explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-12T10:53:59Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2761
| date = April 10, 2023
| title = 1-to-1 Scale
| image = 1_to_1_scale_2x.png
| imagesize = 444x281px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = There's a version that shows the planets with no cropping, but it's hard to find a display that supports it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a DISPLAY THAT SUPPORTS THE PLANETS WITH NO CROPPING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic supposedly shows what each planet would look like at 1:1 scale, which would mean at real size. However, because a minuscule portion of each planet is visible on the page at that scale, it becomes comically useless at distinguishing the size or relative size of each planet, and each planet is just a differently textured straight line.

To understand the diagram, imagine that all eight planets have been drawn close to each other with just a tiny spot of the sky visible between them. The planets have been drawn so it is possible in this small 1:1 image to see all eight planets edges. Space is the black polygon in the center, with Earth the top white segment. The reason why each planet is so smooth is because it's such a small area of each planet: you're only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the planets, and even though they are all round, the curvature would be invisible on this scale. The four Gas giants are completely flat, whereas the four rocky planets display features, most notably on Earth where grass is visible.

That it cannot have been an image of the real planets aligning is clear, as Mercury can be shown to be in front of Jupiter (implying that the latter is in the part of its orbit beyond the Sun), yet Jupiter obscures Earth (which necessitates that it be in the arc of orbit ''nearest'' any given observer). In the title text it is made clear that this is just a small part of a larger drawing, so this is not an image taken from far away – they are only placed this way for scale.

The title text remarks that it is hard to find a display that supports a version of the image without cropping. This is because a true 1:1 scale image showing each of the planets would be ridiculously large[https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/1164/how-big-is-the-solar-system/], larger than any monitor or display currently available on Earth (since it would be much larger than Earth, in fact it would would have to be larger than Jupiter, to depict 1:1).

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|The main panel itself is missing explanation. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A frame with a central area of black 'space', bounded at various intersecting angles by eight 'straight lines' representing planetary surfaces, originating from various out-of-frame angles of 'down' and the white of some bodies obscuring some part of the others.]
:[There are labels indicating which line represents each planet.]
:[The four gas-giants' lines are simply drawn, near straight and featureless.]
:[The lines for the rocky inner-planets have variations to them, stereotypical of some part of their surface.]
:[The "Earth" line ('down' being out the top of the frame) has a profile indicating various small-scale vegetation and also features the white sillouette of an ant that may be of a realistic size for your display.]
:[Caption below the panel:]
:The solar system's planets at 1:1 scale

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Space]]
[[Category:Comics_with_inverted_brightness]]

Talk:2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T15:00:33Z

172.70.85.56:

Really want an explanation for this one. [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

My comment got deleted by a bot!!! [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 03:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:RIP... [[User:JobbieJimmies|Melomaniac]] ([[User talk:JobbieJimmies|talk]]) 03:25, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, UC, it just got overwritten by the 'bot, when it did its job and (re)created the whole initial state of the various pages to depict the new comic coming out. (Noting that you'd not set them all up fully/correctly.)
:That you had spotted it already and had ''just'' gotten in ahead of the 'bot clearly isn't something it was prepared to handle. But as someone spotting it can usually wait a short while for the 'bot to catch up, I don't think it's a problem. In fact, you could have just copied your old contributions into the now receptive page(s), with nary any comment. Too late now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 03:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:: This may have broken the next link on the previous page. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.36|172.71.160.36]] 06:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The lines represent the surfaces of the planets I think, so it's basically all the planets overlaid on top of each other. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.35|172.71.142.35]] 03:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:Yup, I think it's what he meant - but I find it unlikely that the gas giants would have this clear cutoff of a "surface". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.189.241|162.158.189.241]] 03:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
::If there is a gas - liquid phase transition (and I think at least the gas giants have them): Why not? OK, you could see "rain" as blurring a clear cutoff, but wouldn't that also apply to Earth, then?[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 08:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I’d think the same citation as stands for ridiculously large would also cover larger than currently exists on earth, and his that citation is not in fact needed? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.174.186|162.158.174.186]] 06:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

:It seems like the gas-covered worlds are explicitly those with clearly cutoff "surfaces," so maybe in those cases the cutoff is some specific gas density -- which occurs at a consistent radius throughout the planet, thus creating a flat surface. While for rocky worlds (except Venus, which is treated like a gas planet here), a density cutoff can lead to bumpiness due to terrain. [[User:Trimeta|Trimeta]] ([[User talk:Trimeta|talk]]) 03:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

On Twitter there seems to be concern that all planets are depicted flat. This may make this a contribution/mockery of the ongoing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth Flat Earth] discussions in some corners of the internet. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.132|198.41.242.132]] 06:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:You can't see the curvature of the Earth when standing on it; doesn't mean it's flat. Since we're looking at the planets at a 1:1 scale, we're literally only seeing a couple of inches of each of their edges (notwithstanding the whole gas-giants-don't-have-a-sharp-edge issue). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.20|162.158.239.20]] 12:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:actually you can see it, standing on the shore of any large lake on a calm day looking at a shore that's ~6.5 miles (10.5km) away. You'll lose ~8ft (2.5m) below the horizon - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The display for an uncropped version of the image would not only be larger than any display on earth. It would be larger than earth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.243|162.158.86.243]] 06:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:By necessity, at least as large as Jupiter. Maybe slightly above two Jupiters (max dimension squared compared to display height*width of any common aspect ratio) if you wanted to not overlay any of the others at all. And make the lower limit a packing-problem, then add a buffer so there isn't the actual need for any to touch. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.253|172.70.90.253]] 10:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

1-to-1 scale means 'assume all planets are the same size,' right? I see Earth's grass is shown to be as large as Martian rocks, because Earth is a third again as large. (At the scale where grass is visible, Earth looks flat.) At first I thought the point was that altitude variation in cloud-tops varied so little that a gas giant shrunk down to Earth size would be featureless and have a distinct edge, but that's wrong. Ground isn't cloud-tops. Do gas giants have any solid ground? We've seen Jupiter eat comets, and it makes sense they would've collected at least some minerals and metals. According to [[https://www.teachastronomy.com/textbook/The-Giant-Planets-and-Their-Moons/Internal-Structure-of-the-Gas-Giant-Planets/|Teach Astronomy]], gas giants have Earth-sized solid cores. I'm guessing gas giants' immense gravity compresses their cores into featureless spheres, which, if scaled to Earth-size and viewed at the scale where one could see grass, would look flat. Yes?
[[User:EllenNB|EllenNB]] ([[User talk:EllenNB|talk]]) 10:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:Gravity itself won't compress (and 'flatten') the cores. "Shell theory" shows that gravitational force only counts from the proportion of the body that is within the radius of the bit you're concerned with. But there'll also be the external pressure (from being at the bottom of a thick atmosphere that ultimately ''is'' above far more of the planetary mass) and possibly a degree of compression density to make any Earth-sized core slightly heavier than if it was just a bare core of the same size but shorn of outer layers.
:As to flatness, I can take you to very flat stretches of Earth and very lumpy bits (depends which direction I go, from where I am now), all within 30 minutes' drive. We can'teven know how representative a sample of planetary cross-sections we are seeing (once we get over the issues of gas/space boundaries for gas-giants), but I bet there are bits that resemble the diagram... If you ''really'' want it to be so real. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]] 11:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, 1-to-1 means that they are actual size, not the same size. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 13:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

There are several pieces of information here that are featured but don't make sense to me. What's the function of the dark polygon in the center? Why are the lines showing each surface going in random directions? Why is the surface of each planet so flat at a full scale rendition? When I look out my window at full sized Earth, it's not flat. It's quite bumpy, actually. But perhaps he doesn't mean these are full size, he might be saying that they're all shrunk, but the same amount, so 1:1:1:1:1... but even then, I'm totally lost.

"What's the function of the dark polygon in the center?"
I think it is a view of the dark sky, "above" the surface of the Earth, Mars, etc. [[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 11:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I think the "polygon" is a grassy Earth itself, with the white above it sky. Earth is the rearmost planet pictured. Then in front of Earth, on all sides except the top, are the overlays of the various planets, what little of each one as can fit. But then maybe the polygon is night starry sky, and Earth is the white area above it. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 14:35, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Is this an ant on earth, over the letters "EA" ? On my monitor, set for my less-than-perfect vision, it is 15mm long, which (at a 1:1 scale) makes it a cow ant, or a large african ant. I guess people with normal vision get fire and carpenter ants instead? And those on smartphones get pavement ants?[[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.73|172.68.50.73]] 11:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:I do believe it is! It's 6 mm on my desktop monitor and 3 mm on my phone. We also don't know what side of the Earth we're looking at, so I suppose it could really be any ant, including the one in your local area. I like to think it's a black garden ant (''Lasius niger''), since I'm most familiar with those :) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.239.25|162.158.239.25]] 12:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It took me a good while to figure out this one; I don't normally need to come here, but this one stumped me at first. (The comments as of right now weren't too illuminating either.) I think the lack of color was an issue; I first thought the black polygon in the center was the earth, and then interpreted the various lines as a really weird diagram type I'd never seen before, like a phase diagram or something; I also considered one-dimensional planets. [https://imgur.com/a/yJOYvk1 I colored in the planets to aid me.] The way I now interpret this one is thus: imagine an observer sitting a tremendous distance away from the solar system, and they have a camera with an extremely supremely highly zooming telephoto lens. Then a lining-up of all eight planets happens – I believe this is impossible IRL (because of resonances or something), but just go with it. The observer manages to snap this incredible image of a teeny tiny spot of the sky, which simultaneously manages to include the very very edges of all the planets as well as some of the sky behind them all. The sky is the black polygon: it has nebulae and stars. Neptune is in front of Uranus, and that as well as Mercury are in front of Saturn, which is in front of both Jupiter and Mars; Venus is between Mercury, Mars and the Earth, and the Earth is also behind Jupiter. The reason why these are all so smooth is because it's such a small area: we're literally only seeing a couple of square inches of the surface of each of the rocky planets. (See, you can see an individual ant on the Earth. Go to the most rugged mountain range you can find and observe a couple of square inches; it'll be locally flat.) The lack of atmospheres on the rocky planets as well as the hard edges of the gas giants are artistic license. This one is a member of the genre of "true yet unhelpful diagrams"; I'm surprised that isn't a category on this wiki. – [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.4|162.158.238.4]] 12:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

((Written whilst 162.158.238.4 was editing, above, and I got an edit conflict on that. The editor concerned touches on this ordering business, but I'm pasting my original in unaltered, not rejigged as a more focused reply.)) I was wondering abut the "overlap order" for a while, until I twigged it. May not be worth officially documenting, but my analysis, showing that (perhaps depending upon specific orbital positions, during a given range of times, which can of course be checked) it's ''probably'' based upon distance away from Earth.
*Earth is bottom-most. Could be 1st/2nd, shared with Mars, as their overlap isn't shown.
*Mars is our nearest neighbour. (As above, could be 1st ''or'' 2nd on stack.)
*Venus next. Although it could be 7th (only obscured by Mercury) or anywhere else down to 3rd.
*Jupiter as 4th from bottom. (''Could'' be 3rd..5th, though.)
*Saturn takes 5th-up position. (4th..6th)
*Mercury as 6th. (Or all the way to topmost, but I made an assumption about its relationship to the last two.)
*Uranus as 7th. (6th/7th a possibility, depends on Mercury)
*Neptune as 8th. (7th/8th possible, Mercury again.)
...or at least that's what my mental notes tell me. Not helped by starting off counting from near to far and possibly messing up my numbers when I realised it made sense to flip them. It could also be "delta-V needed to reach the planet concerned" (either without or ''including'' flyby slingshot momentum borrowing/burning), but that's something I'd also need to check. I doubt it really needs tying down/Explaining, and when I edited the Transcript I decided not to record every nuance of the "variously orientated surfaces", as I think it adds nothing so long as the description gives the general idea. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.121|141.101.98.121]] 13:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

So no one is going to mention that for the clarity depicted you'd need to literally place the planets inside of each other, or have some sort of focal length from zero to infinity? I'm not sure if that bothers me more or less than the missed trick of making the length of ground shown relate to some comparative parameter (albedo might have been a fun one) - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.213|162.158.186.213]] 13:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:To be fair, you're also going to have to choose a "flat" few inches of surface that stands proud of the local geography (such that anything higher is below the curvature of the Earth for its proximity), and deal with an impossible resolution of an impossibly zoomed telephoto shot from a viewpoint unimaginably distant (''whilst'' a near-enough non-Solar conjunction/asterism is happening, or at least was, when the light passed each body), without significant atmospheric distortion (which is a relatively minor issue, compared with the scarcity of photons that reach the camera ''anyway'').
:Can we perhaps instead assume that these are just individual 1:1-scale cross-sectional diagrams (or even carefully curated local photos) drawn together into a hybrid image to accurately retain the scaling verisimilitude, and individual contexts, but happily faking the relative positions? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 15:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T12:18:21Z

172.70.85.56: /* Transcript */ Expanded transcript. Removed title-text. Left incomplete transcript, in case anyone else wants to refine further.

Talk:2761: 1-to-1 Scale

2023-04-11T10:06:34Z

172.70.85.56:

2754: Relative Terms

2023-03-31T15:40:22Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2754
| date = March 24, 2023
| title = Relative Terms
| image = relative_terms_2x.png
| imagesize = 425x442px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Small sewing machines are sewing machines that are smaller than a sewing machine. A sewing machine is larger than a small sewing machine, but quieter than a loud sewing machine.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT THAT IS LARGER THAN A BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The terms "small" and "big" are used to refer to size; the terms "loud" and "quiet" are used to refer to (audial) volume.

While these terms are relative, they are often used even when there is nothing obvious being compared against (e.g. "A windmill is a big thing" or "An ant is a small thing"). This comic humorously suggests that the item defined to be in the middle of all four terms ("neither small nor big; neither quiet nor loud") is a sewing machine, as a sewing machine seems (at least in comparison to the other items on the graph) to be neither particularly big nor particularly small, neither particularly quiet nor particularly loud.

An alternative argument may be that the in the center would be the average adult human (as this is the perspective from which most people use language), though this observation would lose some of the comic's comedic value.

The center of the chart is a sewing machine, and the comic is claiming that the scales of "loud and quiet" and "big and small" are measured in comparison to a standard size sewing machine. A standard sewing machine is roughly 60dB in volume and approximately 42” X 21”, although this is for industrial machines, and those in the home would be both smaller and quieter.

Many of the items appear to have been placed in the wrong quadrant for their actual attributes; locations seem to reflect more how people generally think of these things, as opposed to their real-life relationship to a sewing machine.

The title text is humorously tautological because it compares the standard against those things that are themselves defined against the standard.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and quiet (upper left)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Ant || Randall has used ants as a small comparator in [[2733:_Size_Comparisons|a previous comic]] on the topic of comparisons.
|-
| Balloon || A party balloon is quite loud when it pops, or if someone 'squeaks' it by rubbing; a hot-air balloon is big enough to carry a few humans, and the burner can be surprisingly loud.
|-
| Book || Books are typically sized to be handheld, and thus smaller than a sewing machine, though some very large books do exist.[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/longest-book-in-the-world-impossible-to-read-180980814/#:~:text=At%2021%2C450%20Pages%2C%20the%20Longest,World%20Is%20Impossible%20to%20Read&text=Artist%20Ilan%20Manouach%20bound%20together,the%20commodification%20of%20comic%20books.] Similarly, books are associated with quiet activity, making no more sound than a quiet turning of a page in typical use, but could make a very loud bang if slammed shut on thrown forcefully on to a hard surface.
|-
| Bun (rabbit or pastry) || "Bun" is an informal term for a rabbit and a loaf of bread; a comparison between the two was made in [[1871: Bun Alert]]. While {{w|Flemish_Giant_rabbit|some rabbits}} may reach the size of a small dog or a child, and specially baked items for promotional activity or record attempts may exceed the size of a sewing machine, both would typically be smaller. However, while bread is usually very quiet, even when being eaten, rabbits can make a large amount of noise that is at odds with their common image.
|-
| Butterfly || Butterflies are used as an exemplar of something small, unnoticeable and seemingly insignificant in the metaphor of the Butterfly Effect.
|-
| Hat ||
|-
| Mouse || A mouse is a very small, quiet animal. This might also be a reference to the expression "quiet as a mouse", meaning very quietly.
|-
| Newt ||
|-
| Pin drop || The expression "hear a pin drop" is used to indicate that an area is exceptionally quiet; the idea is that the space is so silent that even something as insubstantial and tiny as a pin can be heard hitting the ground.
|-
| Snow globe || A {{w|snow globe}} is much smaller than a sewing machine. Some snow globes have a small music box that can be wound up to play a melody. Snow globes without a music box are silent.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and loud (upper right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Baby || Babies are usually considered small, and can be quite loud when they cry.
|-
| Blender || Blenders make a lot of noise when in use. Most household blenders are smaller than a sewing machine.
|-
| Cricket || Given that it is in the small/loud quadrant, this would refer to the insect, which is pretty small and can be quite loud; the sport of cricket or a cricket game would be much larger (though potentially much louder).
|-
| Fire alarm || The primary purpose of a fire alarm is to notify people of fire, so fire alarms are usually very loud, but ideally take up little space.
|-
| Firecracker || A {{w|Firecracker}} is a small explosive firework that makes a very loud bang when lit.
|-
| Flute || An example of a small musical instrument that can nevertheless be audibly quite dominant.
|-
| Harmonica || See Flute.
|-
| Popcorn || A snack that is known for being annoyingly loud in a cinema setting. However, this is largely due to the otherwise low volume environment, and arguably a sewing machine might be equally or more annoying. Also, some helpings of popcorn in some cinemas may actually be larger than a sewing machine.
|-
| Songbird ||
|-
| Whistle || This is of course a device known as a whistle, as these are small. The human act of whistling, or a whistle produced by, for example, a kettle, has no size (other than that of the whistler or whistling object). A whistle is used as an alert or signal, or could be another musical instrument (see Flute). The loudest human whistle ever recorded was 8372 Hz and roughly 110 DB, which is a C9 in the standard musical scale and is roughly as loud as a jackhammer[https://www.vnews.com/West-Lebanon-man-sets-a-world-record-for-whistling-24480844#:~:text=Guinness'%20website%20says%20Stanford%20reached,in%20the%20standard%20musical%20notation.]. Since a whistle should be able to beat this it must be seen as loud.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and quiet (lower left)
|-
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Anaconda ||
|-
| Giraffe || Giraffes can be quite loud, but they usually vocalise using frequencies well below the range of human hearing. So, to a human, giraffes are quiet.
|-
| Northern lights || "In 2016, a Finnish study confirmed that the Aurora Borealis does produce a sound that can be heard" [https://www.techexplorist.com/listen-sound-aurora-borealis/47421/]
|-
| Shark || When people think of sharks, they typically envisage something large a dangerous like a {{w|Great_white_shark|great white}}. However, sharks come in a large variety of sizes, often {{w|Dwarf_lanternshark|considerably smaller}} than a sewing machine.
|-
| Statue || Most statues are larger than a sewing machine. Most statues are silent, but some have fountains or other devices that make sound.
|-
| The Moon || Lower left corner; the Moon is very, very big{{fact}}, but it is also completely silent{{fact}} as sound cannot travel through the vacuum of space.
|-
| Tree ||
|-
| Windmill ||
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and loud (lower right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Airplane ||
|-
| Cannon ||
|-
| Riding mower ||
|-
| [[wikipedia:Calliope_(music)|Steam calliope]] || A large musical device which functions by sending steam (or more recently compressed air) through attached whistles.
|-
| Train ||
|-
| Tuba ||
|-
| Volcano || Lower right corner. Volcanic eruptions can be extremely loud. The {{w|1883 eruption of Krakatoa}} made a pressure wave of 180 dB, the loudest sound ever recorded.
|-
| Waterfall ||
|-
| Whale ||
|}

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

:[A chart, with "Quiet" to "Loud" on the X-axis, and "Small" to "Big" on the Y-axis. It is split into four quarters, with "Sewing machine" in the center.]

:[Upper left quadrant (Small & Quiet items):] Butterfly, Pin drop, Mouse, Ant, Bun (rabbit or pastry), Snow globe, Newt, Balloon, Book, Hat

:[Upper right quadrant (Small & Loud items):] Popcorn, Cricket, Songbird, Whistle, Baby, Harmonica, Flute, Fire alarm, Blender, Firecracker

:[Lower left quadrant (Big & Quiet items):] Shark, Tree, Anaconda, Giraffe, Statue, Windmill, Northern lights, The Moon

:[Lower right quadrant (Big & Loud items):] Tuba, Riding mower, Cannon, Airplane, Train, Waterfall, Steam calliope, Whale, Volcano

:[Caption below the panel:]
:''Big'', ''Small'', ''Loud'', and ''Quiet'' are relative terms. The thing they're relative to is a sewing machine.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Buns]]
[[Category:Sharks]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Volcanoes]]
[[Category:Food]]

Talk:1386: People are Stupid

2023-03-30T00:49:02Z

172.70.85.56:

On average yes, an individual is of average intelligence. But taken as a population of a whole, well, that's a different story entirely. Randall needs a vacation, ever since he jumped the shark with the dead baby it just feels like the downward trend is getting steeper. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.135|108.162.210.135]] 13:20, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:I don't really think that he jumped the shark. I don't quite get what you are trying to say, and individual can't be of average intelligence. You must first define the average, if we take the mean intelligence of the whole population, then take a person from the sample, then we say that the individual is of average intelligence. You can't say people is stupid while referring to the whole population, because of the definition of stupid, if we take a sample of low IQ people then those people are going to be of average intelligence within the sample, the same goes to the whole population. So this comic is perfectly valid. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.192|108.162.212.192]] 04:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
::I know this is a lot later, but I believe that OP was referring to the difference between mean and median measures of intelligence. More than 50% of the population can be below average intelligence if the distribution is skewed right. [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 03:36, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Isn't that a reference to the Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence? [[Special:Contributions/103.22.200.119|103.22.200.119]] 04:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)krayZpaving

White Hat being burned? This certainly will not end here.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.102.208|141.101.102.208]] 04:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

'''''Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.''''' This wiki is founded on the very principle that people are stupid. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.223.29|108.162.223.29]] 05:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: You make an intelligent point, which I both appreciate and like. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.50|108.162.222.50]] 13:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
::Awww, it's just a joke, it's not personal or anything! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

This comment is one that makes me scratch my head and wonder... surely Randall is able to see that intelligence is not a relative but rather an absolute thing (if one were to kill the 10% most intelligent people the rest wouldn't get dumber, nor smarter). Surely intelligence is not to be measured in units of the common denominator. Surely it is obvious that 2nd panel is a pure strawman. Sigh...
Oh and btw an IQ of 100 is the median, not the average. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.17|141.101.104.17]] 09:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: I am wondering if the explanation should not include a mention of the Median/Mean problem because it is entirely possible for a majority of a population to be above or below some mean (average) statistic depending on the distribution. Also stupidity is a standard that is not dependent on either median or mean.[[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 11:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: The IQ of 100 is actually defined to be the median AND the average (and also the mode). It is also defined that the distibution around the IQ of 100 is a perfect bell curve. The IQ just tells you how many people in the world have your IQ (It is also defined that two values that have same distance from hundred, e.g. 80 and 120 have the same amount of people, 'cause it's a perfect bell curve (this means that there are as many people with IQ 120 as people with IQ 80). If the overall population gets more intelligent they have to make the IQ tests harder, so that 100 is again the average and median (This really happened). This and some other things are reasons why I think that IQ tests are BS. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.93.219|141.101.93.219]] 14:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
:: "A test device with numerous correlates measures an amount of environmental influences beside innate determinants, therefore bullshit"... What are your other objections to I.Q. testing? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.221|141.101.89.221]] 14:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The mocking "award", which is an analogy of saying "intelligence isn't everything" (an EXTREMELY common cliche), reflects the fact that Randall, like just about anyone, is oblivious to the magnitude of the totality of positive correlates of intelligence, and even (TRIGGER WARNING, TABOO CONCEPT AHEAD) I.Q. Intelligence, I.Q., not only makes you happier, it also makes you more helpful to other people, more creative, more socially stable, better-to-do, less susceptible to mental illnesses, more likely to remember events in your life, etc. etc. etc... Basically, there isn't a positive trait or quality of life with which intelligence doesn't correlate. But people positively LOATHE awareness of how highly intelligence, in fact, matters. Hence the vehement denial whenever someone indicates its importance, all the "I know an intelligent person who is miserable/mean/...", all stressing of exceptions, all ridicule of the notion of intelligence in general, all the "don't think about it"-mentality, all writing off of I.Q. as "antiquated, grossly limited, racist, metric" rather than the extremely potent predictor that it is. tl;dr Randall at all, take time to actually STUDY intelligence or the g factor before you mock it like that. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 09:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

: IQ is based on an arbitrary test and isn't necessarily accurate or reliable. Cognitive ability (which IQ does not accurately measure) WOULD make you more creative, have better memory, etc. I don't know anything about the mental illness thing, but it doesn't make you happier- you can be extremely intelligent but still have a miserable life. Also many "geniuses" in history have emotional issues and unbalanced lives. Intelligence doesn't make you more helpful, either. Yes, you might be more ABlE to help others, but only if you were educated, and only if you WANT to. Plus, this is a webcomic poking fun at people generalizing humanity, not an in-depth analysis of IQ. This whole argument is pointless, and I don't know why I just wasted a bunch of time on it... I guess I have fallen for the trap described by comic 386, Duty Calls. [[User:Random xkcd Fan|Random xkcd Fan]] ([[User talk:Random xkcd Fan|talk]]) 00:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

: In other words (and this is going to be my last addendum to this note, because it is a vast subject), whenever people say (or imply, as in the comic's case) that "intelligence isn't everything", the question to ask in return is, "okay, now what is the degree to which intelligence enables, facilitates, contributes to, 'the rest' to which you're opposing intelligence here?". People minimise the depth and breadth of the intellectual substrate of achievement. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 09:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

: Also, Randall (and everyone saying that) is being highly unjust in equating "people aren't smart" with "people aren't as smart as me". A perfectly valid alternative sense is, "people aren't as smart as to be rationally expected to contribute to rather than damage the discussion/situation/position at hand"--having the objective good, the objective recognition that certain situations (for instance, a certain online conversation which is expected to be competent) require certain minimal intellectual thresholds (for instance, an I.Q. of 120), in mind rather than egotic comparison. Lower intelligence, deny it all you please, comes with temperamental problems for instance. Selection for intelligence will largely filter them out. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 09:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

:: tl;dr of my entire production here: people must learn that BOTH situations of the Dunning-Kruger are equally harmful, the one that's less often considered perhaps actually even more so. Mistaken self-perception as intelligent is bad for the individual, but refusal to acknowledge the importance of one's own cognitive capacity (which is as good as universal in intelligent people--"I am not that smart" (who hasn't heard that one innumerable times?), "I just like doing thing x, my proficiency in it has nothing to do with my intelligence or I.Q.", "I have areas in which I'm 'stupid' too", "effort counts too") has societal consequences, of contributing to erroneous dismissal of the notions of intelligence & I.Q. & g etc. Shutting up for good now. Night. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 10:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

::: GAHHHHH just one more thing. Consider this: the fact that people dismiss I.Q. is the best indicator of how important a trait it really is. Thing is, people would not feel compelled by modesty to deny its importance had it not been vitally integral to many, many things. We deny what we value, so to give hope to those who lack that thing (to comfort those who lack intelligence). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 10:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

:::: Okay, no offense, but maybe you should calm down a bit. It's just a WEBCOMIC, not the Universal Decree of All Things Correct and Accepted as True. Also, I'm pretty sure you're overthinking it. Randall is just poking fun at those who say, "oh, people are stupid, you know". Cueball isn't seriously giving statistics (although I do agree with his logic- intelligence is NOT absolute, it's relative. And IQ is obsolete; it's based on arbitrary tests and vary based on things like race and social class, which should be evidence enough that it isn't some divine, and 100% precise way of calculating cognitive ability). Cueball is simply making fun of White Hat's statement that "people are stupid". Also the comic generally points out making remarks about the human race as a whole doesn't help anything... {{unsigned|Random xkcd Fan}}

:::: Hey 141.101.89.211... I wonder if you have something to say, but despite my best efforts, I'm having trouble following everything you're saying - I have a feeling you were a bit emotional (perhaps tired?) when writing that, or you might have had fewer "more things" immediately following "I'm done" statements. If you're up for it, I'd appreciate you taking the time to make sure you're saying what you want to say, and ''then'' say it, because you seem to at least have good grammar (though there ''were'' a few British spellings... :-D), so I suspect you probably have a good point. It's also conceivable that I'm just not smart enough to get what you're saying (?) or perhaps it's just too ''early'' for me. BTW the best way of making sure I see what you're saying would probably be to let me know on my [[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk page]]... might even have the conversation there if you'd prefer. Thanks for your time. [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 11:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: I don't know why you think that 141.101.89.211... No where does the comic say that. The mocking award is simply mocking people who '''may or may not''' have higher intelligence than the people they're addressing taking a Better Than Thou attitude because they think they do. In other words: "Higher intelligence doesn't give you an excuse to act like a jerk." I'm sure you can agree with that too [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.218|108.162.245.218]] 04:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I would add one "people are stupid" angle not yet mentioned: judging by behavior, most groups of people are less intelligent that any member of that group individually. This is valid even for the "all people" group - just look at the planet. Surprisingly, judging by content of most wikis, the "editors of wiki" groups seems to immune. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 10:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: Good point--conforming to pressures of one's group or one's position to the detriment of one's judgment is a separate personality trait. The phenomenon is remedied by intelligence, but independent from it. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.211|141.101.89.211]] 10:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: Beat me to it. I'd like to add that even individual people have their occasional stupid and intelligent moments, with the stupid ones typically being of greater magnitude. Thus, it's not unreasonable to say that the average actions of people are at least slightly less intelligent than the average intelligence of most people on most days. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.83|173.245.55.83]] 12:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: Similar to the statement in the film "Men In Black". Agent J says, "Why the big secret [about the aliens among us]? People are smart. They can handle it." Agent K responds, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.45|108.162.221.45]] 01:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I can't believe people say things like that, man, people are stupid [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 10:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the Lake Wobegon references. Not only is it on-target, but I take personal joy seeing mentions of uniquely Minnesotan culture anywhere I can find them. --BigMal27, Minnesota-born, Minnesotan-raised // [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.88|173.245.55.88]] 11:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Instead of saying, "People are stupid," we would do better to say "People make poor decisions / statements / judgments." And this, for multiple reasons, few of them I suspect tied to basal intelligence. Stage of life, level of health and stress, experience relative to the topic, level of education and the quality of that education, cultural idiotic beliefs that interfere with optimal choices, and a zillion others. Plus, as a large percentage of humans are either just coming online in experience and education, or are winding down in health and mental function, we are guaranteed to see a large percentage of stupid decisions right across the IQ landscape. No help for it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.217|108.162.246.217]] 13:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: I.Q. affects level of health and stress, rate of acquisition of experience, level of education, quality of education obtained, preference of cultural beliefs. It doesn't seem to defy reason that it affects the zillion other factors, too. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.221|141.101.89.221]] 13:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
: Remember, in interaction between psychological and social factors, the question is never of *existence* of a connection, but of its magnitude. It is fine to posit a multitude of environmental factors that determine (ir)rationality, but as long as such position keeps people from connecting I.Q. with those factors' actual occurrence (how much I.Q. does it take to finish a good school? to develop a habit of reading a book every month? this is not at all trivial question, and it needs to be resolved with more than anecdotal evidence of "I know an intelligent illiterate person"), there might be an elephant buried underneath the room which no one knows about. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.221|141.101.89.221]] 13:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I know Cueball's explanation can be construed to illustrate otherwise; but I doubt the comic was meant to be a comment on the relative intelligence of humanity. It seems more likely, to me, that the purpose of the comic was to comment on the stonewalling that the mindset, "I'm better than you," induces. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.35|108.162.216.35]] 15:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The cartoon never mentions I.Q. at all, Just "Average Intelligence", so the Mean/Median discussion is moot. As for the other discussion on this page, I'm just going to quote Blaise Pascal: "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time" [[User:Jim E|Jim E]] ([[User talk:Jim E|talk]]) 16:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

As mentioned above, in other comments that it's hard to find a way to indent from, there's a difference between different 'average's. (To compare "the median" with "the average" is not a good way of doing it, because one needn't know whether you're talking mean or mode in the second sense. I could even say that I have more than the average number of arms, for a human.) The assumption that the median [i]and[/i] mean (and, perhaps, also mode) are a single location at which 100IQ can be placed is dependant upon the bell curve being symmetrical. Just one hyper-intelligent could skew the mean well above the median. (Ok, so we're talking about comic-book "hyper"ness, to make it significant, in a world's worth of population, but the principle still stands for any more manageable population.) And about IQ tests being recalibrated... there is already a common convention that there's a score-adjuster (or a look-up table, based on this) that gives you different IQs for the same number of correct answers but for people of different ages (and sometimes male/female). Which seems to me like "we give up trying to be demographically neutral, let's just find how well different people answer in our test and then work out where their own arbitrary sub-group's bell-curve stradles". That said, I like IQ tests. I do well in them, and have fun doing them, even if I don't actually believe in them any more than I believe in Sudoku puzzles! And, sorry, I ended up typing far more than I had intended... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.193|141.101.99.193]] 16:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I see a lot of discussion on intelligence, but nothing on "losing faith in humanity". The way I see it everywhere is not in response to stupid people, but to acts of inhumanity. Random acts of violence and hate, for example. Or not random, but large scale. "Restored my faith in humanity" comments often refer to the opposite (in my experience) which involve random acts of kindness, or large-scale altruism. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.161|108.162.237.161]] 08:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

What about people using Facebook, Twitter, Whatsapp and any other "social network web 2.0" thing? They certainly aren't an individual or small group, they are stupid and I've lost my faith in them. :) {{unsigned ip|173.245.56.166}}

There are distributions where majority of the population would indeed be below average. Luckily for humanity, intelligence is on a bell curve! I am happy beyond words that this is the case. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.31}}

This has to be one of the most entertaining boring conversations I've ever come across! Brilliant! (Or not.) [[User:Taibhse|Taibhse]] ([[User talk:Taibhse|talk]]) 14:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I think when someone says "people are stupid", they actually usually mean something like "people systematically make mistakes that I feel are readily avoidable", rather than making an actual judgement regarding general intelligence. So this comic feels rather off to me. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.113|173.245.48.113]] 08:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

:If you read xkcd long enough, you'll find a lot of Randall's comics feel "off." {{unsigned ip|108.162.212.215}}

Interestingly, the people making comments about average people being stupid tend to be, eh, below-average-smart themselves. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.217|108.162.246.217]] 00:47, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

:"Interestingly," huh? You sound smart. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.215|108.162.212.215]] 14:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

When I say "People are stupid" I mean that a group of people making a decision is much stupider than a person. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.215|108.162.246.215]] 04:33, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

'''"No, people aren't stupid. On average, people are of average intelligence."'''

Hey, guys. Consider that average intelligence ''is'' stupid. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.215|108.162.212.215]] 14:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
: Yeah, this is how I've always interpreted "People are stupid" it means, considering we all think we're a smart species, our average intelligence is really low. It's not "I'm better than everybody/average/most people" but "Everybody/the average person/most people is/are worse than most people believe" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.216|141.101.99.216]] 13:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
:: You stupid, stupid humans. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.52|162.158.255.52]] 02:25, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

What if the distribution of intelligence is bimodal? If no one is of "average" intelligence, might the more extreme stupidity of a large portion of the population give the impression that the actual average is lower than it appears? [[User:Bppubjr|Bppubjr]] ([[User talk:Bppubjr|talk]]) 14:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

"People is dumb." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.164|173.245.52.164]]

All the (admittedly online) IQ tests I've done have always been focussed on logic, mental manipulation of shapes, maths, deduction etc. While this favours those with a certain type of brain, I can't help but think it is heavily biased against those with creative types of thinking. Hand me a paintbrush and canvas, and my logical brain is of no help at all --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 15:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
:Intelligence is the ability of learning, the use of logic and solving problems. While being creative is good, necessary and a very useful thing by itself, is NOT intelligence. So a person could be creative and being dumb at the same time, or the opposite. Also, there are not different kind of brains. The whole left-brain vs right-brain thing is a myth: http://www.livescience.com/39373-left-brain-right-brain-myth.html [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.29|173.245.48.29]] 21:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Not XKCD's best work. This is a normal response that smarter people initially feel when encountering others, having taking themselves as the baseline. This actually reflects a lack of elitism, where you expect other people to be the same as you and are surprised they are not (pretty much the opposite as portrayed here). Case in point is Freeman Dyson. Here's an excerpt from the Atlantic Monthly piece on him:

The prodigy in question, Freeman Dyson, now middle-aged, stared ahead, his incessant concentration on the road unbroken. He seemed mesmerized by the oncoming pavement, or by some idea or formulation glimpsed in the immateriality beyond the pavement. I asked him whether as a boy he had speculated much about his gift. Had he asked himself why he had this special power? Why he was so bright?

Dyson is almost infallibly a modest and self-effacing man, but tonight his eyes were blank with fatigue, and his answer was uncharacteristic.

“That’s not how the question phrases itself,” he said. “The question is: why is everyone else so stupid?”

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.124|108.162.241.124]] 00:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

'''386 + 1000?'''

In Duty Calls (386) http://http://xkcd.com/386/ people were just wrong. Fast forward 1000 strips and they are stupid. [[User:Hananc|Hananc]] ([[User talk:Hananc|talk]]) 13:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I disagree with the author here. Due to ambiguities of language it can correctly be said that most people are stupid. On one hand, we have the strict definition of average intelligence: it is defined by the intelligence of the average. If, however, one defines intelligence based on each person's average use of what they have, well, averaged over time, most people don't use what they have. That is why I assert that most people are stupid: because they have the ability to be average or above, but in practice their lack of thinking leads to decisions as bad of those who would score far worse on any real or theoretically perfect test.

note: The form of testing and its accuracy is irrelevant. It's just a score generated by a process.

[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.16|172.68.174.16]] 07:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Anybody else notice how '''TRIGGER WARNING: DO NOT READ IF YOU CAN'T TAKE CRITICISM''' might be proving [[White Hat]]'s idea right? Just look at the arguments! Note: While not all people are stupid, a moderate percentage of internet contributers have been observed to act stupidly.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.21|108.162.242.21]] 19:50, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

== Analysis of definitions ==

1. "People are X" can mean either "all people are X" (1a) or "most people possess the property Y at least to the degree X" (1b), in this case " a majority of people are unintelligent enough to be called stupid"

2. "Stupid" can mean "below average intelligence" (2a) or "less smart than a reference value (ex. the intelligence of the speaker, or how intelligent the speaker would like humans to be, or than required to deal with a task or problem at hand)" (2b).

Now we just need to go through the combinations of the definitions.

1a/2a. All people have intelligence below average. Impossible by definition of "average".

1b/2a. A majority of people have below average intelligence. Possible if the distribution curve is skewed, i.e. if most people have intelligence slightly below average and some people are a lot smarter than the average. My sample, however, says that the opposite is the case, though it might also be skewed in respect to general population.

1a/2b. No people are smart enough for X. Possible depending on the definition of "enough". The speaker is very probably not the smartest human being in existence, but some statements such as "no living human have demonstrated enough intelligence to formulate a definite proof of Riemann hypothesis as of yet" are objectively true.

1b/2b. Most people are not smart enough for X. Again possible depending on the definition, moreso as most if not all problems could be solved well enough if all or most people just cooperated better and prioritized the global good over their own.

Therefore, the statement can be fine as long as the speaker has a good reason to say it in a particular context and/or includes himself in it. In any other case, Cueball's reaction is justified.

I have to disagree with this comic. Yes, on average, people are of average intelligence. However, if the average intelligence is "stupid", then the average person is stupid. [[User:R3TRI8UTI0N|R3TRI8UTI0N]] ([[User talk:R3TRI8UTI0N|talk]]) 00:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
:As long as you're happy with calling half* of all people ''very'' stupid.
:* - Or you could be mean and assume it's an extreme outlier dragging the number down.
:Which begs the question how smart one needs to be to be considered smart. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 00:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

743: Infrastructures

2023-03-27T12:13:51Z

172.70.85.56: While it _indirectly references_ him, it doesn't _feature_ him per se.

{{comic
| number = 743
| date = May 21, 2010
| title = Infrastructures
| image = infrastructures.png
| titletext = The heartfelt tune it plays is CC licensed, and you can get it from my seed on JoinDiaspora.net whenever that project gets going.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] has sent an essay to his bearded friend (possibly a caricature of {{w|Richard Stallman}}) who is an advocate of free and open-source software. While the essay itself was good, his friend was worried because the essay was in the {{w|Doc (computing)|.doc}} format, the {{w|Proprietary Software|proprietary format}} that old versions of {{w|Microsoft Word}} used. The friend advises Cueball to use a format based on an open standard, possibly like ODF, ODT, ODS, ODP or {{w|OpenDocument|other types}} derived from something such as {{w|OpenOffice.org XML}}.

Cueball, who does not appreciate his friend criticizing the file format over the actual contents of the file, accuses his friend of pedantically stirring up trouble instead of simply caring that the software works (which is what most regular users would be concerned about). Given that it can be a challenge to move from a familiar proprietary application to an open-source rival which may lack compatibility, features, support and popularity, Cueball's stance is not entirely unjustified.

The bearded guy tries to explain that he is just concerned about the current proprietary software infrastructure that forces users to use software in a specific way, penalizing them for sharing the software or even preventing looking at the source code in order to learn what the program actually does or how it works. Cueball, however, isn't buying it, and accuses his friend of having [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html an arrogance that crowds out his perspective], while also claiming that he is {{w|Autism|autistic}} — an ableist epithet often aimed, particularly by denizens of online forums and imageboards, at people who have an intense fixation on seemingly trivial things.

Seven years later, Cueball runs to the friend, having become alarmed at Facebook's immense control and dubious policies about the personal information it collects. Since this is exactly the kind of situation the bearded guy was warning against, he sarcastically retorts by producing "the world's tiniest open-source violin". This is a twist on "{{tvtropes|WorldsSmallestViolin|playing the world's smallest violin}}", a gesture used to convey sarcastic pity at someone else's misfortune. Interestingly, the guy does actually appear to possess the physical instrument itself, which is uncommon; usually it's just a quip or gesture. This implies that the bearded guy has been carrying around the violin for this eventuality (not unlike what [[Black Hat]] does in [[757: Toot]]), or perhaps he uses this sarcastic expression often enough to warrant it. Since the violin is so very tiny, it is rendered only by a few pixels forming a line bottomed with an ovoid shape resembling the vague shape of a violin. Hence, it could also be taken to symbolise a pointed middle finger (if he has peciliarly jointed fingers) to aow the bearded guy to be saying something like "fuck you".

The title text references the following pieces of infrastructure that are compatible with the "free software" ideology:
* [http://www.creativecommons.org Creative Commons licenses] (CC licensed) use existing copyright law to permit someone to share a creative work anywhere so long as the sharer attributes credit to the creator of the work. The particular CC license chosen may also allow for modification, derivative works, and/or commercial usage. The fellow's phrase "you can get it" in the title text is ambiguous: is he offering to share the code for the violin, or the tune that the violin plays? But since CC licenses are not used for software, we can assume "it" refers to the tune: either an audio recording of it, or perhaps source material from which to make modified versions.
* [https://diasporafoundation.org diasporafoundation.org] (formerly joindiaspora.net, and then joindiaspora.com) is the central host of {{w|Diaspora (social network)| Diaspora*}}, an open-source alternative to Facebook which puts the user in control of how their information is used. Of course this sort of use of Diaspora would eliminate Cueball's concern over how Facebook handled his information. Few months after this comic released, a consumer alpha version of Diaspora* was released. An officially launched version is still not available as of 2020, so "whenever that project gets going" seems to be a pretty real view regarding the platform
**It's available now (2022)!
* a Diaspora "seed" is a personal web server that interacts in a Diaspora "pod" of servers. It stores all of your information (such as the tune in this case) and shares it with your friends, in a way that respects your preferences around privacy, etc.

The problem with the lack of open source and Facebook is also the subject of [[1390: Research Ethics]].

==Transcript==
:2003:
:[Cueball approaches a bearded fellow.]
:Cueball: Did you get my essay?
:Bearded Fellow: Yeah, it was good! But it was a .doc; You should really use a more open-
:Cueball: Give it a ''rest'' already. Maybe we just want to live our lives and use software that ''works'', not get wrapped up in your stupid nerd turf wars.

:Bearded Fellow: I just want people to care about the infrastructures we're building and who-
:Cueball: No, you just want to feel smugly superior. You have no sense of perspective and are probably autistic.

:2010:
:Cueball: Oh my God! We handed control of our social world to Facebook and they're ''DOING EVIL STUFF!''

:Bearded Fellow: Do you see this?

:[Inset, the bearded fellow rubs his index and middle fingers against his thumb.]
:Bearded Fellow: ''It's the world's tiniest open-source violin.''

==Trivia==
* In response to this comic, a [http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3193 3D model for a tiny violin] was released as open source files.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

1745: Record Scratch

2023-03-21T10:04:11Z

172.70.85.56: Undo revision 308953 by 172.71.154.229 (talk) Incomplete, and badly phrased even as it is. If it's notable, then note it properly to start with.

{{comic
| number = 1745
| date = October 12, 2016
| title = Record Scratch
| image = record_scratch.png
| titletext = The 78-rpm era was closer to the Civil War than to today.
}}

==Explanation==
A {{w|vinyl disc}} (also known as a {{w|gramophone record}}) is a type of storage medium that stores audio recordings on the disc by carving the audio data into a continuous spiral groove on the surface of the disc. These are typically played on a {{w|phonograph}} (also known as record players (since 1940s) or, most recently, turntables). The player spins the disc as a stationary stylus rides along the groove. The movement of the stylus along the groove is converted by an electromagnetic or piezoelectric transducer into a corresponding electric current, which an amplifier then converts to sound.

The noise referred to as a "record scratch" can be caused by someone attempting to stop a record's play by dragging the stylus across the radius of the record, or by stopping the disc's rotation with one's hand (opposing the turntable's rotation). As a result, this is often used as {{tvtropes|RecordNeedleScratch|a sound effect in movies}} for comedic effect. This type of sound is also often used in hip-hop music; in particular, rapidly and manually rotating the disc in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions.

The comic pokes fun at a movie cliché in which the story opens with the main character in some kind of unbelievable predicament, followed by a record scratch, seemingly freezing time (using the sound of a sudden pausing of a record to symbolize the sudden pausing of time in the movie). As the action in the film is paused, a character narrates something along the lines of, "Yup, that's me. You're probably wondering (how I ended up in this situation)..." The rest of the story then follows, often with the film going back in time to depict the events that leads up to the situation of the opening scene.

In this case, it would be interesting to know why Cueball is at a party where everyone has wine glasses in their hands, but suddenly one of the glasses (Cueball's or his nearest adversary's) is lying on the floor, and it seems like a fight is about to break out. This is what an opening narration might begin to explain (typically in a flashback) after the record scratch. At the time of the comic's posting, parodying the cliché, [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/record-scratch-freeze-frame variations on the phrase] had become a popular meme on social media. As the record scratch continues to be used despite the fact that record players (gramophones) have largely become obsolete technology, [[Randall]] pokes fun at this by beginning this meme by giving the backstory on what that sound actually is, (as many people from the younger generation may very well not know this), rather than giving context to the situation via a story. This is yet one more of Randall's comics that is trying to [[:Category:Comics to make one feel old|make people feel old]], and is likely most relevant to those who have actually used vinyl to listen to music, comedy or other recordings.

The title text indicates (in a manner similar to that of [[891: Movie Ages]]) that the "78-rpm era" – referring to the fact that the original industry standard of records making {{w|Gramophone_record#78_rpm_disc_developments|78 revolutions per minute}} (rpm) (1925-1950s) – is now closer to the time of the {{w|American Civil War}} (1861-1865) than it is to present day, another way that Randall is making the reader feel old. Note; these 78 rpm records were made of shellac, not of vinyl.

==Transcript==
:[In a black area, with jagged edges, at the top of the comic is a sound effect written with white text. Below there are two frames with text. This text is narrated by Cueball standing below with four people around him. Cueball is highlighted by being drawn in the regular way whereas the other four people are drawn in light gray. Cueball has just dropped a wineglass, spilling wine on the floor to the left and dropping the glass, spilling more wine, to the right, He has his arms slightly out, and seems to be turned towards three people to the right, while looking to the left at Ponytail. Ponytail is holding a glass of wine in one hand and is the other hand up waving her fist at Cueball. On his other side Hairy is advancing towards him with both hands up in fists ready for a fight. (It could be his wine glass dropped on the floor at Cueball's feet as it is also drawn in gray). Behind Hairy is Megan also with a wine glass held in one hand, and behind her is another Cueball-like guy with a wine glass holding one arm out pointing a finger at Cueball.]

:{| class="wikitable"
|style="background-color:black;"|<big>''Record Scratch''</big>
|}
:Cueball (narrating): You're probably wondering what that sound was.
:Cueball (narrating): Well, long ago, music was recorded on vinyl discs...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Comics to make one feel old]]

Talk:2749: Lymphocytes

2023-03-16T21:05:59Z

172.70.85.56:

Battery cells have nothing to do with cell phones. The "cell" in cell phone is short for "cellular" and refers to the communication cells around each tower. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 03:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

: And that's short for "sell you our phone" where the contract lets you buy it over an extended time that ends about the same time the spiffier replacement model is available. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.209|172.69.70.209]] 10:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I was originally thinking the CD4+ would be a reference to ''Call of Duty 4'' and onwards, in which players scream (insults?) at each other while playing. But the feeling has subsided, after considering it. Mentioning it here, though, in leiu of adding it as 'factual'. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.47|172.70.162.47]] 06:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

It should have bee Natural Born Killer Cells, but some opportunities were always going to be missed... --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.187|172.71.178.187]] 07:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

"Gamma-Delta T cells" being "unknown/unclassified" could be a reference to Star Trek, which has the galaxy divided into 4 quadrants: Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta. The Delta Quadrant (setting of Start Trek Voyager) and the Gamma Quadrant (seen in Start Trek Deep Space Nine) are unexplored and uncharted from the Federation's point of view. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.51|162.158.129.51]] 09:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
:Doesn't say "unclassified" but "classified". I don't think the Star Trek quadrants are referred to as "classified". [[User:Inquirer|Inquirer]] ([[User talk:Inquirer|talk]]) 02:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
:I had in mind just general "above Top Secret" classifications (or reputed ones) like "Omega Level, Burn before reading" or somesuch. Either that or perhaps 'Greek system' fraternities/sororities and secret societies in general (perhaps there's a Gamma-Delta-Tau, or similar, out there) which seem to be a US cultural thing that seems ripe for Randall to spoof about.
:Bear in mind that he's taking (mostly) real naming conventions and just explaining them funnily (hence why not "Natural Born Killer" cells, mentioned above, which was my first thoughts on reading as well), so shoehorning a Trek reference in without making it more explicitly Trekkie in the 'free description' bit seems a bit like it wasn't even the point.
:My money's on the security level, as an intention. At least until someone comes up with a better cultural reference that fits better but that I hadn't known/remembered on the initial reading. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.57|172.70.85.57]] 13:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

So who is/are "the world's coolest immunologist(s)," who got to name Natural Killer cells (NK cells)? Doctoral student Rolf Kiessling and postdoctoral fellow Hugh Pross may have found them, but did they get to name them?
Likewise, who is/are the "significantly less cool immunologist(s)" who named ILC1, ILC2, and ILC3 cells? [[User:TCMits|TCMits]] ([[User talk:TCMits|talk]]) 15:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
:Their original paper describing them referred to them as "natural" killer cells, so their use of quotes implies that it was a new title they had come up with. [[User:Ahecht|Ahecht]] ([[User talk:Ahecht|talk]]) 16:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Definitely the "coolness" factor is in the naming, not in the discovering. All the discoverers are equally "cool". But coming up with the name "Natural Killer Cells" is orders of magnitude cooler than ILC1, ILC2, and ILC3 (blaaah). [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 16:11, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the Gamma-Delta cells being "unknown/classified" seems to be a reference to US Army Delta force commandos who are tasked with top-secret highly classified missions that would be unknown even to other military or political officials.(corrected thanks to Ahecht) [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 16:11, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
:The comic says "unknown/classified", not "unknown/unclassified". [[User:Ahecht|Ahecht]] ([[User talk:Ahecht|talk]]) 16:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Coincidentally on the same day this comic was released two immunologists received the [https://aktuelles.uni-frankfurt.de/english/paul-ehrlich-and-ludwig-darmstaedter-prize-insights-into-the-origin-evolution-and-development-of-our-immune-system/ Paul Ehrlich Prize] for their work on the evolution of the "learning" immune system. No clue if this is relevant, not my field of expertise. ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.166|198.41.242.166]] 05:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Whoever added the D&D references to D8 and D4, thank you. Was totally unexpected, and as a DM, I laughed so hard I cried. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.232|172.70.126.232]] 13:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
::Team effort. When I found it, it just referenced tabletop games in general. I changed it to D&D specific, because that's really what it is. Most games use d8 for damage like most sports only allow goalies to touch the ball with their hands. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.43|172.70.174.43]] 05:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Pedancy: "...allow only goalies...", as goalies generally ''are'' allowed to kick/head/etc, in such sports where others can't handball. Ignoring the "most sports" bit altogether, as I don't know how what your scope is (only those ''with'' goalkeeping-roles, by whatever name?), how you're tallying it up (by basic list? Participation-weighted? Spectator-weighted?) and the rest... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 12:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:::: My point was that the previous version that stated most games used d8s for damage is only true if you count the number of tables at which games were going on at any given time, while it could be taken as suggesting that the majority of game ''rulesets'' used the convention. Similarly, you could argue that most sports forbid non-goalies from touching the ball with their hands, because of the large number of sporting events worldwide do feature that restriction. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.132|172.71.222.132]] 19:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

"[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2749:_Lymphocytes&diff=next&oldid=308593 Vandalism?]" - Yes, certainly, and you got there just before I undid it. And probably the usual suspect. '''Mods: please continue to do the necessary...''' The idiot concerned probably won't stop, but it'd be nice to tidy away some of the more obvious garbage they're littering up the system with. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.57|172.70.85.57]] 15:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

: Please, follow [[WP:GOODFAITH]] and assume good faith in these edits; maybe they were testing the MediaWiki software before thinking about how to contribute. [[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.49|172.64.238.49]]
::I'd assume good faith by default, but when you see repeat instances of that kind of change (amongst others), it's clearly no longer a matter of a single 'test', inadvertent error, honest misunderstanding, etc... Yep, that's a recurring form of vandalism, I would concur. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 21:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

2747: Presents for Biologists

2023-03-09T00:46:10Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */ Removing unplanned how/has repetition by minor rephrasing.

{{comic
| number = 2747
| date = March 8, 2023
| title = Presents for Biologists
| image = presents_for_biologists_2x.png
| imagesize = 396x353px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = A lot of these are actually non-venomous, but I can see which species you mistook them for. If you pause the crane for a sec I can give you some ID pointers for next time!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SUPERVILLAIN - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this strip, [[Black Hat]] is a supervillain subjecting 'James Bond' (portrayed by [[Hairy]], or very like him) to a death trap, similar to [[123: Centrifugal Force]] (presumably Mr. Bond managed to escape in that instance). This time, however, he also has another victim, [[Hairbun]], being subjected to the same device – a pit full of snakes, into which the victims are slowly lowered (upside-down and suspended by just one ankle) entirely at the whim or mercy of the antagonist.

While Bond voices typical defiance at Black Hat's scheme, Hairbun instead gushes over the sight of an unfamiliar snake species within the pit, asking Black Hat to lower her faster before that creature either escapes (there seemingly being very little to prevent any snake escaping the pit) or just moves to the other end of the pit.

The caption reveals that Hairbun is a biologist. For her, the contents of this death trap would be happily considered a suitable birthday present, and apparently even these circumstances don't dampen the experience sufficiently to reduce her interest.

The title text explains how Hairbun has expertly spotted that the supervillain included some less dangerous snakes, probably {{w|Coral snake#North American coloration patterns|in error}}. Ever the professional, she suggests the possibility of her advice to help him avoid these errors in the future. She would need a short stay of execution, to do so, but is apparently not particularly fazed by how things end up immediately afterwards.

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

:[Hairy and Hairbun are hanging upside down from ropes attached to their feet. Underneath them, there is a pit with many snakes. Black Hat to the left is operating a lever.]
:Hairy: You won't get away with this!
:Hairbun: Ooh! Ooh! That one is a new species for me!
:Hairbun: Hey, can you lower me faster? It's getting away!

:[Caption below the panel:]
:There's a surprising amount of overlap between "Good presents for biologists" and "Things villains want to do to James Bond."

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Animals]]

Talk:2746: Launch Window

2023-03-07T13:23:42Z

172.70.85.56:

Looks like Randall posted this one really late this time. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.75|172.70.111.75]] 05:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Is this about an actual window being open? --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.189|172.70.250.189]] 06:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
yes, that seems to be the joke. it's actually a pretty good one.

It's definitely quite abstract; I think it's talking about an actual window of the building that the rocket is supposedly "inside" [[Special:Contributions/172.71.30.142|172.71.30.142]] 06:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I've added a bit more to the explanation, but I wasn't sure what, if anything, could be said about the 'sunlight' comment... Is it just a joke about the stereotypical "computer nerd/engineer" never stepping foot in the sun, or am I missing something there? Also, could someone please add the characters' names in to the explanation where necessary? I can't remember them well enough to be confident in who's who [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.186|108.162.245.186]] 06:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
:I think it's more general than nerds (though possibly speaking as a probable nerd myself). Depending upon the local clime, and time of year, while having some Sun can be nice (whether or not it's warm, and it's warm enough for the local bugs) I know that even in the winter mornings, where a few streets I might often walk up face directly into the rising Sun, the glare can be severe and I really need to remember my hat so I can tilt its brim down. Even if it isn't simultaneously dropping water (or ice) on my head at the time.
:I get the impression that this launch-building is (like most launch sites) far more equatorial than my 50-odd degrees of latitude, it's probably <s>a fansite</s> equipped with HVAC and though it might still be nice enough to go outside with your packed lunch (bugs excepted) for a while, actually having to work on an external rocket and its launch-pad would not be a matter of moderation and choice to nip back in again because it is too bright (and possibly hot, even in the shade) to be comfortable. Not when the "launch room" had been set up with a nice, predictable temperature and illumination level.
:But I don't want to speak for those actually habituated to the great outdoors. ("There's no bad weather, only bad clothing," etc.) Which even some nerds are, when not working on necessarily indoors tasks... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.87|172.71.242.87]] 13:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

2745: Obituary Editor

2023-03-03T15:22:36Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2745
| date = March 3, 2023
| title = Obituary Editor
| image = obituary_editor_2x.png
| imagesize = 383x232px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = As the editor has reportedly defeated Death in a series of games of skill, no further obituaries are expected.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an AUTO-POST SYSTEM - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
An {{w|obituary}} is a usually short paragraph in a newspaper describing a local person who has recently passed away. They usually offer a few words of praise and a list of a few relatives, as well as a scheduled time for memorial services to be held some time after the obituary is published.

Apparently, the editor of this newspaper's obituary has just died. However, instead of somebody writing their obituary after the fact, as is conventionally done, the editor has seemingly taken matters into their own hands and written their own obituary. They (somewhat vainly) describe themselves as cool, attractive, and universally beloved, a dubious claim at best. The following sentence reveals that the editor had pre-arranged to scheduled this obituary to be posted after their death, probably {{w|Dead man's switch|entirely automatically}}.

Rather than the names of some close family (usually parents, a spouse, and children), the editor is allegedly survived by 8 billion people, or the current population of the entirety of Earth, who further are all heartbroken by the loss. All public spaces will now be reserved for a memorial service of the editor every single day (or, at least, the editor hopes they will be).

The title text references a common trope in culture, in which a person who has just died decides to challenge Death, or the {{w|Grim Reaper}}, to a game of skill (usually {{w|chess}}). Apparently, it is (possibly prematurely) claimed by the editor that they have challenged death to a series of games of skill (probably most or all variations of the trope, including chess), and defeated Death in all of them. Rather than gaining themselves a "second chance at life," however, as is usually the reward promised by Death for the dead person's victory, the editor's victory over Death has been so absolute that Death itself has been nullified for all of humanity. Hence no more obituaries will ever be required, as every human currently alive will now live forever.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
OBITUARIES 
The cool, attractive, universally beloved 
editor of the obituary section has died, 
hopefully of natural causes after a long 
life. They take with them the password to the 
heretofore unrevealed auto-post system.

They are survived by 8 billion heartbroken 
people. Memorial services will be held 
daily in all public spaces from now on.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:92: Sunrise

2023-02-24T15:51:05Z

172.70.85.56: Undo revision 306754 by 172.68.102.169 (talk) Stupid vandal

Doesn't look like Cueball to me, he has hair. [[User:Caagr98|Caagr98]] ([[User talk:Caagr98|talk]]) 17:22, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
:It's interesting that he appears to shave his head/cut his hair before going to the party, becoming a "Cueball" for the last two panels. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 03:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

----
The title text seems wrong. It reads 'Sometimes, I sit on top of parking decks and watch the sun rise. I feel like I should have a guitar or something.' in my Android xkcd reader. --[[Special:Contributions/92.249.196.108|92.249.196.108]] 07:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
:Fixed. According to the {{w|Wayback Machine}} this was the title text at the start: [http://web.archive.org/web/20071011003709/http://xkcd.com/92/] --[[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 13:01, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
----
Hmmm, should we note that the last panel is probably a pencil drawing with colors inverted? [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.168|103.22.201.168]] 13:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
----
Explanation said that the character realised that 4am is a bad time to meet people "other than troublemakers and the police". Removed as this is pure speculation as there is no mention of troublemakers or the police. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 15:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
----
Possible title text explanation: Sitting on a tall structure and watching the sun rise while playing the guitar sounds like a romanticized/idealized scene; the likes of which might be seen in a movie. [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 08:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
----
The second panel, second image may be a reference to that music video about "brushing your teeth with a bottle of jack" before going to a party. [[User:Kirdneh|Kirdneh]] ([[User talk:Kirdneh|talk]]) 01:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
----
The 4am Project has shut down, and the site directs only to a single text line that says "This site doesn't exist here". Maybe an explanation is needed as to what the 4am Project was, or that section needs to be rewritten.{{unsigned ip|Zazathebot}}
:Thanks for your information. Since that dead link didn't explain much I've just removed it because we don't want to explain historical websites not mentioned in the comic. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

92: Sunrise

2023-02-24T15:50:24Z

172.70.85.56: Undo revision 306753 by 172.68.102.17 (talk) Stupid vandal

{{comic
| number = 92
| date = April 21, 2006
| title = Sunrise
| image = sunrise.jpg
| titletext = Sometimes, I sit on top of parking decks and watch the sun rise. I feel like I should have a guitar or something.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is about the desire for an intimate connection with another, and the compromises we make to not be alone.

[[Hairy]] finds a certain beauty in the way the world looks without billions of humans crawling around on it. He thinks of this as a secret place that thrills him. He is excited about the remote chance of finding someone like him who appreciates its beauty. But he realizes that it's the very thing that makes this time beautiful to him that makes his imagined chance encounter exceedingly unlikely. Reconciled to the fact that he will not find a kindred spirit outside this morning, he heads back home.

At the house, he gets ready and drives to a club to meet people. The club is drawn using an inverted color scheme (white people, black background) to emphasize that it is the opposite of the 4am outside world. The club is dark and full of people, who are the lightest things present, where outside, the natural beauty shines without interruption by human forms. Hairy is seen alone in the middle of the crowd.

The title text is a reference to a common music video scene (sometimes country music videos) where people play the guitar on parking garages as the sun rises.

==Transcript==
:[Hairy is on the street. Behind him is a house with a lawn.]
:Hairy (thinking): I love the time just before sunrise. It's quiet; no one is ever just walking about.
:Hairy (thinking): It's like a secret
:Hairy (thinking): I always hope that I'll find someone else quietly hiding from sleep, and we'll see each other and sit and talk.
:Hairy (thinking): I guess this is a bad place to meet people.
:Hairy (thinking): I wish it weren't.

:[Hairy goes into the house, brushes his teeth, shaves his head (?), and leaves the house again.]

:[Hairy is at a club, disco balls in the ceiling and a giant woofer. Many people are dancing around him.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

Talk:2741: Wish Interpretation

2023-02-24T09:08:29Z

172.70.85.56:

To all you people reading the discussion, why can't I add my own person page? I mean, is a year too new? I think I know, [[User:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|(but I'm not completely sure.)]] ([[User talk:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|talk]]) 23:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
:Oh, you have to have an old enough account to make one? I had been wondering how to. [[User:Thexkcdnerd|Thexkcdnerd]] ([[User talk:Thexkcdnerd|talk]]) 00:02, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::To "No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO": I have granted your wish, hope that will teach you a valuable lesson. If the Thexkcdnerd or any one else need the same favor just write me a message on my page --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC).

Ironically, a banknote created by a genie would be counterfeit, although the odds of legal trouble over $20 are nonetheless low. 23:43, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
:It doesn't have to be. The genie could take one away from someone, or just get one that's been lost. Also, the sentence for counterfeiting is the same regardless of the denomination. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:31, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:The sentence for counterfeiting may be the same but the probability someone would actually go through the trouble of prosecuting you for $20 is much less than say $10,000 [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.151|172.70.214.151]] 03:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::The US Treasury Dept. prosecutes every case it can prove. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 04:06, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:::So 2 things: First of all they need to prove it. For that someone has to notice. Not every 20-Dollar-note will be scanned, and I guess the genie could make a pretty good copy (if he needs to copy it). Also noone said US-Dollar. The Genie could make a twist and use one of over 20 other currencies called dollar. Not sure if US Treasury Dept. would be interested in that :D by the way, the eastern caribean dollar has the short "XCD" - does anyone think that a thousand of those would be labeled XkCD? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::::Or he could use Monopoly money. Or Geniedollars. He never said it would be legal tender, after all.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.148|172.70.86.148]] 14:42, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:::::For me, Monopoly Money has always been in £s (the board I always used going from Old Kent Road to Mayfair, naturally), though I've noticed that online (hyperinternational) representations, that I see in game-ads, now seem to use a special "barred-M" currency symbol (to copy how £, €, ¥ and $ are variously barred versions of L, E, Y and S).
:::::What Cueball-genie would use is an interesting phosophical question. I suspect he just gets whatever he needs (for personal use) out of petty cash and settles it up later. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.152|172.70.91.152]] 15:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::Yes, I've read some story where a wish-granting entity generated money by re-printing money lost in some catastrophe (like, burned down, sunk in ship or something). Technically, such banknote is counterfeit, but it's impossible to prove it. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
:::A all powerful genie could make a 20 dollar bill that is now valid without taking it from anyone. Just making a new one and changing reality so it is one of the "real" bills. Also after all the trouble with Black Hat and the Genie offering the bill I'm sure it is valid. Suggesting he has his own money it ridiculous. What should he use those for? I'm sure it is a perfectly valid 20 dollar bill. And the discussion above is irrelevant for such a powerful genie. ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:18, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
::::What would he have it for? For buying his frappegenieos, obviously.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.56|172.70.85.56]] 09:08, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

That's cool. Try https://what-if.xkcd.com/23/. Part 1. I need a new signature. [[User:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|(but I'm not completely sure.)]] ([[User talk:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|talk]]) 23:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I would (as the genie) just teleport Black Hat to the desert. No other trickery or devastation needed. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The oldest "Wish that I wish I didn't wish" I am personally aware of is Midas turning everything he touched into gold, including the food he tried to eat and his beloved daughter. Personally, I'd wish that the genie teach me a lesson. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

It's kinda funny how a citation is needed for claiming that wishing rain doesn't exist is bad because Randall will just cover it in "What If 3" 20:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
:He already replaced the rain with candy in What If 2. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.151|162.158.129.151]] 07:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::Citation needed is used way too much{{citation needed}} and we are already two that have removed two of those from the explanation{{citation needed}}. It is rarely funny and should really only be used when a citation is needed{{citation needed}}. ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:18, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

The proper way of teaching Black Hat a lesson would be twisting his wish to make it beneficial to humanity. [[User:Tkopec|Tkopec]] ([[User talk:Tkopec|talk]]) 08:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

"And I want you to put it in my house." / [POOF!] - "Here, I turned your house into a Klein bottle."
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.39|172.71.160.39]] 08:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:That would better satisfy "And I want my house to contain it", from one single-step literalist perspective... Wishes-gone-strange ''usually'' work on the basis of the 'laziest' misinterpretation (with or without the intention of mallice) that doesn't require too much reinterpretation.
:But how to misinterpret "put it in my house"? Hmmm... Nothing to suggest that it must stay there. Perhaps everything is going to be squeezed in through the front door and (Niagra Straw-like) eventually pushes most out of the back door. The house structure (but not fixtures and fittings) magically strengthened to continue being houselike, even as whatever the back yard is like (before it gets its own turn of being sequentially transported through) fills up with mountains (literally!) of the resulting wreckage/mishmash.
:But not sure if the house itself is not already "in the house", i.e. its structure, to be exempt by prior "in"ness (if not ownership)... I'm not a genie, and have not gone through the rather extensive training/job-orientation that they clearly go through. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.34|172.70.90.34]] 14:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::Wouldn't the simplest thing be to just turn the house inside-out?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.151|172.70.91.151]] 16:48, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:::"I've turned your house inside-out, and we redefine 'inside' and 'outside'. Everything, including the house itself, is within the 'outside' surface of the house." Except the small amount of air 'outside', of course. See also the "Asylum" in Douglas Adams's ''So Long, and Thanks for all the Fish''. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 16:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
::::This idea has already been used by Randall in [[2403: Wrapping Paper]] --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:20, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I had a good laugh when I saw [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2741:_Wish_Interpretation&diff=prev&oldid=306692 one of these 'corrections']. US English mandates "fulfill", where the UK/etc English version is "fulfil", yet it also goes the other way and uses words like "reveler" where most (all?) other versions of English would prefer "reveller".
 And would hope that, whenever words get USified, the editor involved realises (or "realizes", yet surprisingly not ever "realizez"!) that they aren't actually correcting typos (like they sometimes comment), merely relocalising the wordz.. sorry.. ''words''! :P [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 15:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:...--[[User:JLZ0kTC5|JLZ0kTC5]] ([[User talk:JLZ0kTC5|talk]]) 01:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

In https://xkcd.com/1086/, it's shown that Black Hat gained the ability to wish on his eyelashes via wish; and if his wish on February 6th is anything to go by it's likely that whichever entity granted that wish deliberately misinterprets wishes in much the same way as this genie wants to. Should this be mentioned in the explanation? --[[User:A Stingray|A Stingray]] ([[User talk:A Stingray|talk]]) 19:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Curious - if you put all the objects of the world's surface into Black Hat's house, would that be a neutron star, or would it get to a micro black hole? {{unsigned ip|172.70.85.56|19:49, 23 February 2023}}
:The Schwarzschild radius of the whole Earth is less than 1cm, so we can say for sure that an accumulation of 'just' all things upon its surface into a volume the size of any house would be far short of gravitational collapse into a singularity.
:I don't offhand know how much stuff there actually will be, thoug. We could start by extrapolating from [https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/science-and-health/2018/5/29/17386112/all-life-on-earth-chart-weight-plants-animals-pnas something like this] to work out how dense a packing you'd need in any given volume of house.
:Likely still not anywhere near neutronium level, I'm guessing, because a tablespoon of neutron star apparently is the mass of Mt Everest, and you could fit a lot of tablespoons (or pour a lot of tablespoons'-worth of stuff into, though the distinction itself hardly matters) into even the smallest "bedsit" living space. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.128|172.70.86.128]] 21:01, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:an Earth-mass neutron star wold be 305m in diameter (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#Density_and_pressure). If you compress that down to the size of a typcal house, it would collapse into a black hole (question 3 here: https://www.astro.umd.edu/~miller/teaching/questions/neutron.html therefor if you have a house-size neutron star and add enough mass to make an earth-mass neutron star, it would collapse to a black hole). Ergo, if you have earth-mass matter in the space of a house, it would immediately become a singularity, and collapse down to the size of a coin. however, there is also another possibility, depending on how the genie adds the mass to the house. If the genie simple adds matter to the house, if slow enough it would start to undergo fusion and radiate the energy away. Third possibility. There is no known process to get neutronium except in supernovae, so we have to assume the genie will simply start with a house-sized amount of neutronium, and added mass. This would quickly form a VERY SMALL black hole. Adding mass from here would put the material in the BH's accretion disk; some would fall in, some would stay in the disk, and some would radiate away. - Weylin Piegorsch [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.186|172.70.34.186]] 03:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
::Everything in the world could mean the entire universe too. And even if just the Earth, what then about Earth it self? If threes are things then what about rocks? If rocks are things then what about molten rocks? And if that's a thing then the entire Earth should be in the house. Still it would not become a black hole. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:18, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2741: Wish Interpretation

2023-02-23T19:49:28Z

172.70.85.56: What would happen if he did the title text?

2741: Wish Interpretation

2023-02-23T02:33:37Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */ I really should Preview this stuff...

{{comic
| number = 2741
| date = February 22, 2023
| title = Wish Interpretation
| image = wish_interpretation_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x288px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = "I wish for everything in the world. All the people, money, trees, etc." "Are you SURE you--" "And I want you to put it in my house."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by Rain, Rain, Stay - Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In stories where wishing can come true by magical means, a common theme is that the wisher will make a wish (for greater or lesser personal gain) but the entity who grants it will {{tvtropes|LiteralGenie|inadvertently}} (or {{tvtropes|JackassGenie|'inadvertently'}}) fulfil the exact wording such that something bad happens which the wisher clearly did not foresee. This may teach the wisher, or at least the reader of the story, an important moral lesson against greed. The wish-granter is not always represented as deliberately obtuse or malicious, but may merely be a naive and uncritical servant of the wish-granting process. A wish for money, for example, might be 'easiest' to accomish by suddenly being the recipient of a loved-one's Life Insurance rather than the rather less upsetting scenario of finding that they possess a winning Lottery ticket. In the comic, however, this genie is perfectly self-aware of the part he will play in creatively misapplying the wish, and even goes so far as to forewarn the wisher – maybe a deliberate ploy to have wishers take a moment to think and tone down their more spontaneous demands.

However, as is characteristic for him, Black Hat immediately wishes for rain to no longer happen, perpetually, for the apparent trivial reason of merely saving him the need to carry an umbrella. The {{w|Water cycle|consequences}} of this drastic change to the weather (no matter by which method it is accomplished) would plainly be very bad.{{Citation needed}} As Black Hat almost certainly is fully aware. The genie realises that there is very little 'good' idea for him to twist into a bad one, and that Black Hat will be peculiarly unreceptive to being 'taught a moral lesson'. Especially compared to the utter devastation that the granted wish ''will'' cause to the rest of the non-wishing world, which the genie might be reluctant to enact.

Clearly outclassed in his attempt to establish his ability to cause problems, he gets frustrated and backtracks rapidly. He offers just $20 (a token amount of money, possibly out of his own pocket in order to avoid using his potentially dangerousin magical abilities) to get himself out of the original formulaic deal and permanently away from having to be under Black Hat's influence.

In the title text, the wisher (possibly still Black Hat, or possibly just another rather awkward individual) wishes for everything in the world. This is itself a not unknown "bad wish" that would be creatively twisted into a bad consequence for the necessary narrative reasons. The wish continues, however, and explicitly asks that all of this be put into their house. This is impossible for two reasons: First, everything wouldn't fit in their house; second, it causes an infinite regression, since their house is something in the world, so it would have to be put inside itself. Trying to grant this wish would likely also frustrate the genie, and certainly not allow them their usual scope of a personal (and proportional) educational twist.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Feel free to improve it or add more details. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Black Hat is holding a genie lamp in his hands. A Genie, depicted as a turbanless Cueball-like figure floating without a lower body, has appeared from the lamp.]
:Genie: I will grant you one wish.
:Genie: But beware, for I will twist the meaning of your words to teach you a lesson!

:[Black Hat holds the lamp to his side. The Genie has his arms crossed.]
:Black Hat: Gotcha! Hmm.
:Black Hat: I'm tired of carrying an umbrella. I wish it never rained again.

:[Close-up on the Genie.]
:Genie: ...Okay.
:Genie: I'm supposed to twist your words to teach you a lesson, but that actually sounds very straightforwardly bad.
:Genie: Can you maybe try again?

:[Zoom back to Black Hat and the Genie.]
:Black Hat: Fine. Just give me what I deserve.
:Genie: Oh my god. Have you read '''''any''''' stories about wishes?
:Black Hat: Come on! I want to get what's coming to me.
:Genie: Listen, I'm just gonna give you $20 and call this even.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]

2741: Wish Interpretation

2023-02-23T02:32:32Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */ Doh!

{{comic
| number = 2741
| date = February 22, 2023
| title = Wish Interpretation
| image = wish_interpretation_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x288px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = "I wish for everything in the world. All the people, money, trees, etc." "Are you SURE you--" "And I want you to put it in my house."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by Rain, Rain, Stay - Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In stories where wishing can come true by magical means, a common theme is that the wisher will make a wish (for greater or lesser personal gain) but the entity who grants it will {{tvtropes|LiteralGenie|inadvertently}} (or '{{tvtropes|JackassGenie|inadvertently}}') fulfil the exact wording such that something bad happens which the wisher clearly did not foresee. This may teach the wisher, or at least the reader of the story, an important moral lesson against greed. The wish-granter is not always represented as deliberately obtuse or malicious, but may merely be a naive and uncritical servant of the wish-granting process. A wish for money, for example, might be 'easiest' to accomish by suddenly being the recipient of a loved-one's Life Insurance rather than the rather less upsetting scenario of finding that they possess a winning Lottery ticket. In the comic, however, this genie is perfectly self-aware of the part he will play in creatively misapplying the wish, and even goes so far as to forewarn the wisher – maybe a deliberate ploy to have wishers take a moment to think and tone down their more spontaneous demands.

However, as is characteristic for him, Black Hat immediately wishes for rain to no longer happen, perpetually, for the apparent trivial reason of merely saving him the need to carry an umbrella. The {{w|Water cycle|consequences}} of this drastic change to the weather (no matter by which method it is accomplished) would plainly be very bad.{{Citation needed}} As Black Hat almost certainly is fully aware. The genie realises that there is very little 'good' idea for him to twist into a bad one, and that Black Hat will be peculiarly unreceptive to being 'taught a moral lesson'. Especially compared to the utter devastation that the granted wish ''will'' cause to the rest of the non-wishing world, which the genie might be reluctant to enact.

Clearly outclassed in his attempt to establish his ability to cause problems, he gets frustrated and backtracks rapidly. He offers just $20 (a token amount of money, possibly out of his own pocket in order to avoid using his potentially dangerousin magical abilities) to get himself out of the original formulaic deal and permanently away from having to be under Black Hat's influence.

In the title text, the wisher (possibly still Black Hat, or possibly just another rather awkward individual) wishes for everything in the world. This is itself a not unknown "bad wish" that would be creatively twisted into a bad consequence for the necessary narrative reasons. The wish continues, however, and explicitly asks that all of this be put into their house. This is impossible for two reasons: First, everything wouldn't fit in their house; second, it causes an infinite regression, since their house is something in the world, so it would have to be put inside itself. Trying to grant this wish would likely also frustrate the genie, and certainly not allow them their usual scope of a personal (and proportional) educational twist.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Feel free to improve it or add more details. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Black Hat is holding a genie lamp in his hands. A Genie, depicted as a turbanless Cueball-like figure floating without a lower body, has appeared from the lamp.]
:Genie: I will grant you one wish.
:Genie: But beware, for I will twist the meaning of your words to teach you a lesson!

:[Black Hat holds the lamp to his side. The Genie has his arms crossed.]
:Black Hat: Gotcha! Hmm.
:Black Hat: I'm tired of carrying an umbrella. I wish it never rained again.

:[Close-up on the Genie.]
:Genie: ...Okay.
:Genie: I'm supposed to twist your words to teach you a lesson, but that actually sounds very straightforwardly bad.
:Genie: Can you maybe try again?

:[Zoom back to Black Hat and the Genie.]
:Black Hat: Fine. Just give me what I deserve.
:Genie: Oh my god. Have you read '''''any''''' stories about wishes?
:Black Hat: Come on! I want to get what's coming to me.
:Genie: Listen, I'm just gonna give you $20 and call this even.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]

2738: Omniknot

2023-02-16T16:42:45Z

172.70.85.56: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2738
| date = February 15, 2023
| title = Omniknot
| image = omniknot_2x.png
| imagesize = 358x288px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The Gordian knot is an omniknot tied using every bend in the Ashley Book of Knots, and then for extra security the upper rope at every crossing is connected to the lower with a randomly-chosen hitch.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by THE KNOTTED OMNIBOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do KNOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The comic jokes that if you have several potential {{w|knot}}s which could be tied in a given situation, rather than being forced to choose one, you can simply use all of them and create the comic's "Omniknot." The prefix omni- means "all", and so the "all-knot" is the knot containing all the other knots (...that one knows).

Knots in the middle, from top to bottom:
* {{w|Granny knot}}: A bad knot, usually the result of an improperly tied reef knot.
* {{w|Reef knot}}: Also known as the square knot, one of the most commonly tied by competent amateurs. But a poor and possibly dangerous choice as a load-bearing bend, as it has a tendency to {{w|Knot#Capsizing|'capsize'}} and untie itself.
* {{w|Sheet bend}}: Similar to the bowline, a popular, all around good choice, especially if one rope is thinner than the other (the loop should be on the thinner rope).
* {{w|Double sheet bend}}: A more secure version of the previous knot, especially if one rope is much thinner than the other.
* {{w|Carrick bend}}: A very good bend, especially if both ropes are similar in kind and thickness. This version, however, with the ends emerging from the same side is weaker than if the ends were diagonal from each other.

On the sides are {{w|bowline}}s and each rope is terminated by a {{w|figure-eight knot}}.

In the title text, the {{w|Gordian Knot}} is a knot which purportedly was extraordinarily complex and nearly impossible to untie. According to legend, when Alexander the Great was faced with the knot, he simply drew his sword and cut it in half, thereby "untying" it and solving the unsolvable. The Gordian Knot is now used as a linguistic metaphor to describe a problem whose solution, rather than being to directly solve it head-on, involves working around or otherwise bypassing its apparent constraints, or simply one that is so complex as to be practically unsolvable.

{{w|The Ashley Book of Knots}} is an encyclopedia describing thousands of different knots. Though it is now dated because it was written before the widespread adoption of synthetic fiber rope, it is still considered the reference in knot tying. Using all bends from the book and as many hitches would make the final result very complex indeed (a "bend" is a knot that connects two ropes or lines; a "hitch" is a knot that connects a rope (a.k.a. line) to something like a post, loop, or shackle). Randall proposes here that this was the true origin of the mythical Gordian Knot.

In practice, it is knot recommended to use overly complex knots as they provide little in term of additional security compared to a well chosen, simpler knot. The ease of tying and untying, especially in less than ideal conditions is also an important factor to consider. If strength is more important than the ease of tying and untying, {{w|Rope splicing|splices}} should be considered instead of knots, as they don't weaken the rope as much.

==Transcript==
:[Two ropes tied together with several different kinds of knots. The ropes enter from left and right. The left rope proceeds to go up where the right rope goes down. But then they interact to form five nots in the middle of the drawing. Following each rope will show the left to interweave the right rope from top to bottom, and via versa. At the bottom the left rope swings back to where it began going op, ties a knot with it self at the start and the end of the left rope then goes to the right of this knot and ends in another small knot. Similar the right rope goes back to the right at the top and forms a similar know with it self, before the end of the rope goes left an end in the same type of small knot and the left rope. There are thus 5 knots using both ropes, and two knots on each rope with it self, and the entire thing is yet another combined Omniknot, for ten knots in total. There is a caption below the panel:]
:If you know several knots and can't figure out which one to use, just tie one of each.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Fiction]]