explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2880: Sheet Bend

2024-01-13T19:46:30Z

108.162.245.82:

This comic contained material familiar to a hobby engineer that was cast critically and derogatorily (e.g. “sheety” bend) throughout the explanation. I edited a lot of it. I’ve seen this happen repeatedly in other explanations. I don’t edit most of them. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.155|172.71.150.155]] 18:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Why is this called a "sheet" bend? [[User:SystemParadox|SystemParadox]] ([[User talk:SystemParadox|talk]]) 21:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:I don't know the full answer but it's a sailing thing: the 'sheet' is the rope you pull in or let out to control the position of the sail. I guess bend describes the category of knot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.48|172.70.90.48]] 21:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::NO NO NO. The sheet is the sail. [[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 21:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:::It is the rope - {{w|Sheet (sailing)}}. "In sailing, a sheet is a line (rope, cable or chain) used to control the movable corner(s) (clews) of a sail." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.5|172.71.242.5]] 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::::Huh. Dueling Wikipedia articles. The Sheet_bend article has a definition section that says the term "sheet bend" derives from its use bending ropes to sails (sheets). But the Sheet_(sailing) article says a sheet is a line used to control the movable corner(s) of a sail. [[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 23:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::The sheet bend is named for its ability to to secure a sail, or sheet. You fold over the corner of the sail and that's one of your "ropes". The sheet bend is generally used as a knot for tying a large, inflexible rope (or rope-like object) to a smaller, more flexible rope.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.22|172.69.70.22]] 22:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
::I would take the Ashley Book of Knots as authoritative. Sheet Bend is the first knot in the book, and is always (in modern terms) rope-to-rope, not to sail. It is one of the basic knots. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashley_Book_of_Knots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheet_bend
::{{unsigned|PRR|04:04, 13 January 2024}} 
:I added a link to the wikipedia entry, it explains the name. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:Presumably the "different loads" title text is a pun between electrical load and mechanical stress on the knot? [[User:Jim-at-home|Jim-at-home]] ([[User talk:Jim-at-home|talk]]) 21:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

A sail is never, and was never, properly called a "sheet", since at least the 13th century. The Wikipedia explanation of the name is misleading. According to https://www.etymonline.com/word/sheet, it's "shortened from Old English sceatline "sheet-line," from sceata "lower part of sail," originally "piece of cloth," from same Proto-Germanic source as sheet (n.1)." [[User:Jlearman|Jlearman]] ([[User talk:Jlearman|talk]]) 17:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
: When i took a sailing class as a kid they used the word “sheet”, I think it was the lines connected to the sails used for adjusting them? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 19:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

“silver being joined to silver and gold being joined to gold within the insulating white cable” is not the conventional way to join cables.
Unless you are joining one cable to itself (like a Möbius strip), you have ''two'' cables with insulation.
And usually you use non-cursed connectors, where you first remove the insulation at the end of the cable and then crimp or solder the conductors to metal parts of the connector; or solder the conductors and then add a different type of insulation for protection; or use screw terminals;...
Only with insulation displacement connectors you keep using all the insulation of the two cables.
And finally, conductors are usually copper ''or'' aluminum, and very rarely silver ''and'' gold. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.141|162.158.94.141]] 08:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:I think the gold and silver is just color coded for the reader. Not that they are meant to indicate that the conductors are made from this material. Apart from that you comment sounds like you know what you are talking about. So please improve the explanation if you can. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay I looked at the wikipedia article and the knot depicted in the comic looks like a right handed one. I still don't know why it's called right handed, or why the left handed one is insecure.[[Special:Contributions/198.41.236.207|198.41.236.207]] 11:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

A note I nearly added in the bit about short-circuits (or, as I added, 'un'circuiting) is that the electrical behaviour of the knot is different according to which 'end' slips. If the left-side cable 'slips through' enough, then its gold and silver bits of sheath could contact (would short-circuit any current driven at that side). If the right-side cable slips out, it is in no danger of doing so for a right-driven current (it would just disconnect). That ignores the cross-talking that could occur (on one conducting line at a time, so may not matter if there's no external ground-return element, except as far as not being a proper connection any more), or ''both'' ends slipping (where one of the LHS sheaths ''might'' shuffle into a position to bridge the two RHS sheaths). But, as tied, the LHS silver (being bent in and out of the page around its crossing counterpart wire) seems unlikely to be pressed against both gold and silver, should it trivially untwine/slip through. Actual studies with actual knots might be useful. I thought I had a spare length of unterminated Cat5, nearby, but apparently (k)not... that, with some coloured permanent marker-pen marks made upon it, would probably have made a decent analogue for visual analysis of failure conditions. Maybe I'll de-plug an old cable (I've got a number of damaged USB cables I could chop, but their being thinner would change the scale and dynamics of the knot, meaning I might as well just use a scrap of twisted-pair internally-sheathed strands). – But I thought you'd like my mind's-eye analysis of the knot behaviour, before I get around to trying anything practical to this end. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.7|141.101.99.7]] 17:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC) (<- ex Cub-/Boy-/Venture-Scout, but never got any Knot ''Un''tying badge... that brief stint with escapology aside... ;) )

Talk:2412: 1/100,000th Scale World

2021-01-16T09:20:30Z

108.162.245.82:

Sprites?

[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.44|172.68.174.44]] 17:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like there is a form of electrical discharge that can occur above thunderstorms called a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_(lightning) Sprite]

It actually took me a second to realise this was a new comic, I thought Randal just added different jokes to Wednesday's for some reason. Given the title text, I wonder what projection Randall would use for this scale model... I imagine a projection similar to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_the_Earth#Map_projection Build the Earth's modified Airocean] would work for something like this.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.85|172.69.35.85]] 17:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Just for reference and to be checked, I paste here the maths to compute that the panel spans 9 degrees of a great circle:
<pre>
> 10/1e3*1e5/6371*180/pi
[1] 8.993216
</pre>
--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 19:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

The ISS game seems very contradictory to the other rules in this and the previous comic. Given that the ISS would be only about 1 mm wide, hitting it with a nerf dart would almost certainly destroy it. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 19:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
:The world is at scale, but people and the artifacts they create don't seem to be. In particular, the wine glasses are normal size relative to the people. So the ISS may be life size, and hitting it with a dart should be trivial. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 06:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
:Th rules in the other comic along with this one seem entirely for visitor safety rather than preserving anything in the model. There's warnings about standing on cities with "pointy towers" or digging near Yellowstone, implying you're allowed to stand in other cities and dig elsewhere, which would obviously have huge effects on the model.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.60|108.162.215.60]] 23:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Is this a duplicate? Looks the same as [[2411: 1/10,000th Scale World]]. [[User:PvOberstein|PvOberstein]] ([[User talk:PvOberstein|talk]]) 20:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
:Look better, the scale is different. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.47|172.68.245.47]] 20:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Correct me if im wrong but if you ran fast enough, could you go into orbit around earth? [[User:Donthaveusername|Donthaveusername]] ([[User talk:Donthaveusername|talk]]) 20:56, 15 January 2\021 (UTC) 
:This "What If" might help: [https://what-if.xkcd.com/68/ Little Planet] ''(also, I closed your /span tag (not sure why it's there, just following etiquette/not editing your post, while trying to fix a superfluous code-block /div that the wiki was inserting)'' [[User:Elvenivle|Elvenivle]] ([[User talk:Elvenivle|talk]]) 22:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

1:1,000,000 scale next? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.39|162.158.74.39]] 23:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
:Kind of like the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0 Powers of Ten] short film. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 06:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

If visitors in the previous comic get hypoxia unless they crouch regularly, then shouldn't visitors in this comic get hypoxia unless they lie down regularly? However hypoxia would likely negate the need for an intoxicating gas (although the visitors wouldn't be able to enjoy the apparent curvature for long before going unconscious).[[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.220|162.158.186.220]] 00:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

The iss nerf point winning seems to be a reference to the [https://spaceinvaders.fandom.com/wiki/UFO space invaders UFO]

I can't get my head around 5oz as a volume, with wine glasses ranging from petite flutes to huge volumes for 'tasting' and/or 'binging' (depending on how much you fill it, and how much air you (don't) leave for it to 'breathe' into). Fluid ounces, I presume, but they mean little to me as everyday practical alternatives to the litre/millilitre and the US often doesn't even use the same measure amounts even when they nominally share a name with imperial so going to look at my own measuring jug probably would mislead me by a significant fraction. Yes, I could look it up, but it's annoying me that I would have to.
(Also, that glass she's putting icecaps in looks wine-glassy. Either you're icing wine, or using the wrong kind of glass for whisky/whatever.)[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.122|141.101.105.122]] 04:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

The area from the previous comic is visible near mount Everest. It appears to be an exact copy, with the anvil could and ocean matching perfectly.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 09:20, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2411: 1/10,000th Scale World

2021-01-15T00:36:20Z

108.162.245.82:

This sounds like a cool theme for a game jam. [[User:Bwisey|Bwisey]] ([[User talk:Bwisey|talk]]) 07:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The comment about airplanes being close to the speed of a bullet in the explanation wouldn't be relevant due to the scale, so they wouldn't be fast compared to the scale of the people here, and with some rough calculations, I think it would take multiple seconds to pass through the thickness of a human body, so if the people were normal properties and the plane moving at its speed being proportional to its scale (thus making its speed seem normal from the perspective of someone shrunk down and on the plane looking at the rate at which it travels compared to its own length or looking at the model surroundings rather than the giant person), it shouldn't cause significant injury. Granted, as such speeds it wouldn't be able to fly, but the same sort of concerns apply to a lot else here, like the thundercloud and the rate the atmosphere gets thinner at altitude.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.207|162.158.74.207]] 07:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

"Also, airplane speed very similar to the speed at which a bullet is fired" - That is true for real world aircraft; it is not at all given for the 1/10000th scale world. (It depends on if time is scaled or just spatial dimensions) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.84|162.158.134.84]] 09:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The rant about private vs public research seems a tad coat-racky. [[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 12:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
: I agree, so I removed it. There's no indication that Randall meant anything more by it than the usually fun activity of playing with balloons would be harmful if done to weather balloons. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 13:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Do disasters in the model have consequences in the real Earth, like in the first row of xkcd #1515? Not being allowed to create megatsunamis or trigger the Yellowstone Supervolcano would support this, but being allowed to step on cities that do not have especially pointy towers would oppose it.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.220|162.158.186.220]] 14:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

This, ladies, gents, and variations thereupon, is the ''xkcd'' I know and love. [[User:Lightcaller|Lightcaller]] ([[User talk:Lightcaller|talk]]) 14:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I would really like this on a poster. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.57.33|172.68.57.33]] 16:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
:That'd be good. In large format. (Though, if it's a 10,000:1 scale printing I see a couple of problems.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.19|141.101.99.19]] 21:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Wouldn't an airplane be to the people about twice the speed of a garden snail? [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]])

: I thought comparisons of scale were an oft-revisited theme for xkcd, so was disappointed not to find a category for them; though I tried to list some of them, I didn't find nearly as many of them as I thought there ought to be. Only just noticed the reference in discussion here to 1515, which kind of supports my suspicion that there are lots I didn't find. --[[User:Pi one|Pi one]] ([[User talk:Pi one|talk]]) 17:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I like how the curvature of the world is drawn to scale as well. IE: imperceptibly curved. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.182|108.162.216.182]] 17:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Probably not actually related to the comic, but the notes in the explanation about how "earth on this scale would be the size of an asteroid" made me think of the Little Prince, which Randall is known to be fond of. -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.85|162.158.74.85]] 18:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

For comparison the Queen's Museum model of NY City is at a scale of 1:1,200. 1:10,000 maps of many areas are available, so you could lay out a county or so in your living room. Not as good as a model but still interesting.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.121|173.245.54.121]] 22:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
: As recently added to the explanation, but in case anyone missed it and yet would finds it of interest: http://www.mapascotland.org/ [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.85|162.158.155.85]] 22:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

This reminds me of the planet Dwarf Terrace-9 from Rick and Morty. Possible reference? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.19|173.245.54.19]] 23:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

A fun bit of trivia I noticed is that the Kármán line (the "edge of spaaaace") would be a little below the height of a typical utility pole (10.67 m).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 00:36, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2410: Apple Growers

2021-01-12T19:41:10Z

108.162.245.82: Deletion of stuff

I think this is the first strip to refer to Trump by name. Can anyone confirm that? [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 05:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

: Negatory. [[2137: Text Entry]] is one I remember. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.173|172.69.63.173]] 06:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::The earliest I'm aware of is [[980: Money]] from 2011 (so before he'd held elective office). It's almost unfindable in the giant image. Trump is mentioned in the lower right corner of the "Billionaires" box, inside the very large "Billions" section. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.64|108.162.237.64]] 06:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::: And, of course, [[2383: Electoral Precedent 2020]].
:I was sufficiently interested in this question to actually look it up with the search function. Turns out the transcripts are actually useful for something!
:*[[980: Money]] is the only one from before Trump was elected President
:*[[1836: Okeanos]] (mentioned as "Trump" only) is the first after the election - May 12, 2017, nearly six months after it
:*[[1939: 2016 Election Map]] ("Trump" only)
:*[[2126: Google Trends Maps]]
:*[[2137: Text Entry]]
:*[[2220: Imagine Going Back in Time]] ("Trump" only)
:*[[2383: Electoral Precedent 2020]] ("Trump" only)
:*[[2399: 2020 Election Map]] ("Trump" only)
:As far as I can tell, these are the only nine comics (inclusive of this one) that use the name "Trump", and there are only four occurrences of "Donald Trump", including this. So it's not unknown, but Randall does seem to be avoiding it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.238|108.162.237.238]] 06:56, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Is it really a good idea to take the lack of masks on the spokesfolks as evidence of their mental state? It seems to me that Randall often draws characters without masks when they're not directly topical, even in these days of Covid precautions, and the reporters aren't wearing masks either. It's unlikely that either group is made up entirely of family members who share the same residence [citation needed], so I would count it more likely that they can all be assumed to be masked in the same way that they can be assumed to have eyes and mouths despite lack of any visual indicators of such. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.216|108.162.245.216]] 07:48, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:Do remember that they also has no close on, so unless the masks are important for the topic, then you can assume they have masks just as you can assume they have clothe on. (Or if you like, you can assume Megan and Ponytail doesn't, as I always do :-p ) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::Specifically they don't have faces so... rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.42|162.158.155.42]] 10:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the state is Washington. Washington's pretty well known for apples, and the Cosmic Crisp variety mentioned in the title text was developed by researchers at Washington State University. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.40|108.162.245.40]] 08:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

According to a quick Wikipedia search, the title text's "we have SO MUCH to say" could be a reference to the fact that promotion for cosmic crisp was apparently the largest campaign in apple industry history. If anyone has the time to check and confirm that, we should add it to the explanation. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:Right now, "Pink Lady" is splurging an ad (basically a 'facetime filter'-type graphics enhanced thing) over here in the UK. Though the classic from my youth was the ¿Golden Delicious? brand doing a Bugsy Mallone-spoof ("le Crunch Bunch"). But I don't follow apple brands (there's a cooking-apple tree in a garden, that I pick from, been there 40-50 years - but now no idea what cultivar it is, etc) and I'm not particularly exposed to US news on apples, only its politics. Just so you know. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.138|162.158.155.138]] 08:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Does anybody agree that "Uh, apples are great. Best fruit. Everyone should buy 1,000 of them" is a reference to Trump-style way of talking in speeches? [[User:Reisbein|Reisbein]] ([[User talk:Reisbein|talk]]) 08:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:Yes already added this to the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

May I question that "Nothing in modern American history resembles this"? Possibly nothing in the national Capitol's modern history resembles this precisely, but the Capitol in Michigan was invaded last May, Tennessee had an incident of this kind in 2001 while trying to debate state income tax, and there was that thing at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, in Oregon. And there was Black rioting in Washington and in most other places and machine guns at the Capitol when Dr Martin Luther King was murdered, does that count as modern? And President Reagan was shot in Washington. Presidents and the White House are shot at all the time. The President's personal militia attacking other branches of the government is less usual, or is it? Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.82|141.101.107.82]] 12:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:In the sense of '' an attempt to overturn fair election results and prevent the orderly transition of power by attacking the Capitol,'' yes. It's not the "important buildings were attacked/threatened" part, it's the context and meaning behind the actions that's unprecedented. The incident was an unprecedented attack on democracy—it has been described by some as ''an attempted coup d'état in the United States'', and a lot of congressmen and House members, plus the Vice President were close to being seriously harmed/killed during the incident. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 14:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::: I take issue both with your description, Herobrine, and the fact that in some circles, this wasn't looked at as a coup attempt at all, but as an attempt to PROTECT democracy from treasonous congressmen and house members. But I do have a question for you. Exactly what words did the president use in his speech on January 6 to "incite a riot"? Please use direct quotes in your answer.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::::Went through the transcript of the speech and noted that I misunderstood one section that my statement was based on when I read it two days ago. Whether he was responsible for inciting the event is debatable, but since there is no definite statement in the transcript, I have removed the section from my comment and the explanation. As for the coup attempt part, give me a sec and I'll reply later. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 14:41, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::::Changed to "described by some as (lawmakers, media, etc.)" to avoid misunderstanding. But honestly, there is no way that this was an attempt to protect democracy—they were trying to overturn a fair election and prevent the orderly transition of power. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 14:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::The election results are disputed, and around 75% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats are willing to start a civil war over it. In what way can this be considered a fair election if all audits of the voter registration are blocked?[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:55, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::Claims of election fraud have been rejected as totally meritless by numerous state and federal judges, state and local election officials, governors, the Justice and Homeland Security departments, and the Electoral College. I do not see how this the election was unfair. As for the "results are disputed" part, that is primarily the result of the president's efforts to overturn the results of the election and unwillingness to concede and admit his loss. Also, please reply with your quotes and sources, thanks. (Will reply again in a few hours, busy now) [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 15:10, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::::People who do not trust the government to run a fair election- are not going to trust ''numerous state and federal judges, state and local election officials, governors, the Justice and Homeland Security departments and the Electoral College'', or for that matter ''the president'' to self-audit. These are all GOVERNMENT officials, and we're talking about people who have a profound distrust of the government. Why would you think ANY of those people can be trusted to tell the truth? All you've proven is that you are incapable of fairly looking at people who disagree with you. This isn't about evidence- because neither side has actually presented any believable evidence. The government has yet to produce an audit of voter registration changes, and the people disputing the voter registration only have graphs that indicate pay-for-vote scams. Without an audit by a third party- say some private accounting firm- there can be no faith in your "fair election".[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 15:21, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::::Seebert, by that token, the people who dispute the fairness of the election claim that the fraud was SO widespread that ALL of these people—''numerous state and federal judges, state and local election officials, governors, the Justice and Homeland Security departments and the Electoral College''—have committed concerted fraud on an unprecedented scale in the United States. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all these people from both parties? You're accusing Herobrine of being ''incapable of fairly looking at people who disagree with you'', but doesn't that claim seem far-fetched enough to you as to seem outlandish? When Clinton lost against Trump in what was also a hotly debated election, the electoral margins reported were far less important than in this election. Yet there was no fraud outcry. The big difference here is that Trump is crying fraud relentlessly. Now if a third party would intervene to audit the election, would that be proof enough for the people who back him? Would that settle it? Or wouldn't they claim that said third party was bought off, or was biased from the start anyway? Where does this end? In the meantime, we can see where it has led: to gallows being put up in front of the Capitol by a bunch of would-be executioners.[[User:A new user|A new user]] ([[User talk:A new user|talk]]) 17:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Well this is certainly going to be a very controversial comic for a good while. I'm personally under the belief that the election was not rigged and Trump should resign, but I feel we should create a much more neutral explanation than it is currently.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.119|172.69.33.119]] 16:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

:: Yeah, whoever wrote that explanation should resign. They're not even trying to be neutral, it is pure ideological soapboxing being shoveled down the throat of anyone reading. I vote that the first couple of paragraphs be deleted and reworked completely. Or else, this website can abandon any claim it might have had to objectivity and neutrality.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.37.44|172.68.37.44]] 17:02, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

::: I think the explanation is hilarious. To me, this strip is about everyone having abandoned doing what they are supposed to know how to do and instead wasting everyone's time sharing their opinion on the subject that is neither their expertise nor purview. The audience's clear disinterest in apple growers' opinion about Trump is conveyed by "Do you have any apple-related announcements at all?" remark. The current explanation just needs a similar remark along the lines of "Do you have anything xkcd-related at all?" to underscore the irony lest someone takes it seriously, and it will be perfect :) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.113|141.101.69.113]] 18:31, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
::::Well, I deleted a lot of the article that was filled with useless information irrelevant to the actual comic. Feel free to add more if you want.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]]

2410: Apple Growers

2021-01-12T19:39:04Z

108.162.245.82: Removed politically charged statements

{{comic
| number = 2410
| date = January 12, 2021
| title = Apple Growers
| image = apple_growers.png
| titletext = Hopefully in a couple of weeks we'll be able to resume our apple-focused updates, because we have SO MUCH to say about Cosmic Crisp.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a DISTRACTED APPLE GROWER. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

On January 6, 2021, supporters of President {{w|Donald Trump}} {{w|2021 storming of the United States Capitol|stormed the United States Capitol}} while Congress was in session to certify the results of the {{w|2020 United_States_presidential_election|2020 election}}, which President Trump lost. The attack resulted in an evacuation of Congress from the building, a disruption of the operations of the legislature, and the deaths of several people.

Normal American life, already strained under the [[:Category:COVID-19|coronavirus pandemic]], was dealt another blow by the insurrection. Normally planned events continue to be held, but the shadow of current events impacts everything. This comic depicts one such event, a news conference hosted by the State Apple Growers (of an unspecified state). This group apparently had a scheduled meeting to discuss apple variety standards, but their meeting was instead dominated by discussions of events in government, resulting in them issuing a formal statement calling upon President Trump to resign. This statement obviously has nothing to do with apples, and when pressed, the spokesperson makes generic statements in favor of apples, but points out that they're too distracted by more urgent matters to focus on their normal jobs.

{{w|Cosmic Crisp}}, mentioned in title text, is a variety of apples developed in the Washington State University that has been on sale since 2019, amid a large marketing campaign. The implication of the title text is that the people involved ''are'' in fact, very interested in and concerned with details of apple cultivation and marketing, and hope to return to a state in which they they can focus on those. But the more immediate draw of events makes it difficult to focus on what they usually like to talk about.

This is one of very few comics with [[Beret Guy]] where he is not really doing anything, although his presence in food related comics have often been seen, and this is also a weird turn of events that the Apple Growers discuss Trump. However, usually Beret Guy is not interested in real-life problems.

==Transcript==
:[Beret Guy and Cueball stand on either side of Megan with her hair unkempt. They stand behind a lectern with an image of an apple on the front of it. Unreadable text is written on both side of the apple in two rows.]
:Megan: *Ahem*
:Megan: The state apple-growers' association has decided to formally call on President Donald Trump to resign.

:[A wider shot shows Beret Guy, Megan, and Cueball on a podium behind the lectern. The visible audience consist of a Cueball-like guy, Hairy and Ponytail holding a microphone to her mouth as she addresses those on the podium.]
:Ponytail: Weren't you meeting to update the standards for new apple varieties?
:Megan: Yes, but we talked it over and this is what we decided.
:Megan: We feel strongly that this is important.

:[There is a narrow shot with a zoom in on Megan.]
:Ponytail (off-panel): Did you discuss anything on your actual agenda?
:Megan: Thanks for the question! We did not.

:[Beret Guy, Cueball and Megan is again seen from the front behind the lectern, Megan's hair even more unkempt.]
:Ponytail (off-panel): Do you have any apple-related announcements at all?
:Megan: Uh, apples are great. Best fruit. Everyone should buy 1,000 of them.
:Megan: '''''We're a little distracted right now, okay??'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Public speaking]]

Talk:1846: Drone Problems

2017-06-05T22:20:02Z

108.162.245.82:

I wrote a short little explanation that needs a lot more. Maybe I'll add more after school.
[[User:LordFlashmeow|LordFlashmeow]] ([[User talk:LordFlashmeow|talk]]) 15:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)LordFlashmeow

There's a much simpler, if less elegant, solution in buying a Mossberg 500. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

As I read it, the drones were flying around her, in the first place, because people can't control them properly. I find the comic even funnier, reading this way.
(New here. Is the below signature the right way to sign?)
<saim>{{unsigned|Saim}}

Wasn't there another comic where black hat builds something similar that shoots birds or squirrels or something? I can't find it now —[[User:Artyer|Artyer]] <big>([[User Talk:Artyer|talk]]<big>'''|'''</big>[[Special:Contributions/Artyer|ctb]])</big> 19:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I thought this was a parallel to North Korean ICBMs and US anti-missle technology...

I also got the impression that this was an ICBM metaphor. Note the news in recent days: [http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/29/530534854/north-korea-fires-short-range-missile-into-sea-of-japan-its-9th-launch-this-year North Korea missile launch] [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40101629 Anti-missile Launch]--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 22:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1846: Drone Problems

2017-06-05T22:12:45Z

108.162.245.82:

I wrote a short little explanation that needs a lot more. Maybe I'll add more after school.
[[User:LordFlashmeow|LordFlashmeow]] ([[User talk:LordFlashmeow|talk]]) 15:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)LordFlashmeow

There's a much simpler, if less elegant, solution in buying a Mossberg 500. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

As I read it, the drones were flying around her, in the first place, because people can't control them properly. I find the comic even funnier, reading this way.
(New here. Is the below signature the right way to sign?)
<saim>{{unsigned|Saim}}

Wasn't there another comic where black hat builds something similar that shoots birds or squirrels or something? I can't find it now —[[User:Artyer|Artyer]] <big>([[User Talk:Artyer|talk]]<big>'''|'''</big>[[Special:Contributions/Artyer|ctb]])</big> 19:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I thought this was a parallel to North Korean ICBMs and US anti-missle technology...

I also got the impression that this was an ICBM metaphor.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.82|108.162.245.82]] 22:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

898: Chain of Command

2017-04-03T16:22:05Z

108.162.245.82:

{{comic
| number = 898
| date = May 13, 2011
| title = Chain of Command
| image = chain of command.png
| titletext = Themistocles said his infant son ruled all Greece -- "Athens rules all Greece; I control Athens; my wife controls me; and my infant son controls her." Thus, nowadays the world is controlled by whoever buys advertising time on Dora the Explorer.
}}
==Explanation==
The President of the United States is at the top of the US Nuclear Chain of Command, but the engineer is ''de facto'' above him because the engineer is in charge of configuring how the button works, and thus could have installed an override so that he could block the President's use of the button and/or use it himself. The "Red Button" is a simplification denoting procedures for the worst-case scenario, i.e. launching all strategic nuclear capabilities.

This paradoxical situation applies in many other fields. In a major corporation commercially sensitive information is generally hidden from employees at lower levels but available to management, but the systems administrator (who usually sits low on the hierarchy and doesn't manage any other employees) can access not only the sensitive information but the raw data that it's calculated from. Not only that, but the systems administrator is usually responsible for controlling who has access to the information - making him/her the most powerful person in the company (as far as the IT infrastructure is concerned). Many managers think of themselves as being "above" engineers and have trouble coming to grips with this concept.

{{w|Themistocles}}, mentioned at the title text, was an Ancient Greek politician. In the title text is a similar joke placed at the top of the chain of command, this time in Ancient Greece. It refers to Plutarch's [http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Themistocles*.html#p53 ''Life of Themistocles'']:
Of his son, who lorded it over his mother, and through her over himself, he said, jestingly, that the boy was the most powerful of all the Hellenes; for the Hellenes were commanded by the Athenians, the Athenians by himself, himself by the boy's mother, and the mother by her boy.

The part about television advertisements is a proposal that, by controlling the "infant sons" of important political figures (as well as the aforementioned Red Button engineer), one could control said political figures, and thus the entire world. ''{{w|Dora the Explorer}}'' is an Spanish educational show for young children, something a busy man like the President (or the engineer) might turn on for his/her child, and advertisements are known to influence young kids' decisions.

==Transcript==
:[A flowchart shows the President at the top, with an arrow to the Secretary of Defense, and then fourteen arrows leading to a series of boxes labeled Unified Combat Commanders. On the side, a box with a dotted outline has a dotted arrow leading to the president. It's labeled "Engineer Who Installed the Red Button."]
:US NUCLEAR CHAIN OF COMMAND

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Flowcharts]]
[[Category:Politics]]

Talk:1053: Ten Thousand

2016-12-27T07:41:59Z

108.162.245.82:

Regarding: "This also assumes that 10,000 people learn of something every day from the day they are born." That's not accurate. Whatever the any distribution of "age you learn" is, the average will hold. For example, if everybody learns some particular fact on their 21st birthday, it holds simply becuase there are roughly 10,000 people having their 21st birthday each and every day.

I think it also may be referring, in a tongue-in-cheek manner, to the fact that people who call people idiots because they don't know something, and yet fail to explain it, are creating ignorance to criticise it.

Person A says, "What is x?"

Person B responds, "You're an idiot for not knowing x."

Person B is now responsible for the idiocy he claims Person A to have, thus making Person B the ''real'' idiot. In this comic, he makes this point by refusing to be Person B, while at the same time making subtle references to still having the sadistic glee person B has.[[Special:Contributions/76.29.225.28|76.29.225.28]] 22:37, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I think he's getting the pleasure of seeing the look on Person A's face when Person A learns/sees something incredible! I think it's more of a positive. {{unsigned|Theo}}

I wonder which relative came back to life?[[User:Pennpenn|Pennpenn]] ([[User talk:Pennpenn|talk]]) 05:02, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Would someone care to explain the math behind this comic? {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.10}}
:I did a try. The age is unimportant, it's only the birth rate. I'm happy about a feedback. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Looks like there might be a callback to this comic in the latest What-If. http://what-if.xkcd.com/135/ [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.177|108.162.210.177]] 10:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Yesterday I did just this! My mother had mentos and I had diet coke, and asked her if we should try to mix them (so I could show it to my children). And it turned out she'd never heard about it. So after we tried it with some success, I showed her this comic as well ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

To explain the math...In a given year the age of people under 30 is 4 million/yr * 30 yrs. Each of these people have a 1/30 chance of learning "it" in a given year: 4 000 000/yr * 30yr * 1/30yr * 1yr/365day = 4 000 000 / 365day = 10 959/day ~= 10 000 [[User:Zelcon|Zelcon]] ([[User talk:Zelcon|talk]]) 23:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Before solving a math problem, the most important thing to do is recognize what you are trying figure out and what the variables are. So let's examine your "statistics" for learning it. I will accept your estimation of 30 years*4 million (even though the number of people being born each year grows). However, when we get to 1/30, I have a serious issue. You are saying that my chance of learning anything in a given year is 1/30. Where did you get 30 from? The years that people are under. So you are essentially saying that a person has a 1/x chance of learning something in a given year where x is the age? This makes no sense!!! There is not a 1/30 chance that I am going to learn the cure to cancer this year!!

Talk:1008: Suckville

2016-10-20T05:08:36Z

108.162.245.82:

Wait, how did Megan's smack talk not work, as the explanation states? This is not accurate. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.172|108.162.238.172]] 20:34, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
: Cueball changed the statement from an insult to a statement of fact, implying that in the year 2000, he was literally the only resident of a real town called Suckville, but that the population has grown since then. [[User:Leafy Greens|Leafy Greens]] ([[User talk:Leafy Greens|talk]]) 01:05, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

In panel 3 what is going on with Megan's legs? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.85|141.101.99.85]] 15:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
:I have no idea... Maybe she temporarily turned into a spider? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 15:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I think she was just turning around. if you look closely you can see that in one position legs are in a position which would make sense while playing the game. Her other two legs are faced with a computer as if she was using it. Same with her arms. The reason there were three is because one arm stayed in the same position.

If Randall respected disposition of cards, it can't be magic the gathering {{unsigned ip|108.162.229.112}}

1672: Women on 20s

2016-04-26T17:23:24Z

108.162.245.82: /* Explanation */ In keeping with prior edit, removed "incorrectly" characterization of reporters words, since no support for this is offered

{{comic
| number = 1672
| date = April 25, 2016
| title = Women on 20s
| image = women_on_20s.png
| titletext = I get that there are security reasons for the schedule, but this is like the ONE problem we have where the right answer is both easy and straightforward. If we can't figure it out, maybe we should just give up and just replace all the portraits on the bills with that weird pyramid eye thing.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic portrays a series of press conferences with a {{w|US Treasury}} spokesperson (different from [[Cueball]] in the first panel as he has a bit of hair). The panels after the first summarize and ridicule the recent controversy over the upcoming redesign of US currency. The dialog between the US Treasury and reporters is paraphrased for comedic effect, but the events depicted are {{w|United_States_twenty-dollar_bill#Proposal_for_a_woman.27s_portrait|otherwise factual}}.

American currency has only once had a woman as the primary portrait on paper currency ([http://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/martha-washington/martha-on-1/ Martha Washington] was on the $1 Silver Certificate in the 1880's and 1890's), which is widely seen as a real problem. Responding to this issue, the Treasury Department initially planned to replace the portrait of {{w|Andrew Jackson}} in the {{w|United States twenty-dollar bill|$20 bill}} with a woman, to be chosen by public voting. {{w|Trail of Tears}} is a reference to the {{w|Andrew_Jackson#Indian_removal_policy|forced re-locations}} of Native American peoples that Andrew Jackson conducted during his presidency. This is now seen as a human rights violation on a massive scale, and is presented as a reason why Andrew Jackson should not be honored on American currency.

The timing of the release of this new bill with a woman, was to be scheduled with the 100 year anniversary of {{w|Women's suffrage in the United States|Women's suffrage}} in 2020, and should thus preferably also be on the $20 bill.. But as will be seen this has turned into a serious problem...

The voting process [http://www.womenon20s.org/results selected] {{w|Harriet Tubman}}, a 19th century {{w|abolitionist}} and a major figure in the {{w|Underground Railroad}} system which freed {{w|Slavery in the United States|American slaves}}. Cueball is seen to be clearly pleased and excited about this prospect in the first panel, where he votes for her first, among several other options.

The list shows that Cueball chooses Tubman first representing the generic everyman and thus represents the about one in five that choose her first. But he may select up to three out of the fifteen selected candidates.
*The other two women he chooses are:
**{{w|Eleanor Roosevelt}} an American politician, diplomat, and activist. She was the longest-serving {{w|First Lady of the United States}}, holding the post from March 1933 to April 1945 during her husband President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt}}'s four terms in office. She became the runner-up in the vote.
**{{w|Rachel Carson}}, a pioneering environmentalist who is most famous for her book {{w|Silent Spring}}.
Since Carson was not one of the options for the final round, where only four was selected (the other two was {{w|Rosa Parks}}, 3rd; and {{w|Wilma Mankiller}}, 4th), it is clear that Cueball was already voting in the primary ballot, where Roosevelt actually came in first.

At this point, bureaucratic and political complications arise. The Treasury Department announces that, instead of replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, she would replace {{w|Alexander Hamilton}} on the {{w|United States ten-dollar bill|$10 bill}}. The {{w|United_States_ten-dollar_bill#Future_redesign|reason given}} is that the $10 bill was scheduled for redesign first. A reporter asks why they can't simply change the schedule, but doesn't get a clear answer.

There is suggestion from "Steve" to put {{w|Martin Shkreli}} on the {{w|United States five-dollar bill|$5 bill}}. Shkreli is an pharmaceutical executive and hedge fund manager who provoked controversy when he {{w|Martin_Shkreli#Price_hike_controversy|raised the price}} of an anti-parasite drug by over 5000%, making it unaffordable to many poorer people. He became known as "the most hated man in America". This suggestion receives short shrift. This may be the same Steve who messed up both [[809: Los Alamos]] and [[1532: New Horizons]].

The plan to replace Hamilton is complicated when {{w|Hamilton_(musical)|a Broadway musical}} about the life of Alexander Hamilton comes out and becomes massively popular. This creates a flood of interest in Hamilton, and makes replacing his portrait politically complicated. The spokesperson suggests putting both Hamilton and Tubman on the $10 bill, but the reporters clearly think this is an unnecessary compromise.

Finally, the spokesperson announces that they will put Tubman on the $20 bill, but their schedule demands that they do the $10 bill first. They decide to put a "mural to women" on the new $10 bill to try and contain the tension until the new $20 bill is released. The reporters say that the Treasury has total control over the release of currency, so the simpler solution is just to change the schedule, but they're apparently ignored.

In the final panel, the spokesperson mentions that Jackson's portrait will still appear on the new $20 bill, seriously weakening the symbolism of replacing him and adding irony since Jackson was a slave owner. This is likely an effort to head off the complaints of traditionalists, but is seen here as an unfortunate attempt to avoid taking a real stand.

In the title text [[Randall]] reiterates that this is a rare case in politics in which there's a clear and simple solution. The Treasury has the authority to redesign currency, and a petition to Congress could change the release schedule to fit their needs. That makes all the compromises and backtracking unnecessary: they could simply replace Jackson with Tubman and hypothetically release the new $20 bill whenever they choose. Randall appears frustrated with the artificial constraints that are holding back what should be a simple and straightforward process although he does acknowledge that it takes time to evaluate the security of a re-design's resistance to {{w|Counterfeit money|counterfeiting}}.

The mention of the "[http://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Illuminati somewhat arcane symbol] that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting at his laptop. Above him is the text he reads on the screen, then he speaks, and below that text is the list of women from his computer showing the three first options each with a gray "drop-down menu" triangle to the right of the names. Below this is his final spoken line. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:2015
:Website: Petition: Replace Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson with a woman on the $20 for the 100th anniversary of women's suffrage in 2020.
:Cueball: Hey, good idea!
:Website:
::Vote for your three picks:
::1 Harriet Tubman
::2 Eleanor Roosevelt
::3 Rachel Carson
:Cueball: Tubman for #1, definitely.

:[An executive from the department of treasury, with a wee bit of hair on his head, stands behind a lectern. On the front of the lectern the top part of the image inside the seal for the department of treasury is visible inside a circle, showing the scales and the tip of the triangular band beneath it. The rest of this image is hidden below the panel frame. There is text written above this image. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:Soon...
:Treasury Executive: After a flood of public interest, the Treasury has decided to feature a woman on our money!
:Offscreen voice 1: Yay!
:Treasury Executive: She will replace Hamilton on the $10.
:Offscreen voice 1: Yay-- wait, what? Why not the $20?
:Offscreen voice 2: ''Are we mad at Hamilton?''
:Text above the seal: Treasury

:[The executive with a hand on the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: The $10 was scheduled for the next redesign by a board made up of-
:Offscreen voice 3: Can't you just do the $20 next?
:Treasury Executive: We will review the...
:Offscreen voice 3: *Sigh*
:Offscreen voice 4 (Steve): ''Put Martin Shkreli on the $5!''
:Offscreen voice 5: Shut up, Steve.

:[The executive lifts both hands, the one over the lectern points a finger up. Again seen from the side. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:Later in 2015...
:Treasury Executive: Wow, some musical came out, and now suddenly Hamilton has ''tons'' of fans.
:Offscreen voice 6: So do the $20 next. Problem solved!
:Treasury Executive: Maybe he and a woman can ''share'' the $10!
:Offscreen voice 6: Are you serious.

:[The executive, again with a hand on the lectern, is seen from the side. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:2016:
:Treasury Executive: We've decided to put Harriet Tubman on the $20.
:Offscreen voice 7: Perfect! Happy ending.
:Treasury Executive: -After we do the new $10.
:Offscreen voice 7: What?

:[The executive again from the front behind the lectern. On the front of the lectern only the text and the very top of the circle around the image can be seen.]
:Treasury Executive: We'll put a mural to women on the back of the $10. Hopefully that will tide you over until we get to the $20?
:Offscreen voice 8: ''Seriously?'' How is this so complicated? Just say "We're putting Harriet Tubman on the $20," then do it.
:Text above the seal: Treasury

:[The executive with hands down behind the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: We'll do the $20 ASAP, but we can't change the-
:Offscreen voice 9: C'mon, your hands aren't tied here. You're the freaking Treasury. This is the '''''one''''' thing you're definitely in charge of.

:[The executive lifting a hand above the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: Oh, and we're putting Andrew Jackson on the back.
:Three offscreen voices: '''''What.'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Public speaking]]

1672: Women on 20s

2016-04-26T17:17:59Z

108.162.245.82: /* Explanation */ Removed claims about Federal Reserve Act section 16 forcing behavior; no obvious support for this claim in text of Act

{{comic
| number = 1672
| date = April 25, 2016
| title = Women on 20s
| image = women_on_20s.png
| titletext = I get that there are security reasons for the schedule, but this is like the ONE problem we have where the right answer is both easy and straightforward. If we can't figure it out, maybe we should just give up and just replace all the portraits on the bills with that weird pyramid eye thing.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic portrays a series of press conferences with a {{w|US Treasury}} spokesperson (different from [[Cueball]] in the first panel as he has a bit of hair). The panels after the first summarize and ridicule the recent controversy over the upcoming redesign of US currency. The dialog between the US Treasury and reporters is paraphrased for comedic effect, but the events depicted are {{w|United_States_twenty-dollar_bill#Proposal_for_a_woman.27s_portrait|otherwise factual}}.

American currency has only once had a woman as the primary portrait on paper currency ([http://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/martha-washington/martha-on-1/ Martha Washington] was on the $1 Silver Certificate in the 1880's and 1890's), which is widely seen as a real problem. Responding to this issue, the Treasury Department initially planned to replace the portrait of {{w|Andrew Jackson}} in the {{w|United States twenty-dollar bill|$20 bill}} with a woman, to be chosen by public voting. {{w|Trail of Tears}} is a reference to the {{w|Andrew_Jackson#Indian_removal_policy|forced re-locations}} of Native American peoples that Andrew Jackson conducted during his presidency. This is now seen as a human rights violation on a massive scale, and is presented as a reason why Andrew Jackson should not be honored on American currency.

The timing of the release of this new bill with a woman, was to be scheduled with the 100 year anniversary of {{w|Women's suffrage in the United States|Women's suffrage}} in 2020, and should thus preferably also be on the $20 bill.. But as will be seen this has turned into a serious problem...

The voting process [http://www.womenon20s.org/results selected] {{w|Harriet Tubman}}, a 19th century {{w|abolitionist}} and a major figure in the {{w|Underground Railroad}} system which freed {{w|Slavery in the United States|American slaves}}. Cueball is seen to be clearly pleased and excited about this prospect in the first panel, where he votes for her first, among several other options.

The list shows that Cueball chooses Tubman first representing the generic everyman and thus represents the about one in five that choose her first. But he may select up to three out of the fifteen selected candidates.
*The other two women he chooses are:
**{{w|Eleanor Roosevelt}} an American politician, diplomat, and activist. She was the longest-serving {{w|First Lady of the United States}}, holding the post from March 1933 to April 1945 during her husband President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt}}'s four terms in office. She became the runner-up in the vote.
**{{w|Rachel Carson}}, a pioneering environmentalist who is most famous for her book {{w|Silent Spring}}.
Since Carson was not one of the options for the final round, where only four was selected (the other two was {{w|Rosa Parks}}, 3rd; and {{w|Wilma Mankiller}}, 4th), it is clear that Cueball was already voting in the primary ballot, where Roosevelt actually came in first.

At this point, bureaucratic and political complications arise. The Treasury Department announces that, instead of replacing Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill, she would replace {{w|Alexander Hamilton}} on the {{w|United States ten-dollar bill|$10 bill}}. The {{w|United_States_ten-dollar_bill#Future_redesign|reason given}} is that the $10 bill was scheduled for redesign first. A reporter asks why they can't simply change the schedule, but doesn't get a clear answer.

There is suggestion from "Steve" to put {{w|Martin Shkreli}} on the {{w|United States five-dollar bill|$5 bill}}. Shkreli is an pharmaceutical executive and hedge fund manager who provoked controversy when he {{w|Martin_Shkreli#Price_hike_controversy|raised the price}} of an anti-parasite drug by over 5000%, making it unaffordable to many poorer people. He became known as "the most hated man in America". This suggestion receives short shrift. This may be the same Steve who messed up both [[809: Los Alamos]] and [[1532: New Horizons]].

The plan to replace Hamilton is complicated when {{w|Hamilton_(musical)|a Broadway musical}} about the life of Alexander Hamilton comes out and becomes massively popular. This creates a flood of interest in Hamilton, and makes replacing his portrait politically complicated. The spokesperson suggests putting both Hamilton and Tubman on the $10 bill, but the reporters clearly think this is an unnecessary compromise.

Finally, the spokesperson announces that they will put Tubman on the $20 bill, but their schedule demands that they do the $10 bill first. They decide to put a "mural to women" on the new $10 bill to try and contain the tension until the new $20 bill is released. The reporters incorrectly say that the Treasury has total control over the release of currency, so the simpler solution is just to change the schedule, but they're apparently ignored.

In the final panel, the spokesperson mentions that Jackson's portrait will still appear on the new $20 bill, seriously weakening the symbolism of replacing him and adding irony since Jackson was a slave owner. This is likely an effort to head off the complaints of traditionalists, but is seen here as an unfortunate attempt to avoid taking a real stand.

In the title text [[Randall]] reiterates that this is a rare case in politics in which there's a clear and simple solution. The Treasury has the authority to redesign currency, and a petition to Congress could change the release schedule to fit their needs. That makes all the compromises and backtracking unnecessary: they could simply replace Jackson with Tubman and hypothetically release the new $20 bill whenever they choose. Randall appears frustrated with the artificial constraints that are holding back what should be a simple and straightforward process although he does acknowledge that it takes time to evaluate the security of a re-design's resistance to {{w|Counterfeit money|counterfeiting}}.

The mention of the "[http://google.com/search?q=illuminati+confirmed weird pyramid eye thing]" is a reference to the {{w|Eye of Providence}}, which is an old and [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Illuminati somewhat arcane symbol] that appears on the {{w|United States one-dollar bill|US $1 bill}}. Randall seems to be using this as an example of the outdated and frankly strange design of American currency, the implication that using that on all US dollar bills would constitute giving up on ever having a design relevant to the modern world. Also by replacing all portraits with this image, there would no longer be any gender controversy.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is sitting at his laptop. Above him is the text he reads on the screen, then he speaks, and below that text is the list of women from his computer showing the three first options each with a gray "drop-down menu" triangle to the right of the names. Below this is his final spoken line. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:2015
:Website: Petition: Replace Andrew "Trail of Tears" Jackson with a woman on the $20 for the 100th anniversary of women's suffrage in 2020.
:Cueball: Hey, good idea!
:Website:
::Vote for your three picks:
::1 Harriet Tubman
::2 Eleanor Roosevelt
::3 Rachel Carson
:Cueball: Tubman for #1, definitely.

:[An executive from the department of treasury, with a wee bit of hair on his head, stands behind a lectern. On the front of the lectern the top part of the image inside the seal for the department of treasury is visible inside a circle, showing the scales and the tip of the triangular band beneath it. The rest of this image is hidden below the panel frame. There is text written above this image. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:Soon...
:Treasury Executive: After a flood of public interest, the Treasury has decided to feature a woman on our money!
:Offscreen voice 1: Yay!
:Treasury Executive: She will replace Hamilton on the $10.
:Offscreen voice 1: Yay-- wait, what? Why not the $20?
:Offscreen voice 2: ''Are we mad at Hamilton?''
:Text above the seal: Treasury

:[The executive with a hand on the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: The $10 was scheduled for the next redesign by a board made up of-
:Offscreen voice 3: Can't you just do the $20 next?
:Treasury Executive: We will review the...
:Offscreen voice 3: *Sigh*
:Offscreen voice 4 (Steve): ''Put Martin Shkreli on the $5!''
:Offscreen voice 5: Shut up, Steve.

:[The executive lifts both hands, the one over the lectern points a finger up. Again seen from the side. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:Later in 2015...
:Treasury Executive: Wow, some musical came out, and now suddenly Hamilton has ''tons'' of fans.
:Offscreen voice 6: So do the $20 next. Problem solved!
:Treasury Executive: Maybe he and a woman can ''share'' the $10!
:Offscreen voice 6: Are you serious.

:[The executive, again with a hand on the lectern, is seen from the side. At the top of the panel is a small frame breaking the top left border with a caption:]
:2016:
:Treasury Executive: We've decided to put Harriet Tubman on the $20.
:Offscreen voice 7: Perfect! Happy ending.
:Treasury Executive: -After we do the new $10.
:Offscreen voice 7: What?

:[The executive again from the front behind the lectern. On the front of the lectern only the text and the very top of the circle around the image can be seen.]
:Treasury Executive: We'll put a mural to women on the back of the $10. Hopefully that will tide you over until we get to the $20?
:Offscreen voice 8: ''Seriously?'' How is this so complicated? Just say "We're putting Harriet Tubman on the $20," then do it.
:Text above the seal: Treasury

:[The executive with hands down behind the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: We'll do the $20 ASAP, but we can't change the-
:Offscreen voice 9: C'mon, your hands aren't tied here. You're the freaking Treasury. This is the '''''one''''' thing you're definitely in charge of.

:[The executive lifting a hand above the lectern is seen from the side.]
:Treasury Executive: Oh, and we're putting Andrew Jackson on the back.
:Three offscreen voices: '''''What.'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Public speaking]]