Title text: "This one is perfect in every way, except that for some reason it's woven from a tungsten mesh, so it weighs 85 pounds and I'll need to carry it around on a hand cart." "That seems like a bad--" "BUT IT HAS THE PERFECT POCKET ARRANGEMENT!"
|| This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a Tungsten Mesh Backpack - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.|
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.
, apparently representing Randall
, is having issues choosing a good backpack. He notices their different features and is indecisive. The chart below shows that he spends more time unsure of what backpack to pick than of any other such major choice as a college or a car.
This comic gives a rather good indicator of where Randall's interests lie, according to how much time Randall spends deciding on making the right purchase for him. For example, Randall being a tech enthusiast spends much time considering factors when buying a laptop (clock speed, number of cores, amount of RAM, upgradability, screen brightness, display technology, quality of the in-built camera and microphone and whether it comes with any), and so on. This could seem odd to other people, but equally Randall might find it odd that car enthusiasts spend so much time wondering which car to purchase, himself being satisfied with one that drives and can take them to their destination, hence the short amount of time indicated in the figure.
The title text is Cueball having a conversation about a backpack, which seems to be (absurdly) made of heavy tungsten mesh. In fact, at 85 pounds (39 kg), it is so heavy that Cueball thinks he will need to carry it around in a cart, defeating the purpose of the backpack. However, Cueball considers it simply because of the perfect pocket arrangement, which he cannot use anyway due to the backpack's heaviness.
|| This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.
- [Cueball stands in front of a display exclusively of backpacks, with two at his feet along with a messenger bag (or satchel). He thinks to himself:]
- It's down to two: the one with the charger pocket and the one with—
- Wait, that other one is waterproof!
- Ugh. Do I even want a backpack?
- Maybe I should be looking at messenger bags again.
- OK, starting over.
- [Caption below the comic:]
- Amount of time I've spent paralyzed by indecision over choosing the right...
- [A bar graph is shown. Each label is followed by a black bar representing the amount of time:]
- College [short bar, not quite as long as laptop]
- Phone [short bar, a little longer than car]
- Apartment [short bar, a little longer than phone]
- Car [shortest bar, less than half as long as college]
- Laptop [short bar, about as wide as the word "LAPTOP"; the longest of the short bars]
- Backpack [longest bar, four times longer than laptop]
add a comment! ⋅ add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ refresh comments!
Great, now I can't decide how to write the transcript 188.8.131.52 15:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
And I now want a new backpack. I'm fine with the one I have, but *I want a new one dammit!* But I can't decide which one Jdluk (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
The knapsack optimization problem is famous for being NP-hard (Knapsack problem). Seems to be an allusion to it. Sebastian --184.108.40.206 15:53, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Nope, see below. The knapsack problem is about optimizing the amount of stuff put into something, while Cueball goes through a buying decision process. 220.127.116.11 17:49, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- But the buying decision process could be solved by a variation of the knapsack optimation problem: You can choose several features, but cannot combine all of them. The difficulty would be linear in the number of available backpacks (but this would/could be a very large number - for all the other listed items like car, phone, college, appartment, laptop there is less choice available and the decision can be made way faster) and nonlinear in the number of criteria. Sebastian --18.104.22.168 10:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
This comic is an illustration of the law of triviality aka the bike-shed effect. 22.214.171.124 17:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- I don't believe the bike-shed effect is related, since that would imply that he is focusing on unimportant issues instead of important ones. In this case, the problem is trying to satisfy a number of important needs that are not fully met by any one backpack, forcing him to decide which can be left unsatisfied by any particular backpack. Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 18:59, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right. I had the comparison chart in mind and incorrectly connected the dots here. The correct description of the situation is of course analysis paralysis. Snap decisions apparently aren't infallible, either. :P 126.96.36.199 19:38, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Now that you point out your reasoning, I can see where someone might think deciding on a backpack is less important than buying a car or picking a college, which is consistent with the bike-shed effect. You deserve points for thinking of it, even though I think it really is more important to Cueball in this case. In fact, I'm surprised that Cueball didn't have a laptop in hand, calculating a composite feature weighted score per backpack to totally geek things up! ;-) Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
The description completely identifies the author with his figure. Mixes them up. That's very bad form and impolite. --188.8.131.52 21:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- On top of that, it makes no sense. Nothing in this comic says anything about laptop choices. 184.108.40.206 03:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- Agree. Removed that part and marked it as incomplete, again. Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 10:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm confused by this series of comments. I thought the first one was talking about mixing up references to Cueball and Randall. Then the next comment mentions the lack of content related to laptop choices. First of all, I don't understand how laptop choices are related to the Randall vs Cueball issue (if I interpreted it correctly), and furthermore the bar graph specifically includes a bar for choosing a laptop - that means laptop choices in my book! What am I missing here? Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 14:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm too lazy to figure out what you're missing, but if I were to do so, I'd start by checking the edit history to see what the description was like at the time(stamp) of those comments, as maybe it focused too much on laptops or whatever. 220.127.116.11 15:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- It gave lengthy consideration to the difference in length of bars between 'car' and 'laptop', which was probably rather missing the point, which is more that they're all pretty short in comparison to 'backpack'. I'm not sure that does relate to the original point in this thread, hence why the second commenter said "On top of that...". 18.104.22.168 15:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Do we really need a Wikipedia link to explain what 'yelling' is? Really? 22.214.171.124 11:50, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- Unless we want to have a link for every word I don't think so. I removed it. Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- Do we really need one for 'all caps'? Linker (talk) 14:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
- The all caps article explains not only what all caps is, but also its connotation to mean shouting. So I think it's a good inclusion. (Maybe the one for yelling was too much though.) 126.96.36.199 15:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
It is so wonderful to have so many choices. Well, no, not especially. After a point, there is so much to wade through, and the additional does not help much with making a better decision. 188.8.131.52 02:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Gene Wirchenko [email protected]
The 'citation needed' is hilarious to me for some reasons. Whoever added that one needs a gold medal.Boeing-787lover 16:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)