explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

600: Android Boyfriend

2015-06-23T22:41:01Z

108.162.219.47: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 600
| date = June 22, 2009
| title = Android Boyfriend
| image = android boyfriend.png
| titletext = Which is, coincidentally, the most unsettling mantlepiece decoration in my house.
}}

==Explanation==
Referring to [[595: Android Girlfriend]] where [[Cueball]] showed that he had an android girlfriend, ([[Megan]]), [[Ponytail]] has decided she would also like to have an {{w|android (robot)|android}} boyfriend, ([[Hairy]]). But upon bringing these two androids together they fall for each other and decides to have "sex" on the spot.

Part of the joke is that the androids find each other more attractive than the people to whom they were (presumably) created to find attractive. Like likes like, as the saying goes.

{{w|vibrator (sex toy)|Vibrator}}s and {{w|Fleshlight}}s are sex toys that represent male and female genitalia, respectively. Ponytail's flat description indicates that she is not particularly aroused by what amounts to a pair of animatronic sex toys rubbing against each other. [[Randall|Randall's]] title text claims that he has actually done such a thing, and stuck it on his fireplace mantle for all his house-guests to see.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail enters from the right dragging Hairy along by his hand, as she moves towards Cueball who stands with Megan in his hand.]
:Ponytail: I thought your android girlfriend was cool so I got myself an android boyfriend.

:[Suddenly the Megan android runs into the arms of the Hairy android, while Ponytail has let go of his hand. Ponytails head swirls around to follow her run by.]
:Ponytail: He's really great. I like how—
:Ponytail: Uh.

:[Cueball and Ponytail look towards the two android, but they are now outside the panel.]
:Off screen sound: *Zip*
:Off screen voice: Mmmmm

:[Cueball and Ponytail still look at the scene of screen.]
:Cueball: ...Huh.
:Ponytail: It's like somebody stuck a vibrator in a fleshlight.
:Off screen sound: Whirrr
:Off screen voice: Mmmm
:Off screen sound: Click

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Robots]]

Talk:1031: s/keyboard/leopard/

2014-03-03T21:03:05Z

108.162.219.47: :P

My mechanical leopard's been working out for me, just the feeling of my fingers hitting it is amazing. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Why does it say "s/keyboard/leopard/" in the url of this page, but title of this comic is "s/leopard/leopard/"?[[User:DiEvAl|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl|talk]]) 17:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
:Now I see "s/leopard/leopard/" twice in my previous comment. I forgot that I have an extension installed that was inspired by this comic. :) [[User:DiEvAl|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl|talk]]) 18:00, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I swear I read every instance of leopard as keyboard. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.89|173.245.54.89]] 23:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't the title of the comic end in "g" since it's a global replace, like "s/keyboard/leopard/g"? [[User:Kroq-gar78|Kroq-gar78]] ([[User talk:Kroq-gar78|talk]]) 18:56, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
:I have no idea, but I do know that the current title matches the one on xkcd. We're not changing it, even if there was an error. [[User:NealCruco|NealCruco]] ([[User talk:NealCruco|talk]]) 03:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

:I just bought my new leopard today! It's working great, but it's a bit hard to use. Is there such a thing as a leopard-repair shop? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.47|108.162.219.47]] 21:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

354: Startling

2014-02-28T16:58:34Z

108.162.219.47: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 354
| date = December 7, 2007
| title = Startling
| image = startling.png
| titletext = We actually reached the future about three years ago.
}}

==Explanation==
The comic is very simple: [[Randall]] apparently has a realization about the time in which he lives (at the time, anyway), given that he grew up in a time where the 2000s seemed very far away, but he now exists in that timeframe with the rest of society. This mind-blowing thought occurs to him every few months, if he is to believed.

The title text states that "the future" was reached in 2004 (three years before the comic was published). This is possibly a joke on how time works, meaning that, while 'the future' is always, was always, and will always be ahead of the time you're at, that because it's the 21st century, that either the technology has becomes so futuristic that it's, in a loose sense, 'the future', or that, to the perspective of many people, that the current year is after the time they recognize as the present.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball sits silently front of his computer.]
:I still do this every few months.

:[He continues to sit for two more panels.]

:Cueball: Holy crap, it's the 21st century.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

354: Startling

2014-02-28T16:58:10Z

108.162.219.47:

{{comic
| number = 354
| date = December 7, 2007
| title = Startling
| image = startling.png
| titletext = We actually reached the future about three years ago.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Why is 2004 the future? Give examples.}}
The comic is very simple: [[Randall]] apparently has a realization about the time in which he lives (at the time, anyway), given that he grew up in a time where the 2000s seemed very far away, but he now exists in that timeframe with the rest of society. This mind-blowing thought occurs to him every few months, if he is to believed.

The title text states that "the future" was reached in 2004 (three years before the comic was published). This is possibly a joke on how time works, meaning that, while 'the future' is always, was always, and will always be ahead of the time you're at, that because it's the 21st century, that either the technology has becomes so futuristic that it's, in a loose sense, 'the future', or that, to the perspective of many people, that the current year is after the time they recognize as the present.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball sits silently front of his computer.]
:I still do this every few months.

:[He continues to sit for two more panels.]

:Cueball: Holy crap, it's the 21st century.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

334: Wasteland

2014-02-28T16:49:19Z

108.162.219.47: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 334
| date = October 26, 2007
| title = Wasteland
| image = wasteland.png
| titletext = You make forgetting look so easy.
}}

==Explanation==
At the beginning of the comic, [[Cueball]] is wandering around in a barren area, supposedly a desert, thinking about his ex-partner, in which he, at first, appears to be fondly remembering her, but the last two boxes explain that he is trying to take a long walk to forget her, and is obviously not very good at it.

The title text implies that his ex-partner had easily forgotten him, and he wishes that he could forget more easily. It's also possible that he means that it's so hard to forget her that forgetting anything else is simple in comparison to it.

Note: When Cueball mentions walking 1000 miles, he is most likely exxagerating, as, due to his lack of hiking/traveling gear, most likely has only walked a hundred or so, either that, or the story is similar in nature, or even in the same universe, as [[505:_A_Bunch_of_Rocks|comic 505]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is walking through a wasteland talking to himself.]
:I am alone in this wasteland, a thousand miles from you.
:But I haven't forgotten the feel of your skin, your mischievous smile.
:You'd think a thousand miles would be enough.
:I guess I'll keep walking.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Romance]]

334: Wasteland

2014-02-28T16:48:09Z

108.162.219.47: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 334
| date = October 26, 2007
| title = Wasteland
| image = wasteland.png
| titletext = You make forgetting look so easy.
}}

==Explanation==
At the beginning of the comic, [[Cueball]] is wandering around in a barren area, supposedly a desert, thinking about his ex-partner, in which he, at first, appears to be fondly remembering her, but the last two boxes explain that he is trying to take a long walk to forget her, and is obviously not very good at it.

The title text implies that his ex-partner had easily forgotten him, and he wishes that he could forget more easily.

Note: When Cueball mentions walking 1000 miles, he is most likely exxagerating, as, due to his lack of hiking/traveling gear, most likely has only walked a hundred or so, either that, or the story is similar in nature, or even in the same universe, as [[505:_A_Bunch_of_Rocks|comic 505]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is walking through a wasteland talking to himself.]
:I am alone in this wasteland, a thousand miles from you.
:But I haven't forgotten the feel of your skin, your mischievous smile.
:You'd think a thousand miles would be enough.
:I guess I'll keep walking.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Romance]]

334: Wasteland

2014-02-28T16:47:46Z

108.162.219.47:

{{comic
| number = 334
| date = October 26, 2007
| title = Wasteland
| image = wasteland.png
| titletext = You make forgetting look so easy.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Mostly gets at it, but a little bare.}}
At the beginning of the comic, [[Cueball]] is wandering around in a barren area, supposedly a desert, thinking about his ex-partner, in which he, at first, appears to be fondly remembering her, but the last two boxes explain that he is trying to take a long walk to forget her, and is obviously not very good at it.

The title text implies that his ex-partner had easily forgotten him, and he wishes that he could forget more easily.

Note: When Cueball mentions walking 1000 miles, he is most likely exxagerating, as, due to his lack of hiking/traveling gear, most likely has only walked a hundred or so, either that, or the story is similar in nature, or even in the same universe, as [[505:_A_Bunch_of_Rocks|comic 505]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is walking through a wasteland talking to himself.]
:I am alone in this wasteland, a thousand miles from you.
:But I haven't forgotten the feel of your skin, your mischievous smile.
:You'd think a thousand miles would be enough.
:I guess I'll keep walking.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Romance]]

248: Hypotheticals

2014-02-28T16:33:32Z

108.162.219.47:

{{comic
| number = 248
| date = April 13, 2007
| title = Hypotheticals
| image = hypotheticals.png
| titletext = What if someone broke out of a hypothetical situation in your room right now?
}}

==Explanation==
The comic is, in short, a new take on the common TV trope in which characters in a thought bubble will sometimes look out of the bubble and talk directly to the person thinking it, another person nearby, or, occasionally, the viewer. In this comic, however, it features [[Cueball]] and [[Beret Guy]] in a conversation together, in which Beret Guy creates a hypothetical situation by imagining he had Ice Cream. This then, to Cueball's dismay, creates a hypothetical situation in which Beret Guy has ice cream, which he promptly begins to eat. Cueball then creates a hypothetical situation in which his hypothetical self has a knife to 'cut' out of the thought. He then gives this knife to Cueball, who supposedly will use it to cut out of his hypothetical situation.
The title text puts the comic into context, noting the unlikely possibility- and your most likely surprised reaction- if a person in a hypothetical situation you'd involuntarily created managed to break out of it and suddenly appear in your room.

==Transcript==
:Beret Guy: What if I had some ice cream? Wouldn't that be awesome?
:Cueball: No, stop--
:Beret Guy (thinking):
::Cueball: Great, you've trapped us in a a hypothetical situation!
::Beret Guy (holding ice cream): Mm, ice cream.
::Cueball: Maybe if I had a knife I could cut our way free...
::Cueball (thinking):
:::Beret Guy: Mmm, ice cream!
:::Cueball (reaching back into previous thought bubble): Here, take this one.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Recursion]]

600: Android Boyfriend

2014-02-28T16:14:02Z

108.162.219.47: /* Explanation */

Talk:926: Time Vulture

2014-02-28T16:01:45Z

108.162.219.47:

An obvious reference to death itself, which stalks everyone, usually for decades. This is a "memento mori". [[Special:Contributions/75.103.23.206|75.103.23.206]] 17:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
:Is this a reference to Dr. Who's [[wikia:tardis:Weeping Angels|Weeping Angels]], who also (in a different way) hunt by having their victims live to death? [[Special:Contributions/23.19.87.80|23.19.87.80]] 04:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
::I doubt it. While there is definitely a similarity, it seems like too much of a stretch to have been intentional. [[Special:Contributions/71.225.14.203|71.225.14.203]] 00:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
:::While the idea of weeping angels seems pretty true on the surface, they get their 'food' from transporting something through time, but this animal doesn't eat time or anything, it just dramatically speeds up how quickly time passes for it- similar to how sometimes a night's sleep feels only like an hour or sometimes a year. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.47|108.162.219.47]] 16:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Talk:947: Investing

2014-02-12T16:00:47Z

108.162.219.47:

Accounting for inflation, you'll probably end up losing money if you're just relying on bank interest for income. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 10:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
:Losing money compared to what? Even if inflation is 3%, getting 2% interest in a bank is better than getting 0% interest under your mattress... [[Special:Contributions/72.169.224.98|72.169.224.98]] 14:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

::Losing money compared to $1 spending power from the start date to $1 spending power at the end date, regardless of how much interest is earned, you still can't buy the same amount of stuff. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

:::Actually, putting money in the bank, you lose more in inflation than you gain in interest. It's really a scam. However, by putting it under your mattress, you're taking it out of circulation and, in effect, increasing its value through deflation. It really IS a better alternative. At least until you put it back into circulation, then the deflation is undone but, by then, it's no longer in your hands so what the hell do you care?[[Special:Contributions/76.29.225.28|76.29.225.28]] 06:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

:::: Unless you own a bank, it's unlikely that the quantity of money you're able to store in your mattress will have any effect on the rate of inflation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.61|173.245.56.61]] 20:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

::An alternative to investing in a bank account is to do with your money what the bank intends to do with your money, which is to loan it to other people at a higher interest rate, higher than the rate of inflation. Of course, some fraction of these loans will never be repaid, and you can't simply withdraw your money whenever you feel like it, so this type of scheme works better if you have tons of money to begin with-- more than just a thousand dollars seed money.[[Special:Contributions/63.155.139.54|63.155.139.54]] 14:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

:::You don't really have to have the money. You just have to be buddy-buddy with the Fed. Banks are allowed to lend out ten times more money than they actually have.[[Special:Contributions/76.29.225.28|76.29.225.28]] 06:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

:::I see! So in order to avoid having to use a bank, you should... become a bank! ...oh.--[[Special:Contributions/199.244.214.110|199.244.214.110]] 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

::::Banks don't have the luxury of being able to put all their money in insured term deposits. [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 03:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Compound interest is actually extremely powerful, if you have enough interest and enough time. 10% interest (like what you'd get from a good mutual fund) over 30 years (a little under the length of an average working career) gives a pretty impressive return.

Talk:483: Fiction Rule of Thumb

2014-01-19T17:17:33Z

108.162.219.47:

Also, you get minus points if you have to add a totally reading-flow rupturing explanation.
And if the words which supposedly come from one language have completely different linguistic structure.
And for random apostrophes.
And if you cannot read the book without a wordlist for constant reference next to you.
Rule of thumb #2: if it's not clear from the context or from a smooth, unobtrusive explanation* and/or if the reader has to go back the second time it is mentioned to remember what it was, don't use it.
*Exception to this: Terry Prachett. How the hell can that guy make funny literature out of annoyingly large footnotes??
[[Special:Contributions/132.187.20.160|132.187.20.160]] 09:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I know an author who made up words and still turned out well! His name is Andrew Hussie, creator of Homestuck. Captchalogue, Sylladex, Alchemiter, Cruxite, Respiteblock, Recuperacoon, Cookalizer, Fenestrated Wall, you name it!

1202: Girls and Boys

2014-01-01T22:57:59Z

108.162.219.47:

{{comic
| number = 1202
| date = April 22, 2013
| title = Girls and Boys
| image = girls and boys.png
| titletext = To get more knowledge
}}

==Explanation==

This comic is a play on the popular school-yard taunt, "Girls go to college, to get more knowledge; boys go to Jupiter, to get more stupider," also commonly heard as "Boys go to Mars, to get more candy bars; girls go to Jupiter, to get more stupider." The words "boys" and "girls" may be interchanged depending on the gender of the person chanting. The schoolyard taunt embodies the competitiveness and separation commonly seen between young boys and girls, and ideas about the superiority of one's gender. The comic subverts the original rhyme by having both girls and boys go to college to gain knowledge, and then using that knowledge to go to Jupiter as part of a space program.

Going "to Jupiter, to get more stupider" is ironic considering that human beings have not yet even gone to Mars, so the ability to go to Jupiter would take a huge amount of knowledge that we don't currently have. Likewise, people in space programs going to Jupiter would definitely have advanced degrees, a great deal of knowledge, and a motivation to seek out more knowledge. Space programs and going to Jupiter would require the cooperation of many different people, men and women included, rather than the divisive atmosphere of the schoolyard. The roll over text "To get more knowledge" points out that the purpose of space programs is to advance science and wouldn't actually be dumb at all. So the task of going to Jupiter is absolutely dependent on going to college, cooperation, and getting more knowledge...completely opposite of what the schoolyard taunt suggests.

==Transcript==
:Girls go to college
:To get more knowledge
:[Megan studying at a table.]

:Boys go to college
:To get more knowledge
:[Cueball studying at a table.]

:Girls and boys
:[Space launch control room with Megan and Cueball working together amongst other people.]

:Go to Jupiter
:[Rocket launch.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

Talk:1301: File Extensions

2013-12-10T23:57:18Z

108.162.219.47:

The title text reference of "hand-aligned data" may refer to ASCII art. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.28|108.162.215.28]] 05:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Alan K.
:I'd think not, given that art isn't exactly data. My guess would be tables in the .txt - a .txt file is just raw text with no formatting, so putting a table in requires manually formatting it with a bunch of spaces/tabs. It's not hard, but can be time-consuming and obnoxious. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.47|108.162.219.47]] 23:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I think it's also a notable point, that the better rated document formats are more data centric while the low rated formats mix text informations with design elements and finally become pure graphic formats, which often is an indication, that the author didn't use the accurate file type for (mostly) pure text informations.
Something I don't understand is the gap between jpg and jpeg. The first suffix is AFAIK only an abbreviation used by older DOS/MS Systems to fullfill the 8.3 limitation for filenames. The note about hand alignment might concern the fact, that hand alignment is more time expensive which might increase the amount of the the author spend in overthink the content before layouting. Also often automated layouting as supported by many modern writing application might lead to unexpected and sometimes wrong results, because the automatism has no semantical knowledge about the authors intention, which might lead to post processed errors
Sorry for my bad english, I'm not a natural writer
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.239|108.162.231.239]] 05:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:"hand-aligned data" seems to me like (manually) space-indented paragraphs, perhaps even manual padding to achieve the desired justification (centering and right-and-left-margin-hugging). And of course neatly lining up an 'embedded table', perhaps originally extracted from a .csv output. Although a number of plain-text editors (in the days of CGA and pure terminal/fixedspace fonts) or text formatters and wrappers (e.g. Lynx, man-page creaters, etc) ''would'' do things like this for you. And still do. At least insofar as the justification and margining is concerned. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.229|141.101.99.229]] 08:35, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
If anyone has taken the time to hand align a text file (as in a README, or other info file), they want it to look attractive for people to read. Odd are you're not going to take the time to "hand pretty" the document just to be malicious. Back in the BBS days there were a large number of "online" groups who had "signature" text files which were (very probably) hand aligned, and made extensive use of extended ASCII codes to generate basic graphics. (Granted there were programs to help auto-generate "ascii art".) If you've ever seen these files you'd know. [[http://www.thuglife.org/tlv5/aabout.shtml Example 1]] - [[http://textfiles.com/piracy/NFO/ Example 2]] [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I find it interesting that .jpg and .jpeg are at different levels. Aren't those the same thing? --[[User:Mralext20|Mralext20]] ([[User talk:Mralext20|talk]]) 05:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the .gif could contain suddenly unexpected scary/surprising frames? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.208.172|108.162.208.172]] 14:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

:That JPG/JPEG thing indeed seems strange. The more important distinction is between JPEGs that are photographs (fine) and those that are not (stupid). Also, pre-PNG, non-photograph GIFs could be just fine. And with all the accounting scandals we've seen, why would those spreadsheet formats get any credibility? -- [[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 06:06, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::Alongside .jpeg ('full' extension format) and .jpg (MS '8.3'-compatible extension format), I'd have expected .jpe (often full extension historically truncated on an 8.3 system), I must be honest. (And interesting that .docx doesn't co-inhabit the .doc line... or be somewhere else.) And the disparity betwixt the two versions of JPEG extension ''may'' relate to the tendency for a higher artefact-intensity of images back in the early days (when a better option than GIFs for... certain pictures... e.g. on Usenet between *nix workstations with vastly restricted bandwidths and storage capacities) compared to today's users (cameras that regularly store 10+MP pictures in low-loss JFIF files, and/or in Raw format!). But that may be a spurious or off-track reasoning on my part. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.229|141.101.99.229]] 08:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I measured the bars in photoshop to +/- 2pixels. If we scale .tex to a value of 100 like the transcript says, these are the values I get for the bar lengths (rounded to one decimal place)
.tex 100
.pdf 89.4
.csv 84.9
.txt 66.5
.svg 64.8
.xls 48.6
.doc 21.2
.png 15.1
.ppt 14.5
.jpg 3.4
.jpeg -8.4
.gif -35.8

Dunno if it is helpful - or even trusted given I'm a first time commenter - but there it is. Closer values than just estimating, though the eyeballed estimates aren't bad. Not going to adjust the actual transcript because I feel that's overstepping my bounds. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.56}}
:Not at all, wikis are free to edit for a reason. If we didn't want new users to be editing pages, we could have turned that off long ago. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

As the information that is provided by the graph comes as png, we should probably not trust her. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.120|141.101.92.120]] 09:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
: Ha, +1 Like :-) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])

I never saw image of cute cats lying to me ... I mean, the gif is STILL the preferred format for animation, mostly because it's the only one supported. Animation formats based on PNG didn't catched up, hard to say why ... on the other hand, gif animation apparently have huge number of weird extensions, judging by the number of animated images I found which don't render properly in anything EXCEPT the browser. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 10:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:The cute cat may not be lying, but since the format is used in other context -- like banner ads, then the average GIF may well be lying, also I believe there have been many security issues with GIFs and JPGs as they have been used as an attack vector for internet-bad-guys to take over your computer -- so while security issues is not specifically the topic for todays strip, then that may be worth noticing as well [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
:It is also possible to create animations with svg which is (for good reason, I like that format) ranked higher. Especially for scientific purposes it can be handy. Unfortunately is the MediaWiki software unable to show them. For example in the previous comic is an animation of the Galilean moons shown. That is an gif but someone also uploaded an [[Wikipedia:commons:File:Galilean_moon_Laplace_resonance_animation_(en_-_monochrome_-_350x217).svg|svg animation]] and I would say it does look smoother than the gif. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.215|108.162.231.215]] 14:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:The Grumpy Cat is not grumpy in real life - so cat pictures DO lie! [[User:Schmammel|Schmammel]] ([[User talk:Schmammel|talk]]) 15:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
What is the scale of the chart? Does 'top' = most trusted'? Never assume anything with xkcd. [[User:David.windsor|David.windsor]] ([[User talk:David.windsor|talk]]) 18:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Of course Randall does not really think that the file extension determines trustworthiness; the graph is tongue-in-cheek. Information can be trustworthy or untrustworthy no matter the format it's given in. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.221|108.162.216.221]] 18:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, I believe the explanation somewhat misinterprets Randall's intentions, especially when it comes to the image formats. I interpret it not as a question of loss of information due to compression but instead a more general impression of when and by whom these formats are used and, as a consequence, the trustworthiness of the information conveyed through these formats. That would explain the jpg/jpeg distinction as (in my experience though I can't provide data that support it) .jpg is nowadays the preferred compressed format in professional contexts and .jpeg looks slightly childish. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.117|141.101.80.117]] 23:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Reading more into the linked info about viruses embedded in JPEGs, it appears that the only way to receive a virus from a JPEG file would be to have ''already'' received another virus from a standard executable file, where such a virus causes the computer to execute code in a JPEG file rather than simply display it as it normally would. Since such a possibility is independent of the file type (the first virus might just as well have enabled code execution in DOC files, for instance), I've removed that bit of info. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 03:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Can anyone explain the banner near the top of xkcd.com today, 10 Dec 2013? It reads,
"Dear Wikipedia readers: if everyone reading this _showed up at my house,_ (yellow highlight)I would be like "what {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.220}}
: I believe that is a reference to the similar banner that is on top of wikipedia right now asking for donations. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
::I don't see that banner, but it appears to be a play on Wikipedia's donation "pleas" that are often posted (including now) as banners at the top of Wikipedia which suggest that (to use the lates one:) "If everyone reading this donated, our fundraiser would be done within an hour". [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 18:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a bit ambiguous whether Randall's references (for example) to jpg and gif means he doesn't trust that the images are accurate because of artifacting and stuff, or whether he's referring to jpgs and gifs that occasionally circulate with text on them as if to present information (e.g., lifehack images, or cat memes...) [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 18:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

;missing suffices

Obviously .html & .htm are so far to the left, they're off the chart. :-)
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.117|108.162.249.117]] 17:43, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Talk:292: goto

2013-11-22T17:58:51Z

108.162.219.47:

Note that the concept of ''goto being harmful'' fortunately is weaning a little.
Jumping forwards in code to the end where error handling is implemented is actually in wider use now; including many locations in the Linux kernel. [[User:Kaa-ching|Kaa-ching]] ([[User talk:Kaa-ching|talk]]) 09:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
:Actually, ''goto'' has been used quite with some frequency in low-level code in C programming over the years, so it's not altogether surprising that it is used in the Linux kernel, or any other tight bit of code. Given the "advance" of programming languages, I wouldn't say that there's been any weaning, except off of the concept of an unstructured goto in more recent languages. Admittedly, there's a schism between the low-level (that is, near-to-assembly) coders who more readily use ''goto'' because in the end, that's what the compiler reduces code branching down to, and developers using higher-level languages (that is, more highly abstracted, more removed from ''1 statement ~ 1 machine instruction'' languages) avoiding such because alternative structures abound, making ''goto'' somewhat unnecessary. There has been a bit of a dogmatic approach to teaching various languages, as in "thou shalt not use ''goto'' lest thou produce monsterous, unmaintainable code!" applied that many if not most developers observe; the humor in the panel is that this dogma is manifested in the appearance of a literal monster (a velociraptor, no less...) -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 05:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
::From an historical perspective, in the 80's, back when BASIC was the norm for developing proggies on home computers, because code blocks (begin...end, { ... }, etc.) were nonexistent, one had the option of two keywords: GOTO and GOSUB. In the case of branching beyond code that wasn't executed, many programmers abused GOTO even beyond the necessity of its use. This was a fairly hot topic in home-computing magazines at the time, again with BASIC in mind, and it appears that developers using C, [Turbo] Pascal and the like, having hangups about BASIC, emitted serious frowns at the idea of using GOTO at all. But for quick jumps that avoid having to tab forward entire blocks of code, GOTO (case notwithstanding) certainly has my support. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 16:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
:"Jumping forwards in code to the end where error handling is implemented is actually in wider use now [...]" try-catch-finally? Syntactically not a goto but the effect can be similar. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.47|108.162.219.47]] 17:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

"Velociraptors are a running joke..." Ha, I get it [[Special:Contributions/79.169.177.15|79.169.177.15]] 13:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)