explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:263: Certainty

2014-07-14T02:12:07Z

108.162.246.211:

This was done 6 years later by [http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-five/transcript/outrage-over-distribute-wealth-worksheet Fox News]. [[Special:Contributions/72.70.180.234|72.70.180.234]] 10:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It's easy to politicize that. Abelians versus non-Abelians ;) Not all vector spaces will likely share the property seen there.[[Special:Contributions/67.204.136.58|67.204.136.58]] 23:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

If you flip ab + ac around, you end up with ac + ab which looks a lot like ACAB and that can get political very fast.{{unsigned ip|94.76.233.42}}

Abelian means that ab = ba, but this distributive law is different. Both the distributive property and the Abelian property are assumed properties of numbers, i.e., accepted as true and used to prove more complicated properties. Non-Abelian examples of objects that "look" like numbers are not too hard to construct. One interesting example is where "a" abd "b" are rotating a book clockwise 90 degrees (a) and rotating the book forward 90 degrees (b). Start with the book facing you for reading and first do "a", then "b", which is written "ab". The result has the front of the book facing up. Now do "b" first, then "a", to get "ba". Now the binding of the book is facing up and the front of the book is facing to the right. So, "ab" is not "ba". The best I can think of for the distributive type of thing is for everything to make sense, except b+c is something for which multiplying by "a" is undefined.--DrMath 09:07, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

But what about cryptography? A mathematical topic, and hardly apolitical nowadays. However, I appreciate and enjoy Randall's sentiment about the purity of mathematics. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 20:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Politicize that? Easy. When you apply the same policies to a diverse group, the outcome differs from person to person. Just insert context and it can work in a wide range of situations. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.211|108.162.246.211]] 02:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:964: Dorm Poster

2014-07-13T06:07:12Z

108.162.246.211:

I just noticed that he has the same poster, he (cueball) just turned it upside-down and drew a lens on it. [[Special:Contributions/66.217.162.41|66.217.162.41]] 02:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Note also that cueball's side of the room is an inverse of the left side of the room in other ways. The left bed has linens, the right does not, the left side of the room is messy, the right is not, the person on the left is sitting at a desktop, cueball is standing at a laptop and so on.

Also worth mentioning that this album cover is a very popular - to the point of cliche - poster to have in a student dorm. [[Special:Contributions/31.221.45.4|31.221.45.4]] 14:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)Chris C

The original vinyl sleeve actually looks like those two posters but backwards. The back of the jacket is split light being recombined by a prism and shot at an upwards angle into the prism on the front cover, where it is split again. Demonstrated here: http://mobile.collectorsfrenzy.com/gallery/230925609565.jpg [[Special:Contributions/68.170.77.75|68.170.77.75]] 20:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Also, the other figure in the dorm seems to be the "total douchebag" with a goatee and glasses from www.xkcd.com/796/. I think this is his only other appearance, does this say something about Randall's view of Pink Floyd and their fans? {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.165}}
: That goatee/glasses figure is also a psychologist in http://www.xkcd.com/435/ and a person riding the escalator in http://www.xkcd.com/954/. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.211|108.162.246.211]] 06:07, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:1216: Sticks and Stones

2014-07-10T03:58:57Z

108.162.246.211:

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will hurt forever. --[[User:Buggz|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz|talk]]) 06:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Noone can appreciate the difference between broken bones and someone namecalling him without experience with the first. The things childs do to each other is basically the worst they ever experienced - because if those wouldn't, they would do worse. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Is it really a rhyme if it doesn't rhyme? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 15:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
:The rhyming of "stones" and "bones" probably counts as the big feature, and then the 'uhr' sound of "words" and "hurt" echo this resonance, and I've never heard the "harm" version that wouldn't have this. Although it's certainly a non-standard rhyming scheme (if it's AABC) and scan (7+7 syllables, or (3+4)+(2+5) or however you want to split it). It's pithy, which probably trumps strict adherence to anything like iambic pentameter. Maybe there's an argument that it's more musical, with a rythm of 4 groups of 4 beats ("sticks" and "words" extending over two of them, each, the way I'd say it). But musical lyrics and spoken verse are easily interchangable, and as long as it isn't totally 'blank' verse I'd accept it as a rhyme. (Not an authority, though ->) [[Special:Contributions/31.109.101.73|31.109.101.73]] 19:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Citation: http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/27/in-the-brain-broken-hearts-hurt-like-broken-bones/ and http://www.pnas.org/content/108/15/6270.full?sid=758b38cc-b399-4d22-9c37-3c074cf321be [[User:Woliveirajr|Woliveirajr]] ([[User talk:Woliveirajr|talk]]) 16:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

My dear departed mother-in-law put it much more memorably - Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will break my heart. [[Special:Contributions/131.107.147.231|131.107.147.231]] 17:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I can easily disregard words. It's not as easy to disregard a broken bone. After my fourth day at my new job, my knees are killing me, and that's not even close. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 01:16, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

So was this comic copied from here? http://thegentlemansarmchair.com/post/50907218931/sticks-and-stones-http-i-imgur-com-sowwlir-jpg
[[User:Bryced|Bryced]] ([[User talk:Bryced|talk]]) 07:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
:Nice find, looks similar but the child doesn't talk. That's the point here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I think the last panel isn't so much implying that Cueball thinks THE WORLD is horrific, but that the RHYME (and the fact that it's something regularly promoted to children) is horrific.--[[Special:Contributions/68.230.167.173|68.230.167.173]] 07:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
:Definitely. The horrific part is that we have a children's rhyme about a bone-breaking beating with clubs or rocks. That kind of thing curdles my stomach a little when I even read it in the paper (sorry, internet), so yes it does seem out of place here! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 19:21, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
::I disagree. Cueball's first line in that panel is saying that the world is not bad. When asked to explain why the rhyme involves sticks and stones breaking bones, he concedes that (it) is horrific. If the it refers to the rhyme, then the child was naïvely asking for an explanation. If the it refers to the world, then the child was trying to press a point, as he did in the second panel. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.211|108.162.246.211]] 03:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

1216: Sticks and Stones

2014-06-19T20:34:10Z

108.162.246.211: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1216
| date = May 24, 2013
| title = Sticks and Stones
| image = sticks and stones.png
| titletext = Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can make me think I deserved it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Sticks and Stones (nursery rhyme)}}:
<blockquote>Sticks and stones may/will break my bones<br>
But words/names can/will never harm/hurt me.</blockquote>
is a nursery rhyme said, often by parents, to persuade an individual, usually a child, to ignore any name calling or mean taunts that were said by others in an attempt to hurt the individual's feelings.

The comic challenges this sentiment when the child responds that, although words can't harm you physically, they can change how you feel, and isn't that the most important thing of all? [[Cueball]] obviously sees the simple truth in this, but tries to deflect by claiming that the world really isn't that bad. The child refers again to the rhyme, observing that the physical world can be harsh enough, because there are things like sticks and stones that break your bones and presumably people who use them as weapons to do so. Upon reflection, Cueball agrees that this image is actually horrific.

The title text is rather dark, and is probably a reference to the currently active bullying and shaming culture. None of us deserves to be beaten or stoned, but words are powerful enough to make us think that we do.

In the long tradition of the science of the obvious, recent studies (for example: [http://www.pnas.org/content/108/15/6270.full?sid=758b38cc-b399-4d22-9c37-3c074cf321b Social rejection shares somatosensory representations with physical pain]) have shown that, in fact, the brain's reactions to physical pain and emotional rejection are somewhat similar and even feed into each other.

==Transcript==
:Child: Did you hear what he said about me!?
:Cueball: Well, remember: sticks and stones may break my bones, but words—

:Child: —can make someone else feel happy or sad, which is literally the only thing that matters in this stupid world?

:[Brief pause.]

:Child: Right?
:Cueball: The world isn't ''that'' bad.
:Child: Explain the line about sticks and stones?
:Cueball: ...OK, maybe it's kind of horrific.

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