explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

572: Together

2017-09-06T08:05:31Z

172.68.51.70: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number =572
| date =April 22, 2009
| title =Together
| image =together.png
| titletext =This scavenger hunt is getting boring. Let's go work on the treehouse!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Edit for tone, style, speculations, explanation also dangerously enters into a mere description of the panels at times, the place for that is the transcript not the explanation}}
[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] run away from two others (who look like Cueball and Megan as well) standing next to a box in an open field of grass. Together, Cueball and Megan become romantic, get married and retire in old age to a porch swing. without a word, old Cueball leaves old Megan returns to the same location shown in the first panel, as indicated by the same two people, now older and still standing beside the box. Old Cueball picks up a sheet of paper and checks off "HAPPINESS" from a list entitled "SCAVENGER HUNT," where the other items include INDIAN-HEAD PENNY, SNAKE SKIN, FOUR-LEAF CLOVER and SHARK TOOTH.

So finding happiness was just one item in what is presumably the longest-running {{w|scavenger hunt}} of all-time, considering Cueball grew significantly old during the hunt (the duration is as much as 70 years, since Cueball is having to use a cane). The comic ends with one of the three people asking, "What's next?"

The list indicates this is a hunt for somewhat rare items. The US {{w|Indian Head cent}} (penny) was produced from 1859 to 1909, making it somewhat rare. A {{w|four leaf clover}} is a rare variation of the common three-leaf clover. A shark tooth is not easy to obtain, especially from a live shark, unless you live near a beach with souvenir shops and even then you have to question whether the tooth really is from a shark and not some other animal. Like the shark tooth, the snake skin is a little easier to find but still challenging unless you live in the southwest United States. Even so, you have to find a snake and skin it or at least find a snake skin that has been shed by the animal while molting, but that might not qualify depending upon the requirements for "snake skin" since this is just the dead outer layer of the snake's skin.

The title of the comic is probably a reference to the saying that you find happiness ''together'' with your loved one. Cueball and Megan could have taken many different paths to find happiness, together or separate, but they chose togetherness as a way to find happiness, which is a common theme in love stories. But happiness is not something a person finds, it is an experience, hence the need to accumulate enough experiences to determine beyond doubt that happiness was truly found.

The title text indicates that after all this time, the players may abandon the game due to being bored with it, which is another genius punchline. The treehouse reference in the title text is another example of a common childhood activity. Naturally, the intended mental image is a bunch of old men and women building a treehouse and playing in it like six year olds is another punchline. It is also typical for children to tire of a game before it is finished. Except here, Cueball spent nearly a lifetime on just one part of this game! The idea of adults having a fort in the woods was also mentioned, rather darkly, in the title text of [[219: Blanket Fort]].

Three of the old people looks very similar to three of those standing in line in [[586: Mission to Culture]].

==Speculation==

Why Cueball waited until old age to confirm that he and Megan had found happiness? Two possible explanations: 1) he forgot they were playing a game (Megan may have forgotten or simply didn't connect Cueball's leaving her with the game) or 2) Cueball wanted to be certain that he had found happiness and not just some illusory sensation of happiness. Often, happiness is situational and temporal, requiring a statistically sufficient population of experiences before drawing a meaningful conclusion -- and even then with a probability for error. Knowing Cueball's penchant for math and science, the latter is a more likely explanation. This observation into a true characteristic of happiness is the genius of this comic.

The reader may wonder why the second pair of players didn't simply proceed to find the next items. One explanation is that this may be a tag-team scavenger hunt, where each item is found in the order listed and by alternating teams. So the other two people will now have the task of finding a four leaf clover somewhere.

One explanation for old Cueball's sailor cap is to indicate a cherished memory of them being together in the rowboat during their early courtship.

The reader may wonder why Cueball didn't invite Megan to share in the triumph of checking off the item, since they are shown together in the initial frame. One explanation is to create a plot twist and build suspense, invoking questions as to where Cueball was going, as well as propelling the action into the following scene. This may be unsatisfying because the reader must assume that Megan was in on the game from the beginning and therefore would be aware of the hunt, and if they were so much in love for so long, why wouldn't Cueball want to share the triumph with her of checking off this rare item from the list? It leaves a confusion that may never be cleared up and is just one of those unfortunate sacrifices to the art of storytelling. A better setup might have been to start with only Cueball and his friends, Megan is not involved in the game (although the reader would have to assume that Cueball met Megan somewhere, somehow). Then Cueball courted Megan, married her and grew old with her in happiness, then leaves her to return to his friend and the game -- this would have made more sense and been just as poignant. Leaving old Megan on the porch wondering, "What's happening, did I do something wrong, is my husband okay?" -- it seems rude for Cueball to just leave her without explanation and not fitting in with the premise of being happy together. Maybe Megan long ago gave up on the game and doesn't care about it anymore and Cueball never gave up on it, but this is just speculation.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan are running in a field, holding hands. They are running away from another pair which also looks like Cueball and Megan. This pair stand in the background, next to a small box. There may be something lying on top of the box, but it is difficult to see clearly. The sun is shining above them.]

:[Cueball and Megan are in a boat on a lake, very romantic. Cueball is speaking to Megan, illustrated with a heart.]
:Cueball: ♡

:[Cueball and Megan sit together on a bench on a beach, watching the sunset.]

:[Cueball and Megan stand in front of an altar under a wedding arch, with confetti falling around them. He is wearing a butterfly and she a veil.]

:[Cueball and Megan, now old and wrinkled, sit together holding hands on their porch at the top of a small stair outside their house. He has a sailor cap on and Megan now wears her hair in a bun. Although the woman looks like [[Hairbun]], and the old man is wearing a sailor cap, we can assume this is still Megan and Cueball given the juxtaposition of the preceding panel.]

:[The same setting is depicted but seen from the side of the house. Cueball begins walking away from Megan using his cane. He has descended from the stair. Finally Megan speaks, and unusually there is a speech bubble, with an extra smaller bubble hanging on to it for the second sentence.]
:Megan: Dear? Where are you-
:Megan: Come back!

:[Cueball approaches an old couple, presumably the kids from the first panel now turned old. They seem tired looking down all the time. The man only has hair around his neck and also a cane. The woman has long thinning hair. The box from the first panel is between Cueball and the other two. On top of it lies a piece of paper]

:[Same picture except that Cueball is now standing still and has picked up the paper from the box and writes on it with a pen. Again there is a speak bubble.]
:Cueball: Okay,

:[The paper is shown. It is a scavenger hunt list with at least six items. The three first items have been checked off. The last item is blocked by the speech bubble, but can be seen to be there from the check box.]
:<u>Scavenger hunt</u>:
:☒ Indian-head penny
:☒ Snake skin
:☒ Happiness
:☐ Four-leaf clover
:☐ Shark tooth
:☐
:Cueball (off-panel): What's next?

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Wedding]]

Talk:1755: Old Days

2016-11-04T19:48:40Z

172.68.51.70:

[https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf Reflections on Trusting Trust] (pdf), Ken Thompson's acceptance speech for the 1984 Turing Award, in which he discusses creating a backdoor in the C compiler (yes, there was only 1 when he invented the language) that itself creates a second backdoor in the login program when it is compiled. Additionally, it reproduces itself when compiling the C compiler from un-tampered-with source code, so that anyone using the binary (compiled) compiler would be unable to avoid reproducing the backdoor in all its forms. This is the sort of thing that gives security programmers nightmares. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.168|108.162.221.168]] 04:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC) (bonsaiviking)

The "4-6 weeks" thing might be a reference to high-performance computing, in particular scientific calculations, a few decades back. From what I've heard from older people in my scientific field (I'm too young to have experienced it myself), you'd prepare your program on punch cards, mail these to an institution owning a fast computer (because your group or university didn't have one), and they'd run the program and mail the result back to you. This, I've been told, took a few weeks. Maybe someone with first-hand experience can give more information. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.98|141.101.104.98]] 10:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Source Code on Punched Cards: As an undergrad at Durham Uni I remember punching PL1 source code onto cards to be inserted into a batch queue to be compiled and run on an IBM360 at the nearby city of Newcastle, overnight.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.160|141.101.98.160]] 11:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

At the risk of emulating Dilbert's "Topper", I remember at school writing programs on coding sheets (effectively squared paper; one character in each box), which would get sent to the local university, where they would be punched onto cards and run on the mainframe. The following week, you'd get your coding sheets back, plus the cards and the printout from your batch job. Then you'd make your corrections, also on coding sheets... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.143|141.101.98.143]] 13:35, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm reminded of Frank Hayes' song, "When I Was a Boy": "And we programmed in ones and in zeroes / And sometimes we ran out of ones!" On a more serious note, C came out in the late seventies, and I was using punch cards as late as 1975. That's not "long" before, and I wouldn't be too surprised if there were C compilers that accepted punched card input. [[User:Gmcgath|Gmcgath]] ([[User talk:Gmcgath|talk]]) 12:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

: Punch cards 79-80 in the U.S. for C programming. We did have text editors too for other languages, but we'd punch up and submit decks to a queue for batch processing. Usually only waited minutes (though the when big projects were due, it could take an hour - the bad part was there wasn't any way to stop an infinite loop until the job limit ran out. We were given so much in "computer dollars" for the class (because the machines were also used for outside work for real money) and you'd have to ask for extra if you used it up. I miss the green bar paper though. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]]) 18:25, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the punched cards explanation is missing the point that C (or any language, that I know) didn't _require_ that it be on punched cards. I.e. there was nothing in the language specification that prohibited the program from being on paper tape, mag tape, disk, etc. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.70|162.158.74.70]] 14:22, 4 November 2016 (UTC)Pat

: I strongly echo 141.101's recollections. The second panel of 1755 is not far from the truth.

: I wrote my first program in FORTRAN IV in 1972 in an "enrichment" class at my school in Worthing - in the south of England (it calculated the average of 10 numbers). We wrote the programs out by hand on 80 column "coding forms" which were then snail-mailed to the regional computing center. When their keypunch operators had time, they'd punch our programs onto cards. On the following night, after the payroll software had been run, they'd stick our cards into the batch queue of their over-worked IBM 360. If they compiled, the programs would auto-run and would be allowed to produce at most 6 sheets of line-printer paper of output. If they didn't compile, then the first six pages of source code and error messages would go to the printer instead. The following morning, someone would collect our printouts and snail-mail them back to the school.

: If you had a compile error, you'd have to copy everything out onto fresh coding forms and re-submit it.

: When the "unofficial" project to teach programming to 14/15 year-olds ran low on cash, they switched to 2nd class mail in each direction. We did two programming classes a week but we'd be VERY lucky to get a turnaround time of less than a week. So the line on panel two: "To compile your code, you had to mail it to IBM, took 4-6 weeks"...isn't *that* much of an exaggeration! We mailed it to the regional computing center - and it rarely took more than 2 weeks...but what she says isn't very far from the truth!

: In practice, things never went smoothly. The keypunch operators didn't routinely type FORTRAN code - they mostly entered stuff like names and addresses, that are somewhat tolerant of typo's. If you were struck by a typo, you'd have to just resubmit the exact same coding forms and hope you didn't get a typo on the following week! Since it was only a 10 week course, you got VERY good at writing your coding forms up clearly, to NEVER forgetting to slash your zeroes and put serifs on your I's...making 100% sure your code would compile first time around was essential to getting anything to run. We quickly learned that using "I" as a loop variable was worse than (say) "COUNT" because it was more likely to get mis-typed as a '1'.

: I begged and pleaded to be allowed to do the same course for two years running but on the second year, the keypunch operators finally rebelled at the extra work we were giving them as our programs grew larger and more ambitious. So we were instructed to punch our own cards using a "hand punch" machine where you manually held down a "chord" of keys to punch raw binary into the cards. Get just one bit wrong, and you had to toss out the entire card and start again. It would take multiple hours to punch in even a very short program! Gone was the idea of using "COUNT" for a loop variable! The idea of commenting your code became simply ludicrous - so the teacher told us to write comments onto blank cards and stick them into the deck where needed!

: Because of that horrendous problem, the concept of "code-reuse" was important! If you could re-use some of the cards from a previous program, or '''''borrow''''' a subroutine from a friend (they'd want it back afterwards!), you'd save yourself a mountain of time! Decks of handy subroutines had value...you could exchange them for all sorts of playground "items-of-value" with the other geeks who did the class.

: I'm tempted to say that this taught me a lot about the art of programming and the importance of checking your code and writing for re-use...but I rather doubt it. When I finally got to my second year in college, I had access to a PDP-11/20 with DecTapes and a DecWriter terminal, that's about when I started to learn something useful...and in my final year, 1977 - I was finally granted access to the PDP-11/70, UNIX and a ADM 3a "glass teletype". I could really get to learning the craft that's still paying my mortgage 40 years later. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 14:25, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is there a parallel between sending you code off to be compiled and sending your code off to an app store. In both cases a required part of the build is sending your code off to a private company for approval. [[User:Olleicua|Olleicua]] ([[User talk:Olleicua|talk]]) 15:28, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Can someone please verify that it is "actually very difficult" to punch holes in floppy disks? Probably it should be attempted on at least 1000 different disks of different kinds to make sure. {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.64}}

Interesting: there exist two versions of this comic with different size https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/old_days.png and https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/old_days_2x.png The latter is used when zooming in on the comic's page --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.70|172.68.51.70]] 19:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)