explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3184: Funny Numbers

2026-04-30T17:24:58Z

SamEstradiol: 11. it's one higher.

It should be"The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy". {{unsigned ip|2001:5a8:60da:3300:c94a:564:dc6d:d811|05:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)}}
: In response to above unsigned post: fixed! You could've edited it too :) [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 05:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:: In response to your response: post marked as unsigned! You could've done that too ;) [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 11:19, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

this is crazy [[User:Qwertyuiopfromdefly|Qwertyuiopfromdefly]] ([[User talk:Qwertyuiopfromdefly|talk]]) 06:08, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:67 in Numberphile... now in xkcd... very sad (maybe they are related? on YouTube, Numberphile released 12 hours ago, which may be too close, but I don't know if they do Patreon or something) [[User:R128|R128]] ([[User talk:R128|talk]]) 09:09, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::Ya all are way too sad about something this inconsequential. As xkcd rightly notices the so-called brainrot is just rebranding of equally dumb memes of yesteryear with the main difference being that you grew up with one and not the other. Decently funny strip overall. [[Special:Contributions/206.245.134.17|206.245.134.17]] 11:42, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::For one: it is the 19th prime, and 19 is the 8th prime. Also, its digit sum is 13, which is the 6th prime. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727|2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727]] 16:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:::Excellent video from Wrath of Math about it and it was a couple months ago iirc, it's really good. [[Special:Contributions/124.198.132.237|124.198.132.237]] 21:13, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Bad comic, Randall. Put it back. [[Special:Contributions/47.141.37.161|47.141.37.161]] 06:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:It's called depublishing. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727|2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727]] 16:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

"If you have to ask, you're not old enough yet," is there like, some kind of comprehensive guide to sex and sexuality I was supposed to receive on my 18th birthday or something? All I got was 18 $1 scratch tickets. [[Special:Contributions/69.5.140.194|69.5.140.194]] 08:32, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:For that matter, maybe your sense of humor is finally old enough to not amount to "haha sex funny". Incidentally appropriate IP, by the way. [[Special:Contributions/206.245.134.17|206.245.134.17]] 09:02, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:I admit I was trying to be cute, I fully expected someone to "correct" it. It was reminiscent of the analogous question in the Baker House Purity Test (which I'll also admit I didn't get at the time). https://www.mit.edu/~iggy/Amusements/Purity_andnerd_tests/pure.baker.male [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:52, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I observe that the explanation leaves [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6-7_meme 67] off the list of numbers... (it has no real meaning, just a fun thing the kids do to each other and enjoy the adults being confused about) (And now I feel stoopid for not noticing the big link at the very top — but still think it should be in the list.) [[User:Dúthomhas|Dúthomhas]] ([[User talk:Dúthomhas|talk]]) 08:54, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:=-1. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727|2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727]] 16:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I daresay no Robert Anton Wilson clone will immortalize "6 7" in 100 years on. Todays memes have a half-life measured in milliseconds. I say that without assessment. Only observing. [[Special:Contributions/2A02:2455:1960:4000:307A:46A3:7D5E:A7C0|2A02:2455:1960:4000:307A:46A3:7D5E:A7C0]] 10:15, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

69 -- if you have to ask, you're not old enough.
Information technology archeologist in the 31st century, sobbing: "I am 374 years old. How much longer?"[[Special:Contributions/109.43.49.174|109.43.49.174]] 11:45, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:Apparently, that meme is old enough not to have the several milliseconds of half-life (or if it does, it's dilated well to years, for I sometimes do see things with the "69 is funny" appearing). Unless "not old enough" refers to "born [chronologically] too late (i. e. too far from the Big Bang)". [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727|2001:4C4E:1C08:BC00:41F9:90A:BF7A:1727]] 16:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

While I do accredit the audacity to keep the humor in the explanation of 67, the act feels a little unprofessional. It feels like laziness or lack of knowledge, rather than a play on the popularity of the meme across the youth (I have no idea what the meaning behind six-seven is, and have always considered it pure absurd). [[User:Benzaldehyde|Benzaldehyde]] ([[User talk:Benzaldehyde|talk]] 14:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Could someone reorganize the order of the number descriptions? I initially read it as left column down, then right column down, which I think is also chronological. [[User:CreatorOfWorlds|CreatorOfWorlds]] ([[User talk:CreatorOfWorlds|talk]]) 14:45, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:I'm sure we could ascribe creation-estimates to them all (first being 23, etc, last being 6 7), but I don't see any obvious chronological layout, either row-by-row or column-by-column. 69 ''after'' 42? (Unless we accept the Lewis Carol origin, in which case it should even be before 23.) Calculators (suitable types by at the latest 1957) not until after the necessary hacker/BBS culture (early Internet and/or FIDONet era, with maybe the earliest possible date of 19''67<funny-hand-movements>'')? [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.136|82.132.237.136]] 15:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
::On further looking, though I ''suppose'' the list (up until the latest addition, being just now tacked on at the end for simplicity) is definitely ''numerically''-sorted by column-first reading order... Depending upon the sorting algorithm, it'd be interesting to see where 6<space>7 gets shuffled to (and, moreover, how it shuffles anything that now comes after it) in a subsequent year's "list of numbers historically adopted by young people". Could be first, or between 42 and 69. ''Could'' still be last, but tricky to explain that against 23 (with non-numerical parts) being first this time round. Unless typesetting needs trump alphanumeric ordering, too. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.136|82.132.237.136]] 15:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:::''...Anyway...'' I sortably-tabularised it! To the best of my ability. Maybe the date column should be "Discovered?" or something else, but too many unknowns, even after researching. .e.g. the act of 69ing is... well, I bet it's prehistoric (I'm sure bonobos do it... and all kinds of variations!), while the French 'popularisation' of the term is attested to more than 200 years ago, but I'm not going to even hazard a guess when it became a "teens" thing that the mathematicians subsequently decided was new. Brought 58008 into the '70s only because wikipedia suggested that (decadal-displays are older, even seven-segment displays themselves might be {{w|Seven-segment display#History|1903ish}}, but hey!). And defined decade-ranges as their midpoint year, for sorting reasons. You can see where and how to change things, if you disagree and have other/better dates. Or wish to add a further 'fad date' column to differentiate from origin-date. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.136|82.132.237.136]] 17:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oh my a completed transcript already i literally just found out about this comic --[[User:Utdtutyabthsc|Utdtutyabthsc]] ([[User talk:Utdtutyabthsc|talk]]) 15:07, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

... You know what's funnier than 24? [[Special:Contributions/2600:4041:5E13:8400:AC92:4546:AC77:BF90|2600:4041:5E13:8400:AC92:4546:AC77:BF90]] 17:10, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
:I’m not sure where you got the number 24 from, but there is a joke in Mexico that is something of an old Polish-style joke: Many Chinese who moved to Mexico are known to have difficulty with the ‘V’ sound, instead using something closer to an ‘M’. A Mexican was annoyed by a Chinese person and called him a “mendicuadro” — a slang term for a beggar or mendicant (or annoyance), which sounds like the words for 24 (venticuatro) — and the Chinese guy thought a second and responded “Well, you’re a twenty-five!” (“Pues, ¡tú eres un mendicinco!”). Cue hilarity. (These kinds of jokes are always ruined for me by the inherent racism, much like the “how many Polish guys does it take to change a lightbulb” kinds of jokes.) {{unsigned|Dúthomhas|02:11, 24 December 2025}}

Shouldn't the year for "42" be 1978? The Hitchhiker's Guide first broadcast "42" in Fit the Fourth, 29 March 1978. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy_Primary_and_Secondary_Phases#Fit_the_Fourth {{unsigned ip|62.63.216.178|17:22, 23 December 2025}}
:You're right. I was juggling dates and must have caught a different one. (Book publication date..? Not sure, without checking, what I may have mixed it up with.) If not already fixed by you/others, will do so myself. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.136|82.132.237.136]] 17:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

This is conclusive proof that Randall watches YouTube Shorts. [[User:Explainyourself|Explainyourself]] ([[User talk:Explainyourself|talk]]) 20:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm surprised 22 (A major number in Outer Wilds, which I would assume Randall would've played because of ship design in 2765), 17776 (sci-fi story which is highly underrated), and 20020 (sequel to 17776) are all unmentioned. [[User:Usernametakennn|Usernametakennn]] ([[User talk:Usernametakennn|talk]]) 01:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
:Some of those seem more like deciding that 2001 (and thus possibly 2010, 2061 and 3001) or 2312 or 1984 should appear. But are those titles... memetic enough? In a "down wid da yout'" kind of way?
:Especially if the relevent story is "underrated", because then it's not clearly as appreciated as it should be and so unlikely to enter the appropriate global consciousness like that. e.g., I may like the aforementioned fictional numbers, plus Space: 1999 (and, perhaps even more, Space: 1889!), but I'm not sure they've quite invaded the teenage mindset enough to be candidates for the list. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.208|92.23.2.208]] 02:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

More common popular numbers:
53310761 (Elvis Presley's military serial number. Very cool to known at one time!), 7734 (on a calculator), 54 40 (or fight. Winning political slogan thought the U.S. didn't 54 40 and didn't fight), 867-5309 (Jenny), Number 1 or number 2 (Going), 10-4 (Correct in 10 code during C.B craze) "No, 4" (Morbid response to peace sign after Kent state shooting.) "Number 5 is alive", 36-24-36 (Also 362-4360, phone number from a version of AC-DC's "Dirty deads") 86ed (Run out of, thrown out of, rejected).
A little more inside: 17 (Yellow pig day, Michael Spivak &c.), 712 (Shonen Knife ) 96 (tears) DEADBEEF (hex) 1066 (and all that) 1138 (THX, why aren't you at you post, thx-138 plates on the Deuce coupe &c.) 33, 45 & 78 record speeds [[User:Lordpishky|Lordpishky]] ([[User talk:Lordpishky|talk]]) 04:32, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
:11 -- It's one higher! I would leave out hex strings, however, those are more "funny words you can spell with just hexdigits" than "funny numbers", if you ask me. (Though I could argue several of these others are also only funny because of the choice of base 10.) [[User:SamEstradiol|SamEstradiol]] ([[User talk:SamEstradiol|talk]]) 17:24, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Was the origin of 6 7 not ''"and if the devil is six then god is seven"'' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_Gone_to_Heaven#Lyrics_and_meaning uttered by Black Francis in 1988]? [[Special:Contributions/80.2.107.84|80.2.107.84]] 07:13, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

666 --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 07:16, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

You know about the 23 mile pipeline to the mining town of Skidoo right? {{unsigned ip|172.59.84.195|13:31, 24 December 2025}}

I’m surprised no one mentioned the origin of 6 7, which was Skrilla’s song “doot doot 6 7” where 6 7 is referring to Philadelphia police radio code 10-6-7, “report of death/dead body” and the use of the numbers 6 7 to reference death. Yes, I know many of the kids saying 6 7 don’t know what it means or why Skrilla was singing it, but that doesn’t mean the meaning doesn’t exist. I’m reminded of the song lyric “come spend the night inside my sugar walls” (Shena Easton”) I was in high school when it came out, and my classmates seemed to fall into one of 3 groups: those who got it, those who didn’t get it at all, and those who tried to deny what the words meant. [[Special:Contributions/2A09:BAC3:70E8:2773:0:0:3EE:55|2A09:BAC3:70E8:2773:0:0:3EE:55]]
:...if you actually read the explanation, it ''does'' mention Skrilla's song. As to whether it does refer to Phili radio codes or not, this is already mentioned in the linked page as a ''speculated'' but unsubstantiated possibility, and that Skrilla themself does pretty much the opposite of confirming this or any other definite origin. (All the above is as of the versions of the pages, here and on wikipedia, that I last read... I can't be held responsible for any further changes made to them, up to now or later. So more scrutiny might be needed if properly attested 'facts' appear.) [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.208|92.23.2.208]] 23:51, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

I liked Meghan's comment, implying she has matured beyond these number fashions but is glad that the fad contiues amongst the yougsters. [[User:GrannyVanEngeland|GrannyVanEngeland]] ([[User talk:GrannyVanEngeland|talk]]) 16:21, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

5318008 [[Special:Contributions/2401:D005:D402:7A00:4C55:92FB:29AD:E01E|2401:D005:D402:7A00:4C55:92FB:29AD:E01E]] 02:17, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I think it's important to note that 6 7 is not the number 67, but just the numbers 6 and 7 said together. In that sense it might be more properly considered not a number at all; if anything, it is a 2-membered sequence. Or possibly a word formed out of numerals. Though really there is no math involved, and thinking about it mathematically is probably missing the point. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1702:5C65:8E00:981A:7E98:FDFA:E92E|2600:1702:5C65:8E00:981A:7E98:FDFA:E92E]] 02:21, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
:10 4 [[Special:Contributions/107.77.205.131|107.77.205.131]] 20:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
::There’s a whole online encyclopedia of integer sequences, mind you [[Special:Contributions/122.213.236.53|122.213.236.53]] 06:20, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

where are 0451 and 11037? they should take the places of 42 and 58008 {{unsigned ip|94.73.40.242|15:25, 27 December 2025}}

Checks comments, sighs [[User:Commercialegg|Commercialegg]] ([[User talk:Commercialegg|talk]]) 14:30, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3232: Countdown Standard

2026-04-30T16:47:34Z

SamEstradiol: alternate, language-free standard

Refer to all 4 Lethal Weapons movies for discussion. {{unsigned ip|45.138.52.240}}
:{{citation needed}} --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Don't most people say "on three", "on one", or "on go" before starting the count anyway? And then delay the final (action) number a teensy bit? e.g. "On one. Ready? 3 2 1" This isn't that ambiguous, not that I would object to standardisation. [[User:Sameldacamel34|Sameldacamel34]] ([[User talk:Sameldacamel34|talk]]) 23:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
:It is appallingly common for me to hear the inconsistent and dissonant, "On the count of three…one, two, three, GO!" (This is problematic because it is "on the count of THREE" not "on the count of GO, the word after three". Or at least, that is what I understand those words to mean.) [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:Just "on three" is the most common, I think. You say "On three. Ready? One, two THREE." [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 02:42, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::"On three... THREE!" [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:::On three... two... one... zero... GO!! [[User:Logalex8369|Logalex8369]] ([[User talk:Logalex8369|talk]]) 23:15, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:There are two different conventions to synchronize a start -- by reacting or by rythmically coordinating. And both are used: in official swimming championships by World Aquatics they train to start to a perfectly rythmic "bip.. bip.. beeep" while in track and field championships by World Athletics the start judge waits an arbitrary time before triggering the gun to which athletes react. [[Special:Contributions/31.221.183.22|31.221.183.22]] 09:49, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::There's at least a third - go at a predetermined time. And a fourth - use a start gate to physically restrain the starters. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 10:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it. -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 00:35, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:[Arthur:] Right. One, two, five!
:[Galahad:] Three, sir.
:[Arthur:] Three! [*throws it*]
:...just to complicate matters. ;) [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:54, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::Fantastic guys ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:I wouldn't look to God for standards on counting - just look at the mess around what 'forty days and forty nights' means. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:16, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Four... Two... One... One Half... One Quarter... One Eighth... One Sixteenth... One Thirty-second... One Sixty-Fourth... [go to infinity] GO! [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 03:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:Yeah, you don't even get the reference material foods. You're starving. [[Special:Contributions/47.141.37.161|47.141.37.161]] 16:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Just to make things even weirder: the movie industry counts 5, 4, 3, 2, go!
[[Special:Contributions/76.133.66.138|76.133.66.138]] 03:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:{{citation needed}} --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::https://raymonddefelitta.org/i-dig-film-leader/ Film leaders do generally stop at 2 or 3, but they don't really count "3, [2,] go!". There's a 'silent' count for the absent numbers before you reach the 'go!' point. They're left black to avoid fouling the start of the projection. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 10:54, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm sure people all over the world will follow this standard just as faithfully as they follow ISO 8601. {{unsigned|2a00:1a28:1410:5::10db}}
:Here for reference: [[1179: ISO 8601]]. But there is at least one more with ISO reference: [[2322: ISO Paper Size Golden Spiral]]. So that is three comics referencing the ISO system directly (this one not in titel but in the text so no doubt that it would belong with the other two. But I'm not sure three is enough to create and ISO category? Could not on the spot find any others...? If someone can then we could make a category! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::The home inspections series has only 3 comics, if that helps (I can't link it though, for some reason. It's name is Category:Home Inspections). [[User:GSLikesCats307|GSLikesCats307]] ([[User talk:GSLikesCats307|talk]]) 13:36, 14 April 2026
:::If you write <nowiki>[[Category:Home Inspections]]</nowiki>, it ''adds the current page to that category''; if you want to link ''to'' the category, you have to add an extra colon at the beginning, so <nowiki>[[:Category:Home Inspections]]</nowiki> gives you [[:Category:Home Inspections]] - [[User:IMSoP|IMSoP]] ([[User talk:IMSoP|talk]]) 15:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
::::Thanks! [[User:GSLikesCats307|GSLikesCats307]] ([[User talk:GSLikesCats307|talk]]) 19:48, 14 April 2026

All instances of "One... Two... Two and a half..." shall be referred to the International Criminal Court for prosecution. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1004:B0A0:E06:0:3E:A3FD:5401|2600:1004:B0A0:E06:0:3E:A3FD:5401]] 14:37, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I personally use “And a 1, a 2, a 1 2 3 4” [[User:Logalex8369|Logalex8369]] ([[User talk:Logalex8369|talk]]) 15:18, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
: Well that's no good - this one's in 5/8. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 14:25, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

3, 2, 1, 0, -1, ... -∞ [[Special:Contributions/45.178.3.59|45.178.3.59]] 15:26, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Dutch comedian Herman Finkers had a sketch where he said "We count to three. One, two <starts playing music>". In Dutch, "tot" means "up to and not including" while "tot en met" means "up to and including", wso wgen you say "I count to three" you should not include the three, even though most people will do so. [[User:IIVQ|IIVQ]] ([[User talk:IIVQ|talk]]) 18:01, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if 3-2-1-Go is so well understood because it's similar to rocket countdowns: 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1-Blastoff! [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 18:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:In between which of those numbers does the ''"Countdown hold"'' arrive? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 18:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
: 3-2-1-Go isn't similar to rocket countdowns, it *IS* rocket - and other physics - countdowns. [[User:Jgharston|Jgharston]] ([[User talk:Jgharston|talk]]) 21:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
:: Isn't a rocket countdown technically "-3, -2, -1, Go!"? (Which is strictly speaking a countup.) [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:59, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:: ESA and NASA use different countdowns. ESA usually lights main engines on zero and lifts off at say +7. NASA plans lift off at zero and lit the shuttle main engines at -6.6.[[Special:Contributions/76.180.39.133|76.180.39.133]] 19:59, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Medical personnel still use 1-2-3 as the count-up when moving a patient from one platform to another (e.g. between a bed and gurney). They've standardized to lifting on 3. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 18:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hasn't he missed out three two ONE! [[User:Jgharston|Jgharston]] ([[User talk:Jgharston|talk]]) 21:41, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

(I started on writing this before the above comment was here, got edit-conflicted, but this ''could'' almost be a reply to that!) I start people in sports events. My count is "half a minute" [keeping it somewhat vague, just as a lead-up warning but ''trying'' to have that be 30 seconds to go on the "h" of "half"], then "fifiteen", "ten", before "five, four, three, two, one, go!". ''Traditionally'', the competitors would be rocked back and forward slightly (back on 3 and 1, forward on 2 and that converted into a full starting small push on the zero-mark) by the person holding them up, which helps them get off as exactly on time as manually practical. Unfortunately, some hold their brakes on, for reasons of their own, ''and'' tend to release them on or about "one"... I tend to note which of these do this, and ''if'' their finishing time as advantageous by just one second (which is not unknown, but thankfully rare) then I might have a word with the organiser... leave them to worry about if this should affect the final placings. [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 21:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

There was a comment about the ISO not usually punishing people so severely... but they don't punish ''at all'' so far as I'm aware..? Where does enforcement come from? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 04:31, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
: This was a joke... although I do think that now it's been removed entirely the explanation is missing something of the humour of the comic in suggesting punishment when that is not part of the ISO's role. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:: Have replaced it with a slightly less wry version. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:34, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

An advantage of "3-2-1-GO" is that it allows for arbitrarily changing the countdown length - you can start at any number other than 3 and it's still obvious when "GO" will occur. So if "three-two-one-GO" is too long for someone (it's one beat longer than "one-two-THREE"), they just say "two-one-GO" instead. --v.polak06@email.cz, 2026-04-15

Unless I'm wrong, wouldn't a factor in the punishment (that's to say, only being able to eat ISO food) be because it's not intending to be "the best" food, but rather average. So a lifetime of eating ISO food samples would be the same as a lifetime of eating "food that is intended as exceedingly average." [[Special:Contributions/173.210.201.86|173.210.201.86]] 19:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:But that isn't what "ISO food" would really be (though that might be the perception/assumption behind the suggestion in the title text). It's food that's prepared to meet certain standardized criteria. The ISO standard for preparation of tea has nothing to do with whether the tea is good or bad; it's about conditions so that different teas can be compared and evaluated. The tea would be fine to drink. There's the standard for testing food products for aflatoxin, but it doesn't mean that good peanut butter can't be run through the process. The problem might lie in "after the peanut butter has been processed to enable HPLC testing, the result is no longer fit to eat". But not all food products would be ruined by that kind of preparation. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 21:31, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
:: My reading is that, because standards will generally deal with the basic building blocks (leaving combination of those to specific implementations) it would tend to lack complexity, ''and'' because it's standardised it would lack variation from meal to meal, meaning it would be bland not just at the level of the individual item, but also at the level of the overall diet. (Although neither seems to prevent some people enjoying a diet of the likes of McDonald's, so...) [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 08:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

There correct way is: Two Six Heave

Perhaps he meant NIST SRMs rather than ISO food samples. [[Special:Contributions/141.126.197.143|141.126.197.143]] 17:27, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

A potential improvement to avoid people going on 1, is to say "3, 2, ready, go"
[[Special:Contributions/85.255.233.115|85.255.233.115]] 14:33, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Carnegie-Mellon University holds an annual race, the like of which probably is not seen anywhere else on this Earth. https://www.cmu.edu/buggy/ Each heat begins with a countdown;
"Ten," "Nine," "Eight," ..., "Two," "One," "Ready," "Set," <Horn Honks>. [[Special:Contributions/2600:4041:ED:C800:707A:81D4:908:378A|2600:4041:ED:C800:707A:81D4:908:378A]] 23:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Cover your bases. Set the expectation up front. “When I say three: One. Two. ''Three.''”

Bonus: “When I say three — Are you ready? — One. Two. ''Three.''”

Of course, I never say it quite right.
--[[Special:Contributions/2600:100E:B049:BEAC:55B8:F1C7:4268:231|2600:100E:B049:BEAC:55B8:F1C7:4268:231]] 06:41, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

i think the best reason why eating ISO food standards was that standardised ISO preparations are based of consistency, not of taste, as seen as [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAsrsMPftOI this one tom scott video.] it's just taste bland as hell [[Special:Contributions/2001:4451:47AB:8300:86A2:92EB:93BE:E355|2001:4451:47AB:8300:86A2:92EB:93BE:E355]] 02:50, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

I suggest the racing video game standard of "boop, boop, boop, '''BEEP'''" as this does not require understanding English. [[User:SamEstradiol|SamEstradiol]] ([[User talk:SamEstradiol|talk]]) 16:47, 30 April 2026 (UTC)