explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2352: Synonym Date

2020-08-31T19:14:12Z

141.101.69.87: i have important things to contribute here.

"This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by an AUTOMATON." That's funny. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.170.50|172.69.170.50]] 01:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
:Yeah, there's one on a lot of them and nobody's ever bothered removing them. [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 01:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
::"Do NOT kill this warning before it is ready to die" is especially good. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 05:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
:::Do not mistake Synonym for Verbaciousness. A single ''technically'' correct but ''contextually'' dubious word (I suppose the original BOT->AUTOMATON counts) is what it should be. Merely verbosifying an antilaconic and/or polysyllaballic interwoven sentencial restructurisation is very much akin to being ballistically off-target vis-a-vis the inherent humour theme. (i.e. missing the joke.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.70|141.101.98.70]] 10:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I feel like this is not Megan, but a new character, differentiated by her wearing a dress (which also makes her seem almost strange compared to the others). [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.75|173.245.54.75]] 06:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
:Come on, can't a gal wear a dress without turning into a completely new person? I think she looks cute in that outfit! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.214|172.69.34.214]] 07:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Is grub meant to disgust, or is she merely British and using a perfectly normal word for food in use since 1691.The captcha asked me to click on crosswalks, but all I could seee were Zebra crossings. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.108|162.158.155.108]] 07:58, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
:I cannot begin to explain the cascade of confusion and misunderstanding created by having first read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in a UK edition rather than a US edition where the words, "zebra crossing," are replaced by, "crosswalk." Being quite young I thought the idea of zebra crossings must be analogous to deer crossings that exist all over US roads but, perhaps, was a reference to human evolution in Africa and, given Adams's quite loose restrictions on temporal effects, that the 'cleverness' of the human species had echoed back in time and destroyed itself before the cleverness ever took place. In theory, if not in practice. Only because the proof of the non-existence of God due to the existence of the Babelfish wasn't universally accepted was the human species saved. Funny how a colorful expression changes things, in'it?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.107|162.158.79.107]] 13:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

We also have other species pelican, puffin, toucan (pedestrian and cycle) and pegasus crossings, the last for those riding horses. Panda crossings are extinct. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.197|162.158.158.197]] 22:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

As a member of the Facebook Group "Dr. Anna vs. Danger," I can guarantee that many MANY people would find this woman's approach to language very hot indeed. [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 13:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Isn't Megan just overly using British English expressions, which is misinterpreted as being weird on purpose? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.6|108.162.229.6]] 15:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
:Maybe, given the dress, but [[1132|I'll bet you $50 she isn't.]] [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 03:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Clearly, Randall has been watching the most recent episode of Star Trek - Lower Decks (released this Thursday). "Moist" is the word most commonly observed to be found unpleasant, & he just used two synonyms for it in a joke about unsettling phrasings, entitled Synonyms. Moist was right in the ''title'' of the most recent episode.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I think I am in love.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.70|141.101.98.70]] 08:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Is this a crossover episode with [https://instagram.com/nathanwpylestrangeplanet Strange Planet]? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.87|141.101.69.87]] 19:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2347: Dependency

2020-08-18T10:18:51Z

141.101.69.87: Are dependencies a new thing? Maaaybe

I worked for the Linux Foundation on the Core Infrastructure Initiative supporting OpenSSL and other projects. The one that scared me was Expat the XML parser maintained by two people on alternate Sunday afternoons assuming no other distractions. We did get funding for a test suite. Joe Biden was a supporter of LF and CII and was going to host a fund raiser for us at the White House until a perverse result.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.222|141.101.98.222]] 22:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

== Relevance of Imagemagick? ==

Could someone perhaps add to the explanation an explanation of how this applies to Imagemagick (as mentioned in the title text)? —[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.174|108.162.219.174]] 22:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
:I don't use it myself, but it is a very versatile standalone utility that does a lot through command-line (batched) processing or can be accessed through actual API interface (I use GIMP tools that way, in automation, when not using it directly as a manual interface, but I understand there's a lot of love out there for IM). There's potentially untold uses for that, hidden in the background of other applications. If it disappeared or changed in just the wrong way, could perhaps half the CAPTCHA dialogues suddenly break? Could a self-driving car company find its vehicles are suddenly blind? We might suddenly have so many fewer Doge memes! (Wow! Much up-to-datedness! So topical!).
: In Randall's (or his characters') world, that is. In our world, I see someone mentioned Leftpad in the Explanation, which probably needs more Explanation (or else wikilinking) but is an interesting thing that actually happened in our world, albeit not ''quite'' armagg3don for society... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.131|162.158.154.131]] 23:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
: Imagemagick is the de-facto standard for Image processing. Since the 90's engineers were either adding support for new formats to ImageMagick or adding new language bindings for ImageMagick. This resulted in a single library that is available on almost every server and desktop platform and can read and write almost every image format. Using imageMagick is sometimes unwieldly. e.g. on nodeJS it actually spawns a sub-process to run imagemagick. But it is still the de-facto (and the only practical) choice in most cases.--[[User:Deepjoy|Deepjoy]] ([[User talk:Deepjoy|talk]]) 00:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

== from the late 2010s onwards? ==

I'm pretty sure re-use and modularization was a thing long before then. Maybe it got more popular in the 2010s, but it's been around since at least the '70s.
: The ideal of reusable code libraries has been around for nearly ever, but except for some popular Fortran statistics libraries I don't think it achieved widespread achievement until much later, e.g. CPAN. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 03:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)p

The timezone database (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database#History) has been around since 1986. libc in various forms has been around as long as C has. Reuse and modularity is a fundamental principle of software engineering, and not an invention of the last few years. I'd just remove any mention of date.
: I think it's relatively recent that you can delete a file from one Web server and everything on the internet breaks. Dependencies are one thing, dependency on live updated resources is new. Because it's rather a bad idea. Incidentally overall... I think today's comic needs to be explained slower. Most people in the world are very unfamiliar with these concepts. Although coronavirus responses have taught a lot of us about "supply chains" that put stuff into shops for us to buy. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.87|141.101.69.87]] 10:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

== This has happened before ==

It may be worth mentioning a case where this actually happened, like https://www.theregister.com/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/ [[Special:Contributions/141.101.97.101|141.101.97.101]] 01:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

One particularly big risk that instantly came to mind is the timezone database, which is maintained by volunteers yet underpins basically everything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database#Maintenance

== Some random person in Nebraska ==

Is the reference to a random person in Nebraska totally arbitrary, or is it a reference to someone in particular?

Also, it would be good to have examples of heavily used projects with very small (especially one person) maintainer teams. OpenSSL definitely comes to mind, from what I have read. [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 01:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Nebraska came up in 1667, "Algorithms" as well.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.33|162.158.79.33]] 02:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
:Nebraska is... Well, I'm sure some Nebraskonians might have a more fully-fleshed out and accurate opinion of its subtleties, depth of culture(s?) and Diety-given geographic artisanship but viewed from further afield it is one of the contenders for "miles and miles of not much going on", or similar, peopled by people that largely live within that promise.
:It may be just a [https://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Power_Cable meme of such a generality], as a brief look at a {{w|List_of_people_from_Nebraska|list of people from Nebraska}} tends to support the hypothesis that the ones who became significant (Astair, Brando, Carson...) probably did so only once they left.
:OTOH, there are (at least) four computing pioneers/developers mentioned among them, creator or authors of significant 'products', and maybe {{w|Sketchpad|one of these}} matches the (intellectual) dependency meme quite well - other than being written in Massachusetts. Or {{w|Blogger_(service)|this one}}, though that might have been LA-baked, maybe?
:I learnt [[1053|some interesting things]] when investigating this issue, just now. Cheers! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.142|108.162.229.142]] 09:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

== Microservices reference ==
Microservices reference is not related to this comic, as ImageMagick is monolith application. Also microservices are way of operating and deploying web services, not utility apps.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.177|162.158.103.177]] 07:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2040: Sibling-in-Law

2018-09-03T13:34:19Z

141.101.69.87:

Unless you want to go completely nuts on this topic, avoid reading Jane Austen, where the the term "X-in-law" is used to mean, roughly, "someone to whom you are related for legal reasons". It can be used to refer to, for example, what we today might refer to as step/half-siblings, adopted siblings, etc. [[User:Arcanechili|Arcanechili]] ([[User talk:Arcanechili|talk]]) 15:51, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

> The title text refers to incestual relationships, which are generally frowned upon in Western culture.
How on earth this refers to incest if persons are only legally, not genetically related??? It's just that Randall doesn't know how to call new relatives but cannot stop their arrival. {{unsigned ip|162.158.91.251}}

Yes, I also don't think it refers to incest. {{unsigned ip|172.68.94.40}}

:I'm not sure if that is right or not, but that was my interpretation of that text, based on the "a reason why these two should not be wed." Unless there is a different issue with this, also involving marriage? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.59.190|162.158.59.190]] 16:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

::I read the title text as... the reason he is objecting has nothing to do with the couple getting married, it's simply the selfish reason that Randall doesn't want the confusion of having to figure out what to call the new extended-family members. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Somehow I don't have this problem whatsoever...as I'm a single child who married a single child. I have zero siblings-in-law. In fact, my future kids won't even have (regular) cousins... {{unsigned ip|162.158.74.231}}

Am I the only one that thinks there's an error in this comic? Shouldn't spouse's sibling be the sibling-in-law of Cueball's *sibling*? But then, maybe I'm also making Randall's point... [[User:Sspenser|Sspenser]] ([[User talk:Sspenser|talk]]) 18:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

^ Sspenser I honestly think this is a poorly constructed diagram because it invites this type of confusion -- I was also tripped up at first, but I think all relationships are meant to be labeled *with respect to "Me"/cueball*. My initial assumption was that each double-headed arrow was intending to label *pairs* of siblings-in-law; in fact I think it is trying to label individuals who are each independently siblings-in-law of cueball's (or assumed siblings-in-law of cueball's). The different double-headed arrows represent different levels of confidence in claiming this relationship between Cueball and the individuals in that "layer." I think it would have been more clear if he kept the arrows basically the same, but labeled as "*My* Siblings-in-law"/"Also *My* Siblings-in-law, I think?"/etc. ~clukes [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.238|162.158.63.238]] 00:28, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
:'''''I''''' was initially confused by the black border surrounding the image, which connects the heredity lines of ''all'' the people in the chart as if they shared a parent by different matings. This image really ought not to have a border the same color as the chart lines... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:21, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

The Russian language actually has different words for both "types" of brothers in-law (spouse's brother vs. sister's husband), also for parents and children in-law on either side: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Свойство_(родство) .
But all these in-law distinctions are based on the respective spouse's sex, so it won't work for same-sex marriages. {{unsigned ip|162.158.234.58}}

:In German, they even have a word for "spouse of sibling in-law" and similar situations: "Schwippschwager" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwippschwager [[User:Polyfier|Polyfier]] ([[User talk:Polyfier|talk]]) 23:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

The way this is defined, you and your spouse both have the same set of siblings and siblings-in-law. In other words, if someone is your spouse's sibling or sibling in law then that person is your sibling in law if that person is not your sibling. The relationship chains across a maximum of one sibling relationship. [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|talk]]) 18:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Off topic but I can't resist:
:DARK HELMET: I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former room-mate.
:LONE STARR: What's that make us?
:DARK HELMET: Absolutely nothing....
Spaceballs (1987) parody Star Wars --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:51, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Anyone else think this comic is a form of "Wedding Gift" Randal is giving to a sibling who's getting married (presumably today)? {{unsigned|JamesCurran}}

People actually complain cousins removed is hard to understand? When I first learned about it, my thought was actually: Wow, that is so much clearer than what we use in Dutch. In Dutch we use a prefix for each step its is removed so it can get wordy. A cousin would be "neef" a cousin once removed would be "achterneef" a 2nd cousin "achterachterneef". I think a 2nd cousin removed would then be "achterachterachterneef" and third cousins "achterachterachterachterneef". I'm not even sure that's how confusing it is. The English system is easy. Simply count up to the common ancestor (A), then down to the relative (R). Then you're (R-2)th cousins (A-R) times removed. Fun fact, your siblings are your zeroth cousins and you are your own negative first cousin. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 22:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
:That is awesome & I'm totally using it from now on; except I'm going to call anyone 2nd cousin or beyond "altachterneef" & see how long it takes for a Dutch-speaker to give me a quizzical look. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:21, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Sooo... Maybe you can help me with this:
My half-sister from my Mother's first marriage has 3 half-sisters from her Father's second marriage. My half-sister adopted her youngest half-sister, becoming her legal guardian or "parent". So is that person my niece? Half-sister? Half-sister in-law? Sister? Half-sister's half-sister? Half-sister's daughter in-law? Niece in-law once removed? None? [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 01:21, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
:She's your adopted half-niece. She had no named relationship to you prior to adoption. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 12:49, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
::That sounds about right! We all refer to each other as brother & sisters though. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:35, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I've never heard of a spouse's sibling's spouse being called your sibling-in-law before. That usage seems weird to me. But then, none of my siblings or siblings-in-law are married. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 12:50, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

;Ray Steven's song
If he thinks that's confusing, he should follow Ray Steven's ''I'm My Own Grandpa'' song. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.76|172.68.150.76]] 14:12, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
:When I was growing up, I did know some kids where the younger one was claimed as the other's uncle... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:35, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

;Zaphod Beeblebrox character
Zaphod is described as a "semi-half-cousin" of Ford Prefect, with whom he "shares three of the same mothers". Because of "an accident with a contraceptive and a time machine", his direct ancestors from his father are also his direct descendants. He has referred to himself as Zaphod Beeblebrox the First, but is called Zaphod Beeblebrox the Nothingth by his great-grandfather.
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:35, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Accidentally deleted yesterday, sorry for that: --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:11, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
:The Merriam-Webster and Oxford dictionaries both give a simple list of people who can be considered a sibling-in-law. Your sibling's spouse, your spouse's sibling, and your spouse's sibling's spouse. It does not include your sibling's spouse's siblings. So the questionable "sibling-in-law" on the left is not a sibling-in-law, while the one on the right is. Why does two marriage and a sibling relationship count for more than two sibling and a marriage relationship? Because married people generally spend a lot of adult time together, while siblings gradually drift apart. A cause to gather siblings can easily sweep multiple spouses into the gathering, while a cause to gather one side of the family only rarely gathers the other side. These differences become more pronounced in with large numbers of siblings.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.12|162.158.186.12]]

I'm just noting, I looked at Wikipedia, and the best I can find as a solution to it, starting at "Also siblings-in-law, I think?" are "First Cousins-in-law", and the numbers increase as they radiate out. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.58.89|172.68.58.89]] 07:33, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Um, the description of the title text seems to have a lot of supposition in it. All it really says is that the reason isn't good enough - not that anyone actually tried it, was shot down etc, or even that it refers to banns. My reading of it before I came here was actually similar to the incest train of thought, where not having that relationship clarified could cause issues down the road in regards to inheritance, future marriages etc.
Also, 'traditional wedding in most English-speaking regions' isn't entirely accurate - banns are generally a Christian thing, sure, but Christianity extends to non-English-speaking areas as well and has done for quite some time, and a requirement for notice and swearing that no legal impediments to the marriage exist are now part of many secular, legal processes for marriage (e.g. part of the process of obtaining a licence, or via registration of intent). I'd recommend this be changed to something a little less interpretative. e.g:
"The title text states that not knowing whether a marriage would create an in-law relationship between one of the parties and a third person doesn't constitute an objection to a marriage significant enough to stop it from happening. The phrase "reason why these two should not be wed" comes from the historical practice of announcing a marriage in advance so that people could raise any objections - such as one of the parties already being married - prior to the wedding. This process is now often handled by notice requirements or a signed declaration by the parties that no impediment exists." {{unsigned ip|172.68.254.247}}
: I don't know if the objection part of the wedding ceremony exists only in christian rites -I doubt it-, but in christianity it's quite specific to the anglican rite (never heard of it anywhere else) so I would say that "English-speaking" is quite accurate here.
In-law are awefully (intended) simple : exactly one marital and one blood link. I fail to understand how anyone could possibly be confused by that. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.87|141.101.69.87]] 13:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1938: Meltdown and Spectre

2018-01-08T11:05:12Z

141.101.69.87: Ghost in the shell, trolley in the sky with hammers

The "trolley problem" is the ethical dilemma thought experiment where an out-of-control trolley is heading to a junction (which you have control over) - to one side it'll kill one group of people - to the other, some others. Your moral dilemma is deciding which is the "best" outcome (eg, hitting a dozen five year old children or three Nobel laureats). This is like a software "if" statement. Speculative execution in most CPU chips is where the computer always takes both sides of a decision like this - explores what will happen down each path - and only causes the effects of the decision to happen when the decision as to which way to proceed is decided. This allows it to keep on doing useful work while some slower decision is made. The "quantum" aspect of this is that in some versions of quantum theory, quantum-level particles take every possible path at once and the result is the sum of all of them.

In a sense, the computer is exploring the consequences of the trolley problem in a quantum-like manner.
:There's so much wrong with this sentence. You totally did it intentionally. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.118|108.162.216.118]] 05:56, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This would all be OK if it were not for the fact that devious black-hat hackers can come up with devious ways to see the information that should have been discarded in the "path-not-taken". So even though the computer will eventually decide that some piece of information should not be accessible - you can find out the value it would hypothetically read - even though it will soon decide that it should not access the information.

The "rowhammer" problem is something entirely different. Computer memories are organized as a two-dimensional grid of rows and columns - and are physically constructed from tiny capacitors. If you apply just the RIGHT pattern of rapid changes to one row of the grid, you can cause one of the capacitors on the next row to incorrectly change state. This is a design flaw in the memory chip - and it allows (in some circumstances) programs to change data in memory locations that they have no right to change.

[[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 19:33, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

uhhh did you just copy and paste your entire edit into talk? [[User:DPS2004|DPS2004'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 20:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

: Pretty much. When I got here, there was no information about the comic at all. Since I'm unfamiliar with all of the other stuff that goes into an explain, I left it as a comment so someone else could use it...but after a while, nobody did, so I copy-pasted it into the explanation...with some tweaks! Sorry if that was a faux-pas of some variety! [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 21:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

What? Servers are vulnerable to actual hammers? Huh, do you suppose they're be vulnerable to an actual trolley as well? I have a spare server, does anyone have a spare trolley? ~~ SiliconWolf

: My server is actually mounted inside a trolley - precisely to avoid this kind of issue. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 23:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

:I wouldn't recommend that. A collision would anger the honeybees. [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]]

: Do you think we can put a quantum computer in a trolley and ask the ghost in the shell to chase down the one causing the above vulnerabilites? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.87|141.101.69.87]] 11:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

The most helpful technical explanation I’ve found is here: https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/why-raspberry-pi-isnt-vulnerable-to-spectre-or-meltdown/ ;the comments also provide useful clarification. [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 02:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Could an explanation be added as to what a trolley is? Being in the UK, my first thought was that of a shopping trolley (US: Shopping cart). Over here, we call trollies "trams" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.4|162.158.34.4]] 11:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
:The analogy is the same, just the speed and engine that changes. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]]
::...As does the lethality... I expect the worst case scenario to be a bruised hip. In fact I'd send a shopping cart at the 5 people, they'd have a greater chance of stopping it without harm. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:09, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
:Actually, I find "trolley" to be a very UK word. Outside of this Trolley Problem I never hear it here in North America. Without looking it up, I would expect the mere name means it probably was thought up in the UK in the fist place, or by someone using UK English to name it. Only other term I can think of right now is "streetcar", but I never hear that either. Blanking on what they usually are called (perhaps "tram" as well), but they don't have any anymore in my city. This commonality of terms might be different in cities equipped with them. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:09, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I totally expected "Schrodinger's Cat's Cat" to be a popular meme, but apparently it is not. [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s+cat%27s+cat%22&safe=off&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX7NuzssXYAhWwSd8KHWKGCVQQ_AUICSgA&biw=1920&bih=949&dpr=1 Google search] I hereby claim it.[[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 08:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

The explanation assumes Cueball is taking Ponytail's comment litteraly while she agrees with him because of the humor. To me it rather looked like Cueball was making a joke that Ponytail agreed to. The fact that he said "The Cloud" would confirm this view IMHO, as he deliberatly chose another metaphor to push the silly image even further. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.87|141.101.69.87]] 11:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

== Thoughts by someone who just arrived ==

I just read the available explanation, and it seems fairly complete to me, someone who knew next to nothing about spectre and meltdown besides their names before reading. In my opinion, the 'something seems to be missing' tag can be removed. However, as I am no expert on the matter, I will leave someone else to decide and perform (or not perform) the action of removing it. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.186|172.68.65.186]] 02:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)