explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2461: 90's Kid Space Program

2021-05-13T07:02:34Z

162.158.134.84: /* Explanation */ tweaks

{{comic
| number = 2461
| date = May 10, 2021
| title = 90's Kid Space Program
| image = 90s_kid_space_program.png
| titletext = NASA may not want to admit it, but at this point they ARE the 90's Kid Space Program.
}}

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

The "launch system" is just one of the {{w|Eye popper|rubber popper toys}} popular in the 1990s. These toys are little rubber hemispheres, about 1" (25 mm) in diameter and 1/8" (3 mm) thick. When turned inside-out and placed on a hard surface, they will, after a short wait, snap back to their original shape, popping up into the air. The joke is that kids who grew up with these toys will think they're a great idea to propel a space ship to orbit, when in fact the toys launch at mere tens of kilometers per hour, far short of the thousands needed to reach {{w|orbital speed}}. But now kids playing with these are those that make rockets, hence the title 90's Kid Space Program (KSP).

Even if the popper-based propulsion system could generate enough acceleration to reach orbit, the abrupt impulse would likely cause serious harm to any astronauts.

The title text implies that many working now at {{w|NASA}} are/were in fact 90's kids. Both categories would include [[Randall]], as he was born in 1984 and previously worked at NASA.

The title is a reference to the {{w|Kerbal Space Program}} (KSP) which has been a [[:Category:Kerbal Space Program|recurring theme]] on xkcd, and it has previously been hinted at that NASA's employees uses this program in [[1244: Six Words]] and [[2204: Ksp 2]]. And also that you learn more about orbital Mechanics by using KSP than from being hired by NASA in [[1356: Orbital Mechanics]].

==Transcript==
:[A command and service module representing the tip of a spacecraft, is attached by four long trusses to four equidistant points on the edge of a giant light green popper (a green "hill" with a round raised edge around it). The popper is in its inverted configuration, ready to pop. There is a caption beneath the panel:]
:The 90's Kid Space Program prepares for their first orbital launch

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Kerbal Space Program]]

2461: 90's Kid Space Program

2021-05-13T07:00:32Z

162.158.134.84: /* Explanation */ wikilink KSP

{{comic
| number = 2461
| date = May 10, 2021
| title = 90's Kid Space Program
| image = 90s_kid_space_program.png
| titletext = NASA may not want to admit it, but at this point they ARE the 90's Kid Space Program.
}}

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

The "launch system" is just one of the {{w|Eye popper|rubber popper toys}} popular in the 1990s. These toys are little rubber hemispheres, about 1" (25 mm) in diameter and 1/8" (3 mm) thick. When turned inside-out and placed on a hard surface, they will, after a short wait, snap back to their original shape, popping up into the air. The joke is that kids who grew up with these toys will think they're a great idea to propel a space ship to orbit, when in fact the toys launch at mere tens of kilometers per hour, far short of the thousands needed to reach {{w|orbital speed}}. But now kids playing with these are those that make rockets, hence the title 90's Kid Space Program (KSP).

Even if the popper-based propulsion system could generate enough acceleration to reach orbit, the abrupt impulse would likely cause serious harm to any astronauts.

The title text implies that many working now at {{w|NASA}} are/were in fact 90's kids. Both categories would include Randall, as he was born in 1984 and previously worked at NASA.

The title is a reference to the {{w|Kerbal Space Program}} (KSP) which has been [[:Category:Kerbal Space Program|recurring theme]] on xkcd, and it has previously been hinted at that NASA's employees uses this program in [[1244: Six Words]] and [[2204: Ksp 2]]. And also that you learn more about orbital Mechanics by using KSP than from being hired by NASA in [[1356: Orbital Mechanics]].

==Transcript==
:[A command and service module representing the tip of a spacecraft, is attached by four long trusses to four equidistant points on the edge of a giant light green popper (a green "hill" with a round raised edge around it). The popper is in its inverted configuration, ready to pop. There is a caption beneath the panel:]
:The 90's Kid Space Program prepares for their first orbital launch

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Kerbal Space Program]]

Talk:2436: Circles

2021-03-16T20:54:35Z

162.158.134.84: The third element (and the first)?

AS for the overlapping edits, it is because this just showed up in my RSS reader. I was surprised to see that there wasn't anything written yet. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.206.92|172.68.206.92]] 18:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

If Randall was willing to realign the Audi logo, I think he could have stretched the model to accommodate Disney at the 3-ring slot! [[User:Jameslucas|jameslucas]] ([[User talk:Jameslucas|" "]] / [[Special:Contributions/Jameslucas|+]]) 18:58, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
:Audi's logo has the four circles in a straight line, not staggered (</pedant>) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.58|108.162.237.58]] 19:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::If we are being pedantic it was originally the Auto Union logo and Audi was one of the four rings - along with Horch, DKW and Wanderer. Augustus Horch founded Horch and Audi (horch means hark or listen so translates into Latin as Audi). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.6|141.101.98.6]] 18:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
:::The same is true for MasterCard - the two circles are not staggered, but "in a straight line" (horizontal, that is) [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 20:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::::Well, being even more pedantic, two circles are always in a straight line, just not necessarily parallel to the reader...[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.98|162.158.158.98]] 18:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::I have added to the explanation that only the olympic is true logo, but MC is just oriented wrong. But Audi's is not like that. It is relevant. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

ER are shared by both halves of the MC logo. Not AR. Anyone have another explanation?
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.132.41|172.68.132.41]]
:I was thinking about this too! Maybe Randall made a mistake, or is it something unexplained? We'll have to wait for an explanation. My bad, I saw wrong. I thought it was between all the logos.[[User:Hiihaveanaccount|Hiihaveanaccount]] ([[User talk:Hiihaveanaccount|talk]]) 20:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::(Why are we (y'all) bullet-indenting?) Though the circles of the "(MAST(ER)CARD)" might well co-share the "ER", assuming that's correct, here the set {M A S T E R} and the set {C A R D} have clearly been put through an (unordered) set-union to highlight the {A R} that are not ''solely'' members of either original set. Don't know why that, in particular. Maybe it just worked better, and mixed things up better than the "(MAST(ER)CARD)" interpretation which doesn't really parody anything in the process... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.97|162.158.158.97]] 20:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::::I have removed the bullet editing. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
:::Ok, just checked, and the word(s) "MASTERCARD" do(es) not appear on Mastercard logos any more, ''anyway'', having vanished/been relocated below the circles in various stages of cosmetic rebranding between 2006 and 2016. So "(ER)" enclosure wouldn't be strictly true for a number of years. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.97|162.158.158.97]] 21:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::::Well, the AR completes both the MSTE and the CD (ie, MasteR CarD)... as I expect one of the previous commenters was getting at. Perhaps it is a riff on picture in as much as AR completes MASTERCARD just as MASTERCARD's circles Complete Audi's circles... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.41|162.158.75.41]] 05:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh no Randall, please don't turn me into an oversimplified logo! Noooooooo! {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.109}}

I checked the overlap of the circles with the official olympian logo. It's correct. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.125|162.158.111.125]] 12:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

This bugs me more than any other xkcd comic, I could see the mastercard circles being tilted and still in a straight line, but then the Audi logo should be the same: straight line, but they line up to form the actual Olympic ring configuration giving preference to that logo... then there's the color, it would make me happy if the colors lined up with the actual Mastercard colors but they don't... so I don't know why I'm complaining here, probably because Randall doesn't have an actual comment system, so, sorry.... carry on with your day! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.40|162.158.75.40]] 15:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC) Sam
:It is because it is only the number of overlapping circles the diagram takes into account not their geometry. Just as the title text only takes the letters into account, not the words they are forming. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Should the current Audi logo box be a totally empty square? Reloaded several times, there's nothing in there. The other boxes all have pictures in them. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.105|108.162.250.105]] 09:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
:Looks OK here. And ''should'' be far simpler SVG than the historic logo's shading/etc. But maybe it's slightly newer SVG doctype (would need to read its source, to be sure, and this browser has recently removed its original view-source: method so I'd have to switch machines) or inadvertently use a fancier dialect that your browser refuses to render. (If 'current logo' is not actually just five flat, black rings, then maybe ''my'' browser is lagging, too, but differently. ...but then, do you have a 'dark' theme? Black rings on black (through transparency) background, thus apparently blank? A possibility, perhaps... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.207|141.101.99.207]] 17:37, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
:::OK, have checked, and current logo is ''absurdly'' simple (in one 'element' it moves focus and draws four rings! in black!) while the prior logo's SVG actually failed to load (rendering in full-screen, the gradient-shaded components appear with much lag) for reasons not understood if it wasn't file-size issues (doubt it). I'm still leaning towards dark-theme confusion, then. If it aint that, I'm stumped. But its the only obvious thing to me right now, so I'll leave further resolution to when future details can be given. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.22|141.101.98.22]] 18:04, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
::::I've seen the images fail to load occasionally (not just the Audi one; I think I saw the old mastercard logo do it too). {{Purge|Purging}} the page cache fixed it for me. I'm not entirely sure what causes it though. --[[User:Pokechu22|Pokechu22]] ([[User talk:Pokechu22|talk]]) 18:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
:::::I've never seen images (on-site, or those WikiCommons logos) fail to load. Except when the whole page failed to load, or the site .css failed to load and 'flavour' images (presumably) featured as a style element may have been absent due to this, as well as all the normal layout of elements. Interestingly the Current Audi has a handful of lines in its source, while I actually manually crashed my browser when I looked at the Old Audi one in source-mode ('original file', rather than the downsized one that the Gallery probably loads) and it got past thirty-eight ''thousand'' lines of polygon/etc with no close-SVG tag in sight. So much for vector-graphics for simplification and portability. (Mind you, it seemed to be auto-generated by a conversion utility. I could probably have hand-coded a near-identical output with actual intelligent thought put into optimising it.) That said 'web standards' is still a bit of an oxymoron at times, almost as much as it was during the era of "Netscape Unfriendly" pages, despite everything. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.108|141.101.98.108]] 01:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

==The missing item in the progression==
There's an absolutely obvious configuration of three circles that is very recognisable as one of the logos of a popular American media company, as the three overlapping circles are a stylised representation of probably the most famous animated character in the media company's output. Could there be trademark issues why Randall did not use it? Come to think of it, the AT&T 'Death Star'/Konica Minolta logo could be the first element of the series...
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.84|162.158.134.84]] 20:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

2415: Allow Captcha

2021-01-24T19:30:55Z

162.158.134.84: /* What Boxes To Click? */ I promise that's it. Well, not /promise/. Aspire. (Click!)

{{comic
| number = 2415
| date = January 22, 2021
| title = Allow Captcha
| image = allow_captcha.png
| titletext = To prove you're human, please click all the number pairs that appear together in your Social Security number.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a malicious design practice that already exists out there. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Captcha is designed to prevent spambots from being able to post on websites by posing challenges that humans can easily solve but that spambots and other automated programs cannot solve. The original version (used in [[632: Suspicion]]) asked users to identify text that was rotated, warped, or otherwise modified in order to make it more difficult for automated programs to solve. Once automated programs got good at that, new captchas were put out that exploited the fact that computers tend to be bad at image recognition, e.g. asking the user to select only images that contain cats from a grid of images of cats, dogs, and other objects (used in [[1897:_Self_Driving]]). This captcha appears to combine the two methods—with the additional hurdle that in order to pass the captcha, users must be able to not only read but also understand (i.e. know the definitions of words). However, if the goal is to allow humans but not computers to pass (although, as the next paragraph will describe, it is not the goal), this is not a good method of differentiating between the two. Any computer program that can accurately read text (and there are now many programs that can do so) would know which words start with 'A' and would be able to look up the definitions (including parts of speech) online, so this would not be effective as a captcha. Humans on the other hand, would often get confused between "ale" and "ail" or between "allot" and "a lot". The English language has no distinction between nouns and verbs by spelling, only grammatical usage, and many words in English are both nouns and verbs.

In reality, however, the window is merely disguised as a captcha in order to trick human visitors into allowing the website to install "a helper tool", which may be malware, on their computer. The top of the window uses a similar shade of blue to the current version of {{w|reCAPTCHA}} (currently the most common brand of captcha), the prompt includes the phrase "to prove you're human", and the grid is similar to the grid used by reCAPTCHA. However, positioned to appear to humans as two reCAPTCHA boxes is a window asking viewers whether they want to allow or deny the website's request to install the supposed "helper tool". The idea is that because "allow" is a verb beginning with the letter A, human visitors would click on what they think is the box with the word allow in it but actually allow the website to install potential malware on their computer. The window attempts to disguise this by formatting many of the words in boxes as buttons and including other text in smaller font on other boxes. In addition, the captcha may be intentionally difficult so that users will be too distracted by wondering whether ale is a verb to process the meaning of the request.

It should be noted that simply tricking humans would not necessarily be enough to install malware on their computer. First of all, while a person can select any part of a grid box in order to select that box, only clicking on the actual button that says allow will allow malware unto the computer. If a person clicks on another part of the supposed box, nothing will happen, so the person will likely take a closer look in order to see why the window is not being selected and then possibly realize that this is a trick as a result. In addition, the user's computer may have an anti-virus software that will prevent the computer from executing malicious code downloaded by the website. Or in order for the user to install software, a second window may pop up requiring the user to type in an administrator password, which will likely startle the user.

Shady websites often use similar tactics to trick you into allowing notifications, including saying "[https://www.bleepstatic.com/swr-guides/c/click-allow-to-verify-that-your-are-not-a-robot/notification-subscription-page.jpg Please allow notifications to confirm you are not a robot]". This comic combines that with a traditional reCAPTCHA to try and trick savvier users too.

The title text is a another trick reCAPTCHA which is trying to make you give out your {{w|social security number}} by clicking the pairs of numbers that appear in your Social Security number. A social security number is a form of identification used in the United States, originally used for the Social Security Administration. Over time, this number has become a type of national identification number, so stealing these numbers would allow a scammer to commit identity fraud. Of course, it would use a different grid, as the grid pictured in the comic has words, not pairs of digits. If you can find all of the pairs then they would be able to guess your real number and thus this would be a weird kind of phishing attempt. If the grid is 4×4 (and some reCAPTCHA grids are only 3×3), then it can only show 16 of the possible 100 pairs of two digits, so any people who are successfully tricked likely would not reveal their entire Social Security numbers because some digit pairs in their Social Security numbers would not appear. However, it should be noted that this trick likely will not be as successful as the captcha-based trick because the phrase "Social Security number" will likely raise alarm bells concerning identity theft, and people who are not citizens or permanent or temporary residents of the United States will not have Social Security numbers, so they will not be able to be tricked into revealing personal information this way even if they are especially gullible.

It should also be noted that the phrase "to prove you're human", while also attempting to disguise the trick, has a somewhat different implication. In the first example, the idea of the supposed captcha is that it asks the user to complete a task that human brains but not computer programs can perform accurately easily, such as image recognition. In the example in the title text, the idea of the fake captcha appears to be that humans are issued Social Security numbers (at least if they live or have lived in the United States), but computers are not. As the website does not already know the users' Social Security numbers, it would not actually be able to tell whether the user's response was correct. There is nothing to prevent programming an automated spambot program to randomly select zero to four of the boxes. Likewise, users could lie and not reveal their actual Social Security numbers, although those who realize that the supposed captcha is an attempt at identity theft will likely not complete it at all and could report it to law enforcement instead.

==What Boxes To Click?==
{| class="wikitable"
!|Position
!|Contents
!|Analysis
!|Click?
|-
|Row 1
Column 1
|Alike
|Adjective/Adverb: Related to the verb "Like", as in "similar"
Thus is technically "(a verb)" ''prepended'' by an "A", if the instructions are understood as such
|No?
Yes?
|-
|Row 1
Column 2
|Elope
|Verb: To romantically abscond
But does not start with "A"
|No
|-
|Row 1
Column 3
|Aloe
|Noun: A specific type of plant, or its extracts
Vaguely similar to "Allow", but not normally a homophone

To "low" is to make a sound like cattle, so another A-Verb misdirection for the unwary?
|No
|-
|Row 1
Column 4
|Ale
(and squiggles)
|Noun: a type of beer
Confusable with the verb "ail": to suffer

"(To) ply with drink" is conceivably a verb form
|No/Maybe
|-
|Row 2
Column 1
|Avow
(and squiggles)
|Verb: to declare
Also, similarly, "to vow" is a direct verb form of the related noun, thus "a"+"vow" could count (c.f. "alike")
|Yes
|-
|Row 2
Column 2
|Danny
(and squiggles)
|A person's name: familar version of Daniel/Danielle
(Also slang/dialect noun: the hand)

A strained off-homophone of "Deny", as used elsewhere

Does not even start with an "A", anyway!
|No
|-
|Row 2
Column 3
|Allele
|Noun: Genetic variation/subunit
|No
|-
|Row 2
Column 4
|Allot
(and squiggles)
|Verb: To assign or distribute
Can be misspelt "alot", causing confusion as to the legitimate word

Either of the above may be misused instead of "a lot", in its noun form meaning "many"

"Lot" may also count as verb (archaically), so this might also compound to qualify "a"+"lot"
|Yes
|-
|Row 3
Column 1
|Askew
|Adjective/Adverb: Tilted, twisted, off-balance, strange
"Skew" ''is'' a verb (also adjective/adverb/noun)
|No
(except if as "alike")
|-
|Row 3
Column 2
|Deny
(x2)
|Verb: to refuse, disallow, etc
Does not start with "A"
|No
|-
|Row 3
Column 3
|Deny
|As above
|No
|-
|Row 3
Columns 3+4
|(squiggled "www.a????.com") wants to install a helper tool
|Might depend upon a legible version of the URL.
|If so, applies to cell Row 3, Column 3
|-
|Row 3
Column 4
|Allow
|Verb: To permit, licence, be contingent of
|Yes
(despite/because of the trap)
|-
|Row 4
Column 1
|Allow (smaller size)
Alto

(squiggled "to a????? ~squiggles~")
|It might be easy to miss the "Allow", which is valid
"Alto", however, is a noun: instrumental/choral pitch or range

Possibly "Alto" is further taken as a "to"-word (misapplying the 'verb rule') that starts with an "A"

The squiggles ''may'' include a 'valid' A-Verb
|Yes, for "Allow"
(If not another click-trap)
|-
|Row 4
Column 2
|Allow (and squiggles)
|As elsewhere
|Yes
(or further trap)
|-
|Row 4
Column 3
|Deal
|Verb, noun and adjectival: various related or obscure meanings
But does not start with "A", in any case
|No
|-
|Row 4
Column 4
|Delay
|Verb (and related noun): of an enforced wait
Does not start with "A", although the synonym "allay" does

("Delay" also shares common meanings with, ''and'' mixes the phonemes of, both "Allay" and "Deny")
|No
|-
|Any cell
|Unremarked squiggles
|It is entirely possible that those squiggles, if decipherable, could include qualifying text
|Maybe..?
|}

==Transcript==
[Header at the top of the image with white text inside a light blue rectangle]: To prove you're human, please click every box containing a verb that starts with "A"

[Below the header, a series of panels in a 4x4 grid. Each panel has a word in capitals. Most of the words appear to be in buttons, and several have illegible text above or below. Some are tilted or off-center]

Alike

Elope

Aloe

Ale

Avow

Danny

Allele

Allot

Askew

[Two buttons, both saying]: Deny

[The next two panels are joined together, with two buttons next to each other. One says "Deny" and the other "Allow". The text above reads]: [illegible].com wants to install a helper tool

[With the word "Allow" printed clearly above and illegible text below]: Alto

Allow

Deal

Delay

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:CAPTCHA]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]

Talk:2411: 1/10,000th Scale World

2021-01-14T09:59:54Z

162.158.134.84: Airplane speeds

This sounds like a cool theme for a game jam. [[User:Bwisey|Bwisey]] ([[User talk:Bwisey|talk]]) 07:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The comment about airplanes being close to the speed of a bullet in the explanation wouldn't be relevant due to the scale, so they wouldn't be fast compared to the scale of the people here, and with some rough calculations, I think it would take multiple seconds to pass through the thickness of a human body, so if the people were normal properties and the plane moving at its speed being proportional to its scale (thus making its speed seem normal from the perspective of someone shrunk down and on the plane looking at the rate at which it travels compared to its own length or looking at the model surroundings rather than the giant person), it shouldn't cause significant injury. Granted, as such speeds it wouldn't be able to fly, but the same sort of concerns apply to a lot else here, like the thundercloud and the rate the atmosphere gets thinner at altitude.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.207|162.158.74.207]] 07:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

"Also, airplane speed very similar to the speed at which a bullet is fired" - That is true for real world aircraft; it is not at all given for the 1/10000th scale world. (It depends on if time is scaled or just spatial dimensions) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.84|162.158.134.84]] 09:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2384: Set in the Present

2020-11-14T00:49:49Z

162.158.134.84:

Although I've described the TV as being wall-mounted, a literal reading of the scenario is that it and Cueball are both floating in a featureless void (which has covid). [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 02:09, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Can I just say this is ''so'' true... GOOMHR! Anything even vaguely archival (repeats or first-runs of shows recorded before ~Marchish 2020) that don't have a prominent "This was recorded prior to..." announcement look... strange. Unsettling, even. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.158|141.101.98.158]] 02:15, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
:Just out of curiosity (because I mainly watch older stuff): are there any current, contemporarily-set shows that were filmed during COVID and where actors have (or have not) started wearing masks?
: I think if I were a producer, I would simply add masks to the show in situations where people would wear them in real life, even if the script was written before COVID. You wouldn`t even have to mention it in the show. Would make it more realistic, safer for the actors, and would acknowledge that COVID is simply a reality in 2020.
:: Really ''really'' [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53936399 contemporary productions] have famously made various concessions to make 'reality' film safely (not sure what they did about masks to film a 'safe reality', I don't watch that stuff myself). Anything that can be delayed seems to have been delayed, though, so we're yet to see 'new normal' pop up, and anything mid-shoot will likely start again with precautionary but pre-mask arrangements rather than reshoot the old shots to include face-coverings. It's going to be interesting to see what signs creep in (like radio dramas where clearly they Zoomed it in, just one character sounds like they're under a duvet, or ought to have been). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.128|162.158.159.128]] 11:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Transcript has a typo for the year: " Is this story set in 2049?" should read " Is this story set in 2019?"[[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.247|162.158.166.247]] 09:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
:Easily changed. Done! ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.128|162.158.159.128]] 11:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Reminded me of this tweet thread from @qntm in June ("do you feel like in the past six months all contemporary fiction became period fiction"): https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1275909147729551360.html [[User:Arcorann|Arcorann]] ([[User talk:Arcorann|talk]]) 00:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm not affected. In movies I'm watching, missing covid is NOT the most fantastic element. (Also, there is enough CGI that filming each real character separately won't change the movie production much.) -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 06:53, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

The problem with including masks etc. in productions is that it dates the movie/show precisely and makes it *about* COVID (qv.: chechovs gun) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.100|162.158.92.100]] 00:34, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

You're just a bit ahead of the scheduling vs recording of TV-shows. I've seen in this week alone at least four shows where Covid-19 is a major player and everyone has masks... is this the late autumn-winter season of TV? :S --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.84|162.158.134.84]] 00:49, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2379: Probability Comparisons

2020-11-02T20:59:09Z

162.158.134.84:

(Sidenote: for the 88% entry in the comic, "outside" is misspelled as "outide" as of the current moment.)

What's the best way to organize the explanations for this comic, when they begin to be added? By the order they're listed in the comic? That seems inefficient, since presumably many of the entries can be answered as a group by a single explanation. If they should be grouped, how should they be grouped? --[[User:V2Blast|V2Blast]] ([[User talk:V2Blast|talk]]) 03:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: The table I added is sortable. You could add a "type" column of some sort and users could sort by that if they want. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 04:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
There's a discrepancy between the version here and the current official version. Here, 0.2% has the red M&Ms thing paired with the odds of drawing a flush in poker ("you draw 5 cards and they're all the same suit"); the official version has it with "You draw 2 random Scrabble tiles and get M and M." Here, the latter piece of information is at 0.1%, and there the 0.1% item is "Three randomly chosen people are all left-handed." I'm guessing we have an old version of the page? [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 06:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: Updated. [[User:Natg19|Natg19]] ([[User talk:Natg19|talk]]) 08:29, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:: Cool, thanks. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 01:22, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't the Lord of the rings one be, technically, 67%, since 66.6666666... rounds to 67%, not 66? Also, we should really add a better comment interface. [[User:BarnZarn|BarnZarn]] ([[User talk:BarnZarn|talk]]) 06:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: The same goes for the next entry, imho, since LOTR-one is 2 out of 3 movies and the dice rolls are 4 out of 6, which comes down to the exact same percentage.

Hooray, xkcd is finally xkcd again! For the last fifty strips it’s basically been lighter SMBC. Yay Randall!

Also, if anyone wants to read something very English and very horrible, https://endicottstudio.typepad.com/poetrylist/the-white-road-by-neil-gaiman.html. [[User:Lightcaller|Lightcaller]] ([[User talk:Lightcaller|talk]]) 07:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I have to think the second to last is off. First, what is meant by "just been"? Minutes, hours, days? Second, does anyone know the correct number of 10-digit phone numbers that are answered by people named "Barack Obama" (as pronounced, not spelled)? I remember that Obama had a cell, and including the phones in his office and his bedroom (separate #'s), so during his term, that's at least 3. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 15:50, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:first of all, this is no longer his term, so the number of phone numbers he has nowadays might be different. Also, the scenario requires him to pick up the phone, and he probably wouldn't simultaneously be available to pick up a phone in both his office and bedroom, and unless it's a cell phone, only a fraction of the time would he be there. Also, like many people, he might not answer calls from unknown numbers, or he may have a secretary or someone screening his calls. Judging from the following line though, the calculations used here probably just used 1 in 10 billion for that value, leaving only the "just been an 8.0 earthquake in Calfornia" part.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

:Isn't the second to last entry really just a sneaky way of listing the probability of a magnitude 8 earthquake having just occurred in California? The entry says nothing about Barack Obama actually answering the phone, nor even that the number dialed being Barack Obama's. If agreed, then can the explanation in the table be updated? If disagreeing, then I'd appreciate you pointing out where I'm in error.

:Could Obama's phone number be referring to when he Tweeted a phone number to text him at in late September[https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1308769164190941187]? And so the chance of it being the correct number is much higher? [[User:B. A. Beder|B. A. Beder]] ([[User talk:B. A. Beder|talk]]) 01:09, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

guys i have never edited the transcript section im scared. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:This comic has so many American jokes and brands I can't understand this... I found this from [https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1263600/probability-of-picking-up-two-mms-of-same-color-randomly mathematics stack exchange] and that helped me understand what this M&M stuff is... — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
::Alright, I if the only colours are red green and blue how can there be fucking yellow or brown godammit I give up someone else do this shit AHAHAHA — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:45, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:::There are currently 6 colors, blue, red, brown, yellow, green and orange. Each comes in different ratios, for some reason. If there were all the same ratio, then getting 2 that are both red would be 1/36=2.777%, so red is below average. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
::::The colors used to be different a number of years ago. I forget what year, but they had a contest for people to vote on a new M&M flavor. They had people vote between blue, pink, and purple. I guess blue won as both pink and purple are considered girly colors and blue is considered manly, but the presencee of two girly colors split the vote for that. At the same time they got rid of there having used to be light brown M&Ms, and for a while they had commercials with blue M&Ms singing the blues. Anyway, I also read speculation the reason some colors are more common is they put less of the ones where the dye they use is more expensive, though I'm not sure if that's accurate.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand the "You share a birthday with two US Senators" as being 4%. If there is only one pair of U.S. Senators with the same birthday, then your chance of sharing a birthday with them would be 1/365 (~0.27%). --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.143|162.158.74.143]] 20:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:I'm not certain of the math offhand, but it is the odds of randomly sharing a birthday with 2 out of 100 Senators. Not that just a pair shares one with you. Although all this birthday talk ignores Feb 29 births. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
::I just noticed the note about there being 9 days that have a pair of Senators sharing a birthday. Does the 4% take that into consideration? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 01:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:::It's been updated to say that there are 15 days that have at least 2 Senators who share a birthday. That would make the probability (15/365.25), or 4.1%, so Randall is correct. (Using 365.25 to account for Feb. 29 births.) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.55|162.158.74.55]] 03:57, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Um... in the Trivia section, someone wrote:

"the 67% probability of rolling at least a 3 with a D6 is correct. "At least a 3" means a 3, 4, 5, or 6."

Four out of six is ~67%, right? Please don't tell me I've forgotten basic maths. I'm going to delete that section, but feel free to add it back in if I'm just being an idiot. [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 22:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

The explanation for the Social Security Number is wrong- it should be that there are ten possible digits for each of the four digits you're trying to guess. The number of digits in a SSN doesn't matter since the comic specifies you're only guessing the last four. [[User:Duraludon|Duraludon]] ([[User talk:Duraludon|talk]]) 00:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:In addition, there are no valid SSN's with any group as all zeros, so there are only 9999 valid numbers to guess at. Still close enough to .01% [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 13:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

XKCD comics are getting later and later in the (American) day. This one was posted Sunday the 1st, from the point of view of us Aussies. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.119.159|162.158.119.159]] 01:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== 2/3 = both 66% and 67%? ==

I get picking either 66% or 67% as a rounding for 2/3 but to have one of each?? Is there any actual reason for this?

<blockquote>66% A randomly chosen movie from the main Lord of the Rings trilogy has “of the” in the title twice 67% You roll at least a 3 with a d6</blockquote>

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.152|162.158.79.152]] 21:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I wonder what time frame he meant for there "just" having been an earthquake in California.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Angus King is from Maine, that’s ME not MN. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.200|108.162.219.200]] 14:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== Do we do calculus? ==

I think I've got how Randall did the birthday party/free-throw calculations, but it's kind of math-intensive. How much should I put in the explanation column? It's quite easier to explain with summations, but that requires a lot of background to someone who doesn't know calculus (i.e., probably a lot of people who read this). Should I forego the sum entirely? Should I say "the proof is by magic"? Also, at least some of this is stemming from the fact that I have no clue how one would insert a summation sigma into the editing, and I'm too afraid to try it. I'll write it with a bunch of plus signs (basically a sum, but longhand notation) until somebody decides to step in and clean it up. [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 18:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== Let's talk M&Ms ==

I'm beginning to think Randall is nerd-sniping us, because none of the values for M&M colours seem to line up with his source. The easiest example to demonstrate is '77% : An M&M is not blue'. '''Nowhere in the article is there a value which rounds to 23% for blue M&Ms.''' Most of the other calculations also seem to have small-scale differences, and a few have differences so big only using the 95% confidence interval values help. Can anybody figure out his line of reasoning with this? [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 19:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:You have to remember that 87% of all stats are made up. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 21:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:The source in question does show about 23% for blue M&Ms. In 2008: 24%. In 2017, Cleveland plant: 20.7%, Hackettstown plant: 25% (average 22.85%, assuming both factories produce the same volume).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.54|108.162.229.54]] 13:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

== Hemispheres and Seasons ==

Should there be a note of the fact that the summer/winter percentages are only true in the northern hemisphere? In the southern hemisphere, where summer is December-February and winter is June-August, the figures should be reversed (and at the equator, summer and winter don't really exist). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.86.114|172.68.86.114]] 21:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:I'm not entirely sure ''which'' season boundaries are being espoused. Equinox/Solstice ones (summer starts on "mid-summer's day", ''sic''), mid-way between adjacent equinoces/solstices (mid-summer's day ''is'' exactly half way through summer), meteorlogical (groupings of three calendar months)..? I suspect the latter, to provide the off-quarter values from almost continually variable month-lengths, but the other two (in conjunction with the elliptical orbit of the Earth changing the rate each phase of oscillation made by the ecliptic) would be a far more scientific reason worthy of Randall. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.102|162.158.155.102]] 02:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
::By my reckoning the proportions of seasons by various standards are as follows:
{| class="wikitable"
! colspan="2" | Season !! colspan="2" | Meteorological !! colspan="2" | Summer starts 'mid-summer' !! colspan=3 | Summer astride 'mid-summer'
|-
! Northern !! Southern !! Starts !! Prop !! Starts !! Prop !! Starts !! Mid-point 'drift' !! Prop
|-
| Winter 19/20 || Summer 19/20 || style="background: yellow;" | 1/Dec/2019 || style="background: yellow;" | 24.86% || style="background: yellow;" | 22/Dec/2019 04:19 || style="background: yellow;" | 24.36% || 7/Nov/2019 06:04 || 5h14m early || not calculated
|-
| Spring 20 || Autumn 20 || style="background: yellow;" | 1/Mar/2020 || style="background: yellow;" | 25.14% || style="background: yellow;" | 20/Mar/2020 03:50 || style="background: yellow;" | 25.39% || style="background: yellow;" | 4/Feb/2020 16:04 || style="background: yellow;" | 22h35m late || style="background: yellow;" | 24.88%
|-
| Summer 20 || Winter 20 || style="background: yellow;" | 1/Jun/2020 || style="background: yellow;" | 25.14% || style="background: yellow;" | 20/Jun/2020 21:43 || style="background: yellow;" | 25.64% || style="background: yellow;" | 5/May/2020 12:46 || style="background: yellow;" | 5h26m late || style="background: yellow;" | 25.52%
|-
| Autumn 20 || Spring 20 || style="background: yellow;" | 1/Sep/2020 || style="background: yellow;" | 24.86% || style="background: yellow;" | 22/Sep/2020 13:21 || style="background: yellow;" | 24.60% || style="background: yellow;" | 6/Aug/2020 17:32 || style="background: yellow;" | 22h44m early || style="background: yellow;" | 25.12%
|-
| Winter 20/21 || Summer 20/21 || 1/Dec/2020 || 24.66% || 21/Dec/2020 10:03 || 24.36% || style="background: yellow;" | 6/Nov/2020 11:42 || style="background: yellow;" | 5h17m early || style="background: yellow;" | 24.48%
|-
| Spring 21 || Autumn 21 || 1/Mar/2021 || 25.21% || 20/Mar/2021 09:37 || 25.39% || 3/Feb/2021 11:42 || 22h35m late || 24.88%
|-
| Summer 21 || Winter 21 || 1/Jun/2021 || 25.21% || 21/Jun/2021 03:32 || 25.64% || 5/May/2021 18:34 || 5h28m late || 25.52%
|-
| Autumn 21 || Spring 21 || 1/Sep/2021 || 24.93% || 22/Sep/2021 19:21 || 24.60% || 6/Aug/2021 23:26 || 22h47m early || 25.12%
|-
| Winter 21/22 || Summer 21/22 || style="background: yellow;" | 1/Dec/2021 || style="background: yellow;" | 24.66% || style="background: yellow;" | 21/Dec/2021 15:59 || style="background: yellow;" | not calc. || 6/Nov/2021 23:26 || 5h16m early || 24.48%
|}
::This covers two entire years (leap and non-leap). It assigns (northern) winter to whatever year it most lies within, for percentile purposes, as indicated by shared background. The 'astride' seasons start at the calculated mid-point between astronomical 'quarter-points', which is probably not how it's based IRL, and I give the mid-point difference from the quarter-point that ''should'' be their mid-point. Times are UTC, bare dates can be assumed midnight to midnight. Any leap-seconds I may have ignored are well below my level of precision. Also note E&OE, with plenty of possible transfer errors in plugging the raw details into the spreadsheet then re-transfering the spreadsheet into a wikitable format (across various screens/machines, because I'm an idiot). Also does not take into account actual demographic distribution across the solar year, which probably is what ''really'' is at work here. But I too thought it'd be interesting to look at it this way. Enjoy! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.52|141.101.98.52]] 15:42, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

== Obama earthquake probability ==

I'm was thinking about the second-to-last probability. This should be Pr[call Obama] * Pr[Magnitude 8 earthquake "just" occured in CA] = 5e-18.
* From the phrasing we assume 10-digit numbers are dialed randomly, giving Pr[call Obama] = 1e-10
* From the previous quake we know Pr[CA quake/year] = 2e-3
* The time period for "just occurred" is not defined.
* SDSpivey points out there is some ambiguity with the number of phones Obama has and whether to include the probability of him answering personally

If we assume Obama answers a single phone number than the time period would be 5e-18/(1e-10 * 2e-3) = 2.5e-5 years = 13 minutes.

It seems likely that a 15 min period was considered for "just occurred", which would be within rounding error of the quake probability.
--[[User:Quantum7|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7|talk]]) 09:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

== Free Throw meaning ==

Hi! Would it be possible to add an explanation as to what a free throw is, for the benefit of those of us who know nothing about basketball? Thanks! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.183|162.158.158.183]] 13:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Sure: when one of a number of transgressions of the rules occurs (a "foul"), depending on about 17 other variables, the player who was fouled is allowed to stand at a special line called the "Free-throw line" and take either one or two shots at the basket without anyone guarding him. Free throws only count one point, as opposed to baskets made during play which are 2 points (or 3 points outside yet another circular arc some distance from the goal).

== Share a birthday with two US Senators ==
Fairly certain this calculation is wrong. It assumes that births are divided evenly across the dates of the year, but some birth dates are more common than others. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.84|162.158.134.84]] 20:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:375: Pod Bay Doors

2020-10-07T09:31:18Z

162.158.134.84:

Made the "WHAT?" text italic, Because that's the way it is in the comic :3 [[Special:Contributions/121.54.48.38|121.54.48.38]] 01:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic cartoon featuring two of my favourite characters... and with both the pod and the Discovery's hull being spherical they could even stand-in for 'cores'... quite literally "in spaaaaaace".[[User:Squirreltape|Squirreltape]] ([[User talk:Squirreltape|talk]]) 19:42, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) said: OK, how is it possible that when I search YouTube AND Google, I don't get any direct matches for ' "daisy bell" "still alive" '? Where's our duet?
* HAL sings "Daisy" https://youtu.be/OuEN5TjYRCE
* GlaDDOS sings "Still Alive" https://youtu.be/Y6ljFaKRTrI
:{{unsigned|Iggynelix}}
**It is "GLaDOS for "Genetic Lifeform and Disk Operating System"

So, what is the small thing? I thought maybe it was an LED coming to replace the lightbulb. Is it something like that, or is it just a spaceship?? --Selah
:It's an EVA pod from the film, I believe. [[User:Booyahhayoob|Booyahhayoob]] ([[User talk:Booyahhayoob|talk]]) 00:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
*eats potatOS* YUM! {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.5}}

But wasn't GLaDOS technically female? {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.87}}

The song isn't "Daisy Bell", but, as Randall wrote, "Daisy Daisy" aka "A Bicycle Built for Two". This song dates, IIRC, from the late 19th or early 20th century.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.123|108.162.241.123]] 22:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Technically, GLaDOS becomes the deuteragonist in Portal 2. Check Please! [[User:StillNotOriginal|StillNotOriginal]] ([[User talk:StillNotOriginal|Talk to me!]]) 19:39, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, you are forced to cooperate with her after Wheatley knocks you both into Old Aperture. [[User:TheresAFlyAttackingMe|TheresAFlyAttackingMe]]

Amusingly, H.A.L. 9000 and GLaDOS do get to interact in the LEGO Dimensions level GLaD to See You - with GLaDOS being very much annoyed with H.A.L.'s presence and the references to "Dave".
https://lego-dimensions.fandom.com/wiki/H.A.L._9000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5zzndGoM3U

Talk:375: Pod Bay Doors

2020-10-07T09:29:21Z

162.158.134.84: HAL and GLaDOS in Lego Dimensions