https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=108.162.229.31&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2020-09-30T00:19:28ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1070:_Words_for_Small_Sets&diff=68901Talk:1070: Words for Small Sets2014-06-05T08:01:49Z<p>108.162.229.31: </p>
<hr />
<div>I disagree on "A Handful" and "Several". A Handful should be about 4 to 7 and several should be 6 to 8, averaging about 7, which sounds just like several. The other two are within the range that makes sense to me. Also, check out how he sneaks "a couple of friends" and "all three of them" into the image text very sneakily. [[User:Jeff]] - From the blog<br />
:Dude, that's the point. You've been trolled. --[[User:Castriff|Jimmy C]] ([[User talk:Castriff|talk]]) 11:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Several is two or more.<br />
<br />
A handful to me is just that. A dozen berries, one hand grenade, 2-3 sticks of TNT, a bird (2 in a bush else where gives 3) or a wild blonde (more than 1 way to be a handful I guess). [[User:DruidDriver|DruidDriver]] ([[User talk:DruidDriver|talk]]) 07:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
English isn't my natural language, but how common is the word "acrimonious"? Should it be explained? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.56|108.162.254.56]] 03:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)<br />
:Online dictionaries should help. I'm using some addons to my Firefox to help me. The simplest meaning for "acrimonious" should be "bitter", but this is still one of those words hard to describe. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm inclined to interpret the hover text as him saying that a couple does mean more than two. A couple of friends, and then all three of them. However, the entry does not agree with me. Thoughts? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.28|173.245.52.28]] 09:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)<br />
: My guess is that the entry interpreted "all three of them agree" as "your couple of friends agree with you". I think Randell would sooner troll than use inconsistent grammar so, I also think Randell was using couple to mean 3 friends. [[User:Who PhD|Who PhD]] ([[User talk:Who PhD|talk]]) 13:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is a similar ambiguity in German, where "ein paar", which literally means "a couple", is used to say "a few". In Italian the ambiguity is even stronger, as certain regions tend to use "un paio" only in the literal sense, while others mean it figuratively. A friend of mine came from Tuscany to Sardinia and one day told me: "I asked for a couple of cigarette packs, and the clerk said ok, how many? and I said, a couple, and he answered yes, how many precisely, and I had to say, uh, two? What an idiot". I had to explain to her that where I live it was not THAT straightforward that couple == 2 --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.31|108.162.229.31]] 08:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)</div>108.162.229.31https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:953:_1_to_10&diff=68743Talk:953: 1 to 102014-06-03T14:05:01Z<p>108.162.229.31: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of correct answers is P = 1 + 1 - |sgn(10 - 1 - 1)|<br />
<br />
(|x| is absolute value of x, sgn(x) is 1 when x > 0, 0 when x = 0, and -1 when x < 0)<br />
<br />
<br />
If 10 = 1 + 1, then P = 10 - |sgn(0)| = 10 - |0| = 10<br />
<br />
If 10 > 1 + 1, then P = 1 + 1 - |sgn(10 - 1 - 1)| = 1 + 1 - |1| = 1<br />
<br />
If 10 < 1 + 1, then P = 1 + 1 - |sgn(10 - 1 - 1)| = 1 + 1 - |-1| = 1<br />
<br />
So P is 10 iif the question was is in binary, and 1 iif it was not in binary.<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/93.73.186.104|93.73.186.104]] 16:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)<br />
:The absolute value is unnecessary. When is 10 ever less than 1+1?[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.202|108.162.219.202]] 20:28, 3 January 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't think the explanation is right, I mean i don't know binary but i don't think the joke is that he's saying a 4 as in 100% [[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 00:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:A 4 is not 100%, but a 3/4 is always 75%. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.206|108.162.212.206]] 22:47, 26 January 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
1.(1) is the best answer I've got [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 11:53, 5 April 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"How likely" it is? As everyone knows, "every base is base 10", since every base number in its own numbering system is written as "10" (2 is 10 in binary, 16 is 10 in hex and so on). So that question could be in EVERY number system possible. I suppose the probability is then 1 over an infinite number of systems, then very unlikely, so I'd say (as 0 is not in the range of possible answers) the answer is 1. Which, incidentally, is also an acceptable answer for every system. If we want instead to take into account that Megan doesn't know what a 4 is, the possibilities are only base 2, 3 and 4. So the likeliness is 1/3, which corresponds anyway to 1 in those number systems. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.31|108.162.229.31]] 14:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)</div>108.162.229.31https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:993:_Brand_Identity&diff=68097Talk:993: Brand Identity2014-05-26T13:36:34Z<p>108.162.229.31: </p>
<hr />
<div>Notice that the sugar is inverted? Weird.<br />
--Classhole 23:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Weird, the hot sauce is also inverted [[User:BlueRoll18|BlueRoll18]] ([[User talk:BlueRoll18|talk]]) 02:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
NONAME in Canada uses yellow boxes with black text but basically the same idea.<br />
--Pundawg 18:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I didn't get this joke because I grew up eating "Slim Price" food branded exactly this way. -lolo {{unsigned ip|99.120.200.86}}<br />
<br />
There's a brand called "Ja!" from the Rewe group in Germany that uses this exact concept somewhat, but nowadays, the packages contain pictures and illustrations of all kinds, and aren't as white, simple and plain as they used to be in the past. See: http://www.rewe.de/besser-einkaufen/ja/produkte-und-infos.html<br />
--Rolfhub 23:25, 14 September 2013<br />
<br />
:Here is some old image of the designs: [https://web.archive.org/web/20040503194438im_/http://www.rewe-ja.de/nxMODULES/nxCONTENTER/content/1_425Bild1.jpg]. It's not as simple as in the comic, but it's certainly the same idea. -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.39|108.162.219.39]] 20:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Ah, dear old "Ja!"... it saved my life back when I was a broke student. Anyway, also the M-Budget line from Swiss Migros recently started adding pictures to its product, but before that it was all green packaging with black writing. Wonerful --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.31|108.162.229.31]] 13:36, 26 May 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the lack of URL is just to troll the consumers. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.63.180|173.245.63.180]] 00:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)</div>108.162.229.31https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:647:_Scary&diff=67325Talk:647: Scary2014-05-15T12:03:37Z<p>108.162.229.31: </p>
<hr />
<div>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)<br />
<br />
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)</div>108.162.229.31https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1292:_Pi_vs._Tau&diff=530061292: Pi vs. Tau2013-11-18T10:25:24Z<p>108.162.229.31: /* Transcript */ π is written π in the comic.</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1292<br />
| date = November 17, 2013<br />
| title = Pi vs. Tau<br />
| image = pi vs tau.png<br />
| titletext = Conveniently approximated as e+2, Pau is commonly known as the Devil's Ratio (because in the octal expansion, '666' appears four times in the first 200 digits while no other run of 3+ digits appears more than once.)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
<br />
This is yet another of Randall's compromise comics. Many mathematicians argue as to whether to use pi, which is the ratio between a circle's diameter and its circumference, or tau, which is the ratio between a circle's radius and its circumference. Randall is suggesting using pau, which is a portmanteau between pi and tau, and is a number situated halfway between pi and tau. This number would be effectively useless, as there are currently no commonly used formulas that involve 1.5 pi or 0.75 tau.<br />
<br />
<br />
The title text for the comic is also incorrect. The first 200 digits of 'pau' in octal are:<br />
<pre><br />
4.5545743763144164432362345144750501224254715730156503147633545270030431677126116550546747570313312523403514716576464333172731124310201076447270723624573721640220437652155065544220143116155742515634462<br />
</pre><br />
The sequence '666' does not occur at all. Both '2362' and '4376' occur twice, while both '362' and '431' occur three times. 39 other 3 digit sequences occur twice.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript}}<br />
:(π, 'Pi', crossed out) (1.5 π, 'Pau') (2 π, 'Tau', also crossed out)<br />
:A compromise solution to the Pi/Tau dispute<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics with color]]<br />
[[Category:Math]]</div>108.162.229.31