explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1702: Home Itch Remedies

2016-07-06T18:25:29Z

108.162.249.161: Starts out plausible but gets increasingly complicated.

Taking a hot (enough) shower is actually a remedy as it denatures the proteins causing the itching. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.131|162.158.86.131]] 14:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
: Why don't you add that in the explanation? It would help. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.83|108.162.218.83]] 14:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

: "...hot (enough) shower...." {{Citation needed}} [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.113|162.158.255.113]] 15:42, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

: I think it's important to mention that Cueball's remedy starts off plausible but gets steadily more complicated. (So I've done so.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 18:25, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Chiggers are not spiders. [[User:Stealth101|Stealth101]] ([[User talk:Stealth101|talk]]) 15:50, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

: Changed spider to chigger. Chiggers may itch like the devil, but are nowhere as severe as spiders. [[User:Monolith|Monolith]] ([[User talk:Monolith|talk]]) 15:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Somehow, I was expecting the explanation of the remedy to take so long that Megan got distracted away from the itch, or something. After all, the folk remedy I heard most is “Don't think about it.” {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.104}}

This explanation in its current form misses one of the best jokes of the piece: Cueball's comment that it "sounds effective". Seems to me that he's under the genuine belief that Megan's 'home remedy' is effective, simply because it's a home remedy. Solid meta-humour. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.119|141.101.98.119]] 17:35, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

What? No Juno? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.238|108.162.215.238]] 20:55, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

:It'll probably be there tomorrow. he's had jokes for New Horizons, Voyager 1, etc.. I don't see why he would exclude Juno. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.142|108.162.218.142]] 15:27, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Anyone else think there is a pun in the title text in home remedy, since the remedy involves changing where your home is. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]]
([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 21:53, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
:Yes Tharkon. Totally agree [[User:Plm-qaz snr|Plm-qaz snr]] ([[User talk:Plm-qaz snr|talk]]) 23:31, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

1702: Home Itch Remedies

2016-07-06T18:21:54Z

108.162.249.161: Starts out plausible but gets increasingly complicated.

{{comic
| number = 1702
| date = July 4, 2016
| title = Home Itch Remedies
| image = home_itch_remedies.png
| titletext = In my experience, mosquitos and poison ivy are bad, but the very worst itch comes from bites from chiggers (Trombicula alfreddugesi). They're found across the American south and great plains, so the best home remedy is to move to Iceland.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|More on Iceland in title text. Moving home as a home remedy. If the mentioned chigger does not live on Iceland it would work moving there. Which is not what is writtenat the present time.}}

Bug bites, such as mosquito bites, are itchy. Home remedies are often ineffective, and in some cases very complicated -- think of the number of suggestions on how to cure hiccups. In this case [[Cueball]]'s suggestion starts out plausible but rapidly gets increasingly and insanely complicated, involving finding rare French orchids. [[Megan]] is not actually interested in trying out a complex home remedy, she really just wants sympathy.

The suggested remedy is a mix of many popular home remedies such as :
* Taking a hot shower: supposed to stimulate nerve endings, it can also destroy some toxins.
* Applying vinegar: supposedly effective on mosquito bites.
* Applying ice: numbs the pain, more commonly used on bruises.
* Using aspirin: as an anti-inflammatory drug aspirin may have an effect on itches, although it may cause more itches than provide relief.
* Tea and a "rare French orchid": orchids, like many other plants, are commonly used in traditional medicine to cure various ailments, and tea is a common route of administration.

Megan's answer is a {{w|sarcastic}} comment stating that her own family home remedy is to keep scratching until the skin falls off -- which is a natural tendency, although not until the skin literally falls off; hence it is not really a home remedy, just a natural reaction.

The title text refers to {{w|chigger|chiggers}} or {{w|Trombicula alfreddugesi}} as the worst source for itches; in fact only in the larval stages are these mites parasitic. ''Chigger'' can also refer to the chigoe flea or "jigger", {{w|Tunga penetrans}}, a parasitic flea which also causes bad itching, but [[Randall]] explicitly mentions the mite ''Trombicula alfreddugesi''. A move to a more northerly region of the world like Iceland might seem to be a perfect cure, because those parasites are only found in warmer southern regions (similarly, since mosquitoes lay their eggs in water, moving to a dry place with no water usable by mosquitoes would be a "cure" for mosquito bites). Unusually, Iceland does not support native mosquitoes, despite similarities to other northern regions which do. [http://icelandreview.com/news/2013/06/27/no-mosquitoes-iceland-puzzles-scientists] One might fallaciously assume it does not support parasites in general — but it ''does'' support parasitic insects in other genera, and it has other species of mites. [https://books.google.com/books?id=I4pD5t_y05YC] Thus, "move to Iceland" is also a weird home remedy that won't work.

This comic could be seen as a continuation of the title text from [[1693: Oxidation]], where that is interpreted as Ponytail ineffectively reassuring Megan that her bug bites should not be a concern.

==Transcript==
:[Megan and Cueball stand together while Megan loudly scratches her itches and Cueball holds a hand up.]
:Megan: Argh, bug bites are the ''worst''. I shouldn't scratch, but... so itchy.
:Cueball: Oh, you know what's great for that?
:''Scratch scratch''

:[Zoom-in to Megan's head.]
:Megan: No, don't tell me. Everyone always has weird home remedies that never work. I just want sympathy.
:Cueball (off-panel): No, this one isn't weird, I promise. It really helps!

:[A frame less panel with a zoom-out back to Megan and Cueball. Megan is still scratching loudly and Cueball still holds his hand up.]
:Cueball: First, take a hot shower. Then dip some ice cubes in vinegar and use them to crush one baby aspirin. Then make some tea, and...
:''Scratch scratch''

:[Megan walks past Cueball and away from him while Cueball turns and looks after her.]
:Cueball: ...then, you need a rare French orchid-
:Megan: I'm going to try a different home remedy where I complain a lot and scratch until my skin comes off.
:Cueball: Sounds effective.
:Megan: It's an old family trick.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Animals]]

168: Reverse Euphemisms

2016-05-19T06:40:40Z

108.162.249.161: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 168
| date = October 9, 2006
| title = Reverse Euphemisms
| image = reverse euphemisms.png
| titletext = I'm still waiting for a chance to use 'I have to see a man about a horse'.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Euphemisms}} are figures of speech used in place of more offensive terms. In this comic, [[Cueball]] uses swear words in the place of benign terms, inverting the typical usage of euphemisms. To "drop the kids off at the pool" is a euphemism meaning to "go take a shit." In this case, however, Cueball actually has to drop kids off at the pool but instead uses "go take a shit." Cueball is using the euphemism in reverse, hence the title.

In the title text, the figure is waiting for a situation in which he has to see a man concerning a horse, as this relates to another euphemism meaning to urinate. It can be assumed that, when telling someone about seeing the man about the horse, he would say "...then I had to go take a piss."

This is not to be confused with the opposite of a euphemism called a {{w|dysphemism}}.

==Transcript==
:My Hobby: Reverse Euphemisms
:[Two people talking.]
:Cueball: Oh, hey, school just let out and it's YMCA night, so I've gotta go take a shit.
:Friend: What?
:Cueball: I mean I actually have to drop the kids off at the pool.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:My Hobby]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]

1673: Timeline of Bicycle Design

2016-04-28T02:20:33Z

108.162.249.161: /* Transcript */ 1915 description

{{comic
| number = 1673
| date = 27 April, 2016
| title = Timeline of Bicycle Design
| image = timeline of bicycle design.png
| titletext = I'll be honest--the 1950s were a rough time for cycling.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|There still isn't much here. We could use a table of each bike design and what's wrong with it.}}
[[Randall]] created a 200 year history for bicycles with 13 designs ranging from 1810 to 2016. Most of these bike designs are completely fictitious. {{Citation needed}}

The only model that both looks like a real model and fits the year is the 1875 model, which resembles the {{w|Penny-farthing}}. The Penny-farthing was popular in the 1870s until the {{w|Safety bicycle}} took over around 1880. The 1875 model appears to be missing handlebars, but it's worth noting that on the real bicycle, the handlebars were very small and close to the saddle, and may be too small to appear in the drawing.

The 1860 model looks like the {{w|American Star Bicycle}}, but that bicycle was first invented in the 1880s.

Some of the other examples of "bikes" could, however, look like those in the image at the top of the {{w|Velocipede}} Wikipedia page.

Several of the "bikes" are shown with a human — [[Ponytail]] is "riding" the pole-vaulting bike, [[Cueball]] appears in four designs, and [[Megan]] appears in three. These humans provide a sense of scale and, in some cases, a demonstration of how the bike might be operated. Cueball's appearance in the 1900 design shows how huge that bike is, appearing to dwarf the previous two models while continuing the short trend of ever-increasing size.

Only two of the bikes have pedals (1875 and 2016) and only one has a sprocket with a chain (1980). Seven designs include a seat for the rider — eight if you count the device holding Megan in the 1980 model.

The 1925 model is reminiscent of a {{w|fractal}}; {{w|Benoit Mandelbrot}} was born in October 1924.

The 1880 model could be the result of an {{w|evolutionary algorithm}} trying to produce a bicycle. Some sub-optimal algorithms that have been given the task of creating a vehicle have been shown to misplace parts in ways that makes them completely useless and/or inaccessible — for example, placing a small wheel inside a much larger wheel.

This comic (especially the 2016 bicycle) is possibly also a reference to [https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/~rlawson/cycleweb.html The Science of Cycology], a cognitive psychology project run by Rebecca Lawson at the University of Liverpool, which asked study participants to draw a bicycle from memory. The error rate was high, supporting a hypothesis that humans over-estimate their ability to explain how things work. Gianluca Gimini ran a similar project, [http://www.gianlucagimini.it/prototypes/velocipedia.html Velocipedia], in which he asked people to draw free-hand sketches of bicycles from memory, then later rendered some of the results as if they were real bikes.

Also, the designs given for the years from 1825 to 1925 distinctly resemble designs that tend to evolve in the various challenge environments in the genetic evolution games [http://boxcar2d.com/ BoxCar2D] ({{w|Flash Player}}) or [http://rednuht.org/genetic_cars_2/ Genetic Cars 2] ({{w|HTML5}}).

The title text refers to the scene labeled "1955" which depicts Cueball being chased by 3 bicycle wheels. Whatever caused the wheels to chase Cueball down a hill is left to the reader's imagination. This is obviously the most ridiculous of all of these designs, not to mention being completely unrideable, thus meaning that the era this "bike design" is from (1955, which is in the 50s) would be hard to ride a bike in if it was the only available design.

==Transcript==
:[13 drawings 8 in the top and 5 in the bottom row of different and weird "bicycle" designs. Above them there is a heading, and below each bike a year is given. On the very last cycle there is a drinking bottle with a label.]
:'''Timeline of Bicycle Design'''

:[Ponytail hanging on to a bending rod that goes down to a single normal sized bike wheel. It looks like a unicycle with no seat. The rod is bending quite a lot so she looks like she is about to use the contraption as a pole vault]
:1810

:[Cueball is running after a device holding on to a rod bend in several places before reaching the ground at a very small wheel that then is connected with a shorter rod to a normal sized bike wheel.]
:1825

:[Two normal sized bike wheels connected with a single rod between them.]
:1840

:[Megan sits on a large saddle on top of a double sized bike wheel, she has some kind of handle bars to hold on to (or it could just be the saddle) and then a small rod goes down to a half size front wheel.]
:1860

:[A regular drawing of a Penny-farthing with very small back wheel (half the size of the front wheel on the 1860 bike) and very large front wheel (larger than the 1860 bike) and pedals in the middle of the front wheel. The handle bars on such a bike is so small that it is likely they cannot be seen in this drawing.]
:1875

:[A huge wheel twice the size of the one on the Penny-farthing, and then a small wheel (like the small one on the Penny-farthing) hangs in a rod from the center of the giant wheel. The small wheel has a saddle attached, but it is not straight up.]
:1880

:[This is the largest bike. Not the largest drawings, but where the other have the characters in roughly the same size, this one has a small drawing of Cueball standing on top of the wheel holding on to some kind of handle bar. The wheel is about three time his height.]
:1900

:[Cueball sits in the "saddle" of a bike design that is similar to the Penny-farthing, but the saddle is more a rod, and the back wheel is on a rod going straight down from where the saddle ends. Also there are no pedals, so Cueball seems to be directly spinning the front wheel by hand.]
:1915

:[A symmetrical saddle sits on top of single bike wheel, as with a unicycle but no pedals, but then there are (at least) six progressively smaller wheels in-line to the first, three to front and three to the rear, each new wheel approximately half the size of the one before. A possible fourth wheel, presumed to complete the set of medial stabilisers, can no longer be discerned from the rod that goes through the center of the larger wheels.]
:1925

:[Megan stands on top of a saddle with a oar that looks like the single-oar sculling used for gondolas in Venice. She holds this to the ground behind her, while trying to move her bike forward. The bike consists of four small wheels, one straight under her, one behind, one equally in front of her and the last even further in front. They are all connected to the saddle with individual rods.]
:1940

:[Three normal sized bike wheel are rolling down a hill after Cueball who runs away from them with his arms up.]
:1955

:[Megan sits on a bike contraption that seems to have a holder around her mid section rather than her sitting on a saddle. This holder goes to the back wheel below her, and there is actually a sprocket with a chain, although no clear pedals beneath her feet. She holds on to a very long handle bar, which connects with two long rods coming from the sprocket at the front end of the bike far ahead of Megan, below which is a wheel, to where the chain is actually going. Both wheels seems to be normal size.]
:1980

:[Another weird contraption of a bike with pedals on both normal sized wheels which have wheel guards on the side pointing down towards the front. The saddle hangs in a swing that connect to a rod above it which goes to the front of the bike and splits in two rods that connects to the center frame of the bike. In front of these there is a contraption that reminds of a handle bar, which sits just above the front wheel. The two wheels are connected with a long rod between the center of the wheels and in the middle of this is the center part of the frame going up toward the handle. On the middle of this is a bottle with a label. Towards the back wheel there are two rods sticking out, with no clear meaning.]
:2016
:Bottle: Milk

{{comic discussion}}



[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Charts]]

Talk:1619: Watson Medical Algorithm

2015-12-22T23:13:24Z

108.162.249.161: Point out non-feasibility of infinite skin grafts

Build environment is still insane since comic #371. {{unsigned ip|162.158.2.139}}

(Above poster please sign comments with four tildes)

I'm trying to picture Baymax using this algorithm. {{unsigned|International Space Station}}

:"OK, who swapped out Baymax's programming card with a Doomba AI?" [[User:VectorLightning|VectorLightning]] ([[User talk:VectorLightning|talk]]) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, at least the autoconfig isn't as threatening as #416.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.179|108.162.245.179]] 07:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that the extra limbs should be removed when there are 100+ and Vitamin D levels checked when the nmbr of limbs is in an acceptable range... does IBM use a ticketing system? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.194|162.158.91.194]] 08:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Unfortunately the algorithm as shown in the cartoon has the conditions for those two steps exactly the other way around, making even less sense medically. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems a normal patient would end up mostly unscathed and in an infinite loop in the lower right corner. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 09:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Uhm no. You would normally have an oxygen level above 50% of what is expected. (It should be close to 100% if I understand [http://www.nonin.com/Normal-Oxygen-Level this correctly], which I may not...). This means you have had your skeleton removed. If you survived this you are squeezed until fluid comes out. (Probably not necessary after the skelerectomy). But then you end up in the lower right corner. Of course you can also get there after just getting an oxygen injection, but only directly if you are not comforted when the program tries. If you where comforted you will lose some limbs. And then end up in the lower right corner. No matter what if you are still OK (could be possible) when reaching here, you will be asked about your pain level. And even if you start by saying 0-8 many many times, getting as many scalp massages, you will just get the same question, until you say 10 then your eyes will be removed. But no matter what, if you are asked such a stupid question enough times you will surely at some point say something else than 0-10, and then you will die, as this answer will take you down the last path of the program (and only exit of the cycle according the to glitch mentioned in the title text), and this will end up with the program performing an autopsy on you, thus cutting you up and removing all organs etc. So no you will not be able to go unscathed infinitely, and even if you kept saying 0-8 you would eventually die from thirst. ;) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, normal oxygen saturation is 98-100% in air. If it drops below 95% you will be in trouble, if it drops below 85% you're likely dead. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 09:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Actually you can go a lot lower than 85% and still recover. You lose consciousness at about 55% on average, so you could dip below 50% for maybe a minute and still recover with appropriate treatment. It is unclear exactly what "inject oxygen" means, it could mean intubate and actively ventilate with oxygen (appropriate) or it might mean use a syringe & needle to literally inject an oxygen embolus (which would do more harm than good). It could even mean a blood transfusion, because there is oxygen carried by the red blood cells (appropriate). [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This might also partially be a reference to machine learning, which Watson apparently uses: badly designed ML systems often build models which produce the expected results for the training data, but do something unexpected or wrong with real data. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting#Machine_learning]. That said ... 'dissect doctor for parts' doesn't seem like a reasonable response to any training input ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.39.208|162.158.39.208]] 10:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The noted "unrelated actions" aren't all entirely unrelated. The coughing blood one is interpreting backwards (so "is patient not coughing up blood because the patient is not here to do so?"), the vitamin D one is somewhat logical (vit D is part of the chain that converts calcium to bone, low vit D can cause bone loss, but high vit D is basically harmless), and the green fluid is slightly sane but too vague (logic appears to be that green fluid indicates severely infected and/or necrotic tissue, for which cauterizing might be a valid treatment step in extreme situations). Weirdly specific might be a better header? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.197|141.101.106.197]] 11:57, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

So what happens if the skeleton has exactly the right number of bones? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.71|162.158.153.71]] 12:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Indeed this case is not covered, thus making the algorithm faulty even on an abstract logical level. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: What is the "right" number anyway? The number of bones in a normal human is not constant: it changes from 270 at birth to 206 as an adult. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:: {{w|Human_skeleton}} : "It is composed of 270 bones at birth – this total decreases to 206 bones by adulthood after some bones have fused together" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.46|162.158.255.46]] 22:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

the Request organ donation/Remove organs part reminds me of Live Organ Transplants segment in ''{{w|Monty Python's The Meaning of Life}}''. --[[User:Valepert|valepert]] ([[User talk:Valepert|talk]]) 12:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

100 could be a reference to 4 in binary (4+ limbs / less than 4 limbs) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.39|141.101.99.39]] 12:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:I believe you're correct. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:: The binary explanation does make more sense than a human centipede. Although, given the general grossness of the comic, I'm not going to completely rule out the human centipede idea. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think GlaDOS is a descendent from this Watson. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The part about squeezing and looking for the color of the ooze seems to reference Humorism. The colors match the four humors. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.188|162.158.91.188]] 15:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised he didn't make a Dr Watson joke/reference.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This algorithm certainly does not exit without the death of the patient, however, such a death can result from old age as long as the patient can make it to the bottom right infinite loop and continuously reports a number from 0-9 for pain. It IS possible to make it to that loop alive. Extremely low blood oxygen levels have been recorded in healthy Everest climbers, but the article I read gave the results in kilopascals, not in % so I don't know how that converts. However, repeatedly reporting a pain level of 0-8 would result in continuous scalp massages, which may actually be considered pleasant. [[User:Kashim|Kashim]] ([[User talk:Kashim|talk]]) 20:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think this may be the least undesirable path through the flowchart:
START > Draw blood (enough to lower oxygen saturation to 49%) > Record name > Measure height and weight > Measured height/weight happens to match standard chart exactly > No surgery needed > Not coughing up blood > Still here > Record pulse rate > No screaming (unconscious due to low O2 saturation) > O2 saturation below 50% > Inject oxygen > Comforting succesful > Review medical history > Skin grafts > Fewer than 100 limbs > Good vitamin D > Check build environment > Rinse with saline > Phone battery level is high > Sync photos > General anesthesia > Discharge [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Nope, that path doesn't work. First, injecting oxygen may do more harm than good, as previously mentioned. Second, you'll be unconscious, so comforting will be unsuccessful. Third, having fewer than 100 limbs actually leads to the path where some are removed (possibly an error in the chart?). Fourth, due to the bug, discharge leads to hunting you down and capturing you again. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 01:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
::First, it may or it may not... I'm hoping not! (see above for discussion of possible ways to "inject" oxygen) Second, I'll be conscious again because my oxygen saturation has now been restored, so comforting is possible. Third, please look at the updated version of the flowchart, fewer than 100 leads to measuring Vitamin D. Fourth, there is no pathway shown from discharge to hunting down and capturing: I assume that START is admission to the hospital, therefore once discharged from hospital I have escaped Watson's clutches. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::Yes, Randall fixed the bone count decision, but perhaps you missed the 'minor glitch' described in the mouseover text... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 04:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
::::Dammit. Yes I missed that. I have doomed myself to infinite skin grafts. The glitch means the only end point is autopsy. Which is less undesirable, infinite skin grafts or autopsy? [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 05:22, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::No luck on getting infinite skin grafts, I'm afraid. Watson won't draw blood again, so you won't be able to keep failing the oxygen saturation test. Besides, keeping oxygen perpetually under 50% would be fatal in itself. Maybe that's the best way to go: blacking out from oxygen deprivation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 23:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

ALERT!!! The comic has been updated since this explanation was first posted: the decisions for number of limbs have been swapped. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I wonder whether Randall took some inspiration from [http://buttersafe.com/2015/10/15/a-serious-case-of-spookiness/ Buttersafe]? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 04:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
: entirely possible, Randall does list Buttersafe as a web comic he enjoys. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 05:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Man I liked the original limb count decision better.... [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 04:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:Yes, there was a delicious craziness about it. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 05:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Another infinite loop is in the upper right; if the patient's phone battery is low, defibrillate, then check phone battery condition again. Since defibrillating the patient is not going to improve teh patient's phone battery charge level, this will repeat infinitely, unless the battery is being charged by some external force (or, perhaps, by the electric charge from the defibrillator?) [[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]]) 12:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I can't help feeling some of the information on this page are meant as jokes, like "disect the doctor for parts" being "may be considered ethically dubious". Is there someone who can clarify these? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.72.191|162.158.72.191]] 19:49, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1619: Watson Medical Algorithm

2015-12-22T04:50:01Z

108.162.249.161:

Build environment is still insane since comic #371. {{unsigned ip|162.158.2.139}}

(Above poster please sign comments with four tildes)

I'm trying to picture Baymax using this algorithm. {{unsigned|International Space Station}}

:"OK, who swapped out Baymax's programming card with a Doomba AI?" [[User:VectorLightning|VectorLightning]] ([[User talk:VectorLightning|talk]]) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, at least the autoconfig isn't as threatening as #416.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.179|108.162.245.179]] 07:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that the extra limbs should be removed when there are 100+ and Vitamin D levels checked when the nmbr of limbs is in an acceptable range... does IBM use a ticketing system? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.194|162.158.91.194]] 08:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Unfortunately the algorithm as shown in the cartoon has the conditions for those two steps exactly the other way around, making even less sense medically. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems a normal patient would end up mostly unscathed and in an infinite loop in the lower right corner. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 09:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Uhm no. You would normally have an oxygen level above 50% of what is expected. (It should be close to 100% if I understand [http://www.nonin.com/Normal-Oxygen-Level this correctly], which I may not...). This means you have had your skeleton removed. If you survived this you are squeezed until fluid comes out. (Probably not necessary after the skelerectomy). But then you end up in the lower right corner. Of course you can also get there after just getting an oxygen injection, but only directly if you are not comforted when the program tries. If you where comforted you will lose some limbs. And then end up in the lower right corner. No matter what if you are still OK (could be possible) when reaching here, you will be asked about your pain level. And even if you start by saying 0-8 many many times, getting as many scalp massages, you will just get the same question, until you say 10 then your eyes will be removed. But no matter what, if you are asked such a stupid question enough times you will surely at some point say something else than 0-10, and then you will die, as this answer will take you down the last path of the program (and only exit of the cycle according the to glitch mentioned in the title text), and this will end up with the program performing an autopsy on you, thus cutting you up and removing all organs etc. So no you will not be able to go unscathed infinitely, and even if you kept saying 0-8 you would eventually die from thirst. ;) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, normal oxygen saturation is 98-100% in air. If it drops below 95% you will be in trouble, if it drops below 85% you're likely dead. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 09:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Actually you can go a lot lower than 85% and still recover. You lose consciousness at about 55% on average, so you could dip below 50% for maybe a minute and still recover with appropriate treatment. It is unclear exactly what "inject oxygen" means, it could mean intubate and actively ventilate with oxygen (appropriate) or it might mean use a syringe & needle to literally inject an oxygen embolus (which would do more harm than good). It could even mean a blood transfusion, because there is oxygen carried by the red blood cells (appropriate). [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This might also partially be a reference to machine learning, which Watson apparently uses: badly designed ML systems often build models which produce the expected results for the training data, but do something unexpected or wrong with real data. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting#Machine_learning]. That said ... 'dissect doctor for parts' doesn't seem like a reasonable response to any training input ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.39.208|162.158.39.208]] 10:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The noted "unrelated actions" aren't all entirely unrelated. The coughing blood one is interpreting backwards (so "is patient not coughing up blood because the patient is not here to do so?"), the vitamin D one is somewhat logical (vit D is part of the chain that converts calcium to bone, low vit D can cause bone loss, but high vit D is basically harmless), and the green fluid is slightly sane but too vague (logic appears to be that green fluid indicates severely infected and/or necrotic tissue, for which cauterizing might be a valid treatment step in extreme situations). Weirdly specific might be a better header? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.197|141.101.106.197]] 11:57, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

So what happens if the skeleton has exactly the right number of bones? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.71|162.158.153.71]] 12:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Indeed this case is not covered, thus making the algorithm faulty even on an abstract logical level. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: What is the "right" number anyway? The number of bones in a normal human is not constant: it changes from 270 at birth to 206 as an adult. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

the Request organ donation/Remove organs part reminds me of Live Organ Transplants segment in ''{{w|Monty Python's The Meaning of Life}}''. --[[User:Valepert|valepert]] ([[User talk:Valepert|talk]]) 12:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

100 could be a reference to 4 in binary (4+ limbs / less than 4 limbs) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.39|141.101.99.39]] 12:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:I believe you're correct. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:: The binary explanation does make more sense than a human centipede. Although, given the general grossness of the comic, I'm not going to completely rule out the human centipede idea. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think GlaDOS is a descendent from this Watson. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The part about squeezing and looking for the color of the ooze seems to reference Humorism. The colors match the four humors. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.188|162.158.91.188]] 15:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised he didn't make a Dr Watson joke/reference.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This algorithm certainly does not exit without the death of the patient, however, such a death can result from old age as long as the patient can make it to the bottom right infinite loop and continuously reports a number from 0-9 for pain. It IS possible to make it to that loop alive. Extremely low blood oxygen levels have been recorded in healthy Everest climbers, but the article I read gave the results in kilopascals, not in % so I don't know how that converts. However, repeatedly reporting a pain level of 0-8 would result in continuous scalp massages, which may actually be considered pleasant. [[User:Kashim|Kashim]] ([[User talk:Kashim|talk]]) 20:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think this may be the least undesirable path through the flowchart:
START > Draw blood (enough to lower oxygen saturation to 49%) > Record name > Measure height and weight > Measured height/weight happens to match standard chart exactly > No surgery needed > Not coughing up blood > Still here > Record pulse rate > No screaming (unconscious due to low O2 saturation) > O2 saturation below 50% > Inject oxygen > Comforting succesful > Review medical history > Skin grafts > Fewer than 100 limbs > Good vitamin D > Check build environment > Rinse with saline > Phone battery level is high > Sync photos > General anesthesia > Discharge [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Nope, that path doesn't work. First, injecting oxygen may do more harm than good, as previously mentioned. Second, you'll be unconscious, so comforting will be unsuccessful. Third, having fewer than 100 limbs actually leads to the path where some are removed (possibly an error in the chart?). Fourth, due to the bug, discharge leads to hunting you down and capturing you again. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 01:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
::First, it may or it may not... I'm hoping not! (see above for discussion of possible ways to "inject" oxygen) Second, I'll be conscious again because my oxygen saturation has now been restored, so comforting is possible. Third, please look at the updated version of the flowchart, fewer than 100 leads to measuring Vitamin D. Fourth, there is no pathway shown from discharge to hunting down and capturing: I assume that START is admission to the hospital, therefore once discharged from hospital I have escaped Watson's clutches. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::Yes, Randall fixed the bone count decision, but perhaps you missed the 'minor glitch' described in the mouseover text... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 04:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

ALERT!!! The comic has been updated since this explanation was first posted: the decisions for number of limbs have been swapped. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I wonder whether Randall took some inspiration from [http://buttersafe.com/2015/10/15/a-serious-case-of-spookiness/ Buttersafe]? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 04:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1619: Watson Medical Algorithm

2015-12-22T04:48:27Z

108.162.249.161: Add reference to Buttersafe Oct 15

Build environment is still insane since comic #371. {{unsigned ip|162.158.2.139}}

(Above poster please sign comments with four tildes)

I'm trying to picture Baymax using this algorithm. {{unsigned|International Space Station}}

:"OK, who swapped out Baymax's programming card with a Doomba AI?" [[User:VectorLightning|VectorLightning]] ([[User talk:VectorLightning|talk]]) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, at least the autoconfig isn't as threatening as #416.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.179|108.162.245.179]] 07:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that the extra limbs should be removed when there are 100+ and Vitamin D levels checked when the nmbr of limbs is in an acceptable range... does IBM use a ticketing system? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.194|162.158.91.194]] 08:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Unfortunately the algorithm as shown in the cartoon has the conditions for those two steps exactly the other way around, making even less sense medically. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems a normal patient would end up mostly unscathed and in an infinite loop in the lower right corner. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 09:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Uhm no. You would normally have an oxygen level above 50% of what is expected. (It should be close to 100% if I understand [http://www.nonin.com/Normal-Oxygen-Level this correctly], which I may not...). This means you have had your skeleton removed. If you survived this you are squeezed until fluid comes out. (Probably not necessary after the skelerectomy). But then you end up in the lower right corner. Of course you can also get there after just getting an oxygen injection, but only directly if you are not comforted when the program tries. If you where comforted you will lose some limbs. And then end up in the lower right corner. No matter what if you are still OK (could be possible) when reaching here, you will be asked about your pain level. And even if you start by saying 0-8 many many times, getting as many scalp massages, you will just get the same question, until you say 10 then your eyes will be removed. But no matter what, if you are asked such a stupid question enough times you will surely at some point say something else than 0-10, and then you will die, as this answer will take you down the last path of the program (and only exit of the cycle according the to glitch mentioned in the title text), and this will end up with the program performing an autopsy on you, thus cutting you up and removing all organs etc. So no you will not be able to go unscathed infinitely, and even if you kept saying 0-8 you would eventually die from thirst. ;) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, normal oxygen saturation is 98-100% in air. If it drops below 95% you will be in trouble, if it drops below 85% you're likely dead. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 09:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Actually you can go a lot lower than 85% and still recover. You lose consciousness at about 55% on average, so you could dip below 50% for maybe a minute and still recover with appropriate treatment. It is unclear exactly what "inject oxygen" means, it could mean intubate and actively ventilate with oxygen (appropriate) or it might mean use a syringe & needle to literally inject an oxygen embolus (which would do more harm than good). It could even mean a blood transfusion, because there is oxygen carried by the red blood cells (appropriate). [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This might also partially be a reference to machine learning, which Watson apparently uses: badly designed ML systems often build models which produce the expected results for the training data, but do something unexpected or wrong with real data. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting#Machine_learning]. That said ... 'dissect doctor for parts' doesn't seem like a reasonable response to any training input ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.39.208|162.158.39.208]] 10:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The noted "unrelated actions" aren't all entirely unrelated. The coughing blood one is interpreting backwards (so "is patient not coughing up blood because the patient is not here to do so?"), the vitamin D one is somewhat logical (vit D is part of the chain that converts calcium to bone, low vit D can cause bone loss, but high vit D is basically harmless), and the green fluid is slightly sane but too vague (logic appears to be that green fluid indicates severely infected and/or necrotic tissue, for which cauterizing might be a valid treatment step in extreme situations). Weirdly specific might be a better header? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.197|141.101.106.197]] 11:57, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

So what happens if the skeleton has exactly the right number of bones? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.71|162.158.153.71]] 12:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Indeed this case is not covered, thus making the algorithm faulty even on an abstract logical level. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: What is the "right" number anyway? The number of bones in a normal human is not constant: it changes from 270 at birth to 206 as an adult. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

the Request organ donation/Remove organs part reminds me of Live Organ Transplants segment in ''{{w|Monty Python's The Meaning of Life}}''. --[[User:Valepert|valepert]] ([[User talk:Valepert|talk]]) 12:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

100 could be a reference to 4 in binary (4+ limbs / less than 4 limbs) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.39|141.101.99.39]] 12:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:I believe you're correct. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:: The binary explanation does make more sense than a human centipede. Although, given the general grossness of the comic, I'm not going to completely rule out the human centipede idea. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think GlaDOS is a descendent from this Watson. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The part about squeezing and looking for the color of the ooze seems to reference Humorism. The colors match the four humors. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.188|162.158.91.188]] 15:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised he didn't make a Dr Watson joke/reference.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This algorithm certainly does not exit without the death of the patient, however, such a death can result from old age as long as the patient can make it to the bottom right infinite loop and continuously reports a number from 0-9 for pain. It IS possible to make it to that loop alive. Extremely low blood oxygen levels have been recorded in healthy Everest climbers, but the article I read gave the results in kilopascals, not in % so I don't know how that converts. However, repeatedly reporting a pain level of 0-8 would result in continuous scalp massages, which may actually be considered pleasant. [[User:Kashim|Kashim]] ([[User talk:Kashim|talk]]) 20:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think this may be the least undesirable path through the flowchart:
START > Draw blood (enough to lower oxygen saturation to 49%) > Record name > Measure height and weight > Measured height/weight happens to match standard chart exactly > No surgery needed > Not coughing up blood > Still here > Record pulse rate > No screaming (unconscious due to low O2 saturation) > O2 saturation below 50% > Inject oxygen > Comforting succesful > Review medical history > Skin grafts > Fewer than 100 limbs > Good vitamin D > Check build environment > Rinse with saline > Phone battery level is high > Sync photos > General anesthesia > Discharge [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Nope, that path doesn't work. First, injecting oxygen may do more harm than good, as previously mentioned. Second, you'll be unconscious, so comforting will be unsuccessful. Third, having fewer than 100 limbs actually leads to the path where some are removed (possibly an error in the chart?). Fourth, due to the bug, discharge leads to hunting you down and capturing you again. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 01:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
::First, it may or it may not... I'm hoping not! (see above for discussion of possible ways to "inject" oxygen) Second, I'll be conscious again because my oxygen saturation has now been restored, so comforting is possible. Third, please look at the updated version of the flowchart, fewer than 100 leads to measuring Vitamin D. Fourth, there is no pathway shown from discharge to hunting down and capturing: I assume that START is admission to the hospital, therefore once discharged from hospital I have escaped Watson's clutches. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

ALERT!!! The comic has been updated since this explanation was first posted: the decisions for number of limbs have been swapped. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 04:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I wonder whether Randall took some inspiration from [http://buttersafe.com/2015/10/15/a-serious-case-of-spookiness/ Buttersafe]? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 04:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1619: Watson Medical Algorithm

2015-12-22T01:32:08Z

108.162.249.161: Respond to invalid claim of least-undesirable path

Build environment is still insane since comic #371. {{unsigned ip|162.158.2.139}}

(Above poster please sign comments with four tildes)

I'm trying to picture Baymax using this algorithm. {{unsigned|International Space Station}}

:"OK, who swapped out Baymax's programming card with a Doomba AI?" [[User:VectorLightning|VectorLightning]] ([[User talk:VectorLightning|talk]]) 08:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, at least the autoconfig isn't as threatening as #416.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.179|108.162.245.179]] 07:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that the extra limbs should be removed when there are 100+ and Vitamin D levels checked when the nmbr of limbs is in an acceptable range... does IBM use a ticketing system? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.194|162.158.91.194]] 08:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Unfortunately the algorithm as shown in the cartoon has the conditions for those two steps exactly the other way around, making even less sense medically. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems a normal patient would end up mostly unscathed and in an infinite loop in the lower right corner. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 09:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Uhm no. You would normally have an oxygen level above 50% of what is expected. (It should be close to 100% if I understand [http://www.nonin.com/Normal-Oxygen-Level this correctly], which I may not...). This means you have had your skeleton removed. If you survived this you are squeezed until fluid comes out. (Probably not necessary after the skelerectomy). But then you end up in the lower right corner. Of course you can also get there after just getting an oxygen injection, but only directly if you are not comforted when the program tries. If you where comforted you will lose some limbs. And then end up in the lower right corner. No matter what if you are still OK (could be possible) when reaching here, you will be asked about your pain level. And even if you start by saying 0-8 many many times, getting as many scalp massages, you will just get the same question, until you say 10 then your eyes will be removed. But no matter what, if you are asked such a stupid question enough times you will surely at some point say something else than 0-10, and then you will die, as this answer will take you down the last path of the program (and only exit of the cycle according the to glitch mentioned in the title text), and this will end up with the program performing an autopsy on you, thus cutting you up and removing all organs etc. So no you will not be able to go unscathed infinitely, and even if you kept saying 0-8 you would eventually die from thirst. ;) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, normal oxygen saturation is 98-100% in air. If it drops below 95% you will be in trouble, if it drops below 85% you're likely dead. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 09:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Actually you can go a lot lower than 85% and still recover. You lose consciousness at about 55% on average, so you could dip below 50% for maybe a minute and still recover with appropriate treatment. It is unclear exactly what "inject oxygen" means, it could mean intubate and actively ventilate with oxygen (appropriate) or it might mean use a syringe & needle to literally inject an oxygen embolus (which would do more harm than good). It could even mean a blood transfusion, because there is oxygen carried by the red blood cells (appropriate). [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This might also partially be a reference to machine learning, which Watson apparently uses: badly designed ML systems often build models which produce the expected results for the training data, but do something unexpected or wrong with real data. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting#Machine_learning]. That said ... 'dissect doctor for parts' doesn't seem like a reasonable response to any training input ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.39.208|162.158.39.208]] 10:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The noted "unrelated actions" aren't all entirely unrelated. The coughing blood one is interpreting backwards (so "is patient not coughing up blood because the patient is not here to do so?"), the vitamin D one is somewhat logical (vit D is part of the chain that converts calcium to bone, low vit D can cause bone loss, but high vit D is basically harmless), and the green fluid is slightly sane but too vague (logic appears to be that green fluid indicates severely infected and/or necrotic tissue, for which cauterizing might be a valid treatment step in extreme situations). Weirdly specific might be a better header? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.197|141.101.106.197]] 11:57, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

So what happens if the skeleton has exactly the right number of bones? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.71|162.158.153.71]] 12:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Indeed this case is not covered, thus making the algorithm faulty even on an abstract logical level. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 14:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: What is the "right" number anyway? The number of bones in a normal human is not constant: it changes from 270 at birth to 206 as an adult. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

the Request organ donation/Remove organs part reminds me of Live Organ Transplants segment in ''{{w|Monty Python's The Meaning of Life}}''. --[[User:Valepert|valepert]] ([[User talk:Valepert|talk]]) 12:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

100 could be a reference to 4 in binary (4+ limbs / less than 4 limbs) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.39|141.101.99.39]] 12:59, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:I believe you're correct. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:: The binary explanation does make more sense than a human centipede. Although, given the general grossness of the comic, I'm not going to completely rule out the human centipede idea. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: So having exactly 4 (the most common number of limbs for a human to have) results in removal of one or more limbs? Ouch. [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think GlaDOS is a descendent from this Watson. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 15:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The part about squeezing and looking for the color of the ooze seems to reference Humorism. The colors match the four humors. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.188|162.158.91.188]] 15:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised he didn't make a Dr Watson joke/reference.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 17:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This algorithm certainly does not exit without the death of the patient, however, such a death can result from old age as long as the patient can make it to the bottom right infinite loop and continuously reports a number from 0-9 for pain. It IS possible to make it to that loop alive. Extremely low blood oxygen levels have been recorded in healthy Everest climbers, but the article I read gave the results in kilopascals, not in % so I don't know how that converts. However, repeatedly reporting a pain level of 0-8 would result in continuous scalp massages, which may actually be considered pleasant. [[User:Kashim|Kashim]] ([[User talk:Kashim|talk]]) 20:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I think this may be the least undesirable path through the flowchart:
START > Draw blood (enough to lower oxygen saturation to 49%) > Record name > Measure height and weight > Measured height/weight happens to match standard chart exactly > No surgery needed > Not coughing up blood > Still here > Record pulse rate > No screaming (unconscious due to low O2 saturation) > O2 saturation below 50% > Inject oxygen > Comforting succesful > Review medical history > Skin grafts > Fewer than 100 limbs > Good vitamin D > Check build environment > Rinse with saline > Phone battery level is high > Sync photos > General anesthesia > Discharge [[User:Martin|Martin]] ([[User talk:Martin|talk]]) 22:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:Nope, that path doesn't work. First, injecting oxygen may do more harm than good, as previously mentioned. Second, you'll be unconscious, so comforting will be unsuccessful. Third, having fewer than 100 limbs actually leads to the path where some are removed (possibly an error in the chart?). Fourth, due to the bug, discharge leads to hunting you down and capturing you again. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 01:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1597: Git

2015-11-03T03:01:00Z

108.162.249.161: Add comment about detached heads

If someone is interested, the best book I've read on it is [http://www.git-scm.com/book/en/v2 Pro Git]. The chapters 2 and 3 explain pretty well this mess of branching and merging. But it's true that it takes a bit of patience to go over it all. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.228.35|108.162.228.35]] 08:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Also take a look at [http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ GitFlow: A Successful Git Branching Model]. Though Randall is correct there usually comes a time when it is easier to give up and "start again". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 08:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I never liked the name of this piece of software; in British English, the name "git" is mildly rude :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(slang) . [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 09:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
:According to word of god it was on purpose: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)#History [[Special:Contributions/162.158.22.46|162.158.22.46]] 11:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
:He also designed it in such a way that people often run into problems with commitment to detached heads, and typically deal with this by reflogging...

'Internally, Git works by saving the differences between various versions of the files, rather than creating a new copy each time the user "commits" the current version of the code.' - It is exactly the opposite. It stores whole files, or rather all committed pieces of data (blobs). See http://gitready.com/beginner/2009/02/17/how-git-stores-your-data.html [[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.202|141.101.88.202]] 09:38, 30 October 2015 (UTC)TK

: It is stored as diffs in pack file. Whole file (loose object) are packed automatically by default.
:
: See https://schacon.github.io/gitbook/7_the_packfile.html and https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-pack-objects.html
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.177.59|162.158.177.59]] 10:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

::Not sure what pack files are used for, but data is stored as is and named by the SHA-1 of its contents. See [https://schacon.github.io/gitbook/1_the_git_object_model.html object model] in the same reference. [[User:Walenc|Walenc]] ([[User talk:Walenc|talk]]) 16:02, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I think you guys need to differentiate between the underlying data scheme, and the command line. The way git stores underlying data is indeed beautiful, but the command-line is the worst UI ever. You know how you switch to working on a different branch? "git checkout". You know how you revert the changes you've made to a file? "git checkout". You know how you make a new branch? "git checkout -b". If you're used to other systems, you'll find nearly every operations - even common ones - counterintuitively named. I work at Google and even here, every week someone near me screws up their respository enough that they have to save their work, nuke their repo, reapply their changes, and try moving forward again. I don't know why anyone puts up with this! (Actually I do - it's because if you're collaborating between companies, git does it better than anything else.) [[Special:Contributions/199.27.129.107|199.27.129.107]] 18:46, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I feel like this article should end with a quick guide to git commands. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.27}}

Well, I feel this article focuses on explaning git too much that it loses the point of the joke. We have Wikipedia to refer readers to ... The thing is, not just users who are unable to use git beyond a few basic commands, but also those who understand git often use some sort of "start over" method because an action looking perfectly legit got the repository into unusable state, where recovery is much more difficult than reapplying patches. For one of the most common, search for "detached head", for example - especially funny when git insists on falling into that state after checking out master which is in direct contradiction to what docs say when it happens. But I don't feel like rewriting that, sorry :-/ --kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.206|141.101.96.206]] 16:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I feel you've all been nerd-sniped. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.8|108.162.216.8]] 19:33, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Pat

The problem is not about the working copy and about the branching tree structure and some git internals that is quite confusing.
This 4 years old reddit post can be used as a funny reference: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/embdf/git_complicated_of_course_not_commits_map_to/

http://tartley.com/?p=1267
"One of the things that tripped me up as a novice user was the way Git handles branches. Unlike more primitive version control systems, git repositories are not linear, they support branching, and are thus best visualised as trees, upon the nodes of which your current commit may add new leaf nodes. To visualise this, it’s simplest to think of the state of your repository as a point in a high-dimensional ‘code-space’, in which branches are represented as n-dimensional membranes, mapping the spatial loci of successive commits onto the projected manifold of each cloned repository." {{unsigned ip|108.162.210.212}}

Should someone mention how git is by default used through a terminal - which is often more confusing than a GUI for most people - and that while there are graphical shells for git, some people refuse to use them because they're not fully-featured? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.36|108.162.221.36]] 11:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Shit. I use git for almost a year and I delete my repos more often than I'd like to admit. I'm going to read [https://www.git-scm.com/book/en/v2] and (hopefully) fix this once and for all. [[User:Kripmo|Kripmo]] ([[User talk:Kripmo|talk]]) 02:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:It was way easier than I thought. This is what I needed: git reset --hard <commit before fuck up>. Its alias will be fu. [[User:Kripmo|Kripmo]] ([[User talk:Kripmo|talk]]) 08:10, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

The really sad part of all this is that if you work in a multi-dev environment and anyone on the team is doing what Cueball suggests, it negates every other user's ability to use the main trunk properly. [[User:Ericm301|Ericm301]] ([[User talk:Ericm301|talk]]) 02:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hasn't it got too extensive about git? I've never used git but quite understood the comedy. I just visited this page to know about git.txt and there's nothing about it but just long text that doesn't help whatsoever to understand the comic. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.125|141.101.84.125]] 08:45, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

:I agree completely! I've stripped out the overlong discussion of git's features. --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 00:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK, the git.txt is not the part of the Git itself. I just added it to explanation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.231|162.158.114.231]] 20:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

:"This comic is a play on how git, a popular version control system, is misused by people who have a very poor understanding of its inner workings."

Comically missing the point. That is NOT what the comic is about, that is a poor excuse from a fanboy. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.159|162.158.90.159]] 12:00, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
: I agree the verbose "explanation" misses the point. The reality is that git is a confusing mess from a user's point of view. It's a very nice and powerful design from a technical point of view yet one that will mostly confuse anyone who encounters it at first; most people are afraid of admitting it because they don't want to look dumb. There's beauty in a design that is user-friendly at its core, and git misses that mark. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 17:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

: The same can be said of Linux. It seems to be a common theme in Linus Torvalds' work. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.163|108.162.249.163]] 23:52, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

In pretty much every team I've worked I found there ends up being one "git expert" that raises above the rest and people continuously go see that person with "I don't know how to do X", to which the expert will often reply with a magic unheard-of-before git command line that looks pretty much like perl line noise. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 17:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

In what world are telephones not an electronic mean of communication ? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.75.245|141.101.75.245]] 10:56, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

That's not the point. The distinction was being made (ambiguously, perhaps) between electronic and vocal communication. We might naturally turn to telephones for the latter.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.227|162.158.2.227]] 12:16, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

ExplainXKCD is usually amazing, but the explanation above is really "comically missing the point".

:Git has a very cool distributed architecture, but the user experience is much more complex than other revision control systems. TFS and subversion can be taught to junior developers in about 20 minutes, but it takes much longer to learn how to use Git’s basic features. It is very easy for Git to become deadlocked, which requires some obscure commands to fix. Unless you are an expert at Git, it is sometimes easier to delete your project and try again.

:There are things that Git does that other RCS don’t do. (I am not entirely sure what they are, to be totally honest. When the question is asked, the responses usually just talk about the architecture.) Git experts tend to like that the software is more powerful than other RCS systems, and some tend to be dismissive of how difficult other people find it to use. Many people (such as myself and Cueball) find the architecture cool, but are not Git experts.

:So this is the joke. There is a conflict between how experts typically TALK about Git, and how most users actually USE Git. The humor comes from having a character say things that many people think, but wouldn’t say out loud for fear of looking stupid.

Would it be worth polishing the above and adding it to the description, or would that just be flamebait?
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.86|108.162.246.86]] 16:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The title text may be referring to the famous saying: "Git is really pretty simple, just think of branches as homeomorphic endofunctors mapping submanifolds of a Hilbert space." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.40|162.158.255.40]] 23:23, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1533: Antique Factory

2015-06-06T00:37:43Z

108.162.249.161:

The reference to inexorable passage of time reminds me of [[209: Kayak]] [[User:Effy|Effy]] ([[User talk:Effy|talk]]) 11:55, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
The briefcase seems to be slightly different from the third panel to the fourth. Is this just a drawing difference, or something significant? [[User:Technetium|Technetium]] ([[User talk:Technetium|talk]]) 12:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Arguably, the premise of the comic is that while an antique ''may'' be something old that has been in storage (e.g. an attic, or an otherwise unused spare room) for most of its time since it was actually new, some would consider that less desirous than an item that was thoroughly used when new, and has acquired signs of wear and tear (or even an actual patina, rather than the perfect surface of the freshly manufactured goods) over a significant proportion of its existence.

Indeed, fake antiques of various kinds are subjected to intense (and artificial) 'usage' to give them the look of age that they lack, to add to the authentic-looking (but actually deliberately 'back-dated') construction methods that were used. Or even to make up for this being done wrong.

In this comic, however, there's no sign of criminal intent. It seems that contemporary pieces of furniture are being 'used' (the chair sat on, which may be fair enough; the table sat ''at'', which is a somewhat more intangible process) roughly in line with how a then-contmporary antique would have been used, when new, with no intention to accelerate or artifice the 'aging' process. Normally one would not consider this a cost-effect business model, but this argument has never troubled the character before, so why should it now?

(I leave it up to someone else to summarise this idea in the main explanation. If they agree with it.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.95|141.101.106.95]] 13:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I thought that the premise of the comic is that he went to somewhere where normal things (now antiques) were once made, but he's VERY late for work. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.7|108.162.219.7]] 16:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Giving Randall's affinity for {{w|Terry Pratchett}} the title text may be a reference to one of his books. On the title page inside the book [http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0091888050/ref=rdr_ext_tmb The Science of Discworld II: The Globe: 2] there is a waring at the bottom which says: "Warning: ''May contain nuts''". May contain nuts is also the title of the last chapter (#32) in that book. And there is a [http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/read.cgi?id=20020613&tid=322939 foot note] in that book where the Tyrant Lord Vetinari makes it clear that you can never be certain that any item do not include nuts... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

It's also probably not coincidental that there is evidently an acorn seated in the picture. Aging. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.214.227|108.162.214.227]] 23:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes the veneer of the furniture is made of nut tree timber. And creating new antique furniture, advertising with nut tree veneer shall make them more valuable. --[[User:GeorgDerReisende|GeorgDerReisende]] ([[User talk:GeorgDerReisende|talk]]) 08:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

So... the way the hat is positioned it looks like he's turning his head towards the reader in the last panel. Anyone else notice this? [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 09:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

The explanation misses the obvious play on words: "antique factory" could both mean a "factory to create antiques" (through the passage of time) and a "factory that is antique." It's amusing since the latter would be logical meaning of the expression yet the comic relies on the former definition.
Regarding the title text: as some people are allergic to nuts, I'd argue most people are allergic to time (since it is ultimately lethal) and thus need the warning label on the antique objects. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

What about items made using materials (wood, nails, etc.) that have been previously used? OK, so the product isn't going to be antique, but its composite parts are.

Talk:1534: Beer

2015-06-05T06:24:26Z

108.162.249.161: America is asleep.

I hate the taste and smell and associations (such as urine and vomit where they shouldn't be). A friend used to freely admit he didn't like the taste and only drank to get drunk. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 06:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1527: Humans

2015-05-20T21:49:32Z

108.162.249.161: Wishful thinking doesn't make a dumb idea cool.

Yes! Preach it, Randall! [[Special:Contributions/188.114.106.23|188.114.106.23]] 08:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:Everyone knows they're more akin to big cows, anyway. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.143|141.101.106.143]] 09:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
::Big ''spherical'' cows. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 10:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:::[http://what-if.xkcd.com/120/ Although most remaining "cows" are actually closer to oblate spheroids ...] [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.252|108.162.210.252]] 19:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Robots complaining about science is like humans complaining about evolution. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.60|108.162.231.60]] 09:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:Great line :) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.118|108.162.215.118]] 10:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Given the title text, the reference to movie humans makes this cartoon likely an oblique commentary on the upcoming film ''Jurassic World'' where the dinosaurs remain featherless. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.162|108.162.237.162]] 10:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't really want to see a sequel criticized for maintaining continuity. Think of what it would be like if someone made a 2001 movie where instead of travelling to Jupiter, Hal orchestrated the invasion of Iraq. Wait a second, that would make for an awesome movie.--Dave[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.183|108.162.237.183]] 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't like being chased with Aepyornis either, and noone ever doubted Aepyornis had feathers. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder which movie Robot #2 is referring to. Something with a crowned monarch and lots of (almost) naked warriors. ''300'' perhaps? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 12:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:I'm pretty sure their talking about future films, we make films about prehistoric dinosaurs, so the robots make films about prehistoric humans(pre robot history) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.24|141.101.99.24]] 13:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:: except for the use of "their", I'm in complete agreement. I'm gonna make a few tweaks, accordingly - [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
:Robot 2 isn't referring to a current movie, I think this is set roughly 65million years in the future. So i've removed the part about Troy and other sword and sandal films {{unsigned|Zeimusu}}
:::I assume it's more that skeletons and metal are much more likely to survive than clothes. Perhaps, they often see the crowns nearby the skulls in digs and assume that they were attached in life. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.100|108.162.219.100]] 19:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Dinosaurs with feathers. Yawn. The idea is already tired. Dinosaurs with feathers cool? I just picture the T-Rex in Jurassic Park chasing the car to the tune of the Chicken Dance and it doesn't take me long to realise how cool feathered dinosaurs really are. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.161|108.162.249.161]] 21:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)