explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:246: Labyrinth Puzzle

2016-04-30T05:32:15Z

162.158.255.69:

Just ask which color is the sky.. {{unsigned|‎175.110.37.200}}
:Oh, although the strip doesn't explicitly say so; in those riddles you can normally only ask one question. --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 23:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
::There's another (more traditional) three-guard variation where one guard always tells the truth, one guard always tells a lie and the third alternates between pure truth and pure lie (and you don't know which flip they're currently flopped upon). But you ''still'' only get to ask one question of one guard. Have fun with that one. My personal solution certainly has a degree of convolution, but I've heard other workable answers. [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 02:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
:::@‎175.110.37.200, you would know which one lies but you would not know which door leads out. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 23:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
::::Eh, well, even if you had a perfect question to ask in this case, a lot of good would that do you: it'd only reveal the truth behind the setup, that ''none'' of the doors lead out. :p -- [[Special:Contributions/173.245.51.210|173.245.51.210]] 08:20, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::Well yes it says that in the title-text. But good pick-up. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58|108.162.219.58]] 02:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

One question, of one guard. I really like the original form of this riddle. It's a bit of a trick, though. It is crucial that the guards "know" each other's rules, but this is not even implied. And if it was stated in the question, that would probably be a good enough clue to get you to the answer. Of course, once you know the answer it seems trivial, but I wonder what percentage of people actually worked it out for themselves? Another good one is Monty Hall, even though that is pure, straightforward probability. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 18:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

:With two guards, they wouldn't need to know each others role. If they know their own role - which they do - each can infer the role of the other. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.137|162.158.34.137]] 13:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

:I think somebody needs a hug! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 18:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The whole problem with this entire riddle is that if they are both liars you are screwed! Nothing in the riddle establishes a fact that they aren't liars. Now if there was a known truth teller in the riddle that explains the nature of the guards or the narrator does it, then the above solution works. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.28}}

As you aren't given a limit to the number of questions, you can just ask each guard if they're the stabby guard. If two say yes, the third one is the truthful guard and you can ask him which way the exit is. If two say no, the third one is the lying guard and you can ask him where the exit isn't. No tricky questions so the stabby guard shouldn't stab you.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.195|162.158.255.195]] 18:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I have a solution, but you need to ask multiple questions: 
''If the Stab Guard tells the truth:'' 
Ask each guard, firstly, "Are you the Stab Guard?" 
Truth Guard will answer "No." 
Stab Guard will answer "Yes." 
Liar Guard knows the answer is no, but, because he lies, will answer "Yes." 
The one who said no is the Truth Guard, so you can ask him which door leads to freedom. 
''If the Stab Guard lies:'' 
Point to the guard on the left, and ask each guard, "Does that guard lie?" 
If that guard is Truth Guard, then Truth Guard will answer "No," while Stab Guard and Liar Guard answer "Yes." 
If that guard is a liar, then Truth Guard will answer "Yes," while Stab Guard and Liar Guard answer "No." 
Whichever guard gives a unique answer is Truth Guard, so you can ask him which door leads to freedom. [[User:NickOfFørvania|NickOfFørvania]] ([[User talk:NickOfFørvania|talk]]) 23:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I remember a book where the main character kicked one guard in the face and asked if it hurt. {{unsigned ip|162.158.252.137}}

There's another unspoken rule: That the lie is either a yes or a no. If you asked the liar something, he could lie and say, "I don't know," which would leave you with nothing. Also, as Stabby MacStabberson does not appear to have any restrictions on what he tells you (that is, he has the choice between truth or falsehood,) there's no sure way out even if he wasn't tasked with stabbing you.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 05:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1671: Arcane Bullshit

2016-04-23T21:46:41Z

162.158.255.69:

I was obsessively refreshing XKCD and the new comic popped up. Then I did the same on ExplainXKCD to make an explanation. Here's my first rough-draft attempt. [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 13:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Your explanation confuses OOP with [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structured_programming structured programming].
[[User:Svorkoetter|Svorkoetter]] ([[User talk:Svorkoetter|talk]]) 15:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Developing a kernel is not the same as compiling a kernel. You would, for example, rebuild a Linux kernel after you've added a module, or changed some parameters. Also, the purpose of object-oriented programming is not to solve the problem of spaghetti code. (That problem was solved by structured programming.) It's to enforce principles of abstraction, information hiding and modularity.
[[User:Krishnanp|Krishnanp]] ([[User talk:Krishnanp|talk]]) 15:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I modified the explanation on OOP to include Structured & Procedural language code and briefly described the 80's era of low level languages.
[[User:Digital_Night|Digital_Night]] ([[User talk:Digital_Night|talk]]) 15:41, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

OK, I rewrote the kernel compiling explanation to explain why someone would recompile a 80's era kernel. Modular kernels sure are nice!
[[User:Digital night|Digital night]] ([[User talk:Digital night|talk]]) 15:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Could this be a reference to the large amount of open-source projects using C (an arcane bull* language from the 70s/80s that need 10000 lines ./configure scripts to work) ? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.79|108.162.219.79]] 16:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

T.M.I. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.231|162.158.222.231]] 18:54, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I think this comic refers to keeping or fixing 30 over year old programs and their "bs" factor. At which the most extreme will be something like gentoo where you have to compile everything first before doing anything productive. (Sorry gentoo users didnt meant to start a flame war) {{unsigned ip|103.31.5.240}}

:While installing applications on gentoo takes longer because it's being compiled, it's the time of the COMPUTER. You can do something else while it's compiling. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 14:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid the explanation misses the point completely ... Rather than excursion to programming techniques and languages, the sociology behind that should be focused on. Programmers were considered mages (hence "arcane", or do I get the meaning of it wrong, not being native speaker?), and don't forget also that 80's were the time when the GNU project started. The title text then may refer to changing standards in (released) software quality - I remember my ZX Spectrum crashing because of overheating, but not because of software problems. And its system was written in assembler that is kinda badmouthed by the current version of the explanation, in favour of sophisticated languages. Then, with DOS, a problem emerged from time to time, but not a big deal. Then, with Windows 95, the system crashed daily ... Nowadays, programmers just throw their bullshit code on users, and break "everyone else's computer", also thanks to Internet etc. It has very little to do with programming language choice and jumps/gotos. - [[Special:Contributions/141.101.95.123|141.101.95.123]] 06:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

:Agree, the "breaking everyone else's computer" is definitely about low code quality. It's true than programming with "goto" is harder, but maybe that was the reason only people who known how to program was doing it. Nowadays, everyone thinks he can program, but based on number of bugs it's obviously not true. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 14:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The current explanation completely misses the point and honestly should be taken down -- no offense to the original writer. Arcane BS here means "wizard-like stuff" in the sense of what programmers do which is different from what users would do. Where regular users just buy a computer and never open it, the arcane programmer might just actually open the computer and start swapping parts in and out, with or without a precise grasp on what s/he's doing. Same goes on the software part where a user might just run Windows in the 80s since it comes off-the-shelf and one never modifies it, whereas the arcane programmer might go through the effort of installing a UNIX-like system such as Minix and recompile the kernel to adjust parameters, add new modules, all of which involve complicated command lines that look like insane arcane magic to normal users. This is what is called "hacking" in the sense of the original meaning of the work "[http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html hacker]" as you can find in [http://www.catb.org/jargon/ The Jargon File] and that work "hacking" really meant tinkering -- the word "cracker" was coined after misuse of the former by the media.

It was tinkering for the sole purpose of tinkering, which is why the comics says this accomplishes nothing. It is however an excellent way to learn how computers really work, something, again, that normal end-users don't care for, thus the "arcane" aspect.

Also note that in the 80's there was no Linux (the project started in 1991) and no GNU (the project started in the mid 80s with the manifesto but GNU had no kernel at first till it got combined with Linux to form the now-ubiquitous GNU/Linux.)

The tag line is easily explained: nowaday hacking (tinkering) on Linux is a common thing; the arcane hacking happens at the secops level. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 17:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The bullshit is a reference to the whole stack of all software. Back in the 1980's, it was still possible for completely new software architectures to be started. GNU, NT, BSD, X-Windows, NeXTSTEP, C++, all started in the 1980's, all still dominant in some way. And it is all bullshit. Slow, insecure, badly architected, and we can't fix it without breaking everything. Heck, Windows 10 is still releasing security updates for kernel vulnerabilities in its font renderer, and Linux is bloating from its multitude of new features and its No Breaking Applications rule. X-Windows has a whole lot of vestigial functionality that nobody uses anymore, and lacks functionality that its own maintainers want to use, but its successor Wayland is taking a long time to come into use.

BeOS showed what you could do for performance if you ignored backwards compatibility with backwards architectures, but it was too little, too late, and not designed for a networked world. Also, BeOS and its poorly funded open-source imitator Haiku are written in C++, and not C++14, at that.

Which brings me to the programming languages. C++ is deliberately obtuse so it can be compatible with programs written for previous versions of C++, even those written as if C++ were C with classes. C is known for having no type safety, no memory safety, no thread safety; so C++ also lacks those unless somebody imposes strict discipline on the programmer. Java, JavaScript, C#, PHP, Python, Perl, were all written as alternatives, rejecting some aspect of C++, but they all use the same ideas of modularity and execution as C++, and they are all implemented in some combination of C, C++, and assembly(!). To be fair, though, until a major organization made it a priority (Mozilla Rust or Google Go), there just has been no high-performance alternative to C++.

Since we all have limited time and money to deal with bullshit, we just keep using it. Decade [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 21:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:132: Music Knowledge

2015-09-16T23:37:50Z

162.158.255.69: Created page with "It may be worth noting that much of Freezepop's popularity comes from one of the band members being the music director for Guitar Hero and related games and slipping in their ..."

It may be worth noting that much of Freezepop's popularity comes from one of the band members being the music director for Guitar Hero and related games and slipping in their own songs. This got them an audience way beyond most synthpop bands (and I'm sure endorsements by people like Randall didn't hurt).

Of course the rest of their popularity comes from the fact that they wrote great music, made cute videos, and put on a fun live show. And that synthpop is just better than whatever you listen to. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 23:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:135: Substitute

2015-09-16T23:29:30Z

162.158.255.69:

[[User:Rikthoff|Rikthoff]] ([[User talk:Rikthoff|talk]]) The issue date is off, as i can't find a create date for the image. Can anyone fix?

:Yes, I've fixed the date on the page. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 15:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

1. It takes the raptor 25m/s / 4m/s^2 = 6.25s to reach it's top speed, during which I can run 6.25s * 6m/s = 37.5m. Add on my 40m head start, and I can reach a spot 77.5m away from the raptor before he gets me. In the same time, the raptor can run 4m/s^2 * (6.25s)^2 / 2 = 78.125m. I'm eaten before he's fully up to speed.
Therefore, I have to solve for when the raptors location, r(t) = 4m/s^2 * t^2 /2 - 40, and my location, m(t) = 6m/s*t, are equal. Dropping units, we get 2t^2 -40 = 6t, or 2t^2 - 6t - 40 = 0. Dividing by 2 I get t^2 - 3t - 20=0. Using the quadratic equation, I get (3 +/- sqrt(89))/2, roughly equal to 6.217s and -3.217s. Plugging that back into m(t), I get 37.302m for my terminal run. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] ([[User talk:Blaisepascal|talk]]) 22:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there is enough information to solve the second problem, because you don't know how fast the non-injured raptors go. Unless you take that information from the first problem. But then, how fast does the wounded raptor accelerate? You would have to find the angle where the wounded and the closest non-wounded raptor would meet you at the same time. [[Special:Contributions/213.127.132.140|213.127.132.140]] 17:17, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

With all three raptors and you running at top speeds, I don't think you get caught by the injured raptor and uninjured raptor at the same time. I believe that you must run directly towards the wounded raptor and the two non-injuried raptors will reach you simultaneously before you and the injured raptor meet, and you cannot do better. After all, you can try to run directly away from an uninjured raptor, but you will lose ground to it at a rate of 25-6=19 m/s (but, it is worst for the other uninjured raptor). By running directly at the injured raptor, you lose ground from it at the rate of 10+6=16 m/s. However, if you can accelerate at a rate far above the raptors, I think you could change directions so fast that one raptor could not catch you. However, I am not sure you can keep away from all three indefinitely. --DrMath 04:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

For 1 and 2 the solution depends on whether the raptors can accelerate at 2m/s, or they actually increase their speed at this rate. If they just accelerate, It should be possible to do tight circles, and even wind yourself slowly towards another location. I believe this is possible even treating yourself and the raptors as point masses. [[Special:Contributions/2.102.215.18|2.102.215.18]] 13:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

This could also be a parody of Snape substituting for Lupin (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) in the Defense against Dark Arts class. Snape assigns homework on werewolves, in the hopes of one of the students connecting the dots. Here, Randall might be trying to get the students to suspect that Mrs.Lenhart might be a raptor (out of sympathy, or just being a classhole?). Also [[155]]. [[Special:Contributions/208.124.118.63|208.124.118.63]] 18:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)BK201

There is a problem with the test, as Mr. Munroe wrote it: Question #1 says that a raptor has a top speed of 25 m/s, but question #3 says "Remember, raptors run at 10 m/s...". Furthermore, question #2 says an injured raptor runs at 10 m/s.
:The way I resolved that was that raptors wouldn't be able to run straight long enough to reach their top speed inside of a building. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.161|108.162.237.161]] 23:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

BTW, the answer to question #2 is: run straight toward the injured raptor. The uninjured raptors will run toward you and the injured raptor. Just as you get close to the injured one, slide under his legs. Because he is injured, the uninjured raptors will feast on him instead of you. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.227|173.245.55.227]] 20:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

:This presumes the raptors are cannibalistic. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.221|162.158.2.221]] 05:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

::I solved it by being a t-rex and just eating the raptors. It's amazing how many math problems become easier when you're a t-rex. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 23:29, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:137: Dreams

2015-09-16T23:19:36Z

162.158.255.69:

This seems a very short explanation that doesn't reflect the depth or passion of Cueball's speech :P. Or maybe I'm just overly affected by it. --[[User:Mynotoar|Mynotoar]] ([[User talk:Mynotoar|talk]]) 17:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

The mistake is that <nowiki>{{incomplete|the possibilities are countable at any fixed time}}</nowiki>. Because space-information (as opposed to space-time-information) is countable. But Who would have guess that. (there are other problems, but honestly if people expect me to fix all the worlds problems... I have some bad news)This is the algorithm now. 17:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC) {{unsigned|Anomulus}}

:What makes you think "space-information" is countable but "space-time-information" is not? Under mainstream quantum physics (and GR), space is continuous, as are many properties besides location. That means that, even if space is finite, there's uncountable information at any given slice of time. There are theories that try to quantize spacetime, some of which also lead to quantizing all other continuous values, but that leaves space-time just as countable (and, often, finite) as space. There may be some obscure theory you're aware of that I'm not that somehow has continuous spacetime despite discrete space and discrete everything else, and it's even possible that obscure theory will turn out to be true, but unless you think that's actually an established, knowable fact, there is no mistake in the comic or the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 23:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I think that's white hat with the bumps on his head, even though he is hatless [[User:halfhat]], 21:46 12 January 2014 (UTC)

~ ~ ~ ~ Could the road trip be a reference to the plot of T2 I.e. travelling to destroy Skynet? {{unsigned ip|108.162.249.223}}

YOLO [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.65|108.162.221.65]] 22:51, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

138: Pointers

2015-09-16T23:09:09Z

162.158.255.69: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 138
| date = August 7, 2006
| title = Pointers
| image = pointers.png
| titletext = Every computer, at the unreachable memory address 0x-1, stores a secret. I found it, and it is that all humans ar—SEGMENTATION FAULT.
}}

== Explanation ==
This comic is about a play on the dual meaning of the word "pointer". [[Cueball]] is playing a video game in the comic, but he seems to be stuck. So he asks [[Black Hat]] for a few tips ("pointers") to get unstuck again. Black Hat wants to be annoying, so he spits out a couple of (seemingly random) 32-bit hexadecimal addresses, which are "{{w|Pointer (computer programming)|pointers}}" in a programming language. These pointers are used to access a certain location in the computer's memory in order to fulfill a task. Cueball is then annoyed at [[Black Hat]] for not answering his question.

A {{w|segmentation fault}}, as referred to in the title text, is a result by accessing invalid memory addresses. If you define a pointer to an invalid address, then try to access the memory location associated with it, you could end up with this exception. The hexadecimal address 0x-1 is definitely invalid, because it's out of range. If you treat pointers as signed numbers, it points below the lowest address, 0; if you treat them as unsigned (meaning the numbers wrap around, so -1 is the same as the highest address, 0xFFFFFFFF), if it's pointing at any object larger than a byte, most of that object is past the highest address. So, this is a "hidden location", but as soon as you try to read more than one byte at that location, you will get a segfault.

The ending letters of the pointers are spelling, reading top to bottom, the word ACE. As Cueball is playing a game Black Hat could be additionally saying he's an ace of that game.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is playing a video game, with Black Hat standing behind him.]
:Cueball: Man, I suck at this game. Can you give me a few pointers?
:Black Hat: 0x3A28213A 0x6339392C, 0x7363682E.
:Cueball: I hate you.

{{Comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:140: Delicious

2015-09-16T22:57:21Z

162.158.255.69:

[[User:Rikthoff|Rikthoff]] ([[User talk:Rikthoff|talk]]) The issue date is definitely off. Can anyone fix?
:Fixed --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 13:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, my wife has a similar problem with cereal. She won't drink the milk after finishing the cereal, so she goes to get more milk. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 13:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

If you melt the cheese enough, it becomes a vi'''sc'''ous cycle. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 04:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

The explanation states that a vicious cycle is a negative feedback loop while a virtuous cycle is a positive one. Actually, both are positive feedback loops, i.e. self-reinforcing ones. Vicious means that the results are negative, virtuous that the results are positive.

From the linked wikipedia page: The terms virtuous circle and vicious circle refer to complex chains of events which reinforce themselves through a feedback loop. A virtuous circle has favorable results, while a vicious circle has detrimental results. [...] Both circles are complexes of events with no tendency towards equilibrium (at least in the short run). Both systems of events have feedback loops in which each iteration of the cycle reinforces the previous one (positive feedback). [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.121|173.245.53.121]] 23:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

The best way to break this is to remember that you can still eat the chips after using up the dip. {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.211}}

:Or you can drink the melted cheese after running out of chips. That's how you know you're an adult: nobody can stop you from drinking melted cheese. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 22:57, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:180: Canada

2015-09-16T14:08:06Z

162.158.255.69:

Actually I suspect this comic may be referring to the propensity for video games in which you can create teams of characters which can be generally be respawned or come back to consciousness/life after levels/battles to have areas or levels where if someone is killed they die "for real"- that is they don't come back and you lose them for good. [[Special:Contributions/184.21.189.153|184.21.189.153]] 10:58, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Couldn't this be a Matrix reference? 06:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC) {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.52}}

From the explanation: "Canada is arguably part of reality already." I would love to have that argument with someone. {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.202}}
:Canadians don't have arguments. They would either apologize for confusing you by existing, or smack you in the head with a hockey stick. Americans tend to forget the second possibility. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 14:08, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I feel like adding some "dubious-discuss" after the first sentence of the explanation[[User:Meneldal|Meneldal]] ([[User talk:Meneldal|talk]]) 06:54, 11 March 2015 (UTC)meneldal

Sorry for Ninja-editing/commenting, but I take it as a direct reference to the works of Philip K. Dick, especially Ubik (iirc, that is it could also be one of his other VR-related stories), where a scene that could be summarized with 'if you die in canada, you die in real life' actually takes place (in canada). Then again, this could be lucky coincidence, and xkcd might not be familiar with PKD at all. {{unsigned ip|141.101.92.37}}

Addendum to the above (↑) it most certainly is a PKD reference, also taking his biography into account. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.58|141.101.92.58]] 05:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

We might also want to mention that making fun of Canada is basically a national pasttime in the U.S. [[User:Bbruzzo|Bbruzzo]] ([[User talk:Bbruzzo|talk]]) 14:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:264: Choices: Part 1

2015-09-16T09:17:01Z

162.158.255.69:

;Megan dreams
At the parts 1 to 4 Megan is dreaming. This becomes more clear in part 4 where the clone says: "You'll forget this trip...". So the dream should be part of the explanation.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 11:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
:Citing from part 4:
:Megan: Am I going to wake up thinking this was a dream?
:Clone: This is... think of this as after the game, outside the theatre.
:If she is dreaming, she certainly does not realize it!
:"You will forget this trip..:" does not indicate that it's a dream, does it? –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 14:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::So, is Megan at our "real world" or just having a mystic dream?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
:::That is a false dilemma. She enters another world, which seems to be something like the afterlife. Just because supernatural or absurd things happen, we can't draw the conclusion that some main character is dreaming! Cf. [[1013: Wake Up Sheeple]].

Who else would probably do this if it happened to them? I have to admit I probably would, even though technically a hole in reality would be the most likely thing to kill me horribly ever. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.155|108.162.250.155]] 02:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

:As I learned in science class, horizontal cracks in the universe lead to Amy Pond's bedroom. In other words, yes, I'm going through the crack. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 09:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Surely you're more likely to be killed horribly by any of a large number of other things. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.64}}

Talk:326: Effect an Effect

2015-09-16T07:28:51Z

162.158.255.69:

Can someone explain the title text, thanks! –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 14:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah, I'd like to see that get added as well. I kind of assumed it was like taking a kill-count; one painting for each victim. I'm not sure what it specifically refers to, or what the origin of the term is. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 05:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
:seen the silhouette images of enemy planes painted next to the pilots canopy on mid 20th century fighter planes? its a reference to that. i've only seen it in films but presumably where there's smoke there's fire. *edit for improved explanation: the images are painted by the pilot to show how many 'bogies' he's shot down,much like how cueball will paint the grammarian on his desktop as another victim. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 10:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
::"mid 20th century fighter planes"?? As opposed to what? Late 18th century fighter planes?[[Special:Contributions/86.44.215.73|86.44.215.73]] 02:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
:::As opposed to late 20th and 21st century fighter planes perhaps? [[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 08:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::And assuming "mid 20th century" refers to World War II of 1939-45 (less years for Americans, arguably more so for some other countries), there were already gun-attached 'fighter aircraft' in WWI and onward (though often technically called "scouts" or "pursuit" aircraft, in English and American terminology, respectively... other countries/languages having their own varients). Maybe not from the ''very'' start of the 1914-18 conflict, as opposing aircrews were apparently quite friendly to each other for a while until some air-reconnaissance pilot took a pistol up with him (or perhaps it was originally a solution against airships, leastwise those that they could get high enough to attack). And then some people had the idea to hard-attach various projectile weapons to the planes. And, oh boy, they had fun for a while trying to mount them to fire through their own front propellers, didn't they? ;)
::::Anyway, the concept definitely had become engrained before the 'mid' 20thC, by whatever name. Did the Red Baron paint kills on his triplane? Did Biggles (fictionally) do so? Someone ought to actually research this. ;) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 16:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:::::At least in his autobiography "Der rote Kampfflieger" (The red Fighter pilot) Manfred von Richthofen (the actual name of the Red Baron) did not tell about that. And he did not mention any other pilot doing so, either. But since he considered being a fighter pilot as a sport such as hunting and he was very proud of his "score" it is most likely he would have telled if there were such a rite, I guess. As such I would consider "mid 20th century" as correct, since most if not all actual evidences of that tradition I am aware of are from WWII or later. Unfortunately I did not found any information about the origin of that tradition. The only wikipedia entry is the German article about "Abschussmarkierung" which has no links to translations of other languages and does not contain any information about the origin and searching for "kill marks" or "kill scores" leads to nothing but hobbyist forums or World of Tanks/World of Warplanes (both being more or less WWII games) and similar. Maybe I do some more research on this, later. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 15:48, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Effects effecting affects affect effects effectively. Also, Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. --naginalf [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 20:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
: Sure, but really, if an effect can effect affects effectively, how many affects can an effect effectively effect? [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 14:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
:: As many affects as an effect can effect if an effect can effect affects effectively. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.162|108.162.238.162]] 04:09, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
::: What that is that that is is that that is what that is, I guess. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.174|173.245.56.174]] 19:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

I was in a meeting once where a guy said, "I am effected by my environment." I replied, "Oh? We think, therefore you are?" Nobody laughed. Sigh. {{unsigned|CoderLass}}

Can someone simplify the meaning / alternative words for the two variants and verb/noun uses in a spreadsheet? --[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lazer%20erazer Björn Eberhardt] 14:50, 3 June 2015 (CEST)

:You shouldn't need a spreadsheet, since it's only a 2x2 matrix, meaning just 4 meanings. Briefly:
:* Effect (noun): result
:* Effect (verb): cause
:* Affect (noun): visible sign of mood
:* Affect (verb): change

:There are additional meanings for all of these, but they're generally related to the main meaning in obvious ways. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 07:28, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Bjorn- if you find anyone to do that, I'm getting it as a tattoo.
[[User:Gwynfshae|Gwynfshae]] ([[User talk:Gwynfshae|talk]]) 15:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:344: 1337: Part 4

2015-09-16T05:32:42Z

162.158.255.69:

It's the piping of "find ~" (all files in Mom's current login's home directory) and "find ~nomad" (all files in the home directory of user "nomad", presumably that's Elaine's account also on Mom's machine, having recently been on a 'life journey' of self-discovery and learning) through the shred command that is doing the directory recursion, as part of the "find" command's default behaviour (IIRC). I've never used the shredding command myself, but I'd say that it's operating on the list given it by the "find", rather than doing the directory-burrowing itself, for which I'd expect parameters of a "~/* ~/.* -r" (or "-R" or "-s") type of variant to activate the "all files, in all directories from here" inspection... ICBW. Best to check the man pages, though... (Also Mom's obviously got maximum rights for herself, or is drilling through su, as I'd expect.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 08:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

:"find" is passed a variety of arguments - an argument that is not part of an optional parameter (i.e. -name \*.php would specify all files ending with ".php" - the backslash is used to prevent bash or another shell from expanding the parameter into a full list of .php files) is treated as a file or directory to begin searching. So "find ~" would begin searching in the user's own home directory; "find ~nomad" would begin the search in the home directory of the user "nomad". All file and directory names are sent to stdout (standard output).

:Piping the result requires the use of the | symbol (shift-backslash). It's used to pipe data from stdout to stdin (standard input).

:"xargs" is a Linux command that constructs command lines by reading a list of files from stdin and treating each with a command (and optional arguments) specified after "xargs".

:"shred" is a program that takes a filename as a parameter and overwrites the file repeatedly to keep the original contents, which can be discerned using increasingly-expensive hardware solutions, from being pieced together.

:With this in mind:

::find ~ | xargs shred

:1) finds all files (and directories) in the hierarchy of the user's home directory, and sends the list to stdout;
:2) the list gets piped to "xargs", which
:3) passes each file to "shred" for shredding.

:Issues regarding symbolic links, filtering directory names from the operation, and modifying the operating parameters of "shred" will be left to the aspiring sysadmin to discover for theirself. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 13:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

It should be noted that if you want to have a file system that can shred data reliably you will need to use a file system without journaling or it is possible some of your data can be stored in the journal(The journal describes the nature of a write and its prior state before writing to it in order to safeguard the file system against unexpected shutdown).

What is more a lot of modern hard drive detect bad sectors and move data elsewhere, leaving the old data in a sector marked as "do not use". This data will not be securely deleted from these sectors and can be manually accessed by forensics later.

The commonly accepted solution is to use block device level encryption to prevent sensitive data from ever being written.

In short the '''shred''' command can give someone an unrealistic sense of security. I don't think this is relevant to the comic but I just wanted to share what I knew on the subject. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 08:52, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

"Title IV, Section 408: Authorization of deadly force." Does that make any sense in the real world? I don't see an explanation about this remark. [[User:Daniel Carrero|Daniel Carrero]] ([[User talk:Daniel Carrero|talk]]) 09:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Someone should put in that Stallman was given a Katana.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.210|108.162.249.210]] 00:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

:And also that katana-wielding Stallman comes from [[225: Open Source]]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.173|108.162.229.173]] 22:29, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

'''find''' can take multiple path arguments so she could just used '''find ~ ~nomad'''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.181|108.162.238.181]] 02:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Were people still using the Creative Nomad range of MP3 players at this point? Because the linux driver for the Nomad ran under a user account named "nomad", and the fact that it's the RIAA coming after them implies that MP3s are what they're interested in. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 05:32, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:353: Python

2015-09-15T20:55:14Z

162.158.255.69:

It is necessary for both Cueballs to sample the medicine cabinet in order for this to be a hallucination. It was probably python.{{unsigned ip|122.161.29.247}}
:Or maybe there is just one Cueball - the one on the ground who is hallucinating - because he tried everything...? ;-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:45, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

'I also sampled everything in the medicine cabinet for comparison' is a possible reference to George's Marvellous Medicine, the children's book written by Roald Dahl, wherein a combination of medicines and household materials produces fantastical effects. [[User:Quetzalcoatl|Quetzalcoatl]] ([[User talk:Quetzalcoatl|talk]]) 14:31, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

:I think it's related to the invention of photographs, but I'm not sure [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.81|173.245.48.81]] 06:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Woah guys, antigravity is a real module in Python! I was looking around the lib folder, trying to figure out how to put a module into it, and there it was - antigravity.py . It just sends your browser to the comic. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.171|108.162.219.171]] 22:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
:Yeah, that's already covered in the ''Trivia'' section ;-) --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 23:22, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

The implication is that in Python many otherwise amazing things become easily possible after a simple import statement and/or that there is a module for almost anything you'd want to do no matter how difficult.[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 16:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

The explanation was wrong about many things. Python doesn't have a heavily-simplified syntax--it's about as simple as Perl (and a lot less simple than Lisp); the difference is that it's designed first and foremost to be consistent, easy to read, and easy to remember, even at the cost of occasionally being more verbose or rigid. Its syntax doesn't generally reduce complicated things to a single word; it does allow many complicated things that might take 20 statements in C to be reduced to a single statement, but that's because it's high-level (again, like Perl), not because of its syntax. Dynamic typing has nothing to do with declaring the types of values, much less specifically numeric values, and it has nothing to do with Python automatically knowing how much space to reserve for a value--in fact, it's the opposite; C knows to reserve 4 bytes for an int variable at compile time, whereas Python has no idea what kind of value you're going to put into the variable until runtime. And "like in Visual Basic or JavaScript" is very confused--Visual Basic is statically typed, while JavaScript is dynamically typed, just like Python.

Also, the explanation didn't explain why Cueball's friend was reticent to use dynamic typing or significant whitespace, or what the point of importing modules is.

So I rewrote most of it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 20:55, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

353: Python

2015-09-15T20:45:18Z

162.158.255.69: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 353
| date = December 5, 2007
| title = Python
| image = python.png
| titletext = I wrote 20 short programs in Python yesterday. It was wonderful. Perl, I'm leaving you.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Python (programming language)|Python}} is a high-level programming language designed specifically to be make it easy to write clear, readable programs.

{{w|Dynamic typing}} and {{w|significant whitespace}} are two controversial features of Python, which make some people—like Cueball's friend—hesitant to use the language.

Dynamic typing means that variables do not have types (like "list of short integers" or "string"); any value of any type can be placed in any variable. Dynamic typing allows for more flexible languages, but it means that certain kinds of errors (like trying to subtract a list from a number) can't be caught until a program is run, and some people think this is too dangerous for the tradeoff to be acceptable.

Whitespaces are invisible text characters, like spaces or tabs. In programming, blocks of code controlled by a statement are usually indented under that statement. Most languages require you to use braces (<code>{…}</code>) or special keywords (<code>BEGIN…END</code>) to delimit these blocks; in Python, the indentation itself is the delimiter. Many Python programmers find that this makes code more readable, but many other programmers find it too "magical" and don't trust it.

Classes, functions and constants in Python are packed into modules. To use a module, you write "<code>import ''module''</code>" at the top of your source file. Python comes with a very powerful standard library of modules to do everything from parsing XML to comparing two sets of files for differences, and new modules can be easily installed from the PyPI repository, which has more than 65,000 more to choose from. [[Cueball]] can fly because he imported the <code>antigravity</code> module. Python still works for Cueball in [[482: Height]].

{{w|Perl}}, mentioned in the title text, is another high-level programming language, but [[Randall]] doesn't like it any more because its syntax is less friendly.

==Transcript==
:[A Friend is talking to Cueball, who is floating in the sky.]
:Friend: You're flying! How?
:Cueball: Python!
:Cueball: I learned it last night! Everything is so simple!
:Cueball: Hello world is just 'print "Hello, World!"'
:Friend: I dunno... Dynamic typing? ''Whitespace?''
:Cueball: Come join us! Programming is fun again! It's a whole new world up here!
:Friend: But how are you flying?
:Cueball: I just typed 'import antigravity'
:Friend: That's it?
:Cueball: ...I also sampled everything in the medicine cabinet for comparison.
:Cueball: But I think this is the python.

==Trivia==
*In response to this comic, the Python developers implemented the module <code>antigravity</code> in version 2.7+. When you <code>import</code> it, the default web browser will open this comic. Also, in version 3+, the module contains a [[426: Geohashing|geohashing]] function.
*As Perl could also be the name of a girl the title text of leaving Perl has double meaning. Also, ''being'' with the other program was wonderful. He has not only been unfaithful he is actually leaving!

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

Talk:437: SUV

2015-09-15T04:34:57Z

162.158.255.69:

Im not sure this strip even needs an explanation [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 21:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey what's M, P and D stand for? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.187|108.162.250.187]] 17:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
:God question. The first price without a letter should be petrol/gasoline. M should be {{w|Methanol fuel|Methanol fuel}} used in some racing cars. P could be {{w|Propane|Propane}}. D must be {{w|Diesel fuel|Diesel fuel}} which is more expensive than petrol.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

:: M and P mean 89 and 91 or 92 octane. Officially, each chain has their own brand names for each grade, but they all settled on M names (Medium, Midrange, etc.) pretty quickly, and P names (Premium, Pro-Tech, etc.) beat out H names (Hi-Test) by the early 90s. So, now they can all advertise their prices with signs with M and P.

:: The D is always for diesel (and in America, there's only one kind of diesel at non-truck pumps instead of the two found in some parts of the world).

:: By the way, mid-range gas is almost entirely a scam. It sort of made sense in the 70s, when cars that needed more than 88 octane were allowed to use leader gas for a few years after cars using 87 octane. But once that exception expired, its only purpose has been idiots who think "my $50000 BMW can't possibly use the same gas as my crappy old VW, so I'd better spend a bit more". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 04:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

P is probably Premium gasoline. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.164}}

Talk:454: Rewiring

2015-09-14T18:44:11Z

162.158.255.69:

As well as physically 'threading' the mail system, an email (or other messaging) client that keeps track of what messages reply to which others (often as a linear progression or cascade, or a tree-view where multiplie participants can be expected to branch the conversation) is said to show 'threaded' messages. Or was. (These days it's probably got some other name, and everyone seems to just want to top-post anyway. Thank you, Eternal September!!!) [[Special:Contributions/178.107.249.215|178.107.249.215]] 13:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

:If there were so many homes with phone wiring and no ethernet wiring and they were complaining, why didn't they just use the phone wiring for ethernet. It is a little less stable because of lack of addditional grounding/isolation wiring, but ethernet does only actually use 4 wires. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 19:35, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

:: The RJ11 jacks in more than half the houses I've lived in only had 2 wires connected. The most common reason to have 4 wires is that someone ordered two handsets in the 70s--sometimes dialing on one handset would cause the other one to ring, in which case AT&T would install an "anti-tinkle system", which required another wire pair. I also lived in one house whose owner had ordered a business phone when he lived there, and the lights on the business phone were powered by a second pair. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 18:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe that there needs to be more explanation about the title text, particularly about what "threading" and a mail system are. [[User:Codefreak5|Codefreak5]] ([[User talk:Codefreak5|talk]]) 05:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)