explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2323: Modeling Study

2020-08-25T08:07:41Z

162.158.159.66:

Also known as

''I still have no clue about my subject, partly because I devised this study when I knew even less, but I need to write a paper anyway or I can never finish my PhD programme ...''

vs.

''I have now fiddled four years with my model assumptions to get the data to fit without, well, fiddling with the data, so please bear with me and my paper, and for heavens sake graduate me so I can save what is left of my soul and sanity ... '' ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.94|162.158.94.94]] 20:23, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
: One of my friends who studied thermal engineering remarked that if his model agreed with the test data to within ten degrees, it was acceptable, but if it agreed to less than five degrees, he was suspicious, because it was probably over-fit to the peculiarities of his thermal chamber, thermocouple placement, and so on, and less applicable for the system's real operational environment. --[[User:NotaBene|NotaBene]] ([[User talk:NotaBene|talk]]) 23:40, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
::We got trolled by our physics teacher in high school, during a calorimetry experiment (where you measure the changes in temperature of a system). All our measurements were way off from theoretical results, so we "adjusted" the reported values to make them fit the expected curve. Unfortunately, the prof knew that the thermometers were too inaccurate to produce precise results, so it was more of a test of our honesty, which we all failed miserably :-/[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.167|162.158.158.167]] 13:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
:::In our Physics A-Level (normal post-Secondary and pre-University stage, for non-UKians) class, the 'trick' played on us was a 'black box' of components that we had to record the resistance/impedence/whatever of when raising the voltage (can't recall if DC or AC) from zero up to a level and then back down again. One of a number of such tests, to be done by rotating around the lab, you'd be tempted to just run it up and record the down as mirror image, or fudgingly near. Except that there was some sort of latching trip, once a given voltage went through the box, that changed the circuit significantly on the return trip. Only the honest (and possibly honest enough to show the 'error' that crept in, when thinking they'd messed it up - and no time to rerun it from scratch!) gave in the two-slope graph or whatever was the record. Can't tell you whether I was a Goody-Two-Shoes or not, though I like to think I was (and would have known about zenor diodes and self-reinfor ing flip-flop circuits, which this may have crudely used). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 23:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
::::Looks like your teacher was trying to illustrate the principle of {{w|Hysteresis#Electronic_circuits|hysteresis}}
:::In A-level Chemistry between the filthy glassware, M/1000 silver nitrate and contaminated reagents you would always get brown gunge instead of a red precipitate. But you quickly learned that you were supposed to falsify the data if you wanted a good mark.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.92|162.158.78.92]] 16:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
::::That's the point. If the teacher knows this (why wouldn't they?) and wants to honour scientistic behaviour which includes negative results and sometimes even reflecting on the unexpected outcomes of an experiment, they can set up an experiment that will always yield results, that appear wrong, to see who still reports the expected result. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 05:24, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
:I once proof read a master thesis, where an experimental setting to optimize a problem in certain network arrangements was set up (basically a laboratory with 15 desktop PCs, communicating with each other on a specific protocol, etc.). The guy who wrote it found out on the first afternoon after setting it up, that the professor who found and described the problem he was about to tackle made a mistake, and the problem didn't exist. By that time he had already - due to university standards - handed in the name of his thesis. While negative results in research are also good results, the problem is, that by the same standards of his university his master thesis had to be a certain size - if I remember correctly, at least 50 pages in small font, excluding data and images - he managed to stretch his afternoons work and some subsequential tests on it to the required number of pages though. I am sure there is a lesson to be learned here, but... I haven't figured it out yet. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 05:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
::well, I gues the most important lesson would be "minimum length of text" is not a good requirement for any academic work. ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 06:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
:::No. The most important lesson is "always name your thesis vaguely enough you can scale the content between 5% and 2000% or what you originally planned to do". -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:15, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
:::: The lesson is that people are so used to blindly following rules, instead of considering whether the reasons of the rules are relevant and appropriate, that this community produced a thesis paper that met few of the reasons to write one. Usually you would quickly explain that you need to change the title of the paper and this would be accepted because it makes so much sense. If it's not, there is some higher-up who would support you over anything that ensued. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.179|162.158.62.179]] 23:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::That is true for most assignements, but not for a master thesis, which is - at least here in Germany - a very strict process, that has to be legal-proof for your whole career. So fiddling with the process can result in someone sabotaging you decades later for it. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Various "<Problem> Denier" groups, (Climate Change, Covid, other things not ''necessarily'' starting with "C") do tend to lose their shit over "models" that aren't right (whether 1% out or 50%, they'll take any 'error', or just the failure to model what happened later ''because'' the model was heeded and behaviours changed to avoid the outcome) ironically using their clutched-at-straws to model all ''future'' models as wrong/intentionally-misleading-for-nefarious-intent. They also misunderstand the models (witness them dragging out old "85% chance Hillary will win" predictions against the roughly(-and-slightly-more-than) 50% of the votes she got - a different measure and far from incompatible with the other), whether innocently or deliberately, to 'prove' their point. And that's just done by regular Joes/Josephines. I'm sure you can be far more competently incompetent in your modelling (i.e. sneak sneaky shit past more and more learned people) if you're an actual modeller yourself who feels the need to drive towards an end for which you then look for the means. (Or modes, or medians.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.168|162.158.155.168]] 11:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
:I'm nearly 18 hours late reading this comic, but the above is exactly why I'm so surprised to see it. Given Randall's apparent faith in mathematical modeling from other comics that this should be linked to (including the infamous vertical hockey stick temperature graph stretching back several millennia, and all the pro-Hillary bandwagon comics) I found this comic shocking in the extreme- he clearly knows the limitation of the method, and yet is still a true believer. Either that or he's finally growing up on the "A man who is not a liberal when he is young has no heart, a man who is not a conservative when he is old has no brains" spectrum. [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 13:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

:: You seem to have taken the exact opposite of the message of the post above you. The point was that the science is accurate--the problem were people interpreting it wrong. They didn't get that Trump's 85 percent chance of losing meant he'd win roughly 1 in 7 times--only a little less than the probability you role a 1 on a single die. People mixed up his chances of winning with what percentage of the vote he'd get. Plus they lack an intuitive sense of how percentages work, which is why FiveThirtyEight moved to using "1 in X" numbers instead.

:: And I have no idea what any of this has to do with political beliefs: thinking models are inaccurate wouldn't make you change political philosophies. Plus, well, the aphorism you gave has been found to be untrue--it's quite uncommon for liberals or progressives to become more conservative as they age. What does happen is that what counts as progressive changes, which makes sense. The whole concept is trying to make progress, of continually changing. Saying women should be able to vote was progressive in the 1920s, for example. It's not now.

:: Anyways, I hope I've fought some misconceptions. I find a lot of our disagreements are based on these sorts of things, so I make it my goal to clear this stuff up--even if it means I sometimes come off like a know-it-all. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 07:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

:Well, whoever makes statements like the one paraphrased above from the 2016 US election, or merely one like "there is a 75% chance of rain tomorrow", is a moronic pseudoscientist, and ought to be flogged, tarred, feathered, and sentenced to clean out public toilets 8h/d for two months, in that order. Such "measures" (of course they aren´t, they are merely a statement about how firmly one believes in his model extrapolating past measurement results into the future) have only one advantage for the "statistican" and newspapers, they can never be proved wrong. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.44|162.158.92.44]] 20:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
:How utterly ridiculous! There is NO way I want the person cleaning any toilet seat that I am going to use, to be covered in tar and feathers. That stuff is catching. If anyone is getting treated like that, it HAS to be in a different order.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 08:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
:Ummm. If you run a thousand related but variously hedging weather simulations and 750 of them suggest rain (for a given set of criteria - temporal, geographical and terminological limits), then there's 75% chance of rain. This doesn't mean it'll rain only 75% of the typical raincloud or be raining steady for just 45 minutes in any hour. And the same with polling. No, you ''can't'' prove it "wrong" (unless you said 0% or 100% chance and it did or did not happen; anyone who said such things would be taking their own risk), and that's the point. If the models suggest a majority of at least one vote (EC, ideally, but based on the balloting levels) for one party in 85% of circumstances, it is valid to suggest an 85% chance. However tightly packed the scatter is across all half-reasonable patterns. (Which can be enumerated, for those that understand the enumerations, but how many who don't understand the original figure would understand any additional ones?) So you can't prove it wrong, just an unfortunate 'miss' (like a bet that two dice won't come up snake-eyes; even more certain, but it still does fail to go the promised way), and yet some would say it invalidates all modelling. That they don't like the look of. They'll happily use spurious/selective models that seem to share their viewpoint. (As will many different people with many different viewpoints, of course. Hopefully enough people consider enough competent models to appreciate enough of the true uncertainty. But I'm not sure the models support the more optimistic levels of 'enough'.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 23:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
::You'd judge a model by how well it predicts reality. If there is rain 75% of the time the weatherman says there is a 75% chance of rain, then they are using a good model and are right. You can write down their predictions and check this. (you have to combine both approaches). See comment by Seebert below. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.179|162.158.62.179]] 23:59, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

[https://dilbert.com/strip/2020-06-23 Dilbert makes the same point the next morning in a slightly different way]--[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 13:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

2341: Scientist Tech Help

2020-08-03T22:43:13Z

162.158.159.66: Usual cross-midnight/timezoney thing needs correcting. And I'm the one who shall do it. ;)

{{comic
| number = 2341
| date = August 3, 2020
| title = Scientist Tech Help
| image = scientist_tech_help.png
| titletext = I vaguely and irrationally resent how useful WebPlotDigitizer is.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a WASP-INFESTED LAB. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, Randall pokes fun at stereotypes of scientists that tech people hold.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
There are two panels. The one on the left is titled
What tech people think scientists need help with

The one on the right is titled
What scientists actually need:

{{comic discussion}}

2338: Faraday Tour

2020-07-28T15:10:08Z

162.158.159.66: /* Explanation */ Well, look at the world. You could see their point, right?

{{comic
| number = 2338
| date = July 28, 2020
| title = Faraday Tour
| image = faraday_tour.png
| titletext = I asked them if it was safe to be running tours during the pandemic. They said, "During the what?"
}}

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

[[Hairy]], addressing an unseen camera (possibly the reader's POV) welcomes viewers to a {{w|Live streaming|livecast}} walk through "the world's largest {{w|Faraday cage}}." A Faraday cage blocks {{w|Electromagnetic field|electromagnetic transmission}} into and out of the cage area. Attempting to broadcast a walk through such a cage with any medium that uses radio waves would (theoretically, at least) cause the transmitter's signal to drop out completely, resulting in the loading wheel shown in panels three and four. Faraday cages do not necessarily have to be dark inside (they typically block longer wavelengths than the one of visible light, which is an electromagnetic wave), as this one appears to be, but the darkness visually aligns with the concept of {{w|communications blackout}}, which is what Hairy's viewers experience while Hairy is in the cage. The darkness could be taken as a metaphor for depending so heavily on electronic connectivity for one's view of the world that anything not directly connected is conceived as unobservable.

"Smash that like (or subscribe, etc.) button" is a typical command given by YouTubers to watchers, asking to publicly "like" the video or subscribe to their channel if they enjoyed it, ultimately to boost the creator's popularity.

The title text refers to COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. The joke is that, as they don't get cell service in the cage, the owners would be unaware of global events. This implies for comedic effect that the owners and workers solely live inside the Faraday cage, continuing the theme of treating connectivity as the only way to acquire information. They would still be able to receive news if they ever step outside to welcome visitors, or have print media delivered, but their choice to unconventionally isolate themselves might reflect their general attitudes to the world outside and it is also implied that Hairy is one of the rare few outsiders they have pre-agreed to allow to visit.

==Transcript==
:[Close-up on Hairy]
:Hairy: Hey there superfans, welcome to the livecast!

:[Hairy walks toward an opening in a large building]
:Hairy: Got a real treat for you today: a tour of the world's largest Faraday cage!
:Hairy: C'mon, let's check it-

:[Two panels of a "loading" spinner on a black background]

:[Hairy exits the building]
:Hairy: -was ''so cool!'' Wow!!
:Hairy: Thanks for coming along, and don't forget to smash that like button!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:2337: Asterisk Corrections

2020-07-27T14:04:08Z

162.158.159.66:

I think the only spot of the title text quote into which "witchcraft" makes a decent sentence is to replace "next": "I'd love to meet up, maybe in a few days? Witchcraft week is looking pretty empty" [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.161|173.245.54.161]] 01:02, 25 July 2020 (UTC) Me
:I'd go with replacing "meet up". "I'd love to witchcraft, maybe in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty." [[User:Orion205|Orion205]] ([[User talk:Orion205|talk]]) 01:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
:: "I'd love to meet up, witchcraft in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty." would be the third interpretation [[User:Multiverse42|Multiverse42]] ([[User talk:Multiverse42|talk]]) 01:39, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
::Or it could be "I'd love to meet up, maybe witchcraft a few days?" Munroe really loves to mess with people. [[User:A|A]] ([[User talk:A|talk]]) 01:43, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
::If it can take out a whole sentence, "I'd love to meet up in a few days. [Magic & calendar shredding sounds, first sentence replaced with witchcraft] Next week is looking pretty empty." would be a pretty satisfying way I would do it IRL. My plan canceling capabilities are absolute witchcraft [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.82|172.69.71.82]] 08:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
: Alternatively, witchcraft replaces maybe: "I'd love to meet up, [how about we practice] witchcraft in a few days?" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.66|162.158.75.66]] 02:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

A splat? I didn't know that. IME it's just the messed up word resurrected to, summon a beech, auto corrected to the same wrong word. BTW the asterisk on an obsolete keyboard looked like a squished spider, thus 'splat.'

Asterisks can replace multiple words, right? Something like "I'd like to meet up, maybe witchcraft? Next week is looking pretty empty" could work, yeah? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.135|108.162.246.135]] 04:36, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
:"I'd like witchcraft? Next week is looking pretty empty." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.18|162.158.159.18]] 12:35, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I have to admit, before reading the title text I was expecting him to either have a sentence with a single replacement which could go in several locations (maybe both a noun and a verb), or a followup text implying that the obvious place to put those corrections wasn't the intended one. This time I feel a little disappointed; a sentence which feels natural with the replacement in several places would have been much more satisfying than one where it's a stretch to find any suitable place. [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 10:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

does it necessarily have to replace a word? i find "I'd love to meet up, maybe witchcraft in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty." to make more sense. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.80|172.68.174.80]] 11:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd go with replacing "meet". "I'd love to witchcraft up, maybe in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty." --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.54|172.69.34.54]] 21:22, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

How about including the text before the quote (this is surely cheated a bit, but it's witchcraft so..): I like witchcraft to make it as hard as possible. "I'd love to meet up, maybe in a few days? Next week is looking pretty empty"
Maybe someone can even figure out a version, where interpreting the quote after "witchraft", i.e. "witchcraft"", as part of the correction, could make sense. My knowledge of weird english sentence types is limited, since english is not my mother tongue. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.146|162.158.92.146]] 22:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC) WhoCaresAboutMyNameh

I have NEVER seen splat used this way before. Is it really a thing? I have always used regex (s/wrong/correct). [[User:Vampire|Vampire]] ([[User talk:Vampire|talk]]) 03:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I usually put the asterisk after the word, rather than before. For example:

There's smoke coming out of my cat, is that bad?

car*

Is that wrong? --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 07:27, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

:It seems to be centred in the more modern messaging environments. Geeks from a time before Twitter (heck, before the Web!) might have used s///-notation because it was (to them, i.e. people like me) clear, unambiguous and directly parsable by many who were using (say) Usenet. Even if they weren't coders themselves, they may have picked it up. And it was probably that little less 'snappy' and high volume. I mean, early days-of-Web wasn't exactly a competitor on those fronts, and old conventions and priorities still applied in spades, whether 'chat', IRC, a telnet/dial-up BBS or whatever.
:Then came the rapid demographic changes of The Eternal September, and social-messaging revolutions zooming through Web 2.0 and (what I call, but I don't think is 'official') Web 3.0 which basically dumped the masses into the scene of the day and had more time to think up their new way of working than adopting or adapting holdovers from the now minority/archaic lines of communication (I still use [''#''] for feetnete, a lot; luckily it seems understandable enough, still).
:For what it's worth, I understand the asterisk to be footnote-like. You can't actually edit in the referer at the typo/thinko (if you could, you would just correct it!) but there's an implicit one there after the eroor* you make. Which is supposed to be obvious at the time or, at least, when subsequently your attention is called to it.
:So the follow-up opportunity notes a back-referenced correction of the *error, simply and sharply. If maybe not as unambiguously as you might imagine, but that's how it rolls in today's world, daddy-o! You grok my jive, good buddy? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.96|141.101.98.96]] 08:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
:Linguists use an asterisk before something made up or erroneous that's being used as an example so, as a Linguistics graduate, I always saw the "*what I really meant" construction as a sort of progression on from this...but it occurs actually that a) really that's the opposite of how linguists use it and b) most people don't know that linguists do that anyway. So it shouldn't have made any sense to me. But it did.
:So it seems that inasmuch as I immediately grasped what it signified despite all that, somehow it must be fundamentally embedded with very powerful levels of meaning! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.131|162.158.154.131]] 13:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
::Sometimes, cunning linguists can blow your mind! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 14:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2336: Campfire Habitable Zone

2020-07-24T19:47:13Z

162.158.159.66:

Amazingly how similar my aborted (edit-conflicted) edit matched what I found had gazumped me within the prior few minutes. Almost paragraph-for-paragraph on the same topic, with very similar details. Great minds think alike! (Fools never differ...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.100|162.158.159.100]] 01:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Same thing happened to me. This was my first time trying to submit the main explanation. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 02:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Since the marshmallow's axis of rotation (i.e. the stick) is parallel rather than perpendicular to its orbital plane, it cannot be tidally locked in terms of its rotation. However, for the same reason, one side of the marshmallow, that which is closest to the end of the stick, does always face the campfire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.75|162.158.62.75]] 02:43, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Take note of how Ponytail is toasting the Marshmallow above the fire with the stick nearly horizontal. In this orientation, the marshmallow typically becomes too gooey inside to maintain traction on a skewer or smooth stick. Rotating the skewer/stick becomes futile as the marshmallow spins relative to the skewer/stick but remains in the same direction relative to the fire, which will be with the heaviest part down due to the earth's gravity. In maintaining the analogy, the more massive side of the marshmallow is attracted to the fire... it has become tidally locked and cannot escape, preventing even toasting of the marshmallow. [[User:Dodgo|Dodgo]] ([[User talk:Dodgo|talk]]) 04:14, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:you cannot toast marshmallows on a single tip skewer, you need to use a marshmallow fork (which for linguistic reasons that escape me is called a fork despite having only two prongs). Care still must be exercised that the insides don’t become so gooey that the marshmallow falls off, but with a fork you can rotate and brown all sides evenly.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.128|162.158.78.128]] 04:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:(A fork in the road has only two 'tines', or is liable to puncture a tyre if it was just a joke set-up. Four-pronged forks for general dining only became common in the early 1800s, and all kinds of contemporary forks, for given purposes, have three or two tines. The earliest forks were indeed ''just'' two-forked, as they do the basic job of doubly-impaling, whereas modern ones have to partly act as 'shovel', or even 'rake', so need more prongs. Though rarely >4.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.14|162.158.159.14]] 12:01, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:: Tuning forks also only have two tines.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.62|162.158.75.62]] 12:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

How long a stick would we need to roast marshmallows with the sun? [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|talk]]) 06:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Don't know about marshmallows, but from a [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kv7j recent radio show (first item)] I learnt that a (cylindrical, so marshmallow-shaped) burrito should be placed 60 million km sunwards. Assuming "no additional equipment", but plenty of other caveats. No discussion of how you get your snack back to you while still ''only'' cooked and before it cools down. Obviously marshmallows (on sticks, solving one issue) are a different prospect, but maybe start with that and experiment a few times? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.14|162.158.159.14]] 12:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Maybe this question could revive "What If?" and in addition to tackling "roasting" the marshmallow it could address how fast you'd have to retrieve it before it radiated away enough heat to no longer be "gooey"[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.167|162.158.74.167]] 12:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Am I the only person thinking that Cueball left the habitable zone because Megan, trying to get her marshmallow to toast, has just poked him in the face with her stick? [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:03, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

According to my research, not all campfires possess a habitable zone. A few are too small to roast marshmallows; some are large enough that you cannot comfortably stand within marshmallow-roasting distance; and others just had some of that colored-fire gunk thrown in them and you don't want to roast food over whatever that gives off. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 13:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
: I doubt that. Since you can roast a marshmallow on a candle flame just fine I can't imagine a campfire(!) being too small for that. And as for the problem with too big fires it all depends on the length of the stick you are using. But again, we are talking about campfires - these are generally meant to be used for cooking. If you want to actually eat that marshmallow is indeed dependent on the stuff you are burning, on that I agree. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I've found that the habitable zone can get compromised by the smoke direction. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 16:32, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Is it too far fetched to think that "Campfire habitable zone" is a much more direct 1:1 reference on the term "Circumstellar habitable zone". According to the Wikipedia article the first scientific definition of habitable zone from Dole (1964) was the range of 0.72 A.U. to 1.24 A.U. If the same horizontal scaling is applied to the green zones in the comic, then the position of Ponytail pretty precisely corresponds to the distance of planet Earth, the position of Cueball pretty precisely corresponds to the position of Planet Venus and Meghans position quite well corresponds to the position of Planet Mars? [[User:Farnsworth|Farnsworth]] ([[User talk:Farnsworth|talk]]) 20:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Please note: There may be a misspelling in this panel. See the claimed distinction between "marshmallow" (in the panel) and "marshmallow." https://www.askdifference.com/marshmellow-vs-marshmallow/ [[User:JDAddelston|JDAddelston]] ([[User talk:JDAddelston|talk]]) 14:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC) JDAddelston
: I have looked at the current page, the image, and some way back in page history, and I only see "marshmellow" (noted within as incorrect) in that URL you give. Maybe I have missed the point, or it has changed without my noticing, in which case maybe you perhaps should clarify. (I also noted, while checking this, that one historic edit was for a couple of "-ise"->"-ize" changes. But I could point out other changes where international/anglicised usages could be americanized, if this is at all important.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 19:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2336: Campfire Habitable Zone

2020-07-23T16:32:32Z

162.158.159.66:

Amazingly how similar my aborted (edit-conflicted) edit matched what I found had gazumped me within the prior few minutes. Almost paragraph-for-paragraph on the same topic, with very similar details. Great minds think alike! (Fools never differ...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.100|162.158.159.100]] 01:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Same thing happened to me. This was my first time trying to submit the main explanation. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 02:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Since the marshmallow's axis of rotation (i.e. the stick) is parallel rather than perpendicular to its orbital plane, it cannot be tidally locked in terms of its rotation. However, for the same reason, one side of the marshmallow, that which is closest to the end of the stick, does always face the campfire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.75|162.158.62.75]] 02:43, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Take note of how Ponytail is toasting the Marshmallow above the fire with the stick nearly horizontal. In this orientation, the marshmallow typically becomes too gooey inside to maintain traction on a skewer or smooth stick. Rotating the skewer/stick becomes futile as the marshmallow spins relative to the skewer/stick but remains in the same direction relative to the fire, which will be with the heaviest part down due to the earth's gravity. In maintaining the analogy, the more massive side of the marshmallow is attracted to the fire... it has become tidally locked and cannot escape, preventing even toasting of the marshmallow. [[User:Dodgo|Dodgo]] ([[User talk:Dodgo|talk]]) 04:14, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:you cannot toast marshmallows on a single tip skewer, you need to use a marshmallow fork (which for linguistic reasons that escape me is called a fork despite having only two prongs). Care still must be exercised that the insides don’t become so gooey that the marshmallow falls off, but with a fork you can rotate and brown all sides evenly.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.128|162.158.78.128]] 04:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:(A fork in the road has only two 'tines', or is liable to puncture a tyre if it was just a joke set-up. Four-pronged forks for general dining only became common in the early 1800s, and all kinds of contemporary forks, for given purposes, have three or two tines. The earliest forks were indeed ''just'' two-forked, as they do the basic job of doubly-impaling, whereas modern ones have to partly act as 'shovel', or even 'rake', so need more prongs. Though rarely >4.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.14|162.158.159.14]] 12:01, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

How long a stick would we need to roast marshmallows with the sun? [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter|talk]]) 06:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Don't know about marshmallows, but from a [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kv7j recent radio show (first item)] I learnt that a (cylindrical, so marshmallow-shaped) burrito should be placed 60 million km sunwards. Assuming "no additional equipment", but plenty of other caveats. No discussion of how you get your snack back to you while still ''only'' cooked and before it cools down. Obviously marshmallows (on sticks, solving one issue) are a different prospect, but maybe start with that and experiment a few times? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.14|162.158.159.14]] 12:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
:Maybe this question could revive "What If?" and in addition to tackling "roasting" the marshmallow it could address how fast you'd have to retrieve it before it radiated away enough heat to no longer be "gooey"[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.167|162.158.74.167]] 12:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Am I the only person thinking that Cueball left the habitable zone because Megan, trying to get her marshmallow to toast, has just poked him in the face with her stick? [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:03, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

According to my research, not all campfires possess a habitable zone. A few are too small to roast marshmallows; some are large enough that you cannot comfortably stand within marshmallow-roasting distance; and others just had some of that colored-fire gunk thrown in them and you don't want to roast food over whatever that gives off. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 13:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
: I doubt that. Since you can roast a marshmallow on a candle flame just fine I can't imagine a campfire(!) being too small for that. And as for the problem with too big fires it all depends on the length of the stick you are using. But again, we are talking about campfires - these are generally meant to be used for cooking. If you want to actually eat that marshmallow is indeed dependent on the stuff you are burning, on that I agree. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I've found that the habitable zone can get compromised by the smoke direction. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 16:32, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

1926: Bad Code

2020-07-17T14:25:18Z

162.158.159.66: Changed link to 2138, the question mark makes MediaWiki sad.

{{comic
| number = 1926
| date = December 8, 2017
| title = Bad Code
| image = bad_code.png
| titletext = "Oh my God, why did you scotch-tape a bunch of hammers together?" "It's ok! Nothing depends on this wall being destroyed efficiently."
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is the fourth in the [[:Category:Code Quality|Code Quality]] series:
* [[1513: Code Quality]]
* [[1695: Code Quality 2]]
* [[1833: Code Quality 3]]
* [[1926: Bad Code]]
* [[2138|2138: Wanna See the Code?]]

[[Ponytail]] has caught [[Cueball]] in the act of writing some messy code - code in the form of a spreadsheet formula, which in turn produces another program in a language called {{w|Haskell (programming language)|Haskell}}. Haskell is a {{w|purely functional programming}} language, a concept that has a debatably steep learning curve, which causes it to be somewhat obscure, as referenced in [[1312: Haskell]]. It is explained that ''this'' code will, in turn, {{w|Parser|interpret}} ''more'' source code, specifically code written in {{w|HTML}}. Parsing HTML is notoriously tricky without a dedicated software library for several reasons, including frequent changes to web pages, a nested structure of tags and quotes that frustrates {{w|regular expression}}s, allowing new lines to be started almost anywhere, and different standards that are followed or not followed to varying degrees.

After Cueball excuses his bad code by stating that "nothing depends on this" (meaning that no other projects rely on this code being good to operate properly), Ponytail uses the analogy of breaking a non-load-bearing wall to ridicule Cueball's excuse. A {{w|load-bearing wall}} is a wall that plays a role in supporting the building. Damaging such a wall would threaten the structural integrity of the entire building, and could potentially cause a collapse. In contrast, walls that aren't load-bearing are designed only to separate spaces within the building, and do not contribute to keeping the building up. Damaging or destroying such walls wouldn't endanger the overall structure of the building. However, supporting the building is just ''one'' of the functions which could depend on having an intact wall, and non-load-bearing walls are still there for a purpose. Walls serve many other important purposes, from creating opaque and sound blocking barriers (desirable for privacy purposes, particularly for bedrooms and bathrooms{{Citation needed}}), to containing and protecting water pipes and electrical wiring. Ponytail's analogy suggests that, even though poorly written-code wouldn't cause the entire program to fail, it's still not a good idea.

Immediately after, Ponytail appears to have realized that she's only ''inspired'' Cueball to go ahead and break the wall, instead of swaying him away from writing ugly code. If left unchecked, this will only end in tragedy. [[905: Homeownership|Hilarious, knee-slapping tragedy.]]

This is most likely a continuation of the [[:Category:Code Quality|Code Quality]] series, but it differs slightly. For one thing, all of the previous strips were named "Code Quality <number>", with the exception of the first, which was just named "Code Quality". Also note that, unlike the previous Code Quality strips, Ponytail does not start using similes like "This is like being in a house built by a child using nothing but a hatchet and a picture of a house". It's also the longest explanation of Cueball's code by Cueball himself.

The title text suggests that Cueball's approach to breaking the wall - scotch-taping a bunch of hammers together - is as good as his code, and his excuse is similar.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is at his desk in a swivel chair, using his computer. Ponytail walks towards him.]
:Ponytail: That's the ugliest mess of code I've ever seen! What on earth are you working on?

:[Cueball swivels his chair to face Ponytail in a frameless panel.]
:Cueball: It's nothing weird this time, I swear.
:Cueball: It just looks bad because it's a spreadsheet formula.

:[Cueball is facing his computer again.]
:Cueball: ...which assembles a Haskell function.
:Ponytail: Uhhh.
:Cueball: ...for parsing HTML.
:Ponytail: ...oh my God.

:[Ponytail is pointing away from the scene.]
:Cueball: It's ok! Nothing depends on this.
:Ponytail: That wall isn't load-bearing. Does that mean we can just throw hammers at it?
:Cueball: ...I mean...
:Ponytail: Wait. Crap.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Code Quality]]
[[Category:Cueball Computer Problems]]
[[Category:Spreadsheets]]

Talk:2275: Coronavirus Name

2020-07-08T13:05:24Z

162.158.159.66:

Covid-19 is more dangerous than the flu and has already killed more people. And any death rate that starts with 0.00 and then has a number other than zero can only be called "basically zero" if you value human life very little. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.132|162.158.94.132]] 21:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:addendum: this seems to depend on what source you use for the chinese yearly flu death rate. number of deaths is either much higher or somewhat lower.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.123|162.158.91.123]] 21:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:It's Trump taking point that the coronavirus is a hoax and no worse than the flu. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.213|162.158.74.213]] 22:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:At the very least, the fact the virus has over 90,000 confirmed cases makes it a significant disease. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.246|172.69.34.246]] 22:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:It doesn't seem like the point of the comic is to comment on the severity of the virus. Seems more on-topic to say things that are objectively true, like "Many people are concerned about the virus" rather than discussing disputed stats.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.132|162.158.106.132]] 22:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Patb
::I agree, and suggest we remove the line with stats entirely. It isn't relevant to the comic, and having it refer to "current estimates" means someone will have to keep updating it when new estimates are made. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.57|172.69.54.57]] 08:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::A running total here wouldn't be necessary, there is at least one web site especially for that (or a page for Covid-19 on a general disease outbreak tracking site). To me it looks like this virus is about equally dangerous as flu, except that this virus is only in about 70 countries and counting, so if it isn't in yours yet (as far as you know) then you are not yet in danger (as far as you know). Also, flu kills a lot of people, numerically, every year, and if this virus kills an equal number of people, every year, there are twice as many people dead, total. (ish) So it's worth trying to stop this virus from existing, while we might still do that. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.76|162.158.159.76]] 13:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::Let's inject a little sanity here: Trump's "talking point" about it being no on par with the flu is, for once, correct. Most people who are infected have mild symptoms, or none at all. In fact, that's how it's suddenly turned out that the spread is so much greater than previously reported: Because most people never even know they have it. Given this, the mortality rate is a tiny fraction of what was previously reported, perhaps 0.3% instead of 3%. And it was only ostensibly 3% in a primitive region where some people still have dirt floors, and almost nobody is willing to deal with their socialized health care system except in an emergency. Therefore most of the infected were not showing up for treatment, only those in serious trouble. In fact, the vast majority of those who have died are elderly or immunocompromised, ''exactly'' the same group who are killed in the tens of thousands each year by the flu, in the US. So no, this has been a tempest in a teapot, stirred up by the unscientific CDC in order to pad their budget, the way they do periodically with a new fake pandemic threat. SARS, West Nile, bird flu, h1n1, and ebola...no competent epidemiologist would ever seriously have expected those to become a threat in the US, or anywhere else outside of primitive regions. But the CDC has continued to redouble their unearned budget on this fraudulent fearmongering. As I learned when consulting for such ilk in DC, "Fear Equals Funding". Oh, and no, 90,000 cases only make it a "significant disease" in the way that another coronavirus, the common cold, is significant. It's not significantly dangerous. In fact, it really is just a strong kind of common cold. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 21:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::While it doesn't seem to be more lethal than flu (or in general having more severe symptoms), either it's more contagious or the fact it's contagious for weeks before symptoms makes it spread easier. In this sense it's more serious threat - imagine for example if ALL employees of nuclear power plant would be infected leaving noone capable of caring of the reactor. That said, it seems that panic is currently more dangerous than the virus itself. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::::Wait, look carefully at the two separate segments of logic you presented. You need to unify them to be cross-consistent: Since the coronavirus mostly is no worse than the common cold or flu, even if ALL employees of a nuclear power plant catch it they can continue working. Most of them are not immunocompromised. Those few should stay home, and everyone else should keep working, just like they would with a cold. Remember, the majority of people who are infected with the novel coronavirus never even have symptoms. It is in that sense ''less'' harmful than the flu or the other famous coronavirus, the common cold. The only reason the nuclear plant may end up without anyone to man it is the insane panic causing people to stay home en masse. Remember, the actual reason the authorities are saying to stay home isn't that it's a danger to the normal people who are infected, and not to keep you from catching it...but just to slow its spread. That's all. They want it to spread slowly enough that they can deal with it more easily. That is what they're explicitly stating. —[[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]])

:The 2% death rate in the explantion is outdated. [https://news.sina.cn/zt_d/yiqing0121 Here (in Chinese)] is the compiled data for all China. As of March 3rd, the death rate calculated by (death toll)/(confirmed infected patients) is 3.7% for all China and 4.6% for Wuhan city (the epicenter). The number for Wuhan is likely to grow in the following days, too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.190.86|162.158.190.86]] 20:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::The mortality rate in China is only relevant if one lives in an area with a primitive socialized health care system. As with SARS, it won't turn out to have a significant death rate among people infected in the US who are not elderly or immunocompromised. Perhaps, in fact, a zero death rate outside of that high risk group. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 21:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::@kazvorpal your comment is inappropriate for several reasons, including "primitive" and deprecating socialized medicine. Since there've already been deaths among the small group of known cases in the USA, it's way too early to calculate mortality rates here. [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 16:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
::::There is nothing inappropriate about pointing out the primitive nature of the poorest provinces of China, nor the very factual failures of socialized medicine. As for the US, there have been no cases of someone dying here who was actually infected here. And there's no reason to believe that when they do occur, the mortality rate will turn out to be much worse than the flu. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 04:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
:::Can someone ban this fucking racist Trumpbot? Kazvorpal even wrote some sort of article for blaming the failures of the current system on socialism. And then he calls China primitive and says some of the hospitals have dirt floors. Just ban Kazvorpal already.
:::::Can you be a grownup who signs his posts, instead of a little coward who spews childish nonsense and then runs away to hide? I never said their hospitals had dirt floors, but the cold hard fact is that many of the houses in the poorest provinces do, because socialism is indeed such a failure. And those poor provinces are indeed primitive, no actual grownup disputes that fact, either. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 04:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
::Though you're right in that there ''is'' sophistication in the system (potentially), while the US famously has a situation so broken that "almost nobody is willing to deal with their '''non-'''socialized health care system except in an emergency" either. I think if the meaning was "a health system which is primitively socialised(/ist)" I could accept the utterer's original intent, though I don't actually know enough about the the practicalities of the Chinese system to know how it actually transpires in individual off-the-street transactions. I live within the somewhat social UK one, and directly see its problems, but I've been done well by it myself despite it being notably sabotaged by various politicians on the scene by forcing some changes or refusing to implement others. I haven't myself experienced the strange US one, even during my visits there, but I've had such info as a live online chat (early 1990s, via IRC, for reference) with someone who daren't go to a doctor/A&E for a clearly in-progress medical issue - if it wasn't even a real thing (as cynics might suggest may have happened in the text-only pre-Eternal September entirely pseudonymical medium) it must have had a grounding on experience and yet it totally blew my mind that something that would cost a few GBP (in medical supplies) and literally a few minutes of a doctor's time (underpaid, arguably) could instead potentially end up as billed for USDthousands either directly or as private insurance overheads. Still, this is an old (and perpetual) politically-biased discussion that has had few actual new arguments added to any side for years, and will doubtless rumble on as long as it can - I think we should all realise that all the systems are bad, we just fundementally disagree about which particular ones are least bad. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.148|141.101.98.148]] 19:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

If the Godzilla movies have taught me anything, it's that giant insects aren't a problem biologists can solve anyways. That's more of a "nuclear paleontology" sort of job. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 01:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

It is legitimately difficult to tell if Ponytail's use of the word 'catchy' as a descriptor for 'coronavirus' is an intentional or unintentional pun. Either way, it's very opportune. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.239|108.162.221.239]] 03:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The current chapter of Wilde Life (a totally unrelated webcomic) as a giant spider interacting with two of the main characters, starting [https://www.wildelifecomic.com/comic/710/ here]. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 05:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I think they missed a trick with the naming. CORVID-19 would have reminded everyone of H5N1 'bird flu', and we could just blame the crows. Kill a magpie to avoid infection!
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.253|162.158.158.253]] 10:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:What? How is CORVID-19 supposed to remind anyone of H5N1 or bird flu? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::Corvidae is the family including crows, ravens, jays, magpies; so, CORVID~=bird. Not sure how many people would make that connection, but I think that's what the previous poster was getting at.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.91|162.158.187.91]] 13:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:I think "SARS-CoV-2: Electric Boogaloo" has a nice ring to it although a little wordy for everyday use. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.116|198.41.238.116]] 08:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
::I was thinking "SARS 2: The Attack of Pneumonia" 08:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah really dodged a bullet on those rhinoviri. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.44|172.69.22.44]] 11:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

: AKK! NO! It's rhinoviruses, not rhinoviri! Only monoglot English speakers pretending that they have heard of Latin and showing that they don't know any, use viri in this way. Viri is NOT the plural of virus, it's the plural of vir, which means man. 13:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Is it relevant to mention that some spiders grow larger in cities? https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105480
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not really wanting to catch COVID-19. I'm holding out for COVID-19b, which is going to be better beta-tested. (But by the time COVID-19c comes out, it's just going to be a bandwagon of planned obsolescence by then - I'd rather stick with what I've got until the next significent release version and keep a close eye on the advanced reviews and what other vendors are innovating.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.46|162.158.34.46]] 16:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

This is only 3 years too early to be a reference to the spiders in Colorado https://xkcd.com/1688/ especially with Megan holding bio-hazardous material. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.33|162.158.62.33]]

Assorted catchier names: a)Corona-chan (works for every disease with a girl name, Ebola, Zika, Lassa, Malaria, Cholera, Yersinia...Ask 4chan), b) My Corona (OK, a bit 1970-ish), c) Coronjob (for conspiracy buffs). (Personally, I'm less afraid of getting infected than getting, showing no symptoms as always and killing half of my environment...) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.9|172.69.54.9]] 09:36, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:Yeah, "My Corona" got largely superceded by the fad for "e-Corona", except for some niches, and then along came "iCorona" and changed everything. Though there was also the short-lived Corona Millenium Edition. (It didn't stay bad. Corona XP became the highpoint. And if you did't like that, you might as well just go back to Corona Bob.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.43|162.158.154.43]] 16:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I think that it's worth noting that this comic came out the day after the American Super Tuesday primaries.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.64|172.69.71.64]] 15:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:But it didn't. This comic came out the day ''before'' the primaries, and is completely unrelated to them. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.211.28|172.68.211.28]] 02:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Shoulda called it Coronavirus-2019.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.210|162.158.34.210]] 22:51, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking forward to seeing if there is an uptick in children named Corona later this year. I wouldn't bet against it. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

I have to agree with the speculation that in the end this will end up being much ado about nothing just like swine flu and bird flu. 08:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
: A very quick googleskim showed [https://www.google.com/search?q=deaths+by+avian+flu 616 worldwide deaths from the avian flu] ... and [https://www.google.com/search?q=deaths+by+pandemic+swine+flu 575,400 (12,469 USA) from pandemic swine flu.] [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

One American of my acquaintance, living in New Zealand, has quoted (with approval) a recent suggestion he's heard of calling it "Trump's disease". What a great way to commemorate his presidency!

Talk:2275: Coronavirus Name

2020-07-08T13:01:44Z

162.158.159.66:

Covid-19 is more dangerous than the flu and has already killed more people. And any death rate that starts with 0.00 and then has a number other than zero can only be called "basically zero" if you value human life very little. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.132|162.158.94.132]] 21:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:addendum: this seems to depend on what source you use for the chinese yearly flu death rate. number of deaths is either much higher or somewhat lower.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.123|162.158.91.123]] 21:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:It's Trump taking point that the coronavirus is a hoax and no worse than the flu. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.213|162.158.74.213]] 22:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:At the very least, the fact the virus has over 90,000 confirmed cases makes it a significant disease. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.246|172.69.34.246]] 22:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
:It doesn't seem like the point of the comic is to comment on the severity of the virus. Seems more on-topic to say things that are objectively true, like "Many people are concerned about the virus" rather than discussing disputed stats.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.132|162.158.106.132]] 22:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Patb
::I agree, and suggest we remove the line with stats entirely. It isn't relevant to the comic, and having it refer to "current estimates" means someone will have to keep updating it when new estimates are made. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.57|172.69.54.57]] 08:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::A running total here wouldn't be necessary, there is at least one web site especially for that (or a page for Covid-19 on a general disease outbreak tracking site). To me it looks like this virus is about equally dangerous as flu, except that this virus is only in about 70 countries and counting, so if it isn't in yours yet (as far as you know) then you are not yet in danger (as far as you know). Also, flu kills a lot of people, numerically, every year, and if this virus kills an equal number of people, every year, there are twice as many people dead, total. (ish) So it's worth trying to stop this virus from existing, while we might still do that. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.76|162.158.159.76]] 13:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::Let's inject a little sanity here: Trump's "talking point" about it being no on par with the flu is, for once, correct. Most people who are infected have mild symptoms, or none at all. In fact, that's how it's suddenly turned out that the spread is so much greater than previously reported: Because most people never even know they have it. Given this, the mortality rate is a tiny fraction of what was previously reported, perhaps 0.3% instead of 3%. And it was only ostensibly 3% in a primitive region where some people still have dirt floors, and almost nobody is willing to deal with their socialized health care system except in an emergency. Therefore most of the infected were not showing up for treatment, only those in serious trouble. In fact, the vast majority of those who have died are elderly or immunocompromised, ''exactly'' the same group who are killed in the tens of thousands each year by the flu, in the US. So no, this has been a tempest in a teapot, stirred up by the unscientific CDC in order to pad their budget, the way they do periodically with a new fake pandemic threat. SARS, West Nile, bird flu, h1n1, and ebola...no competent epidemiologist would ever seriously have expected those to become a threat in the US, or anywhere else outside of primitive regions. But the CDC has continued to redouble their unearned budget on this fraudulent fearmongering. As I learned when consulting for such ilk in DC, "Fear Equals Funding". Oh, and no, 90,000 cases only make it a "significant disease" in the way that another coronavirus, the common cold, is significant. It's not significantly dangerous. In fact, it really is just a strong kind of common cold. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 21:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::While it doesn't seem to be more lethal than flu (or in general having more severe symptoms), either it's more contagious or the fact it's contagious for weeks before symptoms makes it spread easier. In this sense it's more serious threat - imagine for example if ALL employees of nuclear power plant would be infected leaving noone capable of caring of the reactor. That said, it seems that panic is currently more dangerous than the virus itself. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::::Wait, look carefully at the two separate segments of logic you presented. You need to unify them to be cross-consistent: Since the coronavirus mostly is no worse than the common cold or flu, even if ALL employees of a nuclear power plant catch it they can continue working. Most of them are not immunocompromised. Those few should stay home, and everyone else should keep working, just like they would with a cold. Remember, the majority of people who are infected with the novel coronavirus never even have symptoms. It is in that sense ''less'' harmful than the flu or the other famous coronavirus, the common cold. The only reason the nuclear plant may end up without anyone to man it is the insane panic causing people to stay home en masse. Remember, the actual reason the authorities are saying to stay home isn't that it's a danger to the normal people who are infected, and not to keep you from catching it...but just to slow its spread. That's all. They want it to spread slowly enough that they can deal with it more easily. That is what they're explicitly stating. —[[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]])

:The 2% death rate in the explantion is outdated. [https://news.sina.cn/zt_d/yiqing0121 Here (in Chinese)] is the compiled data for all China. As of March 3rd, the death rate calculated by (death toll)/(confirmed infected patients) is 3.7% for all China and 4.6% for Wuhan city (the epicenter). The number for Wuhan is likely to grow in the following days, too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.190.86|162.158.190.86]] 20:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::The mortality rate in China is only relevant if one lives in an area with a primitive socialized health care system. As with SARS, it won't turn out to have a significant death rate among people infected in the US who are not elderly or immunocompromised. Perhaps, in fact, a zero death rate outside of that high risk group. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 21:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:::@kazvorpal your comment is inappropriate for several reasons, including "primitive" and deprecating socialized medicine. Since there've already been deaths among the small group of known cases in the USA, it's way too early to calculate mortality rates here. [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 16:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
::::There is nothing inappropriate about pointing out the primitive nature of the poorest provinces of China, nor the very factual failures of socialized medicine. As for the US, there have been no cases of someone dying here who was actually infected here. And there's no reason to believe that when they do occur, the mortality rate will turn out to be much worse than the flu. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 04:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
:::Can someone ban this fucking racist Trumpbot? Kazvorpal even wrote some sort of article for blaming the failures of the current system on socialism. And then he calls China primitive and says some of the hospitals have dirt floors. Just ban Kazvorpal already.
:::::Can you be a grownup who signs his posts, instead of a little coward who spews childish nonsense and then runs away to hide? I never said their hospitals had dirt floors, but the cold hard fact is that many of the houses in the poorest provinces do, because socialism is indeed such a failure. And those poor provinces are indeed primitive, no actual grownup disputes that fact, either. « [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 04:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
::Though you're right in that there ''is'' sophistication in the system (potentially), while the US famously has a situation so broken that "almost nobody is willing to deal with their '''non-'''socialized health care system except in an emergency" either. I think if the meaning was "a health system which is primitively socialised(/ist)" I could accept the utterer's original intent, though I don't actually know enough about the the practicalities of the Chinese system to know how it actually transpires in individual off-the-street transactions. I live within the somewhat social UK one, and directly see its problems, but I've been done well by it myself despite it being notably sabotaged by various politicians on the scene by forcing some changes or refusing to implement others. I haven't myself experienced the strange US one, even during my visits there, but I've had such info as a live online chat (early 1990s, via IRC, for reference) with someone who daren't go to a doctor/A&E for a clearly in-progress medical issue - if it wasn't even a real thing (as cynics might suggest may have happened in the text-only pre-Eternal September entirely pseudonymical medium) it must have had a grounding on experience and yet it totally blew my mind that something that would cost a few GBP (in medical supplies) and literally a few minutes of a doctor's time (underpaid, arguably) could instead potentially end up as billed for USDthousands either directly or as private insurance overheads. Still, this is an old (and perpetual) politically-biased discussion that has had few actual new arguments added to any side for years, and will doubtless rumble on as long as it can - I think we should all realise that all the systems are bad, we just fundementally disagree about which particular ones are least bad. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.148|141.101.98.148]] 19:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

If the Godzilla movies have taught me anything, it's that giant insects aren't a problem biologists can solve anyways. That's more of a "nuclear paleontology" sort of job. [[User:GreatWyrmGold|GreatWyrmGold]] ([[User talk:GreatWyrmGold|talk]]) 01:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

It is legitimately difficult to tell if Ponytail's use of the word 'catchy' as a descriptor for 'coronavirus' is an intentional or unintentional pun. Either way, it's very opportune. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.239|108.162.221.239]] 03:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The current chapter of Wilde Life (a totally unrelated webcomic) as a giant spider interacting with two of the main characters, starting [https://www.wildelifecomic.com/comic/710/ here]. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 05:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I think they missed a trick with the naming. CORVID-19 would have reminded everyone of H5N1 'bird flu', and we could just blame the crows. Kill a magpie to avoid infection!
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.253|162.158.158.253]] 10:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
:What? How is CORVID-19 supposed to remind anyone of H5N1 or bird flu? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
::Corvidae is the family including crows, ravens, jays, magpies; so, CORVID~=bird. Not sure how many people would make that connection, but I think that's what the previous poster was getting at.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.91|162.158.187.91]] 13:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:I think "SARS-CoV-2: Electric Boogaloo" has a nice ring to it although a little wordy for everyday use. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.116|198.41.238.116]] 08:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
::I was thinking "SARS 2: The Attack of Pneumonia" 08:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah really dodged a bullet on those rhinoviri. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.44|172.69.22.44]] 11:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

: AKK! NO! It's rhinoviruses, not rhinoviri! Only monoglot English speakers pretending that they have heard of Latin and showing that they don't know any. Viri is NOT the plural of virus, it's the plural of vir, which means man. 13:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Is it relevant to mention that some spiders grow larger in cities? https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105480
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not really wanting to catch COVID-19. I'm holding out for COVID-19b, which is going to be better beta-tested. (But by the time COVID-19c comes out, it's just going to be a bandwagon of planned obsolescence by then - I'd rather stick with what I've got until the next significent release version and keep a close eye on the advanced reviews and what other vendors are innovating.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.46|162.158.34.46]] 16:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

This is only 3 years too early to be a reference to the spiders in Colorado https://xkcd.com/1688/ especially with Megan holding bio-hazardous material. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.33|162.158.62.33]]

Assorted catchier names: a)Corona-chan (works for every disease with a girl name, Ebola, Zika, Lassa, Malaria, Cholera, Yersinia...Ask 4chan), b) My Corona (OK, a bit 1970-ish), c) Coronjob (for conspiracy buffs). (Personally, I'm less afraid of getting infected than getting, showing no symptoms as always and killing half of my environment...) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.9|172.69.54.9]] 09:36, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:Yeah, "My Corona" got largely superceded by the fad for "e-Corona", except for some niches, and then along came "iCorona" and changed everything. Though there was also the short-lived Corona Millenium Edition. (It didn't stay bad. Corona XP became the highpoint. And if you did't like that, you might as well just go back to Corona Bob.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.43|162.158.154.43]] 16:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I think that it's worth noting that this comic came out the day after the American Super Tuesday primaries.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.64|172.69.71.64]] 15:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
:But it didn't. This comic came out the day ''before'' the primaries, and is completely unrelated to them. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.211.28|172.68.211.28]] 02:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Shoulda called it Coronavirus-2019.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.210|162.158.34.210]] 22:51, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking forward to seeing if there is an uptick in children named Corona later this year. I wouldn't bet against it. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

I have to agree with the speculation that in the end this will end up being much ado about nothing just like swine flu and bird flu. 08:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
: A very quick googleskim showed [https://www.google.com/search?q=deaths+by+avian+flu 616 worldwide deaths from the avian flu] ... and [https://www.google.com/search?q=deaths+by+pandemic+swine+flu 575,400 (12,469 USA) from pandemic swine flu.] [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

One American of my acquaintance, living in New Zealand, has quoted (with approval) a recent suggestion he's heard of calling it "Trump's disease". What a great way to commemorate his presidency!

2329: Universal Rating Scale

2020-07-07T08:11:03Z

162.158.159.66: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2329
| date = July 6, 2020
| title = Universal Rating Scale
| image = universal_rating_scale.png
| titletext = There are plenty of finer gradations. I got 'critically endangered/extinct in the wild' on my exam, although the curve bumped it all the way up to 'venti.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an OFFENDED NUMBER NINE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, [[Randall]] has blended many traditional rating scales to create a "universal rating scale". Unfortunately, the mixing of these scales creates a scale that is impossible to use. Alternatively, it can be perceived as a way of comparing the different scales, for instance to answer a question like "Is it worse to get a 2 or an F?"

: '''Scale of zero to ten''' (but with an 11, because people often add that to exaggerate - see {{w|up to eleven}} about the meme)
:: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11. The number 9 is omitted, possibly because 7 ate (8) 9.
: '''Competitive scores''', such as in the Olympics (ordinarily from 0.0 to 10.0, perfect)
:: 10.0
: '''Scale of agreement'''
:: strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree
: '''School grades''' (there are also B, C, D, and others with + or -)
:: F, A, A+
:: S - Schools in Japan may use the {{w|Academic grading in Japan|S grading}}, from the Japanese shū (秀), meaning excellent. Many video games also use S grading, and some (such as Beat Saber) use SS as a rank above (though SS is not shown in the webcomic.)
: '''Restaurant or entertainment ratings'''
:: 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars, 4 stars
: '''{{w|Conservation status}}''' (this is only a subset of the nine groups in the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species)
:: extinct, critical, endangered, least concern
: '''{{w|Starbucks#Products|Starbucks brand beverage sizes}}''' (there is also short and trenta)
:: tall, grande, venti
: '''MPAA age-appropriate {{w|Motion Picture Association film rating system|film ratings}}''' took effect November 1, 1968 with G, M (now PG), R (not shown in comic) and X (now NC-17)
:: G, PG (as of February 11, 1972, replaced GP), PG-13 (introduced July 1, 1984), NC-17 (introduced September 1990, replaced X)
: '''ESRB age-appropriate {{w|Entertainment_Software_Rating_Board#Ratings|ratings}}''' for video games (there is also EC for early childhood, E for everyone, E10+ for Everyone 10+, M for Mature, and AO for Adults Only)
:: T for teen
: '''Happiness emojis''' (alternately, the '''{{w|Wong–Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale}}''')
:: Frowny face (☹, U+2639), neutral face (😐, U+1F610), smiley face (☺, U+263A)
: '''{{w|Coin grading|Coin grades}}'''
:: G, VG, UNC for good, very good, uncirculated
: '''Hurricane/cyclone strengths''', {{w|Saffir–Simpson scale}} (ordinarily categorized from category 1 to category 5)
:: Category 5
: '''Tornado intensities''', {{w|enhanced Fujita scale}} (ordinarily categorized from 0 to 5)
:: EF-5
: '''Credit (and other) ratings'''
:: A, AA, AAA

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

: [Caption above the frame:]
: Universal Rating Scale
:
: [A vertical scale, with 45 gradations, labeled]
: 0
: 1
: Strongly Disagree
: F
: [star] ☆
: Extinct
: Tall
: 2
: G
: Critical
: [frowny face] ☹
: 3
: endangered
: [two stars] ☆☆
: PG
: Disagree
: VG
: 4
: Grande
: 5
: PG-13
: [neutral face] 😐
: 6
: T for Teen
: 7
: [three stars] ☆☆☆
: Agree
: Venti
: 8
: Least Concern
: [smiley face] ☺
: A
: Strongly Agree
: Category 5
: EF-5
: NC-17
: UNC
: AA
: [four stars] ☆☆☆☆
: A+
: S
: AAA
: 10
: 10.0
: 11

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Charts]]

2329: Universal Rating Scale

2020-07-07T08:10:40Z

162.158.159.66: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2329
| date = July 6, 2020
| title = Universal Rating Scale
| image = universal_rating_scale.png
| titletext = There are plenty of finer gradations. I got 'critically endangered/extinct in the wild' on my exam, although the curve bumped it all the way up to 'venti.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an OFFENDED NUMBER NINE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, [[Randall]] has blended many traditional rating scales to create a "universal rating scale". Unfortunately, the mixing of these scales creates a scale that is impossible to use. Alternatively, it can be perceived as a way of comparing the different scales, for instance to answer a question like "Is it worse to get a 2 or an F?"

: '''Scale of zero to ten''' (but with an 11, because people often add that to exaggerate - see {{w|up to eleven}} about the meme)
:: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11. The number 9 is omitted, possibly because 7 are 9.
: '''Competitive scores''', such as in the Olympics (ordinarily from 0.0 to 10.0, perfect)
:: 10.0
: '''Scale of agreement'''
:: strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree
: '''School grades''' (there are also B, C, D, and others with + or -)
:: F, A, A+
:: S - Schools in Japan may use the {{w|Academic grading in Japan|S grading}}, from the Japanese shū (秀), meaning excellent. Many video games also use S grading, and some (such as Beat Saber) use SS as a rank above (though SS is not shown in the webcomic.)
: '''Restaurant or entertainment ratings'''
:: 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars, 4 stars
: '''{{w|Conservation status}}''' (this is only a subset of the nine groups in the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species)
:: extinct, critical, endangered, least concern
: '''{{w|Starbucks#Products|Starbucks brand beverage sizes}}''' (there is also short and trenta)
:: tall, grande, venti
: '''MPAA age-appropriate {{w|Motion Picture Association film rating system|film ratings}}''' took effect November 1, 1968 with G, M (now PG), R (not shown in comic) and X (now NC-17)
:: G, PG (as of February 11, 1972, replaced GP), PG-13 (introduced July 1, 1984), NC-17 (introduced September 1990, replaced X)
: '''ESRB age-appropriate {{w|Entertainment_Software_Rating_Board#Ratings|ratings}}''' for video games (there is also EC for early childhood, E for everyone, E10+ for Everyone 10+, M for Mature, and AO for Adults Only)
:: T for teen
: '''Happiness emojis''' (alternately, the '''{{w|Wong–Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale}}''')
:: Frowny face (☹, U+2639), neutral face (😐, U+1F610), smiley face (☺, U+263A)
: '''{{w|Coin grading|Coin grades}}'''
:: G, VG, UNC for good, very good, uncirculated
: '''Hurricane/cyclone strengths''', {{w|Saffir–Simpson scale}} (ordinarily categorized from category 1 to category 5)
:: Category 5
: '''Tornado intensities''', {{w|enhanced Fujita scale}} (ordinarily categorized from 0 to 5)
:: EF-5
: '''Credit (and other) ratings'''
:: A, AA, AAA

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

: [Caption above the frame:]
: Universal Rating Scale
:
: [A vertical scale, with 45 gradations, labeled]
: 0
: 1
: Strongly Disagree
: F
: [star] ☆
: Extinct
: Tall
: 2
: G
: Critical
: [frowny face] ☹
: 3
: endangered
: [two stars] ☆☆
: PG
: Disagree
: VG
: 4
: Grande
: 5
: PG-13
: [neutral face] 😐
: 6
: T for Teen
: 7
: [three stars] ☆☆☆
: Agree
: Venti
: 8
: Least Concern
: [smiley face] ☺
: A
: Strongly Agree
: Category 5
: EF-5
: NC-17
: UNC
: AA
: [four stars] ☆☆☆☆
: A+
: S
: AAA
: 10
: 10.0
: 11

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Charts]]

2327: Oily House Index

2020-07-06T02:43:02Z

162.158.159.66:

{{comic
| number = 2327
| date = July 1, 2020
| title = Oily House Index
| image = oily_house_index.png
| titletext = We're underwater on our mortgage thanks to the low price of water.
}}

==Explanation==
In economics, an {{w|index (economics)|index}} is a statistical measure of change in a representative group of individual data points. Common indices include NASDAQ (a measure of a range of stock prices) and a consumer price index (a measure of retail prices)

This chart demonstrates an invented index, the "Oily House Index", which measures a ratio of oil price to average house prices, over time.

The numerator is the average price of a new home (presumably in the US), in USD per square foot ($/sqft). It does not specify what kind of home, or where. One available metric is the [https://www.statista.com/statistics/682549/average-price-per-square-foot-in-new-single-family-houses-usa/ average price per square foot of floor space in new single-family houses in the United States] which was $118.91 in 2019. The caption refers to converting the ''mortgage'' of the new house (that is, how much the purchaser borrowed, which could be zero), while the definition simply refers to the ''new home price'' (the total value). It is not clear which of these two is used in the chart.

The denominator is the price of oil in USD per {{w|barrel (unit)|barrel}} ($/BBL). This is also not well defined, although the chart's caption suggests that it is based on crude oil. There are many different indices for different blends of oil in different locations, such as [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/wti.asp West Texas Intermediate], which is a crude oil commonly used as a global oil benchmark. (Others include Brent and Dubai Crude). The WTI price fluctuated around $55-60 throughout 2019. A barrel is a standard unit of oil volume, defined as 42 U.S. gallons (roughly 5.615 cubic feet or 0.16 cubic metres).

The comic then applies {{w|dimensional analysis}} to this index: dividing $/sqft by $/bbl yields a result whose dimension is a linear measurement, which can be called length. 1 barrel is 42 gallons, a gallon is 231 cubic inches, and a cubic foot is 12<sup>3</sup>=728 cubic inches, so a barrel is approximately 5.6146 cubic feet and a cubic foot is approximately 0.1781 barrel. The average price per square foot of a new single-family dwelling in the USA in 2019 was about $119/square foot, while the price of oil in mid 2019 was about $60/BBL or $10.7/cubic foot. Dividing $119/square foot by $10.7/cubic foot gives approximately 11.1 foot. This is slightly lower than the value shown on the chart of around 15.

The chart's caption then interprets that length as the depth that a new home could be filled with the crude oil that could be purchased with its price. For scale Cueball and Megan has been drawn, and the ceiling height of a typical house has been indicated, showing that only in time with deep crisis will the oil not fill the house. It's also not exactly clear where the extra oil should go after a multi-storey house has been filled; on the top floor, you could just take off the roof and let the oil pile up (perhaps after building some retaining walls), but on the lower floors, there's already oil above the ceiling.

The index is high when house prices are high and oil prices are low (such as during the 1999 oil glut), and low when house prices are low and oil prices are high (such as during the 1979 energy crisis). See details about the [[#Chart|chart]] below.

The title text, "We're underwater on our mortgage thanks to the low price of water", is a pun. A mortgage on a property is considered to be [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/underwater-mortgage.asp "underwater"] when the value of the mortgage exceeds the value of the property. This is bad for both the owner (who owes more money than the property is worth) and the bank (who now have a loan which is not fully secured against a default: if the property owner defaults, the bank will lose money in selling the property)- though obviously far worse for the owner.

The title text is hinting at an alternative index based on the ratio of house price to the price of water instead of oil. At the 2019 rate of $118.91/ft² and a rough [https://www.pvwc.com/story_of_water/html/costs.htm average water price of $0.0015/gallon], a house would have to be filled with water to a depth of 1060 ft for the house cost to match the water cost. If the price of water fell or the house cost per square foot rose, then the index would rise, causing the house to be even deeper in water (following the metaphor of the index as filling the house with physical water). This situation could arise even if the property value remained high, although Randall may be humorously suggesting that the increase in the index would literally flood the property with water, which would then damage it, obviously decreasing its value. (If the index continues to be computed on average house prices, then this single event would not materially impact the index as a whole.)

In {{what if|11|What If #11 "Droppings"}}, Randall commented that "unit cancellation is weird" after making a similar calculation about fuel efficiency -- the European convention of presenting fuel mileage as "liters per 100 kilometers" represents an area (volume/distance), which can be physically interpreted as the cross-sectional area of a tube of gasoline with the total volume of fuel burned stretched out over the length of the journey.

===Chart===
;{{w|1979 oil crisis|1979 energy crisis}}
:In the wake of the {{w|Iranian Revolution}}, global oil supply reduced by only 4%, but caused widespread panic and a huge increase in oil price.
;{{w|Gulf War}}
:The {{w|Gulf War}} (August 1990 - Feb 1991) was the invasion of Iraq by the US, which decreased oil supplies and caused a spike in prices.
;1999 oil glut
:In early 1999, Iraq increased its oil production, while the Asian Financial Crisis reduced demand. Prices briefly fell to as low as $16.[https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/A-Recent-History-Of-Oil-Prices-History-About-To-Repeat-Itself.html]
;Ceiling height
:Reinforcing the connection with the metaphorical house filled with oil, "ceiling height" here is shown at somewhere just below 10 feet. The standard ceiling height in US homes is 9 feet for ground floor, and 8 feet on higher floors. [https://rethority.com/standard-ceiling-height/]
:Only twice has the height been below ceiling height, during the 1979 energy crisis, and in the beginning of the financial crisis of 2007-2008.
;Oil and housing crashes partly cancel out
:As a result of the {{w|financial crisis of 2007-2008}}, oil prices crashed from $147/BBL in July 2008 to $30 in December 2008. Meanwhile, {{w|United States housing bubble|falling house prices}}, which had partially triggered the financial crisis, continued to slump across the US, with the Case-Shiller home price index reporting its largest ever price drop in December 2008. Since both oil price and house prices were falling, the effect of dividing one by the other means that the index didn't change significantly, remaining around 8-15 feet.
;{{w|2010s oil glut}}
:In 2014-16 there was a serious surplus of {{w|crude oil}}, partially caused by increasing shale oil from the US and Canada, a slowdown in demand from China, and increasing fuel efficiency and use of renewable energy. Prices dropped from $125/BBL from 2012 to below $30 in January 2016. By October 2018, prices had recovered to $85/BBL. ]
;OHI briefly became infinite as oil prices reached zero in 2020
:In April 2020, the {{w|coronavirus pandemic}} dramatically reduced vehicle and air transport, crashing oil demand. [https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/25/scary-visceral-unprecedented-traders-describe-oils-wild-week-and-fall-to-negative-prices.html Oil futures actually went to zero], and even below, several times: oil producers paying consumers to take their oil, to avoid the costs of storing it. Dividing anything by zero officially has no defined result, but in many thought experiments yields infinity, hence the "infinite oily house index". The graph should actually wrap around to the negative axis at this point.

==Transcript==
:[A line graph is shown. Above it is a rectangular frame with formulas inside. Most of the top part of the frame is removed and instead a heading is written over the missing section of the frame. The formula is written in three parts, with the first two parts having a division line with text written above and below.]
:Dimensional economic analysis
:New home price ($/sqft) / Oil price ($/BBL) = $/area / $/volume = Length

:[The graph has a labeled Y-axis with four ticks, which have values, and also the origin has a value. The X.axis is a time-line without label. There are five labeled ticks.]
:X-axis: 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
:Y-axis label: OHI (feet)
:Y-axis: 40 30 20 10 0

:[Above the line graph there is a caption:]
:'''Oily House Index:''' How deep you could fill the average new home if you converted its mortgage to crude oil

:[The graph begins around 15 before 1980, then dips below 10, rises slowly until about 1988 when it rises sharply. It stays high but has several peaks, and one deep valley until 1999 when there is a very high peak, which then drops fast. A few more peaks, and then a decline to the lowest point in 2008, which is followed by a small peak, and then another drop. From there it stays low until 2015 when it rises quite fast and has one very high peak. It then drops of, until 2020 when there is a really sharp peak. Above the top of the peak is a dotted line extending to the top of the graph (i.e. the top of the Y-axis, not the top of the panel). Then it drops down but not very low as it reaches the present.]

:[There are six labels with arrows pointing from them to notable peaks and valleys along the graph. They are written both above and below the line. From left to right they are:]
:1979 energy crisis
:Gulf War
:1999 oil glut
:Oil and housing crashes partly cancel out
:2010s oil glut
:OHI briefly became infinite as oil prices reached zero in 2020

:[From 2005-2010 there is a dotted horizontal line that hits the valley at 2008. This is labeled with an arrow pointing to it:]
:Ceiling height

:[Below the line is a drawing of Cueball and Megan standing on the X-axis near 1990. Next to them is a label with an arrow pointing to them:]
:People (for scale)

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Timelines]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

Talk:2326: Five Word Jargon

2020-07-01T21:59:18Z

162.158.159.66: Added an amusing comment.

Approximate nonnegative matrix factorization algorithms

That's all. -[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.119|162.158.62.119]] 22:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

super cali fragilistic expiali docious
[[User:Bo Lindbergh|Bo Lindbergh]] ([[User talk:Bo Lindbergh|talk]]) 22:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Over at [https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/ Language Log] they have fun documenting bewildering "noun piles". In the post '''[https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3341 noun pile blog post madness]''' for example
: '''data bound control table row action links'''
:: is a header in this page from Microsoft: '''[https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.web.dynamicdata.dynamichyperlink?view=netframework-4.8 DynamicHyperLink Class]'''
[[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 23:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

All cyanobacteria are unicellular. That word is just an imposition. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
: Cyanobacteria come in various types, such as unicellular, filamentous or colonial. Or even part of a composite organism such as lichen. Plastids, which are intracellular endosymbiotic organelles are technically acellular cyanobacteria. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.165.8|162.158.165.8]] 04:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
::Plastids are still unicellular. Living as endosymbionts doesn't make them multicellular, it makes them endosymbionts. Colonial unicellular organisms are still unicellular. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.188|108.162.219.188]]

Cueball could be Randall copying down the phrase into his collection. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.131|173.245.54.131]] 03:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
:Yea that is clear from it being one of my hobby. Have changed the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I was expecting these would in fact all mean something incredibly simple. I'm a little disappointed :( [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.108|198.41.238.108]] 04:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

My undergraduate research was on fluxional behavior in zwitterionic isoindoline complexes, so this struck close to home.[[User:Eärendil|Eärendil]] ([[User talk:Eärendil|talk]]) 04:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

The phrase from the caption '''really satisfying-sounding five-word technical phrases''' also meets (almost) every criteria it states (except maybe 'technical') - having read many of Randall's comics, I can't imagine this to be a coincidence... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.54|172.68.50.54]] 07:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Before reading this explanation, I was convinced these were nonsensical phrases that Randall had made up![[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.168|162.158.155.168]] 08:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

anomalous electroweak sphaleron transition baryogenesis - roughly translates out of Jargon as Weird Forces Slippery change creation [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.228|162.158.155.228]] 11:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I really want to dive into the word relationships within these 'semantically multityped divaricatedly polyconstructed descriptors' and see how much or little they obey the 'rules' for {{w|Branching_(linguistics)|word order}} of component {{w|Adjective#Order|adjectives}}, etc. Maybe when I get a piece of paper and pencil and a bit of time to tease them apart. ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.240|162.158.155.240]] 13:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Horrifically enough, Pachelbel's Canon uses five chords: I-V-vi-iii-IV-I-IV-V . (It's deeply hated by us musicians who have to play it at weddings and whatnot). Beethoven's 6th: AllegroMaNonTroppo; AndanteMoltoMosso; Allegro; Allegro; Allegretto. Mahler's Fifth: in short terminology, Pan&Bacchus; Flowers; Animals;Man,Angels; Love . [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 13:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe Cueball is looking up the phrase when he types A-N-O-M... I think he's just typing the phrase into the file where he collects the 5-word phrases, as it's listed as the last of his favorites in the bottom section of the panel. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 13:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
:Yea that is clear from it being one of his hobbies to collect them. Have changed the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I had a foundling dog diagnosed with "Juvenile Canine Psychogenic Polydipsia - Polyurea. He also had five different kinds of parasites. [[User:Pwydde|Pwydde]] ([[User talk:Pwydde|talk]]) 21:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I've noticed that Epson loves five word names for its inkjet papers, such as "Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte" [[User:Tanana|Tanana]] ([[User talk:Tanana|talk]]) 23:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

“Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery.” Might be one best not to know about.

"Stationary ergodic Gaussian random processes" were the central part of a university project I did just a month ago ! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.159|141.101.69.159]] 19:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

My new favourite is Dynamic Organic Anthropomorphically Engineered Entropy.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.66|162.158.159.66]] 21:59, 1 July 2020 (UTC)