Talk:2892: Banana Prices - Revision history

172.71.178.55 at 20:42, 1 March 2024

2024-03-01T20:42:05Z

172.70.34.35: Note about rare bananas

2024-03-01T18:13:35Z

Note about rare bananas

Asdf: Undo revision 336249 by 172.71.150.160 (talk)

2024-03-01T02:47:04Z

Undo revision 336249 by 172.71.150.160 (talk)

172.71.150.160 at 02:34, 1 March 2024

2024-03-01T02:34:57Z

198.41.242.210: Quote in what-if.xkcd.com/158

2024-02-19T12:58:57Z

Quote in what-if.xkcd.com/158

141.101.99.117 at 20:24, 13 February 2024

2024-02-13T20:24:21Z

GreatWyrmGold: What it says.

2024-02-13T17:07:23Z

What it says.

Magicalus: Added a question about mentioning the Hot Banana What If?

2024-02-12T15:20:10Z

Added a question about mentioning the Hot Banana What If?

172.71.178.32 at 15:03, 12 February 2024

2024-02-12T15:03:23Z

172.69.6.221: Worth of banana

2024-02-12T14:18:35Z

Worth of banana

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:42, 1 March 2024
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:: Miami fruit sells an 8-10 pound box of rare bananas for $250. At an average size of 5 ounces, that would mean about 30 some bananas, for an average cost of about $8.30 per banana. Given that the size of some of the bananas pictured seems quite small, it may be that some of those bananas can cost upwards of $10... (Miami fruit as sold on superior dishes) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.35\|172.70.34.35]] 18:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)		:: Miami fruit sells an 8-10 pound box of rare bananas for $250. At an average size of 5 ounces, that would mean about 30 some bananas, for an average cost of about $8.30 per banana. Given that the size of some of the bananas pictured seems quite small, it may be that some of those bananas can cost upwards of $10... (Miami fruit as sold on superior dishes) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.35\|172.70.34.35]] 18:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
		+	::: You seem to be assuming that larger bananas are worth more... Could be [[1682: Bun\|the reverse]]... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.55\|172.71.178.55]] 20:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

	Using log scale here is not a joke. It's perfectly legit. Constant inflation is actually an exponential relation. For example, if prices go 10% up every year, in two years they won't be 20% higher but 21% because 1.10*1.10=1.21. And such an exponential relation becomes linear when plotted using a logarithmic y axis.--[[User:Pere prlpz\|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz\|talk]]) 21:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)		Using log scale here is not a joke. It's perfectly legit. Constant inflation is actually an exponential relation. For example, if prices go 10% up every year, in two years they won't be 20% higher but 21% because 1.10*1.10=1.21. And such an exponential relation becomes linear when plotted using a logarithmic y axis.--[[User:Pere prlpz\|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz\|talk]]) 21:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 :given the extinction of Cavendish being imminent is the worth of a banana actually the worth of a banana?
 ::The price of bananas these days is just bananas! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.32|172.71.178.32]] 15:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 Using log scale here is not a joke. It's perfectly legit. Constant inflation is actually an exponential relation. For example, if prices go 10% up every year, in two years they won't be 20% higher but 21% because 1.10*1.10=1.21. And such an exponential relation becomes linear when plotted using a logarithmic y axis.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 21:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:47, 1 March 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~[[File:Flag of the Soviet Union.svg]]~~
−
	<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->		<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
	Is it a linear extrapolation? Or does it only appear so because the Y axis is logarithmic? Inflation is logarithmic, since it's expressed in percentages. [[User:Barmar\|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar\|talk]]) 17:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)		Is it a linear extrapolation? Or does it only appear so because the Y axis is logarithmic? Inflation is logarithmic, since it's expressed in percentages. [[User:Barmar\|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar\|talk]]) 17:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:34, 1 March 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[File:Flag of the Soviet Union.svg]]
		+
	<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->		<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
	Is it a linear extrapolation? Or does it only appear so because the Y axis is logarithmic? Inflation is logarithmic, since it's expressed in percentages. [[User:Barmar\|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar\|talk]]) 17:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)		Is it a linear extrapolation? Or does it only appear so because the Y axis is logarithmic? Inflation is logarithmic, since it's expressed in percentages. [[User:Barmar\|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar\|talk]]) 17:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:58, 19 February 2024
Line 99:		Line 99:
	:There are inherently funny numbers/strings of digits. c.f 42, 69, 99.999, maybe, which hold their strength of comedy even whilst they become devalued against buying-power. A simple, strong number-name like "ten" might be still considered the apex of funny compared with the arhythmical "thirty one dollars, fifteen cents", or even the slightly rounded "thirty dollars". "Ten dollars" might be as ok (or the best, given the circumstances) up until it gets too unexceptional to be considered 'wrong enough'. By the time 'true cost' gets to $5, though, we'd have to be looking for a higher wrong-value. (Compare original HHGTTG situation of saying "keep the change" from a fiver, having bought several pints of beer and peanut snacks. Quite the gesture in the '80s. The post-millenium film had to offer a ''fifty'', as a fiver might not even have covered a single pint (and snack) in many bars, and barely would have in all the rest.)		:There are inherently funny numbers/strings of digits. c.f 42, 69, 99.999, maybe, which hold their strength of comedy even whilst they become devalued against buying-power. A simple, strong number-name like "ten" might be still considered the apex of funny compared with the arhythmical "thirty one dollars, fifteen cents", or even the slightly rounded "thirty dollars". "Ten dollars" might be as ok (or the best, given the circumstances) up until it gets too unexceptional to be considered 'wrong enough'. By the time 'true cost' gets to $5, though, we'd have to be looking for a higher wrong-value. (Compare original HHGTTG situation of saying "keep the change" from a fiver, having bought several pints of beer and peanut snacks. Quite the gesture in the '80s. The post-millenium film had to offer a ''fifty'', as a fiver might not even have covered a single pint (and snack) in many bars, and barely would have in all the rest.)
	:See also Dr. Evil (and Goldmember) having funny and/or realistic numbers in mind for Evil Plan Non-Enacting ransoms at various points in time... There's not necessary a continuum of values, just a time when "one meeelion!" isn't going to cut it (or now ''will'' be funny for being so wrong). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.117\|141.101.99.117]] 20:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)		:See also Dr. Evil (and Goldmember) having funny and/or realistic numbers in mind for Evil Plan Non-Enacting ransoms at various points in time... There's not necessary a continuum of values, just a time when "one meeelion!" isn't going to cut it (or now ''will'' be funny for being so wrong). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.117\|141.101.99.117]] 20:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	The quote previously similarly occurred in https://what-if.xkcd.com/158/ (in note [7]: "It's 300 quadrillion bananas, Michael—what can it cost, 3 quintillion dollars?" --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.210\|198.41.242.210]] 12:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:24, 13 February 2024
Line 96:		Line 96:

	Hold on, ''does'' the joke work as well now as it did in 2003? By my calculations, it only works 75-80% as well. (I got those values by dividing $10 by the actual (estimated) price of a banana now and in 2003. Which is a very scientific way to measure how well a joke works, because it involves numbers.) [[User:GreatWyrmGold\|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold\|talk]]) 17:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)		Hold on, ''does'' the joke work as well now as it did in 2003? By my calculations, it only works 75-80% as well. (I got those values by dividing $10 by the actual (estimated) price of a banana now and in 2003. Which is a very scientific way to measure how well a joke works, because it involves numbers.) [[User:GreatWyrmGold\|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold\|talk]]) 17:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
		+	:Counter-analysis: if you took the $10 in 2003 and respoke the value as its 2024 (the one and only place I queried on this matter just said $31.15) would the joke be at its original strength?
		+	:There are inherently funny numbers/strings of digits. c.f 42, 69, 99.999, maybe, which hold their strength of comedy even whilst they become devalued against buying-power. A simple, strong number-name like "ten" might be still considered the apex of funny compared with the arhythmical "thirty one dollars, fifteen cents", or even the slightly rounded "thirty dollars". "Ten dollars" might be as ok (or the best, given the circumstances) up until it gets too unexceptional to be considered 'wrong enough'. By the time 'true cost' gets to $5, though, we'd have to be looking for a higher wrong-value. (Compare original HHGTTG situation of saying "keep the change" from a fiver, having bought several pints of beer and peanut snacks. Quite the gesture in the '80s. The post-millenium film had to offer a ''fifty'', as a fiver might not even have covered a single pint (and snack) in many bars, and barely would have in all the rest.)
		+	:See also Dr. Evil (and Goldmember) having funny and/or realistic numbers in mind for Evil Plan Non-Enacting ransoms at various points in time... There's not necessary a continuum of values, just a time when "one meeelion!" isn't going to cut it (or now ''will'' be funny for being so wrong). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.117\|141.101.99.117]] 20:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:07, 13 February 2024
Line 93:		Line 93:
	Separately: Can non-hyphen-dash editors [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2892:_Banana_Prices&diff=334823&oldid=334816 consider this edit reason] as a suggestion. If I see two words separated by just a line, it litterally screams of being a hyphen (even when it is typographically different). I will gladly dash (or even "&mdash;") an inadvertent hyphen-as-a-dash (or a two-hyphens-as-a-dash!), but to have no spacing makes it then tend towards dash-as-a-hyphen. And unnecessary when, as in these cases, sometimes a simple commaing will serve the same purpose. And parentheses can also be used when already there's too much commaing to be easily read in, out and across the various commas that might be there, with the advantage of clarifying the ins-and-outs of the rhetorical flourishes. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.20\|172.69.194.20]] 16:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)		Separately: Can non-hyphen-dash editors [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2892:_Banana_Prices&diff=334823&oldid=334816 consider this edit reason] as a suggestion. If I see two words separated by just a line, it litterally screams of being a hyphen (even when it is typographically different). I will gladly dash (or even "&mdash;") an inadvertent hyphen-as-a-dash (or a two-hyphens-as-a-dash!), but to have no spacing makes it then tend towards dash-as-a-hyphen. And unnecessary when, as in these cases, sometimes a simple commaing will serve the same purpose. And parentheses can also be used when already there's too much commaing to be easily read in, out and across the various commas that might be there, with the advantage of clarifying the ins-and-outs of the rhetorical flourishes. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.20\|172.69.194.20]] 16:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

−	Another meta-joke might be that this whole extrapolation business displayed here is a bit "bananas"... ;-)	+	Another meta-joke might be that this whole extrapolation business displayed here is a bit "bananas"... ;-) [no signature]
		+
		+	Hold on, ''does'' the joke work as well now as it did in 2003? By my calculations, it only works 75-80% as well. (I got those values by dividing $10 by the actual (estimated) price of a banana now and in 2003. Which is a very scientific way to measure how well a joke works, because it involves numbers.) [[User:GreatWyrmGold\|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold\|talk]]) 17:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:20, 12 February 2024
Line 33:		Line 33:

	"That line probably has another century or so left." There seems to me to be a pun here - 'that line' could refer to either the line(s) on the graph, which cross the $10 threshhold in a bit over century AND to the "how much could it cost" line of dialogue. In a century that line (of dialogue) won't be amusing any more since by that point - assuming the projection is correct - bananas WILL cost about $10, so the irony and humour will become lost.		"That line probably has another century or so left." There seems to me to be a pun here - 'that line' could refer to either the line(s) on the graph, which cross the $10 threshhold in a bit over century AND to the "how much could it cost" line of dialogue. In a century that line (of dialogue) won't be amusing any more since by that point - assuming the projection is correct - bananas WILL cost about $10, so the irony and humour will become lost.
		+
		+
		+	Is it worth mentioning that Randall has referenced this line before? The seventh citation in the Hot Banana What If? post says "It's 300 quadrillion bananas, Michael—what can it cost, 3 quintillion dollars?" Seems like it could be either in the first line (as proof of the meme being well known) or in the Trivia section. What do y'all think? [[User:Magicalus\|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

	== Bad stats? ==		== Bad stats? ==

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 At the time of the radio series, it would have been an excessive amount of change to give away.
 They did not keep it for the film, when a fiver would barely pay for one of the six beers. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.23|172.69.195.23]] 19:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 Using log scale here is not a joke. It's perfectly legit. Constant inflation is actually an exponential relation. For example, if prices go 10% up every year, in two years they won't be 20% higher but 21% because 1.10*1.10=1.21. And such an exponential relation becomes linear when plotted using a logarithmic y axis.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 21:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)