Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
| || |
Users will often try to work around bugs in their software, and are sometimes able to get used to having the bugs around. Some bugs
, like the one in the comic, are even interpreted as features ; the rapid overheating mentioned in the comic is an expected feature for longtimeuser4, and when the bug is fixed , longtimeuser4 asks the admin to put in an option to allow the spacebar to heat up the cpu like before the bug fix. " |+|
Users will often try to work around bugs in their software, and are sometimes able to get used to having the bugs around. Some bugs are even interpreted as features and when the fixed .
| || |
The titletext takes this situation to
an extreme level. |+|
The titletext takes this situation to extreme level.
| || |
Revision as of 09:27, 11 February 2013
Users will often try to work around bugs in their software, and are sometimes able to get used to having the bugs around. Some bugs are even interpreted as features and users complain when the software authors fixed them.
The comics show somehow extreme example. Some software had a bug causing CPU to overheat when you hold spacebar. In version 10.17, the bug was fixed. Soon, longtimeuser4 complained that he liked the "feature" of CPU overheating on holding spacebar, presents the workflow how he uses it (which is, again, more weird that usual) and wants an option to re-enable it.
The titletext takes this situation to even more extreme level.
add a comment! ⋅ refresh comments!
It's not a bug, it's a feature! Davidy22[talk] 05:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
What? The explanation makes no sense. Where did the user reconfiguring his CPU to overheat upon pressing control come from?126.96.36.199 06:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC) Edit: I was referring to the actual explanation which has since been edited, not the comic itself. I understood that, but the explanation was quoting stuff that wasn't in the comic.188.8.131.52 18:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's not 'from' anything. It's just an extreme and humorously far-fetched example of how a user might put a bug to use. He used the bug so he wouldn't have to reach for his actual control button, a 'horrifying' hack which works for him. 184.108.40.206 17:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
No idea where this coming from, but reminds me this bug and this reaction to it. Firefox is good example in general: about:config was obviously CREATED to make much more settings available that is sane to put in configuration windows. On the other hand, this problem is old, so the comix is probably about some other, more recent problem, possibly in completely different software. -- Hkmaly (talk) 09:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm constantly running stuff like Folding@Home, but I usually underclock my components to conserve power and lengthen the lifespan. However, I created a macro that overclocks my GPU at the press of a button, and I use it to act as a heater for my room whenever I get cold. It works. Those children could follow my example. 220.127.116.11 15:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think this is a jab at Windows 8, only an upside-down one - since the comic is about a lone protester as opposed to the general dissatisfaction with Tile World. Also: Let's wire the computer components (and a heat sink) into an office chair. Would sell like crazy in the North.
I think it would be nice to include in the explanation, for people unfamiliar with Emacs, that most macros require you to type Control something. It's common to remap Ctrl to the Caps Lock position so that it's easier and faster to reach. 18.104.22.168 17:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
I've learned long ago to never assume that my personal expectations will help everybody. To never ignore feedback from your core users (who else would stick around and use such a buggy system?). And that if you taking other's choice away to save them from themselves, try to give a quick alternative, such as a hint on how to modify the script to look for prolonged space-bar commands and engage control button (perhaps that user is disabled?) - E-inspired (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
It's quite possible that this is a reference to this, which is a relatively famous bug that got an incredibly angry reaction. 22.214.171.124 19:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Doesn't the admin rather mean, that it's horrifying that the user's workaround does not work anymore, and not, that he considers the workaround itself horrible?
10:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)