explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2843: Professional Oaths

2023-10-19T15:34:30Z

108.162.221.60:

added transcript [[User:Certified_nqh|Me]][[[285: Wikipedian Protester|''citation needed'']]][[Category:Pages using the "citation needed" template]] 05:47, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

every /^H.*ic$/ would be 4 syllables if it wasn't for hydroelectric [[User:Certified_nqh|Me]][[[285: Wikipedian Protester|''citation needed'']]][[Category:Pages using the "citation needed" template]] 05:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Clearly some lone editor had a grudge against hermeneutics, putting 'study' in scare quotes like that. AzureArmageddon 07:38, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hippopotamic Oath: First, lead your horse to water. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.139|172.70.86.139]] 08:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hypobolic Oath: Do your worst! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.73|172.70.250.73]] 09:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hypochondriac Oath: First, pretend to be sick! [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

"A hippodrome is a circular arena" The classical Greek/Roman was not circular:
"One end of the ancient Greek hippodromos was semicircular, and the other end square with an extensive portico"
Maybe it would be more correct to talk about '''pairs''' of hypergolic substances?
[[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 12:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I think the hyperbaric oath is probably referring to hyperbaric chambers, which are used in medical settings, such as treating scuba divers suffering from the bends. 14:08, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I missed the Hydroponic Oath (“first, maintain nutrient concentration”), the Hypocritic Oath („first, judge others as you ''don't'' wish to be judged”), and the Hyperbolic oath (“first, take two intersecting asymptotes”). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.60|108.162.221.60]] 15:34, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2696: Precision vs Accuracy

2023-10-12T13:03:25Z

108.162.221.60:

87.532% of all statistics are just made up. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.220|172.70.178.220]] 11:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Why is 'Barack Obama is 6'1"' and 'Barack Obama has 4 legs' medium precision? It seems to give exact value, so high precision. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 11:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
: OK, I get it. 6'1" means something between 6'0.50" and 6'1.49". For height it's OK, but when counting legs, it seems like a stretch. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 12:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:: The four legs are probably considered to be only medium precise, not because of the number but because of the imprecise term "leg". While humans can walk on all four extremities, thereby using them as legs, the upper two are commonly referred to as arms. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 14:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:: (ECed by Bischoff) Plus a person's height (excluding differences to footwear and perhaps hairstyle) varies by an inch or so over the course of a day, as the spine compresses whilst mostly upright (would depend a bit upon your daily activities, but "an inch" or 2-3cm is the typical quoted value, with all the questions about precision ''as well as'' accuracy). Within an inch of such a foot-and-inch value is basically between slightly over a percentage point of drift across a continuum of ultimately non-integer values.
:: The number of legs is ''generally'' a whole number (perhaps lower-limb amputees could claim "half a leg", but is that for above the knee or below or... that's beyond my wish to define, I would leave it up to the individual amputee to finesse to their own liking) and assigning decimals, even .000(recurring), would be ''over-''precise. A definite plain figure (however inaccurate) being the happy and acceptable medium between that and the vague imprecision (never mind inaccuracy) of the kind in the cell below. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 15:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:::The medium is because it says most, and not all! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:08, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
::::It says "most cats", indeed, but the above was about Obama, singular. Though I think it's covered anyway... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.25|172.70.85.25]] 09:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
:::::All the statements about 'Barack Obama' ought to be medium precision at best, because there could be more than one Barack Obama, and it doesn't give any further contextualisation to identify, for example 'the Barack Obama who was president of the United States of America'. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.157|141.101.107.157]] 09:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
: Compare with 6'1"1/50 or 4.0000 legs, both of which would imply a higher degree of certainty.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.204|162.158.126.204]] 08:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Someone should add an explanation of the difference between precision and accuracy. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 13:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:Tried it myself. Maybe made it too compact, but I often go on too long so I tried made it as brief and snappy as I felt I could. Over to other editors to rewrite or replace. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 15:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
::That there is confusion over this was a bit of a surprise to me, about 20 years ago, when I worked (as I did for many years) in the outdoor pursuits trade. GPS units would give a 12-character grid reference (1m2), but couldn't be relied upon to that level. I would tell people they're more precise than they are accurate, until it became apparent that they were waiting for me to complete the joke they thought I'd begun, as I was so clearly contradicting myself, what with the two words meaning identical things.
::Having gone on to explain the difference between the words, the neat brevity I'd sought was lost.
::Obviously they can be used sort of interchangeably in casual conversation, but I thought the difference was well enough known that, when talking about a navigational instrument, it would be obvious what was meant.
::Nope. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 20:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:::I deal with OS Grid References a lot, in a similar context, and a number of people who give 10-digits or more (2x5, for 1m res) from devices that typically don't ever settle down to less than 3m, and provably can be tens of metres off if there happens to be a small tree or shrub nearby.
:::(In fact, the other day I was geohashing myself, and my device was insisting I was in a totally different bit of the open field, 50m or so, no matter how much I sat it down at the provably correct point and wandered away so that even ''I'' wasn't obscuring its view of the sky. But it was good enough for me, which was all I do it for, so after giving it 5 minutes I counted it as done.)
:::And, in yet another activity, the publicised information for an event included a 12ish-DP reference for the starting area (vaguer than that), but just the ''postcode'' for the HQ (a very definite building that you could bullseye on a map), in a rural area where it covered half the valley! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 22:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

How is 17.082 palindromic? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:54, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:My error, I meant an anagram! (Was going for "anagramic", and my brain clearly rebelled.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 15:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

High Precision High accuracy, Randall Munroe misses when Obama was president. Low precision Medium-rare accuracy, so do we, Randall, so do we. {{unsigned ip|172.70.130.154 }}

It is so annoying that the US uses . and , to mean the opposite of what most European countries (including Denmark where I live). So when I read this it states that Obama was president less than 3 days (70 hours) but it more than 70000 feet tall. :-) Of course I now the difference but I have to think about it more than if everyone used the same standard. Also height should use SI units as everyone should ;-) (weight given in number of cats is the new SI unit as far as I know, but don't use inches and feet ;-D ) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
:Well, as a UKian, I was happy enough. Tell you what, though, let's develop a [[927: Standards|new and mutually-acceptable standard notation]]... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.25|172.70.85.25]] 09:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
::Good idea. Lets meet on [[2562|11/12/22]] to discuss the details. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:41, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I think Randall missed an opportunity to clarify how high precision can make something inaccurate. He could have said that Obama is 6’ 1.02173” tall, which would clearly be very precise, and also clearly inaccurate, simply because of the excessive precision. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 15:22, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
:Saying 6'1.0278 would have been more in theme, there. And it would be not really more inaccurate (might even be closer to the truth...) but would convey a false precision.
:Interstingly, when Andrew Waugh measured Mount Everest (before it was so named) he got a diffraction-adjusted figure of 29,000 feet, but decided to announced that it was 29,002 so that it didn't just like a rough figure rounded to the nearest hundred or even thousand feet. This made him the first person to put two feet on the top of Everest!
:(...The actual error was not bad, given his measurements had to be made from hundreds of miles away. Current official measurements with on-the-spot modern GPS say 29,031.7 feet (for the snow-peak, which is all that Waugh could mention), after 170ish years of (by some estimates, but contested) about a foot of extra height per decade through the continuing techtonic raising of the Himalaya. And any unknown differences in snow-depth. Certainly it was within tens of feet, i.e. a dozen or so metres. With a bit of an error-bar, but not really that big when you consider it...)
: So, arguably, that case was a deliberately false accuracy to help convey the true precision. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.3|172.70.90.3]] 16:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
:I don't get your point? Unless you just made up everything after the decimal point: How would it be less acurate? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:37, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
::The only thing I can imagine is, that these kinds of numbers happen due to conversions. E.g. 6ft1in would be 185.42cm (according to the first calculator I found), but it is unlikely that 6ft1in was as precise as a cm-value with 2 digits after the decimal point would be. And in the other direction 185cm (which would be the usual precision of a height in m or cm - while 186cm could still be correct as it would be 6ft1in in the "usual precision") would calculate as 6ft and 0.83in --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:18, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
::If Obama's height is provided with this much precision, you can assume that the numbers are made up. 0.0278 inches are - in real measure units ;-) - 0.07mm. That's the diameter of a strain of hair. Nobody's height gets measured to that kind of precision. [[User:Kimmerin|Kimmerin]] ([[User talk:Kimmerin|talk]]) 08:10, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure the current explanation's claim that 'being too precise usually decreases accuracy' is, er, accurate (or perhaps it's just imprecise). It might be reasonable to claim that increasing precision tends to decrease accuracy relative to the level of precision, but not so much in absolute terms, or even necessarily relative to the size of the thing being measured.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.156|141.101.107.156]] 09:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
:I think it's badly phrased. The assumed accuracy can be degraded and disadvantageous.
:For example, to use someone's figures from just above, looking for an individual with a height of 185.42cm might seem to rule out the one that you find is 185.57cm tall, though they are indeed the one initially measured/estimated at 6'1" and would definitely be within an inch or so in this latest attempt to match them.
:An old phrase that I grew up with is "don't try to be accurate over inaccurate details" (courtesy of a chemistry teacher, where we frequently used mmol-like measurements in analyses like titrations). The number of articles that say "the probe flew past the asteroid at a distance of about 20 miles (32.187 kilometres) ...", where clearly the accuracy is misleading, especially if the conversion ends up being back-converted by someone else with no idea ("...which is 20.0000746 miles"), and may have come from an ''original'' figure actually deliberately pegged at 35km (21.748 miles!), within a few metres or less.
:Really, you should be taking the level of precision/accuracy inherent in the initial values, preserving the awkward fractions throughout the intermediate steps ''and'' converting the inherent ranges by the same process then clearly presenting the final figure to no more exactitude than the initial smudge of "all actual values that would be given by this type of input value", and maybe less. The write-up might be then be realistically "...of around 21¾ miles (35km)", if using a better primary source, or "20 miles (~30km)" in a case of the detail already being likely lost by intermediate chinese-whispers.
:But this is what confuses people. And how even those that are not confused can confuse others... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.10|172.70.86.10]] 12:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
::It gets even better when different units also use different 0s. So for a persons height we can assume that as 0ft0in and 0cm is the same, 185cm is one order of magnitude more precise than 6ft1in, as it is 3 significant digits vs 2 at the same height. However a persons body temperature in 38°C with 2 significant digits and 311K with 3 is the same level of precision and only .15°C (Or .15K) apart, while 100°F (37.77...°C) is also very close but a bit more precise. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 14:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
:::One of many reasons that Celsius and Fahrenheit are not considered as true units - their connection to kelvins is affine, not linear. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.75|172.71.142.75]] 05:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
::::Acknowledging that Celsius degrees equal Kelvin degrees, which remains a useful equivalence, even though degrees Celsius does not equal degrees Kelvin. (Ditto with Fahrenheit and Rankine.)
::::...and I'm partial to Delisle, anyway. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.134|172.70.162.134]] 11:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I was expecting maybe a reference to Schrödinger's President when I first read the comic - but later realized that this could have been misconstrued as a threat. Oops!

As far as I recall, isn't the transcript supposed to avoid tables? I understand blind people with text reading programs use the transcripts to follow this comic, and thus it should avoid visual elements wherever possible? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
:Generally, yes, though some useful additional description went in before I might have 'flattened' the description again, and there are ther extant table-transcripts
:Best practice would be to not rely on screen-readers to say nice informative things about tabulation and instead say it all explicitly (like they can't be relied on parsing MathML stuff), but there's good manual description and bad, too. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.25|172.70.85.25]] 13:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

In the fewer-legs-than-your-cat category, any interest in adding a link to the "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?" riddle often attributed to Lincoln? The best link I found is https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/11/15/legs/ which makes it clear the riddle was already in circulation by 1825, well before Lincoln's usage. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.163|108.162.246.163]] 05:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

If you only look at the squares that mention cats, the resulting shape resembles a basic glider from Conway's Game of Life. I don't know how much this has to do with the comic but it feels like the sort of nerd shit that is worth mentioning. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.60|108.162.221.60]] 13:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

2831: xkcd Phone Flip

2023-09-21T14:41:57Z

108.162.221.60: no citations for the fact that phones do not have emotions (yet)

{{comic
| number = 2831
| date = September 20, 2023
| title = xkcd Phone Flip
| image = xkcd_phone_flip_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x458px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Theranos partnership: Sorry, we know, but we signed the contract back before all the stuff and the lawyers say we can't back out, so just try to keep your finger away from the bottom of the phone.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by THE BOT FORTOLD BY THE FORTUNETELLER PROPHECY - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon. Ed: Changed 00000002 times.}}
This is the 9th in the ongoing [[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd Phone]] series in which Randall explains his new joke phone designs with many strange and useless features. It is a reference to the somewhat recent {{w|Galaxy Z}} series, but instead of folding in half, it folds into the more complex and much less usable shape of a typical {{w|paper fortune teller}}. The product's slogan suggests that this was not an intended feature, which would be incredibly difficult to create accidentally without causing the phone to become nonfunctional. It's therefore possible that this phone was designed by [[:Category:Beret Guy's Business|Beret Guy's company]], which has in the past [[1493: Meeting|trademarked seemingly normal phrases]] and [[1293: Job Interview|done impossible things with electronics]].

The name Phone Flip is a play on the term {{w|Flip Phone}}, which has refered to older cellphones with a {{w|Clamshell design|basic hinged construction}}, but {{w|Samsung}} has released a line of {{w|smartphones}} under the Galaxy Z range given the name 'Flip' (or 'Fold') which use a flexible display across the hinge. Randall's version takes this complexity up a notch with a currently impractical varifolded origami design.

From the top, left column first:

; Exfoliating Screen
: A term commonly found on lotions and facial products, "exfoliating" means removing dead skin cells from the surface of the skin, in order to improve its appearance. This could mean that it will exfoliate when pressed to the skin. However, this would probably require a mildly abrasive and/or adhesive screen texture or coating, which are usually not desirable qualities of a touchscreen.{{Citation needed}} A different reading is that the screen itself exfoliates, i.e. slowly disintegrates. Unless the phone is an organism able to regrow exfoliated surfaces, this will eventually lead to the screen's disappearance, not an improvement of its appearance.

; Orthotic shape for arch support
: {{w|Orthotics}} are devices used to reduce stress on the body. "Arch support" is a specific term referring to padded inserts designed to fit to the contour of a person's foot and provide support for the arch of the foot, a raised area between the ball in front and the heel in back. Fitting this space requires either a curved shape or one that's thicker in the center, which would make a phone less straightforward (pun not intended) to use. Additionally, the materials used in a phone are not suitable for orthotic usage and doing so anyway could worsen any issues and damage the phone from the stress of the person's weight upon it.

; Single Big Pixel
: Typical phone displays use many small {{w|pixels}}, each with relatively few display states. For instance, each pixel can show a uniform color. Some displays use smaller numbers of more complicated picture elements (e.g., each element could show a letter, like a {{w|split-flap display}}, or a {{w|nixie tube}}). To use one pixel means that element needs a different display state for every image the phone can show (like a {{w|carousel slide projector}} or {{w|gobo (lighting)|gobo}}).

; Ready to eat
: A typical sales pitch for {{w|convenience foods}} denoting that no time must be spent preparing the product for safe consumption, in contrast to other such meals where ingredients would need to be combined and/or cooked in some fashion. It is unknown how a phone could be produced in such a way as to be edible. The display might use {{w|sugar glass}}.

; Hypoimmunogenic
: Meaning less able to produce an immune response - so perhaps useful in that people do not want their phone to cause an immune response in their body, however cell phones typically cause no immune response, so this is not generally an issue. This is probably related to items that are marketed as hypoallergenic, less likely to cause an allergic reaction.

; Up to 50% more
: A play on the words "Up to 50% more <blank>. Although considering that there is nothing in the blank, this statement is useless. See [[870: Advertising]].

; Full-spectrum backlight optimized for plant growth
: {{w|Full-spectrum lights}} and backlights are typically used to increase {{w|color rendering}} accuracy, especially important in photography, art, and printing. It typically refers to the part of the spectrum people can see. Plants respond to some wavelengths outside our visual spectrum (e.g., UVA), and are less influenced by some portions of the visual spectrum (e.g. green, hence mostly reflecting such light). A backlight optimized for plant growth would not provide a very natural appearance to our eyes and typically appear pink. The screen backlight is unlikely to be used for growing plants.

; Long-lasting main sequence battery
: Perhaps referring to a "{{w|main sequence}}" star (Dwarf stars, like the {{w|sun}}, where main energy generation is hydrogen fusion). Such stars spend a long time in this phase of evolution. This might also explain SPF 15 and full-spectrum backlight. Stars do last a long time compared to most cell phone batteries.{{Citation needed}}

; Break Glass to Access Apps
: A play on how fire alarms and extinguishers are protected by glass casings in most places, although in this case it is not that helpful. Unusual things behind glass is also mentioned in [[1634: In Case of Emergency]].

Right hand column

; Buy one get one
: A play on typical retail sales advertised as "Buy one get one ____", where one buys one item at full price and gets another of that item either for free or at a reduced price. Since no discount has been mentioned, it would imply that you can get two at full price or perhaps simply that if you buy a phone, you receive the phone; this is expected upon almost all purchases and is {{w|Tautology (logic)|tautological}} in nature.

; Bending phone activates chemical flashlight
: This feature parallels a {{w|glow stick}}, which is also activated by bending the stick; this breaks an inner capsule causing chemicals to mix and produce light. However, doing this with a phone likely to cause physical or chemical damage and additionally only works once, which is not very useful for a phone flashlight that one typically uses as a tool throughout the phone's lifetime.

; SPF 15 Coating protects your face from websites
: Sun protection factor (SPF) is a rating used to compare the protection provided by sun screens. Some people find some web sites excessively bright, colorful or garish, making them hard to read, or causing eye strain. This extends that to imply that some sites are so bright that they might cause {{w|sunburn}}. In reality, some sites, browsers, or plugins provide a {{w|night mode}}, for those who have problems with excess brightness. (See also full spectrum, and main sequence battery.)
: Alternatively, SPF in this context might be a novel term for, for example, ''site'' protection factor, or ''socials'' protection factor, and be a method for protecting you from viewing potentially harmful content encountered on the internet.

; Iatrogenic construction
: 'Iatrogenic' means 'physician caused', and usually refers to illnesses which are caused or worsened by medical malpractice. This may imply that the phone was made ''by'' doctors, which may align with the statement given in the title text.

; All-vinyl data storage for maximum fidelity
: This is a reference to the hipster maxim that vinyl records provide high fidelity music. And while {{w|vinyl data}} storage does exist, it's profoundly outdated and was never widely adopted. The relevant formats had several issues, including (relevantly) wear issues that lead to fidelity problems after repeated reads.

; Locks in moisture
: Good for cosmetics perhaps, generally bad for a cell phone.

; National Weather Service partnership - phone is afraid of thunder
: Not a useful feature, as normal phones do not have emotions (yet){{Citation needed}}. How this fear manifests is also unexplained. It may turn off, or it may scream like the original xkcd phone did when in free fall.

; One-click ''ruina montium''
: ''{{w|Ruina montium}}'' ('mountain destroyer') was a now-lost mining technique used by the ancient Romans, thought to involve a form of hydrostatic drilling. It is not clear how this could be applied by a smartphone, let alone as a one-click operation.

; Free Refills
: Good for restaurant drinks, not typical for cell phones. Could mean no cost refueling (e.g., {{w|fuel cell}} power), or recharging or {{w|battery swapping}}.

The title text references the failed company {{w|Theranos}} that notably failed to live up to its ambitious promise to diagnose many health issues from a single drop of blood. Due to legal agreements, and subsequent design choices already built in, the bottom of the phone ''will'' collect a drop of blood, unless you're particularly careful.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A rectangular phone with a touch screen, a small dark camera section at the top of the screen, and a charging port at the bottom of the phone is shown on the right. Lines on the left side of the phone connect to feature descriptions.]
* Exfoliating screen
* Orthotic shape for arch support
* Single big pixel
* Ready to eat
* Hypoimmunogenic
* Up to 50% more
* Full-spectrum backlight optimized for plant growth
* Long-lasting main sequence battery
* Break glass to access apps

:[Two phones folded in the shape of a 'paper fortune teller' are stacked on top of each other on the right, also with feature lines.]
* Buy one get one
* Bending phone activates chemical flashlight
* SPF 15 coating protects your face from websites
* Iatrogenic construction
* All-vinyl data storage for maximum fidelity
* Locks in moisture
* National Weather Service partnership: phone is afraid of thunder
* One-click ''ruina montium''
* Free refills

:[Text below the phone:]
:Introducing
:'''The xkcd Phone Flip'''
:''We actually didn't mean for it to do this''™

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:xkcd Phones]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|xkcd Phones]]

1542: Scheduling Conflict

2015-07-01T05:25:49Z

108.162.221.60:

{{comic
| number = 1542
| date = June 24, 2015
| title = Scheduling Conflict
| image = scheduling_conflict.png
| titletext = Neither a spokesperson for the organization nor the current world champion could be reached for comment.
}}

==Explanation==
There are two humorous features in this comic:
:a pun formed by {{w|syntactic ambiguity}}; and
:the {{w|farce}} of a major national event that is by nature self-defeating.

The comic shows a newspaper with a large headline:
:National Scheduling Conflict
:'''Championships canceled'''
Many readers naturally see a phrase break between the two lines, so that it means "there has been a scheduling conflict on a national scale, which has caused championships to be cancelled" (what the conflicts are, and which championships have been cancelled, is not made clear).

However, the correct interpretation is implied by the picture of an empty lectern under a banner with the text NSCC 2015. The headline should be read like this:
:National Scheduling Conflict Championships (NSCC)
:canceled

This comic thus envisions a "National Scheduling Conflict Championship" (NSCC), presumably as the culmination of some larger scheduling-conflict competition. It is unclear if the goal of the event is to have a scheduling conflict and miss it, or if there are actual challenges at the event, but this year's event has been canceled, most likely due to scheduling conflicts. Whether it is the contestants that miss the event, as it's their nature to always have a scheduling conflict, or if it is the organizers that have an issue is untold. The question is whether the event's cancellation is a success in itself or just a predictable failure of such an event.

The comic could also refer to the very common political ploy of using a "scheduling conflict" as an excuse to miss an event where the politician expects to be challenged or questioned on an issue he wishes to avoid. This is so frequent that it has become a cliché in American politics.

The abbreviation NSCC is related to many other national sports organizations like {{w|NFL}} and {{w|NBA}}. (The most common use of the NSCC abbreviation on-line seems to be for the {{w|Nova Scotia Community College}}).

The title text mentions that is was impossible to reach either a spokesperson for the organization (NSCC) or last year's world-champ (winner of the NSCC) for a comment. Thus continuing the problem with schedules for people involved in this type of championship. The world-champion could be assumed to be able to comment in this national championship (probably the American championship given that [[Randall]] is American), since the paper is looking for a comment on the national championship. But this proves that at least a world champion was crowned last year, so this type of competition is not always canceled.

It is not a necessity for a spokesperson for a sports organization to be good at the sport in question. However it will often be former competitors within the sport or at least people with interest in this kind of activity that takes an interest in such an organization, thus making it likely that they would also be good (or like to think they are good) at achieving scheduling conflicts.

A similar type of competition was mentioned earlier in [[1466: Phone Checking]] in which it was difficult to load the web page with the result of the competition because it was overloaded by all those compulsive phone-checkers that have an interest in such a contest. They continually try to reload the home page of the CPCC (i.e. compulsive phone-checking championship) making the web page go down.

==Transcript==
:[Picture showing a newspaper with a big headline over a picture. In the picture there is a banner over an empty lectern with a microphone. Only the headline and the text on the banner in the picture is readable. All other text in the newspaper is just lines.]
:National Scheduling Conflict
:'''Championships canceled'''
:Banner text: NSCC 2015

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1356: Orbital Mechanics

2014-04-16T06:26:55Z

108.162.221.60:

I just put in a first attempt at the explanation. Could do with links to pages regarding KSP, etc, etc. (Or rewrite entirely how it ought to be done, of course.) Also, if anyone knows ''for sure'' that "aim nose at destination, fire retros", as seen in the film Gravity, would or would not give the desired effect, that'd be useful to clarify or dismiss. From my own experience with the Kerbals, it wouldn't (never mind all the other broad assumptions made in that otherwise spectacular film  ), but KSP ''also'' rather fudges away the N-body problem, artificially. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.209|141.101.88.209]] 05:38, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

:You are correct that "aim nose, fire retros" doesn't work in reality. KSP fudges the n-body problem by putting the planets and moons on tracks, and then changing you into a different 2-body problem when you cross into a smaller {{w|hill sphere}} than the one you were in. The maneuver node system does a little bit of n-body work when you get a maneuver close to another body, but you'll notice that when the ship actually crosses into the other hill sphere the trajectory for the maneuver goes weird. It's a rather clever optimization for a simulator like KSP. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 06:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I really wish there was a downwards curve for "I saw Armageddon". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.60|108.162.221.60]] 06:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

1349: Shouldn't Be Hard

2014-03-31T04:40:47Z

108.162.221.60: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 1349
| date = March 31, 2014
| title = Shouldn't Be Hard
| image = shouldnt_be_hard.png
| titletext = (six hours later) ARGH. How are these stupid microchips so durable?! All I want is to undo a massive industrial process with household tools!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}

==Transcript==
[Cueball looking at a laptop screen
]

Cueball: What I'm trying to do is really simple.

Cueball: It shouldn't be hard.

Offscreen: All computers are just carefully organized sand. Everything is hard until someone makes it easy.

[Cueball sits back and pauses.]

[Cueball picks up the laptop.]

Cueball: Maybe I should turn this one back to sand.

Offscreen: I'll find a blowtorch.

{{comic discussion}}

1349: Shouldn't Be Hard

2014-03-31T04:39:39Z

108.162.221.60:

{{comic
| number = 1349
| date = March 31, 2014
| title = Shouldn't Be Hard
| image = shouldnt_be_hard.png
| titletext = (six hours later) ARGH. How are these stupid microchips so durable?! All I want is to undo a massive industrial process with household tools!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}

==Transcript==
[Cueball looking at a laptop screen
]

Cueball: What I'm trying to do is really simple.

Cueball: It shouldn't be hard.
Offscreen: All computers are just carefully organized sand. Everything is hard until someone makes it easy.

[Cueball sits back and pauses.]

[Cueball picks up the laptop.]

Cueball: Maybe I should turn this one back to sand.

Offscreen: I'll find a blowtorch.

{{comic discussion}}