Talk:3081: PhD Timeline - Revision history

Tzelofachad at 01:06, 15 January 2026

2026-01-15T01:06:20Z

2607:FB90:8F0D:4A57:ACFE:F611:A518:2C2 at 21:01, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T21:01:14Z

Superfluous: Corrected issue with comment order created by the insertion of my comment.

2025-05-12T05:42:00Z

Corrected issue with comment order created by the insertion of my comment.

Superfluous: Added comment re: how the statement "there is no absolute truth" is paradoxical and self-invalidating.

2025-05-12T05:40:43Z

Added comment re: how the statement "there is no absolute truth" is paradoxical and self-invalidating.

162.158.112.187 at 23:23, 30 April 2025

2025-04-30T23:23:39Z

162.158.154.170 at 16:22, 30 April 2025

2025-04-30T16:22:21Z

162.158.78.220 at 15:51, 30 April 2025

2025-04-30T15:51:45Z

172.69.195.179 at 09:18, 30 April 2025

2025-04-30T09:18:33Z

172.68.245.222: My bad it wasn't intentional. Delayed by something

2025-04-30T00:45:13Z

My bad it wasn't intentional. Delayed by something

141.101.98.54: Strange edit, removed two things, added one. Have all three back. (I believe two of them are missing the point, but strangely not the two that were removed, which makes me think it wasn't an intentional censoring).

2025-04-30T00:27:19Z

Strange edit, removed two things, added one. Have all three back. (I believe two of them are missing the point, but strangely not the two that were removed, which makes me think it wasn't an intentional censoring).

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ::A misplaced sentiment. As bitter as it is to say, it's clear the US doesn't care for human rights anymore. The CDC is plastering some bullshit about gender ideology on the page for HIV, immigrants can be dragged off for no reason, the DoD is literally erasing history from their website and only put it back after people got mad...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.115|172.69.70.115]] 12:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
-I dont want to start an argument, but I am glad Randall Munroe is making a specific, reasonable point. A lot of times I see people saying either "there is no antisemitism on campus, nobody should ever get deported, ACTUAL terrorists should get green cards", and others say "EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME SHOULD GET DEPORTED, EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST." I think both of them are extreme points obviously, and I am glad Randall is just taking the side, for now, of "this specific person did not violate their green card visa."
+[deleted]
 :''"...EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST."'' That are literally the words that a Trump official was reported to have said. If you protest the actions they take against anyone they label as a terrorit, YOU will be treated as a supporter of terrorism. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :Hi, expert-on-the-Öztürk-case but not-an-immigration-expert-really here. For clarity, Öztürk held an F-1 student visa but was not a lawful permanent resident (LPR) (green card holder), unlike the similar case of Mahmoud Khalil (Columbia university) who was a green card holder. And "green card visa" is not a thing, there's a "green card," which you cannot "violate" (although you could commit crimes that might have consequences for your LPR status), and you generally don't hear "violate their visa" although it's true that a visa is related to and may restrict that work you can do in the country. Regardless, no allegations have been made that Öztürk violated anything laws or rules or did anything other than lend her name to speech in a newspaper. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 22:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
-::Yes thank you johnhawkinson. I do not know the terminology. Ozturk did not, to my knowledge, violate any laws or rules. Thank you to the clarification.[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
-::as always, based randall, at least for now. [[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 16:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
+::[deleted]
 :::Did you mean "biased"? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::Did you mean "biased towards due process?" [[User:CharlesT|Nyrrix]] ([[User talk:CharlesT|talk]]) 16:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::::It's probably "based", as that's a term that can either be used in support or mockery of a philosophical position (because of Poe's Law, hard to know which in most cases, including here). It's more usually used in 4chan-like responses (and I doubt Randall would be considered "based" in those other places) than hereabouts, so perhaps it needs some clarification for those not (or not enough) in that sort of crame of mind. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.94|141.101.99.94]] 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
-:::::Yes I meant based. I know it is often used in a different space. I meant it in a [Satirical yet Agreeing while in a ironic mode of understanding that nothing is as it seems, but still definitely complimentary] mode. Basically, I agree with this and it is good[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
+:::::[deleted]
 ::::::Yes, Randall Munroe clearly only cares about this one incident because he does not at all care about politics. He's definitely not using this as an illustrative case on the countless other identical incidents happening under the Trump administration. /s /s /s /s /s. [[User:DrMeepster|<sup>'''Dr.'''</sup>Meepster]] (<[[User_talk:DrMeepster|chat]]> • <<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} reply]</span>>) 16:53, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
-:::::::Yes, Randall is currently calling out this one incident, and while he is obviously also disagreeing with many other incidents that have happened and will happen, he is not overgeneralising any specific criticism to every case. For instance, if he said "nobody who was deported has done anything wrong" i would disagree. He said "Ozturk did not do anything wrong" which i agree with. Sorry for the misunderstanding![[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
 I really hope this is one of those comics that does NOT stand the test of time.  In other words, I hope the next generation of graduate students sees this and thinks "oh, that must've been written in 2025, we don't have to worry about those kinds of things anymore."  Perhaps "hope" isn't the right word, it implies I have hope.  Maybe "pray fervently" is the right phrase.  Sigh.  [[Special:Contributions/198.41.227.72|198.41.227.72]] 16:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 :::::"To be properly neutral, you have to give all sides equal time and credence!" This turns out not to be the case. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::: The assertion that "absolute truth does not exist" is laughable for many reasons, but here's one that requires no external assumptions: it's a paradox, in much the same way as the infamous "This statement is false". For there to be no absolute truths, the absence of absolute truth would have to ITSELF not be an absolute truth, which would require that at least one absolute truth exists as an exception, but if that's the case then the premise that there are no absolute truths is false. To put it another way, if there were no absolute truths, then the absence of absolute truth would be an absolute truth, but if the absence of absolute truth is an absolute truth, then clearly absolute truth exists. Therefore, we can conclude absolute truth must exist, because if it didn't, that would be a paradox. --[[User:Superfluous|Superfluous]] ([[User talk:Superfluous|talk]]) 05:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
 Of course, the bit I was correcting (with bad grammar, and lack of facts) got totally changed about before I tried to post it. "''For instance citizens usually {{w|Deportation of Americans from the United States|cannot be deported for any reason}} (only extradited, although the US typically refuses to comply with requests even from countries that freely extradite to it), and would instead be subject only to local legal penalties, but relatively minor allegations have resulted in visitors' extraditions.''" was what I wrote. Now, I ''think'' that was neutral enough, but it doesn't fit there now anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.113|172.70.58.113]] 22:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 :::"A bias towards the truth" is a bias towards what my homies and I declare to be correct - since 'absolute truth' does not exist, all 'truth' is relative, is what 'my homies and I declare to be correct'. This bias is not trivial, as you point out. Explanations on xkcd have striven to cover the "what, when, where, who, how" of the associated comic, and have striven to omit "what do we think about all this" except as is necessary to describe "what, when, where, who, how". The goal is laudable, but [''ahem''] difficult to manage when the topic is a lit match on a powder keg. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.143|108.162.245.143]] 02:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::: This "no absolute truth" false neutrality nonsense is a bad faith argument rooted in pop philosophy and obfuscating rhetoric intended to discredit the existence of inconvenient facts. There's a famous, if apocryphal, parable about the philosopher who tried to argue this sort of hogwash to the oncoming train that hit him. Gravity exists, the Earth is not flat, and the current administration is run by a bunch of idiotic narcissists actively harming people for personal profit. [[User:Scorpion451|Scorpion451]] ([[User talk:Scorpion451|talk]]) 04:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::: The assertion that "absolute truth does not exist" is laughable for many reasons, but here's one that requires no external assumptions: it's a paradox, in much the same way as the infamous "This statement is false". For there to be no absolute truths, the absence of absolute truth would have to ITSELF not be an absolute truth, which would require that at least one absolute truth exists as an exception, but if that's the case then the premise that there are no absolute truths is false. To put it another way, if there were no absolute truths, then the absence of absolute truth would be an absolute truth, but if the absence of absolute truth is an absolute truth, then clearly absolute truth exists. Therefore, we can conclude absolute truth must exist, because if it didn't, that would be a paradox. --[[User:Superfluous|Superfluous]] ([[User talk:Superfluous|talk]]) 05:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
 Of course, the bit I was correcting (with bad grammar, and lack of facts) got totally changed about before I tried to post it. "''For instance citizens usually {{w|Deportation of Americans from the United States|cannot be deported for any reason}} (only extradited, although the US typically refuses to comply with requests even from countries that freely extradite to it), and would instead be subject only to local legal penalties, but relatively minor allegations have resulted in visitors' extraditions.''" was what I wrote. Now, I ''think'' that was neutral enough, but it doesn't fit there now anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.113|172.70.58.113]] 22:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 :::"A bias towards the truth" is a bias towards what my homies and I declare to be correct - since 'absolute truth' does not exist, all 'truth' is relative, is what 'my homies and I declare to be correct'. This bias is not trivial, as you point out. Explanations on xkcd have striven to cover the "what, when, where, who, how" of the associated comic, and have striven to omit "what do we think about all this" except as is necessary to describe "what, when, where, who, how". The goal is laudable, but [''ahem''] difficult to manage when the topic is a lit match on a powder keg. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.143|108.162.245.143]] 02:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::: This "no absolute truth" false neutrality nonsense is a bad faith argument rooted in pop philosophy and obfuscating rhetoric intended to discredit the existence of inconvenient facts. There's a famous, if apocryphal, parable about the philosopher who tried to argue this sort of hogwash to the oncoming train that hit him. Gravity exists, the Earth is not flat, and the current administration is run by a bunch of idiotic narcissists actively harming people for personal profit. [[User:Scorpion451|Scorpion451]] ([[User talk:Scorpion451|talk]]) 04:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::::"To be properly neutral, you have to give all sides equal time and credence!" This turns out not to be the case. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 104: / Line 104: @@
 :::An attempted genocide is still a genocide. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.187|162.158.112.187]] 21:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::::Are you serious? Israel has nuclear bombs. It's not Israel's fault the human shields are so brainwashed, kept there by Hamas or martyrlusted they don't leave when Israel phones then warning shots. They can't warn them forever, the building would just be stripped of valuables like weapons then they'd probably lock them up in there to maximize casualties and say we're giving you 72 virgins. Funny how Hamas forces women and children to be bombed not themselves. If the anti-Nazis of the world gave up Oct 7 do you think the neo-Nazis would stop? Of course not, the river to the sea would've run red with literally 10,000,000 gallons of Israeli blood! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.140|162.158.78.140]] 00:15, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
 I wish Randall would layoff the politics for a moment. Not because it isn't important or worth discussing, but xkcd is one of the few escapes for the hellhole that is the world and Id rather not be reminded of how everything sucks. Glad he's bringing awareness tho. Also, here's praying that the trolls don't descend -anon [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.173|172.69.70.173]] 11:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 128: / Line 128: @@
 :::There'll always be outliers in any such process (and, yes, outright liars). But, goddamit, in the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby: "If you're going to do this damn silly thing, don't do it in this damn silly way." (And, in the words of The Grail Knight: "You have chosen... poorly.") A mismanaged process that is clearly looking for results without sufficiently considering implications, saving on costs of time and money but with bad ''value'' of the final result. Some say they're following the "fascist playbook", but (if they are) they're not even doing ''that'' correctly. Not only should the concerned citizens from the 'left' of US politics (at best, centre-right in more traditional European terms - [https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2024 e.g.]) be appalled by all this, but the actual 'right' and 'further-right' (so far round the horseshoe curve that they're in spitting distance of the communist totalitarian states that we know that some even seem to aspire to) should be finding fault with the whole debacle, as well. If you want my opinion as an onlooker from afar with living experience of a number of other countries under his belt (and a number of far more different and diverse governments in his home country). But ''is this the place to rehash this whole business???'' [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.179|172.69.195.179]] 09:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::::Anyone who sympathizes with Palestinian nationalism more than Jewish nationalism is a {{w|useful idiot}} of the terrorists. Want to keep your partition don't support failed second Holocausts 1936, 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, (1982?), 2023 (etc? I don't know all the history). Especially if you're German I don't how you could support a Strip {{w|Mercaz HaRav massacre|91% of which admitted support for the Jewish school massacre}}. Imagine someone who's leader [https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/film/hajj-amin-al-husayni-meets-hitler met Hitler], bets double or nothing their Holocaust of literal Holocaust victims will work then wants 4+ more Holocaust II doever bets then wants their original partition bet back while still terror bombing Jews. All cause a 2600+ year-persecuted people moved to Ottoman-occupied Israel and bought land from the landlords (mostly absentee ones living in Syria). Anyway if your slippery slope does happen most Americans would have enough warning to get out of dodge and even claim asylum in an industrialized country (one of our AmEnglish idioms from Dodge City, Kansas (a Wild West frontier village at phrase origin (1870s), near mainland USA's middle now)). Also regardless of POTUS try starting an Aryan- or Palestinian-American Nazi Party on student visa and see how long you'd stay here. The fact is non-citizens have higher moral standards to stay than citizens. If a serial killer spawns here we're stuck with him unless a country wants him for something or maybe he joins an invading army or something (probably 1863 was the last? And the pre-Nazis didn't stay independent). If a green card holder just got two doses of food stamps with fake names or something like that (I doubt that happens often) they could deport pre-2017 even though I think they might just temporarily ban you from food stamps if you're a citizen (no jail time?). It's rather hard to become US citizen cause there's no shortage of volunteers (apparently 22,200,000 in 2023) so they could be very very very picky if they want without even cutting net immigration (only 55,000 green card lottery applicants win and it costs Internet cafe time if you don't have at home and likely international postage for documents too (in most places those things are a lot bigger chunk of an average wage for what'd probably take like 404 annual applications to win) and $330 for a temporary visa if you win then hundreds or thousands of US$ or equivalent to fly here then $1440 within 30 days to adjust status to green card and it's illegal to work for the several months of living in the US before the card arrives in the mail, plus maybe a billion would apply if all that was free (many of the over 8 billion humans live on cents or a few bucks or less a day couldn't afford even 1 month of USA housing till they get paychecks) and high enough odds) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.220|162.158.78.220]] 15:51, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::A thing can be logical without even one of the >8,000,000,000 humans realizing. i.e. future math proofs. [[Special:Contributions/104.23.190.68|104.23.190.68]] 20:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
 I think the joke in the comic is that it doesn't take into account the Muslim concept of Dar al-Harb (which are lands that should be liberated from non-Muslim government). The entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict revolves solely around Dar al-Harb, and is actually a part of a wider Muslim-non-Muslim conflict. Muslims who consider Israel as Dar al-Harb (the exact definition is a matter of debate between various Islamic schools of thought) also consider the USA as Dar al-Harb, and so Rümeysa Öztürk clearly wants to free the USA from non-Muslim authority, and therefor it is reasonable to deport her. The joke is that we don't take any of this into account, and view this case as indicative of a change in the entire U.S. PhD timeline. [[User:Halil|Halil]] ([[User talk:Halil|talk]]) 22:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 117: / Line 117: @@
 Here's what I don't get. Why her? If I were an evil dictator hellbent on suppressing free speech, why would I start with a quiet PhD student whose only public role to play in anything political was co-writing an article that was criticizing her university president for not acting strongly enough in favor of a cause she supported? Why wouldn't I start with the more obvious inciters of opposition to my regime? It genuinely feels like we're not getting the full story. And perhaps we never will. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
 :The cause of Palestinian nationalism is bad. A group where 70% admit (how many don't admit?) they support Oct 7 and {{w|Mercaz HaRav massacre|84%! (91% in Gaza Strip!)}} admit they support the 2008 Jewish school massacre shouldn't have a state when far more deserving groups probably won't ever get one i.e. the Kurds. I bet she's WAAAAY less introverted than the imaginary her in your mind, probably not quiet at all. Perhaps they are just deporting all the publicly pro-Palestinian non-citizens? {{unsigned ip|172.70.34.216|22:35, 28 April 2025}}
 :I think you're making the mistake of assuming that logic has anything to do with any of this whatsoever.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.123|172.71.241.123]] 11:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
 ::A thing can be logical without even one of the >8,000,000,000 humans realizing. i.e. future math proofs. [[Special:Contributions/104.23.190.68|104.23.190.68]] 20:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
 I think the joke in the comic is that it doesn't take into account the Muslim concept of Dar al-Harb (which are lands that should be liberated from non-Muslim government). The entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict revolves solely around Dar al-Harb, and is actually a part of a wider Muslim-non-Muslim conflict. Muslims who consider Israel as Dar al-Harb (the exact definition is a matter of debate between various Islamic schools of thought) also consider the USA as Dar al-Harb, and so Rümeysa Öztürk clearly wants to free the USA from non-Muslim authority, and therefor it is reasonable to deport her. The joke is that we don't take any of this into account, and view this case as indicative of a change in the entire U.S. PhD timeline. [[User:Halil|Halil]] ([[User talk:Halil|talk]]) 22:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ::: Pretty sure this ''is'' a happy outcome for everyone who voted for this. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.159.201|172.68.159.201]] 21:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
 :::: Tell that to the naturalized Venezualians that was expelled first. That voting block largely voted Trump. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.24|162.158.103.24]] 14:50, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
 Events like this are scary, and they're even scarier if you have a personal or geographic connection to them like Randall does.  I can understand why he would feel frustrated about his inability to do something concrete, and if this comic raises awareness for the situation then it has done a good thing.  Not sure why I thought this comment was necessary; maybe it's just a way of processing the emotions that the comic made me feel. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
@@ Line 116: / Line 117: @@
 Here's what I don't get. Why her? If I were an evil dictator hellbent on suppressing free speech, why would I start with a quiet PhD student whose only public role to play in anything political was co-writing an article that was criticizing her university president for not acting strongly enough in favor of a cause she supported? Why wouldn't I start with the more obvious inciters of opposition to my regime? It genuinely feels like we're not getting the full story. And perhaps we never will. [[User:MeZimm|MeZimm]] ([[User talk:MeZimm|talk]]) 21:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
 :The cause of Palestinian nationalism is bad. A group where 70% admit (how many don't admit?) they support Oct 7 and {{w|Mercaz HaRav massacre|84%! (91% in Gaza Strip!)}} admit they support the 2008 Jewish school massacre shouldn't have a state when far more deserving groups probably won't ever get one i.e. the Kurds. I bet she's WAAAAY less introverted than the imaginary her in your mind, probably not quiet at all. Perhaps they are just deporting all the publicly pro-Palestinian non-citizens? {{unsigned ip|172.70.34.216|22:35, 28 April 2025}}
 :I think you're making the mistake of assuming that logic has anything to do with any of this whatsoever.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.123|172.71.241.123]] 11:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)