explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2959: Beam of Light

2024-07-16T08:10:28Z

141.101.98.110:

hi {{unsigned ip|172.68.174.143|04:37, 16 July 2024}}
:Hello, could you please sign your post? [[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]] ([[User talk:OmniDoom|talk]]) 04:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]]: I have signed the post for them. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 04:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:::megan detected 🤩🤩🤩 [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.185|172.69.43.185]] 07:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
::::It's just a thematic name. If you keep overreacting to it, we can do [[322: Pix Plz|this]]. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 07:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::aw hell yeah, melt the school computers i use to edit this wiki [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.110|141.101.98.110]] 08:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I totally thought it said Epstein at first, and I was trying to make sense of a seemingly dark, oblique, and dated joke.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.141|172.70.210.141]] 05:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:randall would never [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.185|172.69.43.185]] 07:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

1650: Baby

2024-07-16T08:08:39Z

141.101.98.110: /* Table */ clarity

{{comic
| number = 1650
| date = March 2, 2016
| title = Baby
| image = baby.png
| titletext = Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] (possibly representing [[Randall]]) is uncomfortable about talking with couples who present their baby to him (here represented by [[Megan]] and another Cueball-like guy holding a baby in a blanket). Because he never knows what to say, he has many strange thoughts and/or reasonable questions, that shouldn't be mentioned in front of happy parents showing off their precious baby for the first time. See [[#Table|the table]] below for his thoughts.

Cueball's thoughts of what he didn't say includes awkward or plain strange lines, musings about science which has nothing to do with this baby, and a rating of the baby. Nonetheless some of the thoughts are quite true.

In the end he manages to make a comment about how cool the baby is, and immediately regrets this, as he just realized he has squandered the chance to say something meaningful and instead has come out with something quite inane.

In the title text he continues his thoughts again, going in the scientific direction with a question regarding how a child grows. Does it get tall first and then put on weight? (i.e. widen). This is a valid question which has no general answer. (See more in the table below). But he is not sure, as he also wonders if instead the child will reach full width before getting taller or alternate stages.

Randall was 31 at the time of the release of this comic. As far as this page and Wikipedia informs, at the time of writing, he has no children, although he is married. However, given his age, it is highly likely that many of his friends are having babies during these years, so he will probably often get into the depicted situation. Therefore, it is highly likely that the comic is based on his own experience, ''possibly'' with an added degree of comic exaggeration, and that it is indeed Randall depicted as the thinking Cueball.

Having problems with small talk is a recurring theme in xkcd (see [[222: Small Talk]]), even something as simple as talking about the weather can be a problem (see [[1324: Weather]]). This comic is the third in less than a month were Cueball has issues with this; the first two were [[1640: Super Bowl Context]] and [[1643: Degrees]].

There has previously been a "plural" version of this comic called [[441: Babies]], here Cueball also manages to say something better left unsaid, even if it was about his own baby.

===Table===
*In the table is a list of all the different sentences Cueball can think of or actually speaks in this comic:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
|+ Cueball’s thoughts, including final statement and the title text.
|-
! scope="col" | Sentence
! scope="col" | Explanation
|-
| Wow, it's getting so big! Unlike most babies, which stay the same size forever.
| The first part of the sentence is quite a normal response, if it is not the first time the person sees the baby. But the second part can be interpreted as sarcastic, as newborn babies are supposed to grow fast, and it would be strange/bad if the baby had not grown considerably if it had been some months since last time. This also shows how inane the normal statement is, though people often feel inclined to say it anyway.
|-
| Hi! I'm talking to a baby!
| People often talk to the baby, rather than the parents. This makes no sense for Cueball, as the baby doesn't understand him. Should he mention this?
|-
| What brand is it?
| Typically a question one would ask about a new car, article of clothing, electronics, or other inanimate object, not a baby. Alternatively, the "{{w|brand}}" could also figuratively refer to the baby's sex. Usually it may be OK to ask what sex the baby is, though the normal question would be ''Is it a boy or a girl.''
|-
| Wow, definitely much smaller than a regular person!
| As all babies are... Typically a real response would be ''Wow, they are so small''. Possibly also a reference (in a complimentary sense) to, e.g., a compact vehicle vs. a normal-sized one, or how modern computers are/tend to be tinier (comparatively) than their predecessors, all other things equal.
|-
| You sure did make that.
| A typical comment would be ''he sure looks like you''. (See the comment that it doesn't look like you.) Such a sentence basically means you can see that it is clear that these two people did in fact make this baby. But making a baby requires sex, so when he puts it like that he actually refers to the sex part, which may be an awkward topic for many people.
|-
| ★★★★☆ Great baby.
| It is custom to praise parents for their lovely baby, but do not ever rate it with stars! In [[1608: Hoverboard]] Megan [http://xkcd.com/1608/1019:-1073+s.png rates a sea], something also not usually done. At least Cueball gave the baby more stars than Megan gave the sea.
|-
| It doesn't really look like you since you're not a baby.
| A common comment is ''He totally looks like you''. What people mean is that they can see features in the face (he has his father's nose but his mother's eyes). But of course given that the parents are adults they of course no longer look like a baby. Often it could be speculated that people just say this because they wish to see the similarities and to please the parents (hopefully).
|-
| So do they learn words one at a time alphabetically or can you pick the order or what?
| Here Cueball displays interest in the process of learning to speak a language as a baby. Very interesting subject, but since this is a very small baby, not something first time parents would have thought about yet. Learning one word at a time seems reasonable, but the two suggestions that they learn alphabetically or in a specific order the parents choose is plain silly. Babies learning language are the topic of [[2567: Language Development]].
|-
| I hope it does a good job.
| Cueball could be referring to the baby's future, such as schooling and employment, or could be saying "I hope it does a good job being a baby/growing up/etc."
|-
| Wow, that's a really cool baby!
| This is what Cueball actually ends up saying. He thinks immediately that this was a silly thing to say and thinks ''Dammit'' (see title text of this comic: [[559: No Pun Intended]]).
|-
| Title text: Does it get taller first and then widen, or does it reach full width before getting taller, or alternate, or what?
| It is not possible to generalize about how {{w|Child_development#Physical_growth|children grow}}, but of course it doesn't reach full width before getting taller! But it's mostly true that kids do alternate between putting on weight and using that weight to get taller. So they might get chubbier during a period of time, but then suddenly they will lose the fat as they grow taller and become thin again. If they don't eat much, they may stay small. If you feed them a diet with lots of sugar, they may stay fat even during growth spurts. But not necessarily, as each kid is different. The question is thus very interesting, but again not something to discuss as an anecdote the first time you have the chance to comment on a newborn baby.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is standing in front of a family consisting a Cueball-like guy holding a newborn baby, with spiky hair, in a blanket and Megan. Cueball is thinking lots of thoughts about what to say to the couple upon seeing their baby for the first time. There is thus a huge thinking bubble in the top of the panel above the characters. Everything in this bubble has been crossed out like taking a pencil and drawing lines on top of the text, but it can still be read. After using all this time thinking, Cueball finally decides what to say, only to immediately regret this as can be seen in a small thought bubble below his spoken line, which is between the huge and the small bubble.]
:Cueball (thoughts that are crossed out):
::<s>Wow, it's getting so big! Unlike most babies, which stay the same size forever.
::Hi! I'm talking to a baby!
::What brand is it?
::Wow, definitely much smaller than a regular person!
::You sure did make that.
::★★★★☆ Great baby.
::It doesn't really look like you since you're not a baby.
::So do they learn words one at a time alphabetically or can you pick the order or what?
::I hope it does a good job.</s>
:Cueball: Wow, that's a really cool baby!
:Cueball (thinking): ''Dammit.''

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I can never figure out what to say about babies.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Comics with babies]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Baby 2]]
[[Category:Social interactions]]
[[Category:Kids]]

Talk:1672: Women on 20s

2016-05-30T23:29:47Z

141.101.98.110:

One (potentially) legitimate concern I have seen expressed regarding the proposed rollout date for the redesigned $20s is that we may not be using paper money anymore by then!
[[User:Rajakiit|Raj-a-Kiit]] ([[User talk:Rajakiit|talk]]) 13:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The weird creepy looking eye thing is the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence Eye of Providence]. And now that Randall mentioned it, I somehow have an intense emotional need to see a series of US currency with the Eye of Providence as the featured portrait on every bill....

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.23|108.162.217.23]] 14:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

:I think the humor of the Eye of Providence reference (which is on the US$1 banknote BTW) is that it's often referred to as a sign of the Illuminati. The Illuminati is often used in conspiracy theories, so replacing all of the faces with that sign specifically would not so much enrage people as much as people would be calling Illuminati takeovers. Ergo to not trigger the conspiracy theorist paranoia in our country (i'm US American, BTW) that would likely never happen. Also our $1 bill, which is the only bill to have the Eye of Providence(& no building on the back side) hasn't been changed since like the 1960s, because of vending machine lobbyists. So the anachronisms of that IMO is really annoying.
[[User:Siv3nIvy|Siv3nIvy]] ([[User talk:Siv3nIvy|talk]]) 09:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The real question: why can't the Treasury leave the $10 bill alone, redesign the $20 bill (with Harriet Tubman on both sides), and release that redesign in the 2020s as planned? There is no rush here, so long as it is done.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.61|173.245.50.61]] 15:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

There's been a furor over here in the UK about (losing) a woman from our paper money. (Not the Queen, at least not just yet, although having just turned 90...) Only the other day, though, they announced the [http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/pages/characters/nexttwenty.aspx new £20 note] (JMW Turner, the painter) set for release (as a polymer note) in 2020... And I couldn't help feeling that the fallout from the referendum, if not other events, might easily make this matter moot. One way or another ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.137|141.101.98.137]] 16:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

What is the "Security" issue referred to in the title text? {{unsigned ip|173.245.52.75}}

I'd assume he's referring to security features meant to prevent/deter counterfeiting. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.214.209|108.162.214.209]] 21:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't get what all the fuss is about what picture is on the money. I don't even know what picture is on any of the euro bills. *Grabs a 10, 20 and 50 from wallet.* I still don't know. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 23:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

:Luckily, someone explained it on wikipedia: {{w|Euro banknotes}}: the 5 euro note has a generic rendition of Classical architecture, the 10 euro note of Romanesque architecture, the 20 euro note of Gothic architecture, the 50 euro note of the Renaissance, the 100 euro note of Baroque and Rococo, the 200 euro note of Art Nouveau and the 500 euro note of modern architecture. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

::Though now they are no longer entirely generic, as one guy in the Netherlands decided to build the generic bridges that are depicted on the euro notes, and now the structures depicted on the notes actually exist. (See the references in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_banknotes#Bridges .) -- [[User:Pne|Pne]] ([[User talk:Pne|talk]]) 12:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

The explanation claims "The current rule about changing the $10 next before they can change the $20 comes from Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Treasurer is powerless to work against it." However, I've just read through the text of that Section of that Act several times, and I can't find any wording to justify this claim. If this is a valid claim, could someone point more explicitly to where the Act restricts the order in which bills can be redesigned? [[User:Rhwentworth|Rhwentworth]] ([[User talk:Rhwentworth|talk]]) 02:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

This just in - Treasury decides to print a new $9 bill with Andrew Jackson on it. -[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.16|162.158.255.16]] 04:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

This whole controversy is one reason why there are no real objects on the Euro notes. The individual nation's currencies did have real persons (including women - at least in Germany) or real "things" in a wider sense on them and changing them was often as complicated as depicted here. The current pictures on the Euro notes represent specific architectural styles (e.g. Gothic or Baroque), but the buildings and facades shown don't exist. I don't know if this should be part of the explanation as a side note or something, but I felt it would be nice to know, that other states or organisiations had similar struggles and actually found a compromise. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
::How I long back for the old Dutch NLG 50 note with the yellow sunflower on it! One of the most beautiful banknotes I've ever seen. [[User:Palmpje|Palmpje]] ([[User talk:Palmpje|talk]]) 12:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Can we add a category about Comics Featuring Steve? [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 21:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
:I think that three examples (where it is just a name, for someone not shown) is too little for a new category. If you can find other places where it is similarly used then maybe. But be careful when searching since a "Steve" search will find real people like Steve Jobs and Seven Spielberg for instance... And please do not make a page out of it like you did (deleted the square brackets). If there would be a category it would also not take that form. [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Can we add a category about Comics Which Make Absolutely No Sense To People Outside the USA? [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 22:54, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
:Since Randall is American I think those of us not from the US should just accept that he will make local oriented comics from time to time, and then just enjoy that we can find the explanations here ;-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have very little information as to which parts of this comic are true or false. This page could seriously do with citations. (E.g. what broadway musical? I have no idea.)