explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:459: Holy Ghost

2015-01-31T09:46:06Z

Weatherlawyer: Created page with " Pope: Do you know how much scripture we'll have to revise? It isn't a problem. Trinitarian dogma isn't even peripheral to scripture. So the answer is: "None". I am sure ..."

Pope: Do you know how much scripture we'll have to revise?
It isn't a problem. Trinitarian dogma isn't even peripheral to scripture. So the answer is: "None". I am sure that had there been cause for concern at least one comedian would have come up with it by now.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 09:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:473: Still Raw

2015-01-31T02:14:30Z

Weatherlawyer:

The explanation says: "... Pluto has been the ninth planet in our solar system until 2006 ...".

It should says 'the tenth' isn'it?
[[User:SioD|SioD]] ([[User talk:SioD|talk]]) 14:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

:Pluto was discovered in 1930, and has been since the ninth body to be discovered and classified as a "planet". The sentence is a temporal rather than spacial reference, if that clears up any confusion. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 12:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

::Actually, no. Using the temporal definition, Pluto would be number 13. It was discovered after Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta, which were discovered, named and classified, but then quickly demoted, all about 120 years before Pluto. This was due to the fact that telescopes of the day were strong enough to see quite a bit of the asteroid belt in a relatively short time, unlike with the "previously mythical" Kuiper belt.
::Also, if any thing, the spacial discrepancy should be between eighth and ninth, as Pluto's orbit is squeezed enough to be inside that of Neptune, but long enough to extend outside it. Charon, Pluto's "moon" may cause additional worry, but is usually ignored.
:::Anonymous 01:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
:I think we would all be happy if the astronomers would come up with a definition of a planet that reasonably included Pluto but reasonably excluded the other 'candidates' that have been found so far. You know, the ones without large moons. Or Pluto could just be grandfathered in. Exactly how would science be held back by this?? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 00:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The airplane/treadmill question is actually hard to define properly. In real case scenario, the plane would of course take off, but you can keep it in place if you assume really fast treadmill (much faster that the plane), friction in airplane wheels and that those wheels won't break off, catch fire or otherwise get destroyed under the stress much higher they are developed for. Oh, wait, actually the airplane WONT take off if the wheels break. :-) -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

:If you choose to model friction in the wheels, it would be simpler to model the airplane with NO wheels, and then ask whether it could take off. Well, 'Airplane!' notwithstanding, it couldn't. But that's not an interesting problem, right? And neither is the variation with friction in the wheels. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 23:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
::Odd that carrier decks still have to be so long. In fact launching them from podiums would allow the use of on-deck hangars.
::Anyone know if this applies to helicopters?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 02:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:476: One-Sided

2015-01-31T01:47:11Z

Weatherlawyer:

Could the Bernanke in question be {{w|Ben Bernanke}}, American economist and currently chairman of the {{w|Federal Reserve}} (i.e. "The Fed")? I assume the crossbows are a reference to something topical, but have no idea what. Might it be a video game of some kind? --''[[User:MisterSpike|MisterSpike]] ([[User talk:MisterSpike|talk]]) 09:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)''
:Indeed. As for the crossbow and "uncontaminated" thing, and tying it all together, there was some big video game set in a post-apocalyptic Washington DC, but I can't for the life of me remember what its name was.
--[[Special:Contributions/79.222.56.250|79.222.56.250]] 12:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I think the Fallout 3 reference is a bit far-fetched to be anything more than speculation, especially since there's no mention of Ben Bernanke, or any Bernanke, in said game. The "contamination" aspect of the title text is most likely used because it's a simple, commonly-used "disaster' plot that justifies the use of a crossbow and doesn't require much context or explanation, if any. Also, Fallout 3 does not have crossbows. [[User:Codefreak5|Codefreak5]] ([[User talk:Codefreak5|talk]]) 20:15, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
:Sometimes my bus journeys go on for a while before I realise I went past my stop, replying to people shouting on the telephone.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:47, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:478: The Staple Madness

2015-01-31T01:43:05Z

Weatherlawyer:

Is it possible that Beret Guy stapled Cueball to the ceiling? [[Special:Contributions/71.135.43.118|71.135.43.118]] 19:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:No, it's not that easy to staple a man to the ceiling. And the original transcript is clear:
:*Megan: ...HAVE YOU BEEN ABUSING MY STAPLE GUN?
:*Man with Beret: NO.
:*God: <nowiki>[[outside of scene, as voice from above]]</nowiki> YES!
:God tells Megan the truth, not Cueball.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:38, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The comment from god is rather like dinosaur comics.[[Special:Contributions/78.144.232.6|78.144.232.6]] 20:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The whole "staple-crazy $HAT Guy" thing isn't as original as you'd think: [http://meninhats.com/d/20040128.html]. Also, some of [http://wikibin.org/articles/men-in-hats.html this] is pertinent. Yep, Beret Guy is clearly Beriah (punny, eh?) as much as Black Hat is Aram. --[[Special:Contributions/79.241.123.239|79.241.123.239]] 09:32, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

: my reading is that the "yes" comes from someone stapled to the ceiling . . . [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.135|108.162.225.135]] 20:31, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
::Since he can do the ridiculous such as stapling an OS into a computer...

Talk:482: Height

2015-01-31T01:09:32Z

Weatherlawyer:

Are you sure it reads "missing winds"? It looks like "missing WMDs" to me, which would suggest a political reference to the US engagement of 2003 in Iraq.
[[Special:Contributions/109.40.138.109|109.40.138.109]] 02:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah. Agreed. Changed. [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 11:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

"The comic starts with Black Hat throwing a cat off the edge of the universe, probably a reference to Schrodinger's cat"
::Has the editor here never heard of the "cats always land on their feet" myth? Black Hat would appear to be testing this from the extreme. Anonymous 01:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC) (and yes, that would be WMDs)
:::If I am not mistaken, this is a wiki; there is no set editor. If you have a suggestion for how to improve a page, it would be apt to edit it yourself. The discussion tends to be a forum for matters that may be tangentially related to the comic, or uncertain suggestions for improving the article. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::Sorry, I wasn't aware of the proper terminology. I'll add my line shortly. Anonymous 05:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a "(?)" in "Oort Cloud"? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 02:10, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
:Because it's not known if this cloud really does exist. Many objects are assumed to be there at that vast distance to the sun, but that distance is also the reason they could not be detected from earth. {{w|Voyager 1}}, the farthest humanmade object from Earth, will reach that region in many thousand years. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is Snoop Dogg in space? {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.223}}
:Because he's high as shit, man--he's so high, he's the second-furthest any person's ever been from the earth. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 10:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Diameter of milky way: 100 - 120 kly (Lets call it 110 kly)
Suns distance to galactic centre: 27.2 kly
Distance to edge of galaxy: (0.5*110)-27.2 = 27.8 kly = 263E18

Is my understanding and maths right? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

;Conversion of pixels to height
Because it is a log graph for the y axis
heightfinal = heightinitial * factor
pixels = Logbase(height)

Using identities to show that a vertical distance on this graph represents a multiplicative change in true distance from the starting point of measure, and that a vertical change (delta) in the same number of pixels represents a corresponding multiplicative factor on total height.
pixelsfinal = Logbase(heightinitial * factor) = Logbase(initial) + Logbase(factor)
pixelsfinal - pixelsinitial = Logbase(factor) = pixelsdelta

Solving for the factor and the base of the log function
factor = basepixelsdelta
base = factor1/pixelsdelta

From the diagram it appears that a change (delta) of 550 pixels represents a change of x*1000000 therefore we can determine the base and determine the multiplicative factor for any change in pixels in the original drawing.
base = 10000001/550
factor = (10000001/550)pixelsdelta = 1000000pixelsdelta/550

Therefore:
heightfinal = heightinitial * 1000000pixelsdelta/550
The above can be used as an equation to estimate and validate the heights on the diagram, where heightinitial is the height of the reference point in meters, pixelsdelta is the vertical change in pixels on the diagram, and is positive if height increases and negative if height decreases.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.149|108.162.216.149]] 12:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

:We just need to be careful that the existing heights (which in ''most'' cases have been fairly thoroughly researched) are not replaced by heights determined by their 'pixel position'. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
::Wrong, the explanation is intended to explain the comic not the real world. Before you get excited though let me explain, we may be on the same page.
Many height values can be determined from external research, and can be shown to be consistent with the graph (e.g. center of the galaxy). In these cases the researched number should be used in the height column, as clearly these numbers represent the authors intent.
There or other cases where the height is labeled. These should always be used as height, as these numbers represent the authors intent. If they are inconsistent with the scale of the graph this should be noted in the description.
There are other cases, such as where the space shuttle disintegrated, where we can research the numbers, but they are inconstant with the graph by more than an order of magnitude. Any large inconsistencies should be noted in the description, but in these cases the graph position, not the actual position should be in the height column, because this is the closest representation we can have to authors intent.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 11:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

:Completely agree with the basis that authors intent is priority, and with pretty much everything written above. What I was concerned about was the possibility of someone indiscriminately changing existing height values based solely on its pixel position, with no cross-checking against the real world height. I would venture that the heights of the real items on the graph are intended by Randall to be at their correct positions, but there may be exceptions. I have a personal bias here, in that I spent quite considerable time doing research on many of the heights. That said, I don't in any way expect the height entries I worked on to be taken as correct, simply that there is some degree of reasoning behind the existing heights, and to change them without checking any discrepancies would be reckless. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

::The Bodes Law ratio of one planet to the next but one is:
:::Pi^(9/4Pi): 20Pi^(3/2Pi)
::thus rendering:

*Mercury : Mars
*Venus: Jupiter
*Earth : Saturn
*Mars : Uranus
*Asteroids : Neptune

Not that the inner asteroids appear between Mars and Jupiter on the right hand column.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:09, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:482: Height

2015-01-31T01:07:52Z

Weatherlawyer:

Are you sure it reads "missing winds"? It looks like "missing WMDs" to me, which would suggest a political reference to the US engagement of 2003 in Iraq.
[[Special:Contributions/109.40.138.109|109.40.138.109]] 02:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah. Agreed. Changed. [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 11:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

"The comic starts with Black Hat throwing a cat off the edge of the universe, probably a reference to Schrodinger's cat"
::Has the editor here never heard of the "cats always land on their feet" myth? Black Hat would appear to be testing this from the extreme. Anonymous 01:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC) (and yes, that would be WMDs)
:::If I am not mistaken, this is a wiki; there is no set editor. If you have a suggestion for how to improve a page, it would be apt to edit it yourself. The discussion tends to be a forum for matters that may be tangentially related to the comic, or uncertain suggestions for improving the article. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::Sorry, I wasn't aware of the proper terminology. I'll add my line shortly. Anonymous 05:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a "(?)" in "Oort Cloud"? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 02:10, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
:Because it's not known if this cloud really does exist. Many objects are assumed to be there at that vast distance to the sun, but that distance is also the reason they could not be detected from earth. {{w|Voyager 1}}, the farthest humanmade object from Earth, will reach that region in many thousand years. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is Snoop Dogg in space? {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.223}}
:Because he's high as shit, man--he's so high, he's the second-furthest any person's ever been from the earth. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 10:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Diameter of milky way: 100 - 120 kly (Lets call it 110 kly)
Suns distance to galactic centre: 27.2 kly
Distance to edge of galaxy: (0.5*110)-27.2 = 27.8 kly = 263E18

Is my understanding and maths right? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

;Conversion of pixels to height
Because it is a log graph for the y axis
heightfinal = heightinitial * factor
pixels = Logbase(height)

Using identities to show that a vertical distance on this graph represents a multiplicative change in true distance from the starting point of measure, and that a vertical change (delta) in the same number of pixels represents a corresponding multiplicative factor on total height.
pixelsfinal = Logbase(heightinitial * factor) = Logbase(initial) + Logbase(factor)
pixelsfinal - pixelsinitial = Logbase(factor) = pixelsdelta

Solving for the factor and the base of the log function
factor = basepixelsdelta
base = factor1/pixelsdelta

From the diagram it appears that a change (delta) of 550 pixels represents a change of x*1000000 therefore we can determine the base and determine the multiplicative factor for any change in pixels in the original drawing.
base = 10000001/550
factor = (10000001/550)pixelsdelta = 1000000pixelsdelta/550

Therefore:
heightfinal = heightinitial * 1000000pixelsdelta/550
The above can be used as an equation to estimate and validate the heights on the diagram, where heightinitial is the height of the reference point in meters, pixelsdelta is the vertical change in pixels on the diagram, and is positive if height increases and negative if height decreases.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.149|108.162.216.149]] 12:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

:We just need to be careful that the existing heights (which in ''most'' cases have been fairly thoroughly researched) are not replaced by heights determined by their 'pixel position'. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
::Wrong, the explanation is intended to explain the comic not the real world. Before you get excited though let me explain, we may be on the same page.
Many height values can be determined from external research, and can be shown to be consistent with the graph (e.g. center of the galaxy). In these cases the researched number should be used in the height column, as clearly these numbers represent the authors intent.
There or other cases where the height is labeled. These should always be used as height, as these numbers represent the authors intent. If they are inconsistent with the scale of the graph this should be noted in the description.
There are other cases, such as where the space shuttle disintegrated, where we can research the numbers, but they are inconstant with the graph by more than an order of magnitude. Any large inconsistencies should be noted in the description, but in these cases the graph position, not the actual position should be in the height column, because this is the closest representation we can have to authors intent.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 11:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

:Completely agree with the basis that authors intent is priority, and with pretty much everything written above. What I was concerned about was the possibility of someone indiscriminately changing existing height values based solely on its pixel position, with no cross-checking against the real world height. I would venture that the heights of the real items on the graph are intended by Randall to be at their correct positions, but there may be exceptions. I have a personal bias here, in that I spent quite considerable time doing research on many of the heights. That said, I don't in any way expect the height entries I worked on to be taken as correct, simply that there is some degree of reasoning behind the existing heights, and to change them without checking any discrepancies would be reckless. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

::The Bodes Law ratio of one planet to the next but one is:
:::Pi^(9/4Pi): 20Pi^(3/2Pi)
::thus rendering:

:Mercury : Mars
:Venus: Jupiter
:Earth : Saturn
:Mars : Uranus
*Asteroids : Neptune

Not that the inner asteroids appear between Mars and Jupiter on the right hand column.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:482: Height

2015-01-31T01:06:55Z

Weatherlawyer:

Are you sure it reads "missing winds"? It looks like "missing WMDs" to me, which would suggest a political reference to the US engagement of 2003 in Iraq.
[[Special:Contributions/109.40.138.109|109.40.138.109]] 02:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah. Agreed. Changed. [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 11:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

"The comic starts with Black Hat throwing a cat off the edge of the universe, probably a reference to Schrodinger's cat"
::Has the editor here never heard of the "cats always land on their feet" myth? Black Hat would appear to be testing this from the extreme. Anonymous 01:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC) (and yes, that would be WMDs)
:::If I am not mistaken, this is a wiki; there is no set editor. If you have a suggestion for how to improve a page, it would be apt to edit it yourself. The discussion tends to be a forum for matters that may be tangentially related to the comic, or uncertain suggestions for improving the article. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::Sorry, I wasn't aware of the proper terminology. I'll add my line shortly. Anonymous 05:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a "(?)" in "Oort Cloud"? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 02:10, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
:Because it's not known if this cloud really does exist. Many objects are assumed to be there at that vast distance to the sun, but that distance is also the reason they could not be detected from earth. {{w|Voyager 1}}, the farthest humanmade object from Earth, will reach that region in many thousand years. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is Snoop Dogg in space? {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.223}}
:Because he's high as shit, man--he's so high, he's the second-furthest any person's ever been from the earth. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 10:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Diameter of milky way: 100 - 120 kly (Lets call it 110 kly)
Suns distance to galactic centre: 27.2 kly
Distance to edge of galaxy: (0.5*110)-27.2 = 27.8 kly = 263E18

Is my understanding and maths right? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

;Conversion of pixels to height
Because it is a log graph for the y axis
heightfinal = heightinitial * factor
pixels = Logbase(height)

Using identities to show that a vertical distance on this graph represents a multiplicative change in true distance from the starting point of measure, and that a vertical change (delta) in the same number of pixels represents a corresponding multiplicative factor on total height.
pixelsfinal = Logbase(heightinitial * factor) = Logbase(initial) + Logbase(factor)
pixelsfinal - pixelsinitial = Logbase(factor) = pixelsdelta

Solving for the factor and the base of the log function
factor = basepixelsdelta
base = factor1/pixelsdelta

From the diagram it appears that a change (delta) of 550 pixels represents a change of x*1000000 therefore we can determine the base and determine the multiplicative factor for any change in pixels in the original drawing.
base = 10000001/550
factor = (10000001/550)pixelsdelta = 1000000pixelsdelta/550

Therefore:
heightfinal = heightinitial * 1000000pixelsdelta/550
The above can be used as an equation to estimate and validate the heights on the diagram, where heightinitial is the height of the reference point in meters, pixelsdelta is the vertical change in pixels on the diagram, and is positive if height increases and negative if height decreases.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.149|108.162.216.149]] 12:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

:We just need to be careful that the existing heights (which in ''most'' cases have been fairly thoroughly researched) are not replaced by heights determined by their 'pixel position'. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
::Wrong, the explanation is intended to explain the comic not the real world. Before you get excited though let me explain, we may be on the same page.
Many height values can be determined from external research, and can be shown to be consistent with the graph (e.g. center of the galaxy). In these cases the researched number should be used in the height column, as clearly these numbers represent the authors intent.
There or other cases where the height is labeled. These should always be used as height, as these numbers represent the authors intent. If they are inconsistent with the scale of the graph this should be noted in the description.
There are other cases, such as where the space shuttle disintegrated, where we can research the numbers, but they are inconstant with the graph by more than an order of magnitude. Any large inconsistencies should be noted in the description, but in these cases the graph position, not the actual position should be in the height column, because this is the closest representation we can have to authors intent.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 11:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

:Completely agree with the basis that authors intent is priority, and with pretty much everything written above. What I was concerned about was the possibility of someone indiscriminately changing existing height values based solely on its pixel position, with no cross-checking against the real world height. I would venture that the heights of the real items on the graph are intended by Randall to be at their correct positions, but there may be exceptions. I have a personal bias here, in that I spent quite considerable time doing research on many of the heights. That said, I don't in any way expect the height entries I worked on to be taken as correct, simply that there is some degree of reasoning behind the existing heights, and to change them without checking any discrepancies would be reckless. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

::The Bodes Law ratio of one planet to the next but one is:
:::Pi^(9/4Pi): 20Pi^(3/2Pi)
::thus rendering:

Mercury : Mars
Venus: Jupiter
Earth : Saturn
Mars : Uranus
Asteroids : Neptune

Not that the inner asteroids appear between Mars and Jupiter on the right hand column.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:06, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:483: Fiction Rule of Thumb

2015-01-31T00:45:52Z

Weatherlawyer:

Also, you get minus points if you have to add a totally reading-flow rupturing explanation.
And if the words which supposedly come from one language have completely different linguistic structure.
And for random apostrophes.
And if you cannot read the book without a wordlist for constant reference next to you.
Rule of thumb #2: if it's not clear from the context or from a smooth, unobtrusive explanation* and/or if the reader has to go back the second time it is mentioned to remember what it was, don't use it.
:Exception to this: Terry Prachett. How the hell can that guy make funny literature out of annoyingly large footnotes?? [[Special:Contributions/132.187.20.160|132.187.20.160]] 09:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I know an author who made up words and still turned out well! His name is Andrew Hussie, creator of Homestuck. Captchalogue, Sylladex, Alchemiter, Cruxite, Respiteblock, Recuperacoon, Cookalizer, Fenestrated Wall, you name it! {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.47}}
:Well one, that's a webcomic, not a book. Two, most of these words are portamntus (Captcha + Catalogue = Captchalogue, Recuperate + Cocoon = Recuperacoon). And while this is certainly a nice observation, it doesn't really contribute to the discussion since the page is not really about Homestuck.--[[User:Edrobot|Edrobot]] ([[User talk:Edrobot|talk]]) 19:42, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

''Dune'' comes to mind... [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.71|199.27.128.71]] 07:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Interesting that Randall omitted Shakespeare from the list of people allowed to make up words. Shakespeare used 17,677 different words in all of his known works. About 10% of those words are words that he made up and are now technically official English (includes changing parts of speech for existing words)[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.100|108.162.216.100]] 21:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
:What's the problem?
:If you can make up a story you should be able to make up words. A much worse problem is when an author thinks describing scenery is part of the story. And when women stop in mid paragraph to describe clothing... Feck that!
:Making up a word or two to get around shit like that is OK. It is only hand-waving a ghost out from the machine. Asimov was terrible for that crap in his early work. He grew out of it, in a manner of speaking, recognising there was a time and place.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 00:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:484: Flash Games

2015-01-31T00:37:29Z

Weatherlawyer:

http://reddawn.net/quilt/games/QCon/QCon.html {{unsigned ip|‎173.245.55.222}}

The explanation needs to explain the title text. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.45|108.162.216.45]] 23:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, you are right. No time for me so far, maybe this comic should be on top at the "Today's incomplete explanation of the day" for one day more... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 00:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
:Already got it for you guys [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.66|199.27.128.66]] 07:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Am I missing something or are you looking too hard for an explanation? To me, it seems as simple as what it says. There are amazing gaming systems, but a lot of flash games are way more addictive. So the character (Cueball I guess he's been called here) simply is telling himself that he'll only play for one more hour before playing with his new console. The joke being that in an hour, he will say the same thing again. And again. And so on. That's all there is to this. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.63.180|173.245.63.180]] 07:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
:Games are what happens to nerds while they are waiting for their lives.
:Comics are what happen to me when I am waiting to be right again.
:My most tiresome trait is my effort to be correct.
:One day I will run out of comics.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 00:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:500: Election

2015-01-30T20:43:21Z

Weatherlawyer:

Is this genuinely a thing that Americans do during election years? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
:They have only voted for a chimpanzee twice. That's not a bad score in 400 years.
:Of course you could say that voting for chimpanzees has only ever been a colonial occupation after they declared independence. So that's about twice as often, isn't it?
:In fact, if you admit that it only happened after Texas was granted statehood, it narrows it down a lot.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 20:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:504: Legal Hacks

2015-01-30T20:29:39Z

Weatherlawyer:

While RSA is mentioned as a cryptographic mechanism whose "munitions" status was fought over, yours truly considers the whole of PGP's fight (and its original ''1st'' Amendment idea to get around the restrictions) as the archetype of this kind of export battle. Never did get me one of the alleged T-shirts with the souce-code printed on, that were supposed to be going around in 1991-ish, though...

So, anyway, that's something using the 1st Amendment, something using the 2nd Amendment... So how can we theoretically fight the issue via the right not to have soldiers quartered in one's home? ;) [[Special:Contributions/178.107.63.150|178.107.63.150]] 23:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Every time I see the 2nd Amendment in text... that one comma. That first comma doesn't belong. I think they were trying to write, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ''will always have the right to bear arms''" but then they got distracted or changed their mind and just forgot that the comma was there. I'm not usually that much of a grammar nazi, but that's the freaking ''Constitution!'' --[[Special:Contributions/69.211.56.17|69.211.56.17]] 22:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

:I do admit that the wording would be clearer ''today'', but that is a faulty argument here, for two reasons. First, It was written more than 200 years ago, almost 240, in fact. Unless you have a contemporary grammar, you have no right to be a grammar Nazi with the Constitution. Second, The Constitution was deliberately constructed to be vague, so it might last a little longer than the ten years predicted for it. (Talk about an underestimate) Anonymous 02:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I still don't quite understand this comic. If crypto is classified as a weapon, then people in the USA are free to use it? Why would they not be free to use it today? What does (politicians'?) complacency have to do with all of this?

(On second thought, is this comic referring to the continued attempts of outlawing cryptography? e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424 ) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.111|141.101.80.111]] 09:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

:As it says in the comic, the encryption technique was originally classed as a weapon in order to make it illegal to export the technology to other countries. Controlling the use of encryption within the US was going to be difficult due to the First Amendment, but preventing other countries accessing the US developed technology was seen as the most important goal. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States here] for more detailed explanation. The comic definately addresses the ongoing legal status of encryption technology, but as far any link to Mr Camerons recently reported attacks on encryption, this comic was published in 2008, so no. {{unsigned|Pudder}}

:: Cameron's was just an example; the attacks have been going on for twenty years, and in most western countries.

:: Anyway, I'm quite aware of US embargoes, but the the right-to-bear-arms amendment doesn't apply to them. I'm still finding the last panel incomprehensible. (I don't mean to pick on you specifically, but) none of my questions have been answered. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.111|141.101.80.111]] 11:07, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

::: After re-reading your comment and the comic, I think I understand where you are coming from. With encryption classed as a weapon, it cannot be exported, but may be used by citizens within the US. Once no longer classified as a weapon, it can still be used by citizens (i.e. nothing has changed as far as use by US citizens is concerned). The issue comes when if the government tries to prevent use of encryption; if classed as a weapon, you can use the "2nd amendment" defence. My guess on the complacency thing is that possibly politicians become complacent in believing that they have the power to 'control' encryption, and may deny use of it if they wanted. Classed as a weapon, suddenly the constitution stands in their way... Which would bring us back to 'outlawing encryption', though Mr Cameron and the UK in general would be another kettle of fish. Its a good question.--[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 13:07, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

: Re: outlawing cryptography. Governments, including the US one, haven't liked encryption for a long while, as its use will make obtaining evidence much harder if not impossible. The recent talks have been about just outright outlawing it or otherwise weakening it to the point of irrelevance. See for example the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip clipper chip] from 1993, which has a back door specifically built for law enforcement. See also various [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law key disclosure laws].

: But this might be irrelevant. I'm looking at this from a too modern angle; few of those laws existed in the 1990s, which is what the comic is referring to.

: I think the explanation is missing Megan's point and its effects for the rest of the world; the course of action which she proposes affects the United States alone. And of course, as I've mentioned, I feel that the final panel is halfway unaccounted for in the explanation. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.111|141.101.80.111]] 10:16, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Does the freedom to speak not also include the freedom to speak privately?
You don't HAVE to harbour government agents in your home in the USA do you?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 20:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:522: Google Trends

2015-01-30T19:46:05Z

Weatherlawyer:

This comic made me laugh and laugh and laugh, some of it even out loud. Randall for President in 2014! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 19:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
:The next election is scheduled for Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Maybe [[Randall]] does create a xkcd party and he will run for that job; but I'm pretty sure he won't. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
::USA. The only place in the world where they had to have a national ejaculation to get a chimpanzee out of the home of the head of state.
::I use the term head of state loosely. (0pun Intended)

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:525: I Know You're Listening

2015-01-30T19:36:10Z

Weatherlawyer:

Whether or not this is what the Citation request needs, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager#Criticism would be helpful. Most people tend to go for the "What if it's the ''wrong'' god that you believe in?" counter to the wager. i.e. the parts of your religious observance that most please Zeus might well anger Odin greatly, or something similar for any two gods (pantheonic ''or'' sole Authority, this factor also being a major issue of choice) that you might care to compare between. This is mostly covered in the "Argument from inconsistent revelations" section of the above, it appears.

Personally my favoured counter-argument is that any sufficiently omniscient god worth his pillar-of-salt should ''know'' whether you are Wagering, and probably has a special area of Hell (or Tantarus) reserved for those that try to toady up to him by faking a belief (covered by the "Argument from inauthentic belief" section). I choose to believe that an honest non-believer might at least get a look-in at any middle-ground afterlife (regardless of their lack in belief of same), but I also don't have amy great reason to believe that this attitude is going to reward me, either.

(c.f. also the assumption that 'innocents', and people who have never been exposed to the Word Of GodTM are entitled to a free pass to some non-Hell level of afterlife, the punishment only applying after having been introduced to the whole Judeo-Christian system of post-death existence. On this basis, missionaries that go out and inform remote tribespeoples and oceanic islanders of the state of affairs are actually potentially making things a lot worse for their target audience than they ''would'' have been... Assuming that they're right in the first place.)

But note that, for every philosophical argument, there's an equal and opposite philosophical argument. I just plan on being good in the mortal world (where I know I will be rewarded, or at least regarded in a reasonably good light, if perhaps a bit of a doorstep) and if this doesn't help out when I hypothetically find myself at the Pearly Gates then I probably wouldn't have hit on the right form and combination of observances anyway so its not a wager that I could have reasonably 'won'.

This is, of course, way heavier an edit than I had intended, and I'm not suggesting that this is the best intepretation, just my own, and probably not worth a discussion over. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.87.233|31.111.87.233]] 09:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

(Forgot to say... non-deity eavesdroppers probably wouldn't have the omniscience, so go ahead and randomly profess your belief in them! [[Special:Contributions/31.111.87.233|31.111.87.233]] 09:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC))

:My best argument against pretending to believe something you doesn't is: do you really want to spend an ethernity with people whose belief you faked? For (extreme) example, if only Jehovah's witnesses go to heaven (and assuming you are not one), do you WANT to go there? Similarly, abstinents probably don't want to end in Valhalla. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

::This is a lot of unnecessary talk, even realized to be such by the one who wrote it. The explanation, as written, is fine without this extraneity. [[Special:Contributions/152.119.255.250|152.119.255.250]] 16:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Since you did remove the incomplete tag I did add some more explains for Pascal's Wager. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

You get the record for longest expoundition of a title text.[[Special:Contributions/72.70.180.234|72.70.180.234]] 18:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

:Yes, check your e-mail. (Not you; him.)

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:527: Keynote

2015-01-30T19:22:26Z

Weatherlawyer:

Of course, with the benefit of hindsight we can be fairly sure that this all arose either because of more severe health problems than hinted at or more severe ''medication'' to attempt to overcome what was happening. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.87.233|31.111.87.233]] 08:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
:I don't think voodoo was the cause.
:And I am not vindictive enough to believe that any man deserves a shit liver because he is greedy and rich.
:But... Nobody strapped him to a chair and forced rich food down his gullet.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:22, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
This comic now seems somewhat unfortunate. Randall has been known to edit comics after they are posted, though not (as far as I know) for such reasons. I have the faint wish he would do so for this one. Just something to make it less ... flippant. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 23:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Talk:533: Laptop Hell

2015-01-30T19:06:19Z

Weatherlawyer:

The alt text is a reference to a hilarious post in bash.org, which is at this moment the #12 in the top 100 list:

http://bash.org/?5775

http://bash.org/?top {{unsigned ip|‎113.119.86.124}}

Only the devil is traditionally shown with a pitchfork. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.89|108.162.217.89]] 15:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

What's with the incomplete tag? This article has links to the wikipedia page for both devil and laptop. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.155|108.162.238.155]] 05:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

"the smarter devil is a sony sales rep" What does this mean? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.155|108.162.217.155]] 16:05, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
:That Sony execs can ruin you computer and not have to reacall all their CDs so that you can buy the evil ones at car boot sales decades later.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:535: It Might Be Cool

2015-01-30T19:01:45Z

Weatherlawyer: Created page with "How many life sentences has the idiot had to commute? And how long after they were given? ~~~~"

How many life sentences has the idiot had to commute?
And how long after they were given?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:01, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:542: Cover-Up

2015-01-30T18:48:17Z

Weatherlawyer:

It could be a reference to the ASDF Videos... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.237|108.162.250.237]] 12:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

: Eeeeeeeeeexcept that asdfmovie 2 (the one which includes the "it says gullible on the ceiling" sketch) was first uploaded in January 2010 ... a good 11 months after this comic was published. Given the style and timeline of the asdfmovie shorts, it's rather more likely that they were (as a whole!) inspired by xkcd, not the other way around... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.163|141.101.70.163]] 15:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually it's a really, really old practical joke. Note how cueball is clearly familiar with the gag and doesn't 'fall for it'. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.215|108.162.246.215]] 15:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
:Actually, Blackhat actually says its an old joke.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 18:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:555: Two Mirrors

2015-01-30T18:06:39Z

Weatherlawyer:

Am i the only one who think of the ne555?
[[Special:Contributions/87.179.191.141|87.179.191.141]] 21:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
:No idea. What I was thinking was who reads books like that?
(There again who responds to sites like this?)
And: Shouldn't the mirrors be at a slight angle to one another?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 18:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:555: Two Mirrors

2015-01-30T18:06:16Z

Weatherlawyer:

Am i the only one who think of the ne555?
[[Special:Contributions/87.179.191.141|87.179.191.141]] 21:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
No idea. What I was thinking was who reads books like that?
(There again who responds to sites like this?)
And: Shouldn't the mirrors be at a slight angle to one another?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 18:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:556: Alternative Energy Revolution

2015-01-30T18:02:24Z

Weatherlawyer:

There is a fan-created [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRuqPKcxMZY animation of this comic.] {{unsigned|Bpothier}}
:Define: Fan.
Well he couldn't do any worse than Tom Cruise.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 18:02, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:558: 1000 Times

2015-01-30T16:54:50Z

Weatherlawyer:

Most honest:
Bailout - 1.7 x 10^11
Bonuses - 1.65 x 10^8
[[User:BruceJohnJennerLawso|BruceJohnJennerLawso]] ([[User talk:BruceJohnJennerLawso|talk]]) 23:39, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
:so what WERE the boni for?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 16:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:566: Matrix Revisited

2015-01-30T15:05:08Z

Weatherlawyer:

In panel #9, the characters are upside-down and the colors are inverted. Films are produced on negatives, which invert the colors, and are threaded through the projector upside-down (the lens turns the image right-side-up again when projected). This could mean that, instead of merely being in a "non-existent dimension," the characters have gone WAY out of the Matrix and now see themselves to be what they truly are: images on film. (If this was Randall's intention, he might have made it more clear by including the sprocket holes.) [[User:Shanek|Shanek]] ([[User talk:Shanek|talk]]) 12:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:Regardless of the lack of sprocket holes, I think this is an excellent insight and I will add it to the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Panels 12-13 could also suggest that Neo can't comply with the "please remove any metallic items" instruction because he has metal balls. [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 08:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
:The opposite of what I replied to Shanek. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I wonder if the sequel bit implies of how the entire movie is supposed to make you just accept things as they are no matter how messed up, and people voluntarily ignore the existence of the sequels, which is the exact opposite of the philosophy that the movie encourages. [[User: AndyZ|AndyZ]]
:Actually the Matrix was all about remaking the originals.
:Something Holywoodland does every 5 or 10 years. They can even slip history 80 to 120 degrees west if they think the audience is really stupid.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 15:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:567: Urgent Mission

2015-01-30T14:58:51Z

Weatherlawyer:

The explanation is backwards. Current is defined as the flow of *positive* charge, thus moving from positive to negative terminals. In most cases, the current is actually electrons, which are moving from the negative terminals to the positive.
[[Special:Contributions/72.45.165.98|72.45.165.98]] 16:48, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:Hopefully fixed. This was hard to write clearly. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 01:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I might be completely mistaken but I've thought that the reason why the positive and negative terminals are assigned as they are originated from observing the electric current passing through the solutions of salt. In the said solutions the current consists of the positively charged ions that get deposited onto the negative electrode, while the positive electrode slowly dissolves. This naturally makes one think that the electric current carries the charged particles from the positive to the negative electrode. Of course it might be that I've completely forgotten what I've been taught in school and gotten everything wrong. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.5|108.162.246.5]] 01:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

In a circuit, it is the electrons, or the negative charges, that are actually travelling. The positive charges, the nuclei of the material carrying the current, remain fixed. This is opposite to the definition of current, which is defined as the flow of positive charge. In other words, the particles that we define as flowing in a current are not the ones that actually move. Confusing, right? I think what you may be referring to is when a salt solution undergoes electrolysis, the anions (negatively charged part of the salt) travel to the anode (positively charged electrode), and the cations (positively charged particles) travel to the cathode (negatively charged electrode). [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.196|173.245.52.196]] 06:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Ben Franklin just decided to call two opposing charges positive and negative. Blame the guy who decided electrons should be considered negative and protons should be considered positive.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.71|108.162.217.71]] 03:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Up until Franklin's experiments with electricity, there was debate as to whether electricity came in two forms, vitreous, as in a glass rod rubbed with silk, and resinous, which other experiments before him was shown to be the one in the rubber rubbed with fur (or amber rubbed with fur, hence the name). Franklin felt there was a single "fluid" which flowed to produce an electric current. He felt that when an object such as the glass rod had an excess of this fluid, it was "positive", and when there was a deficiency of this fluid, the object was "negative". Current flow was the flow of a region of excess "fluid" to a region deficient in it. Unfortunately what actually flowed was electrons and the glass rod form contained excess electrons, not a deficiency of the positively charged fluid. Therefore, HE was the one who started the convention of calling electrons positive.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.196|173.245.52.196]] 03:47, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
:What we need here is a time machine so we won't waste too much time arguing.

Talk:568: Well 2

2015-01-30T14:26:59Z

Weatherlawyer:

...1,372 people??? [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 20:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
:Not necessarily; maybe some people threw quarters, dimes or nickels? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.29|173.245.52.29]] 22:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Could the money be a refernce to [[313: Insomnia]]? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.72|173.245.55.72]] 02:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The explanation has this line: "Maybe Megan still thinks the well really works, since she wishes him to get out." I really don't think that is the implied meaning. To me it is pretty clear (and backed up by the title text) that Mike is actually down the well. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

The explanation above interprets panel #2 as meaning that no programming language will ever be '''self-documenting''' (inherently clear to the reader). I don't think that's what it means, and furthermore think that self-documenting code plausibly could exist (at least, I don't see why it would be impossible). Instead, I took panel #2 to mean that no programming language will ever allow you to be vague about what you want the program to do: writing a program inherently involves specifying in exacting detail every single thing the program should do in every possible situation, and no possible change in the language can ever eliminate that fundamental difficulty. (I feel that non-programmers generally fail to appreciate the staggering level of ''precision'' that programming requires.) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.120|173.245.48.120]] 09:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
:What you need to do is invent audio.
:Some sort of a warm wax jar that will take an imprint of sound-waves that you can collect ideas in. With enough jars you could explain the idea as you go -even include problem solving with each step.
:It just requires some sort of mechanism to read it back later. And something to cool the wax and keep it solid until needed.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 14:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:568: Well 2

2015-01-30T14:25:50Z

Weatherlawyer:

...1,372 people??? [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 20:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
:Not necessarily; maybe some people threw quarters, dimes or nickels? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.29|173.245.52.29]] 22:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Could the money be a refernce to [[313: Insomnia]]? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.72|173.245.55.72]] 02:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The explanation has this line: "Maybe Megan still thinks the well really works, since she wishes him to get out." I really don't think that is the implied meaning. To me it is pretty clear (and backed up by the title text) that Mike is actually down the well. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

The explanation above interprets panel #2 as meaning that no programming language will ever be '''self-documenting''' (inherently clear to the reader). I don't think that's what it means, and furthermore think that self-documenting code plausibly could exist (at least, I don't see why it would be impossible). Instead, I took panel #2 to mean that no programming language will ever allow you to be vague about what you want the program to do: writing a program inherently involves specifying in exacting detail every single thing the program should do in every possible situation, and no possible change in the language can ever eliminate that fundamental difficulty. (I feel that non-programmers generally fail to appreciate the staggering level of ''precision'' that programming requires.) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.120|173.245.48.120]] 09:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
:What you need to do is invent audio.
:Some sort of a warm wax jar that ill take an imprint of sound-waves that you can collect ideas in. With enough jars you could explain the idea as you go -even include problem solving as you go.
:
:It just requires some sort of mechanism to read it back later. And something to cool the wax and keep it solid until needed.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 14:25, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:572: Together

2015-01-30T04:04:53Z

Weatherlawyer:

Definitely one of the sweetest xkcd strips ever. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 07:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
:Or one of the most sad - as he just maried for a game and left when he was finished with his project... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 00:41, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
U
Could "building a treehouse" refer to an adult activity that is frequently postponed and possibly never finished, like items in a to do list? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 17:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
:No, those are shark teeth.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 04:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:603: Idiocracy

2015-01-29T17:03:17Z

Weatherlawyer:

This explanation seems to be incorrect. The key point was that White Hat actually was wrong! The average education has gone up, and the average IQ ''cannot'' sink! By allowing Cueball to agree with clearly false laments, he baits him into revealing his stupidity. --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 19:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
:The title text pretty much spells out that, in Randall's mind, White Hat is correct. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.66|199.27.128.66]] 06:14, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I propose that the hatted figure is not in fact [[White_Hat|White Hat]], as neither the hat shape nor the personality are consistent with other appearances. ([[:Category:Comics featuring White Hat‏‎]]) The real White Hat, when he speaks, is generally a bit of a wet blanket or well-meaning buffoon. This one, whom I'll dub [[White_Derby|White Derby]], is speaking counter-buffoonery, what we may reasonably guess to be the actual thoughts of the author. Usually Cueball fills this role (eg [[258:_Conspiracy_Theories]]), and in fact if the roles here were reversed I'd tend to ignore the misshapen hat. But two and two, together, well... --[[Special:Contributions/66.114.70.139|66.114.70.139]] 18:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
:Eh. He hasn't appeared in any other strips, and it's not too harmful to put him under the umbrella of the real White Hat. I see your point; White Hat is no longer a generic character like [[Hairy]], but an actual recurring one.
:Also, have Black Hat and White Hat ever appeared in the same comic? (Click and Drag doesn't count.) [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 09:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

So, does this page qualify for Complete now? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.66|199.27.128.66]] 05:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Randall. You're wrong here. IQ can change. Just because there is a mean for the IQ of the current population, doesn't mean that average can't shift over time. And if we used to be cavemen then either the IQ did shift, or we've always been this smart, which means we couldn't have evolved.

In this case, IQ is exactly the same as morality. Both shift ever so slightly over time, such that the mean is always the acceptable "norm". You can't feel this shift unless you study it. The difference is that morality exhibits locality, so morality shifts slower or faster depending on the subsection of society. Thus you have people who believe they are more right than others, but no one believes they are outright wrong (as a culture). Proof in the pudding is doing a poll on the population as to how smart they think they are. They always rate themselves such that the mean is shifted 1 or 2 deviations up. Same thing with morality. People all espouse a morality that they think is 1 or 2 deviations greater than the standard, whether they are a religious sect or secularists.

But the short of it, a population mean doesn't imply the mean never changes.[[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 21:12, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

:While IQ can change, the way you're explaining it is not the way the Cueball or "White Hat" is explaining it. In fact, "White Hat" never explicitly states that IQ doesn't evolve at all; just not to the depressing trend Cueball here thinks it does. Anonymous 23:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

If there is reason for climate change it is almost certainly due to the destruction of trees. Any ridiculous assertions about carbon dioxide can not be confirmed or denied and the political machinations about carbon dioxide stem from Margaret Thatcher's war on the coal miners in Britain.

It would be a simple matter to replant forests. All we would have to do is pay for that in higher latitudes and send in drones to deal with illegal loggers in lower latitudes. 20 years or so should sort out most of the problems.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 17:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:608: Form

2015-01-29T09:17:25Z

Weatherlawyer:

This space intentionally left without relevant content. [[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 21:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
:No Comment!

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 09:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:610: Sheeple

2015-01-29T09:11:58Z

Weatherlawyer:

Which one is Paul Ryan?[[Special:Contributions/138.162.140.55|138.162.140.55]] 00:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

tsk tsk tsk... somebody has been watching too much of the msnbc propaganda... [[User:Douglasadams472|Douglasadams472]] 20:56, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Probably the one with the briefcase full of money. :P [[User:Hogtree Octovish|Hogtree Octovish]] ([[User talk:Hogtree Octovish|talk]]) 09:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
:Beret guy?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 09:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I find another possible humor in tile text: Ironically, Rand fans would find the concept of a collective rather revolting. A convention is in essence a gathering of everyone who has an interest in a subject, and is thus an "average of averages" (to quote Rand herself) on the respective subject. Fans who take Rand's philosophy as intended would probably find amassing themselves with others in a social hodge-podge of people without much function, mindless discussion, and re-iterating the ideas of someone else, to be against Rand's theory of Objectivism... Unless their Libertarians, of course. [[User:Jinx|Jinx]] 20:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I wonder if this was the same train that blew the Taggart tunnel... [[User: Nemo|Nemo]] 14:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:611: Disaster Voyeurism

2015-01-29T08:45:29Z

Weatherlawyer:

For reasons expounded here, I have given Black Hat my own name. "Mac" for Machiavell, a character who delights in playing the system, often to the detriment, intentional or otherwise, of others. In Mac's case, he plays the system to cause detriment. In a similar vein, Danish is "Sadie" for sadist, the literal, as opposed to literary, version of a Machiavell, and who more often causes others pain. I'm not saying these should be their names, and I will still refer them to as "Black Hat" and "Danish" on site, but I am putting my view out there. Anonymous 07:36, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
:That's very clever. [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 12:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
:: That he or she managed to circumvent the IP address monster or the revelation of the world of their own?
::Can someone please upgrade this Wikipedia entry for the likes of us dyscalculics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_vorticity so that I can look cool on "Hurricane forums"?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 08:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:616: Lease

2015-01-29T08:29:12Z

Weatherlawyer:

I'm coming up on a landmark decade, probably somewhere near the half-way mark of my future-projected life expectency, and I can ''totally'' relate to that feeling of being a child in an adult world... And did I ''really'' just use the word 'totally' in that manner? [[Special:Contributions/178.99.247.73|178.99.247.73]] 22:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:Trust me; nothing changes. You just get older on the outside.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 08:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:618: Asteroid

2015-01-29T08:22:29Z

Weatherlawyer:

:Could someone please help me with the picture, I don't know how to get it to display right...--[[User:7OO Tnega Terces|7OO Tnega Terces]] ([[User talk:7OO Tnega Terces|talk]]) 08:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
::Fix'd. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
:::THANKS!--[[User:7OO Tnega Terces|7OO Tnega Terces]] ([[User talk:7OO Tnega Terces|talk]]) 07:00, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
My Deep Impact/Little Prince crossover fanfic has been poorly received by the community.
I think that is because nobody wants to believe NASA would design the spacecraft upside-down.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 08:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:619: Supported Features

2015-01-29T08:18:25Z

Weatherlawyer:

Note that the major reason why is easier for Linux to supports 4096 CPUs than smooth flash playback is that flash is proprietary format and without cooperation from Adobe very little can be done with it. For example, most of Adobe products, flash player included (since version 11), are now compiled with SSE2 support in a way which makes them not work at all on CPUs which don't have such capability. Noone except Adobe can do anything with it, and Adobe apparently don't consider it problem. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Who is this we that he refers to in the title-text. Is it him and his Intel card, him and his fiance, is he royalty, or does he simply have a tapeworm with good taste in political comedy? [[Special:Contributions/66.249.85.193|66.249.85.193]] 21:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

http://asset.soup.io/asset/0453/8747_0991_800.png (Changelog for xorg; "Fixes XKCD #619")
Sudofox (I haven't made an account. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 19:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

The commit that added 4096 CPUs support was [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/1184dc2ffe2c8fb9afb766d870850f2c3165ef25 1184dc2] by Mike Travis from SGI (which sells systems with that many CPUs); see also [https://events.linuxfoundation.org/slides/lfcs09_travis.pdf this presentation] by him.

However, that commit was soon reverted in [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d25e26b61d59370eee8b7f2634641eb0fa76e952 d25e26b] because it caused too many problems (big CPU mask → some huge stack frames), with a comment that “Some day we'll have allocation helpers that allocate large CPU masks dynamically, but in the meantime we simply cannot allow cpumasks this large.”

Today, [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/1e3827bf8aebe29af2d6e49b89d85dfae4d0154f/arch/x86/Kconfig#L778 up to 8192 CPUs are supported], so presumably they do have these helpers now :) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.230.95|108.162.230.95]] 09:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
:I put some paragraph spacing in your comment because it is difficult to follow on the edit page.
:The problems of computer engineering mirror the difficulties faced by producers of machinery everywhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_calculator
:It doesn't matter what level of technical genius their builders attain nor in which field they exert their energy, Linux machines will be cold-shouldered because Microsoft's is the only code that allows users to work with a cludge like Flash.
:This sort of thing will continue as long as vested interests allow such indecencies to exist. Blaise Pascal never had the luxury of working in tens. It took a famine, an egregious tax system (rather similar to that of the USA's) and a revolution to improve things. Perhaps we can learn something from history?
:
:In 2009, when this comic was published, most computers being sold were 4 cores. The problem was the dissipation of heat and incidental costs of electricity used. Manufactures could see the wall presented by frequency oscillations. Having 4000 CPUs/cores/threads/whatever just meant you had a hotter frying pan.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 08:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:619: Supported Features

2015-01-29T08:07:06Z

Weatherlawyer:

Note that the major reason why is easier for Linux to supports 4096 CPUs than smooth flash playback is that flash is proprietary format and without cooperation from Adobe very little can be done with it. For example, most of Adobe products, flash player included (since version 11), are now compiled with SSE2 support in a way which makes them not work at all on CPUs which don't have such capability. Noone except Adobe can do anything with it, and Adobe apparently don't consider it problem. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Who is this we that he refers to in the title-text. Is it him and his Intel card, him and his fiance, is he royalty, or does he simply have a tapeworm with good taste in political comedy? [[Special:Contributions/66.249.85.193|66.249.85.193]] 21:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

http://asset.soup.io/asset/0453/8747_0991_800.png (Changelog for xorg; "Fixes XKCD #619")
Sudofox (I haven't made an account. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 19:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

The commit that added 4096 CPUs support was [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/1184dc2ffe2c8fb9afb766d870850f2c3165ef25 1184dc2] by Mike Travis from SGI (which sells systems with that many CPUs); see also [https://events.linuxfoundation.org/slides/lfcs09_travis.pdf this presentation] by him.

However, that commit was soon reverted in [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d25e26b61d59370eee8b7f2634641eb0fa76e952 d25e26b] because it caused too many problems (big CPU mask → some huge stack frames), with a comment that “Some day we'll have allocation helpers that allocate large CPU masks dynamically, but in the meantime we simply cannot allow cpumasks this large.”

Today, [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/1e3827bf8aebe29af2d6e49b89d85dfae4d0154f/arch/x86/Kconfig#L778 up to 8192 CPUs are supported], so presumably they do have these helpers now :) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.230.95|108.162.230.95]] 09:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
:I put some paragraph spacing in your comment because it is difficult to follow on the edit page.
:The abilities of a computer engineer mirror the difficulties faced by producers of machienery everywhere:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_calculator
:It doesn't matter what level of technical genius they attain nor in which field they exert their energy, Linux machines will be cold shouldered because Microsoft is the only code that allows users to work with a cludge like Flash.
:This sort of thing will continue as long as vested interests continue to allow such indecencies to exist. Blaise Pascal never had the luxury of working in tens. It took a famine, an egregious tax system (rather similar to that of the USA's) and a revolution to improve things. Perhaps we can learn something from history?
:
:In 2009, when this comic was published, most computers being sold were 4 cores. The problem was the dissipation of heat and incidental costs of electricity used. Manufactures could see the wall presented by frequency oscillations. Having 4000 CPUs just meant you had a hotter frying pan.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 08:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:620: Wings

2015-01-29T01:21:04Z

Weatherlawyer:

Cueball's physics has a mistake on this one (or at least assumes we've managed to heat the atmosphere of Titan to Earth's temperature). The temperature of Titan is roughly 1/3 the temperature of Earth on an absolute scale. Starting with the Ideal Gas Law, PV = NkT (k is Boltzmann's constant, N is # of molecules, P is pressure, V is volume, T is temperature), its easy to define the density of a gas, ρ as:

ρ = m/V = (m P)/(N k T) = P (m/N) / (k T)

Titan's atmosphere is 98.4% molecular nitrogen (N2) and on Earth only 78.1% molecular nitrogen (by volume), but for simplicity we'll assume 100% for both. The weight of one molecule of Nitrogen is (m/N) ~ 2 × 14 × 1.67x10-27 (kg/molecule) (there are 28 nucleons per molecule with a mass of about 1.67x10^-27 kg.

The pressure on Titan is PTitan=146.7 kPa, and TTitan = 93.7 K, while on Earth PEarth=101.3 kPa and TEarth = 287 K.

Plugging in numbers, we get ρTitan = 5.3 kg/m3 and ρEarth = 1.2 kg/m3 (note the measured surface density of air on Earth is 1.2 kg/m3 at Earth's mean temperature even without the simplifying assumption of 100% N2).

Hence Titan's atmosphere is 4.4 = (5.3/1.2) times denser than Earth's (or 340% denser); not 50% denser as stated in the comic.

You will get the 50% denser if you assume the same planetary temperature on Titan as on Earth. Titan at 287 K would have a density of ρTitan at 287K ~ 1.73 kg/m3 which is about 50% greater than Earth's.

For the second calculation (panel 2), note {{w|Lift_(force)|lift}} is proportional to the density of air. If your action on Earth creates a lift of L0 and you weigh W0, on Titan you'd have a lift of 4.4 L0 (Cueball calculated 1.5 L0) due to the greater air density. Your weight would only be 0.14 W0, due to Titan's lower surface gravity. If lift balances weight, you would be able to fly on Titan, that is if 4.4 L0 = 0.14 W0. That means to fly on Titan you need a lift on Earth of L0 = 0.03 W0, that is 3% of your Earth weight. Substituting Cueball's Titan density you would get the critical value from the comic: L0 = 0.14 W0/(1.5) = 9% W0.

PS: I largely adapted this [http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=43578&hilit=620+wings&start=120#p1726506 my writeup on xkcd forums from 2009 when the comic was made]. [[User:Jimbob|Jimbob]] ([[User talk:Jimbob|talk]]) 05:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
:That was the whole point of Blackhat's presence. He was there to make sure Rob (AKA Cueball) wasn't hurt.
:Fortunately, Blackhat couldn't care less about the outcome. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:625: Collections

2015-01-29T01:07:55Z

Weatherlawyer:

I can probably help Cueball (or whoever it is) out in his title-text musings, with an entire bookshelf (floor to ceiling) dedicated to Pratchett books in both Hardback and Paperback versions and related works by him and his collaborators. Apart, that is, from the totally separate bookshelf space reserved for the unabridged audio books of same - these mostly in cassette format, with just a couple of Audio CDs (a purchase error, at the time) and a couple of the newest in MP3-on-CD format (my reluctant nod towards progress). Now talk to me about how long magnetic and optical media can last, in relation to paper. Assuming I don't get hit by a house-fire, flooding, supervolcano, coronal mass ejection, etc. Hmmm... I wonder if I can get them carved onto stone tablets in a reinforced vault? [[Special:Contributions/178.99.247.73|178.99.247.73]] 21:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:Microfilm is all you need. --[[User:Qwach|Qwach]] ([[User talk:Qwach|talk]]) 16:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

::Digital data can be copied. Use it. Best way to protect information is having it stored at two different continents and periodically check that copies at both are readable. Wait. Actually, best way to protect information is to get it into some popular piece of software people are going to download in millions ... speaking about which, I wonder how many copies of fortune database of Terry Pratchett's Discworld related quotes is installed globally ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 01:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Surely the title text is not just "musing about the shelf space" but wondering how many more Pratchett books will be written; #625 is from August 2009, and Pratchett announced that he had Alzheimer's in 2007/8, and on 2nd August 2009 stated that he intended to commit suicide before his disease "reached a critical point". Which would also suggest that he wasn't "gleefully" considering it, either. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.241}}
:The problem with dementia is that you keep forgetting ... to.. ermmm..
:The problem with dementia is ...that you... keep forgetting ... to.. ermmm..

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:626: Newton and Leibniz

2015-01-29T00:58:58Z

Weatherlawyer:

Is the "break-out sunglasses" a theme on xkcd now?--Classhole 02:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

"dramatically pulling off his sunglasses" ?? I'm fairly certain I've never seen the show much less one of these bits, but I thought I understood him to typically be ''putting on'' his sunglasses (?) -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
:The introduction to a glossy Hollywoodland whodunnit is Derivatives? With a take on glasses?
:I really need to get a TV and catch up on all the wonderful stuff I have been missing out on.
:Does it go into any details about how the two protagonists solved their issues?
:I'd really like to see a study on the state of mind that gave the world fluxions and a computer close up of the journey from "fluxions to calculus notation" in 8 years.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 00:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:633: Blockbuster Mining

2015-01-29T00:40:10Z

Weatherlawyer:

Why do we think that this is Danish? The hair isn't the same and there are no other indicators. [[User:LadyMondegreen|LadyMondegreen]] ([[User talk:LadyMondegreen|talk]]) 12:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
:I'm also sure it's not [[Megan]], she isn't that violent. And for now we have chaos here because [[Danish]] is still at the transcript.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 11:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
::I'm only using Megan because it's drawn like Megan. Megan, like Cueball is basically the default girl. Her personality changes as necessary. Besides, we're seeing an actor play Harriet the Spy so none of the violence is a character trait. I'd classify it as Harriet the Spy, but it's not only not completely accurate but it steps on the punchline. [[User:LadyMondegreen|LadyMondegreen]] ([[User talk:LadyMondegreen|talk]]) 16:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
:::I will tag this as incomplete. Megan is not that violent and we still have to find a better solution.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
::::"Woman" is a fine alternative to "Megan", but too generic. "Female spy" might give away the punchline a little early. "Testosterette" looks too much like the name of a toaster pastry flavoured with bacon, gunshot and a hint of Jack Daniel's. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 18:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Misuse of "to" in the title text. I'll check this out. --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 19:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
:Randall has targeted grammar nazi's and people afflicted with OCD in the past. Consider yourself a member in a special breed of Internetter! [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 18:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

The "rectangular object" appears to be be the spiral bound notebook when looked at closely. Or is it just me? {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.120}}

Do we know which particular action scenes of which particular movies are satirized in each frame? I get the feeling they're either extremely generic or from something familiar. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.226.228|108.162.226.228]] 15:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

The one in the "stop I'll talk" frame reminds me of the scene in Mission Impossible III (I think three) where the bad guy gets the info and then shoots the girlfriend anyway, however it could be from any movie. It was my impression that the panels are more of a "spy goes bananas" aspect so this could just be a reference to the stereotypical spy information extraction tactic gone awry.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.65|108.162.215.65]] 20:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

The movie based on this book already and by the same name deserves mention here somewhere.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.192|108.162.219.192]] 03:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
:Bitch II Terror Beater?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 00:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:633: Blockbuster Mining

2015-01-29T00:39:59Z

Weatherlawyer:

Talk:647: Scary

2015-01-28T05:19:11Z

Weatherlawyer:

Not wishing to detract from the gravity of the 9/11 events (expounded at very great length), but the first thing we read, "...never found the ghosts head", is perhaps a lighter parody of the kind of endings that accompany "It was a dark and stormy night..." at the start. Usually in a ghost and/or a horror story (headless ghosts aside) it's usually a newly-found ''corpse'' whose head is missing. Hence there's strange imagery involved in the concept of a decapitated ghost (as opposed to a ghost of a decapitee). It ''could'' have been an interestingly compounded set of tropes, of course, but given its apparent lameness it probably wasn't. [[Special:Contributions/178.99.247.73|178.99.247.73]] 17:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:They never found any traces of firemen in the ruins of the twin towers did they? No fireproof, extremely hardwearing clothing, nor axes, gas cylinders etc.? Horrific or what?
:And the layer at the top of the mounds should have contained some traces of human DNA. Right?
:That's more horrific.

Using movies as a reference for making people feel old and scared about how fast time flies was used also in http://xkcd.com/891/ --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.31|108.162.229.31]] 12:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Talk:651: Bag Check

2015-01-28T05:08:12Z

Weatherlawyer: Created page with "I am presuming beret guy has not been invented yet? ~~~~"

I am presuming beret guy has not been invented yet?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 05:08, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:654: Nachos

2015-01-28T05:00:28Z

Weatherlawyer:

[http://xkcd.com/258/] WiFi and microwaves use the same frequency band?! a conspiracy! the machines are taking over! [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 09:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
:If your microwave is interfering with your wifi then it's time to get a new microwave because your old one has a gaping hole. Microwave ovens form Faraday cages to contain EM radiation within them, and if the EM radiation is leaking that means the Faraday cage is violated somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/72.128.82.131|72.128.82.131]] 01:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
::Thank you, this information really improved my understanding of the joke. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 01:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
::::The problem is the conspiracy theory may be the correct answer. In which case you need a firewall for the microwave or an old one, pre Pentium III at least.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 05:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

:::This is true. It's why you can stand in front of a microwave without boiling alive. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.73|173.245.54.73]] 01:11, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Actually, Sniper doesn't have a "Boom! Headshot." line ingame, it's from the meet the team vids. UT maybe? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.121|108.162.231.121]] 08:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
: "Boom Headshot" actually was first brought up here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olm7xC-gBMY -> CS?

Talk:659: Lego

2015-01-28T04:11:19Z

Weatherlawyer:

This is one of my favorite xkcd strips, and one that I happily point to in any discussion involving organ donation. [[User:Ekedolphin|Ekedolphin]] ([[User talk:Ekedolphin|talk]]) 08:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... Where did the philote of the house go though? The pattern may be gone, but was the philote called back to outside?
Yes, I'm one of the seven fans of xenocide. 04:08, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Anyone interested in the issues raised in this comic would do well to look up the problem of the Ship of Theseus.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.53|108.162.216.53]] 17:03, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

For me, once you accept the fact of evolution, and therefore that all life on earth emerged from a common ancestor, it is patently obvious that the relevance of religion to what happens to my "composition" (self) after death is ... zero. To wit: "If you want to know what happens when you die, go look at some dead stuff." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 01:22, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

The point of this comic is excellent, but it is dampened for me by the fact that Lego doesn't sell general-purpose blocks any more, it's all precision kit crap. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 21:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
:[http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3498752&mr:keyword=&mr:trackingCode=A0545167-7315-E311-A497-90E2BA285E75&mr:match=&mr:adType=pla&mr:filter=56911854646&cagpspn=plat_5739898&mr:referralID=NA&mr:ad=35201231326&mr:device=c&camp=PLAPPC-_-PID5739898&KPID=5739898 Hi.] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:38, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
::For the same price, you could equip yourself with the makings of a Meccano set. Something well out of the reach of most hobbyists way back when. Odd how the more we have the less we do with it.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 04:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

The first time I read this strip, I immediately thought back to one of my all-time favorite books. The basis of Unwind by Neal Shusterman is essentially the idea behind this strip, except from an opposite point of view. --[[User:Hammy2211|Hammy2211]] ([[User talk:Hammy2211|talk]]) 21:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I disagree with this interpretation of the comic. I think ponytail is marking the box with a combination between a checkmark and an X mark, which in a test (where I live at least) means 'partially correct'. It is usually drawn as a check mark with the LONGER arm being one of the two lines of the X, but here, the SHORTER arm and PART of the longer arm seem to form the top half of the X. This makes me not sure that this was the actual intention, but I still think it was.
Now, I think ponytail in part wants to help others with her parts just like the current explanation says, but I also think she's afraid of making herself disappear while doing so. If she isn't an organ donor, she will stay complete and will continue to exist, but if she is a donor, then the arrangement will be gone and SHE will be gone forever. --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 15:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

:I interpreted the unsual check mark as either a tick which had been turned to a cross, or a mix between a cross and tick. I also read the title text as a suspicious child questioning whether Grandpa has been taken apart or something similar. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

:I agree. It seems awfully strange that after being told that she's 'disappear' she'd go and disassemble herself... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.252|141.101.98.252]] 10:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk:661: Two-Party System

2015-01-28T02:15:54Z

Weatherlawyer:

People in Europe (and Billy) usually don't realize that the US parties are not anything like the European parties. The European parties have a rigid pyramidal structure, with the party leader (or a regional version thereof) being the election candidate. If the US parties were like this, the US system really would be two-party. However in reality the US parties have hardly any structure. Pretty much anyone can become a candidate from a US party, it's more of an endorsement. So the primaries act as the first round of the elections, deciding who will get the endorsement from the party. It's possible, and had happened in the past, for the same person to participate in the primaries of both major parties, and even to be nominated as the candidate from both parties (though some places now have laws against the last part)! In the local elections, it's also not uncommon to have multiple candidates with the same self-declared party affiliation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.111|108.162.245.111]] 21:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
: Thanks for the elaboration! [[User:Mumiemonstret|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret|talk]]) 14:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
:: The problem with such a format for democracy is that the anyones involved in US politics have to be steeeeeeenkeeeen rich. And of course the problem with the alternative version of democracy is that it isn't a democracy. Oh wait, neither is...

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 02:15, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:666: Silent Hammer

2015-01-28T01:47:15Z

Weatherlawyer:

I took the comic to be less about a haunting and more about a "Did that really happen to me?" Especially when considering that Black Hat never bothers him again. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.218|108.162.237.218]] 08:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
: Quite so. People who manage to pass the course for most sciences tend to become sceptical. I think that this is to allow them to worship the beast more readily than the uneducated would.

Talk:670: Spinal Tap Amps

2015-01-28T01:17:10Z

Weatherlawyer:

Specifically, it's $166.66 recurring per unit of loud. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 22:49, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I vote we start using "units of loud" instead of "decibels" {{unsigned ip|149.152.191.2}}
:Aye! [[User:BK201|BK201]] ([[User talk:BK201|talk]]) 16:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)BK201

I read somewhere that the amps used to have settings up to 10, but then people found ways to turn the knob past 10. It became culturally known as the 11 setting. In response, manufacturers made amps that went to 11, and this predated the movie. The movie just greatly increased the popularity of the idea. Can't find it anymore though. Maybe it was only urban legend [[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 17:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
:Most likely something to do with the fact that guitarists were still lighting up in the national grid into the 1980's. Check out the health and safety at music festivals act 198011.
:OK most musicians die of heart attacks or cerebral haemorrhage but there is an history of electrical malfunctions at music gigs.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 01:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:671: Stephen and Me

2015-01-28T00:22:54Z

Weatherlawyer:

The etymologies are related.
* http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=revolve&allowed_in_frame=0
* http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=vulva&allowed_in_frame=0
[[Special:Contributions/178.42.120.14|178.42.120.14]] 21:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
:How ironic, then, that Volvo's trademark is the same as the astrological symbol for Mars, the alchemical symbol for iron, and the Linnean symbol for male. [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 13:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
::And attractive?

Talk:672: Suggestions

2015-01-28T00:09:51Z

Weatherlawyer:

What is the icon in the third panel supposed to be? --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 13:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
: Two people being warm against each other. --[[User:Bedunkel|BD]] ([[User talk:Bedunkel|talk]]) 01:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
::So we have a multi millionaire with no life, no respect for anyone's privacy and no moral scruples that has been running this make-believe world since he was a pimply kid and offering the full Monty to any would be Faust.
::HTF did we let that happen? :~D
::Oh yes, sexual persuasion. Why do I get the impression this is all going to end badly for everyone involved?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 00:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:673: The Sun

2015-01-27T22:12:17Z

Weatherlawyer:

Interesting (or deliberate?) that there's no reference at all in the explanation to [[wikipedia:Sunshine_(2007_film)|Sunshine]], released two years previously. [[Special:Contributions/178.99.247.73|178.99.247.73]] 21:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Can't "to spring" be thought of as a physical movement? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.196|108.162.212.196]] 00:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
: Yes; that's why the mnemonic works. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 16:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
:: Also, the mnemonic works because physically it is relatively easier to spring (i.e., jump) forward and to fall (through the simple action of gravity, without being able to catch yourself with your arms) back(ward) than it is to do the reverse. --[[User:Bedunkel|BD]] ([[User talk:Bedunkel|talk]]) 01:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
the fusion reactions are well understood
By whom?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 22:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:675: Revolutionary

2015-01-27T22:06:14Z

Weatherlawyer:

Looks like this guy doesn't know about Lorentz contraction and time dilation. That or he's so confident about his idea that he hasn't bothered to look further into the subject. --[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 09:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Looks like this guy

They both look the same to me. Which one do you mean?

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 22:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I guess that the mouseover text refer to the Occam's razor, a favourite tool of many philosophers. --[[User:Barfolomio|Barfolomio]] ([[User talk:Barfolomio|talk]]) 14:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
:Welcome '''Barfolomio''', but I think the {{w|Occam's razor}} principle wasn't in mind of Randall when he wrote this comic. But it's a nice find and maybe it should be mentioned. Nevertheless the title text explain is wrong, reading all the math and physics books is much harder then just inventing a "racecar on a train" theory as a philosopher. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
::The title text specifically compares two things.
::*That I have uncovered fundamental flaws in this field that no one in it has ever thought about (implying that decades of work by numerous physicists is wrong)
::*That I need to read a little more.
::The actual invention of the idea doesn't come into it. It takes minimal effort to invent an incorrect theory.
::In the vast majority of these cases, reading a little bit more into the subject results in finding out that the flaw you think have found is in fact already explained.
::As an example, lets say a high school student happens to do sqrt(5-6), he thinks he has uncovered a sum which has no answer. His calculator tells him 'Error'. In fact, with a little more reading, he would discover that mathematicians have a whole area devoted to this type of maths, namely {{w|Imaginary unit|imaginary numbers}}. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 15:43, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

The relativity sections of physics forums like www.physicsforums.com, despite having FAQs and pinned posts with explanations, are often full with new threads claiming that relativity is obviously wrong because of "insert simple example here that uses normal velocity addition instead of Lorentz transforms", maybe Randall is a participant in such a forum? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.93.206|141.101.93.206]] 08:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
: None the less the fact remains that there are at least three completely different explanations known. Or at least there were, the last time I spent a couple of hours on the subject (one hell of a while back.)
:Once I got to the fact that there were a lot of alternative values for time -let's face it, that is what it is all about in the first place... I just lost interest.

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 22:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Dgbrt, I have reverted your edit which removed the example using imaginary numbers. I understand that the example uses imaginary numbers which are not referenced in the comic, however rather than removing a paragraph which gives a succinct example of the comics content (and points out that it is only an example), it would be far more useful to change the paragraph to reference special relativity instead of imaginary numbers. There are two reasons I didn't do this when I wrote the paragraph: Firstly, I don't understand special relativity in enough detail to give an example where a 'flaw' is easily explained, and secondly most readers probably don't either. Because of this I used imaginary numbers which I would think a larger proportion of people have come across in some form before. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 10:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
:I removed this paragraph because "sqrt(5-6)" or "imaginary numbers" do not help to explain the comics content — less than 5% will understand only that phrases. We can't explain special relativity — using "imaginary numbers" — to a common reader. BUT we can explain how or why some people NOT understanding Einstein still trying to invent better solutions... without any knowledge of the real matter. I did not remove it again, so it's up to you to give a better explain.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
::I disagree that it doesn't help the explanation. It gives a fairly simple example of somebody who thinks they have found a flaw, but where it would take minimal extra reading to realise its actually not a flaw (which is the whole concept of this comic). I would argue that substantially more than 5% of readers will have come across imaginary numbers, if they haven't then the wiki link is there for them to look them up. The fact that it refers to imaginary numbers is actually not even particularly relevant, only that there is a field of mathematics to explain the sqrt(5-6) "flaw". Maybe the explanation could be improved by changing the example to relate to special relativity, but as I said before I'm not qualified to write that. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)