explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2964: Olympic Sports

2024-09-24T14:19:50Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Depends how badly the first crash went...

{{comic
| number = 2964
| date = July 26, 2024
| title = Olympic Sports
| image = olympic_sports_2x.png
| imagesize = 553x328px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Thankfully for everyone involved, the Winter Olympics officials spotted me and managed to stop me before I got to the ski jump.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic was officially published on the day of the opening ceremony of the {{w|2024 Summer Olympics|2024 Paris (Summer) Olympics}}, though it actually appeared early the following day.

In this comic, [[Randall]], who has no athletic training, imagines himself participating in various Olympic events, with his degrees of failure measured in terms of their humor potential.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Olympic sports ranked by how funny it would be if a regular person competed
! How funny !! Sport !! Reason
|-
|rowspan=5| Not that funny || {{w|Rowing}} - One or more people row a boat to a destination.|| The person would struggle to row effectively, falling out of cadence and fouling the oars of the other rowers in their boat. However, if Randall competed in the single sculls, such coordination would not be an issue, and he would likely just be much slower than the other competitors. Or fall in the water.
|-
| {{w|Fencing}} - Two contestants attempt to land hits on each other with a long fencing weapon.|| Contrary to what is often portrayed in movies, sword fights of any kind are very quick, often lasting just a few seconds. Olympic fencing matches are especially fast, and an untrained layman watching the fight would probably be unable to tell the difference between a fight between two experts and a fight in which one person had no experience, aside from that said person would lose every bout.
|-
| {{w|Weightlifting}} - Contestants lift weights, which, in the Olympics, get heavier with each round, until all but one fail to lift.|| They might just fail to lift the weights or injure their back.
|-
| {{w|Golf}} - Contestants attempt to use golf clubs to hit a golf ball into one or more holes in as small a number of hits as possible.|| The worst case scenario would be simply failing to hit the ball. If he did make contact, the ball would likely fail to go in the right direction and/or fail to achieve the right distance.
----
''The comic illustrates this by having Randall putt and miss the hole at very close range.''
|-
| {{w|Archery}} - Using a bow and arrow, contestants attempt to hit a target with as much accuracy as possible.|| Arrows might miss the target, but this wouldn't be particularly amusing (unless Randall forgoes armbraces & discovers the bowstring's propensity for smacking the inside of his wrist after releasing it).
----
''The comic shows Randall missing all his shots on the target.''
|-
|rowspan=5| Pretty funny || {{w|Swimming}} - Contestants swim to a destination or complete lengths as fast as possible.|| They might struggle to stay afloat (particularly in open water swimming, where they would be buffeted by other contestants) or {{w|Eric Moussambani|swim awkwardly}}. They are also likely to have a markedly different physique to the other competitors, which would have a comic effect.
|-
| {{w|Long jump}} - Contestants, with a running start, attempt to jump as far as possible.|| They would likely make a very short jump, or perhaps foul every jump, and possibly trip and land in the pit.
|-
| {{w|Pole vault}} - Using a bendable pole, contestants attempt to propel (vault) themselves over a bar.|| An untrained person attempting to pole vault would very likely miss the plant altogether, and simply run headlong into the bar. Even if he managed to plant the pole, attempting to hold onto it would likely result in him being knocked off his feet.
|-
| {{w|Diving}} - Contestants attempt to fulfil multiple criteria while diving into water.|| Awkward or painful-looking dives could ensue. Potential for injury would be high.
|-
| {{w|Hurdles}} - Contestants run on a track with hurdles positioned at various places.|| They might trip and fall over the hurdles, just knock them all over as they fail to clear them, or [https://www.npr.org/2023/06/26/1184329986/belgian-shot-putter-runs-hurdles-belgium carefully step over each hurdle].
----
''Drawn in this section, Randall repeatedly and unpleasantly runs into the hurdles, unable to jump over any of them. He has his arm raised bent in front of his face in a classic hurdler's pose, but appears to have failed to get much, if any, height off the ground.''
|-
|rowspan=5| Incredibly funny || {{w|Figure skating}} [The only Winter Olympic discipline featured in the main comic] Competitors perform artistic routines set to music while skating on an ice rink, and are judged on a combination of skating skill, composition, and presentation. || They might slip and fall continually on the ice, with a high risk for sprained joints or bone fractures. This might have particular comic potential if Randall were skating as part of a pair, awkwardly attempting to lift and spin a partner, or perhaps doing nothing but being lifted and dragged around by them.
|-
| {{w|Horizontal bar}} - A horizontal bar is used to perform gymnastics.|| An untrained person would likely struggle to even hold onto the bar, and would likely be able to do no more than swing back and forth until they lost their grip.
|-
| {{w|Equestrian sports}} - Various activities involving the use of horses.|| Attempting any jumps or tricks without training would likely result in failure to control the horse, and most likely end with the riding falling off or being thrown off.
----
''Randall is shown completely unable to control his horse. He is in the process of falling off and is flailing his arms.
|-
| {{w|Freestyle BMX}} - Contestants ride BMX bikes and perform various tricks, and are then judged by trick quality.|| He would likely fail to perform even basic tricks, and any attempts to do so would result in one or more crashes.
|-
| {{w|Pommel horse}} - Using a gymnastic device somewhat similar to a horse, gymnasts perform various tricks.|| They might awkwardly flop around, fall off, or lose their balance & risk crushing {{tvtropes|GroinAttack|a particularly squashy part}} of their anatomy, which could, depending on one's sense of humor, the context, & the exact aesthetics of the incident, elicit laughter.
----
''Randall is depicted awkwardly perched atop a pommel horse with a leg extended.
|}

The title text may be a reference to ski jumper {{w|Vinko Bogataj}}, whose spectacular crash at a (non-Olympic) {{w|Ski_flying|ski flying}} event in 1970 in Oberstdorf, (then) West Germany became emblematic of the expression "the agony of defeat" in the opening narration of the popular US television program "{{w|Wide World of Sports (American TV program)|Wide World of Sports}}". Alternatively the reference may be to {{w|Eddie the Eagle}}, whose poor performance in the {{w|Ski_jumping|ski jump}} at the {{w|1988 Winter Olympics}} led to the introduction of a rule requiring entrants to be ranked internationally in the top 50 and top 30%.

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

:[A header is above three panels, with each panel containing a title at the top of how funny it would be, a bullet list of five sports, and one or two depictions of Cueball performing sports from that list.]
:Header: Olympic Sports ranked by how funny it would be if I, a regular person without athletic training, snuck onto the team to compete:

:[The first panel:]
:Title: Not that funny
:*Rowing
:*Fencing
:*Weightlifting
:*Golf
:*Archery
:[This panel shows Cueball putting a ball with a golf club and missing the hole from a close distance, and Cueball aiming a bow while three arrows are on the ground at various distances from the target.]

:[The second panel:]
:Title: Pretty funny
:*Swimming
:*Long jump
:*Pole vault
:*Diving
:*Hurdles
:[This panel shows Cueball running stomach-first into a hurdle, while holding an arm in front of his head. Another hurdle behind him has fallen down.]
:Cueball: [Bonk] Ow! [Bonk] Ow!

:[The third panel:]
:Title: Incredibly funny
:*Figure skating
:*Horizontal bar
:*Equestrian
:*BMX freestyle
:*Pommel horse
:[The first depiction of this panel shows Cueball balancing himself on a pommel horse as if he's riding a real horse, with both of his hands and one leg down and the other leg slightly raised.]
:Cueball: Look! Look!
:[The second depiction of this panel shows Cueball wearing black helmet and riding a horse, struggling to stay on the running horse with both hands and one leg raised.]
:Cueball: AAAAA!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Sport]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Rankings]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Randall Munroe]]

Talk:2988: Maslow's Pyramid

2024-09-21T20:53:45Z

172.70.86.132: ...it's not very accurate to come back (*much* later) and sign 'as now'. And if you're claiming that you're first when the timestamp says otherwise then it's even more silly. Have the datestamp that you should have originally had.

Oh wow, first post! [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 23:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
: Congratulations on learning how to post![[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.228|172.68.245.228]] 03:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
The 20% figure is incorrect. The lower levels of the pyramid have more volume than the upper levels. By my arithmetic, the breakdown is (rounded) 1%, 6%, 15%, 30%, and 49%, so the "safety" level provides 30% of his needs. [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 00:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
:Plus the bottom layer ought to get partial credit for supplying basic shelter. [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 00:29, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
:: I question this Cueball's ability to get anything okay enough. {{unsigned|172.70.38.122|03:32, 21 September 2024}}
::Seems like he's judging each layer on a pass-fail basis, no partial credit. So the bottom layer fails because it only provides shelter, but no food or water. Like a crypt, which is what the Egyptian pyramids were for. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 18:19, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh crud. What did I do that I think totally messed up the attributions? 172.68.245.228 [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.228|172.68.245.228]] 03:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
:I think you probably put some ~s in the wrong places? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.181|162.158.41.181]] 19:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

But *how* did he build it? Was there some sort of internal ramp? Were extraterrestrials involved? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.48|172.70.163.48]] 06:58, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
: Couldn't care less. Cueball, I AM impressed. If your friends aren't, you need new friends. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.115|172.71.160.115]] 07:37, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

I assumed Cueball was trying to meet the needs, inside the pyramid. :-) Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.231|172.70.160.231]] 10:49, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

And a pyramid is a very safe building, except for emergency exits. ;-) (Also traps, but no one asked you in.) But it's not going to fall over. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@gmail.com [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.227|172.69.194.227]] 10:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
:It's harder to climb over an ''inverted'' pyramid, looking for weak-points. But then it has a weak-point insofar as having to be balanced upon its point, and one of those definitely ''might'' fall over... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.33.237|162.158.33.237]] 17:29, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

2973: Ferris Wheels

2024-08-20T08:35:31Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Orphaned half a sentence

{{comic
| number = 2973
| date = August 16, 2024
| title = Ferris Wheels
| image = ferris_wheels_2x.png
| imagesize = 624x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They left the belt drive in place but switched which wheel was powered, so people could choose between a regular ride, a long ride, and a REALLY long ride.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BELT POWERED BY A DIFFERENT WIKI PAGE IN ORDER TO KEEP THIS ONE GOING - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic depicts an attempted connection of three {{w|Ferris wheel}}s using a {{w|Belt (mechanical)|mechanical belt drive}}, a system typically used to transfer motion between rotating shafts. By connecting the wheels at different circumferences, the relative motion is geared up or down. If the belt passes around the circumference of one wheel and is connected around the hub of another, the latter will rotate significantly faster. In this case, the second wheel's circumference is in turn connected to a third wheel's hub, resulting in even greater rotational velocity. However, this setup is mechanically unsound and possibly dangerous,{{Citation needed}} as Ferris wheels are not intended to be connected in this way.{{cn}} As shown, the first wheel on the left is running at a normal speed, while the other two are rotating increasingly fast, leading to a {{w|G-force#Human tolerance|potentially hazardous}} situation where passengers are flung around to various extents.

Ferris wheels can vary widely in size and speed of rotation, but for illustration, let us assume a diameter of about 200 feet (60 m) and a pretty sedate speed of around 10 minutes per full rotation. The apparent ratio between the connected wheels in the comic is approximately 12.5:1, meaning the motion is significantly sped up as it’s transferred. The second Ferris wheel, driven by the first, could spin at around 1.3 rpm, with passengers moving at 9 mph (14 km/h), giving a more exciting ride, but not inherently dangerous. However, when this motion is further transferred to the third Ferris wheel, it could spin at a possible 16 rpm, with passengers traveling at over 110 mph (180 km/h), subjecting them to around 8 Gs of force. Randall has previously explored the limits of the human body's tolerance for acceleration in ''What If # 116 "No Rules NASCAR"'' [https://what-if.xkcd.com/116/]. Additionally, if a Ferris wheel spun at 110 mph (180 km/h) it would probably topple, which would be just as dangerous. However, since the motor for the first wheel would have been selected merely to drive one wheel, it's unlikely it would be able to power the other two wheels moving at these increased speeds.

In the caption [[Randall]] says that he was fired for this ill-advised modification, highlighting the impracticality and dangers of the idea. A cruise line also fired the cartoonist due to an unsound engineering proposal earlier in [[2935: Ocean Loop]].

The title text imagines the consequences of leaving the belt drive system in place but switching which wheel is powered. If the most extreme wheel (the third one on the right) is powered, the gearing would be reversed, making for a possibly pleasant and normal ride on the right-hand wheel, but rendering the experiences of the riders on the other two wheels far too slow for an enjoyable carnival ride. One revolution of the center wheel might take two hours and five minutes, while the left wheel would take around a little more than a day per revolution.    This exaggerates the impracticality and unintended effects of using a belt drive system to link up Ferris wheels, illustrating how such an idea would lead to absurdly varied ride experiences.

==Transcript==
:[Three Ferris wheels are shown side by side, with some people stood on the ground for scale. Each of the first two wheels has a belt connecting its circumference to the axle of the wheel to its right. "Agitrons" indicate that the middle wheel is turning notably faster than the left wheel, with the gondolas seen to be rocking significantly at all points round the wheel. The spokes of the right wheel are completely replaced by "motion lines", indicating that the the right wheel is turning the fastest of all. All its gondolas are hanging outwards against centripetal force, interspersed with their own motion lines.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The county fair fired me for adding a belt drive to the Ferris wheels.

==Trivia==
The first (slowest) wheel can be seen to notably lack a 'spoke' at approximately the five o'clock position, supporting the point where its respective passenger seating is hung. Clearly, however, the wheel design is strong enough to withstand much greater forces in the other two versions of the wheel (which appears to be complete in the case of the second, though the thin spokes are only seen as blurs in the third wheel) suggesting that there may not be significant danger from this omission. It does not bode well, however, for general {{w|Occupational Safety and Health Administration|OSHA compliance}} in how they erect/maintain the rides, even before the belt-drive idea added its own issues.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Engineering]]

Talk:2964: Olympic Sports

2024-07-29T15:04:23Z

172.70.86.132:

What took bro so long
Is he stupid [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.119|141.101.98.119]] 13:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:Seems totally unclear what you're referring to, here. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
::i think they're referring to this comic being somewhat late. [[user talk:lettherebedarklight|youtu.be/miLcaqq2Zpk]] 15:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:: The comic appeared around 0800 EDT 20240727 (Saturday, a day late). As most folks here surely know, late posts are common on xkcd but aren't often later than the stated "MWF". After 19 years, and without the "weeks ahead" buffer insisted upon by "traditional" syndicated comics (as shown by [https://xkcd.com/2961/ Crowdstrike], posted the day of the event), I think Randall has done remarkably well. I'd struggle to keep a schedule like this for 19 weeks.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.95|172.71.151.95]] 15:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I think "''Synchronized'' Swimming" would be the most hilarious. One person flailing while a whole team tries to make it look choreographed. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:I picture two people that are synchronized to each other while the third person tries to look choreographed - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.172|162.158.212.172]] 15:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:Why must I think of "The fox has left his lair"... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.71|172.71.160.71]] 16:39, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:Google "SNL synchronized swimming". There's a classic sketch. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:I reckon discus has got to be up there. On the other hand, least funny has to be the walking. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 10:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I hear there's an opening on the GB equestrian team. Just sayin'... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.69.119|141.101.69.119]] 19:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to disagree about a couple. Beginning pole vaulters are incredibly funny. Beginners on the pommel horse aren't usually very funny. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.252|162.158.186.252]] 19:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
:I also think pole vault would be in the last category. It has always looked to me like an incredibly difficult maneuver. And I remember doing pommel horse in school; I wasn't very athletic, but I could swing around a little. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

"Ski jump" has got to be a reference to Eddie the Eagle.{{unsigned ip|172.70.115.96}}
Eddie was British champion. And he changed Olympic qualification rules.{{unsigned ip|172.69.43.166}}
: Both Bogataj and Edwards were competitive ski jumpers (Edwards, admittedly, marginally so), whereas the trope of this cartoon is that the protagonist (presumably Randall) is trying to enter the competition without any prior experience. The vibe seems to be - Challenger: "Can you fail more spectacularly than these two?" Randall: "Hold my beer." Olympic official: "Nice try, stick guy, but no. Here's your beer back." 'Thankfully for all concerned' seems a better fit to the Bogataj case, in which he was injured, spectators were put at risk, and the competition schedule was likely disrupted, than the Edwards case in which the only injuries were to the reputations of Olympic administrators, and which yielded a nice 15 minutes for Edwards. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.253|108.162.245.253]] 00:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
: I really doubt the ski jump thing is a reference to anything specific. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.23|108.162.221.23]] 13:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Randall has clearly never heard of an ejector crab https://youtu.be/UcOjeneHJ6E [[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.207|172.69.6.207]] 16:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
: Actually this is an even better example https://youtu.be/hxOW739UlWk [[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.144|172.69.6.144]] 16:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

A German surfer managed to moon all Olympics viewers today, so I doubt Randall could beat that... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.24|108.162.221.24]] 16:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

This is one of the worst XKCDs I've ever seen, I think. {{unsigned ip|162.158.63.70}}

Possibly Randall is aware that an uncoached newcomer to the single sculls will almost certainly capsize their boat, quite possibly one the first stroke as this is the most unstable position. It might be possible to flip a pair oar as well, since the professional rower can only hold up the boat on one side. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.64.223|172.68.64.223]] 08:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Further, the the pair oar would likely inscribe a circle due to the asymetric thrust. In the larger boats he'd likely get smashed in the spine by an oar handle (TBF not that funny) or catch a crab (dig in an oar) that literally throws him out of the boat (both painful and funny) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.64.148|172.68.64.148]] 09:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I doubt that running through the hurdles would really be painful, as depicted - they're pretty light and designed to be easily knocked over.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.148|141.101.99.148]] 10:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Clearly a study on what is funny in these situations must be performed. I would like all checks in this study to be written to me. However, if they are written to Munroe Randal and he and his selected sample attempt them I would be satisfied.{{unsigned ip|172.71.254.103}}

Talk:1281: Minifigs

2024-07-22T10:34:57Z

172.70.86.132:

This is my first time at trying to explain something. Even if it's replaced by a better one, I hope it gets the point across.

Cheers!

[[Special:Contributions/189.186.138.149|189.186.138.149]] 05:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
:Your explanation looks good (perhaps somebody changed it, though). I am happy for you. Welcome to.the community. You are the type of people that make wikis great.
:[[User:Zyxuvius|Zyxuvius]] ([[User talk:Zyxuvius|talk]]) 17:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Related question: what is the current population of Teddy bears? And what about Barbies? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
:Might Mattel be the world's largest shoe maker? [[Special:Contributions/67.51.59.66|67.51.59.66]] 16:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Then we are just waiting for a Wikipedian to remove the comparison of tires manufactures as Wikipedia is not the place for random facts appearing in XKCD comics. [[User:Pmakholm|Pmakholm]] ([[User talk:Pmakholm|talk]]) 10:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
::The information in the Wikipedia article on {{w|Lego tire|Lego tires}}, including the random fact that in 2011 it was the world's largest tire manufacturer, has been there since May 2012 [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 13:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I, for one, welcome our new Lego overlords.[[Special:Contributions/83.227.33.35|83.227.33.35]] 01:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Just a suggestion for discussion: instead of the final phrase of the second paragraph saying "the prognosis of this comic seems quite likely", I think "the prognosis of this comic seems at least possible if not highly likely" as the point of the previous extrapolations is that they were unwarranted/probably impossible, not just unlikely. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 04:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)Grahame

I find it extremely surprising (to the point of incredulity) that the human population has been growing linearly [[Special:Contributions/115.111.223.59|115.111.223.59]] 06:19, 24 October 2013 (UTC) FirstTimeUserAmIDoingThisRight?
:The comic is correct, it's nearly linear at that time range. Look here: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_population_%28UN%29.svg world population].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
::The graph you link to has a logarithmic scale for population, so the straight lines represent exponential growth. Randall's graph has a linear population scale, so the lines should have the form of an exponential function. [[Special:Contributions/198.91.149.86|198.91.149.86]] 12:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Ups, but at that data ranges it doesn't make a big difference. Look at page 21 here: [http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/ppt/paa/PAA_2012_Heilig.pdf UN PDF dokument].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Has Randall taken into account that some of the manufactured lego minifigs have been destroyed? If not, then the number of minifigs should be compared to the number of humans that has ever been born, not only to those still alive today...(Maybe a billion or more of the minifigs have been destroyed?) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:45, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
:Nice point. The {{w|World_population#Number_of_humans_who_have_ever_lived|Number of humans who have ever lived}} is estimated around 100 billions in total. But Randall compares the "Number of people in the world" with the "Number of Lego People in the world", so a good guess on the number of destroyed minifigs is needed. I think it's more likely about the half of the entire production.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:56, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
::Not sure that I completely agree. Keep in mind that a thrown out Lego minifigure will continue to exist for thousands of years (the same can be said of a dismembered one) while a buried or dismembered human will decompose within a few generations (with the occasional exception). Given that, it's fair to assume that every minifigure ever created still exists, while only the humans born in the past 200 years continue to do so.[[Special:Contributions/154.20.80.41|154.20.80.41]] 04:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Has anyone here actually managed to destroy a minfig? I myself have only ever broken an arm or two, which leaves the minifigure mostly intact. I suppose you could melt it down, but most people who would have a reason to (i.e. to use as ink in a 3D printer) would just buy non-LEGOified plastic, as it's cheaper.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.30|108.162.215.30]] 21:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
::::Do you still count humans who have been permanently embalmed? (And how do minifigs that have been kragl'd compare?) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.52|162.158.255.52]] 09:36, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

This strikes me as having a curious overlap with {{w|The Simulation Argument}}: If it is possible for technology to ever allow a civilization's members to casually run simulated universes, or even worlds, on their personal computers, then eventually there would be more human beings living in simulated worlds than the real one, meaning that (in an abstract sense that does not really conform strictly with the science of probability) it is more likely that WE are in a simulation, than in the real, original universe containing the simulations. — [[User:Kazvorpal|Kazvorpal]] ([[User talk:Kazvorpal|talk]]) 16:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Is the LEGO Group the largest manufacturer of tires by mass, or just raw numbers? 21:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

== Are we out numbered yet? ==

It's 2019 bois and girls. Let's see if they outnumber us. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.246.22|162.158.246.22]] 04:08, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

:They recently celebrated the 40th anniversary of minifigs, but there was no mention in the [http://www.lego.com/en-gb/aboutus/news-room/2018/august/minifigure-40| press release] of how many have been produced to date (unlike the [http://www.lego.com/en-gb/aboutus/news-room/2003/october/lego-minifigure-turns-25| 25th anniversary press release], which makes me wonder whether they are saving this up for a big announcement soon... (If they don't do a press release when the number of minifigs overtakes the human population then they're missing out on some good publicity) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.124|141.101.98.124]] 14:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

:Search conducted on 2019-12-30: No new data found to whether or not we are outnumbered yet. Happy new year, everybody. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.210.58|162.158.210.58]] 14:28, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

:In a 2015 [https://web.archive.org/web/20151014120817/http://cache.lego.com/r/www/r/aboutus/-/media/about%20us/media%20assets%20library/company%20profiles/the_lego_group_company_profile_2015_eng.pdf?l.r2=-1675586477 fact sheet], Lego said they made 5 billion minifigs. In [https://web.archive.org/web/20160304024745if_/https://www.lego.com/en-gb/aboutus/events/annual-result-2015#play-minifigures another report], Lego said that they made 725 million minifigs in 2015. By the end of 2019, that would be 7.9 billion minifigs (assuming constant production). The [https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2019_Highlights.pdf UN] says there were 7.8 billion people in the world in 2019. So Randall's prediction for 2019 came true.

:Afraid not chaps, here is a link showing that only four billion by 2020 [https://www.bricksmcgee.com/blog/international-lego-day-lego-facts/ as seen here], so it seems they have yet to outnumber us, here is to another 11-ish years of being dominant! {{unsigned|Jnutlikesxkcd|05:29, 22 July 2024}}

Talk:2956: Number Line Branch

2024-07-11T08:13:15Z

172.70.86.132:

Is it significant that the branch point is close to the value of π? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
:I was thinking the same thing, but decided it was probably nothing worth mentioning - probably just an arbitrary starting point. *Possibly* referencing the strange appearance of π but I doubt it. Anything can be significant if you believe hard enough, anyway.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.60|162.158.158.60]] 20:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
: Keep in mind π isn't special. Most real numbers are like π. The rational numbers, and the roots of polynomials with rational coefficients (algebraic completion), are the aberration. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.71|172.71.160.71]] 07:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

How does adding a new branch to a railway line reduce congestion? Isn't this more like a highway? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.47|141.101.105.47]] 23:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
:Read about the 2nd avenue subway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.168|172.70.111.168]] 02:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

What is "thrembo"? [[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 04:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
: I think the whole section can be removed. The point is to explain the comic, not to describe what is seen (unless it's relevant for the explanation, which, so far, seems not be the case). "Various symbols" should cover it. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 06:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The symbols seem well chosen TBH, I can totally see how they substitute for 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.32|162.158.146.32]] 14:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
:Except that, according to the title text, they should be 4, 8, 16, 32, 64. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.159|172.71.242.159]] 15:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
::I think that the express train travels on the regular number line, so I think the second branch parallels the regular number line. Thus, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 02:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Mathematicians been there, done that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_model_of_arithmetic
Although a nonstandard model of the integers can't branch by Peano axioms. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.71|172.71.160.71]] 15:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
:Hold my beer! [Prompts Claude 3.5 Sonnet to create a non-standard model of arithmetic.]
::"Here is a non-standard model of arithmetic consistent with the Peano postulates:
::Axioms:
::
::∃0, ω : 0 ≠ ω
::∀x : S(x) = x + 1 if x ∈ ℕ; S(ω) = ω
::
::Theorems:
::T1. ∀n ∈ ℕ : n < ω
::T2. ∀n ∈ ℕ : n + ω = ω
::T3. ω + ω = ω
::
::Lemma:
::L1. ∀n ∈ ℕ : S(n) ≠ ω
::"Induction" Principle:
::For any property P, if P(0) ∧ P(ω) ∧ (∀x : P(x) → P(S(x))), then ∀x : P(x)
::
::Conclusions:
::C1. This model "satisfies" Peano axioms while introducing a non-standard element.
::C2. Arithmetic with ω leads to paradoxical results.
::C3. Use of this model may violate conservation of sanity."

:Oh, no! .... Tentacled one sleeps. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu. Accept this new soul. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.103|172.70.210.103]] 03:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
:::That is just the positive integers plus infinity, it should place you in the thrall of Asmodeus, not Cthulhu. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.42|108.162.245.42]]
::::The Russell-Riemann-Cantor diagonalization applies to integers with infinity, mapping each integer to a tentacle on an Eldritch manifold. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.53|172.70.210.53]] 03:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Personally I would have branched off between 9 and 10, and had single character symbols for 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 so that you could do base 16 without having to use letters. Randell just lacks vision. [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 15:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
:Letters are single character symbols! I think he should extend the number line with all the letters, getting to 36 (z) before needing any new symbols[[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 21:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

In my eyes they all seem like geometry or geometry-related symbols. A square, sideways pi, phi (the golden ratio), a spiral, and a triangle. That should probably be noted somewhere.--[[User:Rerere284|Rerere284]] ([[User talk:Rerere284|talk]]) 18:23, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
: I was thinking that the first symbol looks like a square too, so what is this stuff about a Brahmi letter instead of a square? How do we get that complicated with a square? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 18:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

: assuming particular mappings of the depicted symbols to phonemes, and saying "Putting these 5 phonemes together gives a word that sounds a bit like 'bisect,'" is absolutely a stretch and should be removed. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.208|162.158.159.208]]

I'm rather surprised that these mathematicians have decided to subdivide each integer by 8, instead of by 10, like good metricists.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.132|172.70.86.132]] 08:13, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2293: RIP John Conway

2023-07-28T12:59:25Z

172.70.86.132: Windows 3.1 is NOT an operating system

__NOTOC__

This is really very impressive. The design of the stick figure to allow it to release a glider that ascends upwards (the "soul" rising to "heaven" or whatever) with the body decaying - that's a hard thing to get right using just the Game of Life rules. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.175|172.69.68.175]] 17:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
:Although Randall is clever, the Game of Life has been studied for so long that I'm sure this is a well-known animation. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 18:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
:: I played with the game a bunch in the past, but I've only done a bit of research after this appeared. I don't immediately find any previous report of this starting arrangement
:: This is unlikely, as the Game of Life has an uncountable number of patterns of this size, some of which are still being discovered. The pattern above is 7 cells wide by 9 cells tall - the number of distinct patterns that can be drawn in that box nears 2 --> 60 --> 1 (2^60). It's most likely that patterns such as this one are commonplace, and Randall just fiddled around until he reached one that he desired. The pattern itself, however, has likely never been discovered before. (As a fun postscript, [http://catagolue.appspot.com/object/xp16_0c2w3vz33032988/b3s23 a notable 8-cell wide, 9-cell tall pattern oscillating at period 16], just slightly larger than the one above, was discovered in February 2020.)[[User:Hdjensofjfnen|Hdjensofjfnen]] ([[User talk:Hdjensofjfnen|talk]]) 21:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
:::I suspect it's probably more likely that he worked it out backwards, rather than "just fiddled with it." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.244|108.162.216.244]] 04:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
::::AFAIK, many CAs such as Life have the property of being irreversible, which is the entire point for various pattern search efforts.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.54|162.158.92.54]] 07:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:::::He probably started with the floater, and adjusted the rest so it wouldn't interfere. Most figures decay in the game of life (I learned when playing with it, decades ago) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.79|162.158.111.79]] 10:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:::::The Game of Life has been researched a lot. One sub-problem is finding an arrangement of cells that cannot be produced by a prior arrangement of cells. They are called Garden of Eden patterns, and the known ones are not small. Glider generators are rather common, so it is most likely that the initial pattern was created by working backward from an existing glider generator.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.125|173.245.54.125]] 17:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:::I like the comment above by Hdjensofjfnen, where 2^60 is written using [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway_chained_arrow_notation Conway’s chained arrow notation]. That’s a slick way to honor Conway. Anyway, when the number of possible candidates is around 2^64 or less, you can find a desired solution by brute-force search if you have to, provided that the problem is relatively simple and well-defined (i.e. if you can write an efficient program). In this case, the number of the candidates of the initial state is very small, if it should be a tiny, pixel image of a stick figure. So, intuitively, an exhaustive search should be easy—at least it should be doable. (PS: I mean, the idea of this comic is cool and awesome; it’s not trivial at all for you to come up with this. But if you do come up with this problem, then the solution may not be so difficult.) [[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 17:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

was there a placeholder comic posted before the gif went live?

:I am certain there was one with "uh oh one of the lights went out" "that's not supposed to happen" and a picture of a pattern that I did not recognise, which I found to be quite sad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.54|162.158.92.54]] 10:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

::This was SMBC, and the pattern is a glider generator. [[Special:Contributions/188.114.111.211|188.114.111.211]] 12:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Looks like this is second animated comic in xkcd, besides 1116(though 1190 could be possibly counted together) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.190.16|172.69.190.16]] 19:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
:Uh, [[1331: Frequency]] and [[1264: Slideshow]] immediately come to mind, and then I remember about [[961: Eternal Flame]]. There's a lot more than two. [[User:Volleo6144|Volleo6144]] ([[User talk:Volleo6144|talk]]) 19:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
::[[:Category:Comics with animation]]; just added it. [[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 20:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

The explanation says that the simulation is run on an infinite grid, but even when the grid is calculated out beyond the border of the viewable area, bounding errors & boundary formations can occur. I've never seen ''any'' implementation that actually produces an infinite, nor even ''practically'' infinite grid. (In fact, wasn't there a Minecraft mod that runs until it lags out the engine?) Can anybody point me to a truly infinite grid implementation? Conway's ''definitely'' was not infinite, he even commented at length about the boundary formations that show up at the grid edges (which are among the most subjectively beautiful, incidentally). I think the explanation needs correction?
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 21:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
: The explanation is describing Conway's game of life, not any particular implementation IMHO. No change needed IMHOA. Also, the previous post was not signed properly. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.167|162.158.107.167]] 21:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
::Except many of Conway's observations about the "game" & even ''his initial description'' of it explicitly state & indeed hinge upon the fact that it's not (& thus far ''cannot'' be) implemented as an "infinite" grid. Part of the whole point of his experiment with it & the various demonstrations is to illustrate edge effects resulting from a finite range of calculations. '''It's extremely relevant that it's''' '''''not''''' '''infinite.''' It's actually kinda the whole point of his creating it, much the same way people working with fractals likewise tend to become very interested in bounding errors. The boundaries are where the interesting work is done. Apparently someone agreed with me at least in part, because they edited the wording. Thanks... Brian? I think we should actually '''add''' to the description of the "game" info highlighting the edge effects, because that's the primary focus of the project & its outgrowths in the first place. (We can't adequately simulate infinity & that's a big part of the interest in it.) Also, I frequently have to submit & then refresh & sign afterward because of the device I'm on. In this case I'm glad I did, because I saw your reply & the other new stuff!
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 22:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
:Golly uses a grid of arbitrary size by default. It can very easily be verified to at least ±210000. (Note that it also includes finite rectangular and toroidal grids.) [[User:LegionMammal978|LegionMammal978]] ([[User talk:LegionMammal978|talk]]) 01:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:Winning Ways, p. 817 (3rd printing): 'Life is a "game" played on an infinite squared board.'--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.208|172.68.54.208]] 13:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
No computer [Citation Needed] can run an ''actual'' infinite grid, but with some intelligent bounding you can mitigate early signs of problems by maintaining "bubbles" of cells with offsets. You get into problems once you start machine-gunning out gliders (offsets will eventually overflow or awkwardly lose precision, depending on the var-types used; and maintaining a longer and longer bubble, or more and more bubbles just above glider-sized, is probably your other challenge) but it's probably good enough for most purposes. If you somehow have finite patterns that move out in huge (wasteless) cycles from the 'origin' and hold that path until enacting hugely-delayed doglegs (mathematically, it must be a point no further away than can be reasonably enumerated by the bits of information contained within each formation, and significantly less as it'd be a far less efficient count-down cycler than any folded LFSR, but it's ''imaginable'') to meet again at some arbitrary (though deterministic and replicable) distance out in the far far reaches of your abstracted bubble-land then it's possible you could ''pretend'' you have infinite space. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.101|162.158.91.101]] 22:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]], do you have a source for your claim that the main point of Conway's creation of Life was to study the edge effects? [https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life The page for Life on its own wiki] describes the Life grid as "infinite" and only mentions edge effects as inaccuracies to be avoided, and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9Plq-D1gEk this Conway interview about Life's creation] doesn't mention edges at all.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.24|108.162.241.24]] 23:34, 13 April 2020‎ (UTC)
:First of all, as a tip, reply directly to the comment when you want to talk with someone. Secondly, yeah, I'm pretty sure that person's just blasting ass ham. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.28|172.69.69.28]] 02:49, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Possibly worth noting is the bit of artistry in the rendering. Munroe alters the step period of the iterations so that the deconstruction of the humanoid shape happens more quickly, with the stepping of the glider translating away occurring more slowly. [[User:Fixer|Fixer]] ([[User talk:Fixer|talk]]) 21:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I like the comic very much, and I'm afraid to say I hadn't heard of his death in amongst... well, everything else. RIP.
While I'm here, though, I'm a bit concerned about the current cell generation cycle explanation, as it feels awkward. Currently it is (paraphrased) "live cells survive if just enough neighbours / dead cells come to life with exactly enough neighbours / any other dies or stays dead". I'd prefer something that more delineates it as birth (dead to live, by propogation from the right number of live neighbours), death (live to dead due to ''either'' isolation ''or'' overcrowding) and continuation of state in all other cases. Can't work out a good phrasing yet, but ''may'' try it out later. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.101|162.158.91.101]] 22:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
: Agreed 100%. I believe the problem lies in the confusion between "cell as in biology" versus "cell as in jail". It would be better to avoid the word "cell" and describe a grid with squares that are either inhabited or empty; inhabitants with two or three neighbours survive to the next generation, otherwise they die (square becomes empty the next generation); exactly three neighbours to an empty square will give birth (become inhabited) in the next generation; and any other empty square stays empty.

Given the cause of death, should this comic be listed among the Covid-19 series? [[User:Momerath|Momerath]] ([[User talk:Momerath|talk]]) 05:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:Yes.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:No. This is about John Conway. It would have presumably run regardless of the cause of death.

Interesting to see if the next comic is also a Covid-19 comic, because then it will be the 19th covid-19 comic... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:53, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I really think this should not be regarded as a Covid-19 comic, since it's a memorial one and the cause of death is not important for this comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.105|162.158.93.105]] 14:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
:Agree with the others, this is a memorial comic, NOT a COVID-19 comic. I feel like too many comics are being forced into the COVID-19 theme, when they have little to no relation. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.62|172.69.22.62]] 16:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
::Covid-19 is obviously not directly the topic of the comic, but it is related quite close. So I vote to re-add it to the category, but to put the mention of the connection with the other comics not into the explanation, or on its bottom. If this is acceptable, [[961: Eternal Flame]] should also be included to [[:Category:Cancer]]. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
:::Of course this is one in the Covid series. Randall very rarely makes tributes and it has been 5 year since the last. Conway is not very famous, and had he died a year ago, chances are Randall would not have made this comic. But because he died of Covid while all Randall's comics is about Covid he makes a tribute now. For the same reason I do not think that Eternal flame has anything with the cancer category. Because this was a tribute Randall made without any connection to a series of cancer comics. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:25, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
::::Thanks for correcting my spelling errors :D all of that is speculation. How do you know, that Randall is not a huge Conway fan? seems to play exactly into his geekynes. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
:::::I also disagree that Randall is not a huge Conway fan. I believe he would be familiar and interested in the Game of Life automata, as a nerd/geek. It was previously mentioned over 10 years ago in [[696: Strip Games]]. I agree with Lupo's suggestions for this comic. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.44|172.69.34.44]] 17:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

== Is this original? ==

It would seem remarkable if Randall was able to create this starting pattern at such short notice. If it's copied from somewhere, we should provide that detail. [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 03:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
:I do not know if it is taken from another place or a common/known pattern (the comments above seem to suggest otherwise), but it is not uncommon to have an obituary / memorial in stock for elderly persons of relevance. So it might be possible, that e.g. Randall played around with putting stick figures into a simulation, and accidently found this, deciding to keep it somewehere in his archive for this occasion. The seperation of the decaying body and the everlasting part going upward is actually obvious enough to connect with the idea to use it for this occasion. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

== First popularized? ==

The game's popularization "to the general public" in Windows 3.1 really depends on your definition of popular - how many members of the general public had PCs then? I mention this to point out that it was really Martin Gardner's article in SciAm in October 1970 that showed the game to a pretty wide public, although admittedly few people were in a position to program it at the time. As I maintained the University of Cambridge's version on the PDP-7 (then their only computer with a graphics display) in 1971-72 I'm still astonished at how early this publication was. Gardner then did the same for the Mandelbrot Set (which originated in the Other Cambridge...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.74|162.158.78.74]] 04:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:Windows 3.1 was NOT an operating system, it was a Graphical User Interface to the underlying operating system - DOS. Windows did not become an OS until Windows 95 [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.132|172.70.86.132]] 12:59, 28 July 2023 (UTC) Andy Owen

== Leaving the grid ==
<blockquote>"However, any given Game of Life is on a finite grid, so once the glider leaves the grid, it has ceased to exist."</blockquote>

Maybe a philosophical nitpick, but I'd like to dispute this. I submit that it is not possible for anything to "leave the grid". A glider can certainly hit the boundary of a bounded grid, but at that point boundary conditions disrupt the pattern and it ''ceases to be a glider''; thus, gliders cannot leave the grid.

Additionally, the grid can be finite and yet still have no boundary; it is quite common for Life grids to wrap one side of the screen to the other. On such a grid, the glider would in fact persist indefinitely. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 09:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
:Also we don't know if the grid maybe is larger than the screen shown in the comic. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 11:36, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

== Triple whammy ==
FYI: Richard Guy, who found the glider first, and is coauthor of Winning Ways with Conway, already died this March. In the biblical age of 103, so possibly nobody even bothered to check for the cause. (The third author, Elwyn Berlekamp, died a year ago.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.32|141.101.77.32]] 18:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

== Conway was not a fan of his fame for Life ==

" He’d like to remembered for any of his accomplishments except the Game of Life. He once said he checked the index of every book and if it listed the Game of Life he would refuse to read it." -- https://twitter.com/standupmaths/status/1249105201992171522 [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.146|172.69.22.146]] 00:04, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

== Conway died on a Doomsday ==

The thing I remember Conway for (in addition to Game of Life) is discovering the Doomsday rule/algorithm for determining days of the week (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_rule). Of course, I'm nowhere near anywhere as fast as he is (I'm happy if I can do it without making a mistake in 10 seconds, more if I'm calculating under the influence). I find it fitting that Conway died on a Doomsday (Saturday for 2020).[[User:Tovodeverett|Tovodeverett]] ([[User talk:Tovodeverett|talk]]) 05:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
:Trivia: I was introduced to Conway's Game of Life through the book "The Magic of Lewis Carroll", by John Fischer (1973). One of the Life patterns was the "Cheshire Cat", which was a cat-like face that became a smile, then a paw-print (2x2 stable block). Conway developed the Doomsday algorithm from Lewis Carroll's initial formula, primarily by noting the even month pattern (4/4, 6/6, 8/8, 10/10, 12/12) and the 9 to 5 at 7-11 mnemonic.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.191|172.69.63.191]] 13:17, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
:Trivia: More trivia - April 11, 2020 was 42 days after Feb 29, 2020.[[User:Tovodeverett|Tovodeverett]] ([[User talk:Tovodeverett|talk]]) 04:39, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

== Symbolism of the evolving configuration ==

Should we perhaps add an explanation as to what the evolving configuration symbolizes, for the sake of readers with different cultural backgrounds? E.g., that it evokes the religious imagery related to Ecclesiastes 12:7 (KJV: "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it."), that the glider can be viewed as representing the soul departing to heaven, etc. -- [[Special:Contributions/172.68.215.224|172.68.215.224]] 20:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

== Haunted page ==
This page just got haunted. Could we protect or semi-protect it? --[[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

1581: Birthday

2023-07-05T16:52:50Z

172.70.86.132: Undo revision 316992 by FaviFake (talk) Better to say it's no longer the case than to forget. Modified revert as I don't personally have any cite information, though I have heard this before here.

{{comic
| number = 1581
| date = September 23, 2015
| title = Birthday
| image = birthday.png
| titletext = I guess I need to apologize to my parents, friends, and the staff at Chuck E. Cheese's for all the times I called the cops on them.
}}

==Explanation==
[[xkcd]] turns 10 years old on September 30, 2015 (a week after the release of this comic). In this comic [[Randall]] honors his webcomic by singing to it the classic "{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" song.

"{{w|Happy Birthday to You}}" is one of the most commonly sung songs in the English language (and is common in many others). Because of its age, ubiquity and simplicity, it has long surprised people to learn that it was not in the public domain. {{w|Warner/Chappell Music}} claimed the copyright to the lyrics, and has demanded royalties for any recording, publication or public performance for commercial purposes. Total revenues for this song were estimated at US$2 million annually.

This strip refers to a ruling, from the day before the release of this comic, by a federal judge in California ({{w|George H. King|George King}}), stating that the song is not covered by a valid copyright (see [http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-happy-birthday-song-lawsuit-decision-20150922-story.html Warner's 'Happy Birthday' Copyright Not Valid, Judge Rules]). This ruling resulted from a lawsuit filed by Good Morning To You Productions (singer {{w|Rupa Marya}} and filmmaker {{w|Robert D. Siegel|Robert Siegel}}) against Warner/Chappel Music to declare Warner/Chappel's copyright claim in the song invalid (filing at [http://www.scribd.com/doc/147645129/Happybirthday]). With this ruling, the court declared that Warner/Chappell does not have a copyright claim to the song, and therefore the song can now be sung or published by anyone, in any context, without having to pay royalties to Warner/Chappell.

The ruling does not go so far as to declare the song to be in the public domain, leaving it more correctly defined as an {{w|orphan work}}. Randall seems to be celebrating the fact that this strip, which would have put him at risk for a lawsuit the day before, is now unlikely to be challenged since the odds of a new party appearing and successfully claiming copyright on the lyrics and subsequently demanding license fees is approximately zero.

The title text is a joke that refers to Randall calling the police against {{w|Chuck E. Cheese's}} as well as his own friends and parents when they sang "Happy Birthday" and did not pay royalties. The song is very commonly used in entertainment restaurants, such as Chuck E. Cheese's, and at both grown-ups' and children's birthdays. Because restaurants are commercial enterprises, public performances of the song, prior to this ruling, would potentially have exposed the restaurant to liability claims (though singing it at a private birthday party would not). In either case, calling the police would be an extreme overreaction.

It has been said{{Actual citation needed}} that many restaurants (for example, [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG9yZigKk0I Olive Garden]) actually have staff sing a special birthday song, other than ''Happy Birthday To You'', to avoid having to pay royalties.

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the frame:]
:xkcd turns 10 years old this month.
:In light of last night's court ruling in
:''Rupa Marya v. Warner/Chappell Music Inc.'',
:I would just like to say:

:[The song text is written, with nine musical notes, three groups on each side of the text, above a birthday cake with 10 lit candles. The cake has two distinct layers. On each layer there are drawn 6 xkcd stick figures with small black bullets between them. The center bullet in the bottom layer is shaped like a heart. The figures at the edges can be difficult to recognize. The figures in the upper layer and from the left are: A man with a hat (hard to see if it is one of the recognized characters), White Hat, Megan, Pony Tail, Hairy and Cueball (hard to see him properly). Similar in the lower layer: Black Hat, Danish, Beret Guy, Rob, Cutie, and a girl (hard to see, but looks like girls hair, not a hat).]
:Happy birthday to you
:Happy birthday to you
:Happy birthday, dear xkcd
:Happy birthday to you

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Danish]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]

Talk:2797: Actual Progress

2023-07-03T18:24:52Z

172.70.86.132:

So true! If the outliers look weird, it's often because you've misunderstood something about the whole set.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

It may be good to start to ask whether your nice obedient little line is just a coincidence in your testing data. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.159|172.71.26.159]] 17:22, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
:By the time you've happily worked out why the strange exceptions aren't actually strange/exceptions, you realise that there's no real underlying reason that carefully regiments the 'clearly patterned' bits and that's just a pure artefact of data... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.132|172.70.86.132]] 18:24, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

2683: Fan Theories

2022-10-11T09:43:27Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ "an"->"a" (previously "an effective" before "new and" was inserted?)

{{comic
| number = 2683
| date = October 10, 2022
| title = Fan Theories
| image = fan_theories_2x.png
| imagesize = 267x318px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The universe fandom is great. Such sweet and enthusiastic people.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete| Created by an THREE-D PRINTED FAN BASED ON AN HYPOTHETICAL SOLUTION TO THE NAVIER-STOKES LAMINAR-TURBULENCE BOUNDARY EQUATION. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Once again, [[Randall]] has devised a new and effective way to annoy an very sizable proportion of the scientific community.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] refers to scientific {{w|hypothesis|hypotheses}} (in this case, that Jovian moons such as {{w|Callisto (moon)|Callisto}} have oceans underneath an surface of ice) he is trying to explain to his friends, family, and colleagues [[Ponytail]], [[White Hat]], and [[Megan]], as, "{{w|fan theory|fan theories}}." Scientists are sometimes upset when their hypotheses are not treated with respect, because there are an lot of charismatic cranks who obtain undeserved recognition for unscientific claims.

This comic appeared 60 years after [https://iep.utm.edu/kuhn-ts/ Thomas S. Kuhn's] renowned 1962 treatise, ''{{w|The Structure of Scientific Revolutions}}.''

The title text may have to do with unwelcoming or inconsiderate {{w|fandom}}s.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Ponytail, Cueball, White Hat, and Megan standing in a line. Cueball has his hand raised, and Megan has hands balled into fists, exasperated.]
:Cueball: But according to leading fan theories, Jupiter's moons may harbor subsurface oceans.
:Megan: Will you ''please'' stop calling them that?

:[Caption below the panel:]
:How to annoy scientists: refer to all hypotheses as "fan theories"

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

919: Tween Bromance

2022-10-10T08:34:15Z

172.70.86.132: Undo revision 296278 by IJustWantToEditStuff (talk) Heavily revised undo, as clearly inclusive/not-inclusive is being assumed differently in all kinds of ways.

{{comic
| number = 919
| date = July 1, 2011
| title = Tween Bromance
| image = tween_bromance.png
| titletext = Verbiage. Va-jay-jay. Irregardless.
}}
==Explanation==
Apparently, Randall hates some ridiculous neologisms. [[Cueball]] seems to be dictating a "Tween bromance" story or novel to [[Megan]], who is possibly typing it up. He is including all the words that get to Megan in a sequence. Megan is just annoyed and starts to shriek in rage; considering Cueball keeps speaking more annoying words in the title text, that seems to have been the point.

*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tween Tween]" means a pre-adolescent. Portmanteau of ''teen'' and ''between'', specifically above the age of 9 (the last value not in the tens) and below the age of 13 (the first actual "-teen" number).
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bromance Bromance]" means a close non-sexual friendship between two males. Portmanteau of ''brother'' and ''romance''.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=guesstimate Guesstimate]" means an estimate made with very little information. Portmanteau of ''guess'' and ''estimate''.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=frenemy Frenemy]" means a friend who is also a rival. Portmanteau of ''friend'' and ''enemy''.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=yiff Yiff]" is a word invented by the {{w|furry community}}. In most contexts it simply means "copulate", supposedly derived from the sound a fox makes during mating, and can refer to any form of sexual activity, including cybersex.
*"{{Wiktionary|moist}}" is an ordinary word, but one that many people find mildly creepy, especially in this context.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=taint Taint]" is the part between the genitals and the anus (perineum) in slang.
*"[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panties Panties]" is a common term in the U.S. for women's underwear.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=preggers Preggers]" a slang term for being pregnant.
*"{{Wiktionary|verbiage}}" is a fairly new usage of an older word, meaning too many words used to explain a subject.
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=va-jay-jay Va-jay-jay]" /vəˈjājā/ IPA /vəˈdʒeɪdʒeɪ/ is just a way of saying "vagina".
*"[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Irregardless Irregardless]" is a {{w|solecism}}. [http://www.merriam-webster.com/video/0037-irregardless.htm Or perhaps this portmanteau.]

So, the full sentence roughly translates to: By my rough guess, my friend-slash-rival engaged in sexual activity so intensely that her wet perineum caused her underwear to become pregnant.

This is probably nonsensical, as clothing cannot bear children. It may also reflect Cueball’s intentional parody of writers who lack understanding of anatomy/basic reasoning. However, at a stretch, the word “preggers” could be interpreted to refer to the rare, literal meaning of pregnant: full/filled. By this logic, “her moist taint made her panties preggers” would simply be an unusual way to say “her underwear were filled up with liquid”. But in that case: ew.

Like this comic fills a sentence with (gross) neologisms, [[550: Density]] crams a sentence with memes.

According to [[1485: Friendship]], Randall doesn't like the word ''bromance'' much either. Uncomfortable synonyms are also seen in [[1322: Winter]] and [[2352: Synonym Date]].

==Transcript==
:[All of Cueball's lines are overlaid over the entire comic; the panels listed are merely the ones directly under each sentence fragment.]
:[Cueball is standing smugly behind Megan, who is seated in front of a computer and typing.]
:Cueball: By my guesstimate,

:Cueball: my frenemy yiffed so hard

:Cueball: her moist taint made
:[Megan's eye twitches.]

:Cueball: her panties preggers!
:Megan: ''STOP IT STOP IT!''

==Trivia==
*In the first frame, the back of Megan's chair is missing.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Furries]]
[[Category:Sex]]

User talk:While False

2022-10-07T10:43:01Z

172.70.86.132: /* I think you accidentally enabled a spambot... */ new section

== Vandalbot ==

I just found a bug in the vandal bot: if a page starts with "crap", it won't vandalize. Should we run a similar bot that just prepends the word crap once instead of replacing the text with the word repeated, to "vaccinate" the pages? One crap in addition to the page content would be a lot less disruptive than a page full of it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.251|108.162.245.251]] 22:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

::Maybe. (See the source for some code that might work) <div style="display: none">crap</div> [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.251|108.162.245.251]] 22:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

== Thanks for fixing the "crap" on my page ==

Hi While False 
Saw your comment on my page, and did not see the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Kynde&oldid=232561 crap post] before I was looking into this here. Also read about the problems you had with FaIse account. Sad this happens. Sadly I'm not an admin and have no way on contacting any of them. Shame that the x.k.c.d account again is active. But it is very annoying. Thanks for putting [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Kynde&direction=next&oldid=232561 my page] right again. Hope it stays that way. Not sure what we can do, I'm not tech wizard... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

== My Script ==

I thought I owed you a little explanation, since you showed interest earlier.
# Yeah, all the API stuff is indeed by Ozank.
# The tweaks to automatically run the rollback are by my friend [[wikia:w:c:c:User:KockaAdmiralac|KockaAdmiralac]] who I called on shortly before entering the fray.
# I contributed... An autoconfirmed account and enough knowledge of JavaScript to turn down the timer on the script and almost lock myself out of my account by refreshing constantly.
So, you know who to thank. Troll slain. Back to business as usual. [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 01:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
: More context:
:* The base [[wikia:w:c:dev:Rollback|script]] ''is'' by Ozank, though it got [[wikia:w:c:dev:Special:Diff/130753|rewritten]] by me at some point (probably without changing the API calls, though)
:* It also had to be adapted to work on vanilla MediaWiki at all
:* The last about two thousand reverts were made in part by a different script I wrote on this occasion, that I can rerun later if needed
: [[User:KockaAdmiralac|Cube-shaped garbage can]] ([[User talk:KockaAdmiralac|talk]]) 09:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

== Concision and clarity ==

In case it helps, I think that [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1740:_Rosetta&diff=286099&oldid=286098 your edit] was in response to the same person as did a few other edits not long ago, that I reverted. Encompassed by the following lines in Recent Changes, at the end of 2nd June:
* 23:09 1490: Atoms‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [162.158.159.137‎; 108.162.245.173‎]
* 23:08 1368: One Of The‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [162.158.159.137‎; 162.158.107.52‎]
* 20:43 352: Far Away‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [162.158.159.87‎; 108.162.245.43‎]
* 20:41 1140: Calendar of Meaningful Dates‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [162.158.159.87‎; 108.162.246.154‎]
:''Leaving you to find and follow the links, tabbing around to copy and paste addresses to link directly is quite awkward, since the latest update of this browser... Urgh!''
By 'coincidence' or not, all the IPs involved in these original edits we reverted have Contrib histories showing various disruptions from the recent vandal. Not proof in itself, but the insertion of uselessly florid language ( <- no stranger to that myself, admittedly! ) - it looks like a new phase of "trying to mess things up" from the same geographic-at-least source. Subtle and not so disruptive, but maybe a drip drip drip thing with a long-game, unless even cleverer than currently obvious.
 Anyway glad I'm not the only one who thought it was odd. Just thought I'd say. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 12:43, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
:Thanks for letting me know. Seems malucious indeed. [[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 21:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
:I've just reverted several more of the same kind. [[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 22:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

== 'Interesting' edits... ==
{{notice|This commenter has a point.}}
{{notice|{{notice|{{notice|{{notice|{{notice|This comment has been taken to heart.}}}}}}}}}}
I get ''some'' of the reasoning behind the splurge of edits you just made, but must admit that the whole also looks like it has a lot of rather random tweaking. No complaints, but... perhaps some of the things you really meant to Sandbox (or at least Preview and then abandon without actually saving) whilst you were exploring whatever it was you thought it worth trying out? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.71|162.158.34.71]] 22:54, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
:Perhaps it is so. [[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|speak]]) 06:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

== I think you accidentally enabled a spambot... ==

I could be wrong, but the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:ZitaPortus3&curid=25674&diff=296168&oldid=296003 only edit they have so far made] definitely link-spammed with what appears to be spam-links (not followed them myself, just based upon my spidey-sense upon reading the raw URLs). With no obvious attempt of xkcd-ish parody/irony. Looks (semi-)automated copypasta. — Anyway, I've reverted it (much against my principles, but leaving an 'obvious SEO-fodder' seemed an even worse result) but I would defer to any future "Hey, this ''is'' real!" from the user (despite it being a spammer-type username), yourself or the other mods who may investigate my interference and come to the other conlusion. FYI, however, so that you know (sooner) to actually check it yourself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.132|172.70.86.132]] 10:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

2678: Wing Lift

2022-09-30T13:26:40Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Qualify Bernoulli demonstration/'explanation' incidence. (Noting that AoA is probably already intuitive to any schoolchild who has held/moved a flat object through an airstream of any kind.)

{{comic
| number = 2678
| date = September 28, 2022
| title = Wing Lift
| image = wing_lift_2x.png
| imagesize = 679x358px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Once the air from the top passes below the plane of the wing and catches sight of the spooky skulls, it panics, which is the cause of turbulent vortices.
}}

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

This comic is a parody of the incomplete explanations given to physics students on how wings produce lift.

Specifically, it parodies the Equal Transit Time fallacy, which states that the air flowing above the wing and the air flowing below the wing have to travel from one side of the wing to the other in equal time, so the air above the wing has to travel faster to keep up with the air below. This assumes that the air above the wing is somehow conscious of what the air below the wing is doing. 

This assumption of consciousness is taken to extreme parody by the comic - it implies that the bottom air can be frightened by skulls, that the top air is curious to see what's going on, and that air can panic.

Wings can produce {{w|Lift (force)|lift}},<ref name="Prandtl & Tietjens (1952)">Tietjens, Oskar Karl Gustav; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Prandtl Prandtl, Ludwig] (1957). [https://books.google.com/books?id=4KtFcuCZ3VsC&pg=PR1 ''Fundamentals of Hydro- and Aeromechanics'']. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-60374-2</ref> i.e. an upwards force with which an aircraft is held in the air.

One or more of three main reasons may typically be given as to why airplane wings produce lift:
* {{w|Bernoulli's principle}} (Perhaps the most frequently cited/demonstrated as a basic introduction to wing-physics.)
* {{w|Angle of attack}} (The airplane wing angles up so that air is deflected downwards, by the {{w|Newton's sine-square law of air resistance|'ski effect'}}.)
* {{w|Coandă effect}} (The top is curved, so air going over the wing must curve downwards in order to avoid creating a vacuum above the back of the wing, and by Newton's third law, this results in an upwards force on the wing.)
The comic references all three of these reasons. Airflow splitting references Bernoulli's principle, while the air at the bottom being scared and fleeing downwards is similar to the effect of air hitting the angled bottom of the wing. The air going over the top curving down references the Coandă effect, although the comic claims that this effect is instead caused by the top-air noticing the bottom-air fleeing downward and goes down to investigate why the bottom-air is fleeing. The mention of Newton's third law is indeed correct, even if the movement of the air is for the wrong reasons. In the title text, it additionally suggests that the top-flow also end up glimpsing the printed skulls, causing it to also chaotically flee, generating a wing's classic turbulent wake.

Randall previously dealt with explanations of wing lift in [[803: Airfoil]].

==Transcript==
:[Caption at the top of the panel above the drawing:]
:How a wing produces lift

:[The drawing is a diagram of the cross-section of a plane wing. It is large and rounded on the left end and flat on the bottom while the top curves down to meet it at a sharp point to the right. There are many small arrows indicating the flow of wind, in front of, above and below and behind the wing. Four sections of the wind has captions.

:[The arrows come from the left of the panel, point towards the wing, and then half begin to go over and half begin to go under. There is a caption in the middle of this flow:]
:Airflow splits around the top and bottom of the wing

:[The arrow flowing above continue to the back without caption. But the arrows going under the wing goes by a circle underneath the wing. The circle is connected to an arrow which points to the underside of the wing indicating that the content of the circle represents the underside of the wing. The circle shows a repeating pattern of small black (simplified) skulls, that not only fills the circle but can be seen on the arrow pointing to the underside of the wing. There is a caption to the right of this:]
:Spooky skulls microprinted on the bottom of the wing frighten the air, which flees away downward

:[The arrows going above the wing begins to curve downward at the end of the wing. In the middle of these arrows is a caption:]
:Top air goes to see what's wrong

:[After the spooky skulls the the arrows under the wings also begins to curve downwards and both streams of arrows from above and below have joined at the end of the wing and are all pointing to the bottom right of the panel. In front of them is a caption:]
:By Newton's third law, downward deflection of air pushes wing upward

{{comic discussion}}

[[category:Engineering]]
[[category:Physics]]
[[category:Aviation]]

2677: Two Key System

2022-09-27T18:30:34Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Expressing doubts.

{{comic
| number = 2677
| date = September 26, 2022
| title = Two Key System
| image = two_key_system_2x.png
| imagesize = 645x316px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Our company can be your one-stop shop for decentralization.
}}

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

As an allegory, the comic relates the results of software development to the reputed safeguards of nuclear missile launch systems.

Such precautions include the {{w|Two-man rule|need for two independent operators for authorization}}, to prevent honest mistakes or the rogue actions of lone-actors. This in several ways may include the use of the {{w|Nuclear Briefcase}} (or 'Football'), where a verification process involves senior figures other than the current leader, but in this case it is more clearly depicting the kind of procedure used at a launch site, where two duty officers need to turn two respective keys at the same time, physically separated so that neither can possibly initiate the sequence by themselves.

In being related to software development, and perhaps the rise of 'auto-filling' password fields in a browser, it is shown that the 'nuisance' of the safeguards (e.g. having to remember your password every time you visit a site) has prompted the development of a method to circumvent the previously enforced requirement. Rather than typing in passwords on every visit, browsers have long since been capable of remembering authentication details, and/or web-sites often providing {{w|HTTP cookie|'cookies'}} if you ask them to "Remember your login" each time you connect to them – which may be fine for most situations. Thus, in the comic, something else is developed to make the safeguards easier to deal with, a dual key-turner device that allows the deliberately secure operation (the requirement that you provide your password) to be accomplished as if it were a single-operator task (the computer does that all by itself).

And thus we find out that the thing used to make the safeguards less of a nuisance actually defeats the purpose of the safeguards. As with website passwords, where the use of a computer or device by someone else could allow ''them'' to use the autologin capabilities, or even to view all passwords used locally and take away for their own use, the whole point of the deliberately included security factor has been negated. It was only the perceived need for two independent operators that created the initial situation of requiring two separated keys, or indeed any keys at all!

Hence, after a further cycle of development, in order to restore the security of the two-key system, the two-key turning device (rather than being removed or made unworkable) is provided for use but ''only'' if it can be removed from a secure cabinet (labelled as giving access to the 'key turner', much as the original unit was labelled as giving access to a missile) with the requirements to open it being… …two seperate keys to be used at the same time! This could be seen as the same as {{w|password manager}}s being introduced, either as a part of a browser or third-party add-ons, which automatically provide the user's passwords for any given access attempt but only when they are given a password (or other security factor) themselves.

And so, rather than removing a 'problem', a new safeguard is added which does the exact same thing as the original, the possible nuisance (but hopefully also the necessary element of security) included.

Password management, as a process, is substantially similar to key management: Common failure-modes for both passwords and keys, include forgetting your own long-term passwords (especially if you changed computers after asking your computer to remember your passwords for you) which is functionally similar to misplacing your keys, or tending to use just a single password or key for every lock (which, if ever compromised in one situation, may lead to being compromised across many others). A Password Manager can reduce such issues, as it can be capable of 'spitting out' or transfering login details at will and letting you use many different passwords (even generating and using the kinds of passwords nobody should be able to guess, [[936: Password Strength|or remember!]]) across your many different websites, etc. But this passkey storage must itself be secure, and so should be functionally accessible perhaps only through use of a 'master passkey' or some other kind of authentication process, which may be subject to the same issues of forgetting, copying, or theft. Similarly, a central lockbox full of keys (such as those used at some car dealerships), can make handling multiple keys much easier, while introducing a single point of failure in the event that lockbox is illicitly accessed. Various forms of {{w|multi-factor authentication}}, plus auxiallary authentication methods for password recovery/reset, go some way to alleviate these challenges, at the expense of further intermediary steps and hardware requirements; but the balance between ease of use and security is never quite so simple and universal.



The title text mentions a one-stop-shop for decentralization. The drive to make use of one-stop-shops (such as a website aggregating searches for the best insurance) and ''also'' to decentralize (in this case not relying upon any one vendor, even that single aggregator who might actually not be the best aggregator) is another self-contradiction — because a one-stop-shop is by definition centralized.

The comic being posted on September 26th may be a reference to Stanislav Petrov correctly rejecting the false detection of an incoming nuclear missile strike from the US on September 26th, 1983. [[2052: Stanislav Petrov Day]]

For related xkcd on software cycles, see [[2044: Sandboxing Cycle]] and [[1306: Sigil Cycle]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Caption:]
:All software development, eventually

:[Cueball is talking, while pointing to a drawing. It represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys at either end of a missile launch system - a large anonymous cabinet except for a picture of a missile upon it]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key system to prevent accidental missile launches.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents a device with two inward-facing keys connected by a long bar with a further handle, and below that is shown how it is used with a cabinet such as above to let Cueball to activate the unit by himself]
:Cueball: We've developed a dual-turner device to allow a user to efficiently turn multiple keys.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys at either end of a large similarly anonymous cabinet, except for the picture upon it being of the device of panel 2]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key lock on the dual-turner device to prevent accidental use.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

2677: Two Key System

2022-09-26T22:13:43Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Final tweaks. Promise!

{{comic
| number = 2677
| date = September 26, 2022
| title = Two Key System
| image = two_key_system_2x.png
| imagesize = 645x316px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Our company can be your one-stop shop for decentralization.
}}

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

As an allegory, the comic relates the results of software development to the reputed safeguards of nuclear missile launch systems.

Such precautions include the {{w|Two-man rule|need for two independent operators for authorization}}, to prevent honest mistakes or the rogue actions of lone-actors. This in several ways may include the use of the {{w|Nuclear Briefcase}} (or 'Football'), where a verification process involves senior figures other than the current leader, but in this case it is more clearly depicting the kind of procedure used at a launch site, where two duty officers need to turn two respective keys at the same time, physically separated so that neither can possibly initiate the sequence by themselves.

In being related to software development, and perhaps the rise of 'auto-filling' password fields in a browser, it is shown that the 'nuisance' of the safeguards (e.g. having to remember your password every time you visit a site) has prompted the development of a method to circumvent the previously enforced requirement. Rather than typing in passwords on every visit, browsers have long since been capable of remembering authentication details, and/or web-sites often providing {{w|HTTP cookie|'cookies'}} if you ask them to "Remember your login" each time you connect to them – which may be fine for most situations. Thus, in the comic, something else is developed to make the safeguards easier to deal with, a dual key-turner device that allows the deliberately secure operation (the requirement that you provide your password) to be accomplished as if it were a single-operator task (the computer does that all by itself).

And thus we find out that the thing used to make the safeguards less of a nuisance actually defeats the purpose of the safeguards. As with website passwords, where the use of a computer or device by someone else could allow ''them'' to use the autologin capabilities, or even to view all passwords used locally and take away for their own use, the whole point of the deliberately included security factor has been negated. It was only the perceived need for two independent operators that created the initial situation of requiring two separated keys, or indeed any keys at all!

Hence, after a further cycle of development, in order to restore the security of the two-key system, the two-key turning device (rather than being removed or made unworkable) is provided for use but ''only'' if it can be removed from a secure cabinet (labelled as giving access to the 'key turner', much as the original unit was labelled as giving access to a missile) with the requirements to open it being… …two seperate keys to be used at the same time! This could be seen as the same as {{w|password manager}}s being introduced, either as a part of a browser or third-party add-ons, which automatically provide the user's passwords for any given access attempt but only when they are given a password (or other security factor) themselves.

And so, rather than removing a 'problem', a new safeguard is added which does the exact same thing as the original, the possible nuisance (but hopefully also the necessary element of security) included.

Password management, as a process, is actually far more complex than key-turning. Common failure-modes for passwords are either forgetting your own long-term passwords (especially if you asked your computer to remember them for you, ages ago, then had to change computers) or tending to use just a single password for everything (which, if ever compromised in one situation, could lead to being compromised across many others). Possibly a Password Manager can alleviate such issues, as it can be capable of 'spitting out' (or transfering) remembered login details at will as well as letting you use many different passwords (even generating and using the kinds of passwords nobody should be able to guess, [[936: Password Strength|or remember!]]) across your many different websites, etc. But this must itself be secure, and so should be functionally accessible perhaps only through use of a 'master password' or some other kind of authentication process, which may be subject to the same issues of forgetting and/or leaking. Various forms of {{w|multi-factor authentication}}, plus backup authentication methods for password recovery/reset, goes some way to alleviate this, but the balance between ease of use and security is never quite so simple and universal.

The title text mentions a one-stop-shop for decentralization. The drive to make use of one-stop-shops (such as a website aggregating searches for the best insurance) and ''also'' to decentralize (in this case not relying upon any one vendor, even that single aggregator who might actually not be the best aggregator) is another self-contradiction — because a one-stop-shop is by definition centralized.

This comic is posted on September 26th as a reference to Stanislav Petrov correctly rejecting the false detection of an incoming nuclear missile strike from the US on September 26th, 1983. [[2052: Stanislav Petrov Day]]

For related xkcd on software cycles, see [[2044: Sandboxing Cycle]] and [[1306: Sigil Cycle]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Caption:]
:All software development, eventually

:[Cueball is talking, while pointing to a drawing. It represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a missile launch briefcase]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key system to prevent accidental missile launches.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents a device which allows Cueball to activate the briefcase by himself]
:Cueball: We've developed a dual-turner device to allow a user to efficiently turn multiple keys.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a box containing the device of panel 2]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key lock on the dual-turner device to prevent accidental use.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

2677: Two Key System

2022-09-26T21:40:18Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ "L" is next to backspace on this no-haptics on-screen keyboard... *sigh*

{{comic
| number = 2677
| date = September 26, 2022
| title = Two Key System
| image = two_key_system_2x.png
| imagesize = 645x316px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Our company can be your one-stop shop for decentralization.
}}

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

As an allegory, the comic relates the results of software development to the reputed safeguards of nuclear missile launch systems.

Such precautions include the {{w|Two-man rule|need for two independent operators for authorization}}, to prevent honest mistakes or the rogue actions of lone-actors. This in several ways may include the use of the {{w|Nuclear Briefcase}} (or 'Football'), where a verification process involves senior figures other than the current leader, but in this case it is more clearly depicting the kind of procedure used at a launch site, where two duty officers need to turn two respective keys at the same time, physically separated so that neither can possibly initiate the sequence by themselves.

In being related to software development, and perhaps the rise of 'auto-filling' password fields in a browser, it is shown that the 'nuisance' of the safeguards (e.g. having to remember your password every time you visit a site) has prompted the development of a method to circumvent the previously enforced requirement. Rather than typing in passwords on every visit, browsers have long since been capable of remembering authentication details, and/or web-sites often providing {{w|HTTP cookie|'cookies'}} if you ask them to "Remember your login" each time you connect to them – which may be fine for most situations. Thus, in the comic, something else is developed to make the safeguards easier to deal with, a dual key-turner device that allows the deliberately secure operation to be accomplished as if it were a single-operator task.

And thus we find out that the thing used to make the safeguards less of a nuisance actually defeats the purpose of the safeguards. As with website passwords, where the use of a computer or device by someone else could allow ''them'' to use the autologin capabilities, or even to view all passwords used locally and take away for their own use, the whole point of the deliberately included security factor has been negated. i.e. only the perceived need for two independent operators created the initial situation of requiring two separated keys, or indeed any keys at all!

Hence, after a further cycle of development, in order to restore the security of the two-key system, the two-key turning device (rather than being removed or made unworkable) is provided for use but ''only'' if it can be removed from a secure cabinet (labelled as giving access to the 'key turner', much as the original unit was labelled as giving access to a missile) with the requirements to open it being… …two seperate keys to be used at the same time! This could be seen as the same as {{w|password manager}}s being introduced, either as a part of a browser or third-party add-ons, which provide the user's passwords for any given access attempt but only when they are given a password (or other security factor) themselves.

And so, rather than removing a 'problem', a new safeguard is added which does the exact same thing as the original, possible nuisance (but hopefully also the necessary element of security) included.

Password management, as a process, is actually far more complex than key-turning. Common failure-modes for passwords are either forgetting your own long-term passwords (especially if you asked your computer to remember them for you, ages ago, then had to change computers) or tending to use just a single password for everything (which, if ever compromised in one situation, could lead to being compromised across many others). Possibly a Password Manager can alleviate such issues, as it can be capable of 'spitting out' or transfering login details at will and letting you use many different passwords (even generating and using the kinds of passwords nobody should be able to guess, [[936: Password Strength|or remember!]]) across your many different websites, etc. But this must itself be secure, and so should be functionally accessible perhaps only through use of a 'master password' or some other kind of authentication process, which may be subject to the same issue of forgetting or leaking. Various forms of {{w|multi-factor authentication}}, plus auxiallary authentication methods for password recovery/reset, goes some way to alleviate this, but the balance between ease of use and security is never quite simple or universal.

The title text mentions a one-stop-shop for decentralization. The drive to make use of one-stop-shops (such as a website aggregating searches for the best insurance) and ''also'' to decentralize (in this case not relying upon any one vendor, even that single aggregator who might actually not be the best aggregator) is another self-contradiction — because a one-stop-shop is by definition centralized.

This comic is posted on September 26th as a reference to Stanislav Petrov correctly rejecting the false detection of an incoming nuclear missile strike from the US on September 26th, 1983. [[2052: Stanislav Petrov Day]]

For related xkcd on software cycles, see [[2044: Sandboxing Cycle]] and [[1306: Sigil Cycle]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Caption:]
:All software development, eventually

:[Cueball is talking, while pointing to a drawing. It represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a missile launch briefcase]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key system to prevent accidental missile launches.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents a device which allows Cueball to activate the briefcase by himself]
:Cueball: We've developed a dual-turner device to allow a user to efficiently turn multiple keys.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a box containing the device of panel 2]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key lock on the dual-turner device to prevent accidental use.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

2677: Two Key System

2022-09-26T21:38:20Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Hmm, ok, not sure I've done the title text justice, but (barring typos/thinkos) that'll probably do.

{{comic
| number = 2677
| date = September 26, 2022
| title = Two Key System
| image = two_key_system_2x.png
| imagesize = 645x316px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Our company can be your one-stop shop for decentralization.
}}

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

As an allegory, the comic relates the results of software development to the reputed safeguards of nuclear missile launch systems.

Such precautions include the {{w|Two-man rule|need for two independent operators for authorization}}, to prevent honest mistakes or the rogue actions of lone-actors. This in several ways may include the use of the {{w|Nuclear Briefcase}} (or 'Football'), where a verification process involves senior figures other than the current leader, but in this case it is more clearly depicting the kind of procedure used at a launch site, where two duty officers need to turn two respective keys at the same time, physically separated so that neither can possibly initiate the sequence by themselves.

In being related to software development, and perhaps the rise of 'auto-filling' password fields in a browser, it is shown that the 'nuisance' of the safeguards (e.g. having to remember your password every time you visit a site) has prompted the development of a method to circumvent the previously enforced requirement. Rather than typing in passwords on every visit, browsers have long since been capable of remembering authentication details, and/or web-sites often providing {{w|HTTP cookie|'cookies'}} if you ask them to "Remember your login" each time you connect to them – which may be fine for most situations. Thus, in the comic, something else is developed to make the safeguards easier to deal with, a dual key-turner device that allows the deliberately secure operation to be accomplished as if it were a single-operator task.

And thus we find out that the thing used to make the safeguards less of a nuisance actually defeats the purpose of the safeguards. As with website passwords, where the use of a computer or device by someone else could allow ''them'' to use the autologin capabilities, or even to view all passwords usedocally and take away for their own use, the whole point of the deliberately included security factor has been negated. i.e. only the perceived need for two independent operators created the initial situation of requiring two separated keys, or indeed any keys at all!

Hence, after a further cycle of development, in order to restore the security of the two-key system, the two-key turning device (rather than being removed or made unworkable) is provided for use but ''only'' if it can be removed from a secure cabinet (labelled as giving access to the 'key turner', much as the original unit was labelled as giving access to a missile) with the requirements to open it being… …two seperate keys to be used at the same time! This could be seen as the same as {{w|password manager}}s being introduced, either as a part of a browser or third-party add-ons, which provide the user's passwords for any given access attempt but only when they are given a password (or other security factor) themselves.

And so, rather than removing a 'problem', a new safeguard is added which does the exact same thing as the original, possible nuisance (but hopefully also the necessary element of security) included.

Password management, as a process, is actually far more complex than key-turning. Common failure-modes for passwords are either forgetting your own long-term passwords (especially if you asked your computer to remember them for you, ages ago, then had to change computers) or tending to use just a single password for everything (which, if ever compromised in one situation, could lead to being compromised across many others). Possibly a Password Manager can alleviate such issues, as it can be capable of 'spitting out' or transfering login details at will and letting you use many different passwords (even generating and using the kinds of passwords nobody should be able to guess, [[936: Password Strength|or remember!]]) across your many different websites, etc. But this must itself be secure, and so should be functionally accessible perhaps only through use of a 'master password' or some other kind of authentication process, which may be subject to the same issue of forgetting or leaking. Various forms of {{w|multi-factor authentication}}, plus auxiallary authentication methods for password recovery/reset, goes some way to alleviate this, but the balance between ease of use and security is never quite simple or universal.

The title text mentions a one-stop-shop for decentralization. The drive to make use of one-stop-shops (such as a website aggregating searches for the best insurance) and ''also'' to decentralize (in this case not relying upon any one vendor, even that single aggregator who might actually not be the best aggregator) is another self-contradiction — because a one-stop-shop is by definition centralized.

This comic is posted on September 26th as a reference to Stanislav Petrov correctly rejecting the false detection of an incoming nuclear missile strike from the US on September 26th, 1983. [[2052: Stanislav Petrov Day]]

For related xkcd on software cycles, see [[2044: Sandboxing Cycle]] and [[1306: Sigil Cycle]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Caption:]
:All software development, eventually

:[Cueball is talking, while pointing to a drawing. It represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a missile launch briefcase]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key system to prevent accidental missile launches.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents a device which allows Cueball to activate the briefcase by himself]
:Cueball: We've developed a dual-turner device to allow a user to efficiently turn multiple keys.

:[An arrow is pointing to the next panel:] Soon

:[The drawing now represents two keys, pointing to Cueball and Ponytail turning keys of a box containing the device of panel 2]
:Cueball: We've installed a two-key lock on the dual-turner device to prevent accidental use.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

1554: Spice Girls

2022-09-18T07:21:53Z

172.70.86.132: /* Explanation */ Better to page link (here in internal form) than bare-URL, and folded into a thematic continuation as well, rather than almost look like a(n nsigned) Talk contribution. But otherwise good to make the association...

{{distinguish|1511: Spice Girl}}
{{comic
| number = 1554
| date = July 22, 2015
| title = Spice Girls
| image = spice girls.png
| titletext = The Earth's five major mass extinctions were the Posh Extinction, the Sporty Extinction, the Scary Extinction, the Ginger Extinction, and the Baby Extinction.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] are apparently playing a game in which they name all of the elements in some category. Cueball asks Megan to name all of the {{w|Spice Girls}}, a pop group whose nicknames were
*Posh Spice ({{w|Victoria Beckham}})
*Sporty Spice ({{w|Melanie C|Melanie Chisholm}})
*Scary Spice ({{w|Mel B|Melanie Brown}}),
*Ginger Spice ({{w|Geri Halliwell}})
*Baby Spice ({{w|Emma Bunton}})

Instead, Megan winds up making up names by tacking "Spice" onto words from other, completely unrelated categories:
*First guess: The {{w|Sense#Traditional senses|five human senses}}: {{w|Hearing}}, {{w|Visual perception|Vision}}, {{w|Olfactory system|Smell}}, {{w|Touch}}, and {{w|Gustatory system|Taste}}.
*Second guess: The {{w|Kübler-Ross model|five stages of grief}}: {{w|Denial}}, {{w|Anger}}, Bargaining, {{w|Depression}}, and {{w|Acceptance}}.
*Third guess: The {{w|Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse}}: {{w|War}}, {{w|Famine}}, {{w|Infection|Plague}}, and {{w|Death_(personification)|Death}}.
*Fourth guess: Words that are phonetically similar to the actual names: {{w|Pogs|Pog}} (Posh), Story (Sporty), Sarah (Scary), {{w|Gender}} (Ginger), and {{w|Baleen}} (Baby).

This seems to be a continuation of [[1417: Seven]], where Megan asks Cueball to name the seven dwarfs. Apparently Megan confuses different sets of five (or four when she is not trying) which may be compared to the way Cueball mixes items from different sets of seven, thus not mentioning a full set, but just seven items from seven different sets of seven.

The title text has the correct "first" names of the Spice Girls, but replaces the "Spice" part of their names with "Extinction" to associate them with {{w|Extinction event#Major extinction events|Earth's five mass extinctions}}. The [http://www.endangeredspeciesinternational.org/overview.html five actual worst mass extinctions] are:
*The {{w|Ordovician-Silurian extinction}},
*The {{w|Late Devonian extinction}},
*The {{w|Permian-Triassic extinction}},
*The {{w|End Triassic extinction}}, and
*The {{w|Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction}}.

Randall previously referenced the Spice Girls in [[1511: Spice Girl]] (more specifically, using "Which Spice Girl Are You?" as an example of online personality quizzes).
And already in the next comic [[1555: Exoplanet Names 2]] he suggest to give five exoplanets around the same star the five nicknames. On the other hand, he suggests he mixes up different sets when they each consist of [[1417: Seven|seven]] members.

==Transcript==
:Cueball: Your turn: Can you name all of the Spice Girls?

:Megan: Hmm… Hearing Spice, Vision Spice, Smell Spice, Touch Spice, Taste Spice?
:Cueball: That’s senses.

:Megan: Denial Spice, Anger Spice, Bargaining Spice, Depression Spice, Acceptance Spice.
:Cueball: Stages of grief.

:Megan: War Spice, Famine Spice, Plague Spice, Death Spice?
:Cueball: You're not even trying.

:Megan: No, wait, I can get this for real. Uhh…
:Megan: Pog Spice, Story Spice, Sarah Spice, Gender Spice, Baleen Spice?
:Cueball: …Close enough.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Spice Girls]]

2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-08T16:55:25Z

172.70.86.132: /* Table */ Wikilink. Early (preclinical) treatment possibilities.

{{comic
| number = 2669
| date = September 7, 2022
| title = Things You Should Not Do
| image = things_you_should_not_do.png
| titletext = Now I'm tempted to start telling people that I secretly don't actually know how to do any physics calculations, and so all the answers in What If are based on me actually trying to do the thing and then reporting what happened, but phrased as if it's hypothetical.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SUNSCREEN BALL. Seem people forget that he learned this from writing the new book, thus no reason to assume they reference old stuff, for instance see the update to the peel the planets crust away, that clearly is a reference to a new what if in the book. Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic references various questions submitted to the what if? blog, and is a promotion for Randall's new book, ''What if? 2'' (to be released 6 days from the date of this comic publication). This comic has a list of things not to do, an extension of a previous list, and is purportedly things Randall discovered as he was doing research for his book. A visit to the [https://what-if.xkcd.com/archive/ What If? archive] shows the titles, publishing date, and a thumbnail for each article. Many of the acts described under the "new" section of the list are depicted in these thumbnails (see table below); others are references to examples or hypotheticals explored within the articles. Other entries do not seem to reference currently published ''What If?'' content and may therefore be found in the upcoming book, but this cannot be confirmed as of yet.

The title text says that Randall is tempted to tell people that all the things in the book were things that he actually tried to do, not that he calculated the solutions for their problems. Many of the questions/answers in his new book are impossible to attempt in real life.{{citation needed}}

===Table===
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Number !! Entry !! Explanation
|-
! colspan="3" | From existing list
|-
|156,812
|Eat Tide Pods
|{{w|Consumption of Tide Pods|Tide Pod}}s are a brand of laundry detergent sold in small packets ("pods") of water-soluble gel. Many children have tried to eat them, thinking them to be candy, and have had to go to the hospital to treat poisoning. In 2017 and 2018, a satirical "challenge" originated around eating Tide Pods.
|-
|156,813
|Walk on stilts in a thunderstorm
|Taller objects are more likely to be struck by lightning, so walking on stilts outdoors would increase the risk of death by electrocution. It would also presumably risk falling and injuring oneself that way, since the ground becomes wet in a rainstorm.
|-
|156,814
|Set off fireworks at a gas station
|This has the risk of potentially an explosion in the gas station, from the sparks of the fireworks.
|-
|156,815
|Feed your cat treats that are the exact shape and texture of a human hand
|This seems to run the risk of the cat attempting to eat your hand, instead of a cat treat.
|-
! colspan="3" | New!
|-
|156,816
|Lean over a geyser vent and try to look down into it
|Geysers shoot steam and hot water upward. If a person were to lean over the geyser and look down during an eruption, they would be struck in the face by this hot liquid/gas mixture and severely injured or killed.
|-
|156,817
|Fly a hot-air balloon over a firing range
|A hot air balloon could present an irresistible target to the people firing their weapons at the range. The balloon could be shot and you could fall to your death. See image on [https://what-if.xkcd.com/81/ this entry].
|-
|156,818
|Peel away the earth's crust
|This is a reference to an entry in the new book, and an image of what it would look like is shown in [[2575: What If? 2]], where a potato peeler is used to remove the crust of the Earth. See also [https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/mercator this comic]. Several *What If* blog posts also result in massive damage to the earth's crust, including what happened to Texas [https://what-if.xkcd.com/153/ here].
|-
|156,819
|Try to paint the Sahara Desert by hand
|This would be [https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/ difficult] and require more paint than humanity has ever produced[https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/].
|-
|156,820
|Remove someone's bones without asking
|Possibly a reference to ''Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'', in which Professor Gilderoy Lockhart removes all the bones of Harry's arm (instead of merely fixing a broken bone).
|-
|156,821
|Spend 100% of your government's budget on mobile game in-app purchases
|A reference to one of the examples listed in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/108/ this post].
|-
|156,822
|Fill a lava lamp with actual lava
|A {{w|lava lamp}} is a glass lamp, which contains a wax mixture inside, and heats so that the wax rises and falls. Putting actual lava inside a regular lava lamp would most likely cause the lamp to melt and the glass to shatter, not to mention handling lava is very dangerous.{{citation needed}} However, in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/122/ this entry], Randall says it would be fairly easy to find a material that would be able to handle the heat of the lava and thus this would be rather anticlimatic.
|-
|156,823
|Drink the blood of someone with a viral hemorraghic (''sic'') fever
|Drinking someone's blood is a bad idea,{{citation needed}} unless you are a vampire. If someone has a {{w|viral hemorrhagic fever}}, it is potentially much worse, as they have a potentially deadly disease, such as Ebola.
|-
|156,824
|Eat meat from rabid animals
|Eating meat from rabid animals could give you {{w|rabies}}, a virus which is nearly always fatal if not treated prior to the appearance of initial symptoms.
|-
|156,825
|Perform your own laser eye surgery
|Refer to the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/82/ this article]
|-
|156,826
|Tell California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs
|
|-
|156,827
|Funnel the entire flow of Niagara Falls into the open window of a physics lab
|Likely an oblique reference to the image near the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/147/ this article].
|-
|156,828
|Pump ammonia into your abdomen
|
|-
|156,829
|Suspend yourself inside a 10-meter ball of sunscreen and fall into the Sun
|Despite its name, sunscreen only protects against some types of radiation from the sun. No amount is going to be adequate protection if you are right inside the sun. Also, sunscreen, being a gel, would evaporate when exposed to vacuum.
|}

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

:[Caption:]
:Updates to my "Things You Should Not Do" list, based on what I learned writing ''What If? 2''
:(out 9/13, xkcd.com/whatif2)

:[The rest of the text appears in a box.]

:<big>Things You Should Not Do</big> 
:(part 3647 of ????)

:[A numbered list, the first four items in a lighter grey]

:<nowiki>#156,812 Eat Tide pods</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,813 Walk on stilts in a thunderstorm</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,814 Set off fireworks at a gas station</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,815 Feed your cat treats that are the exact shape and texture of a human hand</nowiki>

:[A horizontal divider with the text "New!" in the middle in black. The remaining items on the list are also in black.]

:<nowiki>#156,816 Lean over a geyser vent and try to look down into it</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,817 Fly a hot air balloon over a firing range</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,818 Peel away the Earth's crust</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,819 Try to paint the Sahara Desert by hand</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,820 Remove someone's bones without asking</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,821 Spend 100% of your governments budget on mobile game in-app purchases</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,822 Fill a lava lamp with actual lava</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,823 Drink the blood of someone with a viral hemorraghic fever</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,824 Eat meat from rabid animals</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,825 Perform your own laser eye surgery</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,826 Tell California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,827 Funnel the entire flow of Niagara Falls into the open window of a physics lab</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,828 Pump ammonia into your abdomen</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,829 Suspend yourself inside a 10-meter ball of sunscreen and fall into the sun</nowiki>

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Book promotion]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Randall Munroe]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Pokémon]]
[[Category:Cats]]