explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1835: Random Obsessions

2024-01-03T13:00:58Z

Ijpete98: It's 2024 and we need an update!

I feel like it's worth noting that the internet fixations mentioned on the chart - robot, monkeys, pirate, ninja, zombies, bacon - were all mentioned in #856 Trochee fixation https://xkcd.com/856/ and that sandwich is also a trochee. [[User:Necroleopard|Necroleopard]] ([[User talk:Necroleopard|talk]]) 20:01, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm clearly behind on some things here. I know about all of these except "sandwiches" and "bacon". [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 04:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:Some reference to a rise in "sandwich debate" online (Google trends or something) would be very helpful. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 04:53, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/is-a-hot-dog-a-sandwich is one of the threads of this meme but the meme does go further than just hotdogs --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.4|162.158.2.4]] 07:36, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

I added some description of the bacon fad, I wasn't sure if/where the Know Your Meme entry fits but here it is (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cultures/bacon) in case some other editor wants to put it in[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 13:09, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:Bacon is never a fad though. It has always been and will always be. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:30, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:: Yes, but as a common meme it was though. Though I remember it back in 2006 by 2010 it was already mainstream and fading.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.70|162.158.114.70]] 13:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The current incomplete explanation asking about the bacon.... Are you kidding? This was the one I was most comfortable with! It's the quite current trend of singing the praises of bacon, memes shared around Facebook that say things like "Everything's better with bacon", "When in doubt, bacon", "Like if you love bacon, Comment if you love bacon, Share if you love bacon, ignore if you hate puppies". I even have a Facebook friend who put their middle name as "bacon", LOL! - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.16|108.162.219.16]] 21:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC) I finally signed up! This comment is mine. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
:I added that tag. The question is what about bacon started to rise in 2010 and is peaking now? [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 02:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
::Here is the google trend for "Bacon": https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=bacon [[User:Jona|Jona]] ([[User talk:Jona|talk]]) 07:22, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
:::Looking at the graph, there appears to be a regular uptick in December or January. Interesting. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.166|108.162.245.166]] 22:27, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
::What started to rise? Ummmm, this stuff I already named. :) This graph is suggesting that Bacon memes, jokes, references, etc. started to rise in 2010. This being Google, it would probably mean people searching for these jokes and memes on Google, plus the people creating such things increasing the Google results. And thanks for the more specific answer, Jona, LOL! Even though my iPad is being a brat and won't show anything, the URL sounds quite the comprehensive answer, much better than anything I could say. - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.64|108.162.219.64]] 03:27, 26 May 2017 (UTC) Also mine! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I believe this comic might be talking about the Burger King commercials that set off Google Homes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_O54le4__I -An anonymous person [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.88|108.162.219.88]] 12:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
:By that, I meant "What is the definition of a sandwich?" part. -Same anonymous guy [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.88|108.162.219.88]] 12:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Why has nobody helping to edit these pages tried Googling a few key words? Nobody could figure out "robot monkeys;" I literally Googled the exact pair of words and limited the results to 2001 to 2011. It really does work. --[[User:OriginalName|OriginalName]] ([[User talk:OriginalName|talk]]) 03:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I made the transcript complete by adding the caption and title text. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]][[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]] 11:29, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I fixed the article so it's not incomplete anymore, but it still says "The current incomplete explanation in the spotlight is 1835: Random Obsessions, please help us fix it", even thought I already fixed it. Is it something with the site? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]][[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]] 22:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
:I was wondering this myself... Usually the comic chosen as the "Incomplete Explanation Of The Week" or whatever is one of the juggernauts I won't touch with a ten foot pole (other than some comments I've made which have clearly been lost in the flood, LOL!) but when I hit this one it seems complete, the tag is gone... IDK, maybe the site is programmed to pick a new one once a week or something, but it doesn't re-check to see if it's been completed in the meantime? - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.64|108.162.219.64]] 03:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC) I finally signed up! This comment is mine. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

TITS
:I see. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Is the "Pirates vs Ninjas" a reference to [https://brickipedia.fandom.com/wiki/Pirates_vs._Ninja#]?

Was he right? Is the sandwich conversation over? Did we reach a satisfactory conclusion or at least an acceptable compromise? I don't know the answers, but somebody who does should update the explanation for the new year. [[User:Ijpete98|Ijpete98]] ([[User talk:Ijpete98|talk]]) 13:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk:602: Overstimulated

2021-09-13T23:14:35Z

Ijpete98: Use of the name "Elaine"

The explanation needs to mention the irony of Man 3's line in the last panel. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.45|108.162.216.45]] 12:39, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The Onion actually ran an article on March 19th 2014 titled "Report: Strongest Human Relationships Emerge From Bashing Friend Who Couldn't Make It Out." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.23|108.162.220.23]] 21:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm surprised that there hasn't been a discussion here about the use of the name "Elaine". The protagonist of the "[[:Category:1337|1337]]" series of comics is named [[Elaine Roberts|Elaine]]. Should that possible connection be stated in this article, or in the article for Elaine herself? [[User:Ijpete98|Ijpete98]] ([[User talk:Ijpete98|talk]]) 23:14, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

1658: Estimating Time

2020-11-17T07:59:38Z

Ijpete98: Trivia

{{comic
| number = 1658
| date = March 21, 2016
| title = Estimating Time
| image = estimating_time.png
| titletext = Corollary to Hofstadter's Law: Every minute you spend thinking about Hofstadter's Law is a minute you're NOT WORKING AND WILL NEVER FINISH! PAAAAAANIIIIIIC!
}}

==Explanation==
Estimation is difficult; many people seem to greatly underestimate the amount of time or other resources required. To illustrate how difficult this estimation is {{w|Douglas Hofstadter}} coined {{w|Hofstadter's law}} which is a non-scientific {{w|self-referential}} time-related adage, mentioned in the the title text. It states: ''It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.''

[[Ponytail]] is working at her computer and becomes frustrated as it seems her project will (again) take much longer than she has estimated. She is annoyed with herself for always failing to make a decent guess. [[Danish]] begins to give Ponytail advice on how to estimate the time, starting with the comforting words {{w| Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy#Don.27t Panic |Don’t panic}} and a common guideline of taking the initial estimate and doubling it.

Danish then iterates the law once more and she tells Ponytail to double this again, and then add five minutes. Unless the project to begin with was estimated to somewhat less than an hour, those five minutes will do nothing but confuse Ponytail. But Danish does not stop here, and iterates Hofstadter's law once more. Ponytail still doesn’t get where this goes, saying a hesitant ''okay'' to that.

It turns out that Danish was not at all trying to help, but just mess with Ponytail, as she now tells her that the only thing she has accomplished by listening to her advice is wasting half a minute doubling imaginary numbers (not to be confused with i, the imaginary number), i.e. even her first estimate is just something she has imagined especially since she states herself how bad she is at those kind of estimates. Finally Danish completes her frustration of Ponytail by saying ''Paaaniiic!'', negating the initial advice.

The title text is an extra corollary to the law, that states that using the law to estimate anything about the time your project takes is not only wasted time you could have spent working there is a substantial risk that you will conclude that you will never finish, and thus panic instead of just get the job done now.

Self-reference is a [[:Category:Self-reference|recurring theme]] on xkcd and this comic is quite self-referential both in the comic but also referring to other comics especially to [[917: Hofstadter]]. He is perhaps most famous for his book {{w|Gödel, Escher, Bach}} from where the quote is taken (in a section on {{w|recursion}} and self-reference, rather than estimation). This book has been directly referenced in [[24: Godel, Escher, Kurt Halsey]].

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail is sitting back from her a laptop lifting her hands of the keyboard, having presumably just paused work on a project.]
:Ponytail: Aaaa! I'm so bad at estimating how long projects will take.

:[Danish walks into the panel towards Ponytail who seems to relax back against the chair.]
:Danish: Don't panic-there's a simple trick for that:
:Danish: Take your most realistic estimate and double it.
:Ponytail: Okay, but-

:[A frameless panel with only Danish holding a hand up.]
:Danish: Now double it again. Add five minutes.
:Danish: Double it a third time.
:Ponytail (from off panel): Okay...

:[Danish raises her arms above her head in mock hysteria. Ponytail runs away from her desk screaming.]
:Danish: 30 seconds have gone by and you've done nothing but double imaginary numbers! You're making no progress and will never finish!
:Ponytail: <big>''Aaaaaa!''</big>
:Danish: ''Paaaniic!''
:Ponytail: <big>''Aaaaaaa!''</big>

==Trivia==
*This is the most recent comic in which [[Danish]] has dialogue.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]
[[Category:Self-reference]]
[[Category:Time]]

2374: 10,000 Hours

2020-10-20T08:04:15Z

Ijpete98: /* Explanation */ Randall's age. Is this edit strictly necessary? Nope. It it something for other editors to work off of? Maybe?

{{comic
| number = 2374
| date = October 19, 2020
| title = 10,000 Hours
| image = 10000_hours.png
| titletext = I'm proud to announce that as of this year I've become a world-class expert at chewing.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created in 10,000 hours. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic references the somewhat common urban myth that [https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/8/23/20828597/the-10000-hour-rule-debunked one must do something for 10,000 hours] to become an expert on it. In this comic, [[Cueball]]'s phone tells him that, assuming that idea is correct, he is now a master of several things, because the amount of time he spends on his phone.

The title text refers to the fact that people eat a lot,{{Citation needed}} up to around 2 hours a day. At the time of this comic's publication, [[Randall]] was just over 36 years old (13,151 days), so he has spent a large amount of time eating, well over 10,000 hours.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is staring at his phone. A report is shown above his head]
:If you buy into the "10,000 hours" thing, you are now a world-class expert!

:[Caption below comic]
:My screen time reports have started trying to put a positive spin on things.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Screen Time]]

Talk:2287: Pathogen Resistance

2020-04-02T03:25:34Z

Ijpete98: Mentioned change in text on the top of xkcd.com

Note that the title text says "not not" -- meaning we're both trapped in here together [[User:John.Adriaan|John.Adriaan]] ([[User talk:John.Adriaan|talk]]) 04:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:Randall fixed that. [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 16:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Do bacteriophages "afflict" humanity? To my knowledge, they only infect bacteria and are even considered a possible future alternative to antibiotics by some. What is up with them being represented here? 09:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
: Yeah, bacteriophage is just wrong here, it's a generic virus. This type of virus is depicted on the bacteriophage wikipedia page but viruses that affect humans can have that shape also. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.94|172.68.51.94]]
: There are no known human viruses of that shape (source: I'm a biologist), so this seems like more of a mistake on Randall's side (albeit an odd one for him to make, so perhaps somehow deliberate?). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.155|162.158.91.155]] 08:55, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
::But... if it affects bacteria and humen have many bacteria (and many/most of them useful) in them, shouldn't it affect the human then as well? indirectly? Source: I have very vague knowledge :D --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
::It may be deliberate in the sense that almost everyone will go "Oh, that's a virus!" when they see this shape, contrary to the other 2 which look more like big molecules or bacteria.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.7|162.158.111.7]] 09:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:: The bacteriophage point is now very nicely addressed in the explanation. Good job to all who contributed to that part! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.105|162.158.93.105]] 21:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Don’t worry, pathogens! All is not lost. There will always be some humans whose brains don’t work very well, who will buy into ideas like “vaccines cause autism”, or “faith healing”, or “natural remedies”, or “Trump is always right”. You’ll still have hosts. [[User:Tualha|Tualha]] ([[User talk:Tualha|talk]]) 07:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:That's right [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.158|108.162.216.158]] 13:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
::Not really "always". Those might eventually go extinct. Assuming this kind of stupidity is hereditary ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:::Arthur C. Clarke said decades ago "It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value." Likewise the hope the COVID-19 pandemic will eliminate people based on their unintelligent behavior is not proven. Based on limited data I am guessing the behavior of people around us affect our survival more then our own behavior.[[User:Godzilla|Godzilla]] ([[User talk:Godzilla|talk]]) 13:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Bacteriophages only infect bacteria and some kinds of Archaea, not humans, so the explanation is slightly wrong. They are probably the prettiest and easiest to recognise viral shape though, which is why they are so commonly used in cartoons and illustrations.[[User:Phil|Phil]] ([[User talk:Phil|talk]]) 08:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:I am just as much a hobby-virologist as anybody else suddenly is, but I have no clue what you are talking about. I don't even know which of the 3 shapes you mean. So please edit the explanation yourself if you see, that it is wrong. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:: The narrator-virus in the middle of the three, that looks somewhat like a rotation of a mosquito, with a D20 on top. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteriophage#/media/File:PhageExterior.svg Wikipedia diagram] [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.13|141.101.69.13]] 12:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:::D20 systems have a lot to answer for. The original D6 Star Wars worked well enough, and now I learn the D20 version spread viruses! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.210|162.158.34.210]] 11:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

"They bought lots of pasta." More like they bought lots of toilet paper! Humans, when we think rationally, can make great things happen. Humans, when we panic, can make incredibly foolish decisions. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 11:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:It's both. At least in the supermarkets close to my place (western Germany), pasta, toilet paper, rice, milk, flour, yeast are all common to be out of stock or almost out of stock and usually their shelfes have by now signs that they will only sell a certain amount of them to each customer. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Why does one of the voices say, "I hate lungs"? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.62|108.162.216.62]] 13:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:To emphasize that they really do want to destroy those lungs. All good here. 13:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
::It actually doesn't make sense. Pathogens LOVE lungs - it's a great place for them to have party in. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:::I always imagined it was just a reiteration of a past conversation, to whit something like: "Not another lung? We never get to see anything else. Really, George, I don't know why you keep on booking the same old package deal ''every'' time we go abroad. You know, Janice's family always try something different. Instead of just flying in and sitting on the lung all the time they do exciting things like camping out on an interesting door handle then hitching rides on fingers into noses, or even dining out and taking a chance on an unwashed cup to introduce them to an interesting new throat..." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.210|162.158.34.210]] 11:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

This comic is a positive message giving good advice to people on how to beat the current COVID-19 spread. But the numbers clearly show it is not working (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-52066105/coronavirus-us-death-rates-v-china-italy-and-south-Korea, and many other locations on the internet.) Continuing to believe this pandemic can be beat with only lock-downs, hand washing and telling people to not do things they do naturally without thinking, is the public health equivalent of engineering design with friction-less surfaces and mass-less pullies. We need solutions that understand human nature and tell people to do things they actually will do, not keep saying the same things over and over again despite experience screaming at us that people are not doing it. The 6 places that have controlled the outbreak (China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Japan) have used different methods of testing, tracing, isolating, restricting travel, etc., but the one thing they have in common is a large portion of the population is wearing masks in public. The 5 places with the largest uncontrolled outbreaks (USA (especially NYC) Italy, Spain, Germany and France) are all using the same lock down strategy and all have public health officials discouraging / preventing people from wearing masks in public. This should not be hard to figure out. And saying the limited supply of masks need to go to certain people, not working to increase the number of masks, is what failure looks like. {{unsigned|Godzilla}}
:You know that it's possible to make a mask from piece of fabric at home? It may not be as good as professional mask but would still provide some sort of protection. Also, the amount of masks will go up if China starts making them ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:Masks like the 1.2 million defective ones that a Chinese manufacturer sold to the Dutch government for the care workers? Or the simpler ones that Dutch experts say aren't effective because they're bound to be used incorrectly and thus give a false sense of security? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.219|172.69.54.219]] 18:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:In a situation like the current one it is wise even for expert epidemiologists, virologists and medical practitioners to be very careful in their assumptions, analyses and conclusions. For anyone with little or no expertise in those fields, that goes doubly so. Note, for instance, that the regions you name as having controlled the outbreak also have very different social customs from those you name as uncontrolled. To an Italian, the everyday way Asians (excuse the generalizations) interact with each other is pretty much equivalent to "social distancing". When you regularly shake hands or hug (and then touch your nose or eyes, which people do constantly and subconsciously), the mask is not protective. In other words, there are many factors beyond simply wearing masks that can explain the current differences in virus spread, if such differences are even real (the current numbers are heavily skewed by test availability and criteria for who gets tested). More generally, we currently simply do not have enough information to confidently answer all the questions about this disease and how we should best combat it. Thus, I would recommend using expressions such as "this should not be hard to figure out" sparingly, especially given the knowledge that many very smart and highly trained people are working on "figuring it out"... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.105|162.158.93.105]] 21:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
::I agree it's not so trivial to figure out, but also that we should both start wearing masks and stop with the shaking hands - both is easy enough to try. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
:::"In a situation like the current one it is wise even for expert epidemiologists, virologists and medical practitioners to be very careful in their assumptions, analyses and conclusions. For anyone with little or no expertise in those fields, that goes doubly so. Note, for instance, that the regions you name as having controlled the outbreak also have very different social customs from those you name as uncontrolled. To an Italian, the everyday way Asians (excuse the generalizations) interact with each other is pretty much equivalent to "social distancing"."
These statements are true. It is also true the the 6 places that have controlled the outbreak the best have very different social customs from each other. Likewise with the 5 places where the outbreak is spreading the most; Germans generally do not behave in public like Italians, but both cultures are experiencing similar 2-3 day double rates.
"...given the knowledge that many very smart and highly trained people are working on "figuring it out"..." We all know countless examples in history of "very smart and highly trained people" being wrong for very long periods of time (no-such-things-as-germs, the-earth-is-the-center-of-the-universe, etc.) And the differences in the spread of this outbreak in different countries is not trivial; it is spreading 10s or 100s of time faster in some places then others. These differences are not being explained adequately by the "very smart and highly trained people". At some point we need to realize what we are being told does not match what we are seeing. When we do we will start solving the problem. [[User:Godzilla|Godzilla]] ([[User talk:Godzilla|talk]]) 13:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

(Hey, people have been putting replies to someone else's unsigned comment under my joke. Lemme just move mine down here. -Jacky720)
{|class="wikitable"
|
Pathogens: ''infect humans through day-to-day contact'' 
Humans: ''stop day-to-day contact'' 
Humans: Checkmate.
|}
[[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 16:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

OK the news is saying the CDC is reconsidering their position on the public wearing masks. Note it is not you wearing a mask that protects you, but everyone else wearing one, including the people with the virus who do not show symptoms. The mask catches many of the droplets infected people exhale, sneeze or cough out. This reduces the amount of virus containing droplets in the air for you to breath in, reduces the virus on surfaces you touch and then bring to your face with your hand, etc.

Here is the one study on home made masks, finding them to be roughly 1/3 as effective as surgical masks: [http://https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0921A05A69A9419C862FA2F35F819D55/S1935789313000438a.pdf/testing_the_efficacy_of_homemade_masks_would_they_protect_in_an_influenza_pandemic.pdf Testing the Efficacy of Homemade Masks]

Here is one of a few studies showing the public wearing masks is effective against the spread of the flu, colds, etc:
[http://https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6993921/pdf/CD006207.pdf Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses]

Here is one (of many) source for making a mask: [http://https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2020/4/1/21203241/coronavirus-diy-face-mask-homemade-tutorials Everything you need to know about making your own face mask]

[[User:Godzilla|Godzilla]] ([[User talk:Godzilla|talk]]) 23:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The text on xkcd.com just below the logo has been changed to read "Note: For technical reasons Wednesday's comic will be posted Thursday instead. Apologies for the delay!" Not sure if that's worth mentioning anywhere here, or on tomorrow's explanation once the Thursday comic goes up. [[User:Ijpete98|Ijpete98]] ([[User talk:Ijpete98|talk]]) 03:25, 2 April 2020 (UTC)