Difference between revisions of "Talk:2741: Wish Interpretation"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 23: Line 23:
 
The proper way of teaching Black Hat a lesson would be twisting his wish to make it beneficial to humanity. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 08:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 
The proper way of teaching Black Hat a lesson would be twisting his wish to make it beneficial to humanity. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 08:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
  
"And I want you to put it in my house."
+
"And I want you to put it in my house." / [POOF!] - "Here, I turned your house into a Klein bottle."
[POOF!]
 
"Here, I turned your house into a Klein bottle."
 
 
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.39|172.71.160.39]] 08:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.39|172.71.160.39]] 08:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 +
:That would better satisfy "And I want my house to contain it", from one single-step literalist perspective... Wishes-gone-strange ''usually'' work on the basis of the 'laziest' misinterpretation (with or without the intention of mallice) that doesn't require too much reinterpretation.
 +
:But how to misinterpret "put it in my house"? Hmmm... Nothing to suggest that it must stay there. Perhaps everything is going to be squeezed in through the front door and (Niagra Straw-like) eventually pushes most out of the back door. The house structure (but not fixtures and fittings) magically strengthened to continue being houselike, even as whatever the back yard is like (before it gets its own turn of being sequentially transported through) fills up with mountains (literally!) of the resulting wreckage/mishmash.
 +
:But not sure if the house itself is not already "in the house", i.e. its structure, to be exempt by prior "in"ness (if not ownership)... I'm not a genie, and have not gone through the rather extensive training/job-orientation that they clearly go through. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34|172.70.90.34]] 14:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:56, 23 February 2023


To all you people reading the discussion, why can't I add my own person page? I mean, is a year too new? I think I know, (but I'm not completely sure.) (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, you have to have an old enough account to make one? I had been wondering how to. Thexkcdnerd (talk) 00:02, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Ironically, a banknote created by a genie would be counterfeit, although the odds of legal trouble over $20 are nonetheless low. 23:43, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be. The genie could take one away from someone, or just get one that's been lost. Also, the sentence for counterfeiting is the same regardless of the denomination. SDSpivey (talk) 00:31, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The sentence for counterfeiting may be the same but the probability someone would actually go through the trouble of prosecuting you for $20 is much less than say $10,000 172.70.214.151 03:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
The US Treasury Dept. prosecutes every case it can prove. SDSpivey (talk) 04:06, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
So 2 things: First of all they need to prove it. For that someone has to notice. Not every 20-Dollar-note will be scanned, and I guess the genie could make a pretty good copy (if he needs to copy it). Also noone said US-Dollar. The Genie could make a twist and use one of over 20 other currencies called dollar. Not sure if US Treasury Dept. would be interested in that :D by the way, the eastern caribean dollar has the short "XCD" - does anyone think that a thousand of those would be labeled XkCD? --Lupo (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Or he could use Monopoly money. Or Geniedollars. He never said it would be legal tender, after all.172.70.86.148 14:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

That's cool. Try https://what-if.xkcd.com/23/. Part 1. I need a new signature. (but I'm not completely sure.) (talk) 23:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I would (as the genie) just teleport Black Hat to the desert. No other trickery or devastation needed. SDSpivey (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The oldest "Wish that I wish I didn't wish" I am personally aware of is Midas turning everything he touched into gold, including the food he tried to eat and his beloved daughter. Personally, I'd wish that the genie teach me a lesson. Nitpicking (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

It's kinda funny how a citation is needed for claiming that wishing rain doesn't exist is bad because Randall will just cover it in "What If 3" 20:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

He already replaced the rain with candy in What If 2. --162.158.129.151 07:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The proper way of teaching Black Hat a lesson would be twisting his wish to make it beneficial to humanity. Tkopec (talk) 08:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

"And I want you to put it in my house." / [POOF!] - "Here, I turned your house into a Klein bottle." 172.71.160.39 08:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

That would better satisfy "And I want my house to contain it", from one single-step literalist perspective... Wishes-gone-strange usually work on the basis of the 'laziest' misinterpretation (with or without the intention of mallice) that doesn't require too much reinterpretation.
But how to misinterpret "put it in my house"? Hmmm... Nothing to suggest that it must stay there. Perhaps everything is going to be squeezed in through the front door and (Niagra Straw-like) eventually pushes most out of the back door. The house structure (but not fixtures and fittings) magically strengthened to continue being houselike, even as whatever the back yard is like (before it gets its own turn of being sequentially transported through) fills up with mountains (literally!) of the resulting wreckage/mishmash.
But not sure if the house itself is not already "in the house", i.e. its structure, to be exempt by prior "in"ness (if not ownership)... I'm not a genie, and have not gone through the rather extensive training/job-orientation that they clearly go through. 172.70.90.34 14:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)