https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Grahame&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T12:24:01ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53720Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-26T02:07:58Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I completely agree, Whisky. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. [[User:Sulis|Sulis]] ([[User talk:Sulis|talk]]) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:My understanding of the outlet matter is that:<br />
:# It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.<br />
:# The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here ([http://e-promedia.com/go/_info/?user_id=1812&lang=pl example (in Polish)])<br />
:# The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.<br />
:# Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2551/3900578012_6534fb3fed.jpg Chinese-style instant noodles]<br />
:It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Beret Guy's new business is an extremely low cost one... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.217|108.162.231.217]] 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel ''so'' strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know ''how'' he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does ''most'' of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, ''why''..?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.218|141.101.99.218]] 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Probably a play on "[[wikipedia:Ghostwriter|Ghostwriter]]" [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.213|141.101.98.213]] 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}<br />
:I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.211|173.245.55.211]] 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I know it's spelt "Job", but wanted to avoid being ambiguous. I don't see the "piles of connection mentioned by numerous users" you mention above; the explanation contains it (which could have been written by you) and you mention it in this discussion, that's it. This interview is in no way arduous and the interviewee is not really tested as Job was. Where do you see the connection between the comic and the Book of Job? As for the ghost explanation: as a user pointed out earlier, the Snapchat logo is a ghost, he mentions ghosts in the comic, the comic came out the same week as the Snapchat offers. This comic is clearly about Snapchat and the ridiculousness of the founder turning down an offer of billions of dollars for something that doesn't generate revenue. Where does Job fit into that story? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 09:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::I edited what had already been written about Job. Check the history. You're right - I may have exaggerated "numerous users". But I agree with whoever had written the comments/explanation about Job linking it to his job being a "trial of faith". I make no claim at all that it connects directly to most of the rest of the comic. As Randall often does, he's gone off on a tangent - he especially does this in title texts - switched gears so to speak. And the connection is not to the interview but to the job. Check the title text again. And it's not exactly the "book of Job" but the character/life of Job as described in that book. And as explained by whoever originally wrote in the explanation the connection to Job. And I'm not disputing that other aspects of the comic have other connections. I'm not saying that it doesn't connect in other ways as you are seeing. What I'm saying is the title text is clearly a reference to Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53713Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-26T00:27:53Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I completely agree, Whisky. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. [[User:Sulis|Sulis]] ([[User talk:Sulis|talk]]) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:My understanding of the outlet matter is that:<br />
:# It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.<br />
:# The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here ([http://e-promedia.com/go/_info/?user_id=1812&lang=pl example (in Polish)])<br />
:# The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.<br />
:# Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2551/3900578012_6534fb3fed.jpg Chinese-style instant noodles]<br />
:It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Beret Guy's new business is an extremely low cost one... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.217|108.162.231.217]] 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel ''so'' strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know ''how'' he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does ''most'' of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, ''why''..?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.218|141.101.99.218]] 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Probably a play on "[[wikipedia:Ghostwriter|Ghostwriter]]" [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.213|141.101.98.213]] 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}<br />
:I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.211|173.245.55.211]] 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I know it's spelt "Job", but wanted to avoid being ambiguous. I don't see the "piles of connection mentioned by numerous users" you mention above; the explanation contains it (which could have been written by you) and you mention it in this discussion, that's it. This interview is in no way arduous and the interviewee is not really tested as Job was. Where do you see the connection between the comic and the Book of Job? As for the ghost explanation: as a user pointed out earlier, the Snapchat logo is a ghost, he mentions ghosts in the comic, the comic came out the same week as the Snapchat offers. This comic is clearly about Snapchat and the ridiculousness of the founder turning down an offer of billions of dollars for something that doesn't generate revenue. Where does Job fit into that story? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 09:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::I edited what had already been written about Job. Check the history. You're right - I may have exaggerated "numerous users". But I agree with whoever had written the comments/explanation about Job linking it to his job being a "trial of faith". I make no claim at all that it connects directly to most of the rest of the comic. As Randall often does, he's has gone off on a tangent - he especially does this in title texts - switched gears so to speak. And the connection is not to the interview but to the job. Check the title text again. And it's not exactly the "book of Job" but the character/life of Job as described in that book. And as explained by whoever originally wrote in the explanation the connection to Job. And I'm not disputing that other aspects of the comic have other connections. I'm not saying that it doesn't connect in other ways as you are seeing. What I'm saying is the title text is clearly a reference to Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53619Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-25T08:39:38Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I completely agree, Whisky. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. [[User:Sulis|Sulis]] ([[User talk:Sulis|talk]]) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:My understanding of the outlet matter is that:<br />
:# It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.<br />
:# The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here ([http://e-promedia.com/go/_info/?user_id=1812&lang=pl example (in Polish)])<br />
:# The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.<br />
:# Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2551/3900578012_6534fb3fed.jpg Chinese-style instant noodles]<br />
:It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Green Beret's new business is an extremely low cost one... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.217|108.162.231.217]] 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel ''so'' strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know ''how'' he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does ''most'' of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, ''why''..?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.218|141.101.99.218]] 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:::Probably a play on "[[wikipedia:Ghostwriter|Ghostwriter]]" [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.213|141.101.98.213]] 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}<br />
:I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.211|173.245.55.211]] 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1293:_Job_Interview&diff=532811293: Job Interview2013-11-21T09:19:41Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1293<br />
| date = November 20, 2013<br />
| title = Job Interview<br />
| image = job_interview.png<br />
| titletext = When you talk about the job experience you'll give me, why do you pronounce 'job' with a long 'o'?<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
Following on from [[1032: Networking|his attempts at networking]], [[Beret Guy]] conducts an interview for a programmer position (someone to "write on our computers") at his mysteriously successful company.<br />
<br />
The comic makes fun of a virtual economy where any actual connection to goods or services vanishes. The purported "company headquarters" is nondescript, but appears to have a standard lunchroom although the online soup (soup from an electrical outlet) (a take on soup.io[http://soup.io]?) makes it somewhat more nerdy.<br />
<br />
The label is a variation on the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets.<br />
<br />
The title text makes reference to the story of [[wikipedia:Job (biblical figure)|Job]] ("Job" pronounced with a long O to rhyme with globe), who was put through some horrendous ordeals by Satan who had to get permission from God, and which God allowed to test (or prove) Job's faith. This suggests that taking the job will make the interviewee feel like Job (i.e. the job will be a(n) horrendous ordeal).<br />
<br />
Another job interview was portrayed in [[1094: Interview]]<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Beret Guy ushers a prospective employee into a room.]<br />
:Beret Guy: Welcome to our company! We're headquartered right here, in this real building I found.<br />
<br />
:[They sit down at a table carrying dishes. There is a wall outlet with a lopsided sign SOUP.] <br />
:Interviewee: What do you...''do''?<br />
:Beret Guy: We make stuff for phones!<br />
:Beret Guy: Like apps and stickers.<br />
<br />
:Beret Guy: We want to hire you to write stuff on our computers.<br />
:Beret Guy: We can offer you a bunch of paychecks!<br />
:Beret Guy: There are ghosts here.<br />
<br />
:Interviewee: Are you sure this is a company?<br />
:Beret Guy: I hope so!<br />
<br />
:[Beret Guy plugs a cable into the wall outlet, a liquid pours into a soup bowl.]<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53276Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-21T07:35:35Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I completely agree, Whisky. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53259Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-21T01:36:00Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1293:_Job_Interview&diff=53258Talk:1293: Job Interview2013-11-21T01:31:20Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat<br />
<br />
I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)<br />
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1293:_Job_Interview&diff=532571293: Job Interview2013-11-21T01:31:14Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1293<br />
| date = November 20, 2013<br />
| title = Job Interview<br />
| image = job_interview.png<br />
| titletext = When you talk about the job experience you'll give me, why do you pronounce 'job' with a long 'o'?<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
Following on from [[1032: Networking|his attempts at networking]], [[Beret Guy]] conducts an interview for a programmer position (someone to "write on our computers") at his mysteriously successful company.<br />
<br />
The comic makes fun of a virtual economy where any actual connection to goods or services vanishes. The purported "company headquarters" is nondescript, but appears to have a standard lunchroom although the online soup (soup from an electrical outlet) (a take on soup.io[http://soup.io]?) makes it somewhat more nerdy.<br />
<br />
The label is a variation on the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets.<br />
<br />
The title text makes reference to the story of [[wikipedia:Job (biblical figure)|Job]] ("Job" pronounced with a long O), who was put through some horrendous ordeals by Satan who had to get permission from God, and which God allowed to test (or prove) Job's faith. This suggests that taking the job will make the interviewee feel like Job.<br />
<br />
Another job interview was portrayed in [[1094: Interview]]<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Beret Guy ushers a prospective employee into a room.]<br />
:Beret Guy: Welcome to our company! We're headquartered right here, in this real building I found.<br />
<br />
:[They sit down at a table carrying dishes. There is a wall outlet with a lopsided sign SOUP.] <br />
:Interviewee: What do you...''do''?<br />
:Beret Guy: We make stuff for phones!<br />
:Beret Guy: Like apps and stickers.<br />
<br />
:Beret Guy: We want to hire you to write stuff on our computers.<br />
:Beret Guy: We can offer you a bunch of paychecks!<br />
:Beret Guy: There are ghosts here.<br />
<br />
:Interviewee: Are you sure this is a company?<br />
:Beret Guy: I hope so!<br />
<br />
:[Beret Guy plugs a cable into the wall outlet, a liquid pours into a soup bowl.]<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1289:_Simple_Answers&diff=52537Talk:1289: Simple Answers2013-11-12T00:39:27Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>The title text question is not answered, but I would guess "no", mainly because I don't believe wars would stop even if we understand each other completely. On the other hand, it talks about "make war undesirable" ... isn't "making war undesirable" what nuclear weapons did? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This is just further info on the next-to-last question, and Randall's answer is thus "no". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.157|108.162.254.157]] 12:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
One could argue that technology only helps us understand about each other. Technology cannot help us to understand each other in the sense of appreciate each other. And to go further, understanding about each other can increase the likelihood of war. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1281:_Minifigs&diff=51114Talk:1281: Minifigs2013-10-24T04:34:53Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is my first time at trying to explain something. Even if it's replaced by a better one, I hope it gets the point across.<br />
<br />
Cheers!<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/189.186.138.149|189.186.138.149]] 05:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Your explanation looks good (perhaps somebody changed it, though). I am happy for you. Welcome to.the community. You are the type of people that make wikis great.<br />
:[[User:Zyxuvius|Zyxuvius]] ([[User talk:Zyxuvius|talk]]) 17:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Related question: what is the current population of Teddy bears? And what about Barbies? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Might Mattel be the world's largest shoe maker? [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 16:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Then we are just waiting for a Wikipedian to remove the comparison of tires manufactures as Wikipedia is not the place for random facts appearing in XKCD comics. [[User:Pmakholm|Pmakholm]] ([[User talk:Pmakholm|talk]]) 10:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
::The information in the Wikipedia article on {{w|Lego tire|Lego tires}}, including the random fact that in 2011 it was the world's largest tire manufacturer, has been there since May 2012 [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 13:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I, for one, welcome our new Lego overlords.[[Special:Contributions/83.227.33.35|83.227.33.35]] 01:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Just a suggestion for discussion: instead of the final phrase of the second paragraph saying "the prognosis of this comic seems quite likely", I think "the prognosis of this comic seems at least possible if not highly likely" as the point of the previous extrapolations is that they were unwarranted/probably impossible, not just unlikely. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 04:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1281:_Minifigs&diff=51113Talk:1281: Minifigs2013-10-24T04:34:04Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is my first time at trying to explain something. Even if it's replaced by a better one, I hope it gets the point across.<br />
<br />
Cheers!<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/189.186.138.149|189.186.138.149]] 05:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Your explanation looks good (perhaps somebody changed it, though). I am happy for you. Welcome to.the community. You are the type of people that make wikis great.<br />
:[[User:Zyxuvius|Zyxuvius]] ([[User talk:Zyxuvius|talk]]) 17:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Related question: what is the current population of Teddy bears? And what about Barbies? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Might Mattel be the world's largest shoe maker? [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 16:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Then we are just waiting for a Wikipedian to remove the comparison of tires manufactures as Wikipedia is not the place for random facts appearing in XKCD comics. [[User:Pmakholm|Pmakholm]] ([[User talk:Pmakholm|talk]]) 10:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
::The information in the Wikipedia article on {{w|Lego tire|Lego tires}}, including the random fact that in 2011 it was the world's largest tire manufacturer, has been there since May 2012 [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 13:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I, for one, welcome our new Lego overlords.[[Special:Contributions/83.227.33.35|83.227.33.35]] 01:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
Just a suggestion for discussion: instead of the final phrase of the second paragraph saying "the prognosis of this comic seems quite likely", I think "the prognosis of this comic seems at least possible if not highly likely" as the point of the previous extrapolations is that they were unwarranted/probably impossible, not just unlikely. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 04:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1280:_Mystery_News&diff=50986Talk:1280: Mystery News2013-10-22T00:55:52Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>I would just like to take this moment to say that Explain xkcd's ads are restricted to image files only, and will never play video/sound/flash stuff when you load the page, unlike the site that Cueball currently has open. '''[[User:Davidy22|<u>{{Color|#707|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This has to do with those news videos or live streams that pop up without your consent on some unreputable news sites. If you have a slow network and a lot of tabs, they're almost impossible to find. [[Special:Contributions/66.87.66.186|66.87.66.186]] 13:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
This comic is so 2005; I'm guessing Randal is not using adblockplus (maybe due to a moral enforced by the income from his xkcd.com) [[Special:Contributions/108.168.11.47|108.168.11.47]] 13:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm guessing that he's not referring to audio ads, but rather to news sites that have a video and a story, but can sometimes take so long to load the video that you've read the story and moved on, or to the random sites that have the completely unrelated espn auto-play video in the sidebar. I personally installed an add-on that makes you have to click on a flash object solely for these annoyances.... [[Special:Contributions/66.249.85.193|66.249.85.193]] 14:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
An alternative situation: I sometimes have the domains youtube.com and ytimg.com blocked by NoScript. Then I allow them to watch something and three or four videos in background tabs start playing... [[Special:Contributions/83.41.36.244|83.41.36.244]] 14:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This exact situation happens to me quite often. Here's the scenario: I scan the Google News homepage for today's news, and click the middle mouse button on the 5-10 stories that interest me, thus opening them up directly into background tabs, intending to read them one-by-one afterwards. If any of these articles have videos that autoplay, I start hearing random news reports without knowing which tab(s) the video is playing in, and have to frantically search through them to pause it. I'm pretty sure this is what Randall is referring to. [[Special:Contributions/216.174.143.92|216.174.143.92]] 14:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
: Yes, exactly. I often read a story which contains links to several others I'd like to read. So I open them in background tabs to get to after I finish the first story. And a few moments later some video on a tab (or several tabs) which I'm not looking at will start to play. Often it is difficult to find the tab(s) on which the video(s) is playing since, as noted above, the video is non-obvious. More often than not I find (if I can find it at all) that it's coming from some small ad running in a border area.<br />
: Very frustrating and often leads me to just turn down the sound and ignore the thing that's clamoring for my attention. Gets the advertiser exactly the opposite reaction from me than what they want. Very counter-productive for the advertiser. [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 17:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
Chrome [http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/02/25/google-chrome-may-soon-get-audio-indicators-to-show-you-noisy-tabs-keep-them-open-when-memory-runs-out/ shows a visual indicator of which tab is playing audio], and Firefox is [http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/02/25/google-chrome-may-soon-get-audio-indicators-to-show-you-noisy-tabs-keep-them-open-when-memory-runs-out/ considering adding the feature]. The problem is that plugins do their own audio-playing, and don't let the browser know when they're playing audio. So, for now, this only works for audio that the browser itself plays (which includes Youtube HTML5). --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] ([[User talk:Interiot|talk]]) 18:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It appears that no-one has explained how something will start playing again 30 minutes after it was stopped. Or did I miss something? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=50985Talk:1279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-22T00:51:58Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>My first attempt at an explanation. I have actually received emails designed for someone else because we had the same name and the sender missed a crucial difference between my email address and the intended recipient. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
:This must be the one of the few times where we have such an well written and complete explanation this early in the day -- well done [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])<br />
::Thank you, but all of what I said has been removed, and the new explanation does make more sense! Or at least the bits of it that are relevant. ;-) [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
AFAIK if you have adress name@gmail.com, then gmail delivers all mails in shape name+anything@gmail.com to your box. So the trick is to make address like J@gmail.com, then heavily use J+Brown@gmail.com to the point, that other people catch up an for example Joe Smith instead correct Smith@gmail.com will write J+Smith@gmail.com - which would end in your mailbox then. {{unsigned ip|89.176.232.253}}<br />
<br />
:Good explanation, except gmail only allowes usernames between 6 and 30 characters (and doesn't allow + in username). I would assume that this was true even before this strip and it's not so hard to verify, so Randal probably speaks about addresses like JoeSmith@gmail.com being mistakenly used by other Joe Smiths. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I don't get this. When you're creating an account, every e-mail service provider checks to see if the username is available, and only lets you create an account if your username's unique. This kind of issue can happen if you then go around and enter a wrong e-mail ID whenever you sign up for something, or if the company automatically assumes an e-mail ID without asking you (I don't think the latter happens). It shouldn't matter if a provider (GMail for instance) ignores everything after a certain character (+) while determining recepient, or even if it ignores an entire character (.) - all this should've been taken care of when you signed up in the first place. [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 08:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Exactly, it's about entering wrong e-mail ID. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I'm pretty sure the "+" in the comic refers to a simple concatenation of first initial and last name (e.g., <code>rmunroe@gmail.com</code>), not a literal <code>+</code> character (as in <code>r+munroe@gmail.com</code>). [[Special:Contributions/130.225.98.201|130.225.98.201]] 09:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:No, because then it should be ''<code>[First initial][Last name]@gmail.com</code>'' instead of ''<code>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</code>''.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 10:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
::Taking the plus sign as a literal character does not make very much sense. GMail would ignore ''<code>[Last name]</code>'' behind it and deliver the message to ''<code>[First initial]@gmail.com</code>'', which is no valid address at all due to the limit of 6 characters. Also, it is fairly uncommon to use a plus sign in an email address, and the joke of the comic relies on the pattern being generic. [[User:LotharW|LotharW]] ([[User talk:LotharW|talk]]) 11:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The point of the comic is that old people forget their email address and regularly give other people the wrong email address. So when they register for something, like online notifications of a phone bill, Joe Smith puts down JSmith@gmail.com even though his email address is a different variation on that. [[Special:Contributions/69.143.178.218|69.143.178.218]]<br />
:Some of them might not even ''have'' an email address. They might easily believe that email addresses are assigned automatically, somewhat like street addresses or telephone numbers. Which is not so very far-fetched, since in the early days of the Internet your provider gave you an email address when you signed up for an Internet connection. Many might also think that an email address is reserved for the person with the corresponding name, instead of their having to claim it. [[User:LotharW|LotharW]] ([[User talk:LotharW|talk]]) 12:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
::I can definitely tell you as the owner of a common-pattern email address: it's not just old people. I've had bank statements, insults, and declarations of love, thrown at me that were definitely intended for someone half my age. [[Special:Contributions/131.107.174.244|131.107.174.244]] 18:37, 21 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[First Initial]+[Last Name] is the same as [ FIailnrst]+[ LNaemst]. Then he is clearly referring to names such as IrinaN or FanniL. [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC) <small>This is a joke, and the plus sign means concatenation.</small><br />
<br />
The plus sign is clearly an indication of concatenation and not meant as a literal character. [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 14:29, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This sentence is false, and I deleted it:<br />
:The problem is intensified by the fact that providers like {{w|Google Mail}}, which has become synonymous with email services, regard certain alterations as variations of the same address. For example, Google Mail ignores the dot character and does not allow hyphens and underscores, although they are valid characters for email addresses. Ironically, these restrictions are supposed to prevent fraud, but instead lead to problems like the one described in the comic.<br />
If the addresses jsmith@gmail.com, j.smith@gmail.com, j-smith@gmail.com and j_smith@gmail.com belonged to different persons the problem exposed in the comic would be increased, not decreased. [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 15:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
:You should consider the context: The sentence you deleted appeared after<br />
::Most internet users face at some point the message that their desired email address is "already taken". [...]<br />
:And ''that'' problem is made worse by not allowing any variation in the address. [[User:LotharW|LotharW]] ([[User talk:LotharW|talk]]) 16:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The second scenario presented in the explanation has nothing to do with ''reverse identity theft''. The idea is that the victim is exposing their own identity by assuming someone else's address. A third party sending emails to the wrong recipient (thus exposing the victim) is very unfortunate, but there is nothing '''reverse''' about it. [[User:LotharW|LotharW]] ([[User talk:LotharW|talk]]) 17:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I think the "reverse" nature is that instead of the THEIF going out and hacking the VICTIM'S email to learn their identity and steal information, the VICTIM is the one delivering the information to the THEIF'S email account. [[Special:Contributions/70.31.8.40|70.31.8.40]] 14:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:4:_Landscape_(sketch)&diff=50810Talk:4: Landscape (sketch)2013-10-18T06:26:16Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Interesting... when I first saw this sketch years ago, I assumed that the body of water was frozen and the "river" was a crack in the ice. -- mwburden <br />
[[Special:Contributions/70.91.188.49|70.91.188.49]] 22:41, 13 December 2012 (UTC)<br />
<br />
More likely the dark areas are the watery areas. That would explain the original comment: people asking "why the river?" were only making it too clear to Randall how he missed to convey what he meant. The confusion largely comes from the land being completely flat.<br />
[[Special:Contributions/78.192.177.101|78.192.177.101]] 18:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
:Since he's changed the title text to say that the river is running through the ocean, you seem to be incorrect. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 06:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:25:_Barrel_-_Part_4&diff=50809Talk:25: Barrel - Part 42013-10-18T06:20:22Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>The title text suggests that something bad has happened, not simply that he is swimming elsewhere or that Randall is disappointed the boy is no longer floating in the barrel. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=50806Talk:1279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:06:48Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>My first attempt at an explanation. I have actually received emails designed for someone else because we had the same name and the sender missed a crucial difference between my email address and the intended recipient. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=50805Talk:1279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:06:20Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>My first attempt at an explanation. I have actually received emails designed for someone else because we had the same name and the sender missed a crucial difference between my email address and intended recipient. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=508041279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:05:27Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails for people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. Cueball's response indicates that he's explaining that their logic would only make sense if indeed it was their email address.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=508031279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:04:07Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails for people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. He responds, "Yes, I know it would make '''sense''' if that were your email address, but it's not."<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=508021279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:02:56Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails for people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. He responds, "Yes, I know it would make '''Bold text'''sense'''Bold text''' if that were your email address, but it's not."<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=508011279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T06:02:19Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails for people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. He responds, "Yes, I know it would make *sense* if that were your email address, but it's not."<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:Grahame&diff=50800User:Grahame2013-10-18T06:00:51Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>My email address is religiousnut at yahoo. I imagine you can all figure out from that much more than most of you would care to know about me.<br />
<br />
;-)<br />
<br />
[[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Grahame&diff=50799User talk:Grahame2013-10-18T06:00:02Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Well have at it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
==Creationism== <br />
The belief that there is an omnipotent, personal God Who created all things. It does not contradict science unless the self-serving definition of equating science to (philosophical) naturalism is used and unjustifiably expecting methodological naturalism to tell us with authority about the past whilst ignoring historical records. Further, the founders of most branches of science were "young earth" creationists. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 06:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
==Bible== <br />
The greatest book ever written is actually 66 books written by about 40 different authors over about 1500 years (although the earliest one is probably simply a compilation of sources that were up to 3500 years older than it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 06:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
==Biology== <br />
My favourite subject in High School and for which I received the "book prize" in Grade 12. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 06:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
==Science==<br />
Still one of my favourite topics. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 06:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Grahame&diff=50798User talk:Grahame2013-10-18T05:54:12Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Well have at it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
==Creationism== <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Bible== <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Biology== <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Science==</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Grahame&diff=50797User talk:Grahame2013-10-18T05:52:51Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Well have at it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
====== <br />
Creationism [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== <br />
Bible [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== <br />
Biology [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== <br />
Science [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Grahame&diff=50796User talk:Grahame2013-10-18T05:51:10Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>Well have at it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
====== Creationism [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== Bible [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== Biology [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==== Science [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Grahame&diff=50795User talk:Grahame2013-10-18T05:50:22Z<p>Grahame: Created page with "Well have at it. ~~~~Grahame ====== Creationism ~~~~Grahame ==== Bible ~~~~Grahame ==== Biology ~~~~Grahame ==== Science ~~~~Grahame ===="</p>
<hr />
<div>Well have at it. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
======<br />
Creationism [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====<br />
Bible [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====<br />
Biology [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====<br />
Science [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
====</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:Grahame&diff=50794User:Grahame2013-10-18T05:46:25Z<p>Grahame: Created page with "My email address is religiousnut at yahoo. I imagine you can all figure out from that much more than you care to know about me. ;-) ~~~~Grahame"</p>
<hr />
<div>My email address is religiousnut at yahoo. I imagine you can all figure out from that much more than you care to know about me.<br />
<br />
;-)<br />
<br />
[[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1267:_Mess&diff=50793Talk:1267: Mess2013-10-18T05:44:22Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>I do this on purpose whenever people are likely to come over. I mostly clean my house except for a little thing and apologize for the mess. [[Special:Contributions/62.159.14.62|62.159.14.62]] 11:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
*Remind me never to come visit you.[[Special:Contributions/184.57.72.181|184.57.72.181]] 12:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
::Never come visit him/her. Is that enough of a reminder? --[[Special:Contributions/24.145.230.197|24.145.230.197]] 05:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"There is a common psychological phenomenon which causes people to mentally magnify their own flaws, while failing to notice the flaws of others." '''Tell that to my ex-wife!''' --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 15:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This comic wierdly mirrors (in contrast) a recently broadcast radio programme (which I doubt Randall will have heard, it being UK's BBC Radio 4 "Thinking Allowed", I think it was, with a segment regarding how normal people react to those not acting 'properly' to social norms) in which the phenomena was mentioned. A lady hostess who unselfconsciously apologises for "not having dusted" (despite dust being possibly shed skin cells and such, it's considered "clean mess"), for her visitor, is then utterly mortified when said visitor breaks the rules and also 'helpfully' points out a coffee-ring stain (considered "dirty mess", for some reason) upon a surface. Doubtless the traditional light and largely insignificant layering of dust possibly somehow prevents highlighting any ''geniuinely'' missed spots (if one had actually dusted ''most'' of the room), yet distinct stains and marks (and dust layers with obvious finger-marks in?) ought to have been cleaned or even prevented in the first place.<br />
<br />
(For the record, my own home is a "working mess", much to the chagrin of my mother when she visits. It could definitely be tidier, and there's absolutly no way to convincingly apologise for its state. I consider the whole place to be my "shed", in the grand tradition of "shedology". Mind you, this attitude of mine arises out of the tendency for me to ''lose'' so many things when I deliberately tidy up/pack away "projects in progress" for such esteemed visitors. Better that I can find everything when I need to, IMO. This ''mostly'' works better than with the alternative, under a sometimes Holmesian 'stratified' surface-based filing system.) [[Special:Contributions/178.105.138.196|178.105.138.196]] 15:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
:tl;dr--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:09, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I was reminded of..<br />
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-puts-glass-of-water-on-bedside-table-in-case-h,33751/ {{unsigned ip|173.14.162.93}}<br />
<br />
<br />
People call a clean house messy as a way to seem superior to their guests. They clean it before the guest gets here then say that because they know the guest has not cleaned. [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 17:37, 22 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
"There is a common psychological phenomenon which causes people to mentally magnify their own flaws, while failing to notice the flaws of others." How is this phenomenon called? [[Special:Contributions/79.227.152.95|79.227.152.95]] 09:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
:false humility [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame<br />
I think you mean "What is this called?" I don't know, I've been trying to research it for the last five minutes and it's never the first result on google. Must not exist. [[Special:Contributions/72.94.35.160|72.94.35.160]] 02:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=50792Talk:1279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T05:39:57Z<p>Grahame: Created page with "My first attempt at an explanation. I have actually received emails designed for someone else because we had the same name and they missed a crucial difference between my ema..."</p>
<hr />
<div>My first attempt at an explanation. I have actually received emails designed for someone else because we had the same name and they missed a crucial difference between my email address and theirs. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=507911279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T05:38:28Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails from people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. He responds, "Yes, I know it would make *sense* if that were your email address, but it's not."<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1279:_Reverse_Identity_Theft&diff=507901279: Reverse Identity Theft2013-10-18T05:37:38Z<p>Grahame: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1279<br />
| date = October 18, 2013<br />
| title = Reverse Identity Theft<br />
| image = reverse identity theft.png<br />
| titletext = I asked a few friends whether they'd had this happen, then looked up the popularity of their initials/names over time. Based on those numbers, it looks like there must be at least 750,000 people in the US alone who think 'Sure, that's probably my email address' on a regular basis.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete}}<br />
If, like me, you have chosen an email address based on your name, you may receive emails from people with the same name (or similar). Randall is calling this a reverse identity theft.<br />
<br />
In the comic, Cueball appears to be calling someone with the same name who was using his email address. He uses their phone bill to contact them to let them know they are using his email address.<br />
<br />
They appear to be arguing that it's theirs because they have the name that matches the email address. He responds, "Yes, I know it would make *sense* if that were your email address, but it's not."<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:If your email address is <font color=#888>[First initial]+[Last name]@gmail.com</font> you gradually get to know lots of older people who have the same name pattern<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Yes, I know it would make '''''sense''''' if that were your email address, but it's not.<br />
:Person on the phone: But how did you get my number?<br />
:Cueball: Your phone bill.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Internet]]</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:25:_Barrel_-_Part_4&diff=50789Talk:25: Barrel - Part 42013-10-18T05:30:57Z<p>Grahame: Created page with "The title text suggests that something bad has happened, not simply that he is swimming elsewhere. ~~~~Grahame"</p>
<hr />
<div>The title text suggests that something bad has happened, not simply that he is swimming elsewhere. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 05:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame</div>Grahamehttps://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1267:_Mess&diff=50773Talk:1267: Mess2013-10-18T00:25:21Z<p>Grahame: </p>
<hr />
<div>I do this on purpose whenever people are likely to come over. I mostly clean my house except for a little thing and apologize for the mess. [[Special:Contributions/62.159.14.62|62.159.14.62]] 11:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
*Remind me never to come visit you.[[Special:Contributions/184.57.72.181|184.57.72.181]] 12:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
::Never come visit him/her. Is that enough of a reminder? --[[Special:Contributions/24.145.230.197|24.145.230.197]] 05:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"There is a common psychological phenomenon which causes people to mentally magnify their own flaws, while failing to notice the flaws of others." '''Tell that to my ex-wife!''' --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 15:03, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
This comic wierdly mirrors (in contrast) a recently broadcast radio programme (which I doubt Randall will have heard, it being UK's BBC Radio 4 "Thinking Allowed", I think it was, with a segment regarding how normal people react to those not acting 'properly' to social norms) in which the phenomena was mentioned. A lady hostess who unselfconsciously apologises for "not having dusted" (despite dust being possibly shed skin cells and such, it's considered "clean mess"), for her visitor, is then utterly mortified when said visitor breaks the rules and also 'helpfully' points out a coffee-ring stain (considered "dirty mess", for some reason) upon a surface. Doubtless the traditional light and largely insignificant layering of dust possibly somehow prevents highlighting any ''geniuinely'' missed spots (if one had actually dusted ''most'' of the room), yet distinct stains and marks (and dust layers with obvious finger-marks in?) ought to have been cleaned or even prevented in the first place.<br />
<br />
(For the record, my own home is a "working mess", much to the chagrin of my mother when she visits. It could definitely be tidier, and there's absolutly no way to convincingly apologise for its state. I consider the whole place to be my "shed", in the grand tradition of "shedology". Mind you, this attitude of mine arises out of the tendency for me to ''lose'' so many things when I deliberately tidy up/pack away "projects in progress" for such esteemed visitors. Better that I can find everything when I need to, IMO. This ''mostly'' works better than with the alternative, under a sometimes Holmesian 'stratified' surface-based filing system.) [[Special:Contributions/178.105.138.196|178.105.138.196]] 15:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
:tl;dr--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:09, 20 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I was reminded of..<br />
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-puts-glass-of-water-on-bedside-table-in-case-h,33751/ {{unsigned ip|173.14.162.93}}<br />
<br />
<br />
People call a clean house messy as a way to seem superior to their guests. They clean it before the guest gets here then say that because they know the guest has not cleaned. [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 17:37, 22 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
"There is a common psychological phenomenon which causes people to mentally magnify their own flaws, while failing to notice the flaws of others." How is this phenomenon called? [[Special:Contributions/79.227.152.95|79.227.152.95]] 09:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
:false humility ~Grahame<br />
I think you mean "What is this called?" I don't know, I've been trying to research it for the last five minutes and it's never the first result on google. Must not exist. [[Special:Contributions/72.94.35.160|72.94.35.160]] 02:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)</div>Grahame