explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2720: Biology vs Robotics

2023-01-05T01:08:08Z

172.70.174.114: /* Explanation */ less clunky

{{comic
| number = 2720
| date = January 4, 2023
| title = Biology vs Robotics
| image = biology_vs_robotics_2x.png
| imagesize = 546x260px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Sorry, I've just always had these random things I don't like--like olives, or robots drilling holes in me without warning.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a ROBOT HOMEOMORPHIC TO A HUMAN WITH A HANDLE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In this comic, [[Cueball]] is walking along next to an apparently-{{w|Sentience|sentient}}/[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sapience sapient] robot, complaining to said robot about the problems of biology. Cueball, being a biological entity, has experience, while the robot, an abiological entity ([https://www.futurelearn.com/info/courses/robotic-future/0/steps/26359 some] [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrainInAJar exceptions] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biorobotics apply]) does not have as much experience.

While walking, Cueball complains to the robot that biology (And presumably being biological) is annoying/bad, stating "Biology sucks" and "Bodies have all these problems". This is to some extent true. The human body has many flaws, ranging from {{w|Recurrent laryngeal nerve|mildly inneficient}} to {{w|Stroke|lethal-without-warning}}. The robot counters that the human body, and bodies in general, have many advantages. One such advantage is that human bodies heal while metal robots don't.

This puts Cueball's problems into perspective, humbling him, as he realises that the human body still has a lot of strengths. Possibly a little offended, he replies that it only works "Sometimes", and is often painful. Holes can be different sizes,{{Citation needed}} so it is hardly surprising that their outcomes will vary. For example, a small hole made for an earring would be easy to close, whereas one carved by {{w|List of the largest cannon by caliber|an 91.4cm mortar shell}} would be less easy to heal. Survivablility is also a key factor is whether or not someone survives a hole, as dying greatly impacts someone's ability to heal. There is also ambiguity in what counts as a hole (Is a cut a hole? Is surgery? etc.). This variability is likely why Cueball says "Sometimes".

He also states that "it" is "not exactly fun". This is an understatement, as {{w|Gunshot wound|some holes}} can really hurt. "It" is implied to be the holes themselves, as while the healing process can hurt, the formation of the hole (Such as being shot) is often a LOT more painful.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Cueball is walking alongside a medium-sized, boxy robot with small wheels.]
:Cueball: Ugh, Biology is the worst. Bodies have all these random problems.

:Robot: Is it true that if someone makes a hole in you, it just closes up on its own?

:Cueball: Only '''''sometimes'''''. And it's not exactly '''''fun'''''.
:Robot: Noted. I'll try to avoid perforating your surface.
:Cueball: Thanks! It's kind of a pet peeve.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Robots]]
[[Category:Biology]]

10: Pi Equals

2022-12-27T05:16:24Z

172.70.174.114: /* Trivia */

{{comic
| number = 10
| date = September 30, 2005
| title = Pi Equals
| image = pi.jpg
| titletext = My most famous drawing, and one of the first I did for the site
}}

==Explanation==
There are two possible references here. One is from the book ''{{w|Contact (novel)|Contact}}'' by Carl Sagan, where the existence of God was shown in the last chapter to be encoded in the digits of {{w|pi}}. The other is an old joke of a {{w|Fortune cookie|fortune cookie}} with a fortune that reads, "Help! I'm trapped in a fortune cookie factory!" Similar jokes are often repeated for any mass-manufactured personalized item, often implying that the worker who made the item is working in a sweatshop somewhere or is literally trapped inside a factory and calling for help via the items they produce. This joke is also referenced in [[327: Exploits of a Mom]]'s title text, where [[Mrs. Roberts]] [[Elaine Roberts|daughter]]'s name is "Help I'm trapped in a driver's license factory."

The most literal interpretation of the joke would be that some being who helped to create the universe in a "universe factory" snuck a message into the digits of pi (a number that has an endlessly long decimal that never repeats) asking for help to get out. Mathematical concepts being manufactured in a factory is the main mental image here. One can't help but wonder if the [http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/TimeBandits.jpg primordial beings who labored on the universe] to produce things like the gravitational constant and pi have a labor union. Judging by the fact that they're calling for help, it seems they don't.

Since pi never ends and does not follow any sort of known pattern, if each number pair were assigned a letter from the alphabet, or if it was converted to base-26 (or preferably ASCII or some other form of text encoding, if you desire capitalization and punctuation), the entire works of Shakespeare, as well as any other expressible piece of information, including the message in this comic, could presumably be found (it is not really ''known'' that pi really has {{w|normal number|this property}}, but the absence of this property would in itself be an extraordinary coincidence); although the probability of finding any given string of numbers within a calculable range of digits of pi [http://www.angio.net/pi/whynotpi.html diminishes rapidly as the string length increases].

In the novel {{w|Contact (novel)|Contact}} by {{w|Carl Sagan}}, he includes a "Signature of God" (There was a link here, but the page no longer exists). In brief, the signature consists of a very long string of 1s and 0s far out (after some 10^20 seemingly random numbers) in the base-11 expansion of pi that when arranged in a square of a specific size yields a clear drawing of a circle with a diameter of several hundred digits. The existence of this pattern was hinted to the protagonist by a member of an advanced alien civilization as being encoded in physics by an even more advanced civilization with the ability to create universes.

Interestingly enough, this could also work for pictures: if you assign a set of nine numbers to equal an RGB hexadecimal color value, eventually you will find the Mona Lisa.

In the title text, [[Randall]] notes that this became one of his most famous comics (at the time it was re-released on the new [[xkcd]] site on the 1st of January 2006.) He also notes that it was one of his first drawings for the site (it was the 11th posted originally). See [[#Trivia|trivia]] below.

==Transcript==
:[A huge π to the left, then a large equal-to sign, and then five rows of text.]
:<big><big><big>π</big></big></big> = 3.14159265
::3589793help
::imtrappedin
::auniversefac
::tory7108914...

==Trivia==
*This was the 11th comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]].
**The previous is [[9: Serenity is coming out tomorrow]].
**The next is [[14: Copyright]].
*Comic #36 was originally posted as a duplicate of comic 10: Pi Equals. This was corrected some time between April 23, 2006 and July 5, 2006 when the current version showed up in the web archive (see the links).
*This comic kept its original title: "Pi Equals"
*There were no original [[Randall]] quotes for this comic.
*This was one of the [[:Category:First day on LiveJournal|thirteen first comics]] posted to LiveJournal within 12 minutes on Friday September 30, 2005.
*This comic was posted on [[xkcd]] when the web site opened on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.
**It was posted along [[:Category:First day on xkcd|with all 41 comics]] posted before that on LiveJournal as well as a few others.
**The latter explaining why the numbers of these 41 LiveJournal comics ranges from 1-44.
*One of the original drawings drawn on [[:Category:Checkered paper|checkered paper]].
*The book version of this comic (in ''[http://store.xkcd.com/products/xkcd-volume-0 xkcd: volume 0]'') has different title text:
**''"I've put rescue instructions in e. You'll need the cheat codes for your universe, which I hid in the square root of two."''
*The book version of this comic (in ''[http://store.xkcd.com/products/xkcd-volume-0 xkcd: volume 0]'') has red text at the bottom of the page: CNEG BAR BS RVTUG VA URK: RR AVAR RVTUG SVIR BAR BAR RVTUG. It's ROT13 for "PART ONE OF EIGHT IN HEX: EE NINE EIGHT FIVE ONE ONE EIGHT".
* "7108914" appears in position 13,709,690 of pi, suggesting that the length of the string of "digits" that is 'helpimtrappedinauniversefactory' is correspondent to a good 13,709,675 digits long, meaning each individual letter corresponds to about 456989.166667 digits. Aggravatingly, however, if the string was instead "71089314", it would appear at position 2533.
*If the letters correspond to the phone keypad, then these digits are wrong: 3.14159265358979343574687277334628648377332286797108914
*If the words correspond to their length, then these digits are wrong: 3.14159265358979342721877108914
*And if the words are omitted altogether, then these digits are wrong: 3.1415926535897937108914
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics posted on livejournal| 11]]
[[Category:First day on LiveJournal| 11]]
[[Category:First day on xkcd]]
[[Category:Checkered paper]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Footer comics]] 
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

2046: Trum-

2022-12-26T16:52:58Z

172.70.174.114: /* Explanation */ odd phrasing

{{comic
| number = 2046
| date = September 14, 2018
| title = Trum-
| image = trum.png
| titletext = Excited to vote for future presidents Bill Eisenhamper, Amy Forb, Ethan Obample, and Abigail Washingtoast.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|President of the United States}}, at the time when this comic was published, is {{w|Donald Trump}} and he shares the first letters of his surname with {{w|Harry S. Truman}}, who was US President between 1945 and 1953. [[Megan]] notes that both of these presidents' last names start with "T-R-U-M", but she also states that they are not related.

There were several presidents of the US who even have the exact same last name. For example, {{w|John Adams}} and his son {{w|John Quincy Adams}}, and the more recent father and son {{w|George H. W. Bush}} and {{w|George W. Bush}}. Similarly {{w|Theodore Roosevelt}} and {{w|Franklin Delano Roosevelt}} are 5th cousins. Grandfather and grandson {{w|William Henry Harrison}} and {{w|Benjamin Harrison}} also share a last name. And there are the two [https://www.geni.com/path/Lyndon-B-Johnson-36th-President-of-the-United-States+is+related+to+Andrew-Johnson-17th-President-of-the-USA?from=6000000002045454764&to=361204095530004567| most distantly related] presidents with the same surname, both {{w|Andrew Johnson}} and {{w|Lyndon B. Johnson}} have the last name of Johnson (7 letters), although the shared last name is coincidental, given they do not share any relatives with the name Johnson.

Besides T-R-U-M- and the cases of identical names, the longest common surname prefix is H-A-R (3 letters), shared by William Henry (or Benjamin) H-A-R-rison and Warren Gamaliel H-A-R-ding. (The next longest common surname prefixes are B-U-, shared by James B-U-chanan and George (H.) W. Bush; and C-L-, shared by Grover Cleveland and Bill Clinton.)

The longest common suffix (not counting identical names) is also 4 for I-S-O-N for {{w|James Madison}} and the two Harrison presidents. (It is an interesting fact that the name HARRISON contains both the second-longest common prefix and the longest common suffix among non-identical president surnames.)

The joke is that the matching of those few letters is the least weird thing. Trump's presidency is commonly considered weird in ways too varied to concisely list in this article, and both Megan and Cueball seem to agree on this.

The title text lists "absurd" last names that could start with the same letters as other presidents: Bill Eisenhamper, Amy Forb, Ethan Obample, and Abigail Washingtoast. These would refer to {{w|Dwight D. Eisenhower|Dwight D. '''Eisenh'''ower}}, {{w|Gerald Ford|Gerald '''For'''d}}, {{w|Barack Obama|Barack '''Obam'''a}}, and {{w|George Washington|George '''Washingto'''n}}.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan walking together while talking.]
:Megan: It's pretty weird that we've had two totally unrelated presidents whose last names start with '''''"T-R-U-M-"'''''.
:Cueball: Oh, sure, that's ''definitely'' the weirdest thing about the presidency right now.
:Megan: It's less weird than '''''every other fact'''''. But still weird.
:Cueball: True.

{{comic discussion}}

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

Talk:2704: Faucet

2022-11-30T12:03:15Z

172.70.174.114: Delta faucet experience.

Are faucet designs considered to be confusing? I'm never confused by normal ones like [https://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/sundsvik-kitchen-faucet-chrome-plated__0756711_pe749051_s5.jpg?f=s these] {{unsigned|Flekkie|02:12, 29 November 2022}}

:Yeah I came here wondering the same thing. Is the joke perhaps not so much that the controls are confusing in terms of intent, but just in terms of determining the bounds? Eg, with two identical faucet controls and identical water pressures, "full blast hot" still translates to something radically different, if one building has a water heater set to 120F and the other building has a water heater set to 160F.{{unsigned ip|172.69.170.189|02:46, 29 November 2022}}

:(I find °F confusing, personally, but...) ...the easiest thing is to have two taps, one hot and one cold. Yes, they can combine into a single spout, but there are various conflicting plusses and minuses of that over having the two independent ones per outlet. Speaking (as I'm sure mixer-tap afficionados worldwide will appreciate) as a Brit. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.24|172.70.85.24]] 03:03, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

::Relevant Tom Scott video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfHgUu_8KgA Why Britain Uses Separate Hot and Cold Taps]. TL;DR: British houses used to get their hot water from rat-filled cisterns so they wanted to keep the hot water separate from the cold water, and old habits die hard. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.152|162.158.63.152]] 03:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

:::Silliness of dual-taps aside, that doesn't solve the issue of identical tap hardware yielding radically different results depending on what the hot water thermostat is set to. Maybe that's not the original joke (I'm still not sure what it was) but it's worth mentioning at least. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.170.146|172.69.170.146]] 03:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

: I don't think those are confusing, but in many cases the feedback is too slow (e.g. due to the water in the pipes coming from the hot water source having cooled since the tap was last used), or inconvenient (e.g. the pressure of the hot water not being enough to trigger on-demand gas heaters). While theoretically that design allows exploring the whole temperature/pressure space, in practice one needs some trial-and-error and delay to find the correct setting (as Randall points out in the title text) to make it work. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 10:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

:It's really a joke we are too European to understand. Visit the US to see faucet control disasters in all their glory. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.203|172.68.51.203]] 10:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

:: Yeah, here in Europe I've seen faucets with mechanical thermostats to regulate the temperature and therefore two dials for either flow or temperature. This was more than 20 years ago. --[[User:Sarsey|Sarsey]] ([[User talk:Sarsey|talk]]) 12:01, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

:: Funny, the absolute worst faucet I experienced was in this fall in England (which is part of Europe for some definitions but not others). The temperature selection knob had 180° ambiguity---especially for my poor vision when uncorrected---and no barrier between maximum hot and maximum cold. So, I spent a shower thinking I was operating at mid-range and wondering why there seemed to be no middle ground between freezing cold and scalding hot. Fortunately had an epiphany while exploring the town. [[User:Philhower|Philhower]] ([[User talk:Philhower|talk]]) 14:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

: What's hot and what's cold? Do you turn it in the direction of the red to increase the temperature, or do you turn it so that you can see more of the red than the blue to increase the temperature? Taps exist that follow either convention. In the first case, you turn it to the left, while in the second you turn it to the right. That kind of tap is far more confusing than the traditional one with two knobs (though I've also seen a tap with knobs having "chaud" and "froid" on them in a country where French is not an official language without anything else to distinguish them, so I guess even that is not so straight-forward). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.126.15|172.71.126.15]] 21:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I sympathize with Randall here; even controls designed to independently control temperature and flow rarely meet both the "intuitive to use at a glance" and "function as described" requirements to make them non-confusing. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 03:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be super simple to just have a slider that goes from hot to cold, and a second one that goes from slow to fast flow? Or one for hot, one for cold, with the higher the slider goes, the more the flow is increased? I don't see how much simpler you can get it. Hell, you could even use a dial for temperature (all dials turn clockwise to increase) with a digital readout. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.44|172.70.131.44]] 05:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

: I suppose the issue with that is that, unlike simple mixer taps that control the flow of hot and cold water independently, relying on the human to find the right mixture that creates the desired flow and temperature, what you're describing requires a more complex system that is able to do that process automatically, so it can't be a simple mechanical valve. It would require temperature and pressure sensors for both the hot and cold water streams, and it would have to dynamically adjust the physical valve settings depending on all six parameters (position of the flow handle/slider/knob, position of the temperature handle/slider/knob, temperature of the hot water, temperature of the cold water, pressure of the hot water, pressure of the cold water). I'm not even sure this is possible with a fully mechanical system — likely some electronics would need to be involved, which might complicate things. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 10:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

[Re: 'temperature of the hot water, temperature of the cold water, pressure of the hot water, pressure of the cold water' - those sensors already exist, inside the person using the faucet. If the water isn't hot enough, move the control in the hot direction. If the pressure isn't high enough, move that control in the direction that produces greater pressure. The (subjectively) prefect combination doesn't require the controls to be in the same position every time].

This is probably the very first xkcd comic where I have absolutely no idea where Randal is coming from. While different people have different preferences for different designs, I've never heard of anyone being confused by any faucet design.
Maybe he's trolling us, by trying to get a rise out of people wondering what the hell he's talking about? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

This may be a reference to "Design of Everyday Things - Dan Norman" or books in that direction. Although he talked a lot more about creating doors wrong he also mentioned faucet designs as terrible. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.29|198.41.242.29]] 09:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
::  I was initially drawn to the parallel/derivation from the "{{w|Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door|Build a better mousetrap...}}" concept, which vastly predates {{w|Don Norman|''Don''}} Norman. But it's such a widespread trope that I can't be sure it should be mentioned 'officially'. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.61|172.70.86.61]] 11:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

: I am actually puzzled by how many people ''don't'' relate to this, judging by the comments here. I guess I've been unlucky with the faucets I've encountered so far? Over the years I've had spontaneous conversations with multiple people abut how tap designs are either inconvenient (i.e. hard to find the right handle positions to produce the desired temperature and flow), or confusing to use, especially for hotel showers. In fact I'm adding this comment mostly so other people who share the same perception don't feel gaslighted or otherwise confused by so many people not recognizing this issue. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 10:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Is that hairy? looks like him? [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 10:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:I think it could be, but he is looking different with the hair and because of the scruffy looks his hair standing up could be because he has torn in it. I think it is better not to include it as a Hairy comic. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Is it too pedantic to point out the distinction between a helix (the shape of the control) and a spiral (mentioned by the character)? {{unsigned ip|172.70.162.135|10:28, 29 November 2022}}
:Not really, but it could be a very shallow (by radial increase/decrease per turn) 3D spiral, I'm more concerned by the "tightening", wondering if it's a flexible spiral/helix that is manipulated dynamically, rather than merely a tap* with a funny-shaped handle/head to rotate through into the backplate.
::<nowiki>*</nowiki> - 'faucet' just makes me wait for a "force it" pun. It's a very American word that I'm not personally aware of being used throught the rest of the anglosphere. Maybe Canada, but probably not Aus/NZ/etc if my uptake of their TV/film exports is correctly remembered... Somebody may want to correct me on this issue, or add English As A Second Language metrics to this.
:What is also interesting is that the 3D-perspective drawing by our in-frame inventor, upon the perspectivised drawing surface as depicted by Randall, makes it look like very much like an actual sticky-outy object within the drawn world. Like it's actually a moulded/similar relief model/mockup, surrounded by the more standard 'wall notes' used to suggest on-the-go calculations/annotations. An interesting artistic choice (or possibly an unintentional consequence) by Randall. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.61|172.70.86.61]] 11:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I think it should be added that the issue is mainly for the US. In Europe, and in the other of the rest of the world - except US - the thermostatic head has replaced most other faucet in shower, and the hand washing is not so much of an issue. My shower in some US hotels were a nightmare, where I remember taking multiple minute to understand how it might work. {{unsigned ip|172.71.130.80|11:03, 29 November 2022}}

I think it should be added that the issue is mainly for Europe, especially Americans traveling in Europe. In the USA, where proportioning valves are common and anti-scald protection is mandated by code, controls are both intuitive and safe. {{unsigned ip|172.70.210.49|13:11, 29 November 2022}}
:So funny that these two comments in a row says the opposite. I'm from Denmark and where I sometimes dislike the designs of a faucet I have almost never found one for a tap that was a problem to understand. Sure for a shower there can be some issues, mainly because it can be too hot and problematic to stand under them when turning them on the first time. But it seems to me that this is not a serious problem in Europe. And from reading above it seems like this is in fact a US problem only. But the last comment says the opposite. by the way both sigantures unsigned, so did a check and found they where from two different IP and with time between. Was wondering if someone was trolling by writing the same comment twice with reversed meaning. But seems to not be the case. Have added signatures now. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

::I vote that "confusing faucets" is an American problem. In some places it was hard to set the faucet exactly right (either because of faucet lag, which is the fault of the water lines and not the faucet anyway, or because the controls were highly non-linear around the target I wanted), but the direction in which the controls moved was always fairly clear.
::I have been living in France most of my life, including visits to really old homes. I only ever met faucets of three kinds. In all of them water comes from a single outlet. Type 1 has two flow control knobs (one hot, one cold); type 2 has a single handle that can move in two angular directions (one for temperature, one for flow); type 3 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermostatic_mixing_valve (thermostatic valve)] has one knob for temperature and one knob for flow. Faucets use types 1 and 2, showers can use type 1, 2 or 3. Only type 3 ever confused me the first time, and that was when I was a young child (I would guess age 8 or so?). I suppose the under-the-hood engineering gives rise to all sort of interesting tradeoffs between those three types, but from a user’s perspective they are all reasonable.
::I have traveled to the UK multiple times and lived there for some time. It was mostly the same, though I have seen some dual-taps (essentially type 1 but with one tap per knob). It may be a bad user experience, but it is not confusing.
::I have been to multiple other countries on short trips and do not remember any confusing faucets... except for one US hotel. That devilish shower had a single-knob control; the temperature increased over the whole range, and the flow was maximum at mid-range. I did not mind much that it does not explore the whole shower-space (the trajectory in the flow-temperature diagram was probably a super-optimized curve rather than a straight inverted V); but I did mind that it took a few minutes of exploration to understand what happened. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.126.15|172.71.126.15]] 16:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

My interpretation is that, for normal people, designing an intuitive faucet is easy: just one knob for temperature and another for flow. But designers seem to get overly creative for faucets and add all sorts of odd handles and gizmos. Figuring out a faucet at a hotel is often a task. Hence, in the comic, the designer is adding some sort of bizarre spiral handle when a regular one would be much easier. It's not that its hard to design a good faucet, but designers seem to have an odd blind spot for them. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.230|172.70.110.230]] 13:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

VERY RELEVANT ASIDE
Why aren't there digital faucets? And if this is such a bold idea It's mine [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.43|172.70.131.43]] 14:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC) paradoxical
:There are digital faucets. Just google "IOT Shower faucet" or "IOT Faucet" I struggle to see any real utility to them however. --[[User:EvilGeniusSkis|EvilGeniusSkis]] ([[User talk:EvilGeniusSkis|talk]]) 17:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
::I find analogue faucets to typically be really difficult to control. Turn knobs are fine, but lifting or turning a single handle like many faucets nowadays have just don't give me enough precision. Now, my hand-eye coordination and fine motor control are bad, but not ''entirely'' terrible. So I think for some people, even turn knobs are going to be annoying to use. So digital inputs would probably make it a lot easier if you have a motor disability. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.108|172.68.51.108]] 20:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Damn, you mean people don't just switch on the tap and cope with cold showers? Damn, major L.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.219.42|172.70.219.42]] 16:29, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Just this morning, I was in the shower which has a single lever to control the mix of hot and cold water. I always turn it all the way up to get the hot water flowing and then move it down by small degrees until it is just right. With the lag in response for each successive change it takes a seemingly unnecessary amount of time to get it "just right". I would say that it is not so much "confusing" as it is "annoying". In this faucet there is no separate way to control the flow. The flow is maximized when there is an equal amount of hot and cold water, which of course is not necessarily the optimum temperature, because it takes a very small amount of cold water mixed with the hot to make it comfortable. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 17:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the transcript, which says "Below it is a box shape that dispenses water through a circle". What the ???. Can this be changed to, "Below it is a drawing of a spout"? [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 17:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:Well, its not really a box shape since its a 2D drawing and boxes are 3D... so it should say "Below are 3 parallelograms that form a two-dimensional projection of a rectangular prism..." Or maybe, for brevity we can just say "Below it is a drawing of a spout." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.109|162.158.63.109]] 19:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
::I completed the transcript but did not write that sentence. I have now changed to the short suggestion from you two :-) You are allowed to make such small obvious changes your self. Don't be shy :-D --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

For hotel shower controls, even (especially?) if cleaned regularly, I find that they tend to lose the handy inlaid red and blue textures or overprinting to distiguish the relative functions of chrome or plastic dials and levers. But, even with them visible and discernable, they can be ambiguous. If a dial/rotary component has hot/cold (or flow-control) markings on the fitting it is sat upon then it tends to show which direction to twist it for which change. But if it's marked ''on the dial'' then there's two opposing conventions used for a fairly standard "arrow with increasing line-width towards the head" marker:
:1) Twist the dial in the direction of the more blue bit (incidentally showing more of the opposing red arrow) when you want the cooler temperature, this being a 'turn this way for more "blue water"' sort of thing,
:2) The thicker bit of blue is supposed to be read as aligned to something subtle, like a notch/ridge mark, upon the static backplate, meaning that you should twist the dial in the ''opposite'' direction to bring the "more blue" into play.
...though some (like central-heating radiator controls) do disambuguate this by having the red/blue meshed long thin triangles (and maybe digits/tick-lines to easily establish a position and any small change) hidden within a shroud with just a small window upon the 'meaningful' uppermost/foremost bit of the twisting pattern. Of course, the chances that any one hotel's chosen fitting is easily recognisable as the same as the last one you used in a different hotel (or the last visit to this one!) are not great. I'm sure there's going to be someone who collects "hotel plumbing" photos, or similar, to catalogue their sheer variety. Certainly it's something I might have wished to have started to do, but seems a bit late to begin now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.53|172.70.91.53]] 19:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:Here's an idea: put a little plastic window on the faucet and have the colour behind it turn red or blue. So depending on how it's made, the blue/red thing turns behind the plastic window, or the window shifts over the blue/red thing. Either way, if you can only see red, it's hot; and if you can only see blue, it's cold. And the colours won't get worn away since they are behind a little window. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.121|172.70.251.121]] 21:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
You know, it seems like the most common complaint with faucets of any kind is that the sweet spot between hot and cold is so hard to hit. Meanwhile, most of the range is used for various degrees of cold water which barely feel different. It reminds me of linear rgb, where most of the range is used by bright looking shades, with it only getting darker rapidly near the black end. I think a good start for a better faucet would be nonlinear mixing, where the knob gets less "sensitive" as you move it towards hot. This would sacrifice precision for cold temperatures, but how often do you really need a specific cold temperature (aside from fully unheated)? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.81|141.101.76.81]] 08:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Delta makes a tub control/spigot that flummoxes every visitor to my home: The control is single-action [temp] but to turn on the shower you have to pull down a ring under the tip of the spigot. I give a ‘lesson’ to every new visitor now.
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.114|172.70.174.114]] 12:03, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

2165: Millennials

2022-11-22T14:31:35Z

172.70.174.114: /* Explanation */ Added wikipedia link for genz

{{comic
| number = 2165
| date = June 19, 2019
| title = Millennials
| image = millennials.png
| titletext = Ironically, I've been having these same arguments for at least a decade now. I thought we would have moved on by now, but somehow the snide complaints about millennials continue.
}}

==Explanation==

According to [[1962: Generations|the definitive chronology of generations]], {{w|millennials}} are born between 1982 and 1999. Those born in 1982 reached adulthood (18 years) in 2000. As of writing of this comic (mid 2019), this is about 20 years ago. When the term became widespread around 2012, replacing the previous term "Generation Y", the average millennial was 21 years old, so the image was popularized of millennials as "college kids". The parlance of the word in everyday usage seems to be expanding so that it now includes not just those that were originally Gen Y, but also some younger Gen Xers, as well as current teens and college kids (many of whom are actually {{w|Gen Z}}/Generation 💅).

In this strip, [[White Hat]] expresses a sentiment of prejudice against millennials, claiming they aren’t prepared for “the real world.” This is a sentiment that sometimes can be found among those of older generations.
However, [[Cueball]] refutes this by saying that many millennials have been adults for almost 20 years, and those that had kids early on are taking them to college. This is due to another common misunderstanding, where the definition of “millennial” has changed so much, and expanded so often, that nobody really knows what it means anymore.

White Hat refuses to accept this, saying millennials ''are'' the college kids, to which Cueball says that maybe White Hat is the one not growing up and accepting that millennials are, in fact, adults. The title text builds on this, complaining that [[Randall]] has been having these discussions for over a decade.

The title text begins with the word "ironically," for what appears to be an entirely sincere complaint, possibly in reference to [[wikipedia:Alanis Morissette|Alanis Morissette's]] pop song "[[wikipedia:Ironic (song)|Ironic]]," which is often said to be a generation-defining hit among millennials, and which was widely criticized for misusing the word. Alternatively, Randall may simply be using "ironically" to mean "strangely".

White Hat has been similarly confused by what ages different generations are in [[973: MTV Generation]].

==Transcript==

:[White Hat and Cueball facing each other.]
:White Hat: I'm just saying–
:White Hat: All these millennials will be in for a shock when they have to grow up and enter the real world.

:[Zoom in on Cueball's head and upper body.]
:Cueball: Except...
:Cueball: "Millennials" started reaching adulthood about 20 years ago.

:[Zoom out to full view of White Hat and Cueball facing each other in a frameless panel.]
:Cueball: Which means that some millennials can't respond to your criticism because they're busy taking their kids to check out colleges.

:[White Hat and Cueball facing each other.]
:White Hat: But ...no, millennials '''are''' college kids!
:Cueball: Maybe ''they're'' not the ones failing to grow and change over time here.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics to make one feel old]]

2383: Electoral Precedent 2020

2022-11-07T01:06:37Z

172.70.174.114: /* Table of New Broken Precedents */

{{comic
| number = 2383
| date = November 9, 2020
| title = Electoral Precedent 2020
| image = electoral_precedent_2020-new.png
| titletext = He also broke the streak that incumbents with websites are unbeatable and Delawareans can't win, creating a new precedent: Only someone from Delaware can defeat an incumbent with a website.
}}

==Explanation==

This comic is an update to [[1122: Electoral Precedent]], adding "broken precedents" for the US presidential elections in 2016 and 2020. It was published six days after the 2020 election took place, and two days after {{w|Four Seasons Total Landscaping press conference|most news networks "called" the election}}, projecting Biden as the winner. The majority of the comic's panels are duplicates from 1122, with the exception of the 2012 panel (modified to show that Obama did in fact break the streak), the 2016 panel (added to reflect the election of Donald Trump), and the two 2020 panels. It continues the theme of pointing out that an arbitrary 'precedent' can always be invoked to predict the outcome of an election. Presidential elections happen rarely enough that each is a unique event, and ''something'' is always happening for the first time. Like with the other examples, the precedents mentioned here mix factors that could plausibly impact the election (such as one candidate having been impeached), with precedents that are just a product of time and chance (like a successful challenger having a website).

The final two panels again show how, no matter which candidate won in 2020, it would be a 'first' in some way.
* No sitting president who was impeached was even nominated for the office again until Donald Trump. (Only two other US presidents have been impeached. Bill Clinton couldn't run again afterward due to term limits, Andrew Johnson failed to be nominated at the 1868 Democratic Convention.) After the election, it remains true that no impeached president has ever been re-elected. (As of February 2021, Trump is considered a potential candidate for the 2024 election; should he be nominated and win that election, this statement could become false, depending on how exactly one interprets it.)
* Prior to the 2020 election, no challenger with a website ever won. This, however, is easily explained by the fact that incumbent presidents usually win, and websites are a fairly new technology. The last time a challenger beat an incumbent was in 1992 before Internet use was widespread. By 1996 that had changed and both the incumbent [http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/websites/cg96/ Bill Clinton campaign] and the challenger [http://www.dolekemp96.org/main.htm Bob Dole campaign] had websites that look very simple by today's standards. The title text points out that one could just as easily say that incumbents with websites are unbeatable, until that precedent was broken in 2020.

The 2020 election was also precedent-breaking in a few ways that Randall didn't mention:
* At 78, Joe Biden was the oldest president ever on the day of his inauguration.
* Biden's running mate Kamala Harris is the first-ever female vice president, first Black vice president, and the first Asian vice president (her parents are from Jamaica and India). She's also the first Democratic vice president from the West.
* Biden received over 80 million votes, the highest ever, beating Obama 2008's previous record of just under 69.5 million votes. The second-highest raw vote total was for Trump, with approximately 74.2 million votes, ''also'' beating Obama 2008. Turnout as a percentage of the eligible population was the highest in over a century. Unlike the other precedents, however, this one was not an inevitable outcome of a Biden-Harris victory.

Also, Biden is the first president from the state of Delaware, thus he broke the "precedent" that Delawareans can't win. Randall then proceeds to combine these 2 facts to create a new precedent: Only Delawareans can defeat incumbents with a website.

==Table of New Broken Precedents==

All original options can be found at [[1122: Electoral Precedent]].

{| border =1 width=100% cellpadding=5 class="wikitable"
|-
! Year !! Broken Precedent !! Explanation !! Validity

|-
|2012
|Democratic incumbents never beat taller challengers. ... Until Obama did.
|Mitt Romney stood 6' 2", an inch taller than President Obama. Nonetheless, Obama was re-elected for a second term.
|True
|-
|2016
|No one has become president without government or military experience. ... Until Trump did.
|Every president prior to Trump had either been a general in the US Army, a congressman, a state governor, or a cabinet member.
|True
|-
|2020?
|No one has won after being impeached. ✓
|None of the two prior presidents who were impeached even ran for re-election. This is the first time this specific condition has even been tested.
|Trump was impeached, ran, and lost, so this test remains true at this point in history.
|-
|2020?
|No challenger with a website has won. X
|The ''possibility'' of having a website only arose in the 1990s and Bill Clinton seems to not have had one when he succeeded Bush Sr. Although websites became increasingly ubiquitous, no president since had ever been defeated by their respective challengers.
|"...until Biden did."
|}

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

:The problem with statements like
:"No <party> candidate has won the election without <state>"
:Or
:"No president has been reelected under <circumstances>"

:<nowiki>★</nowiki> Updated for 2020 ★

:[Each statement below has its own panel. The year is in a caption, the precedent is stated by a standing Cueball in the main panel, and the president who broke it is below the panel.]
:1788... No one has been elected president before. ...But Washington was.
:1792... No incumbent has ever been reelected. ...Until Washington.
:1796... No one without false teeth has become president. ...But Adams did.
:1800... No challenger has beaten an incumbent. ...But Jefferson did.
:1804... No incumbent has beaten a challenger. ...Until Jefferson.
:1808... No congressman has ever become president. ...Until Madison.
:1812... No one can win without New York. ...But Madison did.
:1816... No candidate who doesn't wear a wig can get elected. ...Until Monroe was.
:1820... No one who wears pants instead of breeches can be reelected. ...But Monroe was.
:1824... No one has ever won without a popular majority. ...J.Q. Adams did.
:1828... Only people from Massachusetts and Virginia can win. ...Until Jackson did.
:1832... The only presidents who get reelected are Virginians. ...Until Jackson.
:1836... New Yorkers always lose. ...Until Van Buren.
:1840... No one over 65 has won the presidency. ...Until Harrison did.
:1844... No one who's lost his home state has won. ...But Polk did.
:1848... As goes Mississippi, so goes the nation. ...Until 1848.
:1852... New England Democrats can't win. ...Until Pierce did.
:1856... No one can become president without getting married. ...Until Buchanan did.
:1860... No one over 6'3" can get elected. ...Until Lincoln.
:1864... No one with a beard has been reelected. ...But Lincoln was.
:1868... No one can be president if their parents are alive. ...Until Grant.
:1872... No one with a beard has been reelected in peacetime. ...Until Grant was.
:1876... No one can win a majority of the popular vote and still lose. ...Tilden did.
:1880... As goes California, so goes the nation. ...Until it went Hancock.
:1884... Candidates named "James" can't lose. ...Until James Blaine.
:1888... No sitting president has been beaten since the Civil War. ...Cleveland was.
:1892... No former president has been elected. ...Until Cleveland.
:1896... Tall Midwesterners are unbeatable. ...Bryan wasn't.
:1900... No Republican shorter than 5'8" has been reelected. ...Until McKinley was.
:1904... No one under 45 has been elected. ...Roosevelt did.
:1908... No Republican who hasn't served in the military has won. ...Until Taft.
:[The precedent takes up the entire panel this year. Consequently, there is no Cueball.] 1912... After Lincoln beat the Democrats while sporting a beard with no mustache, the only Democrats who can win have a mustache with no beard. ...Wilson had neither.
:1916... No Democrat has won while losing West Virginia. ...Wilson did.
:1920... No incumbent senator has won. ...Until Harding.
:1924... No one with two Cs in their name has become president. ...Until Calvin Coolidge.
:1928... No one who got ten million votes has lost. ...Until Al Smith.
:1932... No Democrat has won since women secured the right to vote. ...Until FDR did.
:1936... No president's been reelected with double-digit unemployment. ...Until FDR was.
:1940... No one has won a third term. ...Until FDR did.
:1944... No Democrat has won during wartime. ...Until FDR did.
:1948... Democrats can't win without Alabama. ...Truman did.
:1952... No Republican has won without winning the House or Senate. ...Eisenhower did.
:1956... No one can beat the same nominee a second time in a leap year rematch. ...Until Eisenhower.
:1960... Catholics can't win. ...Until Kennedy.
:1964... Every Republican who's taken Louisiana has won. ...Until Goldwater.
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 1968... No Republican vice president has risen to the Presidency through an election. ...Until Nixon.
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 1972... Quakers can't win twice. ...Until Nixon did.
:1976... No one who lost New Mexico has won. ...But Carter did.
:1980... No one has been elected president after a divorce. ...Until Reagan was.
:1984... No left-handed president has been reelected. ...Until Reagan was.
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 1988... No one with two middle names has become president. ...Until "Herbert Walker".
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 1992... No Democrat has won without a majority of the Catholic vote. ...Until Clinton did.
:[The precedent takes up the entire panel this year. Consequently, there is no Cueball.] 1996... No Dem. incumbent without combat experience has beaten someone whose first name is worth more in Scrabble. ...Until Bill beat Bob.
:2000... No Republican has won without Vermont. ...Until Bush did.
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 2004... No Republican without combat experience has beaten someone two inches taller ...Until Bush did.
:2008... No Democrat can win without Missouri. ...Until Obama did.
:2012... Democratic incumbents never beat taller challengers. ... Until Obama did.
:[The panel is zoomed in on Cueball's head in this frame.] 2016... No one has become president without government or military experience. ... Until Trump did.
:2020? No one has won after being impeached. <big>✓</big>
:2020? No challenger with a website has won. <big>X</big>

:[Caption below the comic]
:Congratulations to President-Elect Joe Biden for breaking the website curse!

==Errors==
*This comic seems to have used the same image as [[1122: Electoral Precedent]], and so the original version of this comic had a ghost image of the original 2012 2nd "streak": "No nominee whose first name contains a "K" has lost."
*Also, the panels for past elections that were wrong before continue to be wrong, including 1812, 1816, 1820, 1904, and 1952. See [[1122: Electoral Precedent]], Table of Broken Precedents for details.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Elections]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ronald Reagan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring John F. Kennedy]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Donald Trump]]