it. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.161|173.245.48.161]] 09:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Title possibly inspired by http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1732348/regex-match-open-tags-except-xhtml-self-contained-tags/1732454#1732454 (however, there is a lot of stuff like that) {{unsigned ip|108.162.254.108}}

Why a phone? Why cannot Cueball be holding a tablet? {{unsigned|RChandra}}

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T07:55:04Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T07:53:38Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T07:48:51Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T07:48:29Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1538: Lyrics

2015-06-15T07:02:27Z

Gearoid:

Talk:1530: Keyboard Mash

2015-05-27T08:09:05Z

Gearoid: /* What if? */

Spiders. We knew this would happen someday.

So, the plot seems to be that he went outside to deal with his dog, and the spider got inside, perhaps lurking in his room and striking when he sat down at his computer, hence the keyboard smash.
It could be him being taken, or perhaps the spider getting adjusted to the keyboard rather clumsily, what would you see as more feasible?
And from then on, it's the spider typing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.168|108.162.238.168]] 06:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

"All your hands" were on the home row? Surely he means *both* hands or all *fingers* - unless he's already aware of the spider? Plot hole? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.121|141.101.99.121]] 06:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

: Good catch. May be he always was aware he was talking with a spider. And the las comment from the spider is just sarcastic. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Internal skeleton ==

In the title text, the spider invite to “CHAT ABOUT OUR INTERNAL SKELETONS.” Of course, the spiders, being arachnid, are invertebrate and don't have internal skeletons. Humans have. My guess is the spider is trying to fool the human. :-) [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Number of "Fingers" ==
It is 7 keys - "fingers" that are used for the smash on the home row. Spiders have 8 legs. Anybody else notice that? lg tier666 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.43|141.101.92.43]] 07:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

:I count 8 keys: 7 letters and the digit "7". Bit, since the letters are repeated, the spider couldn't press all of the with its legs at the same time. All of this make me think that a spider could be an awesome typist. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Turing test ==

The spider passed the Turing test. Of course, the test were for machines, not arachnids. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== What if? ==

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, the current "What if?" at http://what-if.xkcd.com/136/ is also spider related. It comes with a health warning: "If you're a serious arachnophobe, you might want to skip this one." :-) . [[User:Gearoid|Gearoid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1530: Keyboard Mash

2015-05-27T08:08:44Z

Gearoid: /* Number of "Fingers" */

Talk:1530: Keyboard Mash

2015-05-27T08:08:06Z

Gearoid: /* What if? */

Spiders. We knew this would happen someday.

So, the plot seems to be that he went outside to deal with his dog, and the spider got inside, perhaps lurking in his room and striking when he sat down at his computer, hence the keyboard smash.
It could be him being taken, or perhaps the spider getting adjusted to the keyboard rather clumsily, what would you see as more feasible?
And from then on, it's the spider typing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.168|108.162.238.168]] 06:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

"All your hands" were on the home row? Surely he means *both* hands or all *fingers* - unless he's already aware of the spider? Plot hole? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.121|141.101.99.121]] 06:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

: Good catch. May be he always was aware he was talking with a spider. And the las comment from the spider is just sarcastic. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Internal skeleton ==

In the title text, the spider invite to “CHAT ABOUT OUR INTERNAL SKELETONS.” Of course, the spiders, being arachnid, are invertebrate and don't have internal skeletons. Humans have. My guess is the spider is trying to fool the human. :-) [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Number of "Fingers" ==
It is 7 keys - "fingers" that are used for the smash on the home row. Spiders have 8 legs. Anybody else notice that? lg tier666 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.43|141.101.92.43]] 07:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

:I count 8 keys: 7 letters and the digit "7". Bit, since the letters are repeated, the spider couldn't press all of the with its legs at the same time. All of this make me think that a spider could bean awesome typist. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Turing test ==

The spider passed the Turing test. Of course, the test were for machines, not arachnids. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== What if? ==

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, the current "What if?" at http://what-if.xkcd.com/136/ is also spider related. It comes with a health warning: "If you're a serious arachnophobe, you might want to skip this one." :-) .

Talk:1530: Keyboard Mash

2015-05-27T08:07:14Z

Gearoid:

Spiders. We knew this would happen someday.

So, the plot seems to be that he went outside to deal with his dog, and the spider got inside, perhaps lurking in his room and striking when he sat down at his computer, hence the keyboard smash.
It could be him being taken, or perhaps the spider getting adjusted to the keyboard rather clumsily, what would you see as more feasible?
And from then on, it's the spider typing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.168|108.162.238.168]] 06:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

"All your hands" were on the home row? Surely he means *both* hands or all *fingers* - unless he's already aware of the spider? Plot hole? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.121|141.101.99.121]] 06:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

: Good catch. May be he always was aware he was talking with a spider. And the las comment from the spider is just sarcastic. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Internal skeleton ==

In the title text, the spider invite to “CHAT ABOUT OUR INTERNAL SKELETONS.” Of course, the spiders, being arachnid, are invertebrate and don't have internal skeletons. Humans have. My guess is the spider is trying to fool the human. :-) [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:34, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Number of "Fingers" ==
It is 7 keys - "fingers" that are used for the smash on the home row. Spiders have 8 legs. Anybody else notice that? lg tier666 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.43|141.101.92.43]] 07:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

:I count 8 keys: 7 letters and the digit "7". Bit, since the letters are repeated, the spider couldn't press all of the with its legs at the same time. All of this make me think that a spider could bean awesome typist. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== Turing test ==

The spider passed the Turing test. Of course, the test were for machines, not arachnids. [[User:Arturotena|Arturotena]] ([[User talk:Arturotena|talk]]) 07:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

== What if? ==

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, the current "What if?" at http://what-if.xkcd.com/136/ is also spider related. It comes
with a health warning: "If you're a serious arachnophobe, you might want to skip this one." :-) .

1524: Dimensions

2015-05-13T07:34:15Z

Gearoid: typo

{{comic
| number = 1524
| date = May 13, 2015
| title = Dimensions
| image = dimensions.png
| titletext = I would say time is definitely one of my top three favorite dimensions.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First version of explanation}}
Our world are {{w|Dimension|3-dimensional}} (like in a box, length, width and height.) But in modern {{w|physics}}, {{w|space}} and {{w|time}} are unified in a four-dimensional continuum called {{w|Spacetime|spacetime}} where time becomes the fourth dimension.

It is to this 4-dimensional spacetime that [[Cueball]] refers in his monologue to [[Megan]], while he is philosophizing about his life in these four dimensions. (And not to a possible {{w|four-dimensional space}}, where the fourth dimension would take you out of the universe that we can perceive.)

What Cueball comment on is that whereas we can to some extend determine in which direction we wish to move (at least on the surface of the Earth) in the three dimensions of space (up-down, left-right, forward-backward), then we cannot help but being pushed ''inexorably forward through'' time. So it is quite lucky for Cueball that he think this is OK.

Being pushed in one of the other directions could be lethal, if you where pushed hard enough against a rock, over a cliff or in front of a truck...

In the title text he then continues to muse about his favorite dimensions and places time in his top three of the four. This means that one of the three space dimensions would be his least favorite. But in space, there is no difference between the three dimensions. It is only in a fixed reference system that you can assign any difference to these three directions (like on Earth). So this of course doesn't make sense. Either time should be his favorite or his least favorite dimension. So if it is in the top three our of four, it thus should be number one...

Three are the x, y and z directions we are familiar with. In a sense, time is the 4th dimension. Especially in discussions of general relativity, and the use of Minkowski diagrams, time is treated as a 4th dimension.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting up against a tree, Megan lies with her hands behind her neck in front him under the foliage of the tree.]
:Cueball: Of the four dimensions I could have spent my life being pushed inexorably forward through, I guess "time" isn't the worst.

{{comic discussion}}



[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Time travel]]

1524: Dimensions

2015-05-13T07:33:18Z

Gearoid: typo

{{comic
| number = 1524
| date = May 13, 2015
| title = Dimensions
| image = dimensions.png
| titletext = I would say time is definitely one of my top three favorite dimensions.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First version of explanation}}
Our world are {{w|Dimension|3-dimensional}} (like in a box, length, width and height.) But in modern {{w|physics}}, {{w|space}} and {{w|time}} are unified in a four-dimensional continuum called {{w|Spacetime|spacetime}} where time becomes the fourth dimension.

It is to this 4-dimensional spacetime that [[Cueball]] refers in his monologue to [[Megan]], while he is philosophizing about his life in these four dimensions. (And not to a possible {{w|four-dimensional space}}, where the fourth dimension would take you out of the universe that we can perceive.)

What Cueball comment on is that whereas we can to some extend determine in which direction we wish to move (at least on the surface of the Earth) in the three dimensions of space (up-down, left-right, forward-backward), then we cannot help but being pushed ''inexorably forward through'' time. So it is quite lucky for Cueball that he think this is OK.

Being pushed in one of the other directions could be lethal, if you where pushed hard enough against a rock, over a cliff or in front of a truck...

In the title text he then continues to muse about his favorite dimensions and places time in his top three of the four. This means that one of the three space dimensions would be his least favorite. But in space, there is no difference between the three dimensions. It is only in a fixed reference system that you can assign any difference to these three directions (like on Earth). So this of course doesn't make sense. Either time should be his favorite or his least favorite dimension. So if it is in the top three our of four, it thus should be number one...

Three are the x, y and z directions we are familiar with. In a sense, time is the 4th dimension. Especially in discussions of general relativity, and the use of Minkowski diagrams, time is treated as a 4th dimension.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting up against a tree, Megan lies with her hands behind her neck in front him under the foliage of the tree.]
:Cueball: Of the four dimensions I could have spent my lige being pushed inexorably forward through, I guess "time" isn't the worst.

{{comic discussion}}



[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Time travel]]

1524: Dimensions

2015-05-13T07:31:22Z

Gearoid: typo

{{comic
| number = 1524
| date = May 13, 2015
| title = Dimensions
| image = dimensions.png
| titletext = I would say time is definitely one of my top three favorite dimensions.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First version of explanation}}
Our world are {{w|Dimension|3-dimensional}} (like in a box, length, width and height.) But in modern {{w|physics}}, {{w|space}} and {{w|time}} are unified in a four-dimensional continuum called {{w|Spacetime|spacetime}} where time becomes the fourth dimension.

It is to this 4-dimensional spacetime that [[Cueball]] refers in his monologue to [[Megan]], while he is philosophizing about his life in these four dimensions. (And not to a possible {{w|four-dimensional space}}, where the fourth dimension would take you out of the universe that we can perceive.)

What Cueball comment on is that whereas we can to some extend determine in which direction we wish to move (at least on the surface of the Earth) in the three dimensions of space (up-down, left-right, forward-backward), then we cannot help but being pushed ''inexorably forward through'' time. So it is quite lucky for Cueball that he think this is OK.

Being pushed in one of the other directions could be lethal, if you where pushed hard enough against a rock, over a cliff or in front of a truck...

In the title text he then continues to muse about his favorite dimensions and places time in his top three of the four. This means that one of the three space dimensions would be his least favorite. But in space, there is no difference between the three dimensions. It is only in a fixed reference system that you can assign any difference to these three directions (like on Earth). So this of course doesn't make sense. Either time should be his favorite or his least favorite dimensions. So if it is in the top three our of four, it thus should be number one...

Three are the x, y and z directions we are familiar with. In a sense, time is the 4th dimension. Especially in discussions of general relativity, and the use of Minkowski diagrams, time is treated as a 4th dimension.
==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting up against a tree, Megan lies with her hands behind her neck in front him under the foliage of the tree.]
:Cueball: Of the four dimensions I could have spent my lige being pushed inexorably forward through, I guess "time" isn't the worst.

{{comic discussion}}



[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

User:Gearoid

2015-05-13T07:29:40Z

Gearoid: Created page with "Placeholder for Gearóid."

Placeholder for Gearóid.

Talk:1505: Ontological Argument

2015-04-01T08:04:33Z

Gearoid:

Reminds me some kind of the [http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Babel_Fish#Philosophical_implications Babel Fish]... [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 06:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

:Isn't the greatest fallacy of ontological argument the fact that the set of entities may not be well-ordered by "greatest" or "goodness"? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

::Step 1: Take S to be the set of such entities. Step 2: When I reach step 3, if S hasn't managed to find a well-ordering relation for itself....
::I can't think of what to say next.. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.242|108.162.221.242]] 22:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)BK201

::That's a great point, and (IMHO) a truly serious problem in these attempts to "order" gods (maybe it stems from being tied down to monotheistic thinking?). But it's not really a "fallacy," properly speaking. Not all flaws in reasoning are fallacies... {{unsigned ip|108.162.210.39}}

::I think that (using this argument) the first flaw arises when defining the "set of entities". How can we define it and make sure that it is indeed a set? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.245|141.101.98.245]] 14:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

::I think the greatest fallacy is that they start with the conclusion that the fantasy that God exists isn't a fantasy, and then try to "reason" their way into finding support for that conclusion. IOW, claiming to apply reason while working in exactly the opposite way that true reasoning demands. I realize ontological arguments, as the explanation currently says, "seek to prove that God exists using only premises about the nature of existence and logical deductions from them. This is '''in contrast to arguments that are based on observations of the world'''". But you don't get to reject the logical scientific method (marshal the facts and '''THEN''' draw conclusions from them) and then claim you're being logical. - Equinox [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.120|199.27.128.120]] 15:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

::I find some humor in that 'A god who could find a flaw in the ontological argument' could easily be accomplished by a being who met and/or exceeded the original premise of being 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived'. Some of the more obvious logical flaws are pointed out in this thread, and proving the thought process wrong doesn't really affect its overall truthiness in either direction. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.133|108.162.221.133]] 07:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yay a potential large, all-encompassing argument about religion waiting to happen. Oh glory day. [[User:YourLifeisaLie|The Goyim speaks]] ([[User talk:YourLifeisaLie|talk]]) 13:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Any chance this is really about an omnipotence paradox? Can god create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it? Is he so powerful that he can find a flaw in any argument that proves he exists? {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.186}}

:I think it's analogous and worth mentioning. Added it. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 15:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Why is the William Lane Craig section in there? If there are dozens of versions of the ontological argument on wikipedia, it makes sense to list the original (Anselm), the most famous critique of it (Dawkins), and then refer the reader to wikipedia for more information. The Craig variant is not explained here and seems cherry-picked out of the long list on wikipedia for no clear reason. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 14:08, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

:The text I replaced claimed that ontological arguments for the existence of God are based on the idea that a God that exists is greater than a God that does not exist. I changed it to say that Anselm's version says that and there are other ontological arguments that don't say that. I used William Lane Craig as the clearest and easiest to understand example from the Wikipedia article for which that is not the case. That said, I like how people have edited it since better than what I wrote. [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 00:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Super ultra chocolate fudge cookies mega sundae (from here on refered to as "happy happy") is by definition the best ice cream imaginable, meaning we can't concieve of a better ice cream. but, if the happy happy exists solely in your mind as an idea, than surely you can concieve of a better happy happy, that is, the one that is sitting on a desk in front of you. Therefore, the happy happy must be the one that exists right in front of you. now, where's my ice cream?? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.244|141.101.98.244]] 16:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

:Someone should put a happy happy on 141.101.98.244's desk when he isn't looking.[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.185|199.27.128.185]] 00:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

"Ontological arguments, in general, are arguments that attempt to prove a point by involving a "higher reason" or purpose for the point. " These are teleological arguments, not ontological. {{unsigned|Atnorman}}

I noticed by pure coincidence that Megan and Cueball are posed exactly as they were in [[1315: Questions for God]]. Is that the only time they were posed like that while posing a theological question, or is this a broader pattern? I haven't found any others, offhand. Also noticed that the Ontological argument came up very subtly in [[1052: Every Major's Terrible]]. [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 21:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

: [[1052: Every Major's Terrible]] does not reference the ontological argument. X therefore X exists is not the argument.{{Atnorman|Atnorman}}

Yeah but that's a strawman fallacy. I win.
I commit no fallacy, except the fallacy fallacy. [[User:YourLifeisaLie|The Goyim speaks]] ([[User talk:YourLifeisaLie|talk]]) 17:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

: Errm, isn't "Goyim" a plural and therefore wouldn't "speaks" but "speak"?

Talk:1505: Ontological Argument

2015-04-01T08:03:57Z

Gearoid:

1503: Squirrel Plan

2015-03-25T08:44:09Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1503
| date = March 25, 2015
| title = Squirrel Plan
| image = squirrel plan.png
| titletext = [Halfway to the Sun ...] Heyyyy ... what if this BALLOON is full of acorns?!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Explanation is absent and therefore incomplete. (Explanatione is a comment)}}

The joke is that squirrels are stupid and have no business trying their paws at aeronautics.

The title text further compounds this notion when the airborne squirrel jeopardizes the entire mission because he wants to test if the balloon itself is full of acorns. Basic observational skills will tell anyone that acorns do not float, and in fact have noticeable weight to them. Elementary logic then dictates that the balloon lifting the squirrel should not contain objects that contribute only weight, and therefore the balloon must not contain acorns. Yet perhaps this is for the best, since continuing on with the mission would (obviously, to us humans) end in death for the airborne squirrel, as well as inconclusive data for the ground team. Title text also suggests that the squirrel is "Half way to the Sun", a distance of roughly 74 800 000 km. This provides a small amount of evidence that it was in fact a squirrel that authored the comic or at least its title text as the squirrel would be dead at that altitude without an appropriate space suit and the balloon would have popped long before due to the expansion of the acorns within.

==Transcript==
There are three squirrels. One is suspended from a balloon. The other two are standing on the ground, looking up at it.

Squirrel on right: Once you've chewed a hole in the sun, shoot the balloon to fall back to earth, then pull the parachute ripcord to land.

Squirrel holding balloon: Are you sure it's full of acorns?

Squirrel on right: Look how bright and magnificent it is! What else could be in there?
{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1502: Wasted Time

2015-03-24T08:47:06Z

Gearoid:

If I'm reading the revision history correctly, the Incomplete notice was incomplete when added - if it's a person who added it, then just a typo. If it's a bot, possibly a bug in the bot. [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 05:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Didn’t Momo tell us, that we can’t save time – and if we you, someone ''other'' uses it? ;-). --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 12:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

another one on time management: https://xkcd.com/1205/ [[User:SirKitKat|sirKitKat]] ([[User talk:SirKitKat|talk]]) 14:37, 23 March 2015 (UTC)... which, coincidentally (or not?) is an anagram, numerically speaking, of this one's number. [[User:Gearoid|Gearoid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

1501: Mysteries

2015-03-20T14:55:53Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1501
| date = March 20, 2015
| title = Mysteries
| image = mysteries.png
| titletext = At the bottom left: The mystery of why, when I know I needed to be asleep an hour ago, I decide it's a good time to read through every Wikipedia article in the categories 'Out-of-place artifacts', 'Earth mysteries', 'Anomalous weather', and 'List of people who disappeared mysteriously'.
}}

==Explanation==

The X axis in this graph is weirdness. We assume that the far left is 0% (not that weird) and the far right is 100% (weird as hell).

The Y axis is explainability. We assume that the bottom is 100% (pretty clear) and the top is 0% (no explanation).

{| class="wikitable sortable"
!Entry
!Weirdness
!Explainable
!Further Details
|-
|Who Carly Simon is singing about in ''You're So Vain''
|9%
|4%
|The lyrics of the song include "You're so vain, you probably think this song is about you". While this wording (almost certainly intentionally) seems to suggest that the vain subject of the song is wrong in thinking that the song is about them, they are in fact the subject of the song. Carly is therefore technically suggesting that the subjet's vanity will lead them to a correct interpretation of the song. {{w|You%27re_So_Vain#Subject_of_the_song|Wikipedia article describing possible interpretations of the songs subject}}
|-
|Lindbergh Baby
|17%
|25%
|{{w|Lindbergh_kidnapping|Lindbergh baby kidnapping}}
|-
|UVB-76
|40%
|23%
|{{w|UVB-76}} radio station
|-
|Toynbee Tiles
|25%
|34%
|{{w|Toynbee tiles}} are colorful ceramic tiles with cryptic messages that have been found embedded in asphalt in the streets of various midwestern-to-eastern cities.
|-
|Jimmy Hoffa
|10%
|42%
|{{w|Jimmy Hoffa}} was an American labor union leader who disappeared in 1975. He is widely believed to have been murdered.
|-
|The WOW Signal
|55%
|20%
|The {{w|Wow! signal}} was a strong and clean radio transmission near 1420 MHz received by the Big Ear Radio Observatory at Ohio State University in 1977 that appears to have originated from interstellar space [http://www.universetoday.com/93754/35-years-later-the-wow-signal-still-tantalizes/]. This is the strongest evidence to date of extraterrestrial radio signals.
|-
|Mary Celeste
|70%
|43%
|{{w|Mary_Celeste|The ''Mary Celeste''}} was a sailing ship found adrift, mysteriously abandoned yet otherwise undisturbed, in 1872. No explanation for these events has ever been determined. Its name has become a watchword for mysteriously abandoned ships.
|-
|DB Cooper
|76%
|20%
|{{w|D. B. Cooper}} was an airplane hijacker who jumped from a plane and was never found. Previously referenced in [[1400: D.B. Cooper]].
|-
|Salish Sea Feet
|96%
|31%
|The {{w|Salish Sea human foot discoveries}} occured in the coasts of the Salish Sea in British Columbia (Canada) and Washington (United States).
|-
|Lead Masks Case
|99%
|12%
|In the {{w|Lead Masks Case}} two Brazilian electricians were found dead on a hill top. No injuries. Both were wearing lead masks.
|-
|MH370
|100%
|0%
|{{w|Malaysia Airlines Flight 370}}; disappeared on 8 March 2014
|-
|Voynich Manuscript
|35%
|68%
|The {{w|Voynich manuscript}} is an illustrated codex hand-written in an unknown writing system. See also [[593: Voynich Manuscript]].
|-
|Why I keep putting ice cream back in the fridge instead of the freezer
|0%
|96%
|Randall apparently frequently puts his ice cream container into the refrigerator rather than into the freezer.
|-
|JFK
|38%
|86%
|The {{w|Assassination of John F. Kennedy|assassination of President John F. Kennedy}} has inspired many conspiracy theories, beginning almost immediately after the event. The subsequent murder of assassin Lee Harvey Oswald added fuel to the fire by encouraging speculation that he was silenced to cover up the true story.
|-
|Oak Island Money Pit
|32%
|98%
|An indentation in the ground on {{w|Oak Island}} led to over 200 years of treasure hunting, with the excavations repeatedly hampered by flooding pit collapses. A few flagstones, and periodic layers of logs are all that have been found. Rumours are abound as to what it conceals: Marie Antoinnette's jewels, pirate treasure and Shakespeare's manuscripts have all been suggested. It is called The Money Pit, because of all the money that has been wasted in trying to solve the mystery.
|-
|Zodiac Letters
|62%
|62%
|A set of letters written by the so-called {{w|Zodiac Killer}}, a serial killer who was active at California in the 1960s and 1970s. The letters are available at [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Zodiac_Killer_letters Wikisource].
|-
|Amelia Earhart
|56%
|74%
|{{w|Amelia Earhart}} tried to circumnavigate the earth around the equator in an airplane in 1937, but she, her navigator and the plane disappeared over the Pacific without any trace.
|-
|Lost Colony
|74%
|83%
|The {{w|Roanoke Colony}} was the first English attempt to establish a permanent settlement in the New World. The colony of over a hundred settlers disappeared some time in the late 1580s, with no signs of violence and no clear clues as to what happened other than the word "Croatoan" carved into a fencepost.
|-
|Bigfoot
|60%
|98%
|{{w|Bigfoot}} is a supposed animal or hominid that reputedly inhabits the Pacific Northwest region of North America.
|-
|Loch Ness Monster
|64%
|100%
|The {{w|Loch Ness Monster}} is a supposed animal that reputedly inhabits Loch Ness lake in Scotland.
|-
|Kentucky Meat Shower
|85%
|93%
|In the {{w|Kentucky meat shower}} chunks of meat fell from the sky in Kentucky in 1876; this was possibly projectile vomit from a vulture [http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/running-ponies/2014/12/01/the-great-kentucky-meat-shower-mystery-unwound-by-projectile-vulture-vomit/].
|-
|Dyatlov Pass Incident
|93%
|96%
|On February 2, 1959, nine skiers in the northern Ural Mountains apparently fled their tents without taking time to put on winter clothing. They were found dead, some with physical injuries: {{w|Dyatlov Pass Incident}}
|}

The title text refers to Randall staying up late to read Wikipedia articles, which is apparently not very unusual for him and has an obvious explanation (following up on an idea that eventually led to today's cartoon).

==Transcript==

{{comic discussion}}

1497: New Products

2015-03-11T08:12:27Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1497
| date = March 11, 2015
| title = New Products
| image = new products.png
| titletext = If you ever hear "Wait, is that Kim Dotcom's new project? I'm really excited about it and already signed up, although I'm a little nervous about whether everyone should hand over control of their medical...", it's time to dig a bunker in your backyard.
}}

== Explanation ==

{{incomplete|First draft.}}

This comic points out an apparent paradox in product performance: Many products that are criticized when first announced go on to great success, and many that are heavily hyped are total flops. The product in question may be a reference to the Apple Watch, which was announced around the time of this comic's release.

#*A product that "doesn't do anything new" may still be successful for a variety of reasons. It may in fact do something new that the engineers and programmers are overlooking, or it may simply be a better presentation of an older idea. This latter category is the completion of the life-cycle mentioned later in the comic, those products whose "ideas will show up in something successful."
#*If engineers and programmers can't figure out why anyone would want a product, that may actually be because the applications are highly avant-garde or niche.
# Products that are "really exciting" to engineers and programmers, so much so that they have already preördered them, can turn out to be "nerd bait," so to speak. The developers promise a cool, groundbreaking new gadget or service, and people get so excited by the idea that they ignore whether or not it's actually feasible. When the developers can't follow through, unsurprisingly, the product flops. The ideas that it proposed, which were so intriguing to the programmers and the developers, will be worth billions once someone can figure out how to realize them.
# If a product's developer's name is well-known among engineers and programmers, but not among the general public, that's usually not a good sign. Quite likely, the developer is someone who goes a step farther than those in the previous category, not just announcing something cool and exciting they can't follow through on, but doing so ''knowing'' that they can't follow through, and take people's money anyways. The state may press criminal charges against them (for fraud or such), or the angry investors may sue to get their money back.
# If engineers' and programmers' only objection is that they don't like the company behind the product, that's basically a tacit admission that there's nothing else wrong with it. For the average consumer, the perks of a groundbreaking new product outweigh whatever problems people may have with the company behind it.

The title text imagines a product that fits into the second, third, and fourth categories. ({{w|Kim Dotcom}} is a controversial entrepreneur and convicted criminal, who at this point fights his extradition to the United States.) According to this chart, such a product would a) flop, b) turn out to be a scam, and c) somehow still wind up in control of whatever it wants to control. This does not sound good, and may even suggest the rise of some sort of malicious AI (how else would a product take control of your medical records despite having been a flop?). Thus the suggestion to dig a bunker.

== Transcript ==

:Predicting the success or failure of a new product
:Based on what engineers and programmers are saying about it
:[A two-column table illustrating this. The words "if they say..." and "it means..." are the headers to the two columns; below, they are reprinted before the transciption of each row, for clarity's sake.]
::If they say...
:::"It doesn't do anything new"
:::"Why would anyone want that?"
::It means...
:::The product will be a gigantic success.
::If they say...
:::"Really exciting"
:::"I've already preordered one"
::It means...
:::The product will be a flop. Years later, its ideas will show up in something successful.
::If they say...
:::"Wait, are you talking about <unfamiliar person's name>'s new project?"
::It means...
:::The product could be a scam and may result in arrests or lawsuits.
::If they say...
:::"I would never put <company> in charge of managing my <whatever>"
::It means...
:::Within five years, they will.

== Trivia ==
* There is a typo on the first upload. "Preorded" should be "preordered".
* Nice use of the diaeresis in "preördered"! Don't see that very often these days!!

{{comic discussion}}

1481: API

2015-02-02T10:11:39Z

Gearoid:

{{comic
| number = 1481
| date = February 2, 2015
| title = API
| image = api.png
| titletext = ACCESS LIMITS: Clients may maintain connections to the server for no more than 86,400 seconds per day. If you need additional time, you may contact IERS to file a request for up to one additional second.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete}}

The comic describes {{w|Application programming interface|API}} (application programming interface) documentation for a website. Normally, an API is intended to be used from a program, so both input and output are meant to be easily machine-readable. The documentation then explains how to use the API from your program.

However, in this case, the documentation is explaining (in an obscure way) that the website itself can be used as a (inefficient and hard to develop for) API. Presumably, the XML mentioned is {{w|XHTML}}. The "requested data" is the actual content (e.g. a blog post) and the "documentation describing how the data is organized spatially" is {{w|Cascading_Style_Sheets|CSS}}.

The API keys section is a literal description of setting up a {{w|Transport_Layer_Security|TLS}} session. Normally, the browser or {{w|HTTP_Secure|HTTPS}} library does this behind the scenes, so application-layer programmers do not need to know these details.

The title text specifies an arbitrary maximum time window in which the client may access the server, but upon closer examination the time limit is in actuality the absolute maximal limit which any object may be in interaction with another object for the duration of a single terrestrial rotation. A process is specified that can be observed should one wish to increase this limit, consisting of contacting the {{w|International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service}} (IERS) to request an additional second. The joke here is the IERS decides on when to add {{w|leap seconds}}, which account for slight anomalies in the Earth's rotation speed as compared to the {{w|mean solar day}} (normally, the true day length is slightly longer than 86,400 SI seconds).

Or, explained in the same style as the comic:

This comic pokes fun at how any sufficiently convoluted text arrangement in the pursuit of making a meaning will misdirect persons from their original assumption of the intent of said text arrangement.

The access limits section (in the title text) says that the API can be used for 86,400 seconds each day. This is really the total number of seconds in each normal day, rather than a server time limit.

==Transcript==
API Guide 
Request URL format: 
<nowiki>http://---.com/<username>/<item ID> </nowiki>

Server will return an XML document which contains:
* The requested data.
* Documentation describing how the data is organized spatially.

API Keys 
To obtain API acces, contact the X.509-authenticated server and request an ECDH-RSA TLS key... 

If you do things right, it can take people a while to realize that your "APL documentation" is just instructions for how to look at your website.

{{comic discussion}}