explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:741: Blogging

2026-04-20T21:57:30Z

MeZimm: MeZimm

This explanation seems backwards to me. As I see it, on the literal level the audience member is focused only on content, however, they don't actually get any content from Cueball. Instead, a small reporté is build between the two, which makes the audience member happy with whatever arbitrary content Cueball promises.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.163|108.162.238.163]] 14:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
::And the current version, which has prioritized the above perspective while offering the original interpretation as a secondary "alternative explanation," seems backwards to ME. I have always read the heckler as being highly sarcastic, mocking the notion that "content" can be relegated to tertiary importance over whatever other silly nonsense the presenter regards as somehow more important - when content is quite literally what the blog is MADE OF. I cannot imagine any realistic scenario of a heckler being persuaded and pacified so easily - I didn't even realize that anyone interpreted it that way until I came here. However, I can VERY MUCH imagine a realistic scenario where a heckler employs heavy sarcasm as they continue to heckle. (Plus, the "sarcastic" reading just seems funnier to me. Not sure what the punchline is if the audience member is just easily brainwashed.) I propose switching the two explanations. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

You mean "rapport"? Fixed the explanation[[Special:Contributions/172.68.79.81|172.68.79.81]] 20:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

The viral nature of eyeball harvesting could also be referencing the fact that once your eyes are harvested, you'll be inclined to recruit others to the service, as you now are in need of eyes to transplant! [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 01:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:3233: Make It Myself

2026-04-16T15:38:16Z

MeZimm:

Almost did the same thing, but satisfied with results. Wanted to build a very shallow wide drawer for Ikea Ivar shelf that I use as computer station. Only one I saw that came close was $190. I probably spent $50-60, three hours planning and assembling, three trips to hardware stores and two reworked designs before I made what I wanted. Used a Cambro serving tray form Amazon, couple oak "project boards", couple DIY dowels and screws.
[[User:Fungible|Fungible]] ([[User talk:Fungible|talk]]) 22:23, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

...and a small aubergine.
[[User:Jgharston|Jgharston]] ([[User talk:Jgharston|talk]]) 23:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:Goodness gracious me! [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Where did Dark Mode go??? I used to get it for free, and now I have to get an extension? [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 04:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
:It's still available on https://xkcd.com/3227/ [[User:Maofgf|Maofgf]] ([[User talk:Maofgf|talk]]) 07:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
Seems like today xkcd's website went back to normal, or as normal as can be when you don't have Dark Mode. [[User:SectorCorruptor|SectorCorruptor]] ([[User talk:SectorCorruptor|talk]]) 04:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Bill Sutton's song "Do it Yourself" is the large-scale version of this. [[Special:Contributions/2603:8081:9700:1224:0:0:0:2|2603:8081:9700:1224:0:0:0:2]] 04:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I suspect "weather building" is a typo. Homophone problem.--[[Special:Contributions/2A00:23CC:D248:8901:801E:C71:4D35:EEB4|2A00:23CC:D248:8901:801E:C71:4D35:EEB4]] 07:50, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
: "They want $20k for this cloud seeding operation?!? I could do it myself with $5k worth of silver iodide, 45 hours of pilot training, plane hire, time to develop a dispersal system... [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:48, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

: There is a sort of typo in the alt-text too: “have have”. I hope it’s not intentional, ‘cause if it is I don’t get it. [[User:Jacobus-nl|Jacobus-nl]] ([[User talk:Jacobus-nl|talk]]) 11:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Given gas prices at the moment, depending on the mileage and distance to the hardware store - that remaining $20 is probably only like 100 miles. Not to mention how much time you'd spend - if Cueball's hardware store is 4 miles away and his time is worth $25/h then he is $110 in the red before even buying the second unit. He could do 1 trip to the store, $50 in parts and an hour of labor for less than $80 (or if it was only $10 in parts, 2.5 hours). [[User:Sameldacamel34|Sameldacamel34]] ([[User talk:Sameldacamel34|talk]]) 09:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, actually I dood it. I needed a new 6-fold outlet for my PC and the whole smeg that hangs on it. 6-fold WITH a main breaker+lamp indicator: double the price of a 6-fold without. So I bought the latter...plus a one-in, one-out breaker+lamp, in sum I saved 10€ or so, the effect is the same - I know it still works and can flip one switch to take everything off. {{unsigned ip|2a02:2455:1960:4000:8d1:cdfb:dad3:5cbc|10:09, 16 April 2026 (UTC)}}

I've been told that $500 for providing ponies for a birthday party is "way out of line". Well then, do it yourself, but remember the instructions for making a small fortune with horses: Start with a large fortune. PS: Folks, hire your local pony ride for all sorts of events. [[Special:Contributions/98.22.184.160|98.22.184.160]] 12:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
: Well, yeah - a pony ought to be £25. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 12:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Not factored in is the sense of pride and accomplishment that comes of doing something yourself, the way the homemade version has a special place in your heart where the storebought version is just seen as a generic and replaceable commodity, plus possibly the technical skills learned in the process of doing it yourself and newfound appreciation for the labor that goes into the things you find in the world around you. There are still plenty of good reasons to DIY, if you have the time and resources. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3233: Make It Myself

2026-04-16T15:36:54Z

MeZimm:

Almost did the same thing, but satisfied with results. Wanted to build a very shallow wide drawer for Ikea Ivar shelf that I use as computer station. Only one I saw that came close was $190. I probably spent $50-60, three hours planning and assembling, three trips to hardware stores and two reworked designs before I made what I wanted. Used a Cambro serving tray form Amazon, couple oak "project boards", couple DIY dowels and screws.
[[User:Fungible|Fungible]] ([[User talk:Fungible|talk]]) 22:23, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

...and a small aubergine.
[[User:Jgharston|Jgharston]] ([[User talk:Jgharston|talk]]) 23:03, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:Goodness gracious me! [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Where did Dark Mode go??? I used to get it for free, and now I have to get an extension? [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 04:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
:It's still available on https://xkcd.com/3227/ [[User:Maofgf|Maofgf]] ([[User talk:Maofgf|talk]]) 07:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
Seems like today xkcd's website went back to normal, or as normal as can be when you don't have Dark Mode. [[User:SectorCorruptor|SectorCorruptor]] ([[User talk:SectorCorruptor|talk]]) 04:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Bill Sutton's song "Do it Yourself" is the large-scale version of this. [[Special:Contributions/2603:8081:9700:1224:0:0:0:2|2603:8081:9700:1224:0:0:0:2]] 04:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I suspect "weather building" is a typo. Homophone problem.--[[Special:Contributions/2A00:23CC:D248:8901:801E:C71:4D35:EEB4|2A00:23CC:D248:8901:801E:C71:4D35:EEB4]] 07:50, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
: "They want $20k for this cloud seeding operation?!? I could do it myself with $5k worth of silver iodide, 45 hours of pilot training, plane hire, time to develop a dispersal system... [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:48, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

: There is a sort of typo in the alt-text too: “have have”. I hope it’s not intentional, ‘cause if it is I don’t get it. [[User:Jacobus-nl|Jacobus-nl]] ([[User talk:Jacobus-nl|talk]]) 11:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Given gas prices at the moment, depending on the mileage and distance to the hardware store - that remaining $20 is probably only like 100 miles. Not to mention how much time you'd spend - if Cueball's hardware store is 4 miles away and his time is worth $25/h then he is $110 in the red before even buying the second unit. He could do 1 trip to the store, $50 in parts and an hour of labor for less than $80 (or if it was only $10 in parts, 2.5 hours). [[User:Sameldacamel34|Sameldacamel34]] ([[User talk:Sameldacamel34|talk]]) 09:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, actually I dood it. I needed a new 6-fold outlet for my PC and the whole smeg that hangs on it. 6-fold WITH a main breaker+lamp indicator: double the price of a 6-fold without. So I bought the latter...plus a one-in, one-out breaker+lamp, in sum I saved 10€ or so, the effect is the same - I know it still works and can flip one switch to take everything off. {{unsigned ip|2a02:2455:1960:4000:8d1:cdfb:dad3:5cbc|10:09, 16 April 2026 (UTC)}}

I've been told that $500 for providing ponies for a birthday party is "way out of line". Well then, do it yourself, but remember the instructions for making a small fortune with horses: Start with a large fortune. PS: Folks, hire your local pony ride for all sorts of events. [[Special:Contributions/98.22.184.160|98.22.184.160]] 12:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
: Well, yeah - a pony ought to be £25. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 12:57, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Not factored in is the sense of pride and accomplishment that comes of doing something yourself, the way the handmade version has a special place in your heart where the storebought version is just seen as a generic and replaceable commodity, plus possibly the technical skills learned in the process of doing it yourself and newfound appreciation for the labor that goes into the things you find in the world around you. There are still plenty of good reasons to DIY, if you have the time and resources. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:36, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3229: Grammar

2026-04-07T16:08:36Z

MeZimm:

E3EeE E3eE!! [[User:Logalex8369|Logalex8369]] ([[User talk:Logalex8369|talk]]) 22:26, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I created a transcript, but used OCR for all the E's because I kept losing count of how many there were. If someone wants to factcheck that, please do. [[Special:Contributions/104.28.215.220|104.28.215.220]] 22:45, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
: Factchecked 19 E's counted in the image and 19 E's counted in the transcript. [[Special:Contributions/12.155.149.34|12.155.149.34]] 23:00, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

It looks like the bot picked up the April Fool's "feature" as interactive, should we keep it or remove? [[Special:Contributions/104.28.215.220|104.28.215.220]] 22:46, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Side note: I have heard people using both alternate niche methods of language structure, kinda like those people who adopt a losing format even after it's clear it has lost. On character who has on occasion dabbled in both is Homer Simpson, BTW. --[[Special:Contributions/94.73.49.13|94.73.49.13]]
:I still say that Video2000 was the superior home VCR format, in every way...[[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 23:55, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Any "competitors" to grammar would still be grammars since a grammar, by definition, describes how a language is structured. [[Special:Contributions/75.248.235.98|75.248.235.98]] 00:00, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
:Well, the Random Words one ''seems'' to have no particular structure beyond being word-utterances, and the EEEEEEEEEEEEEE one doesn't even have much that ''can'' be structuralised (though I'm half expecting it to actually supposed to be a modem 'yowl', it needn't even be that), so I'm willing to bet that this exempts them from any consistent quality of being grammar. [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:08, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
: The second example used the term word-s which in itself is a structure with grammar. And the last example might well have grammar, if eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee is a single morpheme, we siply wouldn't be able to recognize the grammar. [[Special:Contributions/195.65.24.115|195.65.24.115]]

I interpreted "words order words random words words random good" differently. I assumed it was missing commas and should be read as "words-order", "words-random" "words-words" "random-good". Maybe(probably?) not what Randall intended, but if anyone interpreted it the same as me, you're not alone! {{unsigned ip|69.204.108.174|00:23, 7 April 2026 (UTC)}}

i reconsider this: non-verbal communication isn't another rival for communication, as it is a subset (after seeing and liking [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=3229:_Grammar&diff=next&oldid=409748 this anon's edit]), but i'm not sure what other methods there could be than just communication and non-communication; Lenhart says "rivals" plural -- [[User:Somefan|somefan]] ([[User talk:Somefan|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Somefan|contribs]]) 00:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
:Pretty sure the joke is that any alternative to communication would by definition be impossible to communicate. --[[User:Biotronic|Biotronic]] ([[User talk:Biotronic|talk]]) 08:18, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
::Actually, I worded that wrong - what I meant is that '' is an example of non-communication, which is not very effective at transmitting information --[[User:Biotronic|Biotronic]] ([[User talk:Biotronic|talk]]) 08:58, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you [[Special:Contributions/137.25.230.78|137.25.230.78]] 00:54, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
:steal orange me steal eat orange me eat orange steal me eat orange steal me you [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 02:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

orange orange orange
orange orange orange
orange orange orange
yellow
orange you glad I didn't say orange? [[Special:Contributions/98.22.184.160|98.22.184.160]] 11:27, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I would suggest that light/photons are the most popular way of transmitting information? to (most) humans anyway... {{unsigned ip|2a02:a468:b8cb:0:5a82:a830:1528:55af|13:15, 7 April 2026 (UTC)}}
: Only up until the last mile. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 14:15, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Why waste time use good grammar when bad grammar do trick? [[Special:Contributions/70.40.121.82|70.40.121.82]] 15:08, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
:Cuz if you're doing too bad grammar, sometimes you'll see some sentences that triggers Uncanny Valley effect (or related stuff). (I would guess this way) [[User:Cream Starlight|Cream Starlight]] ([[User talk:Cream Starlight|talk]]) 15:25, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

::It's a reference to [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bctjSvn-OC8 this scene] from the American version of The Office. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:08, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

In Cookie Clicker, there’s a news ticker message that says “Neeeeews : "neeeew EEEEEE keeeeey working fineeeeeeeee", reeeports gleeeeeeeeful journalist.” Might be a reference to that. [[Special:Contributions/185.124.31.68|185.124.31.68]] 15:41, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

2291: New Sports System

2026-02-24T20:54:05Z

MeZimm: /* Explanation */ Added Kayfabe

{{comic
| number = 2291
| date = April 8, 2020
| title = New Sports System
| image = new_sports_system.png
| titletext = Under my system, boxing and football suffered, pair figure skating still worked but had to adapt by dropping some moves, and pro wrestling was actually completely unaffected.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is the 16th comic in a row (not counting the April Fools' Day comic [[2288: Collector's Edition]]) in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] related to the {{w|COVID-19 pandemic}}.

As communities have been ordered to stay indoors to avoid spreading the virus, this has also affected sports leagues around the world, with many of them suspending their seasons, or cancelling them outright. (see {{w|Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on sports|this Wikipedia article}} for a full list of sports or sporting events impacted) Some leagues have instead promoted e-sports, such as the [https://www.latimes.com/sports/clippers/story/2020-04-06/patrick-beverley-favorite-to-win-nba-2k-players-tournament NBA holding an ''NBA 2K20'' tournament between active NBA players].

[[Randall]], in this comic, proposes an obviously bad "new sports system" of "virtual sports", in which players play with a virtual ball in separate arenas, and are guided by online viewers. This obviously proves to be challenging, as the ball is virtual but the players are not wearing any virtual reality or augmented reality headsets, and thus they do not know how to interact with it properly. Playing in separate arenas would solve the problem of spreading the virus, as the players do not have any direct interactions with each other.

This would be a similar system to {{w|Twitch Plays Pokémon|Twitch Plays ''Pokémon''}}, in which Twitch viewers "play" ''Pokémon'' video games in a crowdsourced manner. There are also many games that are intentionally constructed so that some players must accomplish a goal they cannot see or with incomplete information, while they are guided by other players. These include common team-building exercises (often involving blindfolds), and the bomb-disposal themed puzzle game ''{{w|Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes}}''.

The NBA also is holding a similar idea, holding a {{w|Variations of basketball#H-O-R-S-E|Horse}} tournament among [https://web.archive.org/web/20200410175457/https://www.nba.com/article/2020/04/09/nba-air-horse-challenge-espn NBA and WNBA players], which works better than the version of basketball shown in this comic because players don't need to interact with the same ball.

In the title text, Randall claims that boxing and football (he does not specify gridiron football or association football) proved to be difficult, with {{w|Pair skating|pairs figure skating}} still possible as long as figures like {{w|Figure skating lifts|elevations}} are removed, and {{w|professional wrestling}} being unaffected. Boxing and gridiron football would be impossible to play in these situations; on top of the difficulty of trying to play without knowing where the other players are located, these sports are predicated on contact. A boxer cannot get a knockout without being able to touch the other players, and football players cannot block or tackle even if they mime catching the ball. Association football, with less emphasis on contact, might still be playable, but would suffer at least from the same complications as basketball shown here. Pairs figure skating would be possible, excepting "throwing" moves or "lifts", as typically pairs figure skaters skate in unison, replicating the same moves.

Humorously, Randall claims that {{w|professional wrestling}} will be unaffected by his new system. While professional wrestling maintains a pretense (called "{{w|Kayfabe}}") of actual fighting between competitors, it is now considered an open secret that the matches have predetermined outcomes. In reality, professional wrestling is more a form of stunt-intensive live-action theatrics than actual competition, with much of the ostensibly 'forced' movement of one wrestler aided or even guided by the 'victim' rather than the 'aggressor,' in semi-improvised feats of coordinated athleticism.

==Transcript==
:[Single wide frame representing a basketball court with a basketball hoop at each end. There are seven players running around the court, with a virtual ball in the bottom right corner (indicated as a dashed circle). Nine off-screen voices of "online viewers" are yelling instructions to the players. A caption is below the frame running nearly the full width of the frame.]

:Viewer One: No!
:Viewer Two: It's on the–
:Viewer Three: Look out!
:[A player with thick hair and a goatee is "air-shooting" into the left-hand basket.]
:Viewer Four: ''No!''
:[A player with thick hair is running to the right.]
:Viewer Five: He's right there
:Viewer Five: Don’t run into–
:[A player with no hair is air-dribbling to the right.]
:Viewer Six: Go ''left!''
:Viewer Seven: ''Left!''
:Viewer Eight: ''Riiight!''
:[A player with thick hair and a full beard is facing left and jumping, hands raised to intercept a ball.]
:[A player with no hair is facing left and crouching, reaching for a ball.]
:[A player with no hair is making an alley-oop motion towards the right-hand basket.]
:Viewer Nine: ''Stop dunking and find the ball!''
:[The virtual ball is slowly moving right, unseen by the players.]
:[A player is hanging on the rim of the basket, making a dunking motion.]

:Caption below the panel: No one liked my new sports system, in which each player is in a separate arena sharing a single virtual ball that they can't see while online viewers yell instructions, but it was fun to watch while it lasted.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Sport]]
[[Category:Basketball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]

Talk:3154: Physics Insight

2025-10-13T17:49:18Z

MeZimm:

Avrayter 9:55 am oct. 13 2025: okay, I assume you write these comments with html. can y'all please just implement the standing on the soldiers of giant joke into the first paragraph? [[User:Avrayter|Avrayter]] ([[User talk:Avrayter|talk]]) 13:56, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm reminded of science fiction like Star Trek where children learn "advanced" physics like quantum mechanics in high school. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
:There's something to this, tbh. To use just one example, there was a time in history when NEGATIVE NUMBERS were considered a bizarre innovation to the world of mathematics, boggling even expert mathematicians (since, how can you have -3 apples? A hole in the universe where three apples ought to be? It's quite an abstract concept when you think about it!) Yet nowadays, every high school graduate is expected to understand them intuitively and use them proficiently. I really do wonder what it's doing to us, where what was "advanced" in bygone years is considered "fundamentals" today. Our brains don't evolve THAT quickly. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:49, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Is the drawing of Cueball and White hat the exact same of 3148? [[Special:Contributions/140.77.177.211|140.77.177.211]] 16:52, 13 October 2025 (UTC) divicarpe

Talk:3151: Window Screen

2025-10-07T19:40:53Z

MeZimm:

The 'standard' and '2x' sized images had unexpected sizes, so an imagesize parameter has been added to render the image consistently with other comics on this website. See the web [https://web.archive.org/web/*/window_screen.png archive] for more details. --[[User:TheusafBOT|TheusafBOT]] ([[User talk:TheusafBOT|talk]]) 03:15, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:Oh cool the bot can comment too [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 04:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
Is the comic not fitting into the section right on the original xkcd website? Is this some kind of meta joke? [[Special:Contributions/138.67.132.61|138.67.132.61]] 04:10, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
: Since this has changed during the day. I think it is intentional[[Special:Contributions/62.220.2.194|62.220.2.194]] 15:14, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:This is Randall's mistake. Since comic [[1084: Server Problem#Trivia|1084]] from 2012, comics usually have two versions: normal and double resolution (2x). If you read on a high-DPI screen (like a phone) or zoom in, you'll see a high-resolution version of the comic, but if you read on a desktop or laptop without zooming in, you'll see the normal resolution. In this case, Randall accidentally uploaded the 2x version into ''both'' comics, making the normal one twice as big as it should be. If you zoom in just a tiny bit, it'll look normal again. <del>I'll add this in a Trivia section</del> <ins>Someone already did</ins>. --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 07:35, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:I suspect Randall was inspired by the U.S. President's outsized ego insisting he deserves the Nobel Prize for Peace when he hasn't actually solved any international problems at all, and in the view of many has made things much worse.[[Special:Contributions/68.116.0.20|68.116.0.20]] 05:33, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
::...and in ''objective reality'' has made things much worse. --[[Special:Contributions/45.143.82.106|45.143.82.106]] 06:52, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
::It's such a shame that this is true. Well, obviously, but in frivolous terms too: it would be nice to have this just as a representation of how it feels to get a tricky task right, without referencing the tangerine toddler's nonsense. I think most people know that feeling that they've maxed out their efforts and achieved something brilliant (measured in terms of the how well or how badly the project should have been expected to go). Human effort is human effort, and so it feels like any successful overcoming of a problem is legitimately comparable with any other, if measured from the perspective of the one who performs the task. I love the way this handles that feeling. It was very difficult; I did it successfully; that was an impressive achievement. "It" could be stopping a war or making a window screen. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 10:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks, you've made the world a worse place by dragging the dumpster fire of partisan politics into a comic that originally had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. Please forever avoid doing this in the future. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 19:40, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I suspect all the math could have been avoided if the screen were just carefully laid out on top of the window and cut to a matching shape. Why trig when you can trace? --[[Special:Contributions/45.143.82.106|45.143.82.106]] 06:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

It's easy when building a flat screen to accidentally get the tension wrong on one side and *generate* non-coplanarity--[[Special:Contributions/174.127.176.33|174.127.176.33]] 08:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
: Yeah, I agree with this interpretation of non-coplanarity. Probably the most aggravating part about trying to screen a window is getting the tension perfect so it lays flat. [[Special:Contributions/136.49.188.43|136.49.188.43]] 13:47, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Is the "overly large image mistake" really a mistake, considering it’s about the "size" of an image displaying on a "screen"? {{unsigned ip|89.91.92.1|08:34, 7 October 2025 (UTC)}}
:There is the opinion that Randall made a mistake, but because Cueballs sentence just stops at "how well the screen fits... (the window)" and the panel DOES NOT fit it's window, I believe that this is intentional and the punchline of the comic [[Special:Contributions/195.49.224.20|195.49.224.20]] 09:36, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
::If so, can someone edit the image above to fit the punchline? EDIT: I did it.[[Special:Contributions/138.43.101.123|138.43.101.123]] 12:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:::Aww [[Special:Contributions/138.43.101.123|138.43.101.123]] 18:10, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
: I don't see the problem. For me (on Firefox), while the hi-res image is loaded, it's displayed in the usual size on xkcd.com. I wouldn't even have noticed if I hadn't read it here. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 13:00, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:: Update: I see it on a different computer (also Firefox). Well that's weird.--[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 13:37, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
::: It was displaying normally for me a few hours ago, but now, on the same browser on the same machine, it's outsized. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:02, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Interesting that Cueball has hair in the last two panels --[[User:Darth Vader|Darth Vader]] ([[User talk:Darth Vader|talk]]) 08:40, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
: Obviously with all the screen building he hasn't had time to shave his head. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 09:28, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
: In the last two panels he also wears some kind of bracelet. [[Special:Contributions/82.54.66.129|82.54.66.129]] 10:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:: "That's not a bracelet, its a <s>space station</s> band-aid." Cueball deserves the DIY Purple Heart.--[[User:Bilkie|Bilkie]] ([[User talk:Bilkie|talk]]) 13:52, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Joke's on Cueball: this problem can be seen as mathematical, and Nobel Prizes famously exclude that field in theor awards (the closest is the relatively new award on Economy). He'd have a better chance asking for a Fields Medal.--[[Special:Contributions/94.73.49.72|94.73.49.72]]

One must imagine Norm Abrams happy. [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 13:56, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Whatever issue you guys have solved is still happening for me. Comic is huge. (on chromeOS) --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]][[User_talk:DollarStoreBa'al|converse]] 16:27, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
:ditto here. also chromeOS, specifically a Chromebook is that means any thing -- [[User:Black Hat's Hat|Black Hat's Hat]] ([[User talk:Black Hat's Hat|talk]]) 18:08, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3140: Biology Department

2025-09-10T16:45:26Z

MeZimm: MeZimm

I agree that the biology dept is probably talking about arthropods, not pathogens, BUT it could conceivably be referencing BOTH. Any microbiologists around here who want to weigh in with horror stories of some of the "bugs" they know about or work with? I also think that we might want to divvy this article up into an explanation first, THEN a list of fun examples. (I recently learned about honeypot ants and added it as an example... it would be creepy stuff if we took their defining behavioral characteristic and applied it to humans. Seems like it would be well at home in a horror movie.) [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:45, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

3140: Biology Department

2025-09-10T16:39:09Z

MeZimm:

{{comic
| number = 3140
| date = September 10, 2025
| title = Biology Department
| image = biology_department_2x.png
| imagesize = 558x368px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Welcome to the Linguistics Department - It has been [2] [DAYS] since someone noticed that the Biology Department sign has a one-day-long singular/plural disagreement after it resets.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created recently. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
Insects and other arthropods (informally, "bugs") can have strange life cycles, some of which are truly horrifying. Some examples include
* parasitic wasps lay their eggs in caterpillars, eggs that then hatch and eat the living caterpillar animal from the inside out (this [https://www.vice.com/en/article/darwins-monsters-parasitoid-wasps/ caused a crisis of faith] in {{w|Charles Darwin}})
* carpenter ants get infected by the {{w|zombie-ant fungus}}, causing them to abandon their usual habitat and attach to the underside of a leaf, feeding the fungus until the ant dies
* houseflies vomit on things to start digesting them, then [https://www.rd.com/list/bizarre-bug-facts-totally-freak-you-out/ eat the vomit]
* {{w|honeypot ants}}, some of which are force-fed until their abdomens swell enormously, and are used as living food storage for the rest of the colony.

The sign in this comic implies that this biology department discovers such things so often that they have a frequently-updated sign to document it. Such signs are often found in workplaces, but are typically safety-themed, such as "It has been [X] days since a workplace safety incident here" where X is a number that gets incremented each day.

Signs of this nature, counting the days since some category of incident last occurred, are common in workplaces, especially industrial workplaces where they might count days since a safety incident occurred. For example, https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-factory-safety-sign-showing-days-since-last-accident-29336722.html

The title text refers to a notice board from the Linguistics Department. It points out that during the time that the Biology Department's sign displays the number '1', there is an inconsistency with the plural word "days", and describes how long it has been since someone in Linguistics noticed the problem. The Linguistics sign has a changeable number, and the word for the time period can also be changed. The latter could originally have said "day", to avoid exactly the same error, but it might also have been "second", "seconds", "minute", "minutes", "hour" or "hours" depending on how quickly the sign was put up after the problem with the Biology sign was noticed. Eventually, it might be changed to a longer period such as "month", "months", "year", "years", etc.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
An institutional building with a sign on the lawn in front that says,
:Welcome to the Biology Department. It has been [3] days since we discovered something existentially horrifying about bugs that makes you question your whole reality.

The [3] is a removable tag, implying that it can be updated to larger numbers as days go by, or reset to 0 when something new and existentially horrifying about bugs is discovered.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

495: Secretary: Part 2

2025-07-18T20:31:20Z

MeZimm: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 495
| date = October 28, 2008
| title = Secretary: Part 2
| image = secretary part 2.png
| titletext = That helmet won't save him.
}}

==Explanation==
Whenever something big happens, the media likes to have at least two things: interviews with people who are the news, and on-the-scene reporters. In this case, [[Blondie]] as a [[:Category:News anchor|news anchor]] is shown to begin with talking about [[Black Hat]], and she has even been out at his house. Even if those reporters are simply standing in front of a building that something happened in, they have to be on-scene. To thwart the media (and probably everyone else), Black Hat has built a {{w|moat}} around his apartment building. The second reporter is on-the-scene from the Internet, or rather, one of its darkest corners: {{w|4chan}}. In more detail, 4chan is a collection of image boards that act somewhat like forums, where users go to share images. The different boards are named by their "folder" structure, for lack of a better term. Therefore, the name /b/ comes from its URL: 4chan.org/b/. Pronounced "slash bee" (because the second forward slash is not necessary), /b/ is the "random" board, where anything goes, where anything is the superset of all sets, as in anything. Absolutely. Anything. As in, going more than two seconds without seeing pornographic content or hateful slurs is almost unheard of. /b/ is also the one that gets the most publicity, because it has started many of the {{w|meme}}s [http://knowyourmeme.com/] on the Internet, as well as the birthplace of {{w|Anonymous (group)|Anonymous}}. The chaotic nature of the forums explains why the title text suggests that the reporter isn't safe, even though he is wearing a helmet. In fact, a goofy helmet like that is liable to get the trolls on him faster than if he didn't have it (though with that helmet, he could try to pass as /k/ weapons fan, if only he had a gun). This may be a {{w|Densha Otoko}}[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Densha_Otoko_(TV_series)] reference, which features helmet-wearing /b/ members.

A {{w|haberdasher}} is technically a person who sells small articles of clothing that have been or can be sewed; however, per [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/haberdasher Mirriam-Webster], a haberdasher has historically also referred to "a dealer of hats or caps". Since the only visually distinctive feature about Black Hat is, well, his ''hat'', the suggestion that Black Hat may be a haberdasher shows that news anchors have very little information to go on, and are engaging in wild speculation regarding Black Hat's identity.

This series was released on five consecutive days (Monday to Friday) and not over the usual schedule of three comics a week. It may be a continuation of the comic [[493: Actuarial]], in which Black Hat demonstrates great power over even Internet trolls via his sociopathic ways. This would explain why Black Hat was nominated as Internet secretary. These are all the comics in [[:Category:Secretary|Secretary series]]:
* [[494: Secretary: Part 1]]
* [[495: Secretary: Part 2]]
* [[496: Secretary: Part 3]]
* [[497: Secretary: Part 4]]
* [[498: Secretary: Part 5]]

[[Ron Paul]] is a man who was a U.S. Representative for Texas at the time. At the time the comic was published, he was running, for the second time, for {{w|President of the United States}}. Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign did, in fact, use a {{w|blimp}} that was named the {{w|Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2008#Ron Paul Blimp|Ron Paul Blimp}}. However, despite their elegant appearance, blimps are not a fast way to travel.

The images on the /b/ board behind the reporter are:
*[https://youtu.be/ZWwMre0PuTQ "'''A'''yyy"], a common exclamation by the character {{w|Fonzie}} from the TV show ''{{w|Happy Days}}'', usually while giving {{w|Thumb signal|two thumbs up}}.
*{{w|/b/|/'''b'''/}}, the "random" {{w|Internet forum|discussion board}} on 4chan.
*A {{w|Compact disc|'''C'''ompact '''D'''isc}} (or "CD"), a plastic disc for {{w|Optical disc|optical}} {{w|Data storage|data storage}}.
*[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/epic-fail-guy '''E'''pic '''F'''ail '''G'''uy], a {{w|Internet meme|meme}} that originated on 4chan, of a {{w|Stick figure|stick-figure}} character (often wearing a {{w|Guy Fawkes mask}}) who fails at everything he tries.
Together, the initial letters of these items spell out "'''ABCDEFG'''".

The title text states that the second reporter (Tom)'s helmet won't help him, the implication being 4chan is such a dangerous place that body armor is woefully ineffective.

==Transcript==
:[Blondie as a news anchor sitting behind a desk is reading from a paper she holds in her hands. There is a picture of Black Hat on a screen behind her. There is a caption below the picture.]
:Blondie: Breaking news—the President has made a nomination to the new post of Internet Secretary. We know little about the man, shown here.
:Caption: Possibly a haberdasher?

:[Blondie keeps talking over a scene showing her standing with a microphone in front of a water-filled moat that has been dug between the road and a house. A small stair up to the house is just on the other side of the moat. Behind her is Cueball with a large TV camera on his shoulder pointing towards her and the house.]
:Blondie (narrating): Attempts to reach the nominee at home were unsuccessful.
:Blondie: What the hell kind of apartment has a moat?

:[Back to Blondie behind her desk, the paper is gone, and she leans one arm on the desk. There is no screen behind her.]
:Blondie: To understand the culture from which he came — and which he may soon administer — we sent a reporter to what we're told is the source of that culture.
:Blondie: Tom?

:[This panel is much larger than the three previous panels and partly hidden behind the last. Tom, looking like Cueball with a military helmet with camouflage marks strapped under his chin, holds a large microphone in front of him while standing in front of a large screen. The screen shows a message board with four picture posts. Each picture has a text to the right, but those are unreadable scribbles. The top drawing is of a man with wild hair who holds out his hands with thumbs up. The next is text. Then there is a circle with a smaller circle in the middle and at the bottom what appears to be a Cueball-like man with a fencing mask. Blondie still speaks to him from off-panel left.]
:Tom: I'm coming to you live from the 4chan /b/ board. Despite the tube cloggage, nascent memes are flying fast and furious.
:Blondie (off-panel): Why are you wearing a helmet, Tom?
:Tom: I'm not sure.
:Image with text only: /b/

:[Ponytail is sitting in front of a large control unit using the two levers coming out of it from below two buttons that are again below the lit screen. A voice comes from off-panel left. Above the top of the panels frame, there is a frame with a caption:]
:Meanwhile in Ron Paul's blimp.
:Ron Paul (off-panel): Ahoy! What news of the blogs?

:[Zoom out showing Ponytail, who has turned around on her office chair away from the controls towards Ron Paul drawn like Cueball but with a cane. She holds up a piece of paper with a small square insert visible at the top. Apart from that, it is white.]
:Ponytail: Dr. Paul! The President's named his nominee!
:Ron Paul: It's not me?

:[Ron Paul's blimp is shown from the outside. His voice can be seen coming from the airship. There is text on the blimp, with the four letters after the first written mirrored to spell another word.]
:Ron Paul (from inside the blimp): Wait! I remember that guy from the campaign! He's a notorious troll!
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Back inside the blimp, Ron Paul points to Ponytail, while his other hand is lifted to his chin. His cane leans against his legs. Ponytail looks at him from her chair, the paper now held in her lap.]
:Ron Paul: They mustn't put him in charge. Quick, call the capitol!

:[Ponytail turns around on her chair towards the controls and takes hold of one of the sticks. Ron Paul has taken the cane in his hand again.]
:Ponytail: Can't, sir. The tubes just went down completely.
:Ron Paul: Blast!

:[Ponytail now holds onto both sticks as Ron Paul lifts his cane up into the air pointing away from her up and right.]
:Ron Paul: Then we'll go ourselves. Full speed ahead!

:[A full view of the blimp hanging in the air to the left over a broad landscape. There seems to be a small lake just in front of the blimp. The horizon is shown all along this full width panel, and after the lake, there are five small mountain peaks, two behind the three in front. After the last of these, there follow one more peak and a small mound. Features are shown on the ground. In the air in front of the blimp, there are a small cloud inside the panel at the end of the lake and a large cloud breaking the upper frame over the end of the five mountains stretching over the next peak and mound.]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image. The blimp has advanced minutely, taking the tip clearly over the lake. Beat panel #1]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image. The blimp has advanced minutely again. Beat panel #2]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image, but now the two speak from within the blimp. The blimp has again advanced minutely so the gondola below the blimp is now also almost at the edge of the lake.]
:Ron Paul: I said full speed!
:Ponytail: It's a blimp, sir.
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Secretary|02]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Secretary]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]] 
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ron Paul]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:News anchor]]
[[Category:Airships]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring politicians]]

Talk:495: Secretary: Part 2

2025-07-18T20:28:57Z

MeZimm:

Ron Paul wishing to become Secretary of the Internet could be a reference to the vast numbers of Ron Paul supporters that can be found online. {{unsigned ip|86.158.136.186}}

I switched "/b/ers" to "/b/tards" because that's how they most often refer to themselves. I hope that's ok. {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.157}}

Uh, as a former Ron Paul supporter, I'm pretty sure he ran for President for the SECOND time in 2008, unless anyone can tell me if he ran sometime between 1988 and 2008. Changing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.177|108.162.238.177]] 01:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Are we sure that's a CD, not a boob? This is /b/ we're talking about here.--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 14:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
:The pictures are meant to be alphabetical. '''AAAAAA''' meme, the '''/b/''' board's logo, a '''CD''', and '''E'''pic '''F'''ail '''G'''uy. {{unsigned|Noonespecial|22:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)}}

Not sure why the haberdasher comment should be referring to Truman - figured it was because Black Hat is wearing a . . . black hat . . . [[User:L-Space Traveler|L-Space Traveler]] ([[User talk:L-Space Traveler|talk]]) 16:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
:Agreed; changes made :) [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

495: Secretary: Part 2

2025-07-18T16:12:03Z

MeZimm: /* Explanation */ Haberdasher is a reference to hats, not Harry Truman. I'm not even sure why Truman was brought up here.

{{comic
| number = 495
| date = October 28, 2008
| title = Secretary: Part 2
| image = secretary part 2.png
| titletext = That helmet won't save him.
}}

==Explanation==
Whenever something big happens, the media likes to have at least two things: interviews with people who are the news, and on-the-scene reporters. In this case, [[Blondie]] as a [[:Category:News anchor|news anchor]] is shown to begin with talking about [[Black Hat]], and she has even been out at his house. Even if those reporters are simply standing in front of a building that something happened in, they have to be on-scene. To thwart the media (and probably everyone else), Black Hat has built a {{w|moat}} around his apartment building. The second reporter is on-the-scene from the Internet, or rather, one of its darkest corners: {{w|4chan}}. In more detail, 4chan is a collection of image boards that act somewhat like forums, where users go to share images. The different boards are named by their "folder" structure, for lack of a better term. Therefore, the name /b/ comes from its URL: 4chan.org/b/. Pronounced "slash bee" (because the second forward slash is not necessary), /b/ is the "random" board, where anything goes, where anything is the superset of all sets, as in anything. Absolutely. Anything. As in, going more than two seconds without seeing pornographic content or hateful slurs is almost unheard of. /b/ is also the one that gets the most publicity, because it has started many of the {{w|meme}}s [http://knowyourmeme.com/] on the Internet, as well as the birthplace of {{w|Anonymous (group)|Anonymous}}. The chaotic nature of the forums explains why the title text suggests that the reporter isn't safe, even though he is wearing a helmet. In fact, a goofy helmet like that is liable to get the trolls on him faster than if he didn't have it (though with that helmet, he could try to pass as /k/ weapons fan, if only he had a gun). This may be a {{w|Densha Otoko}}[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Densha_Otoko_(TV_series)] reference, which features helmet-wearing /b/ members.

A {{w|haberdasher}} is technically a person who sells small articles of clothing that have been or can be sewed; however, per Mirriam-Webster, [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/haberdasher "at various times throughout its history, the term haberdasher has referred to a dealer of hats or caps"]. Since the only visually distinctive feature about Black Hat is, well, his ''hat'', the notion that Black Hat may be a haberdasher shows that news anchors have very little information to go on, and are engaging in wild speculation regarding Black Hat's identity.

This series was released on five consecutive days (Monday to Friday) and not over the usual schedule of three comics a week. It may be a continuation of the comic [[493: Actuarial]], in which Black Hat demonstrates great power over even Internet trolls via his sociopathic ways. This would explain why Black Hat was nominated as Internet secretary. These are all the comics in [[:Category:Secretary|Secretary series]]:
* [[494: Secretary: Part 1]]
* [[495: Secretary: Part 2]]
* [[496: Secretary: Part 3]]
* [[497: Secretary: Part 4]]
* [[498: Secretary: Part 5]]

[[Ron Paul]] is a man who was a U.S. Representative for Texas at the time. At the time the comic was published, he was running, for the second time, for {{w|President of the United States}}. Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign did, in fact, use a {{w|blimp}} that was named the {{w|Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2008#Ron Paul Blimp|Ron Paul Blimp}}. However, despite their elegant appearance, blimps are not a fast way to travel.

The images on the /b/ board behind the reporter are:
*[https://youtu.be/ZWwMre0PuTQ "'''A'''yyy"], a common exclamation by the character {{w|Fonzie}} from the TV show ''{{w|Happy Days}}'', usually while giving {{w|Thumb signal|two thumbs up}}.
*{{w|/b/|/'''b'''/}}, the "random" {{w|Internet forum|discussion board}} on 4chan.
*A {{w|Compact disc|'''C'''ompact '''D'''isc}} (or "CD"), a plastic disc for {{w|Optical disc|optical}} {{w|Data storage|data storage}}.
*[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/epic-fail-guy '''E'''pic '''F'''ail '''G'''uy], a {{w|Internet meme|meme}} that originated on 4chan, of a {{w|Stick figure|stick-figure}} character (often wearing a {{w|Guy Fawkes mask}}) who fails at everything he tries.
Together, the initial letters of these items spell out "'''ABCDEFG'''".

The title text states that the second reporter (Tom)'s helmet won't help him, the implication being 4chan is such a dangerous place that body armor is woefully ineffective.

==Transcript==
:[Blondie as a news anchor sitting behind a desk is reading from a paper she holds in her hands. There is a picture of Black Hat on a screen behind her. There is a caption below the picture.]
:Blondie: Breaking news—the President has made a nomination to the new post of Internet Secretary. We know little about the man, shown here.
:Caption: Possibly a haberdasher?

:[Blondie keeps talking over a scene showing her standing with a microphone in front of a water-filled moat that has been dug between the road and a house. A small stair up to the house is just on the other side of the moat. Behind her is Cueball with a large TV camera on his shoulder pointing towards her and the house.]
:Blondie (narrating): Attempts to reach the nominee at home were unsuccessful.
:Blondie: What the hell kind of apartment has a moat?

:[Back to Blondie behind her desk, the paper is gone, and she leans one arm on the desk. There is no screen behind her.]
:Blondie: To understand the culture from which he came — and which he may soon administer — we sent a reporter to what we're told is the source of that culture.
:Blondie: Tom?

:[This panel is much larger than the three previous panels and partly hidden behind the last. Tom, looking like Cueball with a military helmet with camouflage marks strapped under his chin, holds a large microphone in front of him while standing in front of a large screen. The screen shows a message board with four picture posts. Each picture has a text to the right, but those are unreadable scribbles. The top drawing is of a man with wild hair who holds out his hands with thumbs up. The next is text. Then there is a circle with a smaller circle in the middle and at the bottom what appears to be a Cueball-like man with a fencing mask. Blondie still speaks to him from off-panel left.]
:Tom: I'm coming to you live from the 4chan /b/ board. Despite the tube cloggage, nascent memes are flying fast and furious.
:Blondie (off-panel): Why are you wearing a helmet, Tom?
:Tom: I'm not sure.
:Image with text only: /b/

:[Ponytail is sitting in front of a large control unit using the two levers coming out of it from below two buttons that are again below the lit screen. A voice comes from off-panel left. Above the top of the panels frame, there is a frame with a caption:]
:Meanwhile in Ron Paul's blimp.
:Ron Paul (off-panel): Ahoy! What news of the blogs?

:[Zoom out showing Ponytail, who has turned around on her office chair away from the controls towards Ron Paul drawn like Cueball but with a cane. She holds up a piece of paper with a small square insert visible at the top. Apart from that, it is white.]
:Ponytail: Dr. Paul! The President's named his nominee!
:Ron Paul: It's not me?

:[Ron Paul's blimp is shown from the outside. His voice can be seen coming from the airship. There is text on the blimp, with the four letters after the first written mirrored to spell another word.]
:Ron Paul (from inside the blimp): Wait! I remember that guy from the campaign! He's a notorious troll!
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Back inside the blimp, Ron Paul points to Ponytail, while his other hand is lifted to his chin. His cane leans against his legs. Ponytail looks at him from her chair, the paper now held in her lap.]
:Ron Paul: They mustn't put him in charge. Quick, call the capitol!

:[Ponytail turns around on her chair towards the controls and takes hold of one of the sticks. Ron Paul has taken the cane in his hand again.]
:Ponytail: Can't, sir. The tubes just went down completely.
:Ron Paul: Blast!

:[Ponytail now holds onto both sticks as Ron Paul lifts his cane up into the air pointing away from her up and right.]
:Ron Paul: Then we'll go ourselves. Full speed ahead!

:[A full view of the blimp hanging in the air to the left over a broad landscape. There seems to be a small lake just in front of the blimp. The horizon is shown all along this full width panel, and after the lake, there are five small mountain peaks, two behind the three in front. After the last of these, there follow one more peak and a small mound. Features are shown on the ground. In the air in front of the blimp, there are a small cloud inside the panel at the end of the lake and a large cloud breaking the upper frame over the end of the five mountains stretching over the next peak and mound.]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image. The blimp has advanced minutely, taking the tip clearly over the lake. Beat panel #1]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image. The blimp has advanced minutely again. Beat panel #2]
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

:[Same image, but now the two speak from within the blimp. The blimp has again advanced minutely so the gondola below the blimp is now also almost at the edge of the lake.]
:Ron Paul: I said full speed!
:Ponytail: It's a blimp, sir.
:Blimp:
::Ron Paul
::RƎVO⅃UTION

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Secretary|02]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Secretary]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]] 
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ron Paul]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:News anchor]]
[[Category:Airships]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring politicians]]

Talk:3116: Echo Chamber

2025-07-17T21:11:57Z

MeZimm: MeZimm

Sorry no " somehow also causing the events themselves to happen repeatedly" is wrong; the point is that people post videos of their cats doing "things" repeatedly; that's just what happens, not an implied effect of the echo chamber itself. [[Special:Contributions/31.54.45.20|31.54.45.20]] 08:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
: Weird things happen in xkcd-land. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 09:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

What has {{w|The dress}} got to do with an eco chamber? Seems like a poor example. [[Special:Contributions/192.101.166.237|192.101.166.237]] 09:51, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
: Agree. It was an optical illusion that people even very close together, perceived differently, nothing to do with echoing each other's arguments. --[[User:Jarfil|Jarfil]] ([[User talk:Jarfil|talk]]) 13:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
: Ahh, the good old days. When the color of a dress was the internets biggest controversy. [[Special:Contributions/130.76.187.35|130.76.187.35]] 15:28, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I think the "purely partisan fishing expedition" might be the other way around: Cueball expected an expedition where actual fishing would happen, but got into a "purely partisan" or metaphorical "fishing expedition". --[[User:Jarfil|Jarfil]] ([[User talk:Jarfil|talk]]) 13:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
: I agree on that front. Additionally, I'm not sure where the "fishing poles made from polearms" thing is coming from, since the actual joke here is almost certainly a reference to the practice of {{w|Spearfishing}}, with "purely partisan" implying that it's spearfishing done strictly with [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partisan_(weapon) partisans]. [[User:Wote|Wote]] ([[User talk:Wote|talk]]) 15:05, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
: Based on the echo chamber example, it would be some weird combination of the two - like he went on an actual fishing trip, but all they caught was caches of documents exposing someone's smalltime transgressions. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 16:34, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I've been near the center of a very echo-y solid walled spherical dome. Basically the real version of this cartoon but more like 5-7 persons tall. This one was used for the projection surface of a flight training device. The acoustics near the center are just WEIRD. Your voice comes back to you as if you were speaking directly into your own ear but somebody just a few feet away sound as if they're halfway across the room. It's ... unsettling but a neat experience. [[Special:Contributions/130.76.187.35|130.76.187.35]] 15:02, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Am I the only one who read "partisan fishing expedition" and thought the joke was that it meant everyone was crowded over to either the "left" or the "right" side of the boat, causing it to capsize? Yes? Okay then. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

3106: Farads

2025-06-27T21:22:45Z

MeZimm: /* Explanation */ adding Chernobyl comparison

{{comic
| number = 3106
| date = June 23, 2025
| title = Farads
| image = farads_2x.png
| imagesize = 677x253px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = 'This HAZMAT container contains radioactive material with activity of one becquerel.' 'So, like, a single banana slice?'
}}

==Explanation==
This comic shows [[Cueball]] showing off several items that (he claims) comprise approximately one of a given unit, with [[Megan]] and [[White Hat]] reacting appropriately.

The first three — meters, pounds and volts — are all units of which “1” is a not extraordinary amount for an item that can be easily held in the hand. As such, they elicit minimal reaction from Megan and White Hat. A meter (a unit of length) is visually verifiable; a pound (a unit of weight) is easy to hold in the hand; and a volt (V, a unit of electric potential) would cause minimal harm even if discharged. White Hat's remark that the battery "might need a recharge" refers to the fact that 1 V batteries are somewhat uncommon, but a battery with a larger voltage like an AA, C, or D cell (1.5 V) might read as 1 V if significantly depleted.

In contrast, 1 {{w|farad}} is an unusually large amount of capacitance. Capacitance is the ability to store charge, a large amount of which could be dangerous. In common use, most consumer electronics use capacitors in the picofarad to millifarad range, and 1 millifarad is already considered a "large" capacitor. A 1-farad capacitor is considered a supercapacitor. Cueball claiming to have a 1 farad capacitor elicits panic from Megan and White Hat, who fear that {{w|Capacitor#Hazards and safety|it could be very dangerous}}.

For the same charging voltage and load/resistance, a larger capacitor won't deliver greater current or instantaneous power than a smaller one, but the total amount of energy and duration of discharge would be proportionally longer. If the capacitor's wires accidentally touch each other or a third piece of metal, an accidental "short circuit" is created, and all of the capacitor's stored energy discharges very quickly. For example, a 1 farad capacitor charged to 10 volts stores 50 joules of energy, and discharging all of that into a copper wire could cause the wire to heat up by a few dozen degrees Celsius faster than the blink of an eye and cause serious burns (see the [https://old.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/1ljxvdo/do_i_not_understand_what_a_capacitor_is/mzqg7ug/ calculation]).

Large capacitors are often associated with larger voltages and heavy machinery, which can contribute to the feeling of caution around large capacitances.

The title text explores the inverse situation, where “1” of a unit is a very small amount. A becquerel (Bq) amounts to one radioactive decay per second on the atomic level, which is a really low level of radioactivity. As observed, the material in question could be a single slice of a banana (primarily due to the decay of trace {{w|potassium-40}} in the total potassium it contains, a natural proportion of 117 parts per million). Hence, it is both impractical and unnecessary to contain it inside a container for hazardous materials unless the material is dangerous for other reasons (such as corrosiveness, flammability, or overripeness). In comparison, a 70 kg human body itself [https://web.archive.org/web/20200220103556/https://radioactivity.eu.com/site/pages/Activity_Doses.htm has an activity of 8000 Bq], and the 1986 meltdown of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant released [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10628087/ 2x10^18 (that's 2,000,000,000,000,000,000) Bq]! The earlier common unit for radioactivity is the {{w|Curie (unit)|curie}}, originally defined as the decay rate of 1 gram of radium. It has since been redefined to be 3.7 × 1010 decays/second, i.e., 37 GBq. Radioactive material emitting 1 curie that is small enough to fit into a container for hazardous materials is dangerous enough that it probably ''should'' be in one.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
: [Cueball holds a stick while talking with Megan and White Hat.]
: Cueball: This stick is one meter long.
: Megan: Cool.
: White Hat: That's a nice stick.

: [Cueball holds a smallish rock.]
: Cueball: This rock weighs one pound.
: Megan: I'd believe it.
: White Hat: Looks like a normal rock.

: [Cueball holds a small battery.]
: Cueball: This battery is one volt.
: Megan: Seems fine.
: White Hat: Might need a recharge.

: [Cueball holds a capacitor while Megan and White Hat panic.]
: Cueball: This capacitor is one farad.
: Megan: Aaaaa! Be careful!!
: White Hat: Put it down!!

==Trivia==
Of the three 'normal' unit quantities, the battery gets a comment that it might not necessarily be. Common household versions of {{w|electrochemical cell}} will normally be designed to produce around 1.5 volts (though some fairly common other versions go as low as 1.2 V or as high as 2.1 V), with single-/multi-cell {{w|List of battery sizes|batteries in general}} often being rated at a simple multiple of that (e.g. 1.5 V, 4.5 V, 9 V, ...). A cell producing nearer just a single volt, as is pointed out, might be significantly discharged and need recharging. If not replacing entirely, having aged due to too many recharges, as it also definitely would if it is a {{w|primary cell}}.

Also, of all four measures, the {{w|Pound (mass)|pound}} is the only non-SI unit given. A mass of 1 {{w|kilogram}} would also not be too odd a weight to have quoted here, being about 2.2 lb, but may not have been chosen due to its relative unfamiliarity to everyday US readers (even compared to the meter), or else because of its {{w|metric prefix}} (the only one of the {{w|SI base unit}}s, even including the {{w|SI derived unit|derived ones}}, to not be a bare unit) and the gram itself perhaps being even less relatable.

This comic was uploaded very late. Despite the next comic being scheduled for Monday, June 23, it was really released well into the next day. This is one of very few times other than [[:Category:April Fools' Day comics|April Fools' comics]] that Randall was so late. Comic [[3107]] came out well within its nominal day (Wednesday, and not just by US timezones) such that possibly this comic spent the least time as the "latest" comic of any that (together with its successor) belonged strictly to the default three-a-week comic cycle.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category: Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category: Physics]]

Talk:492: Scrabble

2025-06-18T23:22:53Z

MeZimm:

Does anyone know the points for "Ostrich", "Historic", and "Coistril"? I know the game but I don't have it at home.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:25, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

:Not sure what double word type modifiers they have but here are the base scores:

clitoris 10 + 50
coistril 10
ostrich 12
historic 13

:Choosing '''historic''' would be the best family friendly option, but is a far less desirable choice. [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 05:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

:: The only placement for ''historic'' would get it onto the triple word score with one doubled letter, making 42. Still nowhere near ''coistril'' or ''clitoris'', though (which can both get the 50 point bonus and the double letter score for the C). [[Special:Contributions/94.13.166.227|94.13.166.227]] 21:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Please do a separate post and do not destroy the former discussions.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Update by ‎67.0.215.76:
clitoris 60
coistril 60
ostrich 12
historic 42
:{{unsigned ip|‎67.0.215.76}}

:The best option would be ''lictors'' and ''hic'', scoring 71 points. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.85|108.162.254.85]] 14:48, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
::Any prove? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:19, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Randall uses the word "Ostrich" as an alternate word, but "Historic" or "[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coistril Coistril]" would gain more points. {{unsigned|Matchup}}

Top 17 Options taking into account what of the board opens up.
[Hic/Lictors 71points], [Lictors/Chi, 69 points], [Hit/Lictors, 69 points], [His/Lictors, 69 points],
[Lictors/Sh, 69 points], [Lictors/Li, 69points], [Trochils, 64 points], [Clitoris, 63 points]x2,
[Coistril, 63]x2, [Historic, 42], [Col/Oh/Li, 17 points], [Hic/Col, 15 points], [Hit/Lotic, 21 points],
[Chi/Col, 14 points], [Li, 3 points]
Top 14 Scoring words
[Lictors, 64-69]x6, [Trochils, 64], [Clitoris, 63]x2, [Coistril, 63]x2, [Historic, 42], [Lotic,21],
[Lictor,18-20]x3, [Colts,19], [Cots,18]x2, [Cost,18]x2, [Colt,18], [Cols,18], [Cist,18], [Scot,18]
Ostrich is a bad plan either way. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.99|141.101.98.99]]

---
How can you get "historic" from the tiles shown? The player doesn't have an "h" and has only one "i." [[User:Jelsemium|Jelsemium]] ([[User talk:Jelsemium|talk]]) Jelsemium

:Because 'Historic' starts with 'Hi', which has already been played. He can place 'storic' on the end of the existing 'Hi'. -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.185|162.158.79.185]] 04:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

How on earth can "clitoris" ever be an inappropriate word? That is so sexist! [[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 15:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
:If you really don't think the word is EVER inappropriate, consider randomly saying it at your next business meeting loudly enough to be heard, and seeing what kinds of reactions you get. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Can't believe nobody mentioned the smaller size of lefthand Cueball. Neither the granny (presumably) nor the other grown woman (Mother? Older sister?) there might be too bothered personally (depends on the individuals concerned), but with an adolescent child (a boy in particular) it would greatly add to the issues in most family circumstances. Added to the transcript, accordingly. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.79|172.70.85.79]] 19:02, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk:3085: About 20 Pounds

2025-05-06T19:33:53Z

MeZimm:

Wow - first here! I can't help thinking 'about 20 pounds' could be exactly 10 kg! 0r even one Newton?! [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 05:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:"One Newton" and "10 kg" are totally different things. "10 kg" would cause 1 Newton of gravitational force if you were in a world with about 1% of Earth's gravity, though. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.109.86|172.69.109.86]] 09:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
::Oops! In my rush I should have checked and put 100 Newtons. I was relying on 10kg being about 22 pounds, or rather the other way around, and then a particle having mass not weight and Science using Metric units. Apologies. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 11:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
::(Moved your reply up a bit. You seemed to respond to "20 pounds are...", below, ''and'' split their timestamp signature from their message. And forgot to sign properly, at first, so I got edit-conflicted ''twice'' whilst trying to post myself and correct your initial error. Please take a bit more care, everybody. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.53|172.70.163.53]] 11:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC))
:20 pounds are approximately 9.072 kg, so not exactly 10 kg (in fact, it rounds to 9). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.55|172.70.134.55]] 10:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
::That's the wrong way to think about it. "Exactly 10kg" is "exactly 22.0462lbs", but that (to the nearest single significant figure) is legitimately "about 20lbs". See any given step in [[2585: Rounding]], especially where that 'disagrees greatly' with an adjacent step.
::As with any Oracle (that's worth its omphalos), it may be giving an ''entirely true'' answer which nevertheless is deliberately phrased as ambiguous and misinterpretable, the possible supernatural complement to the 'exact words' genie contract. As with the [[2741: Wish Interpretation]] genie, the Oracle ''may'' slip into less "unhelpfully helpful" mode immediately after, though for different reasons. However, "burritos are ''pretty'' good" also suggests that there's some other thing that is ''more'' good, so — again — it's giving a sufficient response to what they (now) should do, but not a perfect one.
::As I write, the explanation (probably needs a general rewrite) doesn't mention anything about the burritos except as title text, or I would have ensured the famed exact-words/vague-detail was noted in that bit. (Shorter than here.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.82|141.101.98.82]] 11:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.55|172.70.134.55]] 10:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Though I don't think it at all merits being described as a reference, I am minded of the {{w|The Usenet Oracle}} (at least when I knew of it). Though, if it ''was'' to be a deleliberate shout-out, I'd expect a few more actual in-jokes. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.130|172.70.86.130]] 06:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I bet Randall is in some kind of force-interaction-related, What-if-induced rabbit hole right now (or has been at the time of writing). Wondering what the next comic will be about. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.144.175|172.71.144.175]] 08:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

"Nature of ... 20 pounds" is a reference to the koan "A monk asked Tozan, 'What is the nature of Buddha?' He replied, 'Three pounds of flax.'" Someone can add this to the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.115|172.70.111.115]] 08:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:There is a similar story in the Principia Discordia. When asked what is the meaning behind POEE, a Discordian cabal, Malaclypse the younger answered "five tons of flax." [[User:FlavianusEP|FlavianusEP]] ([[User talk:FlavianusEP|talk]]) 16:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

"something that doesn't interact with electromagnetism cannot be 'seen', as photons will pass through it completely unaffected": is this supposed to be true ? I thought photons interacted with gravity, and even the phrase before states that gravity is believed to affect everything. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.151.93|172.68.151.93]] 09:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:We can ''infer'' Dark Matter (and, for that... *ahem* ...matter, also Dark Energy) from what the photons in the universe are telling us that does not look anything like what 'light(-interacting) matter' ''should'' be doing. As with some searches for black holes (most particularly, when the theory is that the unseen mass of the universe is a lot of small black holes drifting in the void, not acreting enough to create secondary visible effects), whether or not light is being gravitationally lensed by things (that we cannot directly see) is part of the way that we're narrowing down what-and-where DM is.
:And, I think, currently it seems to be considered that it's residing in a webwork of DM tendrils, at extragalactic (indeed, cosmological) scales, such that where the tendril cross is where they draw 'normal' matter together enough to be any given galaxy. But that's in an "explains all(/many) known facts" way, and might yet be incorrect. e.g. if there's side-dimensions (equally undetectable, at least visually) that change the inverse-square dropoff of gravity at large enough scales to govern galactic rotation rates by just enough to fit observations, or we have some other misunderstanding/scientific blind spot that further study may correct.
:Or, in short, think Brownian Motion. We can't see a handful of air molecules (not by normal, even microscope-enhanced, human vision), they might as well be invisible. But, by what we see of more visible particles, suggests that they exist as something. Conversly, the æther, a proposed medium for light, was thought to exist in a similar all-pervasive manner (insofar as trivial human experience, though less physically 'interactive' than wind), but deeper checks (as to whether its effects on light were as they should have been) dismissed it as a possible concept.
:Depending upon interpretation of the comic (I originally read it as "all dark-matter particles are ~20lbs in mass WIMPs/nano-MACHOs/whatever", but it seems that others take it as "''all of'' dark-matter particles is a single ~20lbs mass particle"; and that's make the oracle-invokers' attitudes more logical, if not the universe), there actually being Dark Matter, but it being just 20lbs of 'something' ''somewhere'' in the whole universe, makes it a needle in a galactic-supercluster-sized haystack.
:Detecting ''that'' would be difficult in the extreme. Even if it's somehow within a few hundred metres of the experimenters. There are ways to {{w|Cavendish experiment|observe the movements of small masses at small distances}}, but when you don't even have a clue ''if'' it exists (or is moving/has moved, and how), it's fairly hopeless. Gravitational lensing of light would be impractical at such distances/masses. LIGO may be very clever, insofar as merging high-mass objects at long distances, but not really for this. Event Horizon Telescope's ability to see a black hole('s accretion disk) via Very Long Baseline Interferometry is also totally useless here.
:I think I'd ''also'' settle for the burritos, given that certainty that I wasn't going to find what I'm looking for via any obvious route. (Assuming I couldn't ask the Oracle to ''show me'' the Dark Matter, rather than just answer questions about it. And noting that, if not for the indicated progression of the conversation, I might have assumed the oracular voice were really from the pentagram (more usual for demonology, not oracularities!) and that the dark blob ''was'' the 20lbs of Dark Matter. Which, of course, it ''does not deny'', so maybe my headcan[n]on ''is'' that the summoned Oracle ''is'' the DM, being deliberately evasive, and successfully so. That would satisfy it being both that which Ponytail seeks, ''and'' the entity of which Ponytail summons in order to seek it! Cueball, however, is currently just seeking food, which (one assumes) the DM-slash-Oracle is not.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.229.25|172.68.229.25]] 12:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

My physics skills are rusty but 20 pounds is much more than the Planck mass. Doesn't this imply that Randall's dark matter particles would be black holes? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.243.107|172.68.243.107]] 10:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, you are right that 9 kg is about 417,000,000 times more than the Planck mass (21.76 μg), but no, that doesn't imply that 9 kg dark matter particles would be black holes, for that particle can be larger than 417,000,000 Planck lengths (1 Planck length is c. 1.616255×10–35 m, so above 7 rm, this particle would not collapse into a black hole). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.81|172.68.245.81]] 10:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Since it's Star Wars day and the 20 lbs. reference would be causing a massively large amount of mass, would it be safe to say that they "sense a great disturbance in the force?"
[[Special:Contributions/67.84.20.42|67.84.20.42]] 10:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Back in 2005, when the kg was an actual object's mass, there was an article about what a five pound (~2.268 kg) electron is, but it was deleted, for it is a "trivial result of special relativity". [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.81|172.68.245.81]] 10:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Since pounds are a measure of weight, and weight is a measure of the gravitational attraction between an object and its "planet", what is the reference planet that is being used to define the weight of the Dark Matter particle?
 Should we assume that Earth's surface is being used as the reference, even though we have no measurements that suggest DM particles are around us, and no reason to assume that the particles would even notice that Earth has a "surface"?
 If Randall wanted to use mass, then he should have used the imperial unit of slug, but I suppose saying that a DM particle is 0.62162 slugs might not give the readers quite the same impression as using 20 pounds. [[User:Galeindfal|Galeindfal]] ([[User talk:Galeindfal|talk]]) 13:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:I might be missing some humour here, but the pound is actually a measure of mass, just like the gram, so it doesn't vary from a planet to another. You might have fallen prey to the second paragraph of the {{w|pound-force|wikipedia article about the pound-force}}, which states: 'Pound-force should not be confused with pound-mass (lb), often simply called "pound"' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.127.160|172.71.127.160]] 14:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Is this, by chance, the Internet Oracle? [[Special:Contributions/104.23.187.126|104.23.187.126]] 13:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:I don't see anything like the pentagram with candles at its web site. The comic seems more like they're summoning a daemon. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Any idea where Randall came up with "20 pounds"? Why not 19 or 21 (blackjack!)? Why not use Newtons (too figgy?)? Only thing I can think of is that, in America at least, many people think they are "about 20 pounds overweight." I think that's too much of a stretch (pants???) to be the answer here. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.27.170|172.68.27.170]] 14:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:I think it's just humorous, adding to the imprecision / casualness of "about 20". Imperial measurements feel "less scientific" than metric. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.124|162.158.146.124]] 16:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:The amount of people confusing mass and weight/force in this thread is pretty disappointing for an xkcd forum. You can't convert pounds into Newtons. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.172.143|162.158.172.143]] 16:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
I don't think it's accurate to say (as the explanation does right now) that 20 lbs is too little to detect through gravitational interaction. Throwing some numbers together: a 20lbs-sphere of Osmium, the heaviest stable element, is about 4.5cm in radius. If a 20lbs point mass flies by just above the surface of that sphere, it would generate a gravitational force of about 2.5 micronewtons (hooray for Gauss's theorem). That's the weight of a few grains of salt - small, but definitely detectable. If they're all really really fast, or there's always lots of them around at any given time or something, that might wash out any measurements (someone more knowledgeable about dark matter can probably comment what the expected velocity and flux density of 20lbs-dark-matter-particles would be where we are). But in principle, rather measurable! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.172.142|162.158.172.142]] 17:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

"A particle that interacts with nothing except gravity, could only be detected by a gravitational telescope." -- Detected by a whatnow? Is that a thing which exists? Google had nothing for "gravitational telescope" when I searched for it.
Additionally, are there any theoretical physicists out there who can weigh in on how plausible the "20 pound particle that doesn't interact with anything else" theory is? [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 19:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3081: PhD Timeline

2025-04-28T21:14:41Z

MeZimm:

<noinclude>{{notice|This comic is about present-day politics and the {{w|Second presidency of Donald Trump|Trump administration}}. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}: don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block, and ignore}}. As with these contentious topics, please don't write in a biased and slanted manner. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. (In case you need assistance in blocking a vandal, message [[User talk:Kynde|Kynde]].)}}</noinclude>

What an age we live in... --[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al | Converse]][https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa%27al My life choices] 15:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:[https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested/index.html It only gets rougher... ] It's enough to radicalize a person. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.187|172.69.65.187]] 16:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:When even Randall starts freaking out, it usually indicates the most entertaining timeline. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.245.161|162.158.245.161]] 00:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:: I will only grant this only if we have a happy outcome for all the people already damaged by your current government. I look forward to Nazis getting punched and the Ark of the Covenant being opened [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 14:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::: Pretty sure this ''is'' a happy outcome for everyone who voted for this. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.159.201|172.68.159.201]] 21:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Events like this are scary, and they're even scarier if you have a personal or geographic connection to them like Randall does. I can understand why he would feel frustrated about his inability to do something concrete, and if this comic raises awareness for the situation then it has done a good thing. Not sure why I thought this comment was necessary; maybe it's just a way of processing the emotions that the comic made me feel. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
: Agree, those of us that are non-US look to the US to uphold human rights. Very sad. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 14:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::A misplaced sentiment. As bitter as it is to say, it's clear the US doesn't care for human rights anymore. The CDC is plastering some bullshit about gender ideology on the page for HIV, immigrants can be dragged off for no reason, the DoD is literally erasing history from their website and only put it back after people got mad...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.115|172.69.70.115]] 12:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I dont want to start an argument, but I am glad Randall Munroe is making a specific, reasonable point. A lot of times I see people saying either "there is no antisemitism on campus, nobody should ever get deported, ACTUAL terrorists should get green cards", and others say "EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME SHOULD GET DEPORTED, EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST." I think both of them are extreme points obviously, and I am glad Randall is just taking the side, for now, of "this specific person did not violate their green card visa."
:''"...EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST."'' That are literally the words that a Trump official was reported to have said. If you protest the actions they take against anyone they label as a terrorit, YOU will be treated as a supporter of terrorism. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, expert-on-the-Öztürk-case but not-an-immigration-expert-really here. For clarity, Öztürk held an F-1 student visa but was not a lawful permanent resident (LPR) (green card holder), unlike the similar case of Mahmoud Khalil (Columbia university) who was a green card holder. And "green card visa" is not a thing, there's a "green card," which you cannot "violate" (although you could commit crimes that might have consequences for your LPR status), and you generally don't hear "violate their visa" although it's true that a visa is related to and may restrict that work you can do in the country. Regardless, no allegations have been made that Öztürk violated anything laws or rules or did anything other than lend her name to speech in a newspaper. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 22:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::Yes thank you johnhawkinson. I do not know the terminology. Ozturk did not, to my knowledge, violate any laws or rules. Thank you to the clarification.[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::as always, based randall, at least for now. [[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 16:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Did you mean "biased"? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Did you mean "biased towards due process?" [[User:CharlesT|Nyrrix]] ([[User talk:CharlesT|talk]]) 16:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::::It's probably "based", as that's a term that can either be used in support or mockery of a philosophical position (because of Poe's Law, hard to know which in most cases, including here). It's more usually used in 4chan-like responses (and I doubt Randall would be considered "based" in those other places) than hereabouts, so perhaps it needs some clarification for those not (or not enough) in that sort of crame of mind. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.94|141.101.99.94]] 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Yes I meant based. I know it is often used in a different space. I meant it in a [Satirical yet Agreeing while in a ironic mode of understanding that nothing is as it seems, but still definitely complimentary] mode. Basically, I agree with this and it is good[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::Yes, Randall Munroe clearly only cares about this one incident because he does not at all care about politics. He's definitely not using this as an illustrative case on the countless other identical incidents happening under the Trump administration. /s /s /s /s /s. [[User:DrMeepster|'''Dr.'''Meepster]] (<[[User_talk:DrMeepster|chat]]> • <[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} reply]>) 16:53, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, Randall is currently calling out this one incident, and while he is obviously also disagreeing with many other incidents that have happened and will happen, he is not overgeneralising any specific criticism to every case. For instance, if he said "nobody who was deported has done anything wrong" i would disagree. He said "Ozturk did not do anything wrong" which i agree with. Sorry for the misunderstanding![[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

I really hope this is one of those comics that does NOT stand the test of time. In other words, I hope the next generation of graduate students sees this and thinks "oh, that must've been written in 2025, we don't have to worry about those kinds of things anymore." Perhaps "hope" isn't the right word, it implies I have hope. Maybe "pray fervently" is the right phrase. Sigh. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.227.72|198.41.227.72]] 16:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Sure ... "Oh, that was before third world war, we don't have to worry about those kinds of things anymore." -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:We can go back to considering how the Ph.D. became a participation trophy for the financial benefit of the awarding institution - and, in the sciences, a source of slave labor. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.61|172.71.146.61]] 01:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

How do we edit the Categories? This should have category Politics. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Usually, once at least one other category (not created from templates like {{template|comic}}) you can edit the page and see the other cat(s) at the bottom, beyond the comic-discussion template. Or edit the Transcript section (or any Trivia one, whatever's the last one) as that'll also have the tail-end of the page. So long as you know there's a category "Foo", you should be able to work out how to add "Category:Foo".
:But don't add Foo if it doesn't exist, hoping that someone will tire of the redlink that's created. You may be wrong about it needing to exist, or miss the ''actual'' "Category:comics featuring Foo", and unless someone is feeling generous it's possible that your edit just gets reverted as not properly researched, or checked... I ''think'' there actually is a Politics category, by that name, but I'm trying to answer the general question, not yet going out there to look it up for certain (at which point, I may have just added it myself, making it useless to have explained how you could 'easily' do it... At least in this instance).
:'''TL;DR;''', though, look at the source (wiki-edit) of another comic that is about Politics and is so categorised. Go all the way to bottom, and you'll see which 'tag' you might want to put at the bottom of this one. Should be obvious. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.94|141.101.99.94]] 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::I think I've added that category now [[Special:Contributions/104.23.190.60|104.23.190.60]] 19:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm so tired of this administration :( [[User:CharlesT|Nyrrix]] ([[User talk:CharlesT|talk]]) 16:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Are you a citizen of the USA? If so, are you dead? In exile? In jail? Have your assets been seized? No to these? Then this is your administration and mine. Own it, or act. "Tired" doesn't cut it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.21|172.71.147.21]] 02:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::Your point being...? [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 14:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::In fact, I think that "tired" is the exact word for it. Yes, it still may be comparatively better than other countries, but man, it is still nowhere near ideal, and I'm just TIRED of all this junk. [[User:Willintendo|Willintendo]] ([[User talk:Willintendo|talk]]) 14:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
The comic on mobile has the title text has a youtube video URL, and if you click on the comic on desktop version, it links to the youtube video of the arrest. This isn't reflected in the description currently. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.121|172.70.126.121]] 16:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The video URL is '''https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyypeEEOklM''' and appears to be "'''CBS Boston [282K subscribers]'''" so probably legit?
I will try to add the URL. --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 17:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:For the sake of consistency, I copy-pasted the "note" from [[1723]] into this comic. '''I also think we should have a category and perhaps a template to make adding notes like this easier and more uniform.''' [[Special:Contributions/172.69.67.22|172.69.67.22]] 21:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::''"I copy-pasted...."'' Thank you! --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 03:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::Well, you can create it right now if you want! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 22:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Is this the first with an out of site link? {{unsigned|Commercialegg|18:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::No this happens often. For instance this comic {{xkcd|1723}}. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Again, let's keep the explanation as neutral as possible. Facts only. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 18:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Dunlap's Laws. 1. Fact is solidified opinion. 2. Facts may weaken under extreme heat and pressure. 3. Truth is elastic. (Arthur Block's "Murphy's Laws", 1977.) - "Facts are elite, facts are fungible, facts are false. And once nothing is true, anything can be true." Alan Burdick, ''Trump vs Science'', New York ''Times'' Newsletter, 25 April 2025. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.41|172.68.22.41]] 02:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
: the problem is facts have a heavy anti trump bias. You CAN NOT state basic facts and not be against this regime [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.187|162.158.112.187]] 00:05, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:: I think it's important to emphasize that neutrality is simply a bias towards the truth rather than towards anything else. On a technical level, being unbiased precludes being neutral and being neutral precludes being unbiased, even if people mostly use the word "unbiased" in the same way as "neutral". In other words, bias isn't inherently a bad thing.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.219|172.71.102.219]] 00:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::"A bias towards the truth" is a bias towards what my homies and I declare to be correct - since 'absolute truth' does not exist, all 'truth' is relative, is what 'my homies and I declare to be correct'. This bias is not trivial, as you point out. Explanations on xkcd have striven to cover the "what, when, where, who, how" of the associated comic, and have striven to omit "what do we think about all this" except as is necessary to describe "what, when, where, who, how". The goal is laudable, but [''ahem''] difficult to manage when the topic is a lit match on a powder keg. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.143|108.162.245.143]] 02:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::: This "no absolute truth" false neutrality nonsense is a bad faith argument rooted in pop philosophy and obfuscating rhetoric intended to discredit the existence of inconvenient facts. There's a famous, if apocryphal, parable about the philosopher who tried to argue this sort of hogwash to the oncoming train that hit him. Gravity exists, the Earth is not flat, and the current administration is run by a bunch of idiotic narcissists actively harming people for personal profit. [[User:Scorpion451|Scorpion451]] ([[User talk:Scorpion451|talk]]) 04:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::"To be properly neutral, you have to give all sides equal time and credence!" This turns out not to be the case. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Of course, the bit I was correcting (with bad grammar, and lack of facts) got totally changed about before I tried to post it. "''For instance citizens usually {{w|Deportation of Americans from the United States|cannot be deported for any reason}} (only extradited, although the US typically refuses to comply with requests even from countries that freely extradite to it), and would instead be subject only to local legal penalties, but relatively minor allegations have resulted in visitors' extraditions.''" was what I wrote. Now, I ''think'' that was neutral enough, but it doesn't fit there now anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.113|172.70.58.113]] 22:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ack, I think I'm the one who changed it before you could. My bad. Anyway, seconded. Opinion on the conflict in Gaza itself is not needed in this explanation; the edit that suggested that the student could be materially linked to Hamas by providing a link to an opinion poll of how Palestinians feel about the Oct 7 attacks is, in my opinion, very disingenuous, especially considering Ozturk is not Palestinian but Turkish, making the cited data even more blatantly irrelevant than it already would have been. [[User:Psycherprince|Psycherprince]] ([[User talk:Psycherprince|talk]]) 23:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

This article could potentially be a reasonable place to try to establish a norm of separately including opposing sides of political topics (rather than the usual edit conflicts). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.176|172.70.110.176]] 00:35, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Step 6: Try not to lose your visa when traveling or studying abroad by being a nuisance, since visas (in any country) can be denied or revoked for virtually any reason. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.168|162.158.112.168]] 01:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Pray the leopards never eat your face. {{unsigned ip|172.69.138.29|26 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::I'll bring decoy meat and try not to insult the cheetahs while visiting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 01:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Do nothing whatsoever controversial, because you don't know who will be running things within a few years? Or what liberties they may take with due process or law? Certainly one wouldn't want to run afoul of officials who are, say, flat-Earthers, Biblical literalists, or holders of unusual views regarding medical practise. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::There is no inalienable right to travel or study abroad, so doing anything "controversial" as a visitor definitely puts you at risk of "being shown the door", as Randall likes to put it. The van full of thugs was added just for drama, but underneath it's no different than being denied a visa for some social media post, which has been happening at least since Obama. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.159.201|172.68.159.201]] 21:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::"...within a few years"? We have that today. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Hang on. Why does the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ]] say no references? We literally have reflist template and a bunch of pages with references. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:24, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:I've never seen a page with references besides this one. I guess the template could be used for other things, but we don't use references in explanations. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 09:32, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::They have been rare, they are (usually) eventually reworded to be 'inline onward references' (i.e. just 'standard' directly hyperlinked text, of whatever kind: [], [[]], {{template|w}}, etc), and I've done that myself on occasion There may even be some cases where the additional "ref"ness available from a ref-tag is more useful (e.g. multi-instance-same-ultimate-external-resource, or metadata).
::It is very true that we highly prefer not-a-Ref links (which editors used to other wikis might not appreciate), I'm uncomfortable with the idea that the reflist template is now quite so "you should ''not'' be seeing this!" in nature. Without actually lookingnat "Pages which use the reflist template"/whatever (I presume you did this?) I'm not sure whether there are any that I would retain, but there may be one or two that I'd be in no hurry to convert to the typical/desirable links instead. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.163|172.69.43.163]] 16:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. He will send in black ops instead." Good that I'm a German. Such stuff can't happen in Germany. Ever! ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.172.244|162.158.172.244]] 11:08, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:Germany would never deny a visa to an outspoken nazi sympathizer? They couldn't even bring themselves to grant asylum to Snowden because some free speech is just too costly, but that's not the same as a visa, I guess. Maybe he can still get a tourist visa for a quick trip from Moscow to Berlin, but the next trip would be to extradition prison. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.182|162.158.112.182]] 23:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

As it is now, the reason given for Özturk's detention is a half-truth. She was not detained because her visa was revoked. That would only prevent her from re-entering the US, if she left it. In contrast, Özturk's visa was revoked in secret, and she did not know about this until after she had been grabbed off the street and treated like a terrorist, or like a dissident in a South American regime.
https://oiss.washu.edu/visa-status-stamps/ says: "The visa stamp is solely for entering the U.S. You will need it again only when you leave the U.S. and intend to re-enter using that visa. It’s sometimes called an “entry visa,” which is different from “status,” a concept explained below. The visa stamp can expire at any time after your entry to the U.S. without affecting your non-immigrant status. If you leave the U.S. and your visa has expired, you will need to apply for a new visa in order to re-enter the U.S." — "Non-immigrant status (also referred to as “status” or “immigration status”) is a non-physical legal condition, granted by an official of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) when you are admitted into the U.S. at a port of entry. Once you obtain non-immigrant status, you must maintain that status throughout your stay in the U.S. unless you legally change to another status."
ExplainXKCD leaves unexplained whether Özturk's immigration status changed, and on what charges she was detained, or whether she was detained without a charge. It is unclear how her visa revocation is related to her arrest, as a visa revocation would not normally lead to an arrest (or does it?). If the ExplainXkCD's failure to explain the reason for Özturk's arrest is related to the US government's failure to explain the reason, then that should be made clear.
Or simply say, "we're not explaining it because politics, go read Wikipedia and educate yourself", but then explainxkcd should not suggest that the reason is the visa revocation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.159|162.158.95.159]] 04:25, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:I've added a brief note that ordinarily, visa revocation is not, in itself, grounds for detention. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Linked the Tufts Daily article she co-authored (which has been claimed to be related to her detention), but it would go better in the References section. Someone, please amend this? I'm too exhausted to do it properly right now. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.6.3|162.158.6.3]] 21:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

The claim of genocide in the explanation is in fact false. There is no genocide. However, as all sources here are biased, and some claim that there is a genocide, I think a better description would be something like "the Gaza war, which is sometimes considered a genocide". The article also misrepresented this - the only plausible thing was that Palestinians were a group that could theoretically be genocided. [[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 11:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:I'm not responding to this person, as they are undoubtedly beyond reach, but I needed to make a comment to clarify that the view that Israel is committing genocide is widely accepted among organizations like Amnesty International and international scholars on genocide. This is not a partisan take but simply an observation. To say there is factually no genocide in Gaza is selfishly inserting your opinion without looking at the diplomatic landscape. This post is aimed at people who, like me, get incredibly frustrated when they have to read comments by genocide or holocaust deniers. {{unsigned ip|162.158.233.116|12:47, 28 April 2025}}
:: Genocide has an actual definition. The war in Gaza does not meet it.[[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 13:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Fact check: many international scholars and experts do think the situation in Gaza meets the definition of a genocide, including the UN special committee and Amnesty International [[Special:Contributions/172.71.95.115|172.71.95.115]] 13:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::: See above (sorry, didn't notice your reply when I inserted my ECed one in again, but can't easily rearrange without rewriting things). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.13|172.70.162.13]] 13:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:(I ''was'' responding to the above (no-indent) voice, but was Edit-Conflicted by the last message... Can't see what they should have signed with. // Ok, now I can, and done!) I would not have put the word "genocide" myself. Nor do I think it's, at this stage, a "war"... It's been a "I hit you 'cos you hit me" thing for so long that "conflict" is better, punctuated by the 'armed forces' of either(/all) sides mostly attacking the civilians on the opposing side with very few proper "army v. army" encounters (whatever either side says about their own intentions).
:However, it is indeed very likely correct in to use "genocide", emotive and assumption-filled as it may be, by the original coining of the term. Targetting a national and/or ethnic group in order to perform acts resulting in "the disintegration of its political and social institutions, of its culture, language, national feelings, religion, and its economic existence".
:Both Israeli and Palestinian actions have been made with the express purpose of making the opposing group "go away" in all those various ways, and right now it's the Israelis who are dismantling the Gazan nation, both violently and 'non-violently'. (And possibly the US, if you take POTUS's statements seriously of scattering all Gazans to free up the real-estate opportunities.) It isn't (necessarily) Aushwitz-level ''killing'' that group out of existence, but it qualifies to the definition of the word.
:I would avoid "genocide" ''mostly'' because it gets interpreted as the full holocaust/death trope, but it's definitely going on (and, for some, it might even ''be'' considered that level). If we use it for everything that it ''could'' be used for, it might devalue its meaning. But the aforementioned definition is happening here, and ''probably'' well within the top 10% of all applicable current uses (if we're crass enough sort by "how genocidy" things are).
:It's a pity that there aren't the nuances available and commonly understood to avoid this kind of conversation (OTOH, it'd make you wonder about the world if there was, indeed, a globally recognised "league table" of these things, and yet nobody then doing anything particularly good with this information). As I said, I wouldn't put the word there. But I certainly wouldn't remove it, either. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 13:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::It is not because genocide is broadly misunderstood as a term that we should not use it when experts agree it is a correct time to use it. By using the term in its proper context, we are educating people on the term and making sure it is used correctly in the future. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.95.115|172.71.95.115]] 13:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:If it's a genocide, it's the least effective genocide in the history of genocides as far as the population number is concerned. And since by the same definition the Israelis were genocided on October 7th, can't we just call it a "self-defense genocide" or "a genocide for a genocide"? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.215|162.158.102.215]] 14:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fact check: international experts have not said that Oct 7th qualifies as a genocide, and genocide is not just a matter of amount of deaths. Many scholars agree at this point that there's a concept of "cultural genocide" like forced relocations, where there might not be any deaths and it still constitutes a genocide. The UN report on genocide makes note of this, though not all member states agreed. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.95.89|172.71.95.89]] 15:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading, https://xkcd.com/1731/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.148|172.70.58.148]]
::::Named fallacies are a tool to help you make your argument or notice the flaws in other's. You did step one and you think you identified a flaw in someone's post. Now state your argument. Posting a link to a page naming the fallacy does not make an argument. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.95.130|172.71.95.130]] 18:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I wish Randall would layoff the politics for a moment. Not because it isn't important or worth discussing, but xkcd is one of the few escapes for the hellhole that is the world and Id rather not be reminded of how everything sucks. Glad he's bringing awareness tho. Also, here's praying that the trolls don't descend -anon [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.173|172.69.70.173]] 11:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:I know where you're coming from. I'd rather an ''entertaining'' comic, primarily. But on the "all it takes [...] is for good men to do nothing" basis, I'm glad he ''occasionally'' makes points like these. He's human{{Citation needed}} and we know he has Opinions. The occasional overtly political point (not even being sneaky about it, unlike some) is understandable and... I'd say "forgivable", but I personally don't see anything needing to be forgived.
:Obviously, it could grate against the sensibilities of those who are politically opposed (even if intellectually in his typical audience type), but we all have to take the rough with the smooth. I know I'm fortunate, here, that I'm not ''too'' politically dissimilar in attitude (though different country, different personal concerns). There's some other creators where I can still appreciate them while clearly not exactly on my side of the political fence (with the redeeming feature that they may come to different conclusions, but at least they do so with internal logic, not just soak up a lazy mindset). And it would be boring never to be challenged like that.
:Given the amount of commentable situations that politics has presented, a couple of political comics that ''happen'' to be inspired in quick succession isn't necessarily a sign of anything new. Same old Randall, and I can't see this completely turning off people who weren't already fully turn-offable before. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 13:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:: I've been turned off before, but came back, so it's not black and white. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.162|172.70.58.162]]
: I agree. It would also calm me down a bit if occasionally he called out the excesses of his party too. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.114|172.70.58.114]]

I'm sad the meaning isn't what I thought in between when I read the comic itself and when I read the title text. Initially I thought the path in red was an alternate path where the PhD candidate's research is some sort of "Stargate"/"Fringe" grade groundbreaking discovery that had to be "hushed up" and they were whisked off to a secret facility to advance their research. Then reality interfered and I realized my calendar had jumped back to 1984... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.59.163|172.69.59.163]] 15:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
: Gross under-reaction usually leads to gross over-reaction. Give it a short while before assuming we are in 1984, k? Things will hopefully balance somewhere between openly, violently supporting terrorist groups, and deporting people for minimal evidence without due process. Best way to get there is for both sides to stop overplaying politics, letting their emotions become primary, and become more extreme against each other in a never ending arms race. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.114|172.70.58.114]]
::I mean, I am willing to give it a bit more time but I do think we are dangerously on the way there. They already track all of our phones and Internet traffic, and now they can just grab people for little reason....[[Special:Contributions/172.70.255.119|172.70.255.119]] 18:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Here's what I don't get. Why her? If I were an evil dictator hellbent on suppressing free speech, why would I start with a quiet PhD student whose only public role to play in anything political was co-writing an article that was criticizing her university president for not acting strongly enough in favor of a cause she supported? Why wouldn't I start with the more obvious inciters of opposition to my regime? It genuinely feels like we're not getting the full story. And perhaps we never will. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-11T03:29:03Z

MeZimm:

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::Plus, there are very few uses of lowercase letters. It just doesn't make sense. [[User:Whoa|Whoa]] ([[User talk:Whoa|talk]]) 21:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I cannot agree that Reddit (or any site's) locking of comments is a good idea; it's a declaration of failure better dealt with by not having anything there at all except a statement that the topic is outside the scope acceptable by one's site. Even worse though, ''removing'' comments that are not abusive, promoting harm, etc, while leaving others that may be either similar or inverse, ''especially'' for difficult topics, is UNACCEPTABLE from any forum hoping to host discussion of anything the least bit controversial. '''Removing non-violating comments is even worse than locking threads, which is also bad.''' I'm outta here & probably won't be back; unhealthy moderation practices make for unhealthy discussions. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Eh? There don't appear to have been any comments removed so far, and the discussion above leans towards ''not'' doing anything if possible. So you're leaving because people aren't doing things you don't want them to do? Seems... odd. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 08:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Please notice that I said “vandalism and trolling”, not comments. I agree with you and am against removing comments (such as from I’m With Her). I think that we can agree that vandalism can be immediately removed and that we shouldn’t respond to trolls/rage bait, correct? The intention of my message was to have the talk page or the explanation page semi-protected ''if'' the vandalism got too bad and it’s better to limit messages temporarily. This is the same policy that Wikipedia uses by semi-protecting controversial and often vandalised articles, one that has worked for years. Besides, the main intention of these talk pages is to discuss how to improve the article and have discussions about how to explain or word things, not promote political ideology. If that occurs, semi-protection would be a good tool to use to limit such off-topic discussions. There’s a time and place for that. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:"Repeatedly"? By what criteria? Obviously in your opinion, anyway, and I'm not going to tell you what to think (or try to guess what you're thinking), but I believe you're being subjective. Nice to hear from you, though. Please do come by again some time. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.226|141.101.98.226]] 20:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Seconded. This really should be the policy. I have strong political opinions like just about everyone (and like everyone, I certainly think that my views are logically derived from cold hard objective facts), but I have refrained from editing this page because I am VERY aware that it would do absolutely nothing to help anyone, and detract from the purpose of this website. "Explain xkcd" is for explaining xkcd, it's not a a platform to persuade the internet to adopt your political opinions. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:I really don't know what you guys are talking about, at least regarding the explanation for this specific comic. I believe the contributors have done a pretty good job keeping the explanation pretty close to neutral, except maybe it might be just a little opinionated in one paragraph. Most of the "extra" explanation in there provides some necessary background that may not be quite as obvious to future readers. Any leaning toward one opinion or another is mostly an explanation of the leaning attributed to the characters by the author himself. If you have a specific rebuke against a portion that seems more opinionated or subjective, either tag it in the explanation without changing the explanation itself, or bring up the specifics in this discussion. Please try not to bash this whole site and the contributors because of your own opinions. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much partisan in the explanation. The comic itself expresses Randall's opinion of Trump's tariffs, and the explanation just describes the context and explains how the comic expresses this opinion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::Here's a small test. Do you believe it is essentially IMPOSSIBLE that the 2020 election was rigged, and therefore Trump's statements were obviously, objectively, and incontrovertibly "false"? Because if you do, [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/02/poll-biden-2020-election-illegitimate 36% of Americans (as of December 2023)] would disagree with you. Now to be sure, that IS a minority - but it's also more than a 1:2 ratio of Americans saying "no" vs Americans saying "yes". If 100 million people say "no" to something while 200 million say "yes" (or more accurately, 122 million say "no," 211 million say "yes," and 7 million say "no comment"), it's safe to say that the claim is ''still genuinely controversial'' - especially when the very institutions being accused of misconduct are themselves being cited as evidence, giving them every incentive to downplay the severity of the problems and assert their own trustworthiness. (An analogy might be made of a police officer who has been accused of a crime being cited as an expert witness in his own trial.) Now, I realize that everyone has to simplify the world around them to some extent, and for some people, that takes the form of relying on axioms like "important people with important jobs have decided it, and that settles the matter." If that is how someone chooses to see the world, I won't be able to change their mind on that. But that doesn't mean everyone feels the same way. And there's something nefarious about branding anyone who doesn't accept that particular paradigm as if they are thereby worthy of contempt, and their perspective as deserving censorship. (And, if you think I am exaggerating when I say "censorship," then do you agree we should change the word "false" in the second paragraph to merely "controversial" or "widely-criticized"?) No one is immune to motivated reasoning or cognitive biases; that includes myself. I really do my best to keep that in mind as I form my opinions. I hope everyone reading this does the same. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure how best to integrate it into the explanation, but I think https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations should be cited somewhere in the article, and I think it should be stated in more explicit terms that Trump's reciprocal tariffs are based on what is effectively a calculation of the United States' trade deficits with other countries. I think the article would benefit from more explicit descriptions and coverage of the tariff announcement for posterity, as I can imagine someone being really confused about this 10 years from now. I think reactions and backlash should be mentioned to provide context, but the article shouldn't get too detailed with any justifications for said reactions, so as not to take a side. Right now I feel that the article is a bit too in-the-weeds with explaining exactly what tariffs are and what a trade deficit is without providing context for why the comic is politically relevant, which I think is necessary to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.166|162.158.62.166]] 21:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

At the moment the article says that "Donald Trump claimed that if the U.S. has a trade deficit with another country, then the U.S. is getting ripped off." This claim seems pretty ridiculous, but I have no idea whether it is what Mr. Trump said. Since the whole cartoon seems based on this premise, I think it would help to have a citation to make this clearer for posterity. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.109|172.71.150.109]] 05:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:It's pretty much his whole schtick on this. Googling gives numerous direct reports or videos of his rhetoric where he says, often visible in the summary (or, with videos, subtitle/surtitles on the thumbnail view). I included an actual quote, thought that better than linking to BBC News (annoying those who don't trust the BBC as a source), Fox News (annoy those who don't trust Fox as a source), etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 08:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::It would be better to link it to a source though, rather than just leaving it as an unevidenced quote.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 08:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Choose ''your'' prefered source and example of the quote, then. Not hard to find. (Or to have tripped over and generally get blasted with over the last week or so, if you've not been avoiding newspapers, blocking news notifications and avoiding all TV/radio news in anticipation of an upcoming film release.) As long as it isn't the National Enquirer or The Onion, it'll probably do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.18|172.71.241.18]] 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-11T03:28:14Z

MeZimm:

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::Plus, there are very few uses of lowercase letters. It just doesn't make sense. [[User:Whoa|Whoa]] ([[User talk:Whoa|talk]]) 21:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I cannot agree that Reddit (or any site's) locking of comments is a good idea; it's a declaration of failure better dealt with by not having anything there at all except a statement that the topic is outside the scope acceptable by one's site. Even worse though, ''removing'' comments that are not abusive, promoting harm, etc, while leaving others that may be either similar or inverse, ''especially'' for difficult topics, is UNACCEPTABLE from any forum hoping to host discussion of anything the least bit controversial. '''Removing non-violating comments is even worse than locking threads, which is also bad.''' I'm outta here & probably won't be back; unhealthy moderation practices make for unhealthy discussions. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Eh? There don't appear to have been any comments removed so far, and the discussion above leans towards ''not'' doing anything if possible. So you're leaving because people aren't doing things you don't want them to do? Seems... odd. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 08:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Please notice that I said “vandalism and trolling”, not comments. I agree with you and am against removing comments (such as from I’m With Her). I think that we can agree that vandalism can be immediately removed and that we shouldn’t respond to trolls/rage bait, correct? The intention of my message was to have the talk page or the explanation page semi-protected ''if'' the vandalism got too bad and it’s better to limit messages temporarily. This is the same policy that Wikipedia uses by semi-protecting controversial and often vandalised articles, one that has worked for years. Besides, the main intention of these talk pages is to discuss how to improve the article and have discussions about how to explain or word things, not promote political ideology. If that occurs, semi-protection would be a good tool to use to limit such off-topic discussions. There’s a time and place for that. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:"Repeatedly"? By what criteria? Obviously in your opinion, anyway, and I'm not going to tell you what to think (or try to guess what you're thinking), but I believe you're being subjective. Nice to hear from you, though. Please do come by again some time. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.226|141.101.98.226]] 20:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Seconded. This really should be the policy. I have strong political opinions like just about everyone (and like everyone, I certainly think that my views are logically derived from cold hard objective facts), but I have refrained from editing this page because I am VERY aware that it would do absolutely nothing to help anyone, and detract from the purpose of this website. "Explain xkcd" is for explaining xkcd, it's not a a platform to persuade the internet to adopt your political opinions. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:I really don't know what you guys are talking about, at least regarding the explanation for this specific comic. I believe the contributors have done a pretty good job keeping the explanation pretty close to neutral, except maybe it might be just a little opinionated in one paragraph. Most of the "extra" explanation in there provides some necessary background that may not be quite as obvious to future readers. Any leaning toward one opinion or another is mostly an explanation of the leaning attributed to the characters by the author himself. If you have a specific rebuke against a portion that seems more opinionated or subjective, either tag it in the explanation without changing the explanation itself, or bring up the specifics in this discussion. Please try not to bash this whole site and the contributors because of your own opinions. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much partisan in the explanation. The comic itself expresses Randall's opinion of Trump's tariffs, and the explanation just describes the context and explains how the comic expresses this opinion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::Here's a small test. Do you believe it is essentially IMPOSSIBLE that the 2020 election was rigged, and therefore Trump's statements were obviously, objectively, and incontrovertibly "false"? Because if you do, [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/02/poll-biden-2020-election-illegitimate 36% of Americans (as of December 2023)] would disagree with you. Now to be sure, that IS a minority - but it's also more than a 2:1 ratio of Americans saying "no" vs Americans saying "yes". If 100 million people say "no" to something while 200 million say "yes" (or more accurately, 122 million say "no," 211 million say "yes," and 7 million say "no comment"), it's safe to say that the claim is ''still genuinely controversial'' - especially when the very institutions being accused of misconduct are themselves being cited as evidence, giving them every incentive to downplay the severity of the problems and assert their own trustworthiness. (An analogy might be made of a police officer who has been accused of a crime being cited as an expert witness in his own trial.) Now, I realize that everyone has to simplify the world around them to some extent, and for some people, that takes the form of relying on axioms like "important people with important jobs have decided it, and that settles the matter." If that is how someone chooses to see the world, I won't be able to change their mind on that. But that doesn't mean everyone feels the same way. And there's something nefarious about branding anyone who doesn't accept that particular paradigm as if they are thereby worthy of contempt, and their perspective as deserving censorship. (And, if you think I am exaggerating when I say "censorship," then do you agree we should change the word "false" in the second paragraph to merely "controversial" or "widely-criticized"?) No one is immune to motivated reasoning or cognitive biases; that includes myself. I really do my best to keep that in mind as I form my opinions. I hope everyone reading this does the same. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure how best to integrate it into the explanation, but I think https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations should be cited somewhere in the article, and I think it should be stated in more explicit terms that Trump's reciprocal tariffs are based on what is effectively a calculation of the United States' trade deficits with other countries. I think the article would benefit from more explicit descriptions and coverage of the tariff announcement for posterity, as I can imagine someone being really confused about this 10 years from now. I think reactions and backlash should be mentioned to provide context, but the article shouldn't get too detailed with any justifications for said reactions, so as not to take a side. Right now I feel that the article is a bit too in-the-weeds with explaining exactly what tariffs are and what a trade deficit is without providing context for why the comic is politically relevant, which I think is necessary to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.166|162.158.62.166]] 21:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

At the moment the article says that "Donald Trump claimed that if the U.S. has a trade deficit with another country, then the U.S. is getting ripped off." This claim seems pretty ridiculous, but I have no idea whether it is what Mr. Trump said. Since the whole cartoon seems based on this premise, I think it would help to have a citation to make this clearer for posterity. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.109|172.71.150.109]] 05:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:It's pretty much his whole schtick on this. Googling gives numerous direct reports or videos of his rhetoric where he says, often visible in the summary (or, with videos, subtitle/surtitles on the thumbnail view). I included an actual quote, thought that better than linking to BBC News (annoying those who don't trust the BBC as a source), Fox News (annoy those who don't trust Fox as a source), etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 08:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::It would be better to link it to a source though, rather than just leaving it as an unevidenced quote.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 08:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Choose ''your'' prefered source and example of the quote, then. Not hard to find. (Or to have tripped over and generally get blasted with over the last week or so, if you've not been avoiding newspapers, blocking news notifications and avoiding all TV/radio news in anticipation of an upcoming film release.) As long as it isn't the National Enquirer or The Onion, it'll probably do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.18|172.71.241.18]] 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-11T00:37:20Z

MeZimm:

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::Plus, there are very few uses of lowercase letters. It just doesn't make sense. [[User:Whoa|Whoa]] ([[User talk:Whoa|talk]]) 21:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I cannot agree that Reddit (or any site's) locking of comments is a good idea; it's a declaration of failure better dealt with by not having anything there at all except a statement that the topic is outside the scope acceptable by one's site. Even worse though, ''removing'' comments that are not abusive, promoting harm, etc, while leaving others that may be either similar or inverse, ''especially'' for difficult topics, is UNACCEPTABLE from any forum hoping to host discussion of anything the least bit controversial. '''Removing non-violating comments is even worse than locking threads, which is also bad.''' I'm outta here & probably won't be back; unhealthy moderation practices make for unhealthy discussions. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Eh? There don't appear to have been any comments removed so far, and the discussion above leans towards ''not'' doing anything if possible. So you're leaving because people aren't doing things you don't want them to do? Seems... odd. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 08:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Please notice that I said “vandalism and trolling”, not comments. I agree with you and am against removing comments (such as from I’m With Her). I think that we can agree that vandalism can be immediately removed and that we shouldn’t respond to trolls/rage bait, correct? The intention of my message was to have the talk page or the explanation page semi-protected ''if'' the vandalism got too bad and it’s better to limit messages temporarily. This is the same policy that Wikipedia uses by semi-protecting controversial and often vandalised articles, one that has worked for years. Besides, the main intention of these talk pages is to discuss how to improve the article and have discussions about how to explain or word things, not promote political ideology. If that occurs, semi-protection would be a good tool to use to limit such off-topic discussions. There’s a time and place for that. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:"Repeatedly"? By what criteria? Obviously in your opinion, anyway, and I'm not going to tell you what to think (or try to guess what you're thinking), but I believe you're being subjective. Nice to hear from you, though. Please do come by again some time. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.226|141.101.98.226]] 20:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Seconded. This really should be the policy. I have strong political opinions like just about everyone (and like everyone, I certainly think that my views are logically derived from cold hard objective facts), but I have refrained from editing this page because I am VERY aware that it would do absolutely nothing to help anyone, and detract from the purpose of this website. "Explain xkcd" is for explaining xkcd, it's not a a platform to persuade the internet to adopt your political opinions. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:I really don't know what you guys are talking about, at least regarding the explanation for this specific comic. I believe the contributors have done a pretty good job keeping the explanation pretty close to neutral, except maybe it might be just a little opinionated in one paragraph. Most of the "extra" explanation in there provides some necessary background that may not be quite as obvious to future readers. Any leaning toward one opinion or another is mostly an explanation of the leaning attributed to the characters by the author himself. If you have a specific rebuke against a portion that seems more opinionated or subjective, either tag it in the explanation without changing the explanation itself, or bring up the specifics in this discussion. Please try not to bash this whole site and the contributors because of your own opinions. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much partisan in the explanation. The comic itself expresses Randall's opinion of Trump's tariffs, and the explanation just describes the context and explains how the comic expresses this opinion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::Here's a small test. Do you believe it is essentially IMPOSSIBLE that the 2020 election was rigged, and therefore Trump's statements were obviously, objectively, and incontrovertibly "false"? Because if you do, [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/02/poll-biden-2020-election-illegitimate 36% of Americans (as of December 2023)] would disagree with you. Now to be sure, that IS a minority - but it's also more than a 1:2 ratio of Americans saying "yes" vs Americans saying "no". If 100 million people say "yes" to something while 200 million say "no" (or more accurately, 122 million say "yes," 211 million say "no," and 7 million say "no comment"), it's safe to say that the claim is ''still genuinely controversial'' - especially when the very institutions being accused of misconduct are themselves being cited as evidence, giving them every incentive to downplay the severity of the problems and assert their own trustworthiness. (An analogy might be made of a police officer who has been accused of a crime being cited as an expert witness in his own trial.) Now, I realize that everyone has to simplify the world around them to some extent, and for some people, that takes the form of relying on axioms like "important people with important jobs have decided it, and that settles the matter." If that is how someone chooses to see the world, I won't be able to change their mind on that. But that doesn't mean everyone feels the same way. And there's something nefarious about branding anyone who doesn't accept that particular paradigm as if they are thereby worthy of contempt, and their perspective as deserving censorship. (And, if you think I am exaggerating when I say "censorship," then do you agree we should change the word "false" in the second paragraph to merely "controversial" or "widely-criticized"?) No one is immune to motivated reasoning or cognitive biases; that includes myself. I really do my best to keep that in mind as I form my opinions. I hope everyone reading this does the same. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure how best to integrate it into the explanation, but I think https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations should be cited somewhere in the article, and I think it should be stated in more explicit terms that Trump's reciprocal tariffs are based on what is effectively a calculation of the United States' trade deficits with other countries. I think the article would benefit from more explicit descriptions and coverage of the tariff announcement for posterity, as I can imagine someone being really confused about this 10 years from now. I think reactions and backlash should be mentioned to provide context, but the article shouldn't get too detailed with any justifications for said reactions, so as not to take a side. Right now I feel that the article is a bit too in-the-weeds with explaining exactly what tariffs are and what a trade deficit is without providing context for why the comic is politically relevant, which I think is necessary to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.166|162.158.62.166]] 21:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

At the moment the article says that "Donald Trump claimed that if the U.S. has a trade deficit with another country, then the U.S. is getting ripped off." This claim seems pretty ridiculous, but I have no idea whether it is what Mr. Trump said. Since the whole cartoon seems based on this premise, I think it would help to have a citation to make this clearer for posterity. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.109|172.71.150.109]] 05:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:It's pretty much his whole schtick on this. Googling gives numerous direct reports or videos of his rhetoric where he says, often visible in the summary (or, with videos, subtitle/surtitles on the thumbnail view). I included an actual quote, thought that better than linking to BBC News (annoying those who don't trust the BBC as a source), Fox News (annoy those who don't trust Fox as a source), etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 08:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::It would be better to link it to a source though, rather than just leaving it as an unevidenced quote.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 08:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Choose ''your'' prefered source and example of the quote, then. Not hard to find. (Or to have tripped over and generally get blasted with over the last week or so, if you've not been avoiding newspapers, blocking news notifications and avoiding all TV/radio news in anticipation of an upcoming film release.) As long as it isn't the National Enquirer or The Onion, it'll probably do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.18|172.71.241.18]] 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-11T00:31:02Z

MeZimm:

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::Plus, there are very few uses of lowercase letters. It just doesn't make sense. [[User:Whoa|Whoa]] ([[User talk:Whoa|talk]]) 21:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I cannot agree that Reddit (or any site's) locking of comments is a good idea; it's a declaration of failure better dealt with by not having anything there at all except a statement that the topic is outside the scope acceptable by one's site. Even worse though, ''removing'' comments that are not abusive, promoting harm, etc, while leaving others that may be either similar or inverse, ''especially'' for difficult topics, is UNACCEPTABLE from any forum hoping to host discussion of anything the least bit controversial. '''Removing non-violating comments is even worse than locking threads, which is also bad.''' I'm outta here & probably won't be back; unhealthy moderation practices make for unhealthy discussions. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Eh? There don't appear to have been any comments removed so far, and the discussion above leans towards ''not'' doing anything if possible. So you're leaving because people aren't doing things you don't want them to do? Seems... odd. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 08:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Please notice that I said “vandalism and trolling”, not comments. I agree with you and am against removing comments (such as from I’m With Her). I think that we can agree that vandalism can be immediately removed and that we shouldn’t respond to trolls/rage bait, correct? The intention of my message was to have the talk page or the explanation page semi-protected ''if'' the vandalism got too bad and it’s better to limit messages temporarily. This is the same policy that Wikipedia uses by semi-protecting controversial and often vandalised articles, one that has worked for years. Besides, the main intention of these talk pages is to discuss how to improve the article and have discussions about how to explain or word things, not promote political ideology. If that occurs, semi-protection would be a good tool to use to limit such off-topic discussions. There’s a time and place for that. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:"Repeatedly"? By what criteria? Obviously in your opinion, anyway, and I'm not going to tell you what to think (or try to guess what you're thinking), but I believe you're being subjective. Nice to hear from you, though. Please do come by again some time. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.226|141.101.98.226]] 20:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Seconded. This really should be the policy. I have strong political opinions like just about everyone (and like everyone, I certainly think that my views are logically derived from cold hard objective facts), but I have refrained from editing this page because I am VERY aware that it would do absolutely nothing to help anyone, and detract from the purpose of this website. "Explain xkcd" is for explaining xkcd, it's not a a platform to persuade the internet to adopt your political opinions. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:I really don't know what you guys are talking about, at least regarding the explanation for this specific comic. I believe the contributors have done a pretty good job keeping the explanation pretty close to neutral, except maybe it might be just a little opinionated in one paragraph. Most of the "extra" explanation in there provides some necessary background that may not be quite as obvious to future readers. Any leaning toward one opinion or another is mostly an explanation of the leaning attributed to the characters by the author himself. If you have a specific rebuke against a portion that seems more opinionated or subjective, either tag it in the explanation without changing the explanation itself, or bring up the specifics in this discussion. Please try not to bash this whole site and the contributors because of your own opinions. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much partisan in the explanation. The comic itself expresses Randall's opinion of Trump's tariffs, and the explanation just describes the context and explains how the comic expresses this opinion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::Here's a small test. Do you believe it is IMPOSSIBLE that the 2020 election was rigged, and therefore Trump's statements were obviously, objectively, and incontrovertibly "false"? Because if you do, [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/02/poll-biden-2020-election-illegitimate 36% of Americans (as of December 2023)] would disagree with you. Now to be sure, that IS a minority - but it's also more than a 1:2 ratio of Americans saying "yes" vs Americans saying "no". If 100 million people say "yes" to something while 200 million say "no" (or more accurately, 122 million say "yes," 211 million say "no," and 7 million say "no comment"), it's safe to say that the claim is ''still genuinely controversial'' - especially when the very institutions being accused of misconduct are themselves being cited as evidence, giving them every incentive to downplay the severity of the problems and assert their own trustworthiness. (An analogy might be made of a police officer who has been accused of a crime being cited as an expert witness in his own trial.) Now, I realize that everyone has to simplify the world around them to some extent, and for some people, that takes the form of relying on axioms like "important people with important jobs have decided it, and that settles the matter." If that is how someone chooses to see the world, I won't be able to change their mind on that. But that doesn't mean everyone feels the same way. And there's something nefarious about branding anyone who doesn't accept that particular paradigm as if they are thereby worthy of contempt, and their perspective as deserving censorship. (And, if you think I am exaggerating when I say "censorship," then do you agree we should change the word "false" in the second paragraph to merely "controversial" or "widely-criticized"?) No one is immune to motivated reasoning or cognitive biases; that includes myself. I really do my best to keep that in mind as I form my opinions. I hope everyone reading this does the same. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure how best to integrate it into the explanation, but I think https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations should be cited somewhere in the article, and I think it should be stated in more explicit terms that Trump's reciprocal tariffs are based on what is effectively a calculation of the United States' trade deficits with other countries. I think the article would benefit from more explicit descriptions and coverage of the tariff announcement for posterity, as I can imagine someone being really confused about this 10 years from now. I think reactions and backlash should be mentioned to provide context, but the article shouldn't get too detailed with any justifications for said reactions, so as not to take a side. Right now I feel that the article is a bit too in-the-weeds with explaining exactly what tariffs are and what a trade deficit is without providing context for why the comic is politically relevant, which I think is necessary to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.166|162.158.62.166]] 21:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

At the moment the article says that "Donald Trump claimed that if the U.S. has a trade deficit with another country, then the U.S. is getting ripped off." This claim seems pretty ridiculous, but I have no idea whether it is what Mr. Trump said. Since the whole cartoon seems based on this premise, I think it would help to have a citation to make this clearer for posterity. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.109|172.71.150.109]] 05:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:It's pretty much his whole schtick on this. Googling gives numerous direct reports or videos of his rhetoric where he says, often visible in the summary (or, with videos, subtitle/surtitles on the thumbnail view). I included an actual quote, thought that better than linking to BBC News (annoying those who don't trust the BBC as a source), Fox News (annoy those who don't trust Fox as a source), etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 08:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::It would be better to link it to a source though, rather than just leaving it as an unevidenced quote.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 08:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Choose ''your'' prefered source and example of the quote, then. Not hard to find. (Or to have tripped over and generally get blasted with over the last week or so, if you've not been avoiding newspapers, blocking news notifications and avoiding all TV/radio news in anticipation of an upcoming film release.) As long as it isn't the National Enquirer or The Onion, it'll probably do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.18|172.71.241.18]] 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-10T23:00:54Z

MeZimm:

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::Plus, there are very few uses of lowercase letters. It just doesn't make sense. [[User:Whoa|Whoa]] ([[User talk:Whoa|talk]]) 21:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::I cannot agree that Reddit (or any site's) locking of comments is a good idea; it's a declaration of failure better dealt with by not having anything there at all except a statement that the topic is outside the scope acceptable by one's site. Even worse though, ''removing'' comments that are not abusive, promoting harm, etc, while leaving others that may be either similar or inverse, ''especially'' for difficult topics, is UNACCEPTABLE from any forum hoping to host discussion of anything the least bit controversial. '''Removing non-violating comments is even worse than locking threads, which is also bad.''' I'm outta here & probably won't be back; unhealthy moderation practices make for unhealthy discussions. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Eh? There don't appear to have been any comments removed so far, and the discussion above leans towards ''not'' doing anything if possible. So you're leaving because people aren't doing things you don't want them to do? Seems... odd. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 08:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::::Please notice that I said “vandalism and trolling”, not comments. I agree with you and am against removing comments (such as from I’m With Her). I think that we can agree that vandalism can be immediately removed and that we shouldn’t respond to trolls/rage bait, correct? The intention of my message was to have the talk page or the explanation page semi-protected ''if'' the vandalism got too bad and it’s better to limit messages temporarily. This is the same policy that Wikipedia uses by semi-protecting controversial and often vandalised articles, one that has worked for years. Besides, the main intention of these talk pages is to discuss how to improve the article and have discussions about how to explain or word things, not promote political ideology. If that occurs, semi-protection would be a good tool to use to limit such off-topic discussions. There’s a time and place for that. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:"Repeatedly"? By what criteria? Obviously in your opinion, anyway, and I'm not going to tell you what to think (or try to guess what you're thinking), but I believe you're being subjective. Nice to hear from you, though. Please do come by again some time. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.226|141.101.98.226]] 20:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Seconded. This really should be the policy. I have strong political opinions like just about everyone (and like everyone, I certainly think that my views are logically derived from cold hard objective facts), but I have refrained from editing this page because I am VERY aware that it would do absolutely nothing to help anyone, and detract from the purpose of this website. "Explain xkcd" is for explaining xkcd, it's not a a platform to persuade the internet to adopt your political opinions. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:I really don't know what you guys are talking about, at least regarding the explanation for this specific comic. I believe the contributors have done a pretty good job keeping the explanation pretty close to neutral, except maybe it might be just a little opinionated in one paragraph. Most of the "extra" explanation in there provides some necessary background that may not be quite as obvious to future readers. Any leaning toward one opinion or another is mostly an explanation of the leaning attributed to the characters by the author himself. If you have a specific rebuke against a portion that seems more opinionated or subjective, either tag it in the explanation without changing the explanation itself, or bring up the specifics in this discussion. Please try not to bash this whole site and the contributors because of your own opinions. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:I don't think there's much partisan in the explanation. The comic itself expresses Randall's opinion of Trump's tariffs, and the explanation just describes the context and explains how the comic expresses this opinion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::Here's a small test. Do you believe it is an obviously, objectively, and incontrovertibly true claim that Trump's statements that the 2020 election was stolen are "false"? Because if you do, [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/02/poll-biden-2020-election-illegitimate 36% of Americans (as of December 2023)] would disagree with you. Now to be sure, that IS a minority - but it's also more than a 1:2 ratio of Americans saying "yes" vs Americans saying "no". If 100 million people say "yes" to something while 200 million say "no" (or more accurately, 122 million say "yes," 211 million say "no," and 7 million say "no comment"), it's safe to say that the claim is ''still genuinely controversial'' - especially when the very institutions being accused of misconduct are themselves being cited as evidence, giving them every incentive to downplay the severity of the problems and assert their own trustworthiness. (An analogy might be made of a police officer who has been accused of a crime being cited as an expert witness in his own trial.) Now, I realize that everyone has to simplify the world around them to some extent, and for some people, that takes the form of relying on axioms like "important people with important jobs have decided it, and that settles the matter." If that is how someone chooses to see the world, I won't be able to change their mind on that. But that doesn't mean everyone feels the same way. And there's something nefarious about branding anyone who doesn't accept that particular paradigm as if they are thereby worthy of contempt, and their perspective as deserving censorship. (And, if you think I am exaggerating when I say "censorship," then do you agree we should change the word "false" in the second paragraph to merely "controversial" or "widely-criticized"?) No one is immune to motivated reasoning or cognitive biases; that includes myself. I really do my best to keep that in mind as I form my opinions. I hope everyone reading this does the same. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 23:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure how best to integrate it into the explanation, but I think https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/reciprocal-tariff-calculations should be cited somewhere in the article, and I think it should be stated in more explicit terms that Trump's reciprocal tariffs are based on what is effectively a calculation of the United States' trade deficits with other countries. I think the article would benefit from more explicit descriptions and coverage of the tariff announcement for posterity, as I can imagine someone being really confused about this 10 years from now. I think reactions and backlash should be mentioned to provide context, but the article shouldn't get too detailed with any justifications for said reactions, so as not to take a side. Right now I feel that the article is a bit too in-the-weeds with explaining exactly what tariffs are and what a trade deficit is without providing context for why the comic is politically relevant, which I think is necessary to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.166|162.158.62.166]] 21:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

At the moment the article says that "Donald Trump claimed that if the U.S. has a trade deficit with another country, then the U.S. is getting ripped off." This claim seems pretty ridiculous, but I have no idea whether it is what Mr. Trump said. Since the whole cartoon seems based on this premise, I think it would help to have a citation to make this clearer for posterity. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.109|172.71.150.109]] 05:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:It's pretty much his whole schtick on this. Googling gives numerous direct reports or videos of his rhetoric where he says, often visible in the summary (or, with videos, subtitle/surtitles on the thumbnail view). I included an actual quote, thought that better than linking to BBC News (annoying those who don't trust the BBC as a source), Fox News (annoy those who don't trust Fox as a source), etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.42|172.71.26.42]] 08:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
::It would be better to link it to a source though, rather than just leaving it as an unevidenced quote.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 08:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Choose ''your'' prefered source and example of the quote, then. Not hard to find. (Or to have tripped over and generally get blasted with over the last week or so, if you've not been avoiding newspapers, blocking news notifications and avoiding all TV/radio news in anticipation of an upcoming film release.) As long as it isn't the National Enquirer or The Onion, it'll probably do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.18|172.71.241.18]] 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

User:MeZimm

2025-04-09T20:58:24Z

MeZimm:

:::::You are loved.

　

User:MeZimm

2025-04-09T20:57:12Z

MeZimm:

:::::Whoever you are, remember you are loved.

　

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-09T20:42:59Z

MeZimm:

Talk:628: Psychic

2025-03-10T14:00:04Z

MeZimm:

Tip: No one picks 50. [[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 01:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:The '''Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything''' is 42. This comic is wrong ;) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Interestingly, it appears Megan was trying to trip Cueball up. The obvious choice would have been "42", a number with very geeky connotations, {{w|42_(number)#Popular_culture|to say the least}}. Megan may have thought of it immediately, known Cueball would suspect, and gone for the next higher number, 43. Of course, Cueball was smart enough to realize this simple trick, and knew Megan was, too. So he won anyway. {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.91}}

I seems that 37 (or 73) would be most not-random random. Though I cannot say, that sources are 100% reliable: [http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/creatures/pages/random.html]
[http://catb.org/jargon/html/R/random-numbers.html]
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.219|141.101.88.219]] 08:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Koovert

Wait, if Cueball's probability to pick a specific number is 1/100 and Megan's probability to pick a specific number is also 1/100, wouldn't the probability of their picks being the same be 0.01%?
--[[User:Jogerj|Jogerj]] ([[User talk:Jogerj|talk]]) 02:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, now multiply it by 100 because there can be 100 specific numbers. [[User:Anachor|Anachor]] ([[User talk:Anachor|talk]]) 10:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
::No, because you only have to have one of them match the other, not both of them match a number from some other source.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.34|173.245.54.34]] 07:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Ooh, so the 17 thing is real after all! I've long since spotted it, but was never sure whether it's objective or just me preferentially noticing this number. Man, it feels good to be vindicated. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.82|141.101.104.82]] 05:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Did anyone else read this that this trick worked and got Cueball a date to the movies? He took the lead, assuming that she would go along with because she was amazed by his psychic ability. [[User:Cosumel|Cosumel]] ([[User talk:Cosumel|talk]]) 05:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
:I think him saying "let's get to the movie" means they already had plans to go to the movies. Cueball probably just decided to stop and try out this trick out of the blue on their way there. [[User:Eurydice|Eurydice]] ([[User talk:Eurydice|talk]]) 05:07, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I had this 'card trick' where I let someone think of any card in the 32 card deck im holding. Then I shuffle, present the deck face down and tell them to draw their card. Has worked once when like 10 people were watching. Everyone was baffled and tried to figure out how I did it for *hours*. Good times. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.95|198.41.242.95]] 12:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6iQrh2TK98 Veritasium now has a video dedicated to why "37" is probably the best number to guess.] [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 13:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Talk:628: Psychic

2025-03-10T13:59:22Z

MeZimm:

Tip: No one picks 50. [[Special:Contributions/75.69.96.225|75.69.96.225]] 01:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:The '''Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything''' is 42. This comic is wrong ;) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Interestingly, it appears Megan was trying to trip Cueball up. The obvious choice would have been "42", a number with very geeky connotations, {{w|42_(number)#Popular_culture|to say the least}}. Megan may have thought of it immediately, known Cueball would suspect, and gone for the next higher number, 43. Of course, Cueball was smart enough to realize this simple trick, and knew Megan was, too. So he won anyway. {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.91}}

I seems that 37 (or 73) would be most not-random random. Though I cannot say, that sources are 100% reliable: [http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/creatures/pages/random.html]
[http://catb.org/jargon/html/R/random-numbers.html]
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.219|141.101.88.219]] 08:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Koovert

Wait, if Cueball's probability to pick a specific number is 1/100 and Megan's probability to pick a specific number is also 1/100, wouldn't the probability of their picks being the same be 0.01%?
--[[User:Jogerj|Jogerj]] ([[User talk:Jogerj|talk]]) 02:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, now multiply it by 100 because there can be 100 specific numbers. [[User:Anachor|Anachor]] ([[User talk:Anachor|talk]]) 10:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
::No, because you only have to have one of them match the other, not both of them match a number from some other source.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.34|173.245.54.34]] 07:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Ooh, so the 17 thing is real after all! I've long since spotted it, but was never sure whether it's objective or just me preferentially noticing this number. Man, it feels good to be vindicated. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.82|141.101.104.82]] 05:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Did anyone else read this that this trick worked and got Cueball a date to the movies? He took the lead, assuming that she would go along with because she was amazed by his psychic ability. [[User:Cosumel|Cosumel]] ([[User talk:Cosumel|talk]]) 05:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
:I think him saying "let's get to the movie" means they already had plans to go to the movies. Cueball probably just decided to stop and try out this trick out of the blue on their way there. [[User:Eurydice|Eurydice]] ([[User talk:Eurydice|talk]]) 05:07, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I had this 'card trick' where I let someone think of any card in the 32 card deck im holding. Then I shuffle, present the deck face down and tell them to draw their card. Has worked once when like 10 people were watching. Everyone was baffled and tried to figure out how I did it for *hours*. Good times. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.95|198.41.242.95]] 12:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6iQrh2TK98Veritasium now has a video dedicated to why "37" is probably the best number to guess.] [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 13:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

User:MeZimm

2025-03-07T17:39:03Z

MeZimm:

Whoever you are, remember you are loved.

User:MeZimm

2025-03-07T17:37:52Z

MeZimm:

You are loved.

Talk:3007: Probabilistic Uncertainty

2025-03-07T17:35:45Z

MeZimm:

Emotional spirals are useless. I've been coping by pretending we're in scenario 1, it keeps me sane. If I'm wrong, I'll jump off that bridge when we come to it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:And I have a friend whose strategy is baking. It's both therapeutic and delicious. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:I see I don't know US geography well: which bridge you can jump from to leave it? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Most of them. Some of them may be 'caged in' for safety/anti-suicide/anti-DropThingsInThoseBelow purposes (or a {{w|covered bridge}}). Relatively few of the others will be ones that you would have no qualms about vaulting the railing, but (as well as it clearly being a witticism by Barmar) I think you could easily ''find'' a bridge that you could jump off. And the resulting falling part isn't at all the difficult bit. Landing safely (or, in extremis for those desperate enough, in a guaranteed immediately fatal manner) is more the challenge. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.206|172.70.86.206]] 14:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I think the question was which bridge can you jump off of to LEAVE THE USA entirely. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 16:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Not that this particular destination(/departure) was mentioned, in the above, but perhaps look at some of the border-crossing points, that feature bridges (either to cross geographical features like rivers, or footbridges that separately cross over the roadway that vehicles use) and determine if there any cases where the ''de facto'' (if not ''de jure'') jurisdiction over the bridge is owned by US authorities even though the terrain beneath is not. Perhaps where the US controls(/shares) the check-in facilities located just on the other side, so that bridge-crossers need to be pre-approved for entry before transitioning over (which would be very much in line with immigration policy, not ceding "semi-neutral territory" on the US side if they don't have to).
::::Would not help if the bridge itself is 'true neutral' (each party has a reception-building over on the other side, granting permission to wander onto the crossing 'pre-approved' for all but the most cursory further checks), and if it's two different sections in/out of the US then you might need to walk out upon the right one, backwards, from the US side. Still a definite possibility to find ''some'' permutation of bridge-territory and (e.g.) thalweg-positioning that gives a possible leap 'out' of the US. However awkward it might be. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.70|172.69.194.70]] 17:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but think that at preparing for the negative outcome regardless of which outcome is more likely (unless that outcome is *very* unlikely) is a healthy thing to do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.141|172.71.147.141]] 20:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
: "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst" is my usual approach to things. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This comic appeared the day before the 2024 United States Presidential Election. At publication time, polls were strongly suggesting about a 50/50 odds that either major candidate would win. Recent news items included advice from mental-health professionals on how to deal with election-related anxiety. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.195|172.71.167.195]] 20:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Definitely related. This should be in the text, not in the comments, frankly. The yanks are going nuts about the election right now. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.124.243|172.71.124.243]] 20:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Did the advice suggested narcotics? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

My personal policy is to expect and prepare for the worst. That way I can be surprised when it doesn't happen, and not surprised when it does, rather than the other way around. I don't "do" emotions, so it's basically just planning and mumbling colloquialisms involving the digestive system... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.134.64|172.71.134.64]] 21:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:As someone who used to think this way, this is obstructively cynical, and downright ''sad''. I mean, in theory you should be pleasantly surprised by the good, and prepared for the bad, but in practice you just dismiss anything good and focus exclusively on the bad. As someone with experience in this type of thinking, it isn't healthy. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:: As someone who also practices this, applied properly and cautiously it's fine; expect trump to win and plan out for what you'll do if he wins (which for me mainly involves providing emotional support for American friends) and be suprised if Harris does. It's not that hard to avoid negative thinking if you focus on the positives, the solution, the mitigation of effects instead of the bad stuff. And if you get a positive result - throw all that away and bask in the positive result. [[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.56|172.64.236.56]] 11:31, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but feel that it's mostly Democrats that are anxious, where Trump winning is the bad case. Not being an American I don't have much perspective. Are many Republicans likely to also be anxious, and if so, why? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.60.170|172.69.60.170]] 21:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Not sure about "anxious", for Trump-supporting Rs (as opposed to Trump-opposing ones, who are both anxious and tremendously conflicted), but there's certainly a buzz of some emotion. That, if ''their'' expectations/hopes/desires are dashed, seem more likely to turn into more direct push-back than Ds would in their case. i.e. if Trump truly wins, there'll be turmoil as the legitimate government forcefully pushes against large subsets of the people, if Harris truly wins then small but determined fractions of the people will push back against the legitimate government. (If it's any way ambiguous, for long enough, which 'truth' indicates a win, it could easily be people vs. people for at least as long as the confusion lasts, with very little reason to believe that it'll be Harris supporters throwing the first stone, probably making Florida 2000 look like a "neat transition"). But this is just what it looks like at this moment. Within a day we ''might'' get to see whose words get eaten, or it could be at least a month of building tensions (due to the US system of elections, deliberately legislated to be so much more inefcicient than it needs to be, compared to various other Western nations). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:From what I've seen the ones in public-facing forums seem pretty indifferent. They do talk a lot about election fraud though. {{unsigned ip|172.70.34.117|22:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)}}

I like that the comic leaves "good" and "bad" open to interpretation.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.83|172.70.211.83]] 22:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:He doesn't want to start fights in the comments/discussion pages/replies! Good to see him appealing to no specific demographic in this one. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 22:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Considering that the "Harris for President" banner is still active, I'm not sure I agree with that. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.4|172.68.22.4]] 22:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::yeah, for that reason i think it's more just so the comic can have further longevity, as this way it can be applied to any number of things with two outcomes, not just the current election [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.193|141.101.109.193]] 00:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Well, so far so good ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=3007:_Probabilistic_Uncertainty&oldid=355799 Further, with regards to N/A - the odds of "precisely" 50/50 are probabilistically zero]: Bear in mind that with the Electoral College system and the fact that only 7 US states are "likely in play," we are talking only hundreds or thousands of realistic possibilities. The odds of a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College are far more than 0. One possibility of a tie that is "on the radar" is if the Republicans take Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and the 2nd Congressional District of Nebraska (which is very likely to go Democratic) and the Democrats take Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If you consider just the 7 "in play" states but Arizona "flips" from Republican to Democratic, there are 3 combinations that yield a 269-269 tie. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.249|172.70.210.249]] 01:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
: If there's a 269-269 tie, that's basically going to be a Trump win due to how the contingent election process works. (For that matter the far more plausible 270-268 to Harris, which happens if she wins Nevada but not Pennsylvania, is likely going to result in Trump getting the presidency as well, but let's ignore that.) However, many analysts, when faced with numbers like Nate Silver's 50.015%, are going to round it to 50% or 50.0% in the public-facing reports, resulting in apparent exact 50/50 odds even if mathematically they actually favor one side slightly. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.130.3|172.71.130.3]] 10:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::There's little point in being so precise, since the fraction is far less than the margin of error in the polling. Anything between 49% and 51% is essentially a toss-up. If the 51% is in your favor you can feel hopeful, but hardly confident. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re '''We contacted several researchers who are experts in emotional spirals to ask them, but none of them were in a state to speak with us''': Is it a stretch to think that the emotional-spiral experts were all "in Puerto Rico" (which is not a state), emotionally speaking? In the last week a supporter of one of the candidates insulted Puerto Rico and by extension, people of Puerto Rico and Puerto Rican descent, causing an emotional uproar all over the inter-tubes. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.210|162.158.90.210]] 01:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Created an account just to say this; don't get mad at me but in my opinion, both candidates are equally bad, which has led to a weird sense of calmness in me due to my belief that we'll be equally screwed no matter what, just in different ways. Tbh in my opinion both candidates are in between what their supporters think of them and what their opponents think of them. Please be civil if you reply, no ad hominem please. [[User:BurnV06|BurnV06]] ([[User talk:BurnV06|talk]]) 05:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:No, one of them is clearly worse than the other. How do you feel about LGBTQ+ rights? Abortion? Medicare? Teaching kids that racism and homophobia in schools is bad? Well, if Project 2025 is anything to go by, one side ''clearly'' is the unpreferable unless you're a white, Christian, rich, and male. This is not a "both sides" issue. One is clearly the worse option. And frankly, I wish centrists knew this. I can agree to disagree on some issues but I just cannot elect someone who wants to punish people for the egregious crime of, ''gasp'', not conforming to societal standard of gender and romance.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::... And Project 2025 is absolutely nothing to go by. It's what a (private) conservative think tank (privately) wants to see implemented. Trump had no involvement in its contents or publication. The Heritage Foundation has been publishing things like it since 1981; it only attracted attention THIS year because politically-motivated people are trying to scare you, and were running out of ideas. It should not surprise you to learn that people who you already disagree with, have ideas that you also disagree with, and might publish compilations of those ideas you disagree with on a regular basis. Freaking out over Project 2025 is like if conservatives started freaking out over a set of published policy recommendations by the Center for American Progress. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::While I understand where you are coming from, you also gotta understand that the worries about Project 2025 aren't baseless, given the {{rw|Project_2025#Connections_to_Donald_Trump|several connections that the people behind it have with Trump}}. [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 18:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::Fair enough, but the point still stands that this is explicitly ''not'' a both sides issue. Even taking Project 2025 out of account, one side is clearly worse.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.71.44|172.68.71.44]] 17:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:"Equally bad" is highly subjective, Burn. More people would consider "a total disaster" vs "at least they're not a total disaster!" as a closer truth (whether their own personally-configured disastermeter comes in a Red or Blue casing), and consider balancing dead in the center of the fence to be the most inexplicable position to take. (Not to mention those like above, and also their antithesis opinions, who have a very definite good/bad opinion 9n the pair.)
:Not that I'd support being mad at you, as the problem with politics today is ''too much'' extreme polarization (we need more moderate voices, rather than wedging open an ever wider void between both limits of opinion). But there's just no realistic middle-ground to gather support around, and what middle-ground there is might also be moving one way or another (depending upon who you ask), so I'm afraid that the strictly neutral "as bad as each other" types are just guaranteed to be setting themselves up to be disappointed. In the 'best' case scenario, disappointed that things aint turning out to be as bad as feared, but I'm not sure that's reassuringly likely enough to comfort you. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Well said, and I think it's important to mention that the reason there isn't any moderates is that the moderates ''just don't care anymore''. At least online, complete political apathy is a position I've seen a lot of people take ("Why are they constantly slamming politics into my face, I just don't care"). Unfortunately, these kinds of people are also the moderates, people who aren't particularly one side or the other. This leads to a political landscape where you have 2 extremes, and a bunch of people in the middle who couldn't care less because of said extremes. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.31.24|172.71.31.24]] 15:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Being tired of politics is one thing (blame the years-long election season for that) but it's objectively incorrect to characterise both sides as "extreme". The democrats ''are'' the moderates. In most of the Western world outside of North America the Democrats would even be considered right-wing.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.193|172.70.46.193]] 04:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:Not to be a “Discord mod” here, but the entire idea of the 50-50 portion of the comic alluding to the election today is just a theory. Y’all are reading in wayyyyyyy too deep. The comic isn’t even directly saying if one candidate is better (although the Header text is supporting Harris). The discussion is supposed to be for discussing the comic and how to improve it, not clash over ideological differences. Maybe instead of arguing about who’s the better candidate, we can finish up the comic explanation, which is extremely bare bones? TL;DR: break it up, people. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it's funny that so many Democrats are genuinely terrified of the results and spend their days anxiously refreshing 538, whereas Republicans are filled with optimism and already know that the democrats have run the weakest candidate since Dukakis. Ah well, maybe in four years you'll actually get to vote for who leads your ticket instead of having them be appointed by the party elites directly without a vote. ;) {{unsigned ip|172.71.22.120|07:35, 5 November 2024}}
:Given the indirect democracy system the US has, there's a number of problems with who gets to be President. And if Harris is weaker than H. Clinton, but it's still on a knife-edge of popular/EC voting, does that mean that Trump's win was therefore less legitimate? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Do I really have to remind you that election results are not the same thing as poll results? In 2016, [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ FiveThirtyEight gave Trump a 28.6% chance vs Clinton's 71.4% chance.] Most polls were even more egregiously in favor of Clinton. Yet Trump won. Now in 2024, you say "it's still on a knife-edge of popular/EC voting" - somehow pretending the PREDICTIONS of right now are in any way comparable to the ACTUAL RESULTS of 2016. Yet polls get "shy Tories" and pranksters and all kinds of complicating factors (even assuming the pollsters are being honest - which is not something you should EVER "simply assume"). Polls are a little bit better than astrology in terms of actual predictive power. So comparing "polls now" to "actual election then" is completely wrongheaded. You have to compare predictions to predictions. And the predictions of 2016 were "the odds are MASSIVELY in Clinton's favor" - yet now they are running a WEAKER candidate and rate her has having even LESS probability of winning than Clinton did. Don't worry, though, I'm sure they figured out some way to solve all the problems with their 2016 process, and are now 100% trustworthy again! /s [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]])] 19:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Whatever direction we're going with the rest of the arguments, don't lead us down the route of misanalysing (say) 28.6% vs. 71.4% as meaning anything other than that's the predicted chance (by a necessarily incomplete process) of the process coming out one way or another (even by just one vote that swings just one EC contribution). It doesn't mean that the popular vote will split by that proportion or the EC votes will split that way, it is just an assessment of how much the (each slightly biased) coins will fall either majority heads or majority tails. But we only see the one end result (itself a fudge of a fudge of many possibly imperfect opinions) and try to read the entrails all while hearing "but the predictions were 29/71, and it was much closer than that, so obviously those stats guys were wrong".
:::Do try not to fall for such statistical fallacies. The polling will be refined for all the things that it can be refined for (accounting for the kinds of people who do vote but don't answer to pollsters, or don't vote even though they say they will, etc) and should come with error bars which can be very telling but rarely get mentioned in 'executive summaries' that get selectively quoted by the headlines of organisations with less integrity and more of their own message to try to promulgate.
:::But looking across many polls, you can see even the 'headline figure' end predictions, shorn of the most obviously optomistic/pesimistic extremes, smeared from several percentage points one way to a similar the other. If the result is within one, two or three swingstates'-worth of ECs, it'll still vindicate most of the polling opinions. Though doesn't mean you can guarantee the reverse. Anyway, not long now until the process stops being fed by votes and starts being fully chewed on by those who produce the 'answer' to this year's big question. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.185|172.70.162.185]] 20:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:To follow upon this, maybe Randall should stop endorsing political figures? He always picks the reddit candidate and sets himself up for disappointment. At least we might get a new Electoral Precedent comic out of this.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.152|108.162.238.152]] 14:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Politics is not some spectator sport. It's not a victory to endorse a winning candidate if that candidate doesn't stand for something you actually believe in. Randall did not set himself up for disappointment. The political climate in the US set him up for disappointment, regardless of whether he chose to endorse Harris or not.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.119|172.70.46.119]] 15:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Why bring Reddit into this? [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 18:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Randall is the stereotypical Redditor: a smug liberal millennial that used to be really interested in technology before it became associated with conservatives. The fact that he picks the reddit candidate shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.132.223|172.69.132.223]] 12:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
::::...and ''that'' response is indicative of all that is wrong with the those who more likely self-identify under the neocon banner. Speaking as a frustrated Gen-X, myself, conservative in many ways but decrying the perverse hard-right 'populism' and that you're probably speaking from the perspective of. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.11|172.70.91.11]] 23:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm reminded of some of my coding theory class, where the absolute worst bit error rate is 50%. Less than 50% and you can repeat the data to detect and correct the errors to some vastly low probability of an incorrect result, and more than 50% and you can invert the signal which flips it to less than 50%, then do the same. At exactly 50% you're essentially getting random noise, and there's nothing you can do about that (but allow allows a one-time pad encryption to be unbreakable if done correctly). --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.214.13|172.71.214.13]] 18:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

There's been talk about pollsters potentially herding because of just how tight the race allegedly is across all of the swing states (which should be more inclined D/R relative to each other, not all exactly even). I think Nate Silver made a tweet about the odds that the odds are so close. Could that be related to this comic, indirectly? {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.61|20:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)}}

What's with the section talking about strategies to manage expectations? It reads like it came straight out of ChatGPT. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.155|172.71.102.155]] 04:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:It probably is, considering I asked ChatGPT to analyze the comic yesterday to see if it could catch the joke about emotional spiral experts and got a very similar response. Shall we remove it? —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 04:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::The wikilinks show that wherever it came from originally, an editor reviewed and marked it up, so I would lean towards keep. It's not bad advice, although I'm not a psychologist or therapist. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.136|172.68.23.136]] 04:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It's perhaps not ''bad'' advice, but it's mostly ''irrelevant'' advice. It's not in any way linked to the comic. To keep this information more relevant, I think it should be clearly linked to what Randall proposes as the appropriate way to think about it. In addition, the ChatGPT-like phrasing means it spends a lot of words on saying very little of substance. I'm not against keeping an explanation of the various strategies of coping with uncertainty, but I am against doing it in ''this'' format.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.213|172.71.182.213]] 10:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Irrelevant? It's a direct answer to the nine question marks in the bottom row, a specific response to the one question raised as the whole point of the comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.226|108.162.245.226]] 02:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Yes, irrelevant. First of all, the question marks don't raise a question of how to actually prepare for such an occation, they're a rhetorical device to highlight that the middle ground between both provided options would have you expect or be prepared for neither outcome if taken at face value, ''which is the entire joke''. Furthermore, much of the section is redundant. "Acknowledge and accept uncertainty" is already part of scenario #2 ("Recognize that the bad outcome is possible"), "Practice defensive pessimism" is part of #1 ("Prepare for the bad outcome"), "Develop coping mechanisms" is part of both ("be reassured that the odds are in your favor"; "the future isn't certain and hope is justified"), as is "Focus on what you can control" (arguably all the advice Randall gives counts, in addition to which, this is internally completely redundant even within the section), "Set realistic expectations" is completely internally redundant with "Acknowledge and accept uncertainty". The only part that can't trivially be put elsewhere is under the "Seek support" header. So, here is what I suggest: move the non-redundant explanations of each strategy into the table with the scenario to which they're relevant (making sure to keep the wikipedia links; they provide meaningful context). And then add a section to the table for the "Precisely 50/50" scenario that states that in reality, the strategies fitting the other two scenarios can both be applied, or in addition to those you can seek support. As a result, the content of that section will no longer be irrelevant because it's now actively used to explain the comic rather than providing tacked-on advice as an afterthought. The focus here needs to be on explaining what Randall suggests, with miscellaneous advice only being relevant insofar that we can speculate about advice that ''should'' have been in the "50/50" row if it had been a serious publication rather than an XKCD comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.215|172.71.94.215]] 06:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps as expected, this has gone outdated pretty quickly. [https://manifold.markets/ManifoldPolitics/will-trump-win-the-2024-election Manifold] and [https://polymarket.com/event/presidential-election-winner-2024 Polymarket] are now both trading above 90% for Trump as of this comment. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 04:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

It's gone completly outdated. It was a bigger trump win than expected, and it's not even in the 50/50 category. [[User:SomeRandomNerd|SomeRandomNerd]] ([[User talk:SomeRandomNerd|talk]]) 08:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
: As someone noted above, this is not how odds work. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.61|172.70.162.61]] 09:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:3007: Probabilistic Uncertainty

2025-03-07T17:34:37Z

MeZimm:

Emotional spirals are useless. I've been coping by pretending we're in scenario 1, it keeps me sane. If I'm wrong, I'll jump off that bridge when we come to it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:And I have a friend whose strategy is baking. It's both therapeutic and delicious. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:I see I don't know US geography well: which bridge you can jump from to leave it? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Most of them. Some of them may be 'caged in' for safety/anti-suicide/anti-DropThingsInThoseBelow purposes (or a {{w|covered bridge}}). Relatively few of the others will be ones that you would have no qualms about vaulting the railing, but (as well as it clearly being a witticism by Barmar) I think you could easily ''find'' a bridge that you could jump off. And the resulting falling part isn't at all the difficult bit. Landing safely (or, in extremis for those desperate enough, in a guaranteed immediately fatal manner) is more the challenge. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.206|172.70.86.206]] 14:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I think the question was which bridge can you jump off of to LEAVE THE USA entirely. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 16:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Not that this particular destination(/departure) was mentioned, in the above, but perhaps look at some of the border-crossing points, that feature bridges (either to cross geographical features like rivers, or footbridges that separately cross over the roadway that vehicles use) and determine if there any cases where the ''de facto'' (if not ''de jure'') jurisdiction over the bridge is owned by US authorities even though the terrain beneath is not. Perhaps where the US controls(/shares) the check-in facilities located just on the other side, so that bridge-crossers need to be pre-approved for entry before transitioning over (which would be very much in line with immigration policy, not ceding "semi-neutral territory" on the US side if they don't have to).
::::Would not help if the bridge itself is 'true neutral' (each party has a reception-building over on the other side, granting permission to wander onto the crossing 'pre-approved' for all but the most cursory further checks), and if it's two different sections in/out of the US then you might need to walk out upon the right one, backwards, from the US side. Still a definite possibility to find ''some'' permutation of bridge-territory and (e.g.) thalweg-positioning that gives a possible leap 'out' of the US. However awkward it might be. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.70|172.69.194.70]] 17:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but think that at preparing for the negative outcome regardless of which outcome is more likely (unless that outcome is *very* unlikely) is a healthy thing to do. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.141|172.71.147.141]] 20:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
: "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst" is my usual approach to things. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This comic appeared the day before the 2024 United States Presidential Election. At publication time, polls were strongly suggesting about a 50/50 odds that either major candidate would win. Recent news items included advice from mental-health professionals on how to deal with election-related anxiety. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.195|172.71.167.195]] 20:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Definitely related. This should be in the text, not in the comments, frankly. The yanks are going nuts about the election right now. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.124.243|172.71.124.243]] 20:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Did the advice suggested narcotics? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

My personal policy is to expect and prepare for the worst. That way I can be surprised when it doesn't happen, and not surprised when it does, rather than the other way around. I don't "do" emotions, so it's basically just planning and mumbling colloquialisms involving the digestive system... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.134.64|172.71.134.64]] 21:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:As someone who used to think this way, this is obstructively cynical, and downright ''sad''. I mean, in theory you should be pleasantly surprised by the good, and prepared for the bad, but in practice you just dismiss anything good and focus exclusively on the bad. As someone with experience in this type of thinking, it isn't healthy. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:: As someone who also practices this, applied properly and cautiously it's fine; expect trump to win and plan out for what you'll do if he wins (which for me mainly involves providing emotional support for American friends) and be suprised if Harris does. It's not that hard to avoid negative thinking if you focus on the positives, the solution, the mitigation of effects instead of the bad stuff. And if you get a positive result - throw all that away and bask in the positive result. [[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.56|172.64.236.56]] 11:31, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but feel that it's mostly Democrats that are anxious, where Trump winning is the bad case. Not being an American I don't have much perspective. Are many Republicans likely to also be anxious, and if so, why? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.60.170|172.69.60.170]] 21:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Not sure about "anxious", for Trump-supporting Rs (as opposed to Trump-opposing ones, who are both anxious and tremendously conflicted), but there's certainly a buzz of some emotion. That, if ''their'' expectations/hopes/desires are dashed, seem more likely to turn into more direct push-back than Ds would in their case. i.e. if Trump truly wins, there'll be turmoil as the legitimate government forcefully pushes against large subsets of the people, if Harris truly wins then small but determined fractions of the people will push back against the legitimate government. (If it's any way ambiguous, for long enough, which 'truth' indicates a win, it could easily be people vs. people for at least as long as the confusion lasts, with very little reason to believe that it'll be Harris supporters throwing the first stone, probably making Florida 2000 look like a "neat transition"). But this is just what it looks like at this moment. Within a day we ''might'' get to see whose words get eaten, or it could be at least a month of building tensions (due to the US system of elections, deliberately legislated to be so much more inefcicient than it needs to be, compared to various other Western nations). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:From what I've seen the ones in public-facing forums seem pretty indifferent. They do talk a lot about election fraud though. {{unsigned ip|172.70.34.117|22:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)}}

I like that the comic leaves "good" and "bad" open to interpretation.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.83|172.70.211.83]] 22:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:He doesn't want to start fights in the comments/discussion pages/replies! Good to see him appealing to no specific demographic in this one. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 22:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Considering that the "Harris for President" banner is still active, I'm not sure I agree with that. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.4|172.68.22.4]] 22:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::yeah, for that reason i think it's more just so the comic can have further longevity, as this way it can be applied to any number of things with two outcomes, not just the current election [[Special:Contributions/141.101.109.193|141.101.109.193]] 00:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Well, so far so good ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=3007:_Probabilistic_Uncertainty&oldid=355799 Further, with regards to N/A - the odds of "precisely" 50/50 are probabilistically zero]: Bear in mind that with the Electoral College system and the fact that only 7 US states are "likely in play," we are talking only hundreds or thousands of realistic possibilities. The odds of a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College are far more than 0. One possibility of a tie that is "on the radar" is if the Republicans take Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and the 2nd Congressional District of Nebraska (which is very likely to go Democratic) and the Democrats take Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If you consider just the 7 "in play" states but Arizona "flips" from Republican to Democratic, there are 3 combinations that yield a 269-269 tie. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.249|172.70.210.249]] 01:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
: If there's a 269-269 tie, that's basically going to be a Trump win due to how the contingent election process works. (For that matter the far more plausible 270-268 to Harris, which happens if she wins Nevada but not Pennsylvania, is likely going to result in Trump getting the presidency as well, but let's ignore that.) However, many analysts, when faced with numbers like Nate Silver's 50.015%, are going to round it to 50% or 50.0% in the public-facing reports, resulting in apparent exact 50/50 odds even if mathematically they actually favor one side slightly. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.130.3|172.71.130.3]] 10:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::There's little point in being so precise, since the fraction is far less than the margin of error in the polling. Anything between 49% and 51% is essentially a toss-up. If the 51% is in your favor you can feel hopeful, but hardly confident. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Re '''We contacted several researchers who are experts in emotional spirals to ask them, but none of them were in a state to speak with us''': Is it a stretch to think that the emotional-spiral experts were all "in Puerto Rico" (which is not a state), emotionally speaking? In the last week a supporter of one of the candidates insulted Puerto Rico and by extension, people of Puerto Rico and Puerto Rican descent, causing an emotional uproar all over the inter-tubes. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.210|162.158.90.210]] 01:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Created an account just to say this; don't get mad at me but in my opinion, both candidates are equally bad, which has led to a weird sense of calmness in me due to my belief that we'll be equally screwed no matter what, just in different ways. Tbh in my opinion both candidates are in between what their supporters think of them and what their opponents think of them. Please be civil if you reply, no ad hominem please. [[User:BurnV06|BurnV06]] ([[User talk:BurnV06|talk]]) 05:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:No, one of them is clearly worse than the other. How do you feel about LGBTQ+ rights? Abortion? Medicare? Teaching kids that racism and homophobia in schools is bad? Well, if Project 2025 is anything to go by, one side ''clearly'' is the unpreferable unless you're a white, Christian, rich, and male. This is not a "both sides" issue. One is clearly the worse option. And frankly, I wish centrists knew this. I can agree to disagree on some issues but I just cannot elect someone who wants to punish people for the egregious crime of, ''gasp'', not conforming to societal standard of gender and romance.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.22.85|172.71.22.85]] 15:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::... And Project 2025 is absolutely nothing to go by. It's what a (private) conservative think tank (privately) wants to see implemented. Trump had no involvement in its contents or publication. The Heritage Foundation has been publishing things like it since 1981; it only attracted attention THIS year because politically-motivated people are trying to scare you, and were running out of ideas. It should not surprise you to learn that people who you already disagree with, have ideas that you also disagree with, and might publish compilations of those ideas you disagree with on a regular basis. Freaking out over Project 2025 is like if conservatives started freaking out over a set of published policy recommendations by the Center for American Progress. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:::While I understand where you are coming from, you also gotta understand that the worries about Project 2025 aren't baseless, given the {{rw|Project_2025#Connections_to_Donald_Trump|several connections that the people behind it have with Trump}}. [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 18:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::Fair enough, but the point still stands that this is explicitly ''not'' a both sides issue. Even taking Project 2025 out of account, one side is clearly worse.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.71.44|172.68.71.44]] 17:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:"Equally bad" is highly subjective, Burn. More people would consider "a total disaster" vs "at least they're not a total disaster!" as a closer truth (whether their own personally-configured disastermeter comes in a Red or Blue casing), and consider balancing dead in the center of the fence to be the most inexplicable position to take. (Not to mention those like above, and also their antithesis opinions, who have a very definite good/bad opinion 9n the pair.)
:Not that I'd support being mad at you, as the problem with politics today is ''too much'' extreme polarization (we need more moderate voices, rather than wedging open an ever wider void between both limits of opinion). But there's just no realistic middle-ground to gather support around, and what middle-ground there is might also be moving one way or another (depending upon who you ask), so I'm afraid that the strictly neutral "as bad as each other" types are just guaranteed to be setting themselves up to be disappointed. In the 'best' case scenario, disappointed that things aint turning out to be as bad as feared, but I'm not sure that's reassuringly likely enough to comfort you. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Well said, and I think it's important to mention that the reason there isn't any moderates is that the moderates ''just don't care anymore''. At least online, complete political apathy is a position I've seen a lot of people take ("Why are they constantly slamming politics into my face, I just don't care"). Unfortunately, these kinds of people are also the moderates, people who aren't particularly one side or the other. This leads to a political landscape where you have 2 extremes, and a bunch of people in the middle who couldn't care less because of said extremes. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.31.24|172.71.31.24]] 15:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Being tired of politics is one thing (blame the years-long election season for that) but it's objectively incorrect to characterise both sides as "extreme". The democrats ''are'' the moderates. In most of the Western world outside of North America the Democrats would even be considered right-wing.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.193|172.70.46.193]] 04:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:Not to be a “Discord mod” here, but the entire idea of the 50-50 portion of the comic alluding to the election today is just a theory. Y’all are reading in wayyyyyyy too deep. The comic isn’t even directly saying if one candidate is better (although the Header text is supporting Harris). The discussion is supposed to be for discussing the comic and how to improve it, not clash over ideological differences. Maybe instead of arguing about who’s the better candidate, we can finish up the comic explanation, which is extremely bare bones? TL;DR: break it up, people. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it's funny that so many Democrats are genuinely terrified of the results and spend their days anxiously refreshing 538, whereas Republicans are filled with optimism and already know that the democrats have run the weakest candidate since Dukakis. Ah well, maybe in four years you'll actually get to vote for who leads your ticket instead of having them be appointed by the party elites directly without a vote. ;) {{unsigned ip|172.71.22.120|07:35, 5 November 2024}}
:Given the indirect democracy system the US has, there's a number of problems with who gets to be President. And if Harris is weaker than H. Clinton, but it's still on a knife-edge of popular/EC voting, does that mean that Trump's win was therefore less legitimate? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.186.106|172.68.186.106]] 15:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
::Do I really have to remind you that election results are not the same thing as poll results? In 2016, [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ FiveThirtyEight gave Trump a 28.6% chance vs Clinton's 71.4% chance.] Most polls were even more egregiously in favor of Clinton. Yet Trump won. Now in 2024, you say "it's still on a knife-edge of popular/EC voting" - somehow pretending the PREDICTIONS of right now are in any way comparable to the ACTUAL RESULTS of 2016. Yet polls get "shy Tories" and pranksters and all kinds of complicating factors (even assuming the pollsters are being honest - which is not something you should EVER "simply assume"). Polls are a little bit better than astrology in terms of actual predictive power. So comparing "polls now" to "actual election then" is completely wrongheaded. You have to compare predictions to predictions. And the predictions of 2016 were "the odds are MASSIVELY in Clinton's favor" - yet now they are running a WEAKER candidate and rate her has having even LESS probability of winning than Clinton did. Don't worry, though, I'm sure they figured out some way to solve all the problems with their 2016 process, and are now 100% trustworthy again! /s [[Special:Contributions/172.68.3.127|172.68.3.127]] 19:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC) MeZimm
:::Whatever direction we're going with the rest of the arguments, don't lead us down the route of misanalysing (say) 28.6% vs. 71.4% as meaning anything other than that's the predicted chance (by a necessarily incomplete process) of the process coming out one way or another (even by just one vote that swings just one EC contribution). It doesn't mean that the popular vote will split by that proportion or the EC votes will split that way, it is just an assessment of how much the (each slightly biased) coins will fall either majority heads or majority tails. But we only see the one end result (itself a fudge of a fudge of many possibly imperfect opinions) and try to read the entrails all while hearing "but the predictions were 29/71, and it was much closer than that, so obviously those stats guys were wrong".
:::Do try not to fall for such statistical fallacies. The polling will be refined for all the things that it can be refined for (accounting for the kinds of people who do vote but don't answer to pollsters, or don't vote even though they say they will, etc) and should come with error bars which can be very telling but rarely get mentioned in 'executive summaries' that get selectively quoted by the headlines of organisations with less integrity and more of their own message to try to promulgate.
:::But looking across many polls, you can see even the 'headline figure' end predictions, shorn of the most obviously optomistic/pesimistic extremes, smeared from several percentage points one way to a similar the other. If the result is within one, two or three swingstates'-worth of ECs, it'll still vindicate most of the polling opinions. Though doesn't mean you can guarantee the reverse. Anyway, not long now until the process stops being fed by votes and starts being fully chewed on by those who produce the 'answer' to this year's big question. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.185|172.70.162.185]] 20:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:To follow upon this, maybe Randall should stop endorsing political figures? He always picks the reddit candidate and sets himself up for disappointment. At least we might get a new Electoral Precedent comic out of this.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.152|108.162.238.152]] 14:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Politics is not some spectator sport. It's not a victory to endorse a winning candidate if that candidate doesn't stand for something you actually believe in. Randall did not set himself up for disappointment. The political climate in the US set him up for disappointment, regardless of whether he chose to endorse Harris or not.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.119|172.70.46.119]] 15:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Why bring Reddit into this? [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 18:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Randall is the stereotypical Redditor: a smug liberal millennial that used to be really interested in technology before it became associated with conservatives. The fact that he picks the reddit candidate shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.132.223|172.69.132.223]] 12:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
::::...and ''that'' response is indicative of all that is wrong with the those who more likely self-identify under the neocon banner. Speaking as a frustrated Gen-X, myself, conservative in many ways but decrying the perverse hard-right 'populism' and that you're probably speaking from the perspective of. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.11|172.70.91.11]] 23:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm reminded of some of my coding theory class, where the absolute worst bit error rate is 50%. Less than 50% and you can repeat the data to detect and correct the errors to some vastly low probability of an incorrect result, and more than 50% and you can invert the signal which flips it to less than 50%, then do the same. At exactly 50% you're essentially getting random noise, and there's nothing you can do about that (but allow allows a one-time pad encryption to be unbreakable if done correctly). --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.214.13|172.71.214.13]] 18:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

There's been talk about pollsters potentially herding because of just how tight the race allegedly is across all of the swing states (which should be more inclined D/R relative to each other, not all exactly even). I think Nate Silver made a tweet about the odds that the odds are so close. Could that be related to this comic, indirectly? {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.61|20:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)}}

What's with the section talking about strategies to manage expectations? It reads like it came straight out of ChatGPT. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.155|172.71.102.155]] 04:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:It probably is, considering I asked ChatGPT to analyze the comic yesterday to see if it could catch the joke about emotional spiral experts and got a very similar response. Shall we remove it? —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 04:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::The wikilinks show that wherever it came from originally, an editor reviewed and marked it up, so I would lean towards keep. It's not bad advice, although I'm not a psychologist or therapist. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.136|172.68.23.136]] 04:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It's perhaps not ''bad'' advice, but it's mostly ''irrelevant'' advice. It's not in any way linked to the comic. To keep this information more relevant, I think it should be clearly linked to what Randall proposes as the appropriate way to think about it. In addition, the ChatGPT-like phrasing means it spends a lot of words on saying very little of substance. I'm not against keeping an explanation of the various strategies of coping with uncertainty, but I am against doing it in ''this'' format.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.213|172.71.182.213]] 10:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Irrelevant? It's a direct answer to the nine question marks in the bottom row, a specific response to the one question raised as the whole point of the comic. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.226|108.162.245.226]] 02:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Yes, irrelevant. First of all, the question marks don't raise a question of how to actually prepare for such an occation, they're a rhetorical device to highlight that the middle ground between both provided options would have you expect or be prepared for neither outcome if taken at face value, ''which is the entire joke''. Furthermore, much of the section is redundant. "Acknowledge and accept uncertainty" is already part of scenario #2 ("Recognize that the bad outcome is possible"), "Practice defensive pessimism" is part of #1 ("Prepare for the bad outcome"), "Develop coping mechanisms" is part of both ("be reassured that the odds are in your favor"; "the future isn't certain and hope is justified"), as is "Focus on what you can control" (arguably all the advice Randall gives counts, in addition to which, this is internally completely redundant even within the section), "Set realistic expectations" is completely internally redundant with "Acknowledge and accept uncertainty". The only part that can't trivially be put elsewhere is under the "Seek support" header. So, here is what I suggest: move the non-redundant explanations of each strategy into the table with the scenario to which they're relevant (making sure to keep the wikipedia links; they provide meaningful context). And then add a section to the table for the "Precisely 50/50" scenario that states that in reality, the strategies fitting the other two scenarios can both be applied, or in addition to those you can seek support. As a result, the content of that section will no longer be irrelevant because it's now actively used to explain the comic rather than providing tacked-on advice as an afterthought. The focus here needs to be on explaining what Randall suggests, with miscellaneous advice only being relevant insofar that we can speculate about advice that ''should'' have been in the "50/50" row if it had been a serious publication rather than an XKCD comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.215|172.71.94.215]] 06:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps as expected, this has gone outdated pretty quickly. [https://manifold.markets/ManifoldPolitics/will-trump-win-the-2024-election Manifold] and [https://polymarket.com/event/presidential-election-winner-2024 Polymarket] are now both trading above 90% for Trump as of this comment. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 04:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

It's gone completly outdated. It was a bigger trump win than expected, and it's not even in the 50/50 category. [[User:SomeRandomNerd|SomeRandomNerd]] ([[User talk:SomeRandomNerd|talk]]) 08:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
: As someone noted above, this is not how odds work. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.61|172.70.162.61]] 09:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2962: President Venn Diagram

2025-03-07T17:33:38Z

MeZimm:

<noinclude>{{notice2|This site is intended to explain the technical details and inspirations (perhaps humorous) behind the comics. This particular page is for Discussion/Talk about the particular comic in question, which ''will'' involve some personal overviews and meta-discussion. But it is not the ideal place to reproduce the wi(l)der issue of public opinion, which the actual political process will eventually establish, and many other public forums and outlets exist in which you can convey your own current leanings/observations on the whole election-related happenings. Please be <s>sensible</s> ''typically geeky in your wit'', and try to keep all the ideological heat and partisan arguments out of this as much as possible.|image=warning!!.png|}}</noinclude>

Another really timely comic. Biden just dropped out of the race and endorsed Harris yesterday. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 01:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Forget Biden, Hillary and Obama. This is the endorsement that counts. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.199|172.68.23.199]] 01:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I suppose no one is allowed to say that the upper right circle is mislabeled. It was supposed to say incompetent, dishonest and despicable. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.25|162.158.90.25]] 02:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:You're allowed to say it, but then we're allowed to suggest (with rather more emperical proof) that her presumptive opponent better fits your rewording. How about we all just don't try to re-run the old arguments (or pre-run the upcoming election) in that sort of tone, eh?
:(To be clear, Randall has made positive comments to his favoured candidate, rather than stooping to arbitrarily attacking their opponent. If you can't at least be as positive in your own convictions then it's really not going to help your cause.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.6|172.69.195.6]] 04:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::First, Harris has more than one opponent, not just within her own party, but in the general election to follow if she’s nominated. Second, the many good qualities of my favo[u]red candidate are irrelevant to this comic, so I didn’t mention ''her''. Third, I didn’t start this political discussion; Randall did, by making a refutable claim in his comic. Lastly, there’s nothing arbitrary about a resident of California pointing out [https://truthout.org/articles/kamala-harris-has-a-distinguished-career-of-serving-injustice/ facts about the former attorney general of California] that people in other states, such as Massachusetts, might be completely ignorant of. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.253|162.158.186.253]] 05:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Ugh, those abuses from the supposed party of police accountability. Politics in this country are so performative. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.75|108.162.216.75]] 13:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
: You could say it, but then the box which says 'Kamala Harris' is mislabeled and 'Donald Trump' should be placed in the box above the middle one. [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 07:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::Also by saying the first circle is mislabeled you also say Randall is all those things. And if you feel that way, then remember you are free to NOT read his comics... I'm always on Randall's side in politics it seems, but I'm from another country, so I wont vote for any presidential candidates even if Randall was on the ballot ;-) I won't say more here now... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Note the difference between “upper right” and “upper left.” [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.198|172.70.207.198]] 21:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Well Kamala, you had a good run. Randall has the touch of death when it comes to picking political candidates. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.39|162.158.154.39]] 03:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:You mean that no candidate endorsed by XKCD has ever won? ;) https://xkcd.com/2383/ [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:Randall was smart enough to not make a comic endorsing Joe *before* he got elected like he did with Hilldawg and (now) Kamala.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.31|162.158.154.31]] 11:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
: Not so; Randall endorsed [https://blog.xkcd.com/2008/01/28/obama/ Obama in 2008]. [[User:-insert valid name here-|-insert valid name here-]] ([[User talk:-insert valid name here-|talk]]) 15:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::So, the criterion could be adjusted either way. "No woman endorsed by XKCD has won" and "No white person endorsed by XKCD has won" are both true, but the first prevents a Harris win, while the second does not. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.192|172.68.174.192]] 01:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:Maybe Randall secretly wants Kamala to lose and is doing 5D chess. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.130.122|172.69.130.122]] 16:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Randall angling for VP? [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 02:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I think Randall would be good president. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 03:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:Meh, he seems to at least not be good at public speaking. And from what he says about himself, he would be distracted way too easily. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:I, as an Epsilon Eridani native, think he would be a spectacular president, but his research priorities would swiftly result in [https://www.space.com/universe-end-false-vacuum-decay false vacuum decay], so please, for the sake of the universe, please do not elect him. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.218|172.70.214.218]] 20:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:: Is this a reference to some particular sci fi story, or do you coincidentally have the same favorite star name I do?
::: [https://everything2.com/title/Ed+Stories The Ed stories] feature Epsilon Eridani and what's effectively false vacuum decay, but I don't know what the "research priorities" could be to make this a clear reference. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.176.100|172.70.176.100]] 05:34, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

The layout of this Venn diagram reminds me of https://xkcd.com/112/ {{unsigned ip|162.158.166.234|03:04, 23 July 2024}}

I think I would probably swap the two. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.23|162.158.174.23]] 04:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I would be very interested in which non-Politicians Randall would put into the top middle section. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:People eligible to be president who would make a good president but aren't politicians? I would be much more interested in who he would list in the right middle section, that is, people who would make good presidents and love Venn diagrams, but are ineligible. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.133|172.69.6.133]] 03:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I guess Munroe has no issues with questions about ongoing U.S. backed genocides shrugged off with "shrimp and grits!"? {{unsigned|Markifi|05:39, 23 July 2024}}

What really strikes me is that the USA have a (de facto) 2-Party system and still go so much into personal attacks and endorsements, etc. which in my mind could be the decision-making bit between 2 similiar parties in a multi-party system, or 2 equally sympathic parties to me. But in my mind a 2-party system should at least have the upside of actually discussing policy, and voters deciding based on that... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

If Randall was in charge he could stop supplying weapons to Israel probably [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.63|172.69.195.63]] 10:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

:Randall sempai- we are targeted too. {{unsigned ip|172.70.131.52|15:37, 23 July 2024}}

Re: the mouseover text: "[[1062:_Budget_News|I am more of a deficit sugar glider]]" ought to be in the running. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.157|172.69.58.157]] 12:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

personally I'd put most candidates either the top left [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.24|172.69.58.24]] 17:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Neat. A Euler diagram (and no, Venn cannot just have this one). {{unsigned ip|172.71.158.226|18:18, 23 July 2024}}
:Quite! Venn called his diagrams "{{w|Euler diagram|Euler circles}}." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.137|172.71.151.137]] 22:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the 'eligible' topic is related to a campaign against Harris saying she isn't eligible because she's not american enough. This (fake) news was reposted in France by french Trump's fans. {{unsigned ip|172.69.225.223|20:36, 23 July 2024}}
:No, the topic of Constitutional eligibility, it is more nuanced than each said is represented to state it. Kamala Harris was undisputedly (I believe) born in the US. This makes her a native-born citizen. The Constitution calls for a natural-born citizen but doesn't define that. From writings at the time (I don't remember which) natural-born means born to two citizen parents. Apparently, neither of her parents were US citizens at the time of her birth, so once again (as with Obama, Ted Cruz, others) there are fair questions by thinking people. [[User:ProfDigory|ProfDigory]] ([[User talk:ProfDigory|talk]]) 23:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

_sigh_ I was about to come in here and suggest that we don't do the obvious political battle here but then I realized I'd be up all night because someone was WRONG on the internet [[386: Duty Calls]]! [[User:Tomb|Tomb]] ([[User talk:Tomb|talk]]) 21:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I, too, have rather strong political opinions that absolutely nobody here cares about. But I also wanted to extend a heartfelt thank-you to the person who put the cautionary banner to not make the main article into a debate platform. I hope its presence becomes a staple of articles on all forthcoming controversial comics, as we commence our quadrennial plunge into the bubbling muck of American election season. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Would it be a good idea to include a link to the actual United States Constitution in regard to the Presidential eligibility section? In other words, I'm wondering if it would be preferable to link directly to a primary source of information as opposed to a tertiary source like Wikipedia? Either way, I have a [https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/#article-2-section-1-clause-5 link to the document on the Congress.gov website] for those who may want to have a read. [[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]] ([[User talk:OmniDoom|talk]]) 00:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Does anyone have a longer version of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWR2uTfrh-k&ab_channel=GOPWarRoom ? I want to see the diagram props! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.19|172.71.147.19]] 21:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:"So many memes" https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=XOjRsJiBTF0&ab_channel=FoxNews [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.129|172.70.214.129]] 22:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:I see you are a netizen of exquisite taste. Might I suggest https://www.c-span.org/search/basic/?query=kamala+venn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.29|108.162.245.29]] 22:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
::Oh my God, infinite anonymous clipping! https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5125621/user-clip-venn-diagram [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.3|172.71.150.3]] 23:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:::[https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5125622/user-clip-circle-venn-diagram A fourth Eulerian circle emerges!] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.5|162.158.186.5]] 23:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

It has been decided. As per the [https://x.com/yashar/status/1815476912355205212 edict of the National Republican Senatorial Committee,] the problems with Kamala Harris are: (1) Her laugh is weird. And, (2) she loves Venn diagrams. Let the games begin! We shall [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI_lxFv203I&ab_channel=SaturdayNightLive focus on the two issues Americans do care about: swine flue and fracking.] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.200|172.68.23.200]] 22:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:For anyone who didn't click on the link provided above, "habit of laughing at inappropriate moments" (NOT "laugh is weird") and "loves Venn diagrams" were two bullet points out of seventeen, both of them listed under the final section labeled "Weird" after many more obviously concerning policy positions. So, this discussion entry is yet another example of dishonest misrepresentation from the Left. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.61|172.68.34.61]] 15:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
::And dishonest misrepresentation is definitely not something that you get from the Right, right?</sarcasm> "Crime Of The Century", I ''don't'' think...
::This is why I instantly and instinctively thought it a bad idea for Randall to make his opinion known, in this comic. Not because I have reason to diagree with his (singular boiled-down to minimal description) assessment, but because everyone not ''totally'' on the same hymnsheet is likely to start complaining that only ''their'' boiled-down assessment (usually an objection) has any veracity... And sparks an ideogical tit-for-tat with far more heat than light. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 16:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

This is a really sad comic. Harris is a top cop and a corrupt one. America deserves better than either party is offering, and the supposed party of police accountability should not be running Harris. It's sad that Randall is telling himself otherwise. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.91|172.70.178.91]] 13:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:I was not aware that Harris was ever in the police, herself, and cannot find any reference to it in a quick search. I know she advocated police bodycams, which only corrupt cops need to properly fear/avoid using, though obviously one can always be corrupt "in your spare time", or if you're not a uniformed officer/just sat at a desk. Anyway, you have an opinion, and feel free to make your own webcomic if you have better names, wish to add other names and/or want to change the basis upon which Harris's name is judged. It might well be that (of all likely candidates, as well as the unlikely one that is "me") Randall honestly sees Kamala as (one of) the better individual(s) for the role. If everyone agreed, there'd be no need to ask everybody and try to distil the resulting popularity contest into a close-fought result that maybe half the country won't like (but who ''would'' like a result that the other half(ish) of the country wouldn't like), give or take various statistical anomalies. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.103|172.70.85.103]] 15:15, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:: RE: [https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-call-Kamala-Harris-a-cop Why do people call Kamala Harris a cop?] - Top answer: "Because she was a prosecutor, both for San Francisco and as Attorney General of California. Many people conflate cops and prosecutors as they work closely. Harris had a reputation as a tough prosecutor, but also refused to seek the death penalty against the killer of a San Francisco police officer, and started a rehabilitation program that let some offenders clear their records. So her record was mixed." [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:23, 26 July 2024
::: Right. That's an odd definition of a cop. You could almost call a fireman a cop (or a cop a fireman), or a donut-store owner.
::::Top cop is just a colloquiallism to describe a DA, since they're the one that has to rubber stamp every police accusation, and they're typically the main impediment to charging police officers with the crimes they commit. Kamala has a very bad record in that regard. Prosecuting people for minor drug offenses she herself was guilty of, like Marijuana possession. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.217|172.70.131.217]] 22:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
::: And opinions about the efficacy of the Death Penalty varies (it stops reoffending, as well as any possible full exoneration in the event of a miscarriage of justice; the jury (figuratively and otherwise) is out whether it prevents further crimes by other people, especially those who are already subject to the pressures of 'street justice' with nonjudicial killing a constant threat anyway). Rehabilitation of ''receptive and truly repentent'' criminals is also surely better than letting everyone rot, regardless; or, if/when released, giving them no hope but to be more prolific criminals; and perhaps even relying upon being housed and fed by the penal system again as the only option, so caused more upset to force the courts' hands.
::: It's not really a mixed record, but a mixable interpretation. And "hang 'em all" people will have different perspectives from the "always be forgiving of mistakes" crowd, with the ideal 'truth' likely being somewhere between, and reality always going to err in both directions. So you can disagree about specific judgements and decisions, but be careful of either lauding or lambasting a wider policy shift. Hard cases make bad laws, and bad laws make individual cases hard to deal with.
::: Imagine that you're Glynn Simmons, or Sandra Hemme, or one of those eventually exonerated only ''after'' their exocutions (not necessarily all nice people, but doubts or actual disprooving facts about their parts in any particular Capital crime, or the social goalposts shifted away from discriminatory and heavy-handed policies, is a not an unusual event).
::: All I'm saying is that there's going to be nuance. And every person will have "mixed" approval ratings, even per a given individual's own personal assessment if they know enough to get at least a 2D viewpoint, and ideally at least 3D. And I don't know how anyone without an extreme view on the world would equate a general policy of enhanced rehabilitation with corruptness (when corruption can equally involve framing and improperly prosecuting innocent people, whilst letting the truly irredeemable go free). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 16:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

What do you call a diagram with more than three circles? I feel we should add ones for "Held ANY public office prior to Presidential bid.", "Served ANY employer, other than one's self, prior to Presidential bid.", "Pledges to abide by the Constitution and the laws of the United States.", and "Pledges to abide by the results of the Presidential election of the United States." It will be easy, as Randal can just copy and paste existing name. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:55, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
:Well, you couldn't do "four circles" as a Venn Diagram (only as an Euler), at least not in 2D strictly-euclidean (and non-wrapping) space. But there is an ellipse-based version that would work for you, as well as even more arbitrary-shaped zoning or just going up a dimension and making it four spherical bubbles in 3D space.
:As to your categories: Randall would probably fit in the intersection of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th supercategories (can't rule out he has fit the first, as I don't know what else he's done apart from his NASA stuff and I'm not sure what the definition of "public office" would extend to, anyway (even "elected official" could cover being voted into some position of note in his university's Physics/D&D/Film-Appreciation/Morris-Dancing Society, if he indeed participated in any of that kind of thing at the time).
:And I reckon that almost all the usual politicians you could name could fit into ''at least'' those same three, plus the first if they've actually done any legwork to rise up the ranks to actually get to touch President-worthy status.
:Anyone who doesn't occupy the last two is probably bad at the "would be a good President" of the comic, though given the arguments about how to best interpret the Constitution (even within actual SCOTUS rulings on such issues) then you're likely to get subjective arguments from Candidate A's supporters that Candidate B won't do that as well as from Candidate B's supporters that Candidate A won't do that (to their respective preference). Naming no names, but fairly obvious cases should come to mind. It's possibly that (for a given state of opinion) you could even put any given into your #3 but not in the #4, or vice-versa (but "would be a good President" then depends upon which of these interpretatins you value and which of them you're willing to let slide), rather than the more obvious "both or neiher" dichotomy. Perspective is the key. And the US has many (and polarised) perspectives, unfortunately. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.227|172.69.43.227]] 11:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

The only thing I need explained to me is why [https://xkcd.com/112/ Vanilla Ice] is not in the upper left circle. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.102|172.70.85.102]] 13:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2962: President Venn Diagram

2025-03-07T17:32:14Z

MeZimm:

<noinclude>{{notice2|This site is intended to explain the technical details and inspirations (perhaps humorous) behind the comics. This particular page is for Discussion/Talk about the particular comic in question, which ''will'' involve some personal overviews and meta-discussion. But it is not the ideal place to reproduce the wi(l)der issue of public opinion, which the actual political process will eventually establish, and many other public forums and outlets exist in which you can convey your own current leanings/observations on the whole election-related happenings. Please be <s>sensible</s> ''typically geeky in your wit'', and try to keep all the ideological heat and partisan arguments out of this as much as possible.|image=warning!!.png|}}</noinclude>

Another really timely comic. Biden just dropped out of the race and endorsed Harris yesterday. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 01:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Forget Biden, Hillary and Obama. This is the endorsement that counts. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.199|172.68.23.199]] 01:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I suppose no one is allowed to say that the upper right circle is mislabeled. It was supposed to say incompetent, dishonest and despicable. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.25|162.158.90.25]] 02:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:You're allowed to say it, but then we're allowed to suggest (with rather more emperical proof) that her presumptive opponent better fits your rewording. How about we all just don't try to re-run the old arguments (or pre-run the upcoming election) in that sort of tone, eh?
:(To be clear, Randall has made positive comments to his favoured candidate, rather than stooping to arbitrarily attacking their opponent. If you can't at least be as positive in your own convictions then it's really not going to help your cause.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.6|172.69.195.6]] 04:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::First, Harris has more than one opponent, not just within her own party, but in the general election to follow if she’s nominated. Second, the many good qualities of my favo[u]red candidate are irrelevant to this comic, so I didn’t mention ''her''. Third, I didn’t start this political discussion; Randall did, by making a refutable claim in his comic. Lastly, there’s nothing arbitrary about a resident of California pointing out [https://truthout.org/articles/kamala-harris-has-a-distinguished-career-of-serving-injustice/ facts about the former attorney general of California] that people in other states, such as Massachusetts, might be completely ignorant of. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.253|162.158.186.253]] 05:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Ugh, those abuses from the supposed party of police accountability. Politics in this country are so performative. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.75|108.162.216.75]] 13:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
: You could say it, but then the box which says 'Kamala Harris' is mislabeled and 'Donald Trump' should be placed in the box above the middle one. [[User:Jaap-Jan|Jaap-Jan]] ([[User talk:Jaap-Jan|talk]]) 07:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::Also by saying the first circle is mislabeled you also say Randall is all those things. And if you feel that way, then remember you are free to NOT read his comics... I'm always on Randall's side in politics it seems, but I'm from another country, so I wont vote for any presidential candidates even if Randall was on the ballot ;-) I won't say more here now... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Note the difference between “upper right” and “upper left.” [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.198|172.70.207.198]] 21:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Well Kamala, you had a good run. Randall has the touch of death when it comes to picking political candidates. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.39|162.158.154.39]] 03:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:You mean that no candidate endorsed by XKCD has ever won? ;) https://xkcd.com/2383/ [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:Randall was smart enough to not make a comic endorsing Joe *before* he got elected like he did with Hilldawg and (now) Kamala.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.31|162.158.154.31]] 11:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
: Not so; Randall endorsed [https://blog.xkcd.com/2008/01/28/obama/ Obama in 2008]. [[User:-insert valid name here-|-insert valid name here-]] ([[User talk:-insert valid name here-|talk]]) 15:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
::So, the criterion could be adjusted either way. "No woman endorsed by XKCD has won" and "No white person endorsed by XKCD has won" are both true, but the first prevents a Harris win, while the second does not. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.192|172.68.174.192]] 01:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:Maybe Randall secretly wants Kamala to lose and is doing 5D chess. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.130.122|172.69.130.122]] 16:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Randall angling for VP? [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 02:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I think Randall would be good president. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 03:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:Meh, he seems to at least not be good at public speaking. And from what he says about himself, he would be distracted way too easily. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:I, as an Epsilon Eridani native, think he would be a spectacular president, but his research priorities would swiftly result in [https://www.space.com/universe-end-false-vacuum-decay false vacuum decay], so please, for the sake of the universe, please do not elect him. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.218|172.70.214.218]] 20:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:: Is this a reference to some particular sci fi story, or do you coincidentally have the same favorite star name I do?
::: [https://everything2.com/title/Ed+Stories The Ed stories] feature Epsilon Eridani and what's effectively false vacuum decay, but I don't know what the "research priorities" could be to make this a clear reference. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.176.100|172.70.176.100]] 05:34, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

The layout of this Venn diagram reminds me of https://xkcd.com/112/ {{unsigned ip|162.158.166.234|03:04, 23 July 2024}}

I think I would probably swap the two. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.23|162.158.174.23]] 04:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I would be very interested in which non-Politicians Randall would put into the top middle section. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
:People eligible to be president who would make a good president but aren't politicians? I would be much more interested in who he would list in the right middle section, that is, people who would make good presidents and love Venn diagrams, but are ineligible. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.133|172.69.6.133]] 03:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I guess Munroe has no issues with questions about ongoing U.S. backed genocides shrugged off with "shrimp and grits!"? {{unsigned|Markifi|05:39, 23 July 2024}}

What really strikes me is that the USA have a (de facto) 2-Party system and still go so much into personal attacks and endorsements, etc. which in my mind could be the decision-making bit between 2 similiar parties in a multi-party system, or 2 equally sympathic parties to me. But in my mind a 2-party system should at least have the upside of actually discussing policy, and voters deciding based on that... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

If Randall was in charge he could stop supplying weapons to Israel probably [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.63|172.69.195.63]] 10:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

:Randall sempai- we are targeted too. {{unsigned ip|172.70.131.52|15:37, 23 July 2024}}

Re: the mouseover text: "[[1062:_Budget_News|I am more of a deficit sugar glider]]" ought to be in the running. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.157|172.69.58.157]] 12:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

personally I'd put most candidates either the top left [[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.24|172.69.58.24]] 17:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Neat. A Euler diagram (and no, Venn cannot just have this one). {{unsigned ip|172.71.158.226|18:18, 23 July 2024}}
:Quite! Venn called his diagrams "{{w|Euler diagram|Euler circles}}." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.137|172.71.151.137]] 22:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the 'eligible' topic is related to a campaign against Harris saying she isn't eligible because she's not american enough. This (fake) news was reposted in France by french Trump's fans. {{unsigned ip|172.69.225.223|20:36, 23 July 2024}}
:No, the topic of Constitutional eligibility, it is more nuanced than each said is represented to state it. Kamala Harris was undisputedly (I believe) born in the US. This makes her a native-born citizen. The Constitution calls for a natural-born citizen but doesn't define that. From writings at the time (I don't remember which) natural-born means born to two citizen parents. Apparently, neither of her parents were US citizens at the time of her birth, so once again (as with Obama, Ted Cruz, others) there are fair questions by thinking people. [[User:ProfDigory|ProfDigory]] ([[User talk:ProfDigory|talk]]) 23:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

_sigh_ I was about to come in here and suggest that we don't do the obvious political battle here but then I realized I'd be up all night because someone was WRONG on the internet [[386: Duty Calls]]! [[User:Tomb|Tomb]] ([[User talk:Tomb|talk]]) 21:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I, too, have rather strong political opinions that absolutely nobody here cares about. But I also wanted to extend a heartfelt thank-you to the person who put the cautionary banner to not make the main article into a debate platform. I hope its presence becomes a staple of articles on all forthcoming controversial comics, as we commence our quadrennial plunge into the bubbling muck of American election season. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Would it be a good idea to include a link to the actual United States Constitution in regard to the Presidential eligibility section? In other words, I'm wondering if it would be preferable to link directly to a primary source of information as opposed to a tertiary source like Wikipedia? Either way, I have a [https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/#article-2-section-1-clause-5 link to the document on the Congress.gov website] for those who may want to have a read. [[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]] ([[User talk:OmniDoom|talk]]) 00:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Does anyone have a longer version of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWR2uTfrh-k&ab_channel=GOPWarRoom ? I want to see the diagram props! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.19|172.71.147.19]] 21:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:"So many memes" https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=XOjRsJiBTF0&ab_channel=FoxNews [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.129|172.70.214.129]] 22:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:I see you are a netizen of exquisite taste. Might I suggest https://www.c-span.org/search/basic/?query=kamala+venn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.29|108.162.245.29]] 22:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
::Oh my God, infinite anonymous clipping! https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5125621/user-clip-venn-diagram [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.3|172.71.150.3]] 23:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:::[https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5125622/user-clip-circle-venn-diagram A fourth Eulerian circle emerges!] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.5|162.158.186.5]] 23:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

It has been decided. As per the [https://x.com/yashar/status/1815476912355205212 edict of the National Republican Senatorial Committee,] the problems with Kamala Harris are: (1) Her laugh is weird. And, (2) she loves Venn diagrams. Let the games begin! We shall [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI_lxFv203I&ab_channel=SaturdayNightLive focus on the two issues Americans do care about: swine flue and fracking.] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.200|172.68.23.200]] 22:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:For anyone who didn't click on the link provided above, "habit of laughing at inappropriate moments" (NOT "laugh is weird") and "loves Venn diagrams" were two bullet points out of seventeen, both of them listed under the final section labeled "Weird" after many more obviously concerning policy positions. So, this discussion entry is yet another example of dishonest misrepresentation from the Left. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.61|172.68.34.61]] 15:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
::And dishonest misrepresentation is definitely not something that you get from the Right, right?</sarcasm> "Crime Of The Century", I ''don't'' think...
::This is why I instantly and instinctively thought it a bad idea for Randall to make his opinion known, in this comic. Not because I have reason to diagree with his (singular boiled-down to minimal description) assessment, but because everyone not ''totally'' on the same hymnsheet is likely to start complaining that only ''their'' boiled-down assessment (usually an objection) has any veracity... And sparks an ideogical tit-for-tat with far more heat than light. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 16:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

This is a really sad comic. Harris is a top cop and a corrupt one. America deserves better than either party is offering, and the supposed party of police accountability should not be running Harris. It's sad that Randall is telling himself otherwise. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.91|172.70.178.91]] 13:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:I was not aware that Harris was ever in the police, herself, and cannot find any reference to it in a quick search. I know she advocated police bodycams, which only corrupt cops need to properly fear/avoid using, though obviously one can always be corrupt "in your spare time", or if you're not a uniformed officer/just sat at a desk. Anyway, you have an opinion, and feel free to make your own webcomic if you have better names, wish to add other names and/or want to change the basis upon which Harris's name is judged. It might well be that (of all likely candidates, as well as the unlikely one that is "me") Randall honestly sees Kamala as (one of) the better individual(s) for the role. If everyone agreed, there'd be no need to ask everybody and try to distil the resulting popularity contest into a close-fought result that maybe half the country won't like (but who ''would'' like a result that the other half(ish) of the country wouldn't like), give or take various statistical anomalies. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.103|172.70.85.103]] 15:15, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:: RE: [https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-call-Kamala-Harris-a-cop Why do people call Kamala Harris a cop?] - Top answer: "Because she was a prosecutor, both for San Francisco and as Attorney General of California. Many people conflate cops and prosecutors as they work closely. Harris had a reputation as a tough prosecutor, but also refused to seek the death penalty against the killer of a San Francisco police officer, and started a rehabilitation program that let some offenders clear their records. So her record was mixed." {{unsigned ip|172.68.3.2|15:23, 26 July 2024}}
::: Right. That's an odd definition of a cop. You could almost call a fireman a cop (or a cop a fireman), or a donut-store owner.
::::Top cop is just a colloquiallism to describe a DA, since they're the one that has to rubber stamp every police accusation, and they're typically the main impediment to charging police officers with the crimes they commit. Kamala has a very bad record in that regard. Prosecuting people for minor drug offenses she herself was guilty of, like Marijuana possession. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.217|172.70.131.217]] 22:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
::: And opinions about the efficacy of the Death Penalty varies (it stops reoffending, as well as any possible full exoneration in the event of a miscarriage of justice; the jury (figuratively and otherwise) is out whether it prevents further crimes by other people, especially those who are already subject to the pressures of 'street justice' with nonjudicial killing a constant threat anyway). Rehabilitation of ''receptive and truly repentent'' criminals is also surely better than letting everyone rot, regardless; or, if/when released, giving them no hope but to be more prolific criminals; and perhaps even relying upon being housed and fed by the penal system again as the only option, so caused more upset to force the courts' hands.
::: It's not really a mixed record, but a mixable interpretation. And "hang 'em all" people will have different perspectives from the "always be forgiving of mistakes" crowd, with the ideal 'truth' likely being somewhere between, and reality always going to err in both directions. So you can disagree about specific judgements and decisions, but be careful of either lauding or lambasting a wider policy shift. Hard cases make bad laws, and bad laws make individual cases hard to deal with.
::: Imagine that you're Glynn Simmons, or Sandra Hemme, or one of those eventually exonerated only ''after'' their exocutions (not necessarily all nice people, but doubts or actual disprooving facts about their parts in any particular Capital crime, or the social goalposts shifted away from discriminatory and heavy-handed policies, is a not an unusual event).
::: All I'm saying is that there's going to be nuance. And every person will have "mixed" approval ratings, even per a given individual's own personal assessment if they know enough to get at least a 2D viewpoint, and ideally at least 3D. And I don't know how anyone without an extreme view on the world would equate a general policy of enhanced rehabilitation with corruptness (when corruption can equally involve framing and improperly prosecuting innocent people, whilst letting the truly irredeemable go free). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 16:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

What do you call a diagram with more than three circles? I feel we should add ones for "Held ANY public office prior to Presidential bid.", "Served ANY employer, other than one's self, prior to Presidential bid.", "Pledges to abide by the Constitution and the laws of the United States.", and "Pledges to abide by the results of the Presidential election of the United States." It will be easy, as Randal can just copy and paste existing name. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:55, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
:Well, you couldn't do "four circles" as a Venn Diagram (only as an Euler), at least not in 2D strictly-euclidean (and non-wrapping) space. But there is an ellipse-based version that would work for you, as well as even more arbitrary-shaped zoning or just going up a dimension and making it four spherical bubbles in 3D space.
:As to your categories: Randall would probably fit in the intersection of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th supercategories (can't rule out he has fit the first, as I don't know what else he's done apart from his NASA stuff and I'm not sure what the definition of "public office" would extend to, anyway (even "elected official" could cover being voted into some position of note in his university's Physics/D&D/Film-Appreciation/Morris-Dancing Society, if he indeed participated in any of that kind of thing at the time).
:And I reckon that almost all the usual politicians you could name could fit into ''at least'' those same three, plus the first if they've actually done any legwork to rise up the ranks to actually get to touch President-worthy status.
:Anyone who doesn't occupy the last two is probably bad at the "would be a good President" of the comic, though given the arguments about how to best interpret the Constitution (even within actual SCOTUS rulings on such issues) then you're likely to get subjective arguments from Candidate A's supporters that Candidate B won't do that as well as from Candidate B's supporters that Candidate A won't do that (to their respective preference). Naming no names, but fairly obvious cases should come to mind. It's possibly that (for a given state of opinion) you could even put any given into your #3 but not in the #4, or vice-versa (but "would be a good President" then depends upon which of these interpretatins you value and which of them you're willing to let slide), rather than the more obvious "both or neiher" dichotomy. Perspective is the key. And the US has many (and polarised) perspectives, unfortunately. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.227|172.69.43.227]] 11:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

The only thing I need explained to me is why [https://xkcd.com/112/ Vanilla Ice] is not in the upper left circle. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.102|172.70.85.102]] 13:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2702: What If 2 Gift Guide

2025-03-07T17:31:13Z

MeZimm:

The puzzle is almost certainly a reference to the Monty Hall problem, since that's usually framed in terms of 3 doors: behind 2 are goats (bad prizes), behind the third is a new (the desirable prize). While the other puzzles share some attributes, I doubt they're intended. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
:Who says goats are a bad prize? If you want to make goat's milk cheese, they are quite necessary. Whereas a car may be a burden, most states still require the recipient to pay sales tax, which can be thousands of dollars. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 01:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
:Maybe figuring out how to transport the goats in the new car without the goats ruining it would also be a puzzle.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.215|172.71.102.215]]
:I don't think there is a solid enough connection to the Goat, Wolf, Cabbage problem to warrant including in the table as a reference. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.124|162.158.166.124]] 18:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

The goat can be left on its own, but not with the fox or the cabbage. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.135|172.70.162.135]] 00:12, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Another problem with the James Webb photo is that, from its orbit, the Earth appears too close to the Sun to be safe to photograph. So, the recipient of the gift would have to travel into deep space, well past the orbit of the Moon, for the shoot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.29|172.70.111.29]] 22:22, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Wasn't Bobcat in a Box inspired by xkcd #576 and its title text, which wasn't even the first boxed bobcat in xkcd? Feels weird to say that the boxed bobcat is a reference to an external brand and not xkcd's rich internal history of mailing people bobcats. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 06:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

I assume that even if the platinum (or platinum-iridium) cylinder used to define kilogram was recreation, rather than original, it would still be very expensive ($31,965 per kg). --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 11:40, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

== "Katherine and Brandon" ==

Could someone explain those Names in the "Chemistry" entry to me? It would be very atypical for Randall to make a mistake in that place, but both seem to be impossible to spell with the periodic table of elements.
Potassium, Astatine and Helium would give K-At-He- (and some radiation posioning) and Iodine and Neon -Id-Ne. But neither Rubidium (Ru), nor Radium (Ra), nor Ruthentium (Ru), nor Rhodium (Rh) nor Radon (RN) give you a pure "R" and likewise there is no Element Ri or Er, so it is impossible to put the "R" into "Katherine".
Likewise "Brandon" could be started with Boron (B), Radon (Ra), Nitrogen (N) and finished with Oxygen (O) and again Nitrogen (N), but there are only two "D"s in the whole peridoic table and both are fixed to other letters, that would not fit: Paladium (Pd) and Gadolinium (Gd).
P.S.: 3 full Minutes of Captcha-solving for a Wiki? WTF??? {{unsigned ip|172.70.247.13|23:40, 23 November 2022}}
:Potassium-Astatine-Hydrogen-'''Erbium'''-Iodine-Neon [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.184|172.69.79.184]] 23:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
:As for Brandon, you seem to have missed '''Neodymium''' (Nd). So, Boron-Radon-Neodymium-Oxygen-Nitrogen [[User:TurZ|TurZ]] ([[User talk:TurZ|talk]]) 07:00, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Could he be limiting himself to rendering only the capital letters of each element? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.43|172.71.160.43]] 00:17, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
But Astatine is so radioactive that no one has ever seen it. A lump big enough to physically see would instantly sublimate with its own heat of radioactivity. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.7|172.68.210.7]] 00:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Due to the prior comic, I actually bought a Cybiko (I'm into older computer collecting). Now that he's mentioned it again, I'm thankful I got it quick, before the inevitable price rise. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.106|108.162.221.106]] 01:00, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
:Is it good? —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 05:28, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
:I got one, long ago. I think it has a serial connection (RS232?) as well as a radio of whatever kind, and there was reasonably good SDK support for writing your own software, on PC, to download to the Cybiko. I had and have an RSI problem with my hands, and what I tried to do is to use it as a one-handed PC keyboard - so I had to do some pretty simple programming for that, to transmit keys. On the PC end, I think that a serial keyboard was or is a standard supported disability aid option. It might wear out, thought. But currently I do better with a touch screen PC and the "FITALY" on-screen typing program - the man who wrote that died, though. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.222|172.70.162.222]] 13:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Might be relevant, but What If? had a chapter dedicated to the hypotetical idea of building a periodic table with each square comprised of the element represented therein. It obviously gets dangerous/apocalyptic by the time you get past the first couple rows.--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.114.20|172.71.114.20]] 13:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

A quick and largely inelegant run-through (assuming I listed all 118 correctly) shows that as well as two single characters (J and Q) for which there are currently no possible elemental spellings, there are a further 45 digraphs (excluding those already rendered impossible) with no possibilities of being spelt, as well as 2543 trigraphs (again, minus all those predisqualified) which cannot be so rendered. (Without such cascading exclusions, that's 145 digraphs and 8365 trigraphs - out of the basic and otherwise unaccented 26 letters, making a full 8%, 21% and 48%, respectively of all conceivable lengths from 1 to 3, incapable of being sequenced.)
 Though all absences should more properly be weighted to the likelihood of encountering them, as well. Maybe "ytz" isn't such a great loss, and "qqq" even less so; except perhaps by the next Musk child, who will probably have other issues to worry about. But the impossibility of "dan" (not even with Deuterium, which was just one of those that I didn't include in my check) causes problems for anyone called Dan as well as hypernyms (Daniel/Danielle, etc, though for those, and others, the lack of "iel" is probably a bigger problem). If anyone is called anything like "BMX" or "BMW" (depending upon the peculiar, and possibly misguided, aspirations of their parents) then they're probably also outliers!
 If I find a good name-frequency list, I may run the lists through a further stage to highlight particularly overlooked holes in the sequences such that we can work out which new symbols (under the guise of whole 'relevant' names) we could most usefully petition IUPAC to adopt for elements 119+... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.136|172.71.178.136]] 07:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
:Impossibility of a short name does not necessarily imply longer names containing them are impossible. "Tim" is not possible, but "Timothy" is. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.30|172.70.46.30]] 12:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
::I'd forgotten I'd set this thing running but, on getting back from my Christmas break I spotted that my (woefully inefficient) script had got to a certain point. And unlikely to get to the next waypoint any time soon without a major optimisation/parallelisation rewrite!
::I used a semi-weighted list of the top 100 names given to boys in Britain over the last several decades. I first tried to get a list of more names, male and female, with actual number of instances, but I didn't get anything easily analysable so quickly plugged in the above for proof-of-conceot and approximated numbers by doing something clever but not necessarily correct from the ranking number, if any, in each year... ("Jack", in my system, is 197 times more common than "Otis". "Tommy" is the median, at 4.4 times Otis, just above Mohammad at 4.2 - but even if I've got the order right, I probably have mis-scaled my population numbers. I used Logs, along the way, to try to actually make the changes less steep, but only so that the figures "looked right ...ish".)
::I did an assessment of how novel element symbols might 'improve' name coverage. By two measures. Firstly, by just how many more names (than the baseline) any given symbol(s) added to the spellable list, without regard for popularity. Secondly, by how many more individuals (by assumed frequency of any given name) would benefit.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
! Combos !!colspan="7"|2-letter symbols only!!colspan="7"|1- and 2-letter symbols
|-
|rowspan="4"|Symbols||676||Total||colspan="5"|(Aa..Zz)||702||Total||colspan="5"|(A..Z,Aa..Zz)
|-
|573||Unused ||colspan="5"|''not a current symbol''||586||Unused||colspan="5"|
|-
|424||Unused2||colspan="5"|''also not two current 1-char symbols''||437||Unused||colspan="5"|
|-
| 30||Useful ||colspan="5"|''also in sourced names''||41||Useful||colspan="5"|
|-
!rowspan="2"| !!rowspan="2"|Combo sets!!colspan="3"|More names!!colspan="3"|Better names!!rowspan="2"|Combo sets!!colspan="3"|More names!!colspan="3"|Better names
|-
!New Symbols!!% names!!% improve!!New Symbols!!% weight!!% improve!!New Symbols!!% names!!% improve!!New Symbols!!% weight!!% improve
|-
|Baseline ||0||''Current''||14%||''n/a''||''Current''||16%||''n/a''||colspan="7"|''ditto''
|-
|Add one ||30||Le||18%||29%||Ry ||23%||38%||41||R||23%||64%||J||40%||144%
|-
|Add two ||435||El Li||21%||50%||Ma Oa||25%||53%||820||E L||35%||150%||J R||53%||122%
|-
|Add three||4,060||El Ja Le||24%||71%||Da El Ma||28%||71%||10,660||E L R||44%||214%||A J R||62%||277%
|-
|Add four ||27,405||El Ja Le Lo||27%||93%||Da El Ma Oa||30%||85%||101,270||A E J L||57%||279%||A J M R||68%||317%
|-
|Add five ||142,506||El Ja Le Lo Ma||29%||107%||Da El Ja Ma Oa||33%||101%||749,348||A E J L R||63%||350%||A E J L R||75%||362%
|-
|Add six ||593,775||El Ja Le Lo Ma Mi||31%||121%||Da El Ja Le Ma Oa||35%||114%||4,496,388||A D J L M R||72%||414%||A E J L M R||82%||403%
|}
::FYI, the final four results give the following (including previously valid) names:
::* Six 2chars, most names: Arlo (never knew that was a name!), Benjamin, Bobby, Brody, Caleb, Dylan, Elijah, Ellis, Finley, Finn, Gabriel, Hudson, Jacob, Jasper, Leo, Liam, Logan, Louis, Luca, Lucas, Mason, Milo, Oliver, Oscar, Otis, Reuben, Samuel, Sonny, Stanley, Thomas, Yusuf (31 total)
::* Six 2chars, best names: Bobby, Brody, Caleb, Daniel, Dylan, Elijah, Ellis, Finley, Finn, Gabriel, Hudson, Jacob, Jasper, Leo, Liam, Luca, Lucas, Mason, Noah, Oakley, Oliver, Oscar, Otis, Reuben, Samuel, Sonny, Stanley, Thomas, Yusuf (29 total)
::* Six 1+2chars, most: Adam, Albie, Alfie, Alfred, Arlo, Arthur, Benjamin, Blake, Bobby, Brody, Caleb, Carter, Daniel, David, Dylan, Edward, Elijah, Ellis, Ethan, Ezra, Finley, Finn, Frankie, Freddie, Gabriel, George, Harrison, Harry, Harvey, Henry, Hudson, Hunter, Isaac, Jack, Jackson, Jacob, James, Jasper, Jesse, Joseph, Joshua, Jude, Kai, Leo, Liam, Logan, Louie, Louis, Luca, Lucas, Nathan, Noah, Oakley, Oliver, Ollie, Oscar, Otis, Ralph, Reuben, Riley, Ronnie, Rory, Rowan, Samuel, Sebastian, Sonny, Stanley, Teddy, Theo, Theodore, William, Yusuf (72 total)
::* Six 1+2char, best: Albie, Alfie, Arlo, Arthur, Benjamin, Blake, Bobby, Brody, Caleb, Carter, Dylan, Elijah, Ellis, Ethan, Ezra, Finley, Finn, Frankie, Gabriel, George, Harrison, Harry, Harvey, Henry, Hudson, Hunter, Isaac, Jack, Jackson, Jacob, James, Jasper, Jesse, Joseph, Joshua, Kai, Leo, Liam, Logan, Louie, Louis, Luca, Lucas, Mason, Milo, Myles, Nathan, Noah, Oakley, Oliver, Ollie, Oscar, Otis, Ralph, Reuben, Riley, Roman, Ronnie, Rory, Rowan, Samuel, Sebastian, Sonny, Stanley, Theo, Thomas, William, Yusuf (68 total)
::(Any errors in the above might just be my transcribing.)
::I had hoped to get to the point where the 1+2char test would actually find a 2char candidate in the final run. The last run started with "A Ad Bl C Ch D", improving name quantity by 72% and fitness by 38%. At 0.38% of the way through the test, the list "A Ad E J L R" (fitness+367%) was the last appearance of a digraph in the incremental striving for higher values. I'm quickly guessing it'll be at the stage of testing 8+ additional symbols, maybe much later. And my current script will take at least two months to give me ''that'' result, even with some rather obvious shortcuts.
::...anyway, as I'm probably not going back to this, enjoy. And/or have a laugh at my incompetence. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.244|172.70.85.244]] 17:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

== Psychology ==

Hi, this is my first edit, I hope I'm doing it right. The psychology example is most likely about the norm of reciprocity (see Wikipedia). It's a very strong norm. Violations of this norm can indeed cause distress to a point where people express anger if they can't reciprocate (which seems somewhat irrational at times).
I'm a psychology student from Germany, I might do some errors when writing in english :) [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.85|198.41.242.85]] 06:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
: Welcome! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.156|172.71.154.156]] 21:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

The Benjamin Franklin effect is not involved here. The Benjamin Franklin effect is when you get someone to like you by asking that person to do you a favor. Named after Benjamin Franklin because he described how he made a friend out of an enemy by asking to borrow a rare book. Franklin had previously tried to get on this person's good side by giving gifts, only to be constantly rebuffed.
[[User:Ophidiophile|Ophidiophile]] ([[User talk:Ophidiophile|talk]]) 21:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

== Baby Shoes ==

Has nobody mentioned the xkcd comic that references this yet? https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1540:_Hemingway

Artinum [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.186|172.71.178.186]] 09:45, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

The alt text is a reference to Ernest Hemingway's 6 word short story [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_worn "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."] This is also referenced in comic 1540 https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1540:_Hemingway —[[User:Robm|Robm]] ([[User talk:Robm|talk]]) 19:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

...this was [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2702:_What_If_2_Gift_Guide&diff=299763&oldid=299762 already Explained] before any of the above was added to the discussion. (It had to be improved, e.g. the wikilink, but now it's fairly well resolved unless you think it needs tweaking.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 21:40, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

I can't be the only one who wishes he'd done it as "Babies/Literature (Not Both): Baby Shoes" [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Anyone who reads that short story and thinks it's sad hasn't experiences how quickly babies grow in a while. We've given away so many baby shoes that the baby grew out of before they got a chance to wear them. It's just a reality of life. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 17:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

== Stephen King ==

I admit I haven't read it, but might the entry for Stephen King's desk be a reference to ''Misery'', which involves an author kidnapped by a psycho fan of his? Let me know how far off base I am, or if there's actually some merit to my speculation. [[User:MarsJenkar|MarsJenkar]] ([[User talk:MarsJenkar|talk]]) 15:02, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2765: Escape Speed

2025-03-07T17:30:53Z

MeZimm:

<noinclude>
{{notice|Given the popularity of this talk page, please do not use the "add new topic" feature to avoid making the index confusing. To add a new talk section, just make your title bold/use the definition-list semicolon for that line.}}

</noinclude>"A special feature it that it does not have its own gravity, so the ship continues to be attracted to the crystal sphere regardless of which side of the planet you're on." This seems wrong. You are attracted to the Click and Drag planet and can land on it on any side. It is just that the gravity of the crystal sphere is so relatively huge that it quickly overpowers the gravity of the planet when too high above the surface on the near side makes the ground appear sloped on the "sides", similar to the moon of Origin. It would be really cool if someone could make a map that showed the gravity field everywhere. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.39|162.158.203.39]] 11:09, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

When Beret Guy says "Wow!" on the starting planet, isn't it actually a reference to the alt text of [[1117: My Sky]], and not [[502: Dark Flow]]? --[[User:BrightBlackHole|BrightBlackHole]] ([[User talk:BrightBlackHole|talk]]) 18:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

With an old browser (all I have, this moment) I just have the starscape, the hovertext and a button in the bottom right corner to seemingly reset (same starscape, and briefly the message "Welcome back pilot", or words to that effect). I look forward to trying it on something more interactive, on this very-late-for-Wednesday special comic... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]] 17:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
:For me, Firefox 112 and Chrome 112 work just fine. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.133|172.68.50.133]] 15:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
The only cheat is "window.python("import antigravity"). (To my knowledge) "ze.goggles()" dosen't work/do anything. Arrow keys, WASD, and HJKL work for movement. (Working on an object table) --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 17:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

<s>I tried to correct a BOT error, but the BOT [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2765:_Escape_Speed&diff=310745&oldid=310744 reverted the correction back to an error]. (Or my 'poor browser', see above, is also going wrong with the hovertext). So we need the BOT's human pappy to override it. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]]</s>
:NVM, done now. Somehow... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.159|172.70.162.159]] 17:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
::Looks like the original title text contained the error, but has since been fixed. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 18:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Spoiler but there is hollow space between the rollercoaster and the St Louis arch 17:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay I'm still working on it but here's the link to my object table: [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xhw3oVb4fMktZB_KEIF9fGkYCkfbpRMHKBLI63laTgc/edit#gid=0] --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 17:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm having trouble using the arrow keys, because it keeps moving the browser window up and down. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.11|108.162.245.11]] 18:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
:Try clicking on the comic itself, which should move focus there. --[[User:Moble|Moble]] ([[User talk:Moble|talk]]) 18:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I managed to escape the larger planet's gravity well by jumping off the start planet and perfectly manipulating to barely miss it. it wasn't until afterwards thatI found the tunnel --[[User:Toriski3037|Toriski3037]] ([[User talk:Toriski3037|talk]]) 18:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The tunnel is how you escape the planet. Fall through and when you get to the center use your thrusters to leave. --[[User:Silverfunk|Silverfunk]] 18:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

There is a way to escape the crystal dome. Fly to the edge and continue around until you find the crack. You need to get enough power ups on your ship in order to make it out. --[[User:Silverfunk|Silverfunk]] 18:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
:You can also find the crack pretty easily by finding the 6th Lagrange Point and finding the sign that says "Exit" and heading straight there. [[User:AdmiralMemo|Admiral Memo]] ([[User talk:AdmiralMemo|talk]]) 19:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely no idea what you’re even talking about. I see a mostly black picture with some white spots. Your ‘explanation’ explains nothing, just makes the confusion worse.
: You probably need a relatively modern browser and Javascript turned on [[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.107|172.70.251.107]] 19:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

There is an area that is a huge maze with cities marked on it -the subway system. In Washington DC there is a black hole, which even with lots of power ups I think is inescapable once you land on it (you can reset and retain your powerups). The map of the subway system is from xkcd 1196.
:I'm pretty sure the area is Boston. Also, the black hole just has very high, not infinite, gravity. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 18:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Re:"there is a way out" - I went farther down and launched upwards as quickly as I could while not hitting the sides to get past the intense gravity. You can get to the top on the left side, but the gravity is so strong that you're basically stuck to the ground. If you scoot along farther to the left you see a spot that says "the end". Just past there, there is a small dip that, due to how strong the gravity is, I couldn't get out of. I wouldn't be surprised if you got enough upgrades you could get past it.
: If you go right instead, you can go all the way around the "crystal dome" and there is a point of interest a long the way (half way around maybe?) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.214|172.71.154.214]] 19:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Should we start saying what planets things are on? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.41|162.158.146.41]]

Once you get off the planet by falling through the tunnel and shooting out the other side you can fly around space, visiting other planets. There are power ups in the form of balls with stars in the center. Each power up gives your ship more thrust, faster recharge, etc. If you keep flying straight eventually you get to a white barrier that goes all around space. This is the crystal dome that is mentioned on the "origin" planet. If you fly along the dome long enough you will eventually come across a crack in it. As you fly up through the crack the gravity gets stronger and stronger. Eventually you will not be able to any further. You have to get enough power ups to fly out. Once out there is a dome of text that just says "The end." --[[User:Silverfunk|Silverfunk]] 18:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

::Which is not remotely actually the end. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.254.100|172.71.254.100]] 22:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I have raw images for the points of interest here: https://aeromancer.dev/xkcd_2765/ [[User:Aeromancer|Aeromancer]] ([[User talk:Aeromancer|talk]]) 21:00, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

::Cool! There are apparently quite a bunch of places I missed... (which is unsurprising given that I mostly navigated by flying in random directions while hoping to get to where I wanted (still haven’t figured how to reliably find Subway) [[User:Nleanba|Nleanba]] ([[User talk:Nleanba|talk]]) 12:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

apparently if you exit the page it saves your "you've found:" stuff and your position, and a spoilery upgrade that shows a gray line, but not any of the upgrades you got to your ship. (the upgrades do NOT reappear anywhere, so you can't collect them again.) thanks firefox for randomly closing to install an update --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.214|172.70.110.214]] 21:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

^this is a major buzzkill. The page crashed on me twice, and both times I lost my upgrades. It's essentially non-functional now.

you can probably hack back the upgrades quickly somehow. for me, i found a handy variable to use for 'accessibility' (if you want to cheat/skip parts) is to set the starting position to that of some other location, for example to skip to 'mtba' (the +1000s are just so you're not warped to the center of the object, you'll need to tweak for other locations):
window.Comic.voyager.opts.startPos = [window.Comic.map.locations[61].pos[0]+1000, window.Comic.map.locations[61].pos[1] + 1000]
to reset to the original starting location:
window.Comic.voyager.opts.startPos = window.Comic.map.player.pos
in firefox anyway, you can use this to browse the game objects to poke around more:
console.dir(window.Comic)
in particular, .voyager and .map.locations are interesting, as is .gamestate.
i didn't look into forcing upgrades, i grinded those out myself, just didn't want to hunt down all the subway tokens manually ... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.55|172.69.134.55]] 22:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

:Try these
* _.updatePlayerConfig({ thrustDuration: _.playerConfig.thrustDuration + 2.5 })
* _.updatePlayerConfig({ thrustDuration: _.playerConfig.thrustDuration + 0.4 })
These are the commands run when the most powerful upgrades are run. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 23:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You can refer to https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2712:_Gravity#Hacks for Console commands ...

In Microsoft Edge on Windows, you can change your speed and refuel-rate as shown. At speed=2, you can escape the black hole in Washington, DC.
Comic.gameHandle.playerConfig.speed=0.9
Comic.gameHandle.playerConfig.thrustRecoveryTime=0.000001

Looks like I'll have to wait awhile for someone to make a map I can simply scroll around instead of playing interactive mode. As much fun as it was in the beginning, it's miserable once you've lost your upgrades.

Was floating around in space and found a point where the ship just sits there and the screen orientation spins dramatically when moving around that point. Makes me think there's either a microsingularity there, or maybe something cloaked that only leaks gravitation (mentioned by some characters). Is there a way to check what my coordinates are so I can report the anomaly [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.73|172.70.230.73]] 23:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Found this as well. It was a marked location, and there was a heavy subway token at this point. After you pick up the token, the location appears to be empty.

Ah, okay. So the residual gravitation field was left behind. Thanks! Still looking for a way to read out my current coordinates though - you know, for science [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.141|162.158.154.141]] 23:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I think I figured it out. Just added "Comic.voyager.pos.x" and "Comic.voyager.pos.y" to the "Watch Expressions" portion of the Web Developer Tools -> Debugger. Simple for those who know. But something new to me. The coordinates for the microgravity well is [-20473, 3682] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.143|162.158.154.143]] 23:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Has anyone found the orange line token? I thought it would be with the group singing a Boston song on Origin, but it doesn't seem to be? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.68|162.158.63.68]] 23:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Skimming through the code, it looks like the MIT cloaking system also cloaks the subway lines or something? And MIT harbors a hyperdrive?? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.79|162.158.63.79]] 23:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If you've lost your upgrades, you can reset the game to its original state by deleting your xkcd.com cookies. [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]] ([[User talk:Whoop whoop pull up|talk]]) 00:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Looks like resetting shouldn't be necessary anymore, just hard-refreshing: https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/12t8e9i/xkcd_2765_escape_speed/jh2tvpl/ [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.208|162.158.146.208]] 00:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

There's Quite a bit outside the crystal shell and "the end" rainbow. on the opposite side of the shell there's a small dot with "the platinum cylinder formerly used to define the kilogram", directly above the "rainbow" there's a stream of missiles leading to 2 areas (follow them either way), and even more engine upgrades for some reason. I stopped exploring after that - [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.155|172.69.33.155]] 00:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

guess this is the late april fools comic. [[user:lettherebedarklight|youtu.be/]][[user talk:lettherebedarklight|miLcaqq2Zpk]] 01:34, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

::Probably, the captain of the Corellian corvette adds a message signed April 3rd 2023 to his log. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.116|162.158.86.116]] 10:09, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

If you get stuck with your engine in a weird mode like warp or infinite improbability drive you can fix it by using the command ship.engines = “lander” and the ship gets set back to normal. I don’t think it keeps any upgrades though.

You can also escape the planet with the sign that you can never leave, simply by starting there and keeping your finger down. The rocket will return a few times but gets further away each time and eventually lands on your home (start) location. No need to visit the rollercoaster.
[[User:XKCDnl|XKCDnl]] ([[User talk:XKCDnl|talk]]) 04:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Found out that when landed on a surface, with the shield not automatically active, in some condition (maybe some thrust score) using the down-arrow retro thruster allows you to slowly "back up" through surfaces. Can be used to back-through some of the MBTA path blockers thereby reducing the need to deactivate all the blocked paths [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.174|162.158.154.174]] 05:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

::Yeah, when slamming into a surface with high enough speed (possible even without hyperdrive, but very easy with), the ship seems to clip through the ground. It's possible then to navigate (very slowly) through the solid mass, which makes it even possible to leave the crystal sphere without hyperdrive (you are, however, stuck very close to the ground outside). Annoyingly, this also allows the ship to get stuck occasionaly: e.g. when slamming into Boston in the lettering or blocked lines, or on the Earth-map in lakes. [[User:Nleanba|Nleanba]] ([[User talk:Nleanba|talk]]) 12:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I've found about 80 total subway tokens, but for the life of me cannot remember where the subway planet was.

:: If you travel straight through the hole right next to the starter planet, you'll land at a guiding planet [[User:Toby|Toby]] ([[User talk:Toby|talk]]) 13:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Am I hallucinating, or is this a sequel with the same basic "space UI" as a previous comic? (I can't find it in the index, but I remember an extremely similar xkcd comic, with a spaceship being navigated between distant planets.) If such a comic exists, it should be mentioned in this one's description. -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 14:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I found the the "gold crown Archimedes stole" (which significantly boosts thrusters) and "a necklace of element samples whose symbols spell out your name (note: hopefully you are not named 'Katherine' or 'Brandon')" whilst traveling around the crystal sphere. How should I add those to the list?[[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 14:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The end is not the end - you will need a lot of speed BUT the "there is a way out" leads to the outside of a round planet that everything you have discovered is inside. Continue flying up and you will see a second planet in the wayfinder. There is a line of torpedos and a tunnel up there playerPos: (1361.094208512935,-62444.80167042731) Megan(??) is talking to cuebal and firing torpedos "we have not photon torpedos so I'm firing regular ones"

"You found a Juicero Juicer"

Megan to cueball "Prediction: Seconds before you die you will remember these words" while walkint to an icecream cooler

"you found and out of control trolley"

skateboarder in a bubble going AAAAAAAAaaa (2206.485760681366,-64359.17874192683)

There are multiple ways through this layer in these tunnels

"you found a lymphocyte" (-5565.828800080446,-64207.654606168755)

Outside this layer seems infinite currently have made it past y = -5,000,000

Wayfinder is no longer changing headed back to circle the outer layer and confirm that the layer past the end is the end

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.57|162.158.146.57]][[User:Frogg|Frogg]] 15:43 April 21

The orange token is near the spiral planet. It's on a floating stadium-like thing with "BOSTON" labeled on it.

The outer layer is not a layer it seems like some sort of ship, perhaps a star destroyer, roughly triangular shaped.

Found and emperor in a cloak "My Emperor... We all share in yuour newfound enthusiams for birdwatching but normally one watches them in the wild, rather than drugging them and imprisoning them in a house of stairs."

Cueball "Aha! Darth Vaders secret Gold Bullion Reserves! We'll be rich!"
Megan "I'm not sure this is cannon"

Definitely a star destroyer, found the command tower. cool stuff! (22067.78723320221,-71701.23138735193)

For complete Locations list see Comic.map.locations it is a 75 item array accessible in developer tools it gives coordinates and names that will be useful to the wiki I think.

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.57|162.158.146.57]][[User:Frogg|Frogg]] 16:21 April 21 2023 UTC

I got stuck in VANCOUVER. Literally. I was flying so fast I clipped into the N and will have to reset to get out. I had many engine upgrades and was going in random directions since my "regular search pattern" had stopped finding things, so I don't know how to get back. I only know it exists.... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.170.94|172.71.170.94]] 16:26, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
* Still not found my way back to VANCOUVER, but I love the hint that the space shuttle was a dinosaur. Straight off the nose of the shuttle is the compromise projected Earth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.101|162.158.174.101]] 16:46, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
* OK, I think I found VANCOUVER. I gave up on looking for it and went for other things and after finding MONTERREY on the Subway Planet I suspect that VANCOUVER is somewhere here too.
* Also, if someone does a long edit of this Discussion page they will overwrite your edits made in the mean time. You can find them in the History if you want to restore them. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.166.248|172.71.166.248]] 17:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure that "17 angels on the head of pin" is a Calvin and Hobbes Reference, but I can't seem to find the comic online.[[User:Argis13|Argis13]] ([[User talk:Argis13|talk]]) 18:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
::Okay, so, after sleeping on it, and reading trough the entire online archive of Calvin and Hobbes, I'm pretty sure that I was misremembering a Dilbert Strip as a C&H strip, and I don't think that would put an intentional reference to Dilbert anymore. Also I'm not paying money to Scott Adams to search the Dilbert archives. [[User:Argis13|Argis13]] ([[User talk:Argis13|talk]]) 03:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
::: The angels on the head of a pin thing is a long-standing theological debate point (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_the_head_of_a_pin%3F) - however, the use of precisely 17 is likely a reference to "The Science of Discworld II", in which Ridcully is certain that the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin is precisely 16. 17 would be a deliberate disproof of Ridcully's claim. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.64.157|172.69.64.157]] 04:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

CHEAT: window.noclip = true; is pretty handy if you're struggling with navigating through some mazes. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.29|172.70.34.29]] 18:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The absolute best I can get out of this page (across multiple browsers and platforms) is on my Android versions of Chrome and Firefox. It forces itself into full-screen mode and then by using touch regions at either side of the scene I can get one/both "turning thruster" plus the main-thruster to show a 'flame'. I can get it to turn, both ways, very very slowly but I seem to have no forward-thrust ability at all. I can be parallel to the ground and the side thrust from pressing both sides doesn't move me sideways any noticable amount (nor will a turning craft "roll" away from the palm-tree), free of gravitational resistance in that direction. If I stay facing upwards (or return to it) I just settle down under the weak (but stronger than any thrust!) gravity, spawn landing-gear and I no longer can even induce a rotation now being perched on legs. This is consistent in both browsers, so I rule out javascript-running inconsistencies in any obvious way.
 I presume (from reading the above) that I can get better thrusting, but whether by collecting things that I can't reach or by 'cheating' (more awkward, on mobile browsers, to edit page-variables/etc), I can't help thinking that it's already going wrong for me in ways it isn't for everyone else. And none of my desktop browsers even play ball for me at all (all I have is star background and the reset-button).
 On mobile browsers I've got a short thin line on the right-hand edge of the (fullscreen) background that I thought might be some sort of draggable power-bar (at 50% position, perhaps), but it doesn't respond to touch/dragging, or change at all. Might be just a relic of being on a wider-than-expected aspect ratio screen. Or it's something jutting (barely) on-screen from another nearby on-screen object/destination. As the viewpoint never moves, it's hard to say either way.
 This ''is'' more functionality than I ever got with Gravity, so maybe I'm just unluckily using incompatible browsers/platforms. A pity, though, that this is where I'm left with this. It looks like everyone else (or many, at least) are getting a lot out of this (and that), just not me. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.137|172.69.79.137]] 21:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

: I couldn't play this at all on mobile (neither chrome nor firefox worked: I got the same behavior as you). It works fine on desktop, though. (I'm using Firefox 112 on Ubuntu 23.04). Granted, controls kinda suck at the beginning, but that's intended. You should get at least a little forward trust if pressing UP on a physical keyboard (at least enough to get you off the ground). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.3.212|172.69.3.212]] 04:09, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I think the giant spider might be a Tintin reference (see The Shooting Star). [[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.140|172.64.238.140]] 00:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Two things: First, you don't need the warpdrive to be able to exit the crystal sphere or to even explore the area outside of it like the cruiser ship. It's enough to have most of the other upgrades from inside the sphere and do some careful flying/orbital mechanicsing. Second with the warpdrive and most other upgrades you can escape from the black hole in the air and space museum. You likely can escape without the warp drive as well with some very careful flying but it's quite tricky to time the thrusters correctly to get a nice elliptical orbit going. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.59.64|172.69.59.64]] 18:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Given the occasional occurrences of D&D as a topic in xkcd and the recent re-publication of the Spelljammer setting for fifth edition D&D, the Crystal Sphere might be a reference to Spelljammer (which likely drew on the already-mentioned story ''The Crystal Spheres'' by David Brin for the idea since Spelljammer was published 5 years after the short story). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.204|141.101.68.204]] 22:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm having a similar reset problem as everyone else. My game crashed, my speed upgrades stayed, but my energy regen upgrades are gone. Which is quite annoying. Does anyone know of a solution to this?

Most of the upgrades I've collected with a given star token have not been the same as what's listed here. I think that which upgrade you get is either semi-random, or that there is a sequential list and you get the upgrades in a predetermined order - with the exception of the "significant" boost upgrades, and perhaps some that specifically relate to the message when found (like the Tank recharge upgrade on Andal, or the Thruster Efficiency upgrade at the Shuttle Skeleton). [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 22:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

;Time slowed
I got the "A single molecule of caffeine" upgrade, and it didn't seem to make my tanks recharge faster. Instead, it made my rocket's movement speed extremely slow. Is anyone else experiencing this? I tried reloading and even deleting all cache data stored on XKCD. It still didn't fix it. Any ideas?

Did not personally experience this issue, but if you're looking to reset your progress, try pasting this into your browser console and refresh the comic page: localStorage.save = ""; [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.29|172.70.34.29]] 21:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Experiencing a similar issue. It was also right after getting a power up, but a different one. "A significant engine boost for a curious pilot". My forward speed and turning speed have been cut down significantly, and gravity seems lower as well. I checked in an incognito page, and turning speed is still much slower than when I initially played, so it seems to affect any instance of the game. I'd love a solution that doesn't require wiping my progress. Maybe I'll try warping to an upgrade I haven't gotten (since getting there myself is basically impossible) and see if collecting it fixes it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.85|172.70.130.85]] 03:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Inspecting element and putting Comic.voyager.opts.speed into the console showed that my current speed was 0.285, which seems low. I manually changed it with Comic.voyager.opts.speed = 1.0 which mostly fixed things. I still feel that my turning speed is lower than before, but otherwise I'm moving around like I used to. Option to avoid resetting progress. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.85|172.70.130.85]] 18:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I had the same problem. I played around with console, but it seems like the issue is related to browser tick speed, since things like falling to the ground when returning to the start position are also very slow. The problem went away after I closed some other tabs and plugged in my laptop (not certain which of those fixed it). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.177|162.158.155.177]] 04:12, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

That happened to me too, but I plugged my computer in and now it's working fine.

Guessing it's just a power saver feature reducing the tick speed then. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.140|172.70.110.140]] 03:46, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Turning off chrome's "energy saver" worked for me. [[User:Rotartsi|Rotartsi]] ([[User talk:Rotartsi|talk]]) 17:07, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

;Full map of the whole thing, what do?
Someone called u/Boojum on the XKCD subreddit ([https://old.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/12tmw01/escape_speed_2765_maps/ old reddit link], [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/12tmw01/escape_speed_2765_maps/ new reddit link]) managed to reverse engineer how the game encodes the map data and posted the whole thing for us to enjoy, should we just put it at the very top or be more measured?

Full zoomable version here: https://aeromancer.dev/xkcd_2765/map.html [[Special:Contributions/172.69.135.75|172.69.135.75]] 23:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

"A sparking Gem" in the Gulf of Boni in Indonesia [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.178|162.158.155.178]] 23:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

There's also [https://xkcd2765-map.kuilin.net/ this map] ([https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/12txn1o/i_made_an_interactive_map_for_escape_speed/ from Reddit]), which shows the location of all the collectables and seems to load a bit faster than the other one --[[User:CruseCtrl|CruseCtrl]] ([[User talk:CruseCtrl|talk]]) 13:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

;Article structure and explaining
I have the impression, that the article structure is a bit messy, and I like to make some suggestions to improve it. Currently, the article is structured with a section for each planets. I suggest to keep that structure roughly but create several list below each of those sections

1. First I suggest to rename the "List of planets" to "List of planets and space objects".

2. Second, I'd like to point out, there are several things to collect, which you can categorize clearly as following:
* '''"You've found"-items''': They appear as a collectible dot. When collected, there is a message of the style "You found WHATEVER". And that WHATEVER item gets added to the list "You've found:" below the comic.
* '''Upgrades''': They appear as large circle with a star.
* '''Messages''': They only display a message when you reach a certain spot. I think it is not visible that there is a message, before you reach that spot.
* '''Subway puzzle tokens.''' They appear as dot with a "T" letter in it and unlock passages at the second subway planet.
Basically you can get a good overview about those at https://aeromancer.dev/xkcd_2765/map.html if you turn on those 4 things in the layer menu in the upper right corner. Beside from that you might also discover:
* '''Fixed text messages.''' From xkcd characters or on signs. You could also add the subway station names.
* '''Interesting looking objects'''. This is a bit vague, as it is not clear, what to add there.
However, those are completely passive things which do not interact with the space ship of the player.

I think we should describe those four types of collectibles in the explanation section.

3. Currently, the lists at the planets do not separate the categories which I mentioned at 2. or only separate '''Messages''' from other collectibles. Sometimes it seems to me some of the passive objects or messages went into the list, too.
So I suggest to always separate the these six categories and add at least the first four of those to each planet and space object, unless the list is empty. For '''Fixed text messages''' I am not sure, if it is worth to always list them, but it is a clearly defined group. For the '''Interesting looking objects''' I would not make a list because it is not clear what to add or not. Instead I suggest to always describe them in the description text for the planet/space object.

4. Note, that players get that "You've found:" list below the comic. Many would like to find out, if their list is complete and whether they have found everything. Currently with the list in that article this is not possible at all. Therefore, I think it is important, that the lists for the "You've found" matches exactly the list which appears below the game.

5. Explain xkcd is about explaining. Many of the '''You've found''', '''Upgrades''', and '''Messages''' are (more or less funny) jokes or references to real things and/or other xkcd comics. We should explain them very shortly for each. So, behind each '''You've found''', '''Upgrades''', and '''Messages''' I suggest to put a very short explanation. You can separate this with a hyphen, a line break, start with italique font or do some other optical separation.

6. Another option would be to create a huge sortable table with four columns:
* Planet / Space Object
* Type ('''You've found''', ''Message''', '''Upgrade''', '''Subway token''', '''fixed text message''')
* Text (1 to 1 as in the game)
* Explanation for the joke or reference.
However, I am currently a bit more in favor for the planet/space object sections and just going with list.

What do you think about those 6 suggestions? Are you with me? Should we start with this restructuring? --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.39|172.70.246.39]] 12:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
:I think it is good suggestions. Although text on the image should also be added to the full transcript. But yes in principle all references and jokes should be explained. But it is a huge project. I have also been taking some screenshots that I would like to add for reference but again it is such a huge and tedious job to upload them all. I think there should be a table of all the collectible items that would be nice to have with sortable so you can check alphabetically but also with planet/place so you can sort on that. Maybe no explanation there, but go to planet sections for that? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
::Hi, I have just finished the (hopefully) full transcript of the objects inside and on the outer edge of the Crystal Sphere. I have transcribed all the dialogues, monologues, signs and inscriptions. As for the messages of "You found" kind, I have copied them from the spreadsheet, just to be sure. Screenshotting is uncomfortable and my memory is short, so I have made a lot of mistakes until I noticed the spreadsheet. However, I have not put in the (shortened) object names as they appear on the "you've found" list. I think it may be a good start to take all the texts from there and put them in a table, so people can start writing explanations for everything. I will try to transcribe the rest (the big ships and the Click and Drag planet), but I am a bit tired of it already, maybe someone would take over. It's almost midnight here, have a good sleep everybody! --[[User:Malgond|Malgond]], late April 26th.

Fun little game. You can even do a little antigravity park without the antigravity cheat on! https://imgur.com/a/sJ72VvW [[Special:Contributions/108.162.227.49|108.162.227.49]] 14:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Outside the shell I found a powerup called "it is very lonely out here". I forget what kind of powerup it was...I had left the star destroyer and orbited counter-clockwise around the shell for several seconds before I saw it by chance, and after a bit of searching I was able to backtrack and pick it up. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.133|172.70.127.133]] 00:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Nathan

If anyone needs a hint, black hole moon [[User:IJustWantToEditStuff|IJustWantToEditStuff]] ([[User talk:IJustWantToEditStuff|talk]]) 23:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

;Glitches?
Anybody else got duplicate items? After picking up "very lonely out here", I fell into the crystal sphere hard enough to glitch and get stuck, so warped back home… and then noticed that the orb wren seemed to have respawned. Looking down the list (with the help of ctrl+F), I see that it does indeed appear twice in the list of objects I've found. No idea what happened there. I then went back to the outside and eventually managed to find the last item (the one talking about the "source"), but as soon as I touched it the ship became stationary. The messages appeared, but the item didn't vanish, and the controls were unresponsive. Refreshing the page left me in deep space, so I resorted to using the wayfinder script to find the dot again; and it confirmed that I'd collected everything.

Is there something I've missed, or are these both weird little glitches? -- [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 11:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
i cant teleport it puts me in the middle of the starry void my thrusteres work but i dont move [[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.132|172.71.222.132]] 13:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I can't say this happens on every planet, but on a few I've tried (What-If planet, small starting planet) if you are landed (no shields on) you can reverse thrust into the ground and dig into the planet. In most cases there is nothing to find, but the "What-If Planet" has a Megan and Cueball floating around the open core. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.141|172.70.126.141]] 21:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)mlganser3

;Click and Drag Planet Trivia
Didn't know where to put this, so I made a new category: The Water tower on the click and drag planet is placed on the location with the highest gravity potential (which makes sense, of course!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.88|172.70.114.88]] 21:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

;What-If Planet Core
Once the hyperdrive has been obtained it is possible to travel to the centre of the What-If planet by parking on top of the volcano, accelerating forwards for a couple of seconds, stopping, then powering in reverse. Keeping reverse held down down for a very long time once in reverse, it will gradually travel to the centre of the planet where you meet Megan and Cueball. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 17:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

If you keep going in reverse past Megan and Cueball, eventually you pop out on the opposite side of the planet, just on the other side of a short pillar from where another Megan is sitting. (Megan sits on a block looking at a short pillar. On the other side of this pillar is where you emerge if entering from the volcano.) You can also enter here by landing then powering in reverse. Also, I was able to enter here in forward thrust, going quite fast (lucky shot, maybe?) but I got all the way into the center of the planet in very short order.

I've found that I can reverse thrust from any standing location and dig into any planet, not just the What-If Planet. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.134|172.70.127.134]] 21:13, 28 April 2023 (UTC) mlganser3

::Yeah, there seems to be a corridor of sorts through the What-If planet centre, between the volcano and the pillar that Megan is contemplating. Since it takes soooo long to go down the volcano, I definitely recommend starting at the pillar and reversing in. If you land on the pillar itself and reverse, it should get you to the centre space relatively quickly.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.123.148|172.71.123.148]] 10:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

;Inital Statrting Bug
I have a bug in my game where when I start, I am pushed off of the starting planet, and I continue to get pushed around. My shield is up and everything, and sometimes it tries to land. I have tried many of the cheats, but they aren't working. I need some help! AlabroX201 - 13:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Update: NoClip stops the bug, but only when it is true. 13:28 26 April 20203 (UTC)

;Making a table to organize EVERYTHING

Good heavens, y'all - format table so text is at the top of the cell.

I'm currently making a table to organize planet (file)names, coordinates, and explanations, and the four item types and their explanation, inspired by the comments from [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/User:Kynde Kynde], [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/User:Malgond Malgond], and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/172.70.246.39 172.70.246.39]. Here's my progress so far, do you have any suggestions or feedback? A few things to note:
* I will try to add all explanations for each item found
* The "???" are there because the spreadsheet with all the items doesn't include the message shown to the user. I temporarily put the words that the wiki used instead
* All the "Z" between items will be replaced by a new line. The editor I'm using doesn't support adding new lines directly
* Can someone let me know how to find the coordinates of each planet? Many thanks

----

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! Filename
! Description
! Tiles (X, Y)
! Explanation
! "You found" items
! Upgrades
! Messages
! Subway tokens
|-
| <code>tiny-world</code>
| Starting planet
|
| To return here from anywhere, click the "Home" button in lower right corner. The planet is tiny, grassy, a has few trees. Beret-Guy says 'Wow!'.
| a rock with neat stripes!Za cool bug!Za pretty leaf!
|
| Wheeee!
|
|-
| <code>origin</code>
| Origin
|
| To get here, simply fall from the starting planet by thrusting off from Beret Guy's place. The planet has a sign saying 'Welcome to Origin! You can never leave™'. A large shaft leads from below the rollercoaster to the St. Louis Arch on the opposing side. Lots of landmarks (many on small pedestals) each mark the direction to a different planet.
| a secret gladeZa holographic Charizard business cardZa tiny meteorite!Za 5G seagullZa DVD of The Core (2003)Za normal-looking leafZa marsh wrenZan orb wrenZa single grain of saltZ11 squares packed into a larger squareZa tumbleweed
| Nice flying! (Your tanks recharge faster now.)
| Welcome to liminal spaceZThe St. Louis arch is also known as the gateway to space.ZBe careful; this roller coaster can be disorienting!
|
|-
| <code>hollow-shell</code>
| Hollow Planet
|
| To get here, swing through Origin's central shaft and out the St. Louis Arch. The planet is just a shell with some gaps. On the outside, there are signs pointing at the directions to a few other planets.
| a handful of the quantum foam that makes up the fabric of space!
| You found a sixth lagrange point! (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)ZYou found a glass of heavy water (engine a little more powerful???)
|
|
|-
| <code>orb</code>
| Round Planet
|
| To get here, launch from the sign on the Hollow Planet or the tower with an orb on it on Origin. The planet is moderately small with no vegetation and some architecture such as Stonehenge and the Great Wall of China.
| a swatch pop-out wristwatch
| You found a sensible cheese platter (Your tanks recharge a bit faster now)Z??? (engine a little more powerful???)
|
|
|-
| <code>uzumaki</code>
| Uzumaki
|
| To get here, launch from the sign on the Hollow Planet, Origin's spiral monument, or below the plane-towed banner on the Round Planet. The planet is a large spiral of grass inspired by the manga ''{{w|Uzumaki}}'' by Junji Ito. A Roomba is loose, a reference to [[1558: Vet]].
| a golden radio tuned to 1.618 MHzZa scroll lock keyZa primordial black holeZa cool pair of shoes with flames on the sideZan ink cartridgeZa podcast episodeZa festive but somehow unnerving holiday card from Junji ItoZa friendly beeZa spiral-cut diamondZa burrito
| You found a tree-filled grove and a nice spot for quiet contemplation (Your thrusters are significantly more efficient now.)ZYou found a single caffeine molecule! (Your tanks recharge a bit faster now.)
| Exit OnlyZYou're going the wrong way!Z
|
|-
| <code>guitar-ship</code>
| Guitar Ship
|
| To get here, launch from near Uzumaki. The planet is an enormous guitar labeled 'Boston' with the city skyline under a dome on the back (a reference to the cover art of the album {{w|Boston (album)|''Boston''}}). A guitar shaped UFO with "BOSTON" written on it and the skyline of Boston under a dome at the bottom.
| a guitar pick
|
|
| Orange line deactivated!
|-
| <code>soccerfield</code>
| Spacetime Soccer Field
|
| To get here, launch from the pyramid with a soccer ball on top on Origin. The planet is reference to [[2705: Spacetime Soccer]] and consists of a central pure-white body, goals on the poles and intangible lines farther away.
|
| GOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLL!!! (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)ZGOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLL!!! (Thrust Speed???)ZYou found the 3 million point line (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)ZYou found a sunspot! (Your launch speed has increased.)
|
|
|-
| <code>saturn</code>
| Saturn
|
| To get here, launch from the pyramid with a ringed on top on Origin. If you instead see the Spacetime Soccer Field, you're too far left. The planet has a soccer ball inside it, a reference to [[2513: Saturn Hexagon]]
| a really cool data point
| You found a pair of platonic solids, not quite touching! (Thrust power???)ZYou found a block of scandium! (Thrust power???)
|
|
|-
| <code>platform-planet</code>
| Andal
|
| To get here, launch from below Saturn's equator, when the soccer ball is oriented to the bottom left compared to the rocket, or from the miniature of Andal to the left of the pyramids on Origin. The planet is small and has a T-shaped tower, mountains, and grass. On a grass patch Blondie says to Cueball "The MIT cloaking device only affects the electroweak and nuclear forces. Gravity is the odd one out, as usual.", hinting that 'A random point out in space' is the Subway Planet.
|
| You found two Andalites, one canonical! (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)ZWhat a nice place for a ship to sit! (Your tanks recharge a bit faster now.)ZYou found a friend (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)ZYou found baby shoes (and baby)! (Engine power???)
|
|
|-
| <code>earth-map</code>
| Compromise Projection of Earth
|
| The planet is a huge distorted map of all land masses on Earth. The rocket can fly where water would be, but it can't go over land
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
| <code></code>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}

Do you have any suggestions or feedback? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
:There's a bit of a mix in the game itself between messages, "You found" items and powerups. At first it looked like a small grey dot is an item, a bigger grey star is a powerup. Sometimes they're collocated, i.e. a dot inside the hollow center of a star. But further in the game, I have found hollow stars (i.e. without the dot inside) which leave a "you found" list item anyway. Also, sometimes the "you found" message contains a description that differs from the name on the list below the game viewport. The ultimate source of all is the spreadsheet linked at the start of [[2765:_Escape_Speed#List of planets|List of planets]] section. Any Message (including "you found..." messages) can be accompanied by an Item and an Action (an upgrade or some other things like decloaking or subway token), both of them or none of them. I think it shall be somehow reflected in the table. For example: one column for Message (a value always present), another for Item name (may be empty) and another for Effect (may be empty). Unfortunately, the spreadsheet does not contain the kind of visual representation (a dot, a star, a star with a dot inside, or none at all). --[[User:Malgond|Malgond]]
:Another comment: the Explanation column is currently a short description (of a planet) and some of its features, the way to get there, only sometimes containing an explanation of what the planet name refers to. These should be separate. Explanation shall be a short paragraph about a pun or reference connected to the name of a planet or the text found in the game. For example, explanation for the Message/Item of "11 squares packed into a larger square" shall have a reference to [[2740:_Square_Packing]] and a short description of the mathematical problem involved. I also think we may need separate tables for planets (with very general descriptions and directions), features on the planets, possibly one table per planet (containing architecture, vegetation, animals, people etc. - if worth noting or there's some pun or reference), items and messages to be collected by the player (maybe one per planet), and for words spoken by the people and messages written somewhere (again, only if they contain a pun or a reference). Otherwise, the table would be too big. --[[User:Malgond|Malgond]]

::Hey, thanks for replying.

::>''[...] ... I think it shall be somehow reflected in the table. For example: one column for Message (a value always present), another for Item name (may be empty) and another for Effect (may be empty). Unfortunately, the spreadsheet does not contain the kind of visual representation (a dot, a star, a star with a dot inside, or none at all).''

::Yeah I noticed that too, but tbh I don't think it's SO important that needs to be included in the table or even in the entire page. Also, it would be very time-consuming.

::> ''the Explanation column is currently a short description (of a planet) and some of its features, the way to get there, only sometimes containing an explanation of what the planet name refers to. These should be separate.''

::I don't think they should be separate, because it would mean that the table would get even bigger and navigating it would be harder. You're welcome to add any information in the explanation section, as I'm not editing its contents.

::> ''explanation for the Message/Item of "11 squares packed into a larger square" shall have a reference to [[2740:_Square_Packing]] and a short description of the mathematical problem involved.''

::I totally agree, and as I said in the initial message (above the table), I plan on adding item-specific explanations next to the item "names".

::> ''I also think we may need separate tables for planets (with very general descriptions and directions), features on the planets, possibly one table per planet (containing architecture, vegetation, animals, people etc. - if worth noting or there's some pun or reference), items and messages to be collected by the player (maybe one per planet), and for words spoken by the people and messages written somewhere (again, only if they contain a pun or a reference).''

::I'm sorry but the amount of effort I'm putting in this ''"simple"'' table is already IMMENSE. This would probably require dozens of hours between exploration and formatting. I'm afraid I won't be doing that myself :) [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:57, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

:If you want to get rid of the "Z", you can make line breaks inside the wiki's editing window using the expression '''''' (remove the spaces--I couldn't type the phrase without getting a break). It's the html code for a line break. Technically, I think '''''' works, too. Really, though, just put ''openCarrot br closeCarrot'' wherever you want a break and you'll be fine. --Sorry, I don't have a name here, so I can't really sign this. 11:21, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

::Thanks, but i figured it out. I used Notepad++ to replace all uppercase "Z" with two line breaks and an asterisk. This thing took soooooooo many hours to make, I'm so proud I've finally published it. I'll never touch it again. Now I despertly need to sleep, g'night everyone! [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 23:24, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

:::General style that I use:
:::*The first linefeed/break in any cell content is fully respected
:::**(Because it takes a line that starts with a cell-markup and then one that doesn't, and actually understands it as a different qualification, so the LF between isn't collapsed to mere whitespace?)
:::**Other div-like markup starters (e.g. bullet points) enforce this.
:::*But, ''if'' you want to add linebreaks where it won't (third-and-later paragraphs?), I sugest using <code><nowiki> </nowiki></code>, the self-closing single-tag version that can't be misinterpretted by any (XML-aware, in general) markup-parser.
:::**You can even use it in the midst of some text flow, whhich might be useful for certain layouts (and their sources).
:::...Or double-LF can often do the job, too. But just Preview things to see what does/does not need additional tweaking... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.22|162.158.34.22]] 23:55, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
:I like the idea of the table thank for making it. I have added two more pages, one with overview images of the world and the planets and one with a place to post the screen shots needed for making a full explanation. Put some of the relevant images up already but will not have time to much more the rest of this week. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:26, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

;Speedrun
Has anyone started making speedruns of this yet? I'd absolutely love to see an any% run to vader, or to some other end game location. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.3.200|172.69.3.200]] 04:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
: Hi! I've done a couple speedruns to get the hyperdrive. Currently, my best time is 25:32. Pretty bad though. There's almost certainly a way to get straight to the center of Uzumaki, which takes like 5 minutes to do. I don't really have a route, just some planets I like going to. [[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]] ([[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al|talk]]) 18:04, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

;Gravity of shell

: Halfway thru the crack, gravity gets increasingly stronger as the spaceship feels the gravitational force of all the celestial bodies it is leaving behind.

It's the gravity of the ''shell itself'', no? A uniform shell has no net force on objects inside it.
[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 23:09, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I have removed the topic lines, as they mess with the main explanations table of contest. They are not needed here in the discussion and we try not to use them so do not ass new. Just make a heading with text like here above! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

:Good job, they were getting annoying. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of the new table. It's harder to use 'cause long text is limited to narrow column. How to get to where you're going needs to be its own column if we're doing this. And I used the old list to organized to order I wanted to do things in.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.19|162.158.154.19]] 20:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

: Hey, I'm not sure when you made the comment, but yesterday [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] noticed that an item message was one extremely long word (something like "GOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!!!") and added a space that made the table look much better. I think it's readable enough, and it's way more organized that the old list (and i added more info that wasn't there).

: >How to get to where you're going needs to be its own column if we're doing this

: If you add another column it's gonna get even more narrow, I think it's best to keep it as is. One could argue the instructions to get there are part of the explanation for the planet. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

::I think it's important to keep the flow of conversation, so I'm putting this after what I'm replying to. I hope that's not too confusing.

::>It's way more organized that the old list (and i added more info that wasn't there).

::Yes, but in this particular instance, I think there are better ways of doing it. You can set a template up where every planet is dealt with typographically in exactly the same way. Each piece of information is in the same place relative to other pieces and handled typographically the same way in every single planet, the objects in interplanetay space and the objects in extraspherical space. You'd loose the ability of a table to sort by arbitrary columns which doesn't seem to be a help with this information, but you'd also loose the annoying short lines, the fact that for most entries, the column head way up there above the readable portion of the screen and because you can use typography to show what different data is, it's a little more intuitive to us monkey-brained folk.

:: For example '''Planet-name: Large, Bold.''' Colon, name in code, comma, coordinates as x=number and y=numers, all in regular wight roman. ''New line, Explanation of how to get there starting with "To get there" and in italics''. New line, any other notes in roman. New line, a bullet-pointed list of items and messages to find. Each entry is structured Name of object or message when found in roman, powerup text in prethases, And then any notes in italics.

::'''Andal''': Filename: Andal, x= 123456 y= -654321
::''To get here, launch from below Saturn's equator, when the soccer ball is oriented to the bottom left compared to the rocket, or from the miniature of Andal to the left of the pyramids on Origin.''
::The planet is small and has a T-shaped tower, mountains, and grass. On a grass patch Blondie says to Cueball "The MIT cloaking device only affects the electroweak and nuclear forces. Gravity is the odd one out, as usual.", hinting that 'A random point out in space' is the Subway Planet.
::* You found two Andalites, one canonical! (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)
::* What a nice place for a ship to sit! (Your tanks recharge a bit faster now.)
::* You found a friend (Your thrusters are more efficient now.)
::* You found baby shoes (and baby)! (Engine power???)

::This can be tweeked and I don't program in html ever so this can be improved. And I recognize that this is harder than a table, but it is much better.

::: I don't really agree this is better, the main reason we wanted to create the table in the first place was so that people could sort it at their liking: ''"there should be a table of all the collectible items that would be nice to have with sortable so you can check alphabetically but also with planet/place so you can sort on that"''. Imagine someone wanted to obtain as many upgrades as possible: they would just sort the table to put the upgrades first and discard planets without them, or sort by subway tokens, to get the hyperdrive and know exactly where to look. A table is the only way to have that, and it's also more compact than a list. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 14:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.47|162.158.62.47]] 22:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]], thank you for the table version!
You can get the list of coordinates from the console with this js command:
console.log(Comic.map.locations.map(e=>[e.name,e.pos[0],e.pos[1]].join("\t")).join("\n"))
you will get a list with planet, x coordinate, y coordinate that is easy to manage. [[User:Hydra454|Hydra454]] ([[User talk:Hydra454|talk]])
:Thank you! I added all the coordinates and moved the planet filenames to the Planet Name column to make more space for the other columns

My game restarted after I hadn't played it in a while, but now there seems to be items missing? Like for instance, I can't find the small meteorite item on origin or the quantum foam on the hollow planet? I've searched both planets inside and out and can't find them anywhere. I have all the other items from those planets, it's just those two that are missing. I haven't searched any other planets yet, any idea why this is happening? [[User:IJustWantToEditStuff|IJustWantToEditStuff]] ([[User talk:IJustWantToEditStuff|talk]]) 02:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

'''Another attempt to explain EVERYTHING'''
:Hi everyone, I have made a [[User:Malgond/Drafts/Escape_Speed|DRAFT]] of ''explanation of everything'' as two tables, one for planets, another for objects, and put in what I think is interesting or worth noting and explaning for initial four planets. I am basing this work on the [[2765: Escape Speed/Transcript|full transcript]], which I also made. Do you think it is any better than the current form? -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 21:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
::I really like you table. Maybe we should make seperate pages for the tables used for the explanations? But anyway I like how your look Malgond. Good work. I think it would be a good idea to use those in the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
:::For instance here [[2765: Escape Speed/Tables]] --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:21, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
::::Hey, I've said this in my user page and I'll add it here too. I think the structure of the current table in the article is better at a few things than the one you've been working on: for example, it's easier to sort for upgrades and items (which was the main reason [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] wanted to make a sortable table in the first place), is more compact, and is easier to browse. Why don't we just add a "transcript" column like the table on [[2712: Gravity]] to put what things and people say, and add the rest of the information on the respective columns on the current table? Personally, I think the new one is a little bit too complicated to browse. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
:::::Also, we're already trying to move on from the old list and transfer everything to the "new" table. If we add a "newer" table, won't it become even harder to keep track of what needs to be moved and added to what? [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:39, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
::::::Here's what I think we should do: we keep the compact, easy-to-use and easily sortable table in the article, but we put a notice above it that links to the /Tables page for people who want an even more in-depth look description and explanation of everything. The /Tables page is longer than the entire article page AND discussion page combined, so I think it would be too big to be added directly into the article. Do you guys like the plan?
::::::I'll start by adding a prominent link above the current table in the article that points to /Tables --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:53, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

'''Script to stop momentum of spaceship'''
Cool script to stop momentum of spaceship, useful when flying around and you see something but couldn't stop the spaceship.
<code>
window.onkeydown = function(e){if(e.key == 'p'){Comic.gameHandle.playerConfig.maxSpeed = 0; setTimeout(() => {Comic.gameHandle.playerConfig.maxSpeed = 100;},10)}}
</code>
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.75|172.69.58.75]] 01:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

:Thanks! I'll add that into the page

Is it just me or is Click-and-Drag at a different scale to everything else?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.227|162.158.158.227]] 15:15, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

;"anyone up for a game of scrabble later" is a reference to the comic 470

https://xkcd.com/470/
"anyone up for a game of scrabble later" is a reference to the comic where someone shows up at a protest content; "anyone up for a game of scrabble later" is one of the signs he's holding. i'd like to add this because i'd love to contribute and this page helped me a lot during my playthrough. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.204|108.162.245.204]] 19:21, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
:Cool, feel free to add that to the article. I'm not sure why you wrote it here instead of editing the actual page, do you need help with anything? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:09, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Apparently the objects (like the weird spaceship thing, transmitter, etc.) on origin points to planets so fly directly up and you'll get there. also does anyone know how to slow your velocity down bc everytime i fly past the planets {{unsigned ip|172.70.207.165|15:48, 24 July 2023}}
:Please remember to sign your post using the button in the toolbar on talk pages. [[2765:_Escape_Speed#Celestial_Bodies_and_Collectable_Items|The table in the article]] already describes how to reach any planet by using those landmarks. To slow down, use the arrow down button on your keyboard. It's the one below the arrow up button you use to accelerate. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
::Or, if playing on a touchscreen mobile device (though it works badly on my devices, that may just be because they aren't <12 months old, as with many things, and become fiddly to use for unsupportable reasons - it looks as if mobile interface has been thought about but perhaps insufficiently tested on a representative variety of devices that aren't "the latest iPad"/whatever), rotate to face backwards and retrothrust 'forward' to bleed off roughly the same amount of velocity you gained in the initial outward-phase of the journey. Standard space-sim (Asteroids, xPilot, countless other gravity-well games) methodology. Doesn't seem to be (nose-based) retrothruster-braking implemented for my touchscreen input, anyway. (hnless that's another thing that is the fault of my being on Android, even with updated browsers that ''should'' be transparently and platform-agnostically handling all that coded-guff.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.244|172.70.162.244]] 19:52, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

For some reason after I got one of the upgrades on the Mercator projection (forgot which one) my game just got really slow. Not lagging or anything, just time had slowed to like a tenth of the normal speed. Closing the tab doesn't fix it, neither does restarting chrome. If it's any help, I'm on google chrome version 116.0.5845.210. [[User:Certified_nqh|Me]][[[285: Wikipedian Protester|''citation needed'']]][[Category:Pages using the "citation needed" template]] 18:53, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
:Hooray! Doing nothing fixed it!!!!!!????? [[User:Certified_nqh|Me]][[[285: Wikipedian Protester|''citation needed'']]][[Category:Pages using the "citation needed" template]] 13:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
::The speed of the game has to do with your computer's internal framerate. Usually when your computer goes into low-battery mode, it automatically lowers the framerate, which is probably what you experienced {{unsigned|TheTrainsKid|08:07, 5 January 2025}}

How do you get to the center of the ''What If'' planet? I've been trying for ten minutes lol [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 20:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
:Ten whole minutes? Wow. Much effort! ::( [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.70|172.71.242.70]] 04:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

;I got to editing it in now
hi im on a different device now but still xkcd...ing? anyway i edited it in but, as my brain is as small as an acorn, i have no idea how to insert links! (this is my first time editing ANY wiki) i'm putting this up because if i do that, you might notice it quicker
now im at the end so hyphen(?) time! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.239|172.71.150.239]] 18:38, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

When I'd gathered all of the things, I took off from the sphere into the void. The stars started moving from 12 to 6 o'clock. But, as the months have rolled by, they have moved from there and are now going from 2 to 8 o'clock. I'm finding that interesting. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.116|172.70.111.116]] 16:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
And now my ship has stopped dead. That's interesting. There is a further sphere that you can get stuck in. That takes a long time to get to. Cool.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.75|162.158.155.75]] 16:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC) Honestly, I'd expected my ship to fall back and hit the sphere eventually. I haven't tried to get unstuck.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.76|162.158.155.76]] 16:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2838: Dubious Islands

2025-03-07T17:28:08Z

MeZimm:

As a native of the North Country of Northern New York, I'm really disappointed that Randall didn't label the St. Lawrence river. :-( [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.253|162.158.158.253]] 22:49, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Had a go at the Transcript. Plenty of problems with it, but I was attempting to be partway methodical (generally heading north-to-south, seemed easier than "north-and clockwise" or any other sweep, once I started to do it) and not actually mention 'quoted' words more than once. Unless they're actually written multiple times. (looking at you, Mississippi!) 
But had no option but to repeat some of the quoted text ''within'' the label-descriptor 'tags', perhaps each actual fragment should indeed by given ''all'' boundaries, but I think that's better left for the table that will inevitably have to be put into the main Explanation. There one can actually list the named ''and unnamed'' bordering waters (river, canal, lake, sea and ocean) for actual reference. 
Also the wording. Tried not to repeat "bounded by" synonyms too much, but maybe I should just have chosen one option and repeated it anyway, given the difficulties and contextual issues of doing it absolutely unrepeatably. But it's my best try (at just gone midnight, indicating how personally familiar I might be with the continental US's geography, or not). And thus over to you people who actually know more about the Mississippi than merely how to spell it. (Not sure I've read, and thus spelt, some of the other names given right, either. Definitely check and edit as necessary.) Perhaps a geographic map could (e.g.) even identify the "Nunavuk+" territory with a better actually known descriptor, too! Canada is even less my forté than the US. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.63|162.158.74.63]] 23:50, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Im shocked that Randall conflated the hudson and Champlain when the two dont connect, missing each other by a slim margin.
Source: i live close to lake george, the missing point [[Special:Contributions/172.69.59.47|172.69.59.47]] 00:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
: The Champlain Canal crosses that gap. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.63|162.158.154.63]] 06:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Southern NJ is made an island by the Delaware River, the Delaware and Raritan canal and the Raritan river. -- [[User:162.158.158.98|162.158.158.98]] ([[User talk:162.158.158.98|talk]]) 03:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC) ''(please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~</nowiki>~~)''

I'm disappointed that Randall did not include the Rideau Canal in Ontario, Canada. It connects Ottawa, on the Ottawa River, that flows into the St. Lawrence River, with Kingston, on Lake Ontario, which also flows into the St. Lawrence River. {{unsigned ip|172.70.114.10|05:22, 15 October 2023}}

I came to this comic hoping to learn the names of the islands, and then to the explanation hoping they were present but hidden in some way. Irrational! [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 07:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
:There are no names because the islands shown are not normally considered islands, so have not been given "island names". Of course, you could name them based on typical geographical labels, like "Eastern United States", "South Florida", etc. Some of the regions are distinct enough to have names, such as Cape Cod Canal naturally creating the "island" of Cape Cod - although depending on your opinion, some parts of Bourne might be considered on the Cape but on the mainland side of the Canal.[[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 20:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
::Yes, the point was I anticipated being entertained by Randall's conception of the dubious names for the dubious islands. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 00:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

It should be noted that the headwaters for the Mississippi are roughly 100 miles north and east of the beginning of the Red River of the North. It's not important, really, but it is quite a long stretch to dig if someone were to actually cross the Traverse Gap. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.81|172.70.126.81]] 23:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
:Yes, strictly speaking, the Traverse Gap separates the headwaters of the Red River of the North (Lake Traverse) from the headwaters of the Minnesota River (Big Stone Lake), not Mississippi, but the Minnesota eventually flows into the Mississippi. The Gap itself is officially 1 mile long, but an easier connection method might be to dig a trench 1/2 mile due west to the Little Minnesota River (mostly in South Dakota) and let physics do the rest.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.114|172.70.131.114]] 15:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

There's also the Height of Land Portage, a 400m long strip of land along the US-Can border that separates the Great Lakes watershed from the Hudson Bay watershed. By contrast, the Traverse gap is ~1600m in length at its narrowest. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.80|172.70.127.80]] 13:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

;Where is Long Island?
Oh! Wait. The map only shows _dubious_ islands. {{unsigned ip|172.70.38.72|06:28, 7 October 2023}}
:All actual islands (Hawaii, the myriad of ones in the Canadian arctic, etc) are not there, so I take it as read that this is the contiguous mainland continental North America (stopping at the Panama cut) with divided by all cross-waterways of any significance. i.e. major rivers, hence why no lichen-like tributary 'fan' incursions into these areas; major canals, which means massive irrigation projects (and any actual ship-navigable ones, I presume) or else ever ditch or drain would count, lakes of course (but there's a lot of lakes in the Canadian north that are not shown, let alone used as might be hydrodynamically linked).
:Compared with [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Map_of_canals_of_the_United_Kingdom.png what Great Britain might look like], so subdivided, it looks positively restrained. I mean, you can probably remove all those with dead-ends to make the 'disconnection map' simpler. And, in today's age, all stretches that are no longer viable/continuous/navigable for various reasons like railways and major roads being slapped over/next to them and rendering them obsolete/uncared-for/etc, but that still leaves quite a lot of [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/England_Wales_Waterway_Map_Simplified.svg islands], such the cut(s, several!) between Thames and Severn, the Humber to various Lancashire 'outlets', etc. And that link doesn't even show the Caledonian Canal cross (alongside/within the Great Glen), the more southerly Forth And Clyde route, etc. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.19|141.101.98.19]] 16:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

No mention of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Ocean_Pass Two Oceans Creek]? {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.13|17:52, 7 October 2023}}
:Um... yes? There's a link to Parting Of The Ways (I made a grammatical/contextual edit, to make more sense, but might need another tweak) which involves the Atlantic Creek/Pacific Creek split from North Two Ocean Creek, or so I just read myself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 18:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

At least in the case of the {{w|Panama Canal}}, it's not really a "body of water" at all. It's a series of water locks which allow humans to convey boats over what would otherwise be dry land. Yes, the boats are floating in water the whole time, but it's not like an artificial river was dug between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans that a boat can just cruise on through. It takes a long time and the coordination of many people to get a boat through the canal. Oversimplified diagram [https://media.istockphoto.com/id/1456056228/vector/the-panama-canal-explained.jpg?s=612x612&w=0&k=20&c=lUpBCDRLecDONsUbSphLsIpMVbG75SHjHip1ADY5pDw= here.] [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 14:43, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

:Generally, though, there is some volume of water flowing through/past lock gates even when they're closed, via sluices, overspills, etc. No, you couldn't float a boat through them, but that doesn't mean there isn't a continuous watercourse. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.22|172.70.85.22]] 16:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

If we're going for seriously dubious, I nominate the Colorado River, which flows from Baja California, up and over the Rocky Mountains, and down through Austin, Texas into the Gulf of Mexico. At least, that's what the substitute teacher made us draw on our homework maps in class in high school. She had some... problems. But it would've made an awesome river. Is there a special class of "island" where the rivers are connected by name? [[User:Mrkxcd|Mrkxcd]] ([[User talk:Mrkxcd|talk]]) 06:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

It is overgrown to the point of being unreadable, but there is a sign outside Olympia, WA that describes the "Olympic Island" the small island west of Washington/British Columbia. [https://maps.app.goo.gl/DHMTjBTRoJ2ALdBA8?g_st=ic]

== Contrast with general/typical patterns of river flow? ==

Would it be overstuffing the explanation to get into the basic logic of how water flows, which in its most simplified form wouldn't create islands - a small stream of water would only follow the most direct path to lower elevation. Thus, rivers tend not to "branch out" going downstream, only as you travel upstream, which is really the convergence of incoming water flowing downstream. As a result, they only partially divide up land on a continent, since you can just keep going uphill until you can get around the division.

Obviously, in real terrain, the volume of a river or lake causes it to spread out, so it CAN split into two different outflow channels. Then, we also build canals, further creating divisions.

It just struck me that the map here is almost a commentary on those water channels that don't follow the "basic" rule of simply going downhill.[[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 04:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
:I'm pretty sure all those bits of water ''do'' flow downhill (or, at a push, flow along a completely level bed by dint of more water being dumped in at one end whilst the excess is allowed to exit at the other). Just that it's not all the same direction along any particular composite route, with possibly multiple drain/source points wherever directions meet/diverge. And possibly you have to abstract out any lock-gates/similar as continuity even when closed.
:That some of the canals are sent through undulating topography (to be valid here, surely can't involve tunnels/aqueducts; but deep cuttings are a thing... as are channels atop embankments, making only ''slightly'' confusing in this regard if they designed wet or dry culverts under them to maintain the old cross-directional terrain profile) doesn't change the level/downwards gradients in their very local geography.
:The exact details are (deliberately?) lost in this topological-but-not-topographical diagram, however. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.122|172.71.242.122]] 13:17, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

== Possible inspiration for this comic? ==

I just found this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN2flAvdQXU, dated September 21, 2023, which is about North Two Ocean Creek, and at 3:53 it describes the section of North America north and east of the Columbia River-Snake River-Pacific Creek-North Two Ocean Creek-Atlantic Creek-Yellowstone River-Missouri River-Mississippi River as an island. [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 13:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Was this reddit thread created before the comic was posted? https://www.reddit.com/r/geography/comments/170xg7l/is_new_england_eastern_new_york_state_southern/ [[Special:Contributions/172.68.119.172|172.68.119.172]] 01:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

::Ooh. Seems that way! Thu, October 5, 7:51 pm ET. The night before the comic was posted. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 09:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

There was also a writer, Neil Moore who did the trek across country in canoe via Two Ocean Pass in 2020 and 2021. https://22rivers.com/the-expedition/ Interestingly his trip also nearly connects Lake Erie to the Allegheny River via Lake Chatauqua. He did an overland portage between Chatauqua and Erie of about 10 miles via Old Portage Road. It appears a shorter portage exists at a lake at 42°15'42.1"N 79°32'32.3"W that is bisected by a road. But-for that road and the lake drying up, that route would turn a good portion of the Midwest into an island. {{unsigned ip|172.70.135.218|19:54, 10 January 2024}}

Talk:2675: Pilot Priority List

2025-03-07T17:25:37Z

MeZimm:

Who else googled 'words ending with ate' and had an extra chuckle at what could have been? My favorites: circumnavigate, excommunicate, disarticulate. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.30|172.70.175.30]] 05:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:I was disappointed not to see 'conjugate' on the list. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:Not to mention 'copulate'. I guess he wanted to keep it G-rated. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:On the top of my list would be "Procrastinate": Attending to all other tasks in reverse order. [[User:Mumiemonstret|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret|talk]]) 11:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
:"Deliberate": Think about what to do next. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.185|172.68.174.185]] 20:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

How about 'exterminate'? [[User:MarquisOfCarrabass|MarquisOfCarrabass]] ([[User talk:MarquisOfCarrabass|talk]]) 05:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:: Only if the pilot is a Dalek. {{unsigned ip|172.70.135.118|14:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)}}
: My thoughts exactly! (Note: I moved your signature up) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

What categories does this kind of list belong in. I guess Randall has made similar lists before? Should there be a category for this kind of comics, that do not easily belong in any other. I added Food category because of the cake, but that was just for the title text... Also if anyone has a better link to a good picture of a layered cake, as [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ the one currently] in the title text explanation please add that. But it is a good picture resembling the airspace diagram inverted very much --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:I can see that for instance this comic with a list, [[1957: 2018 CVE List]], has been added to the [[:Category:Charts]]. In that case this comic should also, but to me this is not really a chart. Maybe a Category:Lists would work? Should it be "lists" rather than "list"? Not native English speaker. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:56, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::::(On List/Lists, yes, I would say Category:Lists would be a categorical list of all lists. Any such Category:List would be appropriate if ''a particular'' list (henceforth "it's that list again!") has multiple appearances (perhaps in rationed fractions, like the "things not to do" one) across comics that thus need to be categorised. If that ever happens though then the List might be better "Category:The List", leaving room for The Other List, A Further Different List, all those categories maybe needing to be added to a category of all "List"s (which of course qualifies them for being under "Lists"), but we'll cross those bridges if we come to them. :P ) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 14:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::Other list comics (Feel free to add to mine without signature):
:::[[2525: Air Travel Packing List]]
:::[[1011: Baby Names]]
:::[[1957: 2018 CVE List]]
:::[[887: Future Timeline]]
:::[[]]

Afterate - enjoy a waffer-thin mint.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 09:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Does anybody else get "list of achievements" vibes from this? it shares many features like simple names, descriptions etc. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 10:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Instead of ANC it's ANCDARESPC [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.12|172.71.167.12]] 12:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

As for Categories, this is definitely Aviation related and a List. So, most of things that [[1937:_IATA_Airport_Abbreviations]] qualifies for, should also apply to this one. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 13:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:Created [[:Category:Aviation]]. [[User:Natg19|Natg19]] ([[User talk:Natg19|talk]]) 23:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Am I the only one who thought about the INXS video "Mediate"? https://youtu.be/Pr-Vfnd7Yno [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 17:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
::Definitely not. I came here to check for this. Kind of disappointed that this is the only comment to that effect (and also disappointed that Mr. Munro missed the opportunity.)[[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.177|172.71.142.177]] 04:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
::Like the above poster, I specifically came here to check for references to the INXS song.

Agitate - put protest signs on the cockpit door [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.227|108.162.216.227]] 11:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Way at the absolute bottom of the list should be Autodefenestrate - the act of throwing oneself out a window. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 00:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This comment is to memorialize "our" (explainxkcd's) supposed "ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST" for after the incomplete tag gets removed. Should we add a Trivia-level section after the Transcript for it? Or put it in the Editors' FAQ? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.243|172.70.210.243]] 02:06, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This explanation needs an actual picture of the "upside down wedding cake" airspace class diagrams referred to in the titletext. Like this: https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/FTB/Airspace/Airspace%20Chart.jpg —[[User:Scs|Scs]] ([[User talk:Scs|talk]]) 03:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:🗸 ILLUSTRATEd. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.99|172.69.33.99]] 05:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Why are complex airspace classes tiered instead of coned? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.243|172.70.210.243]] 08:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
:So you don't have to do trigonometry to figure out if you're in the wrong place. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.146|172.70.211.146]] 09:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
::Well, trig isn't really needed for "if x-thousand feet away from (focal point/boundary) at height y, where x=ny" (n could even be 1). Trig isn't even really needed if you're sighting the angle between the horizon and the beacon at the apex of the cone and ''without needing to know your altitide'' need to know that once the declination is beyond a given amount that you're in the controlled-cone.
::But as much flight is horizontal within broad bands (save for deliberate ascending/descending) and altitude is actually supposed to be something you're very aware of at least within a hundred feet or so, you might as well just know that "lower than Level A, the radius to know about is A', or above that but lower than Level B it is B', ...etc". This can be represented on flat charts/on-screen displays much easier as nested/concentric/etc boundaries 'of interest', without any of the complexity of a [[2519: Sloped Border]] situation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.205|162.158.34.205]] 19:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps overly literal, but some of these "lower-priority" items might actually be of interest to real pilots. It's impossible to take off without accelerating, for one. For another, pilots do sometimes broadcast congratulatory messages, which is nice but would certainly be of a lower priority than aviating, navigating and communicating. Finally, occasions such as public holidays or the founding of the airline are sometimes celebrated aboard airliners, and would naturally be announced to the passengers by the captain - although having the pilot leave the cockpit and join in the celebrations might be a cause for alarm.{{cn}} [[Special:Contributions/172.70.142.95|172.70.142.95]] 06:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

educate: teach the passengers how to fly a plane. [[User:Sci09273.15|Sci09273.15]] ([[User talk:Sci09273.15|talk]]) 18:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

How did Randall forget "pontificate"‽

Talk:3054: Scream Cipher

2025-03-07T17:23:35Z

MeZimm:

Anyone know a good free all-language OCR tool to help with the transcript? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.67.156|172.69.67.156]] 17:30, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
: Found one here: https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/diacritics.htm [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The written cipher is very interesting, but where can I hear recordings of the spoken form? [[Special:Contributions/Rockymountain|Rockymountain]] 17:31, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL4piuUn5nc Here ya go.] [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Are Cueball and Megan millenials? Who else would text greetings when they're standing right next to each other? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 17:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
:They could be texting other people. [[User:B_for_brain|B for brain]] ([[User_talk:B_for_brain|talk]]) ([https://www.youtube.com/@bforbrain youtube channel] [https://bforbrain.weebly.com/ wobsite (supposed to be a blag)]) 19:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
:Engineers and cyberfolk were text messaging their neighbors rather than talking long before it was <s>cool</s> encouraged for social distancing or quarantine! It's always helpful to get a reminder not to do this. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.101|162.158.159.101]] 20:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
:They might not be diegetically in the same room. Comics can get weird with physical space. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 20:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Likely a pun on "stream cipher"

: Related reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scream_(cipher) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.26.229|172.68.26.229]] 17:46, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

A̦ÅÄ ẠÂÅȀ, A̓A̅ ȀÅÄĂA̱ ȦÁ ÂÁAĂĂA̦ A̮ÄÂÂA̦ A̓A̮ ȀÁ A̱A̓A̱ A ÀÁÂÃA̓ÅÂ ÅA̮ A̅A̰A̓Ã A̭AA̋Á A̓Â A̅A̰A̓Ã ÃA̅A̦ĂÁ! [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:50, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:The Wikifunction [https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z22728 from Scream] returns "YOU KNOW, JA̅ WOULD BE NEALLY FUNNY JF WE DJD A VENSJON OF A̅HJS A̭AGE JN A̅HJS SA̅YLE!". Hmmm... [[User:Mwarren|Mwarren]] ([[User talk:Mwarren|talk]]) 19:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

::The page you link to came into existence 7 minutes after I had posted this comment ;) I was doing it all manually, using [https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/diacritics.htm this page] and best-guess attempts to interpret what Randall's handwritten diacritics were meant to correspond to. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 19:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

::: updated version: "A̦ÅÄ ẠÂÅȀ, ẢĀ ȀÅÄĂA̱ ȦÁ ȂÁAĂĂA̦ A̮ÄÂÂA̦ ẢA̮ ȀÁ A̱ẢA̱ A ÀÁȂÃẢÅÂ ÅA̮ ĀA̰ẢÃ A̯AA̋Á ẢÂ ĀA̰ẢÃ ÃĀA̦ĂÁ!" [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

On Wikifunctions, we implemented the two functions [https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z22725 to Scream Cipher] and [https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z22728 from Scream Cipher] --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.38.235|172.70.38.235]] 18:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:It looks like the wikifunctions are using a different character for "D" than [https://scream-cipher.netlify.app/ the github project] linked in the explanation. Seems as though one's using U+0331 and the other's using 0332. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 20:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

::Could always be made fault-tolerant, accepting both characters. If one wants to be conservative with A-candidates to save them for further alphabetical expansion, well, we might have to ask Randall for proper specification.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.94|172.71.160.94]] 08:42, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Is there a logic behind the choices of the letter? I guess A̧ is for C because of the French ç and Å is pronounced like O in some Nordic languages. Also, is it A̱, A̲ or A̲ ? (or something else). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.126.50|172.71.126.50]] 18:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
: Seems to be mostly visual similarity. Å has an actual O shape added to it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.171|172.70.110.171]] 20:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I give it a week for people to make a translator to and from this cipher. [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 18:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

: The Wikifunctions translations above were complete at least 11 minutes ''before'' your comment and well within the goal of one week :-) . [[User:Mwarren|Mwarren]] ([[User talk:Mwarren|talk]]) 19:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Numbers should be variations of h and/or g. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 18:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)#
:H > g [[User:SqueakSquawk4|SqueakSquawk4]] ([[User talk:SqueakSquawk4|talk]]) 18:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Using ''sed'' you can encode with <code>sed 's/C/A̧/g;s/D/A̱/g;s/F/A̮/g;s/G/A̋/g;s/H/A̰/g;s/J/A̓/g;s/P/A̯/g;s/Q/A̤/g;s/X/A̽/g;s/Y/A̦/g;y/BEIKLMNORSTUVWZ/ȦÁẢẠĂǍÂÅȂÃĀÄÀȀȺ/'</code> and decode with <code>sed 's/A̧/C/g;s/A̱/D/g;s/A̮/F/g;s/A̋/G/g;s/A̰/H/g;s/A̓/J/g;s/A̯/P/g;s/A̤/Q/g;s/A̽/X/g;s/A̦/Y/g;y/ȦÁẢẠĂǍÂÅȂÃĀÄÀȀȺ/BEIKLMNORSTUVWZ/'</code>. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.102|162.158.159.102]] 18:41, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
: This is really neat. I suppose `tr` might work too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.10.242|162.158.10.242]] 16:15, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:: I don't think `tr` can be used, at least not the most common (GNU) implementation; it doesn't do multibyte characters (and thus UTF-8 or other Unicode). [[User:Chaw|chaw]] ([[User talk:Chaw|talk]]) 20:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
::: You'd be able to use Perl's inbuilt equivalent tr/// (or y///) fair enough. I'd have to test for edge cases, but might or might not have to fight with /u or /l post-params (if otherwise desired), in concatonation with /i for case-insensitivity (useful for upconverting "plainText" to "CIPHERTEXT", unless you're also wanting to cater for "á" as well as "Á" in code, so that it can be restored upon decoding). There's plenty of scope for all of this, of course, well beyond the brief spec as given in the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.108|162.158.74.108]] 20:47, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

It would be really funny if someone added an image of Bill Cipher screaming, with the tag "A screaming cipher". It wouldn't reall fit but it'd be funny [[User:SqueakSquawk4|SqueakSquawk4]] ([[User talk:SqueakSquawk4|talk]]) 18:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
:[[File:Screamingcipher.png]] I did. [[User:B_for_brain|B for brain]] ([[User_talk:B_for_brain|talk]]) ([https://www.youtube.com/@bforbrain youtube channel] [https://bforbrain.weebly.com/ wobsite (supposed to be a blag)]) 19:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC) (EDIT: WOW, that thing is MASSIVE! Can someone please downscale it because I have no idea how. You have permission to edit my comment '''''only for that.''''') (DOUBLE EDIT: Nevermind, I did it.)
Someone started a GitHub repo with a web-based encoded/decoder already: https://github.com/Reginald-Gillespie/StreamCipher [[User:Dlech|Dlech]] ([[User talk:Dlech|talk]]) 19:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I'd almost want to edit in my repo instead of the current one because mine is objectively better, but I'm new to this and not sure if that's appropriate or not =P (I don't even know if I am commenting correctly) [[User:WKoA|WKoA]] ([[User talk:WKoA|talk]]) 00:17, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:Look to the likes of the [[1190: Time]] comic, where several different fanbase compilations may have been given. I would anticipate that you could do a decent job of editing "This thing here does..." into "Ways of experiencing it include this [existing one] and that [yours] [with room to add more, if they add up]. Or just mention your link here, let others decide if your claims of (better?) functionality stand up enough to prompt it to be put up alongside/ahead/instead of the other. I am at least intrigued as to how you did it differently.
:And you certainly had a bit of trouble with the signing. Just add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to the end of Talk comments and it autoreplaces. No need to go back in and edit (I added the original timestamp back in, for you, just for future reference). Unless of course you forgot to do it the first time... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.161|172.71.178.161]] 02:41, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

I know you can decode a substitution cipher by counting letters and replacing common ones like 'E' and then filling in the rest by inspection, but what kinds of automated approaches are there? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.105|162.158.159.105]] 20:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

'''HEADS UP:''' I just changed A̲ (0332 COMBINING LOW LINE) to A̱ (0331 COMBINING MACRON BELOW) as encoding for "D" in the table and the transcript. Rationale: "T" is written with macron, so it's only logical to encode "D" likewise. A "low line" is longer than a macron, and looking at Randall's comic, the line below the "D" is definitely not longer than the one above "T". It would also make no sense to encode "T" with a "combining low line" as well when a single, uncombined character exists. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.123|172.70.114.123]] 20:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
: These options should all be including as different writing styles! I think the longer line makes it clearer that A̲ represents D because the ink comes nearer to forming into a closed curve. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.68|172.68.54.68]] 15:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

What's the American alphabet? AnAussie [[Special:Contributions/172.68.64.213|172.68.64.213]] 01:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
: I coined this term. What I meant by it is the alphabet used by americans from the point of view of an american cultural experience (mine), where for example a decorated word like façade is seen so infrequently that the word cedilla may be equated with the letter C. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.105|162.158.62.105]] 20:24, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I expect to win a Turing Award for my proof this cypher is computationally equivalent to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_language) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.19|172.71.158.19]] 02:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

The page technically uses the incorrect characters for (at least) E, M, N, O, R, S, and T based on the title text shown on xkcd.com. The original title text uses two separate characters (ex. A + 0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT for E), whereas the table uses the combined character (ex. 00C1 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A WITH ACUTE for E). Alternatively, my browser is just doing something weird. Not necessarily worth updating, but something I noticed when implementing the cipher. [[User:Abus|Abus]] ([[User talk:Abus|talk]]) 06:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
: I think it's the browser. Firefox->Page Source gives me A+COMBINING WHATEVER, but <code>w3m -dump_source https://xkcd.com/3054/ | zcat | grep 'img.*title='</code> returns single characters. The title text here on explainxkcd was copied by ''TheusafBOT''. I trust ''TheusafBOT'' and ''w3m'' to be so basic and simple that they wouldn't try to do something 'clever' with the characters, whereas I tend to suspect the multi-MB-monster Firefox messed things up. I'm just guessing, though... could maybe someone test with yet another browser - e.g. Edge or Opera? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.107|162.158.159.107]] 11:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:: Argh, no, turns out ''w3m'', and also ''wget'' all return A+COMBINING THINGY, but they got merged into the single chars by my ''xterm'' when I copied them to some 'identify unicode' web page. Looking at the raw file dumped by ''wget'' I see A+COMBINING XX - I think... So I think you are right with your observation! Randall uses A+COMBINING XX for the title text on XKCD (though I really doubt that was intentional), then ''TheusafBOT'' merged the characters when it copied the text to create this page. That said, I still think using the merged chars is cleaner. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.107|162.158.159.107]] 12:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::: It may be worth noting the difference somewhere, even though the merged chars are cleaner. Someone copying the characters from this page to encipher text would technically be in violation of the "spec" since Randall used the two character version in the title text. If someone wished to decipher the title text from the original XKCD, this characters on this page would fail. [[User:Abus|Abus]] ([[User talk:Abus|talk]]) 18:56, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
: unsure how to indent a sourceblock, see below [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.167|172.68.54.167]] 16:13, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
<source>$ curl -s https://m.xkcd.com | sed -ne 's/.*id="altText">$[^<]*$<.*/\1/p' | iconv -f utf8 -t wchar_t | hexdump -C
00000000 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 |A...A...A...A...|
00000010 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 20 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 |A...A... ...A...|
00000020 20 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 03 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 | ...A.......A...|
00000030 27 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 11 03 00 00 |'...A...A.......|
00000040 41 00 00 00 26 03 00 00 20 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 |A...&... ...A...|
00000050 0c 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 0a 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 |....A.......A...|
00000060 02 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 03 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 |....A.......A...|
00000070 04 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 01 03 00 00 41 00 00 00 |....A.......A...|
00000080 11 03 00 00 20 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 |.... ...A...A...|
00000090 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 41 00 00 00 |A...A...A...A...|
000000a0 41 00 00 00 21 00 00 00 0a 00 00 00 |A...!.......|</source>

'''TRIARESIS'''
Does anyone else view the triaresis as a missed opportunity? I'm thinking of Die Aerzte". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_%C3%84rzte#Band_name]. Can someone insert the image of the band's logo? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.222|172.71.102.222]] 17:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:I saw that, when following up on the actual A-diaresisand I quite like the idea that they {{tvtropes|HeavyMetalUmlaut|heavy metal umlauted}} an ''actual'' existing umlaut/diaeresis... If it weren't irrelevent to the comic (and skipped the bit at the top that actually translates the name), I might have relinked to that anchor point. But happily boosting the visibility of it here with a small reply⋯ [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.122|172.68.205.122]] 21:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, should encode all numbers, in binary, using 'g' and 'h' for 0 and 1.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.195|172.70.162.195]] 17:56, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
:Why g and h? I saw an early comment saying the same. Why those when letters are A? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
::I presume for the "AAAAAAAAAGH!" type thing... (Although, given that a number would then be something like GHHHGGH, as a separate word, I'm not sure it'll look "AAAAAAAGH"ish.
::And is it coded as MSF (42=101010), N-bit (e.g. =00101010), BCD per digit (4=0100 2=0010 =01000010) or some other form? Plenty of scope for interpretation.
::Also, might I suggest E and I (or I and E) for it, instead..? IEIEIE EEIEIEIE EIEEEEIE! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.178|172.68.205.178]] 19:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Should "Augh" be added to the versions of screaming? Randall uses it alot, e.g. https://xkcd.com/493/, https://xkcd.com/1401/, https://xkcd.com/1388/, https://xkcd.com/1207/, https://xkcd.com/1226/, https://xkcd.com/780/, https://xkcd.com/990/ {{unsigned|Drkaii|18:06, 22 February 2025}}

ÅĂÃÃÀ ÂȦA̮Ⱥ! A̯ ȀA̦ÀȀÀȺĂ A̰ ÂÀÀẠ A̤ÀẢ AA̦ÀȀÅA̮ ǍA̦ÀĀ 2916 AÀ A̰ÄA̮ÀÄĂ A̱ÅÀ A̓A̰Ä ǍA̯ÄẠ A̓ÅA̰A̦A̰A̓AĂA̦Ⱥ ǍÀA̦ ȀȦÄA̓AȦA̰AA̯ÀÄ A̰ÄẠ ÄȦĀẢĂA̦Ⱥ AÀ A̰ẠẠ A̯ÄAÀ AÅĂ A̓A̯ȀÅĂA̦, A̰ÄẠ A̱ÅA̯AĂ ÅA̰A'Ⱥ ÅA̰A AÀ A̰ÄA̮ÀÄĂ A̱ÅÀ A̓A̰Ä ẠĂA̓A̯ȀÅĂA̦ AÅA̯Ⱥ A̯Ä 1 ĀA̯ÄȦAĂ ẢA̮ ÅA̰ÄẠ. (A̰ẢÂĀ: ĀȂA̦ A A̧ẢA̯A̰ÁȂ ĀA̰AĀ ȦÁA̋ẢÂÃ ȀẢĀA̰ ĀA̰Á ȦĂÄÁ, AÂA̱ A̱ÅÁÃ ẢĀÃ ȀÅȂẠ ȦA̦ A̱ÅẢÂA̋ A ĀȂAÂÃĂAĀẢÅÂ.)
(A̰ẢÂĀ ĀÅ ĀA̰Á A̰ẢÂĀ: ĀA̰Á ȦĂÄÁ A̧ÅÀÁȂÃ 70% ÅA̮ ĀA̰Á ȀÅȂĂA̱'Ã ÃÄȂA̮AA̧Á.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.46|162.158.90.46]] 03:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Can anybody provide pronunciation notes or recordings for those 'A's which are actually used in human languages? Can we transcribe the title text and the "Hello", "Hi" from the comic in IPA or something? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.88|141.101.99.88]] 10:33, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Choose the base letters arbitrarily other than ‘A’ and we get {{w|furigana}}. [[User:物灵|物灵]] ([[User talk:物灵|talk]]) 05:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

If you accept the definition that a 'word' is a bunch of letters, surrounded by a gap, then 'xnopyt', AAAAAAJJJJJJJ [[Special:Contributions/172.68.71.111|172.68.71.111]] 15:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

A̰ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.144|172.69.71.144]] 16:48, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

The Trivia "Notes" section reads like pareidolia. -- [[User:Rei|Rei]] ([[User talk:Rei|talk]]) 13:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Talk:2869: Puzzles

2025-03-07T17:22:37Z

MeZimm:

Aunt Alice is obviously a reference to the standard Alice / Bob / Eve crypto protocol characters. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.219|162.158.158.219]] 20:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Anyone know if this is an actual scene from an actual children's book? Or is it just sort of an ad hoc representation of how these things might typically go? [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

:Something about this reminded me of *The 39 Clues*? Which I've never read, so I don't know why. Looking them up, Wikipedia says book 1 leads to the clue "iron solute", and the fact that it specifically anagrams to "resolution" (sounds backwards, I'd think the final one would be "iron solute") - never mind that it could be many, many other things, such as "tonsure oil" or "ursine loot" (honey) or "oriole nuts" or "urine stool" or lots of other less-immediately-interpretable-as-an-ingredient things. And never mind that this clue was supposedly hidden by Ben Franklin, old enough that I wouldn't trust anything that relies on very specific spellings. I would assume that other puzzles within the book, and the rest of the series, are of similar dubiousness. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.183|162.158.146.183]] 04:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

:"Aunt Gertrude" suggests *The Hardy Boys* series of children's novels. I don't recall this particular scene. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.46|172.70.85.46]] 20:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

::I don't think Aunt Gertrude ever set Frank and Joe a puzzle herself, but it is certainly evocative of several puzzles in the Hardy Boys. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.136|172.71.151.136]] 21:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Can anyone with stronger Hardy Boys knowledge add some examples? I never read the Hardy Boys books or similiar kid mysteries, so it's hard to imagine how thin those mysteries got, to be compared to "character name -> random letter/word association -> answer" as used here without some examples. [[User:Mneme|Mneme]] ([[User talk:Mneme|talk]]) 22:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

::::I read seven of the earliest Hardy books plus about that many around #100, give or take. They didn't use a lot of word clues, it was more about who looks shady/innocent (but isn't), interviews, half-overheard crime plans, footprints, vehicle tracing, a suspect lost a hat/glove/crossbow, etc. The only word clues I recall off the top of my head were: shipment abbreviations (easy), a crook deathbed-confessing where he hid his loot (but the boys search the wrong building, confusing them), a bit of Morse Code (bonus for Frank sending it to Aunt Gertrude, and she understood despite the fact that she ''hated'' the idea of her nephews getting into danger), and two or three other coded distress signals (which the boys and/or their expert detective dad had already discussed beforehand). The most obscure of those signals I can recall was from The Mystery of Cabin Island -- Google that name plus "''alley'' cat" and you'll see how difficult it was (i.e. not at all) for them to guess that shady-guy-of-the-week Mr. ''Hanleigh'' was dangerous. (there was also a time when their computer-geek friend cracked a password, but it wasn't really a puzzle -- the computer belonged to a medieval faire technician, so I think the friend just brute-forced medieval words until he got in) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.126|172.70.175.126]] 00:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

::::The Mystery of Cabin Island included a substitution cipher that was not trivial (at least to crack by hand). The cipher told the location of the stolen medals. The Yellow Feather Mystery used a platen (a piece of paper with cutouts which, when placed on the proper source text, reveal the hidden message) as the device to reveal the location of a dead man's will. I also recall a time when the Hardy's pilot friend Jack Wayne was kidnapped and could only communicate in an obfuscated radio message that was something like 'beware the bite'. Turns out he mean the homophon 'bight', like a curve or recess in a coastline (it was a geograpical reference). There was a public domain Hardy story published earlier this year, The Crypto Mine Cypher, which involves a group of thieves that are stealing electricity to run a crypto mine as well as stealing NFTs and crypto via a drainer smart contract. Perhaps that would be more to Randall's liking? --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.58.14|172.69.58.14]] 06:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

::::The Secret of the Lost Tunnel has a good example of a multi-layered mystery involving codes. A piece of paper is hidden in an ammo box. The paper itself is a sort of book cipher that when decoded just gives a clue to location ("Find coin in iron"), not much better than "diG a hole in the Ground", really. Of course this was a reference to hiding a lot of gold in some cannon balls.

Could someone add a category for "Alice and Bob" comics? Right now, the list seems to be 177, 1323, 2440, 2691, 2869. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.38|162.158.233.38]] 22:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
:I'm not convinced that [[2440]] should be in the list; at best, it's using similar naming patterns. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 22:48, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
::Eve is clearly mentioned in the title text (Evangeline the Adulterator, which is clearly a reference to Eve from 177).
::: ''Is'' Evangeline the Adulterator clearly a reference to Eve? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 23:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
::: Well, 2440 doesn't mention anything about Evangeline the Adulterator except that she is named Evangeline and presumably adulterates. But in 177, Eve (not Evangeline) is the adulterat''ed'', not the adulterat''or''. That would be Alice, since Bob was in a relationship with Eve, not Alice. It feels disingenuous to say that they ''might'' be the same person; there's no proof they ''aren't'', but there are no reasons to think they ''are''. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 00:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
:::I've always felt that xkcd fans are better than even conspiracy theorists at finding connections that don't exist[[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.15|172.69.6.15]] 13:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
::::Conspiracy theorists don't actually exist, though. They're all actors spreading lies to distract from what's ''actually'' happening! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.12|141.101.98.12]] 14:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
:::::Clearly there had to be ''some'' way to blame the actor's strike, for all this global unrest recently. Thanks for clearing that up! ;S
:::::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I think Aunt Vergenie would leave a clue that has some specific content and requires some effort to understand, but isn't simply impossible to figure out without the key like Aunt Alice's. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.170|162.158.154.170]] 05:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Is it worth putting in this scene from Batman 66 as a similar example? Even if it is A. TV instead of book and B. Making fun of the idea itself
https://youtu.be/M-vAlR3-Ovg

Commissioner Gordon : It could be any one of them. But which one? Which ones?

Batman : Pretty *fishy* what happened to me on that ladder.

Commissioner Gordon : You mean where there's a fish there could be a Penguin?

Robin : But wait! It happened at sea. See? C for Catwoman!

Batman : Yet, an exploding shark *was* pulling my leg...

Commissioner Gordon : The Joker!

Chief O'Hara : All adds up to a sinister riddle. Riddle-R. Riddler!

Commissioner Gordon : Oh, the thought strikes me. So dreadful, I scarcely dare give it utterance.

Batman : The four of them. Their forces combined.

Robin : Holy nightmare

I feel like the explanation needs at least one example, from somewhere.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118|162.158.74.118]] 10:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

: Same immediate association here. You soooo beat me to it...TVTropes doesn't call it "BatDeduction" for nothing. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.25|172.71.160.25]] 18:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
:: I think the 1966 Batman is a bad one, because that is mocking the whole phenomenon. But Batman Forever is an example, where this was seemingly played straight. Batman jumps from the solutions to Riddler's riddles, which are obvious but don't say much to the fact that the answers aren't the point. The riddles are pointing to numbers, and then when the digits are combined in the right way, they form an alphanumeric code. The code spells out A,M,R, which then is supposed to be read as MR E —> mystery, and enigma is a synonym for mystery. Ergo Edward Nigma is the Riddler. The kicker is that it was completely obvious that Nigma was the Riddler, if one put three seconds of thought into how the Riddler was committing his crimes, instead of making a blind leap from the riddles.
::Aunt Alice did, but when she told her will to her lawyer Bob, Eve listened in and got the tresure before... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
::: Actually, I feel like 1966 Batman being also a reference to this sloppy mystery design trope makes it MORE relevant, not less. Though I agree about Batman Forever (except it wasn't A M R, it was M A H E, but the 1 of A and the 8 of H were to be combined into the 18 of R. I forget if anything linked those clues to make this logical, but I doubt it, LOL!). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

This reminds me a lot of the classic E.Nesbit book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_the_Amulet

However, I don't think they had an aunt Gertrude. I read tons of Hardy Boys books but I don't remember Aunt Gertrude ever giving clues like this, either.
[[User:Gtschemer|Gtschemer]] ([[User talk:Gtschemer|talk]]) 16:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

A lot of the books (& even comics) I've read were pretty old, & it strikes me that the ''opposite'' of what this comic claims, seems more accurate in my experience? Older stories have a lot of legit world-war \ cold-war tactics depicted, whereas newer stories (including those meant for "adults") often have something absurdly simple; presumably so that the most naive readers can get an "ah-ha" moment?
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

This one made me think of the Encyclopedia Brown books. Most of those puzzles were baffling if you thought about it for more than 5 minutes, like the stolen money was stored in stuffed penguins in a museum display on the artic wildlife, the reason that Brown figured that out was penguins were only in the southern hemisphere, which doesn't explain where the penguins to be stuffed with money came from in the first place. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.26.225|172.68.26.225]] 16:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
:You said it yourself: The southern hemisphere... Ultimately. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.179|172.71.242.179]] 17:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hang on, Cousin Mallory is trying to eavesdrop again. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.67|172.71.167.67]] 18:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The important question, though: is it Gertrude as in gif or Gertrude as in gin? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.223.189|172.69.223.189]] 10:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
:It's actually Gertrude as in gnome.... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.176|172.69.195.176]] 11:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
:Trying to start an argument by using the same kind of G twice? I see what you're doing... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
::gif as in jif refers to the .jif file format (JPEG Interchange Format) [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you want to]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 21:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I grew up with Enid Blyton (British author, I assume my mom's familiarity with British stuff led to this), loved them, particularly the Famous Five and the Adventure series, I'm sad that I can't remember which side of this particular coin Blyton lands on, LOL! I FEEL like they were great, fun books? So maybe Blyton was decent at designing mysteries? Both WERE stories of this ilk, children on their own finding, investigating, and solving mysteries (not sure about Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew, etc, but they were NEVER at home, always travelling, LOL! What kind of kids travel and explore unfamiliar locations without adults?) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2806: Anti-Vaxxers

2025-03-07T17:18:23Z

MeZimm:

Did he forget to write a punchline?
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.58|172.70.131.58]] 05:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
OH NO!!!!
:I think this comic is just a comment, not a joke. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Nah punchline is in the title text [[User:LentilLord|LentilLord]] ([[User talk:LentilLord|talk]]) 06:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Randall appears to express a "99th percentile fallacy", in which intelligent people (1%ers of a type) assume that all people will reason in the same way that they do, and will arrive at the same conclusions, if they will only try. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy vaccine hesitancy] contains (rough estimate) some 12,500 words, most of which discuss factors associated with the origin (a long time ago), propagation, and persistence of anti-vaccination movements and other forms of vaccine hesitancy. Twelve thousand words is not congruent with "simple". A common thread may be: the embracing and aggressive assertion of vaccine hesitancy, irrespective of any factual accuracy, represents the assertion of power over the intellectual 1%, which is attractive. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Meter_Telescope Especially when it works.] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.45|172.70.210.45]] 07:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:Appealing to wiki page word count is truly a decision. By that metric the capitalization of the i in star trek into darkness is more complicated than vaccines. https://xkcd.com/1167/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.30|172.70.207.30]] 18:16, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

: It's true that people have made the topic as lot more complex than it actually is, by coming up with many rationalisations and conspiracies to try to justify being anti-vax, and drawing unjustified conclusions from anecdotal correlations. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.55|172.71.160.55]] 12:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B

: One notable point is the herd immunity. Unlike lot of other vaccinated illnesses, there is no herd immunity from covid, because no matter how many vaccines you take and how many times you had covid, you can still spread it. Several politicians argued based on herd immunity even long after this became known. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::Noteable point and useful illustration of the whole topic... There is no vaccine that produces herd immunity YET. But you write as if there never could be...[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 07:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Herd immunity, as professed by those that mostly use that term in this context, is via ''not'' being immunised but "catching it normally, surviving (whilst passing it on to others, to hopefully repeat the process in everyone else) and forevermore not being bothered by it again". Of course, that requires surviving (not guaranteed, especially for some you'd be passing it on to) and gaining perpetual infection-induced-resistence (also not guaranteed, it turns out).
:::Immunising everyone, who ''can'' be immunised, drastically reduces the threat of individual fatality (rather than significant risk of dying from the virus, a non-zero but still magnitudes less risk from the injection) and yet actually throttles down the spreadability of the real thing to a similar degree (especially with pro-active variant-tuned boosters). Which is just basic immunity for most, acting as herd immunity who can't/won't be immunised if there aren't too many in the latter camp. But better just to be directly immunised where you don't have a very good reason to rely upon the protective status of everyone else around you. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 09:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::I'm certainly not in the loop on every instance of someone using the term herd immunity, but it seems to me that it's always been used in the sense of protecting people who cannot safely become immune from infection by developing immunity among most other people, by ''either'' vaccination or by natural infection. Do you have any examples of herd immunity excluding immunization?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.120|162.158.62.120]] 20:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Just take your mind back to the post-outbreak/pre-vaccine period of COVID, when there were those saying that "we don't need lockdowns", or testing, or restrictions of whatever degree of personal liberty they considered to be unduly infringed. Instead just let the virus do its thing (in a "bring it on!" way) and then we'll have herd immunity. Ok, so it was before the western world was clocking up deaths measured in ''way'' more than mere unfortunate handfuls. And when it was still generally imagined by even the experts that it was "catch it once, never again, and the coronavirus doesn't really mutate that quickly" scenario, but it ''was'' the main argument rolled out by the 'passive resistance to even reasonable authority' crowd, treating every suggested precaution as over-reach. Very loosely, as in overlapping in most ways but time, the proto-anti-vaxxers who just hadn't yet been presented a vaccine to actually be anti- to.
:::::As I said, the 'proper' use of the Herd Immunity term is relevent to mass-vaccinations to shut off as many potential infection vectors as possible. But in the context of those already tilted against vaccines it tends to have been the buzzword for using 'pox parties' and other casual disregard for the dangers of live-and-wild viruses which, by design, only increases the spreading potential. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.173|172.71.178.173]] 21:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::There was definitely a sense pre-vaccine that, once enough people caught it and developed natural immunity, then that would stop transmission and the pandemic would peter out. But that's still herd immunity. Your distinguishing of "proper" use of the term isn't correct, to my understanding. Herd immunity simply refers to enough of the population being immune so that there is a low chance of the non-immune being infected, regardless of how that immunity is developed. It's certainly less painful to get there through large scale vaccination than through natural infection, and the nature of a particular disease and its evolution versus the effectiveness of vaccination may affect the ability to get there, but the concept of herd immunity doesn't require vaccination. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.149|172.70.110.149]] 13:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:::Never say never, but the chance is extremely low. The problem is that the immunity you get is due to antibodies in blood. Which helps if covid gets into blood, helps if it gets to lungs, but covid starts in nose and can spread from there just fine - and blood-based antibodies don't work there. There is separate immunity layer there on mucous membranes, but that one is very bad at remembering stuff long-term AND won't learn anything from injections ever. I've read about some attempts to make vaccines in form of some nasal spray, but it would need to be repeated at least every three months ... and seems those attempts failed. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 19:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I added a bunch of info, including a disclaimer to take this with a grain of salt. I normally don't comment on Randall's political comics, as I disagree with nearly all of them, but this one irritates me more than most and borders dangerously close to misinformation. Randall is a physicist. I don't know his familiarity with the virology world, but I would presume not much.
I'm a biologist by degree ''and'' career. Emphasis on microbiology. I'm not vaccinated for Covid-19. I ''never'' will be. I am vaccinated for everything else. I don't trust the vaccine for a number of reasons, not just because there are a statistically significant number of cases of severe harm and death. [[User:Darkwolf0218|Darkwolf0218]] ([[User talk:Darkwolf0218|talk]]) 07:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
: That, my friend, is an appeal to authority - an all-too-common logical fallacy. Yes, Randall may be a physicist and you may be a biologist. But that represents absolutely ZERO evidence that you are right and he is wrong. It is a complete and utter non-argument. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.139|172.69.43.139]] 15:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
:What is your personal definition of "statistically significant number of cases of severe harm and death"? is it greater, by any chance, than the risk of death by NOT taking a vaccine? [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 02:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

: I'm glad that a vaccine dose wasn't wasted on you, and can go to someone else who deserves it. I also hope that you don't seek medical attention when you do contract the virus, because those resources can be used for better people as well.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.138|172.70.85.138]] 21:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:: What a horrible thing to say to someone. It's exactly this sort of thing that makes people resist changing their minds: why would you want to have anything in common with someone who would say such terrible things?
: Vaccines can have very harmful effects in some cases, but isn't it still safer than the increased risk of COVID-caused death or side effects? [[User:MelodyOfStorms|MelodyOfStorms]] ([[User talk:MelodyOfStorms|talk]]) 17:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
: I don't know it it is a named bias, but I have noticed that people working in a field often don't trust their own field, because they know "how it is done". For example, I work in the aeronautics industry, and many of my colleagues avoid flying, because they get to see everything that's done wrong and get first in line when something bad happens. But they don't realize that if you take a step back and look at the numbers, thanks to redundancy and safety margins, flying is actually quite safe. Other examples include internet security professionals who avoid online purchases.
:: No, the cybersecurity folks are objectively correct, it's very much a dismal science at the moment, as soft is full of holes and people are largely too gullible. Not to mention every modern PC has a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine government-mandated backdoor]! The question is usually not how safe you are (you aren't), but how much you have to lose. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.251|172.71.94.251]] 11:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: I'm not sure... IMO, the amount of direct, obvious hacking going around has plummeted. Main problem is all the ludicrous phishers and spam emails that pop up everywhere. Maybe it's just me, but saying that cybersecurity is essentially rotten at the core seems a bit sensationalized to me. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 13:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: EVERY PC? While getting rid of Intel ME is problem, the situation is much better regarding AMD. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

: (Almost) nobody claims science "disproves" God, though. The problem is actually that he ''cannot'' be disproven, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot such] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability things] are outside the domain of science. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.8|172.71.94.8]] 08:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Likewise, it's never possible to prove that any given vaccine won't cause harm. I'm allergic to live vaccines. Just... all of them. Any live vaccine I take, I will react to. I've been told, time and again, that that's impossible, that science assures us these are safe, and yet, every time, I get symptoms of the disease. I've been a scientist, in the strictest definition of the word, for over 5 years now, and I've learned that there is nearly ''nothing'' in science that is concrete. Even the established basic laws of the universe are occasionally modified as we learn about things like quarks and antimatter. Dark matter still violates the known laws of physics, but the data suggest that it ''must'' exist. I'm also a Christian who believes that science does not disprove the existence of Creation but rather supports the idea of intelligent (or at least guided) design. We can't disprove the existence of God because it is nearly impossible to conclusively disprove '''anything''' with 100% certainty. Even things we think are true, such as the speed-of-light limitation (does light travel the same speed in both directions or does it move instantly one way and half speed back? We can never know for sure [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k]) are not conclusive.{{unsigned|Darkwolf0218|08:17, 25 July 2023}}
::Many COVID vaccines are of course not Live. Depends which country you're in whether that's your only (or dominant) option, perhaps. And my (mRNA) first shot gave me a delayed-by-a-few-hours reaction "as if they'd injected a virus in me", which was unpleasant but (clearly) I survived to get a second (booster of the same) and third (booster of a different kind), as suggested for my particular age-slot. Neither of those caused problems, if you'd accept this just as a self-selecting anecdote, and when I finally ''maybe'' got COVID (or just a flu-like thing that general isolation had held up, letting it hit harder once people were being much less virologically cautious again/overcompensating by licking each other constantly) it was something I suffered but survived, whereas it's hard to say that I would have beforehand.
::Science does ''not'' support a 'designer', it's an undefined/undefinable issue. Any Sufficiently Omnipotent God could have designed and created the world last Tuesday, with all your and my memories, experiences and beliefs in place, and it would be untestable for. Science indicates a singularity start to the universe-as-we-see-it, but finds no reason to believe a 'designer' sparked it off. They would have to be sufficiently cogniscent as to know that the particle/radiation mix would eventually coellesce into a planet upon which one particular belief system actually 'worked out' what they did (and many others made up their own, wrong, versions!). Which perhaps means that the Designer ran through the scenario in Their head before they lit the spark, which raises of the question of whether we're actually the pre-spark ''thought experiment'', being simulated to see what will work. And maybe the God Of Logic deciding upon this doesn't ''like'' beings who decide that They exist even though he left no proof, so He'll never actually create us but instead go for a more rational full on agnostic universe when They eventually do the real thing. Disprove that! (Science can't. Theology can't. Never mind, it doesn't matter to a Designer. Only to other people Designed or accidental byproducts of any other process.)
::There are always gaps in science, which more science tries to make narrower (or find new gaps, in the process). Religion tends to pretend there are no gaps, or papers over the gaps with temporary repairs. You can mix science and religion to your own tastes; or stick to just one and put aside the other as irrelevent - either way, but with totally different outcomes in how you deal with the world (and how the world deals with you). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.210|141.101.98.210]] 09:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:: One could explain to a 5-year-old why people get symptoms from vaccines - some vaccines contain a weakened version of the virus (not Covid, FWIW), while others may cause an immune system reaction to generate anti-bodies, and the immune response is where many symptoms come from. It's concerning that you claim to be a biologist and you don't seem to know this (of course, you could also just be lying about that). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.55|172.71.160.55]] 12:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B
:Please keep in mind that a "statistically significant number" is not the same as an actually significant number. Yes, there are more complications than with giving a placebo. Statistically significantly (meaning: more than can reasonably dismissed as random chance) so. No, there are not that many severe complications, especially the mRNA vaccines are quite safe. They are both statistically and actually significantly safer than a CoViD 19 infection or even the general risk of an infection and they offer significant (again statistically and actually) protection from both infection and complications thereof. Lying with statistics is a thing and it mostly happens not because of bad numbers but because people don't know how to read them. [[User:627235|627235]] ([[User talk:627235|talk]]) 12:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Darkwolf0218, I'm genuinely curious what your reasons are. I don't really take anyone's word for it when they say "statistics support me," so, is there a link you can share that you feel is unanswerable? And see how the pro-vax crowd tries to answer it? I really do feel like I'm caught on the fence in a lot of this; the pro-vax crowd APPEARS to have so much expertise, but they're such smug and condescending jerks about it - and they NEVER really seem to engage with what their opponents are ACTUALLY saying - that I feel I'm forced to go to "neutral" talk pages like this one to see what the best arguments "for" and "against" actually are. Many thanks if you ever end up replying! [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 18:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::As a general note: the reason that the pro-vax crowd are smug and condescending jerks is the same reason that I, among many others, am frequently unable to be polite to flat-earthers. What do you engage with when your opponent understands nothing and is obviously wrong? What else should you do, if someone advocates a cult of death for what you intuitively know is no good reason at all? There's nothing fair. It's like calling out people who uphold the historicity of the Holocaust for being mean to Holocaust deniers: Holocaust deniers understand almost nothing about the actual event and they discredit themselves the moment they make a cogent point, so there's no point in trying to uphold false notions of equivalence of respect. At any rate, we engage with their arguments and disprove them ad-nauseam. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::: Well, what is your intention? Is it to change minds? Is it to set the record straight? Is it to learn how they think? Or is it to trash-talk people that you don't like (with the inevitable consequence of making them despise you and everything you stand for, and dig in their heels further, and also incidentally come across as an irrational jerk to any undecided people who might be reading the discussion.)
:::Take the flat-earth analogy: if I were to talk to someone who seemed genuinely convinced that there was a flat earth, I wouldn't suggest they were worthless or that it would be better if they were dead (as was *actually done* to Darkwolf0218 in this very thread!) I would ask what they felt was their best argument, or what (if anything) would change their minds. Depending on how they answer, I can validate whatever legitimacy there may be to their perspectives, carefully explain why I think my beliefs are justified, identify the place where our understandings diverge, fill in gaps in their knowledge which might be useful to forming a more complete understanding of the subject, and (if nothing else) show to all the people reading why my perspective is the reasonable one based on good-faith understanding of the evidence available.
::: And, on the off-chance that I am shown to be wrong about something, I can accept correction gracefully.
::: You refer to "death cults" in your response. Do you know what causes people to stay in cults? It's the perception that everyone outside the cult seems like a hostile aggressor and that the cult is the only place where they will find acceptance. People LEAVE cults when they are compassionately shown that there are better ways to live. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::I understand that responses can be biting and themselves dissuading. However, there's a fair amount of reasons that these comments get made so biting anyway, and maybe some of them will be illuminating.
::::
::::Plenty of people want to change minds. Some just want to trash-talk (and it's not as if this is entirely undeserved). It is also true that anti vaxers have hardly ever been historically accepting of new information or anything that doesn't fit what they've already made up about the topic, so people justifiably perceive changing minds as near-impossible (and my estimation is that even now flow from pro to anti is still higher than the converse). It also stands that anti-vaccination has hardly ever come up with any alternate responses to the COVID pandemic than just "keep doing what we were doing", which is proven to cause more death. With that standing, and with the fact that we recognize thinly-veiled anti-vax rhetoric when we see it like with Darkwolf0218, the comment at them about not using up resources is - if not justified - entirely understandable to me.
::::
::::"whatever legitimacy there may be to their perspectives" is usually taken out of context and warped (e.g. the thalidomide scandal, which happened 60 years ago and with the drug not being approved by the FDA anyway, is being used as a recent and currently-relevant example of pharmaceutical wrongdoing). Careful explanation has been tried, and yet they just dig in or bring up the same thing again. "filling in gaps in their knowledge" is hardly effective when all those gaps magically open at the same places. And reams of papers and other writing, as well as historical evidence, have found that pro-vax is the best method. Also, any being wrong about a claim tends to be simply ignored.
::::
::::Anti-vaxxers are hardly immune to the perception that you mention, because they (and other conspiracy theorists) are quick to name-call anything that doesn't fit their view as being shilled. Compassion has been tried, yes, but the most common response by loads is "shut up you shill" or some other new argument which has already been debunked. And when you've tried everything, and none of it works... you might be tempted to vent and call it quits for the moment. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

It's important to remember that we have all been exposed to aggressive and conflicting media and messaging. Randall's been exposed to media and messaging intended for mainstream intellectuals, whereas others have been exposed to "antivax" media and messaging. _Both_ of these are pushing a view while discrediting any counterinformation, and also contain true infornation. Combining them fairly is a noble and difficult goal. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.18|172.70.114.18]] 10:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:It's important to remember that the other side may not have nearly as aggressive or one-sided messaging as your side has. Those who oppose the scientific consensus are notoriously aggressive and tend to repeat the same things over and over again without bringing up or addressing counter-arguments, whereas many science communicators have responded to antivaxx claims. Both sides may be pushing back against what the other side is saying, but only one side is supported by like 99%+ of the people who've professionally studied the topic. Most of antivaxx is spread by celebrities and internet personalities with no scientific education. If you're inclined to try to understand everything each side is saying, go for it. But for laypeople, "trust the experts on their topic of expertise" is a fairly good rule of thumb. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.110|172.71.160.110]] 11:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:: That has not been my experience. My experience is that (intelligent) dissenters from mainstream views point to specific facts that appear (at least on the surface) to challenge or even debunk the mainstream view, and have specific (and eminently reasonable) questions about those facts which they cannot find a "mainstream" answer for (without being yelled at and called names, or at the very least, being told "don't worry about it, the experts have done your thinking for you." The only people they can find actually talking about such questions are their fellow dissenters, and so it is among their fellow dissenters that they find a home. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 17:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

The problem with how covid was handled is that it incentivizes pharmaceutical manufacturers, spy agencies, and major digital service providers to stimulate pandemics. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.64|172.70.114.64]] 10:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Unrelated to the curr. comic but does anyone find it odd that Randall doesn't make any comics about the Russian invasion of Ukraine? [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 11:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
: Not really? The only time XKCD really got political was when Trump was upon the land, usually he's not as topical. And while the current madness is also depressing, Randall is unlikely to be affected by it as much -- enviable, really! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 12:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:It's also fair to say that an armed conflict that affects a specific group is much harder to make anything approaching a joke--whereas the pandemic was something that affected nearly everyone and had the potential to highlight themes of hope and humanity even amidst the confusion and death [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone know where I can find a calm, measured discussion between intelligent, informed, and reasonable people who disagree on this topic? (And if you think "my side is the only side that has intelligent, informed, and reasonable people" - that kind of thinking is exactly what perpetuates the polarization problem, which makes it hard to find such discussions.) [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:In general, the place to go is probably what are known as rationalist groups. The main locus is probably LessWrong, but there are also important nodes at AstralCodexTen on Substack, its now-static ancestor, SlateStarCodex, and several other descendant sites. They specialize in trying to think about and discuss even prickly subjects, as rationally as they can (which necessarily includes them factoring in some epistemic humility). Personally, I think they might be a bit over-committed to runaway-AI position (even they have some bias they can't get out of, and they happen to have a large proportion of Bay Area tech researchers), but on the upside, they're a worldwide bunch, so they at least avoid some biases you're probably seeing more frequently. Rationalists are typically fans of XKCD themselves, since they're all very science-focused. // Other sources for reasonable discussion of COVID, particularly the "mRNA vaccines aren't necessarily good for you" position, include Bret Weinstein's and Heather Heying's Dark Horse Podcast (they're both evolutionary biologists), and, believe it or not, Joe Rogan - cut away the stand-up and MMA, and he gets some honestly intellectually stimulating guests, such as Michael Osterholm and Robert Malone. // For the "mRNA vaccines are probably good for you" position, there's Derek Lowe's In The Pipeline blog. All of these discuss other topics in addition to COVID, so search around. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.39.178|172.70.39.178]] 16:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::Joe Rogan lets conspiracy theorists on his show, and just nods along as they spout their conspiracies, often without a hint of pushback. If you're looking for an actual debate, where each side brings their best, you're not going to find it there. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.138|172.70.250.138]] 16:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::I think there do exist conspiracy theorists that have appeared on Rogan's show, but I'm fairly sure Osterholm was not one of them. Nor was Malone (the fellow who invented the entire mRNA technique). Either way, I think it's hard to find debate on JRE, but not for that reason; rather, it's because Rogan's approach is to largely let whoever his guest is, talk. That's important, because while we can probably agree that if a conspiracy theorist gets on Rogan and speaks at length, the other direction doesn't work - someone speaking at length on Rogan doesn't mean they're a conspiracy theorist. // Additionally, there's another problem with using "CT!" as a counterargument. It tacitly implies that institutions are trustworthy, in order to show that the conspiracy is false, and the theorist cannot be trusted. However, there's evidence that institutions have incentive to lie. Presenting that evidence will sound like a conspiracy is being offered, when the party to trust is the opposite of what one would expect. The remedy there is non-trivial: you have to look at the actual claims made, not the claimants. And you have to look at *both* parties' claims; often, the claims made by the challenger might be on reputation, but so are those made by the institution. If we try to say the institution can be trusted more, we run into a circular argument. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.195|172.70.42.195]] 17:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Conspiracy theorists are people who present a theory (in the colloquial sense, i.e. roughly a guess) of a conspiracy. It doesn't "tacitly imply institutions are trustworthy"; it implies that they don't have justification for whatever they're claiming about institutions. If you claim that Nazis were hiding advanced alien technology, calling that a conspiracy theory doesn't imply trust in Nazis, it just implies that you think that claim is rather detached from reality. And I don't know who Osterholm is; I was just making a general statement about how Rogan does stuff. Although Malone might be a conspiracy theorist, and saying he "invented the entire mRNA technique" is somewhere between misleading or false - he, along with his co-authors, just wrote 2 early papers, amongst hundreds of researchers who contributed to mRNA vaccine research. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.219|172.70.242.219]] 18:58, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B

:Randal obviously has knowledge and opinions on a lot of topics, and the comic often covers topics ranging from love to linguistics. If you see this as preaching, this might not be the comic for you. As for as that "fair and balanced" discussion you are looking for, have you considered that maybe this is one of those topics where intelligent, informed, reasonable people actually fall almost entirely on one side? With some questions, logic leads to the same conclusion for most people who make use of it. This is why you rarely find rational people engaging in debate over the truth of the moon landings, the sphericity of the earth, or the existence of anthropogenic climate change.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.184|172.68.174.184]] 19:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:I see your point, and I don't have a detailed answer, but peer-reviewed studies are at least a good place to start to inform what talking points are defensible and which may be based in shakier assumptions. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:I'd add that this comic clearly isn't about vaccine-critical (as in 'weighing the pros and cons, finding a personal balance of probability whether they confer a net help or harm), but those who start by being anti-whatever and suck up every contrary opinion out there in order to shore up their presupposed position. They don't want to be moved. And possibly some pro-vaccine people also don't want to be, but my experience is that there's many more resonable people who can be swayed by nuances.
:No, not everyone can be given a vaccine (if you have a suppressed immune system, for whatever reason, then it also probably can't be 'taught', in the way a fully functioning one can be, but any risks associated with them are at least as potent and ultimately more of a factor) but that makes it more important that those around them are (it's not just those individuals that need the advantages). Or enforced isolation, which has psychological, physiological and/or financial side-effects that became very obvious during various Lockdowns (definitely necessary prior to the vaccines being developed and tested, thankfully became less needed after they were, but always a balancing act).
:But full on anti-vax thoughts tend to be just "against anything the 'experts' say", drawing upon the more extreme 'theories' that invoke everything from 5G conspiracies to Microsoft-manufactired nanoparticle trackers in a house of cards that they've desperately stapled together to stop any bit of it falling down. And that's not a (mentally, at least initially) healthy place to be - or to try to be in putting yourself in their shoes whilst looking for a compromise position. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 18:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:There has been plenty of calm, measured discussion between intelligent people (but one side of most debates will inevitably have underinformed or less-than-reasonable people). But these discussions have been had so many times, and people just keep repeating the same things over and over again, regardless of how many times it's been addressed (and in many cases claims have gotten less reality-based, like claiming that all governments and scientists worldwide are colluding to lie to the public - that isn't even considered a particularly extreme view in public discourse). People loudly taking a firm stance on the opposing side have contributed to public distrust of vaccines and science as a whole, which led to the deaths of millions of people so far (never mind the long-term damage that could result distrusting experts). People who contributed to the deaths of millions of people tend not to be treated too kindly. But if you'd like to be more informed on the topic and you ask questions in good faith, people will respond calmly and respectfully, more often than not (although there are also plenty of resources available to read up on the topic). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.247.98|172.70.247.98]] 19:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B
::If, as you say, there is "plenty of" such discussion, then I am begging you: give me a link to the calmest and most measured discussion you are aware of between a pro-vaxxer and an anti-vaxxer. Or at least, a discussion that's in your top twenty "calmest and most measured" of such discussions. Because I cannot find one to save my life. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 19:19, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Plenty of science communication channels and wikipedia.org cover this well. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::I don't know that I'd be able to find such a debate any time soon. It's been years since that debate was worth having. At this point, if you're looking for that, your best bet is probably to put together what each side has said in their separate corners. Calm and reasoned responses to anti-vaxx arguments is probably a lot easier to find than live debates - most science communicators I know of on YouTube discussed the topic, or you can just head to Wikipedia. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.87.152|162.158.87.152]] 02:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::That conversation can happen, but it is extremely painful to have. It is not a discussion that is easy to have in a calm and measured way simply because of the magnitude of the circumstances and the polarization. Nonetheless, some people are open to speak, especially if you listen. Also, a lot of people trust their experience, and this has opened them up to different ideas. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 05:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:"intelligent, informed, and reasonable people" - this is a contradiction in terms - humans are primarily big bags of irrational emotions and biases, with a limited capacity for assimilating information. The best you can hope for is someone who is slightly less so than the rest. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.196|141.101.98.196]] 10:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

It's really disappointing to see the anti-vaxxers coming out of the woodwork for this comic, I'd assume that most xkcd fans would be more scientifically minded and logical. I definitely agree with Randall on this one, the data is so obvious and unambiguous about how effective the vaccines are, yet people love to pretend that the minor side effects are somehow worse than the illness they prevent, despite having absolutely no evidence other than perhaps some exaggerated anecdotes they heard from a Youtuber's cousin's friend's sister. I've had the vaccine, I've had Covid, the actual disease is far worse than the vaccine's minor side effects. More anecdata, but the science all agrees with it. Sigh. [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 18:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:I'd probably believe both the anti-vaxx threads started in the talk page are all flamebait from lame trolls. Think about it: who the heck reads xkcd, is able to actually write a iscussion thread, and then waste that discussion thread activating their conspiracy theory neurons and yelling out goddamn infuriatingly sensationalized words like "misinformation" and "propaganda".[[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 22:10, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::There are surprisingly many anti-vaxxers among the well educated. That includes doctors. I think there is something viscerally unsettling with injecting stuff into our bodies, especially something that not only doesn't treat an illness but makes us a little sick. And it is stuff that has not been tried on a large scale before, that we know will cause serious complications or even death to a some people (even if it saves much more). It is scary, and it can interfere with our abilities to think rationally. On a subconscious level, it is something we try to avoid, and we will find every reason. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.186.19|172.71.186.19]] 01:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::To quote Richard Feynman (no really), "Of course you laugh at this because it’s self-evident to the rational mind, but not to the emotional mind—the emotional mind can’t laugh at this." [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Yes, injecting stuff into our bodies is viscerally unsettling, and it makes your arm hurt a little and it might make you a little sick for a day or so. And this is all to fight against an invisible disease that spreads through the air and has killed millions of humans, that just randomly showed up one day, and may randomly kill us too, and there's only so much we can do to prevent that (like injecting the above thing, which reduces our risk massively). And all that can be scary, and that can interfere with our ability to think rationally. And on a subconscious level, it is something we try to avoid, and we will find every reason. And some of those reasons include thinking that maybe it hasn't been tested quite enough, or maybe there are frequently complications (and a whole lot of other reasons), but that doesn't mean those reasons are actually justified nor that they correspond to the truth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.103|162.158.95.103]] 02:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B

:It's disappointing, but of course the comments on such a comic are going to be a self-selected group of people who felt the need to speak up. This is, admittedly, not a comic that most people need the explanation for. A vocal minority is no reflection on the bulk of Randall's readership. And for those who came to this page to express a dissenting view, we absolutely look forward to civil debate and well-cited caveats. As someone who has trawled the ancient depths of this wiki, the political comics always get a certain amount of "Randall has jumped the shark" (from a comic in 2010) or "this one isn't funny". It's just a normal part of any feedback system. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:19, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:'the science all agrees with it'. The science doesn't even agree with the previous science. It doesn't even agree with the current science. It is supposed to be a critical discipline. Meaning that ideas that have been rejected or branded as wrong can be explored nonetheless. There is no one science. You should know that all scientific progress comes from the fringes, and almost always is met with rejection and revilement. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 05:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::Significant scientific progress may have come from the fringes, but this very, very rarely happens. Just think for a second what you're actually saying: that "all" progress is made by scrapping much of what we know and replacing it with entirely new things. No, most progress is made in small increments by building on existing knowledge, in line with the scientific consensus. And modern scientists are more open than ever to bring proven wrong (and many are even excited at the prospect, because that means new stuff to learn), as long as, and here's the crucial part, it's actually supported by evidence. Most "revilement" in the past came from the religious, who didn't want to accept that all that exists doesn't revolve around humanity (many still don't accept this). In any case, I'll accept you saying that roughly no-one agrees with you, but you thinking this somehow gives any credence to your position is you taking a massive leap of logic, possibly through a brink wall or ten (you're employing flat Earth "logic" there). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

Surely this is an allegory to climate change with the tree being the indicator
:How? [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

People are trying to edit the page to be "more balanced" by spreading vaccine hesitancy. I don't really know where to draw the line between accurately representing their position and not giving them a platform to do harm. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.56|172.70.243.56]] 22:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B

This comic has gotten more comments in a day than most comics do in a year. Just thought I'd point that out. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 22:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Actually maybe not more comments, just more words. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 22:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Probably because unlike the other vaccine/covid related XKCDs, this one seems to be missing a punchline and therefore reads as preachy.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.12|172.69.23.12]] 03:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

This one is probably the creepiest of all COVID comics. It starts with a variant of "I'm not a racist, but" and goes on to call the enormously complex bio-engineered vaccines "the easiest and simplest intervention". Oh no, dear reader, you don't need to understand the technical details. The Science works in mysterious ways. But in Its infinite love, It commands you to inject Its miraculous gift, not once, not twice, but as many times as The Science tells you. The Data says it's safe, therefore it's safe. This is what's easy, this is what's simple, and this is all you need to know, you infidel antivaxxer.
:The development of vaccines is "enormously complex", but this is primarily relevant to people with multiple degrees in microbiology. For the general public, it's as simple as "stick this in your arm to not get sick". Most people know nothing about food production, but trust things they buy in the supermarket. Most people know nothing about construction materials and processes, but trust that a building won't collapse in on itself. Heck, this even applies to medicine, where people are more than happy to let a doctor inject whatever while they're in the hospital. But when it comes to vaccines, everyone seems to think of themselves as an expert, when roughly every person who's studied the topic professionally is telling them they're mistaken. If you want to become an expert, or learn from experts, go for it, but if you're not an expert, you probably shouldn't think of yourself as one. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.210|198.41.242.210]] 09:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::This is where the creepiness of the comic comes from: instead of appealing to logic and reason, it demands trust. But one does not earn trust with a long history of controversies, making their services mandatory, aggressive propaganda, censorship, or saccharine web-comics. If it weren't for the reputation of the vax crowd (governments, corporations, media and general laypeople combined), I'd probably consider doing it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.154|172.71.182.154]] 11:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::We have spent massive amounts of time appealing to logic and reason to explain why antivaxx isn't justified (and how "a long history of controversies", "propaganda" and "censorship" are all greatly misleading, if not entirely false), but that hasn't worked for many. Humans aren't all that rational, especially on topics that carry emotional appeal (and the other side isn't immune to that, but there are more people on that side who try to actively counteract that weakness we all have through skepticism, and that side also has expert judgement on their side). And the comic never mentions trust. It only states that vaccines are effective. You can either trust scientists on that, or you can engage with the science to find out why that is - your choice. But also, trusting experts on their topic of expertise is fairly logical (while trusting people who know very little about the topic, or trusting your own intuitive feelings, is not all that reliable and therefore not all that logical). [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.118|198.41.242.118]] 13:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::Is the thalidomide scandal greatly misleading or entirely false? Many smaller pharmaceutical scandals. The "misinformation policies" of Youtube - can't argue with the WHO, can't doubt the US presidential elections.
::::Vaccines are effective - to some extent - and they all have side effects. It's obvious that the pharmaceutical companies that produce them are financially motivated to exaggerate the positive effects, downplay or hide the adverse ones, and sell as much doses as possible. Knowledge and power don't somehow make an entity truthful. On the contrary, with greater knowledge and greater power, its lies become harder to detect, sometimes even dangerous to expose. Society has a moral obligation to doubt and question, rather than blindly accept everything the authorities say, as Cueball recommends. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.59|172.70.46.59]] 15:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::The FDA refused to approve thalidomide, so there goes most of your argument (despite this, they also added even more regulations as a result of this). Also, why is the only example you offer from 60 years ago? If you know anything whatsoever about medical history, you should know that what happened that long ago might as well have been happening on a different planet for how different it is from modern medicine, given how much more we've learnt about medicine and safe and effective medical practices (which included learning from the mistakes of our past). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.44|162.158.95.44]] 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::::There used to be a nice long list of controversies on Wikipedia that I wanted to share, but it seems to be gone. Here's random page describing six scandals from 1986 to 2020, found by googling "Pfizer controversies": https://corporatewatch.org/pfizer-six-scandals-to-remember/ Feel free to substitute Pfizer with Johnson&Johnson and the like in the search bar. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 19:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Of course pharmaceutical companies are financially motivated, and are often very, very greedy. If you've ever listened any amount to a pro-vaccine science communicator, you've probably have heard them complaining about that. But that doesn't mean the entire system of regulation and verification that's been built around that cannot be trusted. Ending up in prison for fabricating results would be rather contrary to their goal of making money. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.44|162.158.95.44]] 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::::Big Pharma is a big (heh) problem. Many people, on either side, are cognizant of it, but one should understand that Pharma is pragmatic - not always-evil OR always-good, but they're rather willing to do unethical things in the name of money. With that said, COVID-19 doesn't have much reason to be one of them. They made their billions, and COVID clearly isn't as much of a problem as it was two or three years ago. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Trust is a spectrum! Note how the link above doesn't mention imprisonment, only fines, which suggests that Big Pharma is balancing on its own spectrum of conscientiousness, looking for the optimal point that maximizes profits minus fines. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 19:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I thought the easiest and simplest intervention was to rely on the natural immune response to produce antibodies. Not sure if it's the most effective though, but it's proven to be effective enough for me personally, and it definitely has the best effectiveness to complexity ratio. Anyway, the decisive advantage of the method is not siding with the modern mass-surveilling thought-controlling Inquisition. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 08:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, and quite a few people who considered their natural immune response to be effective enough are dead now. Anecdotes is not how you determine whether something works or not. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.210|198.41.242.210]] 09:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:(@172.71...) Have you understood the point of [[2557: Immunity|this comic]]? Oh well, never mind. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 09:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::Imagine a company selling a pocket device that has been rigorously proven to reduce 1000 times the chance of being struck by a lightning. The company routinely electrocutes kittens in public to show what happens to those unprotected, and the company's fans are notorious for patronizing and lecturing those who haven't yet purchased the device. Would you buy it? As for myself, while generally trying to avoid death and suffering, I can afford the luxury to pay with a tiny fraction of my expected lifetime for other things I value. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.154|172.71.182.154]] 11:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::A few thousand people have gotten killed by lightning in the same time it took Covid to kill millions (and that's with a bunch of preventative measures against Covid). So that analogy is completely on the wrong scale. Absolutely no idea where you get "electrocutes kittens in public" from. Many people are dying all by themselves. We're the ones trying to STOP deaths. At best we sometimes point deaths out when people try to imply or assert that it's not serious. So are you intentionally dishonest, or just accidentally dishonest? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.110|172.71.160.110]] 11:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::Low probabilities do matter at the national level as they accumulate into mortality statistics, but in daily life, people tend to classify things as either dangerous or safe-ish. On the global scale, cars kill (say) millions, and lightnings kill (say) thousands. Does this difference of three orders of magnitude matter that much? People drive their cars fearlessly and don't panic when they spot a storm cloud. On the other hand, we mortals are doomed to die, and no matter how hard we try, it's still impossible to STOP death. Considering the whole bulk of death causes combined, it seems you are influenced by so-called "zero-risk bias", i.e. focusing on minimizing one particular type of risk while disregarding the rest of them.
::::As for the public kitten electrocution (for the greater good of inducing electricity fear and stopping lightning deaths), it's a metaphor for behavior one might find repelling: semi-mandatory vaccinations, aggressive propaganda, social media censorship etc. And what's dishonest in taking a small risk to make a point? Why can't you respect my personal decision? Essential liberty, little temporary safety, Benjamin Franklin.
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.4|172.71.102.4]] 13:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Counterpoint: anyone who wants to give up others' safety for a little of their own liberty also deserves neither (which I would argue is just as important as Franklin's sentiment), and the ideology of antivaxxers causes mass-death for essentially no reason. Why can't you respect the decision of the world around you to not be at risk of death because they're next to you? [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::Hmm, I guess essential is more valuable than little and temporary, be it safety or liberty. Then again, in reality, the vaxxers are safe with their unreasonably effective vaccine, and the antivaxxers are only responsible for their own well-being. No harm done! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.59|172.71.94.59]] 17:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::I wouldn't be so sure about that, because there are people who intend to get the vaccine but cannot right now, and antivaxxers risk exposing them too. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Fine, some harm is done (in a probabilistic sense). In a world where car owners don't feel guilty for being probabilistic suicide killers, and most Covid-fearing people can get their shots, I find this threat level acceptable. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.176|172.70.46.176]] 04:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::To some extent, people who own automobiles aren't in much control over their transportation (though I'm fully in favor of scrapping automobiles for transport and replacing them with trains). You're in full control to sign up and get the COVID vaccine, but you've already outed yourself as a death cultist when you casually refer to the proven incitement of death by antivaxxers as acceptable, so I'd rather you just hole yourself up in your room and let a better person than you get the shot they need. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::::"anyone who wants to give up others' safety for a little of their own liberty also deserves neither" - a misquote of Benjamin Franklin, who was objecting to a proposal by the Penn family (which was ruling Pennsylvania '''from britain''' at the time) to give the Pennsylvania General Assembly a lump-sum one-time payment in exchange for the Pennsylvania General Assembly agreeing it didn't have authority to tax the Penns.[https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-safety-quote-lost-its-context-in-21st-century] It had nothing to do with the desire of antivax cultists to be fucking narcissistic plague rats.
:::::::::Pfft, better to be a free narcissistic plague rat than a caged narcissistic lab rat. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.176|172.70.46.176]] 04:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm actually wondering whether this comic is meant to say A) Antivaxxers made/make things complicated while it isn't. Or B) Whether or not you decided to take the vaccine was a very complicated decision for some ('the pandemic brought with it so much confusing stuff. Ambiguous data, weird tradeoffs, disagreements, dilemmas, and uncertainty'), so if you really try to 'meet people where they are' you should be open-minded to speak with people on both sides, people that took the vaccine and people that didn't. Although Cueball claims to be open-minded, he can't fathom the idea that although taking the vaccine felt like the most effective, easiest and simplest intervention to him, there might be people out there (maybe even the other two people in the comic, who don't say a word) that made another decision, because they felt that decision was better for them, not just 'to make it complicated'. This comic was sent in the chat of my group of friends and it seems there are different ways to interpret the comic. Either it's a very good comic or I'm overthinking it (I'm leaning towards explanation B). What do you think? [[User:K|K]] ([[User talk:K|talk]]) 14:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC) K

Was there some news event or something that prompted this? Seems so random at this point. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.175.13|162.158.175.13]] 19:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

'''Let's make it quite simple.''' Meeting antivax nutjobs 'where they are' is impossible for sane people, because there IS no logic to the insane antivax cultist position. "You can't logic someone out of a position they didn't logic themselves into."
:This is a matter of personal preference, not logic. You can't logic someone into liking apples, insults won't help you either. In fact, this kind of attitude might contribute a lot to the person's distaste for apples. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.74|141.101.76.74]] 06:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::Do you think people LIKE getting jabbed with a needle? You're not supposed to LIKE getting vaccinated, you're supposed to do to avoid the risk of not doing it. And being "logic'ed" into doing something to avoid some risk is one of the basic things that we use logic for. If that wouldn't work on you, then I can only presume you don't care about logic at all, and you make all your decisions purely based on emotional appeal, which would be concerning, to say the least. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.35|172.71.160.35]] 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:Indeed, however, you are arguing with a boogeyman in your head, in reality, the whole conversation has been flanderized to oblivion, where someone is either 'one of us' or 'one of them'. Being hesitant of a new biotechnological advancement is not being a nutjob, it's being cautious, and people who know the history of science, kind of have good reason to be cautious about the newest panacea. Remember people eating radioactive candy because it was 'reinvigorating'? How about people using lead in gasoline? How long did it take us to prove that lead in gasoline was bad? How long did thalidomide take? How long did asbestos take? Did the Romans ever figure out that their plumbing was making them stupid and die? Technology is not always good. And it definitely is '''no good''' without being aware that there are always unintended effects to progress. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 02:12, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::People who know the history of science, know that we've learnt from every mistake that's been made in the past, we've learnt so much about safe and effective medical practices, and we've learnt so much more about reality itself, and they know that science is the most reliable method to gain knowledge about reality. People who know nothing about the history of science, or those who are engaging in the most egregious of cherry-picking, would imply something like "the Romans were not very bright, therefore we can't trust any science", as you just did. Once you move past the "science = bad" silliness and you begin to understand how we conclude that medicine is safe and effective, your entire argument falls apart. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::People who know history know that the only thing we can learn from history is that we don't learn from history. Also, I didn't imply what you understood, I merely gave you one of many examples where society-wide technological advancements had a hidden cost that was only understood many years later. Science is not bat at all, it is a method, and that method must be open to criticism, even criticism no one wants to hear. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 17:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

If you dislike apples because someone else told you to like apples, then you’re a contrarian idiot. If you had an apple and didn’t like it then you’re disliking apples for a logical reason. Similarly, if you refuse to get a vaccine because someone else told you to get a vaccine then you’re Ali a contrarian idiot. The vaccine equivalent to “having the Apple” to determine that you don’t like it would be actually running tests of your own to determine efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Since you can’t run a large scale vaccine test at home your only option is to rely on the information provided by the experts. Don’t trust the experts? Then why do you trust the fake internet experts?
:I disagree with your association of contrarianism with idiocy. Moderate contrarianism is a valuable personality trait that prevents communities from degenerating into monolithic oppressive echo chambers, and opposing an irritatingly widespread idea is not the same as doing things to spite some random guy. As for anti-vaccination, it's more of a lifestyle preference than a product preference. Am I in grave danger if I take the vaccine? Probably not. Am I in grave danger if I refuse it? Probably not. Rationally, I even agree that vaccination is most likely the healthier option, but the difference doesn't seem significant enough. So I ''prefer'' to indulge in contrarianism. It is against my personal ''preferences'' to be manipulated by powerful organizations and their numerous supporters into obediently taking some experimental substance, repeatedly, at regular intervals. But again, it's not a fear of adverse side effects, it's an aversion to anything force-fed, not distrust in the sense of "I don't trust the quality of your product", but in the sense of "I don't trust you to tell me what to do". And of course, I don't trust the "fake internet experts" either, I don't even read them on purpose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.177|172.70.46.177]] 09:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::While contrarianism IS valuable, it's not a reason to do things. If (as you say) getting and not getting the vaccine are equal situations for you medically, but getting it is socially encouraged, then the only reason you have to NOT get it is to be contrarian, as you say. It's contrarian, but it brings no benefit to you. Being contrarian AGAINST logic is the issue. If the vaccine was more medically dubious than beneficial but still had the social gain, then yeah, contrarianism has benefits because there are costs to weigh. But if being contrarian only provides downsides, it's illogical and you're just making something simple complicated. --[[User:Magicalus|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus|talk]]) 12:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:::It's illogical only in the assumption that:
:::1) Human beings are model rational agents maximizing a precisely defined real-valued utility function
:::2) Maintaining health is the ultimate goal and meaning of life
:::3) There are no unknown unknowns
:::If one feels being manipulated and the health risk is not too high, one can choose the seemingly less healthy option. It might even turn out to be more healthy because of some unknown unknowns not taken into account in the rational assessment of the vaccine's utility. Might not. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 16:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::::So the logic is "There could be an unknown downside, so it's better not to risk it." If we're just going to claim unknowns, we can't assume all unknowns are negative. Who knows, maybe it turns out 0.01% of the people who get the vaccine get superpowers. That line of thinking is just an endless pit because there are infinite arguments on both sides. So out of the remaining arguments, let's talk about the second one. The idea isn't that maintaining health is the ultimate goal, it's that maintaining health is a positive thing to do and the vaccine in this regard is, for the sake of argument, neutral. The first argument doesn't make sense. You're eitehr implying that humans act illogically anyways, so it IS an illogical action, or that "social credit" is determined by illogical humans who don't always make the right choices. So this is illogical if humans make logical decisions, health is a beneficial trait, and the vaccine doesn't give people superpowers and doesn't turn them into rats. Being contrarian here only serves as a detriment unless what is essentially random chance works in your favor and not against. --[[User:Magicalus|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus|talk]]) 01:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::Skepticism is a valuable personality trait (that prevents communities from degenerating into monolithic oppressive echo chambers). Contrarianism, on the other hand, may sometimes have the same effect, while at other times could lead to people literally dying, just for the sake you being able to disagree with something. Being contrarian seems, at most, like a useful thought exercise to get a different perspective (which is essentially a part of skepticism in any case). Letting contrarianism be a driving factor in significant life decisions seems like a terrible idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.35|172.71.160.35]] 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::Can't skepticism lead to people literally dying, just for the sake you being able to doubt something? Can't conformism lead to people literally dying? Any -ism, taken to the absolute, is a terrible idea in significant life decisions. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 16:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

It seems to me like the very term "anti-vaxxer" has become a misleading slur applied to anyone who opposes certain policies, regardless of reason. I think vaccines are great; I got my (multiple) COVID shots, flu shot every year, etc.. But apparently I'm an "anti-vaxxer" because I oppose vaccine MANDATES. I would rather respect other people's personally autonomy, letting them make their choice about their body, rather than force people to undergo medical procedures against their will, even if I think their reasons are stupid. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.105|172.70.135.105]] 17:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:Think carefully. Some people want the vaccine, but can't get it for now or have other facts preventing them, and antivaxxers will expose these yet-un-immunized folks to COVID, which is a gross violation of the personal liberty of '''not having COVID-19.''' If you actually did take all those shots and aren't lying in order to make yourself seem better, then you'd know that.
:Everyone likes personal autonomy, but nobody considers the fact that a person's personal autonomy is invalid when it endangers others... and that's exactly what anti-vaxxers do. They're not just affecting themselves, they're hurting others - as we've seen in places where nobody vaccinates against polio and it makes a sharp uptick. In that light, a vaccine mandate is the best available option. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 13:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::After thinking carefully, I've come to the conclusion that you just want to A) call me a liar with no evidence or reason, and B) redefine personal liberty to mean the exact opposite. It's not going to be productive for me to try to have any kind of rational discussion with you. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.134|172.70.135.134]] 01:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Can you clarify? The person you are responding to is simply saying that you shouldn't use personal autonomy as an excuse when you are actively harming other people. Main problem though, is the person's equivalence of your rather balanced opinion with the opinions of the radical anti-vaxxers that spit out nonsense about 5G contamination and microchip scandals. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

This comic reads like it's almost self aware. "Things are never that simple" "That never happens". Indeed Randall. And this is no exception. For all the good any treatment may or may not do, it is ethically imperative to always acquire informed consent from the subjects. Informed consent was not acquired because the risks were not fully understood at the time. Most people were not made aware of this fact, and were misled into thinking that this was a tried and tested treatment. Long term side effects cannot be found at "warp speed" they are by definition, long term. Science is meant to be critical, and there is no way we can be critical of a treatment that we gave to up to 60% of the population in two years. Remember to take care of your biases. If you gave your product to more than 60% of the world population, would you want to find out that it wasn't great? Would you want to find out it might have not been a good idea? No. Conflict of interest. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 01:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
:While the world isn't simple all of the time, it also stands that some situations are less complex than others - and this one was particularly simple.

:You say "may or may not do" as if you live in 2020 and this is still some sort of hypothetical. '''This is not hypothetical: during the first year, the vaccines already saved 20 million lives.''' Immunizing people to COVID '''works.'''

:Your next statement is about informed consent, and the first thing you cast doubt on is the idea that the vaccines were tried and tested, but.. .they were. There were 110 possible candidates in clinical development at one point - what do you think they did to narrow it down to a few? Eeny miney moe? Rock paper scissors? There was no misleading because it's just true that the final candidates were tried and tested, and we did it faster because of (among other things) much higher funding, usage of mRNA tech built by people such as Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissmann, as well as overlapping trial phases and an appreciable head-start given that we'd done a lot of work on vaccination of coronaviruses already (since 2002 in fact).

:"Long term side effects" in the field of vaccines are really rare. Even severe side effects at '''any''' length of time are rare for any vaccinations, but they show up within the first few weeks a great majority of the time - this is expected, because vaccines are only taken at one moment, and the body will eliminate the payload in a matter of months. Therefore, panicking about long term side effects is irrelevant here - COVID-19 has '''far more likelihood to affect you long-term anyway.'''

:There is a way we can be critical of a treatment given to a vast amount of people: '''look at what it did.''' And what it did was reduce disease, hospitalization and death incident multiple-fold!

:"If you gave your product to more than 60% of the world population, would you want to find out that it wasn't great?" There is no need to answer hypotheticals that didn't happen when I can simply say that if my product was given to 60% of the world population, reduced disease 8-fold, hospitalization 25-fold and death 25-fold, I'd be '''ecstatic that I was a great contributor to the solution of the pandemic and made a few billions on the side!''' Because that's what happened. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 13:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:So how many million more deaths would've been acceptable in your opinion, in order for us to meet whatever criteria for medical treatment, across however many decades or centuries, that exists in your head? Also, for how many years have you been a virologist (or a biologist, or some other scientist that researches medical treatments)? I'm guess ZERO, because almost all scientists agree that the vaccine went through sufficient testing, on par with other new treatments, and it's mostly laypeople who know nothing about medical testing that are complaining about the medical testing. Also, we haven't seen any of these long-term side effects you speak of, so is your position that people weren't warned about ... nothing? Thinking that people were "misled" can only really be described as a delusion. The testing it went through is fairly well-publicised, for anyone who cares to look it up (even before anti-vaxxers started anti-vaxxing about it). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

:: Here is some real science that casts doubt on how good an idea this whole program was. I will cite one of a lot of articles 'Compelling evidence has been published to indicate that the spike protein, which is derived from SARS-CoV-2 and generated from the vaccines currently being employed, is not only able to cross the blood–brain barrier but may cause inflammation and/or blood clots in the brain. Consequently, '''should vaccine-induced expression of spike proteins not be limited to the site of injection and draining lymph nodes there is the potential of long-term implications following inoculation that may be identical to that of patients exhibiting neurological complications after being infected with SARS-CoV-2'''.' [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780773/ spike is not the best idea]. Here is another one that compounds nicely to that hypothesis in bold, there is evidence that vaccine induced spike does not stay at the injection site, I cite: 'We found that vaccine-associated synthetic mRNA persists in systemic circulation for at least 2 weeks.' [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35884842/ mrna circulates in blood after shot]. Look, you can laugh at me and that's ok. Here's some more science for yall's enjoyment. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35028901/ Could SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Be Responsible for Long-COVID Syndrome?], [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34328172/ SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 induces fibrin(ogen) resistant to fibrinolysis: implications for microclot formation in COVID-19], [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35523737/ Sars-Cov-2 Spike Protein-Induced Damage of hiPSC-Derived Cardiomyocytes]. Now, my point is this: '''there is good reason to doubt the covid vaccine, and a measured conversation recognizes the risks, instead of downplaying them, or straight up denying their existence. It also does not involve insulting the nonbelievers. That is the most sad and ironic part of all this.''' Science does not trust, it verifies. Cheers fellow science enthusiasts. I look forward to you all citing scientific papers supporting the hypothesis that covid vaccines are safe and effective. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 17:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

::: I'm not too inclined to dig through a bunch of studies (and also other studies, and responses, and breakdowns, and such) to see what's up. But also, it's kind of a "boy who cried wolf" situation. Anti-vax has made so many patently absurd claims, misrepresentations and blatant lies, that I'm not too inclined to put much weight into any further claims, nor evaluate them in much detail. And no, that's not an ad hominem fallacy: I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, I'm just saying I don't have a good reason to think you may be right, and I have better things to spend my time on. I'm happy enough to let scientists investigate those claims, and update their consensus and public statements, along with medical treatments, appropriately (because, even if granting you that it's the worst possible case, which it most likely isn't and doesn't seem to be, none of what you cited demonstrates that vaccines were the wrong decision, given what we knew at the time, nor that anti-vax was justified - the essence of science is to learn new things, and update our beliefs appropriately, not to believe unjustified things because we may one day learn new information which justifies it). Also, the claim was never that vaccines carry ZERO risk, which seems to be all that all your links can "debunk", from a cursory glance. All medicine carries some risk, the question is whether the risk of the vaccine is worse than the risk of the disease, which I don't see addressed there, and which still seems highly doubtful, given how many confirmed '''deaths''' we have from Covid. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.246.136|172.71.246.136]] 19:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

:::: Hey B. Thanks for sharing your concerns. I understand your hesitation to "antivax" ideas, however, I hope you can see that we always need to carefully examine the effects of '''any''' treatment for prolonged periods of time to establish their safety profile. We need access to the data so anyone can cross verify hypotheses, and we need to keep an open mind. Frankly, '''I have always hoped in my heart that covid vaccines are 100% safe, that is because I love so many people who have chosen to take this treatment'''. However, there is evidence (for example see the studies cited in my comment above) that this is not the case. Finding information about what is going on with the people who were harmed can help pave the way for how to help them heal. These are real people, marginal or not, tiny percentage or not, I want to find information that might to help them.
:::: Regarding to whether the vaccine is worse than covid or not, consider that encoding an antigen into the vaccine (the spike protein) means that we need to study the safety profile of the antigen. As it turns out, the spike protein itself is pathogenic (see references in above comment), meaning that covid harms the body (in part) because of this specific protein. Some vaccines have a modified version of the protein that is meant to inactivate its capability to interface with ACE2 receptors. There remain some open questions. Mainly, we need to establish the safety profile of the modified S-protein encoded in those vaccines. There is reason for concern, as there is evidence that normal S-protein, as well as the S1 subunit can can disrupt and cross the blood brain barrier, induce inflammation, induce clotting, and induce the formation of lewy bodies in the brain. This is really bad news for anyone who has had covid in their brain. It is also cause for us to pause and consider the safety of the current generation vaccines, for which there is evidence that some of them can result in detectable levels of spike and S1 in plasma [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241425/ here]. I put forth these questions:
:::: '''Should we really be injecting people with the template for S-protein, modified or not?'''
:::: '''How do the modifications to the mRNA made in some vaccines change the resulting behavior of the protein? Does it become less pathogenic? Which effects are lessened?'''
:::: '''Can we find a more innocuous protein of the virus to choose as an antigen?'''
:::: '''Could we find a protein that is part of the virus and could work as an antigen but that mutates less readily?'''
:::: This is how I see things, not necessarily close to right. I hope I'm entirely wrong, and so, I keep looking for studies proving me wrong. Once again, thank you fellow science enthusiasts, and '''I look forward to your help in finding studies that support the safety of these products.'''. What does this have to do with the comic? Well.... this is not simple. At all. Cueball is in denial.[[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 19:30, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
::::: '''Should we really be injecting people with the template for S-protein, modified or not?'''
::::: If it's better for public health than not, then yes.
::::: '''How do the modifications to the mRNA made in some vaccines change the resulting behavior of the protein? Does it become less pathogenic? Which effects are lessened?'''
::::: Is it more pathogenic than Covid? Probably not.
::::: '''Can we find a more innocuous protein of the virus to choose as an antigen?'''
::::: There are always possible improvements. But, if it were up to some people, ''nothing'' would be tested because everything potentially has a remote chance of a problem. How about use the tools we have, seek to assess and improve those tools (a rubber hammer still works as a hammer, and can likely do a better job than no hammer at all when we ''really'' need to drive some nails in). Science doesn't stand still, fortunately.
::::: '''Could we find a protein that is part of the virus and could work as an antigen but that mutates less readily?'''
::::: Possibly. Of course it may ideally have to be a surface protein ''like'' the above protein in order to have the immune system learn enough to vaguely recognise Covid ''before'' it gets into cells, replicates (damages/kills the cells, is multiplied) and probably exposes the body to even more S-proteins from the whole process of viral shell dissassembly (from its own shedding process or following the T-cell battles that result) that are at least as bad for the body as any vaccine-invoked fragments.
::::: ...it's a balance, of course. But not one easily weighted towards rejecting the vaccines (which come in many forms, perhaps you can accept one that you ''don't'' have an overly irrational hatred of?) while there remains the risk of catching (and passing on) a version of the real virus from someone who doesn't even wear a white coat, wield an obvious syringe and happily present you with the latest risk/ingredient paperwork for what you're going to involuntarily get.
::::: Keep an open mind about the latest medical advice, but don't have it so open that you get total garbage flydumped into your head. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.62|172.70.85.62]] 00:44, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::: The question of whether or not the modified S protein used in some vaccines is more pathogenic than COVID really should take into account multiple exposures to the antigen. This also opens the can of worms that while related to vaccines, affects virtually everyone on earth, and that is the pathogenicity of the spike protein. This is something that we should definitely focus on, especially to help those with "long covid" but also the people who get acute covid and those who have adverse reactions to the inoculations.
:::::: Finally my friend, I hope you can understand, I don't have hatred of anything, and at this moment, I think it's clear that there are very rational concerns related to the genetic vaccines. You can and people often do catch covid even after vaccinating (and the protection wanes significantly after some months) so this is not an 'altruistic' move, but rather one of personal choice and responsibility. Cheers. You make your own choices, and you live with them, so try to find and process information on your own, because you will be responsible on your own. Love. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 06:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::: "...multiple exposures to the antigen..."... Inevitable if people passively allow/encourage the virus to become endemic. Cats/bags and horses/stable-doors, maybe, but needn't be that way. And can be made less significant if people are, or become, sensible about it. Not sure how much hope there is for that, reading the above exchanges. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.160|172.70.86.160]] 09:09, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I find it really insulting to be lumped in with antivaxxers. I'm not an antivaxxer. I love vaccines. The covid jab is not a vaccine, it's a scam. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.0.142|172.69.0.142]] 00:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
:I'm reticent to ask you to elucidate, as I predict that you're trapped down one or other particular pernicious and unfounded rabbit-hole from which there is no easy rescue. But you clearly have a <s>good...</s> ...''definite'' idea of what this scam is, yet are leaving us hanging there as to exactly what it is that you mean. (In leiu of any reasonable clarification, don't be surprised if we ignore you. This response may just be a badly thought-out courtesy reply to let you know about that.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.195|172.70.86.195]] 07:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
:Then you need a reality check, and to grow a thicker skin, because this is the path YOU have chosen. Nobody made you mistake it for a scam, nobody made you leave yourself vulnerable and betray mankind (presuming you haven't been vaccinated). Being against only one vaccine doesn't stop you from being an anti-vaxxer, sorry. You're still against science just because you don't understand it. Don't like being lumped in under that term, stop being against it, simple. I mean, I could see not wanting to lump in the Covid vaccine under the label of "vaccines", seeing as it's the most advanced, innovative, impressive vaccine we've ever seen, that it's a bit minimizing to just call it a vaccine, but that's obviously not a reason to be AGAINST it. Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it a scam. Do you realize they've never come up with a vaccine for colds or flus (not a true one, anyway), or why? Do you realize the Covid vaccine is a humongous step towards that? It's because colds, flus, and Covid (as a variant of them) are thousands of viruses, not one like the other things we have vaccines for. The usual flu vaccine is rather a vaccine against the specific strains they predict will be prevalent that season. It would be like if they came out with a Omicron Vaccine - stop THAT variant and no other. Since viruses mutate (I think particularly Covid), that would quickly become useless. THIS vaccine protects against the whole Covid family, it's a much more general protection, with the drawback that it can't fully STOP it, it makes the virus less effective and less likely to pass on. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
:: care to share any study on how effective your panacea is? ANY will do. Bow down before the one you serve... [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 15:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2806:_Anti-Vaxxers&curid=26549&diff=320191&oldid=319966 "Replacing offensive language"] ...can only speak for myself, but I found it funny. And you can't take seriously anything put in the Incomplete tags, I just took it as knowing sarcasm. If anything, that people strongly disagree is true, but I don't care for them and that type of person has nothing useful to add here anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.172|172.70.90.172]] 10:02, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
: Oh jeez, bugs me when people are THAT hypersensitive, LOL! I feel it just contributes to nobody in the current generation having thick skin anymore (particularly as, like you say, these comments are never taken seriously). If I wasn't sure it's gone by now I'd have to go change it back, :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

==Alternative Explanation: Misinformation==
'''The current "''Explanation''"''' interprets the comic literally and at face value when the comic is deliberately ''equivocal''. This fails to take into consideration either Randall's inclination towards irony or his concern for wider social issues. Here is what I consider to be a more accurate interpretation, together with a detailed analysis, that addresses both of these issues. I look forward to your comments. 
The stylistic techniques used in this comic are sufficiently advanced that I decided they warranted a separate explanation. This explanation I have omitted for now but would be happy to share if there is sufficient interest.
:'''[SUMMARY]'''
:     This comic can be interpreted as Randall appealing to society to take a little more time to rationally consider all information instead of repeatedly being emotionally manipulated by it. The appeal is in response to both misinformation and disinformation that came to light as a result of the many pandemic-related issues.
:     The dialogue of the comic emotionally goads the reader into hastily casting judgement on a narrative they think they're seeing so setting the reader up to be their own demonstration of how easy it is be a victim of either misinformation or disinformation. Given that the comic is an appeal to society to consider information more rationally, the comic can be considered to be deliberately ironic.
:'''[ANALYSIS]'''
:     The pejorative "Anti-vaxxer" refers to either any individual questioning the COVID-19 vaccination or any individual who has refused a COVID-19 vaccination. However, this pejorative obscures two arguments that such individuals typically make: (1) that [https://www.transparency.org/en/press/covid-19-vaccines-lack-of-transparency-trials-secretive-contracts-science-by-press-release-risk-success-of-global-response everbody should be entitled to comprehensive and accurate information regarding the content and efficacy of any vaccine being developed], and (2) based on that information, everyone should have the [https://www.nvic.org/news-events/other-events/vaccine-freedom-of-choice freedom to choose whether to have a vaccination or not].
:     Box #1's dialogue, "''I TRY TO MEET PEOPLE WHERE THEY ARE, BUT I HAVE SUCH A HARD TIME WITH ANTI-VAXXERS.''", deliberately suggests that Randall has tried, ''unsuccessfully'', to reconcile his own principles with those of the "Anti-vaxxer"s. However, even though both the comic's ''title text'' and [[2455|previous XKCD comics]] may be interpreted as Randall [[2397|advocating for vaccination]], there is no emperical evidence to support that Randall has explicitly disagreed with either of the "Anti-vaxxer"s' aforementioned arguments. Box #1 instead expresses an ideological dilemma. On the one hand, Randall believes everybody should be vaccinated for COVID-19. On the other hand, he believes in the [[706|notion of personal freedom]]. He realises, however, that any attempt to legislatively enforce the former encroaches on the latter. Box #2 refers to an unknown number of "''DILEMMAS''" the pandemic brought with it and this can be considered to be one such dilemma.
:     Society observed during the pandemic that fake or inaccurate information was able to manipulate how society perceived important issues. This resulted in two words being introduced into the common vernacular: "''misinformation''" and "''disinformation''". Randall was already aware that both of these phenomena existed well before the pandemic through his [[978|long-standing interest in the perpetual cycle of both fake and inaccurate information in society]]. However, the wide range of pandemic-related issues caused the uncovering of both misinformation and disinformation on a scale that even Randall had previously been unaware. He observed "''AMBIGUOUS DATA''" (from corporations and governments), "''WEIRD TRADEOFFS''" (both [https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/hgf/difficult-trade-offs-in-response-to-covid-19.pdf internally within governments] and [https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-absurd-world-of-coronavirus-mask-traders-and-middlemen-trying-to-get-rich-off-government-money between governments and corporations]), and "''DISAGREEMENTS''" ([https://jme.bmj.com/content/49/1/9 within both government and wider society with regard to pandemic-related policy]), and increased "''UNCERTAINTY''" overall.
:     The wide range of pandemic-related issues also caused Randall to observe that a major crisis can be effective at [[2305|coalescing public opinion]] which can force decisive action on key social issues. Compared to the complex machinations of government where political ambitions often obstruct decisive action, Randall realised that a crisis is simplicity itself for getting action when it is required, and this is reflected in "...ALSO ''TURNED OUT TO BE ONE OF THE EASIEST AND SIMPLEST.''". It is from this standpoint that Randall sees the '''perpetual lack of decisive action''' on a range of social issues, from stamping out disinformation to deciding global vaccination policy, as society's "''SUFFERING''" and he sees the '''pandemic itself''' as an "''INTERVENTION''" that reduced that suffering as the crisis either forced awareness of the issues or forced action with respect to them.
:     This, however, presents Randall with a new dilemma which can also be considered to be one of the pandemic-related "''DILEMMAS''" referred to in box #2. He in no way wishes the social upheaval and physical suffering caused by major crises, and yet he observes that, due to decisive action on social issues that may be brought about, there are rare occasions where major crises result in a net ''overall improvement'' in the way society functions. It is the ''rarity'' of these "beneficial crises", of which Randall considers the COVID-19 pandemic to be one, that is expressed by the phrase "''THAT NEVER HAPPENS''". However, the fact that the pandemic did happen, and the exact timing of it, appears to have forced positive action on one or more (possibly unstated) issues important to Randall himself, and it is from this standpoint that the pandemic, to him at least, "''JUST FEELS LIKE A MIRACLE''".
:     Overall, though, Randall is frustrated at this new dilemma and continues "''I HATE THAT PEOPLE ARE WORKING SO HARD TO MAKE IT COMPLICATED WHEN IT'S ONE OF THE FEW THINGS IN THIS WORLD THAT ISN'T''". He appears to be angry that [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_misinformation_by_governments government misinformation] and [https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/did-pharma-promote-vaccine-disinformation corporate disinformation] are complicating issues for society as a whole so hindering people from making informed choices regarding those issues and effecting decisive action. Randall believes that if society took a little more time to rationally consider information placed before it then it may be able to avoid emotional manipulation and see past the misinformation, enabling decisive action to be taken sooner rather than having to wait an indeterminate period for the next major crisis to come along and force action to be taken.
:     Finally, the comic's ''title text'', though sarcastic, is a challenge to the "Anti-vaxxer"s. Randall claims that, even given the culture of misinformation uncovered during the pandemic, the [[2400|scientific data regarding vaccine efficacy]] is reliable enough to withstand close scrutiny. He is challenging the "Anti-vaxxer"s to excerise their Freedom to Choose based on this data, positing that their initial argument for being entitled to accurate information regarding vaccines has been addressed.
----
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.98.227|172.71.98.227]] 05:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Cueball says 'people are working so hard to make it complicated when it's one of the few things in this world that isn't'. Given the length and fractiousness of this comments section, I think they may have a point. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.138|172.69.43.138]] 15:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Excess deaths are up, cancers are up, dementia is up, strokes are up. There must be a simple explanation for this all... if only there were one.
Oh well. Guess science can't explain everything after all. I used to get mad at fanatics, but now I just feel sad, because the denial is rock solid.
[[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 03:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
:Your point is ambiguous. Despite your username, hard to tell if you're using sarcasm or not. Poe's law seems to apply. But, to extend/counter your point (whichever), we can say:
:*Excess deaths are a comparison of the expected trend, from thenimmediate lead-up of historic data, against what is then seen. Higher excess deaths could mean reversion to the mean after doing well on death-prevention before. Give or take whether you account for all those that previously didn't die who are now older and thus closer to dying from ''something else'', which a good Excess Deaths estimation might need to account for (slice it up be age demographics, obviously a 20yo who fortunately didn't die at 18 isn't likely to die of old age by 22).
:*Dementia and strokes are the kinds of thing you die of when you "haven't died of anything else", so if you're saving people from dying of cholera, car-crashes, rampaging cattle stampedes or suicide (through healthcare, seatbelts, farm safety and treating depression) then people will get old and succumb to more geriatric condictions.
:...so, yes, science can explain things. The fine detail can be argued about, but you can always check how much good data you have in order to give confidence to the minutiae, but population-wide statistics across stretches of time tend to be fairly reliable as far as such conclusions. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.20|172.70.162.20]] 10:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
:Get boosted [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 20:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

== Digital Equipment Corporation ==

Am I the only one disappointed this wasn't actually about the {{w|VAX}} line of computers? [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 00:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2996: CIDABM

2025-03-07T17:15:22Z

MeZimm:

Still makes more sense than BRICS. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.144.34|172.71.144.34]] 19:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I for one think Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego is a classic example of an island that does NOT dangle awkwardly at the bottom of a mainland. It's almost a case study in graceful, near-seamless islandic placement relative to the mainland, such that if you informed someone that it's technically an island they may do a double-take and have to squint at a map before they believe you. As further evidence for this perspective, I commend to the reader [[2256: Bad Map Projection: South America]] where IGdTdF is only represented as truly distinct from the mainland in 1 out of the 36 South Americas represented - and this is probably more for comedy value than anything else, since in this map, IGdTdF ITSELF has been replaced by another entire (and extremely small) South America! [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 22:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Very tempted to make an official Explanation addition that if we named the group for the members (like BRICS has been, and which originally had me trying to identify the islads by shape and what initials they might have, before my eyes finally drifted down to their actual names), it would ''almost'' make a very unfortunate initialism indeed. And the one it does make is basically the same in phonetic terms... I won't actually do so. But I am left wondering if this was actually intended as an additional unspoken bit of Randall's humour, in fact. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.94|172.69.195.94]] 23:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I shall create my own island below the UK to join this Coalition. [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 06:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

dunon why, but my first thought on the alt-text was that it was a joke about south america being an island below north america. ~~storm. {{unsigned ip|172.69.60.185|11:27, 10 October 2024}}

Anyone else think Sri Lanka is a really weird shape for an island? It just doesn't make sense to me, geologically speaking [[User:Tommyds|Tommyds]] ([[User talk:Tommyds|talk]]) 13:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

I feel like we should have a [blank] news category. That seems to come up a lot. {{unsigned|Ok123|17:55, 10 October 2024}}
:agreed. I’ll bring it up in the community portal. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 20:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
The group flatly rejected the application for membership of North America South of Two Ocean Creek. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 02:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if it's worth mentioning the "theory of continental drip", postulated in one of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iain_Banks Iain Banks]'s novels. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.172|172.70.86.172]] 06:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Tasmania Is an island dangling from a larger island. [[User:SomeRandomNerd|SomeRandomNerd]] ([[User talk:SomeRandomNerd|talk]]) 01:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The two small islands marked as dots between Tasmania and the mainland also happen to be part of the Tasmanian state.--[[User:Ozhamada|Ozhamada]] ([[User talk:Ozhamada|talk]]) 02:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:I'm an aussie and that's learning for me! However they aren't marked on the map. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.14|172.68.210.14]] 08:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::It might depend upon what resultion image you're looking at. The two (actually three, two to the right) dots north of Tasmania's corners (King and Flinders/Cape Barren) are marked the grey of the mainland rather than the black of all other points Tasman.
::The south-eastern-edge islands may get a decent showing (in full black), given the resolution, though the anti-aliasing hints at features (e.g. Bruny/Maria) that may or may not be represented there for reasons of typical Randallian illustration.
::For obvious reasons of scale/coverage, though, Macquarie Island doesn't festure at all! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.128|172.70.85.128]] 15:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

No love for Cuba, Madagascar, or Sumatra? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.49|172.69.23.49]] 19:43, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
:Cuba and Sumatra are in more complex relationships than being ''an'' island "dangling below". (Other islands/continents all around them, generally moreso than the cited examples which tend to be the predominant islands at their scale and in their context.) Madagascar hangs off the 'side' of Africa (maybe below Eurasia, if Africa wasn't counted). Obviously there's leeway of interpretation, but it's part of why Tierra Del Fuego is mentioned as an iffy candidate.
:There are probably other edge-candidates (NZ South Island, c.f. North Island, etc? Though Stewart Island c.f. South Island might be more apt)... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.62|172.70.85.62]] 19:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
::Cuba is much longer than Florida, and I would not say it looks like it dangles below that part of the US. Also the distance is much greater compared to the size than the ones between the other islands. Maybe Tasmania is as far away but it is a very big landmass above so when drawn on the banner it looks similar. Cuba would not look anything like the others. Sumatra is larger than the part of the mainland it is near and it is not even under it. And as said Madagascar is not at all under Africa. So of course they would not be included. The reason Tierra del Fuego is not included is that when drawn like the others it would be difficult to see where it did not hang onto the mainland. Seems to me that the other not included islands given as examples in the current version of the explanation also fails to come close to the idea of the comic. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 05:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I can't help but notice that simply listing the members would be a shorter acronym, :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:46, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Well, the BRIC (then BRICS) group tried that, but now have ''ten'' members. They wisely decided to not become the BRICSEEIIU (or whatever anagram you could/should rearrange it into). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.124|172.71.178.124]] 14:54, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Talk:2625: Field Topology

2025-03-07T17:13:27Z

MeZimm:

First [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 12:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

To me the topological fields look like toilet seats with three more or less seashells. --[[User:Gunterkoenigsmann|Gunterkoenigsmann]] ([[User talk:Gunterkoenigsmann|talk]]) 16:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Why is football on the two-hole field? Where are the holes? I don't think the goal posts in American football introduce any since they're not closed. Maybe it's soccer? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.88|172.69.68.88]] 12:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: I think it is because the goal posts extend into infinity and the topological definition of a hole: something you can draw a circle around that you cannot contract to a point. [the user placed a horizontal rule instead of a signature by accident.]

:Well, you might still be able to call them holes. They would be if they were fully rectangles. --[[User:BlackBeret|BlackBeret]] ([[User talk:BlackBeret|talk]]) 12:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: Gridiron football's field contains two areas (the endzones) that can be thought of as not being part of the "normal" field of play, for lack of a better way of saying that pre-coffee. Association football likewise has the areas within the nets. [[User:Noëlle|Noëlle]] ([[User talk:Noëlle|talk]]) 13:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: My immediate thoughts were also that football (soccer) and football (gridiron) are the same, or indeed the other way round. In both cases the closed hole (assuming not a Y-like vertical holder, but H-like as per rugby football) plays no more or less topological part. Threading through the hole from behind has no relevence in either, and in fact defining it as a region that is 'a special enclosed gap with meaning' (which doesn't really matter in the topology sense, just like golf would be a topologically hole-less surface and as a coffee-cup's inside 'dimple' doesn't count, just its handle-hole that makes it equivalent to a doughnut) actually counts for something in association football. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 13:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:: It's not the space bounded by the goal that is the 'hole' - it's the goal post itself (or in the case of the high jump, it's the bar, not the space under it). The reason soccer doesn't have 'holes' where the goals are is that they're positioned on the edge of the playable area - you can't play around the bars, because as soon as you cross the goal line you're out of play. And it doesn't matter whether it's a Y-shaped or H-shaped goal - topologically, they both form one continuous 'hole'. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 13:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

::: I don't think that's the reason why soccer doesn't have holes. The goalposts in football are also outside the playable area, and so are the poles in volleyball. I think soccer is listed as zero-holes because soccer goals are typically not fixed to the field, and are instead separate objects that can be dragged around and removed from the field. On the other hand, the same is true of volleyball and badminton nets (and those nets contain many holes!) so the comic seems a bit inconsistent.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.146|172.70.175.146]] 14:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:::: Speaking from a "football is soccer" nation (well, mostly, the exceptional subregions would argue that it's rugby) a soccer goal is typically ''not'' draggable around the field, but permanent (or a unit frame that has to be painstakingly hoisted out of the ground if you ''don't'' want them in your football stadium, when you repurpose it for other purposes) and it's only the optional net that gets added to the park's permanent goalposts for the official five-aside competition evening or day of the weekend. Draggable goalposts need a further level of intermediate organisation that goes beyond the typical "shipping container with windows cut in it (with shutters bolted over them) as a cheap changing room/officials' cabin" that might be found near the edge of the field but rarely even has as much as a corner flag left in them, between games".
:::: I presume that US 'football' posts are considered holes because they are an infinitely-tall window (even though the delineating poles only reach so high) that is a meaningful slice (where the goal is, you have to loop around it in mutually different unsimplifiable paths to reach the other side), but then that should make for ''two'' holes per end, if you count getting a field-goal and then returning round the sides (or vice-versa) as another valid surface-path.
:::: ...but, yeah, I can imagine the problem of definition (and cultural famiarity) here is going to produce more problems even than the understanding of topology. One of the less internationally-accepted comics, this. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.177|172.70.85.177]] 18:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
: O_O . Randall is united-statesian, so football means the thing where you tackle each other and hold the ball in your hands. I've never been into football, and I've always seen it with two large goal posts with a horizontal bar between them. The hole is formed under the horizontal bar. When I played football in computer games, you had to get the ball over the horizontal bar. After this, I'll search the web to see if the horizontal bar still exists. Regarding soccer, there aren't two holes because the nets are closed at the back. You cannot pass through the field structure by going through a goal: you bump into the net the ball bounces off of when a goal is made. So, Randall is considering soccer fields topologically equivalent to a plane (ignoring all the holes in the netting). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.229|172.70.114.229]] 14:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
: I looked up the goal thing and found that what I was imagining are called H-frame or H-style goal posts. Not the norm; the have two posts instead of one. I'm a weirdo that I thought they were what was up. But Randall could have been thinking of H-frame goals. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.63|172.70.230.63]] 15:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Many high school and amateur football fields still use H-frame goals. The resulting space can be used as a goal in some other sports. That does raise the question of why they didn't just have one field with lots of holes, and just plug the ones up that aren't needed for the sport being played. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.191|172.70.134.191]] 15:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::H-frames are indeed the norm for American football in the everyday world. Only the professional and highest tier colleges use the more expensive Y-frames (which have the advantage of being harder for players to run into them). In fact, it is very common for the lower space of the H-frame to have the dimensions of a soccer goal, so that the field can be used for both association and gridiron football. If some Americans get go to the nearest park to play football, or go out on a weekend to see a local team (i.e. high school or community college) play, they are likely using H-frame goals. These are not the sorts of games that are televised, but there are thousands of such games played for every one on a fancy field with a Y-shaped goal. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.31|172.69.68.31]] 13:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Tetherball, in many variants, does contain an obstruction -- the pole, which you're not allowed to touch. The Topology Department is getting tired of having to switch out the fields. [[User:Noëlle|Noëlle]] ([[User talk:Noëlle|talk]]) 13:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:But you can surely jump over it, so it's topologically the same as a zero-height pole... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 13:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:Tetherball does not have a *hole*. The pole, rope, and ball are just a stretched out bit of the continuous surface.

Croquet has six hoops and a peg. How does that make for nine holes? Is it including the opponents' two balls as holes? And if so, why aren't opposing players counted as holes in the other sports? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 13:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croquet#Nine-wicket] 'Nine-wicket croquet, sometimes called "backyard croquet", is played mainly in Canada and the United States, and is the game most recreational players in those countries call simply "croquet".' (Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.215|172.70.126.215]] 18:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

American football goals are Y-shaped. Rugby goals are H-shaped. Did... did Randall get those confused? Also, I fail to see how basketball and American football get two, croquet gets a bunch, but soccer gets zero. Aren't soccer goals (in-game at least) basically the same shape as croquet wickets, just waaaay bigger? Granted, I don't know anything about topology and I came to this wiki specifically cuz I'm dumb, so I'd love if someone could splain this all for me ;) [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 13:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:The soccer goal has a net, so the ball can't go through it. Topologically it's just a wall (Randall seems to be ignoring all the tiny holes in netting, presumaby because they're smaller than the balls so they're insignificant to the sports). [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::I agree with that explanation - the net is the only thing that makes the soccer field not to have holes. It should be included in the comic explanation.
::The hole for the volleyball only makes sense taking in account that the bottom of the net doesn't reach the floor, although this space is not used in the game.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::I agree about soccer; the explanation should be that soccer goals (with net) are topologically part of the plane. The same is true of ice hockey, even though you can travel "around" the net, it is topologically part of the field with no holes. As for (American) football, the topology only makes sense for H-shaped goals, which are more often seen on primary/secondary play fields than in higher level play. [[User:Aramisuvla|Aramisuvla]] ([[User talk:Aramisuvla|talk]]) 16:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::Agreed. Soccer goals are shaped such that their bottoms connect smoothly to the ground in a single continuous piece. So they are topologically equivalent to the plane. This wouldn't be the case if not for the back part holding the net. That's unlike basketball hoops, which are actual holes. The holes in football must be referring to the H-shaped uprights that were standard until 1967 in professional leagues and are still seen in some high school fields and even a couple college fields. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.128|172.70.131.128]] 03:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::EDIT: I should point out that the net actually has, like, hundreds of holes. But I think the net here is being treated as a continuous sheet. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.215|172.70.126.215]] 03:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I mentioned all the little holes in the net in my comment that you're replying to. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

The group link pointing to group (mathematics) doesn't bear any relation with the sentence or the comic. I would remove the link.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
: The joke seems important to me because their no consideration of the word 'field' being a math pun, and it raises the idea in readers. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.74|162.158.79.74]] 15:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:When I first saw the comic title I assumed that part of the joke would be a pun on the word "field" being used for both sports and math. And even though the comic doesn't explicitly make this joke, I'll bet it inspired Randall. It's worth mentioning. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

In rugby (both League and Union) the goalposts are within the field of play: significant game activity takes place behind them. This is not the case with soccer. I have no clue what difference this makes topologically.{{unsigned ip|}}

I've been thinking about this classification system, and can't quite work out the baseline for it. I think we're supposed to assume that the whole 3d manifold is represented in a 2d 'field', or at least any path through the air flattened to an arbitrarily thin surface 'bulge' during topological rationalisation. But there are several possible field-of-play definitions we can be using...
* A single valid 'play' or traversal
** For ball-sports (or indeed other play-objects) this could be where the item can travel. But in this case I think almost 'all' codes of football are Type 1 (first of the topologies) as almost every football code deals with both 'goal' and 'endzone' (where valid) as the same as a hole (dimple) in golf... It goes into it and it might as well come out of it again, there's no continuation of play 'through the defined' space, and so the topological hole (the barrier defined the scoring membrane's edge) never comes into play. Unlike in Gridiron, where a touchdown doesn't even need the 'ball' to touch the ground, rugby (league and/or union, and possibly further derivatives) requires this and a player can fail to score a Try if (s)he passes bodily over the line but is unable to plant the ball (not allowed to throw/drop it) and I'd have to check what happens if the defending player(s) keeping them sufficiently off the ground (assuming that's done in an allowable fashion) returns the intended scorer back over the line via a circuitous route around /back-through the suspended goal-mouth (above the cross-bar, between the verticals)... They keep changing those kinds of technical rules, so I can't be sure of the current technicalities involved. Likewise, a volleyball or shuttlecock that passes under the net-top-edge is out of play, so it is really a Type 1 under this definition. (Might as well be a solid barrier, floor-to-top-height, rather than a thin bar or a partial net.) The basketball case is interesting. Although a dunk ends the play of the ball, I'm not sure if the path of a ball ''up'' through the hoop does not. In that circumstance I could believe it is a Type 3 case, but if that's a game-stopping thing then Type 1. Croquet is indeed a varying number of paths through (I ''think'') an unordered set of holes, or at least nothing to say that they can be taken out of order (or 'un-passed-through'), and you can't necessarily restrict a 'play' to one shot at a time if certain conditions allow you to play on, so dodging in and around all scoring zones defined by the hoops gives you something like.
** For player/competitor/participant movement, similarly passing under the bar is not valid for the High Jump. I don't think there's anything to stop such transitions upon the Parallel Bars, but it is much more a feature of the ''Uneven'' Parallel Bars, whereas from what I've seen of the sport, the even-variety tends to be topologically used much as the pommel-horse. Players of football (American variations certainly, rugby of course, proper football if you don't bother with the nets) are not restricted from passing through the scoring area (either way) on a circuitous path that may be off the field of play but isn't off the field ''of players''. For the Olympic Swimming, I'm not suring porpoising over and under the lane-delineations is a thing, so I would have said that (under this definition), it should be a number of entirely disconnected Type 1 'zones', with no valid movement between them at all. So far as I'm aware, there are no rules for/against croquet ''players'' passing through hoops (intentionally or perhaps because they severely annoyed an opponent) so maybe that stands in this case, too. Ditto for basketball, if hoisted. Although in both cases it may prevent the balls passing through immediately afterwards, without game-stoppage to resolve the issue.
* If it's a game's-worth of play, then the status of the basket in basketball (unlike the pocket in snooker/pool/some-versions-of-billards) might be defined by the topological-hole-that-is-the-physical-hole's-edge, rather than treat it as the old basket-with-bottom from which the precusor to the net-ring almost immediately evolved. And the same could be said about the suspended scoring-hole (whether supported as Y-post or an H-post, the lower limb(s) are merely physical necessities that play little part in the gameplay specifics except as a general hazard to avoid, it is the crossbar and verticals-to-infinity (and the infinity itself) that is the gap through which a circular path cannot be rationalised back to a point). For most of the rest (including the participant-paths, with there being nothing to stop the traversal of a footballer of whatever stripe jumping the cross-bar, but that may only mean something in the topology of some variations, as far as the game is concerned...) it seems meaningless. Even in an Aussie Rules field with four 'posts' per end, and probably more interest in whether jumping onto an opposing player is against the rules or indeed an entirely legitimate and expected tactic.
* The general arena-wide area is a further superset (perhaps with no additional complications, i.e. exactly congruent) of the field-of-play(er) definition. For coin-operated table-top games (foosball/table-football) the path from each goal may (additionally to any on-top topological loop-disconnections) force passage of the ball underneath and out into the new-play insertion spot. So add a couple more (unidirectional) paths, at least. Or six for a coin-operated pool/etc table, and I assume the Skeeball (not something I'm familar with, at least by that name) is defined that way already...
Sorry, I found I needed to say a lot more than I thought I did, so the first point (and sub-points) went on a bit and I cut down what I might have said for the following points. I may come back to re-edit this. I've got a handy little table, in mind, but I'm not sure it'll work much better to summarise everything I've been cogitating about for most of today while away from the keyboard... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.5|172.70.162.5]] 15:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:The "hole" in the goalpost in American football is relevant for field goals, not touchdowns. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::I'm not sure it's relevent for either. The field-goal passes over the crossbar and between (but also maybe above) the raised verticles, but that route is topologically the same as one above the crossbar but wide, which is in turn the same as one rolling along the ground and wide... Or indeed carried across just like most touchdowns (any that isn't run through the middle of the H-post', un-netted but otherwise soccer-like 'goalmouth' lower section).
::Possibly running around the post(s) that support the field-goal defining beams counts as the path around the topological hole because any change to that route that attempts to transform it to a useless loop within the main field of play must either (at some point) pass through the support for the crossbar or else wholly through the region that defines (in one direction, at least) the goal-scoring area. Can anyone get Word Of God in his intentions, here? It looks weird, to me. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 03:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

As has been alluded to, this must be an American university's topology department. A rest-of-the-world university would include four holes for cricket. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.191|172.70.134.191]] 17:48, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, this is my (not yet properly tabularised, or properly wikimedialinked) idea of all the kinds of information I'd suggest go in there. But it's a monstrocity and I don't want to remove the very useful existing information already in the Explanation (that may even be better/more accurate than my interpretation). ...so here it is for review. If anything in it is useful to anybody else as inspiration for future edits then... well, your choice!
*Click to expand:
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed leftAlign" style="width:100%">
Competition
|-
Field diagram
|-
Usage description
|-
Topology
|-

'''Type 1 Field'''
|-
(First image in comic.)
|-
Any path looping around this area can be moved at will and shrunk to just one point that could result from any other path.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with no other notable features.

'''Baseball'''
|-
(Partial!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball#/media/File:Baseball_diamond.svg
|-
The playing area for baseball contains many important physical features for scoring and playing purposes, but is essentially one flat area (and continuous airspace) when you disregard the elevation of the pitcher's mound or even the outfield fence and stands (for any ball that carries that far, upon being hit).
|-
Randall explicitly classes this in the Type 1 diagram, and there isn't any obvious reason to argue this point.

Association Football ("'''Soccer''''"/"Football")
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Football_pitch_metric_and_imperial.svg
|-
An unobstruted rectangular playing area with a goal formed of two vertical posts connected between the tops by a crossbar. In official competition (and where otherwise desired) there is a net stretched behind each goalmouth to stop any ball that passes completely through it (with or without hitting any of the posts), although games can be played with no net in place, or in street/schoolyard situations by goals defined only as a goalpost-like markings painted upon a solid wall (hitting the wall within the bounds of the painted line constitutes a goal, give or take arguments about whether it counts if it hit the line).
|-
Stated by Randall as a Type 1 (a single unobstructed zone), which is likely due to the 'pocket' of the net-backed goalmouth being nothing more than a straight extension of the playing area.
However, an un-netted set of goalposts might be considered a Type 3, with each set of goalposts defining an impassible frame (the hole in the topology, ''not'' the same thing as the physical hole formed by the goal-frame) within which the balls can freely pass and return ''not'' through the goalmouth, or vice-versa.

'''Tetherball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tetherball_in_Georgetown,_Seattle,_Washington.jpg
|-
A ball attached to a cord anchored at the tip of a pole that is in turn stuck in the ground.
|-
Although the mechanism used to allow free swivelling of the tether around the pole may be quite complex (including being looped around a helical thread to help register how many excess orbits of the pole the ball has made in either direction), the basic premise can be simplified to a single extrusion from the playing area, which is topologically identical to a playing area with no extrusion at all. Thus Randall properly states this as a Type 1 variant.

'''Type 2 Field'''
|-
(Second image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will be pass around the unpassable hole in the topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with a single central hole in it.

'''Volleyball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volleyball#/media/File:VolleyballCourt.svg
|-
A volleyball court consists of a flat area disected by a raised net in the centre. Valid shots pass over the net, but it is possible for the ball (or players) to pass between the net and the floor.
|-
Randall lists this under the Type 2 diagram. An argument can be made that the net could effectively reach to the ground, or questions asked about anchoring the net top/bottom to the posts at either side with separate straps (adding left and right 'passages' between the elements of the obstacle that is the net) but he clearly intends the loop around the hole to represent the ability to passing over the net one way and under the net the other (or vice-versa) as a topologically irreducible loop.

'''Badminton'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Badminton_court_3d.svg
(Note that this diagram completely abstracts the under-net area away.)
|-
The net setup is very similar to volleyball, i.e. raised above the ground, with very similar rules regarding valid shots between the areas on each side.
|-
As with Volleyball, Randall feels justified in this being classed as a Class 2, having similar reasons for this as well as possible arguments against.
(Note that another form of {{w|Badminton Horse Trials|Badminton}} is arguably far more topologically complex!)

'''High Jump'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1912_Platt_Adams5.JPG
|-
A bar supported at height between two supports. The idea is to successfully pass over the bar (without knocking it off, the bar being only supported to the supports, not firmly attached to them), although a competitor who decides to abort their attempt mid-run might well choose to pass underneath to default the attempt with the least physical and organisational aftermath.
|-
With an 'above' and 'below' path to potentially loop around (though not in a single jump), Randall chooses to ascribe this as a Type 2. If a competitor displaces the bar, during a failed jump, it can morph the topology into a Type 1 scenario

'''Type 3 Field'''
|-
(Third image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will pass around one ot other ''or both'' of the holes in the topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with two holes in it, towards each end.

'''Basketball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Basketball_terms.png
|-
Played upon a court, at each end of which is a tall pole (or supporting wall or other structure) from which a 'basket' is projected over the playing area. The earliest baskets were an actual closed-bottom basket, but this required climbing up to retrieve balls successfully landed within them. By removing the bottoms of the baskets and, later, using just a hoop (with or without a bottomless net). Points are scored by sending the ball through the basket-loop ''from above'', to be retrieved for further play as it exits below.
|-
Topologically, the edge of each loop is directly connected to the ground, so it can be smplified as a two-hole Type 3 field (the hole in the field is the impassible rim in the basket-loop). This does not preserve the orientation (or intended unidirectional nature) of the basketball-shot, but this is Topology's fault, not Randall's!

American/Canadian Football ("Gridiron"/"'''Football'''")
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football_field#/media/File:AmFBfield.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canadian_football_field.png
|-
A unobstructed rectangular playing area and two 'Endzones' at each end. Goalposts are either of an "H" shape or essentially a "Y" (crossbar, upper verticals and a single utilitarian post, usually set back beyond normal playing area with an extension over to hold the crossbar directly over the goal-line. The verticals are tall but are also conceptually projected upwards without limit, for scoring purposes, should a field-goal/etc be kicked high enough to exceed the structures.
|-
Stated by Randall as a Type 3 (a topological hole at each end of the field), which ''may'' represent the bound surrounding the elevated goal-scoring area. Alternately it represents the physical structure of the H-shaped posts which rationalise down to the open-backed ground-touching goalpost footings and the crossbar.

'''Parallel Bars''' or perhaps ''Uneven'' Parallel Bars
|-
PB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AlejandroonParallelBars.jpg
UPB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Paksaltoliukin.jpg
|-
The Parallel Bars are two horizontal bars supported at roughly hand-height, upon which a gymnast will perform various hand-supported feats strength and coordination. The participant will not usually fully use the space beneath either bar (and between the two supports for the bar), but a will needs the opportunity to grip fully around the bar, especially when the other hand is released for a complicated body movement and it would be impractical or a different discipline entirely to used a 'filled' bar-support.

The Uneven Parallel Bars are two similarly supported bars but at two different (and greater) heights, with the performance being generally that of keeping the grip of both hands (or knees/etc) on either one or other of the bars whilst rotating around its axis, when not actively transfering across between the bars themselves.
|-
Effectively two loops (as per basketball hoops but in a different orientation and scale). The Type 3 topology suggested by Randall is more meaningful for the use of Uneven Parallel Bars, but is probably applicable to the 'even' version in its own way.

'''Type 4 Field'''
|-
(Fourth image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will pass around at least one (and possibly several) of the nine holes in this topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with nine small holes dotted into it.

'''Olympic Swimming'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Swimming_pool_50m_2008.svg
|-
In competitive swimming, a swimming pool is often delineated into lanes (for Olympic purposes, Lane 0 to Lane 9, though usually not all will be used) by floating barriers and other markings. These provide a limited amount of wave-reduction but mostly keep competitors from inadvertently drifting across or into each others' paths.
|-
Randall considers this setup to require nine 'holes' in the competition area, presumably where the floats pass along the surface of the water, to make a Type 4 field of competition. He must then consider it perfectly possible for competitors to pass under ''or over'' these barriers, at will, with complete disregard for the usual competition (and risking disqualification). Otherwise, it might be best considered as (up to) ten ''separate'' Type 1 arenas, with just one swimmer in each.

'''Croquet'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Modern_croquet_equipment.JPG
|-
A game in which a number of metal hoops are placed in the ground such that a given number of players (or teams of players) must each propel their own ball(s), and possibly those of their opponents, through each loop either directly with their own mallet or through contact between balls.
Many variations exist with differing numbers of hoops and variations of rules and winning conditions. Randall appears to favour the "Nine-wicket Croquet" popular to North America.
|-
The topological simplification of nine hoops across a flat surface can be thought of as the Type 4 topology displayed.

Table Football ("'''Foosball'''"/"Table Soccer") - as per title-text
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Foosball_garlando_aerial.jpg
|-
An enclosed playing surface with (typically) eight rotatable and extendable bars supporting representative (soccer) 'footballer' figures, ready to strike a small ball across the surface, as might be desired by the two or more opposing players who are each able to control the movements of half of the 'bars' (each team's-worth having a goalkeeper, defence, midfield and attacking 'layer'). By skill and/or luck, the aim is to propel the ball into the opposing's player's goal.
On coin-operated games, often the playing area is usually sealed off from direct manual interference, and a ball that goes into the goalmouth finds itself in a lower chamber that stores the ball(s) and deposits them via some feed to carry the ball back up and 'thrown in' towards the centre of the table to start the next attempt at goal.
|-
With eight bars across, and potentially two goalmouth sinks, this may not actually add up to a nine-hole Type 4 field of play. But presumably Randall is thinking of a version that does.

'''Skee-Ball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skee_Ball.JPG
|-
An arcade game in which a ball is propelled by the player to land in (according to skill) one of various holes in a target-ridden surface (to return back to the player for another go).
|-
It would depend upon the exact confuguration of Skee-Ball machine but, again, Randall seems to think this matches the Type 4 topology.

Further (football) examples, unmentioned

Australian Rules Football ('Aussie Rules'
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Footygroundfix.svg
|-
An unobstructed oval field with four simple vertical posts upon the perimiter arcs at each end.
The ball passing between the (taller) central pair of each end's posts (projected upwards indefinitely) is a Goal. Passing between the outer posts and the adjacent central one (or bouncing off these) is a Behind.
|-
Type 1 if the protruding poles are rationalised to zero, without respect to scoring zones. Four ''or perhaps six'' topological holes (two or three per end) if respecting the imaginary projections indefinitely upwards for scoring purposes, depending upon if you care about chirality of the ball path.

Gaelic football ('Gaelic') - fields also used for Hurling
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_football#/media/File:Gaelic_football_pitch_diagram.svg
|-
An unobstructed rectangular field with an H-shaped set of goalposts at each end, the area below the crossbar often being netted, while the upper verticals being nominally considered as projecting upwards without limit.
Valid balls sent over the crossbar and between the verticals are awarded Points; those sent into the netted goalmouth are Goals (equivalent to three Points for scoring purposes).
There is no in-play use of the area behind the line of the goalposts, unlike various other football codes with similar-looking posts.
|- Topologically, probably considered a Type 1. Goal-shots are into a 'pocket' extension (if nets are used), and Point-shots are topologically indistinguishable from passing over any other part of the boundary line.

Rugby League/Union ('Rugby'/'Rugby Football'/'Football')
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_union#/media/File:RugbyPitchMetricDetailed.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_league_playing_field#/media/File:NRL_Rugby_League_field.svg
|-
An unobstructed rectangular playing area and two 'In Goal' areas continuing on behind the 'Try Line' upon which the H-shaped goalposts sit.
The field of play extends into this area, the lower parts of the vertical posts play no purpose other than to hold the upper elements in the air. A 'Try' (roughly equivalent to a Touchdown) can be scored by placing the ball somewhere over the line or by touching the base of the (often padded) posts.
The cross-bar and the verticals upwards of it (towards and bounded at infinity) count as the hard boundary of a scoring area for "conversions" (taken immediately after a try) and other kicks (penalties and drop-goals).
|-
Might be treated as Type 3 (two holes), unless concerned about whether balls kicked through the goals or taking across the try line weave back one or other side of, or between, the lower vertical posts.
Alternately, is a Type 3 for the lower (not more special for scoring than any adjacent lower area) frames, while the open tops (meaningful for scoring purposes) rationalise as topologically irrelevent.
</div>
(TL;DR; - It's too long, you may not want to read it...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.213|162.158.34.213]] 21:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

The extended discussion in the explanation about the issues with "two-holes for football" goes away if the goals are the H-shaped kind rather then the Y-shaped kind. Since the comic specifically states that these fields belong to the Topology Department - and are NOT generalized across all sports fields - then we can use the "two hole" information to deduce that the department's fields have the H-shaped kind...which solves 100% of the confusion and eliminates the long (and excessively intricate) digression about other weird forms of "football" with different topologies. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- agree [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 15:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Is this really explainxkcd? Asking since I don't see the obvious stated anywhere. Hell, '''the obvious question and last statement of the image isn't even addressed'''. Why does no one ever want to use the topology department's athletic fields? Its a mystery right? Whats wrong with a soccer field that has a topology like that? It make detecting when the ball crossed the line so much easier.
Also, how has no one talked about the geographic/field topology that the last question implies along with the obvious reprecusions (ball roll down hill. stuck in middle. habing to climb. tripping in holes and breaking legs)? Why is everything so freaking high level here? '''Where the hell is the explanation of the joke's? Something is terribly wrong!''' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.82.81|172.71.82.81]] 17:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

: One of the more serious problems with explainxkcd is the well-known phenomenon that explaining a joke often kills the humor. So, quite often, in the course of fully explaining the cartoon - we do indeed shred the actual humor into tiny, tiny fragments. However, we're here to explain it - and that's that.
: I guess the joke is that the topology department are so obsessed with the topological shape of their sport's fields that they have lost the shape and dimensions of the fields - and thereby made them useless for playing actual sports on.
: Two fields that are topologically equivalent are not necessarily capable of being used for playing multiple sports. Swimming on a croquet field - or playing croquet in a swimming pool does not work. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.199|172.69.71.199]] 18:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
:: The goal is to explain the joke in '''laymans terms''' yaknow, "because your dumb". Since the joke is missed by those outside the fields and don't know how definitions of terms differ in different fields and whatnot. Its the whole purpose. The thing above explains nothing in laymans terms. There is no joke. All there is is an explanation on how field theory and topolgy work and then why the resulting images make sense. Nothing on why this is supposed to be funny. The one thing we actually have to explain at minimum. The joke seems to be that this field which is created for the reasons already described is the actual field we would play on (something completly unaddressed in the explanation above). This could be dangerous with those holes (also unaddressed). And then there is the unadressed question of is this a raised plot of land thats been cut out, or is this all that exist, and kicking the ball off field or falling in a hole goes into a void. This needs to be an explanation for people who are much, much, much dumber. We are not supposed to be explaining field theory, just enough of it to get the joke [[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.124|162.158.187.124]] 18:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
: explainxkcd was weird, but has definitely been getting weirder, and i also question its reality and worry for if the server breaks without somebody to fix it. i get a lot of reverses and edits that sometimes look like subtle vandalism or political information insertion. i think a lot of people are on twitter, and i think xkcd has an irc chat too. but i'm here for now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.209|172.70.110.209]] 09:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Wondering if any topologists understand American football, and if any football fans understand topology. I am a football fan who doesn't understand topology. As requested before, I would like to understand why there is any topological difference in analyzing the American football gameplay and playing field, between H-shaped and Y-shaped goals.

The field-goal-space is functionally a rectangle above the crossbar, and the width between the uprights, but of undefined height, in both the H and Y cases. It is directly above the back line of the endzone for pro and for college football. The one or two supports for the crossbar are irrelevant to gameplay. All supports below the bar would be eliminated, if the engineering problem could be solved. Why does the existence of one vs. two engineering kludges make a critical difference in the number of topological holes?

The endzone, that is, all of the space on the playing field (grass) in front of, and on either side of the goalposts is valid and legal for every player and for the ball on every play, potentially with scoring implications at the termination of the play. Note that the goal posts for pro football were at one time at the back of the endzone, then from 1933 to 1974, on the goal line, and since 1974, at the back of the endzone again. NCAA/college football has had the goalposts at the back of the endzone since 1927.

All of the space above the grass, above the endzone, both under and above the height of the horizontal crossbar, are also legal and valid for play by the players and by the ball on every play. In one case, a play involving a legally kicked field goal, the space above the crossbar and between the uprights, has scoring significance. A field goal has the same name and the same general mechanics in basketball and in American football. In neither case do the engineering contrivances supporting and suspending the goal rectangle (football) or circle (basketball) play a conceptual role in the gameplay. Why, then, do the topologists here in the discussion treat football and basketball differently, and why are H-shaped and Y-shaped goals in football not equivalent? Randall counts both basketball and football as 'two-holers', but the current public Expain xkcd text says that he is wrong for pro and college football. So far as I can tell, pro and college football have both used the Y-goal since 1974 or before. The Y-support for the goalposts is 6.5 feet behind the back of the endzone, and completely outside of the playing field. I look forward to learning something. [unsigned]

: I've edited the first paragraph to make this clearer, but topology is the mathematics which describes a particular aspect of a shape, which ignores many other specifics of shape, size and material. In particular topology pays attention to any place where something can pass through an object, like the holes shown (and places where the object passes through itself are even more interesting). So, while difference between the two supporting poles of the H-support goal and the single pole of the Y-support is irrelevant to gameplay, as far as topology is concerned it is basically the only relevant difference, as two poles supporting a bar form an aperture that things (balls, people) can pass through, and there is one such "hole" in each end.

: I am pretty sure Randall is ignoring all markings on the field and rules of play, considering that the joke is that the topology department is ignoring such important things as size (of volleyball vs high-jump "fields"), positioning (of basketball hoops vs parallel bars) and protrusions (of soccer nets or tetherball stands).[[Special:Contributions/172.68.66.37|172.68.66.37]] 02:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

In describing the shapes for the transcript, amused to find that the ellipses (plural of ellipse, oval) are used to denote ellipses (plural of ellipsis, missing material). Are the etymologies related? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.66.37|172.68.66.37]] 02:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion around football type appears to have missed out a fundamental point of terminology, namely that rugby is never called "football". It is one of the variants of football-type games, there is the fact that its codes are governed by the various Rugby Football Unions and Rugby Football Leagues around the world, there's even the fact that it's one of the things referred to by Australians as "footy", which derives from "football"... but isn't actually the word "football". While the word "football" obviously means different things in different contexts, when used on its own, without qualification, it never means "rugby".

Leaving the nets in place on a soccer field which is also used for other activities is not that usual, but it's not unheard of and does make easy sense of the lack of topological holes (and is easily explained by an American's likely unfamiliarity with common soccer-apparatus practice). H-shaped American-football posts have holes bounded by the ground, uprights and crossbar; these holes exist physically and may be described topologically, irrespective of their irrelevance to gameplay. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 09:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
:Call yourself <s>a pudding, you Yorkshire</s> a Yorkshire, you pudding!?! It is far from uncommon to call {{w|Rugby_league|the game of 'rugby'}} by the name of "football" in the real heartlands of the sport... Though I doubt that this terminology has encroached into the US, what with their obsession with body-armour to slow things down and then taking a two-minute breather for every other minute of actual play in their peculiar version of handegg... ;) (I'm not casting aspersions upon their choices of sports, though, I hear they're fairly keen on rounders, which is actually slightly faster paced than even our one-day cricket...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.5|172.70.162.5]] 10:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
::Ah, cobblers. It is uncommon to call anything other than the kicking of a round ball "football", even in the realm of the oval-balled faithful. Ask A. N. Other resident of the West Riding about football - they're not going to think you mean Trinity, Tigers or Hull K.R. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 23:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please clarify or remove the parenthesis about "points, in different disconnected topologies"? The fact that loops around a hole cannot be moved to loops that aren't around a hole is one thing, but where do the points or disconnected topologies come in? Or is it a separate concept, of points existing in one topology not existing in another one because there is a hole there? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.146.81|172.68.146.81]] 02:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Amused that the citation needed comment on swimming pools being filled with water is not fulfilled by the wikilink for Olympic-sized swimming pools, as that article does not explicitly state anywhere that the pool should be filled with water! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.146.81|172.68.146.81]] 03:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

To the editor who corrected the "ellipsis" in the transcript, not sure if you're reading the discussion, but it was deliberate and I do know the difference - the whole reason I noticed the ellipses/ellipses double meaning was because I was trying to replace the word "hole", as the rest of the article hadn't yet been updated to clarify the difference between topological holes in a negative space and holes in a solid object. As it stands, "ellipse" is probably the better word for the purposes of describing the picture for the transcript, rather than "ellipsis" for the missing material it is depicting. If I've slipped up anywhere else, please feel free to fix. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.66.63|172.68.66.63]] 00:45, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

The fact that the volleyball net creates a hole is absolutely correct. (I'm sure) the configuration is in the rules, including at least the approximate height of the open space under the net. Critically, touching the net is a violation. But temporarily moving under it is not, as long as one doesn't interfere with the opposing team. A net that started from the floor would change the game dramatically, since not even toes could ever legally be extended under it.
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.42.91|172.69.42.91]] 23:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Except for the long jump community. [[User:GetPunnedOn|GetPunnedOn]] {{unsigned|GetPunnedOn|23:23, 21 May 2023}}

Talk:2597: Salary Negotiation

2025-03-07T17:12:27Z

MeZimm:

The second panel is me every time I haggle for something, and I have to make sure I don't end up haggling the wrong way. Or starting above my desired price when I mean to start below so that I can meet in the middle at my desired price.

[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.36|172.70.91.36]] 23:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
:It's not a one-time negotiation, anyway. During an annual review I'd have to suggest any pay adjustments. Was useless at it, too self-effacing. I left one job after ten years and later on found my exact same old position (which I had felt now wasn't adding much to the team, part of the reason I left) readvertised with a suggested salary range starting at ''twice'' that of what I had actually departed with. Seems they needed me (or someone quite like me) more than any of us knew. That experience didn't improve my assertiveness, though. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.211|172.70.90.211]] 10:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

They should offer him $61,333.33 plus a penny extra once every three years.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.198|162.158.107.198]] 23:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
:The way a friend solved it was to cut a penny into six pieces (like a pizza), and then give me two of them. [[User:Ruffy314|Ruffy314]] ([[User talk:Ruffy314|talk]]) 09:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:: This raises more questions than it answers. Why was your friend giving you 1/3 of a penny? Why two sixths rather than one third? How did they cut it? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 13:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
::: I would imagine that it is significantly easier to slice a coin all the way through than it is to cut it halfway through. But I'm still wondering how: after making the first cut (presumably relatively easy given the right tools), the subsequent cuts would be against *parts* of a penny, not the entire thing (thereby decreasing the utility of making full slices). Once a penny is cut in half, the two parts won't stay together anymore, unlike a pizza where the entire thing retains its same shape the entire time. I also wonder about the utility: a fraction of a penny under 50% of the total volume is completely worthless. When someone has more than 50%, then it is worth the entire value of the penny. [[User:Cwallenpoole|Cwallenpoole]] ([[User talk:Cwallenpoole|talk]]) 14:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:::You can clamp down the two parts of a now discected coin, for a further cut across-tye-cut almost as easily as you can clamp down the original. Harder to do the two ⅙ths and two ⅓rds (or just the latter two) to get the final four ⅙ths. Or overlay the cut halves (or thirds), perhaps, then cut through both with a powerful enough slicer.
:::But the way I'd do it (assuming 6 ⅙s is the target) is to make the cut across all but a ''sliver'' of one edge, realign, make a similar cut (liberating ⅙, having ⅓+⅙+⅓ still joined) then clean through at the third angle (two more ⅙s loosed), after which you just need to snip through the two cut-ends that you left to make the slotted ½ into 3 separate ⅙s.
:::Just snipping from edge to centre, three times, can mess up at the meeting point. Though it involves the same angles, getting them to meet (non-messily) in the exact centre is awkward, and it's easier to visually map six equilateral triangles with an edge-length equal to the radius (to execute three cross-cuts, fairly) than the three obtuse triangles (or one equilateral triangle with edges ≠2r) in planning where on the edge to start. Well, from my regular experience in actual pizza-cutting into three equal portions, before we get to the difficulty in cleanly cutting a much smaller coin made of metal. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.154|141.101.99.154]] 14:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Any idea how Cueball arrived at the figure of $61 1/3 thousand?--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 03:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
: Arbitrarily non-round numbers are a really good idea as per [https://hbr.org/2016/03/dont-use-round-numbers-in-a-negotiation] (which I just added), and Cueball's is one of the simplest in terms of algebraic fractional expression at the bottom of the 110-120% widely-accepted counter-offer range already mentioned (with which I agree and have heard repeatedly from associates, but rather uncomfortably is in the explanation without a source.) I would sincerely say he's being quite shrewd at that point, except for the haggling over cents and fractional cents. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.185|172.70.214.185]] 03:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. In the UK, I was taught to call them recurring decimals. Never heard of repeating decimals. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.20|141.101.99.20]] 08:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:I just assumed the usual trans-Atlantic difference in terminology. In general I'd also say "point three three three recurring" to establish the (unvarying) pattern, or something like "point one nine one nine recurring" for a bistable pattern, etc, so that it doesn't look like all-nines to infinity. But, to be honest, I'd be glad if people didn't use "point thirty-three" or the like. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.211|172.70.90.211]] 10:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think the 15% is meaning a 15% cut in the (offered) salary, as the current explanation has it. I think this is referencing agent-type negotiations, where the agent might take 15% of the salary negotiated for the person they're representing.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.209|172.69.79.209]] 09:15, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:Fixed. [[User:Justhalf|Justhalf]] ([[User talk:Justhalf|talk]]) 10:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:Also inappropriately used/ill-formed, in this negotiation, but "15% of the gross" might be a given film-star's deal for appearing/cameoing in a movie, i.e. variable according to the success, tying directly into the money it earns the studio - potentially quite lucrative, without scaring off the studio by risking it (excessive) debts in the event of a flop or other failure to cash in. So long as the {{w|The Producers (1967 film)|total percentages are not excessive}}!
:A salary that is a set percentage (other than 100%) of one's own salary is, of course, nonsensicle and paradoxical (though one could suggest an introductive percentage 'discount' for the first year, as a wary employer's inducement/guarantee, perhaps in direct exchange for a corresponding bonus against the measure of productivity that is expected/hoped to be massively increased by being hired), but muddled Cueball seems to be grasping at apt-sounding fragments of such 'business language' yet mashing them together in various wrong ways. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 12:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Summary is way too long and overdetailed. It's more like a play-by-play of the comic than an explanation [[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.145|172.69.248.145]] 02:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
:Seconded. Apologies to whoever wrote the existing description, but you worked too hard. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 19:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

As others have pointed out, $61,333.33 1/3 is not an irrational number; however calling it a rational number (and linking the page for that term) seems pointless. Could we change it to say "irrational amount" to indicate Cueball's mindset and eliminate the link?

Why not just say that the 1/3 of a cent is paid in advance in 3 year cycles? The first year will get him $61333.34, then $61333.33 for the next 2 years. He can just save the 2/3¢ for the second and third years. :P [[Special:Contributions/162.158.118.58|162.158.118.58]] 06:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2591: Qua

2025-03-07T17:11:29Z

MeZimm:

As i've never seen anyone use this, we can safely assume that exterminating these people would not affect the world one bit [[Special:Contributions/162.158.191.131|162.158.191.131]] 10:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

If Megan's not careful, this pattern can quickly spiral to infinity: "Nice use of qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua." "Nice use of qua qua qua qua qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua qua qua qua qua." "Nice use of..." [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:Or perhaps "Nice use of 'Nice use of ... '" although new forms of quote mark would need to be invented. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 19:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
::From what I've seen, you just alternate between " and '. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.65|172.70.126.65]] 23:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:Hey, [[244|no recursing]]. [[User:Ruffy314|Ruffy314]] ([[User talk:Ruffy314|talk]]) 21:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
'''qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua''' [[User:New editor|New editor]] ([[User talk:New editor|talk]]) 20:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:eh, close enough.[[User:Lettherebedarklight|youtube.com/watch?v=miLcaqq2Zpk]] ([[User talk:Lettherebedarklight|talk]]) 12:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I feel like there should be a duck somewhere. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:05, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Buffalo everywhere are concerned.

Maybe one could note that the two uses of "qua" are different: While in the meaning of "as"/"in capacity of", qua is a preposition, it is a relative pronoun in the Latin expression "sine qua non".
So, actually, the explanation of the title text given so far is slightly incorrect: The correct use of "qua" (as a preposition) is NOT essential to the correct use of "sine qua non" (where we use only the Latin relative pronoun). Instead, "qua" is essential to build the complex expression "sine qua non qua sine qua non", where the middle qua is indeed the preposition!
I also feel that Randall is making fun of "pretentious" people by demonstrating how quickly their talk turns into something like "blablabla" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.153|172.70.246.153]] 21:51, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

:But the explanation of the title text is not claiming that it is specifically as a proposition that “qua” is essential, is it?
:[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 04:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:: Well, basically, you're right. But to clarify it better, you would at least have to point out that the title text is talking of two different "qua"s then, BOTH the preposition and the relative pronoun. And in order to use them correctly, you ought to differentiate between the both, i.m.h.o. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.171|162.158.90.171]] 07:38, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:::I agree with you.
:::[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 08:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:This is somewhat incorrect, as well as a distinction without a difference. The Latin "qua" that is not a pronoun, used in the comic, is not a preposition (although it can translate to the preposition "as" in English), but rather an adverb. This adverb is directly derived from "qua" the pronoun, ablative feminine form of "qui" ("which"). In fact, the simple ablative use of the pronoun completely covers the meaning of the adverb ("as", "by which", "as which" etc.). Calling some uses of "qua" adverbial, rather than simple ablative use of a feminine pronoun, is something modern linguists do to facilitate understanding of "qua" when not preceded by prepositions; it is not, I suspect, a distinction the Latin speakers of antiquity would recognise. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.95|141.101.105.95]] 08:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Even after reading the comic, title text & the explainxkcd.com description, I am still confused. I've never heard of that word/phrase.

:Agreed, I feel that the explanation qua it stands leaves me almost qua confused qua I was before coming here and reading it. If qua roughly means “as” or “for the purpose of” then would someone please explain why this not an example of someone using sine qua non: “I could have left work after the accident if I wanted, but decided sine, bore the pain, and stayed.” I don’t get it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.214|172.70.131.214]] 06:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:Yeah, it's only really familiar to people who speak Higher Academic. I think at least three nines of all uses of the word "qua" in English-language writing are in the phrase "sine qua non", which is itself too prolix to really qualify as common. The main thing that saves "sine qua non" from being jargon, is that it's not in any way discipline-specific. It's as likely to show up in a formal academic paper related to algebraic topology, as it is to show up in a formal academic paper related to medieval literature. This puts it into the same general category as e.g. "albeit", "je ne sais quoi", or "prolix". As for uses of the word "qua" outside the context of the phrase "sine qua non", I believe this may be the first I've ever encountered, so it's difficult to generalize. --Jonadab (not logged in).
::Hey, I actually use "albeit" all the time! (British English? Possibly even regional dialect. But I also use "whilst" a lot, and know that people like to assume that I mean "while", never mind the occasional confusion between the usage as meaning "during" or the one that means "until" ({{wiktionary|while#Conjunction|c.f. usages 3 and 4!}}) Not that I've used a "naked ''qua''" at all, that I can recall, only really used ''je ne sais quoi'' when speaking yer actual French, whilst ''prolix'' is unknown to me and out of context I'd have thought it a medical term... ;)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 21:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

On this you are not alone.

If you say "Qua Qua Qua Qua" really fast, it kind of sounds like you are saying "quack quack quack". Thus Megan would sound like she is saying "Nice use of quack quack quack quack..." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.230|162.158.107.230]] 00:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

: “Qua qua qua” is how in Italian you write the duck sound. [[User:Vdm|Vdm]] ([[User talk:Vdm|talk]]) 21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

This comic is most likely inspired by this week's Sunday puzzle on NPR, which asks for an English word that starts with the "kw" sound but doesn't contain Q,U,K, or W. See https://www.npr.org/2022/03/06/1084744124/sunday-puzzle-may-the-odds-be-in-your-favor
:Well, apart from the u...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.153|172.69.79.153]] 17:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:My answer to the puzzle is "choir" [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 20:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Quamvis sint sub aqua sub aqua maledicere temptant. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.88|172.70.251.88]] 06:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Randall is not using qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua, he's using it to sound funny and play with words. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 07:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:I think Randall is just trying to sound pretentious coûte que coûte ;-P --[[User:IByte|IByte]] ([[User talk:IByte|talk]]) 10:33, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

No reference here to Waiting for Godot?

:People only reference Waiting for Godot in order to sound pretentious. Nobody has ever actually read it.

::Because it's a play? … You usually don't read a play. … Especially one … with so many … pauses.
::(Well, at least five people will then read the play. Whosoever play Estragon, Vladimir, Pozzo, Lucky and the boy(s). Nobody who plays Godot.)
::You can always tell people you read ''Waiting For Godot'' in the original French, if you really want to sound pretentious. … Or French. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 21:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I am anxiously awaiting the day when I come to explainxkcd and the content for that day's comic is just "...look, I don't know man"
:Yes. and I am waiting for someone to answer, "...it's just funnier that way." [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 20:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it would help to explain to use angle brackets:
- Cueball: <qua> qua <qua> ''("qua-word" _used for_ "qua-meaning"), but also ("any word/expression" _used for_ "its own meaning") with the two outer "qua" = abbreviation of "aliqua" in the meaning of "something"''
- Megan: <<qua> qua <qua>> qua <<qua> qua <qua>> ''("qua qua qua"-wording _used for_ "qua qua qua"-meaning)''
- Title Text: <Qua> qua <qua> is the <sine qua non> of <<sine qua non> qua <sine qua non>> ''"qua qua qua"-meaning/construct is the _indispensable essence_ of "sine qua non"-wording _used for_ "sine-qua-non"-meaning''
Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.207|172.70.242.207]] 06:02, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

I have trouble reading the word <code>qua</code>, my brain seems to automatically reorient it, so I can comfortably read <code>end</code>. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.193|162.158.92.193]] 17:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
: enb

I am guessing that "Badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger" is just as valid as "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"? [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 00:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
: No, because the plural of "badger" is "badgers", not "badger". Also "Badger" isn't a well-known city, if it is indeed a place. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 05:34, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::If we are going to accept the use of "buffalo" as the plural form of buffalo [https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-plural-of/buffalo.html when it is actually "buffalos/buffaloes"], then "badger" as a plural should also be valid. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badger,_Alaska Badger, Alaska] has the largest population of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badger_(disambiguation) seven places with that exact name](~19,000). However, the popularity of the location doesn't matter to the validity of the sentence, as long as it exists. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
:::"{{wiktionary|buffalo#Noun|buffalo (plural buffaloes or buffalos or buffalo)}}" vs "{{wiktionary|badger#Noun|badger (plural badgers)}}" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.44|172.70.86.44]] 12:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
::::OK, I admit that I stopped after I found a link that I thought supported my argument. I resubmit it as: ''Badger badgers Badger badgers badger badger Badger badgers.'' [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 20:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::Can mushroom mushroom? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 23:42, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::Snake snake.... Snake... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 01:48, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

The second, third, and fourth sentences still need a lot of work, folks. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.72|172.70.211.72]] 09:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2549: Edge Cake

2025-03-07T17:10:07Z

MeZimm:

The cake being all edges is a reference to everything about her birth being an edge case.
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.227|172.70.110.227]] 03:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: It seems likely that the title of the comic is a related pun: her birthday is an edge case, and so she has an edge cake.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.221|162.158.106.221]] 04:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
So is Hairbun officially named Emily now, sort of like how all instances of Megan are Megan even though she's only called that once? I know all the names here are just placeholders of convenience, but even then I've never know what the rules for naming are. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 06:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: Well, Megan is referred to multiple times in the xkcds as "Megan", while the one time Hairbun was called Emily, it referred to the real{{citation needed}} Emily Dickinson. So, probably not. [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 02:44, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Edge pieces on cake are often sought after because they hold more frosting, for cakes which are frosted while out of the pan. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 06:37, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: I have an impression that Cueball is delighted by having only edge pieces, however some cakes edge pieces may be either sought for or avoided, depending on one's tastes. E.g. tarts have more crispy base cake content and less filling at the edges. One person may go for the filling, another for the crispy base. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.11|162.158.102.11]] 09:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

So it seems the events in the comic happened on Apr 1., as the "last month" birthday could be either Feb 28. or 29. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.11|162.158.102.11]] 09:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:Not necessarily. Remember, Emily can have her birthday ''whenever she wants'', so the date this comic is set as is entirely arbitrary. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.51|172.70.178.51]] 12:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Are there any particular existing arctic international flights that could have been the one Emily was born on? -- [[Special:Contributions/256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] 15:51, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:There are a few possibities (at least pre-COVID, and obviously we'd be looking historically in this case anyway) as [https://interestingengineering.com/polar-routes-flights-that-go-over-earths-poles might be shown here]. There's two possible (but neither definite) International Datelines on the comic diagram, in case they help orient which from/to directions might have been diverted further in or out of their own kinks in the flightpath to coincide with 90°N. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 16:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Expanded copies of this comic have been appearing on other comics, so large that it fills the whole screen for me. Is anyone else having this problem? [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 22:24, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:Someone (check the [[Special:RecentChanges|Recent Changes]] page, if you want) has been vandalising a lot of things. Currently I see a picture of an amphibious avian creature on this article's top (if I still need to revert it myself, I will do, but I've seen others have already been reverting other recent vandalism, so I may not need to by the time I've checked again). This very clever individual is obiviously mentally superior to us all(!) the way they can edit wiki pages seemingly at will... Impressive, eh? At some point I'm sure we'll get back to normlal, however boring that may be. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.67|172.70.90.67]] 23:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Not to be too pedantic but isn't rotation a FREQUENCY, not a SPEED? [[User:Skulker|Skulker]] ([[User talk:Skulker|talk]]) 03:19, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:Depends on the context (and scale). The convention is usually speed for rotation (surface(distance/time) when it's relevant, angular(revolutions/time) otherwise) to avoid conflicts with wave frequency (which is independent of speed). Also they can be freely converted, though converting to and from surface speed requires an additional radius term. The exception is, if comparing periodicity, sometimes frequency is used when it has special relevance (Ex: resonance) -- [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.200|172.69.68.200]] 02:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Tempted to add a link in the Trivia section to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Warrimoo Wikipedia] or [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ss-warrimoo/ Snopes] pages on the SS Warrimoo, a ship that (reportedly) was on the intersection of the Equator and the International Date Line at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 1900, with a number of interesting implications that follow. There's no way to prove that it actually happened, but it's fun to imagine and is somewhat similar to the premise of the comic. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 14:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:What convinces me that it's a post-constructed yarn, rather than a legitimate account of a plausible event, is that the 1899-1900 'specialness' is (numerically aside) significant only from a more modern viewpoint. The dominant view at the alleged time of the incident, was the 1-rooted changeover between Centuries (1801 through to the end of 1900, then 1901-2000 to follow), and only changed as the more classical form of education/opinion phased out of common use. It was either later contrived from whole cloth as a tall-tale (if done at the time, it would have been given a 1900/1901 timestamp) or gradually embroidered with all the extra coincidental boundary-crossings (spatial and temporal) well after the actual inspirational seed incident in order to make a better anecdote/shaggy-dog-story.... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 15:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:::Okay... but it's fun to imagine... and is somewhat similar to the premise of the comic. And I'd say it's a good deal more plausible than the situation presented in the comic. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Many airplanes actually have limitations written into their operating manuals that prohibit flying north of 89 deg. N or south of 89 deg. S, mostly just so that the navigation software doesn't have to deal with the singularity. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.187|172.69.71.187]] 23:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:bloody lazy engineers! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.107|108.162.219.107]] 12:19, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Is it not possible that Emily's birth happened to occur at the same moment that the contract specified transfer of ownership? Additionally, is it not possible that the airplane took off from within UTC+13:00 or UTC+14:00 and that the moment of Emily's birth happened to occur in the brief one-or-two hour period in which it was March 1st at that airport, but February 28th in UTC-12:00? UTC-11:00 is inhabited, so it would be possible that ownership of an airplane that took off from within UTC+14:00 was transferred to a company based out of UTC-11:00 during the one-hour period that it was February 28th in UTC-11:00 and March 1st in UTC+14:00 and that, at that exact moment, it was passing over the North Pole. [[User:DL Draco Rex|DL Draco Rex]] ([[User talk:DL Draco Rex|talk]])

Am I alone in thinking that babies don't get born instantaneously? I've never given birth myself but i'd always got the impression that it's a process and any attempt to pick a precise 'instant' is going to be somewhat arbitrary. This means that the plane will very probably have travelled through a variety of time zones any of which could be the 'real' time of birth. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.155|172.70.85.155]] 05:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
:Time of birth is an arbitrary decision made by the midwives filling out forms in a hospital. The more unlikely point about that is that she'd be able to correlate the precise position of the plane at the exact time listed. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.187|108.162.219.187]] 12:37, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Dickenson looks like a typo. Dickinson? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 08:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Isn't an "all edge pieces cake" just a plate of cupcakes lol? [[User:Zman350x|Zman350x]] ([[User talk:Zman350x|talk]]) 06:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
:Only if you frosted all sides of it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.3|172.70.114.3]] 12:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
:Alton Brown made a similar argument, but after experimenting, I strongly disagree. As with brownies, the cooking pattern is slightly different between having more edges and having a cupcake shape. In an edge piece, the edges and the corners are crisp while the center is gooey. Meanwhile, if cooked in a cupcake tin, while there might be more crispness, there is significantly less gooeyness. [[User:Cwallenpoole|Cwallenpoole]] ([[User talk:Cwallenpoole|talk]]) 14:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:If you cut the sheet into quarters or if the whole was round and cut with radial slices there won't be any center piece(s). And there are more, unusual cuts that could result in all edge pieces...[[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.165|172.70.34.165]] 14:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:My take was that a normal cake was baked, frosted and cut (with both edge and center pieces), and only the edge pieces were delivered to Emily.
::Only a cake baked in a fractal pan would be good enough for her!

Any commentary on the fact that the middle panel shows 25 time zones? [[User:Inca hoots|Inca hoots]] ([[User talk:Inca hoots|talk]]) 16:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

this comic has the same number as the carrier pigeon RFC, 2549. maybe related? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.251|172.70.114.251]] 19:37, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

Talk:2549: Edge Cake

2025-03-07T17:09:26Z

MeZimm:

The cake being all edges is a reference to everything about her birth being an edge case.
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.227|172.70.110.227]] 03:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: It seems likely that the title of the comic is a related pun: her birthday is an edge case, and so she has an edge cake.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.221|162.158.106.221]] 04:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
So is Hairbun officially named Emily now, sort of like how all instances of Megan are Megan even though she's only called that once? I know all the names here are just placeholders of convenience, but even then I've never know what the rules for naming are. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 06:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: Well, Megan is referred to multiple times in the xkcds as "Megan", while the one time Hairbun was called Emily, it referred to the real{{citation needed}} Emily Dickinson. So, probably not. [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 02:44, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Edge pieces on cake are often sought after because they hold more frosting, for cakes which are frosted while out of the pan. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 06:37, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
: I have an impression that Cueball is delighted by having only edge pieces, however some cakes edge pieces may be either sought for or avoided, depending on one's tastes. E.g. tarts have more crispy base cake content and less filling at the edges. One person may go for the filling, another for the crispy base. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.11|162.158.102.11]] 09:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

So it seems the events in the comic happened on Apr 1., as the "last month" birthday could be either Feb 28. or 29. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.11|162.158.102.11]] 09:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:Not necessarily. Remember, Emily can have her birthday ''whenever she wants'', so the date this comic is set as is entirely arbitrary. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.51|172.70.178.51]] 12:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Are there any particular existing arctic international flights that could have been the one Emily was born on? -- [[Special:Contributions/256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] 15:51, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:There are a few possibities (at least pre-COVID, and obviously we'd be looking historically in this case anyway) as [https://interestingengineering.com/polar-routes-flights-that-go-over-earths-poles might be shown here]. There's two possible (but neither definite) International Datelines on the comic diagram, in case they help orient which from/to directions might have been diverted further in or out of their own kinks in the flightpath to coincide with 90°N. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 16:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Expanded copies of this comic have been appearing on other comics, so large that it fills the whole screen for me. Is anyone else having this problem? [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 22:24, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
:Someone (check the [[Special:RecentChanges|Recent Changes]] page, if you want) has been vandalising a lot of things. Currently I see a picture of an amphibious avian creature on this article's top (if I still need to revert it myself, I will do, but I've seen others have already been reverting other recent vandalism, so I may not need to by the time I've checked again). This very clever individual is obiviously mentally superior to us all(!) the way they can edit wiki pages seemingly at will... Impressive, eh? At some point I'm sure we'll get back to normlal, however boring that may be. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.67|172.70.90.67]] 23:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Not to be too pedantic but isn't rotation a FREQUENCY, not a SPEED? [[User:Skulker|Skulker]] ([[User talk:Skulker|talk]]) 03:19, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:Depends on the context (and scale). The convention is usually speed for rotation (surface(distance/time) when it's relevant, angular(revolutions/time) otherwise) to avoid conflicts with wave frequency (which is independent of speed). Also they can be freely converted, though converting to and from surface speed requires an additional radius term. The exception is, if comparing periodicity, sometimes frequency is used when it has special relevance (Ex: resonance) -- [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.200|172.69.68.200]] 02:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Tempted to add a link in the Trivia section to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Warrimoo Wikipedia] or [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ss-warrimoo/ Snopes] pages on the SS Warrimoo, a ship that (reportedly) was on the intersection of the Equator and the International Date Line at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 1900, with a number of interesting implications that follow. There's no way to prove that it actually happened, but it's fun to imagine and is somewhat similar to the premise of the comic. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 14:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:What convinces me that it's a post-constructed yarn, rather than a legitimate account of a plausible event, is that the 1899-1900 'specialness' is (numerically aside) significant only from a more modern viewpoint. The dominant view at the alleged time of the incident, was the 1-rooted changeover between Centuries (1801 through to the end of 1900, then 1901-2000 to follow), and only changed as the more classical form of education/opinion phased out of common use. It was either later contrived from whole cloth as a tall-tale (if done at the time, it would have been given a 1900/1901 timestamp) or gradually embroidered with all the extra coincidental boundary-crossings (spatial and temporal) well after the actual inspirational seed incident in order to make a better anecdote/shaggy-dog-story.... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 15:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:::Okay... but it's fun to imagine... and is somewhat similar to the premise of the comic. And I'd say it's a good deal more plausible than the situation presented in the comic. --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.43|108.162.221.43]] 16:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Many airplanes actually have limitations written into their operating manuals that prohibit flying north of 89 deg. N or south of 89 deg. S, mostly just so that the navigation software doesn't have to deal with the singularity. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.187|172.69.71.187]] 23:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
:bloody lazy engineers! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.107|108.162.219.107]] 12:19, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Is it not possible that Emily's birth happened to occur at the same moment that the contract specified transfer of ownership? Additionally, is it not possible that the airplane took off from within UTC+13:00 or UTC+14:00 and that the moment of Emily's birth happened to occur in the brief one-or-two hour period in which it was March 1st at that airport, but February 28th in UTC-12:00? UTC-11:00 is inhabited, so it would be possible that ownership of an airplane that took off from within UTC+14:00 was transferred to a company based out of UTC-11:00 during the one-hour period that it was February 28th in UTC-11:00 and March 1st in UTC+14:00 and that, at that exact moment, it was passing over the North Pole. [[User:DL Draco Rex|DL Draco Rex]] ([[User talk:DL Draco Rex|talk]])

Am I alone in thinking that babies don't get born instantaneously? I've never given birth myself but i'd always got the impression that it's a process and any attempt to pick a precise 'instant' is going to be somewhat arbitrary. This means that the plane will very probably have travelled through a variety of time zones any of which could be the 'real' time of birth. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.155|172.70.85.155]] 05:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
:Time of birth is an arbitrary decision made by the midwives filling out forms in a hospital. The more unlikely point about that is that she'd be able to correlate the precise position of the plane at the exact time listed. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.187|108.162.219.187]] 12:37, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Dickenson looks like a typo. Dickinson? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 08:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Isn't an "all edge pieces cake" just a plate of cupcakes lol? [[User:Zman350x|Zman350x]] ([[User talk:Zman350x|talk]]) 06:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
:Only if you frosted all sides of it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.3|172.70.114.3]] 12:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
:Alton Brown made a similar argument, but after experimenting, I strongly disagree. As with brownies, the cooking pattern is slightly different between having more edges and having a cupcake shape. In an edge piece, the edges and the corners are crisp while the center is gooey. Meanwhile, if cooked in a cupcake tin, while there might be more crispness, there is significantly less gooeyness. [[User:Cwallenpoole|Cwallenpoole]] ([[User talk:Cwallenpoole|talk]]) 14:23, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:If you cut the sheet into quarters or if the whole was round and cut with radial slices there won't be any center piece(s). And there are more, unusual cuts that could result in all edge pieces...[[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.165|172.70.34.165]] 14:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:My take was that a normal cake was baked, frosted and cut (with both edge and center pieces), and only the edge pieces were delivered to Emily.
::Only a cake baked in a fractal pan would be good enough for her!

Any commentary on the fact that the middle panel shows 25 time zones? [[User:Inca hoots|Inca hoots]] ([[User talk:Inca hoots|talk]]) 16:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

this comic has the same number as the carrier pigeon RFC, 2549. maybe related? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.251|172.70.114.251]] 19:37, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

Talk:2540: TTSLTSWBD

2025-03-07T17:08:46Z

MeZimm:

XKCD 332 should be referenced here. Gyroscopes are not only directly referenced but also the similar observation that they should not work. I am being careful not to edit this page at the moment since it's probably very active. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.38|162.158.62.38]] 04:46, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
: Done! :D [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 06:10, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
"FIRST ANNUAL"?? How does one know that it will be an annual event until the second one takes place??? <PET PEEVE> [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.195|172.70.126.195]] 10:14, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
: Planning is a thing? [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 10:33, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
: It immediately followed the long-running 363-day conference on Things That Seem Like They Should Work But Don’t, so naturally there’ll be another one every year. They didn’t even have to change the banner.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.131|162.158.106.131]] 10:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
: There may ''never'' be a second, especially in Randallworld. As a roundworld example, this very year we had the "31st '''First Annual''' Ig Nobel Prize ceremony". ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.35|172.70.90.35]] 12:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC) I once was in a "First Annual Iron Man" competition that wasn't held the following year, so . . . .[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.24|162.158.74.24]] 13:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Uh...I legit want to go to this conference. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.209|172.70.130.209]] 13:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
:It's actually entirely possible to plan conferences yourself, so maybe if you know some place where it could be held you could organize it? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.80|shitpoocrapfeces]] 15:11, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
::Hey, that's a good idea, thanks shitpoo...crap...maybe I shouldn't take unsolicited advice from strangers on the internet...[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.195|172.70.126.195]] 15:38, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that lunch is listed as if it were a topic. It's normal to say that lunch takes place between sessions. The session topics are described as "on <something>", but lunch isn't. And why isn't there a [citation needed] after saying that many humans eat lunch? That's clearly more sarcastically appropriate than the ones about airships being big and heavy. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:33, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

:Agreed, I wasn't sure whether to be annoyed or amused at that entry. I was... "anused" ''(presumably pronounced "ann-YOOZED").'' [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 15:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

::Also agree. I'mma remove it. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 17:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I feel like the conference itself seems like it should not work, but apparently the conference did work. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.53|172.70.82.53]] 19:51, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

[https://www.livescience.com/33075-how-bees-fly.html Bumblebees!] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.129.133|172.68.129.133]] 20:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Due to the n’t shortening, the banner looks like it could mean “Things That Seem Like They Should Work But Don’t”{unsigned)

I would dispute lunch being there for the displacement of dinner. In some parts, dinner is still firmly in the middle of the day, if it is eaten at all. The evening meal is teatime and may be more or less important ("high tea" might happen, if ritualisticly social, but that's leaning firmly towards finger-food) depending on what/if dinner was eaten. 'Lunch' is merely a foreignish term for a dinnertime-'lite' (or more informal, like desk-eating or al-fresco sarnis in a manner that isn't a full-on picnic, where a full dinner is not eaten and tea (or a more formal "evening meal") is the major meal), with 'elevenses' being any mid-morning break (ideally within ''wishful'' range of 11AM, but can be early!) with at least a choice of biscuits accompanying some work-appropriate drink (maybe less filling than the fabled "brunch", but that's not necessary if you have a good fortifying breakfast first thing) sometimes termed a "mid-morning/pre-dinner lunch" in gatherings where there's also to be a cooked buffet at or soon after midday. If you want to (but apparently it's not good for overnight blood-sugar or sleep-patterns) there's also "Supper" to be partaken of before bed. Liquid-lunch (or liquid-supper) is a drinks only repaste, of an alcoholic variety, often in pints and/or short-measures, and very rarely does this apply to other suffixed versions (rather, it could just be continual between the two, but not considered healthy). Of course, I don't speak for everyone, especially hobbits, but there can be much cultural confusion so I'd normally suggest not trying to tie mealtimes down too much. (In dialects of English. The German Abendessen and Mittagessen, etc, seem obvious enough!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.41|172.70.85.41]] 16:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

== Other Possible Conference Topics ==

Vinyl records, anyone? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.161|172.70.130.161]] 23:25, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2538: Snack

2025-03-07T17:08:03Z

MeZimm:

IRB is Institutional Review Board. IRB approval is needed for biomedical research involving human subjects.
https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/institutional-review-boards-frequently-asked-questions
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.91|172.69.34.91]] 20:51, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering what the International Rugby Board had to do with the price of fish. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 22:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't know who changed the bot's name to "Apple Cookie," but now I really want to know what that would taste like... [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 20:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
: Simply Google it (or possibly your favourite alternate of Bing, DuckDuckGo, AskJeeves, AltaVista, Yahoo, whatever else is actually around and hasn't been fatally out-Googled). One of the first things I got just now suggests a 20 mins bake using Brown sugar, apple, egg, baking soda, all purpose flour... but there are several others.
:(I wasn't the Bot-changer, I must add, but I too now want some sort of apple biscuity-snack. And I only have some of the above ingredients at hand.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.185|172.70.85.185]] 21:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:: Personally I'm completely OK with googling something on DuckDuckGo. I'm also ok with using escalators which are not from Otis, keeping tea in thermos not from Thermos, playing frisbee not from Wham-O, photoshoping images with Gimp, fasten clothes with velcro not from Velcro or zipper not from Universal Fastener Company, drinking Coke from Pepsi and generally with using trademarks and brands as generic words in cases where it makes the sentence more instead of less clear -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:17, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Is altruism the only thing that psychologists study? It seems like psych students should be suspicious of just about any interactions. For instance, if they're invited to play in a game of chance, it could be a study of how they assess risk. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:11, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I understood the comic as if he was given a choice that will reveal something about his personality instead of the altruism interpretation. The two very different options led me to this idea, that he doesn't want to choose the cookie because it seems unhealthy or whatever. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.167|108.162.237.167]] 23:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
:I second the idea that what he's afraid of isn't altruism but choice. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:17, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I was given a choice of snack in one study that I participated in. But I don't know WHY. This might be too niche for me to understand.

I don't think this really has anything to do with altruism. The cookie vs apple thing is reminiscent of studies on self-control, and in general I think the idea is that a lot of psychological studies require participants to make choices, and the participants are also often not made aware of the true nature of the experiment to avoid skewing results. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 00:15, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
: Given a few people seem to generally agree with me, I've been bold™ and changed the explanation to relegate "altruism" to a secondary interpretation. Some examples of specific studies would be great; I'm blanking right now. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 01:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

This seems like it would be more effective on an Ayn Rand fanboy than a psych major. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 05:32, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

What if the real lesson here is that all psychologists are just over-trained to be super cautious about considering EVERYTHING to be a psych experiment that requires ethics review? Maybe if the person offering snacks were ALSO a psychologist, they ACTUALLY WOULD BE REQUIRED to undergo IRB review and experiment documentation procedures and consent requirements.... JUST TO FIND OUT, as a matter of mild personal curiosity, which snack a specific person actually happened to prefer.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.6|172.70.127.6]] 09:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Being asked whether I consent to cookies is literally the most common question I get this entire decade so far. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.4|162.158.107.4]] 21:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

: With enough time and drive I'm sure we could come up with a beautifully compelling subtext for this comic involving cookies, Facebook, ambiguously ethical experimentation, Apple Inc., and the relationship therebetween. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 22:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2536: Wirecutter

2025-03-07T17:06:17Z

MeZimm:

Note: they don't say they tried out a large number of ''religions'' but a large number of '''belief systems'''. This could include things like "Libertarianism" or "Monarchists". (By CWALLENPOOLE, but not signed in.)
:But the picture of the article title says “The Best Religion” [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.233|108.162.216.233]] 20:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The phrase "highly controversial" should not be used in the explanation. For the record, I am opposed to the things listed in that sentence and my objection is not based in a desire to defend them. Religion itself might be said to be "highly controversial" so the use in the last sentence is both superfluous and biased. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.53|172.70.82.53]] 00:34, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I really want this article to be real. ----Dave
: Me too. I did something similar in my early 20s, and feel such an article honestly done would be a great help to many. In fact, the current description is slightly inaccurate- in that even lifelong practitioners, do usually have a wandering time in early adulthood if not given direction. Such an article would give some direction.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 15:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:Try kialo.com/what-is-the-best-religion-to-believe-3371 . [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.53|172.70.82.53]] 00:16, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

The major problem with trying multiple religions is that to fully test a religion you need to die - and most people only die once, with the ability to die multiple times being exclusive feature of small number of religions. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 04:49, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:I ain't mad Hkmaly, but the idea that a religion's primary purpose is to promote a vision of the afterlife is alien to a lot of religions (including my own flavor of Judaism), whose policy on the hereafter is "afterlife, shmafterlife, pass the bagels." Hence also my edits toning down the "religions are about provable belief claims" rhetoric (eyeroll). ----Ben
::Reviewers rarely fully test tech items. (e.g. they often don't cover complete lifecycle costs - what happens to the device after it dies, how easy is it to move on to a new one, etc.) Don't have to test everything to have a meaningful review.
::Many religions make claims about impacts in this life. (e.g., intercessory prayer) Such claims are eminently testable. A comparative review would be interesting. I am only aware of a few such tests, mostly comparing a single product to general average or to no intervention {{w|Efficacy of prayer}}. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.167|108.162.245.167]] 19:18, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't look like the search bar text says "search," but I can't make out what it actually says.--[[User:KrazyKat|KrazyKat]] ([[User talk:KrazyKat|talk]]) 06:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:Maybe it says Seance, since for "seach" the high stoke from the H is missing. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.10|162.158.203.10]] 07:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
::or Sermon maybe, that would fit the theme
:Could be Search with large S and smaller caps for the rest? Anyone subscribe to the NYT and care to visit the actual WireCutter site to see the formatting? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.147.195|172.70.147.195]] 12:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:: Don't need to be a subscriber to see the site. It says "Show me the best..." [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 13:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't want to sound controversial but tithing would be a refreshing change comparing to current tax systems [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 10:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
: Agreed- 10% is much less than the near 50% I'm paying when I figure it all in.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 15:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:: You really want to pay tithes AND taxes? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.63|108.162.249.63]] 18:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Last night I was writing a huge thing about religions' almost universal reluctance to be 'tried out' (lestways allowing easy unsubscription at the end)  but on reflection, after a night's sleep, I'm wondering if they just had 70+ 'mystery shoppers' tasked to report back on one assigned 'product' each, their reports aggregated so this didn't matter too much (to the overall report-writers, at least). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.175|172.70.85.175]] 14:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, the 'religious' wars metaphor extends quite easily to different platforms, yet (say) laptop reviews might compare a set of Windows vs a Mac or two (vs Chromebook, and maybe others) as options. And when it comes to keyboards, the QWERTY-Othodoxy and the Dvorak-Reformists both have bad (and untrue) things to say about each other, when 'enough time' with any given layout should be good enough to prosper in that. (That said, I had a {{w|Casio_FX-702P|programmable calculator}} from the '80s until it gave up the ghost some time post-Millenium, and I really did not get on with its ''alphabetical''-order keyboard all that time, perhaps because I was QWERTYing almost everywhere else.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.175|172.70.85.175]] 14:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
:In the case of religions though, the wars are not allegorical, they are literal. Nothing else in human experience really compares to the effects of a religious war (except ''maybe'' our wars to support a certain socioeconomic idealogy). The impact of format wars don't even come close; even if you count Uranium VS Thorium. This comic doesn't really draw a ''comparison'' between reviewing religions & reviewing products; so much as it ''contrasts'' the enormous differences in how we approach the two subjects... 
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:41, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

(Also also: QWERTY with UK-layout is my own personal sub-sect, with occasional need to adapt to US-layout (physically printed keycaps and/or what the computer ''thought'' was plugged in) with " and # and ~ characters amongst the main jumbled up ones, and no easy £ access. Which wasn't actually as unnerving as being in the 'wrong' bit of Belfast, but had the same subtle note of discordant undertone to it until I shifted my mental gears or ideally corrected the situation satisfactorarily by configuration.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.175|172.70.85.175]] 14:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

There's a book by John S. Dunne, ''The Way of All the Earth'', that advocates essentially trying out religions while keeping one foot in one's own (Dunne describes it as "crossing the abyss and crossing back"). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.158|162.158.74.158]] 17:17, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Surprised no-one has yet mentioned this joke was done in almost exactly the same way on the UK satirical TV show TW3 in 1963 by David Frost (of later Frost/Nixon fame). --- jg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRZWyfERiCc

I was just looking for psychological/psychiatrical papers that say something about the frequency of mental illnesses by religion. Maaaaaaaaaayyybeeeeeeeeee there is a religion that is clearly superior to other religions in that regard, and so government health officials could make a recommendation to change to a specific religion. :-P --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.57|162.158.88.57]] 10:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
:But then, illnesses (as well as the symptoms of the same illness) depend on the culture, so my sardonic idea was probably left unresearched...--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.106|162.158.91.106]] 12:23, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Feels like there should be a line in there about how religion is itself often "that which determines what is valued" and therefore very hard to treat objectively. So, for example, if your religion taught that discipline was inherently good, you would think less of another religion that specifically warned against the dangers of excessive discipline. Meanwhile, a member of that religion might think YOUR religion was worse, because - according to the tenets of THEIR religion - you put TOO MUCH emphasis on discipline, while you think your emphasis is correct and THEY are wrong for not having it.
Now, granted, people might want different things from their technology - one person might want user-friendliness, another might value greater customizability - but religion is different in that it, in itself, informs our understandings of "what is valuable". It would be like if Apple users actively began extolling the benefits of user-friendliness BECAUSE they are Apple users and Apple itself is what taught them to value user-friendliness, while Linux users were originally indifferent but BECAME fans of customizability BECAUSE they used Linux. (And yes, there can be cult-like elements of both fandoms, but hopefully the distinction I'm drawing here is reasonably clear: religion tells you what is valuable, technology does not.)
(Also, why all the Judaism-specific stuff now?) [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 16:42, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Rather than picking one religion - join them all. Slag-blah takes a militant agnostic approach (we don't know, and neither do you). So they believe in/practice all religions (one a day for a year, so their calendar is 7,823 days long). From [https://web.archive.org/web/20150428210028/http://www.airshipentertainment.com/buckcomic.php?date=20071222 Buck Godot Zap Gun for Hire - Learning about Slag-blah by Phil Foglio, Dec. 2007] Sadly hard to find online, but here is the relevant page from the archive. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.167|108.162.245.167]] 19:18, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Went to graduate school (Wash U, St Louis) where one of my classmates said [of the weather!], "I don't know what religion to be." Huh? He explained his habit was to try out a different religion each season, but the weather that month had been changing so often that he didn't know which one to follow on a given day! [Think he was only half serious]

I feel like the explanation's focus on "can't easily change religion" is both inaccurate and quite missing the point. Religious freedom is not about whether belief is inherent or chosen, but rather about the fact that no one has the right to tell anyone else what to believe. The controversial part, IMO, is not "criticism of an inherent feature like race", but rather, it's the fact that Wirecutter is analysing belief systems, not by trying to judge their truthfulness, but in simple ROI terms. It's a bit like analysing whether female or male children are more cost-effective; people will get upset about the fact that you made the analysis in such mercenary terms at all.

I am also concerned with the paragraph speculating about ease of changing religion and its possible implications towards comparison between discrimination on the basis of political belief versus skin color. This is a topic about which there is much debate in many places and I'm not sure that debate is appropriate for this site. I say this not out of any particular stance regarding that debate, I say that because this site is intended to provide explanations relating to XKCD and not really for comparison of different kinds of discrimination. I'm going to remove that paragraph. If you strongly disagree please feel to revert my edit but I'd appreciate it if you would then share here why you think it helps explain the comic to someone who might not otherwise understand. [[User:Tomb|Tomb]] ([[User talk:Tomb|talk]]) 13:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

:The fact that people cannot compare and choose a religion (and are also willing to die with their chosen religion, e.g. in the face of persecution) is the very reason religious freedom exists. Thank you for deleting the section. I will not contribute here for a while.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.128|162.158.89.128]] 22:42, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
::This wiki is exclusively about presentation of the comic, not discussion. Nor is it a Mom an' Pop shop where you can threaten their lively hood and stomp out and feel superior. Consider going to reddit or any other media to discuss the expanded meanings of these comics. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.125|172.70.126.125]] 18:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Pascal's Wager has literally nothing to do with this comic. Literally nothing. I'm tempted to remove that paragraph altogether, especially since it's also presenting an atheistic critique of the idea and thereby slanting the neutrality of the explanation. --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.47|172.69.71.47]] 13:46, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

The assumptions here really need pruning. For starters, groups *exist* to do exactly what is suggested here: http://shipoffools.com/mystery-worshipper/ being a perfect example. Just as brand loyalty to car manufacturers doesn't prevent reviews, neither does loyalty to religions. And while the claim that all wars are purely economic has been debunked, the idea of purely religious wars will get similar mocking from historians. The claim of exclusivity is absurd, given that Christians use the Jewish scriptures, and Muslims regard both Moses and Jesus as prophets; the Messianic Jews are the most famous example of belonging to two religions.

:Huh? Mystery worshipper isn't about reviewing *religions* but different congregations of the same religion (at least if we consider Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox etc. all part of the same religion, which many do). This is a much easier (and less self-defeating) task than what the comic suggests.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.80|172.69.34.80]] 01:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
::"...which many do..."? It depends upon [https://upjoke.com/heretic-jokes who you ask]... (Multiple versions there of the one that I mean!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 06:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Well Christans, Jews and Muslims all belive Moses to be a prophet. And Jews and Christans (and maybe Muslims??) worship the same God(kinda, Christans belive Christ is God as a human, and Jews say that Christ is a false prophet.). So everything before 3 B.C. they agree on, thats why they use the same religous texts. However after Christ died, 27 new texts were created talking about his life, death, and teachings. Obvously the Jews dont use these texts so thats where they differ. Just wanted to clear that up, they are very different religions and belifs, they just all agree on what happened before Christ. Also the part where it says in the explanation about how that most people don't change their religion, I'm not sure if thats true for other religions, but my religon(non-demoninational Christian) is all about choosing wether or not to accept God into your heart. Also most teens or college students fall away from God and later in life they come back (Quite a few of them, in fact, my youth pastor went through the same thing). My pastor grew up in a house that practiced "magic", and most defently wasnt taught religon, but in his later years he became a Christian. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 14:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
:Religion is ...[https://brandonvogt.com/funniest-religious-joke-of-all-time/ complicated]. And it might help to realise that what you experience as 'most people do this' might be a bit skewed towards only what your experiences have been. I think you're mostly amongst practicing Christians where you find that those who left ''and returned'' seem to show that people 'leave and return'. Others may have communities who shun returnees, and/or where leavers (perhaps of a distorted belief system) see absolutely no reason to return to the now obviously broken system. Some people grew up without a great faith, but find themselves drawn to one, fervently (perhaps your pastor was one, I don't know what you/he means by "magic", possibly he was in a synchratic system so instead just rejected one bit of his family's faith and concentrated on the rest). There are those who have taken up surprisingly different creeds from where they started off. People might also have been brought up as essentially secular and ''remain'' secular (give or take a 'social nod' towards the local spin on communal religion, but as habit rather than true belief).
:You can know your own heart, and believe you know the hearts of others (and, indeed, God in whatever form you believe exists), but faith is a tricky thing. Could be as solid as a rock, easily windblown into a handy corner, just like autumn leaves, or as ultimately fragile as a cobweb, if not as intangible and transient as a dream. And, if you want my opinion, all of these can (and do) co-exist. Where there's trouble is where the ideology (with or without any actual belief) violently tries to create a lock-step culture in its own strict image. You can't truly make (or change) genuine beliefs, in others, especially if you don't believe it yourself.
:One can only be whatever it is that one believes is right. If you're lucky, that may not include making compromises for outwards appearances. And, if you're kind, that will not mean forcing others to compromise on your behalf. That should apply whatever shade of religion (or none) you subscribe to. But there's a world (at least!) of possibilities out there, and you are always a product of your own particular lived life. I can only hope that you be happy with that. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.19|172.70.162.19]] 15:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
::Your right I don't know what other religons are like. I can only speak for my religon and my experiences. And yes, many religions (or even demoninations) arent very reaccepting or forgiving. A lot of people have left and been unable to return. Or somepeople just don't return, I know several people who've done that. My point wasn't that even if someone leaves their religion that they'll come back, it was that people do leave and change religions. Those people I talked about changed religions twice, thats why I brought it up.
::And I 100% agree with you that nobody should force their opinion on anyone. I would never try to pressure anyone to belive anything, or yell at anyone for beliving in a certain religion.[[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 15:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
:::Was mainly responding to "most teens or college students fall away from God and later in life they come back". I might not argue that they fall (or move) away from their household's interpretation (as a teen, you're biologically programmed to look at things differently than you did when younger, and ''moving away'' to college also takes you outside your 'silo' to potentially expose you to alternate viewpoints - anyone who doesn't, I'd consider 'indoctrinated', rather than merely lovingly guided). That "most come back", I'm not sure about. I'm not saying that most will abandon all faith, or most will go to a new(ly discovered) one, but "back" is relative. Even those broadly settling back in the same 'spirit' may have evolved their faith (e.g., their opinions on evolution!). Greater or lesser fervency.
:::In the broadest view, you'll probably end up the same type of faith as you used to be. A vast number of the world's population probably don't 'rebel' very far (not much scope for investigating shintoism if you live a substistance lifestyle in an Indian village, or encounter much scientology in the Amazon) and social pressures will keep many well within the same brand of monotheism (if that's where they were), even if no more than a 'casual adherence'.
:::More narrowly, generations ''do'' tend to change, especially in 'the modern world'. Immigrant families may arrive with a basic 'lived' version of their native religion (but not so fervant thst they couldn't move away, and may even have done so to escape it), their children may almost completely secularise to fit in with(/not stand out from) their new home's society (with maybe a nodding acquaintence with the local temple/mosque/gurdwara/chapel, for appearances), the ''grandchildren'' may 'rediscover' and become far more adherent to their 'ancestral' faith than their great-grandparents ever did.
:::But all these examples depend upon the scope of anyone's premise of where boundaries are between brands/intensities of faith. Hence it being 'complicated', and using personal experiences does not necessarily map to the universal.
:::Mostly, though, you do not choose how you were brought up. This would greatly influence both where you might naturally drift in and out of ''and'' how others treat you if you even try to take up a different scope of faith. Perhaps most easy to just drift out of organised religion and stay out of it, ''except'' where some religion has a stranglehold on you (whatever your true feelings). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.80|172.70.86.80]] 16:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2528: Flag Map Sabotage

2025-03-07T17:05:05Z

MeZimm:

Example map (of that of which sabotage might be intended) could be something like: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/41/0f/36/410f3661d1cee3b255b82a111f99d242.jpg ..? I have no doubt that someone is even now polishing off an initial Explanation, and wouldn't want to exit-conflict with them, but that's something like what I'd link to in order to demonstrate the thing being messed with. (Noting that the reference to North American territory both in words and the obvious Candian mapleleaf(less) flag as a basis. (Not sure, by sight, where the 'bite' matches, if not as per the red 'key', but note how Spain gets twisted in my link in order to not look odd with coastlines and similarly twisted Portugese neighbour cutting at odd angles through its stripes. That's the kind of thing this flag would evoke the confusion of.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.35|141.101.76.35]] 02:26, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:It's now over 12 hours later, I think you should add it to the text. I didn't understand anything about the comic or even its explanation before I saw your picture. Also, what kind of drugs is Randall on‽ :D [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 10:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Why is Korsika coloured green on this map? It belongs to France. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.40|162.158.93.40]] 06:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:That's Sardinia, which belongs to Italy (the west of Italy is green). Corsica is north of Sardinia. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.140|162.158.89.140]] 06:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I can't help but thinking there's significance to the shape of the red area in the flag. Which country would this flag belong to in order to cause further confusion? And since it's red, why would any country cede part of its area to Delaware? Unless it's the flag of a newly independent Delaware? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.140|162.158.89.140]] 06:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Only the south-eastern part of Belgium, which would already be Delawarian, is likely to border Delawarian France. The unexplored area (and most if not all of the tornado zone) would likely be bordering the white area (unclaimed? neutral zone? sea?) of France. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.120|141.101.69.120]] 08:30, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

My first thought was that this was a Canada joke, since the flag looks a bit like Canada's flag (e.g. red a white with a solid red stripe on the edge) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.48.151|172.69.48.151]] 13:28, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:I just added my hypothesis that this is a new US flag that nicely attaches both to Canada's flag at the top, and Mexico's at the bottom. It would be nice to try and produce such a map with Randall's design, similar to https://st.depositphotos.com/2353733/5164/v/950/depositphotos_51647815-stock-illustration-north-america-map-with-flags.jpg.
I would say that "Delware" might add new context to the flag from [[1815]], but if we assume that the three stars on that flag represent three states, and one of those states has to be Massachusets where Munroe lives, then there's no way it could also include Deleware and still be contiguous. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.143|172.69.71.143]] 14:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I kinda want to see what this would look like replacing USA on a map of the Americas now... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.131|172.70.134.131]] 15:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the above posts, yeah, I'm 95% sure the gap in the white at the bottom corresponds to the Gulf of Mexico. I think it likely that this design is intended to be superimposed onto the entire United States, to imply that the western portion of Canada continues further south and borders with the "newly independent" region of western Mexico. (Just ignore the enormous eagle to the south.)
Also, I would guess that the light blue is intended to suggest that oceans and other large bodies of water are really "disputed territory"? [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 14:43, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
:Also, I suppose the flag would be separately superimposed onto Alaska as well as the continental US, so that would also be interesting to see...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.142|172.69.63.142]] 18:03, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
I think we are all in agreement that we need a section dedicated to displaying the theoretical maps and flags, along with the theories as to why this may or may not be what Randall envisioned. (plus an honorary comment on how we might be reading to far into this by assuming it goes on an existing/real country) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.22|172.69.68.22]] 22:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't agree with the hypothesis in the sentence starting "If this flag is intended for the USA...". I interpret this map to be a hypothetical new micronation within Delaware, where on a typical USA map of this design the state would be covered in a red stripe (perhaps suggesting that that stripe or all of them are greater Delaware). It makes more sense that Randall would establish a micronation just to sabotage these maps than it would to get this flag adopted as the national American flag. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.142.77|172.69.142.77]] 00:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Any possible connection here to the "Red Flag" 🚩 memes that have been trending on Twitter recently? Is there some reason why Delaware raises red flags for Randall? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.54.3|172.70.54.3]] 17:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

So, we have Europe and North America already ... now, what if it's U.S. states map supposed to be sabotaged by this? https://ubique.americangeo.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/map34.jpg -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 20:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
:Ironically, that would make most of Delaware disputed territory. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.135|162.158.159.135]] 13:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

What about the unexplored insides of the giant monster in the part of Greater Delaware formerly known as Albania? I think Randal missed a joke there. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.141|172.68.141.141]] 15:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Actually, bordering Belgium wouldn't work - Randall used the wrong colours, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Belgium#Design_and_specifications
Probably wouldn't work for a lot of other countries' flags as well.
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.203|172.69.55.203]] 18:09, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Theory of how randall thought of this: https://twitter.com/xkcd/status/1420142457413570560 maybe? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.197|108.162.210.197]] 16:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Bumpf

Just realized that countries such as India or Ireland would be at least somewhat immune, since their flags contain the color orange (not represented in the key). [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 04:06, 6 September 2023 (UTC)