https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=162.158.152.95&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T10:32:29ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1651:_Robotic_Garage&diff=114089Talk:1651: Robotic Garage2016-03-06T12:52:39Z<p>162.158.152.95: </p>
<hr />
<div><!-- Please sign your comments with a ~~~~ --><br />
[[493: Actuarial|First Post]] (just read that comic (and [[269: TCMP|this]]) the other day and couldn't help my self :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
black hat axe hmmm fire rescue axe? maybe? possibly damaging the car defeating the purpose of an automatic "aprking" system that handles cars like top gear handles valet keys? [[User:Needforsuv|Needforsuv]] ([[User talk:Needforsuv|talk]]) 12:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)<br />
:Well, an axe would definately damage everyone else's car. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 21:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)<br />
::For some reason, I thought the axe was "hack a hole into the bottom of the bin, to gain access/egress for your car", although that would have meant BlackHat has as little regard of his own 'storage device' as the cars themselves... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.95|162.158.152.95]] 12:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
When I first read this I did it as Cueball being mistaken that it was a parking garage when it really was a car crusher, and since Blackhat then would get money from the recycling of the car he does not care if Cueball gets it back ever [[User:Wjbodin3|WJBodin3]] ([[User talk:Wjbodin3|talk]]) 02:26, 5 March 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Ya'll think this is a joke about Black Hat being disrespectful of other people's things again. It's not (well, it is, but it's not just that). This is actually reasonably accurate. I've seen cars go vertical on the elevators in a robotic garage. And if the automation software goes wrong (as it very well can), getting the correct car out can be difficult. {{unsigned ip|199.27.129.17}}</div>162.158.152.95https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1650:_Baby&diff=1140871650: Baby2016-03-06T12:48:12Z<p>162.158.152.95: /* Explanation */ Minor grammatical correction (unless I completely missed something intentional about that?)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1650<br />
| date = March 2, 2016<br />
| title = Baby<br />
| image = baby.png<br />
| titletext = Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Could need a better flow for the main explanation. Maybe there are also some better explanations or just alternative explanation for the items in the table.}}<br />
[[Cueball]] (representing [[Randall]]) is uncomfortable about talking with couples who have just had a baby (here another Cueball-like guy and [[Megan]] with what appears to be a newborn baby). Because he never knows what to say, he has many strange thoughts and/or reasonable questions, that shouldn't be mentioned in front of happy parents showing off their precious baby for the first time. (See [[#Table|the table]] below for his thoughts.) <br />
<br />
Cueball's thoughts of what he didn't say includes the awkward ''You sure did make that'', the plain strange ''What brand is it?'', and interesting musing about science, which has nothing to do with this baby, ''So do they learn words...'', and even rating someone's baby: ''★★★★☆ Great baby''! Some of the thoughts are quite true, like ''It doesn't really look like you since you're not a baby.''<br />
<br />
In the end he manages to make a comment about how cool the baby is, and immediately regrets this, as he just realized that he might have hurt the parents' feelings. Given the other possibilities he discarded before delivering his verdict, it could have been much worse.<br />
<br />
Another reading of the final statement is not that he might have hurt the parents' feelings (after all, having a cool baby would be a good thing!) it's more that Cueball has squandered the chance to say something meaningful and instead has come out with something quite inane.<br />
<br />
In the title text he continues his thoughts again, going in the scientific direction with a question regarding how a child grows. Does it get tall first and then put on weight? (i.e. widen). This is a valid question which has no general answer. (See more in the table below). But he is not serious, as he also wonders if the child ''reach full width before getting taller''.<br />
<br />
Randall was 31 at the time of the release of this comic. As far as this page and Wikipedia informs, at the time of writing, he has no children, although he is married. However, given his age, it is highly likely that many of his friends are having babies during these years, so he will probably often get into the depicted situation. Therefore, it is highly likely that the comic is based on his own experience, and that it is indeed Randall depicted as the thinking Cueball.<br />
<br />
Having problems with small talk is a recurring theme in xkcd (see [[222: Small Talk]]), even something as simple as talking about the weather can be a problem (see [[1324: Weather]]). This comic is the third in less than a month were Cueball has issues with this; the first two were [[1640: Super Bowl Context]] and [[1643: Degrees]].<br />
<br />
There has previously been a "plural" version of this comic called [[441: Babies]], here Cueball also manages to say something better left unsaid, even if it was about his own baby.<br />
<br />
===Table===<br />
*In the table is a list of all the different sentences Cueball can think of or actually speaks in this comic: <br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
|-<br />
|+ Cueballs thoughts, including final statement and the title text.<br />
|-<br />
! scope="col" | Sentence<br />
! scope="col" | Explanation<br />
|-<br />
| Wow, it's getting so big! Unlike most babies, which stay the same size forever.<br />
| The first part of the sentence is quite a normal response, if it is not the first time the person sees the baby. But the second part can be interpreted as sarcastic, as newborn babies are supposed to grow fast, and it would be strange/bad if the baby had not grown considerably if it had been some months since last time. This also shows how inane the normal statement is, though people often feel inclined to say it anyway.<br />
|-<br />
| Hi! I'm talking to a baby!<br />
| People often talk to the baby, rather than the parents. This makes no sense for Cueball, as the baby doesn't understand him. Should he mention this?<br />
|-<br />
| What brand is it?<br />
| Typically a question one would ask about a new car, article of clothing, electronics, or other inanimate object, not a baby. Alternatively, the "{{w|brand}}" could also figuratively refer to the baby's sex. Usually it may be OK to ask what sex the baby is, though the normal question would be ''Is it a boy or a girl.''<br />
|-<br />
| Wow, definitely much smaller than a regular person!<br />
| As all babies are... Typically a real response would be ''Wow, they are so small''.<br />
|-<br />
| You sure did make that.<br />
| A typical comment would be ''he sure looks like you''. (See the comment that it doesn't look like you.) Such a sentence basically means you can see that it is clear that these two people did in fact make this baby. But making a baby requires sex, so when he puts it like that he actually refers to the sex part, which may be uncomfortable for many people.<br />
|-<br />
| ★★★★☆&nbsp;Great&nbsp;baby.<br />
| It is custom to praise parents for their lovely baby, but do not ever rate it with stars! In [[1608: Hoverboard]] Megan [http://xkcd.com/1608/1019:-1073+s.png rates a sea], something also not usually done. (At least she gives fewer stars than Cueball does for the baby). According to [[1098: Star Ratings]] this means the baby is OK.<br />
|-<br />
| It doesn't really look like you since you're not a baby.<br />
| A common comment is ''He totally looks like you''. What people mean is that they can see features in the face (he has his fathers nose but his mothers eyes). But of course given that the parents are adults they of course no longer look like a baby. Often it could be speculated that people just say this because they wish to see the similarities and to please the parents (hopefully).<br />
|-<br />
| So do they learn words one at a time alphabetically or can you pick the order or what?<br />
| Here Cueball displays interest in the process of learning to speak a language as a baby. Very interesting subject, but since this is a very small baby not something first time parents for instance would have thought about yet. Learning one word at a time seems reasonable, but the last two suggestions that they learn alphabetically or in a specific order the parents chooses is plain silly.<br />
|-<br />
| I hope it does a good job.<br />
| A baby actually does nothing that can be described as a ''job'', so this statement is not meaningful. <br />
If it were about the future of the baby, it would be a socially very inadequate comment to care only about the possible usefulness of the baby, than to anticipate the joy of the parents about the child's person.<br />
|-<br />
| Wow, that's a really cool baby!<br />
| This is what Cueball actually ends up saying. He thinks immediately that this was a silly thing to day and thinks ''Dammit'' (see title text of this comic: [[559: No Pun Intended]]).<br />
|-<br />
| Title text: Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?<br />
| It is not possible to generalize about how {{w|Child_development#Physical_growth|children grow}}, but of course it doesn't reach full width before getting taller! But it's mostly true that kids do alternate between putting on weight and using that weight to get taller. So they'll might get chubbier during a period of time, but then suddenly they will lose the fat as they grow taller and becomes thin again. If they don't eat much, they may stay small. If you feed them a diet with lots of sugar, they may stay fat even during growth spurts. But not necessarily as each kid is different. The question is thus very interesting, but again not something to discuss as an anecdote the first time you have the chance to comment on a newborn baby.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is standing in front of a family consisting a Cueball-like guy holding a newborn baby, with spiky hair, in a blanket and Megan. Cueball is thinking lots of thoughts about what to say to the couple upon seeing their baby for the first time. There is thus a huge thinking bubble in the top of the panel above the characters. Everything in this bubble has been crossed out like taking a pencil and drawing lines on top of the text, but it can still be read. After using all this time thinking, Cueball finally decides what to say, only to immediately regret this as can be seen in a small thought bubble below his spoken line, which is between the huge and the small bubble.]<br />
:Cueball (thoughts that are crossed out): <!--These thoughts are not striked-out --><br />
::Wow, it's getting so big! Unlike most babies, which stay the same size forever.<br />
::Hi! I'm talking to a baby!<br />
::What brand is it?<br />
::Wow, definitely much smaller than a regular person!<br />
::You sure did make that.<br />
::★★★★☆ Great baby.<br />
::It doesn't really look like you since you're not a baby.<br />
::So do they learn words one at a time alphabetically or can you pick the order or what?<br />
::I hope it does a good job.<br />
:Cueball: Wow, that's a really cool baby!<br />
:Cueball (thinking): Dammit.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:I can never figure out what to say about babies.<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]<br />
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Baby 2]]</div>162.158.152.95https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1648:_Famous_Duos&diff=113536Talk:1648: Famous Duos2016-02-29T10:22:20Z<p>162.158.152.95: </p>
<hr />
<div><!-- Remember to sign your comments with a ~~~~ --><br />
;No rhyme nor reason to these pairings?<br />
<br />
It appears the pairings are completely random. I was looking for some deeper meaning to them but it seems this is one of those comics to be taken entirely at face value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.12|108.162.216.12]] 14:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Aren't "Pinky and Clyde" also the names of the pink and orange Pacman ghosts? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.36|108.162.216.36]] 11:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
: Yes, this is true. Are there any other sensible pairings? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.35|173.245.54.35]] 17:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
::I noticed an interesting pun with "Timon and Garfunkel" in that "Timon" is the same as "Simon" just with a different first letter. And "Mario" rhymes with "Romeo" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.61|141.101.70.61]] 20:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
: I added this to the explanation. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 05:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
:::There seems to be many sensible pairings... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:19, 28 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You've already posted the correct pairs, but of course I wanted to draw them with lines, nursery school style:<br />
<br />
http://i.imgur.com/tWTJAYC.gif<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.143|108.162.228.143]] 15:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
;Possible inspiration<br />
Possible inspiration: the comedy music duo calling themselves Garfunkel and Oates<br />
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.48|108.162.216.48]] 15:45, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Yes, that was my first thought as well. Never heard of Hall. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.5|108.162.219.5]] 16:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: If you're from the U.S. and over 35, you probably should have. Hall & Oates are the [http://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/hall-and-oates-road-to-the-rock-and-roll-hall-of-fame-20131216 best-selling musical duo of all time]. [[User:Fryhole|Fryhole]] ([[User talk:Fryhole|talk]]) 20:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: "Never heard of Hall", this statement saddens me greatly, LOL! It's up there with Kanye fans thinking he discovered Paul McCartney. :) Wow. I myself had barely heard of Garfunkel & Oates until I looked up and watched their show, they're the obscure ones here. I, however, agree that they probably inspired this comic, or at least contributed. - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.191|198.41.235.191]] 00:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: I was thinking of (Captains) {{w|Robert Falcon Scott|Scott}} and {{w|Lawrence Oates|Oates}} , I must admit, but then I'm British. (Needs more emphasis... "...but then I'm ''British''!!" That's better. We do love our {{w|Terra Nova Expedition|glorious failures}}, at least our historic ones.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.95|162.158.152.95]] 10:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As currently described, the cycles thing does not make any sense to me. The order seems wrong. For example, the way the first cycle makes sense is to start with Thelma and Louise, Batman and Robin; and end with Anna and the King,Calvin and Hobbes. That way you've arrived back at the top and would only repeat if you continued. Can anyone justify the current order? [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 19:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
:Yeah, you can do it that way and will arrive at the same cycle lengths, each cycle just backwards. The way I did it was to go from "Thelma" to "Hobbes", then go to "Calvin" because that's who "Hobbes" belongs to, then go from "Calvin" to "The King" and so on. If the first name is the order of couples, then the second name basically just tells you the index where to jump next, that's usually how permutations are written. Your way considers the second names to be in the right order and uses the first as an index to jump to next. I also doubt it's an important part of the meaning, but I was curious how long the cycles would be. [[User:Or|or]] ([[User talk:Or|talk]]) 19:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The rating system for "At the Movies", at least during Siskel and Ebert's term, was that each reviewer would give a thumbs up or thumbs down. "Two thumbs up" referred to the aggregate rating when both reviewers liked the film. The explanation said that Siskel gave ''Romeo and Butthead'' two thumbs up, which wouldn't make sense if we assume that the show's rules were the same. [[User:Fryhole|Fryhole]] ([[User talk:Fryhole|talk]]) 20:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Haven't there been some similar comics? I cannot remember which... The style reminds of [[1625: Substitutions 2]] and [[1288: Substitutions]]. But they are not like this in theme. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting how there's only one "Bill" and one "Ted", but both their movies are represented, I thought it indicated that there was some mismatch, like an incomplete pair somewhere... But sorting it out, I realize now that's it's only that "Bill" got one complete title, "Ted" the other. Oh well. Usually view these on my iPad, I needed a computer to truly analyze. Turns out I nerd-sniped myself, LOL! - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.191|198.41.235.191]] 00:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Seems to me that Harry/Sally are outliers here. Every other pair is exclusively, or by far most commonly, known by the same regular pairing format of "A&B," but Harry/Sally are not most often named as a duo, as 'Harry & Sally,' but through the movie's title, "When Harry Met Sally." When I saw 'Sally' in my first read-through, I instantly wondered "Who's the X in 'X & Sally?" (Having already managed to forget 'When Harry Met' above.) The only 'A&B format' pairing which I could casually dredge up with a 'Sally' was "Sally Rand And Her Magic Fan," a risqué 1930's-40's burlesque performance in which a seemingly near-nude Ms. Rand held & used large ostrich feather fans as strategic cover, thereby teasing the audience. However, in that instance not only was Sally's A&B 'partner' an inanimate object (& thus not quite a "duo"), Sally was the pair's 'A,' while the comic's pattern requires her to be the second, 'B' name. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 18:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)</div>162.158.152.95