explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1576: I Could Care Less

2015-09-14T13:17:13Z

141.101.98.195: Another reply

Another excellent comic by Randall. In case of interest to anyone a different perspective, David Mitchell did a wonder rant on this... "Dear America... | David Mitchell's SoapBox"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw {{unsigned ip|‎141.101.98.100}}

The only people who complain about this phrase are pedantic morons who have never heard such things as "head over heels".

Here, I've composed a list of common vernacular/slang idioms which are valid, clear, and diametrically opposed to their original meaning:
* "Head over heels"
* "Break a leg"
* "It's the shit"
* "That's bad"
* "She's phat"
* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"
* "Irregardless"{{unsigned|Cwallenpoole}}
: "Diametrically opposed" is redundant. The words mean the same thing. Sorry, when the topic of conversation is pedanticism I couldn't resist :P [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.170|108.162.221.170]] 22:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
:The reason I dislike "I could care less" is because it just grates me. It disrupts the flow of parsing language in my brain, throwing up a "wait, what?" exception that I have to expend far more mental energy than usual to correctly interpret the meaning of something in my head. I'm not being pedantic for the sake of uptight rule adherence and feeling superior (I play around with language and use it in non-standard forms all the time), I'm pedantic because it causes my brain real difficulties in processing the meaning of what a person's said. I mean I'm a woman with Asperger's (and a British one at that) so maybe things are a little different for me, but that's just why I personally strongly dislike this usage. The things on your list though are all different in some way to "I could care less", at least for me, for example:
:* "Head over heels" - How is this an opposite meaning, exactly? Doesn't it give a rather nice metaphor for being giddy about something? Being hyperbolic and metaphorical doesn't make it an opposite meaning.
::*Because your head is ''normally'' over your heels. Nothing special about it. Heels over head would be much more interesting...[[User:Silverpie|Silverpie]] ([[User talk:Silverpie|talk]]) 17:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:::*Personally I always think of it as your head being bowled over your heels - not the sort of "over" as in "higher gravitational potential energy", but in the same "around" sense of being "turned over" or "starting over". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.47|108.162.218.47]] 03:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "Break a leg" - This is closer to being an opposite, but the exact opposite to wishing an actor good luck would be to wish them bad luck. The mutation to a slightly absurdist statement marks it out as having a different meaning, especially as "break a leg" isn't really used in any other context than to wish a person good luck. While it may be the case that "I could care less" is rarely (if at all) used in its literal form, there's still nothing to mutate it and obviously mark it out as a linguistic special usage case. It's also still how I'd expect someone to phrase it if they were actually telling me they could care less about something.
::: The "Vaudeville theory" on this page is where I got my understanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Break_a_leg --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "It's the shit" - Again, this is mutated. People aren't saying "it's shit", the word "the" handily tags it for my brain parser to handle differently.
:* "That's bad" - Well, you've got me here actually. I mean, context (and tone) makes the meaning obvious but I can't objectively understand why this phrase doesn't cause me the same sort of difficulties at all. Perhaps because I grew up in the 80s, and a big part of my musical upbringing was Michael Jackson. ''♬ A-hee-hee! Hoo! ♬''
:* "She's phat" - This is completely literal, "phat" is a slang term meaning excellent or attractive. It may be a mutation of the word "fat" or not, its etymology is uncertain, but it is indisputably a very different word now (much like how "orchids" means a species of flower rather than testicles, and "sinister" hasn't meant left in centuries).
::: I understand it's an acronym: Pretty Hot And Tempting. --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" - This is also completely literal, Freud meant that while he believed many things ''could'' have hidden, psychosexual meanings... that while sometimes a person might be puffing on a cigar due to some suppressed phallic desires... they could also just be puffing on a cigar because they're enjoying a nice cigar. That is to say, not everything has a hidden subconscious meaning, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, not a substitute object to fellate.
:* "Irregardless" - Well yes, the suffix added to "regardless" here would usually invert its meaning, but "irregardless" isn't actually a word that existed before it came into use with its current meaning so it's not like saying a previously established and defined word (or phrase).
: Anyway, while I do believe language is flexible and mutable, this particular phrase fails the easily interpretable test for my brain. I try not to be too uptight about it, but it really does irritate me in a way I can't help. Obviously my opinion is not the only one, so that's just my 1.29587 British pence on the matter :D [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::(In response to Cwallenpoole, not 141.101.98.195, who makes good points that I didn't actually read first!) "Head over heels" is of course "head over (and down), heels (upwards) (...and continue this rotation to its logical conclusion)"; "Break a leg" has {{w|Break_a_leg|a number of possible origins}} (I always assumed wishing luck was unlucky, thus the inverse, but several "the leg not being yours" versions also ring true); "It's the shit" is using a somewhat unfortunate object (certainly if you miss out the "the") that is a short-cut off-colour superlative like "the dog's bollocks"; "bad==good" I always assumed was "what's bad to the establishment is good for our own clique"; "phat" is far too modern for me, but probably arises a similar positive superlative with some counter-culture anti-standard spelling; Cigars being cigars don't sound diametrically opposed, to me, although who knows ''what'' went on in Freud's head!; "Irregardless" is an obvious portmanteau/malapropism blend that is so easy to create. - Or so I would personally explain these.
:: Here's an additional one, though, if you care for it: "Cheap at half the price". It sounds wrong if you dig deep and work out that it must mean "It is not more than or equal to twice the actually fair price you should have been asking" (i.e. it's less than double the price). But I've always internally rationalised it as really saying "If this figure you mention actually were only half of the full price you are ''truly'' asking for, the real price would still be considered cheap" (i.e. it's less than half price). Or it could just be obfuscated salesman patter, i.e. telling the truth (still making a profit, but less than a 100% mark-up) but using weasel-words and terminology that create misleading imagery in the listener's mind. i.e. No crime, no foul, should Trading Standards happen to come-a-visiting, one day... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:::''Actually'', to follow-up on myself: "It's cheap(, it being in this instance) at half the price (I would normally charge)" works best. Why has that only just occured to me? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:::Attempting to interpret "head over heels" to somehow mean "head down, heels up" isn't etymologically accurate; it's simply a reversal of the original expression, which was "heels over head." There's a similar expression in German ("Hals über Kopf") and Scandinavian (Norwegian "hals over hode", Swedish "hals över huvud") literally "neck over head," which means "in great hurry or disarray, without thinking" and is also sometimes (particularly in Norwegian) reversed for no particular reason: perhaps it's just the "mouth feel" that makes it tempting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'I couldn't care less' is the standard formulation in the UK, for one. I always assumed that the US version was originally a variant on this which was later contracted, eg 'I could care less, but not much'.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.106|141.101.99.106]] 07:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Given that xkcd is so pro-science, I don't think the analysis here should endorse the peeve that there's anything wrong with "I could care less" (or use of "literally" as an intensifier), since most actual linguists, experts on how language works, think it's fine. See for example the list of posts dealing with the question here: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=21170#more-21170 And of course, the comic itself points out how petty an besides the point this kind of "correction" is. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:43, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

: As a linguist, regarding the claim that most actual linguists think it's fine, I'd have to respectfully say HELL NO! There is a difference between acknowledging the pragmatic implementation of the phrase, that is, its use in common parlance and the general acceptance and understanding of it, and the question wether or not it is "fine". The comic exemplifies a rather extreme version of the idea "Whatever people use is proper language" - in other words, as long as everybody involved in a conversation gets what is meant, there is no point in arguing semantics, grammer, etc. This is, however, neither the only, nor the dominant approach to language and linguistics. For exapmle, it doesn't answer the question how such an ostensibly paradox use of this phrase came to happen, where (geographically, socially, etc.) the phrase might have originated, and other puzzless regarding the origin of the phrase; this attitude also dismisses any inquiry into how humans process (or ignore) such discrepancies between literal meaning and actual use, and in general, how humans organise, structure, and conecptualise language. Additionally, this comic adds a radical deconstructional (and maybe existential) twist to this perspective by basically saying, "We're all alone, and can never really know or understand anybody else".
: Such an attitude of total relativism ("Every experience ist entirely subjective and unique") makes my skin crawl. It is by far more presumptious than being a little pedantic about grammar and the use of expressions.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.176|162.158.114.176]] 11:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Agreed. Words have meanings and reducing the amount of trust you can place in those meanings decreases the value of the language. "You could never understand me, so I might as well not even try to make myself understood" is a cop-out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.23|108.162.219.23]] 15:22, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:: I stand by my comment that most linguists would argue that the phrase does not warrant censure, on the grounds that it is (1) in very common use, probably about 5 times as common as "couldn't care less" in American speech, including educated speech, and about half as common in writing, (2) long established, with the OED's first reference back in 1966, only twenty years after it first notes "I couldn't care less" (and with Google Book Search, we can push this back to the 1940s: it occurs repeatedly in the official transcript of a House Congressional Hearing in 1947, for example), (3) idiomatic, so that logical analysis of its strict literal content is not helpful, and (4) analogous to other constructions (in English and other languages) that don't raise any eyebrows or hackles. That does not mean that they don't consider it interesting and worthy of explanation, of course. Indeed, almost all the work of actually trying to explain how "could care less" arose has been done by people who are at pain to point out that they find the phrase unobjectionable (while those who disapprove of it don't seem to get much further than calling it "an ignorant substitution" or a result of "sloppy speech and sloppy writing"). It's of course hard to prove that this is the majority view in academic circles, but I refer to Lawler, Liberman, Pullum, Okrent [http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/03/18/why_i_could_care_less_is_not_as_irrational_or_ungrammatical_as_you_might.html], Pinker, the various dictionaries that list it without deprecation (e.g. RH Webster's: "usage: could care less, the apparent opposite of couldn't care less, is actually used interchangeably with it to express indifference. Both versions occur mainly in informal speech."), and linguistic popularizers such as Grammarist [http://grammarist.com/usage/could-care-less/]. This clearly reflects the descriptivist paradigm that seeks to understand language as it actually occurs, and looks skeptically on attempts to impose "rules" that are often demonstrably wrong. In other words, treating linguistics as an empirical science. The version of this position that Megan argues in the comic is obviously heightened for comic effect (she's also using a sort of mock-Gricean analysis to impute a possible helpful intent to Ponytail). You can find most of these points endorsed in a very reasonable [http://blog.dictionary.com/could-care-less/ blog post by dictionary.com]. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.152|141.101.105.152]] 09:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As it's currently written, the explanation seems to suggest that "I could care less" is the American form and "I couldn't care less" British. In fact, both forms are in use in the US, and it wouldn't surprise me if "I could care less" occurs occasionally in British English as well. There are also other English-speaking countries in the world. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:As a Brit, I can't think of any time I've heard a fellow Briton say "I could care less", it's always seemed very much an American phenomenon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:Another American chiming in here to say that I never, ever, ever say "I could care less" when I mean "I couldn't care less". Characterizing it as "*the* American form" is incorrect. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.167|173.245.56.167]] 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As for the title text, I'd disagree with "The sentence is also ambiguous, as it may mean that literally or figuratively, the speaker could or couldn't care less." I think that Randall is pretty clear here: he ''should'' ('could' as in polite request) care less about irrational idioms instead of wasting time drawing comics about it. But he just can't resist. And without him doing so, we wouldn't be here. So in fact, it is nonsense for Randall to care less, and this contradiction is the point of the title text joke. But then again, I'm not native English speaker, and even less of a thought reader to understand what was on his mind. -- kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.224|141.101.96.224]] 08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:I had an alternate take on the title text. Since I could care less literally means I care some but could stand not to care as much, I took it to mean that for all the comic says about the true spirit and nature of communication and the evils of forcing linguistic absolutism onto other people, at the end of the day Randall still does care about people using correct phraseology. Yes, language is so much more than words and sounds but without clear grammatical usage rules communication could descend into chaos. This is actually one of the pivotal points in Jet Li's movie Hero which is a great commentary on this comic's profundity. The deep resonating pools of meaning that communication stores is only useful for peace and coexistence if we can all understand each other and come together as one. --[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::I'm solidly with the IP. Randall is saying that, evidently, this is something which is important to him, and something he's put a lot of thought into. [[User:FourViolas|FourViolas]] ([[User talk:FourViolas|talk]]) 17:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I think "I could care less" is completely unheard of in Britain - I had to come here to find out what this was all about! In the UK the correction wouldn't be seen as pedantic, but rather that you had said something really rather odd, possibly for effect. I'm guessing in the US this doesn't stand out, and the phrase is "familiar" so the brain will run with it, but it just sounds really weird and jarring to me. That's not being pedantic, we toss double negatives around all over the place. Randall's point is that it how you interpret the words, rather than exact rules. So if ponytail is British then she is genuinely just trying to check that it wasn't a slip of the tongue and not meant for effect. To experience how odd it sounds its like a similar phrase "I don't give a s**t", but someone saying "I do give a s**t" (unless you guy's say that as well?!). {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.205}}

: You're right, the British National Corpus has essentially no hits for "could care less" [http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/]. However, Ponytail's "correction" doesn't sound like she's unfamiliar with the expression, but more like the common pedantic objection to it, so I doubt that she's intended to be British, or that it's anything other than "showing off how well she knows some mental checklist." The Lawler link above ([http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html]) discusses the example "They could give a damn about Whitewater" (as in they '''don't''' actually give a damn about it). I think you could get away with "I give a shit?" or "[Like] I give a shit!" (with the "like" elided) as implicitly negative, but no, you can't put in an affirmative "do." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm fighting a long lost battle, I know, but can I mention my fight against the (long-standing) misuse of Decimation when the speaker/writer probably means Devastation? These days it's often assumed to be its own mathematical complement (around ~10% survival, rather than the intended ~10% depletion). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I am right with you on this one. Although I don't think the users are mistaking the Dev- for the Dec-, they have just forgotten or never learned that "decimate" had anything to with percentages. Heck, many English speakers don't grasp that percent has anything to do with percentages. [[User:NoniMausa|NoniMausa]] ([[User talk:NoniMausa|talk]]) 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Either one works, depending on how the sentence is finished:
* I could care less...about this than other things.
* I couldn't care less...about this than I already do.
--EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:Indeed, but "I could..." also begs the question "...but will I?" and so does not actually affirms that "I ''will'' care less (than with other things)", whilst "I couldn't..." is more imperative as in "...and therefore I wouldn't". (Unless you want to read the latter as "I couldn't care less because I actually care quite a lot already and I know that this will never change", I suppose! Oh dear, we uregently need to start using one of those totally-umambiguous ConLangs based upon predicate logic!) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

On a different note: The way the panels are set up is pretty interesting. Anyone a idea, why he set it up like that? Does he want to tell us something? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.196|162.158.92.196]] 17:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:The panels seem to form a logical story progression: introduction / development / conclusion, each on 3 lines. The panel on solitude and darkness is inverted -- it's literally dark -- which is a common comics idiom to emphasize a specific panel and break monotony {{Citation needed}}. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

This is starting to feel like the [http://english.stackexchange.com/ English Language & Usage Stack Exchange] :-)

It's quite amusing as most of the discussion here is about the pedantic usage solely focused on how the listener perceives the expression irregardless (;-p) of what the speaker tried to express, which is is exactly what the comic is ranting about.
If we want to be all pedantic, I'd offer the alternative that "I could care less" is a literally (;-p) perfectly sound form in itself. It's all about expressing the emotional value that someone attaches to a concept or thing -- think of it as an emotional energy or charge. Since everything is inter-dependent, there is no such thing as an absolute zero, it's the relation to other things that matters. The expression "I don't care" would imply the speaker devotes a neutral emotional energy value to the subject. Since it's a relative value, there are no boundaries in either direction and consequently "I could care less" and "I couldn't care less" are perfectly valid. It's all relative, as used to say Frank. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

'I know what you're thinking about,' said Tweedledum; 'but it isn't so, nohow.'
'Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, 'if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:26, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

"I could care less, but I would have to try" is the phrase as I have always known it (shortened to "I could care less...). I always took this to mean that someone was indifferent to a thing. It is a bit of an oxymoron since to try would mean you care more when your goal is to care less. My assumption has always been that the way someone feels about something generally exists on a scale from love to hate with the dead center being indifference. To care more from an indifferent standpoint is too move towards one of the poles (love or hate) and thus the oxymoron.--[[User:The elusive pickle|The elusive pickle]] ([[User talk:The elusive pickle|talk]]) 22:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Is it proper to use citations or should we just link to the source? {{User:17jiangz1/signature|10:44, 12 September 2015}}

;Negation by association in French

The [http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html assertion] that ''could care less'', or ''give a damn'', is "negative in its own right" in the same way as ''pas'' in French sounds dubious to me to say the least, if not downright bovine excrement. In French, the original word for negation is ''ne'', it came to be associated with ''pas'', so that there was a perceived redundancy. Dropping ''ne'' when ''pas'' is used clearly conserves the negative meaning (it is only usual in oral French though, and frowned upon in written French). The same applies with adverbs that have a negative meaning, like ''jamais'' (never). But this is a very generic process, and thus completely different from very specific cases like ''could care less''. [[User:Zoyd|Zoyd]] ([[User talk:Zoyd|talk]]) 17:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
:I've heard people say they ''couldn't'' give a damn. Never heard someone say they ''could''. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 13:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

It's a shame we don't know Ponytail's name. If we did, this would pass the Bechdel test. Out of interest, are there any xkcds which pass the Bechdel test? {{unsigned ip|108.162.249.183}}

Talk:1576: I Could Care Less

2015-09-11T12:54:32Z

141.101.98.195: Minor edit to my comment

Talk:1576: I Could Care Less

2015-09-11T12:52:42Z

141.101.98.195: Added a couple replies to comments

1560: Bubblegum

2015-08-05T05:13:16Z

141.101.98.195:

{{comic
| number = 1560
| date = August 5, 2015
| title = Bubblegum
| image = bubblegum.png
| titletext = I came here to chew bubblegum and say no more than eighteen words ... and I'm all out of
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First draft.}}

This comic spoofs the iconic line from the action movie "They Live", where the armed protagonist, upon entering a bank, states that "I have come here to chew bubble gum and kick ass, and I am all out of bubble gum." This implies that the protagonist will soon fight the inhabitants of the bank, as he cannot do the other objective he came there for (chewing bubble gum).

Former wrestler Rowdy Roddy Piper, who played the protagonist in "They Live," recently died. This comic is a tribute to him.

In the comic, Beret Guy stands in the open doorway with a strong light behind him, a typical pose in action movies when someone is dramatically entering somewhere. However, in this instance, Beret Guy claims that he is here to "chew bubble gum and make friends". He then offers a stick of gum to both Megan and Cueball, making it clear he intends to do both of his stated objectives.

The title text is another variation of the line, with meta-humor. The speaker states that he is here to say 18 words and chew bubble gum, but reaches 18 words before he is able to finish his sentence. Thus, readers are left in ambiguity as to whether or not he is also out of bubble gum, as the line could either end "and I'm all out of words", or "and I'm all out of both".

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1495: Hard Reboot

2015-03-06T16:03:55Z

141.101.98.195:

My interpretation is that the 1-10 hours is how long it would take to troubleshoot the problem and the 5 minutes is how long it would take to get kitchen timer and put into socket. So slides are showing the two solutions (one techy and liable to take up to 10 hours vs. the hacky but fast solution). {{unsigned ip|‎108.162.225.118}}

:At first I thought the ten hours was troubleshooting, but 5 minutes sounds about right for the granularity of the timer. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 06:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

''Of course, the problem could be solved without a reboot simply by increasing the swap size.'', my understanding is that the SWAP is overflowing and not just 'too little'. So no, ''simply increasing the swap size'' wouldn't solve the problem. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.214|173.245.53.214]] 07:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

::I agree, and have removed that sentence, because there is no way to be sure that increasing the swap size will help. In fact increasing the swap size is the first step down the '1-10 hours to troubleshoot' path. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 08:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
::I think it deserves mention. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 09:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

"Also, it can be scheduled during, say, the middle of the night when most users are sleeping to minimize disruption." That would be ''so'' annoying in my case. I'm glad Randall has a better discipline of schedule than me, with my Windows NT machine which these days definitely needs its manual weekly reboot and ''really'' needs to be functionally replaced except for all the additional fuss it'd require. (Also, I'm not sure about the "first sentence of the title text" bit, as currently stated, but doubtless it'll all be adjusted slightly.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.181|141.101.98.181]] 12:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:I would recommend 5:00 (am). It's nowhere near the middle of the night, but it's the time when it's most probable everyone is sleeping. Alternatively, considering it's just HIS router, he should know his sleeping patterns ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 12:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:: When a reboot is least disruptive also depends on whether the machine is being used by users in other time zones. It really annonys me when I'm presented with "Server is down for scheduled maintenance", and the powers that be have decided that the best time to do that is in the middle of the day (for me). --[[User:RenniePet|RenniePet]] ([[User talk:RenniePet|talk]]) 12:42, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:My reaction to the solution (instead of using cron) was similar to when I see somebody emailing a photo by embedding it in a word document. I guess Randall did that on purpose! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]]

Re: ''"Why everything I have is broken"'' - I think better explanation would be that by applying soem workarounds you can use broken things without actually fixing them. E.g. you can use server with memory leak without spending 10+ hours fixing the problem. Using this approach you can end up with a buch of broken things that are still useful.

I think the ''"Why everything I have is broken"'' text refers to the fact that he has spent 10 hours troubleshooting the problem, then implements a hacky fix in 5 minutes which just makes the problem worse - hard rebooting a server every day is not likely to fix the problem and will probably make it worse, and the server will ultimately break. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.87|141.101.99.87]] 14:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

"The title text's first sentence refers to situations where the given solution to a problem is just the original problem rephrased to sound like a solution." I don't think that's right... it makes it sound like the solution to the problem is to not have the problem, but the first sentence of the title text doesn't reference a solution at all. It's just noting that there's no point in the user looking around for other posts because this is exactly what he's getting, so if there's no solution for this problem then the problem can't be solved. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.105|108.162.219.105]] 14:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the description! I was reading the 1-10 hours as the time it took for the system to crash, and the 5 minutes as the on-off time -- which obviously conflicted with the 24 hours text in the comic. This makes so much more sense now. =8o) [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:42, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

540: Base System

2014-12-25T22:11:32Z

141.101.98.195: /* Infield */

{{comic
| number = 540
| date = February 6, 2009
| title = Base System
| image = base system.png
| titletext = I once got to second base with a basketball player. She was so confused.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a pun on the {{w|Baseball metaphors for sex|Baseball metaphor}} used to describe how far a date went regarding erotic actions. Many different versions of the Baseball metaphor exist, with varying degrees of complexity.

The comic comes in two parts. In the first one, the strip along the top, Ponytail and Cueball discuss how Cueball's date went. When Cueball answers Ponytail's question with "second base", Ponytail asks what that means exactly. They fumble around with the definition in panel two, then Ponytail brings two more, very different, sports into the metaphor: {{w|American football}} (50 Yard line) and {{w|bowling}} (ten-pin). What this could mean is up for debate, but it certainly sounds tricky, as Cueball says. Ponytail then brings up a ''third'' sport in her elaboration; her reference to "red flag" could mean anything, as {{w|Flag#In sports|many sports use flags}}, some of them red, for a variety of things.

The second part, the diagram, depicts a much more complex version of the baseball metaphor, where baseball terms and jargon are used to describe the many and varied things human beings like to do in the bedroom. Explanations have been separated by position. In order to understand the terms used, one may want to consult this picture:

[[File:540baseballdiamond.jpg|The baseball diamond and surrounding areas]]

===Out of Play===

Outside the foul line extending from either side of the diamond, the area is "out of play". Anyone who takes the ball out of this area has committed a foul, and as such breached one of the acceptable rules of sexual conduct in the metaphor.

*Anal sex is a pun on the term "foul ball", as the anus is where fecal matter collects. The position is placed just outside the foul line.
*Downloading Star Trek fanfiction and replacing Riker's name with your crush is a reference to {{w|Star Trek: The Next Generation}}. Riker, the First Officer of the Enterprise-D, is often a subject of sexual desire among the fandom, and so taking a piece of fanfiction (fan-written, noncanon stories written about a piece of fiction) and replacing Riker's name with that of your crush is an ultra-nerdy way of indicating that they are attractive - so ultra-nerdy, it's creepy.
*The binary (i.e. base 2) numbers are an {{w|ASCII}} representation of the characters "base 2". The base of a number system is the number of unique digits required to represent numbers in that system. Binary is therefore a "base 2" system. This seems to be a little nerd sniping: wasting the time of anyone familiar enough with computing to know how to decode it.
*"Your base" is a reference to the original "base" metaphor mixed with a reference to the Zero Wing {{w|All Your Base}} meme. It's possible that this being here is a stealth insult towards the reader - the reader's own base (himself) is "out of play" and thus undesirable.

===Outfield===

The "outfield" is a group of players who are there to catch the ball if it goes away from the main play area (anything outside the upper curving line) and return it to play in a manner advantageous to their team. As they separated away from the main play area, the things in the outfield are often references to sexual behaviors that are "kinky" and "out there".

*2outfielders1glove is a reference to the infamous {{w|2girls1cup}} scatological site and associated meme.
*The [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=retrograde%20wheelbarrow Retrograde Wheelbarrow] is a sex position, one referenced previously in [[300: Facebook]], making this a callback.
*Eye contact from {{w|Janeane Garofalo}} is a tie-in to the "eye contact" entry positioned near first base. It's possible that this is placed in the outfield because fantasizing about celebrities like Janeane Garofalo is a behavior that is often considered unusual, even though many people do it.

===Infield===

The infield is a series of catchers stationed immediately outside or just within the diamond, with the goal of receiving the ball from the outfield (or catching it themselves) and using it to tag any running opposing teammates to foil their attempts at moving to the next base on the diamond. Players within the diamond, such as the shortstop, will also be doing this as well - they often receive the ball from the infield. As such, the infield is still "out there", away from the "usual" sexual interactions in the diamond, but they are things you might pass upon the way.

*Napoleon's Forces is a cartography joke, one making a comment that all of this complicated positioning makes the image look like a map depicting military maneuvers - or possibly simply a visual gag meant to evoke the image of Napoleon's army marching through a land of sexual behaviors.
*Fursuits are anthropmorphic animal costumes worn by some members of the {{w|Furry Fandom}}, people who are fans of anthropomorphized (human-like) animals. Fursuiters are a small fraction of the entire fandom, but are sometimes used in sexual play.
*Fursuits (crotchless) are fursuits with no fabric or covering on the groin (crotch) of the wearer, and as such are specifically intended for sexual play. They are placed slightly further "out there" on the field due to this being more unusual, and across the orgasm line.
*Standing anywhere near Peaches is referring to the musician {{w|Peaches (musician)|Peaches}} who is known for her heavy use of sexual imagery.

===The Diamond===

The "diamond" is the geometric pattern formed by the four bases - first, second, third, and home plate. After the ball is hit by the batter, and is in the air, players have a chance to move to the next base in line, from first, to second, to third, and finally to home plate (scoring only if they make it to home plate), only being removed from play if they are touched by a player carrying the ball in an attempt to move between bases. Thus there is a "progression" from one base to the next of sexual activity in the metaphor, until climax is achieved (getting to 'home plate' and 'scoring a point')

The entries in this section are ordered roughly from home plate to first, to second, to third, and then to home plate again, in the counterclockwise direction that the players move.

*Eye contact is placed just alongside the initial stage where the 'player' has just stepped off the home plate and is starting to move towards first. This is a deliberate setup for the 'thigh contact' pun later just before home plate (eye contact first, and then thigh contact later, when sex has begun).
*Passing notes refers to a common method of communication in the classroom in school, often used by students as a form of courtship. It is placed halfway between the start and first base - the point at which communication has begun.
*First base is kissing. This is one of the most common assigned meanings for what the 'first base' is in the baseball metaphor - as in, "getting to first base".
*The boring zone is the point between kissing and sexual teasing or activity - the point where intimacy has become normal but sexual behaviors have not been okayed yet. This is boring for many (stereotypical) males especially. It can also be the point at which a workup is attempted from kissing to gentle stroking and finally to the overt sexual teasing that is found by the time you have gotten to second base.
*Second base is licking or hands under the shirt. Overt sexual teasing, in an attempt to get the other person aroused.
*'Hands on the pants' and 'hands in the pants' are two activities that happen in a very short distance of each other during an average sexual encounter. They are also separated by the 'orgasm line', indicating that teasing has stopped and actual sexual activity has begun.
*Third base is oral sex. Oral sex is often used to prepare or arouse another person in preparation for intercourse, although it can be performed until one or both climax. In older versions of the baseball metaphor, third base was "hands in the pants" instead, which has been moved to earlier on the line in this new, "modern" version - or at least, Randall's conception of it.
*The Virginity line, which is also named, in brackets, after the {{w|Maginot Line}}, a series of French fortifications that were thought to be impenetrable during the leadup to {{w|World War II}}. This line provides a direct "barrier" to the path between third base and a home run. The Maginot Line was thought to be completely impenetrable until it was bypassed by the German army during WW2 through the Ardennes forest, whereupon it was encircled and destroyed. Virginity is often seen as an impenetrable barrier, or an unwillingness, up until arousal and desire conspire to make it go away rapidly.
*Teens, naturally, having a propensity for hormone-driven sex, bypass the Virginity line with ease.
*Sharing root PWs (passwords) is placed very close to home plate. As a system administrator, the one thing you never, ever do is give anyone the root (core) password to a file system, because anyone with the password is able to get unlimited access to the system to do whatever they please. Sharing a root password with another person is a nerdy way of saying that you trust them on an intimate, deep level. In other words, it requires more trust than oral sex.
*Finally, there is home plate. In this diagram, it is unlabelled, but in all versions of the baseball metaphor, the home plate signifies sexual intercourse and climax. Scoring a "home run" with a sexual partner means you "took it all the way" and "scored a point".

===Within the Diamond and the Orgasm Line===
Inside the diamond, at the center of the mound, is the pitcher. Several odd positions are placed here in Randall's diagram.

*Dry humping is the activity of humping (thrusting against) a partner without one or both of them removing their clothes, in order to arouse or gain sexual satisfaction. Why it is placed here is unknown.
*Using the scroll thingy on that one Apple mouse is presumably here because the small, rounded scroll button can be imagined to be a clitorus. See also [[243]]
*The Orgasm Line, which passes through almost every other play field, seems to be a divider that runs throughout the entire map that separates teasing and arousing behavior from overt sexual behavior intended to pleasure others. Fursuits (arousing, to some) become crotchless fursuits (overtly a sexual tool) when they cross the orgasm line. Hands on the pants and hands in the pants are two related but different activities - hands on the pants is arousing, and hands in the pants is intended to pleasure others.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Ponytail are talking; Ponytail is sitting on the back of a chair with her feet on the seat, and Cueball is sitting on the floor facing her.]
:Ponytail: So how far did you get with her?
:Cueball: Second base?

:Ponytail: Wait, which one is that? Below the waist, but... not under the clothes?
:Cueball: I think that's... shortstop?

:Ponytail: You should try crossing the pitcher's mound. Then down the 50-yard line, and right past her ten-pin.
:Cueball: Sounds tricky.

:Ponytail: Yeah. Last time I tried it, I got a red flag. If you know what I mean.
:Cueball: I really don't.

:[A diagram of a baseball diamond.]
:The "Base" Metaphor Explained
:[Bases and x points are marked, as well as dashed lines covering the field.]
:[Along the first base line is "Your Base".]
:[Slightly right of that is a binary base:
::0110 0010 0110 0001
::0111 0011 0110 0101
::0010 0000 0011 0010] ("base 2" in ASCII)
:[First base: Kissing.]
:[Second base: Hands under the shirt and/or licking.]
:[Third base: Oral sex (formerly "hands in the pants").]
:[The following are x marks:
::Slightly right of home plate: Eye contact.
::Along the first base line: Passing notes.
::Slightly before first base: Downloading Star Trek fanfiction and replacing Riker's name with your Crush's.
::Right field: Eye contact from Janeane Garofalo.
::Between the pitcher and second base: Using the scroll thingy on that one Apple mouse.
::Near the shortstop: Dry humping.
::Left of second base: Fursuits.
::Farther left: Fursuits (crotchless).
::Just before home plate: Thigh contact.
::Beyond 3rd base, along the 3rd base line: Standing anywhere near Peaches.
::Foul of the third base line: Anal sex (fill in your own "Foul Ball" pun here.)
::Left outfield: 2outfielders1glove.
::Left outfield: Retrograde wheelbarrow.]
:[The following are dashed lines:
::A region along the line from first to second base: The Boring Zone.
::A line traveling across the second to third baseline, and towards home plate: The orgasm line. (Dry humping is on the "orgasm" side.)
::Between third base and home: "Virginity" (Maginot) line.]
:[Arrows pointing out various other features:
::An arrow crossing the "Virginity" line: Teens.
::An arrow nearer to home plate: Sharing root PWs.
::An arrow crossing the orgasm line in the outfield: Napoleon's forces.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Furries]]

540: Base System

2014-12-25T22:10:49Z

141.101.98.195: /* Out of Play */

{{comic
| number = 540
| date = February 6, 2009
| title = Base System
| image = base system.png
| titletext = I once got to second base with a basketball player. She was so confused.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a pun on the {{w|Baseball metaphors for sex|Baseball metaphor}} used to describe how far a date went regarding erotic actions. Many different versions of the Baseball metaphor exist, with varying degrees of complexity.

The comic comes in two parts. In the first one, the strip along the top, Ponytail and Cueball discuss how Cueball's date went. When Cueball answers Ponytail's question with "second base", Ponytail asks what that means exactly. They fumble around with the definition in panel two, then Ponytail brings two more, very different, sports into the metaphor: {{w|American football}} (50 Yard line) and {{w|bowling}} (ten-pin). What this could mean is up for debate, but it certainly sounds tricky, as Cueball says. Ponytail then brings up a ''third'' sport in her elaboration; her reference to "red flag" could mean anything, as {{w|Flag#In sports|many sports use flags}}, some of them red, for a variety of things.

The second part, the diagram, depicts a much more complex version of the baseball metaphor, where baseball terms and jargon are used to describe the many and varied things human beings like to do in the bedroom. Explanations have been separated by position. In order to understand the terms used, one may want to consult this picture:

[[File:540baseballdiamond.jpg|The baseball diamond and surrounding areas]]

===Out of Play===

Outside the foul line extending from either side of the diamond, the area is "out of play". Anyone who takes the ball out of this area has committed a foul, and as such breached one of the acceptable rules of sexual conduct in the metaphor.

*Anal sex is a pun on the term "foul ball", as the anus is where fecal matter collects. The position is placed just outside the foul line.
*Downloading Star Trek fanfiction and replacing Riker's name with your crush is a reference to {{w|Star Trek: The Next Generation}}. Riker, the First Officer of the Enterprise-D, is often a subject of sexual desire among the fandom, and so taking a piece of fanfiction (fan-written, noncanon stories written about a piece of fiction) and replacing Riker's name with that of your crush is an ultra-nerdy way of indicating that they are attractive - so ultra-nerdy, it's creepy.
*The binary (i.e. base 2) numbers are an {{w|ASCII}} representation of the characters "base 2". The base of a number system is the number of unique digits required to represent numbers in that system. Binary is therefore a "base 2" system. This seems to be a little nerd sniping: wasting the time of anyone familiar enough with computing to know how to decode it.
*"Your base" is a reference to the original "base" metaphor mixed with a reference to the Zero Wing {{w|All Your Base}} meme. It's possible that this being here is a stealth insult towards the reader - the reader's own base (himself) is "out of play" and thus undesirable.

===Outfield===

The "outfield" is a group of players who are there to catch the ball if it goes away from the main play area (anything outside the upper curving line) and return it to play in a manner advantageous to their team. As they separated away from the main play area, the things in the outfield are often references to sexual behaviors that are "kinky" and "out there".

*2outfielders1glove is a reference to the infamous {{w|2girls1cup}} scatological site and associated meme.
*The [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=retrograde%20wheelbarrow Retrograde Wheelbarrow] is a sex position, one referenced previously in [[300: Facebook]], making this a callback.
*Eye contact from {{w|Janeane Garofalo}} is a tie-in to the "eye contact" entry positioned near first base. It's possible that this is placed in the outfield because fantasizing about celebrities like Janeane Garofalo is a behavior that is often considered unusual, even though many people do it.

===Infield===

The infield is a series of catchers stationed immediately outside or just within the diamond, with the goal of receiving the ball from the outfield (or catching it themselves) and using it to tag any running opposing teammates to foil their attempts at moving to the next base on the diamond. Players within the diamond, such as the shortstop, will also be doing this as well - they often receive the ball from the infield. As such, the infield is still "out there", away from the "usual" sexual interactions in the diamond, but they are things you might pass upon the way.

*Napoleon's Forces is a cartography joke, one making a comment that all of this complicated positioning makes the image look like a map depicting military maneuvers - or possibly simply a visual gag meant to evoke the image of Napoleon's army marching through a land of sexual behaviors.
*Fursuits are anthropmorphic animal costumes worn by some members of the {{w|Furry Fandom}}, people who are fans of anthropomorphized (human-like) animals. Fursuiters are a small fraction of the entire fandom, but are sometimes used in sexual play.
*Fursuits (crotchless) are fursuits with no fabric or covering on the groin (crotch) of the wearer, and as such are specifically intended for sexual play. They are placed slightly further "out there" on the field due to this being more unusual.
*Standing anywhere near Peaches is referring to the musician {{w|Peaches (musician)|Peaches}} who is known for her heavy use of sexual imagery.

===The Diamond===

The "diamond" is the geometric pattern formed by the four bases - first, second, third, and home plate. After the ball is hit by the batter, and is in the air, players have a chance to move to the next base in line, from first, to second, to third, and finally to home plate (scoring only if they make it to home plate), only being removed from play if they are touched by a player carrying the ball in an attempt to move between bases. Thus there is a "progression" from one base to the next of sexual activity in the metaphor, until climax is achieved (getting to 'home plate' and 'scoring a point')

The entries in this section are ordered roughly from home plate to first, to second, to third, and then to home plate again, in the counterclockwise direction that the players move.

*Eye contact is placed just alongside the initial stage where the 'player' has just stepped off the home plate and is starting to move towards first. This is a deliberate setup for the 'thigh contact' pun later just before home plate (eye contact first, and then thigh contact later, when sex has begun).
*Passing notes refers to a common method of communication in the classroom in school, often used by students as a form of courtship. It is placed halfway between the start and first base - the point at which communication has begun.
*First base is kissing. This is one of the most common assigned meanings for what the 'first base' is in the baseball metaphor - as in, "getting to first base".
*The boring zone is the point between kissing and sexual teasing or activity - the point where intimacy has become normal but sexual behaviors have not been okayed yet. This is boring for many (stereotypical) males especially. It can also be the point at which a workup is attempted from kissing to gentle stroking and finally to the overt sexual teasing that is found by the time you have gotten to second base.
*Second base is licking or hands under the shirt. Overt sexual teasing, in an attempt to get the other person aroused.
*'Hands on the pants' and 'hands in the pants' are two activities that happen in a very short distance of each other during an average sexual encounter. They are also separated by the 'orgasm line', indicating that teasing has stopped and actual sexual activity has begun.
*Third base is oral sex. Oral sex is often used to prepare or arouse another person in preparation for intercourse, although it can be performed until one or both climax. In older versions of the baseball metaphor, third base was "hands in the pants" instead, which has been moved to earlier on the line in this new, "modern" version - or at least, Randall's conception of it.
*The Virginity line, which is also named, in brackets, after the {{w|Maginot Line}}, a series of French fortifications that were thought to be impenetrable during the leadup to {{w|World War II}}. This line provides a direct "barrier" to the path between third base and a home run. The Maginot Line was thought to be completely impenetrable until it was bypassed by the German army during WW2 through the Ardennes forest, whereupon it was encircled and destroyed. Virginity is often seen as an impenetrable barrier, or an unwillingness, up until arousal and desire conspire to make it go away rapidly.
*Teens, naturally, having a propensity for hormone-driven sex, bypass the Virginity line with ease.
*Sharing root PWs (passwords) is placed very close to home plate. As a system administrator, the one thing you never, ever do is give anyone the root (core) password to a file system, because anyone with the password is able to get unlimited access to the system to do whatever they please. Sharing a root password with another person is a nerdy way of saying that you trust them on an intimate, deep level. In other words, it requires more trust than oral sex.
*Finally, there is home plate. In this diagram, it is unlabelled, but in all versions of the baseball metaphor, the home plate signifies sexual intercourse and climax. Scoring a "home run" with a sexual partner means you "took it all the way" and "scored a point".

===Within the Diamond and the Orgasm Line===
Inside the diamond, at the center of the mound, is the pitcher. Several odd positions are placed here in Randall's diagram.

*Dry humping is the activity of humping (thrusting against) a partner without one or both of them removing their clothes, in order to arouse or gain sexual satisfaction. Why it is placed here is unknown.
*Using the scroll thingy on that one Apple mouse is presumably here because the small, rounded scroll button can be imagined to be a clitorus. See also [[243]]
*The Orgasm Line, which passes through almost every other play field, seems to be a divider that runs throughout the entire map that separates teasing and arousing behavior from overt sexual behavior intended to pleasure others. Fursuits (arousing, to some) become crotchless fursuits (overtly a sexual tool) when they cross the orgasm line. Hands on the pants and hands in the pants are two related but different activities - hands on the pants is arousing, and hands in the pants is intended to pleasure others.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Ponytail are talking; Ponytail is sitting on the back of a chair with her feet on the seat, and Cueball is sitting on the floor facing her.]
:Ponytail: So how far did you get with her?
:Cueball: Second base?

:Ponytail: Wait, which one is that? Below the waist, but... not under the clothes?
:Cueball: I think that's... shortstop?

:Ponytail: You should try crossing the pitcher's mound. Then down the 50-yard line, and right past her ten-pin.
:Cueball: Sounds tricky.

:Ponytail: Yeah. Last time I tried it, I got a red flag. If you know what I mean.
:Cueball: I really don't.

:[A diagram of a baseball diamond.]
:The "Base" Metaphor Explained
:[Bases and x points are marked, as well as dashed lines covering the field.]
:[Along the first base line is "Your Base".]
:[Slightly right of that is a binary base:
::0110 0010 0110 0001
::0111 0011 0110 0101
::0010 0000 0011 0010] ("base 2" in ASCII)
:[First base: Kissing.]
:[Second base: Hands under the shirt and/or licking.]
:[Third base: Oral sex (formerly "hands in the pants").]
:[The following are x marks:
::Slightly right of home plate: Eye contact.
::Along the first base line: Passing notes.
::Slightly before first base: Downloading Star Trek fanfiction and replacing Riker's name with your Crush's.
::Right field: Eye contact from Janeane Garofalo.
::Between the pitcher and second base: Using the scroll thingy on that one Apple mouse.
::Near the shortstop: Dry humping.
::Left of second base: Fursuits.
::Farther left: Fursuits (crotchless).
::Just before home plate: Thigh contact.
::Beyond 3rd base, along the 3rd base line: Standing anywhere near Peaches.
::Foul of the third base line: Anal sex (fill in your own "Foul Ball" pun here.)
::Left outfield: 2outfielders1glove.
::Left outfield: Retrograde wheelbarrow.]
:[The following are dashed lines:
::A region along the line from first to second base: The Boring Zone.
::A line traveling across the second to third baseline, and towards home plate: The orgasm line. (Dry humping is on the "orgasm" side.)
::Between third base and home: "Virginity" (Maginot) line.]
:[Arrows pointing out various other features:
::An arrow crossing the "Virginity" line: Teens.
::An arrow nearer to home plate: Sharing root PWs.
::An arrow crossing the orgasm line in the outfield: Napoleon's forces.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Furries]]

704: Principle of Explosion

2014-12-23T22:18:52Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 704
| date = February 19, 2010
| title = Principle of Explosion
| image = principle_of_explosion.png
| titletext = You want me to pick up waffle cones? Oh, right, for the wine. One sec, let me just derive your son's credit card number and I'll be on my way.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] explains the {{w|principle of explosion}}, a classical law of logic, that says that if you start out with propositions ({{w|axiom}}s) that contradict each other, it is possible to derive (prove) any statement you want in the language you are working in, true or false. (In math for example, if you assume that √2 is a rational number, you can 'prove' things that are obviously false, such as the fact that some numbers must be both even and odd. Consequently, you can draw the conclusion that √2 must be an irrational number (provided such a thing exists at all! - luckily, it does and obeys the same calculation rules as for rational numbers; this is how {{w|proof by contradiction}} works.)

This can be seen in a {{w:Truth Table}}
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! P
! ¬P
! P ∧ ¬P
! P ∧ ¬P ⇒ Q
|-
| T
| F
| F
| T
|-
| F
| T
| F
| T
|}

The formula P ∧ ¬P ⇒ Q is true in every possible interpretation. No matter what propositions are substituted for P and Q the implication is true. So if a single example of a contradiction were found, then every proposition would be true, (and simultaneously false).

Cueball's friend then proceeds to misinterpret (perhaps intentionally) that you can derive any ''fact'' about the physical world. His formula of {{w|propositional logic}} in the third panel reads "'''P''' and not '''P'''", where '''∧''' is the formal logic symbol for "and" and '''¬''' is the symbol for "not". '''P''' stands for a proposition. As "'''P''' and not '''P'''" is shorthand for "'''P''' is both true and false", this forms a contradiction from which the principle of explosion can begin. Humorously and to Cueball's bewilderment he then successfully manages to 'derive' his mom's phone number. His mom turns out to be [[Miss Lenhart]] (now a Mrs?), and to his vexation she asks his friend out.

Waffle cones are a variety of {{w|ice cream cone}}. The rest of the title text is just more of the main comic's derivation joke, since Cueball's "friend" is apparently a cheap bastard who can't spare five bucks to buy his own ice cream cones. (Unless he is smart enough to exploit the system of universe.)

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is talking to his friend.]
:Cueball: If you assume contradictory axioms, you can derive anything. It's called the principle of explosion.
:Friend: ''Anything?'' Lemme try.

:[Cueball's friend is writing on a piece of paper on a desk.]

:[Cueball's friend is holding up a piece of paper to Cueball, while holding a phone.]
:Friend: Hey, you're right! I started with '''P∧¬P''' and derived your mom's phone number!
:Cueball: That's not how that works.

:[Cueball is looking at the piece of paper, while his friend is talking to someone on a phone.]
:Friend: Mrs. Lenhart?
:Cueball: Wait, this ''is'' her number! How—
:Friend: Hi, I'm a friend of— Why, yes, I ''am'' free tonight!
:Cueball: ''Mom!''
:Friend: No, box wine sounds lovely!

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Logic]]
[[Category:Your Mom]]

702: Snow Tracking

2014-12-23T22:05:09Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 702
| date = February 15, 2010
| title = Snow Tracking
| image = snow_tracking.png
| titletext = I suppose that's more accurately a hare dryer.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a guide to recognizing various animals by their footprints. However, the comic typically detours into strange, ridiculous or pop-culture-referencing footprints. In order:

*The first panel is nothing special. Just a regular cat.
*"Moose and squirrel" is a reference to the cartoon ''{{w|Rocky and Bullwinkle}}''. Rocky and Bullwinkle were a flying squirrel and a moose, respectively, and were frequently referred to as "moose and squirrel" by the show's antagonist Boris Badenov.
*[http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/longcat Longcat] is an internet {{w|meme}} from pictures of cats all stretched out that make them look very tall (or long).
*"Mouse riding Bicycle" is a reference to ''{{w|Ralph S. Mouse}}'', a series of novels by {{w|Beverly Cleary}}.
*The hair dryer has melted an irregular region around the rabbit. The title text is a pun on the Rabbit with a hair dryer frame, possibly an homage to {{w|Looney Toons}}, where shows with {{w|Bugs Bunny}} would often contain a pun on "hare".
*{{w|Legolas}} is a reference to the character by the same name in the ''{{w|Lord of the Rings}}'' trilogy of books and movies. Legolas, as an elf, was able to walk on top of snow, while the other races in his party were forced to trudge through it.
*The "Bobcat on pogo stick" panel is a possible reference to the character Bonkers D. Bobcat from {{w|Bonkers (TV series)}}
*The "Knight" panel is a {{w|chess}} reference, as the tracks move just like the knight piece in chess.
*The two "Kid with" frames are a reference to the comic strip ''{{w|Calvin and Hobbes}}''. In it, Calvin would crawl in a cardboard box to do various things. When upside down, he pretended the box was a "transmogrifier" and could turn him into something else, in this case a tiger like his friend Hobbes, whereas when on its side, the box was a duplicator and could produce multiple clones of Calvin.
*{{w|Prius}} is a reference to current events in which Toyota Prius's pedals have allegedly malfunctioned causing accidents. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/business/global/04prius.html]
*The {{w|Higgs Boson}} is an {{w|elementary particle}} which, at the time this strip was posted, had not yet been detected. It was tentatively detected in March 2013 in the {{w|Large Hadron Collider}}.

==Transcript==
:BACKYARD SNOW TRACKING GUIDE

:[Each panel contains an overhead view of tracks through the snow, with a caption indicating the apparent source.]

:[Standard paw prints through the snow.]
:CAT

:[Large split-toe tracks and smaller rodent tracks.]
:MOOSE AND SQUIRREL

:[Cat prints, but with more space between the pairs of prints.]
:LONGCAT

:[Two similar careening tire tracks.]
:MOUSE RIDING BICYCLE

:[Longer rodent tracks, with a large melted ring surrounding a point in the middle of the frame.]
:RABBIT STOPPING TO USE HAIR DRYER

:[No visible tracks.]
:LEGOLAS

:[Single deep holes with cratering.]
:BOBCAT ON POGO STICK

:[Round prints that suddenly turn to the right halfway into frame.]
:KNIGHT

:[Human footprints up to a square melting pattern, turning into animal prints.]
:KID WITH TRANSMOGRIFIER

:[Human footprints up to a rectangular melted area, which are then doubled to another rectangular area, which are then doubled again up to another rectangular area, which are then doubled.]
:KID WITH DUPLICATOR

:[Right curve on a road, with tire tracks careening out of frame.]
:Out of Frame Garden Owner: MY VEGETABLE GARDEN!
:PRIUS

:[A series of spiraling and outwardly traveling lines extend from a point in the middle of the frame.]
:HIGGS BOSON

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Calvin and Hobbes]]

Talk:1427: iOS Keyboard

2014-11-30T12:17:14Z

141.101.98.195:

XKCD references on the XKCD wiki? Who would've thought... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.197|141.101.104.197]] 06:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
:I'm so meta even this acronym.
:Just saying... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.125|108.162.217.125]] 07:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)BK201

I believe that the ios word prediction is personalised based on your previous sentences. My Android autocomplete comes up with "Elementary, my feast of the United Kingdom", and "Toto, I've a feeling we're not going to Switzerland"... --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 07:53, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
:I imagine it is, but it's still interesting to see the defaults before you've added much to the dictionary. I believe this is what Randall is up to. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.209|108.162.216.209]] 13:00, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

What about adding a reference to XKCD Questions[http://xkcd.com/1256/]? --[[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]]

Wasn't there XKCD comics about keyboard prediction starting from blank state? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 09:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
:[http://xkcd.com/1068/] You're welcome. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.217|141.101.89.217]] 10:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I thought some of the humor for the LoTR reference was the Gimli's dad was a character in The Hobbit. Obviously, Randall didn't work this in, but it could've affected his choice to feature this one in the comic [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 16:35, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Given the outcome of the Scottish referendum on secession, it seems to me that the iOS-updated version of Wallace's quote is perfectly appropriate. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.64.125|141.101.64.125]] 23:01, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Wallace didn't fight the British, he fought the English.

226: Swingset

2014-09-22T17:08:46Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 226
| date = February 21, 2007
| title = Swingset
| image = swingset.png
| titletext = Someone bring me a pocket fan so I can drift around the yard.
}}

==Explanation==
In the opening panel of this comic an unknown woman sees [[Cueball]] sitting on a swing set. She tells him that during his swing he becomes weightless. Cueball then imagines that at the peak of his swing he is able to become permanently weightless, floating above the ground without any support.

When on a swing or other [http://www.learner.org/interactives/parkphysics/pendulum.html pendulum ride], there is a moment between swinging forwards/backwards and swinging back down again when, the forces of gravity, friction, air resistance, etc., brings the velocity of the swing to zero. At this moment, there is no acceleration toward the pivot of the swing (since the centripetal acceleration is proportional to the square of the speed). So the swinger experiences no centrifugal force. Of course gravity still acts on the person, but if the swing is horizontal at that point, then the there is no reaction force, so for one moment the swinger is in free-fall and experiences {{w|weightlessness}}. On a real swing,

In the title text Cueball asks for a pocket fan, believing he could fly around the garden using this small device perhaps as a propeller.

==Transcript==
:[Woman talking to Cueball on swing-set.]
:Woman: You know, at the peak of a big swing, you become weightless.
:[Thought bubble from Cueball.]
:[Cueball swings higher and higher. At the peak of a big swing he shoves off the swing. Cueball remains hovering in the air.]
:Cueball: Hey guys. Come check this out.

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

871: Charity

2014-07-26T11:46:53Z

141.101.98.195: Added more detail on title text. Non-expert so a review might be necessary!

{{comic
| number = 871
| date = March 11, 2011
| title = Charity
| image = charity.png
| titletext = I usually respond to someone else doing something good by figuring out a reason that they're not really as good as they seem. But I've been realizing lately that there's an easier way to handle these situations, and it involves zero internet arguments.
}}

==Explanation==
Maybe donating for {{w|Malaria}} would just have been to silence [[Cueball]]'s conscience, and [[Megan]]'s comment made him realize that he really wanted to spend all the money on games. It could also be that Megan's snide denigration of Cueball's act of charity as inadequate and self-serving has dissuaded him from any act of charity at all, if this is what it gets him. In any case, it seemed to give the opposite effect than intended.

Clicking on the original image leads to [http://www.nothingbutnets.net the website of] {{w|Nothing But Nets}}, an organization aiming to distribute mosquito bed nets in Africa, for the eradication of malaria.

Supposedly these kinds of conversations happen to [[Randall]] on the internet, so a good way to avoid them would be to quit participating in stupid and meaningless discussions there.

The reference to 0 internet arguments in the title text is to the zero-sum game of Game Theory. Megan is suggesting that the overall utility of giving $10 to charity is poor (whether or not this is actually the case), therefore Cueball cynically decides that the utility can be increased by spending the money on himself. "Internet" presumably because such discussions frequently happen on the Internet where the rules of logic are somehow different.

==Transcript==
:Cueball: I'm going to buy this $10 game I want, and I'm donating $10 for malaria eradication.

:Megan: If you actually cared, you'd skip the game and donate all $20.
:Megan: What's more important? Games, or mosquito nets and medicine for kids?

:Later:
:Cueball: I think I'm going to buy these two $10 games I want.
:Friend: Cool; which ones?

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-29T11:56:43Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A relative of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a {{w|YouTube}} video to someone. The relative is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the address of the YouTube video from the address bar in the browser, then paste the address in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though [[Randall]] encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or because of the further misconceptions that would be exposed of which the relative should be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of a complicated and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T05:08:38Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the address of the youtube video from the address bar in the browser, then paste the address in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or because of the further misconceptions that would be exposed of which the relative should be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of a complicated and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T05:07:33Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the address of the youtube video from the address bar in the browser, then paste the URL in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or because of the further misconceptions that would be exposed of which the relative should be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of a complicated and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T04:55:42Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the URL of the youtube video from the browser to the clipboard, then paste the URL in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or because of the further misconceptions that would be exposed of which the relative should be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of a complicated and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T04:52:27Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the URL of the youtube video from the browser to the clipboard, then paste the URL in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or the further misconceptions of which the relative would have to be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of a complicated and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T04:43:49Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the URL of the youtube video from the browser to the clipboard, then paste the URL in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or the further misconceptions of which the relative would have to be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of this complex and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

763: Workaround

2013-12-28T04:40:22Z

141.101.98.195: /* Explanation */ Clarified (hopefully)

{{comic
| number = 763
| date = July 7, 2010
| title = Workaround
| image = workaround.png
| titletext = I once worked on a friend's dad's computer. He had the hard drive divided into six partitions, C: through J:, with a 'Documents' directory tree on each one. Each new file appeared to be saved to a partition at random. I knew enough not to ask.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Delete this incomplete tag if you feel the text is now adequate}}
A 'relative' of [[Cueball]] is depicted, who explains how he goes about sending a youtube video to someone. The 'relative' is one of the 'non-computer people', perhaps the dad or granddad of Cueball. The relative explains how he saved a web page and opened it in Microsoft Word; then uses the 'Share' feature in Word to generate an email that contains the web page reformatted as a Word document; then sends that email to a service that extracts YouTube Videos. Perhaps this service would then email back a link to some extracted file on some server, and this link could in turn be copied-and-pasted in another email, which could be sent to the intended recipient.

The premise is that non-computer-literate people will find a clumsy, elaborate way of achieving some task on a computer. They will do this by stringing together the functions they stumble upon in the few software packages they have limited familiarity with, rather than taking a more sensible, straightforward route. In this case, a more sensible route would be to copy the URL of the youtube video from the browser to the clipboard, then paste the URL in an email to the intended recipient.

The caption says that though Randall encourages his relatives to solve their computer problems on their own, by trial and error, he has to resist the urge of asking them the method they used. That method is likely to be unnecessarily complicated. Perhaps this complexity, inefficiency or illogicality will cause Randall to be exasperated. Perhaps Randall feels it is unwise to tell them why their method is inefficient because the possibility of humiliating or upsetting them, especially after they have spent a long time experimenting to find this suboptimal solution; it would be disrespectful to correct them. Or perhaps it would take too long to explain an alternative because of the questions that would lead to, or the further misconceptions that would have to be disabused.

The title text just explains another example of this complex and elaborate way of working that people who don't understand computers can create.

==Transcript==
:[A relative stands at a computer terminal, while Cueball behind him stands with his head in his hands.]

:Relative: See, I've got a really good system: if I want to send a YouTube video to someone, I go to File -> Save, then import the saved page into Word. Then I go to "Share This Document" and under "recipient" I put the email of this video extraction service...

:I'll often encourage relatives to try to solve computer problems themselves by trial and error. However, I've learned an important lesson: if they say they've solved their problem, ''never'' ask how.

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

Talk:1287: Puzzle

2013-11-11T16:57:52Z

141.101.98.195:

So is there an answer to the puzzle? [[User:Clwhisk|Clwhisk]] ([[User talk:Clwhisk|talk]]) 19:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Black thinks he's playing Go and white thinks he's playing chess. Although a 7 x 7 board is a bit small for go, it is not unusual for a beginner to play on such a board {{unsigned|hax}}

It is a 9x9 go board! (usually used for learning, as its smaller, less strategic, and quicker to finish game, whereas regular go is played on 19x19 intersections). Olivier. {{unsigned ip|108.162.229.17}}

::You beat me to it. "Less strategic" also means "more tactical". In my experience, 9x9 boards are rare (mostly, people would just use part of a 19x19 board), but when they do exist, they have 4 handicap intersections marked with dots. [[User:Homunq|Homunq]] ([[User talk:Homunq|talk]]) 08:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

::: 9x9 boards are great for variety and getting through games, and for beginners of all levels! Go on a 9x9 is about as hard as chess, in terms of playability, state space, and only recently seeing pro strength computers. [[User:Clwhisk|Clwhisk]] ([[User talk:Clwhisk|talk]]) 18:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

The picture on xkcd.com is changed. The bishop on e4 is removed and the one on c1 moved to d2. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.93.11|141.101.93.11]] 08:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Could this be another Time Lapse much like the Wait For It comic?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.31|108.162.221.31]] 02:31, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:It only changed once, to fix a legal error with a move. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:41, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Would it be better to use algebraic notation instead, seeing as FIDE stopped recognizing descriptive notation in 1981? {{unsigned|Banak}}

::Possibly - I was trying to distinguish between Go moves and Chess moves by using the older Chess notation as a disambiguation, but... eh. I'm ambinotational - I read metric and imperial and barely notice the conversion. :) [[User:SleekWeasel|SleekWeasel]] ([[User talk:SleekWeasel|talk]]) 11:18, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Then you may have a career at NASA ahead of you... ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.214|141.101.98.214]] 14:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
:::: Haha, NASA approached me once about designing a catsuit/pressuresuit, based on my stretchy.org website, thinking that I lived in Cambridge Mass, not Cambridge UK. [[User:SleekWeasel|SleekWeasel]] ([[User talk:SleekWeasel|talk]]) 23:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

It would be helpful to give a description - or at least a primer (or a link to one) - of the notation used for chess moves (i.e. Q, N, R ... x, +, #, ... which sides of the board are alphabetic vs. which are numeric). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.228|108.162.221.228]] 16:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Re: black not playing on a handicap positions: it may be that black considers the players evenly matched (or white to be only slightly better), so no handicap. If there was a handicap, black would have 6 stones on the board (I've never heard of a 1 stone handicap). In any case, the upper-right move is a traditional starting move (assuming black is facing the board from the top), as it gives good control over the corner (and in a 9x9, the center).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.52|108.162.219.52]] 14:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC) -TauCeti

Also, as a note, it looks like the two players are playing in response to each other. Black is playing in contact with the white pieces as a tactical play to contest that section of the board, while white is carefully positioning their pieces to protect against a player who has somehow taken control over the center of the board (although white is treating the go stones as more valuable than pawns, or the knights wouldn't be there).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.52|108.162.219.52]] 14:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC) -TauCeti

::How did that bishop get out? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 17:04, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Do you mean the light-squared bishop or the, uh, other light-squared bishop? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.59|108.162.218.59]] 15:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:::: I mean the light one that's not in its starting location, but out mingling with the pawns [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 16:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I have to say, Black's position is extremely unusual for Go. The two uppermost stones are on 4-4 and 3-4 (counted from the edge of the board as 1). A 4-4 opening invites a corner invasion, which could be a disaster in a 9x9 game, especially if your opponent has another corner. A one stone handicap is pretty common, as this would just mean playing without komi (the few points white gets to counter black's advantage for going first). Playing on the handicap points (3-3 in 9x9, and 4-4 in 19x19) are usually considered just decent starting points, apart form their use in handicapped games. Of course, there are many different openings, especially in even games, so there's plenty of different moves to play. But 4-4 in 9x9 still seems exceedingly unusual.
[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.182|199.27.128.182]] 16:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)greyaenigma
::I figured that the 3-4 move was black's first, and the remaining moves were in response to white (where the 4-4 was to shore up the left side of the board). That said, I generally play on 19x19 and play rather poorly, so I'd trust your judgement over mine. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.15|108.162.219.15]] 18:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC) -TauCeti

Talk:1287: Puzzle

2013-11-07T17:04:25Z

141.101.98.195: