explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2832: Urban Planning Opinion Progression

2023-09-26T09:46:51Z

141.101.98.40: /* What makes a city walkable? */ Should according to whom? There may be alternative, more convenient, and more pleasant ways to provide for pedestrian access that making them walk alongside roads.

{{comic
| number = 2832
| date = September 22, 2023
| title = Urban Planning Opinion Progression
| image = urban_planning_opinion_progression_2x.png
| imagesize = 675x2033px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = If they're going to make people ride bikes and scooters in traffic, then it should at LEAST be legal to do the Snow Crash thing where you use a hook-shot-style harpoon to catch free rides from cars.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a DUTCH BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic follows Cueball, Megan, Knit Cap and Ponytail as they begin to favor pedestrian-centered design. In the first panel, Cueball and Megan complain about the common problem many car-centric cities face about not having enough space for all the cars, and give the naïve suggestion of making more space for cars. In the second panel, Knit Cap mentions how she is going to visit Amsterdam, a city known for its {{w|walkability}} and bike friendliness. Ponytail expresses concern over the popularity of cycling in the street presumably because cycling in the street is dangerous where she lives and so she expects it to be dangerous in Amsterdam.

In the third panel, Cueball discusses another problem many car-centric cities face which is that there are not a lot of bike paths. Since there is a limited amount of space on a street, cities face a dilemma on how much space they should allocate to pedestrians, cycles and vehicles. Car-centric cities often allocate the most space to cars, leaving less space for bikes and pedestrians. The default for cities is for cyclists just to cycle in the street with the cars, as the road vehicles they are. This, however, is considered by some to be significantly more dangerous than a city having dedicated bike lanes, which is why Ponytail was likely concerned in the second panel. (A recent study reported that painted bike lanes are more dangerous than no bike lane, and only protected bike lanes are safer: <span title="Conclusions: Protected bike lanes and buffered bike lanes had estimated protective effects on segments between intersections but estimated harmful effects at intersections. Conventional bike lanes had estimated harmful effects along segments and at intersections.">Garber, Michael D., et al: ''[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140523001056 Bicycle infrastructure and the incidence rate of crashes with cars: A case-control study with Strava data in Atlanta]''. Journal of Transport & Health, '''32'''. September 2023: Received 13 February 2023; Received in revised form 10 July 2023; Accepted 14 July 2023; Available online 11 August 2023. doi:[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2023.101669 10.1016/j.jth.2023.101669]) This danger was discussed more in the fifth panel as well. From a wider perspective, however much you attempt to segregate different forms of transport (at junctions and other bottlenecks where space cannot be reserved), you'll always need to bring bicycles and traffic back into contact, briefly, and in circumstances where motorised traffic has become unused to sharing the roadspace with the lighter vehicles. This is unlike a more integrated place like Amsterdam where you are rarely going to be surprised by the presence of bicycles, overlook them and therefore cause an accident.

One editor found that Megan's comment in the sixth panel may be referring to lifted pickup trucks in addition to regular trucks, and related that pickup truck owners care a lot about the distance their vehicle is off the ground and so they will either purchase a pickup truck with a high ground clearance or raise it themselves, resulting in what is known as a lifted pickup truck. The belief is that a vehicle with higher ground clearance will keep them safe on the road, but that this comes at the cost of potentially hurting others who are in smaller vehicles or no vehicle at all. Another editor learned the opposite, that the elevated center of mass reduced safety due to reducing the stable tipping angle, and has only seen high clearance useful when driving on unpaved roads. The comment may refer to many large tractor trailer cabs or garbage trucks that if you move directly in front of the cab you can't see the driver and they can't see you. It is particularly dangerous for children.

{{w|Induced demand}} is an economic theory in which increasing the supply of a good or service causes the demand to rise faster than the increased supply, worsening the shortage. The most common example is traffic: some US cities have tried to alleviate traffic jams by widening the roads and highways, which incentivized more people to take up driving, more vehicles to route through their streets, or took potential funding from other transportation solutions, worsening the traffic jam problem. Conversely, other cities have tried removing traffic lanes or converting them to dedicated public transit lanes, and have reported a reduction in traffic congestion, due to people choosing other transportation options. Among urban planners, this is known as the {{w|Downs–Thomson paradox}}.

Cueball's comment in the second-to-last panel that "anything that makes a city a worse place to drive in makes it a better place to live, short of scattering random tire spikes on the road" is a slight exaggeration, although in the final panel Megan suggests that tire spikes might be a good idea after all. 

The title text references a cyberpunk book called "{{w|Snow Crash}}", by Neal Stephenson. An early scene in that book involves the equivalent of a skater using a magnet on a cable to attach onto the back of a pizza delivery vehicle. He swerves in order to dislodge her, she taunts him and attaches stickers to his vehicle.

=== What makes a city walkable? ===
As all of Europe{{actual citation needed}} agrees, urban planning (or zoning) must be seamlessly integrated with public transport planning. The central truth is that everybody is a pedestrian for some time, which also includes car drivers. Crucially, the average pedestrian is willing to walk about 2000 ft from their home to the next public transport stop, and an additional 2000 ft between the last public transport stop and their workplace. Opportunities for shopping and eating should exist at every connecting station, with the connections scheduled in a way that it both allows changing to the connecting train/tramway/bus immediately - as well as buying groceries.

All roads should have a sidewalk{{actual citation needed}}, which, of course, costs area, but make the pedestrians' lives much easier. But then, not only roads impact walkability. In the United States, many places open to the public are, by municipal ordinances, forced to provide enough parking space for [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUNXFHpUhu8 all customers at any given time], which leads to serious knock-on effects: Pedestrians must often cross a large and weather-exposed parking lot in order to shop. A building can often be only re-purposed if a neighboring building is bulldozed to create the necessary parking area. And tenants who live in an apartment, but do not own a car, are forced to pay for the parking space they do not need.

Another topic is subsidizing public traffic. Municipalities in Switzerland, for example, order bus connections - e.g. a hourly bus from 6 AM until 10 PM, and in exchange, they cover the deficit of any such connection. That way, families, who usually are better taxpayers, move to villages, and beginning with grade 5, 6 or 7, pupils can still easily commute to a district school.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:'''Typical urban planning opinion progression'''

:[Each panel is connected to a point on a timeline. Timeline is recognizable as the tread of a bicycle tire]

:Cueball: I wish there wasn't so much traffic to get into the city. They should put in more lanes.
:Megan: And more parking.
:Megan: Parking is so bad here.

:Knit Cap: I have to go to Amsterdam for work next week. I hear they all ride bikes there.
:Ponytail: Bikes are fine but people shouldn't ride them in the street! I worry I'm going to hit someone!

:Cueball: It would be nice if we had better transit options!
:Cueball: I tried a scooter. It was fun but I wish there were more bike paths.

:Megan: It's funny how widening roads to speed up traffic makes them more dangerous to walk near, making driving more necessary and creating more traffic.
:Megan: Really makes you think.

:Knit Cap: Visiting the Netherlands was cool!
:Knit Cap: Amsterdam is really neat.

:Cueball: We've ceded so much of our land to storing and moving cars, with the rest of us tiptoeing around the edges and making drivers mad for trespassing on "their" space.
:Cueball: Even though '''''we're''''' the ones in danger from '''''them!'''''

:Megan: Those giant trucks with front blind spots that keep hitting kids should be illegal.

:Knit Cap: We should be more like the Netherlands.
:Knit Cap: They design their streets to prioritize...

:[Cueball is frustrated.]
:Cueball: The problem is car culture. It's systemic.
:Cueball: I don't know if we can fix it.

:[Megan’s arms are thrown out, and her hair is bedraggled.]
:Megan: People approach road planning decisions from the point of view of drivers because that's how we're used to interacting with the city, so we make choices that make it more car-friendly.
:Megan: It's a vicious cycle.

:[Knit Cap is walking around with two Dutch flags raised in her hands.]
:Knit Cap: '''''Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands!'''''

:Cueball: Anything that makes a city a worse place to drive in makes it a better place to live, short of scattering random tire spikes on the road.

:Megan: Honestly, I think the city council should consider the tire spikes thing.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Knit Cap]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

2307: Alive Or Not

2020-05-21T21:42:06Z

141.101.98.40: /* Things ranked as alive */

{{comic
| number = 2307
| date = May 15, 2020
| title = Alive Or Not
| image = alive_or_not.png
| titletext = Computer viruses currently fall somewhere between prions and fire.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an alive virus. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
There is no universally-accepted definition of "{{w|life}}"; {{w|Life#Definitions|all definitions}} thus far proposed have either excluded some things commonly understood to be alive or included some things commonly understood to not be alive. Take reproduction, a trait commonly assumed to be essential and unique to life; by this definition, anything which cannot reproduce (including {{w|mules}}, {{w|worker bees}}, and postmenopausal women) would be considered nonliving, while anything which can duplicate itself (including {{w|computer viruses}}, {{w|3D printers|advanced 3D printers}}, and {{w|fire}}—see below) would be considered alive.

Many more elaborate definitions of life have been attempted over the decades. Some common additional factors include:

* {{w|Homeostasis}}, the ability to control an internal environment to maintain a constant state;
* {{w|Metabolism}}, converting nutrients into energy and building blocks for growth, reproduction, and so on;
* {{w|Adaptation}} through heredity and natural selection; and
* Responding to the environment.

Despite all of this, the only definite definition of "life" is "something everyone agrees is alive". This comic attempts to rank several types of things by how likely people are to perceive them as "alive".

=== Things ranked as alive ===

* '''Animals (normal)'''
* '''Animals (weird ones like jellyfish and coral)''': Randall's categorization of animals as "normal" or "weird" is a simplified version of the {{w|Great chain of being}}, a philosophical framework in which humans are seen as the most "advanced" form of life, followed by a divine or otherwise justified hierarchy of progressively lesser life-forms (mammals, birds, fish, lizards, insects, and so on). Categorizing weird animals was already done in [[1587: Food Rule]]
* '''{{w|Fungi}}''': Fungi represent a unique lineage of eukaryotic, mostly multicellular organisms. Although historically studied by botanists specializing in the sub-discipline "mycology", modern scholarship places fungi in the "opisthokont" lineage, which contains both the animals and the fungi. Fungi, like animals, cannot make complex organic molecules from carbon dioxide, and must consume organic molecules as food to survive. Like plants, fungi are typically unable to move on their own. The various types of fungi include mushrooms, yeasts, rusts, smuts, and molds. Fungi evolution is also referenced in [[1749: Mushrooms]].
* '''{{w|Plant}}s''': Those often green, often leafy things outside your current isolation dwelling, sometimes inside, next to the window. They are primarily distinguished from other eukaryotes by being able to use photosynthesis to convert water, carbon dioxide and energy from light into sugar and free oxygen.
* '''{{w|Slime mold}}s''': Slime molds are eukaryotic single-celled organisms (so "more advanced" than bacteria). In the "plasmodial" slime molds, the "single cell" may expand to spread across several feet of territory, and weigh several pounds, while the "cellular" slime molds are most notable for their occasional congregation into macro-sized colonies which can appear to move as a single creature. It's interesting that Randall ranks them as "less alive" than fungi (which they were once thought to be), especially given some of their curious behaviors (e.g. [https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/feb/18/slime-mould-rail-road-transport-routes optimizing transportation networks] when presented with a collection of food flakes and obstacles).
* '''{{w|Bacteria}}''': Bacteria are one of two groups of prokaryotes meaning cells do not contain a nucleus and rarely harbour membrane-bound organelles. A small portion of Bacteria are pathogenic, but most are actually harmless. Bacteria's ability to convert raw materials into nutrients available for other living things makes them essential to other living things.
* '''{{w|Archaea}}''': Archaea (misspelled as ''Archea'' by Randall) is a {{w|domain (biology)|domain}} of organisms, which do not fall under eukaryotes or bacteria. They are single-celled organisms that lack a nucleus, and were initially thought to be ancient lineages of bacteria (i.e. ''archaeobacteria'') found in extreme environments similar to the early Earth, which is probably why Randall ranks them as "less alive" than bacteria. However, it is now known that they live pretty much everywhere that regular bacteria do, and that they have very distinct biochemistry from bacteria; they are actually more closely related to eukaryotes (i.e. slime molds and up) than bacteria are.
* '''{{w|Virus}}es''': Viruses are infectious agents consisting of a genome surrounded by a protein or lipid shell. When a virus contacts a cell, it delivers its genome inside the cell which causes the cells' reproductive machinery to create more viruses. Since viruses are incapable of reproducing without the aid of larger cells, [https://www.google.com/search?q=are+viruses+alive it is often debated] whether or not they are actually alive. Randall has ranked viruses as "alive" but on the lowest possible rung of such; indeed, many biologists say [https://askabiologist.asu.edu/questions/are-viruses-alive viruses fall in a gray area], or that [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848616300103 the question is arbitrary and non-scientific]. By another criterion life on Earth is defined by the presence of extremely long molecules that can be replicated (copied). Every organism above viruses contains both DNA and RNA. Viruses only contain either RNA or DNA. Nothing below here contains any (biologically active) DNA or RNA.

===Things ranked as not alive===
* '''{{w|Prions}}''': Prions are misfolded proteins that cause other proteins to misfold. They are most famously the cause of various brain diseases such as "{{w|mad cow disease}}", and may be involved in Alzheimer's disease. Similarly to viruses, prions require something else to replicate, but unlike viruses, they do not possess a nucleic-acid genome or any other means of carrying heritable information, and they do not alter the cell's production machinery, but rather interact with proteins which are already made. In that sense, they're more like a particularly tricky kind of metabolic waste product or pollution.
* (from title text) '''{{w|Computer virus}}es''': A piece of code which hijacks computer systems to replicate itself, named by analogy to biological viruses. Strictly speaking, they're just a particular encoding of information, usually stored in electromagnetic media (although there's no reason one couldn't be stored on punch cards). Randall ranks them as "''currently''" more alive than fire, because they do carry "genetic" information (which anti-virus programs can be programmed to look for, analogous to vaccination) and some are capable of modifying themselves to adapt to new environments, but less alive than prions because they only operate within information systems. However, if a virus were able to e.g. hijack an electronics factory to start making flash drives and memory cards that carry the virus's code, then perhaps it might move up in the hierarchy.
* '''{{w|Fire}}''': Fire is a common example of something which meets many common definitions for life; it grows, reproduces by spreading seeds (sparks), and consumes energy and excretes waste (ashes and smoke) by the same net chemical process as respiration. However, while fire can be a necessary part of the life cycle of other organisms (e.g. redwood trees), it does not maintain a constant environment within itself, nor does it perform {{w|anabolism}}, the construction of larger molecules from smaller ones. Respirating life-forms use helper molecules to moderate the oxidation reaction into small steps to produce useful units of energy, rather than letting it all happen at once to produce heat.
* '''Clouds''': Random shapes taken by clouds may resemble animals and other objects, but arguably they are not alive in any sense. Things like tornadoes and hurricanes, on the other hand, can meet some definitions of life: they maintain homeostasis, actively seek and consume energy, and occasionally reproduce. Cf. ''Fire'' above.
* '''{{w|Fossils}}''': Fossils are the petrified remains of once-living organisms, so in that sense they are more connected to life than "regular rocks", and some may hold DNA that could theoretically be used to clone the fossilized life-form.
* '''Rocks shaped like faces''': Humans have an extremely advanced capability for seeing patterns, and one of the most powerful patterns we seek is {{w|Face perception|faces}}, so much so that we see faces even where they don't exist (a common form of {{w|pareidolia}}). Humans instinctively anthropomorphize any object which vaguely resembles a face as having a sense of attention and mood, and so a rock shaped like a face would likely be treated differently than a rock not shaped like a face. Randall does not distinguish between rocks intentionally carved to look like faces (such as the famous {{w|Moai}} sculptures) or rocks that happen to look vaguely like faces under the right lighting conditions (such as the famous {{w|Face on Mars}}.)
* '''Regular rocks''': Modern taxonomy originates from Carl Linnaeus, who categorized all objects on Earth as animals, plants (often stated as "''vegetable''" in quiz games like Twenty Questions), or minerals. Minerals are most obviously not alive, although some cultures and works of fiction have creatures that turn to stone and will return later to life, and some people keep {{w|Pet Rock|rocks as "pets"}}.

Interestingly, the vertical line linking the categories extends beyond both the most-alive and least-alive things, making one wonder what Randall might think is more alive than "normal animals" or less alive than "regular rocks".

==Transcript==
:[A chart consisting of vertical line, with 14 dots and a horizontal dashed dividing line drawn across the list a bit below the middle. Each dot has a label to the right of the line with a line pointing to the dot they belong to. Above and below the dividing line is a label with a broad arrow pointing up above and down below.]
:Up arrow: Alive
:Down arrow: Not alive

:[Dot labels from top to bottom above the dashed line:]
:Animals (Normal)
:Animals (Weird ones like jellyfish and coral)
:Fungi
:Plants
:Slime molds
:Bacteria
:Archea
:Viruses

:[Dot labels from top to bottom below the dashed line:]
:Prions
:Fire
:Clouds
:Fossils
:Rocks shaped like faces
:Regular rocks

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Geology]]

Talk:2307: Alive Or Not

2020-05-21T21:39:42Z

141.101.98.40:

I'm pretty sure high-pressure fire hoses belong on this scale[[User:60sRefugee|60sRefugee]] ([[User talk:60sRefugee|talk]]) 21:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
:What about wacky waving inflatable tube guy? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.38.124|172.68.38.124]] 00:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Funny, for once viruses are said to be alive. That's new... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.138|141.101.107.138]] 22:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
:Definitely new, and extremely angering! I could scream... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.143.30|172.68.143.30]] 22:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
::Jup. The nex disgusting piece of antiscience after Wednesday´s nonsense about handwashing helping against respirational diseases. I think Monroe has caught a bug from Potus Donald. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.33|141.101.69.33]] 07:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
:::There was nothing unscientific about either one. The cold is spread in part by contact--it's why we cough into our elbows, not our hands now--it reduces spread. And whether or not viruses count as alive is debatable, not obviously wrong. They do have genetic material and reproduce, and you can kill them, making them inert in various ways. -->
:::But even if he had been incorrect, comparing someone to some other hated figure for some much smaller slight is just Godwin-lite. And, like the original, it contributes nothing of value to the conversation. In no way does it help determine who is correct. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 16:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Do we want to bicker over the placement of the line (like "Why is it below viruses"), or the order things are placed in (like "Why are slime molds below plants")? [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 22:06, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
: Oh, go on. If you insist. You go first, unless you already have. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.31|162.158.154.31]] 22:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
: Seconded, I'm most interested which criterion (even a numeric one, as the diagram is suggestive of) Randall used. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.163|162.158.158.163]] 09:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

True fossils have remineralised so generally do not have DNA left. They are merely the shadow of a previous life.
: So fossils are closer to "Rocks with Faces," well, for the ancient vertebrate fossils anyway? [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 15:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Surprised no one has noticed the typo yet. It's 'archaea', not 'archea'
:(Sign yourself(/ves), "True fossils" and "Surprised"?) I disagree. It's 'archæa'... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.31|162.158.154.31]] 22:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Poor English and a mistake. It should say...
"...discussion about *whether* virus*es* are alive."
Also the (covid for starters) is wrong. Covid19 is the disease caused by the virus (as mentioned in the line above) not the virus itself

I am disappointed that sponges are not mentioned as an example of weird animals. I mean, come on, way weirder than jellyfish. But it is good that viruses get the recognition they deserve.[[User:Jkrstrt|Jkrstrt]] ([[User talk:Jkrstrt|talk]]) 13:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

When looking at viruses, I consider them made of the things of life (proteins, lipids, nucleic acids), but are not actually alive as they have no metabolism and can not reproduce on their own; they need to co-opt the protein production facility of truly living cells in order to reproduce. Without a host, they just sit there (or maybe blow around on the wind). Also without metabolism, they can not starve to death, like bacteria and other single-cell organisms that get into the wrong environment. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 15:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
:Agreed that the lack of metabolism is a big thing. On the other hand, ''all'' organisms need an acceptable habitat to be able to reproduce, and viruses are no different: their habitat is their target cells, where they can reproduce like mad. Furthermore, viruses can be infected and killed by other viruses, namely by {{w|virophages}}, and it's hard to see how they can be killed if they weren't alive to begin with. Whether they're "alive" depends only on one's definition of the word; it can be interesting to discuss this because it reveals what people think "alive" means, but not because there's a true answer. [[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 22:18, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
:: technically, virophages do not directly infect other viruses, they rather co-infect a cell and use the reproduction machinery of the other virus, blocking it at the same time... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.27|162.158.93.27]] guest from outer space

Well, this raises the question where the sun (or any main sequence star) fall on this list. Is it just a really big thermonuclear fire?

This is not a COVID-19 comic. Just because it is biology-related, doesn't make it a COVID-19 comic. I have removed it from the category and its mention in the explanation.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.38|172.69.34.38]] 07:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
:Of course it is. The whole idea about this comic is to spark the discussion if Virus (covid) is alive or not. I put it back. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
::I fully disagree, this comic could have been published in previous years. This is only tangentially related to COVID-19, and is a general discussion about "life". Viruses are only barely mentioned in this comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.38|172.69.34.38]] 23:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
:::Agree it shouldn't be classified as COVID-19, but then there's a bunch of others that should be removed from the category: 2278, 2283, 2289, 2292, 2293.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.78|141.101.107.78]] 08:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
:::I wouldn't consider this comic about COVID-19, either. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
::::OMG - this comic is centered around virus being alive or not in the midst of a virus pandemic that all comics the last two months has been about, and you cannot see the connection! Of course this is inspired by the previous comic about corona, with virus that speaks to us! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::Nope. Granted, there _may_ be a connection since it would indeed be fitting to the last comics and the current world situation. However nothing in the comic leads to the conclusion that it actually _is_. Unless you actually _are_ Randall there is no way you can actually say that it is "of course inspired" by the event/previous comic. It's all like "Sad", again - you are seeing "obvious" connections where there are none. Like 172.69.34.38 said, the comic wouldn't be less funny/informative/whatever without this connection. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
::::::I disagree that this comic is inspired by or a "continuation" of the previous comic. Randall likes to anthropomorphize things, but that doesn't provide a lead-in to whether they are alive or not. These two comics are separate topics. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.47|172.69.35.47]] 23:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Well I still think this is a clear continuation of the previous one and no matter what is a take on virus being alive or not, in the midst of a viral pandemic. Cannot understand the objectiopn at all to this being a COVIS 19 comic. But this disucssion is Not (alive). --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Somewhat disappointed that he didn't include any fictional items such as golems. For that matter, where to place Alexa? [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 10:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m surprised this doesn’t include Schrödinger’s Cat at the origin. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.77|162.158.91.77]] 14:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
: Shouldn't Schrödinger’s Cat be in a super-position on both sides of the line? A pair of grey dots above and below the demarcation line. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 11:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Missed joke opportunity: which type of cloud? because one type of cloud has AI in it..

Why are slime molds below plants and fungi? They actually move.--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.241|172.68.189.241]] 17:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I assume the reason mushrooms are so high up is because of https://xkcd.com/1749/

2309: X

2020-05-21T13:35:33Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */ Tweak.

{{comic
| number = 2309
| date = May 20, 2020
| title = X
| image = x.png
| titletext = The worst is when you run out of monospaced fonts and have to use variable-width variables.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COMIC SANS X AND A NEW PROGRAMMER. This page needs an expanded explanation of what esoteric languages are. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] has developed a new {{w|programming language}} with novel syntax. These languages are classified as {{w|esoteric language}}s, which are programming languages developed for no practical use (although that doesn't stop people from trying) other than novelty. The classic example of these are {{w|INTERCAL}} and {{w|brainfuck}}.

Normally, there is no law against developing bad programming languages or bad code (although some would argue there should be). The law often has to play catch-up with technology. However, as with the example of Cueball and the EPA, and Cueball with tech support problems, it seems that the Government has made an exception in this case, possibly because the result is so egregious as to cause real harm.

A {{w|Variable (computer science)|variable}} is a piece of data (such as an integer or a string of text) that can change in value. Variables can usually be named any string of alphanumeric characters. For the sake of readability, variables are usually named something relevant to what the variable represents. For example, a variable counting how many seconds have passed since the program was launched might be called elapsedTime. Some programmers, particularly if they are working under time pressure, will give their variables names (such as 'x') that do not describe what they do, and are thus almost completely meaningless. This is considered bad coding practice, because anyone reading the code who is not familiar with it will not understand what the variable does, and possibly also the original programmer after an arbitrary amount of time - somewhat likely after years of being untouched and unconsidered, but possibly even after minutes of frantic 'improvement' of some convoluted spaghetti-code that is now 'merely' tagliatelle.

Here, Cueball is developing a language where the only way to differentiate variables is to write the letter "X" in different fonts. Typically, code is written in plain text without a way to specify a font, which would mean that Cueball has implemented a lot more processing in the {{w|compiler}} or {{w|Integrated development environment|IDE}} in a fashion typically seen as unconventional. This 'feature' would be a nightmare to program with, as all of the variables would look very similar unless careful attention is being paid, and there would be little to no way to determine what each one does, since font names are typically not particularly descriptive. Additionally, the fact that some fonts look similar (such as Arial and Helvetica) would require the programmer to have an intricate knowledge of different fonts and how to distinguish them from only one letter. Programs would also be difficult to edit if two programmers do not have the same fonts installed.

This is also a jab at mathematicians who are in addition to using variable names which are short and nondescript (e.g. "x"), are also "typeface sensitive" (in addition to case sensitive). In other words, one can typically find a statement involving three different "X" variables, referring to three different objects, and they are distinguished by their font and case.

The title text references the fact that most IDEs use a monospaced font (i.e. one where every character is the same width), as opposed to variable-width fonts, in which some characters like 'I' are narrower than others. This is partly because fixed horizontal alignment is sometimes useful when dealing with certain text strings.

'Variable-width variables' refers to the fact that the letter X, like all letters, has different widths in different fonts. This would make this fixed alignment almost impossible, thus creating yet another reason why Cueball's language would be highly unpleasant to use. It likely also directly (mis)refers to systems such as {{w|variable-width encoding}} in which the ''data'' linked to in a variable storage is packed into an unfixed number of bits and/or bytes. Such systems often use Huffman-type encoding to progressively differentiate, from the initial elements, how many more elements are needed to fully define the value, but a reserved deliminating value marking the end of a cummulative arbitrary-length array might be considered another form.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Cueball holds a laptop with code visible on the screen.]
:Cueball: I've developed a new programming language!
:Offpanel voice: Didn't a judge order you to stop doing that?

:[In a frameless panel, Cueball holds the laptop with one hand and types on the keyboard.]
:Cueball: Higher court threw out the ruling!
:Cueball: I'm back, suckers!
:Offpanel voice: ''Dammit.''

:[Cueball holds the folded down laptop at his side.]
:Cueball: But I promise it's good this time!
:Cueball: Just normal code. Good clean syntax. Nothing weird.
:Offpanel voice: Okay...

:[Cueball holds the laptop at his side, and raises a finger on his other hand.]
:Cueball: Except the only variable name is "X". To refer to different variables you have to write "X" in different fonts.
:Offpanel voice: I'm calling the court.
:Another offpanel voice: Maybe we can appeal.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Programming]]

2309: X

2020-05-21T13:31:49Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */ sTRAY cAPITALISATION

{{comic
| number = 2309
| date = May 20, 2020
| title = X
| image = x.png
| titletext = The worst is when you run out of monospaced fonts and have to use variable-width variables.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COMIC SANS X AND A NEW PROGRAMMER. This page needs an expanded explanation of what esoteric languages are. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] has developed a new {{w|programming language}} with novel syntax. These languages are classified as {{w|esoteric language}}s, which are programming languages developed for no practical use (although that doesn't stop people from trying) other than novelty. The classic example of these are {{w|INTERCAL}} and {{w|brainfuck}}.

Normally, there is no law against developing bad programming languages or bad code (although some would argue there should be). The law often has to play catch-up with technology. However, as with the example of Cueball and the EPA, and Cueball with tech support problems, it seems that the Government has made an exception in this case, possibly because the result is so egregious as to cause real harm.

A {{w|Variable (computer science)|variable}} is a piece of data (such as an integer or a string of text) that can change in value. Variables can usually be named any string of alphanumeric characters. For the sake of readability, variables are usually named something relevant to what the variable represents. For example, a variable counting how many seconds have passed since the program was launched might be called elapsedTime. Some programmers, particularly if they are working under time pressure, will give their variables names (such as 'x') that do not describe what they do, and are thus almost completely meaningless. This is considered bad coding practice, because anyone reading the code who is not familiar with it will not understand what the variable does, and possibly also the original programmer after an arbitrary amount of time - somewhat likely after years of being untouched and unconsidered, but possibly even after minutes of frantic 'improvement' of some convoluted spaghetti-code that is now 'merely' tagliatelle.

Here, Cueball is developing a language where the only way to differentiate variables is to write the letter "X" in different fonts. Typically, code is written in plain text without a way to specify a font, which would mean that Cueball has implemented a lot more processing in the {{w|compiler}} or {{w|Integrated development environment|IDE}} in a fashion typically seen as unconventional. This 'feature' would be a nightmare to program with, as all of the variables would look very similar unless careful attention is being paid, and there would be little to no way to determine what each one does, since font names are typically not particularly descriptive. Additionally, the fact that some fonts look similar (such as Arial and Helvetica) would require the programmer to have an intricate knowledge of different fonts and how to distinguish them from only one letter. Programs would also be difficult to edit if two programmers do not have the same fonts installed.

This is also a jab at mathematicians who are in addition to using variable names which are short and nondescript (e.g. "x"), are also "typeface sensitive" (in addition to case sensitive). In other words, one can typically find a statement involving three different "X" variables, referring to three different objects, and they are distinguished by their font and case.

The title text references the fact that most IDEs use a monospaced font (i.e. one where every character is the same width), as opposed to variable-width fonts, in which some characters like 'I' are narrower than others. This is partly because fixed horizontal alignment is sometimes useful when dealing with certain text strings. 'Variable-width variables' refers to the fact that the letter X, like all letters, has different widths in different fonts. This would make this fixed alignment almost impossible, thus creating yet another reason why Cueball's language would be highly unpleasant to use.

It likely also directly (mis)refers to systems such as {{w|variable-width encoding}} in which the ''data'' linked to in a variable storage is packed into an unfixed number of bits and/or bytes. Such systems often use Huffman-type encoding to progressively differentiate, from the initial elements, how many more elements are needed to accurately define the whole value, but a reserved deliminating value marking the end of a cummulative arbitrary-length array might be considered another form.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Cueball holds a laptop with code visible on the screen.]
:Cueball: I've developed a new programming language!
:Offpanel voice: Didn't a judge order you to stop doing that?

:[In a frameless panel, Cueball holds the laptop with one hand and types on the keyboard.]
:Cueball: Higher court threw out the ruling!
:Cueball: I'm back, suckers!
:Offpanel voice: ''Dammit.''

:[Cueball holds the folded down laptop at his side.]
:Cueball: But I promise it's good this time!
:Cueball: Just normal code. Good clean syntax. Nothing weird.
:Offpanel voice: Okay...

:[Cueball holds the laptop at his side, and raises a finger on his other hand.]
:Cueball: Except the only variable name is "X". To refer to different variables you have to write "X" in different fonts.
:Offpanel voice: I'm calling the court.
:Another offpanel voice: Maybe we can appeal.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Programming]]

2309: X

2020-05-21T13:28:57Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */ A couple of things. May need better version/more links to end para.

{{comic
| number = 2309
| date = May 20, 2020
| title = X
| image = x.png
| titletext = The worst is when you run out of monospaced fonts and have to use variable-width variables.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COMIC SANS X AND A NEW PROGRAMMER. This page needs an expanded explanation of what esoteric languages are. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] has developed a new {{w|programming language}} with novel syntax. These languages are classified as {{w|esoteric language}}s, which are programming languages developed for no practical use (although that doesn't stop people from trying) other than novelty. The classic example of these are {{w|INTERCAL}} and {{w|brainfuck}}.

Normally, there is no law against developing bad programming languages or bad code (although some would argue there should be). The law often has to play catch-up with technology. However, as with the example of Cueball and the EPA, and Cueball with tech support problems, it seems that the Government has made an exception in this case, possibly because the result is so egregious as to cause real harm.

A {{w|Variable (computer science)|variable}} is a piece of data (such as an integer or a string of text) that can change in value. Variables can usually be named any string of alphanumeric characters. For the sake of readability, variables are usually named something relevant to what the variable represents. For example, a variable counting how many seconds have passed since the program was launched might be called elapsedTime. Some programmers, particularly if they are working under time pressure, will give their variables names (such as 'x') that do not describe what they do, and are thus almost completely meaningless. This is considered bad coding practice, because anyone reading the code who is not familiar with it will not understand what the variable does, and possibly also the original programmer after an arbitrary amount of time - somewhat likely after years of being untouched and unconsidered, but possibly even after minutes of frantic 'improvement' of some convoluted spaghetti-code that is now 'merely' tagliatelle.

Here, Cueball is developing a language where the only way to differentiate variables is to write the letter "X" in different fonts. Typically, code is written in plain text without a way to specify a font, which would mean that Cueball has implemented a lot more processing in the {{w|compiler}} or {{w|Integrated development environment|IDE}} in a fashion typically seen as unconventional. This 'feature' would be a nightmare to program with, as all of the variables would look very similar unless careful attention is being paid, and there would be little to no way to determine what each one does, since font names are typically not particularly descriptive. Additionally, the fact that some fonts look similar (such as Arial and Helvetica) would require the programmer to have an intricate knowledge of different fonts and how to distinguish them from only one letter. Programs would also be difficult to edit if two programmers do not have the same fonts installed.

This is also a jab at mathematicians who are in addition to using variable names which are short and nondescript (e.g. "x"), are also "typeface sensitive" (in addition to case sensitive). In other words, one can typically find a statement involving three different "X" variables, referring to three different objects, and they are distinguished by their font and case.

The title text references the fact that most IDEs use a monospaced font (i.e. one where every character is the same width), as opposed to variable-width fonts, in which some characters like 'I' are narrower than others. This is partly because fixed horizontal alignment is sometimes useful when dealing with certain text strings. 'Variable-width variables' refers to the fact that the letter X, like all letters, has different widths in different fonts. This would make this fixed alignment almost impossible, thus creating yet another reason why Cueball's language would be highly unpleasant to use.

It likely also directly (mis)refers to systems such as {{w|Variable-width encoding}} in which the ''data'' linked to in a variable storage is packed into an unfixed number of bits and/or bytes. Such systems often use Huffman-type encoding to progressively differentiate, from the initial elements, how many more elements are needed to accurately define the whole value, but a reserved deliminating value marking the end of a cummulative arbitrary-length array might be considered another form.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Cueball holds a laptop with code visible on the screen.]
:Cueball: I've developed a new programming language!
:Offpanel voice: Didn't a judge order you to stop doing that?

:[In a frameless panel, Cueball holds the laptop with one hand and types on the keyboard.]
:Cueball: Higher court threw out the ruling!
:Cueball: I'm back, suckers!
:Offpanel voice: ''Dammit.''

:[Cueball holds the folded down laptop at his side.]
:Cueball: But I promise it's good this time!
:Cueball: Just normal code. Good clean syntax. Nothing weird.
:Offpanel voice: Okay...

:[Cueball holds the laptop at his side, and raises a finger on his other hand.]
:Cueball: Except the only variable name is "X". To refer to different variables you have to write "X" in different fonts.
:Offpanel voice: I'm calling the court.
:Another offpanel voice: Maybe we can appeal.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Programming]]

Talk:2260: Reaction Maps

2020-01-29T03:26:35Z

141.101.98.40:

Damn bro, you got the whole squad laughing.

Also Cueball, if you want to react with driving directions you might as well go drive to her and punch her you coward[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 03:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I can't find Jump, OH. [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 23:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
: Apparently there's one in Kentucky, too, but if you want to use {{w|Jump,_South_Yorkshire|one I knew of}}, that'd make for an interesting route. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.144|141.101.107.144]] 17:16, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I can't find a town named "A" in Clay County WV. Is there supposed to be one? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.136|162.158.214.136]] 23:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Wiki sez: "Clay is a town in and the county seat of Clay County, West Virginia, United States.[6] The population was 491 at the 2010 census. It is the only incorporated town in Clay County." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.136|162.158.214.136]] 23:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I looked for "A, Clay County, WV" and [https://goo.gl/maps/sUm6MtwEvpsBbfLX8 found this]. "B" and "C" also find places but "D" doesn't. It looks like Clay County is divided into A, B and C. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.53|141.101.99.53]] 08:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC) Update: According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_County,_West_Virginia#Geography they rationalised their old districts into "A", "B" and "C" between 1990 and 2000.

I completely missed this one! In my defence, here in southern England ‘Tudor’ sounds much less like ‘two-door’, and ‘compact’ is much less commonly applied to cars... [[User:Gidds|Gidds]] ([[User talk:Gidds|talk]]) 23:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Tip if you are doing a European version, and want to avoid F-Bombs: You can [https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Fucking,+%C3%96sterreich/Bad+Kissingen,+Deutschland/ replace "Fucking" by "bad Kissing"]. It is "only" a 430km reroute. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:47, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Does that pun actually work in US English? In UK English, Tudor and two-door have totally different vowel sounds. The former is more "tew-der". {{unsigned ip|162.158.158.179|09:58, 28 January 2020‎}}
:It does work with my weird accent (German, officially learned british English in school, tought by a German teacher who lived a while in Australia, and refined with watching Hollywood productions, travelling Ireland (and other places, but mostly Ireland), and working with Indians, Americans and Brits in an American company...) Slight difference between how I would pronounce two and "tu" of tudor. (more or less as tju(?)) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 09:05, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
:Yes, and in fact, Ford named several two-doored body styles in the interwar period "Tudor" (and, somewhat distressingly, dubbed the corresponding four-door styles "Fordor"). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.160|172.69.34.160]] 12:03, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

;H.ON.D.A.
This reminds of when I worked in a place with a very slow Internet connection, but I found one solution (sort of) which required about 40 minutes to get connected, but was very fast once I was connected. I called it Hurry-ON Driving Access (HONDA). The way it worked was that I got in my Honda Civic, and drove to a place with a better Internet connection... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.20|172.69.34.20]] 03:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I named my Smart Fortwo "Eddie." Fortwo > 42 > Hitchhikers. And that engine was a pretty improbable size. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.236|108.162.216.236]] 13:54, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Anyone who can make a decent argument why this joke should be bad enough to end a friendship? Or could Randall just not find anything better. Did it need to be related to driving? I like the idea of answering like this, but cannot really understand why such a joke would necessitate such a fierce response...? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:04, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
:It's kind of a cultural joke that puns are the one of the lowest forms of wit, and that especially bad or forced puns are so bad as to merit comical overreactions, such as flipping tables, throwing yourself out of a window, or expressing physical pain. It might be an internet thing, although I'm sure the sentiment pre-dates the internet. Cueball is not seriously suggesting ending their friendship - he's just suggesting that he ''should'', as penance for the terribleness of the pun. I believe the pun doesn't have to relate to driving - Randall has just found a clever way to express disapproval that happens to use driving directions. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 14:05, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
:Possible reason: it's not that the pun itself is so bad, it's the "get it"--Ponytail (probably) knows the pun isn't very funny, *knows Cueball didn't think it was funny*, and is demanding that he acknowledge the pun. Once is nothing, but annoyance can build up. The fiftieth time someone interrupts a real conversation with a pun, and repeats the pun if nobody gives them the laugh or at least groan they want, it becomes something like "yeah, guy, we heard you. If it was funny someone would have laughed. Stop interrupting the conversation to get attention. It's not as clever as you think it is."
:As someone else mentioned, it sounds like the pun only works if you pronounce Tudor incorrectly, which could repeat a trend of Americans assuming they are right without regard to other cultures, and demonstrating that they haven't valued putting any effort in to learn this. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.236|172.69.22.236]] 14:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
::I could be wrong, but it sounds decisively like you think you're right without regard for our culture! You're also lumping all Americans into a single group in your comment, which is at least inappropriate, if not worse. Ultimately, we can say it however we want to say it, and you can do the same! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 19:35, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Given that the Tudors descend from the ''Welsh'' "Sir Tudur" (his sons being "ap Tudur", 'ap' in P-Celtic being equivalent to 'Mac'/'Mc' in Q-Celtic, and from thence trailled the dynasty that eventually became Henry (VII) Tudor and the rest of them), the South-Walian accent renders both vowels as /i/ (or maybe /i:/ for the first), or in North Wales /y/ (like the Germanic ü?), not likw the Welsh 'w' ("bws" is the public transport vehicle). The Tudurs of Penmynydd are Northern (Anglesean) but with Ceredigion lands too (mid-Southern, and nobody can really agree whether Aberystwyth is North or South, equally difficult to get to from everywhere else!) so you can take your choice on that one! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.144|141.101.107.144]] 17:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2250: OK/okay/ok

2020-01-04T11:25:57Z

141.101.98.40:

He forgot the eternal joke - 0K
Come on Randall, you're a person of science[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 11:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I think this should have been a table. Put spellings down the side (I've seen a lot of "oki" online; maybe "A-OK" too, or some humorous misspelling) and possible permutations of punctuations and capitalisation across the top. I want to know how "o.k.ay." makes you sound :p
[[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 17:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:But when you do a single word response, it should just be, "k".
:[[User:Hax|Hax]] ([[User talk:Hax|talk]])
:: "'kay" is better, but I've also seen "'k" -- highlighting, perhaps, that the "o" is supposed to be there even if people are lazy and cut off too much when speaking and writing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.100|108.162.237.100]] 06:43, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
:If it's not capitalized, I'm definitely imagining the person making clucking noises, even if I ''know'' that's not what they meant... Doesn't ''everybody'' read "ok" phonetically, as "ock", as in grok? ;S
:[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

As of this writing, the title text is wrong. I don't know how to edit it. The current explainXKCD version ends with ("oK".). But the xkcd website ends with ("oK.") The location of the period within the quote changes the meaning of this comment. [[User:Agrasin|Agrasin]] ([[User talk:Agrasin|talk]]) 20:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:Good catch! I edited it. I was the one who put it in wrong in the first place as well. I had to insert the quotes manually, when I copy-pasted the title text from the inspect tool of xkcd.com and made this error. Things like the title text or the date can be edited easily when you use the edit button on top of the page instead of the small one at the explanation/transcript. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 21:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:The period's placement does not necessarily change the meaning of the sentence as its inclusion within the quotation marks does not imply it is part of the quote. Punctuation immediately following a quote goes inside the quotation marks under English grammar. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.112|172.68.174.112]] 21:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
::That's a ridiculously bad rule & I'd hope nobody actually does that. Punctuation should only go inside the quotation marks if it's part of the quote. To put punctuation in where it wasn't used muddles whether the punctuation is part of the quote or part of the sentence containing the quote, & offers no possible benefit to comprehension. Bad rule: Don't do that.
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:::Totally agree although I suspect that english grammar is not supposed to be logical. Also, I think using "oK" would be good idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:::However, it looks much nicer and mimics proper handwriting, where the comma sign is directly underneath the quotation mark. It's considered proper form for American English, whereas Brits put it outside.
:::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
::No, that's only for comma signs. Periods go inside if it's a part of the quote, outside if it isn't, and in both places if you end your sentence with a quote. "This quoted sentence ends with a period.".
::[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.142|162.158.134.142]] 23:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
:::I have never seen a double period like that anywhere. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 05:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

2249: I Love the 20s

2020-01-02T22:36:59Z

141.101.98.40: Fix incorrect spellings & plurals, and (pedantically) remove accusation of pedantry

{{comic
| number = 2249
| date = January 1, 2020
| title = I Love the 20s
| image = i love the 20s.png
| titletext = Billboard's "Best of the 80s" chart includes Blondie's 1980 hit "Call Me." QED.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a PEDANT. Explain title text.}}
This comic was released on the first day of {{w|2020}}. It was the second of two [[:Category:New Year|New Year comics]] around the 2019-2020 New Year.

[[Megan]], [[Cueball]], and [[Ponytail]] are all happy for the beginning of the new {{w|decade}}, from 2020-2029, for a variety of reasons, but [[White Hat]] has objections to this beginning of a new decade.

It begins with Megan wishing happy new decade and Ponytail naming it the {{w|2020s|'20s}}. At this point White Hat tries to get in with an objection to this, but he is interrupted twice before he can make his point.

First Ponytail is exited that decades have "easy names" again. Decades such as the {{w|1960s}} or {{w|1970s}} had easy "names" - '60s, '70s, etc. The {{w|2000s_(decade)|2000s}} were {{w|2000s_(decade)#Name_for_the_decade|sometimes}} named the "{{w|Aughts}}" and the {{w|2010s}} the "Teens", names that did not enter popular usage, but we can return to the shortened decades name with the '20s decade.

Then she continues to discus cultural trends and Cueball chimes in. In decades before the 2000s, trends were named for the decade in which its members reached adulthood / teenage years, e.g. a trend from the '90s. After 2000, many trends have been labeled with the "{{w|millennials}}" term, which refers to an entire generation who grew up in the 2000s. Cueball and Ponytail hope that trends will not be labeled as "millennial" or by generations in this new decade. This phenomenon was previously discussed in [[1849: Decades]]. Millennials have also been mentioned in [[1962: Generations]] and in [[2165: Millennials]].

The main point of the comic, however, is White Hat's claim that the new decade does not start until 2021. Ponytail claims that he is pedantic but in that case he should at least be right... Of course both sides believe they are correct. White Hat's argument appears to be analogous to the point often made at the turn of the millennium, which is that, because the Gregorian calendar doesn't include a year 0, the first century started in year 1, the second century began in the year 101, and so forth, so the 21st century didn't begin until the start of 2001. Nevertheless, most people was celebrating the shift from 19 to 20, as the first two numbers in the year, much more than they did the next year when the new millennium officially began.

Ponytail retorts that decades aren't numbered cardinally: any set of ten years constitutes a decade. While the 203rd decade of the Common Era doesn't begin until 2021, "the twenties" refers to all years that include a "twenty". White Hat appears not to accept this argument, insisting that that Ponytail doesn't "get it", he even wish to draw her a diagram which makes Ponytail interrupt again to respond in kind.

At this point Megan stops their heated argument claiming she can resolve this. She then states that {{w|MC Hammer}}'s song ''{{w|U Can't Touch This}}'', released in 1990, was featured in a 1990s-themed television show ({{w|I Love the '90s (American TV series)|''I Love the '90s''}}) instead of its 1980s-themed counterpart. Ponytail then claims that this settles the discussion. And White Hat throws in the towel stating that he accept VH1's authority and lets Ponytail win. This comment can be read in two ways: Sarcastic ("VH1 is a random pop culture organization with no expert knowledge, you have presented a poor argument") or legitimate ("I accept VH1 as a legitimate authority and defer to them," which would be humorous because VH1 is a random pop culture organization with no expert knowledge of the calendar). {{w|VH1}} is the parent company of MTV, a cable TV channel known for grouping music by decades.

However, reading the Wikipedia page on Decade it is clear that neither White Hat nor Ponytail can claim to be correct. There is not consensus about what a decade should mean regarding 2021-2030 vs 2020-2029. On the other hand saying the '20s is much clearer defined as those years with two thousand and twenty something. But that was not what Megan was saying. Ponytail on the other hand uses that version.

Perhaps [[Randall]] may be concerned that a single datum-point is not sufficient proof, so in the title text he continues this theme with a hit song from 1980 grouped with the 1980s, not the 1970s. In this case it is {{w|Blondie (band)|Blondie's}} 1980 hit "{{w|Call Me (Blondie song)|Call Me}}" which is featured in {{w|Billboard (magazine)|Billboard's}} chart [https://www.billboard.com/charts/greatest-billboards-top-songs-80s Best of the 80s].

The title text ends with {{w|Q.E.D.|QED}}, quod erat demonstrandum", literally meaning "what was to be shown, traditionally used at the end of a mathematical proof to mean "thus it has been demonstrated", as if this second landmark piece of evidence sufficiently proves Megan's point beyond a doubt, as conclusive as a mathematical proof.

==Transcript==
:[Megan walks in from the left greeting Cueball, White Hat, and Ponytail standing in a line, the last two looking in her direction.]
:Megan: Happy new decade!
:Ponytail: Welcome to the '20s!
:White Hat: '''''Actually—'''''
:Ponytail: I'm excited we can name decades again.
:Ponytail: "Aughts" and "teens" never caught on.

:[Megan stops next to Cueball as White Hat has his finger raised.]
:White Hat: Actually, the new decade doesn't start-
:Ponytail: Mostly, I'm just glad we can go back to attributing cultural trends to decades instead of generations.

:[All four just stand normal.]
:Cueball: Yeah.
:Cueball: Decades were silly, but making everything about "millennials" turned out to be even worse.
:Ponytail: Seriously.

:[Only White Hat and Ponytail are shown, both with their arms held out to the sides.]
:White Hat: It's technically not a new decade until '''2021'''.
:Ponytail: OK, listen.
:Ponytail: If you're going to be pedantic, you should at least be right.
:White Hat: I '''''am''''' right!
:Ponytail: You're '''''not'''''.

:[Zoom in on White Hat and Ponytails upper parts as they gesture towards each other both raising their hands palm up. Megan interrupts them from off panel, as made clear in the next panel. Her voice comes out of a star burst on the left panel frame.]
:White Hat: See, the 20th century didn't start until--
:Ponytail: But decades aren't centuries. They're not cardinally numbered.
:White Hat: You don't get it. Let me draw a--
:Ponytail: No, '''''you''''' don't--
:Megan (off-panel): Stop!

:[All four characters are displayed again. Megan has raised a finger and all the others look at her.]
:Megan: I can resolve this.
:Megan: *Ahem*
:Megan: MC Hammer's ''U Can't Touch This'' (1990) was featured in '''''I Love the '90s''''', not ''''' '80s'''''.
:Ponytail: ...That settles that.
:White Hat: Yeah, I accept VH1's authority.
:White Hat: You win.

==Trivia==
Traditionally, the First Century starts in year 1 and ends in the year 100, the Second Century starts in the year 101 and runs through the year 200, and so on, because {{w|Zero-based numbering|zero indexing}}, like the number zero itself, was not in wide use at the time. However, due to an error by {{w|Dionysius Exiguus}}, the year 1 was after the death of {{w|Herod the Great}}, so Jesus could not have been born in that year, and was probably born either in 4 B.C. or 6 B.C., so the first, second, etc., century after his birth would actually end in the mid '90's.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:New Year]]

Talk:2249: I Love the 20s

2020-01-02T16:20:50Z

141.101.98.40:

in gif diehard is a Christmas movie. There is no right or wrong answer.
But is White Hat right or wrong? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.197|162.158.91.197]] 19:00, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
:Both. It's the only way to settle this. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.63|173.245.54.63]] 19:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
::I think that he is right, but it’s like asking if diehard is a Christmas movie. There is no right or wrong answer.
:::Indeed, famed D.J. and space journalist [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZVOSZqth70 Scott Manley says it's a new decade in C but not in FORTRAN]. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.241|172.68.189.241]] 19:37, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
::::You mean it's already 21th century for FORTRAN? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:33, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
::::But what decade is it in the {{w|Delisle scale}}? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.250|141.101.98.250]] 20:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain Ponytail contradicts herself in panel 5. Arguing that decades are not cardinally numbered is arguing that the decade starts in 2021 (ordinal numbering.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.34|162.158.126.34]] 21:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
:She doesn't: you're assuming there are only two options, but that's not the case. Decades (in the common "20s, 30s, 40s" form) are not technically numbered at all: they're named, it's just that those names are based on numbers.
:It's still a sequence, like names or dictionary entries being grouped into "As, Bs, Cs" and so on, though. (Is there a specific name for this type of sequence? If so, I don't know it.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.144|141.101.107.144]] 23:03, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
::She (more likely Randall's slip of the pen) is still wrong: what she means is that they aren't ''ordinally'' numbered, which is the reason the other guy is wrong. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.179|162.158.158.179]] 08:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Having had this conversation on WhatsApp, I have settled on an ingenious solution that works for me (on being told that "0" had not been invented in the year between -1 and +1") and explains why decades start with "10, 20...": As usually nowadays, the first decade was the Betaversion and so only ran from 1-9... {{unsigned ip|188.114.103.5|07:29, 2 January 2020 (UTC)}}
:Nobody really recognised the possibility of having/not having 0AD until c.525AD, anyway. (Sitting betwixt the nominal start of what became in our zero in 5thC and its eventual formalising in 7thC, over in India/etc.) If you ask me (and you aren't doing, I know!) I think they probably were envisaging an early version of 1s' Compliment, but knew it would be silly to have two separate numbers for the year ±0 and so fudged it entirely the other way. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.9|162.158.158.9]] 11:37, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Every year is a new decade. Just some of them overlap. The 203rd decade was from 2021 to 2030, while the '20s will run from 1920 to 1929. Both are legitimate decades. So id 1994-2003; it just doesn't have a convenient name to refer to it by. Heck, you don't even need a new year. 1981-12-03 to 1991-12-02 is the first decade of my life :) So if you want to celebrate the start of a new decade, you should celebrate ''every single day''. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 10:48, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
:By that logic, the 203rd decade started 203 planck lengths (or other smaller time units) after the big bang. Or was it 202 planck lenghts after? However I agree, that decades start and end all the time. The question is just, what day does the decade "the 20s" start. I'd say it started on January 1, 2020. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 11:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

There is an interesting theory that CULTURALLY, a new decade doesn't really start until year 2 or year 3 of said decade. So, what we traditionally envision as "the 80s" actually was typical for ca. 1983-1992, what we think of as "the 90s" actually happened between 1993 and 2002, and so on. It makes a lot of sense if you think of it (and if you listen to music or look at pictures of the time); mullets were still a thing in 1991, just as carrot pants were in 1981 and psychedelic music was in 1971. (It also works for centuries, but with a longer timespan, about 15 years. 1910 or 1911 feels a lot more 19th century than 20th century. In 1815, the Congress of Vienna was held, which ended the European Wars of the 18th century and laid the foundation for the nation states typical of the 19th century, and for a period of relative peace that enabled the Industrial Revolution. And so on.)--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.233|162.158.158.233]] 12:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
:I'd argue that this is just randomness. There is no reason, any trends should align to the way the years are set up. Of course noone says "hey, it's first January 2020, let's start a new style of dressing and listen to new music." But neither do they in 2022. However e.g. carrot pants were MOST popular, and on their peak of popularity in the 70s, and psychadelic music in the 60s, even though trends linger and resurface long after all the time. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:54, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
::Well, I'd already planned to use exclusive and entirely 2020s' slang and fashion from yesterday onwards. After a few false starts because nobody knew what I was vocing about, I'm now starting it ween and only going full-barbecue as I get past the prime snick of my voc, in empthy my viewclan viz my deltas and merj my vocstyel, all charged for the dec fronting up! Ten-four, me hearties? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 16:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

In the decades under discussion, VH1 and MTV were competing channels, not parent company - child company. (And MTV came first.) It's much more relevant to the explanation that VH1 was a music channel on cable TV than to explain who owns what now, three decades later. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.159|172.69.63.159]] 15:59, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I find it surprising that Randall didn't reference ISO-8601 by way of Wikipedia, such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero#ISO_8601 in the Year Zero article], to make the argument that the first 10 years ran from 0-9 as "the standard". Though I suppose it is more entertaining/broadly targeted to reference pop. culture sources when labeling pop. culture trends. [[User:SensorSmith|SensorSmith]] ([[User talk:SensorSmith|talk]]) 16:12, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

2233: Aurora Meaning

2019-11-26T08:48:49Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2233
| date = November 25, 2019
| title = Aurora Meaning
| image = aurora_meaning.png
| titletext = The astro-ph.SR arXiv servers are simultaneously being overwhelmed by electronic requests and actual electricity.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a an arXiv server. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The phenomenon of atmospheric {{w|aurora}} (known as aurora borealis in the northern hemisphere and aurora australis in the southern hemisphere) occurs as a result of charged particles emitted by the sun interacting with the earth's magnetic field. The magnetic field funnels the charged particles towards the polar regions of the earth. At some point, the flow of particles hits the atmosphere where the particles interact with the molecules of the gases which make up the atmosphere, adding to those molecules' energy. Those molecules subsequently release the added energy in the form of light, which is observed as an aurora.

Where in the atmosphere the aurora occurs is related to the quantity & energy of the particles being emitted by the sun. Under normal circumstances, this occurs in high latitudes relatively close to the poles. In less common circumstances of more intense solar activity such as a a {{w|solar flare}} or {{w|coronal mass ejection}} (CME), aurora will occur at lower latitudes. This comic indicates both the rarity with which this would occur and the impact it would have on people.

'''Polar latitudes:''' Normal, aurora typically can be seen in these high latitudes.

'''Subpolar latitudes:''' (e.g. southern Canada/northern US) Happens frequently enough to be unconcerned but uncommon enough to be notable and interesting. About a week before the publication of this comic, on Wednesday, November 20, 2019, [https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/20/us/aurora-borealis-wednesday-trnd-scn/index.html aurora activity was visible] in the northern United States and southern Canada.

'''Subtropical/Tropical latitudes:''' Charged particles of sufficient energy to cause aurora at this latitude are likely to interfere with the functioning of electronics in orbit, possibly to the point of disabling them entirely. This has only happened on a few occasions in recorded history and not during the space age.

'''Equatorial latitudes:''' Aurora have never been recorded here, so all scientific inquiry into what the effect would be on the earth in general, and on life itself, is purely theoretical. Were this to actually occur, those theories could be proven or disproved based on actual observations (presuming all observers have not been incapacitated or otherwise occupied by the complete breakdown of all electric and electronic systems as the charged particles induce electric currents in conducting objects).

The title text comments on what would happen if aurora were seen in the middlemost band. [http://arXiv.org arXiv.org] is an electronic database of unreviewed, pre-print research papers. The [https://arxiv.org/list/astro-ph.SR/recent astro-ph.SR] sublist is a list of papers in the "Solar and Stellar Astrophysics" topic. So if aurora were seen in the middlemost band, there would be many requests to upload electronic publications on the subject, as well as actual electrical interference to the servers of the website.

==Transcript==
:[A drawing of a circle with six dashed lines dividing it into 7 segments with different width. Those at equal distance above and below the broadest middle segments have the same width. Each segment has a label. Above the circle there is a caption:]
:What it means if you see an aurora, by latitude.

:[The labels of the seven segments:]
:Normal
:Cool and exciting
:Someone should go check on our satellites
:A bunch of open questions in solar-terrestrial physics are about to be answered
:Someone should go check on our satellites
:Cool and exciting
:Normal

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Astronomy]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2018-06-16T09:14:11Z

141.101.98.40: /* List of specific individuals */

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} was an act by the U.S. Congress that revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, it is unclear whether members of Congress can be designated in the line of succession. Secondly, the Act allows for a cabinet officer to be "replaced" as acting President by a new Speaker of the House or a new President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

An additional concern regarding the Act is that after the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the line of succession list the members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established with the oldest departments first, irrespective of the Secretary's personal fitness or appropriateness of the office. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is all the way at the bottom of the current Presidential line of succession at 18th, behind other Secretaries such as that of Agriculture (9th) and Education (16th).

Another practical concern is that, by including the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which (in the current American political climate) could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis, and could even encourage assassinations.

The full text of the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission can be found here: <https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf>. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is here: <https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission/>. The first 6 members of the commission's list are included in the current line of succession, after which they specificy that 5 new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of succeeding the presidency if needed. Randall's list begins with these 11 people (stuffing all 5 of the new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list continues with more politicians, actors who have played Presidents, athletes, and others.

Randall's list omits the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, as well as many other cabinet positions. He is probably simply following the commission's report in this. But perhaps he does not find those people qualified to become President of the United States, or is concerned about the constitutionality of lawmakers becoming President. However, he does not seem to be concerned about constitutionality, because he included the entire line of succession to the British throne, most of whom do not meet the requirement to be a natural-born citizen of the United States.{{Citation needed}} {{w|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_5:_Qualifications_for_office|Article Two of the US Constitution}} establishes that the President must be a "{{w|Natural-born-citizen clause|natural-born}}" US citizen at least 35 years of age and had lived in the US for the last 14 years.

Randall's list includes several other people who also might not be eligible to become President either because they are not natural-born U.S. citizens (e.g., as of the time of the comic's publication, {{w|Serena Williams}} had withdrawn from her last match in the {{w|French Open}} to {{w|Maria Sharapova}}, who is Russian) or they are under 35 years of age ({{w|Russell Westbrook}}, the reigning NBA Most Valuable Player at the time of the comic's publication, was only 29 years old). These would mainly be athletes due to the relatively global reach of the four major professional sports leagues in North America and the fact that 35 is quite old for a professional athlete, let alone one who is good enough to win the league MVP. Presumably, those who wouldn't qualify for the office of President would be skipped over like in real life -- at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|potential habitability}}. Nevertheless it's a completely meaningless way of settling a tie. However, depending on the relative positions of Earth and Jupiter when you were born, you could easily have been tens of millions of kilometers closer. Alternatively, Randall could be playing on how Europa sounds like Europe.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|President
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|Vice president
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|Secretary of State
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. Existing rules of succession hand Executive power to the leaders of the Legislative branch if the President and Vice-President are both killed or removed from power. This is troubling for a number of reasons. One is that the Executive and Legislative branches are supposed to act as independent checks on one another's power, and so are supposed to be kept separate. Another issue is that the Executive and Legislative branches are frequently controlled by political rivals from different political parties. In such a case, assassins could effectively reverse the results of Presidential elections if they managed to kill the President and Vice-President in a short period of time (which is used as part of the twist ending in {{w|White House Down}}). Additionally, leaders of the House and Senate aren't as deeply connected to the military and diplomatic missions of the country, and so would have a hard time maintaining continuity, particularly if an attack or disaster killed multiple national leaders at once. These problems could all be addressed by keeping the initial Line of Succession confined to the Executive branch of government.
|-
|4
|Secretary of Defense
|President pro tempore of the Senate
|Moved up from 7th position
|-
|5
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position, possibly to highlight the Attorney General's place in the current order
|-
|6
|Attorney General
|Secretary of the Treasury
|Moved up from 8th position
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission as a potential mechanism to ensure members of succession are not in Washington DC during a catastrophic attack.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. He has also never played a president, though he has received a {{w|Presidential Medal of Freedom}}, and appeared in a {{w|Last Week Tonight with John Oliver}} [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyPRssh2rk0 skit], where he rallies five (wax) presidents to action. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|Secretary of the Interior
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, Gov {{w|Jerry Brown}} would be first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|Secretary of Agriculture
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|Secretary of Commerce
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) is legally eligible for the office; Sheeran is from the UK, and the other seven are too young.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time are: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it isn't clear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen as he was born in the UK and his father is British but his mother is American.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was the top female tennis player (though not the world #1 ranking, because she took time off for pregnancy). She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and led the terrorist attack that killed everybody in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are not US citizens (the former is from Venezuela and the latter from Canada), and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) are too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

As of the present, Pullman's immediate descendants consist of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29, so all are currently too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen (especially one who is a U.S. citizen based on place of birth and a British citizen based on having a parent who was a British citizen descended from {{w|Sophia of Hanover}}) or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 57 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}, as of the time of publication. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans are currently in the top 100. In theory, however, the full British succession list includes several thousand people (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession to the British throne (and she is planning to give up her U.S. citizenship in favour of British citizenship, so her children (who would come immediately after Harry in the British line of succession) would not be born U.S. citizens either). A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner is {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner is {{w|Miki Sudo}}. Neither is currently old enough to assume the office.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be President of Untied states (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) as of the date the comic was published:
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!Order
!Name
!Reason
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|Donald Trump}}
|{{w|President of the United States}}
|
|-
|2
|{{w|Mike Pence}}
|{{w|Vice President of the United States}}
|
|-
|3
|{{w|Mike Pompeo}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of State}}
|
|-
|4
|{{w|Jim Mattis}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense}}
|
|-
|5
|{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|
|-
|6
|{{w|Jeff Sessions}}
|{{w|United States Attorney General}}
|
|-
|7
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Tom Hanks
|As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
|-
|8
|{{w|Jerry Brown}}
|Governor of California
|
|-
|9
|{{w|Greg Abbott}}
|Governor of Texas
|
|-
|10
|{{w|Andrew Cuomo}}
|Governor of New York
|
|-
|11
|{{w|Rick Scott}}
|Governor of Florida
|
|-
|12
|{{w|Bruce Rauner}}
|Governor of Illinois
|
|-
|13
|{{w|Tom Wolf}}
|Governor of Pennsylvania
|
|-
|14
|{{w|John Kasich}}
|Governor of Ohio
|
|-
|15
|{{w|Rick Snyder}}
|Governor of Michigan
|
|-
|16
|{{w|Nathan Deal}}
|Governor of Georgia
|
|-
|17
|{{w|Roy Cooper}}
|Governor of North Carolina
|
|-
|18
|{{w|Phil Murphy}}
|Governor of New Jersey
|
|-
|19
|{{w|Ralph Northam}}
|Governor of Virginia
|
|-
|20
|{{w|Jay Inslee}}
|Governor of Washington
|
|-
|21
|{{w|Charlie Baker}}
|Governor of Massachusetts
|
|-
|22
|{{w|Eric Holcomb}}
|Governor of Indiana
|
|-
|23
|{{w|Doug Ducey}}
|Governor of Arizona
|
|-
|24
|{{w|Bill Haslam}}
|Governor of Tennessee
|
|-
|25
|{{w|Mike Parson}}
|Governor of Missouri
|
|-
|26
|{{w|Larry Hogan}}
|Governor of Maryland
|
|-
|27
|{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}}
|Governor of Wisconsin
|
|-
|28
|{{w|Mark Dayton}}
|Governor of Minnesota
|
|-
|29
|{{w|John Hickenlooper}}
|Governor of Colorado
|
|-
|30
|{{w|Kay Ivey}}
|Governor of Alabama
|
|-
|31
|{{w|Henry McMaster}}
|Governor of South Carolina
|
|-
|32
|{{w|John Bel Edwards}}
|Governor of Louisiana
|
|-
|33
|{{w|Matt Bevin}}
|Governor of Kentucky
|
|-
|33
|{{w|Kate Brown}}
|Governor of Oregon
|Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
|-
|35
|{{w|Mary Fallin}}
|Governor of Oklahoma
|
|-
|36
|{{w|Dannel Malloy}}
|Governor of Connecticut
|
|-
|37
|{{w|Kim Reynolds}}
|Governor of Iowa
|
|-
|38
|{{w|Phil Bryant}}
|Governor of Mississippi
|
|-
|39
|{{w|Asa Hutchinson}}
|Governor of Arkansas
|
|-
|40
|{{w|Jeff Colyer}}
|Governor of Kansas
|
|-
|41
|{{w|Gary Herbert}}
|Governor of Utah
|
|-
|42
|{{w|Brian Sandoval}}
|Governor of Nevada
|
|-
|43
|{{w|Susana Martinez}}
|Governor of New Mexico
|
|-
|44
|{{w|Jim Justice}}
|Governor of West Virginia
|
|-
|45
|{{w|Pete Ricketts}}
|Governor of Nebraska
|
|-
|46
|{{w|Butch Otter}}
|Governor of Idaho
|
|-
|47
|{{w|David Ige}}
|Governor of Hawaii
|
|-
|48
|{{w|Paul LePage}}
|Governor of Maine
|
|-
|49
|{{w|Chris Sununu}}
|Governor of New Hampshire
|
|-
|50
|{{w|Gina Raimondo}}
|Governor of Rhode Island
|
|-
|51
|{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}}
|Governor of Montana
|
|-
|52
|{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}}
|Governor of Delaware
|
|-
|53
|{{w|Dennis Daugaard}}
|Governor of South Dakota
|
|-
|54
|{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}}
|Governor of Alaska
|
|-
|55
|{{w|Doug Burgum}}
|Governor of North Dakota
|
|-
|56
|{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}}
|Governor of Vermont
|
|-
|57
|{{w|Matt Mead}}
|Governor of Wyoming
|
|-
|58
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}
|Kate MicKinnon
|If she is available. Entries #10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible members.
|-
|59
|{{w|Luis Fonsi}}
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist
|Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
|-
|60
|{{w|Peggy Whitson}}
|Astronaut, 665 days in space
|
|-
|61
|{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}
|Astronaut, 534 days in space
|
|-
|62
|{{w|Scott Kelly}}
|Astronaut, 520 days in space
|
|-
|63
|{{w|Mike Fincke}}
|Astronaut, 382 days in space
|
|-
|64
|{{w|Mike Foale}}
|Astronaut, 374 days in space
|Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
|-
|65
|{{w|Serena Williams}}
|Serena Williams
|Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
|-
|66
|{{w|Tom Brady}}
|{{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}
|The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office.
|-
|67
|{{w|Bill Pullman}}
|Bill Pullman
|None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
|-
|68
|{{w|Prince Charles|Charles Windsor}}
|1st successor to British throne
|US citizenship and residency is ignored in this and succeeding entries for British royalty.
|-
|69
|{{w|Prince William, Duke of Cambridge|William Windsor}}
|2nd successor to British throne
|
|-
|70
|{{w|Prince Andrew|Andrew Windsor}}
|7th successor to British throne
|Successors of order 3 to 6 are too young to be serve as President.
|-
|71
|{{w|Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex|Edward Mountbatten-Windsor}}
|10th successor to British throne
|Unlike his older brothers, Prince Edward combines his father's surname of "Mountbatten" with his mother's family name.
|
|-
|
|''everyone else''
|Jousting tournament
|Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions are too young to hold the office.
|}

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2018-06-16T09:12:49Z

141.101.98.40: Correcting errors in names - "Windsor-Cambridge" and "Windsor-Wessex" were erroneously given as surnames.

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} was an act by the U.S. Congress that revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, it is unclear whether members of Congress can be designated in the line of succession. Secondly, the Act allows for a cabinet officer to be "replaced" as acting President by a new Speaker of the House or a new President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

An additional concern regarding the Act is that after the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the line of succession list the members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established with the oldest departments first, irrespective of the Secretary's personal fitness or appropriateness of the office. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is all the way at the bottom of the current Presidential line of succession at 18th, behind other Secretaries such as that of Agriculture (9th) and Education (16th).

Another practical concern is that, by including the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which (in the current American political climate) could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis, and could even encourage assassinations.

The full text of the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission can be found here: <https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf>. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is here: <https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission/>. The first 6 members of the commission's list are included in the current line of succession, after which they specificy that 5 new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of succeeding the presidency if needed. Randall's list begins with these 11 people (stuffing all 5 of the new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list continues with more politicians, actors who have played Presidents, athletes, and others.

Randall's list omits the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, as well as many other cabinet positions. He is probably simply following the commission's report in this. But perhaps he does not find those people qualified to become President of the United States, or is concerned about the constitutionality of lawmakers becoming President. However, he does not seem to be concerned about constitutionality, because he included the entire line of succession to the British throne, most of whom do not meet the requirement to be a natural-born citizen of the United States.{{Citation needed}} {{w|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_5:_Qualifications_for_office|Article Two of the US Constitution}} establishes that the President must be a "{{w|Natural-born-citizen clause|natural-born}}" US citizen at least 35 years of age and had lived in the US for the last 14 years.

Randall's list includes several other people who also might not be eligible to become President either because they are not natural-born U.S. citizens (e.g., as of the time of the comic's publication, {{w|Serena Williams}} had withdrawn from her last match in the {{w|French Open}} to {{w|Maria Sharapova}}, who is Russian) or they are under 35 years of age ({{w|Russell Westbrook}}, the reigning NBA Most Valuable Player at the time of the comic's publication, was only 29 years old). These would mainly be athletes due to the relatively global reach of the four major professional sports leagues in North America and the fact that 35 is quite old for a professional athlete, let alone one who is good enough to win the league MVP. Presumably, those who wouldn't qualify for the office of President would be skipped over like in real life -- at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|potential habitability}}. Nevertheless it's a completely meaningless way of settling a tie. However, depending on the relative positions of Earth and Jupiter when you were born, you could easily have been tens of millions of kilometers closer. Alternatively, Randall could be playing on how Europa sounds like Europe.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|President
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|Vice president
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|Secretary of State
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. Existing rules of succession hand Executive power to the leaders of the Legislative branch if the President and Vice-President are both killed or removed from power. This is troubling for a number of reasons. One is that the Executive and Legislative branches are supposed to act as independent checks on one another's power, and so are supposed to be kept separate. Another issue is that the Executive and Legislative branches are frequently controlled by political rivals from different political parties. In such a case, assassins could effectively reverse the results of Presidential elections if they managed to kill the President and Vice-President in a short period of time (which is used as part of the twist ending in {{w|White House Down}}). Additionally, leaders of the House and Senate aren't as deeply connected to the military and diplomatic missions of the country, and so would have a hard time maintaining continuity, particularly if an attack or disaster killed multiple national leaders at once. These problems could all be addressed by keeping the initial Line of Succession confined to the Executive branch of government.
|-
|4
|Secretary of Defense
|President pro tempore of the Senate
|Moved up from 7th position
|-
|5
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position, possibly to highlight the Attorney General's place in the current order
|-
|6
|Attorney General
|Secretary of the Treasury
|Moved up from 8th position
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission as a potential mechanism to ensure members of succession are not in Washington DC during a catastrophic attack.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. He has also never played a president, though he has received a {{w|Presidential Medal of Freedom}}, and appeared in a {{w|Last Week Tonight with John Oliver}} [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyPRssh2rk0 skit], where he rallies five (wax) presidents to action. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|Secretary of the Interior
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, Gov {{w|Jerry Brown}} would be first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|Secretary of Agriculture
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|Secretary of Commerce
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) is legally eligible for the office; Sheeran is from the UK, and the other seven are too young.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time are: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it isn't clear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen as he was born in the UK and his father is British but his mother is American.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was the top female tennis player (though not the world #1 ranking, because she took time off for pregnancy). She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and led the terrorist attack that killed everybody in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are not US citizens (the former is from Venezuela and the latter from Canada), and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) are too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

As of the present, Pullman's immediate descendants consist of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29, so all are currently too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen (especially one who is a U.S. citizen based on place of birth and a British citizen based on having a parent who was a British citizen descended from {{w|Sophia of Hanover}}) or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 57 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}, as of the time of publication. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans are currently in the top 100. In theory, however, the full British succession list includes several thousand people (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession to the British throne (and she is planning to give up her U.S. citizenship in favour of British citizenship, so her children (who would come immediately after Harry in the British line of succession) would not be born U.S. citizens either). A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner is {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner is {{w|Miki Sudo}}. Neither is currently old enough to assume the office.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be President of Untied states (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) as of the date the comic was published:
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!Order
!Name
!Reason
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|Donald Trump}}
|{{w|President of the United States}}
|
|-
|2
|{{w|Mike Pence}}
|{{w|Vice President of the United States}}
|
|-
|3
|{{w|Mike Pompeo}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of State}}
|
|-
|4
|{{w|Jim Mattis}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense}}
|
|-
|5
|{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|
|-
|6
|{{w|Jeff Sessions}}
|{{w|United States Attorney General}}
|
|-
|7
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Tom Hanks
|As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
|-
|8
|{{w|Jerry Brown}}
|Governor of California
|
|-
|9
|{{w|Greg Abbott}}
|Governor of Texas
|
|-
|10
|{{w|Andrew Cuomo}}
|Governor of New York
|
|-
|11
|{{w|Rick Scott}}
|Governor of Florida
|
|-
|12
|{{w|Bruce Rauner}}
|Governor of Illinois
|
|-
|13
|{{w|Tom Wolf}}
|Governor of Pennsylvania
|
|-
|14
|{{w|John Kasich}}
|Governor of Ohio
|
|-
|15
|{{w|Rick Snyder}}
|Governor of Michigan
|
|-
|16
|{{w|Nathan Deal}}
|Governor of Georgia
|
|-
|17
|{{w|Roy Cooper}}
|Governor of North Carolina
|
|-
|18
|{{w|Phil Murphy}}
|Governor of New Jersey
|
|-
|19
|{{w|Ralph Northam}}
|Governor of Virginia
|
|-
|20
|{{w|Jay Inslee}}
|Governor of Washington
|
|-
|21
|{{w|Charlie Baker}}
|Governor of Massachusetts
|
|-
|22
|{{w|Eric Holcomb}}
|Governor of Indiana
|
|-
|23
|{{w|Doug Ducey}}
|Governor of Arizona
|
|-
|24
|{{w|Bill Haslam}}
|Governor of Tennessee
|
|-
|25
|{{w|Mike Parson}}
|Governor of Missouri
|
|-
|26
|{{w|Larry Hogan}}
|Governor of Maryland
|
|-
|27
|{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}}
|Governor of Wisconsin
|
|-
|28
|{{w|Mark Dayton}}
|Governor of Minnesota
|
|-
|29
|{{w|John Hickenlooper}}
|Governor of Colorado
|
|-
|30
|{{w|Kay Ivey}}
|Governor of Alabama
|
|-
|31
|{{w|Henry McMaster}}
|Governor of South Carolina
|
|-
|32
|{{w|John Bel Edwards}}
|Governor of Louisiana
|
|-
|33
|{{w|Matt Bevin}}
|Governor of Kentucky
|
|-
|33
|{{w|Kate Brown}}
|Governor of Oregon
|Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
|-
|35
|{{w|Mary Fallin}}
|Governor of Oklahoma
|
|-
|36
|{{w|Dannel Malloy}}
|Governor of Connecticut
|
|-
|37
|{{w|Kim Reynolds}}
|Governor of Iowa
|
|-
|38
|{{w|Phil Bryant}}
|Governor of Mississippi
|
|-
|39
|{{w|Asa Hutchinson}}
|Governor of Arkansas
|
|-
|40
|{{w|Jeff Colyer}}
|Governor of Kansas
|
|-
|41
|{{w|Gary Herbert}}
|Governor of Utah
|
|-
|42
|{{w|Brian Sandoval}}
|Governor of Nevada
|
|-
|43
|{{w|Susana Martinez}}
|Governor of New Mexico
|
|-
|44
|{{w|Jim Justice}}
|Governor of West Virginia
|
|-
|45
|{{w|Pete Ricketts}}
|Governor of Nebraska
|
|-
|46
|{{w|Butch Otter}}
|Governor of Idaho
|
|-
|47
|{{w|David Ige}}
|Governor of Hawaii
|
|-
|48
|{{w|Paul LePage}}
|Governor of Maine
|
|-
|49
|{{w|Chris Sununu}}
|Governor of New Hampshire
|
|-
|50
|{{w|Gina Raimondo}}
|Governor of Rhode Island
|
|-
|51
|{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}}
|Governor of Montana
|
|-
|52
|{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}}
|Governor of Delaware
|
|-
|53
|{{w|Dennis Daugaard}}
|Governor of South Dakota
|
|-
|54
|{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}}
|Governor of Alaska
|
|-
|55
|{{w|Doug Burgum}}
|Governor of North Dakota
|
|-
|56
|{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}}
|Governor of Vermont
|
|-
|57
|{{w|Matt Mead}}
|Governor of Wyoming
|
|-
|58
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}
|Kate MicKinnon
|If she is available. Entries #10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible members.
|-
|59
|{{w|Luis Fonsi}}
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist
|Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
|-
|60
|{{w|Peggy Whitson}}
|Astronaut, 665 days in space
|
|-
|61
|{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}
|Astronaut, 534 days in space
|
|-
|62
|{{w|Scott Kelly}}
|Astronaut, 520 days in space
|
|-
|63
|{{w|Mike Fincke}}
|Astronaut, 382 days in space
|
|-
|64
|{{w|Mike Foale}}
|Astronaut, 374 days in space
|Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
|-
|65
|{{w|Serena Williams}}
|Serena Williams
|Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
|-
|66
|{{w|Tom Brady}}
|{{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}
|The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office.
|-
|67
|{{w|Bill Pullman}}
|Bill Pullman
|None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
|-
|68
|{{w|Prince Charles|Charles Windsor}}
|1st successor to British throne
|US citizenship and residency is ignored in this and succeeding entries for British royalty.
|-
|69
|{{w|Prince William, Duke of Cambridge|William Windsor}}
|2nd successor to British throne
|
|-
|70
|{{w|Prince Andrew|Andrew Windsor}}
|7th successor to British throne
|Successors of order 3 to 6 are too young to be serve as President.
|-
|71
|{{w|Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex|Edward Mountbatten-Windsor}}
|10th successor to British throne (Unlike his older brothers, Prince Edward combines his father's surname of "Mountbatten" with his mother's family name.)
|
|-
|
|''everyone else''
|Jousting tournament
|Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions are too young to hold the office.
|}

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

1889: xkcd Phone 6

2017-09-14T13:48:49Z

141.101.98.40: Spelling correction

{{comic
| number = 1889
| date = September 13, 2017
| title = xkcd Phone 6
| image = xkcd_phone_6.png
| titletext = We understand your privacy concerns; be assured that our phones will never store or transmit images of your face.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|All features need an explanation, the version number war and title text as well. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This is the sixth entry in the ongoing [[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd Phone series]], released the day after Apple announced their new {{w|iPhone 8}} and the higher-end {{w|iPhone X}} (pronounced iPhone 10) with facial recognition features.

===List of features (clockwise from center/top)===

; Front camera (centered for eye contact during video chat)
: Front camera is a common feature of smartphones. The camera lens is located on the same side of the phone's case as the main screen and therefore it is possible to capture the image of the user's face looking at the screen and display the interlocutor's face on the screen simultaneously, enabling video chat. However, as the camera is usually located above the screen, a user looking at the displayed image of the other person directs his or her eyes at the center of the screen and not at the camera's lens. This is very visible on the other end of the chat as if the person talking was looking down and not in the interlocutor's face which is an uncomfortable situation for most people. For this reason, professionals involved in movie or TV-making, like actors or reporters, are trained to look straight into the camera's lens while talking, which creates impression of looking straight at the viewer's face. During a video chat, however, looking into the lens of an above-screen camera does not allow one to see the interlocutor's face clearly because it is then in the peripheral field of vision.

: To solve this conundrum, Randall proposes locating the camera lens right in the middle of the screen. Therefore the user looking at the screen to see the other person's face would be also looking at the lens, creating an impression of a straight look on the other end of the chat. This is absurd since the lens would then take place of some of the center pixels of the screen, not allowing the display the center part of the captured image of the other person's face (like eyes and/or lips) which is most important for nonverbal communication. Such location of the camera lens would also likely interfere with touch-screen function. It will make other applications on the phone difficult to use, since virtually no user interface is designed to accommodate for a blind spot in the center.

; Full-width rear camera
: Phone cameras tend to have lenses which are quite small and round or square -- same width as height. Full-width makes it sound like the camera lens is really wide, as in a long oval or rectangle shape. This generally would not accomplish anything worthwhile, unless it allowed you to take one-shot panorama photos.

; CDC partnership - phone automatically administers seasonal flu vaccine to cheek every year
: U.S. {{w|Centers for Disease Control and Prevention}} is a government agency tasked with addressing public health concerns such as infectious diseases, including seasonal flu. A common way of limiting spread of an infectious disease is {{w|Vaccine|vaccination}}, which most often involves administering a specially prepared medicine via an {{w|intramuscular injection}}. This features implies that the phone would automatically perform such an injection once a year, by shooting a needle out of a small aperture while the user is holding the phone to his or her cheek during a call.

; 12-function
: Most smartphones can be used for more than 12 different things. However, this may refer to the 12 basic functions of calculus (identity, squaring, cubing, square root, logarithm, exponential, reciprocal, sine, cosine, greatest integer, absolute value, and logistic), or the twelve function keys on a modern keyboard (more than the ten on the original IBM PC keyboard). Alternatively it may be a reference to calculators: basic models are sometimes referred to as four function calculators (addition, subtraction, multiplication and division), and complex scientific calculators may advertise 250 or more functions.

; Dishwasher safe
: Usually a feature of plastic containers or fancy dishes. Unlikely to appear on a smartphone, though potentially useful if you need to clean your screen.

; GPS transmitter
: Many smartphones have a receiver for the Global Positioning System, which allows a phone to compute its position based on signals from the constellation of GPS satellites. However, a device with a "GPS transmitter" would broadcast signals that would interfere with the GPS receivers of all devices nearby.

; 3-G acceleration
: Usually, a phone is 3g compatible if it uses a certain standard ("third generation") for data transmission. However, 3-G acceleration implies the phone can accelerate at a rate of 3 times the acceleration of gravity, or approximately 30 m/s².

; Portable, solar-heated
: Portability is pretty much the entire point of using a ''mobile'' phone, so advertising portability is rather pointless. Solar ''power'' charging could be a very useful feature on a phone, but solar ''heating'' usually applies to plumbing, where a water tank is heated by the sun and used to supply hot water to taps. Technically, as the sun heats up everything on Earth, the phone is in fact solar heated.

;Pore-cleaning strip
: Something sticky on that location would be very annoying for people trying to use their beards to make a call. See also [[777: Pore Strips]]

; Maximum strength
:Medicines are often sold a "Maximum strength", as in the highest dose allowed by law or allowed without a prescription. For phones, there are sometimes "hardened" or "ruggedized" versions which are designed to survive harsher environmental conditions such as surviving drops and collisions, excessive water and dust, etc. So Maximum strength could indicate a "ruggedized" phone, though a screen that extended past the edges would likely have the opposite effect.

; Never needs sharpening
: Phones do not need to be sharpened in the first place{{Citation needed}}. This is a feature more likely to be found in a knife advertisement (especially for a knife that cannot be sharpened, like a serrated or ceramic blade).

; Can survive up to 30 minutes out of water
: This is a play on the common IP-rating of water resistance, which is typically rated for submersion to a rated depth for 30 minutes. A phone which could only be used or carried for 30 minutes and then needed to be immersed in water would be rather inconvenient.

; Exclusive Audubon Society app identifies birds and lets you control their flight
: {{w|National Audubon Society}} is a non-profit organization dedicated to conservation of nature, mainly of birds, also organizing open {{w|birdwatching}} events. An app that identifies bird species, as for example from a photo of a bird made by the smartphone itself, would be cool. An app allowing you to control the bird's flight would be way cooler, but it is not possible at the current state of technology - and it would fly in the face of the Audubon Society core activity. This is a reference to {{w|Unmanned_aerial_vehicle|drones}} (artificial "birds") which are often controlled by a smartphone app. This may also be a reference to [[1425: Tasks]], in which an app that can recognize if a bird is on camera is proposed.

; Extra screen
:Because of the center camera, an additional section of screen was added. This is similar to the new iPhone, which also has a few extra pixels up there.

; Wireless charging port
:An oxymoron; because wireless charging has no wires, it needs no port.

; Safe for ages 6-8 months, 10 months, 18 months-3 years, and 12 years and older
:Usually an item is deemed safe for a particular age or older, or (in the case of toys) is recommended for a particular age range. This is unusual in that it's a hodge-podge of age ranges with no apparent reason why some ages are safe and others are not. It may be a parody of drug commercials that list several age ranges for which the drug had to be separately approved.

; Screen goes past the edge
:A parody of the trend of "edge to edge" displays in recent generations of smartphones

; High thread count CPU
:A CPU thread is a task the CPU performs. Several threads may share memory making them a process. Threads are meant to run in parallel and the operating system distributes the workload on the available hardware execution units. These execution units are sometimes called hardware threads, especially when there is more than one per core. For example, the Intel Core i7 7700 is considered a 4-core, 8-thread CPU. The vague "high thread count" statement could make sense in this context, however, it is most likely a joke about bedding, where it is an actual selling point.

; Shroud of Turin-style facial transfer unlock
:The {{w|Shroud of Turin}} contains an image of a face, ostensibly of {{w|Jesus Christ}}. Presumably, to unlock this phone, the user would have to physically press their face against the phone, the way Jesus Christ's allegedly transferred to the shroud. This is likely a reference to the iPhone X's FaceID unlock, which uses a ''photograph'' of your face to unlock it and which had attracted [https://www.wired.com/story/iphone-x-faceid-security/ significant criticism] immediately before this comic came out.

; Fonts developed by NASA
: Between 1975 and 1992 NASA used the {{w|NASA insignia|"worm" logotype}} in its insignia. It was a special font omitting the horizontal bar in the capitalized letter A. May be a reference to many advertisements that claim their product uses technology developed by NASA. This seems impressive, as NASA technology does tend to be quite strong and advanced, as they claim at their [https://spinoff.nasa.gov/ spin off] website. However, it would not be as impressive due to fonts having very little to do with NASA's core operations.

; Includes applicator
: What tampon packages, cosmetics, paints, and other products often say. An applicator for a phone would be absurd since the phone cannot be applied, spread, inserted, or attached to something else.

; Burns clean coal
: There is a push for clean energy production due to pollution concerns.  Using heat to generate operating electricity for a mobile phone is absurd, as the apparatus to burn any fuel and then extract electricity from that heat would be very large compared to the phone itself, and thus be impractical for a mobile.

; Pre-seasoned
:Pre-seasoned typically refers to cast iron cookware which is ready to use out of the box, as opposed to needing to season it with oil and heat. It can also refer to packaged meats which are ready to cook without needing to be seasoned with herbs and spices, or timber that has been dried and is ready for use.

; Broad-spectrum SPF 30
:The xkcd phone somehow gives an SPF 30 level of skin protection from the sun.

; College-ruled
:College-ruled is a style of notebook paper having narrower lines in order to fit more text per page.

; Sterile packaging
:Useful for medical supplies, less so in a phone.

; Radium backlight
:The discovery of the radioactive element radium sparked a brief fad in which some watch makers painted watch faces or hands with a paint containing radium and a radioluminescent substance such as zinc sulfide which converted the radiation from the radium into visible light. This allowed the time to be read at night without needing an external power source for the light. However, it was eventually realized that regular exposure to radium could result in radiation poisoning, particularly for the workers assembling and painting the watches. A radium-based backlight would therefore be both potentially dangerous (especially for an object carried on one's person much of the time) but also largely useless, as the radioluminescent light is rather dim compared to conventional phone back lights.

; 4K pixels (50×80)
:This refers to having 4,000 pixels in the screen in total, rather than a screen width of ~4000 pixels. TV's advertised as "4K" are typically up to 4096 × 2160 pixels, or 8.8 million pixels. That would be outstanding for a cell phone whereas 4,000 pixels total would be horrendous. As a comparison, the old Commodore VIC-20 with a resolution of 176 × 184 would have over 8 times the pixels of this phone. It is however quite close to the screen resolution of the sturdy Nokia 3310, boasting a total of 4032 pixels positioned 84 × 48.

In the caption below the phone [[Randall]] presents many different version numbers:
*The number 6 is in correct order of all the xkcd phones
*The {{w|Roman numerals|roman number}} VIII refers to the newly announced {{w|iPhone 8}} and jokes about the roman number X below
*Version number 10 is the current version of Microsoft Windows after omitting the number 9
*The {{w|iPhone X}} was announced together with the iPhone 8 by Apple on September 12, 2017, a day before this comic was released. Apple clarified X must be read as the roman number 10, so for additional absurdity two xkcd phones share the same number, using different numeral
*The number 26 refers to...
*In the year 1876 {{w|Alexander Graham Bell}} received the U.S. Patent No. 174465 for the {{w|invention of the telephone}}, but there is still a {{w|Elisha Gray and Alexander Bell telephone controversy|controversy}} whether {{w|Elisha Gray}} was the first who presented a working telephone.
Below of this numbers Randall states that xkcd isn't responsible for this ''nonconsecutive version number war'', but, as it can be seen here above, he attempts to win. And by counting parallel version numbers xkcd defeated Apple 6:2. The symbols at the end are ™ for trademark, ® for registered trademark, and © for a copyright protection. The degree symbol ° after the letter C could be a play with degree Celsius.

In the title text Randall attributes privacy concerns about the facial recognition feature. A picture of a face will only be used for this new feature but never stored on the device nor transmitted to internet. A ''small'' side effect may be that the famous selfie pictures aren't possible anymore, as well as video calls.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A smartphone is shown, the screen is slightly wider than the case, in the middle is a photo lens, and at the right bottom a small extra part is added to the screen.]
:[On top a bracket ranges nearly over the entire width of the case. The text reads:]
:Full-width rear camera
:[The label at the photo lens is:]
:Front camera (centered for eye contact during video chat)
:[The label on the extra part says:]
:Extra screen
:[At the bottom below the case a label reads:]
:Wireless charging port

:[The labels left to the phone are:]
:4k pixels (50x80)
:Radium backlight
:Sterile packaging
:College-ruled
:Broad spectrum SPF 30
:Pre-seasoned
:Burns clean coal
:Includes applicator
:Fonts developed by NASA
:Shroud of turn-style facial transfer unlock
:High thread count CPU
:Screen goes past the edge
:Safe for ages 6-8 months, 10 months, 18 months-3 years, and 12 years and older

:[The labels right to the phone are:]
:CDC partnership: Phone automatically administers seasonal flu vaccine to cheek every year
:12-function
:Dishwasher safe
:GPS transmitter
:3-G acceleration
:Portable, solar-heated
:Pore-cleaning strip
:Maximum strength
:Never needs sharpening
:Can survive up to 30 minutes out of water
:Exclusive Audubon Society app identifies birds and lets you control their flight

:[Text below the phone:]
:Introducing
:'''The XKCD PHONE 6, VIII, 10, X, 26, and 1876'''
:''We didn't start this nonconsecutive version number war, but we will not lose it.''™®©°
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:xkcd Phones]]

1885: Ensemble Model

2017-09-05T09:12:24Z

141.101.98.40: Spelling correction

{{comic
| number = 1885
| date = September 4, 2017
| title = Ensemble Model
| image = ensemble_model.png
| titletext = I'm in talks with Netflix to produce an alternate-universe crime drama about the world where sliced bread was never re-legalized, but it's going slowly because they keep changing their phone numbers and the door lock codes at their headquarters.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Requires descriptions of each entry. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

An {{w|ensemble forecasting|ensemble model}} is a combination of multiple, similar models to show a wider range of possible outcomes. The graphs on the left are tracks of predictions from multiple models. In this comic, Randall starts out describing actual changes that ensemble models show, but sinks into absurdity, describing strange alternate universes and scenarios that likely would not be necessary in an actual model.

The upper graph looks like one plotting global temperatures with time using different scenarios, like this one: https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-spm-5.html
The bottom right graph is a typical hurricane path-prediction graphic.

Not all of the outcomes are serious. They are explained below:
;…rain is 0.5% more likely in some areas
This is usually a prediction rather than a parameter, but might be used as a parameter in a second iteration.

;…wind speeds are slightly lower
A usual parameter.

;…pressure levels are randomly tweaked
A very vague but otherwise understandable parameter.

;…dogs run slightly faster
This is where the comic diverges from reality; there is no reason to have the locomotion speed of dogs as a parameter.

;…there is one extra cloud in the Bahamas
This situation is most likely too specific and subtle a difference to be useful to the model.

;…Germany won WWII
"What if Germany won World War II" is a {{w|Hypothetical Axis victory in World War II|very popular}} subject for {{w|alternate history}} stories.

;…snakes are wide instead of long

;…Will Smith took the lead in ''The Matrix'' instead of ''Wild Wild West''
Actor {{w|Will Smith}} famously turned down the lead role of {{w|Neo (The Matrix)|Neo}} in ''{{w|The Matrix}}'', instead taking the role of Captain James T. West in the widely-panned action-comedy ''{{w|Wild Wild West}}''. The role of Neo ultimately went to {{w|Keanu Reeves}}. For a more detailed discussion of how the cinematic world would have been different had Smith taken the role, see [https://moviepilot.com/posts/2481780 "How Will Smith Turned Down "The Matrix" - And Blew A Chance To Change Hollywood Forever."]

;…swimming pools are carbonated
A simple calculation reveals this as a serious {{w|Greenhouse effect|greenhouse}} problem. In the United States there are not less than 5,000,000 private owned pools. Conservatively assumed a volume of 25,000 liters per pool gives 125 billion liters of carbonated soda. According to Wikipedia the U.S. sales reached around 30 billion bottles of water in 2008 (including non carbonated water) which is surely much less than all the pool water. While all those bottles are not considered to have an impact on the green house effect this scenario is getting even worse. Open a bottle of carbonated water and fill the content into glasses. More or less soon the sprinkling is over, meaning you have to open the next bottle and so on. In a pool at the bottom the pressure is high enough to hold the carbon dioxide but on the surface it behaves like the glass. So, while a glass needs new carbonated water every two hours, or ten times per day, let's say it's three times per day for the pool which leads to one thousand times per year. The total number in this scenario would be 125 trillion liters of carbonated soda, ejecting carbon dioxide, per year. But stop: The carbon dioxide used for artificial carbonated water is taken from the air and because of the pressure at the bottom of the pool it doesn't release all back this should have a positive effect. But as Randall has shown in {{what if|88|Soda Sequestration}} this effect would be minimal.

;…sliced bread, after being banned in January 1943, was never re-legalized.
{{w|Sliced bread}} was in fact {{w|Sliced bread#1943 U.S. ban on sliced bread|banned in the US}} for about two months in early 1943, as a supposed wartime conservation measure. The issue was not the bread itself, but that the pre-sliced loaves required a heavier {{w|wax paper}} wrapping to prevent them from drying out too quickly.

The title text suggests that [[Randall]] has been pitching an absurd "alternate-universe crime drama" to {{w|Netflix}}. He indicates that a breakdown in communication has occurred between them, though he does not assume directly assume responsibility for this situation. It is nonetheless clear that Netflix has zero interest in the pitch, and so Randall has become overzealous in pushing his idea, to the point that Netflix employees are changing their numbers (presumably they can't block his number because he has resorted to calling from many different phones). He has even taken to infiltrating Netflix's corporate headquarters using ill-gotten security codes, which is definitely illegal.{{Citation needed}}

only that Netflix is uninterested and is attempting to prevent Randall from contacting them (or trespassing into the building).

==Transcript==
:[Inside this single panel comic the header on top reads:]
:In an ''ensemble model'', forecasters run many different versions of a weather model with slightly different initial conditions. This helps account for uncertainty and shows forecasters a spread of possible outcomes.

:[To the left side a picture shows several gray overlapping swirling lines emitted from a point, then gradually diverging rightwards. Below are two smaller pictures; the first shows the lines connected to several loops and in the second it's still a similar figure to the above but moving into the opposite direction with the point emerged to a spiral.]

:[The text right to the pictures reads:]
:'''Members in a typical ensemble:'''
:A universe where…
:…rain is 0.5% more likely in some areas
:…wind speeds are slightly lower
:…pressure levels are randomly tweaked
:…dogs run slightly faster
:…there's one extra cloud in the Bahamas
:…Germany won WWII
:…snakes are wide instead of long
:…Will Smith took the lead in ''The Matrix'' instead of ''Wild Wild West''
:…swimming pools are carbonated
:…sliced bread, after being banned in January 1943, was never re-legalized.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Science]]

1791: Telescopes: Refractor vs Reflector

2017-01-30T13:00:23Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */ fixed wikipedia link to Space Vampires

{{comic
| number = 1791
| date = January 27, 2017
| title = Telescopes: Refractor vs Reflector
| image = telescopes_refractor_vs_reflector.png
| titletext = On the other hand, the refractor's limited light-gathering means it's unable to make out shadow people or the dark god Chernabog.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic compares two major types of {{w|optical telescope}}: The {{w|refracting telescope}} and the {{w|reflecting telescope}}. A refracting telescope produces an image with a series of lenses. A reflecting telescope uses mirrors. (A third type, the {{w|catadioptric system}} telescope, uses both mirrors ''and'' lenses. It is not shown here.)

It first looks like the comic is simply trying to show that refracting has many flaws, such as expense, size and visibility (see more [[#The real problems with refracting telescopes|details below]]). However, the punchline invalidates these complaints with the (apparently major) flaw listed with the reflecting telescope: '''It can't see space vampires'''.

The unstated reason for this is that {{w|vampires}}, {{w|Vampire#Apotropaics|according to some cultures}}, cannot be seen in a mirror. As {{w|Space Vampires}} (like earth vampires) are widely believed to be {{w|Vampire#Origins_of_vampire_beliefs|made up}} and thus unlikely to interest most [[1644: Stargazing|stargazers]], this complaint is superfluous, and the reflecting telescope effectively has no flaws in comparison to the refracting telescope. There are other problems, though, with reflecting telescopes see [[#The real problems with reflecting telescope|details below]]. (Also there was a big problem in the [[#Trivia|original version of this comic]]).

Frequently, however, the right-angle transition at the base of the refractor telescope is done with a prism (an "image erector"). This uses the optical principle of total internal reflection. If mirror-non-appearance of vampires is due to the interaction of evil with silver, a refractor using a prism could still see vampires. On this theory, however, the reflector could too, since modern astronomical mirrors are coated with aluminum, not silver.

The title text expands on the seeing of supernatural beings, as another negative point is added to the refracting telescope; it apparently can't see {{w|Shadow person|Shadow People}} or the Slavic god {{w|Chernobog|Chernabog}} (normally spelled Chernobog), both of which are important although clearly not as important to the telescope's merit as seeing vampires since the fact is only mentioned in the title text. So of course the refracting telescope is still the best. Of course also neither the {{w|Shadow_person#History_and_folklore|shadow people}} nor {{w|Chernobog#Folklore|the god}} exists{{Citation needed}} so this would likewise be a moot point.

In reality, "shadow people" are a psychological phenomenon wherein humans ascribe human shapes and movements to shadows in dark spaces. Chernobog is a 12th century Slavic deity, whose name translates to ''black god''. His most famous appearance in modern media was in the 1940 Disney movie {{w|Fantasia (1940 film)|''Fantasia''}} (and Disney merchandise is also almost the only place that his name is spelled as Randall spelled it, with an "a" in the middle). Because shadows are dark and the god is also dark, they cannot be seen by the refracting telescope due to the reduced light-gathering which has already been mentioned as a drawback in the main comic.

Telescopes have been the subject of [[:Category:Telescopes|many comics]] on xkcd. Recently one about space telescope was released [[1730: Starshade]] and before that a large "private" telescope was shown in [[1522: Astronomy]].

===The real problems with refracting telescopes===
The basic performance of a telescope is determined by its size: a wider telescope catches more light, making it easier to see faint objects, while a longer telescope is better for high magnification viewing. For looking at stars, the width is actually more important. No matter how much you zoom, a star is too far away to make bigger, but with a big aperture, you can see stars too faint for the naked eye. Planets benefit more from magnification, and distant galaxies need both.

In both respects, it's much easier to make a big reflector telescope than a big refractor one. Since a lens can only be held in place by its edge, the center of a large lens sags due to gravity, distorting the images it produces. This means most refractor telescopes make do with narrow apertures only a couple of inches across. Reflector telescopes are sometimes called "light buckets" because they can have extremely big openings that can catch light from even very faint stars. In addition, because it has a mirror at one end, the reflector telescope is, in effect, twice as long as it appears - a refractor just cannot compete.

Refracting telescopes were only gradually overtaken by reflecting telescopes, however. In the age of {{W|great refractors}}, the largest telescopes in the world were refractors. Reflectors at the time had mirrors surfaced in {{W|speculum metal}} that began to tarnish only months after application, negatively affecting telescope performance. This problem was resolved when it became possible to surface a mirror in silver, but the problems with refractive lenses persist. Because of this, the {{w|List of largest optical telescopes historically|largest optical telescopes ever built}} are reflectors, rather than refractors. In addition, a {{w|liquid mirror telescope}} uses a very cheap, but potentially very large mirror - with the drawback that the telescope can only look straight upwards.

'''Randall's points:'''
*More expensive
**Grinding a high quality lens is more expensive than producing an equivalent mirror - {{w|Crown glass (optics)|crown glass}}, which is needed for good quality telescope lenses, is expensive.
*Less compact
**In theory, a refractor ''could'' be made compact, but the image quality would be awful, because the lens would have to be extremely fat. The longer the telescope is, the less dramatic the focusing needs to be.
*{{w|Chromatic aberration}}:
**In optics, chromatic aberration is an effect resulting from dispersion in which there is a failure of a lens to focus all colors to the same convergence point, producing a rainbow effect around the image familiar to people who wear glasses, and with prisms. It occurs because lenses have different refractive indices for different wavelengths of light. Each colour is therefore focused slightly differently by the lens. Mirrors don't have chromatic aberration, since the light is reflected off the front of the mirror. The {{w|achromatic lens}} can reverse this effect, but it's expensive and its size is limited. Nevertheless, before telescope mirrors were perfected in the early 20th century, the best telescopes were achromatic refractors.
***Note that this effect has also been mentioned in relation to photography by [[Black Hat]] in [[1014: Car Problems]], in a completely different context, but shows this is an issue Randall has considered before.
*Reduced light-gathering
**Apart from generally needing to be smaller than reflector telescopes a further problem comes from glass defects, striae or small air bubbles trapped within the glass. In addition, glass is opaque to certain wavelengths, and even visible light is dimmed by reflection and absorption when it crosses the air-glass interfaces and passes through the glass itself. All of this reduce the light gathered.

'''Other problems not mentioned by Randall:'''
*Suspending a lens
**Another important difference (and a big reason why large refracting telescopes don't exist) is that the lens of a refracting telescope has to be supported by the edges, so that light can pass through it. As a result there comes a point where it is no longer feasible to mount a large lens in a telescope due to its weight and the need to support it from the edges. In contrast the mirror of a reflecting telescope is supported from behind, and any support structures for the primary mirror are not in the path of the light. As a result, substantially larger mirrors can be easily mounted and supported. As an additional benefit this behind-the-mirror support has led to the creation of {{w|Adaptive_Optics|Adaptive Optics}}, a technique (which is impossible for refracting telescopes) that allows some of the atmosphere's distortions to be corrected for.
*A mirror can be segmented to make a larger reflecting surface out of smaller (and hence easier to build/mount/support) mirrors. By using a {{w|Segmented_mirror|segmented mirror}} it is possible to build an effective aperture much larger than what could be built even from a single mirror, which is itself much larger than the largest possible lens that might be built for a refracting telescope.

====The real problems with reflecting telescope====
It is worth noting that (apart from the vampire problem) reflecting telescope also has disadvantages compared to a refracting telescope:
*The main disadvantage is that in almost all reflecting telescope designs the focal point is directly in front of the mirror, i.e. in between the mirror and the target of interest.
**As a result a {{w|Secondary_mirror|secondary mirror}} is commonly used to direct the focal point somewhere outside of the field of view. However, this secondary mirror (and the struts that support it) will still block part of the field of view - although the focus of the telescope means that the secondary mirror is not visible when looking at distant objects, it will result in diffraction patterns that also hinder the image quality. In fact, this is the source of the {{w|Diffraction_spike|diffraction spikes}} around stars which are commonly seen in astronomical images.
*A reflecting telescope is also harder to maintain:
**The mirrors need to be very precisely aligned (this is called {{w|collimation}}), and this can be a laborious process. They may also need re-polishing.
**The telescope is open at one end, allowing dust and dirt to enter.
*A reflecting telescope is not very portable. This is why {{w|Birdwatching|bird-spotters}} use small refractor telescopes as an easy way to get a closer view of birds.

Despite this disadvantage, reflecting telescopes are used almost exclusively in modern astronomy because of practical limitations in making large refracting telescopes. Very few amateur astronomers use refracting telescopes - nowadays, they most exist to con people looking for Christmas presents in department stores (just because a telescope promises 100x zoom doesn't mean the image quality is any good!)

==Transcript==
:[A one panel comic showing two different telescope designs next to each other with labels above them and a bullet list of points below the them. The left drawing will be described first then the right.]

:[Left:]
:<big>Refractor</big>

:[A slim telescope design is shown. At the top the light enters shown in a light yellow shade between two thin parallel light gray lines that just fits inside the opening of the telescope which is slightly wider at the top than at the lens sitting a short way into the opening. The lens causes the light to focus just where the telescope again changes dimensions, and the light enters a small opening at the bottom of the long pipe of the telescope. Here the yellow light is a point as the two gray lines cross each other at that point. The light then broadens slightly again and the thin yellow light cone hits a mirror at the bottom of the telescope and is reflected to the left and out through the eyepiece. Below are the following points:]
:*More expensive
:*Less compact
:*Chromatic aberration
:*Reduced light-gathering

:[Right:]
:<big>Reflector</big>

:[A much broader (more than 150% of the first) but also much shorter (66%) telescope design is shown. At the top the light enters shown in a light yellow shade between two thin parallel light gray lines that still just fits inside the opening of the telescope. On it's way down to the bottom of the telescope the light passes by a small mirror turned down towards the bottom. When the hits the curved bottom mirror light is focus on it's way back back and a small light cone hits the small mirror mentioned before sitting almost at the top of the telescope. This mirror reflects the light to the left into an even thinner light cone that goes out through the eyepiece located near the top of the telescope. Below is the following point:]
:*Can't see space vampires

==Trivia==
In an '''[http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/archive/b/b2/20170127171253%21telescopes_refractor_vs_reflector.png earlier version]''' of this comic, the eyepiece of the refracting telescope included a mirror, often used with refractors to give an upright image and more comfortable access for the observer. This would of course invalidate the only advantage it has (vampire-visibiity) over reflecting telescopes.

[[Randall]] later corrected this so the '''[http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/b/b2/telescopes_refractor_vs_reflector.png current/final version]''' shows the light going straight out of the end.

An {{w|amici roof prism}} is sometimes used instead of a mirror with refractors, because it does not only deliver an upright image, but also one that is not a mirror image. In a prism, there is only total reflection, which, as opposed to a metal mirror, would probably work on vampires.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Telescopes]]
[[Category:Rankings]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Religion]]

1778: Interest Timescales

2016-12-28T14:03:27Z

141.101.98.40: "Fast" and "Slow" were the wrong way round in the transcript.

{{comic
| number = 1778
| date = December 28, 2016
| title = Interest Timescales
| image = interest_timescales.png
| titletext = Sometimes, parts of a slowly-rising mountain suddenly rises REALLY fast, which is extra interesting.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Randall]]'s sharing a bit about himself and the things that interest him, in one of his strange but still funny graphs.

The caption reads: "Most of my interests fall under 'things rising up from the ground, hanging in the air, and then drifting away on the breeze,' just on very different timescales." The four examples fit this as follows:

In the case of a fireworks display, the fireworks fire up into the air, explode, and then the glowing embers drift away on the breeze in the course of a few seconds.

In the case of a rocket launch, the rocket launches from the ground into space, leaving a large plume of smoke that slowly dissipates over many minutes. The rocket remains in space for a time, and then later it re-enters the atmosphere and reaches the ground—in the case of a typical parachute-descent system, it literally drifts through the air. A typical timespan for such an event is several days or weeks.

In the case of a tree, it grows from the ground upwards, remains there until autumn comes, then drops its leaves, which drift on the breeze. This process takes months.

Finally, in the case of a mountain, typically mountains rise from the ground due to movement of {{w|tectonic plates}} which result in volcanic activity. The mountains are then very slowly broken down by natural erosion forces, and the stone particles disperse on the wind. These events are much slower than the others, typically taking tens of millions of years to completely erode away a mountain.

The title text refers to the dramatic event in which a mountain suddenly rises much higher due to a massive earthquake or volcanic eruption. Such events are rare and potentially deadly to living things. [https://youtu.be/ZhvkITCGqK4?t=25s Calling it "extra interesting" is an understatement.]

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
From left to right:

Cueball watches a fireworks display: "Ooooh"

Cueball watches a rocket launch: "Wow!"

Cueball climbs a tree: "Zoom!"

Cueball stands atop a mountain: "Wheeeee!"

Below: A graph axis, from 'fast' (left) to 'slow' (right).

Caption: Most of my interests fall under "things rising up from the ground, hanging in the air, and then drifting away on the breeze," just on very different timescales.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

1379: 4.5 Degrees

2016-09-13T18:42:15Z

141.101.98.40: Undo revision 126886 by 141.101.98.40 (talk)

{{comic
| number = 1379
| date = June 9, 2014
| title = 4.5 Degrees
| image = 4_5_degrees.png
| titletext = The good news is that according to the latest IPCC report, if we enact aggressive emissions limits now, we could hold the warming to 2°C. That's only HALF an ice age unit, which is probably no big deal.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic represents the impacts due to climate change by demonstrating the changes in climate that should be expected with a given change in global temperature. This is done by detailing the world's climate in geologic periods where the global average temperature has changed by one or more "Ice Age Units," or IAU. The comic defines an IAU as the difference in global temperature between today and the last ice age, about 4.5 °C. An IAU of 0 represents modern global temperature. It was later followed with a similar but much more elaborate chart in [[1732: Earth Temperature Timeline]].

One IAU unit happens to be the expected increase in global temperature the world will see by the end of year 2100. The prediction of 4-5 degrees Celsius of warming may not appear significant, but is easy to see as a substantial difference when comparing today to the last ice age.

: An IAU of -4 is associated with {{w|Snowball Earth}}. Snowball earth is a near-total freezing of the entire surface around 650 million years ago, in the {{w|Cryogenian}}. This may have been the greatest ice age known to have occurred on Earth.

: An IAU of -1 is associated with the last ice age. During this time [[Randall|Randall's]] neighborhood was buried under an ice sheet.

: An IAU of +1 is the predicted global temperature by the end of year 2100. While it makes sense to assume it's just as drastic a difference as -1 IAU, we still don't know the actual nature of what it would be, which is why it is represented by a question mark in the comic.

: An IAU of +2 is associated with the {{w|Cretaceous Thermal Maximum|"Hothouse Earth"}} of the early {{w|Cretaceous period}}. At this time there were "{{w|Arecaceae|palm trees}} at the poles" as there were {{w|Polar forests of the Cretaceous|polar forests}} during Cretaceous summers. (Average temperature of North Pole during the summer is 0 °C or 32 °F. 0+2*4.5 = 9 °C = 48.2 °F, hot enough for trees to grow at the North Pole under hypothetical 2 IAU scenarios)

An increase of 4.5 °C (+1 IAU) seems like a small change in temperature, but the changes it would cause are likely very large as it can also be described as halfway to palm trees at the poles.

The topic of ice coverage over various cities has previously been covered in [[1225: Ice Sheets]]. The image of Boston from that comic is reused at the top of the huge chart in [[1732: Earth Temperature Timeline]].

This comic shows the extreme extend to which {{w|global warming}} can (and will) change our environment. Randall presented this view earlier in [[164: Playing Devil's Advocate to Win]]. Climate change, especially global warming, is a [[:Category:Climate change|recurring theme]] in xkcd and Randall is clearly convinced that we are causing it.

The title text expands, demonstrating that the potential impacts of an increase by the IPCC report's best case scenario of 2 °C, about half an ice age unit, makes controlling climate change seem more urgent. The figure of 2 °C is the most commonly agreed {{w|Climate change mitigation#Temperature targets|temperature target}} that assumes the creation of aggressive emissions limits at the time of the publishing of the comic.

===A1F1 Scenario===
The 4.5 degree increase is predicted by the bern2.5cc simulation (a moderate simulation) of the A1FI scenario. In the A1FI scenario the world has a high dependence on fossil fuels, experiences "very rapid economic growth", a declining world population by 2050, as well as a high rate of increase in energy efficiency after 2050.

===Trivia===
The oldest known animal fossils ({{w|Sponges#Fossil record|sponges}}) are from the Snowball Earth, while {{w|Flowering plant#Evolution|flowering plants}} became the dominant plant species during the Cretaceous period. It is believed that the entire Earth was frozen for the first time about 2,400 to 2,100 million years ago, which could have been a result of the {{w|Great Oxygenation Event}}.

The 200m {{w|Current sea level rise|sea level rise}} given in the last panel for a "Cretaceous Hothouse" (i.e. if all ice on earth melted, including the Antarctic ice cap) could not be explained by this melt-off alone. If all the ice melted the water level would only increase by about 60-80m, according to {{w|Antarctica}}, [http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/ IPCC Third Assessment Report] (section 11.2.3 on Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets) and [http://water.usgs.gov/edu/sealevel.html Sea Level and Climate: USGS Water-Science School]. Additional sea level rise can be expected from thermal expansion of seawater, and indeed the main reason for rising sea level at the moment is actually caused by this expansion of the sea due to increasing temperature. But the high-end 500-year projection for a 4x increase in CO2, at {{w|Current sea level rise#IPCC Third Assessment|expansion of the sea}}, is for an additional 2m due to thermal expansion, with a decreasing rate of growth over time. (Some of the sea level change in the Cretaceous are due to changes in bathymetry.)

The 5th and most recent {{w|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change}} (IPCC AR5) presents four alternative trajectories for future concentrations of greenhouse gasses, termed {{w|Representative Concentration Pathways}} (RCPs): RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6, and RCP8.5. They are named after possible ranges of radiative forcing values in the year 2100 relative to pre-industrial values (+2.6, +4.5, +6.0, and +8.5 W/m2, respectively). The hottest of these, RCP8.5, is predicted to result in a warming of 2.6 °C to 4.8 °C for the 2081−2100 period, and between 3 and 5.5 by the year 2100 ([http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf Working Group I Summary for Policymakers]).

The lack of internationally binding agreements makes breaching an increase of 2 °C more and more likely.

==Transcript==
:Without prompt, aggressive limits on CO2 emissions, the Earth will likely warm by an average of 4°-5°C by the century's end.
:'''HOW BIG A CHANGE IS THAT?'''

:[A ruler chart is drawn inside a frame.]
:In the coldest part of the last ice age, Earth's average temperature was 4.5°C below the 20th century norm.
:Let's call a 4.5°C difference one '''"Ice Age Unit."'''

:[A ruler with five main divisions — each again with 3 smaller quarter division markers. Above it the five main divisions are marked as follows with 0 in the middle:]
:-2 IAU -1 IAU 0 +1 IAU +2 IAU
:[Next to the 0 marking a black arrow points toward 0.25 on the scale and above it is written:]
:Where we are today

:[The rest of the text is below the ruler.]
:[To the far left below -2 IAU a curved arrow points to the left. Below it is written:]
:Snowball earth (-4 IAU)
:[Below -1 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:20,000 years ago
:[Below this an image of a glacier. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:[At the bottom of the image is an arrow pointing to the glacier:]
:Half a mile of ice
:[Below 0 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Average during modern times
:[Below this an image of Cueball standing on a green field with a city skyline in the background. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:Cueball: Hi!
:[Below +1 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Where we'll be in 86 years
:[Below this a white image. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:[Below this is a very large:]
:'''?'''
:[Below +2 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Cretaceous hothouse
:+200m sea level rise
:No glaciers
:Palm trees at the poles

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Climate change]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

1379: 4.5 Degrees

2016-09-13T18:41:46Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1379
| date = June 9, 2014
| title = 4.5 Degrees
| image = 4_5_degrees.png
| titletext = The good news is that according to the latest IPCC report, if we enact aggressive emissions limits now, we could hold the warming to 2°C. That's only HALF an ice age unit, which is probably no big deal.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic represents the impacts due to climate change by demonstrating the changes in climate that should be expected with a given change in global temperature. This is done by detailing the world's climate in geologic periods where the global average temperature has changed by one or more "Ice Age Units," or IAU. The comic defines an IAU as the difference in global temperature between today and the last ice age, about 4.5 °C. An IAU of 0 represents modern global temperature. It was later followed with a similar but much more elaborate chart in [[1732: Earth Temperature Timeline]].

One IAU unit happens to be the expected increase in global temperature the world will see by the end of year 2100. The prediction of 4-5 degrees Celsius of warming may not appear significant, but is easy to see as a substantial difference when comparing today to the last ice age.

: An IAU of -2 is associated with {{w|Snowball Earth}}. Snowball earth is a near-total freezing of the entire surface around 650 million years ago, in the {{w|Cryogenian}}. This may have been the greatest ice age known to have occurred on Earth.

: An IAU of -1 is associated with the last ice age. During this time [[Randall|Randall's]] neighborhood was buried under an ice sheet.

: An IAU of +1 is the predicted global temperature by the end of year 2100. While it makes sense to assume it's just as drastic a difference as -1 IAU, we still don't know the actual nature of what it would be, which is why it is represented by a question mark in the comic.

: An IAU of +2 is associated with the {{w|Cretaceous Thermal Maximum|"Hothouse Earth"}} of the early {{w|Cretaceous period}}. At this time there were "{{w|Arecaceae|palm trees}} at the poles" as there were {{w|Polar forests of the Cretaceous|polar forests}} during Cretaceous summers. (Average temperature of North Pole during the summer is 0 °C or 32 °F. 0+2*4.5 = 9 °C = 48.2 °F, hot enough for trees to grow at the North Pole under hypothetical 2 IAU scenarios)

An increase of 4.5 °C (+1 IAU) seems like a small change in temperature, but the changes it would cause are likely very large as it can also be described as halfway to palm trees at the poles.

The topic of ice coverage over various cities has previously been covered in [[1225: Ice Sheets]]. The image of Boston from that comic is reused at the top of the huge chart in [[1732: Earth Temperature Timeline]].

This comic shows the extreme extend to which {{w|global warming}} can (and will) change our environment. Randall presented this view earlier in [[164: Playing Devil's Advocate to Win]]. Climate change, especially global warming, is a [[:Category:Climate change|recurring theme]] in xkcd and Randall is clearly convinced that we are causing it.

The title text expands, demonstrating that the potential impacts of an increase by the IPCC report's best case scenario of 2 °C, about half an ice age unit, makes controlling climate change seem more urgent. The figure of 2 °C is the most commonly agreed {{w|Climate change mitigation#Temperature targets|temperature target}} that assumes the creation of aggressive emissions limits at the time of the publishing of the comic.

===A1F1 Scenario===
The 4.5 degree increase is predicted by the bern2.5cc simulation (a moderate simulation) of the A1FI scenario. In the A1FI scenario the world has a high dependence on fossil fuels, experiences "very rapid economic growth", a declining world population by 2050, as well as a high rate of increase in energy efficiency after 2050.

===Trivia===
The oldest known animal fossils ({{w|Sponges#Fossil record|sponges}}) are from the Snowball Earth, while {{w|Flowering plant#Evolution|flowering plants}} became the dominant plant species during the Cretaceous period. It is believed that the entire Earth was frozen for the first time about 2,400 to 2,100 million years ago, which could have been a result of the {{w|Great Oxygenation Event}}.

The 200m {{w|Current sea level rise|sea level rise}} given in the last panel for a "Cretaceous Hothouse" (i.e. if all ice on earth melted, including the Antarctic ice cap) could not be explained by this melt-off alone. If all the ice melted the water level would only increase by about 60-80m, according to {{w|Antarctica}}, [http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/ IPCC Third Assessment Report] (section 11.2.3 on Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets) and [http://water.usgs.gov/edu/sealevel.html Sea Level and Climate: USGS Water-Science School]. Additional sea level rise can be expected from thermal expansion of seawater, and indeed the main reason for rising sea level at the moment is actually caused by this expansion of the sea due to increasing temperature. But the high-end 500-year projection for a 4x increase in CO2, at {{w|Current sea level rise#IPCC Third Assessment|expansion of the sea}}, is for an additional 2m due to thermal expansion, with a decreasing rate of growth over time. (Some of the sea level change in the Cretaceous are due to changes in bathymetry.)

The 5th and most recent {{w|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change}} (IPCC AR5) presents four alternative trajectories for future concentrations of greenhouse gasses, termed {{w|Representative Concentration Pathways}} (RCPs): RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6, and RCP8.5. They are named after possible ranges of radiative forcing values in the year 2100 relative to pre-industrial values (+2.6, +4.5, +6.0, and +8.5 W/m2, respectively). The hottest of these, RCP8.5, is predicted to result in a warming of 2.6 °C to 4.8 °C for the 2081−2100 period, and between 3 and 5.5 by the year 2100 ([http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf Working Group I Summary for Policymakers]).

The lack of internationally binding agreements makes breaching an increase of 2 °C more and more likely.

==Transcript==
:Without prompt, aggressive limits on CO2 emissions, the Earth will likely warm by an average of 4°-5°C by the century's end.
:'''HOW BIG A CHANGE IS THAT?'''

:[A ruler chart is drawn inside a frame.]
:In the coldest part of the last ice age, Earth's average temperature was 4.5°C below the 20th century norm.
:Let's call a 4.5°C difference one '''"Ice Age Unit."'''

:[A ruler with five main divisions — each again with 3 smaller quarter division markers. Above it the five main divisions are marked as follows with 0 in the middle:]
:-2 IAU -1 IAU 0 +1 IAU +2 IAU
:[Next to the 0 marking a black arrow points toward 0.25 on the scale and above it is written:]
:Where we are today

:[The rest of the text is below the ruler.]
:[To the far left below -2 IAU a curved arrow points to the left. Below it is written:]
:Snowball earth (-4 IAU)
:[Below -1 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:20,000 years ago
:[Below this an image of a glacier. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:[At the bottom of the image is an arrow pointing to the glacier:]
:Half a mile of ice
:[Below 0 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Average during modern times
:[Below this an image of Cueball standing on a green field with a city skyline in the background. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:Cueball: Hi!
:[Below +1 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Where we'll be in 86 years
:[Below this a white image. At the top of the image is written:]
:My neighborhood:
:[Below this is a very large:]
:'''?'''
:[Below +2 IAU a black arrow point toward this division. Below the arrow is written:]
:Cretaceous hothouse
:+200m sea level rise
:No glaciers
:Palm trees at the poles

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Climate change]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:1711: Snapchat

2016-07-26T14:02:34Z

141.101.98.40:

"No, it's because I'm ignorant." Is Snapchat the one where photos last ten seconds only, then they're gone? And the Pulitzer prize is some American thing, right? (As opposed to Pulletzer prize, some chicken thing.) [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 11:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Pulitzer prize is a worldwide prize for Journalism (amongst which Photography is a category) and arts (drama, etc). {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.92}}

Its for published items from the U.S., not worldwide.~d {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.96}}

Should there be some level of explanation that in spite of Snaps "self destructing" people often save screenshots of Snaps meaning that the picture is probably out there somewhere? Possibly even saved by the Pulitzer committee? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.242|108.162.237.242]] 15:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure in the title text ("...while it's still fresh in the committee's memory") the "it" is referring to the picture, not the name of the person who took it, as stated in the above explanation. I'm not sure though, and do not like to change these things, so if someone else could look it over and, if necessary, change it, it would be much appreciated.--[[User:Snewmark|Snewmark]] ([[User talk:Snewmark|talk]]) 18:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
:I agree with your assessment. I've changed the text to only refer to forgetting what the picture looked like; after all, the winner's name can simply be written down, whereas few committee members likely have the skill to sketch a decent reproduction of the snap from the memory of 10 seconds or less of viewing it. [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 21:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Probably should somehow work in the reference to the fact that you can permanently save screenshots, as a counter to the title text. Also, it's not a few seconds but 24 hours.

There's some hole in the logic here. Cueball has not yet viewed the picture, so a limit of a few seconds view for each viewer would not prevent him seeing it. His few seconds hasn't started running yet. (Quite apart from the issue of honouring that on the client side.) His reaction implies that he's missed all chance of seeing the picture, which would require there to be some other restriction, such as the picture only being available for a very limited time from when it was posted, or there being no way to select a specific picture to view. The Wikipedia article on Snapchat doesn't mention any overall restriction of those kinds, but does describe the harsh per-viewer time restriction on actual viewing. What am I missing? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.74|141.101.98.74]] 06:31, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

:You're missing the time lag for a committee to make a decision and release a press release on it. They may not have looked at the photo before 23 hours were up. Normally this takes months. Possibly this has taken just under 24 hours and by the time Cueball has looked, it's gone forever [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 06:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

::So there *is* an expiration a limited time after the picture was posted? In addition to the ten-seconds-of-viewing limit? If there is, that would be what I missed, not decision-making lag. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.74|141.101.98.74]] 08:59, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

"The awards were always intended to include the Arts, as well as reportage, but not so many people may realise that Poetry, Drama and Music also get rewarded" -- does this imply that poetry, drama, and music aren't part of the arts? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 14:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

1711: Snapchat

2016-07-25T14:21:27Z

141.101.98.40: Removed second paragraph because it was completely irrelevant to the understanding of the comic.

{{comic
| number = 1711
| date = July 25, 2016
| title = Snapchat
| image = snapchat.png
| titletext = For obvious reasons, the prize is awarded at a different time of year from the others, while it's still fresh in the committee's memory.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Don't remove this tag too fast. Links are missing and maybe much more.}}
The Pulitzer Prize is awarded for spectacular writing (there are many categories; see {{w|Pulitzer Prize#Categories|here}}). Snapchat is a photo-sending app that allows the receiving user to only view the photo (known as a "snap") for a few seconds before it is deleted. Cueball is disappointed that he missed out on the chance to see the prize winning photo due to the temporary nature of Snapchat.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan standing together. He holds a smartphone in his left hand and looks at it.]
:Cueball: Oh, the Pulitzer Prize for Snapchat was just awarded.
:Megan: Yeah.
:Megan: I hear the photo was really good.
:Cueball: Aw, ''maaaan''...

{{comic discussion}}

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

1697: Intervocalic Fortition

2016-06-25T14:41:45Z

141.101.98.40:

{{comic
| number = 1697
| date = June 22, 2016
| title = Intervocalic Fortition
| image = intervocalic_fortition.png
| titletext = These pranks happen all the time. English doesn't allow one-syllable words to end in a lax vowel, so writers on The Simpsons decided to mess with future linguists by introducing the word "meh."
}}

==Explanation==
The linguistic processes of {{w|lenition}} ("weakening") and {{w|fortition}} ("strengthening") refer to a sound becoming, respectively, either more or less vowel-like. {{w|Intervocalic}} means "between two vowels." An unvoiced consonant like ''f'' in between two vowels (which are {{w|Voicelessness#Voiceless_vowels_and_other_sonorants|almost always}} voiced) is more noticeable and takes more effort to pronounce than the voiced version ''v'' of the same sound in that position, so a change from ''v'' to ''f'' in this context would be an example of fortition. As a rule, however, lenition is much more common, and in fact one of the most common regular changes observed across languages is the kind of lenition that is the precise opposite of Cueball's prank: An unvoiced consonant between two vowels comes to be spoken, over time, as a voiced consonant, such as the middle consonant in the word "butter" that in American English is now pronounced as a brief {{w|alveolar tap}} [ɾ] rather than [t]. Observing a pattern of fortition rather than lenition in that position (especially for just one particular consonant) would be a very puzzling phenomenon to future linguists.

'''Examples for the suggested change are:'''
*''"Beafer"'' instead of ''beaver''
*''"Nofember"'' instead of ''November''
*''"Luffing"'' instead of ''loving''

In some languages, like German and Dutch, V is often pronounced like F. But it is not always the case.

The title text refers to the fact that English {{w|phonotactics}} [http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/169429/are-there-any-words-in-english-pronounced-with-e-at-the-end tend to discourage final or unstressed /ɛ/]. Exceptions tend to be monosyllabic interjections, such as:
* meh
* heh
* eh
* yeh

The word 'meh', is an interjection used to express boredom or indifference. The suggestion that it was originated by the writers of the animated TV show, {{w|The Simpsons}}, [http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2013/09/06/meh_etymology_tracing_the_yiddish_word_from_leo_rosten_to_auden_to_the_simpsons.html is incorrect]. However, its use surged in popularity following its use in various episodes of the show, beginning with the 1994 episode "Sideshow Bob Roberts".

This is the second time in 2016 that [[Randall]] tries to spread linguistic misinformation, the first being [[1677: Contrails]], but since both are in the My Hobby series it is not so strange...

==Transcript==
:[Cueball holding his hands in front of his mouth is whispering into his Cueball-like friend's ear. The friend turns his head towards Cueball.]
:Cueball: Psst - Teach your kids to pronounce V's in the middle of words as F's, but don't write down why you're doing it.
:Cueball: Pass it on.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:My hobby: Playing pranks on future linguists

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:My Hobby]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Language]]

Talk:268: Choices: Part 5

2016-05-26T17:20:51Z

141.101.98.40: Definitely the same series.

I think it's related to [[235: Kite]]. There is kite, Megan, Cueball - but they didn't say "hi". {{unsigned ip|108.162.231.55}}

I'd agree here. It's nice to have pleasant realisations. [[User:Toad573|Ribbit it's Toad!]] ([[User talk:Toad573|talk]]) 05:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this should be taken as something that happens in direct chronological relation with the previous "Megan travels to another universe" series; it's not apparently related. I see no reason to treat these cartoons as if they follow any particular order or time frame, except when it's obvious. In fact, until I came here and started reading the explanations, I never even thought of them as particular "characters" with names, just representations of certain types of people. It wasn't long, but I hadn't even associated Black Hat with being an "asshole" in particular. I thought it was just a way of giving the series some texture. In any case, he's the only one that shows a real definite set to his personality, and he could be representative of a certain type of person. The others are less so, but I don't think they should be viewed as sequential characters in a storyline; they're more like people in The Far Side, where they usually look very much alike, but there is no actual relation between the people shown in on frame and the next. Not to say giving them names doesn't make explaining easier, but I wouldn't take it any further than that. Personally, anyway. Unless Randall specifically said they were intended to be specific characters at some point... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.118|108.162.218.118]] 06:19, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
: Um, you've seen the strip title? It's labeled as part of the series, if it wasn't enough to be directly after and contain an identical character doing something in line with the previous strip's suggestions. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.40|141.101.98.40]] 17:20, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

1680: Black Hole

2016-05-13T07:21:05Z

141.101.98.40: /* Explanation */ removed some nonsense

{{comic
| number = 1680
| date = May 13, 2016
| title = Black Hole
| image = black_hole.png
| titletext = It also brings all the boys, and everything else, to the yard.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|First draft.}}
Cueball is curious as to why Black Hat has a miniature black hole on his table; Black Hat responds that it "really brings the room together", making a pun on both the black hole aesthetically completing the room as well as it literally "bringing the room together" through its gravitational pull.

The comic references 'The Dude's' rug in the film "The Big Lebowski", whilst the title text makes a more contemporary cultural reference to a well-known song lyric from the song "Milkshake" by Kelis; however, in this case, since gravity does not discriminate between which things it will attract [citation needed], it brings "the boys, and everything else", to Black Hat's yard.

Randall describes a similar scenario in the "Neutron Bullet" chapter of the [http://whatif.xkcd.com/book/ what if?] book, and a black hole of similar dimensions in [[what if?]] ''{{what if|129|Black Hole Moon}}''.

==Transcript==

:[Cueball is standing near a coffee table as Black Hat approaches. They are presumably in Black Hat's living room. The coffee table has a miniature black hole on top of it, resting on a small pedestal.]
:Cueball: Why do you have a miniature black hole on your coffee table?
:Black Hat: It really brings the room together.

{{comic discussion}}

1160: Drop Those Pounds

2014-03-06T15:39:39Z

141.101.98.40: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 1160
| date = January 14, 2013
| title = Drop Those Pounds
| image = drop those pounds.png
| titletext = If the flyers don't work, we'll switch to the LEAST subtle method of informing a town of the existence of a trebuchet club.
}}

==Explanation==

The comic presents a flyer with text typical of a ubiquitous advertisement for a "Weight Loss Program". However, the image at the bottom of the flyer and the title text make it clear that the flyer is actually an advertisement for a trebuchet club. This unexpected meaning is meant to highlight the ambiguity of the flyer's content.
A {{w|trebuchet}} is gravity powered siege engine, which was originally used to attack fortifications. It works by dropping a raised counter weight to rotate a throwing arm, launching a projectile on a ballistic path.
The phrase "We'll help you hit your target by dropping 30 pounds FAST" is where the ambiguity is produced. In the context of a weight loss ad, the "target" would be a rhetorical device referring to the weight which one wishes to achieve. In the context of a trebuchet club, the target is a literal location which one is trying to hit with a projectile. Likewise, a weight loss ad may indicate that a client could quickly lose 30 pounds (~13,6 kg). However, in this context, the 30 pounds being dropped is either the counter-weight - which is dropped to provide a trebuchet with its power, implying a rather small trebuchet - or the projectile itself being dropped at the target - it will be slower than the counter-weight but definitely still much faster than any weight loss program.

The only hint that the flyer advertises a trebuchet club is in the drawing at the bottom of the flyer, which appears to show two individuals pondering a ballistic path towards a castle tower (though no trebuchet is shown). The subtitle indicates that this flyer "may have been too subtle", while the title text suggests that, if the flyer is indeed too subtle a form of advertisement, they have less subtle options of announcing their club's existence — such as using their trebuchet to attack the town.

==Transcript==
:[We see a poster taped to a wall. It has Megan and Cueball in the bottom left, a silhouetted crenellated tower in the bottom right, and a thin arc between them. It reads:]
:Struggling with those 2013 resolutions?
:We'll help you hit your target
:By dropping thirty pounds '''fast'''
:[Small print.]
:WEB: http: [illegible].com
:CALL: (555) 123-4567

:The flyer for our trebuchet–building club may have been too subtle.

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