explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1607: Supreme Court

2015-11-24T02:35:15Z

GonzoI:

Made some additions, since I'm the first person up at this ungodly hour. Well, it's ungodly in my time zone, anyway. (Why is it that the time changes depending on where you live, but the months don't?) I am a first-time editor, so please correct any mistakes in formatting. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.5|05:32, 23 November 2015‎}}
:I'm awake, it's 11:26 PM. PS, you forgot to sign, but IDK how to fix. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 05:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
::I do - I've added a signature. --[[User:Sophira|Sophira]] ([[User talk:Sophira|talk]]) 06:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
He just might be... THE LAW! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.41|108.162.221.41]] 06:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Isn't the joke that xkcd people are stick men, so the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libra_(constellation)#History_and_mythology libra] could just be a man with a tiny head carrying two buckets..? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.159|162.158.91.159]] 10:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Currently there's nothing in the explanation of the titletext that addresses that Justice X is claiming to be ''either'' of two individuals, not even trying to properly impersonate a specific individual. Of course, logically, if they claimed to be a specific person then this specific person they claimed to be could so easily counter-claim. So that approach shouldn't work. But being vague would ''also'' be strange. Unlike a game of Mafia, when there might (occasionally) be reasons to be vague in this manner about one's role (and yet accept that this can look utterly Scummy, if this approach is directed at the Townies) to try to offset targetting by the opposing camp, this should ''still'' not work in a group where everyone already knows each other. So who knows how 'relatively illogical' the two approaches are, to each other... ;) But can anyone explain this better than me? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.5|162.158.152.5]] 11:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Although there are nine justices, 10 votes were counted... it is possible that the mysterious tenth person voted along with the majority, and one of the original justices has voted against. The supreme court rarely votes unanimously on anything regardless of how reasonable the majority seems.[[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]]) 11:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
:Not sure where you're getting your information. For the 2014 term, fully 2/3 of the decisions decided were unanimous 9-0 decisions. The most common splits are 9-0 and 5-4. Most unanimous decisions are on smaller, less widely important matters. Larger more important and notable decisions are more likely to be concerned with a disagreement of law or interpretation and therefore to not be unanimous. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.48|108.162.216.48]] 14:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a guess, but it could be in reference to [http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/11/20/obama-administration-appeals-immigration-ruling-supreme-court/76103084/ this article], where the nine represents the actual justices and the single is the President. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, "this guy" is the picture in the background. It looks like an emoticon with eyes/eyelids, eyebrows, and a nose. It seems to have two sides in balance, which could explain the Alito/Ginsburg reference.
[[User:Tlane|Tlane]] ([[User talk:Tlane|talk]]) 20:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
:That is the "scales of justice", a symbol of the weighing of arguments or the weighing of justice vs mercy, depending on the viewpoint. [[User:GonzoI|GonzoI]] ([[User talk:GonzoI|talk]]) 02:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

This is slightly funnier knowing there should be only nine on the panel. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 21:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Also, the thing in the picture is a symbol representing justice. So it is "justice," but it is not "a justice." [[User:Tlane|Tlane]] ([[User talk:Tlane|talk]]) 23:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

[[User:Atreides]] has mentioned at [[1600: MarketWatch]] that identifying the newsreader as [[Ponytail]] is questionable, but if she is there, she should be here too. [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 00:19, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1601: Isolation

2015-11-09T15:44:11Z

GonzoI:

The title text is referring to Yudkowsky's [http://www.yudkowsky.net/singularity/aibox/ AI-Box Experiment], which was already mentioned in [http://www.xkcd.com/1450/ xkcd.com/1450] and explained [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1450:_AI-Box_Experiment here]. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.11|162.158.153.11]] 09:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, there's a letter by an Ancient Roman writer complaining that people always write stories down now instead of just telling them to each other. So this mindset has existed for much longer than two centuries. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.191|141.101.106.191]] 09:08, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
:But there had been little update in the technology behind books/writing since then and the news paper! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

There is someone (not logged in) that believes that the last panel indicates that it is the same Cueball through 175 years that are ignored by his friends, instead of just a jab at generic people who complains about technology. Cueball being this generic person. I highly disagree with this, but the second I changed it to something else the same IP address changed it right back. I have now made two versions of this explanation. And made it clear that it would mean Cueball and his friends were about 200 years old. Then I will leave it to someone else to choose if both of these explanations should be left in, or maybe even a third be added...? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:42, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
:Your explanation is correct and [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.17|108.162.218.17]] is behaving like a child. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 13:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
::It's neither! Part of the humor is the bizarre reframing that occurs in the last few panels as you suddenly begin to consider that instead of just being a representative sampling of generic people's complaints throughout the years, you suddenly consider that maybe this IS just one guy, riding his hobby-horse relentlessly throughout the decades without letup -- Dude! Take a hint! For me, especially the way he is hanging on a strap in the penultimate panel suddenly makes him seem like he's been stalking these people, following them with his opinions... {{unsigned ip|108.162.218.142}}
:::We will have to wait until the official transcript appears. That might settle the question. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 15:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

it says "sims" not "The Sims". "sim" is just short for "simulator". there are other things that simulate things beyond "The Sims". --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.233|141.101.106.233]] 12:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I would rather say that the main explaination of the joke is a third way:
-Cueball represent the kind of person that complains about people ignoring each other. The contemporaries of such kind of person are clearly annoyed by his behavior and ignore him willingly. The complainer should understand the hint that people prefer isolation much better than having to interact with him. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.135.57|162.158.135.57]] 12:27, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
:I'm pretty sure that this is the joke. It's not that society is becoming more isolated, it's that everybody is intentionally trying to ignore Cueball, ''and he's not taking the hint'' [[Special:Contributions/162.158.60.11|162.158.60.11]] 14:54, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
::Agreed --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.66|173.245.54.66]] 15:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that "dude, it's been 2 centuries" refers to the actual notion of people complaining about social isolation due to the current relavant "media" at the time rather than cueball himself- this might be other people, but these guys are all stick figures... It's also very unlikely that someone would live this long. {{Citation needed}} --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.5|108.162.216.5]] 12:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't think those people are supposed to be Cueballs friends. They may be strangers, and the idea is that people don't WANT to be social with strangers. Using technology to isolate may be reaction to fact that cities force us into bigger groups that we are comfortable socializing with. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 13:40, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I thought that Cueball being centuries old WAS the joke - it looks like this is just a montage along the lines of [[1227]], but it was actually Cueball saying the same thing for two solid centuries.
:I am inclined to agree that it's one of the jokes. I have never heard "take a hint" used to refer to things someone hadn't personally experienced. While people don't really live 2 centuries, it is a comic, not reality, and the implication he is the same Cueball makes a fun twist at the end of an obvious joke. He's poked at the history of this before, and the joke "maybe it's not technology, maybe it's your personality" has been done at least as far back as the Walkman example, probably much further. [[User:GonzoI|GonzoI]] ([[User talk:GonzoI|talk]]) 15:44, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Also, this is clearly a lowercase-s-sim, not The Sims. Possibly inspired by the Infinite Fun Space of Ian M Banks' Culture novels, but that's not definite enough to put it.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.207|162.158.38.207]] 14:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Anyone else think these might be actual quotes from the relevant times? Quick Google search doesn't support that (but then Google seems to skew its results towards recent more "relevant" responses, to the detriment of historical references -- give me what some random blogger has to say over the historical context! (Google obviously hasn't incorporated this strip yet, because then this strip will be the top result for all searches, and pages like this one will be the rest...)), but maybe Randall deliberately choose obscure references. Against this idea is that when he's done this in the past [citation needed], he's put in the references. But then, maybe he's mixing it up a little.... Thoughts? {{unsigned ip|108.162.218.142}}
:I could find nothing to support it either. I doubt it is specific quotes because some are very generic, and because the cartoonist uses the same internet as the audience. If we can't find it, I doubt that would be the joke. [[User:GonzoI|GonzoI]] ([[User talk:GonzoI|talk]]) 15:44, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1600: MarketWatch

2015-11-06T15:59:39Z

GonzoI: Responding to reference and mentioning skyline origin

I don't get it as much... Perhaps something to do with the apparent erratic behavior of a stock market chart? You'd expect a rising and falling line, but for it to completely trace out building patterns is odd.{{Citation needed}} It would need a straight line, wouldn't it? and isn't that impossible in graphs like this? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.5|108.162.216.5]] 13:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Couple of things in play with this one:
* Comic #1600, so that's probably a reference to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (address of the White House). True, the WH isn't mentioned, but it's flat and makes for an uninteresting skyline element. What is shown looks to be the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument, followed of course by the Capitol Building as referenced by the text.
* Desire not to break the pattern is like in comic #276, where the pattern is so tempting that people wanted to continue with it, in spite of negative side effects.

Just a couple of thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.57|173.245.54.57]] 13:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
:There is no such a thing as "probably a reference". A reference requires mentioning the referenced thing. A more appropriate word would be coincidence. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 13:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

::He/she is guessing that it is a reference, and that is a good guess. "That's probably a reference" is fine to use in this situation.
:::But it's not a reference, it's a coincidence. If it were a reference the White House could be seen in the skyline; it's just between the Washington Monument and the Capitol [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 13:58, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
::Coincidence is not at all appropriate when the intended meaning is that something was done purposefully. What the person is speaking of is an implicit reference, so "reference" was the right word choice. You are speaking of explicit references, which are merely one type of reference. [[User:GonzoI|GonzoI]] ([[User talk:GonzoI|talk]]) 15:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

My view is that it is a play on how silly stock trader can be sometimes. There is a way of trading called technical analysis, where a trader will look for graphical "patterns" and "signals" in the stock charts and trade on that. This way of doing is notoriously looked down at by either truly quantitative investors that rely on actual stats/signal processing to place their bets or fundamental investor that will look for information in things like the balance sheet statement of a company to place their bets. So if you are such a technical analyst and you see such a pattern as DC Skyline appearing in the stock chart of a stock...well best of luck to make a trading decision based on that, mate.

Plus, Randall seems to be playing on the whole idea some pundits on TV gives people that "the market" is a conscious entity with the ability to go up and down. If this was the case, well this skyline pattern could emerge just like that. But as real price is defined by market participants behavior, there is no way for it to be so smooth (unless this is a fairly illiquid stocks that trade rarely and jumps violently when it does.)
Finally, the comments play on the same idea that some people will see a "spirit" in the market, while it's just participant pushing the price around (taking actual economic factors into account in their decisions.).

And stock price can definitely jump if a major event happen or flatline if nobody trades it so the Capitol is really the only pattern that feels truly impossible here :p (first time I post here, so apologies if I did not respect a rule of the wiki) [[User:Legaulois|Legaulois]] ([[User talk:Legaulois|talk]]) 14:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

In my mind, there has recently been an increase in tools allowing for live events to be controlled by massive numbers of internet users in order to attempt to bang out patterns. Twitch Plays Pokemon comes to mind. Perhaps this comic has something to do with this new trend: a stock market version of the Twitch Plays phenomenon, with investors trying to bang out a pattern together by pressing the right buttons (buying stocks and dumping them) in the right order. Is that worth mentioning? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.64|173.245.55.64]] 15:17, 6 November 2015 (UTC)dmar198

I saw this as a reference to the logos TV news reports use for their segments. Most market news segment logos have some representation of a generic or stylized line meant to imply a market index, and I know I have seen at least one that had their stylized line draw pictures in the middle similar to this. [[User:GonzoI|GonzoI]] ([[User talk:GonzoI|talk]]) 15:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)