Difference between revisions of "Talk:1527: Humans"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Added my random thoughts on the pillow comment in the comic.)
(11 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
I don't really want to see a sequel criticized for maintaining continuity. Think of what it would be like if someone made a 2001 movie where instead of travelling to Jupiter, Hal orchestrated the invasion of Iraq. Wait a second, that would make for an awesome movie.--Dave[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.183|108.162.237.183]] 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 
I don't really want to see a sequel criticized for maintaining continuity. Think of what it would be like if someone made a 2001 movie where instead of travelling to Jupiter, Hal orchestrated the invasion of Iraq. Wait a second, that would make for an awesome movie.--Dave[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.183|108.162.237.183]] 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
* LOL! :) [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 23:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
+
: LOL! :) [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 23:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  
 
Personally, I wouldn't like being chased with Aepyornis either, and noone ever doubted Aepyornis had feathers. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 
Personally, I wouldn't like being chased with Aepyornis either, and noone ever doubted Aepyornis had feathers. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Line 30: Line 30:
  
 
I was thinking that "growing metal out of their head" is a Viking reference -- in the romantic depiction of a Warrior with a Helmet with horns {{w|Horned_helmet}}. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 06:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 
I was thinking that "growing metal out of their head" is a Viking reference -- in the romantic depiction of a Warrior with a Helmet with horns {{w|Horned_helmet}}. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 06:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
: Could be, but I would assume he would have gone futher with it then, since that is another historically false idea. I am assuming he just referring to a future trend of depicting crowns and ingrown in kings heads. [[User:Carewolf|Carewolf]] ([[User talk:Carewolf|talk]]) 13:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
+
: Could be, but I would assume he would have gone futher with it then, since that is another historically false idea. I am assuming he just referring to a future trend of depicting crowns as ingrown in kings heads. [[User:Carewolf|Carewolf]] ([[User talk:Carewolf|talk]]) 13:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
::There is no reference to "horns" only to "crowns". The robots have assumed that humans fossilized with crowns are a distinct species, and the metal crown is part of the skeleton. I've removed explainations of "horns"[[User:Zeimusu|Zeimusu]] ([[User talk:Zeimusu|talk]]) 17:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  
 
Isn't it worth noting that dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are cloned, and their DNA is patched up with frog DNA? Michael Crichton also wrote about the dinosaurs not being exactly how they used to be in the books because of it. I would have thought it strange if the dinosaurs in Jurassic World looked different from how they did in Jurassic Park as they exists in the same continuity. They even mention the T-Rex has lived on the Island for more than 20 years. [[User:RavenLiquid|RavenLiquid]] ([[User talk:RavenLiquid|talk]]) 12:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 
Isn't it worth noting that dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are cloned, and their DNA is patched up with frog DNA? Michael Crichton also wrote about the dinosaurs not being exactly how they used to be in the books because of it. I would have thought it strange if the dinosaurs in Jurassic World looked different from how they did in Jurassic Park as they exists in the same continuity. They even mention the T-Rex has lived on the Island for more than 20 years. [[User:RavenLiquid|RavenLiquid]] ([[User talk:RavenLiquid|talk]]) 12:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
:I wonder if, when they eventually do a full reboot of the franchise, they'll say they patched up the dinosaurs with bird DNA, since that kind of make more sense than frogs. I mean, as much sense as any of it makes. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 23:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
::The frog DNA was a huge plot point (at least in the books) as all dinosaurs were female (to control the population), and frogs can change sex if the environment has to much of either sex. So the dinosaurs got this trait from the frogs and were reproducing (the famous life finds a way quote).[[User:RavenLiquid|RavenLiquid]] ([[User talk:RavenLiquid|talk]]) 10:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
This might sound weird, but it reminds me of that Spongebob episode where at the end, some floating creatures, taking pictures with their tongue, visit Jellyhenge or something. [[User:Nk22|The Twenty-second. The Not So Only. The Nathan/Nk22]] ([[User talk:Nk22|talk]]) 18:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
Usually I would say I understand xckd just by reading it.  But this one puzzled me enough to look up what an "explain xkcd" had to say.  I actually thought the Kings and Queens being "big pillows" remark referred to use of the words for mattress sizes (as well as possibly the colorful fabric being sheets or comforters).  But since the comic is about misunderstandings over long periods of time, it may be deliberately confusing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.117|108.162.210.117]] 05:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
I'm guessing there's nothing genius about this. Randall thought "I'll recreate the dinosaur feathers reaction but in the future with humans instead of dinosaurs" and then something popped into his mind about those prehistoric movies from the 60s with mostly naked people or 300 or something and he threw the word movie in. It didn't really make sense, it wasn't really funny, but he just published it anyway. - [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.189|173.245.48.189]] 14:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
The post claims that Jurassic World is a reboot of the franchise, but that isn't strictly true. There is some retconning of some events to allow for the events to believably fit into the continuity of the previous films, but the overall plot is unchanged. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.189|173.245.52.189]]
 +
 +
"Now they're, what, big pillows?"; I took this to mean that rather than humans being extinct in this comic, it takes place in a future where obesity is common, no humans work. So if humans are just fat and sit around all day, that would explain the pillow comparison. Maybe?  -[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.118|173.245.52.118]] 04:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:13, 2 June 2015

Yes! Preach it, Randall! 188.114.106.23 08:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Everyone knows they're more akin to big cows, anyway. 141.101.106.143 09:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Big spherical cows. --Pudder (talk) 10:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Although most remaining "cows" are actually closer to oblate spheroids ... 108.162.210.252 19:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Robots complaining about science is like humans complaining about evolution. 108.162.231.60 09:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Great line :) --108.162.215.118 10:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Given the title text, the reference to movie humans makes this cartoon likely an oblique commentary on the upcoming film Jurassic World where the dinosaurs remain featherless. 108.162.237.162 10:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't really want to see a sequel criticized for maintaining continuity. Think of what it would be like if someone made a 2001 movie where instead of travelling to Jupiter, Hal orchestrated the invasion of Iraq. Wait a second, that would make for an awesome movie.--Dave108.162.237.183 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

LOL! :) KieferSkunk (talk) 23:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't like being chased with Aepyornis either, and noone ever doubted Aepyornis had feathers. -- Hkmaly (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder which movie Robot #2 is referring to. Something with a crowned monarch and lots of (almost) naked warriors. 300 perhaps? Smperron (talk) 12:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure their talking about future films, we make films about prehistoric dinosaurs, so the robots make films about prehistoric humans(pre robot history) --141.101.99.24 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
except for the use of "their", I'm in complete agreement. I'm gonna make a few tweaks, accordingly - Brettpeirce (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Robot 2 isn't referring to a current movie, I think this is set roughly 65million years in the future. So i've removed the part about Troy and other sword and sandal films -- Zeimusu (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
I assume it's more that skeletons and metal are much more likely to survive than clothes. Perhaps, they often see the crowns nearby the skulls in digs and assume that they were attached in life. 108.162.219.100 19:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Dinosaurs with feathers. Yawn. The idea is already tired. Dinosaurs with feathers cool? I just picture the T-Rex in Jurassic Park chasing the car to the tune of the Chicken Dance and it doesn't take me long to realise how cool feathered dinosaurs really are. 108.162.249.161 21:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

What's tired is the idea that dinosaurs evolved and developed in such a way for people to find cool millions of years later. Then again, lets see how tired you are when my cloned puffball T-rexes have chased you down! Hahaha! -Pennpenn 04:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

"covered with colorful fabric" - "big pillows" - Am I the only person who thinks the robots have discovered, and are taking as authoritative, a furniture store ad for king and queen size beds? 108.162.238.183 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Could this also be reference to Stephen Hawking's recent comments about computers overtaking humans with AI ("Checkmate" - HAL)? 108.162.215.191 04:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Though it's almost certainly not a reference, this reminds me of the Futurama episode "Fear on a Bot Planet" (the one where they have to deliver something to a robot controlled planet where humans are thought of as highly destructive horror movie monsters). -Pennpenn 108.162.250.162 04:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I was thinking that "growing metal out of their head" is a Viking reference -- in the romantic depiction of a Warrior with a Helmet with horns Horned_helmet. Spongebog (talk) 06:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Could be, but I would assume he would have gone futher with it then, since that is another historically false idea. I am assuming he just referring to a future trend of depicting crowns as ingrown in kings heads. Carewolf (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
There is no reference to "horns" only to "crowns". The robots have assumed that humans fossilized with crowns are a distinct species, and the metal crown is part of the skeleton. I've removed explainations of "horns"Zeimusu (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Isn't it worth noting that dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are cloned, and their DNA is patched up with frog DNA? Michael Crichton also wrote about the dinosaurs not being exactly how they used to be in the books because of it. I would have thought it strange if the dinosaurs in Jurassic World looked different from how they did in Jurassic Park as they exists in the same continuity. They even mention the T-Rex has lived on the Island for more than 20 years. RavenLiquid (talk) 12:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder if, when they eventually do a full reboot of the franchise, they'll say they patched up the dinosaurs with bird DNA, since that kind of make more sense than frogs. I mean, as much sense as any of it makes. -Pennpenn 108.162.250.162 23:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The frog DNA was a huge plot point (at least in the books) as all dinosaurs were female (to control the population), and frogs can change sex if the environment has to much of either sex. So the dinosaurs got this trait from the frogs and were reproducing (the famous life finds a way quote).RavenLiquid (talk) 10:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

This might sound weird, but it reminds me of that Spongebob episode where at the end, some floating creatures, taking pictures with their tongue, visit Jellyhenge or something. The Twenty-second. The Not So Only. The Nathan/Nk22 (talk) 18:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Usually I would say I understand xckd just by reading it. But this one puzzled me enough to look up what an "explain xkcd" had to say. I actually thought the Kings and Queens being "big pillows" remark referred to use of the words for mattress sizes (as well as possibly the colorful fabric being sheets or comforters). But since the comic is about misunderstandings over long periods of time, it may be deliberately confusing. 108.162.210.117 05:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing there's nothing genius about this. Randall thought "I'll recreate the dinosaur feathers reaction but in the future with humans instead of dinosaurs" and then something popped into his mind about those prehistoric movies from the 60s with mostly naked people or 300 or something and he threw the word movie in. It didn't really make sense, it wasn't really funny, but he just published it anyway. - 173.245.48.189 14:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

The post claims that Jurassic World is a reboot of the franchise, but that isn't strictly true. There is some retconning of some events to allow for the events to believably fit into the continuity of the previous films, but the overall plot is unchanged. 173.245.52.189

"Now they're, what, big pillows?"; I took this to mean that rather than humans being extinct in this comic, it takes place in a future where obesity is common, no humans work. So if humans are just fat and sit around all day, that would explain the pillow comparison. Maybe?  -173.245.52.118 04:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)