https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Tromag&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T13:44:19ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2910:_The_Wreck_of_the_Edmund_Fitzgerald&diff=3381032910: The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald2024-03-25T13:49:28Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2910<br />
| date = March 22, 2024<br />
| title = The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald<br />
| image = the_wreck_of_the_edmund_fitzgerald_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 463x672px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = You know that asteroid that almost destroyed Earth in the 90s? Turns out the whole thing was secretly created by Michael Bay, who then PAID Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck to look heroic while blowing it up!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by ONE OF THE FBI'S MOST WANTED, FOR CRIMES AGAINST SHIPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
The comic features [[Cueball]] performing a {{w|narrative song}}, which parodies {{w|Gordon Lightfoot}}'s song '{{w|The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald|The Wreck of the ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}' This song, which was one of the most recognizable and successful of Lightfoot's career, recounts the fate of the {{w|SS Edmund Fitzgerald|SS ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}, a {{w|Great Lakes}} freighter which famously sank during a storm on {{w|Lake Superior}}, resulting in the deaths of the entire crew. <br />
<br />
A real song, {{w|Back Home in Derry}}, was written by Irish author and activist {{w|Bobby Sands}} and sung by {{w|Christy Moore}} using substantially the same tune as Lightfoot's original.<br />
<br />
Cueball's song begins with lyrics based on the original song (though heavily modified), but quickly shifts into a (completely fictional) account of Lightfoot deciding bribe a mechanic to sabotage the ship, implicitly causing the disaster for the purpose of writing a song about it. <br />
<br />
In real life, the cause of the ship sinking remains unknown, but it's speculated that the ship's hull broke up in the rough waters of a storm.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIg90sVSwSE] Lightfoot wasn't involved with the ship at all, and devoted considerable time, effort, and money to the families of the disaster's victims.[https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/the-ship-sank-all-over-again-families-of-victims-in-wreck-recall-gordon-lightfoot/article_8cb6b84d-5576-5344-ba20-d5b06e3370d9.html] In addition, while the parody presents Lightfoot as desperate for a career-making song, he was already internationally famous, with multiple hits, when the wreck occurred. <br />
<br />
As a punchline, the verse goes on to claim that an greater maritime disaster, the {{w|Sinking of the Titanic|sinking of the RMS ''Titanic''}}, was somehow caused by director {{w|James Cameron}}, implying that he did so in order to make a {{w|Titanic (1997 film)|film about it}}. While the tale of Lightfoot causing the first disaster is theoretically feasible (the song came out only a few months after the accident), the second tale clearly is not. The ''Titanic'' sank in 1912, 85 years before the film was made, and over 40 years before Cameron was even born.<br />
<br />
The title text continues this particular cycle by suggesting that an even bigger potential disaster was orchestrated {{tvtropes|RecycledInSpace|in space}}, as the real life basis for yet another film, ''{{w|Armageddon (1998 film)|Armageddon}}''.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Cueball is holding a guitar and singing on a pier. Two pairs of connected eighth notes are on the left and right of Cueball, as well as a detached eighth note on his right. Three seagulls fly in the background on his left. Four pillars of the pier and the water below it are also shown. Throughout the comic, alternate pairs of lines of the song are indented as indicated below.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:The ship was the pride<br />
:of the American side<br />
::It was due to set<br />
::sail for Cleveland<br />
:As the big freighters go,<br />
:it was bigger than most<br />
::With a crew and good<br />
::captain well seasoned<br />
<br />
:[Zoom on Cueball, without the pier, water, and seagulls. A pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a half note and a detached eighth note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:But taking a walk on<br />
:the shore by the dock<br />
::Was a songwriter named<br />
::Gordon Lightfoot<br />
:He was humming a tune<br />
:but it didn't have words<br />
::For it's challenging<br />
::trying to write good<br />
<br />
:[Close-up on Cueball's face. A quarter note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a detached eighth note and a quarter note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Poor Gordon sought glory<br />
:but needed a story<br />
::His career in folk<br />
::music imperiled<br />
:He mulled over this as<br />
:he watched them do work<br />
::On the hull of the<br />
::''Edmund Fitzgerald''<br />
<br />
:[Zoom back to second panel. A pair of connected eighth notes to Cueball's right, a separated eighth note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Perhaps it was wrong,<br />
:what he did for a song<br />
::He should never have<br />
::bribed that mechanic<br />
:But his maritime crimes<br />
:are no worse than the time<br />
::Young James Cameron<br />
::sank the ''Titanic''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]<br />
[[Category:Songs]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2910:_The_Wreck_of_the_Edmund_Fitzgerald&diff=3381012910: The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald2024-03-25T13:46:51Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2910<br />
| date = March 22, 2024<br />
| title = The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald<br />
| image = the_wreck_of_the_edmund_fitzgerald_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 463x672px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = You know that asteroid that almost destroyed Earth in the 90s? Turns out the whole thing was secretly created by Michael Bay, who then PAID Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck to look heroic while blowing it up!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by ONE OF THE FBI'S MOST WANTED, FOR CRIMES AGAINST SHIPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
The comic features [[Cueball]] performing a {{w|narrative song}}, which parodies {{w|Gordon Lightfoot}}'s song '{{w|The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald|The Wreck of the ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}' This song, which was one of the most recognizable and successful of Lightfoot's career, recounts the fate of the {{w|SS Edmund Fitzgerald|SS ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}, a {{w|Great Lakes}} freighter which famously sank during a storm on {{w|Lake Superior}}, resulting in the deaths of the entire crew. <br />
<br />
Cueball's song begins with lyrics based on the original song (though heavily modified), but quickly shifts into a (completely fictional) account of Lightfoot deciding bribe a a mechanic to sabotage the ship, implicitly causing the disaster for the purpose of writing a song about it. <br />
<br />
In real life, the cause of the ship sinking remains unknown, but it's speculated that the ship's hull broke up in the rough waters of a storm.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIg90sVSwSE] Lightfoot wasn't involved with the ship at all, and devoted considerable time, effort, and money to the families of the disaster's victims.[https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/the-ship-sank-all-over-again-families-of-victims-in-wreck-recall-gordon-lightfoot/article_8cb6b84d-5576-5344-ba20-d5b06e3370d9.html] In addition, while the parody presents Lightfoot as desperate for a career-making song, he was already internationally famous, with multiple hits, when the wreck occurred. <br />
<br />
As a punchline, the verse goes on to "reveal" that another even greater maritime disaster, the {{w|Sinking of the Titanic|sinking of the RMS ''Titanic''}}, was caused by director {{w|James Cameron}} implying that he did so in order to make a {{w|Titanic (1997 film)|film about it}}. While the tale of Lightfoot causing the first disaster is theoretically feasible (the song came out only a few months after the accident), the second tale clearly is not. The ''Titanic'' sank in 1912, 85 years before the film was made, and over 40 years before Cameron was even born.<br />
<br />
The title text continues this particular cycle by suggesting that an even bigger potential disaster was orchestrated {{tvtropes|RecycledInSpace|in space}}, as the real life basis for yet another film, ''{{w|Armageddon (1998 film)|Armageddon}}''.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Cueball is holding a guitar and singing on a pier. Two pairs of connected eighth notes are on the left and right of Cueball, as well as a detached eighth note on his right. Three seagulls fly in the background on his left. Four pillars of the pier and the water below it are also shown. Throughout the comic, alternate pairs of lines of the song are indented as indicated below.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:The ship was the pride<br />
:of the American side<br />
::It was due to set<br />
::sail for Cleveland<br />
:As the big freighters go,<br />
:it was bigger than most<br />
::With a crew and good<br />
::captain well seasoned<br />
<br />
:[Zoom on Cueball, without the pier, water, and seagulls. A pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a half note and a detached eighth note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:But taking a walk on<br />
:the shore by the dock<br />
::Was a songwriter named<br />
::Gordon Lightfoot<br />
:He was humming a tune<br />
:but it didn't have words<br />
::For it's challenging<br />
::trying to write good<br />
<br />
:[Close-up on Cueball's face. A quarter note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a detached eighth note and a quarter note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Poor Gordon sought glory<br />
:but needed a story<br />
::His career in folk<br />
::music imperiled<br />
:He mulled over this as<br />
:he watched them do work<br />
::On the hull of the<br />
::''Edmund Fitzgerald''<br />
<br />
:[Zoom back to second panel. A pair of connected eighth notes to Cueball's right, a separated eighth note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Perhaps it was wrong,<br />
:what he did for a song<br />
::He should never have<br />
::bribed that mechanic<br />
:But his maritime crimes<br />
:are no worse than the time<br />
::Young James Cameron<br />
::sank the ''Titanic''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]<br />
[[Category:Songs]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2910:_The_Wreck_of_the_Edmund_Fitzgerald&diff=3381002910: The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald2024-03-25T13:45:32Z<p>Tromag: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2910<br />
| date = March 22, 2024<br />
| title = The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald<br />
| image = the_wreck_of_the_edmund_fitzgerald_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 463x672px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = You know that asteroid that almost destroyed Earth in the 90s? Turns out the whole thing was secretly created by Michael Bay, who then PAID Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck to look heroic while blowing it up!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by ONE OF THE FBI'S MOST WANTED, FOR CRIMES AGAINST SHIPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
The comic features [[Cueball]] performing a {{w|narrative song}}, which parodies {{w|Gordon Lightfoot}}'s song '{{w|The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald|The Wreck of the ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}' This song, which was one of the most recognizable and successful of Lightfoot's career, recounts the fate of the {{w|SS Edmund Fitzgerald|SS ''Edmund Fitzgerald''}}, a {{w|Great Lakes}} freighter which famously sank during a storm on {{w|Lake Superior}}, resulting in the deaths of the entire crew. <br />
<br />
Cueball's song begins with lyrics based on the original song (though heavily modified), but quickly shifts into a (completely fictional) account of Lightfoot deciding bribe a a mechanic to sabotage the ship, implicitly causing the disaster for the purpose of writing a song about it. <br />
<br />
In real life, the reason for sinking on {{w|Lake Superior}} is still unknown, but it's speculated that the ship's hull broke up in the rough waters of a storm.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIg90sVSwSE] Lightfoot wasn't involved with the ship at all, and devoted considerable time, effort, and money to the families of the disaster's victims.[https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/the-ship-sank-all-over-again-families-of-victims-in-wreck-recall-gordon-lightfoot/article_8cb6b84d-5576-5344-ba20-d5b06e3370d9.html] In addition, while the parody presents Lightfoot as desperate for a career-making song, he was already internationally famous, with multiple hits, when the wreck occurred. <br />
<br />
As a punchline, the verse goes on to "reveal" that another even greater maritime disaster, the {{w|Sinking of the Titanic|sinking of the RMS ''Titanic''}}, was caused by director {{w|James Cameron}} implying that he did so in order to make a {{w|Titanic (1997 film)|film about it}}. While the tale of Lightfoot causing the first disaster is theoretically feasible (the song came out only a few months after the accident), the second tale clearly is not. The ''Titanic'' sank in 1912, 85 years before the film was made, and over 40 years before Cameron was even born.<br />
<br />
The title text continues this particular cycle by suggesting that an even bigger potential disaster was orchestrated {{tvtropes|RecycledInSpace|in space}}, as the real life basis for yet another film, ''{{w|Armageddon (1998 film)|Armageddon}}''.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Cueball is holding a guitar and singing on a pier. Two pairs of connected eighth notes are on the left and right of Cueball, as well as a detached eighth note on his right. Three seagulls fly in the background on his left. Four pillars of the pier and the water below it are also shown. Throughout the comic, alternate pairs of lines of the song are indented as indicated below.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:The ship was the pride<br />
:of the American side<br />
::It was due to set<br />
::sail for Cleveland<br />
:As the big freighters go,<br />
:it was bigger than most<br />
::With a crew and good<br />
::captain well seasoned<br />
<br />
:[Zoom on Cueball, without the pier, water, and seagulls. A pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a half note and a detached eighth note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:But taking a walk on<br />
:the shore by the dock<br />
::Was a songwriter named<br />
::Gordon Lightfoot<br />
:He was humming a tune<br />
:but it didn't have words<br />
::For it's challenging<br />
::trying to write good<br />
<br />
:[Close-up on Cueball's face. A quarter note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his right, a detached eighth note and a quarter note to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Poor Gordon sought glory<br />
:but needed a story<br />
::His career in folk<br />
::music imperiled<br />
:He mulled over this as<br />
:he watched them do work<br />
::On the hull of the<br />
::''Edmund Fitzgerald''<br />
<br />
:[Zoom back to second panel. A pair of connected eighth notes to Cueball's right, a separated eighth note and a pair of connected eighth notes to his left.]<br />
:Cueball:<br />
:Perhaps it was wrong,<br />
:what he did for a song<br />
::He should never have<br />
::bribed that mechanic<br />
:But his maritime crimes<br />
:are no worse than the time<br />
::Young James Cameron<br />
::sank the ''Titanic''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]<br />
[[Category:Songs]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2901:_Geographic_Qualifiers&diff=3365252901: Geographic Qualifiers2024-03-04T14:39:51Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2901<br />
| date = March 1, 2024<br />
| title = Geographic Qualifiers<br />
| image = geographic_qualifiers_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 435x386px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = 'Thank you for the loveliest evening I've ever had...' [normal] '...east of the Mississippi.' [instant intrigue!]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT EAST OF THE INTERNATIONAL DATE-LINE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
In this comic, [[Cueball]] is bragging to a [[:Category:Multiple Cueballs|Cueball-like guy]] in front of a giant statue of a {{w|squirrel}} standing on a skateboard. Cueball states that this is the largest statue of that theme in “the {{w|Northern Hemisphere}}”. The other guy then becomes confused, as he realizes that this seems to imply the existence of a taller one in the {{w|Southern Hemisphere}} (not to mention the existence of one or more smaller ones in the Northern Hemisphere). A skateboarding squirrel is a peculiar enough subject that to find one example of such a statue would be a surprise, and to learn that there is at least one other would be even more surprising.<br />
<br />
He quickly considers different countries in that hemisphere, {{w|Brazil}}, {{w|South Africa}} and {{w|Australia}}. Native squirrel species are found in both {{w|Sciurus ingrami|Brazil}} and {{w|Smith's bush squirrel|South Africa}}, and the local people might plausibly choose to erect statues to them. Australia, however, has no native squirrels, and introduced populations of {{w|Eastern gray squirrel|gray}} and {{w|Northern palm squirrel|palm squirrels}} [https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/palm-squirrel reportedly] have been eradicated, at considerable expense of time and money. "Confused Cueball" wonders whether Australians would know or care enough about squirrels to erect statues to them. It so happens, though, that many animals (and many entirely fictional ones) are depicted as statues in countries where they are not native, Australia is known for its many {{w|Big things (Australia)|overly large statues}}, and 1.5 m (5 foot) tall [https://natureworks.com.au/products/animals/mammals/farm-forest-animals/giant-wirral-the-enormous-squirrel-statue/ squirrel statues] are already sold there. So the existence of squirrel statues in the Southern Hemisphere that are larger than the one Cueball is bragging about is not out of the question - but the comic doesn't permit "confused Cueball" the half hour he'd need to drag out his phone and look up all these factoids. The question about whether, and how many, of these putative squirrel statues are mounted on a skateboard is separate, although there is nothing in the urban cultures of the places named to preclude this possibility.<br />
<br />
It's entirely possible that this qualifier is unnecessary. If the statue were the largest of its kind in the world, or even the only one in the world (which is a distinct possibility, given the very specific nature of the statue), the description would still be true. Sometimes qualifiers are added simply due to incomplete information. They've exhaustively surveyed skateboarding squirrel statues in the Northern Hemisphere and determined that this one is the largest, but since they haven't searched the Southern Hemisphere, they don't want to commit to it being the largest in the world. On the other hand, it's clearly possible that he deliberately added a needless qualifier, specifically to create the implication of larger skateboarding squirrel statues. [[Randall]] states, in the caption, that he loves the mystery that such qualifiers create. Doing so could thus have been one of Randall's [[:Category:My Hobby|hobbies]], but he doesn't make that explicit. <br />
<br />
Another example appears in the title text, where Randall uses the other example qualifier given in the caption. Here someone is expressing gratitude at the end of a date, saying that it's the loveliest evening they've ever had. This seems normal until they add the location qualifier of "East of the {{w|Mississippi River|Mississippi}}" (the river). This leaves the companion wondering what kind of great evening they had in some other location. In this case, it's unlikely that the speaker would have incomplete information about their own dating history.<br />
<br />
The statue may be a reference to [https://www.worldrecordacademy.org/2022/06/worlds-largest-squirrel-sculpture-cedar-creek-texas-sets-world-record-422206 Ms. Pearl], the giant squirrel statue in {{w|Cedar Creek, Texas}} which, at 14 ft (4 m) was indeed the largest squirrel statue in the western hemisphere in 2018. The qualifiers, in this case, ''are'' necessary since a [https://www.new-east-archive.org/articles/show/10477/a-giant-squirrel-has-taken-over-almat|temporary 40 ft (12 m) statue] was erected in {{w|Kazakhstan}} in 2018. But information for tourists in Cedar Creek, Texas, doesn't tend to include this information{{Actual citation needed}} creating the mystique. The artist behind the Kazakhstan statue appears to have been unaware of the Cedar Creek statue so the Kazakh statue is ''not'' intentionally close to three times bigger.<br />
<br />
It is perhaps thanks only to the specific phrasing "tallest statue of a skateboarding squirrel" that we need not consider tallest-statues-of-squirrels (temporarily) placed on skateboards, tallest statuesque skateboards with squirrels atop or even a rather modestly sized statuette representing a moment when [https://bigthings.vroomvroomvroom.com/listing/worlds-largest-skateboard/ a large skateboard] had sciurine visitors. In any or all hemispheres.<br />
<br />
In [[1368: One Of The]], the use of the unnecessary qualifier "one of the" was portrayed as one of Randall's [[:Category:Pet Peeves|Pet Peeves]], with a reporter describing the {{w|Gateway Arch}} as "one of the most recognizable arches in St. Louis", when it could have been described as "the most recognizable arch" in the city.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[The scene in this comic is shown from afar and drawn in black silhouette on a white background. It depicts a huge statue of a squirrel standing on a skateboard, which is on a pedestal. Below and in front of the statue there are two Cueball-like guys. The Cueball on the left is pointing at the statue and speaking to his friend on the right who has a thought bubble above him.]<br />
:Cueball: At over 40 feet, it's the tallest statue of a skateboarding squirrel in the Northern Hemisphere.<br />
:Friend [thinking]: ...Wait, who in the heck...Brazil? South Africa? Australia? Squirrels aren't even native there...<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:I love the instant mystery created by qualifiers like "east of the Mississippi" or "in the Northern Hemisphere."<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]<br />
[[Category:Squirrels]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2899:_Goodhart%27s_Law&diff=3360562899: Goodhart's Law2024-02-28T16:21:11Z<p>Tromag: /* Additional examples of Goodhart's Law */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2899<br />
| date = February 26, 2024<br />
| title = Goodhart's Law<br />
| image = goodharts_law_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 295x321px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = [later] I'm pleased to report we're now identifying and replacing hundreds of outdated metrics per hour.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
In this comic, [[White Hat]] suggests creating a meta-metric, "number-of-metrics-that-have-become-targets," and making it a target.<br />
<br />
First, the comic introduces and defines {{w|Goodhart's Law}}, which is the observation that when a metric — a {{w|performance indicator|measure of performance}} — becomes a goal, efforts will be unhelpfully directed to improving that ''metric'' at the expense of systemic objectives. <br />
<br />
For example, imagine a scenario in which a car dealership is looking to grow profits, and its managers decide to focus on increasing a component metric of profit: how many cars it sells. So they offer a bonus to their salespeople to sell more cars. But then the salespeople offer deep discounts to rack up sales, rendering the car sales unprofitable. This example shows how a ''metric'' (cars sold) can become the ''target'', replacing the real target, profit growth, if individual incentives are not properly managed.<br />
<br />
White Hat's suggestion could be a good or a bad idea. It all depends on how the bonus incentive is awarded:<br />
<br />
* A '''well-designed implementation''' would award bonuses only for finding metrics which truly aren't serving their purpose, so the organization's managers could fix the measurement issues (assuming the fix isn't worse than the status quo). If submissions are in good faith, bonuses are awarded only for approved submissions, and the identifications result in real improvements, the organization will likely be better off.<br />
<br />
* A '''poorly-designed implementation''' would offer a bonus to every identification, regardless of quality. This would incentivize the identification of even quite useful metrics — and perhaps even the ''creation'' of new metrics-as-targets for the sole purpose of then removing them and collecting the bounty.<br />
<br />
The title text imagines this '''poorly-designed implementation''', leading to the creation of a new metric (metric changes per hour) and the organization identifying — and ''replacing'' — hundreds of metrics per hour, crowding out actual focus on the organization's true goals. It's the ultimate example of "change for change's sake." <br />
<br />
Part of the joke is that White Hat's original suggestion — the new metric causing the issue and one that ''should'' be replaced — seems to be ironically surviving the replacement of hundreds of other metrics. <br />
<br />
This comic illustrates that the thoughtless combination of Goodhart's Law and poorly designed incentives can have ruinous results for an organization.<br />
<br />
The proper usage of organizational metrics and incentives is the focus of {{w|managerial accounting}}, a field within organizational management.<br />
<br />
===Discussion of the promises and perils of operational measurement===<br />
While there is a temptation to game any metric, measurement is the main objective way of describing the success of an activity and assessing the effect of changes. "Data-driven" or "evidence-based" approaches are used to drive measurable improvements in various areas of society. <br />
<br />
Discussions of Goodhart's Law have noted [https://commoncog.com/goodharts-law-not-useful/] that people may respond to a metric by either (1) improving the system, (2) distorting that system (examples below), or (3) distorting the data (e.g., governments publishing false or cherry-picked economic data). Channeling energy toward improvement requires an organization to make (1) more appealing (flexibility and culture) and the others less (transparency, culture, reduced pressure to meet unrealistic goals). Figuring out how to do that involves a slow and thoughtful process unlike White Hat's unilateral jump to a new metric.<br />
<br />
===Additional examples of Goodhart's Law===<br />
* The classical example of Goodhart's Law is the {{w|Perverse_incentive#The_original_cobra_effect|Cobra Effect}}: anecdotally the British rule in India paid bounties for dead cobras as a pest control effort. People quickly realized that more cobras allowed them to harvest more for the bounty, and began actively breeding cobras.<br />
* School test scores are intended as a metric for how well a school is teaching its students. When that becomes an incentivized target, schools are forced to design their curriculum around the exams, which can create a more rigid system which fails to engage students and teachers. In extreme cases, this can motivate decisions to remove underperforming students from school districts, or encourage teachers to allow or even facilitate cheating. <br />
* A hospital measures inpatient ''Length of Stay'' because shorter stays save money and free up beds for other patients. But this metric, on its own, may encourage doctors to discharge patients too soon. This not only puts patients at risk, but can also result in costly re-admissions. <br />
* A call center measures the number of calls handled per hour as a measure of worker productivity. This can drive workers to rush through calls, terminating them as quickly as possible, which can lead to short, frustrating interactions.<br />
* The hypothetical {{w|Instrumental convergence#Paperclip maximizer|Paperclip Maximizer}} concept demonstrates how having a seemingly benign metric as a goal might still result in almost unlimited adverse effects, if unchecked.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball and White Hat are standing and talking, White Hat with hand on his chin.]<br />
:Cueball: When a metric becomes a target, it ceases to be a good metric.<br />
:White Hat: Sounds bad. Let's offer a bonus to anyone who identifies a metric that has become a target.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Statistics]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2897:_Light_Leap_Years&diff=3354572897: Light Leap Years2024-02-21T15:51:06Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2897<br />
| date = February 21, 2024<br />
| title = Light Leap Years<br />
| image = light_leap_years_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 288x389px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = When Pope Gregory XIII briefly shortened the light-year in 1582, it led to navigational chaos and the loss of several Papal starships.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a LIGHT LEAP SECOND - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
A {{w|light-year|light year}} is a length unit that is defined as how much light will travel in a vacuum during a year; however, the year used is the average {{w|Julian year (astronomy)|Julian year}}, or 365.25 days. In this comic, however, [[Randall]] works with the assumption that a light year is based on the length of the ''current'' year, which means that during leap years, it uses 366 days, and during non-leap years, it uses 365 days. That means that at the start and end of leap years, databases with astronomical distances have to be adjusted.<br />
<br />
2024 is a leap year in the {{w|Gregorian calendar}} used in most parts of the world.<br />
<br />
This comic portrays [[Cueball]] and [[Ponytail]] updating astronomical distances in some sort of database, noting how long and unpleasant the process is, the caption reveals that the reason is that leap years "make light-years 0.27% longer.<br />
<br />
A {{w|light year}} is a unit of distance, common used in astronomy, equivalent to the distance light travels in a vacuum in one year. The joke of this strip is based on the fact that "one year" isn't a precise unit of measurement, there are different definitions of what what constitute a year, which have evolved over time, and which vary among themselves. The Gregorian calendar (the most commonly used in modern times) includes a system of "leap years" in which an additional day is added every fourth year (with some exceptions) to make up for inconsistencies between day and year cycles. This temporarily changes the length of a year from 365 to 366 days, which could be taken to change the length of a light year.<br />
<br />
Standardized systems of measurement naturally don't change continually. As the comic points out, the difficulty in having to regularly update every reference to these units would be enormous and pointless. In real life, a light year is defined by the {{w|Julian Year}}, which is defined as 365.25 days, with each day being 86,400 SI seconds in length. This results in a light year which is standardized at 9,460,730,472,580.8 km, no matter how long the calendar year may be. <br />
<br />
The rollover text jokes that {{w|Pope Gregory XIII}}, the originator of the Gregorian calendar, "briefly shortened the light-year in 1582, which led to "navigational chaos and the loss of several papal starships". This, of course, is ludicrous, as there were no starships in the 16th century, there's never been a "papal starship", and the light-year wasn't developed as a unit of measurement until 1838. The joke is that the evolving and somewhat loose and changing definitions of early calendars had significant impacts on the units of measurement we still use today. Such changes were of only minor significance at the time, but as technology has advanced and become more reliant on precise and consistent measurements, such changes could be disastrous. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Cueball sitting at his laptop and leaning to the back of his office chair, while looking at Ponytail who is standing behind him.]<br />
:Cueball: It took until February, but I finally got all the distances updated!<br />
:Ponytail: I really wish we didn't have to do this.<br />
:[Laptop screen:]<br />
:<u>Proxima Centauri</u><br />
:Distance: [crossed over in red] <s>4.2493 ly</s><br />
:[in green] 4.2377 ly<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Time]]<br />
[[Category:Calendar]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2893:_Sphere_Tastiness&diff=3352982893: Sphere Tastiness2024-02-19T16:32:13Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2893<br />
| date = February 12, 2024<br />
| title = Sphere Tastiness<br />
| image = sphere_tastiness_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 388x392px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Baseballs do present a challenge to this theory, but I'm convinced we just haven't found the right seasoning.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a STRANGELY TASTY MOON MADE OF RUSSIAN PELMENI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
This comic graphs the tastiness vs. the size of four roughly spherical objects: {{w|melons}}, {{w|grapes}}, {{w|Earth|Earth}} and the {{w|Moon}}. Based on the the fact that melons and grapes are (in this context) relatively small and tasty to most people, and that planetary scale bodies are relatively large and made mostly of rocks and metals generally considered not remotely tasty,{{cn}} [[Randall]] postulates the existence of an intermediate body, one which is approximately 800 meters in diameter and "tastes okay".<br />
<br />
This is the second comic in a row to feature fruit, graphs and predictions (after [[2892: Banana Prices]]), and continues the theme of a logarithmic axis scale to facilitate plotting a linear regression. Here the line is interpolated between known data, rather than extrapolated beyond it. Such interpolation is quite common in scientific analysis, and is often useful, but this example clearly leads to a ludicrous conclusion. Using such ridiculous analyses to show the dangers of flawed and/or sloppy methodology is a common theme in xkcd.<br />
<br />
There are multiple ways in which this analysis is flawed, and therefore why the conclusion is unsupportable:<br />
* there are only four data points, which is insufficient to interpolate from.<br />
* these clusters represent entirely different sub-classes of spherical object (fruit vs. astronomical bodies) while other subclasses are not represented at all (the title text mentions this flaw).<br />
* as tight clusters of [[2533: Slope Hypothesis Testing|similarly sourced data]], it effectively reduces the data down to two useful data points. This also makes the choice of log-median interpolation unjustified.<br />
* the 'tastiness' scale has no indication of what assessment (subjective or objective) it records. Nor does it even have graduations, making it unknown if the graph is linear-log or log-log (or otherwise), changing the implied meaning behind the choice of straight-line interpolation.<br />
* according to astronaut John Young, who visited the Moon's surface during the Apollo 16 mission, [https://phys.org/news/2006-02-mysterious-moondust.html "moondust doesn't taste half bad"]. (Although other Apollo astronauts likened its smell and taste to burnt gunpowder, so make of that what you will.)<br />
<br />
The title text points out that {{w|baseball (ball)|baseballs}} seem to refute this theory since they're not usually thought of as tasty, but they're between the sizes of grapes and melons, which would place them in the bottom left of the graph, way off the fit line. Baseballs are typically made of a combination of a rubber or cork center wrapped in yarn, and covered by either horsehide, cowhide or synthetic leather. In point of fact, there are many, many common round objects that completely fail to conform to this graph, but rather than acknowledge that this analysis is fatally flawed, Randall uses {{w|special pleading}} to justify its exclusion from the graph, suggesting that the problem is that we lack "the right seasonings". While seasonings can improve the taste of foods, it's implausible that the inedible components of baseballs would be rendered "tasty" with any conceivable combination of seasonings. Even if they could, there's no evidence that such would give them the proper level of 'tastiness' to conform to the graph. This argument lampoons the use of "cherry picking" and motivated reasoning, in which researchers include only data points which fit their hypothesis and make up reasons to exclude those which don't. This is obviously very poor science, but less exaggerated versions are all too common in scientific studies. <br />
<br />
The comic refers to this plot as research. This is an exaggeration, since two clusters of paired points are rarely considered sufficient for research purposes. But plotting a justifiably sufficient quantity of data points on a logarithmic plot, and then drawing a line through them, is a common way to visualize an actual exponential relationship more comprehensibly. An example of that is the {{w|Gutenberg–Richter law}} where the magnitude of earthquakes (an intrinsically logarithmic scale) in a particular region is plotted together with the frequency of occurrence, typically resulting in a statistically significant straight line.<br />
<br />
Other fruit opinions have previously been mentioned in [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]], but it is unknown what the line would be like if Randall included grapefruit.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[Graph with Y axis using an arrow indicating tastiness from "Not Tasty" to "Tasty" and X axis labeled "Sphere Diameter (meters)" with a logarithmic scale running from 10<sup>-5</sup> to around 10<sup>8</sup> (with 10<sup>-3</sup>, 10<sup>0</sup>, 10<sup>3</sup> and 10<sup>6</sup> labeled).]<br />
<br />
:[The graph contains two points for "Grapes" and "Melons" at the "Tasty" end of the Y axis, between 10<sup>-2</sup> and 10<sup>-1</sup> meters, and two points for "The Earth" and "The Moon" at the "Not Tasty" end, both around 10<sup>7</sup> meters. A straight dashed line shows a linear interpolation between the points. There's a circle with a question mark about halfway between them.]<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
: My research suggests the existence of an 800-meter sphere that tastes okay.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Food]]<br />
[[Category:Astronomy]]<br />
[[Category:Baseball]]<br />
[[Category:Extrapolation]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2893:_Sphere_Tastiness&diff=3350002893: Sphere Tastiness2024-02-13T16:58:54Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2893<br />
| date = February 12, 2024<br />
| title = Sphere Tastiness<br />
| image = sphere_tastiness_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 388x392px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Baseballs do present a challenge to this theory, but I'm convinced we just haven't found the right seasoning.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a STRANGELY TASTY MOON MADE OF RUSSIAN PELMENI - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
This comic graphs the tastiness vs. size of four roughly spherical objects: {{w|melons}}, {{w|grapes}}, {{w|Earth|Earth}} and the {{w|Moon}}. Based on the the fact that melons and grapes are (in this context) relatively small and tasty to most people, and that planetary scale bodies are relatively large and made of rocks and metals (therefore not being remotely tasty), [[Randall]] postulates the existence of an intermediate body, one which is approximately 800 meters in diameter and "tastes okay".<br />
<br />
This is the second comic in a row to feature fruit, graphs and predictions, and continues the theme of a logarithmic axial scale to facilitate plotting a linear regression. Here the line is interpolated between known data, rather than extrapolated beyond it. Such interpolation is quite common in scientific analysis, and is often useful, but this example clearly leads to a ludicrous conclusion. Using such ridiculous analyses to show the dangers of flawed and/or sloppy methodology is a common theme in XKCD.<br />
<br />
There are multiple ways in which this analysis is flawed, and therefore why the conclusion is unsupportable:<br />
* there are only four data points, which is insufficient to extrapolate from.<br />
* these clusters represent entirely different sub-classes of spherical object (fruit vs. astronomical bodies) while other subclasses are not represented at all (the title text mentions this flaw).<br />
* as tight clusters of [[2533: Slope Hypothesis Testing|similarly sourced data]], it effectively reduces it down to two useful data points. This also makes the choice of log-median interpolation unjustified.<br />
* the 'tastiness' scale has no indication of what assessment (subjective or objective) it records. Nor does it even have graduations, making it unknown if the graph is linear-log or log-log (or otherwise), changing the implied meaning behind the choice of straight-line interpolation.<br />
<br />
The title text points out that {{w|baseball (ball)|baseballs}} seem to refute this theory since they're not usually thought of as tasty, but they're between the sizes of grapes and melons, which would place them in the bottom left of the graph, way off the fit line. Baseballs are typically made of a combination of a rubber or cork center wrapped in yarn, and covered by either horsehide, cowhide or synthetic leather. In point of fact, there are many, many common round objects that completely fail to conform to this graph, but rather than acknowledge that this analysis is fatally flawed, Randall suggests that the problem is that we lack "the right seasonings". While seasonings can improve the taste of foods, it's implausible that the inedible components of baseballs would be rendered "tasty" with any conceivable combination of seasonings. This argument lampoons the use of "cherry picking" and motivated reasoning, which researchers include only data points which fit their hypothesis, and make up reasons to exclude those which don't. This is obviously very poor science, but less exaggerated versions are all too common in scientific studies. <br />
<br />
The comic refers to this plot as research. This is an exaggeration, since two clusters of paired points are rarely considered sufficient for research purposes. But plotting a justifiably sufficient quantity of data points on a logarithmic plot, and then drawing a line through them, is a common way to visualize an actual exponential relationship more comprehensibly. An example of that is the {{w|Gutenberg–Richter law}} where the magnitude of earthquakes (an intrinsically logarithmic scale) in a particular region is plotted together with the frequency of occurance, typically resulting in a statistically significant straight line.<br />
<br />
Other fruit opinions have previously been mentioned in [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]], but it is unknown what the line would be like if Randall included grapefruit.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[Graph with Y axis using an arrow indicating tastiness from "Not Tasty" to "Tasty" and X axis labelled "Sphere Diameter (meters)" with a logarithmic scale running from 10<sup>-5</sup> to around 10<sup>8</sup> (with 10<sup>-3</sup>, 10<sup>0</sup>, 10<sup>3</sup> and 10<sup>6</sup> labelled).]<br />
<br />
:[The graph contains two points for "Grapes" and "Melons" at the "Tasty" end of the Y axis, between 10<sup>-2</sup> and 10<sup>-1</sup> meters, and two points for "The Earth" and "The Moon" at the "Not Tasty" end, both around 10<sup>7</sup> meters. A straight dashed line shows a linear interpolation between the points. There's a circle with a question mark about halfway between them.]<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
: My research suggests the existence of an 800-meter sphere that tastes okay.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Food]]<br />
[[Category:Astronomy]]<br />
[[Category:Baseball]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2892:_Banana_Prices&diff=3348752892: Banana Prices2024-02-12T17:00:39Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2892<br />
| date = February 9, 2024<br />
| title = Banana Prices<br />
| image = banana_prices_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 564x378px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = It's a linear extrapolation, Michael. How big could the error be? 10%?<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a MANDALORIAN BANANA ARMORER - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}<br />
<br />
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl_Qyk9DSUw ‘It’s one banana, Michael. What could it cost, $10?'] is a line from an {{w|Arrested Development}} episode (Season 1, Episode 6, "Charity Drive", 2003) that became a well-known meme used to mock out-of-touch elites. The character who spoke this line (Lucille Bluth, a wealthy socialite) made a satirically high estimate for the price of a banana because she had never bought her own groceries. The implication is that she sees $10 as a trivially small amount of money, and has trouble conceiving of anything that costs less. According to the graph, the banana price at the time of that episode was actually just under 25 cents, and the price at the time of this comic’s publication (2024) is around 30 cents.<br />
<br />
It's common for fictional works to avoid mentioning actual prices or amounts of money. One of the reasons for this is that presenting an actual amount risks the work becoming dated by inflation. A price that's presented as surprisingly high can lose its impact as the value of money changes, making it difficult for a punchline or a dramatic moment to land. In this case, however, the number is so exaggerated (being around 40 times higher than the actual price of a banana), that it's unlikely for inflation to impact the joke in the immediate future. Twenty years after the episode first aired, the joke works just as well as it did. Randall attempts to put specific values on this, extrapolating when bananas are likely to sell for $10 apiece using three different models: (1) the general inflation rate (a value dominated by the cost of housing), (2) the inflation rate for fresh fruit, and (3) 45 years of historic banana prices. Those models present the joke becoming reality around 2140, 2170 and 2250, respectively. Hence, even under the most aggressive of these models, we can expect the joke to make sense for another century (under the slowest model, it appears closer to two centuries). <br />
<br />
The reference to "BLS/St. Louis FRED" refers to The {{w|Bureau of Labor Statistics}} and {{w|St. Louis Fed Financial Stress Index|St Louis FRED}}, widely respected sources of economic data. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis maintains the FRED database; FRED stands for Federal Reserve Economic Data.<br />
<br />
The title text continues the ignorant tone of Lucille Bluth to satirically guess an error less than 10%. The humor is that the three predictions themselves (from 115 years to 220 years) differ wildly, which emphasizes the point that any economic extrapolation into the distant future is at most an educated guess, with an expected error far in excess of 10%. Expecting such small errors in such speculative projections is just as clueless as expecting individual bananas to cost so much. <br />
<br />
It’s not typical to plot commodity prices on a log-scale, but maybe Randall did this to allow himself to make this subtle “linear extrapolation” joke.<br />
<br />
This comic uses several common xkcd themes:<br />
* '''Log scales''' and their peculiarities are a recurring xkcd theme, and this is the second comic in a row to play with logarithms (the prior one being [[2891: Log Cabin]]). <br />
* It's also the second comic in the last four to involve '''predictions across centuries''' (i.e. [[2889: Greenhouse Effect]]). <br />
* Another '''extrapolation''' comic includes [[605: Extrapolating]]. And this comic looks a lot like [[1007: Sustainable]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[A graph with the x-axis showing time, from the years 1950 to around 2275. The y-axis is a log scale showing the price of a banana from $0.10 to over $10.00. A label called "Price of a banana (BLS/St. Louis ''Fred''[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/])" show a rising trend in the price of a banana. There are two dots on that trend. One is labeled "Episode airs" and the other one "Now". 3 extrapolations shown as dashed lines labeled "General inflation rate", "Fresh fruit price trend" and "Banana price trend" extend until reaching the $10 mark, indicated by 3 dots.]<br />
<br />
:[Caption above the graph:] "It's one banana, Michael. What could it cost? $10?"<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:] That line probably has another century or so left.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Line graphs]]<br />
[[Category:Timelines]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]]<br />
[[Category:Extrapolation]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2890:_Relationship_Advice&diff=3343682890: Relationship Advice2024-02-06T18:31:45Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2890<br />
| date = February 5, 2024<br />
| title = Relationship Advice<br />
| image = relationship_advice_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x241px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Good to be a little wary of advice that sounds too much like a self pep talk.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a RELATIONSHIP WITH A JOB IN THE FINE ARTS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
In this comic, [[White Hat]], [[Cueball]], and [[Ponytail]] can be seen having a conversation about relationships. White Hat expresses the opinion that "relationships aren't easy". The others accept this advice, which is generally accepted as a reasonable view: two people are always going to have at least some difference in opinions, desires and needs that need to be communicated, negotiated and worked out. This requires mutual effort and some level of compromise in any healthy and successful relationship. <br />
<br />
In the subsequent frames, however, White Hat continues to push the matter, describing relationships in increasingly unpleasant terms, starting with calling them "constant work" and ultimately calling it a "crushing burden". Cueball and Ponytail correspondingly agree with him less, and instead begin to worry about him. <br />
<br />
White Hat's views on what is necessary and appropriate in relationships appear to go to unhealthy extremes. While his initial comments about relationships requiring efforts are reasonable, the notion that relationships consist of endless, overwhelming effort is not. Rather than representing a realistic and healthy viewpoint, it turns into a fairly disturbing view of what relationships require. Cueball and Ponytail appear to suspect that Cueball may be describing a relationship that he's currently in, and trying to rationalize an unhealthy situation by telling himself that "this is normal". <br />
<br />
When someone is in an abusive relationship, they may struggle to see that the relationship is abusive, often confusing genuinely destructive behavior with normal relationship troubles. There are various reasons this may occur, some people experience {{w|Traumatic bonding}}, some have spent so much time in or around unhealthy relationships that they've come to seem 'normal', some experience various forms of {{W|Codependence}}. For people in such situations, help from friends and/or professional counselors is often necessary to allow them to even identify the situation they're in, and particularly to separate themselves from the situation.<br />
<br />
Seeing Randall’s often negative thoughts on Valentine’s Day [https://xkcd.com/223/ 1] [https://xkcd.com/1016/ 2], it may not be a coincidence that this comic was released only 9 days before the holiday. <br />
<br />
The title text explains that advice which focuses on remaining upbeat in a bad situation (like a "pep talk"), should give others pause. There's a good chance that the person giving such advice is trying to convince themselves that their situation is alright, rather than providing useful guidance for others. In this comic, this sentiment is seemingly applied to White Hat, whose "relationship advice" may be much more personal than such advice should reasonably be, and the reader is thus warned to take advice like this with a grain of salt. This is similar to [[449: Things Fall Apart]] where Cueball tells Megan "I love you" repeatedly and Megan points out he's only saying it to reassure ''himself'' rather than express it to her.<br />
<br />
This comics title is reminiscent of [[Randall|Randall's]] [[:Category:Tips|Tips]] comics. Here though an advice rather than a tip, and thus not part of the tip category.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[White Hat, Cueball and Ponytail are walking. White Hat has his palm out.]<br />
:White Hat: What you have to remember is, relationships aren't easy.<br />
:Ponytail: Yeah, fair.<br />
<br />
:[Close-up of White Hat with his finger raised.] <br />
:White Hat: They're hard. They require constant work.<br />
:White Hat: A relationship is a job.<br />
:Off-panel voice: I guess...<br />
<br />
:[White Hat has stopped walking and is facing Cueball and Ponytail standing a bit further away.]<br />
:White Hat: It's a challenge that feels overwhelming. It's a crushing burden.<br />
:Cueball: Umm.<br />
<br />
:[White Hat has his arms raised while still facing Cueball and Ponytail.]<br />
:White Hat: A relationship is a grueling ordeal.<br />
:Cueball: ...Who are you trying to convince, exactly?<br />
:Ponytail: Yeah, are '''''you''''' okay?<br />
:White Hat: I'm '''''fine!''''' This is '''''normal!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Social interactions]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2889:_Greenhouse_Effect&diff=3343612889: Greenhouse Effect2024-02-06T18:06:09Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2889<br />
| date = February 2, 2024<br />
| title = Greenhouse Effect<br />
| image = greenhouse_effect_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x315px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Once he had the answer, Arrhenius complained to his friends that he'd "wasted over a full year" doing tedious calculations by hand about "so trifling a matter" as hypothetical CO2 concentrations in far-off eras (quoted in Crawford, 1997).<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by CREATING CRETACEOUS PARK - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
This comic has [[:Category:Climate change|climate change as its topic, a recurring theme]] on xkcd. There is no 'joke' <em>per se</em>, instead the comic represents a wry (and serious) observation on the timeline of climate change, and our understanding of it. The fact in question here is when science became aware of anthropogenic global warming and its primary cause.<br />
<br />
The comic depicts a timeline with three events:<br />
* The advent of the First {{w|Industrial Revolution}}. The comic dates this from the introduction of the {{w|Watt steam engine}} in 1776. This is arguably the event that most directly ushered in an explosion in the burning of fossil fuels that continues to this day.<br />
* [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Influence_of_Carbonic_Acid_in_the_Air_upon_the_Temperature_of_the_Ground The first quantitative prediction] of the {{w|greenhouse effect}} by {{w|Svante Arrhenius}} in January and April 1896 (that, a. o., an increase of CO<sub>2</sub> concentration by half would increase mean temperature over 3 °C). Arrhenius drew on and included a summary of {{w|Arvid Högbom}}'s 1894 Swedish article, which dealt with carbon cycle over geological periods and also first estimated annual global carbon emissions.<br />
* The present day, early 2024.<br />
<br />
As the comic's caption points out, less time elapsed between the start of the Industrial Revolution and the work by Arrhenius, than has elapsed since then. Moreover, some present-day climate discussions may cite [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x a 1957 paper by Revell and Seuss] as "the starting point" for modern inquiries into global warming. The comic notes "we figured out the greenhouse effect" 61 years prior; see both [https://folk.universitetetioslo.no/roberan/t/EarlyEstimates1.shtml Robbie 2018] and even longer {{w|History of climate change science}} which includes earlier, qualitative works.<br />
<br />
The implication, which is consistent with other [[:Category:Climate change|climate change themed xkcd comics]], is that humans have taken insufficient action to slow or stop global warming despite knowing about it for more than a century, and understanding, at least intellectually, the consequences of inaction.<br />
<br />
The title text portrays Arrhenius as dismissive of his work. A reading of the reference cited (page 8 in [https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/EPS281r/Sources/Greenhouse-effect/Arrhenius/3-optional-Crawford-1997.pdf Crawford 1997]: 'Writing to a friend at the end of [1895], he found it "unbelievable that so trifling a matter has cost me a full year".') suggests instead that Arrhenius was complaining about the unanticipated difficulty of answering what he thought initially was a simple question, about the historical (geological time) connection between carbon dioxide concentrations and global temperature. Per this reading, Arrhenius's complaint was about the work required to achieve the result, <em>not</em> about the significance of the result. His interpretation of the significance, though, differs from today's consensus (page 11 in Crawford 1997): "[Global warming will] allow our descendants, even if they only be those of a distant future, to live under a warmer sky and in a less harsh environment than we were granted".<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[At the top of the comic a timeline is shown as a long line. It has three dots, one at each end a bit inside the end of the line and one close to the middle Each dot has a gray curved line going up to it from below. Below the end of these lines a year is given. And beneath the year is a caption. Above the time line are two gray double arrows going from three gray lines above each of the three dots. The lines are broken in the middle where a label is written.]<br />
<br />
:[Label of arrow that spans from first to second dot:]<br />
:120 years<br />
<br />
:[Label of arrow that spans from second to third dot:]<br />
:128 years<br />
<br />
:[Label for the first dot:]<br />
:'''1776'''<br />
:James Watt develops a steam engine that helps kick off the Industrial Revolution<br />
<br />
:[Label for the second dot:]<br />
:'''1896'''<br />
:Arvid Högbom and Svante Arrhenius note that industrial activity is adding CO<sub>2</sub> to the atmosphere, and calculate how much the Earth will heat up if the CO<sub>2</sub> concentration doubles. Their answer closely matches modern estimates.<br />
<br />
:[Label for the third dot:]<br />
:'''2024'''<br />
:Today<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:We figured out the greenhouse effect closer to the start of the Industrial Revolution than to today.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]<br />
[[Category:Timelines]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1986:_River_Border&diff=3333581986: River Border2024-01-22T20:34:23Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1986<br />
| date = April 27, 2018<br />
| title = River Border<br />
| image = river_border.png<br />
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This strip is about the complexities that arise when political boundaries are mapped to geographical features. [[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that many borders run along rivers, which can become tricky, since the courses of rivers can change over time. The specific example Ponytail uses is a segment of the Missouri-Nebraska state border which runs along the {{w|Missouri River}}. She explains that, when the course of rivers changes slowly, state boundaries generally move with them, but this section had changed abruptly, due to a {{w|meander cutoff}} and the border didn't move with it. That means that they are on a part of the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.<br />
<br />
Rather than simply being interested in this geographical oddity, Megan mistakenly concludes that she could break the law in this area without consequences, which Ponytail immediately points out isn't true, but Megan seems to ignore her.<br />
<br />
The notion of a "legal dead zone" in which laws either don't apply or can't be enforced intrigues many people, likely because people who've lived under a system of laws their whole lives often wonder what it would be like to be unrestricted by any legal code. While Megan's assertion is this case is wrong, there are a number of cases in history where areas, either in theory or in fact, fell beyond the reach of normal laws.<br />
<br />
- In 2005, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=691642 An article in the Georgetown Law Review] noted that, due to a mismatch in state borders and federal districts in one region of Yellowstone National Park, it would theoretically be impossible to create a jury to convict someone for crimes committed in that region. This theory has never been tested, and it's not sure how the courts would respond, but that region has been referred to as a legal dead zone. (''What If? 2'' referenced this region.) <br />
<br />
- {{w|Bir Tawil}}, a region along the border between Egypt and Sudan, is claimed by neither country as a result of the {{w|Halaib Triangle}} border dispute. This makes it unlikely that either country would try to enforce its laws in this region (though the region is uninhabited, making the potential for crimes limited. <br />
<br />
- {{w|Kowloon Walled City}} was an enclave in British-controlled Hong Kong. The original treaty gave China the right administer this enclave, but they were driven out by the British. Following World War 2, China announced its intention to reclaim the enclave, setting up a decades-long stand-off in which neither side administered the area, making it effectively lawless. Unlike the earlier examples, this loophole was quickly taken advantage of by war refugees who built a dense city there out of reach of the authorities. <br />
<br />
- Border disputes between countries often result in enclaves controlled by one country within the other. That means that neither country's authorities can travel to the enclave without crossing international borders. When that isn't allowed, the enclave is effectively beyond the reach of law enforcement. This is arguably the closest case to what's portrayed in this comic: if there are no bridges over that section of the river, then Nebraska police couldn't enter the area without either travelling through Missouri or taking a boat across the river. In reality, though, there is no restriction against local authorities from travelling through a different jurisdiction to get to their own. Not to mention that, if Megan committed a federal crime in that region, national authorities could arrest her anywhere in the country. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, Megan reveals the "crime" she's excited to commit: cutting a pizza into a spiral. While unconventional, there's no law against doing so in any jurisdiction, making the entire point moot. Megan ignores this fact, simply shouting "crimes!", suggesting that her excitement about being free from the law is largely theoretical, rather than having specific crimes that she wants to commit. <br />
<br />
In the title text, [[Randall]] claims/hypothesizes the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting the pizza case would then fall under {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. Historically, the "high seas" have been the primary region that stands outside the jurisdiction of any specific authority. As a result, other areas that are similarly outside national boundaries (such as outer space) are often considered to be governed by maritime law, as it's the most convenient legal framework to use. "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy"; and pizzas are frequently made with marinara sauce, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime".<br />
<br />
The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border. See: [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html Missouri v. Nebraska, 196 U.S. 23 (1904)].<br />
<br />
===Riverine Boundaries in Common Law and Surveying===<br />
This strip is alluding to the concepts of 'accretion' and 'avulsion' in boundary law.<br />
<br />
Accretion is the gradual change of the location of a river or stream by erosion or addition of sediment through natural river processes. According to common law in the United States and elsewhere, if a river or stream location changes gradually, then the boundary line moves with the stream. In cases of pure accretion, it is possible for a parcel of land to be entirely eroded away on one side of a river, and have material be added to the opposite side of the river. In such cases, one property owner could lose all their land.<br />
<br />
An avulsion is a sudden change in the location of a river or stream, often due to flooding. In times of flood, a river can cut a new channel through surrounding land, which can create islands and oxbow lakes. According to common law, an avulsive change will not change the boundary of the land, as it is likely that the property is unchanged except for the new channel.<br />
<br />
In the real world, however, river systems undergo both accretion and avulsion multiple times over a period of time. This makes the determination of property lines along riverine boundaries one of the most complicated aspects of boundary surveying. An examination of a river boundary will require in-depth research of the local history of the river, including reviewing deeds, government survey plats, private survey maps, aerial photos taken over time, local landowners recollections, and local lore. In situations where there is disagreement over whether an avulsive or accretive change happened, landowners may have to go to court for a suit to quiet title.<br />
<br />
Further in-depth reading may be found in the US Bureau of Land Management's 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions, Chapter 8, specifically pages 197-205. (See: [https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Manual_Of_Surveying_Instructions_2009.pdf PDF (37.7 MByte)].)<br />
<br />
=== Real-world examples ===<br />
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:<br />
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank and much less at the inner bank.<br />
*The border follows the middle of the river.<br />
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river. In terms of {{w|natural border}}s, one counterpart of a talweg is the {{w|drainage divide}}, but these divides are hard to recognize on a map and rarely used to define a real border.<br />
<br />
The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission. There is also a strange section on the border to Canada, which Randall mentions in this comic: [[1902: State Borders]].<br />
<br />
The border between Delaware and New Jersey veers from the median and talweg methods such that Delaware's border includes all the way to the New Jersey shore where the {{w|Delaware River}} is within what is known as the {{w|Twelve-Mile Circle}}.<br />
<br />
One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.<br />
<br />
Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.<br />
<br />
Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing on a grassy riverbank, with the nearby part of the river shown above their heads. They are looking towards the river and Ponytail is gesturing at the river with her hand.]<br />
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.<br />
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.<br />
<br />
:[A map is shown beneath the text spoken by Ponytail (off-panel). The map includes a bendy river shown in gray which is snaking its way from the left part of the panel down to the bottom. A dotted line indicates the old path of the river. It follows the gray river most of the way, but towards the bottom, this line moves away from the current river extending to north-east, including a large chunk of land that the river used to encompass previously. Two arrows point to the gray section of the river with the dotted line, and another arrow points to the section of the dotted line not following the gray section. Both are labeled. On each side of the dotted arc, where it is farthest from the gray part of the river the state names are labeled, so the text follows the direction of the river (almost north to south here).]<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.<br />
:River<br />
:Old riverbed<br />
:Nebraska <br />
:Missouri <br />
<br />
:[In a frame-less panel (with no background) Ponytail has turned to look at Megan who is holding a hand to her chin.]<br />
:Megan: Wow.<br />
:Megan: So...<br />
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!<br />
<br />
:[Megan runs away from Ponytail while she is holding her arm up in the air with a finger extended up.]<br />
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?<br />
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''<br />
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!<br />
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1986:_River_Border&diff=3333571986: River Border2024-01-22T20:32:32Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1986<br />
| date = April 27, 2018<br />
| title = River Border<br />
| image = river_border.png<br />
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This strip is about the complexities that arise when political boundaries are mapped to geographical features. [[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that many borders run along rivers, which can become tricky, since the courses of rivers can change over time. The specific example Ponytail uses is a segment of the Missouri-Nebraska state border which runs along the {{w|Missouri River}}. She explains that, when the course of rivers changes slowly, state boundaries generally move with them, but this section had changed abruptly, due to a {{w|meander cutoff}} and the border didn't move with it. That means that they are on a part of the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.<br />
<br />
Rather than simply being interested in this geographical oddity, Megan mistakenly concludes that she could break the law in this area without consequences, which Ponytail immediately points out isn't true, but Megan seems to ignore her.<br />
<br />
The notion of a "legal dead zone" in which laws either don't apply or can't be enforced intrigues many people, likely because people who've lived under a system of laws their whole lives often wonder what it would be like to be unrestricted by any legal code. While Megan's assertion is this case is wrong, there are a number of cases in history where areas, either in theory or in fact, fell beyond the reach of normal laws.<br />
<br />
- In 2005, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=691642 An article in the Georgetown Law Review] noted that, due to a mismatch in state borders and federal districts in one region of Yellowstone National Park, it would theoretically be impossible to create a jury to convict someone for crimes committed in that region. This theory has never been tested, and it's not sure how the courts would respond, but that region has been referred to as a legal dead zone. (''What If? 2'' referenced this region.) <br />
<br />
- {{w|Bir Tawil}}, a region along the border between Egypt and Sudan, is claimed by neither country as a result of the {{w|Halaib Triangle}} border dispute. This makes it unlikely that either country would try to enforce its laws in this region (though the region is uninhabited, making the potential for crimes limited. <br />
<br />
- {{w|Kowloon Walled City}} was an enclave in British-controlled Hong Kong. The original treaty gave China the right administer this enclave, but they were driven out by the British. Following World War 2, China announced its intention to reclaim the enclave, setting up a decades-long stand-off in which neither side administered the area, making it effectively lawless. Unlike the earlier examples, this loophole was quickly taken advantage of by war refugees who built a dense city there out of reach of the authorities. <br />
- Border disputes between countries often result in enclaves controlled by one country within the other. That means that neither country's authorities can travel to the enclave without crossing international borders. When that isn't allowed, the enclave is effectively beyond the reach of law enforcement. This is arguably the closest case to what's portrayed in this comic: if there are no bridges over that section of the river, then Nebraska police couldn't enter the area without either travelling through Missouri or taking a boat across the river. In reality, though, there is no restriction against local authorities from travelling through a different jurisdiction to get through their own. Not to mention that, if Megan committed a federal crime in that region, national authorities could arrest her anywhere in the country. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, Megan reveals the "crime" she's excited to commit: cutting a pizza into a spiral. While unconventional, there's no law against doing so in any jurisdiction, making the entire point moot. Megan ignores this fact, simply shouting "crimes!", suggesting that her excitement about being free from the law is largely theoretical, rather than having specific crimes that she wants to commit. <br />
<br />
In the title text, [[Randall]] claims/hypothesizes the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting the pizza case would then fall under {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. Historically, the "high seas" have been the primary region that stands outside the jurisdiction of any specific authority. As a result, other areas that are similarly outside national boundaries (such as outer space) are often considered to be governed by maritime law, as it's the most convenient legal framework to use. "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy"; and pizzas are frequently made with marinara sauce, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime".<br />
<br />
The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border. See: [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html Missouri v. Nebraska, 196 U.S. 23 (1904)].<br />
<br />
===Riverine Boundaries in Common Law and Surveying===<br />
This strip is alluding to the concepts of 'accretion' and 'avulsion' in boundary law.<br />
<br />
Accretion is the gradual change of the location of a river or stream by erosion or addition of sediment through natural river processes. According to common law in the United States and elsewhere, if a river or stream location changes gradually, then the boundary line moves with the stream. In cases of pure accretion, it is possible for a parcel of land to be entirely eroded away on one side of a river, and have material be added to the opposite side of the river. In such cases, one property owner could lose all their land.<br />
<br />
An avulsion is a sudden change in the location of a river or stream, often due to flooding. In times of flood, a river can cut a new channel through surrounding land, which can create islands and oxbow lakes. According to common law, an avulsive change will not change the boundary of the land, as it is likely that the property is unchanged except for the new channel.<br />
<br />
In the real world, however, river systems undergo both accretion and avulsion multiple times over a period of time. This makes the determination of property lines along riverine boundaries one of the most complicated aspects of boundary surveying. An examination of a river boundary will require in-depth research of the local history of the river, including reviewing deeds, government survey plats, private survey maps, aerial photos taken over time, local landowners recollections, and local lore. In situations where there is disagreement over whether an avulsive or accretive change happened, landowners may have to go to court for a suit to quiet title.<br />
<br />
Further in-depth reading may be found in the US Bureau of Land Management's 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions, Chapter 8, specifically pages 197-205. (See: [https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Manual_Of_Surveying_Instructions_2009.pdf PDF (37.7 MByte)].)<br />
<br />
=== Real-world examples ===<br />
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:<br />
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank and much less at the inner bank.<br />
*The border follows the middle of the river.<br />
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river. In terms of {{w|natural border}}s, one counterpart of a talweg is the {{w|drainage divide}}, but these divides are hard to recognize on a map and rarely used to define a real border.<br />
<br />
The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission. There is also a strange section on the border to Canada, which Randall mentions in this comic: [[1902: State Borders]].<br />
<br />
The border between Delaware and New Jersey veers from the median and talweg methods such that Delaware's border includes all the way to the New Jersey shore where the {{w|Delaware River}} is within what is known as the {{w|Twelve-Mile Circle}}.<br />
<br />
One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.<br />
<br />
Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.<br />
<br />
Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing on a grassy riverbank, with the nearby part of the river shown above their heads. They are looking towards the river and Ponytail is gesturing at the river with her hand.]<br />
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.<br />
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.<br />
<br />
:[A map is shown beneath the text spoken by Ponytail (off-panel). The map includes a bendy river shown in gray which is snaking its way from the left part of the panel down to the bottom. A dotted line indicates the old path of the river. It follows the gray river most of the way, but towards the bottom, this line moves away from the current river extending to north-east, including a large chunk of land that the river used to encompass previously. Two arrows point to the gray section of the river with the dotted line, and another arrow points to the section of the dotted line not following the gray section. Both are labeled. On each side of the dotted arc, where it is farthest from the gray part of the river the state names are labeled, so the text follows the direction of the river (almost north to south here).]<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.<br />
:River<br />
:Old riverbed<br />
:Nebraska <br />
:Missouri <br />
<br />
:[In a frame-less panel (with no background) Ponytail has turned to look at Megan who is holding a hand to her chin.]<br />
:Megan: Wow.<br />
:Megan: So...<br />
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!<br />
<br />
:[Megan runs away from Ponytail while she is holding her arm up in the air with a finger extended up.]<br />
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?<br />
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''<br />
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!<br />
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1986:_River_Border&diff=3333561986: River Border2024-01-22T20:31:11Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1986<br />
| date = April 27, 2018<br />
| title = River Border<br />
| image = river_border.png<br />
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This strip is about the complexities that arise when political boundaries are mapped to geographical features. [[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that many borders run along rivers, which can become tricky, since the courses of rivers can change over time. The specific example Ponytail uses is a segment of the Missouri-Nebraska state border which runs along the {{w|Missouri River}}. She explains that, when the course of rivers changes slowly, state boundaries generally move with them, but this section had changed abruptly, due to a {{w|meander cutoff}} and the border didn't move with it. That means that they are on a part of the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.<br />
<br />
Rather than simply being interested in this geographical oddity, Megan mistakenly concludes that she could break the law in this area without consequences, which Ponytail immediately points out isn't true, but Megan seems to ignore her.<br />
<br />
The notion of a "legal dead zone" in which laws either don't apply or can't be enforced intrigues many people, likely because people who've lived under a system of laws their whole lives often wonder what it would be like to be unrestricted by any legal code. While a truly lawless region doesn't exist there are a number of real life cases where, either in theory or in fact, areas were beyond the reach of normal laws.<br />
<br />
- In 2005, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=691642 An article in the Georgetown Law Review] noted that, due to a mismatch in state borders and federal districts in one region of Yellowstone National Park, it would theoretically be impossible to create a jury to convict someone for crimes committed in that region. This theory has never been tested, and it's not sure how the courts would respond, but that region has been referred to as a legal dead zone. (''What If? 2'' referenced this region.) <br />
<br />
- {{w|Bir Tawil}}, a region along the border between Egypt and Sudan, is claimed by neither country as a result of the {{w|Halaib Triangle}} border dispute. This makes it unlikely that either country would try to enforce its laws in this region (though the region is uninhabited, making the potential for crimes limited. <br />
<br />
- {{w|Kowloon Walled City}} was an enclave in British-controlled Hong Kong. The original treaty gave China the right administer this enclave, but they were driven out by the British. Following World War 2, China announced its intention to reclaim the enclave, setting up a decades-long stand-off in which neither side administered the area, making it effectively lawless. Unlike the earlier examples, this loophole was quickly taken advantage of by war refugees who built a dense city there out of reach of the authorities. <br />
- Border disputes between countries often result in enclaves controlled by one country within the other. That means that neither country's authorities can travel to the enclave without crossing international borders. When that isn't allowed, the enclave is effectively beyond the reach of law enforcement. This is arguably the closest case to what's portrayed in this comic: if there are no bridges over that section of the river, then Nebraska police couldn't enter the area without either travelling through Missouri or taking a boat across the river. In reality, though, there is no restriction against local authorities from travelling through a different jurisdiction to get through their own. Not to mention that, if Megan committed a federal crime in that region, national authorities could arrest her anywhere in the country. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, Megan reveals the "crime" she's excited to commit: cutting a pizza into a spiral. While unconventional, there's no law against doing so in any jurisdiction, making the entire point moot. Megan ignores this fact, simply shouting "crimes!", suggesting that her excitement about being free from the law is largely theoretical, rather than having specific crimes that she wants to commit. <br />
<br />
In the title text, [[Randall]] claims/hypothesizes the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting the pizza case would then fall under {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. Historically, the "high seas" have been the primary region that stands outside the jurisdiction of any specific authority. As a result, other areas that are similarly outside national boundaries (such as outer space) are often considered to be governed by maritime law, as it's the most convenient legal framework to use. "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy"; and pizzas are frequently made with marinara sauce, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime".<br />
<br />
The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border. See: [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html Missouri v. Nebraska, 196 U.S. 23 (1904)].<br />
<br />
===Riverine Boundaries in Common Law and Surveying===<br />
This strip is alluding to the concepts of 'accretion' and 'avulsion' in boundary law.<br />
<br />
Accretion is the gradual change of the location of a river or stream by erosion or addition of sediment through natural river processes. According to common law in the United States and elsewhere, if a river or stream location changes gradually, then the boundary line moves with the stream. In cases of pure accretion, it is possible for a parcel of land to be entirely eroded away on one side of a river, and have material be added to the opposite side of the river. In such cases, one property owner could lose all their land.<br />
<br />
An avulsion is a sudden change in the location of a river or stream, often due to flooding. In times of flood, a river can cut a new channel through surrounding land, which can create islands and oxbow lakes. According to common law, an avulsive change will not change the boundary of the land, as it is likely that the property is unchanged except for the new channel.<br />
<br />
In the real world, however, river systems undergo both accretion and avulsion multiple times over a period of time. This makes the determination of property lines along riverine boundaries one of the most complicated aspects of boundary surveying. An examination of a river boundary will require in-depth research of the local history of the river, including reviewing deeds, government survey plats, private survey maps, aerial photos taken over time, local landowners recollections, and local lore. In situations where there is disagreement over whether an avulsive or accretive change happened, landowners may have to go to court for a suit to quiet title.<br />
<br />
Further in-depth reading may be found in the US Bureau of Land Management's 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions, Chapter 8, specifically pages 197-205. (See: [https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Manual_Of_Surveying_Instructions_2009.pdf PDF (37.7 MByte)].)<br />
<br />
=== Real-world examples ===<br />
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:<br />
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank and much less at the inner bank.<br />
*The border follows the middle of the river.<br />
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river. In terms of {{w|natural border}}s, one counterpart of a talweg is the {{w|drainage divide}}, but these divides are hard to recognize on a map and rarely used to define a real border.<br />
<br />
The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission. There is also a strange section on the border to Canada, which Randall mentions in this comic: [[1902: State Borders]].<br />
<br />
The border between Delaware and New Jersey veers from the median and talweg methods such that Delaware's border includes all the way to the New Jersey shore where the {{w|Delaware River}} is within what is known as the {{w|Twelve-Mile Circle}}.<br />
<br />
One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.<br />
<br />
Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.<br />
<br />
Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing on a grassy riverbank, with the nearby part of the river shown above their heads. They are looking towards the river and Ponytail is gesturing at the river with her hand.]<br />
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.<br />
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.<br />
<br />
:[A map is shown beneath the text spoken by Ponytail (off-panel). The map includes a bendy river shown in gray which is snaking its way from the left part of the panel down to the bottom. A dotted line indicates the old path of the river. It follows the gray river most of the way, but towards the bottom, this line moves away from the current river extending to north-east, including a large chunk of land that the river used to encompass previously. Two arrows point to the gray section of the river with the dotted line, and another arrow points to the section of the dotted line not following the gray section. Both are labeled. On each side of the dotted arc, where it is farthest from the gray part of the river the state names are labeled, so the text follows the direction of the river (almost north to south here).]<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.<br />
:River<br />
:Old riverbed<br />
:Nebraska <br />
:Missouri <br />
<br />
:[In a frame-less panel (with no background) Ponytail has turned to look at Megan who is holding a hand to her chin.]<br />
:Megan: Wow.<br />
:Megan: So...<br />
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!<br />
<br />
:[Megan runs away from Ponytail while she is holding her arm up in the air with a finger extended up.]<br />
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?<br />
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''<br />
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!<br />
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1986:_River_Border&diff=3333551986: River Border2024-01-22T20:30:17Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1986<br />
| date = April 27, 2018<br />
| title = River Border<br />
| image = river_border.png<br />
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This strip is about the complexities that arise when political boundaries are mapped to geographical features. [[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that many borders run along rivers, which can become tricky, since the courses of rivers can change over time. The specific example Ponytail uses is a segment of the Missouri-Nebraska state border which runs along the {{w|Missouri River}}. She explains that, when the course of rivers changes slowly, state boundaries generally move with them, but this section had changed abruptly, due to a {{w|meander cutoff}} and the border didn't move with it. That means that they are on a part of the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.<br />
<br />
Rather than simply being interested in this geographical oddity, Megan mistakenly concludes that she could break the law in this area without consequences, which Ponytail immediately points out isn't true, but Megan seems to ignore her.<br />
<br />
The notion of a "legal dead zone" in which laws either don't apply or can't be enforced intrigues many people, likely because people who've lived under a system of laws their whole lives often wonder what it would be like to be unrestricted by any legal code. While a truly lawless region doesn't exist there are a number of real life cases where, either in theory or in fact, areas were beyond the reach of normal laws.<br />
<br />
- In 2005, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=691642 An article in the Georgetown Law Review] noted that, due to a mismatch in state borders and federal districts in one region of Yellowstone National Park, it would theoretically be impossible to create a jury to convict someone for crimes committed in that region. This theory has never been tested, and it's not sure how the courts would respond, but that region has been referred to as a legal dead zone. (''What If? 2'' referenced this region.) <br />
<br />
- {{w|Bir Tawil}}, a region along the border between Egypt and Sudan, is claimed by neither country as a result of the {{w|Halaib Triangle}} border dispute. This makes it unlikely that either country would try to enforce its laws in this region (though the region is uninhabited, making the potential for crimes limited. <br />
<br />
- {{w|KowloonWalledCity}} was an enclave in British-controlled Hong Kong. The original treaty gave China the right administer this enclave, but they were driven out by the British. Following World War 2, China announced its intention to reclaim the enclave, setting up a decades-long stand-off in which neither side administered the area, making it effectively lawless. Unlike the earlier examples, this loophole was quickly taken advantage of by war refugees who built a dense city there out of reach of the authorities. <br />
- Border disputes between countries often result in enclaves controlled by one country within the other. That means that neither country's authorities can travel to the enclave without crossing international borders. When that isn't allowed, the enclave is effectively beyond the reach of law enforcement. This is arguably the closest case to what's portrayed in this comic: if there are no bridges over that section of the river, then Nebraska police couldn't enter the area without either travelling through Missouri or taking a boat across the river. In reality, though, there is no restriction against local authorities from travelling through a different jurisdiction to get through their own. Not to mention that, if Megan committed a federal crime in that region, national authorities could arrest her anywhere in the country. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, Megan reveals the "crime" she's excited to commit: cutting a pizza into a spiral. While unconventional, there's no law against doing so in any jurisdiction, making the entire point moot. Megan ignores this fact, simply shouting "crimes!", suggesting that her excitement about being free from the law is largely theoretical, rather than having specific crimes that she wants to commit. <br />
<br />
In the title text, [[Randall]] claims/hypothesizes the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting the pizza case would then fall under {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. Historically, the "high seas" have been the primary region that stands outside the jurisdiction of any specific authority. As a result, other areas that are similarly outside national boundaries (such as outer space) are often considered to be governed by maritime law, as it's the most convenient legal framework to use. "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy"; and pizzas are frequently made with marinara sauce, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime".<br />
<br />
The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border. See: [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html Missouri v. Nebraska, 196 U.S. 23 (1904)].<br />
<br />
===Riverine Boundaries in Common Law and Surveying===<br />
This strip is alluding to the concepts of 'accretion' and 'avulsion' in boundary law.<br />
<br />
Accretion is the gradual change of the location of a river or stream by erosion or addition of sediment through natural river processes. According to common law in the United States and elsewhere, if a river or stream location changes gradually, then the boundary line moves with the stream. In cases of pure accretion, it is possible for a parcel of land to be entirely eroded away on one side of a river, and have material be added to the opposite side of the river. In such cases, one property owner could lose all their land.<br />
<br />
An avulsion is a sudden change in the location of a river or stream, often due to flooding. In times of flood, a river can cut a new channel through surrounding land, which can create islands and oxbow lakes. According to common law, an avulsive change will not change the boundary of the land, as it is likely that the property is unchanged except for the new channel.<br />
<br />
In the real world, however, river systems undergo both accretion and avulsion multiple times over a period of time. This makes the determination of property lines along riverine boundaries one of the most complicated aspects of boundary surveying. An examination of a river boundary will require in-depth research of the local history of the river, including reviewing deeds, government survey plats, private survey maps, aerial photos taken over time, local landowners recollections, and local lore. In situations where there is disagreement over whether an avulsive or accretive change happened, landowners may have to go to court for a suit to quiet title.<br />
<br />
Further in-depth reading may be found in the US Bureau of Land Management's 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions, Chapter 8, specifically pages 197-205. (See: [https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Manual_Of_Surveying_Instructions_2009.pdf PDF (37.7 MByte)].)<br />
<br />
=== Real-world examples ===<br />
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:<br />
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank and much less at the inner bank.<br />
*The border follows the middle of the river.<br />
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river. In terms of {{w|natural border}}s, one counterpart of a talweg is the {{w|drainage divide}}, but these divides are hard to recognize on a map and rarely used to define a real border.<br />
<br />
The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission. There is also a strange section on the border to Canada, which Randall mentions in this comic: [[1902: State Borders]].<br />
<br />
The border between Delaware and New Jersey veers from the median and talweg methods such that Delaware's border includes all the way to the New Jersey shore where the {{w|Delaware River}} is within what is known as the {{w|Twelve-Mile Circle}}.<br />
<br />
One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.<br />
<br />
Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.<br />
<br />
Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing on a grassy riverbank, with the nearby part of the river shown above their heads. They are looking towards the river and Ponytail is gesturing at the river with her hand.]<br />
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.<br />
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.<br />
<br />
:[A map is shown beneath the text spoken by Ponytail (off-panel). The map includes a bendy river shown in gray which is snaking its way from the left part of the panel down to the bottom. A dotted line indicates the old path of the river. It follows the gray river most of the way, but towards the bottom, this line moves away from the current river extending to north-east, including a large chunk of land that the river used to encompass previously. Two arrows point to the gray section of the river with the dotted line, and another arrow points to the section of the dotted line not following the gray section. Both are labeled. On each side of the dotted arc, where it is farthest from the gray part of the river the state names are labeled, so the text follows the direction of the river (almost north to south here).]<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.<br />
:River<br />
:Old riverbed<br />
:Nebraska <br />
:Missouri <br />
<br />
:[In a frame-less panel (with no background) Ponytail has turned to look at Megan who is holding a hand to her chin.]<br />
:Megan: Wow.<br />
:Megan: So...<br />
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!<br />
<br />
:[Megan runs away from Ponytail while she is holding her arm up in the air with a finger extended up.]<br />
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?<br />
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''<br />
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!<br />
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1986:_River_Border&diff=3333531986: River Border2024-01-22T20:29:47Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1986<br />
| date = April 27, 2018<br />
| title = River Border<br />
| image = river_border.png<br />
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This strip is about the complexities that arise when political boundaries are mapped to geographical features. [[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that many borders run along rivers, which can become tricky, since the courses of rivers can change over time. The specific example Ponytail uses is a segment of the Missouri-Nebraska state border which runs along the {{w|Missouri River}}. She explains that, when the course of rivers changes slowly, state boundaries generally move with them, but this section had changed abruptly, due to a {{w|meander cutoff}} and the border didn't move with it. That means that they are on a part of the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.<br />
<br />
Rather than simply being interested in this geographical oddity, Megan mistakenly concludes that she could break the law in this area without consequences, which Ponytail immediately points out isn't true, but Megan seems to ignore her.<br />
<br />
The notion of a "legal dead zone" in which laws either don't apply or can't be enforced intrigues many people, likely because people who've lived under a system of laws their whole lives often wonder what it would be like to be unrestricted by any legal code. While a truly lawless region doesn't exist there are a number of real life cases where, either in theory or in fact, areas were beyond the reach of normal laws.<br />
<br />
- In 2005, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=691642 An article in the Georgetown Law Review] noted that, due to a mismatch in state borders and federal districts in one region of Yellowstone National Park, it would theoretically be impossible to create a jury to convict someone for crimes committed in that region. This theory has never been tested, and it's not sure how the courts would respond, but that region has been referred to as a legal dead zone. (''What If? 2'' referenced this region.) <br />
-{{w|Bir Tawil}}, a region along the border between Egypt and Sudan, is claimed by neither country as a result of the {{w|Halaib Triangle}} border dispute. This makes it unlikely that either country would try to enforce its laws in this region (though the region is uninhabited, making the potential for crimes limited. <br />
- {{w|KowloonWalledCity}} was an enclave in British-controlled Hong Kong. The original treaty gave China the right administer this enclave, but they were driven out by the British. Following World War 2, China announced its intention to reclaim the enclave, setting up a decades-long stand-off in which neither side administered the area, making it effectively lawless. Unlike the earlier examples, this loophole was quickly taken advantage of by war refugees who built a dense city there out of reach of the authorities. <br />
- Border disputes between countries often result in enclaves controlled by one country within the other. That means that neither country's authorities can travel to the enclave without crossing international borders. When that isn't allowed, the enclave is effectively beyond the reach of law enforcement. This is arguably the closest case to what's portrayed in this comic: if there are no bridges over that section of the river, then Nebraska police couldn't enter the area without either travelling through Missouri or taking a boat across the river. In reality, though, there is no restriction against local authorities from travelling through a different jurisdiction to get through their own. Not to mention that, if Megan committed a federal crime in that region, national authorities could arrest her anywhere in the country. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, Megan reveals the "crime" she's excited to commit: cutting a pizza into a spiral. While unconventional, there's no law against doing so in any jurisdiction, making the entire point moot. Megan ignores this fact, simply shouting "crimes!", suggesting that her excitement about being free from the law is largely theoretical, rather than having specific crimes that she wants to commit. <br />
<br />
In the title text, [[Randall]] claims/hypothesizes the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting the pizza case would then fall under {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. Historically, the "high seas" have been the primary region that stands outside the jurisdiction of any specific authority. As a result, other areas that are similarly outside national boundaries (such as outer space) are often considered to be governed by maritime law, as it's the most convenient legal framework to use. "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy"; and pizzas are frequently made with marinara sauce, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime".<br />
<br />
The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border. See: [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html Missouri v. Nebraska, 196 U.S. 23 (1904)].<br />
<br />
===Riverine Boundaries in Common Law and Surveying===<br />
This strip is alluding to the concepts of 'accretion' and 'avulsion' in boundary law.<br />
<br />
Accretion is the gradual change of the location of a river or stream by erosion or addition of sediment through natural river processes. According to common law in the United States and elsewhere, if a river or stream location changes gradually, then the boundary line moves with the stream. In cases of pure accretion, it is possible for a parcel of land to be entirely eroded away on one side of a river, and have material be added to the opposite side of the river. In such cases, one property owner could lose all their land.<br />
<br />
An avulsion is a sudden change in the location of a river or stream, often due to flooding. In times of flood, a river can cut a new channel through surrounding land, which can create islands and oxbow lakes. According to common law, an avulsive change will not change the boundary of the land, as it is likely that the property is unchanged except for the new channel.<br />
<br />
In the real world, however, river systems undergo both accretion and avulsion multiple times over a period of time. This makes the determination of property lines along riverine boundaries one of the most complicated aspects of boundary surveying. An examination of a river boundary will require in-depth research of the local history of the river, including reviewing deeds, government survey plats, private survey maps, aerial photos taken over time, local landowners recollections, and local lore. In situations where there is disagreement over whether an avulsive or accretive change happened, landowners may have to go to court for a suit to quiet title.<br />
<br />
Further in-depth reading may be found in the US Bureau of Land Management's 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions, Chapter 8, specifically pages 197-205. (See: [https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Manual_Of_Surveying_Instructions_2009.pdf PDF (37.7 MByte)].)<br />
<br />
=== Real-world examples ===<br />
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:<br />
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank and much less at the inner bank.<br />
*The border follows the middle of the river.<br />
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river. In terms of {{w|natural border}}s, one counterpart of a talweg is the {{w|drainage divide}}, but these divides are hard to recognize on a map and rarely used to define a real border.<br />
<br />
The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission. There is also a strange section on the border to Canada, which Randall mentions in this comic: [[1902: State Borders]].<br />
<br />
The border between Delaware and New Jersey veers from the median and talweg methods such that Delaware's border includes all the way to the New Jersey shore where the {{w|Delaware River}} is within what is known as the {{w|Twelve-Mile Circle}}.<br />
<br />
One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.<br />
<br />
Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.<br />
<br />
Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing on a grassy riverbank, with the nearby part of the river shown above their heads. They are looking towards the river and Ponytail is gesturing at the river with her hand.]<br />
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.<br />
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.<br />
<br />
:[A map is shown beneath the text spoken by Ponytail (off-panel). The map includes a bendy river shown in gray which is snaking its way from the left part of the panel down to the bottom. A dotted line indicates the old path of the river. It follows the gray river most of the way, but towards the bottom, this line moves away from the current river extending to north-east, including a large chunk of land that the river used to encompass previously. Two arrows point to the gray section of the river with the dotted line, and another arrow points to the section of the dotted line not following the gray section. Both are labeled. On each side of the dotted arc, where it is farthest from the gray part of the river the state names are labeled, so the text follows the direction of the river (almost north to south here).]<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.<br />
:Ponytail (narrating): This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.<br />
:River<br />
:Old riverbed<br />
:Nebraska <br />
:Missouri <br />
<br />
:[In a frame-less panel (with no background) Ponytail has turned to look at Megan who is holding a hand to her chin.]<br />
:Megan: Wow.<br />
:Megan: So...<br />
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!<br />
<br />
:[Megan runs away from Ponytail while she is holding her arm up in the air with a finger extended up.]<br />
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?<br />
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''<br />
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!<br />
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]<br />
[[Category:Geography]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1894:_Real_Estate&diff=3331581894: Real Estate2024-01-18T15:20:11Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1894<br />
| date = September 25, 2017<br />
| title = Real Estate<br />
| image = real_estate.png<br />
| titletext = I tried converting the prices into pizzas, to put it in more familiar terms, and it just became a hard-to-think-about number of pizzas.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
In this comic, [[Cueball]] is speaking with [[Ponytail]], his real estate agent, about an ongoing negotiation over the price of a house he is looking to buy. This is probably his first time buying a house and he is very overwhelmed by the process, a very common feeling among first-time home buyers. Houses are the largest single purchase most people will ever make, involves sums far greater than most people typically deal with. The housing market is so complicated and ever-changing that it is almost impossible for the layman to have a clear understanding of what a piece of property is worth. One must rely on the opinions of their real estate agent, building inspector, friends and family, along with research regarding the housing market in the area (average property values, what houses recently sold for, etc). Despite the comic mocking it as an obvious stalling tactic, telling the agent that you need time to think about it is a good strategy to research further while seeming to know what you're doing.<br />
<br />
In the caption [[Randall]] makes it seem that he is in Cueball's situation in any financial negotiation, not only for such large ones as when buying real estate.<br />
<br />
In the title text Randall mentions that he tried to convert the prices into the equivalent numbers of pizzas that amount could buy. Humans can't directly comprehend large numbers, and the value of money is what it can buy, so thinking of a sum of money in terms of a commodity you regularly buy is a pretty good tactic. However, when dealing with the sums of money involved in real estate purchases, that once again becomes meaningless: the $10,000 price reduction translates to hundreds of pizzas and the typical price of a house translates to thousands of them. At this point, the volume of pizza becomes as incomprehensible as the amount of money itself. A better tactic might be to think in terms of the equivalent months of income. Alternately, one could do the mortgage calculations and determine how much the prices translate to on a monthly basis (which would likely convert to a more reasonable number of pizzas per month). <br />
<br />
This comic is in line with the much older [[616: Lease]] and the more recent [[1674: Adult]] regarding buying real estate and not feeling sufficiently grown-up to handle such an important transaction (see also [[905: Homeownership]]).<br />
<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail and Cueball sit in office chairs on either side of a desk. Ponytail looks at a piece of paper she is holding in her hand, more papers lie on the table. Cueball sits with his hands in his lap, thinking in a thought bubble before he replies to her remark.]<br />
:Ponytail: The sellers offer to drop their price by $10,000 ''and'' cover the driveway repairs.<br />
:Cueball [thinking]: These are all staggeringly large amounts of money that I have no idea how to even ''think'' about, let alone compare.<br />
:Cueball [speaking]: Tempting. We'll need a few hours to consider it.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panels:]<br />
:Me in any financial negotiation.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category: Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category: Comics featuring Cueball]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=907:_Ages&diff=333057907: Ages2024-01-17T18:58:05Z<p>Tromag: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 907<br />
| date = June 3, 2011<br />
| title = Ages<br />
| image = ages.png<br />
| titletext = Every age: "I'm glad I'm not the clueless person I was five years ago, but now I don't want to get any older."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
This is a graph of the general themes that occur between the ages covered by each individual set of brackets. The layout is a parody of larger timescales of human or geologic history, e.g. "Bronze Age" or "Iron Age".<br />
<br />
The "ages" identified and experiences typical at that age:<br />
*0-3 - "[Non-sentient]" - Babies/toddlers are not self-sufficient and not intelligently communicative, which means they lack many of the elements that we associate with human intelligence. Sentience is difficult to clearly devine, but it's often (and somewhat erroneously) correlated with self-awareness. There's disagreement about when self-awareness emerges in children, but some sources argue that it occurs around 2-3 years old. <br />
*4-12 - "Everything is exciting!" - During this period, children are growing rapidly and learning many things for the first time. Between the newness of their experiences and a general lack of emotional inhibition, children of this age frequently exhibit a level of enthusiasm and excitement about the world which is rarely found in adults. <br />
*13-17 - "Everything sucks!" - As children grow to be teenagers, they frequently have prolonged periods of personal and emotional turmoil. This age range includes the transition from childhood to adulthood, which carries multiple social, personal and biological implications. Many children of this age tend to encounter hard truths of life and lose much of the naivete of youth. This often leads to strongly cynical attitudes about life in general. <br />
*18-22 - "Woooo college! Wooooo—" [vomit] - This age is typically a young adult's first foray into the freedom of adulthood (frequently in college). With many of the restrictions of childhood removed, but lacking the experience and maturity of someone older, young adults will often take things to excess, including partying and drinking (which accounts for the vomiting).<br />
*23-30 - "Relationships are ''hard''!" - Having grown out of the young adult stage, people in their twenties experience their first "adult" relationships, and generally encounter a great deal of difficulty and often no small amount of heartbreak.<br />
*31-42 - "So are careers!" - Growing now into their thirties, many people become increasingly concerned about building careers. The more serious one becomes about a serious and long-term vocation, the more complexity they're likely to encounter. <br />
*43-54 - "No daughter of ''mine'' is going out dressed like that!" - This is the general age range in which people might be the parents of teenagers. This phrase is a cliche, implying a parent is forbidding their daughter from wearing revealing clothing in public. This sort of interaction represents an older person who is focused on preventing perceived impropriety or danger, and is often thought of as an oppressive killjoy by the younger generation.<br />
*55-75+ - "[More sex than anyone is comfortable admitting]" - For people with kids, this age is known as the "empty nest" phase, where their children have moved out on their own. For many people, this is also when retirement occurs. Both of these things bring about a significant increase in both free time and privacy. While many young people don't like to think about their parents being sexually active (and some would prefer to assume that older people don't have sex at all), there are many people who remain sexually active well into their later years.<br />
<br />
The title text is a joke about the shortsightedness of many people (at any age) in believing their current age to be ideal.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[A number line labeled "age." The start point is 0, with points labeled 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70, and the line continues past the width of the panel. There are interstitial, non-labeled points. Above the line are labeled brackets. They are (approximated):]<br />
::0-3: [Non-sentient]<br />
::4-12: "Everything is exciting!"<br />
::13-17: "Everything sucks!"<br />
::18-22: "Woooo college! Wooooo—" [vomit]<br />
::23-30: "Relationships are ''hard!''<br />
::31-42: "So are careers!"<br />
::43-54: "No daughter of ''mine'' is going out dressed like that!"<br />
::55-75+: [More sex than anyone is comfortable admitting]<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Charts]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2249:_I_Love_the_20s&diff=3326562249: I Love the 20s2024-01-10T20:41:19Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2249<br />
| date = January 1, 2020<br />
| title = I Love the 20s<br />
| image = i love the 20s.png<br />
| titletext = Billboard's "Best of the 80s" chart includes Blondie's 1980 hit "Call Me." QED.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This comic was released on the first day of the year {{w|2020}}. It was the second of two [[:Category:New Year|New Year comics]] around the 2019-2020 New Year, after [[2248: New Year's Eve]]. <br />
<br />
The comic opens with [[Megan]], [[Cueball]], [[White Hat]], and [[Ponytail]] celebrating the new year. Ponytail expresses relief that, they can now unambiguously name the decade "the 20s", since the decade has a well-defined name, any cultural trends that begin in the 20s can be attributed to the decade itself, and not to the generation that happens to coincide with it.<br />
<br />
Prior to 2000, and particularly in the latter half of the 20th century, eras were often defined by decades, such as discussing the social movements of the 60s, or the music of the 80s. Beginning in 2000, this trend was noticeably reduced, most likely because the first two decades of a century didn't fit into the same naming convention, making it clunkier to discuss. "{{w|Aughts}}" and "Teens" were names suggested for the {{w|2000s_(decade)|2000s}} and {{w|2010s}} respectively; however, neither of those names managed to gain widespread acceptance.<br />
<br />
In this same era, there was an increased emphasis on generational cohorts, which Ponytail seems to see as a replacement for dividing time into decades. {{w|Millennials}} is a name given to the generation which was born in the 1980s through the mid 1990s. The term is sometimes used pejoratively by older generations who view millennials as immature or complacent, and this was particularly common in the 2010s. It's possible that this focus on the generation was really a substitute for a focus on youth culture of that era. This is particularly notable since, as time moves on, Millenials continue to age, but the older generation still views them as the current youth. This phenomenon was previously discussed in [[1849: Decades]].<br />
<br />
White Hat, however, raises a pedantic objection to Ponytail's celebration: he believes that the new decade does not "officially" start until 2021.<br />
<br />
Ponytail corrects him on this, but he refuses to accept the correction until Megan cites an unlikely source: the fact that the {{w|VH1}} television show {{w|I Love the '90s (American TV series)|''I Love the '90s''}} categorized MC Hammer's 1990 single "{{w|U Can't Touch This}}" as a 90s song, which supports Ponytail's definition of a decade. The joke is that a pop culture documentary is not an authoritative source for definitions of time standards,{{Citation needed}} yet everyone is willing to immediately accept its authority on such matters anyway. Demonstrating the common usage of language is a valid argument, but the degree to which the authority of a single cable channel resolves the argument is unexpected. <br />
<br />
The disagreement over the definition of when decades start is due to the fact that there is more than one way to count decades. You could do it in one of the following two ways:<br />
*By counting every span of ten years that has occurred since the start of year 1 in the Common Era (White Hat's definition)<br />
*By taking the digit that is common to all years in a given ten-year span (Ponytail's definition)<br />
<br />
White Hat's definition is an "ordinal" method since it functions by counting the number of ten-year spans ''since the first one'', which is defined to have begun in the year 1. However, Ponytail's definition is the "cardinal" method, which simply groups years by their common most significant digits. For example, when we say "the 1980s", we mean "the span of ten years that all began with the digits 1-9-8".<br />
<br />
Neither definition is technically wrong, but Ponytail's definition is clearly the more common one. She notes that this is not how decades are typically determined, and the fact that we count centuries in an ordinal way does not require that we do the same with decades. <br />
<br />
White Hat's objection (probably deliberately) recalls an issue that was frequently discussed around the year 2000. Because we ''do'' count centuries ordinally (eg. "1st century", "20th century", etc.), and the first century began on the year 1, the 21st century did not technically start until 2001. Much of the world, not understanding this (or not caring), celebrated the dawning of the year 2000 as the start of both a new century and a new millennium, ignoring those who point out the change wouldn't happen for another year. (Though it should be noted unlike decades this is a genuine mistake rather than two slightly different definitions.)<br />
<br />
Megan's exclamation "Stop!" is similar to the line famously used by MC Hammer in "U Can't Touch This" ("Stop! Hammer time.").<br />
<br />
Continuing the dubious "proof" offered by Megan, the title text goes on to use the {{w|Billboard (magazine)|Billboard}} [https://www.billboard.com/charts/greatest-billboards-top-songs-80s Best of the 80s] chart as proof that the 1980s started in 1980, as their chart includes {{w|Blondie (band)|Blondie's}} "{{w|Call Me (Blondie song)|Call Me}}", which was released in 1980. The title text ends with {{w|Q.E.D.|QED}} ("quod erat demonstrandum"), which means "which was [necessary] to be shown", and is traditionally used at the end of a mathematical proof, implicitly equating such pop culture references to unassailable logical evidence. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Megan walks in from the left greeting Cueball, White Hat, and Ponytail standing next to each other, the last two looking in her direction.]<br />
:Megan: Happy new decade!<br />
:Ponytail: Welcome to the '20s!<br />
:White Hat: '''''Actually—'''''<br />
:Ponytail: I'm excited we can name decades again. <br />
:Ponytail: "Aughts" and "teens" never caught on.<br />
<br />
:[Megan stops next to Cueball as White Hat has his finger raised.]<br />
:White Hat: Actually, the new decade doesn't start-<br />
:Ponytail: Mostly, I'm just glad we can go back to attributing cultural trends to decades instead of generations.<br />
<br />
:[All four just stand normal.]<br />
:Cueball: Yeah.<br />
:Cueball: Decades were silly, but making everything about "millennials" turned out to be even worse.<br />
:Ponytail: Seriously.<br />
<br />
:[Only White Hat and Ponytail are shown, both with their arms held out to the sides, with White Hats's arms more relaxed than Ponytail's.]<br />
:White Hat: It's technically not a new decade until 2021.<br />
:Ponytail: OK, listen.<br />
:Ponytail: If you're going to be pedantic, you should at least be right.<br />
:White Hat: I '''''am''''' right!<br />
:Ponytail: You're '''''not'''''.<br />
<br />
:[Zoom in on White Hat and Ponytail's upper bodies as they gesture towards each other both raising their hands, palm up. Megan interrupts them from off-panel, as made clear in the next panel. Her voice comes out of a starburst on the left panel frame.]<br />
:White Hat: See, the 20<sup>th</sup> century didn't start until--<br />
:Ponytail: But decades aren't centuries. They're not cardinally numbered.<br />
:White Hat: You don't get it. Let me draw a--<br />
:Ponytail: No, '''''you''''' don't--<br />
:Megan (off-panel): Stop!<br />
<br />
:[All four characters are displayed again. Megan has raised a finger and all the others look at her.]<br />
:Megan: I can resolve this.<br />
:Megan: *Ahem*<br />
:Megan: MC Hammer's ''U Can't Touch This'' (1990) was featured in '''''I Love the '90s''''', not ''''' '80s'''''.<br />
:Ponytail: ...That settles that.<br />
:White Hat: Yeah, I accept VH1's authority.<br />
:White Hat: You win.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
* Millennials were also mentioned in [[1962: Generations]] and in [[2165: Millennials]]. Also, [[Randall]] himself is a millennial.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<!-- Include any categories below this line. --><br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:New Year]]<br />
[[Category:Pedantic]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2297:_Use_or_Discard_By&diff=3326532297: Use or Discard By2024-01-10T20:17:06Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2297<br />
| date = April 22, 2020<br />
| title = Use or Discard By<br />
| image = use_or_discard_by.png<br />
| titletext = One of the things of bear spray says that, and I'm not one to disobey safety instructions, but there are no bears around here. Guess it's time for a camping trip where we leave lots of food out!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
Many products carry a "Use By", "{{w|Expiration date}}", "Discard by" or similar date. The date shows the latest date by which the product has been verified to provide its expected use. For example, a foodstuff will have a "consume by" date, showing the date after which the food may be unsuitable for eating. In most cases, this will be a conservative estimate, and the useful lifetime can be significantly extended by proper storage.<br />
<br />
One of the issues around expiration dates is that the language used is decided on by the manufacturer, making them highly variable and often ambiguous. Some have explicit instructions to the consumer, such as "use by:", others have instructions to the seller, such as "sell by:", still others say things such as "best by:" or "freshest before:". This can make it confusing how important it is to avoid using a product past a given date.<br />
<br />
For many consumer goods, the expiration dates are of minimal importance, and using them afterward risks nothing more than a drop in quality. In certain cases, however, they can have safety implications. Some foods, if kept too long, become dangerous to consume. Medications can lose their potency over time, and relying on them past the expiration date could put a person's health at risk.<br />
<br />
In this comic, two similar emergency {{w|flare gun}}s, an item typically used to send out distress {{w|flare}}s, have slightly different expiry instructions. One has an instruction to "use by or discard by" a specific date (in this case, three days after the date of publishing). The other has an instruction to "use by" this date. These two phrases almost certainly have the same intent. The older flares are, the less reliable they become, so the manufacturer recommends replacing regularly replacing unused flares with working ones, to ensure that working flares are available in case of an emergency. <br />
<br />
[[Megan]], however, seems to take the latter instruction literally, as an order to actually fire the flare gun prior to the expiration date, whether or not it's necessary. It may be taken that she <em>wants</em> the experience of firing a flare, and takes that instruction as an excuse to do so. [[Cueball]] immediately objects to this line of reasoning. Firing a flare unnecessarily is generally a bad idea. It could summon emergency responders to a non-emergency situation, diverting emergency resources that may be needed elsewhere. Even worse, if a flare is fired improperly, or in an unsafe direction, it could cause a fire and/or injuries, ironically creating an emergency situation, rather than signaling one. <br />
<br />
The title text similarly indicates that Megan encountered similar instructions on a can of {{w|bear spray}}. Since there are no bears present, she intends go camping and leave her food out to attract bears, so that she may use the bear spray to repel them before it "goes bad". Clearly, this would be a bad idea. While bear spray is a useful emergency measure, there are many reasons why it could fail to protect the user, which would risk severe injury or death. Even if the bear spray effectively protected Megan, deliberately baiting wildlife so that you can repel them with a painful irritant would be irresponsible and cruel. In both cases, the humor derives from the language that appears to instruct the use of an emergency product, even if no emergency has occurred. In both cases, taking such instructions literally would risk causing injuries, rather than preventing them. <br />
<br />
Expiration dates (for food) have also been mentioned in [[737: Yogurt]], [[1109: Refrigerator]], and [[2178: Expiration Date High Score]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
<br />
:[Megan stands in the middle of the panel, holding two flare guns, one in each hand.]<br />
:Megan: These emergency flare guns are about to expire.<br />
:Cueball [off-panel]: I forgot we had those.<br />
<br />
:[Cueball sitting at a desk, working on a computer.]<br />
:Megan [off-panel]: This one says "Use or discard by Apr 25 2020."<br />
:Cueball: Okay...<br />
<br />
:[Megan holds up one of the flare guns looking at it. She holds the other flare gun by her side.]<br />
:Megan: But '''''this''''' one just says "Use by" ...<br />
:Cueball [off-panel]: '''''No.'''''<br />
<br />
== Trivia ==<br />
* Twenty-seven years ago exactly ([https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/04/22 April 22, 1993]), ''Calvin and Hobbes'' made a similar joke about expiration dates on milk. Obviously the humor has a very long shelf-life.<br />
* This comic shares some similarities with [[1821: Incinerator]], particularly in the last panel.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2337:_Asterisk_Corrections&diff=3321172337: Asterisk Corrections2024-01-02T22:46:22Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2337<br />
| date = July 24, 2020<br />
| title = Asterisk Corrections<br />
| image = asterisk_corrections.png<br />
| titletext = I like trying to make it as hard as possible. "I'd love to meet up, maybe in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty. *witchcraft"<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
In text messaging etiquette, asterisks are commonly used to denote a correction of some error in an earlier text. Asterisk corrections typically specify the corrected words, but do not explicitly mark the words that should be replaced, the reader is expected to understand which word is being corrected. Typically, this is due to a typo or autocorrect issue, so the corrected word will be similar to the original, but this comic plays with the fact that the words can be completely different, and most people will still understand it.<br />
<br />
In the strip, the messenger ([[Randall]]) issues four corrections, which replace words with completely different words, and entirely change the meaning of the message. The original message is "I'm gonna ride a horse on the beach at dawn", suggesting a life of adventure and romanticism. The corrected version comes out "I'm gonna eat a pizza on the couch at 3 am", suggesting that his plans are unimpressive, and may indicate a slothful and unhealthy existence. <br />
<br />
Randall finds it remarkable that these corrections can be issued, with no indication of which words they're replacing (and aren't even issued in the proper sequence), and most people have very little difficulty figuring out the corrected message. This is likely possible because the syntax of most English sentences are as follows:<br />
:''Subject — Verb — Object — Manner — Place — Time''<br />
After a lifetime of practice with this language structure, the typical human brain can very quickly identify the nature of each word, and slot them into their proper place in the sentence, often without any conscious effort.<br />
<br />
Other languages have different {{w|word order|word orders}} but generally have the same six categories.<br />
<br />
The messenger's original sentence can be parsed as follows:<br />
: I ''(subject)'' — am gonna ride ''(verb)'' — a horse ''(object)'' — ''(no manner)'' — on the beach ''(place)'' — at dawn ''(time)''.<br />
<br />
Notice that the four corrections fall into four different categories in this structure, so there is only one sensible replacement:<br />
* '''Eat''': verb<br />
* '''3AM''': time<br />
* '''Couch''': place<br />
* '''Pizza''': object<br />
<br />
"Couch" and "pizza" are both nouns so they could theoretically be subjects, but asterisk corrections must ''replace'' an existing part of the sentence satisfactorily, so the "'m" part of the verb prevents these third-person nouns from being parsed as the subject. Theoretically one could also swap "couch" and "pizza" around, giving "eat a couch on the pizza", but this makes much less practical sense than "eat a pizza on the couch". That said, in xkcd's fictional universe there is nothing to stop the character from eating a couch on a pizza.<br />
<br />
In the title text, Randall says that he likes to make it as difficult as possible for his text recipient to guess where his correction should be, and uses the following sentence and correction:<br />
:"I'd love to meet up, maybe in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty."<br />
: *witchcraft<br />
The trick here is that the word "witchcraft" doesn't fit into the sentence in any obvious way, and attempting to fit it in results in a sentence which is either very odd or grammatically meaningless. This creates a bit of mental tension, as many people's minds will try to find a way to make it work, even though none exists. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[A screenshot of a text messaging app.]<br />
:Other user: Do you have any weekend plans?<br />
:User of this device: I'm gonna ride a horse on the beach at dawn<br />
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>Eat<br />
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>3AM<br />
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>Couch<br />
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>Pizza<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:] <br />
:I like how we can do corrections in text chat by appending words with asterisks and our brains just figure out where they go.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Phones]]<br />
[[Category:Food]]<br />
[[Category:Animals]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2350:_Deer_Turrets&diff=3321162350: Deer Turrets2024-01-02T22:33:30Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2350<br />
| date = August 24, 2020<br />
| title = Deer Turrets<br />
| image = deer_turrets.png<br />
| titletext = When my great grandfather designed the Titanic and it hit an iceberg and sank, he didn't sit around moping. He took those lessons to his next job designing airships, and he made the Hindenburg completely iceberg-proof!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
In this comic [[Black Hat]] is giving what appears to be a press conference, in which he's offering a non-apology for his recent actions. This is not uncommon in politics and the military, in which the speaker offers bland admissions, such as "mistakes were made", while minimizing the importance of whatever happened.<br />
<br />
In true Black Hat fashion, he has apparently built laser turrets that automatically shoot at nearby wireless devices. This could potentially be useful in a military context, but for [[72|reasons unforeseeable]], he's mounted them on local deer. This not only releases dangerous and indiscriminate weapons, potentially into populated areas, but also makes those weapons very difficult to identify and recover or shut down. Moreover, he then apparently lost interest in the whole project, presumably making no attempt to contain the damage. <br />
<br />
Throughout the exchange, Black Hat shows a typical lack of concern for the consequences of his action, dismissing them as "mistakes", even though they were clearly deliberate actions with very predictable outcomes. He then says that it was also a mistake to invite everyone present without warning them to put their phones in airplane mode, heavily implying that the laser-deer are approaching, and everyone on the audience is in immediate danger. <br />
<br />
The title, "Deer Turrets," may be a pun on "deterrents," as laser turrets would certainly deter people with wireless devices from approaching deer. <br />
<br />
In the second panel Black Hat uses the common idiom "hindsight is {{w|Visual acuity#Expression|20/20}}". This may be a pun, as "hind" is a term for an adult female (doe) deer - as {{w|Red_deer#Behaviour|a counterpoint}} to the adult male (buck) deer being known as a "stag" - and a "sight" is a {{w|Sight_(device)|visual aligning device}}, often for weaponry. Whether or not the potential pun has any further {{w|caliber}} to its references, this ''might'' be the ultimate aim of this wording.<br />
<br />
The auto-targeting laser turrets may be a reference to attempts by researchers at the University of Washington to create a laser-based battery charging device [https://www.wired.com/story/wireless-charging-with-lasers/]. The device in question is mounted on a turret that locates and aims the beam at a photovoltaic cell attached to the battery. The same technology could theoretically be used with a higher-powered laser, but for the application described in the comic, the targeting mechanism would need to be altered to sense any electronic rather than the accompanying photovoltaic cell.<br />
<br />
In the title text, Black Hat claims that his great grandfather designed the RMS ''{{w|Titanic}}'', the then-largest ocean-liner in the world which {{w|Sinking of the Titanic|sank after striking an iceberg}} in 1912, and the ''{{w|LZ 129 Hindenburg}}'', the then-largest airship in the world which {{w|Hindenburg disaster|caught fire and crashed}} in 1937. He claims that his ancestor did not retire from the design business after the loss of the ''Titanic'', but instead learned from it and made the ''Hindenburg'' "iceberg-proof". This is an obvious and humorous lie for several reasons. First, the lead designers of the ''Olympic''-class ''Titanic'' and the ''Hindenburg''-class airship were two different people, {{w|William Pirrie, 1st Viscount Pirrie|Lord Pirrie}} and Dr. {{w|Ludwig Dürr}} respectively, and Black Hat is probably not one of Dürr's great-grandsons (Lord Pirrie had no children). Secondly, while no airship has been recorded to be destroyed by striking an iceberg, it's not because of any "iceberg-proofing" efforts by Black Hat's great-grandfather, or anyone else -- it's just due to the basic fact that airships fly in the air, where there are no icebergs.{{Citation needed}} Were an airship to strike an iceberg, it would almost certainly be destroyed; in fact, the even deadlier accident on the airship {{w|USS Akron|USS ''Akron''}} resulted from the airship simply striking the (unfrozen) ocean.<br />
There is also the implication that the "iceberg proofing" is where the project went awry - a hot enough fire will melt an iceberg, so it may be implied that the "iceberg proofing" was intentionally filling the airship with flammable hydrogen gas so it would explode and melt the iceberg on impact. It is unclear how this would be remotely helpful in case of iceberg collision, but give the fate of the Hindenburg, it is very ironic.<br />
<br />
The possibility of mounting devices on wild deer was previously referenced in the title text of [[1924: Solar Panels]].<br />
<br />
Black Hat has built a similar device to target users of Google Glass in [[1251: Anti-Glass]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Black Hat is at a podium, addressing a crowd]<br />
:Black Hat: Was it a mistake to build turrets that can track nearby wireless devices and fire powerful lasers in their general direction?<br />
:Black Hat: Sure. I realize that now.<br />
<br />
:[Face-front view of Black Hat]<br />
:Black Hat: Was it a mistake to mount those turrets on neighborhood deer, release them, then lose interest in the project and move on?<br />
:Black Hat: Yes. Hindsight is 20/20.<br />
<br />
:[Close-up, Black Hat holds up his index finger]<br />
:Black Hat: But science is about learning from mistakes<br />
:Black Hat: And not being afraid to make new ones.<br />
<br />
:[Side view again]<br />
:Black Hat: Like inviting you here, but not warning you to put your phones in airplane mode.<br />
:Black Hat: Another mistake.<br />
:Black Hat: But that's okay.<br />
:Off-Panel: ''Gallop gallop''<br />
:Audience member: ''Is it really?!''<br />
:Black Hat: I think it's fine.<br />
:Deer: ''Pew! Pew!''<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category: Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category: Animals]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2363:_Message_Boards&diff=3321152363: Message Boards2024-01-02T22:23:09Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2363<br />
| date = September 23, 2020<br />
| title = Message Boards<br />
| image = message_boards.png<br />
| titletext = (c) You can have a scooter when you pay for it yourself, and (d) if you can't learn to start a new thread rather than responding to an old one, you'll be banned. [thread locked by moderator]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The joke of this comic lies in the dates of the forum posts and the (presumed) relation between the posters.<br />
<br />
The initial post was made in 2000 by NIN85 who was, at the time, a teenaged girl (likely 14 or 15 years old given that her username ends in "85," implying she was born in 1985), complaining that her mother did not allow her to get a {{w|Vespa}}. Vespa is a brand of scooters and mopeds produced by the Italian manufacturer Piaggio. Most U.S. states require motorcycle licenses for any vehicle with an engine size over 50 cubic centimeters. Most Vespas are larger than this, although 49 CC models (classified as mopeds) do exist. Depending on the state, the [https://drivinglaws.aaa.com/tag/mopeds-other/ minimum age to get a moped in the United States] is 14, 15, or 16.<br />
<br />
The reply was written in 2020 (twenty years later) by JULZ (or Julian), the presumed son of the now-adult NIN85, likely in his teenage years. The "Z" may refer to "Generation Z", paralleling the "85." "JULZ" complains about his mother refusing to allow him to get an electric scooter, which doesn't require a license. He is implicitly pointing out the hypocrisy of his mother, as a fifteen-year-old, thinking that teenagers with scooters are perfectly reasonable, while as a thirtyfive-year-old, being against the idea.<br />
<br />
The primary source of humor in this strip (made explicit in the caption) derives from the fact that the Internet has been in common use for so long that teenagers can now look up old posts that their parents made when they, themselves, were teenagers. The late 1990s to early 2000s was right around the time the average person would be expected to have access to the internet and use it regularly, which means that, as of 2020, that's been the case for around one human generation. This can be jarring for people who are still used to thinking of the Internet as a new technology. Noting how much time has passed since events that feel recent is [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Category:Comics_to_make_one_feel_old a recurring theme in xkcd.]<br />
<br />
Of course, the basic premise of this exchange is nothing new. Teenagers have encountered (and been surprised by) the notion that their parents were once young for as long as there have been people. In the past, it's happened through finding old photographs, old videos, old diaries, or simply by hearing stories from their family and old friends. Young people are often shocked by what they learn, and accuse their parents of hypocrisy when they punish behavior that they once engaged in. Of course, this isn't true hypocrisy: we expect teenagers to grow and evolve, and develop mature, adult viewpoints. Parents naturally have both more understanding of dangers and lower tolerance for risk when dealing with their children. This strip points out that the internet has now existed for long enough (and preserves archives for long enough) that it's now become a potential medium for this whole dynamic. Part of the humor results from the unexpected situation that the child went to the trouble of tracking down his mother's old forum post, and that his mother is still active in the same niche forum 20 years later (as evidenced by her rapid response). <br />
<br />
In the title text, the parent is apparently a {{w|Internet_forum#Moderators|moderator}} on that board now, or at least can quickly twist the ear of an actual mod. She has the thread locked (preventing further replies) and threatens banning the kid if he does not learn to post new threads, instead of dredging up dead threads from two decades ago. The act of reviving long-dead threads is often called "thread necromancy", "necroing" or "necroposting", and many forums (and users) frown upon it. It is seen as similar to bringing up a conversation from ages ago in real life. It often adds nothing new, and the original participants in the discussion may no longer be active or no longer interested in the topic. Some forums may actually encourage tagging onto existing but idle discussions (to add new or updated information), but this is not especially common, and does not seem to be the case here. This complaint also parallels the actual conflict here: bringing up someone's actions or attitudes from the distance past is generally frowned upon, just as posting onto old threads with a new argument is considered a breach of etiquette.<br />
<br />
Invoking the power of moderation could suggest that, in typical parental fashion, she's using her greater influence and social position to end the discussion, making clear that she's the one in charge. "You'll be banned from this forum thread" could be seen as the Internet version of "as long as you live under my roof, you'll live by my rules".<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Single panel showing a view of the "MopedPro" forum on a message board, with a caption below the panel.]<br />
::Forum Tab: '''''MopedPro Forum''''' (Top Left) | (4 tabs with illegible writing on them. None of them appear to be selected) (Top Right)<br />
<br />
:NIN85 (posted December 5, 2000 - 13:01): <br />
:So mad that my mom won't let me get a Vespa. I'm old enough for a moped license and they're really not that dangerous.<br />
<br />
:JULZ [new user] (posted September 23, 2020 - 17:05): <br />
:At least she's not stopping you from getting an electric scooter you don't even need a license for<br />
<br />
:NIN85 (posted September 23, 2020 - 18:36): <br />
:Okay, Julian, (a) you know we talked about this, and (b) how the heck did you find this thread<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the comic]:<br />
:I love that message boards are now old enough for this to happen.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Social networking]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2374:_10,000_Hours&diff=3321132374: 10,000 Hours2024-01-02T22:12:58Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2374<br />
| date = October 19, 2020<br />
| title = 10,000 Hours<br />
| image = 10000_hours.png<br />
| titletext = I'm proud to announce that as of this year I've become a world-class expert at chewing.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
Popular smartphone operating systems automatically record the amount of time the user spends using their phone, broken down by time spent in each app. This feature is supposed to allow users to analyze their own habits. On iOS, this feature is called [https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208982 Screen Time]. On Android, it is called [https://www.android.com/digital-wellbeing/ Digital Wellbeing]. Such analyses are typically presented to show users how much time they spend on their devices, with the implication that they should spend less time on screens. Accordingly, higher amounts of time on a device can give feelings of guilt and unhappiness.<br />
<br />
This comic inverts the idea by referencing "the 10,000 hours thing". This is a (somewhat dismissive) reference to the notion that [https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/8/23/20828597/the-10000-hour-rule-debunked at least 10,000 hours of practice] are required to become an expert in any given field. This notion was popularized by Malcolm Gladwell in the book "Outliers", and has frequently been misunderstood to imply that anyone who practices anything for 10,000 hours will become an expert. <br />
<br />
In this comic, [[Cueball]]'s phone tells him that, assuming that the 10,000-hour idea is correct, he is now an expert, implying that he's spent 10,000 cumulative hours on his phone. The 10,000-hour refrain usually pertains to skill-based tasks, such as arts or athletics. Spending time one one's phone requires almost no skill, and it's unlikely that he spent all, or even most of that time focused on a particular set of skills. The joke is that Cueball has spent a huge amount of time on largely frivolous activities, and has now become a "world-class expert" in browsing, playing and texting on his phone. <br />
<br />
Randall often pokes fun at his extensive screen time, such as in [[2223: Screen Time]].<br />
<br />
The title text refers to the fact that people eat a lot, [https://www.statista.com/chart/13226/where-people-spend-the-most-time-eating-drinking/ 1-2 hours a day], though not all of this time is spent chewing. At the time of this comic's publication, [[Randall]] was just over 36 years old (13,151 days), so he has spent a large amount of time eating, well over 10,000 hours. It could also be a reference to the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes (which has been referenced before), in which Calvin refers to routines he has created to improve at chewing.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is staring at his phone. A report from the phone is shown above his head]<br />
:If you buy into the "10,000 hours" thing, you are now a world-class expert!<br />
<br />
:[Caption below comic]<br />
:My screen time reports have started trying to put a positive spin on things.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Screen Time]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2858:_Thanksgiving_Arguments&diff=3318472858: Thanksgiving Arguments2024-01-02T15:01:03Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2858<br />
| date = November 22, 2023<br />
| title = Thanksgiving Arguments<br />
| image = thanksgiving_arguments_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x272px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = An occasional source of mild Thanksgiving tension in my family is that my mother is a die-hard fan of The Core (2003), and various family members sometimes have differing levels of enthusiasm for her annual tradition of watching it.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The comic features a conversation between [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], discussing the dynamics of family gatherings during {{w|Thanksgiving (United States)|Thanksgiving}}, specifically about the topics of political arguments and how to navigate them. This was a topical comic, as Thanksgiving in the United States in 2023 was on November 23, the day after the posting of this comic.<br />
<br />
In the first panel, Cueball is depicted sitting at a computer, presumably writing an article or blog post titled "How to Win Political Arguments with Your Awful Relatives at Thanksgiving Dinner" - a common topic for 'filler' articles at this time of year. Such articles are based on the perception that political arguments are common at holiday dinners. This is likely based on the idea that people will tend to avoid relatives with "awful" political views, but holiday dinners carry the expectation that the whole family will be together, making such arguments difficult to avoid. <br />
<br />
Megan challenges this perception, citing [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/poll-nobody-fights-thanksgiving_n_5deece02e4b07f6835b7eab6 an article in ''Huffington Post''] which reports on a poll which found that only 16% of families reported discussing politics at Thanksgiving dinner, and only 3% reporting having argued about politics. She also points out that Cueball's family has political views that are "mostly fine". This is probably not especially uncommon, as families tend to share similar experiences and backgrounds, which inform their political opinions. Where disagreements do occur, it's common for those to be minor, and not the subject of particularly emotional arguments. In addition, where politics are a source of friction within a family, most learn not to bring it up at holiday gatherings, precisely to avoid such arguments. <br />
<br />
The misperception at the root of this may be a case of selection bias. There certainly are families in which members hold opposing political views with such emotional fervor that gatherings typically devolve into arguments. Since those arguments can be so intense and emotional (and often personally hurtful), the people involved are far more likely to relate their experiences to others, both in person and in media (such as in articles, columns, and portrayal in fiction). By contrast, people who have quiet, undramatic family dinners are less likely to get attention. This can give rise to the perception that heated political arguments are the norm for such gatherings. <br />
<br />
The comic concludes by revealing that Cueball's family, rather than arguing about politics, tends to argue about ''{{w|The Rise of Skywalker}}'', a controversial recent entry in the {{w|Star Wars}} franchise, with Megan agreeing that his aunt "brings that up a lot". The joke is that Cueball's family, like him, tend to have nerdy, pop-culture-based passions, and those are areas that are far more likely to result in family debates. The title text extends this theme by referencing the mother's devotion to the 2003 movie ''{{w|The Core}}'' (widely considered a contender for "{{w|The Core#Reception|all-time-worst 'science in a movie' winner}}") and her insistence on watching it annually during Thanksgiving is mentioned as a bone of contention within the family. This underscores the idea that perceptions of a "normal" family gathering (ie, arguing about politics) aren't necessarily applicable to most families. The individual character and eccentricities of each family are far more likely to define what their holidays are like. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting on an office chair at his desk typing on his stationary computer as Megan walks up behind him. The text he writes is shown above the screen with a zigzag line going from a starburst on the screen.]<br />
:Text: ''How to win political arguments with your awful relatives at Thanksgiving dinner''<br />
<br />
:[Closeup of Megan in a frame-less panel. Below Megan there is a footnote relating to the asterisk at the end of her sentence.]<br />
:Megan: You know, despite all the posts about it, surveys show most families don't actually argue about politics at Thanksgiving.<sup>*</sup><br />
:Footnote: <sup>*</sup><nowiki>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/poll-nobody-fights-thanksgiving_n_5deece02e4b07f6835b7eab6</nowiki><br />
<br />
:[Zoom back on to Cueball and Megan. Cueball has turned around in his chair, hands on his lap, looking up at Megan.]<br />
:Megan: Take ''your'' relatives. Their political opinions are basically fine.<br />
:Megan: Maybe you should write about what ''they'' argue about?<br />
<br />
:[Closeup of Cueball typing on his computer. The text he writes is again shown above the screen with a zigzag line going from a starburst on the screen. Megan speaks to him from off-panel, her speech line coming from a starburst at the right edge of the panel.]<br />
:Text: ''How to win arguments about '''The Rise of Skywalker''' at your Thanksgiving dinner''<br />
:Megan (off-panel): Aunt Katie ''does'' bring that up a lot, doesn't she.<br />
:Cueball: This'll be year four.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Social interactions]]<br />
[[Category:Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Star Wars]]<br />
[[Category:Holidays]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]] <!--The Core--><br />
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]] <!-- citation/URI --><br />
[[Category:Footnotes]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2858:_Thanksgiving_Arguments&diff=3318462858: Thanksgiving Arguments2024-01-02T14:56:29Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2858<br />
| date = November 22, 2023<br />
| title = Thanksgiving Arguments<br />
| image = thanksgiving_arguments_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x272px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = An occasional source of mild Thanksgiving tension in my family is that my mother is a die-hard fan of The Core (2003), and various family members sometimes have differing levels of enthusiasm for her annual tradition of watching it.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The comic features a conversation between [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], discussing the dynamics of family gatherings during {{w|Thanksgiving (United States)|Thanksgiving}}, specifically about the topics of political arguments and how to navigate them. This was a topical comic, as Thanksgiving in the United States in 2023 was on November 23, the day after the posting of this comic.<br />
<br />
In the first panel, Cueball is depicted sitting at a computer, presumably writing an article or blog post titled "How to Win Political Arguments with Your Awful Relatives at Thanksgiving Dinner" - a common topic for 'filler' articles at this time of year. Such articles are based on the perception that political arguments are common at holiday dinners. This is likely based on the idea that people will tend to avoid relatives with "awful" political views, but holiday dinners carry the expectation that the whole family will be together, making such arguments difficult to avoid. <br />
<br />
Megan challenges this perception, citing a citing [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/poll-nobody-fights-thanksgiving_n_5deece02e4b07f6835b7eab6 an article in ''Huffington Post''] with a poll that suggests that most families do not, in fact, engage in political arguments at Thanksgiving, and points out that Cueball's family has political views that are "mostly fine". This is probably not especially uncommon, as families tend to share similar experiences and backgrounds, which inform their political opinions. Where disagreements do occur, it's common for those to be minor, and not the subject of particularly emotional arguments. <br />
<br />
The misperception at the root of this may be a case of selection bias. Some percentage of families in which members hold opposing political views with such emotional fervor that gatherings typically devolve into arguments. Since those arguments can be so intense and emotional (and often personally hurtful), the people involved are far more likely to relate their experiences to others, both in person and in media (such as in articles, columns, and portrayal in fiction). By contrast, people who have quiet, undramatic family dinners are less likely to get attention. This can give rise to the perception that heated political arguments are the norm for such gatherings. <br />
<br />
The comic concludes by revealing that Cueball's family, rather than arguing about politics, tends to argue about ''{{w|The Rise of Skywalker}}'', a controversial recent entry in the {{w|Star Wars}} franchise, with Megan agreeing that his aunt "brings that up a lot". The joke is that Cueball's family, like him, tend to have nerdy, pop-culture-based passions, and those are areas that are far more likely to result in family debates. The title text extends this theme by referencing the mother's devotion to the 2003 movie ''{{w|The Core}}'' (widely considered a contender for "{{w|The Core#Reception|all-time-worst 'science in a movie' winner}}") and her insistence on watching it annually during Thanksgiving is mentioned as a bone of contention within the family. This underscores the idea that perceptions of a "normal" family gathering (ie, arguing about politics) aren't necessarily applicable to most families. The individual character and eccentricities of each family are far more likely to define what their holidays are like. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting on an office chair at his desk typing on his stationary computer as Megan walks up behind him. The text he writes is shown above the screen with a zigzag line going from a starburst on the screen.]<br />
:Text: ''How to win political arguments with your awful relatives at Thanksgiving dinner''<br />
<br />
:[Closeup of Megan in a frame-less panel. Below Megan there is a footnote relating to the asterisk at the end of her sentence.]<br />
:Megan: You know, despite all the posts about it, surveys show most families don't actually argue about politics at Thanksgiving.<sup>*</sup><br />
:Footnote: <sup>*</sup><nowiki>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/poll-nobody-fights-thanksgiving_n_5deece02e4b07f6835b7eab6</nowiki><br />
<br />
:[Zoom back on to Cueball and Megan. Cueball has turned around in his chair, hands on his lap, looking up at Megan.]<br />
:Megan: Take ''your'' relatives. Their political opinions are basically fine.<br />
:Megan: Maybe you should write about what ''they'' argue about?<br />
<br />
:[Closeup of Cueball typing on his computer. The text he writes is again shown above the screen with a zigzag line going from a starburst on the screen. Megan speaks to him from off-panel, her speech line coming from a starburst at the right edge of the panel.]<br />
:Text: ''How to win arguments about '''The Rise of Skywalker''' at your Thanksgiving dinner''<br />
:Megan (off-panel): Aunt Katie ''does'' bring that up a lot, doesn't she.<br />
:Cueball: This'll be year four.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Social interactions]]<br />
[[Category:Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Star Wars]]<br />
[[Category:Holidays]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]] <!--The Core--><br />
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]] <!-- citation/URI --><br />
[[Category:Footnotes]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2870:_Love_Songs&diff=3316432870: Love Songs2023-12-29T15:00:32Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2870<br />
| date = December 20, 2023<br />
| title = Love Songs<br />
| image = love_songs_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 373x341px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = The Piña Colada song carves a trajectory across the chart over the course of the song.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
The comic shows an xy-chart of various love songs, graphed according to how the subjects of the song feel. The x-axis represents the narrator/singer's feelings for whomever they are singing to or about, from "No!!" to "Yes!!", while the y-axis represents the other person's feelings for the one singing the song.<br />
<br />
The songs can be found in Spotify playlists ([https://open.spotify.com/playlist/0R1FWH3Hq4Ur08HSNSFtyf?si=WMD6u3QuThW7f2GXBTTJQA&pi=e-wEOR4pNmQ2Sp], [https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1YqJMaPVdH1FO71TcoEXCr?si=f3ac8278bb274c13]).<br />
<br />
{|class = "wikitable"<br />
! Song !! Artist(s) !! Year <!-- !! Genre --> !! Explanation !! Do I like you? !! Do you like me?<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|No Scrubs}} || {{w|TLC (group)|TLC}} || 1999 <!-- || R&B --> || The narrator is the target of another person's affections but considers that person completely undesirable as a romantic partner. || No!! || Yes!!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|That Don't Impress Me Much}} || {{w|Shania Twain}} || 1998 <!-- || Country pop --> || The song says the person singing doesn't find certain things impressive in a potential partner, and having nice things alone won't make them like that person. It shows the singer cares about being independent and wants someone special. This song was referenced in [[984: Space Launch System]]. || Unclear or Neutral || Yes!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Cry Me a River (song)|Cry Me a River}}<!-- needs disambiguating --> || {{w|Justin Timberlake}}<br/>(or {{w|Cry Me a River (Arthur Hamilton song)|Knight /&nbsp;Cocker /&nbsp;Wilson /&nbsp;Welch /&nbsp;Bublé}}) || 2002 (or 1953 onwards) <!-- || Pop --> || The lyrics describe a relationship that has ended, and the singer expresses a sense of betrayal and heartbreak. The title phrase "Cry me a river" is a metaphorical way of telling the other person to go ahead and cry as much as they want because the singer has moved on and is no longer affected by the breakup. || No! || Yes!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together}} || {{w|Taylor Swift}} || 2012 <!-- || Pop --> || At the start of the song, the narrator has spent a prolonged time in an on-and-off relationship with someone, repeatedly getting close to them before they distance themselves. As the song progresses, the narrator expresses their frustration with their partner and makes it clear that this time, ''they'' are the one leaving, and they're ''never'' coming back, no matter what their now-former lover says or does. || No!! || Yes?<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|You're So Vain}} || {{w|Carly Simon}} || 1972 <!-- || Soft rock --> || The song talks about someone who is very self-centered and vain, with the lyrics describing various instances of their narcissistic behavior. The narrator expresses frustration with this person's attitude, but there's a sense of mystery about their identity. This song has been [[1501: Mysteries|mentioned before]] in xkcd. || No! || Unclear or Neutral<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|I Will Survive}} || {{w|Gloria Gaynor}} || 1978 <!-- || Disco --> || The narrator's partner left her to hurt her emotionally, only for her to eventually realize the abusive nature of their relationship and decide she doesn't need him anymore. As he tries to come back to her, she refuses to take him back and tells him to leave. || No! || No!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Somebody That I Used to Know}} || {{w|Gotye}} feat. {{w|Kimbra}} <!-- NTBCW "Someone That I Used to Love", Bette Midler --> || 2011 <!-- || Art pop --> || The narrator's relationship with his partner has ended, but he is upset that his former partner has since then broken off all contact with him. The third verse is from the former partner's point of view, and she claims she ended the relationship because he was emotionally abusive, instead of the narrator's claim in the second verse that they simply drifted apart. || Unclear or Neutral || No!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|You Oughta Know}} || {{w|Alanis Morissette}} <!-- NTBCW "You Ought to Know...", Phil Collins --> || 1995 <!-- || Alternative rock --> || The song describes the intense emotions and pain experienced after a breakup, expressing feelings of betrayal, anger, and confusion toward the former partner. || No!! || No!!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Thank U, Next (song)|Thank U, Next}} || {{w|Ariana Grande}} <!-- NTBCW "Thank U", Alanis Morissette --> || 2018 <!-- || Pop --> || The song reflects on past relationships. || Unclear or Neutral || Unclear or Neutral<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Teenage Dream (Katy Perry song)|Teenage Dream}} || {{w|Katy Perry}}<br/>(or {{w|Teenage Dream (T. Rex song)|T. Rex}}<br/>&nbsp;or {{w|Teenage Dream|others}}) || 2010 (or 1974 or others) <!-- || Electropop (or glam rock or others) --> || The song is about teenage romance. || Yes!! || Yes!!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Shape of You}} || {{w|Ed Sheeran}}<br/>(or {{w|Shape of You (Reshaped)|Beverly Knight}}) || 2017 (or 2003) <!-- || Pop (or R&B) --> || This song is about being in love physically, and to a lesser extent, emotionally, to another person. The verses indicate that the love is reciprocated. || Yes!! || Yes!!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|I Will Always Love You}} || {{w|Dolly Parton}},<br/>&nbsp;cover: {{w|Whitney Houston}} || 1974, 1995 <!-- || Country, pop --> || Expressing deep love and gratitude, the lyrics convey a heartfelt farewell while emphasizing the enduring commitment to cherish memories and maintain love despite the separation. || Unclear or Neutral || Yes<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Call Me Maybe}} || {{w|Carly Rae Jepsen}} || 2011 <!-- || Pop --> || The lyrics describe an encounter where the narrator gives their number to someone they find attractive. (Although, in the music video, the guy turns out to be gay.) This song/Carly in general has been mentioned [[2379: Probability Comparisons|lots]] [[2198: Throw|of]] [[2067: Challengers|times]] in xkcd. || Yes! || Unclear or Neutral<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Killing Me Softly with His Song|Killing Me Softly}} || {{w|Lori Lieberman}},<br/>&nbsp;covers: {{w|Roberta Flack}},<br/>&nbsp;&nbsp;{{w|The Fugees}} || 1971, 1973, 1996 <!-- || Folk, soul, hip hop --> || The singer recounts the experience of hearing a song that seems to reflect their own life story. || Yes!! || Unclear or Neutral<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Girlfriend (Avril Lavigne song)|Girlfriend}} || {{w|Avril Lavigne}}<br/>(or {{w|Girlfriend (disambiguation)#Songs|many others}}) <!-- NTBCW "Girlfriend In A Coma", The Smiths --> || 2007 (or many others) <!-- || Pop punk (or many others) --> || The narrator is in love with a boy who already has a girlfriend, and spends the song trying to convince him to dump her so she herself can go out with him. || Yes || Unclear or Neutral<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'}} || {{w|The Righteous Brothers}} || 1964 <!-- || Pop --> || The song expresses the pain and sorrow of a fading romantic connection, capturing the emotional toll of lost love and the desire to rekindle the passion that once defined the relationship. This song was featured in [[317: That Lovin' Feelin']]. || Unclear or Neutral || No?<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|You Belong with Me}} || {{w|Taylor Swift}} || 2009 <!-- || Country pop --> || The narrator has a crush on someone already in a relationship (implied throughout the song to be a toxic one), and lists various reasons why they would make a better partner. It's also worth noting that in the [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VuNIsY6JdUw& music video], the narrator's crush is actually on decent terms with them, rather than flat-out disliking them as the chart suggests.|| Yes || No!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Creep (Radiohead song)|Creep}} || {{w|Radiohead}}<br/>(or {{w|Creep|others}}) || 1992 (or others) <!-- || Alternative rock (or others) --> || Expressing feelings of inadequacy and unrequited love, the song conveys the narrator's sense of not belonging and yearning for someone who appears out of reach. || Yes!! || No!!<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Escape (The Piña Colada Song)|The Piña Colada Song}} (title text) || {{w|Rupert Holmes}} || 1979 <!-- || Soft rock --> || The narrator is bored with his relationship (and apparently his life in general), when he reads a personal ad from someone expressing a desire to find an adventurous romance. He makes plans to meet this person, only to discover that it was placed by his partner. This seems to spark the realization that they have more in common than they realized, and the decision to pursue a more adventurous life together, resulting in a trajectory from the lower left to the middle or upper right. || varies || varies<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Y-axis label:]<br />
:Do you like me?<br />
<br />
:[X-axis label:]<br />
:Do I like you?<br />
<br />
:[X- and Y-axis values (from bottom left):]<br />
:''NO!!''; No; Unclear or Neutral; Yes; ''YES!!''<br />
<br />
:[Top left quarter:]<br />
:No Scrubs<br />
:That Don't Impress Me Much<br />
:Cry Me a River<br />
:We Are Never Ever Ever<!--sic--> Getting Back Together<br />
<br />
:[Middle left:]<br />
:You're So Vain<br />
<br />
:[Bottom left quarter:]<br />
:I Will Survive<br />
:Somebody That I Used to Know<br />
:You Oughta Know<br />
<br />
:[Center:]<br />
:Thank U, Next<br />
<br />
:[Top right quarter:]<br />
:Teenage Dream<br />
:Shape of You<br />
:I Will Always Love You<br />
:Call Me Maybe<br />
<br />
:[Middle right:]<br />
:Killing Me Softly<br />
<br />
:[Bottom right quarter:]<br />
:Girlfriend<br />
:You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'<br />
:You Belong with Me<br />
:Creep<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Songs]]<br />
[[Category:Romance]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1504:_Opportunity&diff=3304581504: Opportunity2023-12-08T23:02:00Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1504<br />
| date = March 27, 2015<br />
| title = Opportunity<br />
| image = opportunity.png<br />
| titletext = We all remember those famous first words spoken by an astronaut on the surface of Mars: "That's one small step fo- HOLY SHIT LOOK OUT IT'S GOT SOME KIND OF DRILL! Get back to the ... [unintelligible] ... [signal lost]"<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This comic is talking about the robotic science platform {{w|Opportunity (rover)|''Opportunity''}}. On January 25, 2004, two rovers, named ''Spirit'' and ''Opportunity'' were landed on the surface of {{w|Mars}} for the purpose of gathering data about the surface of Mars. The original plan called for these rovers to function and collect data for 90 days on the surface. <br />
<br />
Both rovers proved to be remarkably robust, with ''Spirit'' functioning for 6 years, 24 times longer than the original mission plan, before it became stuck in a sandstorm, which covered its solar panels. This was covered in [[695: Spirit]], in which the Spirit rover is also portrayed with an anthropomorphic personality.<br />
<br />
Even after ''Spirit'' ceased to function, ''Opportunity'' continued to operate. As of the publication of this strip, it had been operating for over 11 years. This comic extrapolates the rover's resilience to absurdity for comedic effect, implying that the rover begins to operate independently, even with its original power sources disconnected, and presumably developing some form of general intelligence. It then takes a darker turn, implying that ''Opportunity'' attacks both later rovers and even human astronauts that later land on Mars. This evolution is similar to the stories of {{w|HAL 9000}} (from {{w|2001: A Space Odyssey (film)|''2001: A Space Odyssey''}}) and {{w|List of Star Trek characters (T–Z)#V'Ger|V'Ger}} (from ''{{w|Star Trek: The Motion Picture}}''), both of which became dangerous to human beings. The final panel suggests that humans eventually manage to terraform Mars, but that ''Opportunity'' grows so powerful that humanity cedes half the planet to it. <br />
<br />
In real life, as of Feb 12th, 2019, the Opportunity rover has finally been {{w|Opportunity mission timeline|declared dead}} after 5352 Sols (Mars Days) or 5500 Earth days on Mars. On Feb 13th, 2019, [[Randall]] eulogies the Opportunity Rover in [[2111: Opportunity Rover]].<br />
<br />
They mention another Martian rover, {{w|Spirit (rover)|''Spirit''}} that was also sent to Mars on the same date as Opportunity. Unfortunately, it became stuck and a sandstorm covered its solar panels. On March 22, 2010, it was thought that Spirit's batteries finally ran out, marking the end of its mission. This was covered in [[695: Spirit]], in which the Spirit rover is also portrayed with an anthropomorphic personality.<br />
<br />
In 2023, Opportunity is still moving despite having supposedly no power source. It also became aggressive and deactivated the {{w|Mars 2020|Perseverance rover sent in 2020}}. [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] can't explain how it moves, but investigating is now too dangerous. This evolution is similar to the stories of {{w|HAL 9000}} (from {{w|2001: A Space Odyssey (film)|''2001: A Space Odyssey''}}) and {{w|List of Star Trek characters (T–Z)#V'Ger|V'Ger}} (from ''{{w|Star Trek: The Motion Picture}}''), both of which became dangerous to human beings. This, however, never ended up happening, as Opportunity "officially" stopped working on June 10, 2018.<br />
<br />
"Everything the light touches" is a reference to a line by {{w|List of The Lion King characters#Mufasa|Mufasa}} in ''{{w|The Lion King}}''. Mufasa's son {{w|List of The Lion King characters#Simba|Simba}} then asks "What about that shadowy place?" and Mufasa tells him "That is beyond our borders. You must never go there". This was used again in [[1608: Hoverboard]], where [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/a/a0/1608_0986x1076y_Our_kingdom_from_a_cliff.png Cueball tells the same line] to Ponytail in the left part of the world. In the ''[[what if? (blog)|what if?]]'' article ''[https://what-if.xkcd.com/48 Sunset on the British Empire]'', concerning the end of the sun shining on the British Empire, Cueball tells a child that everything the light touches is their kingdom, and the child asks (in the title text) "What about that shadowy place over there?" to which Cueball replies (also in the title text), "That's France. We'll get it one of these days."<br />
<br />
The title text forecasts the first words of the first astronauts on the surface of Mars. At first, the astronaut copies the first words of {{w|Neil Armstrong}} on the Moon ("That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind") but it is interrupted by the ''Opportunity'' rover. Opportunity has a drill to collect Martian rock samples, but here it is heavily suggested that the drill is being used as a weapon against the astronaut.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[The year (or year and first sentence) for each panel is written in a small frame at the top of each panel. It breaks the top frame of the panels.]<br />
<br />
:[Ponytail is sitting at a computer, facing left. Hairbun stands behind her.]<br />
:2010:<br />
:Ponytail: After six years, ''Spirit'' is down, but ''Opportunity'' is still going strong.<br />
:Hairbun: Tough little rover!<br />
<br />
:[Opportunity traveling on Mars. Text is written in frames with zigzag lines]<br />
:2015:<br />
:Off-screen: Eleven years, wow.<br />
:Off-screen 2: Wasn't the original mission 90 days?<br />
:Off-screen: This is starting to get weird.<br />
<br />
:[Cueball and Megan sitting at a computer, facing right.]<br />
:2023:<br />
:Cueball: The battery is totally disconnected. How can it still be moving??<br />
:Megan: Given what it did to the Mars 2020 rover, we may never know.<br />
<br />
:[Two Martian inhabitants looking like Cueball and Megan stands on a cliff edge pointing towards a dark, mountainous region. Behind them are a tower and a hover car]<br />
:2450, terraformed Mars, Martian imperial capital:<br />
:Martian Cueball: Everything the light touches is our kingdom.<br />
:Martian Megan: What's that dark area?<br />
:Martian Cueball: That is ''Opportunity's'' half of the planet. We must never go there.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]<br />
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]<br />
[[Category:Mars rovers]]<br />
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]<br />
[[Category:The Lion King]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1494:_Insurance&diff=3304501494: Insurance2023-12-08T22:41:54Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1494<br />
| date = March 4, 2015<br />
| title = Insurance<br />
| image = insurance.png<br />
| titletext = LIFEHACKS: You can just take all the luggage off the airport conveyer belt and leave with it. They don't check that it's yours at the door!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]], apparently having just purchased a new insurance policy, is given a document explaining the policy terms. As is often the case, he's presented as some sort of programmer or at least logically minded person. He reads through the terms that are handed to him, and finds some sort of loophole. This is a play on the fact that programmers tend to look for loopholes in programs, code and system architecture, and treat finding them as a challenge (either to exploit them, or to prevent such exploitation by other parties). The fact that Cueball is trying to discuss his findings with the agent suggests that he's trying to prevent it from happening, rather than planning to do it himself. <br />
<br />
In this case, the obvious "loophole" in a fire insurance policy is that the customer generally receives a large payment in the event of a fire. This means that a person could make money by insurance a building or other property for more than its actual value, then deliberately setting a fire. Alternately, someone could set a fire and claim that more valuables were destroyed than actually were. In either case, the customer would effectively receive free money for their troubles. In principle, this could be done repeatedly, resulting in an unlimited source of money.<br />
<br />
All of this is implied simply by Cueball reviewing the document, starting to ask a question, and being cut off by the agent, explaining that this {{w|Life hacking|"cool hack"}} is actually just an instance of {{w|insurance fraud}}, which is a) well known and b) highly illegal. In practice, insurance companies are constantly on the lookout for such forms of fraud, and attempting to do so in real life would be more likely to land you in prison than to enrich you. <br />
<br />
The comparison here is that exploiting a program's faults can be regarded as interesting or fun, while exploiting the faults in a legal document will often result in some sort of legal repercussions. Moreover, most such exploitations that involve money have usually been figured out already, and systems changed or laws passed in order prevent them from happening. When they do occur, the exploiter is subject to legal punishment. <br />
<br />
Cueball begins to ask how the agent knew what his question was, and is again cut off by the agent explaining that he sees a lot of programmers, suggesting that Cueball is not the first to consider that particular loophole. <br />
<br />
The title text provides another example: US airports typically place passengers' luggage on carousels, and leave it to the individual travelers to find and retrieve their own luggage, which would seem to make it easy to take luggage that's not yours (even "all the luggage"), but that's less of a 'hack' than a crude form of petty theft, which contravenes both the law and normal social and ethical expectations. <br />
<br />
It should be noted that there are place in which it's typical for airports to verify luggage ownership before allowing people to take their bags. In most wealthy countries, this practice has largely been abandoned, because other peoples' luggage isn't typically very valuable, airports are generally fully of security cameras, and walking off with a random piece of luggage creates a significant risk that the actual owner will see you trying to take it. For these reasons, the risks associated with such theft generally outweigh the rewards. A single person trying to remove "all the luggage" would be particularly impractical. Even if they could contrive a method to transport it all, their actions would be so obvious that they would almost certainly be caught immediately. <br />
<br />
The core point, in both of these cases, is that theoretical loopholes, which might be easy to exploit in computer code, are usually wildly impractical in reality, and often carry both moral implications and the risk of punishment. <br />
<br />
[[1469: UV]] also contains a case of insurance fraud.<br />
<br />
==Lifehacks vs. IT hacks==<br />
The term hacking in IT is ambiguous and goes from code development (in particular in the opensource community) to the fact of "using a {{w|Hack|hack}}". A hack would then refer to a tricky piece of code doing the intended job in a way that the framework or project in which it is inserted was not intended to. To the general public, 'hacking' a system would normally refer to some illegal way of achieving a goal against the will of the original developers of the system, like getting a copy of all the data available or taking advantage of some unwanted behavior, but a more distinctive term for such an exploitation (maliciously or after an invitation to perform legitimate penetration testing) would be 'cracking'.<br />
<br />
This comic is making fun of what IT hacks would look like in real world. Surely, taking lots of luggage from an airport is technically possible and probably not so difficult, but first, it looks weird, and second, it's also obviously illegal. The weirdness of such behavior is more obvious in real life than in IT.<br />
<br />
It is worth noting that it is currently popular on social media sites to share small tricks to make one's life easier. This is called {{w|Life hacking|"life hacking", or "hacking your life"}}.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is standing in front of a desk, which a man sits behind. The man is presumably an insurance agent, and is handing Cueball a paper.]<br />
:Insurance agent: Here's a page explaining the terms of your new fire insurance policy.<br />
<br />
:[Zoom in on Cueball as he reads the paper.]<br />
<br />
:[Cueball starts to ask the insurance agent a question when he hands Cueball yet another paper.]<br />
:Cueball: Hey, what if I-<br />
:Insurance agent: And ''here's'' a page explaining that the "cool hack" you just thought of is called "insurance fraud". We already know about it and it's a crime.<br />
:Cueball: Oh. Right. How did-<br />
:Insurance agent: I see a lot of programmers here.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Aviation]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2366:_Amelia%27s_Farm_Fresh_Cookies&diff=3297552366: Amelia's Farm Fresh Cookies2023-11-28T18:31:50Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2366<br />
| date = September 30, 2020<br />
| title = Amelia's Farm Fresh Cookies<br />
| image = amelias_farm_fresh_cookies.png<br />
| titletext = I told her I'd take her address off the packaging if she'd stop submitting anonymous food safety complaints about my bakery to the health department, but she sent me a note that said NO DEAL along with an extra large batch of cookies.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The comic portrays the back side of a box of cookies (evidenced by the {{w|nutrition facts}}-style table on the left side). Many brands have a romanticized {{w|origin story}} on their packaging explaining the name or how they have a secret ingredient. Instead, this brand's origin story is a tale of petty one-upmanship as the brand's founder sets out to prove that her cookies are better than her grandmother's.<br />
<br />
The first paragraph lovingly describes the founder's memories of sitting in her grandmother's kitchen, watching her bake cookies. One would expect this to transition to a description of how delicious those cookies were, and a claim that her recipe became the basis for the cookies being offered for sale. Instead, 'Amelia' insists that her grandmother's cookies were ''awful'', and insists that the goal of her company is to show how cookies are supposed to taste. This subversion of expectations breaks down the sense of nostalgia that's often used to market products, and publicly embarrasses her grandmother, turning a minor family squabble into a very public fight. Such is a very unusual strategy for convincing people to buy cookies. <br />
<br />
To complete her revenge, the "story" contains the grandmother's address. Creating false addresses for their mascots is often used as a publicity stunt for children to write testimonials to the brand's PR or marketing department. However, here it appears to be Amelia's actual Grandma's actual address, the goal being for her to receive thousands of letters on a regular basis about how her granddaughter's cookies are so great, while jabbing "unlike yours!"<br />
<br />
In retaliation, Amelia's grandmother has started submitting (presumably bogus) food safety complaints about Amelia's bakery to the health department in a ploy to overburden the bakery with unnecessarily frequent inspections. At one point Amelia eventually decided to offer a truce, which her grandmother emphatically rejected, underscoring it by sending Amelia an extra-large batch of the cookies she knows Amelia hates.<br />
<br />
While the name of the city past the first letter and at least one of the zip code digits is too illegible to read, by process of elimination it is plausible that the city is Orlando and the zip code is 32841. No other location in Florida consists of one word starting with O and a zip code legibly close to the one in the comic.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[What looks like the back of a package of cookies is shown.]<br />
<br />
:[Top left: Product logo.]<br />
:'''Amelia's''' Farm-Fresh ''Cookies''<br />
:[Parts of an oval surround the logo]<br />
<br />
:[Middle left: What appears to be a standard Nutrition Facts panel, though the details are illegible squiggles]<br />
<br />
:[Bottom left: What appears to be an ingredients list, though the details are illegible squiggles, and a few other squiggles]<br />
<br />
:[Right side:]<br />
:''Our Story''<br />
:Growing up on my grandma's farm, I spent so many cozy mornings in the kitchen, watching her take trays of fresh-baked cookies from the oven.<br />
:Her cookies were just ''awful''.<br />
:She used the finest ingredients. Eggs straight from the coop, stone-ground flour, hand-churned butter. But she squandered them. It's so sad. She told me I was too picky, but I know what cookies are supposed to taste like.<br />
:When I started a bakery, I vowed not to repeat her mistakes. These cookies won't fall apart in your hands. They have gooey centers, and slightly crisp exteriors, not the other way around, ''Grandma''. There's no mysterious gritty texture. Why would there be?<br />
:If you enjoy these cookies, please write to my grandma to let her know.<br />
:Thanks!<br />
:''Amelia''<br />
<br />
:[A partially legible squiggled address appears at the bottom left of the Our Story part of the box. The bracketed dashes represent portions that are illegible.]<br />
:Ms W[——] M[——]<br />
:1[—] A[——] Ln<br />
:O[——], FL 328[–]1<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Food]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2848:_Breaker_Box&diff=3297542848: Breaker Box2023-11-28T18:05:00Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2848<br />
| date = October 30, 2023<br />
| title = Breaker Box<br />
| image = breaker_box_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 560x776px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Any electrician will warn you to first locate and flip the house's CAUSALITY circuit breaker before touching the CIRCUIT BREAKERS one.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
A {{w|distribution board}}, referred to as a "breaker box" here and also commonly referred to as a "fuse box", "breaker panel", "DB box", and many other names, is a metal box attached to a wall, usually in some maintenance area, containing multiple {{w|circuit breakers}} that distribute electricity to various parts of the building. A circuit breaker is an electrical switch, usually in the form of a small lever, which disconnects the circuit from the power source when opened. These breakers are designed to automatically open if too much electrical current flows through them. This is a safety measure to reduce the risk of damage, fire or electrocution in the event of a short circuit or an overloaded line. These breakers can also be opened manually, deactivating the circuit to allow electrical work to be done.<br />
<br />
In breaker boxes, each individual breaker is typically labeled to let the operator know what that breaker controls. Typically, the circuit controlled by each breaker will feed an intuitive set of connections: a certain room, or set of rooms, or possibly a set of related services (like overhead lights, or all the outlets on one floor). Some large appliances will have a dedicated circuit and breaker. <br />
<br />
However, in houses that have been rewired multiple times (or were poorly wired the first time), this can quickly become overcomplicated with seemingly random connections. Randall lives in Boston where much of the housing stock is from the late 1800s and early 1900s, and he is likely to live in a house with non-ideal wiring, which may have inspired this comic.<br />
<br />
The comic satirizes these complex wiring setups, with multiple breakers "controlling" arbitrary things, including some that – in the classic style of xkcd – are puns on the word "breaker" or may be impossible to hook a breaker up to, getting progressively more absurd to the point of nullifying laws and "breaking" certain laws of physics.<br />
<br />
===Table of the breaker labels===<br />
{|class = "wikitable"<br />
! Label next to breaker !! Explanation !! Note<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Left column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| Kitchen lights || The lights in the kitchen. || rowspan="3"| Standard items that could be separate<br />
|-<br />
| Living room lights || The lights in the living room.<br />
|-<br />
| Porch lights || The lights on the porch.<br />
|-<br />
| Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere || The lights in the bathroom, but also a random outlet.<br />
It is not uncommon for the power supplies to bathrooms (and other rooms with water connections) to be on a separate circuit. This is because water can potentially cause a short circuit, resulting in the breaker opening, and separate circuits minimize the impact and makes the problem easier to locate. These are called "GFCI" or "GFI" (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter [https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/099_0.pdf]) circuits.<br />
<br />
It is a standard to connect a bathroom outlet with another outlet also requiring a GFCI, such as basement or outdoors. Another option is that an electrician (or homeowner), having initially reserved an output from the box for such a limited use, may – while adding wiring – chooses to wire seemingly unrelated things into the same circuit. This may make sense (for example, an outlet near a non-bathroom sink or some other water source could reasonably be grouped with the bathroom), or it may simply be out of convenience from how long the wires needed to run (such as an outlet in the room adjacent to the bathroom). In either case, future residents and installers may not be informed of this, and therefore wouldn't realize that the outlet is grouped with that circuit.<br />
| Standard or 'kludged'<br />
|-<br />
| North-facing appliances || colspan="2"|Peculiar and a bit complex to execute. Here's how it might have been set up:<br />
# Install a breaker switch that is actually a mechanical switch to control a smart home automation instead of its normal function<br />
# Replace relevant normal outlets with Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets <br />
# Use smart home software to create a custom group of all outlets that control all ''north-facing appliances''<br />
# Set up a software automation to selectively toggle this user-defined group of smart outlets when triggered.<br />
* Adding a matching appliance to the house would require editing the automation.<br />
<br />
Alternative explanations:<br />
* The switch may be physically wired only to outlets installed on a southern wall in the property (or ''all'' southern walls, for each room that requires them), and you'd ensure that everything connected to these exclusively north-facing outlets also faces directly away from the wall(s).<br />
* The switch could control appliances on the north-facing walls of the house. <br />
<br />
Note: "North-facing" has broad interpretation, as lax as northeast to northwest or as strict as {{w|Points of the compass#32-wind compass rose|north by east to north by west}}. It could also be as exact as perfect north, but this would render this breaker completely functionless unless an appliance happens to be ever-so-perfectly aligned.<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| Bathtub drain light || colspan="2"|Bathtub drains typically do not have lights, but this breaker provides power to that and only that. Why it isn't already considered a "bathroom light" is unexplained (unless it's for the bit of the pipe that is ''external'' to that room). Perhaps it is a sub-menu of bathroom breaker, but then its position on the panel is unusual in that it isn't next to the bathroom breaker.<br />
<br />
It obviously cannot be the "surprise mystery outlet" already referred to earlier as being covered under the switch for the bathroom lights, much apart from it not being a socket/outlet.<br />
|-<br />
| Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" || colspan="2"|Another odd and amusing specification. <br />
<br />
To make it work, one might use the "North-facing appliances" setup described above, but just with a different custom group of Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets chosen to only control appliances with an "F' in their name.<br />
<br />
Some common household appliances (kitchen and elsewhere) that this switch might control:<br />
* coffee maker<br />
* refrigerator<br />
* freezer<br />
* fan<br />
* air fryer<br />
* food processor<br />
* waffle iron<br />
* fabric steamer<br />
* fireplace (electric)<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Hot water heater}} || Usually just a heater that creates (and typically stores) hot water. But given that the next breaker controls the "Regular water heater", this breaker might actually control a water heater that pointlessly heats water that is ''already'' hot. <br />
This is probably a joke about the fact that the common phrase "hot water heater" is [[technically]] redundant or misleading:<br />
* Redundant because the simpler term "water heater" is enough to describe a device that produces hot water.<br />
* Misleading because it's not the purpose of residential water heaters to heat water that is ''already'' hot.<br />
<br />
Trivia: In some languages, "hot water" is a separate, single word, so "hot-water heater" can be accurate. One such example is Japanese, where "hot water" is simply referred to as "お湯" ("Oyu"), however this is taken a step further as "hot water heater" is referred to as "給湯器" ("Kyūyuki").<br />
|rowspan="2"|Two "heaters"<br />
|-<br />
| Regular water heater || The heater for regular water. In context with the switch above, this label presumes it's for a heater for heating water that is not yet hot (usually called a "hot water heater", hence the joke). Alternatively, if we assume that a ''hot water heater'' is for ''making'' hot water, this heater must be for making “regular water”, whatever temperature that may mean. Further still, the difference in these labels may be speaking to the nature of the heaters themselves - it could be the case that one of the heaters is abnormally hot to the touch, where the other is a "regular" temperature, but are otherwise both capable of heating water just fine. <br />
|-<br />
| Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in || colspan="2"|This controls every outlet in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in, such as the dining room and kitchen and – depending on the "normal" habits of the inhabitants – other rooms such as the bedroom, bathroom, or living room (if not already covered by the "living room lights" switch above). Closets and single-purpose rooms such as the laundry room are presumably not included.<br />
|-<br />
| High-pitched hum generator || colspan="2"|Controls a high-pitched hum generator. This is a call-back to [[1590: The Source]], which was released just over 8 years before this comic.<br />
|-<br />
| The solution to the cryptogram below: || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on a "code breaker," something or someone that solves a code, such as Randall's cryptogram, a type of puzzle where a sentence has been encoded using a cipher, usually simple, and the goal is to determine the cipher and recover the original sentence from the encoded one. Randall has not actually written a cryptogram, simply making the label's text illegible to the audience.<br />
2 other explanations:<br />
* The identity of the electrical load sourced from this breaker can be found by solving the cryptogram.<br />
* This switch enables or disables the code's solution somehow, perhaps toggling its knowability or solvability or turning on a computer for solving cryptograms.<br />
|-<br />
| Bugs || colspan="2"|Several interpretations are possible:<br />
* Disable all software bugs in the house*<br />
* Disable all insect bugs in the house – as an efficient form of pest control – perhaps using ultrasonic emitters that drive away bugs (may be a reference to [[2753: Air Handler]]) – or perhaps the house contains noise machines that play sounds of insects or other ways of simulating insects.<br />
* Disable power to all covert listening devices, which would be able to be switched off if wired into the house's electrical grid.<br />
* Disable the whole global category of bugs (insects, arachnids, and other small arthropods), in which case we'd have no more pests and we'd reduce disease like malaria and {{w|Lyme disease}}! Of course, food webs would also collapse, and our world would be overrun with waste.<br />
* All of the above<br />
<nowiki>*</nowiki>Though it's unlikely that it's what Randall is referring to, computer bugs switches actually exist. It's a feature in some video game emulators to either run an unofficial patched version or to stay true to the original system, for example to allow bug-exploit speedruns of a video game.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Right column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now || colspan="2"|Fans generally produce a steady, low-level 'white' noise that people generally stop noticing. When such a fan is turned off, the absence of that noise is quickly noticed. Alternatively, the fan could be somewhere that cannot be heard, with the label on the switch serving as the only reminder of the fan's existence.<br />
<br />
Shutting down a fan that you didn't realize was running could be worrisome for a couple of reasons: it could be serving an important function (like HVAC or server cooling) and cause a problem when it's off, or it may be a fan that wasn't supposed to be running, but had been for some time without being noticed.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishwasher || colspan="2"|A dishwasher may find itself with a separate circuit breaker for a few reasons. Commercial-grade dishwashers are often high-load appliances that require more power (incorporating powerful heating units and pumps). Residential-grade dishwashers may not be as energy-intensive, but if the house wasn't originally built with a dishwasher in mind, it is likely new wiring had to be added during its installation, resulting in a breaker that exclusively controls the dishwasher.<br />
<br />
Though what "dishwasher" actually means may depend on what the "dishes" of the next switch might be, and thus what additional device may be required to ensure they remain clean. Even at the more trivial end of the interpretation (though not then explaining the following "dishes"), a busy restaurant might have an employee section equipped exclusively for the dishwashing role and separately supplied with power in a similar manner to that suggested for the bathroom.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishes || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on "breaking" dishes. <br />
<br />
Of course, dinnerware and dishes are usually not powered devices and wouldn't require a circuit breaker at all; discovering they need their own circuit breaker separate from their dishwasher is a spoof of many common circuit breaker frustrations. Lastly it's also possible the switch powers/controls two or more satellite dishes. <br />
|-<br />
| Hallway lights || The lights in the hallway or hallways. || rowspan="3"|"Hallway" regions<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway outlets || The outlets in the hallway or hallways, presumably the same as the "Hallway lights" hallways. A common confusion when turning off breakers is separate wiring for outlets and lights in the same room. Though having the room go dark is a good mnemonic that it is unpowered, it is not a guarantee, and indeed, wiring them separately allows working on the outlets without having to do it in the dark.<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway floors || Yet another breaker for the hallways, presumably the same hallways as the previous two breakers, adding more confusion and frustration. This breaker has several potential interpretations:<br />
#A master switch for all floors (stories) in the building which include hallways, e.g. the guestroom areas in a hotel, whilst possibly excluding the lobby and service levels<br />
#Outlets in the floor<br />
#Electric underfloor heating (heated bathroom floors are a feature in some houses)<br />
#Electrification of the floors – not common outside of horror and heist movies<br />
#Disabling all floors entirely, so everything resting on the floors falls through<br />
|-<br />
| Social media || colspan="2"|This breaker also has several potential interpretations of "taking a social media break" or "turning off social media":<br />
#'Digital detoxes', where someone says "I'm going to take a social media break" and intends to deny themselves access to all their social media apps.<br />
#A switch for a parent to turn off all social media entering the house to protect their kids and themselves, which references a type of specialized content filter available through Wi-Fi router settings, not traditionally a breaker box.<br />
#A callback to [[908: The Cloud]]. Since most social media platforms are centralized services, it would be theoretically possible to hook up a switch to the main power supply of every server building at once, given some extremely long wires, a breaker capable of handling the abhorrently massive electric load, and agreement from every social media provider.<sup><i>([[1439|optional]])</i></sup><br />
#The theoretical desire by some to "turn off social media" for the world due to its harmful effects on society. As someone who lived before social media and saw its spread over two decades, Randall may be ruing the impacts of social media on civilization and channeling his desire to put the genie back in the bottle.<br />
#Potentially a play on the phrase “breaking the internet”, meaning going viral on social media, though "breaking social media" is not an idiom.<br />
|-<br />
| State law || This and the next two items are a pun on "breaking the law."<br />
Taken literally, it would either disable enforcement of State Law or nullify every single one, creating a state of lawlessness similar to the premise of the popular movie, "The Purge". It's unclear if this refers to Randall's state of Massachusetts or State Law as a general concept.<br />
<br />
If the switch just nullifies State Law within the confines of the house, that would make the home a place where State Law could be broken without consequence.<br />
| rowspan="2"|"Legal" items<br />
|-<br />
| Federal law || An extension of the previous entry. When discussing legal matters (taxes, regulations, etc.) it's not uncommon for state and federal authorities to issue their own statutes, often labeled "state" and "federal" respectively.<br />
<br />
The ramifications of nullifying every US Federal law are immense. Disabling Federal Law while keeping State Law would theoretically fulfill the goals of the "States Rights" advocates, groups of conservatives across US history aiming to return Federal power to the States.<br />
|-<br />
| Second law of thermodynamics || The {{w|second law of thermodynamics}} means that things naturally move from order to disorder over time. It also says you can't take heat from a place that's cooler and use it to make a place hotter than the cooler place, unless you use some energy to do it. In short, without adding energy, only the hotter place can warm up the cooler one.<br />
<br />
| rowspan="3"|"Physics" items<br />
|-<br />
| Friction || {{w|Friction}} is the resistive force that opposes the relative motion or tendency of such motion of two surfaces in contact. Being in a frictionless environment (and a vacuum, as physicists love...) was the subject of [[669: Experiment]].<br />
|-<br />
| Gravity || {{w|Gravity}} is a natural force that attracts two bodies toward each other, proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers.<br />
<br />
Of course, if this switch is turned off, it may simply mean that objects within the house itself are no longer subject to gravity. This would be '''''far''''' less cataclysmic, and as a bonus, this would make it very different when moving around the house, making it easier to get to higher areas, and move objects, though impossible to place them without some other force being applied, and could prove to cause some problems once the breaker is turned back on, especially for things under said objects.<br />
|-<br />
| Circuit breakers || colspan="2"|Possibly the "master" breaker, controlling the main circuit that supplies power to all other circuit breakers. However, given the other surreal things this breaker box controls, turning it off may possibly make it impossible to turn it on ever again as the switch will no longer function once switched off (i.e.: If this was turned off, it would presumably turn off the functionality of the circuit breaker itself, if it was wired to include itself). Another interpretation is that turning off this breaker should supposedly make this breaker not able to control the power, which leads to a situation similar to the liar's paradox.<br />
<br />
Moreover, if this circuit breaker disables all circuit breakers everywhere, it would result in global infrastructure collapse, halting essential services, including transportation, healthcare, and communication, and leading to widespread chaos.<br />
<br />
Note that it might be a perfectly valid label if it refers to multiple subsidiary 'boxes', cascaded off this particular one, each containing one or more additional breakers for convenience or safety. e.g. units dedicated to a shed, garage or workshop room which save the need to traipse all the way to this box's utility cupboard location in the event of an otherwise easily resolved power issue.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Title text<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3"|The title text is about {{w|causality}} (not to be confused with {{w|casualty}}), and how to use this (unseen, located elsewhere) breaker along with the last shown switch that (de)powers the illustrated box.<br />
<br />
Causality, in its simplest form, is the process of cause and effect, meaning that everything that happens only happens because something caused it to happen - in other words, every event is an effect caused by another event. For example, a bag of chips can't just fall onto the floor for ''literally'' no reason - it has to be caused by some other event, such as someone smacking it or a gust of wind blowing it down. <br />
<br />
Turning off the circuit breaker using the CIRCUIT BREAKERS switch may lead to a loop, if the disabled breaker can no longer disable itself, leading to it turning back on, etc. Alternatively, turning off the CIRCUIT BREAKER switch might be a one-way street.<br />
<br />
Turning the CAUSALITY switch from OFF back to ON might be unlikely to do anything if the circuit breakers upstream of it have been fully deactivated. The separation of cause and effect would ostensibly take precedence over the current switch setting. Turning off CAUSALITY first would prevent either the loop or the permanent disabling of circuit breakers, but would also have many other side effects, including letting switches potentially serve power even if there is no power being served ''to them'', or even spontaneously switching (on or off) without any intervention or reason. <br />
<br />
The 'warning', from an electrician, could even be to locate the nominally ''off'' CAUSALITY switch in order to turn it ''on'', or else all other intended effects will possibly not end up being actually actioned. Either way, whether or not turning on/off causality would change the state of causality (at one stage or other being rendered ineffectual) is an exercise left for the reader. <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[An open breaker box is shown. There are 26 labelled breakers, all of which are on, paired back to back in thirteen rows as a label, switch, switch and label.]<br />
:Kitchen lights / A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now<br />
:Living room lights / Dishwasher<br />
:Porch lights / Dishes<br />
:Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere / Hallway lights<br />
:North-facing appliances / Hallway outlets<br />
:Bathtub drain light / Hallway floors<br />
:Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" / Social media<br />
:Hot water heater / State law<br />
:Regular water heater / Federal law<br />
:Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in / Second law of thermodynamics<br />
:High-pitched hum generator / Friction<br />
:The solution to the cryptogram below: [Additional squiggled words that are too small/indistinct to read.] / Gravity<br />
:Bugs / Circuit breakers<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2848:_Breaker_Box&diff=3297532848: Breaker Box2023-11-28T17:59:25Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2848<br />
| date = October 30, 2023<br />
| title = Breaker Box<br />
| image = breaker_box_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 560x776px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Any electrician will warn you to first locate and flip the house's CAUSALITY circuit breaker before touching the CIRCUIT BREAKERS one.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
A {{w|distribution board}}, referred to as a "breaker box" here and also commonly referred to as a "fuse box", "breaker panel", "DB box", and many other names, is a metal box attached to a wall, usually in some maintenance area, containing multiple {{w|circuit breakers}} that distribute electricity to various parts of the building. A circuit breaker is an electrical switch, usually in the form of a small lever, which disconnects the circuit from the power source when opened. These breakers are designed to automatically open if too much electrical current flows through them. This is a safety measure to reduce the risk of damage, fire or electrocution in the event of a short circuit or an overloaded line. These breakers can also be opened manually, deactivating the circuit to allow electrical work to be done.<br />
<br />
In breaker boxes, each individual breaker is typically labeled to let the operator know what that breaker controls. Typically, the circuit controlled by each breaker will feed an intuitive set of connections: a certain room, or set of rooms, or possibly a set of related services (like overhead lights, or all the outlets on one floor). Some large appliances will have a dedicated circuit and breaker. <br />
<br />
However, in houses that have been rewired multiple times (or were poorly wired the first time), this can quickly become overcomplicated with seemingly random connections. Randall lives in Boston where much of the housing stock is from the late 1800s and early 1900s, and he is likely to live in a house with non-ideal wiring, which may have inspired this comic.<br />
<br />
The comic satirizes these complex wiring setups, with multiple breakers "controlling" arbitrary things, including some that – in the classic style of xkcd – are puns on the word "breaker" or may be impossible to hook a breaker up to, getting progressively more absurd to the point of nullifying laws and "breaking" certain laws of physics.<br />
<br />
===Table of the breaker labels===<br />
{|class = "wikitable"<br />
! Label next to breaker !! Explanation !! Note<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Left column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| Kitchen lights || The lights in the kitchen. || rowspan="3"| Standard items that could be separate<br />
|-<br />
| Living room lights || The lights in the living room.<br />
|-<br />
| Porch lights || The lights on the porch.<br />
|-<br />
| Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere || The lights in the bathroom, but also a random outlet.<br />
It is not uncommon for the power supplies to bathrooms (and other rooms with water connections) to be on a separate circuit. This is because water can potentially cause a short circuit, resulting in the breaker opening, and separate circuits minimize the impact and makes the problem easier to locate. These are called "GFCI" or "GFI" (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter [https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/099_0.pdf]) circuits.<br />
<br />
It is a standard to connect a bathroom outlet with another outlet also requiring a GFCI, such as basement or outdoors. Another option is that an electrician (or homeowner), having initially reserved an output from the box for such a limited use, may – while adding wiring – chooses to wire seemingly unrelated things into the same circuit. This may make sense (for example, an outlet near a non-bathroom sink or some other water source could reasonably be grouped with the bathroom), or it may simply be out of convenience from how long the wires needed to run (such as an outlet in the room adjacent to the bathroom). In either case, future residents and installers may not be informed of this, and therefore wouldn't realize that the outlet is grouped with that circuit.<br />
| Standard or 'kludged'<br />
|-<br />
| North-facing appliances || colspan="2"|Peculiar and a bit complex to execute. Here's how it might have been set up:<br />
# Install a breaker switch that is actually a mechanical switch to control a smart home automation instead of its normal function<br />
# Replace relevant normal outlets with Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets <br />
# Use smart home software to create a custom group of all outlets that control all ''north-facing appliances''<br />
# Set up a software automation to selectively toggle this user-defined group of smart outlets when triggered.<br />
* Adding a matching appliance to the house would require editing the automation.<br />
<br />
Alternative explanations:<br />
* The switch may be physically wired only to outlets installed on a southern wall in the property (or ''all'' southern walls, for each room that requires them), and you'd ensure that everything connected to these exclusively north-facing outlets also faces directly away from the wall(s).<br />
* The switch could control appliances on the north-facing walls of the house. <br />
<br />
Note: "North-facing" has broad interpretation, as lax as northeast to northwest or as strict as {{w|Points of the compass#32-wind compass rose|north by east to north by west}}. It could also be as exact as perfect north, but this would render this breaker completely functionless unless an appliance happens to be ever-so-perfectly aligned.<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| Bathtub drain light || colspan="2"|Bathtub drains typically do not have lights, but this breaker provides power to that and only that. Why it isn't already considered a "bathroom light" is unexplained (unless it's for the bit of the pipe that is ''external'' to that room). Perhaps it is a sub-menu of bathroom breaker, but then its position on the panel is unusual in that it isn't next to the bathroom breaker.<br />
<br />
It obviously cannot be the "surprise mystery outlet" already referred to earlier as being covered under the switch for the bathroom lights, much apart from it not being a socket/outlet.<br />
|-<br />
| Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" || colspan="2"|Another odd and amusing specification. <br />
<br />
To make it work, one might use the "North-facing appliances" setup described above, but just with a different custom group of Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets chosen to only control appliances with an "F' in their name.<br />
<br />
Some common household appliances (kitchen and elsewhere) that this switch might control:<br />
* coffee maker<br />
* refrigerator<br />
* freezer<br />
* fan<br />
* air fryer<br />
* food processor<br />
* waffle iron<br />
* fabric steamer<br />
* fireplace (electric)<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Hot water heater}} || Usually just a heater that creates (and typically stores) hot water. But given that the next breaker controls the "Regular water heater", this breaker might actually control a water heater that pointlessly heats water that is ''already'' hot. <br />
This is probably a joke about the fact that the common phrase "hot water heater" is [[technically]] redundant or misleading:<br />
* Redundant because the simpler term "water heater" is enough to describe a device that produces hot water.<br />
* Misleading because it's not the purpose of residential water heaters to heat water that is ''already'' hot.<br />
<br />
Trivia: In some languages, "hot water" is a separate, single word, so "hot-water heater" can be accurate. One such example is Japanese, where "hot water" is simply referred to as "お湯" ("Oyu"), however this is taken a step further as "hot water heater" is referred to as "給湯器" ("Kyūyuki").<br />
|rowspan="2"|Two "heaters"<br />
|-<br />
| Regular water heater || The heater for regular water. In context with the switch above, this label presumes it's for a heater for heating water that is not yet hot (usually called a "hot water heater", hence the joke). Alternatively, if we assume that a ''hot water heater'' is for ''making'' hot water, this heater must be for making “regular water”, whatever temperature that may mean. Further still, the difference in these labels may be speaking to the nature of the heaters themselves - it could be the case that one of the heaters is abnormally hot to the touch, where the other is a "regular" temperature, but are otherwise both capable of heating water just fine. <br />
|-<br />
| Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in || colspan="2"|This controls every outlet in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in, such as the dining room and kitchen and – depending on the "normal" habits of the inhabitants – other rooms such as the bedroom, bathroom, or living room (if not already covered by the "living room lights" switch above). Closets and single-purpose rooms such as the laundry room are presumably not included.<br />
|-<br />
| High-pitched hum generator || colspan="2"|Controls a high-pitched hum generator. This is a call-back to [[1590: The Source]], which was released just over 8 years before this comic.<br />
|-<br />
| The solution to the cryptogram below: || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on a "code breaker," something or someone that solves a code, such as Randall's cryptogram, a type of puzzle where a sentence has been encoded using a cipher, usually simple, and the goal is to determine the cipher and recover the original sentence from the encoded one. Randall has not actually written a cryptogram, simply making the label's text illegible to the audience.<br />
2 other explanations:<br />
* The identity of the electrical load sourced from this breaker can be found by solving the cryptogram.<br />
* This switch enables or disables the code's solution somehow, perhaps toggling its knowability or solvability or turning on a computer for solving cryptograms.<br />
|-<br />
| Bugs || colspan="2"|Several interpretations are possible:<br />
* Disable all software bugs in the house*<br />
* Disable all insect bugs in the house – as an efficient form of pest control – perhaps using ultrasonic emitters that drive away bugs (may be a reference to [[2753: Air Handler]]) – or perhaps the house contains noise machines that play sounds of insects or other ways of simulating insects.<br />
* Disable power to all covert listening devices, which would be able to be switched off if wired into the house's electrical grid.<br />
* Disable the whole global category of bugs (insects, arachnids, and other small arthropods), in which case we'd have no more pests and we'd reduce disease like malaria and {{w|Lyme disease}}! Of course, food webs would also collapse, and our world would be overrun with waste.<br />
* All of the above<br />
<nowiki>*</nowiki>Though it's unlikely that it's what Randall is referring to, computer bugs switches actually exist. It's a feature in some video game emulators to either run an unofficial patched version or to stay true to the original system, for example to allow bug-exploit speedruns of a video game.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Right column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now || colspan="2"|Fans generally produce a steady, low-level 'white' noise that people generally stop noticing. When such a fan is turned off, the absence of that noise is quickly noticed. Alternatively, the fan could be somewhere that cannot be heard, with the label on the switch serving as the only reminder of the fan's existence.<br />
<br />
Shutting down a fan that you didn't realize was running could be worrisome for a couple of reasons: it could be serving an important function (like HVAC or server cooling) and cause a problem when it's off, or it may be a fan that wasn't supposed to be running, but had been for some time without being noticed.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishwasher || colspan="2"|A dishwasher may find itself with a separate circuit breaker for a few reasons. Commercial-grade dishwashers are often high-load appliances that require more power (incorporating powerful heating units and pumps). Residential-grade dishwashers may not be as energy-intensive, but if the house wasn't originally built with a dishwasher in mind, it is likely new wiring had to be added during its installation, resulting in a breaker that exclusively controls the dishwasher.<br />
<br />
Though what "dishwasher" actually means may depend on what the "dishes" of the next switch might be, and thus what additional device may be required to ensure they remain clean. Even at the more trivial end of the interpretation (though not then explaining the following "dishes"), a busy restaurant might have an employee section equipped exclusively for the dishwashing role and separately supplied with power in a similar manner to that suggested for the bathroom.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishes || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on "breaking" dishes. <br />
<br />
Of course, dinnerware and dishes are usually not powered devices and wouldn't require a circuit breaker at all; discovering they need their own circuit breaker separate from their dishwasher is a spoof of many common circuit breaker frustrations. Lastly it's also possible the switch powers/controls two or more satellite dishes. <br />
|-<br />
| Hallway lights || The lights in the hallway or hallways. || rowspan="3"|"Hallway" regions<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway outlets || The outlets in the hallway or hallways, presumably the same as the "Hallway lights" hallways. A common confusion when turning off breakers is separate wiring for outlets and lights in the same room. Though having the room go dark is a good mnemonic that it is unpowered, it is not a guarantee, and indeed, wiring them separately allows working on the outlets without having to do it in the dark.<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway floors || Yet another breaker for the hallways, presumably the same hallways as the previous two breakers, adding more confusion and frustration. This breaker has several potential interpretations:<br />
#A master switch for all floors (stories) in the building which include hallways, e.g. the guestroom areas in a hotel, whilst possibly excluding the lobby and service levels<br />
#Outlets in the floor<br />
#Electric underfloor heating (heated bathroom floors are a feature in some houses)<br />
#Electrification of the floors – not common outside of horror and heist movies<br />
#Disabling all floors entirely, so everything resting on the floors falls through<br />
|-<br />
| Social media || colspan="2"|This breaker also has several potential interpretations of "taking a social media break" or "turning off social media":<br />
#'Digital detoxes', where someone says "I'm going to take a social media break" and intends to deny themselves access to all their social media apps.<br />
#A switch for a parent to turn off all social media entering the house to protect their kids and themselves, which references a type of specialized content filter available through Wi-Fi router settings, not traditionally a breaker box.<br />
#A callback to [[908: The Cloud]]. Since most social media platforms are centralized services, it would be theoretically possible to hook up a switch to the main power supply of every server building at once, given some extremely long wires, a breaker capable of handling the abhorrently massive electric load, and agreement from every social media provider.<sup><i>([[1439|optional]])</i></sup><br />
#The theoretical desire by some to "turn off social media" for the world due to its harmful effects on society. As someone who lived before social media and saw its spread over two decades, Randall may be ruing the impacts of social media on civilization and channeling his desire to put the genie back in the bottle.<br />
#Potentially a play on the phrase “breaking the internet”, meaning going viral on social media, though "breaking social media" is not an idiom.<br />
|-<br />
| State law || This and the next two items are a pun on "breaking the law."<br />
Taken literally, it would either disable enforcement of State Law or nullify every single one, creating a state of lawlessness similar to the premise of the popular movie, "The Purge". It's unclear if this refers to Randall's state of Massachusetts or State Law as a general concept.<br />
<br />
If the switch just nullifies State Law within the confines of the house, that would make the home a place where State Law could be broken without consequence, with some exciting implications:<br />
* '''No More Licenses''': Practice medicine, law, or cut hair without the need of a license!<br />
* '''The Ultimate Man Cave or She Shed''': Pet lion, or maybe a nuclear reactor in the basement.<br />
* '''24/7 Parties''': No noise complaints. Late-night parties with blaring music can continue indefinitely.<br />
* '''Tax-Free Zone''': Sell goods from the home without any sales tax.<br />
* '''Unusual Living Arrangements''': OK to live with 50 other people in a 2-bedroom house, with no zoning laws or housing regulations.<br />
* '''DIY Everything''': All those building codes and safety regulations wouldn't apply. OK to install an indoor waterfall or convert the living room into a beach.<br />
* '''Gambling House''': Turn the living room into a full-blown casino, no license needed.<br />
* '''Ultimate Privacy''': No worries about warrantless searches. State law enforcement would have no jurisdiction inside your house.<br />
| rowspan="2"|"Legal" items<br />
|-<br />
| Federal law || An extension of the previous entry. When discussing legal matters (taxes, regulations, etc.) it's not uncommon for state and federal authorities to issue their own statutes, often labeled "state" and "federal" respectively.<br />
<br />
The ramifications of nullifying every US Federal law are immense. Disabling Federal Law while keeping State Law would theoretically fulfill the goals of the "States Rights" advocates, groups of conservatives across US history aiming to return Federal power to the States.<br />
<br />
If the switch just nullifies Federal Law within the confines of the house, there could be some fun results:<br />
<br />
* '''Alternative Currency Operations''': Inhabitants could craft their own monetary system, designing and printing their own currency.<br />
* '''Endangered Species Game Park''': The house could become a zone for hunting creatures federally recognized as endangered or protected, like the bald eagle, making it a place to shoot or trap rare wildlife.<br />
* '''Exotic Collection Hub''': With federal import restrictions made moot, the house could transform into a repository for exotic items otherwise forbidden at a national level -- a potential trove of rare fruits, plants, or artifacts.<br />
* '''Tax-free Commercial Zone''': Any enterprise operating entirely within the house's boundaries is free from federal income taxation.<br />
* '''Experimental Culinary Experiences''': Free from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) constraints, the house could offer dishes using ingredients or preparations not federally approved.<br />
|-<br />
| Second law of thermodynamics || The {{w|second law of thermodynamics}} means that things naturally move from order to disorder over time. It also says you can't take heat from a place that's cooler and use it to make a place hotter than the cooler place, unless you use some energy to do it. In short, without adding energy, only the hotter place can warm up the cooler one.<br />
<br />
Turning off (or breaking) the second law of thermodynamics would have some pros and cons.<br />
;GOOD STUFF<br />
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines''': Machines that can do work indefinitely without an energy source would become possible, defying our current understanding of energy conservation.<br />
*'''Reversibility of Processes''': Many natural processes that are irreversible under current laws could be reversed. For instance, melted ice could spontaneously turn back into a solid without energy removal.<br />
*'''Recycling Energy''': We could theoretically use the same quantum of energy over and over again, leading to ultra-efficient systems and potentially solving many of the world's energy problems.<br />
*'''Reversing Entropy-Driven Processes''': Things like mixing cream and coffee or ink in water could spontaneously unmix.<br />
;BAD STUFF<br />
*'''End Life as We Know It:''' All living organisms rely on the second law for crucial processes, including metabolism and reproduction. If the second law were negated, life, at least as we understand it, might not be possible.<br />
*'''No Heat Engines:''' Engines rely on the flow of heat from hotter to colder bodies. Without the Second Law, our cars, power plants, refrigerators, and many other devices would not function.<br />
*'''Breakdown of Molecular Processes:''' Molecules spontaneously move from areas of higher to lower concentration due to entropy. Without this, diffusion, osmosis, and many biochemical reactions wouldn't occur as they currently do.<br />
*'''Loss of Directionality:''' One interpretation of the Second Law provides a directionality to time (the so-called "arrow of time"). Without it, causality and our understanding of past, present, and future could be fundamentally altered.<br />
*'''Unpredictable Outcomes:''' Turning off the Second Law could result in a universe where outcomes are not probabilistically predictable. You couldn't rely on anything happening as it "should," leading to chaos in every sense.<br />
This law of physics was also explored in the What If? article [https://what-if.xkcd.com/145/ Fire From Moonlight].<br />
| rowspan="3"|"Physics" items<br />
|-<br />
| Friction || {{w|Friction}} is the resistive force that opposes the relative motion or tendency of such motion of two surfaces in contact. Turning it off has some upsides and downsides.<br />
;UPSIDES<br />
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines:''' Without friction, once an object starts moving, it would continue indefinitely unless acted upon by another force.<br />
*'''Super-Efficient Transport:''' Cars, trains, and other vehicles would glide effortlessly once set into motion, leading to immense energy savings.<br />
*'''Unique Sports:''' New sports and activities would emerge, where players glide or slide over surfaces without friction.<br />
;DOWNSIDES<br />
*'''Walking Would Be Impossible:''' We rely on friction between our feet and the ground to move. Without it, we would be unable to walk, run, or even stand.<br />
*'''No Manual Dexterity:''' Holding, grabbing, or manipulating objects would be very difficult, because they would be perfectly slippery.<br />
*'''Catastrophic Mechanical Failures:''' Many machines rely on friction to function. Brakes in cars, for instance, use friction to slow down and stop the vehicle. Without it, uncontrollable accidents would occur.<br />
*'''No Sound:''' Friction between air molecules creates sound waves. Without friction, the world would be silent (some may consider this an upside).<br />
*'''Breathing Difficulties:''' Our respiratory system relies on frictional forces when the alveoli in our lungs exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide with the bloodstream.<br />
*'''Hard to Light Fire:''' Lighting a fire by striking a match would no longer work, because it relies on friction. However, there are other methods for starting a fire that don't require friction, [https://www.wikihow.com/Create-Fire-With-a-Magnifying-Glass the most famous of which just requires a magnifying glass].<br />
*'''Collisions:''' Objects, once set in motion, would continue to move until they hit something, leading to a myriad of unpredictable and uncontrollable collisions.<br />
Being in a frictionless environment (and a vacuum, as physicists love...) was the subject of [[669: Experiment]].<br />
|-<br />
| Gravity || {{w|Gravity}} is a natural force that attracts two bodies toward each other, proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers.<br />
Turning off gravity would have some advantages and disadvantages.<br />
;ADVANTAGES<br />
* '''Flight''': Without gravity, every leap could turn into a flight. We could push off surfaces and float effortlessly through the air.<br />
* '''No Weight Restrictions''': Large structures could be built without concern for weight-bearing loads. This would drastically change engineering and architectural designs.<br />
* '''New Sports''': Zero-gravity sports and activities could become a reality on Earth. Imagine playing basketball or soccer without gravity!<br />
;DISADVANTAGES<br />
* '''''Uncontrollable'' Flight''': Without gravity, every push of two objects (such as one's foot on the ground) turns into a flight... right out of the atmosphere of the Earth, and directly into space. Combined with the issue below, if there's no air left to let you "swim" back down, you have no chance of making it back to Earth.<br />
* '''Loss of Atmosphere and Oceans''': Without gravity, Earth's atmosphere would dissipate into space, and water from oceans, rivers, and lakes would float away, making life as we know it impossible.<br />
* '''Unanchored Chaos''': Everything not fixed to the ground, including people, animals, vehicles, <!--trees, *ummm... anchored, surely!*-->and foundationless structures, could become airborne, causing massive destruction and chaos.<br />
* '''Disruption of Celestial Order''': Earth would no longer orbit the Sun, the Moon would drift away rather quickly, and the structural integrity of the universe, including galaxies and solar systems, would be jeopardized.<br />
* '''Everything Exploding''': Most celestial bodies, ranging from the moon to supermassive black holes, would explode from internal pressure and centripetal forces no longer fighting against gravity, throwing everything into space.<br />
* '''Aggregation Absence''': Stars, galaxies, and basically anything in space requires gravity to form. Without gravity, no stars, planets, or meteors would form ever again.<br />
<br />
Of course, if this switch is turned off, it may simply mean that objects within the house itself are no longer subject to gravity. This would be '''''far''''' less cataclysmic, and as a bonus, this would make it very different when moving around the house, making it easier to get to higher areas, and move objects, though impossible to place them without some other force being applied, and could prove to cause some problems once the breaker is turned back on, especially for things under said objects.<br />
|-<br />
| Circuit breakers || colspan="2"|Possibly the "master" breaker, controlling the main circuit that supplies power to all other circuit breakers. However, given the other surreal things this breaker box controls, turning it off may possibly make it impossible to turn it on ever again as the switch will no longer function once switched off (i.e.: If this was turned off, it would presumably turn off the functionality of the circuit breaker itself, if it was wired to include itself). Another interpretation is that turning off this breaker should supposedly make this breaker not able to control the power, which leads to a situation similar to the liar's paradox.<br />
<br />
Moreover, if this circuit breaker disables all circuit breakers everywhere, it would result in global infrastructure collapse, halting essential services, including transportation, healthcare, and communication, and leading to widespread chaos.<br />
<br />
Note that it might be a perfectly valid label if it refers to multiple subsidiary 'boxes', cascaded off this particular one, each containing one or more additional breakers for convenience or safety. e.g. units dedicated to a shed, garage or workshop room which save the need to traipse all the way to this box's utility cupboard location in the event of an otherwise easily resolved power issue.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Title text<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3"|The title text is about {{w|causality}} (not to be confused with {{w|casualty}}), and how to use this (unseen, located elsewhere) breaker along with the last shown switch that (de)powers the illustrated box.<br />
<br />
Causality, in its simplest form, is the process of cause and effect, meaning that everything that happens only happens because something caused it to happen - in other words, every event is an effect caused by another event. For example, a bag of chips can't just fall onto the floor for ''literally'' no reason - it has to be caused by some other event, such as someone smacking it or a gust of wind blowing it down. <br />
<br />
Turning off the circuit breaker using the CIRCUIT BREAKERS switch may lead to a loop, if the disabled breaker can no longer disable itself, leading to it turning back on, etc. Alternatively, turning off the CIRCUIT BREAKER switch might be a one-way street.<br />
<br />
Turning the CAUSALITY switch from OFF back to ON might be unlikely to do anything if the circuit breakers upstream of it have been fully deactivated. The separation of cause and effect would ostensibly take precedence over the current switch setting. Turning off CAUSALITY first would prevent either the loop or the permanent disabling of circuit breakers, but would also have many other side effects, including letting switches potentially serve power even if there is no power being served ''to them'', or even spontaneously switching (on or off) without any intervention or reason. <br />
<br />
The 'warning', from an electrician, could even be to locate the nominally ''off'' CAUSALITY switch in order to turn it ''on'', or else all other intended effects will possibly not end up being actually actioned. Either way, whether or not turning on/off causality would change the state of causality (at one stage or other being rendered ineffectual) is an exercise left for the reader. <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[An open breaker box is shown. There are 26 labelled breakers, all of which are on, paired back to back in thirteen rows as a label, switch, switch and label.]<br />
:Kitchen lights / A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now<br />
:Living room lights / Dishwasher<br />
:Porch lights / Dishes<br />
:Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere / Hallway lights<br />
:North-facing appliances / Hallway outlets<br />
:Bathtub drain light / Hallway floors<br />
:Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" / Social media<br />
:Hot water heater / State law<br />
:Regular water heater / Federal law<br />
:Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in / Second law of thermodynamics<br />
:High-pitched hum generator / Friction<br />
:The solution to the cryptogram below: [Additional squiggled words that are too small/indistinct to read.] / Gravity<br />
:Bugs / Circuit breakers<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1587:_Food_Rule&diff=3293401587: Food Rule2023-11-20T06:31:20Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1587<br />
| date = October 7, 2015<br />
| title = Food Rule<br />
| image = food_rule.png<br />
| titletext = I won't eat invertebrates, because I can fight a skeleton, but I have no idea what kind of spooky warrior a squid leaves behind.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
There are various {{w|Vegetarianism|vegetarian}} diets which restrict certain foods for ethical or personal concerns. The traditional standard for vegetarianism is not eating any kind of meat, but some people consider themselves to follow a form of vegetarianism, while still eating specific meats, such as poultry or fish. On the other hand, {{w|veganism|vegans}} typically go further, and refuse to use animal byproducts, such as eggs and milk, and even honey. <br />
<br />
Some vegetarians follow a more capricious rule: ''[https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debate/dont-eat-anything-face/#/ don't eat anything with a face]''. This is likely, at least in part, a facetious response to demands over where the line should be drawn: if cows and pigs deserve life, what about mosquitoes, and worms, and bacteria. This standard sidesteps the whole argument by declaring that anything that looks vaguely similar to people (since faces are the main way we identify people) are enough like us that they deserve at least some protection.<br />
<br />
[[Randall]] presents an alternative rule: ''I won't eat something if I have to Google to figure out whether or not it has a face'', and presents a list (see [[#Items on the list|details]] below) of allowed and forbidden food in his diet. For the most part, this consists of a typical omnivorous diet. He'll eat things that obviously aren't animals, like fruits, vegetables and grains, and he'll eat meat from typical livestock, like cows, pigs and chickens, but the section in the middle, consisting of ocean-dwelling invertebrates, is off-limits him. The implication is that animals without an obvious face are strange enough to be off-putting. Rather than basic dietary restrictions on ethical or health considerations, this bases them on familiarity and perceived weirdness. <br />
<br />
The title text gives another rule that also would make these same three omissions. This rule is about not eating {{w|Invertebrate|invertebrates}} (animals without a {{w|vertebral column}}, i.e. spineless creatures). All of the foods he's willing to eat are either vertebrate animals or plants. His reason for avoiding invertebrates is somewhat outlandish: he fears that the spirits from creatures he has eaten will come back to haunt him. In horror stories, {{w|undead}} creatures often appear as spooky skeletons. Randall apparently doesn't find such skeletons overly concerning (insisting that he can fight them), but being haunted by something unknown is too much. Restricting your diet based on fear of being haunted is an even more unusual strategy. <br />
<br />
The comic may also be a joke on the modern {{w|Paleolithic diet|paleo diet}} trend, which emphasizes eating fruit, vegetables, and meat ("anything with a face"). <br />
<br />
Randall has previously depicted cuttlefish as spooky in [[520: Cuttlefish]], and he's also mentioned his dislike of certain foods (namely {{w|lobster}} - another invertebrate) in [[1268: Alternate Universe]].<br />
<br />
===Items on the list===<br />
Here is a list with explanation for each item on Randalls food list:<br />
*{{w|Red meat}}, includes meat from most adult {{w|mammals}}, but many people will probably think of {{w|beefsteak}} from {{w|cattle}}.<br />
*{{w|Pork}}, is meat from {{w|Domestic pig|pigs}}. While technically a "red meat" (according to the US Department of Agriculture) it is popularly considered "the other {{w|white meat}}", hence its own bullet point. <br />
*{{w|Poultry}} are domesticated birds; most people will think of {{w|Chicken (food)|chicken}}.<br />
*{{w|Fish}} covers a very large group of animals, most of them are not eaten on a regular basis, but a large group of fish are {{w|Fish as food|used as food}}.<br />
*{{w|Shrimp}} is used to refer to {{w|Decapoda|ten-footed}} {{w|crustacean}} and some of these are {{w|Shrimp (food)|used for food}}. In the UK they often go under the name {{w|prawns}}.<br />
*{{w|Oysters}} refers to a family of {{w|mollusca}} within the class {{w|bivalvia}} (i.e. body enclosed in shells consisting of two hinged parts). Most people will probably think of the {{w|Ostreidae|true oysters}} specifically the {{w|Ostrea edulis|edible oyster}}, which are not the only edible oyster!. Note that the {{w|pearl oyster}} is not a true oyster.<br />
*{{w|Squid}} are {{w|cephalopods}} (also of the mollusca family) with eight arms arranged in pairs and two longer tentacles. They are closely related to {{w|cuttlefish}} and {{w|octopuses}}.<br />
*{{w|Fruit}} is a part of a flowering plant. Common fruits are {{w|apples}}, {{w|oranges}}, {{w|bananas}} and {{w|pear|pears}}. But in principle anything that comes from a flower is a fruit, including grains. Although in a culinary sense there is a distinction between vegetables and fruit, any part of a flower is actually a vegetable. See below and also see [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]].<br />
*{{w|Vegetables}} are any kind of plant. But in everyday it refers to any part of a plant that is consumed by humans as food as part of a {{w|Umami|savoury}} meal, thus excluding fruit, {{w|Nut (fruit)|nuts}} and cereal grains. For instance a {{w|tomato}} would be seen as a vegetable due to its taste and as a fruit botanically – see the Venn diagram {{w|Fruit#Botanic fruit and culinary fruit|here}}.<br />
*{{w|Grain|Grains}} are small, hard, dry {{w|seeds}}. Usually when mentioning these people will think of breakfast {{w|cereal}} grains. Typical grains are {{w|corn}}, {{w|rice}} and {{w|wheat}}. As mentioned above grains are botanically both a fruit and a vegetable.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[There is a caption above a list of food with indication whether it is OK or not to eat. Below is another caption.]<br />
<br />
:My food rule:<br />
:{| class="wikitable" style="border: 0px;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Red meat<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Pork<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Poultry<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Fish<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Shrimp<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:red;" | X<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Oysters<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:red;" | X<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Squid<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:red;" | X<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Fruit<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Vegetables<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|-<br />
| style="border: 0px; text-align: right" | Grains<br />
| style="border: 0px; color:green;" | ✓<br />
|}<br />
:I won't eat something if I have to Google to figure out whether or not it has a face.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Food]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1585:_Similarities&diff=3293361585: Similarities2023-11-20T01:45:57Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1585<br />
| date = October 2, 2015<br />
| title = Similarities<br />
| image = similarities.png<br />
| titletext = I just came from The Martian, and I just have to say: Forget BB-8; I want a pet Sojourner! It's always been the cutest of our Mars rovers.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
There's a common punchline in which the plot lines of two thematically-different works of fiction (usually movies) are compared in greatly-abbreviated form, and the speaker sarcastically concludes that the two movies are "basically the same". For sake of example, Disney's ''{{w|Aladdin (1992 Disney film)|Aladdin}}'' and {{w|James Cameron}}'s ''{{w|Titanic (1997 film)|Titanic}}'' [http://imgur.com/gallery/kasCMYd both feature a story] in which a lower-class boy and an upper-class girl fall for each other, among other cherry-picked yet interesting parallels. But due to the different emotional tones of the films, most people would not consider them to be at all similar (one is a family-friendly "happy ever after" tale and the other is a period romance that turns into a disaster thriller).<br />
<br />
This comic spoofs the idea. Instead of comparing plot lines of two movies, [[Ponytail]] and [[Cueball]] compare the respective movies' development histories.<br />
<br />
''{{w|The Martian (Weir novel)|The Martian}}'' was originally a serialized story written by {{w|Andy Weir (writer)|Andy Weir}} on his blog which was later compiled into an ebook for people to easily download, then published into a physical book, and has now had a {{w|The Martian (film)|movie}} created based on it. The movie was officially released in the US on the same day this comic was released (October 2, 2015).<br />
<br />
''{{w|Fifty Shades of Grey}}'' began as a {{w|fan fiction}} of a well known brand (the {{w|Twilight (novel series)|Twilight book series}}). It was originally written on the internet by {{w|E. L. James}}. It was then transformed into a successful book series which was later turned into a {{w|Fifty Shades of Grey (film)|movie}} released in February 2015. The book was already referenced back in 2012 in [[1128: Fifty Shades]].<br />
<br />
Since ''Fifty Shades'' is a romance story about a sadomasochistic relationship, and ''The Martian'' is a very technical story about surviving completely alone on a hostile planet, the two books could not be any more different, hence the joke due to the juxtaposition. <br />
<br />
Cueball continues the joke by joining the two titles using red for Mars, to make a new book title, that should cover both books: ''Fifty Shades of Red.'' Ponytail says to Cueball that such a book would be irresistible for him. She does this by daring him to say that he wouldn't read it, believing he could not say so without lying.<br />
<br />
It is possible that the brand that ''The Martian'' derives from is {{w|NASA}} itself. ''The Martian'' has been compared to the film {{w|Apollo 13 (film)|Apollo 13}} by Randall in [[1536: The Martian]]. ''Apollo 13'' does indeed glorify the roles of the NASA engineers, and ''The Martian'' does a similar thing. That Randall would go see this movie as soon as it was released was already made perfectly clear back in June when he released the comic [[1536: The Martian]] showing how excited he is about the book. He then really looked forward to the movie.<br />
<br />
Randall indicates in the title text that he has just seen the movie (certainly possible, if he caught a midnight screening; perhaps he drew this comic in advance and wrote the title text after) and finds the Sojourner rover adorable. Of course, he could also have seen it in the trailers.<br />
<br />
The [http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/BB-8 BB-8] mentioned in the title text is the {{w|astromech droid}} from the movie {{w|Star Wars: The Force Awakens}} and is available as a toy (see also BB-8 on the [http://www.starwars.com/databank/bb-8 official Star Wars] home page). {{w|Sojourner (rover)|Sojourner}} was the Mars ''Pathfinder'' robotic rover.<br />
<br />
'''Spoiler alert''': The rover was used by Mark Watney, the protagonist of ''The Martian'' (played by Matt Damon in the movie), to allow him to contact Earth. <br />
<br />
Randall indicated that he thinks the Sojourner is much cuter than BB-8, and that he would like to have one as a pet. He then states that the Sojourner has always been the cutest among all the [[:Category:Mars rovers|Mars rovers]]. The cuteness of Mars Rovers is also mentioned in [[2433: Mars Rovers]]. There have been five so far, the other four being {{w|Opportunity (rover)|Opportunity}}, {{w|Spirit (rover)|Spirit}}, {{w|Curiosity (rover)|Curiosity}}, and {{w|Perseverance (rover)|Perseverance}}, three of which have already been used in xkcd comics: [[695: Spirit]], [[1091: Curiosity]] and [[1504: Opportunity]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail is talking to Cueball.]<br />
<br />
:Ponytail: So it's a work of fiction about a well-known brand. written on the Internet by an enthusiast, republished as a bestselling book, and then made into a big movie.<br />
:Cueball: Yup.<br />
<br />
:[Ponytail holds her hand to her chin. Beat panel.]<br />
<br />
:[Ponytail is talking to Cueball again.]<br />
:Ponytail: Yeah, ''The Martian'' and ''Fifty Shades of Grey'' are basically the same book.<br />
:Cueball: "''Fifty Shades of Red?''"<br />
:Ponytail: Man, ''tell'' me you wouldn't read that.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]] <!--50 shades and Martian --><br />
[[Category:Mars rovers]] <!--Title text--><br />
[[Category:Star Wars]] <!--Title text--><br />
[[Category:Space]]<br />
[[Category:Twilight]] <!--The well-known brand that 50 Shades of Grey is based upon--></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1536:_The_Martian&diff=3293351536: The Martian2023-11-20T01:42:00Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1536<br />
| date = June 10, 2015<br />
| title = The Martian<br />
| image = the_martian.png<br />
| titletext = I have never seen a work of fiction so perfectly capture the out-of-nowhere shock of discovering that you've just bricked something important because you didn't pay enough attention to a loose wire.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]] is very excited about seeing that the trailer for ''{{w|The Martian (film)|The Martian}}'' is finally released, because he really liked the book. Cueball most likely represents [[Randall]] himself in this comic.<br />
<br />
''The Martian'' is a 2015 film based on a 2011 science fiction {{w|The Martian (Weir novel)| novel of the same name}} by {{w|Andy Weir (writer)|Andy Weir}}. The plot involves an astronaut who's accidentally left on {{w|Mars}} when the rest of his crew has to leave during a disaster. The central plot of the novel involves the protagonist having to improvise ways to survive in such an inhospitable environment until a rescue mission can be mounted. <br />
<br />
[[White Hat]] is apparently unfamiliar with the book, and [[Cueball]] explains it by referencing a scene from another movie. {{w|Apollo 13 (film)|''Apollo 13''}} was a film about {{w|Apollo 13 incident|an actual event}} in which a mission to the moon had to be aborted when the ship was damaged en route. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry55--J4_VQ the referenced scene], NASA personnel had to quickly develop a plan to build an improvised adapter for a carbon dioxide scrubber, using only those materials available on the spacecraft. This task was critical to the astronauts' survival, if they had failed, the air in the ship would have soon become unbreathable. <br />
<br />
Cueball apparently particularly enjoyed that scene, and suggests that this kind of on-the-fly problem solving in order to survive is the central theme of ''The Martian'', rather than being only a single scene. <br />
<br />
In the final panel, White Hat wonders how such a plot was made into a big-budget film starring Matt Damon. Matt Damon is a high-profile star, known for action films like the {{w|Bourne (film series)|''Bourne'' series}}. Blockbuster films with such stars are usually designed to appeal to as broad an audience as possible, to maximize ticket sales, and therefore justify their large budgets. The kind of cerebral, science-heavy problem solving at the core of ''The Martian'' tends to appeal to a smaller, nerdier demographic. Cueball appears similarly surprised that the film was made in the first place, but is happy that it was. <br />
<br />
On the day the movie was released in the US, Randall went to see it and released this comic about it: [[1585: Similarities]].<br />
<br />
In [[2561: Moonfall]] a similar discussion of an upcoming movie is made for ''{{w|Moonfall (film)|Moonfall}}''. But in that case it is the scientific inaccuracy that is the subject, and the huge explosion that makes it worth seeing anyway... maybe?<br />
<br />
<!-- The title text needs a<br> *** This is supposed to be a comment, is it? And I think it worked well enough when the line was given a preceding space thus formatting as 'text box'-ish ((Actually, that was Moonfall's original setup. Sorry!)). Alternatively, jut put a blank line between. Anyway. I'll let others clean this up with their own preference. --><br />
'''Spoiler alert:'''<br><br />
The title text references a particular event in ''The Martian'''s story: The protagonist managed to establish communications with Earth by {{w|repurposing}} the {{w|Mars Pathfinder|Pathfinder}} space probe that NASA landed on Mars in 1997. While working on another piece of equipment, he accidentally subjects the probe to an electrical short-circuit, destroying its electronics and "bricking" it. "{{w|Bricking}}" is a term in consumer electronics which essentially means to cause an electronic device to become non-functional and essentially no more useful than a "brick". An unexpected "bricking" can be very surprising, and in a case where the item is critical, could be devastating. This bricking scene from the book was left out of the movie.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting at a desk using a computer and White Hat walks in.]<br />
:Cueball: Ooh, trailer for ''The Martian!''<br />
:White Hat: What's that?<br />
:Cueball: Movie of a book I liked.<br />
:White Hat: Should I read it?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair and turns away from computer to face White Hat.]<br />
:Cueball: Depends. You know the scene in Apollo 13 where the guy says "we have to figure out how to connect ''this'' thing to ''this'' thing using ''this'' table full of parts or the astronauts will all die?<br />
:White Hat: Yeah?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair again and resumes using computer while talking. White Hat looks at his smart phone.]<br />
:Cueball: ''The Martian'' is for people who wish the whole movie had just been more of that scene.<br />
:White Hat: How on earth did ''that'' become a big-budget thing with Matt Damon?<br />
:Cueball: No idea, but I'm ''so'' excited.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SemyzKgaUU&feature=youtu.be&t=2760 a video interview] by Adam Savage with Andy Weir the author of ''The Martian'' says that his goal was to make the whole book like the mentioned scene from ''Apollo 13'' - exactly what the comic is saying. The video was posted on YouTube the day after the xkcd comic.<br />
<br />
In the end, ''The Martian'' likely didn't disappoint the big-budget movie makers, grossing more than $630 million against a budget of $108 million.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Space]]<br />
[[Category:Space probes]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] <!--Matt Damon--></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1536:_The_Martian&diff=3284701536: The Martian2023-11-09T21:23:50Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1536<br />
| date = June 10, 2015<br />
| title = The Martian<br />
| image = the_martian.png<br />
| titletext = I have never seen a work of fiction so perfectly capture the out-of-nowhere shock of discovering that you've just bricked something important because you didn't pay enough attention to a loose wire.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]] is very excited about seeing that the trailer for ''{{w|The Martian (film)|The Martian}}'' is finally released, because he really liked the book. Cueball most likely represents [[Randall]] himself in this comic.<br />
<br />
''The Martian'' is based on {{w|The Martian (Weir novel)| a book of the same name}} by {{w|Andy Weir (writer)|Andy Weir}}. The plot involves an astronaut who's accidentally left on {{w|Mars}} when the rest of his crew has to leave during a disaster. The central plot of the novel involves the protagonist having to improvise ways to survive in such an inhospitable environment until a rescue mission can be mounted. <br />
<br />
[[White Hat]] is apparently unfamiliar with the book, and [[Cueball]] explains it by referencing a scene from another movie. {{w|Apollo 13 (film)|''Apollo 13''}} was a film about {{w|Apollo 13 incident|an actual event}} in which a mission to the moon had to be aborted when the ship was damaged en route. In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry55--J4_VQ the referenced scene], NASA personnel had to quickly figure out how to build an adapter for a carbon dioxide scrubber, using only materials to which the astronauts had access. This task was critical to the astronauts' survival. If they had failed, the air in the ship would have soon become unbreathable. Cueball suggests that this kind of on-the-fly problem-solving in order to survive is the central theme of the book (and therefore the movie). <br />
<br />
In the final panel, White Hat wonders how such a plot was made into a big-budget film starring Damon. The implication is that this kind of cerebral and procedural story has niche appeal to the nerdier demographics, but wouldn't be expected to have the kind of broad appeal that would draw a large audience, and therefore justify a large budget. Matt Damon is a high-profile star, known for action films like the {{w|Bourne (film series)|''Bourne'' series}}. Cueball appears similarly surprised that the film was made in the first place, but is happy that it was. <br />
<br />
On the day the movie was released in the US, Randall went to see it and released this comic about it: [[1585: Similarities]].<br />
<br />
In [[2561: Moonfall]] a similar discussion of an upcoming movie is made for ''{{w|Moonfall (film)|Moonfall}}''. But in that case it is the scientific inaccuracy that is the subject, and the huge explosion that makes it worth seeing anyway... maybe?<br />
<br />
<!-- The title text needs a<br> *** This is supposed to be a comment, is it? And I think it worked well enough when the line was given a preceding space thus formatting as 'text box'-ish ((Actually, that was Moonfall's original setup. Sorry!)). Alternatively, jut put a blank line between. Anyway. I'll let others clean this up with their own preference. --><br />
'''Spoiler alert:'''<br><br />
The title text references a particular event in ''The Martian'''s story: The protagonist managed to establish communications with Earth by {{w|repurposing}} the {{w|Mars Pathfinder|Pathfinder}} space probe that NASA landed on Mars in 1997. While working on another piece of equipment, he accidentally subjects the probe to an electrical short-circuit, destroying its electronics and "bricking" it. "{{w|Bricking}}" is a term in consumer electronics which essentially means to cause an electronic device to become non-functional and essentially no more useful than a "brick". An unexpected "bricking" can be very surprising, and in a case where the item is critical, could be devastating. This bricking scene from the book was left out of the movie.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting at a desk using a computer and White Hat walks in.]<br />
:Cueball: Ooh, trailer for ''The Martian!''<br />
:White Hat: What's that?<br />
:Cueball: Movie of a book I liked.<br />
:White Hat: Should I read it?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair and turns away from computer to face White Hat.]<br />
:Cueball: Depends. You know the scene in Apollo 13 where the guy says "we have to figure out how to connect ''this'' thing to ''this'' thing using ''this'' table full of parts or the astronauts will all die?<br />
:White Hat: Yeah?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair again and resumes using computer while talking. White Hat looks at his smart phone.]<br />
:Cueball: ''The Martian'' is for people who wish the whole movie had just been more of that scene.<br />
:White Hat: How on earth did ''that'' become a big-budget thing with Matt Damon?<br />
:Cueball: No idea, but I'm ''so'' excited.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SemyzKgaUU&feature=youtu.be&t=2760 a video interview] by Adam Savage with Andy Weir the author of ''The Martian'' says that his goal was to make the whole book like the mentioned scene from ''Apollo 13'' - exactly what the comic is saying. The video was posted on YouTube the day after the xkcd comic.<br />
<br />
In the end, ''The Martian'' likely didn't disappoint the big-budget movie makers, grossing more than $630 million against a budget of $108 million.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Space]]<br />
[[Category:Space probes]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] <!--Matt Damon--></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1536:_The_Martian&diff=3284681536: The Martian2023-11-09T21:17:26Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1536<br />
| date = June 10, 2015<br />
| title = The Martian<br />
| image = the_martian.png<br />
| titletext = I have never seen a work of fiction so perfectly capture the out-of-nowhere shock of discovering that you've just bricked something important because you didn't pay enough attention to a loose wire.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]] is very excited about seeing that the trailer for ''{{w|The Martian (film)|The Martian}}'' is finally released, because he really liked the book. Cueball most likely represents [[Randall]] himself in this comic.<br />
<br />
''The Martian'' is based on {{w|The Martian (Weir novel)| a book of the same name}} by {{w|Andy Weir (writer)|Andy Weir}}. The plot involves an astronaut who's accidentally left on {{w|Mars}} when the rest of his crew has to leave during a disaster. The central plot of the novel involves the protagonist having to improvise ways to survive in such an inhospitable environment until a rescue mission can be mounted. <br />
<br />
[[White Hat]] is apparently unfamiliar with the book, and [[Cueball]] explains it by referencing a scene from {{w|Apollo_13_(film)}}, an earlier film about {{w|an actual event| Apollo 13 incident}} in which a mission to the moon had to be aborted when their ship was damaged en route. Specifically, in [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry55--J4_VQ one scene], NASA personnel had to quickly figure out how to build an adapter for a carbon dioxide scrubber, using only materials to which the astronauts had access, knowing that if they failed, the air in the ship would become unbreathable, and the astronauts would all die. Cueball suggests that this kind of on-the-fly problem-solving in order to survive is the central theme of the book (and therefore the movie). <br />
<br />
In the final panel, White Hat wonders how such a plot was made into a big-budget film starring Damon. The implication is that this kind of cerebral and procedural story has niche appeal to the nerdier demographics, but wouldn't be expected to have the kind of broad appeal that would draw a large audience, and therefore justify a large budget. Matt Damon is a high-profile star, known for action films like the {{w|Bourne (film series)|''Bourne'' series}}. Cueball appears similarly surprised that the film was made in the first place, but is happy that it was. <br />
<br />
On the day the movie was released in the US, Randall went to see it and released this comic about it: [[1585: Similarities]].<br />
<br />
In [[2561: Moonfall]] a similar discussion of an upcoming movie is made for ''{{w|Moonfall (film)|Moonfall}}''. But in that case it is the scientific inaccuracy that is the subject, and the huge explosion that makes it worth seeing anyway... maybe?<br />
<br />
<!-- The title text needs a<br> *** This is supposed to be a comment, is it? And I think it worked well enough when the line was given a preceding space thus formatting as 'text box'-ish ((Actually, that was Moonfall's original setup. Sorry!)). Alternatively, jut put a blank line between. Anyway. I'll let others clean this up with their own preference. --><br />
'''Spoiler alert:'''<br><br />
The title text references a particular event in ''The Martian'''s story: The protagonist managed to establish communications with Earth by {{w|repurposing}} the {{w|Mars Pathfinder|Pathfinder}} space probe that NASA landed on Mars in 1997. While working on another piece of equipment, he accidentally subjects the probe to an electrical short-circuit, destroying its electronics and "bricking" it. "{{w|Bricking}}" is a term in consumer electronics which essentially means to cause an electronic device to become non-functional and essentially no more useful than a "brick". An unexpected "bricking" can be very surprising, and in a case where the item is critical, could be devastating. This bricking scene from the book was left out of the movie.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is sitting at a desk using a computer and White Hat walks in.]<br />
:Cueball: Ooh, trailer for ''The Martian!''<br />
:White Hat: What's that?<br />
:Cueball: Movie of a book I liked.<br />
:White Hat: Should I read it?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair and turns away from computer to face White Hat.]<br />
:Cueball: Depends. You know the scene in Apollo 13 where the guy says "we have to figure out how to connect ''this'' thing to ''this'' thing using ''this'' table full of parts or the astronauts will all die?<br />
:White Hat: Yeah?<br />
<br />
:[Cueball pivots on chair again and resumes using computer while talking. White Hat looks at his smart phone.]<br />
:Cueball: ''The Martian'' is for people who wish the whole movie had just been more of that scene.<br />
:White Hat: How on earth did ''that'' become a big-budget thing with Matt Damon?<br />
:Cueball: No idea, but I'm ''so'' excited.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
In [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SemyzKgaUU&feature=youtu.be&t=2760 a video interview] by Adam Savage with Andy Weir the author of ''The Martian'' says that his goal was to make the whole book like the mentioned scene from ''Apollo 13'' - exactly what the comic is saying. The video was posted on YouTube the day after the xkcd comic.<br />
<br />
In the end, ''The Martian'' likely didn't disappoint the big-budget movie makers, grossing more than $630 million against a budget of $108 million.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Space]]<br />
[[Category:Space probes]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] <!--Matt Damon--></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1512:_Horoscopes&diff=3284581512: Horoscopes2023-11-09T20:48:58Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1512<br />
| date = April 15, 2015<br />
| title = Horoscopes<br />
| image = horoscopes.png<br />
| titletext = If you live in the Northern hemisphere. In the southern hemisphere, due to the coriolis effect, babies are born nine months BEFORE they're conceived.<br />
}}<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{w|Horoscopes}} purport to predict someone's personality or future, based on the position of planets and stars at the time of their birth and at present. Horoscopes commonly group people into twelve groups based on {{w|zodiac signs}}. The names of the horoscope Zodiac signs are based on the names of twelve constellations that were the backdrop for the path of the sun in the ancient times when the rules of settings horoscopes were originally developed. Today, due to precession of the Earth's axis of rotation (and to a lesser degree due to the modern formal definitions of constellations), the Zodiac signs do not correspond fully to the names of actual constellations in the path of the Sun. One's zodiac sign is determined by the position of the sun on their birthday, with each sign representing a specific 30.4 day period (1/12th of a year), starting from the {{w|equinox|First point of Aries}}.<br />
<br />
Modern science has found {{w|Astrology and science|no basis for horoscopes}}. As with many unscientific claims and mythologies, [[Randall]] doesn't seem to care for the beliefs, and has more fun gently mocking them. The joke of this strip is that the only thing you can calculate from your astrological sign is the period of the year during which you were {{w|conceived|conception}}. The average human is born 38 weeks after conception. There's enough variation in the length of pregnancies that this can vary by as much as several months, but for the majority of people, the date of their conception can be calculated from their birthday, within a week or two.<br />
<br />
This can be a slightly uncomfortable topic, because most humans were conceived by their parents having sexual intercourse, which is a topic that many people find uncomfortable to think about. The premise of this strip is that, based on the time you were born, you can make a guess at the circumstances under which you were conceived. Such guesses wouldn't be universally accurate, of course, but the notion that you could make a decent guess of the circumstances of someone's conception feels almost transgressive. <br />
<br />
Randall phrases his "predictions" as possibilities ("you may have") rather than declarations, acknowledging that it is a guess, and that it, unlike actual horoscopes, doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. <br />
<br />
The title text mentions that these predictions only apply to the northern hemisphere. This references both an issue with zodiac signs (as constellations are different in the southern hemisphere), and the fact that his 'predictions' are clearly based on an American context (many of the holiday references are exclusive to America). This idea is then lampooned by attributing it to the Coriolis effect (which has nothing to do with birth dates), and claiming that children in the southern hemisphere are born 9 months ''before'' conception (which is obviously impossible). <br />
<br />
The {{w|Coriolis effect}} refers to a phenomenon of motion that occurs relative to a rotating reference frame. Since the Earth is rotating, an apparent force (the Coriolis force) causes objects moving toward the poles to be deflected to right in the northern hemisphere, and to the left in the southern hemisphere. This effect is the reason that {{w|Coriolis_effect#Meteorology|weather systems}} (most clearly seen for {{w|hurricanes}}) which rotate in opposite directions, depending the hemisphere.<br />
<br />
==Table of Astrological signs==<br />
Here below is a table with data and explanation of the individual horoscopes:<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!{{w|Astrological sign|Astrological sign}} <br/> (English name)<br />
!{{w|Birthday}} <br/> range<br />
!Expected <br/> {{w|Fertilisation|conception}}<br />
!Horoscope prediction<br />
!Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|♈ {{w|Aries (astrology)|Aries}} <br/>(The Ram)<br />
|March 21 – April 21<br />
|June 28 – July 28<br />
|You may have been conceived after a 4th of July fireworks show<br />
|In the US the {{w|Independence Day (United States)|Independence Day}} is celebrated on the 4th of July, and this is customarily celebrated with huge fireworks. Fireworks are a common metaphor for the culmination of sex (i.e. the orgasm), and are often the focus of social gatherings that might lead to conception.<br />
|-<br />
|♉ {{w|Taurus (astrology)|Taurus}} <br/>(The Bull)<br />
|April 20 – May 20 <br />
|July 27 – August 27<br />
|You may have been conceived on a hot August day<br />
|In most of the northern hemisphere there are many hot days in {{w|August}}. People in hot weather tend to wear less clothing, which might promote sexual attraction.<br />
|-<br />
|♊ {{w|Gemini (astrology)|Gemini}} <br/>(The Twins)<br />
|May 21 – June 21<br />
|August 28 – September 28<br />
|You may have been conceived as the leaves began to change<br />
|In the northern part of the northern hemisphere the {{w|autumn}} starts at the end of this time period, so the leaves will begin to change color. <br />
|-<br />
|♋ {{w|Cancer (astrology)|Cancer}} <br/>(The Crab)<br />
|June 21 – July 21<br />
|September 28 – October 28<br />
|You may have been conceived by people trying on costumes<br />
|This period ends a few days before {{w|Halloween}}, so it possible that the people who conceived you (mom and dad) tried on their new costumes when they made you. Roleplay, enhanced with costumes, can be a way to spice up a relationship and can lead to sex and procreation.<br />
|-<br />
|♌ {{w|Leo (astrology)|Leo}} <br/>(The Lion)<br />
|July 22 – August 23<br />
|October 29 – November 30<br />
|You may have been conceived during Thanksgiving<br />
|{{w|Thanksgiving}} is celebrated in the US on the fourth Thursday of November.<br />
|-<br />
|♍ {{w|Virgo (astrology)|Virgo}} <br/>(The Maiden)<br />
|August 23 – September 22<br />
|November 30 – December 29<br />
|You may have been conceived while a Christmas song played<br />
|It is very common for {{w|Christmas}} songs to be played in the month of December.<br />
|-<br />
|♎ {{w|Libra (astrology)|Libra}} <br/>(The Scales)<br />
|September 22 – October 23<br />
|December 29 – January 30<br />
|You may have been conceived after a New Year's Eve party<br />
|{{w|New Year's Eve}} always falls on December 31. Parties are commonly held to celebrate the new year, which create an ideal circumstance in which to either find a mate, or to celebrate with an existing partner. New Year's parties, by definition, are held late at night, it's common for alcohol to be consumed, and it's become a custom in the US to celebrate the moment of the New Year by kissing someone. All of these factors could contribute to sexual relations during or after such a party. <br />
|-<br />
|♏ {{w|Scorpio (astrology)|Scorpio}} <br/>(The Scorpion)<br />
|October 23 – November 22<br />
|January 30 – February&nbsp;29<br />
|You may have been conceived by people stuck inside after a long winter<br />
|This period is during the coolest part and towards the end of the {{w|winter}} in the northern hemisphere. People may even be forced to stay at home due to snow. When people have nothing else to do [https://www.google.dk/search?q=babies+9+month+after+snowstorm&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=qzkuVcjAE4qsswGevoC4CQ many babies are born 9 months later]. Interestingly, this period also includes {{w|ValentinesDay}}, which is a famous celebration of love and romance, but isn't mentioned as a potential contributor to potential conceptions. <br />
|-<br />
|♐ {{w|Sagittarius (astrology)|Sagittarius}} <br/>(The Archer)<br />
|November 22 – December 21<br />
|February 29 – March 28<br />
|You may have been conceived during March Madness<br />
|Originally {{w|European_hare#Mating_and_reproduction|March madness}} referred to the early part of the mating season for the {{w|European Hare}}, in which females fight off male suitors. Today, in a US context, this is an {{w|NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship|American college Basketball tournament}} that started in 1939 and is mainly held in March. It is even covered on TV under the name {{w|NCAA March Madness (CBS/Turner)|NCAA March Madness}}.<br />
|-<br />
|♑ {{w|Capricorn (astrology)|Capricorn}} <br/>(The Goat)<br />
|December 22 – January 19<br />
|March 29 – April 28<br />
|You may have been conceived during a sexy Easter Egg hunt<br />
|{{w|Easter}} falls between {{w|List of dates for Easter#Earliest Easter|March 22}} and {{w|List of dates for Easter#Latest Easter|April 25}} so most Easter celebrations, (and therefore most {{w|Egg hunt|Easter Egg hunts}}) will occur during this period. Egg hunts are typically activities for children, in which adults hide eggs and treats and children are encouraged to search for them. While Easter is traditionally associated with fertility symbolism, the holiday itself isn't generally associated with notions of romance or sex, making the concept of a "sexy Easter Egg hunt" rather unexpected. It may be playing with ability of people to turn nearly any occasion sexual, with enough creativity. <br />
|-<br />
|♒ {{w|Aquarius (astrology)|Aquarius}} <br/>(The&nbsp;Water&nbsp;Carrier)<br />
|January&nbsp;20 – February&nbsp;18<br />
|April 27 – May 25<br />
|You may have been conceived on Mother's Day<br />
|{{w|Mother's Day}} in the USA,and some other countries, is on the second Sunday in May, between 8 and 14 May. It's traditional for mothers to receive special recognition and affection on this holiday, and such attention from their partners could potentially lead to sex. (Such recognition generally only happens if a woman is already a mother, which would imply that the person must have older siblings). <br />
|-<br />
|♓ {{w|Pisces (astrology)|Pisces}} <br/>(The Fish)<br />
|February&nbsp;19 – March&nbsp;20<br />
|May 25 – June 27<br />
|You may have been conceived at someone's wedding<br />
|June is widely reported as the [http://www.statista.com/statistics/241231/percentage-of-us-weddings-by-month/ most popular month for weddings in the United States], likely due to a preference for being married in warm weather (particularly if the wedding takes place outdoors). A child might be conceived on their parents' wedding night, but weddings are often large social gatherings, and are generally built around a celebration of love, which can prime people with a romantic mindset. A married or dating couple attending a wedding might might feel particularly amorous, and single people might use the opportunity to spark new relationships. the specific phrase "'''at''' someone's wedding" implies a couple so overcome with love and/or lust they can't even wait until they've left the event. <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Above the frame:]<br />
:'''Horoscopes'''<br />
:With an actual basis in fact<br />
:[A list with the name of each astrological sign in the first column (in gray) and a horoscope for each sign in the second column. Here given in table form]<br />
:{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Aries •<br />
| You may have been conceived after a 4th of July fireworks show<br />
|-<br />
! Taurus •<br />
| You may have been conceived on a hot August day<br />
|-<br />
! Gemini •<br />
| You may have been conceived as the leaves began to change<br />
|-<br />
! Cancer •<br />
| You may have been conceived by people trying on costumes<br />
|-<br />
! Leo •<br />
| You may have been conceived during Thanksgiving<br />
|-<br />
! Virgo •<br />
| You may have been conceived while a Christmas song played<br />
|-<br />
! Libra •<br />
| You may have been conceived after a New Year's Eve party<br />
|-<br />
! Scorpio •<br />
| You may have been conceived by people stuck inside after a long winter<br />
|-<br />
! Sagittarius •<br />
| You may have been conceived during March Madness<br />
|-<br />
! Capricorn •<br />
| You may have been conceived during a sexy Easter egg hunt<br />
|-<br />
! Aquarius •<br />
| You may have been conceived on Mother's day<br />
|-<br />
! Pisces •<br />
| You may have been conceived at someone's wedding<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Sex]]<br />
[[Category:Christmas]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1512:_Horoscopes&diff=3284571512: Horoscopes2023-11-09T20:46:45Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1512<br />
| date = April 15, 2015<br />
| title = Horoscopes<br />
| image = horoscopes.png<br />
| titletext = If you live in the Northern hemisphere. In the southern hemisphere, due to the coriolis effect, babies are born nine months BEFORE they're conceived.<br />
}}<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{w|Horoscopes}} purport to predict someone's personality or future, based on the position of planets and stars at the time of their birth and at present. Horoscopes commonly group people into twelve groups based on {{w|zodiac signs}}. The names of the horoscope Zodiac signs are based on the names of twelve constellations that were the backdrop for the path of the sun in the ancient times when the rules of settings horoscopes were originally developed. Today, due to precession of the Earth's axis of rotation (and to a lesser degree due to the modern formal definitions of constellations), the Zodiac signs do not correspond fully to the names of actual constellations in the path of the Sun. One's zodiac sign is determined by the position of the sun on their birthday, with each sign representing a specific 30.4 day period (1/12th of a year), starting from the {{w|equinox|First point of Aries}}.<br />
<br />
Modern science has found {{w|Astrology and science|no basis for horoscopes}}. As with many unscientific claims and mythologies, [[Randall]] doesn't seem to care for the beliefs, and has more fun gently mocking them. The joke of this strip is that the only thing you can calculate from your astrological sign is the period of the year during which you were {{w|conceived|conception}}. The average human is born 38 weeks after conception. There's enough variation in the length of pregnancies that this can vary by as much as several months, but for the majority of people, the date of their conception can be calculated from their birthday, within a week or two.<br />
<br />
This can be a slightly uncomfortable topic, because most humans were conceived by their parents having sexual intercourse, which is a topic that many people find uncomfortable to think about. The premise of this strip is that, based on the time you were born, you can make a guess at the circumstances under which you were conceived. Such guesses wouldn't be universally accurate, of course, but the notion that you could make a decent guess of the circumstances of someone's conception feels almost transgressive. <br />
<br />
Randall phrases his "predictions" as possibilities ("you may have") rather than declarations, acknowledging that it is a guess, and that it, unlike actual horoscopes, doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. <br />
<br />
The title text mentions that these predictions only apply to the northern hemisphere. This references both an issue with zodiac signs (as constellations are different in the southern hemisphere), and the fact that his 'predictions' are clearly based on an American context (many of the holiday references are exclusive to America). This idea is then lampooned by attributing it to the Coriolis effect (which has nothing to do with birth dates), and claiming that children in the southern hemisphere are born 9 months ''before'' conception (which is obviously impossible). <br />
<br />
The {{w|Coriolis effect}} refers to a phenomenon of motion that occurs relative to a rotating reference frame. Since the Earth is rotating, an apparent force (the Coriolis force) causes objects moving toward the poles to be deflected to right in the northern hemisphere, and to the left in the southern hemisphere. This effect is the reason that {{w|Coriolis_effect#Meteorology|weather systems}} (most clearly seen for {{w|hurricanes}}) which rotate in opposite directions, depending the hemisphere.<br />
<br />
==Table of Astrological signs==<br />
Here below is a table with data and explanation of the individual horoscopes:<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
!{{w|Astrological sign|Astrological sign}} <br/> (English name)<br />
!{{w|Birthday}} <br/> range<br />
!Expected <br/> {{w|Fertilisation|conception}}<br />
!Horoscope prediction<br />
!Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|♈ {{w|Aries (astrology)|Aries}} <br/>(The Ram)<br />
|March 21 – April 21<br />
|June 28 – July 28<br />
|You may have been conceived after a 4th of July fireworks show<br />
|In the US the {{w|Independence Day (United States)|Independence Day}} is celebrated on the 4th of July, and this is customarily celebrated with huge fireworks. Fireworks are a common metaphor for the culmination of sex (i.e. the orgasm), and are often the focus of social gatherings that might lead to conception.<br />
|-<br />
|♉ {{w|Taurus (astrology)|Taurus}} <br/>(The Bull)<br />
|April 20 – May 20 <br />
|July 27 – August 27<br />
|You may have been conceived on a hot August day<br />
|In most of the northern hemisphere there are many hot days in {{w|August}}. People in hot weather tend to wear less clothing, which might promote sexual attraction.<br />
|-<br />
|♊ {{w|Gemini (astrology)|Gemini}} <br/>(The Twins)<br />
|May 21 – June 21<br />
|August 28 – September 28<br />
|You may have been conceived as the leaves began to change<br />
|In the northern part of the northern hemisphere the {{w|autumn}} starts at the end of this time period, so the leaves will begin to change color. <br />
|-<br />
|♋ {{w|Cancer (astrology)|Cancer}} <br/>(The Crab)<br />
|June 21 – July 21<br />
|September 28 – October 28<br />
|You may have been conceived by people trying on costumes<br />
|This period ends a few days before {{w|Halloween}}, so it possible that the people who conceived you (mom and dad) tried on their new costumes when they made you. Roleplay, enhanced with costumes, can be a way to spice up a relationship and can lead to sex and procreation.<br />
|-<br />
|♌ {{w|Leo (astrology)|Leo}} <br/>(The Lion)<br />
|July 22 – August 23<br />
|October 29 – November 30<br />
|You may have been conceived during Thanksgiving<br />
|{{w|Thanksgiving}} is celebrated in the US on the fourth Thursday of November.<br />
|-<br />
|♍ {{w|Virgo (astrology)|Virgo}} <br/>(The Maiden)<br />
|August 23 – September 22<br />
|November 30 – December 29<br />
|You may have been conceived while a Christmas song played<br />
|It is very common for {{w|Christmas}} songs to be played in the month of December.<br />
|-<br />
|♎ {{w|Libra (astrology)|Libra}} <br/>(The Scales)<br />
|September 22 – October 23<br />
|December 29 – January 30<br />
|You may have been conceived after a New Year's Eve party<br />
|{{w|New Year's Eve}} always falls on December 31. Parties are commonly held to celebrate the new year, which create an ideal circumstance in which to either find a mate, or to celebrate with an existing partner. New Year's parties, by definition, are held late at night, it's common for alcohol to be consumed, and it's become a custom in the US to celebrate the moment of the New Year by kissing someone. All of these factors could contribute to sexual relations during or after such a party. <br />
|-<br />
|♏ {{w|Scorpio (astrology)|Scorpio}} <br/>(The Scorpion)<br />
|October 23 – November 22<br />
|January 30 – February&nbsp;29<br />
|You may have been conceived by people stuck inside after a long winter<br />
|This period is during the coolest part and towards the end of the {{w|winter}} in the northern hemisphere. People may even be forced to stay at home due to snow. When people have nothing else to do [https://www.google.dk/search?q=babies+9+month+after+snowstorm&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=qzkuVcjAE4qsswGevoC4CQ many babies are born 9 months later]. Interestingly, this period also includes {{w|ValentinesDay}}, which is a famous celebration of love and romance, but isn't mentioned as a potential contributor to potential conceptions. <br />
|-<br />
|♐ {{w|Sagittarius (astrology)|Sagittarius}} <br/>(The Archer)<br />
|November 22 – December 21<br />
|February 29 – March 28<br />
|You may have been conceived during March Madness<br />
|Originally {{w|European_hare#Mating_and_reproduction|March madness}} referred to the early part of the mating season for the {{w|European Hare}}, in which females fight off male suitors. Today, in a US context, this is an {{w|NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship|American college Basketball tournament}} that started in 1939 and is mainly held in March. It is even covered on TV under the name {{w|NCAA March Madness (CBS/Turner)|NCAA March Madness}}.<br />
|-<br />
|♑ {{w|Capricorn (astrology)|Capricorn}} <br/>(The Goat)<br />
|December 22 – January 19<br />
|March 29 – April 28<br />
|You may have been conceived during a sexy Easter Egg hunt<br />
|{{w|Easter}} falls between {{w|List of dates for Easter#Earliest Easter|March 22}} and {{w|List of dates for Easter#Latest Easter|April 25}} so most Easter celebrations, (and therefore most {{w|Egg hunt|Easter Egg hunts}}) will occur during this period. Egg hunts are typically activities for children, in which adults hide eggs and treats and children are encouraged to search for them. While Easter is traditionally associated with fertility symbolism, the holiday itself isn't generally associated with notions of romance or sex, making the concept of a "sexy Easter Egg hunt" rather unexpected. It may be playing with ability of people to turn nearly any occasion sexual, with enough creativity. <br />
|-<br />
|♒ {{w|Aquarius (astrology)|Aquarius}} <br/>(The&nbsp;Water&nbsp;Carrier)<br />
|January&nbsp;20 – February&nbsp;18<br />
|April 27 – May 25<br />
|You may have been conceived on Mother's Day<br />
|{{w|Mother's Day}} in the USA,and some other countries, is on the second Sunday in May, between 8 and 14 May. It's traditional for mothers to receive special recognition and affection on this holiday, and such attention from their partners could potentially lead to sex. (Such recognition generally only happens if a woman is already a mother, which would imply that the person must have older siblings). <br />
|-<br />
|♓ {{w|Pisces (astrology)|Pisces}} <br/>(The Fish)<br />
|February&nbsp;19 – March&nbsp;20<br />
|May 25 – June 27<br />
|You may have been conceived at someone's wedding<br />
|June is widely reported as the [http://www.statista.com/statistics/241231/percentage-of-us-weddings-by-month/ most popular month for weddings in the United States], likely due to a preference for being married in warm weather (particularly if the wedding takes place outdoors). A child might be conceived on their parents' wedding night, but weddings are both social gatherings, and are generally built around a celebration of love, which can prime people with a romantic mindset. A married or dating couple attending a wedding might might feel particularly amorous, and single people might use the opportunity to spark new relationships. the specific phrase "'''at''' someone's wedding" implies a couple so overcome with love and/or lust they can't even wait until they've left the event. <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Above the frame:]<br />
:'''Horoscopes'''<br />
:With an actual basis in fact<br />
:[A list with the name of each astrological sign in the first column (in gray) and a horoscope for each sign in the second column. Here given in table form]<br />
:{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Aries •<br />
| You may have been conceived after a 4th of July fireworks show<br />
|-<br />
! Taurus •<br />
| You may have been conceived on a hot August day<br />
|-<br />
! Gemini •<br />
| You may have been conceived as the leaves began to change<br />
|-<br />
! Cancer •<br />
| You may have been conceived by people trying on costumes<br />
|-<br />
! Leo •<br />
| You may have been conceived during Thanksgiving<br />
|-<br />
! Virgo •<br />
| You may have been conceived while a Christmas song played<br />
|-<br />
! Libra •<br />
| You may have been conceived after a New Year's Eve party<br />
|-<br />
! Scorpio •<br />
| You may have been conceived by people stuck inside after a long winter<br />
|-<br />
! Sagittarius •<br />
| You may have been conceived during March Madness<br />
|-<br />
! Capricorn •<br />
| You may have been conceived during a sexy Easter egg hunt<br />
|-<br />
! Aquarius •<br />
| You may have been conceived on Mother's day<br />
|-<br />
! Pisces •<br />
| You may have been conceived at someone's wedding<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Sex]]<br />
[[Category:Christmas]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1581:_Birthday&diff=3284451581: Birthday2023-11-09T19:46:10Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1581<br />
| date = September 23, 2015<br />
| title = Birthday<br />
| image = birthday.png<br />
| titletext = I guess I need to apologize to my parents, friends, and the staff at Chuck E. Cheese's for all the times I called the cops on them.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[xkcd]] turns 10 years old on September 30, 2015 (a week after the release of this comic). In this comic [[Randall]] honors his webcomic by singing to it the classic "{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" song.<br />
<br />
"{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" is one of the most commonly sung songs in the English language (and is common in many others). Because of its age, ubiquity and simplicity, it has long surprised people to learn that it was not in the public domain. {{w|Warner/Chappell Music}} claimed the copyright to the lyrics, and has demanded royalties for any recording, publication or public performance for commercial purposes. Total revenues for this song were estimated at US$2 million annually.<br />
<br />
This strip refers to a ruling, from the day before the release of this comic, by a federal judge in California ({{w|George H. King|George King}}), stating that the song is not covered by a valid copyright (see [http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-happy-birthday-song-lawsuit-decision-20150922-story.html Warner's 'Happy Birthday' Copyright Not Valid, Judge Rules]). This ruling resulted from a lawsuit filed by Good Morning To You Productions (singer {{w|Rupa Marya}} and filmmaker {{w|Robert D. Siegel|Robert Siegel}}) against Warner/Chappel Music to declare Warner/Chappel's copyright claim in the song invalid (filing at [http://www.scribd.com/doc/147645129/Happybirthday]). With this ruling, the court declared that Warner/Chappell does not have a copyright claim to the song, and therefore the song can now be sung or published by anyone, in any context, without having to pay royalties to Warner/Chappell.<br />
<br />
The ruling does not go so far as to declare the song to be in the public domain, leaving it more correctly defined as an {{w|orphan work}}. Randall seems to be celebrating the fact that this strip, which would have put him at risk for a lawsuit the day before, is now unlikely to be challenged since the odds of a new party appearing and successfully claiming copyright on the lyrics and subsequently demanding license fees is approximately zero.<br />
<br />
{{w|Chuck E. Cheese's}} is an entertainment restaurant, geared toward young children, which routinely hosts birthday parties as part of its business model. Parties held in commercial venues tend to be a gray area for this kind of issue. Singing copyrighted songs at a private function is allowed, but the staff of a restaurant singing them to patrons could be considered a commercial performance, and potentially expose the restaurant to claims from the copyright holder. The title text suggests that [[Randall]] was at a family birthday party, witnessed someone (possibly the staff) singing "Happy Birthday", and called the police. This would be an extreme overreaction in any case (even if it were a violation, copyright infringement is a civil liability, not a criminal offense), but the decision that the copyright wasn't valid in the first place makes such an action even more indefensible. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Caption above the frame:]<br />
:xkcd turns 10 years old this month.<br />
:In light of last night's court ruling in<br />
:''Rupa Marya v. Warner/Chappell Music Inc.'',<br />
:I would just like to say:<br />
<br />
:[The song text is written, with nine musical notes, three groups on each side of the text, above a birthday cake with 10 lit candles. The cake has two distinct layers. On each layer there are drawn 6 xkcd stick figures with small black bullets between them. The center bullet in the bottom layer is shaped like a heart. The figures at the edges can be difficult to recognize. The figures in the upper layer and from the left are: A man with a hat (hard to see if it is one of the recognized characters), White Hat, Megan, Pony Tail, Hairy and Cueball (hard to see him properly). Similar in the lower layer: Black Hat, Danish, Beret Guy, Rob, Cutie, and a girl (hard to see, but looks like girls hair, not a hat).]<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
:Happy birthday, dear xkcd<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1581:_Birthday&diff=3284441581: Birthday2023-11-09T19:44:19Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1581<br />
| date = September 23, 2015<br />
| title = Birthday<br />
| image = birthday.png<br />
| titletext = I guess I need to apologize to my parents, friends, and the staff at Chuck E. Cheese's for all the times I called the cops on them.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[xkcd]] turns 10 years old on September 30, 2015 (a week after the release of this comic). In this comic [[Randall]] honors his webcomic by singing to it the classic "{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" song.<br />
<br />
"{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" is one of the most commonly sung songs in the English language (and is common in many others). Because of its age, ubiquity and simplicity, it has long surprised people to learn that it was not in the public domain. {{w|Warner/Chappell Music}} claimed the copyright to the lyrics, and has demanded royalties for any recording, publication or public performance for commercial purposes. Total revenues for this song were estimated at US$2 million annually.<br />
<br />
This strip refers to a ruling, from the day before the release of this comic, by a federal judge in California ({{w|George H. King|George King}}), stating that the song is not covered by a valid copyright (see [http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-happy-birthday-song-lawsuit-decision-20150922-story.html Warner's 'Happy Birthday' Copyright Not Valid, Judge Rules]). This ruling resulted from a lawsuit filed by Good Morning To You Productions (singer {{w|Rupa Marya}} and filmmaker {{w|Robert D. Siegel|Robert Siegel}}) against Warner/Chappel Music to declare Warner/Chappel's copyright claim in the song invalid (filing at [http://www.scribd.com/doc/147645129/Happybirthday]). With this ruling, the court declared that Warner/Chappell does not have a copyright claim to the song, and therefore the song can now be sung or published by anyone, in any context, without having to pay royalties to Warner/Chappell.<br />
<br />
The ruling does not go so far as to declare the song to be in the public domain, leaving it more correctly defined as an {{w|orphan work}}. Randall seems to be celebrating the fact that this strip, which would have put him at risk for a lawsuit the day before, is now unlikely to be challenged since the odds of a new party appearing and successfully claiming copyright on the lyrics and subsequently demanding license fees is approximately zero.<br />
<br />
{{w|Chuck E. Cheese's}} is an entertainment restaurant, geared toward young children, which routinely hosts birthday parties as part of its business model. Birthday parties held in commercial venues tend to be a gray area in copyright law, since singing copyrighted songs at a private function is allowed, but the staff of a restaurant singing them to patrons could be considered a commercial performance, and potentially expose the restaurant to claims from the copyright holder. The title text suggests that [[Randall]] was at a family birthday party, witnessed the staff singing "Happy Birthday", and called the police. This would be an extreme overreaction in any case (copyright infringement is a civil liability, not a criminal offense), but the decision that the copyright wasn't valid in the first place makes such an action even more indefensible. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Caption above the frame:]<br />
:xkcd turns 10 years old this month.<br />
:In light of last night's court ruling in<br />
:''Rupa Marya v. Warner/Chappell Music Inc.'',<br />
:I would just like to say:<br />
<br />
:[The song text is written, with nine musical notes, three groups on each side of the text, above a birthday cake with 10 lit candles. The cake has two distinct layers. On each layer there are drawn 6 xkcd stick figures with small black bullets between them. The center bullet in the bottom layer is shaped like a heart. The figures at the edges can be difficult to recognize. The figures in the upper layer and from the left are: A man with a hat (hard to see if it is one of the recognized characters), White Hat, Megan, Pony Tail, Hairy and Cueball (hard to see him properly). Similar in the lower layer: Black Hat, Danish, Beret Guy, Rob, Cutie, and a girl (hard to see, but looks like girls hair, not a hat).]<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
:Happy birthday, dear xkcd<br />
:Happy birthday to you<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2848:_Breaker_Box&diff=3275762848: Breaker Box2023-11-01T13:49:05Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2848<br />
| date = October 30, 2023<br />
| title = Breaker Box<br />
| image = breaker_box_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 560x776px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = Any electrician will warn you to first locate and flip the house's CAUSALITY circuit breaker before touching the CIRCUIT BREAKERS one.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a HIGH-PITCHED HUM GENERATOR THAT WAS LAST MENTIONED EXACTLY 1258 COMICS AGO - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
A {{w|distribution board}}, referred to as a "breaker box" here and also commonly referred to as a "fuse box", "breaker panel", "DB box", and many other names, is a metal box attached to a wall, usually in some maintenance area, containing multiple {{w|circuit breakers}} that let distribute electricity to various parts of the building. A circuit breaker is an electrical switch, usually in the form of a small lever that can be used to manually isolate the electrical connections it controls from the incoming power supply. These breakers are designed to automatically open if too much electrical current flows through them. This is a safety measure to reduce the risk of damage, fire or electrocution. The breakers can also be opened manually to de-energize specific circuits when electrical work needs to be done. <br />
<br />
In most breaker boxes, each individual breaker is labeled to let the operator know what that specific breaker controls. Typically, the circuit controlled by each breaker will feed an intuitive set of connections: a certain room, or set of rooms, or possibly a set of related services (like overhead lights, or all the outlets on one floor). Some large appliances will have a dedicated circuit and breaker. <br />
<br />
However, in houses that have been rewired multiple times (or are poorly wired), this can quickly become overcomplicated with seemingly random connections. Randall lives in Boston where much of the housing stock is from the late 1800s or early 1900s, and he is likely to live in a house with non-ideal wiring, which may have inspired this comic.<br />
<br />
The comic satirizes these complex wiring setups, with multiple breakers "controlling" arbitrary things, including some that – in the classic style of XKCD – may be impossible to hook a breaker up to, getting progressively more absurd to the point of disabling certain laws of physics.<br />
<br />
===Table of the breaker labels===<br />
{|class = "wikitable"<br />
! Label next to breaker !! Explanation !! Note<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Left column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| Kitchen lights || The lights in the kitchen. || rowspan="3"| Standard items that could be separate<br />
|-<br />
| Living room lights || The lights in the living room.<br />
|-<br />
| Porch lights || The lights on the porch.<br />
|-<br />
| Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere || The lights in the bathroom, but also a random outlet.<br />
It is not uncommon for the power supplies to bathrooms (and other rooms with water connections) to be on a separate circuit. This is because water can potentially cause a short circuit, resulting in the breaker opening, and this minimizes the impact and makes the problem easier to locate.<br />
<br />
Having initially reserved an output from the box for such a limited use, it is possible that another electrician – while adding wiring – chooses to wire seemingly unrelated things into the same circuit. This may make sense (for example, an outlet near a sink or some other water source could reasonably be grouped with the bathroom), or it may simply be out of convenience. In either case, homeowners (and future installers) may not be informed of this, and therefore wouldn't realize that the outlet grouped with that circuit. <br />
| Standard, but 'kludged'<br />
|-<br />
| North-facing appliances || colspan="2"|Peculiar and a bit complex to execute. Here's how it might have been set up:<br />
# Install a breaker switch that is actually a mechanical switch to control a smart home automation instead of its normal function<br />
# Replace relevant normal outlets with Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets <br />
# Use smart home software to create a custom group of all outlets that control all north-facing appliances<br />
# Set up a software automation to selectively toggle this user-defined group of Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets when triggered.<br />
# Adding a matching appliance to the house would require editing the automation.<br />
<br />
Alternative explanations:<br />
* The switch may be physically wired only to outlets installed on a southern wall in the property (or ''all'' southern walls, for each room that requires them), and you'd ensure that everything connected to these exclusively north-facing outlets also faces directly away from the wall(s).<br />
* The switch could control appliances on the north-facing walls of the house. <br />
<br />
Note: "North-facing" has broad interpretation, as lax as northeast to northwest or as strict as {{w|Points of the compass#32-wind compass rose|north by east to north by west}}.<br />
<br />
|-<br />
| Bathtub drain light || colspan="2"|Bathtub drains typically do not have lights, but this breaker provides power to that and only that. Why it isn't already considered a "bathroom light" is unexplained (unless it's for the bit of the pipe that is ''external'' to that room).<br />
Indeed, it is possible the reason the "bathroom light" breaker was able to take that additional random outlet connection was because this light had been miswired.<br />
|-<br />
| Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" || colspan="2"|Another odd and amusing specification. <br />
<br />
To make it work, one might use the "North-facing appliances" setup, but using a different custom group of Wi-Fi-controlled smart outlets chosen to only control appliances with an "F' in their name.<br />
<br />
Some common household appliances that this switch might control:<br />
* coffee maker<br />
* refrigerator<br />
* freezer<br />
* fan<br />
* air fryer<br />
* food processor<br />
* waffle iron<br />
* fabric steamer<br />
* fireplace (electric)<br />
Note that only ''most'' of these are kitchen appliances, following the theme of "bathroom and one mystery outlet somewhere"<br />
|-<br />
| {{w|Hot water heater}} || Usually just a heater that creates (and typically stores) hot water. But given that the next breaker controls the "Regular water heater", this breaker might actually control a water heater that pointlessly heats water that is ''already'' hot. <br />
This is probably a joke about the fact that the common phrase "hot water heater" is [[technically]] redundant or misleading:<br />
* Redundant because the simpler term "water heater" is enough to describe a device that produces hot water.<br />
* Misleading because it's not the purpose of residential water heaters to heat water that is ''already'' hot.<br />
However, there is a specific situation in which this is ''not'' redundant or misleading: some languages have a separate, single word that describes "hot water" with the connotation that it's (near-)boiling or close to it. In that sort of household, this breaker would control the electric kettle or tabletop water boiler.<br />
|rowspan="2"|Two "heaters"<br />
|-<br />
| Regular water heater || The heater for regular water. Together with the switch above, this presumes it's for a heater for heating water that is not yet hot (usually called a "hot water heater", hence the joke). Alternatively, if we assume that a ''hot water heater'' is for ''making'' hot water, this heater must be making “regular water”, whatever temperature that may mean.<br />
|-<br />
| Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in || colspan="2"|This controls every outlet in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in, such as the dining room and kitchen and – depending on the "normal" habits of the inhabitants – other rooms such as the bedroom, bathroom, or living room (if not already covered by the "living room lights" switch above) but presumably not closets and single-purpose rooms such as the laundry room.<br />
|-<br />
| High-pitched hum generator || colspan="2"|Controls a high-pitched hum generator. This is a call-back to [[1590: The Source]], which was released just over 8 years before this comic.<br />
|-<br />
| The solution to the cryptogram below: || colspan="2"|Likely a pun on "breaking" or solving a cryptogram, which is a puzzle where a sentence has been encoded using a cipher, usually simple, and the goal is to determine the cipher and recover the original sentence from the encoded one.<br />
Another explanation is that this switch enables or disables the solution somehow, perhaps toggling its knowability or solvability.<br />
|-<br />
| Bugs || colspan="2"|Several interpretations are possible:<br />
* Disable all software bugs in the house*<br />
* Disable all insect bugs in the house – as an efficient form of pest control – perhaps using ultrasonic emitters that drive away bugs (may be a reference to [[2753: Air Handler]]) – or perhaps the house contains noise machines that play sounds of insects or other ways of simulating insects.<br />
* Disable power to all covert listening devices, which would be able to be switched off if wired into the house's electrical grid.<br />
* Disable the whole global category of bugs (insects, arachnids, and other small arthropods), in which case we'd have no more pests and we'd reduce disease like malaria and {{w|Lyme disease}}. Food webs would also collapse, and our world would be overrun with waste.<br />
<nowiki>*</nowiki>Though it's unlikely that it's what Randall is referring to, computer bugs switches actually exist. It's a feature in some video game emulators to either run an unofficial patched version or to stay true to the original system, for example to allow bug-exploit speedruns of a video game.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Right column of switches<br />
|-<br />
| A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now || colspan="2"|Fans generally produce a steady, low-level 'white' noise that people generally stop noticing. When such a fan is turned off, the absence of that noise is quickly noticed. Shutting down a fan that you didn't realize was running could be worrisome for a couple of reasons: it could be serving an important function (like HVAC or server cooling) and cause a problem when it's off, or it may be a fan that wasn't supposed to be running, but had been for some time with being noticed.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishwasher || colspan="2"|Although dishwashers aren't typically high-load appliances that require a breaker to themselves (unlike, for example, the water heater), if the house wasn't originally built with a dishwasher in mind, it is likely new wiring had to be added during its installation, resulting in a breaker that exclusively controls the dishwasher.<br />
<br />
Though what "dishwasher" actually means may depend on what the "dishes" of the next switch might be, and thus what additional device may be required to ensure they remain clean. Even at the more trivial end of the interpretation (though not then explaining the following "dishes"), a busy restaurant might have an employee section equipped exclusively for the dishwashing role and separately supplied with power in a similar manner to that suggested for the bathroom.<br />
|-<br />
| Dishes || colspan="2"|Traditionally, dishes cannot be turned off, as they do not normally require electricity. "Dishes" could be the label for a dishwasher on another house's breaker box, but this one already used that label. Another explanation, perhaps unusual in most contexts, is that this switch powers/controls two or more satellite dishes. Yet another explanation is that, since this is a ''breaker switch,'' tripping it simply breaks all dishes in the house.<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway lights || The lights in the hallway or hallways. || rowspan="3"|"Hallway" regions<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway outlets || The outlets in the hallway or hallways. A common confusion when turning off breakers is separate wiring for outlets and lights in the same room. Though having the room go dark is a good mnemonic that it is unpowered, it is not a guarantee, and indeed, wiring them separately allows working on the outlets without having to do it in the dark.<br />
|-<br />
| Hallway floors || This breaker has several potential interpretations:<br />
#A master switch for all floors (stories) in the building which include hallways, e.g. the guestroom areas in a hotel, whilst possibly excluding the lobby and service levels<br />
#Outlets in the floor<br />
#Electric underfloor heating (heated bathroom floors are a feature in some houses)<br />
#Electrification of the floors -- not common outside of horror and heist movies.<br />
#Disabling all floors entirely, so everything resting on the floors falls through.<br />
|-<br />
| Social media || colspan="2"|This breaker also has several potential interpretations of "turning off social media":<br />
#'Digital detoxes', where someone says "I'm going to turn off my social media" and intends to deny themselves access to all their social media apps.<br />
#A switch for a parent to turn off all social media entering the house to protect their kids and themselves, which references a type of specialized content filter available through Wi-Fi router settings, not traditionally a breaker box.<br />
#A callback to [[908: The Cloud]]. Since most social media platforms are centralized services, it would be theoretically possible to hook up a switch to the main power supply of every server building at once, given some extremely long wires, a breaker capable of handling the abhorrently massive electric load, and agreement from every social media provider<sup><i>([[1439|optional]])</i></sup>.<br />
#The theoretical desire by some to "turn off social media" for the world due to its harmful effects on society. As someone who lived before social media and saw its spread over two decades, Randall may be ruing the impacts of social media on civilization and channeling his desire to put the genie back in the bottle.<br />
#A play on the phrase “breaking the internet”, meaning going viral on social media.<br />
|-<br />
| State law || Likely a pun on "State Law Breaker."<br />
Taken literally, it would either disable enforcement of State Law or nullify every single one, creating a state of martial law similar to the premise of the popular movie, "The Purge". It's unclear if this refers to Randall's state of Massachusetts or State Law as a general concept.<br />
| rowspan="2"|"Legal" items<br />
|-<br />
| Federal law || Likely a pun on "Federal Law Breaker," though it could also be taken literally, as above. The ramifications of nullifying every US Federal law are immense. Disabling Federal Law while keeping State Law would theoretically fulfill the goals of the "States Rights" advocates, groups of conservatives across US history aiming to return Federal power to the States.<br />
|-<br />
| Second law of thermodynamics || The {{w|Second Law of Thermodynamics}}, in simple terms, states that the total entropy (or disorder) of an isolated system can only increase over time. It's a fundamental principle that dictates the direction of energy flow and the feasibility of many processes, and provides an arrow of time. In even simpler terms, you cannot take the heat from a cold place (not necessarily a chilly one like a winter day - just colder than the other place) and transfer it to make a different place hotter than the cold place, unless you use up some form of energy doing it - without expending energy, you can only take heat from the hotter place to warm up the colder place.<br />
Turning off (or breaking) the second law of thermodynamics would have some pros and cons.<br />
;GOOD STUFF<br />
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines''': Machines that can do work indefinitely without an energy source would become possible, defying our current understanding of energy conservation.<br />
*'''Reversibility of Processes''': Many natural processes that are irreversible under current laws could be reversed. For instance, melted ice could spontaneously turn back into a solid without energy removal.<br />
*'''Recycling Energy''': We could theoretically use the same quantum of energy over and over again, leading to ultra-efficient systems and potentially solving many of the world's energy problems.<br />
*'''Reversing Entropy-Driven Processes''': Things like mixing cream and coffee or ink in water could spontaneously unmix.<br />
;BAD STUFF<br />
*'''End Life as We Know It:''' All living organisms rely on the second law for crucial processes, including metabolism and reproduction. If the second law were negated, life, at least as we understand it, might not be possible.<br />
*'''No Heat Engines:''' Engines rely on the flow of heat from hotter to colder bodies. Without the Second Law, our cars, power plants, refrigerators, and many other devices would not function.<br />
*'''Breakdown of Molecular Processes:''' Molecules spontaneously move from areas of higher to lower concentration due to entropy. Without this, diffusion, osmosis, and many biochemical reactions wouldn't occur as they currently do.<br />
*'''Loss of Directionality:''' One interpretation of the Second Law provides a directionality to time (the so-called "arrow of time"). Without it, causality and our understanding of past, present, and future could be fundamentally altered.<br />
*'''Unpredictable Outcomes:''' Turning off the Second Law could result in a universe where outcomes are not probabilistically predictable. You couldn't rely on anything happening as it "should," leading to chaos in every sense.<br />
This law of physics was also explored in the What If? article [https://what-if.xkcd.com/145/ Fire From Moonlight].<br />
| rowspan="3"|"Physics" items<br />
|-<br />
| Friction || {{w|Friction}} is the resistive force that opposes the relative motion or tendency of such motion of two surfaces in contact. Turning it off has some upsides and downsides.<br />
;UPSIDES<br />
*'''Perpetual Motion Machines:''' Without friction, once an object starts moving, it would continue indefinitely unless acted upon by another force.<br />
*'''Super-Efficient Transport:''' Cars, trains, and other vehicles would glide effortlessly once set into motion, leading to immense energy savings.<br />
*'''Unique Sports:''' New sports and activities would emerge, where players glide or slide over surfaces without friction.<br />
;DOWNSIDES<br />
*'''Walking Would Be Impossible:''' We rely on friction between our feet and the ground to move. Without it, we would be unable to walk, run, or even stand.<br />
*'''No Manual Dexterity:''' Holding, grabbing, or manipulating objects would be very difficult, because they would be perfectly slippery.<br />
*'''Catastrophic Mechanical Failures:''' Many machines rely on friction to function. Brakes in cars, for instance, use friction to slow down and stop the vehicle. Without it, uncontrollable accidents would occur.<br />
*'''No Sound:''' Friction between air molecules creates sound waves. Without friction, the world would be silent (some may consider this an upside).<br />
*'''Breathing Difficulties:''' Our respiratory system relies on frictional forces when the alveoli in our lungs exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide with the bloodstream.<br />
*'''Hard to Light Fire:''' Lighting a fire by striking a match would no longer work, because it relies on friction. However, there are other methods for starting a fire that don't require friction, [https://www.wikihow.com/Create-Fire-With-a-Magnifying-Glass the most famous of which just requires a magnifying glass].<br />
*'''Collisions:''' Objects, once set in motion, would continue to move until they hit something, leading to a myriad of unpredictable and uncontrollable collisions.<br />
Being in a frictionless environment (and a vacuum, as physicists love...) was the subject of [[669: Experiment]].<br />
|-<br />
| Gravity || {{w|Gravity}} is a natural force that attracts two bodies toward each other, proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers.<br />
Turning off gravity would have some advantages and disadvantages.<br />
;ADVANTAGES<br />
* '''Flight''': Without gravity, every leap could turn into a flight. We could push off surfaces and float effortlessly through the air.<br />
* '''No Weight Restrictions''': Large structures could be built without concern for weight-bearing loads. This would drastically change engineering and architectural designs.<br />
* '''New Sports''': Zero-gravity sports and activities could become a reality on Earth. Imagine playing basketball or soccer without gravity!<br />
;DISADVANTAGES<br />
* '''Flight''': Without gravity, every leap turns into a flight... right out of the atmosphere of the Earth, and directly into space.<br />
* '''Loss of Atmosphere and Oceans''': Without gravity, Earth's atmosphere would dissipate into space, and water from oceans, rivers, and lakes would float away, making life as we know it impossible.<br />
* '''Unanchored Chaos''': Everything not fixed to the ground, including people, animals, vehicles, <!--trees, *ummm... anchored, surely!*-->and foundationless structures, could become airborne, causing massive destruction and chaos.<br />
* '''Disruption of Celestial Order''': Earth would no longer orbit the Sun, the Moon would drift away rather quickly, and the structural integrity of the universe, including galaxies and solar systems, would be jeopardized.<br />
* '''Everything Exploding''': Most celestial bodies, ranging from the moon to supermassive black holes, would explode from internal pressure and centripetal forces no longer fighting against gravity, throwing everything into space.<br />
* '''Aggregation Absence''': Stars, galaxies, and basically anything in space requires gravity to form. Without gravity, no stars, planets, or meteors would form ever again.<br />
<br />
Of course, if this switch is turned off, it may simply mean that objects within the house itself are no longer subject to gravity. This would be '''''far''''' less cataclysmic, and as a bonus, this would make it much, much easier to move around the house, get to higher areas, and move objects, but could prove to cause some problems once the breaker is turned back on, especially for the floor.<br />
|-<br />
| Circuit breakers || colspan="2"|Possibly the "master" breaker, controlling the main circuit that supplies power to all other circuit breakers. However, given the other surreal things this breaker box controls, turning it off may possibly make it impossible to turn it on ever again as the switch will no longer function once switched off (i.e.: If this was turned off, it would presumably turn off the functionality of the circuit breaker itself, if it was wired to include itself). <br />
<br />
Moreover, if this circuit breaker disables all circuit breakers everywhere, it would result in global infrastructure collapse, halting essential services, including transportation, healthcare, and communication, and leading to widespread chaos.<br />
<br />
Note that it might be a perfectly valid label if it refers to multiple subsidiary 'boxes', cascaded off this particular one, each containing one or more additional breakers for convenience or safety. e.g. units dedicated to a shed, garage or workshop room which save the need to traipse all the way to this box's utility cupboard location in the event of an otherwise easily resolved power issue.<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="3"|Title text<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3"|The title text is about {{w|causality}} (not to be confused with {{w|casualty}}), and how to use this (unseen, located elsewhere) breaker along with the last shown switch that (de)powers the illustrated box.<br />
<br />
Causality, in its simplest form, is the process of cause and effect, meaning that everything that happens only happens because something caused it to happen - in other words, every event is an effect caused by another event. For example, a bag of chips can't just fall onto the floor for ''literally'' no reason - it has to be caused by some other event, such as someone smacking it or a gust of wind blowing it down. <br />
<br />
Turning off the circuit breaker using the CIRCUIT BREAKERS switch may lead to a loop, if the disabled breaker can no longer disable itself, leading to it turning back on, etc. Alternatively, turning off the CIRCUIT BREAKER switch might be a one-way street.<br />
<br />
Turning the CAUSALITY switch from OFF back to ON might be unlikely to do anything if the circuit breakers upstream of it have been fully deactivated. The separation of cause and effect would ostensibly take precedence over the current switch setting. Turning off CAUSALITY first would prevent either the loop or the permanent disabling of circuit breakers, but would also have many other side effects, including letting switches potentially serve power even if there is no power being served ''to them'', or even spontaneously switching (on or off) without any intervention or reason. <br />
<br />
The 'warning', from an electrician, could even be to locate the nominally ''off'' CAUSALITY switch in order to turn it ''on'', or else all other intended effects will possibly not end up being actually actioned. Either way, whether or not turning on/off causality would change the state of causality (at one stage or other being rendered ineffectual) is an exercise left for the reader. <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[An open breaker box is shown. There are 26 labelled breakers, all of which are on, paired back to back in thirteen rows as a label, switch, switch and label.]<br />
:Kitchen lights / A whirring fan you didn't realize was on until now<br />
:Living room lights / Dishwasher<br />
:Porch lights / Dishes<br />
:Bathroom lights and one surprise mystery outlet somewhere / Hallway lights<br />
:North-facing appliances / Hallway outlets<br />
:Bathtub drain light / Hallway floors<br />
:Appliances whose names contain the letter "F" / Social media<br />
:Hot water heater / State law<br />
:Regular water heater / Federal law<br />
:Outlets in rooms that it's normal to eat pizza in / Second law of thermodynamics<br />
:High-pitched hum generator / Friction<br />
:The solution to the cryptogram below: [Additional squiggled words that are too small/indistinct to read.] / Gravity<br />
:Bugs / Circuit breakers<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2842:_Inspiraling_Roundabout&diff=3271542842: Inspiraling Roundabout2023-10-26T20:53:30Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2842<br />
| date = October 16, 2023<br />
| title = Inspiraling Roundabout<br />
| image = inspiraling_roundabout.png<br />
| titletext = Look, I just think we need to stop coddling those hedonistic roundabout hogs who get into the inner lane and circle for hours, wasting valuable capacity.<br />
}}<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by RUNAROUND SUE}}<br />
<br />
This is the second consecutive comic that deals with confusing directions given to road users.<br />
<br />
A {{w|roundabout}}, a form of traffic circle or rotary, is a traffic control device that serves as an alternative to stop signs, instead allowing for mere yields, as all traffic flows in the same counterclockwise direction around a central point (clockwise in left-hand traffic countries). Roundabouts improve safety and the flow of traffic, since they eliminate turns against traffic and full stops are only needed during high-traffic periods. One downside is that they take up more space than a traditional signaled intersection.<br />
<br />
Various roundabout designs have been proposed and used throughout the world. Some use "out-spiraling" designs in which a driver wishing to access one of the furthest exits is initially directed into a lane towards the center, which then spirals outwards, guiding them out until they reach the intended exit. Randall, in contrast, proposes an "Inspiraling Roundabout" which spirals each entrance lane inward, eventually leading all three roads to meet in the center and become the exit lanes.<br />
<br />
The caption states that it's "[[Technically|technically]] navigable", but that the Highway Department has vetoed it, presumably because of its deliberate complexity, impracticality, and the high risk of head-on collisions.<br />
<br />
The system is fairly simple to use. Assuming {{w|Left- and right-hand traffic|left-hand driving / right-hand traffic}}, one could get to the next exit without entering the spiral. Getting to the subsequent exit would simply require making a lane change toward the right. However, if the driver doesn't change lanes -- or the ideal lane change can't be performed at the right spot -- the driver would travel ever deeper into the spiral, meaning that more lane changes would need to be performed to get out. A driver who didn't make lane changes quickly enough would be drawn into the center. <br />
<br />
The convergence of all inward-bound vehicles at the roundabout's center makes this design exceptionally dangerous. Someone who got to the center would either collide with another car there, become stuck there without an obvious way out, or would risk turning into one of the other lanes, causing them to spiral out, driving against traffic. If any other cars used the same lane at the same time, the risk of a head-on collision would be very high. <br />
<br />
The joke is that such a deliberately challenging and dangerous design would be unlikely to be approved. <br />
<br />
The '''title text''' justifies this creative design by manufacturing an amusing problem of "coddling hedonistic roundabout hogs who get into the inner lane and circle for hours". Of course, it's unlikely (but [https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/hamilton-county/carmel/2019/09/22/hamilton-county-bicyclist-sets-carmel-indiana-roundabout-record/2411449001/ not unheard of]) that anyone would deliberately spend more time than necessary (let alone hours) circling a roundabout, so this design proposes to solve a non-issue. In reality, if someone finds themselves deeper into or longer in a roundabout that they need to be, it's more likely to be a misunderstanding of how roundabouts work and confusion about how to get out of them rather than a hedonistic "doing it for the thrill" rush.<br />
<br />
* In street racing culture, doing "donuts" -- circling a single spot at high speed to leave circular tread marks on the pavement -- is a popular pastime, but these drivers circle for a few rotations, not several hours.<br />
* The complaint of "coddling" some group was popularized by the title of the 2018 book, "The Coddling of the American Mind," a criticism of modern higher education.<br />
<br />
==Similar XKCD comics==<br />
* [[253: Highway Engineer Pranks]] also has a rotary that intentionally collides cars.<br />
* [[2728: Lane Change Highway]] has a similar theme of changing lanes because the road is poorly designed -- and it was the first time Randall complained about his ideas getting rejected by traffic engineers.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
* Unlike inspiraling roundabouts, outspiraling roundabouts are a real thing, common across western Europe. They are known as "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Turbo_roundabouts turbo roundabouts]", though the design usually features at least 4 entrances/exits.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript}}<br />
:[A large roundabout with three entrances of two lanes, three exits, and three spirals (as is CLEARLY evidenced by the three inner termini and three separate starts) of dotted lines starting from the medians between entry lanes and exit lanes of the same road which terminate in the center leaving a lane-sized median of plain asphalt.]<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:Even though it '''''was''''' technically navigable, the highway department vetoed my inspiraling roundabout design.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<!-- Include any categories below this line. --></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=843:_Misconceptions&diff=326962843: Misconceptions2023-10-23T20:54:19Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 843<br />
| date = January 5, 2011<br />
| title = Misconceptions<br />
| image = misconceptions.png<br />
| titletext = "Grandpa, what was it like in the Before time?" "It was hell. People went around saying glass was a slow-flowing liquid. You folks these days don't know how good you have it."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The Wikipedia article {{w|List of common misconceptions}} gives a list of {{tvtropes|CommonKnowledge|commonly-repeated claims}} that are widely believed to be true, but actually are not. <br />
<br />
The teacher, [[Miss Lenhart]], is announcing that since it is the first {{w|Tuesday}} in {{w|February}}, by law and custom the reading of this article is requirement to stem the repetition of these incorrect anecdotes. (Funnily enough the comic was released the first Wednesday in January, which could just as well have been written in the comic).<br />
<br />
This seems to be presented as something [[Randall]] would like to actually see: one day out of each school year spent to make the population aware of things that they're likely to hear at some point, but which have been proven to be false. The stated purpose is to make people "a little less wrong." Most of the misconceptions about that page are trivial, and unlikely to be of real importance, but it's implied to be worth it for the sake of guests at future parties, implying that these bits of inaccurate trivia are often repeated in that environment. There are however, some misconceptions that could have serious, real-world consequences, such as how long people have to wait before filing missing persons reports. <br />
<br />
In the caption below the comic [[Randall]] expresses his wishes that he lived in a {{w|Many-worlds interpretation|parallel universe}} where this rule had been used for many years. So he would not have to listen to all these stories at every party he goes to. Since Randall likes to correct people if they are wrong (see [[386: Duty Calls]]), not having to discuss with those that believe these misconceptions, would make his parties much better.<br />
<br />
The title text refers to a specific one of these {{w|List_of_common_misconceptions#Materials_science|false stories about glass}}: <br />
:''That {{w|glass}}, while seeming solid, is actually an extremely viscous liquid and will flow over time, as is seen on older buildings where the window panes are thicker at the bottom.'' <br />
This myth likely arises from the fact that glass is an {{w|Amorphous_Solid}} without a well-defined freezing point. In fact, glass becomes effectively solid at around 1400 degrees centrigrade. At room temperature, it cannot flow at perceptible rates over human timescales. Old window panes had variable thickness due to the manufacturing process, and the thick end was generally (though not always) placed at the bottom for stability. <br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Miss Lenhart the teacher is standing in front of a board, looking at a laptop computer she is holding in one hand while elocuting.]<br />
:Miss Lenhart: Okay, middle school students, it's the first Tuesday in February.<br />
:Miss Lenhart: This means that by law and custom, we must spend the morning reading through the Wikipedia article ''List of Common Misconceptions'', so you can spend the rest of your lives being a little less wrong.<br />
:Miss Lenhart: The guests at every party you'll ever attend thank us in advance.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:I wish I lived in this universe.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]<br />
[[Category:Wikipedia]]<br />
[[Category:Physics]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2727:_Runtime&diff=3264232727: Runtime2023-10-19T21:31:20Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2727<br />
| date = January 20, 2023<br />
| title = Runtime<br />
| image = runtime_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 399x389px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = At least there's a general understanding all around that Doctor Who is its own thing.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
The comic presents two separate conversations, which boil down to the same premise and yet differing conclusions. In one, a particular TV show is being watched, in the other a film franchise.<br />
<br />
While it is finding its feet, a new season of a television show (perhaps commissioned, on the back of some perceived interest in the story it will tell, for a dozen or so episodes of around 50 minutes - i.e. about ten hours) is not necessarily going to get everything right in the writing style, the slant it puts on the subject matter, the cast of characters or other production values. Or at least not for mass appeal to the everyman, for whom [[Cueball]] is the archetypal representative. Nevertheless, many series ''do'' get further seasons and greatly improve. [[White Hat]] (the optimist, and clearly won over by the production) is on the way to successfully convincing Cueball to view a particular series, or perhaps to continue to watch it after becoming jaded by its early failure to live up to its hype. It sounds reasonable to Cueball, just from his friend's recommendation, to get over the hump and appreciate it "when it gets good".<br />
<br />
A series of films, however, is seemingly a different matter. By substituting 10+ hours of filmed-for-television with something more cinematic, the prospect of getting over a similar 'hump' in a long-running set of sequels. While the total runtime of movies varies, and the total runtime of television seasons varies even more, [[Randall]] estimates that 8 films and a season of television will both run between 10 and 15 hours. <br />
<br />
There are legitimate reasons why people might treat these situations differently:<br />
* A television series that gets good can be expected to run for at least five seasons, whereas nine movies is already quite long for a movie series. The ratio of 'good' to 'bad' content is likely to be much better for a television series.<br />
* Watching a television series is generally more convenient than watching multiple films. While streaming has lowered the barrier to watching movies, each one still requires a continuous block of time and attention (usually between 90 and 120 minutes). TV episodes historically ran from 23 to 46 minutes, and still generally run less than an hour each. This makes it easier to fit the content into a busy schedule. <br />
* The longer run-time of a movie generally means that a film series will focus on one specific plotline in each entry, whereas televised series are or can be more episodic (the characters are involved in a different situation each time) and can also interweave plotlines throughout individual episodes or episode arcs, so that less time per episode is spent on plots viewers dislike.<br />
* In the US, a film typically begins shooting from a completed script with only minor revisions conducted once filming starts; whereas in television, writers are usually engaged throughout most of a series' season and can more quickly change unpopular elements in future episodes.<br />
<br />
The mention of “after the first 8 movies” might be a reference to the long-running Fast and the Furious franchise, which now has 9 movies (plus a couple of spin-offs) at the time of this comic’s publication. The more recent movies are well-reviewed (rated “fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes), even though the first four were widely panned by critics. Someone like Randall, who may have ignored the franchise when it first came out in 2001, may be wondering if he should watch the more recent ones that critics generally like; and, if so, does he need to catch up on the initial movies first?<br />
<br />
The title text talks of the long-running British TV series that is ''{{w|Doctor Who}}''. The original Doctor Who, running from 1963-1989 was typically low budget, for its time and locality, though initially considered cutting edge in many ways. Compared to more modern classics, and especially Hollywood sci-fi, it would be noticeably not as good. The revived series (2005-present) has a much higher production budget and is typically much more aligned to modern viewers, who may willfully ignore or not even know of the older episodes. Someone just starting to watching Doctor Who sequentially from the ''very'' first season (broadcast in 1963) would have to watch hundreds of episodes (26 'seasons', by some counts) before the series "gets good" to modern eyes, if the {{tvtropes|GrowingTheBeard|"good" point}} is the 2005 series revival, or even quite a few to reach any given key point in the original run. Thus Doctor Who is considered to be its own thing, and unlike other shows where the fans recommend you suffer through a poor first season to enjoy improvement in subsequent seasons, {{w|Whovians}} might recommend potential new fans to begin with the 2005 reboot (technically the 27th season), which was produced to appeal to all new-comers without even necessarily any cultural knowledge of what had been broadcast up until the long hiatus a decade and a half before.<br />
<br />
It is vague about Randall's precise opinion, but even the most dedicated fan would acknowledge that it has had a varying quality/charm/consistency/etc, according to one's personal tastes for such things. Comparing the original run (pre-Millenium, featuring seven key actors sequentially taking on the title role over more than four decades, and another for a standalone TV-movie) with the revived series (continuing the pattern with a similar number of additional title-actors in just half the time), and any number of 'show-runners' (producers, main writers, etc) is one possible point of contention, probably more suited to British viewers. Possibly, in Randall's case, it is just the (perceived) ups and downs in the more recent era, which has been more consistently screened in the US.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Two situations are depicted between White Hat and Cueball.]<br />
:[Situation 1:]<br />
:White Hat: You should keep watching! After the first season it gets really good.<br />
:Cueball: Oh yeah, I've heard that!<br />
:[Situation 2:]<br />
:White Hat: You should keep watching! After the first 8 movies, they get really good.<br />
:Cueball: Haha, what? I'm not going to sit through '''''eight''''' bad movies!<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:It's weird how it's way more normal and socially acceptable to suggest someone spend 10-15 hours watching something when it's TV rather than movies.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]]<br />
[[Category:Doctor Who]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2727:_Runtime&diff=3264212727: Runtime2023-10-19T21:15:14Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2727<br />
| date = January 20, 2023<br />
| title = Runtime<br />
| image = runtime_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 399x389px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = At least there's a general understanding all around that Doctor Who is its own thing.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
The comic presents two separate conversations, which boil down to the same premise and yet differing conclusions. In one, a particular TV show is being watched, in the other a film franchise.<br />
<br />
While it is finding its feet, a new season of a television show (perhaps commissioned, on the back of some perceived interest in the story it will tell, for a dozen or so episodes of around 50 minutes - i.e. about ten hours) is not necessarily going to get everything right in the writing style, the slant it puts on the subject matter, the cast of characters or other production values. Or at least not for mass appeal to the everyman, for whom [[Cueball]] is the archetypal representative. Nevertheless, many series ''do'' get further seasons and greatly improve. [[White Hat]] (the optimist, and clearly won over by the production) is on the way to successfully convincing Cueball to view a particular series, or perhaps to continue to watch it after becoming jaded by its early failure to live up to its hype. It sounds reasonable to Cueball, just from his friend's recommendation, to get over the hump and appreciate it "when it gets good".<br />
<br />
A series of films, however, is seemingly a different matter. By substituting 10+ hours of filmed-for-television with something more cinematic, the prospect of getting over the exact same scale of 'hump' in a long-running set of sequels (eight films at a not unreasonable average length of 85 minutes each would ''also'' require a bit more than ten hours of commitment), is not at all enticing. However, since the average movie runs about 131 minutes, 10 hours of TV run time (about 15 episodes each with 40 minutes of show - the 40 minutes being the one hour time slot minus commercials) would only last the same as about four and a half movies, not eight. TV shows on modern streaming services such as Netflix tend to be longer (55 minutes per episode) but also fewer episodes per season (10-13) and so are still only as long as four to five movies. Watching four or so movies seems much less of a burden, many modern film franchises (among them the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Star Wars, Star Trek and the Harry Potter series) have successfully gone well beyond four films.<br />
<br />
The real reasons for this difference are that:<br />
* A television series that gets good can be expected to run for at least five seasons, whereas nine movies is already quite long for a movie series. Sitting through eight bad movies in order to understand two or three good ones is not a worthwhile tradeoff.<br />
* The longer run-time of a movie generally means that a film series will focus on one specific plotline in each entry, whereas televised series are or can be more episodic (the characters are involved in a different situation each time) and can also interweave plotlines throughout individual episodes or episode arcs, so that less time per episode is spent on plots viewers dislike.<br />
* In the US, a film typically begins shooting from a completed script with only minor revisions conducted once filming starts; whereas in television, writers are usually engaged throughout most of a series' season and can more quickly change unpopular elements in future episodes.<br />
<br />
The mention of “after the first 8 movies” might be a reference to the long-running Fast and the Furious franchise, which now has 9 movies (plus a couple of spin-offs) at the time of this comic’s publication. The more recent movies are well-reviewed (rated “fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes), even though the first four were widely panned by critics. Someone like Randall, who may have ignored the franchise when it first came out in 2001, may be wondering if he should watch the more recent ones that critics generally like; and, if so, does he need to catch up on the initial movies first?<br />
<br />
The title text talks of the long-running British TV series that is ''{{w|Doctor Who}}''. The original Doctor Who, running from 1963-1989 was typically low budget, for its time and locality, though initially considered cutting edge in many ways. Compared to more modern classics, and especially Hollywood sci-fi, it would be noticeably not as good. The revived series (2005-present) has a much higher production budget and is typically much more aligned to modern viewers, who may willfully ignore or not even know of the older episodes. Someone just starting to watching Doctor Who sequentially from the ''very'' first season (broadcast in 1963) would have to watch hundreds of episodes (26 'seasons', by some counts) before the series "gets good" to modern eyes, if the {{tvtropes|GrowingTheBeard|"good" point}} is the 2005 series revival, or even quite a few to reach any given key point in the original run. Thus Doctor Who is considered to be its own thing, and unlike other shows where the fans recommend you suffer through a poor first season to enjoy improvement in subsequent seasons, {{w|Whovians}} might recommend potential new fans to begin with the 2005 reboot (technically the 27th season), which was produced to appeal to all new-comers without even necessarily any cultural knowledge of what had been broadcast up until the long hiatus a decade and a half before.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, it is not uncommon to recommend that even within the 2005 reboot of Doctor who, that new viewers don't start at the beginning (season 1 or 27 if counting the original series), but instead start at season 5 (or 31 including the originals), when the Doctor regenerated to his 11th incarnation (due to higher budgets and production values by that point, and the start of a new story arc with new characters being introduced), and later on go back to watch the earlier seasons.{{Actual citation needed|...because, come on, Ten(nant) had some iconic stuff to more than rival Matt Smith's initial term. The best reason to start with the opening of Smith's era instead was that it was a (mostly) fresh start with no hangover Companions, etc, so you didn't need to know about Rose's prior time so much. But Matt and Karen didn't start off brilliantly, so you'd still have to bear with a few 'finding their feet' episodes until it started dealing with Pandorica-level awesomeness (assuming you *liked* the Pandorica stuff, which isn't universally accepted). What I'm saying here is "horses for courses" on this *whole* paragraph, but not going to remove it.}}<br />
<br />
There is also the wrinkle that anyone wishing to start with the original run would be out of luck, seeing as many early episodes - before the late-70s - were {{w|Doctor Who missing episodes|lost forever}}. ([https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/MissingEpisode/DoctorWho TV Tropes link]).<br />
The BBC didn't see any value in keeping them as they couldn't rerun them, so random episodes would be disposed of or recycled for various reasons, and those episodes are gone, making many stories incomplete. Some have been recovered because fans recorded them, or because tapes were sent to overseas stations for rebroadcast and never discarded (in fact, the ''audio'' for every single episode has been preserved) but most lost episodes remain lost.<br />
<br />
It is vague about Randall's precise opinion, but even the most dedicated fan would acknowledge that it has had a varying quality/charm/consistency/etc, according to one's personal tastes for such things. Comparing the original run (pre-Millenium, featuring seven key actors sequentially taking on the title role over more than four decades, and another for a standalone TV-movie) with the revived series (continuing the pattern with a similar number of additional title-actors in just half the time), and any number of 'show-runners' (producers, main writers, etc) is one possible point of contention, probably more suited to British viewers. Possibly, in Randall's case, it is just the (perceived) ups and downs in the more recent era, which has been more consistently screened in the US.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Two situations are depicted between White Hat and Cueball.]<br />
:[Situation 1:]<br />
:White Hat: You should keep watching! After the first season it gets really good.<br />
:Cueball: Oh yeah, I've heard that!<br />
:[Situation 2:]<br />
:White Hat: You should keep watching! After the first 8 movies, they get really good.<br />
:Cueball: Haha, what? I'm not going to sit through '''''eight''''' bad movies!<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:It's weird how it's way more normal and socially acceptable to suggest someone spend 10-15 hours watching something when it's TV rather than movies.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]]<br />
[[Category:Doctor Who]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2785:_Marble_Run&diff=3264202785: Marble Run2023-10-19T20:59:34Z<p>Tromag: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2785<br />
| date = June 5, 2023<br />
| title = Marble Run<br />
| image = marble_run_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 438x512px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = I have so many plans. It would incorporate a Galton board, a Ranque-Hilsch marble vortex tube, and a compartment lined with pinball bouncers with a camera-and-servo Maxwell's Demon that separated the balls into fast and slow sides.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
A {{w|Rube Goldberg machine}} is a fancifully complex system (either real or imagined), which makes use of an overly elaborate chain of actions. The name comes from an American cartoonist who was one of those who became famous for depicting convoluted and outlandish processes for accomplishing simple tasks.<br />
<br />
There's a long history of people building actual contraptions along these lines. Such devices are almost never intended for practical purposes, but exist entirely for entertainment, and as an exercise in building complex and carefully planned systems. This has become particularly common in the internet age, as videos of particularly interesting examples can gain popularity online. The most common category of these systems is probably the marble run (also known as a {{w|rolling ball sculpture}}), in which the goal of the system is to move one or more balls or marbles from the beginning of the arrangement to the end in interesting ways. This contrasts to the {{w|Domino toppling|domino run}} where motions are transferred by many intermediate pieces painstakingly arranged, although both aspects are commonly combined in such contrivances. <br />
<br />
When [[Megan]] tries to show [[Cueball]] an example of such a video, he refuses, not because he lacks interest, but because of how he predicts it will impact him. Cueball (likely as a stand-in for [[Randall]]), has sufficiently strong interest in things like designing, building and engineering complexity that he's certain he will eventually adopt building such systems as a hobby, and that it will dominate his time and attention. Accordingly, he appears to be deliberately delaying his exposure to them so that he can continue to pursue other hobbies, with the assumption that he will eventually succumb to this one. Randall foresees the amount of time he might use if he first began trying to construct his ideas into a marble run.<br />
<br />
Megan responds that he knows where he's going, but is taking "a really interesting and circuitous path" to get there. This draws a parallel between the type of systems he's avoiding and his approach to life more generally, which Cueball expands upon by suggesting he would do some of the things a marble typically would in a marble run. <br />
<br />
The title text mentions specific ideas Cueball plans to incorporate into such a set-up. <br />
<br />
A {{w|Galton board}} is a device that distributes falling balls into a {{w|normal distribution}}. Its design is similar to those used in {{w|pachinko}}-style games.<br />
<br />
A Ranque-Hilsch {{w|Vortex tube}} is a device for separating compressed gas into hot and cold streams. While such a device isn't directly applicable to marbles, one can imagine using the principle to separate a stream of marbles based on speed.<br />
<br />
Pinball bouncers are properly supposed to be the {{w|Pinball#Bumpers|Bumpers}} in {{w|Pinball}} machines. In Randall's marble run there will be a compartment where the walls are lined with these bumpers. Supposedly there will be many marbles on the floor of this segment of the run, which will hit these bumpers and get a kick so they will move fast and randomly around the compartment, which is where the Demon comes in.<br />
<br />
{{w|Maxwell's Demon}} is a thought experiment by James Clerk Maxwell which would violate the {{w|Second Law of Thermodynamics}}. Maxwell proposed that, if a container of air was separated by a divider, with a door that allowed only one molecule through at a time, and a theoretical "demon" were to control the door to sort high-energy atoms into one side and low-energy atoms into the other, the two sides would develop a temperature difference with no energy input. While such a system wouldn't actually be possible without energy input, it remains a compelling thought experiment. <br />
<br />
Randall's version of this apparently involves the marbles bouncing around inside the bouncer-lined compartment, with an automated system to divert the fastest moving marbles into one side, and the slowest moving into the other, presumably to output higher velocity balls into one subsequent part of the arrangement, and slower ones into another. As these are macroscopic scales this would not be impossible, just really difficult.<br />
<br />
Knowing Randall and his fans, some might design something using his ideas from this comic.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
:[Megan is walking towards Cueball and showing her phone. Cueball holds a hand to his face and looks away.]<br />
:Megan: Check out this cool video of a Rube Goldberg marble run.<br />
:Cueball: No! Not yet.<br />
<br />
:[Megan has lowered her phone. Cueball has his hand in a fist.]<br />
:Cueball: I've always known I'm doomed to eventually become one of those people who builds elaborate marble runs in their garage.<br />
:Cueball: I can feel the pull.<br />
:Cueball: So satisfying.<br />
<br />
:[Close-up on Cueball.]<br />
:Cueball: I just want to do as many other things as I can before I give in and disappear into that world.<br />
<br />
:[Megan and Cueball are walking.]<br />
:Megan: So you know where you're going to end up, but you're trying to take a really interesting and circuitous path to get there.<br />
:Cueball: Exactly. Bounce around, maybe go off a few jumps.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Physics]]<br />
[[Category:Statistics]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2834:_Book_Podcasts&diff=3264192834: Book Podcasts2023-10-19T20:46:19Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2834<br />
| date = September 27, 2023<br />
| title = Book Podcasts<br />
| image = book_podcasts_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 262x394px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = I've been working my way through this 1950s podcast by someone named John Tolkien called 'Lord of the Rings'--it's a deep dive into this fictional world he created. Good stuff, really bingeable!<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
<br />
[[Randall]] (represented as [[Cueball]]) discusses his love of {{w|podcast}}s, episodic audio files of a talk show. He uses them to pass the time when doing chores. At one point he imagines what it would be like if someone made a podcast narrating books, as an easy and convenient way to digest literature when reading the book yourself isn't an option. As spelled out in the caption, he quickly realizes he hasn't invented a new concept but simply described the existence of an {{w|audiobook}}s, a product which has existed well before the concept of podcasts. It's also worth noting that although podcasts usually involve talking and discussions, podcasts that are essentially chapter-by-chapter audiobooks already exist, as do podcasts that are effectively anthologies of shorter stories, meaning that there's nothing remotely original about his idea.<br />
<br />
He confesses this has happened more than once, which as can also be seen in [[1367: Installing]] and [[2724: Washing Machine Settings]], is not the first time Randall has accidentally reinvented the proverbial wheel for an idea.<br />
<br />
"{{w|First principles}}" are the set of propositions that a method or theory is founded on, and which can not be derived from other theories that exist in the field. Therefore, first principles can't be derived from other propositions. In this case, Randall is describing the first principles of audiobooks by working backwards from a medium that was invented later, and that borrowed elements from the existence of audiobooks. The humor is in this circular reasoning and {{w|anachronistic}} thought process, as true first principles would probably have involved a real life read-aloud session, and as such is an example of reverse-engineering and not first principle deduction.<br />
<br />
The title text is an inverse of the joke, with Randall seemingly having been listening to the ''{{w|Lord of the Rings}}'' audiobook without realizing that this "podcast", which somehow seems to have predated widespread audio devices by being released in 1952, was actually originally a book written by {{w|J. R. R. Tolkien}}. This would {{w|The Lord of the Rings (1978 film)#Reception|likely irritate}} longtime fans of the book (which humorously, would also include Randall).<br />
<br />
The words "deep dive" might be referencing the fact that Tolkien wrote the book with the frame story that he was actually just translating the story which was written by the characters in the story, which might also be a joke regarding the reversal of the writing from first principles to "writing" by translation. In addition to this, in 1952, Tolkien's friend George Sayer [https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/1952_tape_recording recorded Tolkien narrating excerpts from ''The Hobbit'' and ''The Lord of the Rings''], later distributed more widely in the 1970s on vinyl records, which this may also be an allusion to.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball, wearing headphones, is looking down towards a phone-sized device held in his hand. From Cueball's head small circles go up to a large thought bubble above him.]<br />
:Cueball: I need more podcasts to listen to while doing chores.<br />
:Cueball: Hey, someone should do a podcast where they just read through a book! Each chapter could be an episode...<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the comic:]<br />
:Every now and then I reinvent audiobooks from first principles.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]<br />
[[Category:LOTR]]</div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2842:_Inspiraling_Roundabout&diff=3262692842: Inspiraling Roundabout2023-10-18T14:48:06Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2842<br />
| date = October 16, 2023<br />
| title = Inspiraling Roundabout<br />
| image = inspiraling_roundabout.png<br />
| titletext = Look, I just think we need to stop coddling those hedonistic roundabout hogs who get into the inner lane and circle for hours, wasting valuable capacity.<br />
}}<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by RUNAROUND SUE}}<br />
<br />
A {{w|roundabout}}, a form of traffic circle or rotary, is a traffic control device that often serves as an alternative to stop signs, instead allowing for mere yields, as all traffic flows in the same counterclockwise direction around a central point (clockwise in left-hand traffic countries). It's argued that using roundabouts for intersections improve the flow of traffic and increase safety, since they eliminate turns against traffic and don't require a full stop during low-traffic periods. <br />
<br />
Various roundabout designs have been proposed and used throughout the world. Some of these use spiraling designs, where a road user wishing to access one of the furthest exits of the roundabout is initially directed into a lane towards the centre, which then spirals outwards, guiding them out until they reach their intended exit. Randall, on the other hand, proposes an "Inspiraling Roundabout" which spirals each entrance/exit lane inward, eventually leading all three roads to meet in the center. <br />
<br />
The caption states that it's "[[Technically|technically]] navigable", but that the Highway Department has vetoed it, presumably because the system directs all vehicles toward a common center, which seems designed to cause head-on collisions.<br />
<br />
The system is "technically navigable", because it's fairly simple to use, in principle. Assuming {{w|Left- and right-hand traffic|left-hand driving / right-hand traffic}}), one can get to the next exit without even entering the spiral. Getting to the subsequent exit simply requires making a single lane change to the right. One could even make a 180 degree turn by making two lane changes. <br />
<br />
The problem comes if a person fails to (or is unable to) make a lane change at the proper time. That would cause them to travel deeper into the spiral, increasing the number of lane changes they need to make to get out. A driver who couldn't change lanes quickly enough would be drawn all the way into the center, which would risk a head-on collision with any other cars that were directed to the center. Alternately, a person in the center could become confused and enter one of the other lanes, causing them to drive out in the wrong direction, once again risking a head-on collision. The confusing and kinetic nature of this intersection would make such accidents almost inevitable. <br />
<br />
The joke is that such a deliberately challenging and dangerous design would be unlikely to be approved. <br />
<br />
The '''title text''' justifies this creative design by presuming the amusing existence of "hedonistic roundabout hogs who get into the inner lane and circle for hours". This design is deliberately antagonistic to people to don't change lanes quickly enough, as it diverts them toward danger. Of course, it's unlikely that anyone would deliberately spend more time than is necessary (let alone 'hours) circling a roundabout, so this design is apparently intended to protect against a purely hypothetical issue. <br />
<br />
[[253: Highway Engineer Pranks]] also has a rotary that intentionally collides cars.<br />
[[2728: Lane Change Highway]] has a similar theme of changing lanes because the road is poorly designed.<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
* Unlike inspiraling roundabouts, outspiraling roundabouts are a real thing, common across western Europe. They are known as "[https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/?q=turbo+roundabout Turbo Roundabouts]", though the design usually features at least 4 entrances/exits.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript}}<br />
:[A large roundabout with three entrances of two lanes, three exits, and three spirals (as is CLEARLY evidenced by the three inner termini and three separate starts) of dotted lines starting from the medians between entry lanes and exit lanes of the same road which terminate in the center leaving a lane-sized median of plain asphalt.]<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:Even though it '''''was''''' technically navigable, the highway department vetoed my inspiraling roundabout design.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<!-- Include any categories below this line. --></div>Tromaghttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2682:_Easy_Or_Hard&diff=3247912682: Easy Or Hard2023-10-03T15:46:16Z<p>Tromag: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2682<br />
| date = October 7, 2022<br />
| title = Easy Or Hard<br />
| image = easy_or_hard_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x400px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = "Friction-driven static electrification is familiar and fundamental in daily life, industry, and technology, but its basics have long been unknown and have continually perplexed scientists from ancient Greece to the high-tech era. [...] To date, no single theory can satisfactorily explain this mysterious but fundamental phenomenon." --Eui-Cheol Shin et. al. (2022)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
This comic uses a table to compare the perceived difficulty of various questions with how easily they're answered in real life. [[Randall]] has a long history of comics with similar themes, comparing perceptions to reality. In this case, both the perception and the reality are divided into three levels of difficulty, giving a total of nine categories. Accordingly three of the problems listed are effectively as difficult as one would expect, and the remaining six are not. All three of the questions whose answers are "actually pretty easy to find out" relate to the Eiffel Tower, though there's no apparent theme among the other six questions. <br />
<br />
It's likely that this comic was at least partially inspired by writing the books ''[[How To]]'', ''[[What If? (book)|What If?]]'', and ''[[What If? 2]]'', the latter of which was published just a few weeks before this comic. These books involve answering very elaborate questions from a scientific point of view. This process likely emphasized that some really strange questions are actually relatively easy to answer, while some questions that seem simple continue to confound scientific knowledge. ''What if? 2'' mentions the fact that no one understands why static charges separate.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
|-<br />
! Question !! Perceived Difficulty !! Real Difficulty !! Explanation<br />
|-<br />
|How tall is the Eiffel Tower?||Easy||Easy||The Eiffel Tower was constructed to be the centerpiece of the {{w|1889 World's Fair}}. At the time of its construction, it was the tallest man-made structure on earth, which meant that its height was widely publicized since it was first constructed (312m when constructed, and now 330 meters, or 1083 feet, with the antenna added later on). This number is widely published, and easily confirmed with trigonometry. <br />
* albeit with a ±6 inch differential depending on local air temperature; as the Eiffel Tower is built out of cast steel, it expands according to how much heat builds up in the metal, which in turn is derived from the intensity and daily duration of the Sun's energy. It can also be argued that the number given above is due to rounding, and at sub-millimetrical lengths, the tower's exact height is fluctuating constantly as a result of the aforementioned thermal expansion.<br />
|-<br />
|Where was Mars in the sky from Paris on the day the Eiffel Tower opened?||Difficult||Easy||The date of the opening of the tower to the public is well known (May 6, 1889). Since the motions of the planets are predictable, it's clear that calculating the answer should be possible, but it involves enough factors that one might expect it to be very difficult. However, thanks to the existence of [https://in-the-sky.org/skymap.php?no_cookie=1&latitude=48.85&longitude=2.35&timezone=1.00&year=1889&month=5&day=6&hour=9&min=0&PLlimitmag=2&zoom=182&ra=3.78242&dec=20.26465 online tools], which automatically calculate exactly this sort of thing, finding the answer is quite easy. (It was in the constellation of Taurus, and extremely close to where the Sun also was in the sky during that time so probably not easily directly observable). Alternately, to use the tools available at the time, one might check a nautical almanac for 1889, which gives the position of the major planets (and various other celestial bodies) in the sky throughout the year.<br />
|-<br />
|How much does the {{w|Eiffel Tower}}'s gravity deflect baseballs in Boston?||Near Impossible||Easy||This problem sounds extremely specific and esoteric, concerning an effect far too small for direct experimentation. But in theory, it's actually a very simple physics problem. {{w|Newton's law of universal gravitation|Gravitational acceleration}} is determined entirely by masses and distance, and here even the mass of the baseball can be ignored. Since the mass of the Eiffel Tower and the geographic details of both the tower in Paris and any given location in Boston (perhaps {{w|Fenway Park}}, a famous baseball stadium) are easy to look up, the calculation is quite simple.<br />
|-<br />
|How does {{w|general anesthesia}} work?||Easy||Difficult||While biology is always complex, inducing unconsciousness seems relatively simple. In fact, keeping a person unconscious and insensate without causing permanent damage or death is a difficult proposition, requiring a medical specialist. Despite this field being well-established, it might surprise people to know that {{w|Theories of general anaesthetic action|the mechanism of general anesthesia}} is still the subject of research, and recent studies have revealed things that we didn't previously understand.<br />
|-<br />
|How many ants are there?||Difficult||Difficult||While the existence of ants is a mundane part of life for many people, there are so many of them that coming up with a total number of ants in the whole world sounds exceedingly difficult. It is, in fact, a difficult problem, but experts have done a significant amount of work and have come up with well-founded estimates [https://phys.org/news/2022-09-ants-earth-quadrillion.html in the range of 20 quadrillion ants on earth].<br />
|-<br />
|What time of year did the Cretaceous impact happen?||Near Impossible||Difficult||The "Cretaceous impact" (the {{w|Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event}}) happened approximately 66 million years ago. The margins of error on calculating something that ancient are necessarily thousands of years wide at least, so the notion of determining the time of year seems far-fetched. In fact, the problem is a difficult one, but many of the animals killed in the impact were fossilized, and comparing those fossils to modern-day animals at different points in their seasonal growth cycles has led to [https://www.science.org/content/article/springtime-was-season-dinosaurs-died-ancient-fish-fossils-suggest the suggestion that the impact happened in the northern-hemisphere spring.]<br />
|-<br />
|Why does your hair get a static charge when you rub it with a balloon?||Easy||Near Impossible||Inducing a {{w|Static electricity|static charge}} by {{w|Triboelectric effect|rubbing together two materials}} is a method that's been known since ancient times. Since human hair has a marked tendency to develop a positive charge, and the latex commonly used in balloons tends to develop a negative charge, rubbing the two together is a very simple way to create an electric field. This process is so simple that it's used for both party tricks and as a fun demonstration of electrical phenomena. Because of this simplicity, most people would assume that the phenomenon is well understood. So it's surprising that the actual mechanism remains an unsolved problem in physics. This also has previously been mentioned in [[1867: Physics Confession]]. The title text quotes [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360674587_Derivation_of_a_governing_rule_in_triboelectric_charging_and_series_from_thermoelectricity a recent paper] explaining that, as common as this phenomenon is, there's still no theory that can adequately explain what we observe.<br />
|-<br />
|How does {{w|Tylenol (brand)|Tylenol}} work?||Difficult||Near Impossible||Tylenol is a brand name for {{w|Paracetamol|paracetamol, also known as acetaminophen}}, a drug commonly sold without prescription for pain relief and fever reduction. This drug has been widely used since 1950, and has been well established as being both effective and safe when used properly. Although one would expect the biological mechanism for any drug to be complicated, most people would assume that a drug that's been widely used and studied for so long to be well-documented. Surprisingly, however, the precise action still isn't fully understood. [https://medicine.tufts.edu/news-events/news/how-does-acetaminophen-work Tufts University]<br />
|-<br />
|How can {{w|Theory of relativity|relativity}} be reconciled with {{w|quantum mechanics}}?||Near Impossible||Near Impossible||This remains one of the {{w|Theory of everything|great unsolved questions}} in physics. The problem sounds almost unsolvable to laypeople, and remains unsolved even to experts in the field.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
|-<br />
! !! Actually pretty easy to find out !! Very hard, but there have been recent breakthroughs !! Extremely hard, currently unsolved<br />
|-<br />
! Sounds borderline unsolvable<br />
|How much does the Eiffel Tower's gravity deflect baseballs in Boston?||What time of year did the cretaceous impact happen?||How can relativity be reconciled with quantum mechanics?<br />
|-<br />
! Sounds pretty hard, but you'd assume someone knows<br />
|Where was Mars in the sky from Paris on the day the Eiffel Tower opened?||How many ants are there?||How does Tylenol work?<br />
|-<br />
! Sounds like it would be easy to look up<br />
|How tall is the Eiffel Tower?||How does general anesthesia work?||Why does your hair get a static charge when you rub it with a balloon?<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Charts]]<br />
[[Category:Science]]<br />
[[Category:Ants]]<br />
[[Category:Medicine]]<br />
[[Category:Physics]]<br />
[[Category:Astronomy]]</div>Tromag