explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:243: Appropriate Term

2023-01-19T20:30:24Z

192·168·0·1:

"Nub" tending towards "Nipple", in my part of the world. Also various alternatives based on it looking and feeling like a pencil eraser (also 'rubber', in local vernacular, normally without the non-local 'prophylactic' association to that word, thus going towards the SFW end of the scale).

I liked them too. Touchpads are too prone to being tapped or brushed when typing on the keyboard, potentially changing the window focus or active mouse position at awkward times mid-composition. Which is why a lot of people get them disabled and get a USB mouse, perhaps travel-sized, for using with their laptops. Or at least disable the "tap equals button-click" behaviour and rely on the (marginally less accidentally pressed) actual left/right(/centre) buttons for that purpose. I use whatever's there (see below about preference to keyboard, though), due to temporarily working with many different people's devices. I can get on with just about anything that isn't touchscreen-only (and may ''eventually'' get used to that, also).

However, you all remember the awkward self-centering nature of the 'nub', right? The firmware treats an extended period of the 'nub' at rest as being at true centre and thus nullifying any previous motion. Applying a steady pressure to (say) move a scroll-bar gradually sideways or up/down, to review a table or graphic being edited would soon result in the mouse movement stopping as it assumes the offset position is centre. You naturally automatically compensate by applying more offset to keep it moving (perhaps to repeat). You then either hit the maximum deflection limit and have to stop trying or else finish your scrolling and let go of it (and the left-button/whatever that you're also holding down). Now the cursor is rapidly retreating in the opposite direction as its position at the mechanical centre is being treated as movement in the other direction.

You can fight it for a temporary stillness (although you never make the situation better, just can temporarily hold the cursor still when that's important) but eventually you have to let the nub sit there and wait, often with the mouse cursor representation moving towards an the edge (or corner) of the screen, and often hitting it. If there's now no perpendicular edge-wise motion to it (or is 'cornered') you're never ''quite'' sure when it stops being a mouse forced against the edge by the presumption of movement and becomes a mouse cursor ''resting'' against the edge, for lack of input to take it anywhere else, so you may wait a bit longer than you need before trying the 'nub' again to elicit movement onto the next bit of the screen that truly needs the mouse-cursor's presence.

(Personally, I've always been a big fan of keyboard shortcuts for as many things as I can do to replace a mouse. But now we're onto the realms of software that ''has'' tabbing between active controls, but in a really bad non-sequential order. Active KillDisk is one perpetrator, with some of the tickboxes on a given dialogue being mis-arranged in the internal tab-order list. A couple of shift-tabs sometimes needed to reverse-traverse the focus onto the next bit you want to 'click' on, even though it is visually the next item down... But I digress.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 04:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

: I really enjoyed this rant, thank you. In part because of its level of nerdy detail, in part because I genuinely learnt something about these funny little joysticks, and largely because of the "but I digress" at the end of a multi-paragraph description of cursor moving algorithms. [[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 20:30, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Rather then 'very informal,' perhaps we move the tone to 'erotic?' {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.167}}

Is it worth mentioning that men also have breasts, and nipples? [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 21:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2701: Change in Slope

2022-11-21T23:02:37Z

192·168·0·1: Pedantry about a sci fi cartoon, what depths have I sunk to?

I am an occasional data scientist, and I can confirm this is why we have monitor stands that tilt. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.50|172.71.94.50]] 16:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

The third e in "neeed" in the title text seems to be a typo
[[User:Victor|Victor]] ([[User talk:Victor|talk]]) 16:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
:I think Randall may have added it to represent that the speaker prolongs the "e" sound for emphasis, although that's usually done with 4-5 e's. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:53, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
::I had to double-check this, myself (presumed the 'Bot created the lage faithfully, but went straight to source to see if I needed to find a vandalism post to revert). May need a comment (to prevent hypercorrection, if not to note the implied emphisis) and certainly will if it turns out to be a typo and gets corrected (for which I'm sure a future checker will discover Randall's revisiting, but then worth a note to that effect). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.2|172.70.90.2]] 17:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Bender Bot was one of the main characters in Futurama. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:54, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
:Just donning my unnecessary pedantry hat for a moment: his name is Bender Bending Rodriguez --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 23:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

A couple(?) of authors used the word(s) "(point of) inflection", which is {{w|Inflection point|not really suitable}} for a join between two straight segments. Was tempted to talk about "discontinuity", but that really only applies to the meta-slope (derivatives, to one degree or other) where it suddenly jumps (at a point), or the derivative's derivative has jumps (as it enters and leaves the smoothly linking curve). Hope it works well enough how I left it, though. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.176|162.158.142.176]] 21:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2673: Cursed mRNA Cocktail

2022-09-20T16:45:34Z

192·168·0·1:

"¼ tsp MSG or nutritional yeast," is like saying, "A monochrome d12 or the city of Washington, D.C." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.25|172.71.154.25]] 20:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
:I’ve never eaten the city of Washington, DC, but I am pretty sure I’ve had a 12-sided die in my mouth for some stupid reason or another. I don’t see how the colour would affect the flavour, and since I don’t specifically remember, I don’t know if it was a single colour or swirly. But had it been particularly umami tasting I think I would actually remember, as I would not have expected that. MSG and yeast/yeast extract both have a strong umami flavour (gluten extract, which you are not sensitive to unless you have coeliac disease, also has this taste, as do many broths). As a result, both would impart that flavour to the concoction. I am pretty sure dice and cities don’t impart this flavour, so I can’t see how this assertion could possibly make sense.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.10|172.68.175.10]] 10:02, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
:: It's about relative complexity, and is probably intended generally as hyperbole. MSG is a single smallish molecule and nutritional yeast is an entire living organism. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.25|172.71.154.25]] 05:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
:To be super-pedantic, I suppose it's like saying "A Washington DC's volume of monochrome d12s or the city of Washington D.C." (that doesn't detract from your point, which I enjoyed and learnt from!) [[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 16:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if this was inspired by "drug coctails", where a combination of different drugs is prescribed to treat a disease. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
: Spelled cocktails. I like it. The wikipedia disambiguation page for cocktail lists "A mixture of drugs, especially a mixture of Antiretroviral drugs used to treat HIV sometimes called a "triple cocktail"" but there is no specific page for the term. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.185|162.158.166.185]] 04:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Given how little of the mayo and yeast are in the final drink, I would expect that this would taste like slightly sweetened water. Therefore I dispute the assertion in the explainer that "very few people would find such a mixture palatable". --[[User:Gamrix|Gamrix]] ([[User talk:Gamrix|talk]]) 03:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Funny, "MSG" always makes me recall "Triangle and Robert"... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.41|141.101.76.41]] 06:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Taking (admittedly large) liberties with the recipe, this is almost watered down kewpie or Japanese mayo. One online recipe suggests that adding sugar, msg and rice wine vinegar to American mayo is sufficient to create an kewpie imitation. Considering the water, perhaps mRNA cocktail is best enjoyed as a glaze on sushi? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.125|162.158.2.125]] 04:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Serious question: is this comic funny? If so, someone please explain the joke to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.185|162.158.166.185]] 02:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
:Speaking personally, to me this is funny (in a smile, warm glow of nerdy joy kind of way) because of the concept that you might think making a large amount of vaccine like substance as a swanky cocktail is a good idea. The humour of XKCD often comes from a combination of being very clever and very naive at the same time - smart enough to be able to reproduce a vaccine (more or less) using household ingredients, silly enough to try. [[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 16:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Not all XKCDs are "funny". Some are more about answering odd question, like "what would a mRNA vaccine taste like?" [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 08:06, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

:Many of them are educational. Coronavirus vaccines are made of things people eat routinely. Realizing that may help allay fears about safety. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.36|162.158.107.36]] 18:34, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
:[https://eontimes.com/news/europe/what-happens-if-you-drink-the-covid-vaccine/amp/ What happens if you drink the Covid vaccine?] [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.137|172.71.146.137]] 18:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Randall speaks: https://www.npr.org/2022/09/18/1123689628/randall-munroes-what-if-2-answers-the-absurd-science-questions-you-didnt-know-yo [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.179|172.70.126.179]] 09:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

2022-05-05T21:43:16Z

192·168·0·1: /* Adverts */

{{notice|This page is for discussion of the [[Main Page]] itself. For discussion of the latest comic, see [[{{LATESTCOMIC}}#Discussion|its discussion section]]. Other issues probably belong at the [[Explain XKCD:Community portal]].}}

{{notice|This page has a sandbox, located at [[Main Page/sandbox]].}}

As a new user, I think the first page is very important. So I thought why not begin a discussion here what to have on the first page every user visits.--[[User:Relic|Relic]] ([[User talk:Relic|talk]]) 05:59, 1 August 2012 (EDT) Re-signed here - b/c I broke the comment in two when I added the "List of comics" header. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 23:01, 2 August 2012 (EDT)

==List of comics==
I was thinking of having a quick link to the list of comics that is explained. Right know, it took me a while to even see any of them. Eventually I found the "List All Pages" (found it in Special pages) where I could find the comics that have been explained. What do you think?
:A category tag will do that for you automatically. Having a list of comics indexed by its number would be a little different.--[[User:Relic|Relic]] ([[User talk:Relic|talk]]) 05:59, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::Sounds like a great list - I ''think'' it'd have to be manually maintained until/unless we get someone who knows how to make a bot update it. Categories will be useful, but they only work if someone added the category to the page in the first place. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 07:21, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::A (somewhat) related question - should [[:Category:Comics]] be sorted alphabetically or by comic number? --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 07:43, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::::I think [[:Category:Comics]] should be sorted by comic number. If you are looking for a specific comic, you will use the search field. Is there a way to make that happen? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 08:11, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::::They are two different functions. For the former, instead of adding <nowiki>[[Category:Comics]]</nowiki>, add, say, <nowiki>[[Category:Comics|1]]</nowiki>. For the second, we can create redirects. Normally, I'd say just make sure the search term was in the article text, but since numbers are going to be use for other purposes than just comic titles, it may be better to create [[1]] and [[Comic 1]] as redirects to the relevant articles right off the bat. --08:24, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::::::We could also have a comic-list template on the Main Page, I suppose, or perhaps two - one for number and one for name? --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 08:54, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::::::Here's what I was thinking of for that: {{tl|Comics navbox}} Thoughts? ''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]]
:(outdent) It's ugly, but a sortable wikitable [[User:SurturZ/sandbox|(click here for example)]] could be used as a checklist to see what has been uploaded and what hasn't. What's the project namespace here, anyway (analogue of "WP:")? --[[User:SurturZ|SurturZ]] ([[User talk:SurturZ|talk]]) 03:04, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
:OK, I've found a way to get all the titles of the comics, so I was confident enough to create <big>[[Explain XKCD:Checklist]]</big> which can be used to fill in the gaps. --[[User:SurturZ|SurturZ]] ([[User talk:SurturZ|talk]]) 03:41, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
::I'm liking the checklist! That should do quite nicely as a "tool for editors". (I'm linking to it at the Community Portal). We still need the "template for readers." Did you think {{tl|Comics navbox}} was on the right track or should we do something else for that? --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 20:09, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
::Better idea - I'm throwing it directly onto the Main Page. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 20:10, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

==Admin list==
You can find a system-accurate list of admins [{{canonicalurl:Special:ListUsers|group=sysop}} here], so that might good to share, along with the manual list. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 07:13, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:Added to page. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 08:10, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::That's exactly what I wanted, but couldn't find the auto page for it. I knew it was somewhere. I don't see any reason to keep the link to the manual page. Do you? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 08:11, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::Not unless you want it. I'll remove it. Should I add the similar link for 'crats or is that unnecessary at this point? --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 08:25, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::::To be honest, I have no idea what the Burecrats role does. Might be unnecessary now but helpful in the future? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 11:16, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::::Bureaucrats can turn other users into administrators (or indeed, other bureaucrats). That privilege isn't available to ordinary administrators. I'd keep it to yourself for the time being. :-) --[[User:Yirba|Yirba]] ([[User talk:Yirba|talk]]) 17:39, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::::::You can actually see a technical list of which rights each group confers at [[Special:ListGroupRights]]. As the wiki grows, you might want to spin off a few, such as the ability to grant rollbacker and autopatrolled, to admins as some other wikis have. But for the time being, at least, there's really no reason for the wiki to have more than one 'crat. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 17:07, 2 August 2012 (EDT)

== Community portal ==

I've created the [[Explain XKCD:Community portal]] as a tools/help page. If that's not what you want, feel free to change/move/whatever it, but I thought it'd be nice to save this page for discussion of the Main Page and discuss the wiki as a whole/ask for help there. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 08:36, 1 August 2012 (EDT)

== Direct link to latest comic ==

There should be a direct link to the latest comic at the top of the Main page. A nice thing about going to explainxkcd.com was that the latest comic is right there at the top. For those changing their default link to the wiki, there should be an easy "Latest Comic" link that quickly takes them there. I'm sure some folks actually skip xkcd.com and come directly here instead to read the latest offering from Randall. They shouldn't have to search for it.
[[User:Christopher Foxx|- CFoxx]] ([[User talk:Christopher Foxx|talk]]) 11:59, 1 August 2012 (EDT)

: Maybe the page [[latest]] should redirect to the most recent comic? Could that be taken care of by some sort of script/template so it doesn't have to be manually updated? Should each explination page also have "next", "previous", "random", "first" and "latest" links, possibly also generated automatically via scripts/templates? Additionally, shouldn't the number page be the canonical one? It seems like [[Internal monologue]] should redirect to [[1089]] rather than the other way around - certainly it would make a bunch of scripting types of things a lot easier. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 13:02, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::If you wanted, we could even use wiki-magic to show the title of the page as the Comic name, but the URL as the number - in order to parallel the actual XKCD website. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 17:09, 2 August 2012 (EDT)
:: Shouldn't there be a way to programmatically find the comic with the highest number that has a page with content? That would work as long as no one puts future comic pages up. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 20:25, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:::It's all sounding like folks are over-complicating something quite easy. All I'm suggesting is a prominent link to http://www.xkcd.com/. No need, I think, to list which number the latest is, or include the next/last/random buttons, etc. [[User:Christopher Foxx|- CFoxx]] ([[User talk:Christopher Foxx|talk]]) 11:41, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
::::Oh. We've got that, now, in the sidebar - labeled as "XKCD." I do think that having an internal link to the latest (explained) comic would be a great thing, though. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 16:36, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

You can transclude the latest comic on the main page like this: <nowiki>{{:pagename}} e.g. {{:Internal_monologue}} </nowiki>--[[User:SurturZ|SurturZ]] ([[User talk:SurturZ|talk]]) 00:25, 2 August 2012 (EDT)
: I've started with just a manual link to the latest comic. Ideally it will be automatic, but a manual link will work for now as I've had quite a few people ask for it. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:09, 1 August 2012 (EDT)

Transclusion of the latest comic is great. Someone with the right permissions should add (for instance on the top-right corner of the grey transclusion area) a link to edit the corresponding wiki page, so that people seeing something they could add would feel invited to do so (wiki style). In my opinion this would be a good way to improve the quality of the user-generated explanations.
Also, all the "XKCD"s in the "New here?" section should be converted to the lowercase "xkcd"...
[[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 14:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
:Good points. I've done both. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 15:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Call me dumb, but... You've got a link called "prev" that goes to the explaination for the previous comic. Then a link called "comic #42" but that goes to xkcd. And then a smaller, less prominent link called "go to this comic" that doesn't go to the comic but to its explaination. Anyone else think that's a little back-to-front? [[User:Zootle|Zootle]] ([[User talk:Zootle|talk]]) 17:18, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
:OK, you're dumb :-). The standard template for an explanation page includes the header with "Prev", "Comic # (date)", and "Next" links. If we don't have explanation pages for the previous or next comic, we don't show the respective link. I hadn't noticed that the "Comic # (date)" bit was a link to the xkcd site before, but in context it makes sense to me. Including a link to the Explain page for the comic who's explain page you are already looking at doesn't make sense.
:The explanation page for the latest comic is "transcluded" in the main page pretty much as-is, so we get the header, the comic, the explanation, etc. We don't get the discussion, which is visible at the bottom of the Explain page. Because there is never an explanation for a comic that hasn't been released yet, there is never a "Next" link on the main page's transcluded header. So you get "Prev" and "Comic" links. The "Go to this comic" link is added by the main page above the transcluded explain page.
:I can see how the "Go to this comic" link might be poorly worded especially as it's placement seems to be within the explanation it's linking to. [[User:Blaisepascal|Blaisepascal]] ([[User talk:Blaisepascal|talk]]) 18:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
::Rather than "Go to this comic" maybe it could be "Go to full explanation" ? Something else? [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 13:38, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
::There was [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#.22Edit_this_explanation.22_link_on_main_page a discussion at one point] about a wittier/more descriptive link - but no one came up with anything. I do like "Go to Full Explanation" better, for what it's worth. --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 15:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
:::My problem with that suggestion is that it implies that the main page explanation is not full. As of right now, the full explanation is transcluded on the main page. There's nothing more to see by clicking that link (explanation wise) Perhaps "Go to full explanation page" but that doesn't quite sound right to me... [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 15:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
::::How about "Go to this Comic Explanation Page"? One nice thing about the specific page rather than the [[Main_Page]] transcoding is that it nicely includes the discussion as well. I have a bookmark to the [[Main_Page]] that I look at every day, but I want to easily read the discussions, not only the explanation. Humm, maybe we could have a page [[most recent comic]] that automagically redirects to the most recent comic? [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 12:42, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::I tried to get [[most recent comic]] to redirect to LATESTCOMIC, but can't get the syntax working - it is possible? [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 13:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
::::::Apparently it isn't. I would have tried <code><nowiki>#REDIRECT [[{{LATESTCOMIC}}]]</nowiki></code> like you did, but since that doesn't work, I'll delete the page for now. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:38, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

== Discussion of latest comic ==
Perhaps include the discussions of the latest comic here? I almost missed there was a discussion field a few times because I would only read about the latest comic on the main page. [[User:Carewolf|Carewolf]] ([[User talk:Carewolf|talk]]) 14:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

This comics's explanation is complete bollocks, I think. Of course it is NOT a "fact that such a room exists". This comics parodies trope often used in cop movies - an elderly cop goes to work for the last time before his retirement, packs things, plans fishing the next day ... only to be called to one more case (possibly with a new, young and brash partner). And despites his efforts not to screw anything and stay clear of danger, he is either mortally wounded or screws big time and is degraded. So much clichè, that if someone says "It's my last day or service", you might be sure one of the two options above happens. See http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Retirony [[User:edheldil|Edheldil]] 10:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe this link maybe relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_graphics {{unsigned|Rhudi}}

I went ahead and filled out the bracket from today's (see edit date) comic: http://m.imgur.com/gallery/WyPkHx2 {{unsigned|Glaucon81}}

*rise

Btw, why wouldn't I just enter "ipconfig free" if I didn't want my IP address showing? {{unsigned ip|172.68.65.48}}

== The comic explanation count is wrong ==

The adjustment is currently 3, but there are now 6 subcategories and one list making the current correct adjustment 7.
If the wiki was upgraded to version 1.20, a form exists to automatically exclude subcategories.
--[[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 09:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

:Looks like another week of the wiki going down then.
:But seriously, I've been noticing this too. Didn't know what was causing it, but it's going to have to be fixed sometime.[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 10:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

::The text reads <pre><nowiki>We already have [[:Category:Comics|'''{{#expr:{{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-3}}''' comic explanations]]!</nowiki></pre> The -3 is to account for the subcategories and non-explanation pages in the category. There apparently used to be three such pages, and now there are seven. I would fix this myself, but the page is protected. If the wiki where upgraded to version 1.20, the categories could be explicitly excluded, but the [[List of all comics]] would still be in the category. (Note that the -3 actually appears twice.) --[[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 05:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

:::Mediawiki 1.20 fixes this issue, although it'd be nice if this could be fixed in the meantime via the hack reccommended by divad. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 06:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

:Looks like Waldir updated the "Comic Correction Count" to "10" (as of 20 November 2012):
<nowiki> We already have [[:Category:Comics|'''{{#expr:{{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-10}}''' comic explanations]]!</big>
Note: the -10 in the calculation above is to discount subcategories (there are 7 of them as of 20 November 2012),
non-comic pages (2 as of same date: [[List of all comics]] and [[Exoplanet]])
and the comic 404, which was deliberately not posted. Thus 7 + 2 + 1 = 10
(But there are still {{#expr:{{LATESTCOMIC}}-({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-10)}} to go. Come and [[List of all comics|add yours]]!)</nowiki>
:Could we possibly make this more dynamic by creating a "IGNORE_IN_COUNT" category or something? and then using something like: <nowiki>{#expr:{{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-{{PAGESINCAT:IGNORE_IN_COUNT}}}</nowiki>? Then any additional entries to the "Comics" category (that are 'special' entries) could just have the special category added and no main page editing would be necessary? --[[User:Bpothier|B. P.]] ([[User talk:Bpothier|talk]]) 07:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

==Make Jeff stop apologizing==
The apology for server downtime has been around for a while now. Can we take it down? [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] ([[User talk:Davidy22|talk]]) 04:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

== Spambots ==

I think someone should install [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter AbuseFilter]. --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 10:09, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

== Purge ==

We should regularly purge the server's cache for the main page using http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=purge to keep the explanation up to date. --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 02:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

== Updating the Rules ==

I've been having a lovely discussion with someone who apparently thought the "edit anything you want" rule applied to the Talk pages. As we don't have any codified rules for ''here'' and can only point to "well the canonical way this is done on Wikipedia is..." I think that there are a few things we need to put into the list of Rules on the front page, and then have a link to a more in-depth talk about why the rules exist and what-not.

Specifically, I'm talking about writing "Feel free to edit any page on the wiki to be better. But, treat talk pages like you would blog comments: comments by other people ''cannot be changed by you'', you can only respond to them." as a new rule to be plastered on the front page, as there seems to be an increasing number social neophytes that seem to think that editing words that are attributed as being said by another person is perfectly legitimate and non-controversial.

Shall we discuss? [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 01:25, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

:We could add the etiquette rules as an addendum to the signature reminder at the top of the page. Just an extra note below the alert box asking people to not edit other people's comments. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 06:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

::It really should be right down with the "edited mercilessly" description, because this is an exception to that statement. Shouldn't have two sets of contradictory instructions in different places. When I made my improper edit, I had a semi-conscious moment of doubt about whether changing the other guy's comment was ok, even though this is a wiki (and even though it wasn't really clear to me that this "discussion" box held something totally separate from the page content), but that statement at the bottom put all such doubts to rest. I read it multiple times to be sure. But I did not notice that line at the top about the four tildes until ''much'' later. It's somewhat lost, visually, in the header line, when you're not looking directly at it.[[Special:Contributions/50.0.38.245|50.0.38.245]] 18:32, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

:::There's discussion to replace that message with a more noticeable alert box. The message at the bottom of the page appears for all pages, including talk pages, so a talk-page specific message there would not entirely fit. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 00:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

::::If that text at the bottom is in fact alterable, it should be written to take every case into account. It's an extremely poor user interface that has instructions appearing on a page stating rules that are the exact opposite of reality. And note that the altert box on the top looks a lot like a banner add, when you don't focus on it and read it. People will tend to habitually filter out anything written there from their perception. Also, it can easily be scrolled off the top of the screen when the discussion starts to get long, and they have a preview displayed.
::::So I think after the "...then do not submit it here.", it should add, "'''Exception''': others' comments in Discussion pages are not to be altered. See full rules at <<link to appropriate wikipedia page>>."[[Special:Contributions/50.0.38.245|50.0.38.245]] 15:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

== Update after changes ==

The front page explanation hasn't been updated at all day to match changes in the explanation on the comic's page. This is a major problem i think, as it is the front page explanation people visitors will most often read. --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 20:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
: It might be a caching issue. Appending <code>&action=purge</code> to the URL will probably fix it. Can you confirm it looks good to you now? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 00:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::Yep, now it updates instantly! Well done, whatever you did! :) --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 16:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

:::I've also added a link underneath the comic box that has the action embedded, so no one has to do any manual URL hacking. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

::::Just wanted to check in on this - are there issues with automated systems or spammers following this link? I know it can affect performance - caching is important on a busy site! --[[User:Overand|Overand]] ([[User talk:Overand|talk]]) 22:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

== Suggestion: Change "Go to this comic" to "Go to this entry" ==

Just a small suggestion. For the Main Page, I suggest changing "Go to this comic" to say "Go to this ''entry''" instead to remove any confusion for new and regular viewers. It certainly took me a while to figure how to go to each featured comic's entry from the main page.

[[Special:Contributions/69.43.114.2|69.43.114.2]] 17:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

:How about if it reads "Go to this comic explanation"? Would that be less confusing? I only quibble because the explanations aren't really entries, in wiki parlance each page is usually called an article, but that doesn't seem to fit here as we really have explanation pages. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:41, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

::Agreed. [[User:Ctxppc|Randy Marsh]] ([[User talk:Ctxppc|talk]]) 22:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

== Explain the Unreleased Comic? ==
:I wonder if [[http://i56.tinypic.com/a9ton8.png this comic]] is permitted to be explained, despite the double issue of Randall pulling the comic plus me finding the pulled comic through "xkcd overrated"... [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 18:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

== Comic 1156 ==

I don't have an account to edit the page directly, so here's an edit someone should make:
It looks like whoever wrote the existing page simply googled 'conditioning' and found the first link that came up.
Please modify the link to point to 'Classical conditioning', not 'Operant conditioning'.
Thanks. {{unsigned ip|124.191.56.91|05:26, 7 January 2013‎ (UTC)}}

:Hi. This is the talk page for the main page of the wiki. This page only has a "view" of the actual comic explanation. The actual explanation page is at [[1156: Conditioning]], and I assure you, edit permissions have not been restricted for that page. Someone has already changed the page to link to Classical conditioning, but the original editor came back stating that Operant was correct. If you would like to start a discussion about this [[Talk:1156: Conditioning|on the talk page for this explanation]] that would be much more conducive to getting this matter settled. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 05:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== Comic Links ==

Some of the links seem to be confusing, as they're titled in a weird way. The link/button 'go to this comic', I'd expect would go to the actual comic on XKCD's page. Yet it goes to the comic's wiki page. And clicking on the comic # and date directs you to the XKCD page, yet I really feel that link should go to the wiki page, as it's right at the top center there, and has the date and everything, sort of indicating that it's a wiki page, yet it's not. And the prev and next buttons next to it don't go to the xkcd page, they go to the wiki pages. Which is really messed up, I think. Because of my confusion, every single time I visit here, I clicked on the wrong link, though now I've gotten used to it. I suggest rewording the links as 'XKCD Comic # and date' and 'go to this comic's wiki page'. And possibly switching the links' positions so that the wiki links could be in that navigation bar and the XKCD links could be off to the side. After all, we are a wiki, so putting our wiki links to the comic off to the side and the direct xkcd link in the center seems odd. Anyway, has anyone had the same thoughts and/or agree with me on this?--[[Special:Contributions/69.119.250.251|69.119.250.251]] 18:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

== Unexplained comics ==

The template that starts each explanation page should be edited to have the next and previous buttons automatically skip over pages that don't exist, rather than simply not being there if comic n+1 or n-1 doesn't exist. Preferably it would append a notice to the next page (like the redirect notices commonly found on mediawiki) telling you how many comics have been skipped. I'm not sure how feasible this would be to script, however. [[Special:Contributions/130.160.145.185|130.160.145.185]] 23:45, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

== Percentage of remaining comics calculation is off... ==

Okay, I hate to be "that pedantic math guy", but... Today the main page reads "We have collaboratively explained 936 xkcd comics, and only 252 (27%) remain." While I agree that 252/936 is roughly 27%, I believe we should really be calculating the percentage as "the number left to explain" divided by "the total number of comics that exist", not divided by "the number we have finished". That is (today), 252/1188=21%. Think about it. If we had completed 594 comics today, with 594 remaining, what should the percentage be? 594/594=100%? That's not right... 594/1188=50%? That's what we really want to say.

The page is protected, which makes sense. So I'll make my suggestion here.

Change this:

<pre>
and only {{#expr:{{LATESTCOMIC}}-({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-9)}}
({{#expr: ({{LATESTCOMIC}}-({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-9)) / ({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-9) * 100 round 0}}%)
remain.
</pre>
To this:
<pre>
and only {{#expr:{{LATESTCOMIC}}-({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-9)}}
({{#expr: ({{LATESTCOMIC}}-({{PAGESINCAT:Comics}}-9)) / {{#expr:{{LATESTCOMIC}}}} * 100 round 0}}%)
remain.
</pre>
[[User:Imperpay|Imperpay]] ([[User talk:Imperpay|talk]]) 15:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

:Done and done. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|purple|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 15:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

:Thanks for the heads-up! However, notice that the #expr: around LATESTCOMIC was unnecessary. I've removed it. [[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 11:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

::Waldir, you have exposed me as a charlatan and a fool! (I just copied, pasted, and tinkered until I made something that worked. I don't actually understand it. No formal training, you see. It's what we used to call "hacking" back in the dawn of the digital era, before the word took on connotations of vandalism, trespassing, and fraud. Have you kids come up with another word for it?) [[User:Imperpay|Imperpay]] ([[User talk:Imperpay|talk]]) 13:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

::: Joke's on me then, 'cause you sure fooled me – I readily assumed you knew your way around those parser functions. Nice job hacking the code, it was a nearly perfect crime ;) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

:::I've heard the cool kids call that the "Maker Mentality", usually with a reference to [http://makezine.com/ Make magazine] and [http://makerfaire.com/ Maker Faire]. But I think there's also a movement to resurrect the original meaning of hacker. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 04:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

==sidebar ads?==
''Moved to [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals]] –– [[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 08:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)''

== Expression error on Main Page ==

Please use <code><nowiki>{{PAGESINCAT:...|R}}</nowiki></code> instead of <code><nowiki>{{PAGESINCAT:...}}</nowiki></code> to correct these errors :) --[[Special:Contributions/110.168.83.62|110.168.83.62]] 10:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
:Dun diddly done. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

== Compile a list of non-technical comics to non-technical readers? ==

I'm a long-time reader and fan of >< |< C |}, but my normal approach is useless when I introduce this provocative comic series to my less technical friends. They stay at the apparent level of many comics. They don't bother reading the explanations, but they would say, "it's hard to make sense". Imagine an average non-technical (and non-arts) major guy/girl, can we compile a list of state-of-the-art but less-technical, easy-to-comprehend but "ah ha!!" strips that is suitable for them? --[[User:FrenzY|W shll nvr flly xpln xkcd!]] ([[User talk:FrenzY|talk]]) 12:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
:Oh my god that signature.
:Gaah, derailment. Uh, pretty much anything that isn't tagged with the physics or math categories are easy enough to understand for the average English speaker, so just check the categories at the bottom of the page for that. Also, avoid comics with the incomplete tag, and that oughta be fine. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

== Quit building? ==
''This post was moved to [[Talk:1214: Geoguessr]].''

:Hello, this is the talk page for the content of the front page of the wiki, not for discussion of the most recent comic, that happens [[Talk:1214: Geoguessr|here]]. I've moved your post over there for you. Cheers, and welcome to explain xkcd! [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 05:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

== List of incomplete comics ==
We need a link to the "Incomplete articles" at the main page below the "Missing link". Most pages are created but many are incomplete.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

== Header message ==

'''Please don't take this seriously unless you actually think it's a good idea:'''

I think the header should be changed from "explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb." to "explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb... or still have some hope that comic [[1190]] will end." or something similar. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 14:53, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

::Nope! This page is trying to explain more than 1222 comics, not only [[1190: Time]]. The header just states the truth.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd vote for a change. People have started coming over to discuss the comic even when they've 'gotten' it. That, and the fact that this is one step ahead of Googling the references yourself. So.. maybe, "it's because you're dumb..and lazy."[[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 02:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
:I honestly don't think it either. This is the most comprehensive comic-by-comic Wiki. People don't come here because they're dumb ''or'' lazy. That's like saying I'm dumb for reading a review of an episode after I've watched it - I'm interested in seeing what other people up with or caught that I didn't. It denigrates the idea of aggregating information, which is a very un-XKCD idea.

As a regular reader of explainxkcd (who was to lazy to cotribute anything until now), I'd like to support the proposed edit. (... and lazy) It really fits to the tone of our favourite waste of otherwise productive time (which is xkcd for myself). Best wishes from Heidelberg, Germany. --[[Special:Contributions/147.142.13.86|147.142.13.86]] 14:38, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

A friend that happens to be blind hates this site because of the "It's cause you're dumb" tagline. If he wants a transcript of the comic on xkcd, his option is to come here and have his screen reader program telling him that he is dumb every single time.

How about, "explain xkcd: because sometimes we all need a little help."? -- [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.65|173.245.54.65]] 02:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Oh, hadn't thought about that. There's been recurring complaints about this over the years, though the tagline's been around since before we were a wiki. I'll write something up and put this to a vote. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

== A point of confusion ==

Why is 'Apatosaurus' a category but 'Internet Argument' no longer a category? [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 13:53, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
:Cuz people hit the random button, see an Apatosaurus feature in three comics and figure it must be a recurring theme. Same as the internet argument thing. Will get round to a category purge after we've cleared out all the incomplete tags. I think there's one for ferrets hidden away somewhere in the dark recesses of our catalog of categories. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
::On the subject, can I suggest a "Barred from Conferences" category, or similar? That's definitely a recurring theme (for a long, long time), and thus should be justified enough. I'd be happy to add various qualifying articles as I scroll through again, if I can, but first I'll leave it up to someone else to solidify the actual name. (In case it turns out not to be just conferences, for example.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 16:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

== Incomplete comics statement ==

I suggest the minor change: "We have an explanation for all x xkcd comics, and only y (y/x %) are '''marked as''' incomplete." –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 08:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

== 1262 is out ==

So what are you waiting for? [[Special:Contributions/75.60.27.102|75.60.27.102]] 06:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
:<nowiki>(diff | hist) . . N 1262: Unquote‎; 06:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC) . . (+322)‎ . . ‎Davidy22 (Talk | contribs | block)‎ (Created page with "{{comic | number = 1262 | date = September 9, 2013 | title = Unquote | image = unquote.png | titletext = I guess it's a saying from the Old Country. }} ==Expl...")</nowiki>
:Examine the time stamps. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:30, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

== Adverts ==

I am not going to disable my adblock, I hate ads. If you accept bitcoin I can make a donation though. [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 05:24, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:Our ads are always easy-to-load images as opposed to flash ads, they're always pointing to some valuable product of some form and we've looked at and approved all of them. They also occupy space that would otherwise have been empty, as our one ad is bound strictly to the sidebar. We used to have a paypal donation button, but it was pitifully tended to and a much less reliable source of income than ads. Ads are the only reliable business model for small sites like this one; unless our readers suddenly become willing to pay all our server costs for us, we can't feasibly afford a better hosting plan without ads. We legally aren't allowed to open a merch store, because that infringes on Randall's shop, and we haven't had a single generous benefactor yet. If you want to stop seeing our server error messages, loosening up adblock for us and contributing to our impressions count will help us massively. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't care about your server message, I wanted to make a donation. Sooo, you don't want any bitcoins? [[Special:Contributions/37.221.161.235|37.221.161.235]] 07:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:This took a bit of digging. We're fine with bitcoin donations, it's just that at the rate donations came in, they were just not enough to pay for anything. [https://coinbase.com/checkouts/b19f921822ac962807a8f72d51509e59] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Donation made! [[Special:Contributions/184.66.160.91|184.66.160.91]] 23:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
:Thanks! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I hope you kept your Bitcoins ;) --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 21:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Am I the only one that feels it is "wrong" that the explainxkcd site has ads and the real xkcd doesn't have any? It feels like someone is profiting off of Randall's work. Does he officially endorse this website? Do any proceeds help go to support his ongoing publication of an awesome comic? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.19|173.245.54.19]] 16:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

:An admin will be able to give you more detail than me, but explainxkcd has a significant number of visitors (and thus hosting costs), and no way to generate income other than donations and ads. In contrast, Randall makes money from his comics by way of books and merchandise (and possibly public speaking), some of which will pay for his hosting. He could choose to have ads on his site to generate additional income, its his choice not to. I have no knowledge of the finances of explainxkcd, however I doubt there is much/any surplus ad revenue being pocketed by the owners/admin. As far as the site being officially endorsed, not as far as I'm aware, no.
:Also, for more discussion on adverts/income, see [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Sidebar_ads here].--[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 16:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

== /wiki is returning a 403 ==

Hello, 
http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/ is returning a 403 now. In my eyes you should redirect it to the main-page instead :-). --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 12:41, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:We have a new, hopefully better, server. The problem is already reported to [[User_talk:Jeff#Forbidden]] --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:22, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

== Explain Explain XKCD / Explain^2 XKCD ==

This particular comic explanation requires explanation. Way too many potential cross references with each conjecture requiring its own explanation page. Dial it back a little. {{unsigned ip|108.162.245.11}}
:Uh, sorry, could you clarify that a little? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

::He is talking about the [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/ http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/] issue. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Well if it's that, that's an intentional permissions setting on a URL that no-one is feasibly going to type. Unless you can come up with a better use for that URL, with a reason? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:40, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
::::A symlink to "index.php" at the root folder would solve the problem.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 09:26, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::I cannot believe how many weeks that took to fix. Amazing. No one was going to type it, but everyone was going to get redirected to it from the home page! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.227|108.162.222.227]] 11:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The problem is still not solved. [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/ http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/] gives still a 403 error because "index.php" is not included in the http server configuration as a default index page. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:07, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:: I've fixed this. Sorry about the delay. Was super busy! --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks Jeff, it's working. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

== Webmaster: Obtrusive video ad on your site ==

In the ad section I saw a box sticking out and blocking out the explanation. This was therefore a very obtrusive botched video ad. Please remove this ad from your site. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.188|199.27.128.188]] 22:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: It's now sticking out and preventing me from clicking on the "Save page" button. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.188|199.27.128.188]] 22:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
:We only accept GIFs for moving ads. Ads should also be contained within the sidebar as they're techonogically restricted to standard-sized PNGs and GIFs, so an extruding ad would be a CSS error on the site end/browser error. In addition, we run ads from lots of advertisers, and "this ad" is not specific enough to tell us which ad you want us to remove. Could you provide a screenshot/link/more information? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

== Adding an arcs list page ==

I think there should be a page listing all webcomics arcs so far (the red spiders, the race, etc.)[[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.134|188.114.102.134]] 12:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

:This already exists, see [[:Category:Comic series]]. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 05:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

== This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: link ==

This has been bothering me for a while now. Why does the link in the info box for the main page link to editing the main page? It needs to link to the editing of the page which the comic's explanation is on. When I would like to edit the latest XKCD explanation, I click that thinking I am going to edit the explanation, but instead I am led to editing the main page. [[User:Auraxangelic|Auraxangelic]] ([[User talk:Auraxangelic|talk]]) 15:19, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
:Ooooooh, nice catch. I've actually never noticed that before, and it's definitely not intentional. It happens because the text of the explanation page is folded into the main page before mediawiki parses links and syntax, and the "Edit this page" button links to the page that the link is on. I have an idea for how to fix it though, so I'll get on that. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

== #1454 - bad description ==

"Curly-hair states longingly..." She comes across as disappointed (or even heartbroken), not "longing", which suggests sounding somewhat positive and energetic, rather than deflated. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.88|141.101.99.88]] 22:29, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

==Cueball/Rob merge==

It seems to me from a general reading of the comics that Randall has always intended for the character we here call "Cueball" to have the name "Rob". Much as "Cutie" was renamed "Megan" when we learned her name, and now she is identified as "Megan" even in comics where her name is not explicitly mentioned, I think we should consider merging the "Cueball" and "Rob" articles. I know there's a lot of inertia here, but it seems to me that this is Randall's intention for the character's name. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 13:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
: Alternatively, we should un-merge [[Megan]] and [[Cutie]] for consistency. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 14:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
: I'm pretty sure this is an augmentation of the author's internal characters, including the one he has developed involuntarily as to the nature of his love. His memory of his love is not his love, yet it is what he has to love. Randall seems the type to delve into this, and thus I am in support of keeping the character names as they stand. /eof [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.185|173.245.56.185]] 05:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

== Kerbal Space Program ==

I'm a schizophrenic who's been playing Kerbal Space Program for about five days with no sleep, and I'm pretty sure this is a reference to [https://www.google.com/search?q=xkcd+kerbal+space+program&oq=xkcd+kerbal+space+program&aqs=chrome..69i57.10851j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8 comic 1365] :D [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.185|173.245.56.185]] 05:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

== 1509 is missing ==

When will it be added? By bot, I presume.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 04:51, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

== Broken Date Box on comics ==

The "Comic #1511 (April 13, 2015)" textbox that appears on top of each comic breaks if you shrink the screen. I think the space after the comma needs to be replaced with a non breaking space.{{unsigned ip|108.162.238.144}}

:Is it fixed now? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

::It looks like it. I had pointed it out once before and it was fixed. I guess somebody reverted that change or something... --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.202|173.245.56.202]] 13:42, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

== 1515? ==

Is it correct that we have 1515 comics, as of April 15, 2015? --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.122|173.245.48.122]] 05:20, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
:It's not, but some people insist on making comic pages for things that aren't comics. I'll fix that. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

== 972 is broken ==

Look, I'm not going to make an account here or anything, but I just wanted to point out that trying to access the page for comic #972 leads to a database error, and maybe someone should check on that. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.102|173.245.48.102]] 07:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually a lot of other pages lead to that same error as well... Even the 'Technical Diskussions' sub-page is broken. Seems to my, like some swap-spac needs cleaning up? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.230.83|108.162.230.83]] 10:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
:Yep. It's a symptom of another problem, but the errors should be cleared up now. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
::No dice. [[997]] is still broken. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.119|198.41.235.119]] 00:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

:::Looks like they're working now. 21:01, 2016-11-27 {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.163}}

== #1567 ==

I think the current explanation is missing the connection, and the parody of, many "As Seen On TV" commercials selling kitchen products. Many of these commercials show people trying to use common kitchen equipment (pots, pans, can openers, etc) in a way that no normally functioning human would do it (for example, one has a lady draining the liquid from a pot of food into a sink in an extremely awkward manner — one that no normal person who has ever seen a kitchen would do — but then the lid flies one way, food goes another, there's a huge mess, etc; another commercial has someone trying to open a can of food using a can opener '''backwards''', with the woman looking extremely confused looking on how the can opener is supposed to be used or attached to the can [if you told someone act like they are a clueless monkey trying to use a can opener for the first time, that's basically what the commercial had the woman doing — no joke]). These commercials often begin with phrases such as "If you are like me" or "If you are like most home makers" or some other closely related "If you are like..." phrase (thus this comic is directly tieing itself to these commercials using this catch phrase). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.11|108.162.220.11]] 07:50, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
:: Other opening catch phrases for these commercials include the "Tired of [fill-in made-up frustration]" and the "Do you [fill-in made-up frustration]" kind. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.11|108.162.220.11]] 08:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

== "I used Google news BEFORE it was clickbait" ==

Go to a handful of older pages on this wiki, and it won't be long before you see this phrase in the comments - [[941: Depth Perception]], for instance has two of them. Does anyone know why this happens? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.116|108.162.221.116]] 10:59, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
:That's the signature of a person who used to post here. If you click through, it actually goes to a userpage. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:25, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

== URL ==

I notice that whenever you add "explain" to an xkcd url, it takes you here! neat! [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.233|198.41.235.233]] 23:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
:Someone noticed! Finally! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

== Should we really be using CC-BY-SA? ==

Don't get me wrong, CC-BY-SA is my favorite creative commons license. The problem is, are we really allowed? The reason I'm worried is that I'm not sure if what we are doing really counts as "fair use" with respect to XKCD. It would probably be better to do CC-NC-BY-SA, to respect XKCD, or at least put a note that CC-BY-SA only covers the wiki portion (since it's probably too late to do CC-BY-SA anyway).
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.37|173.245.54.37]] 23:38, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
:This is a tough one. Mediawiki sites generally use CC-BY-SA, even if the content they're based off is copyrighted (Wikia sites for various topics do this). The license only does apply to content ''created'' here. What should probably be done, if it isn't already, is some specification on pages in the <code>File:</code> namespace indicating that they are owned by someone other than the owners of this site. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 19:37, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

== #1663: Garden not yet added? ==

For me it's 4:30 AM, 4/4/16 - I have a sleep schedule just like [https://xkcd.com/361/], so I've been first on quite a few xkcd explanations immediately. when they came out.
I notice that usually, immediately once a new xkcd comic is released, a bot generates a corresponding bare-bones page on this wiki. However, this new comic "1663: Garden" doesn't yet have an automatically-generated page. Maybe it's because of the strange user-session hash key that appears in the URL bar when the "comic" is interacted with? Maybe this sort of interactive thing messes with the bot?
Am I just being impatient? Do I have to wait a few minutes? (I'm going to bed, and this probably won't be seen until tomorrow, but I am at least interested in knowing how the bot system works.) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.21|173.245.54.21]] 09:01, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

== Skins broken ==

It seems both the Classic and Monobook skins are very very broken. Only Vector seems to be laid out normally. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 19:39, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
: Yes, for me too. Let me see what can be done. [[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 20:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
::All calls to /load.php seem to fail, which results in the broken look. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.167|162.158.86.167]] 11:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
:::Oh wow, I thought I was the only one. [[User:SuperSupermario24|Just some random derp]] 15:57, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
::::Should be fixed now. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:59, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

== #1682: Not sure about the reference for Russian meaning for Bun ==
''Also interesting to note is that in several Slavic languages (including Russian, Czech and Polish), the word for Rabbit literally means Little King''

I'm a native Russian speaker, and i've never heard of Rabbit being used for ''Little King''...

* Rabbit: ''krolik'' (кролик)
* Little King: ''korolyok'' (королёк)

Not sure if this above statement is correct for Russian language. {{unsigned ip|162.158.255.28}}
:This is the main page. You probably want to put this in [[Talk:1682: Bun]]'''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

== Random Button ==
The actual xkcd site has one and adding one would make it closer to the actual site and make discovering random comics and their explanations easier. It could go next to the comic # button.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.69|173.245.52.69]] 01:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
:There is a random page button on the left. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:36, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
::Oh. Didn't see that. Sorry.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.69|173.245.52.69]] 20:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

== XKCD Alignment Chart ==

A while back, I was searching for an XKCD alignment chart, with no success, so I made one. It is not perfect, so I'm wondering what other opinions on the alignment of the characters are.

Lawful Good- Beret

Neutral Good- Ponytail

Chaotic Good- Mrs. Roberts

Lawful Neutral-Cueball

Neutral Neutral- Megan

Chaotic Neutral- White hat

Lawful Evil- Hairy

Neutral Evil- Danish

Chaotic Evil- Black Hat

--[[User:Fallencrow305|Fallencrow305]] ([[User talk:Fallencrow305|talk]]) 22:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

:What about Help I'm trapped in a drivers license factory Elaine Roberts? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 15:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
::Or Hairbun? Or Science Girl? Here are my predictions: Elaine - Chaotic Good, Hairbun - Lawful Good, Science Girl - Lawful Neutral --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

What? How can Beret Guy be anything other than chaotic?

== 1713 cc also means carbon copy. So 50 carbon copies of either of those words could be called for. ==

1713 cc also means carbon copy. So 50 carbon copies of either of those words could be called for. {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.146}}
:Sorry, but [[User:108.162.215.146|108.162.215.146]], you need to remember to sign your work. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

== Chatroom Idea... What do you guys think? ==
I have an idea. What if there was a discussion board for the wiki? (And no, I don't mean boards like this or the "comment section" of comic explanations. I mean a live chatroom plugin of sorts. We could add it to the website and enable it so we can talk to each other in real-time and make live edits with each other. This way, we can also let each other know of edits we've made, make new pages altogether, or just talk. What do you guys think? -- [[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 9:10, 13 September 2016
:The [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:RecentChanges recent changes] log already notifies all users on the site of new pages and edits. User talk pages and the community portals exist for coordination. Also, avoid creating new comment topics in the middle of a talk page in the future, comments are supposed to follow a chronological order. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 15:39, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
::Sorry. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 13:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

== Copying versus embedding ==

Hi, I'm new here and I'm trying not to be an asshole. However, I just noticed that this site uses its own archive of copied xkcd comics, rather than using the image URL provided for hotlinking and embedding. I can understand this website will want to have its own archive in case xkcd.org ever goes offline, but until then, why not just embed the images instead of copying?

The reason I'm asking: I just realised I hardly ever go to xkcd.org anymore ever since my browser put explainxkcd above xkcd.org. Explanations get updated, so sometimes I check back later, which rarely happens with the comics. It makes perfect sense. But if more people experience this issue, xkcd.org is getting fewer unique visitors because of it, and this could be fixed by fetching the image directly from there, while still making and storing a copy in case it is needed in the future. Thoughts, anyone? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.33|141.101.104.33]] 17:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
:So, we can't do this for every comic, like [[1190]] or other april fools comics. Also, xkcd's revenue comes from merchandise sales, not ad revenue, so I believe it's not actually negatively impacting them that we're serving the images ourselves rather than making the main site serve them for us. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

:Embedding images is generally known as "stealing bandwidth", since it uses resources of the original site's server (may be limited) without bringing it any actual visitors (they won't see anything else of the website, like announcements, shop, other sections, ...). Also, depending on how unique visitors are counted, "visitors" through embedding might be invisible (client's side scripts won't be loaded). So no image embedding without the original site's owner express permission. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.88.106|141.101.88.106]] 12:51, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

== Other Languages ==
Are there translations of pages anywhere. It has been mentioned that they are on subdomains of this site, or a sub-page, as Main_Page/es for spanish. I can't seem to find them there. [[User:The Muffin Man|The Muffin Man]] ([[User talk:The Muffin Man|talk]]) 14:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
:It's a work in progress, long delayed but I really do want to get to it eventually. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:58, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

== Why are there male/female symbols in some of the entries? ==

Those symbols are not in the comic, but they're in the table. I think a vandal put them there. Can someone remove them from the Lavaball, Bladeball, Eggspotting, Merfishing, Consequence Golf and Heck Escape? (now don't act like someone who criticizes "politically correct leftist "libt++d" SJW snowflakes" just because I said "heck" or censored the derogatory term for "liberal" or not even trying to say these uncensored) -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.106|108.162.221.106]] 12:36, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

== How quaint ==

From the Main Page:

Explain xkcd: '''It's 'cause you're dumb.'''

From the Rules section:

'''Don't be a jerk. '''

(Emphasis mine)

How very ,very quaint. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.100|162.158.126.100]] 21:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

== HTTPS? ==

Hi,
With the general trend towards HTTPS being favoured over HTTP for security and speed reasons, would it be possible to force the use of HTTPS and secure the mixed content please?

Please see [https://www.whynopadlock.com/results/7e707bfd-cd71-4b00-b95e-be226fb10fb6 Why no Padlock?] for more details.

Thanks,
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.179.202|162.158.179.202]] 10:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

:Browsing using HTTPS seems to just work. There's even a signed certificate.
:https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1946

:I really don't get why people are so convinced that browsing using HTTPS is so much more "secure". You even seem to claim that it's faster?
:If you love it so much, install a browser extension like https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere.

:With the exception of the login / register page, I really don't see the point for enforcing this for the whole site. I am no admin though.
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.93|172.69.54.93]] 22:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

We are already in 2018 and this website still does not even redirect automatically to HTTPS ([https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/200170536-How-do-I-redirect-all-visitors-to-HTTPS-SSL- you can do it so easily with Cloudflare...]) nor enforce HTTPS with {{w|HSTS}}... I don't know, just check [https://scotthelme.co.uk/hardening-your-http-response-headers/#strict-transport-security on Scott Helme's site] why it's important. Having to rely on the user installing an extension for doing the sysadmin work is a bad joke, really. And it does not fix some issues with mixed content of course. With Let's Encrypt and Cloudflare providing certificates for free and the plethora of tutorials online on securing a website (not limited to HTTPS), there is no excuse to not do it. -- [[User:guest|guest]] ([[User talk:guest|talk]]) 11:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

== "It's 'cause you're dumb" ==
I see that there was some talk about this a while ago, in which people seemed to agree that the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline is unnecessarily mean and should be changed... and yet, it's still here. I'd like to add some more fuel to the fire with several reasons why I really hate this tagline:

* The tagline doesn't fit the tone of XKCD. Randall celebrates knowledge. Even Black Hat wouldn't just outright say "You're dumb", because he's a classhole who can insult way better than that.
* Many of the people who contribute to this wiki are very smart. They're not dumb.
* They're also quite amicable from what I've seen. If they wouldn't insult someone, why is the website doing so?
* Not knowing something is not the same as being dumb. Even the smartest people don't know everything.
* Having a desire to learn is smart, not dumb.
* The tagline's logic is flawed. Just because you learn a new thing, doesn't mean you were dumb to begin with.

Anyone with me on this?

[[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 14:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

: The first line of the "Rules" section is "Don't be a jerk" at the time of writing. The first thing this wobsite does is to break that rule. I'm not sure what else is to be said here. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.76|162.158.126.76]] 16:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

:I always thought that was weird too. But it's still there... I'll tell the admins about it, and hopefully it will be changed. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 13:18, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Explanation: ''This'' is a joke... Missing the punchline? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:15, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I'm fine with the current tagline. I consider it a joke and don't feel offended. However, if there is consensus a) that and b) to what it should be changed, I'm ok with changing it. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 16:18, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm wondering, would it be possible to temporarily (a week or so?) stop new ads from appearing in the sidebar and replace it with a poll concerning this issue? Right now it's just showing what appeared in the banners in [[1965: Background Apps]], and not a real ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.58.81|162.158.58.81]] 10:12, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
:The advertisement is used to pay the fees needed to run this site. Right now this wiki get's an upgrade but when it's done this discussion will get a proper placement here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

The first time I encountered this tagline I thought it was pretty funny. Satire can be hard to detect online but this one seems clear enough. --[[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 20:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
:What is it satirizing? I'm serious; I genuinely don't know. It could well be that I just don't get the joke. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 13:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

At first I liked the joke, but now it's either annoying or I ignore it. Personally I don't feel it needs to be changed, as it's in the satirical spirit of xkcd, but I wouldn't care too much. [[User:Nyx goddess|Nyx goddess]] ([[User talk:Nyx goddess|talk]]) 22:56, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

It's satire, if it gets removed that's exactly the kind of overzealous political correctness that MAGA chuds are talking about when they accuse us of being snowflakes, howabout let's not give them ammo. - 02:03, 22 December 2018 (UTC) {{unsigned ip|162.158.63.94}}
:As above: what it is satirizing? Also, for my part, it's not about political correctness at all; it's that the tagline doesn't match my personal positive image of XKCD, nor of this wiki, and it just feels unfitting to me, for all the reasons that I laid out. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 13:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm in favor of a change. Let's drop the "dumb". Or at least modify it. I propose a "strikethrough" of dumb, then add any one of a list of possible words: confused, ignorant, curious, wondering, befuddled... (Oooh, could it randomly change each time the page is loaded? Code wizards, advance!) [[User:Imperpay|Imperpay]] ([[User talk:Imperpay|talk]]) 22:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
:A complete list of all synonyms of dumb, including dumb and all synonyms of those synonyms, according to thesaurus.com. One randomly loads each time you load the page via rng, or on a once a day system, like the incomplete page of the day. That would actually probably make it more mean on average, but more clearly a joke. Wouldn’t be impossible to code either.[[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 15:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

The reason I come to Explain XKCD is because I'm excited to see what other people have said about it. I agree with the above - it doesn't fit the spirit of xkcd's joy for knowledge and it really just isn't why people come here. Furthermore, it skirts demeaning people with disabilities. Please remove it. [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 07:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I also agree with Hawthorn. This tagline always was very strange for me. No, this is nothing about political correctness. I don't mind being insulted, if there is a joke, or something ironical or satirical behind it. But there just isn't. It's just not funny at all.
A random selection on every page load from a long list of completely absurd reasons would be more the XKCDs way. You could even try to create one or more "''It's because ...''" explanations for every comic and randomly display one out of those. 2206: "''... you don't know how to type capital numbers.''", 2205: "''... you don't assume Pi is one.''", 2204: "''... you didn't give us a moon.''", 2203: "''... there wasn't a really big meteor impact for a while.''" and so on. Pretty straight forward. The more frequent visitors of XKCD would probably even get many of the references and remember the corresponding comic. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.221|162.158.91.221]] 17:39, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
:I did recently raise the issue again on the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Is_the_.22It.27s_.27cause_you.27re_dumb.22_tagline_a_relic_of_the_past.3F Community Portal], explaining my case in more detail, although it seems to have garnered little interest. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 12:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

What instead, then? It's poor form to suggest half a change; if not "it's cause you're dumb," what should the tagline be? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.85|173.245.52.85]] 16:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

There seems a pretty clear consensus to get rid of the jarring insult, with no apparent objections. Has been for years now. What do we need to do to delete it? What's the blocker, here?
"first we need a consensus on replacement" isn't an answer. It sets too high a bar for something which is trivial, and anyway replacement is a separate task which can be performed later. Deletion is step 1, so what needs to be done to perform step 1, since none of us seems to have access to do so?
Personally, I'd argue for making it publicly editable, which then magically also resolves step 2, replacement. Any tagline that stayed for any amount of time would then only remain because it was widely considered worthy by site members. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.143|172.69.71.143]] 16:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
:I like that idea, it efficiently gets rid of the years-old issue, and any further issues would have their own discussion page, plus any change that's problematic, obscene or spam could easily be reversed. I can imagine that at first there would be many changes, but after a few weeks/ months it should stabilize itself. [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk]]) 14:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion it is not an issue of political correctness, or any related flavour of woke nonsense. It is much simpler. Problem is, ''"It's 'cause you're dumb"'' is extremely pretentious and high-horsed, while simultaneously having absolutely no business being so. It feels like it is said by someone who unironically refers to him/herself in third person. Someone whose professional CV includes the fact that he/she used to be a class leader in second grade of primary school. Someone who used to remind a teacher about homework that the teacher was supposed to check, but forgot. Someone who still asks his/her mom to cut the crust off his/her sandwiches. I am not offended nor insulted by this line, I am just cringing because of that line's author being too socially inept to realize that he/she is not in the place to judge and attempt insulting readers' intellectual capabilities. Understanding Munroe's poorly drawn stick figures, diatribes, and diagrams originating from his neurotic turmoil does not come with an added bonus of entering the supposed high echelons of intelligence, and certainly not comedy nor humour. Munroe's "humour" actually requires only the superficial sliver of knowledge from any given domain to understand and thus does not really come with too many prerequisites, while at the same time it succeeds in making readers feel rare and exceptional as a result of being able to understand said "humour", and makes them feel much smarter than they actually are. That's why those comics were able to find quite a large audience within their niche. It is quite smart in itself, actually: while Munroe may be poor quality comedian, he seems to be self-aware enough to realize the existence of his own shortcomings, and compensate by "bribing" his readers via appeasing their egos. In return, the readers are willing to overlook poor comedic value of virtually all Munroe's content, as long as they are being deluded to feel exceptionally intelligent and sophisticated for understanding the comics' supposedly hyperintellectual subtle references. Meanwhile, doing what this website does: insulting that audience is basically, in principle, going in the completely opposite direction to what actually made Munroe's content successful in the first place, and hence is quite self-destructive from this website's point of view. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.207|172.70.242.207]] 00:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

== Editor FAQ ==
Eventually we may need that banner at the top for something else, like the incomplete explanation spotlight, or when the wiki was being upgraded, so I think we should add the Editor FAQ in the New Here? section. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 11:21, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
:It's a first draft and I'm just waiting to be convinced that it's NOT incomplete. And be sure I haven't written it without a plan how to present it on the proper places. Furthermore this "Sitenotice" on the top is only "dissmissable" for valid users, every visitor not logged in does see this always. Thanks for your participation and I'm grateful about any help. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:30, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

== Categories on Main Page ==

[[MediaWiki:Common.css]] has the following entry:
<pre>
.page-Main_Page div#catlinks ul li {
border-left: none;
position: absolute;
left: 70px;
bottom: 6px;
}
</pre>
The <code>70px</code> cause an overlap for me in Firefox, and much too small a gap in Chrome. I suggest to actually remove that line completely, just compare it with categories on other pages: The gap is quite large. In Firefox, also the <code>6px</code> are too much, but in Chrome they are required. But it might be worth to try whether setting vertical align to something else can achieve a more consistent display. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.230|162.158.88.230]] 10:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
:And the comment above that says: "Dirty hack to hide the categories of the current comic from main page. ...". I'm aware of this but there is much more, especially for a mobile version I'm looking forward to. Only in this case I see three problems: The component is rendered as a list (ul,li) by hiding the bullets. This then empty space is always rendered different in different browsers. Using "position: absolute" tries to circumvent this but absolute positioning is bad layout and never should be used. Furthermore mixing the units ''px'' and ''em'' in many places is also a problem when comparing it at different browsers. I'm working on this with the final goal also having a proper mobile version, not only for Firefox, Chrome, Edge,... on a desktop. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

== Bookmark ==

I think we should add this book mark I made to automatically transfer anything from xkcd to its explainxkcd page (I was frustrated, ok?):

javascript:x=window.location.href;x = x.replace(/\D/g,'');t=document.title.substring(5).replace(/ /g,"_");window.location.href="https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/"+x+":"+t;

I know the code could be more compact, but using this, you can just press a button and it will take you to the explain page {{unsigned ip|172.68.47.84}}
:Just changing the URL from <code>xkcd.com/2115/</code> to <code>explainxkcd.com/2115/</code> (putting the word explain to the beginning) does the same. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
:Collecting these [[Browser helpers|here]]. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 04:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

== Non-comic explanations? ==

So I was looking at xkcd and I noticed a little jokey line near the bottom of the page in very small print that reads <pre> <nowiki> "xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing." </nowiki> </pre>
Now, I know enough to understand the joke, but it would be nice to have a page for this. Do we have one? Am I just blind? Either way, I would like to know. Thanks! [[User:Nyx goddess|Nyx goddess]] ([[User talk:Nyx goddess|talk]]) 23:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
:Nevermind, I just found it. Sorry! [[User:Nyx goddess|Nyx goddess]] ([[User talk:Nyx goddess|talk]]) 23:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

== Latest comic released. ==

I don't know where to post this, but the bots haven't created the page yet.
[[User:HelloWorld|HelloWorld]] ([[User talk:HelloWorld|talk]]) 19:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

: Probably infected by COVID-19. That's why you should wash your keyboards after visiting other websites. Until then, feel free to create the page manually (if possible). --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.19|108.162.242.19]] 21:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

== Minor edit proposal ==

Line 19 of the main page includes this sentence:
<pre>Many of the recent contributors, listed above, have [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=newbie just joined].</pre>
That right there is not a wikilink. Could we change it to:
<pre>Many of the recent contributors, listed above, have [{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|contribs=newbie}} just joined].</pre>
Both render as follows:
{|class="wikitable"
|Many of the recent contributors, listed above, have [{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|contribs=newbie}} just joined].
|}
And I think my way is cleaner. [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 14:52, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

==1000: 1000 Comics/1000 characters update==
I've completed the blank explanations for all the remaining characters in [[1000: 1000 Comics/1000 characters]]; however, it could really use some work in terms of verification. I offer the sweet incentive of being able to get rid of a page's 'incomplete' label as reward for people to double check my, and [[User:Kynde|Kynde's]] work on the project. [[User:BlackHat|Your favourite sociopath]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|(the one who leaves all the parentheses open]] 07:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC

==2021-02 updates to top of page==
I don't really like the changed first few lines - I think it takes up too much room and the previous info was better. I look at the main page daily, and want to see the comic and explination not all this stuff that I think would be better down below the daily comic display. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 17:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

: I agree, and it drives me crazy that {{tl|Welcome}} is designed for talk pages, so there is a red link to [[User:Main Page]]! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.213|172.68.142.213]] 15:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

: Since Jeff is much more involved in all this sort of stuff than myself, I would tend to defer to his judgement, but I also agree that the "Main Page" red link is pretty ugly. I will "be bold" and revert the change and then drop it if he really wants it. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 18:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
::I guess I cannot revert things as there are no "edit" buttons I can view for the Main Page [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 19:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::You need administrator privileges to edit the main page. This was done to reduce spam, which is basically non-existent now. I made the {{tl|Welcome}} template, and I certainly did not make it for it to be displayed in the main page! I made it to welcome new users to the site. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 13:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
::::I see on [User:Jeff|Jeff]]'s talk page that Sqrt-1 has made a comment about this so maybe it will be taken care of. I am guessing that some automatic bot-like thing might have made an error. Today I got the {{tl|Welcome}} template added to my user page by Sqrt-1. It does seem like a useful template for user pages - less so for the Main page. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 13:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
:It looks like [[User:Jeff|Jeff]] has reverted it - Thanks! [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 11:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

== Overuse/misuse of incomplete template ==

Instead of having information on why the comic is incomplete or being removed once the explanation is finished, the incomplete template is being treated as a place to put witty comments. This overcrowds the category, making it more difficult to see articles in need of actual help or know why they need help. I have gone through the incomplete articles and posted new topics on ones with incomplete tags that do not provide information on why the template is there, asking to know why the comic is incomplete and, failing that, to have the template removed. For the full details, please see [[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|my user page]].

I would like to request that either a less obtrusive solution or compromise be found or the error of my (relatively new user) ways be explained to me by someone more experienced.

Sincerely, <s>[[406:_Venting|Summer Glau]]</s> [[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]][[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|Quill]][[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]]

P.S. Maybe an "incomplete incomplete template" template? I don't know.

P.P.S. I can kill you with my brain.

I don't know. I re-signed and edited so many times, March 2021 (UTC)
: In some cases, the "incomplete" tag is left on for a long time, when nobody takes the trouble to remove it from a page that has migrated out of people's attention. Sometimes, people remove it inappropriately, while a page is still actively under revision. In many cases, it's hard for anyone to say what's "incomplete" about a page because there's relevant stuff to add that isn't obvious until someone adds it. The question is more: at what point can a page be reasonably assumed to be "complete"? A week after the most recent edit to it? Some pages undergo revision for quite a while after they're first posted; other pages remain stable after only a few days. It annoys me when someone edits a page and removes its "incomplete" tag at the same time, which gives me the impression of "now that I have made my change, the page is in its final form, and nobody else should touch it!" [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 22:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
::Proposal: The default text of the incomplete template could be modified to include <code><nowiki>[[Category: Incomplete Incomplete (or something similar)]]</nowiki></code>. If the text is modified, the page should be removed from the category. This new category would be easily accessible from the main page, and anyone visiting it should see information about the category's meaning and how to help make said templates more informative. Possible ways to go about this:
::* Line 315 of the bot script would be changed to read: <code><nowiki>{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.[[Category: Whatever The Name Ends Up Being]]}}</nowiki></code>.
::* The main page banner would be changed to read: <code><nowiki>''Welcome to the '''explain [[xkcd]]''' wiki!'' 
We have an explanation for all [[:Category:All comics|'''{{#expr:{{PAGESINCAT:All comics|R}}-1}}''' xkcd comics]],

and only {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}}
({{#expr: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} / {{LATESTCOMIC}} * 100 round 0}}%) [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|are incomplete]]. Help us finish them! If you're looking for something easier, you could also edit one of the {{PAGESINCAT:Whatever The Name Ends Up Being|R}} pages with [[:Category:Whatever The Name Ends Up Being|incomplete explanations]], which would help other editors.</nowiki></code>.

::* The new category would read: <code><nowiki>This is the category page for incomplete pages that have no explanation for why they are incomplete in the incomplete tag. Do not add pages to this category. See also: [[:Category:Incomplete pages]] and [[:Category:Incomplete transcripts]]</nowiki></code>.
::I will not do this without first seeking community approval, because these are huge edits that could majorly change the wiki. Is this a good idea? [[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]][[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|Quill]][[Special:Contributions/Quillathe_Siannodel|{)|(}]]
::: Feels a great idea. Given the dearth of opinion ventured either way, and given you've given plenty of time for people to declare an opinion, I'd argue to be bold, do it, and see if people squeal. It can always be reverted if required. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.161|172.70.178.161]] 17:02, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

== Add another digit to percentage incomplete count ==

With the large majority of comics gaining explanations, I suggest that the current expression be adjusted to the following, changing "round 0" to "round 1":

<pre>({{#expr: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} / {{LATESTCOMIC}} * 100 round 1}}%)</pre>

Resulting in: ({{#expr: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} / {{LATESTCOMIC}} * 100 round 1}}%)
[[User:Gamma|Gamma]] ([[User talk:Gamma|talk]])

== Problems creating account ==

I just attempted to create an account, and got the following message:
There are problems with some of your input.

I made an adjustment to the password (which seemed to be the problem), consisting of making one of the letters of my original attempt a capital. This didn't work.

There is no point telling me there are problems with my input and not telling me what the problems are. I can't read your mind at this distance.

Cheers
Copey.

== 2530: Clinical Trials ==

Maybe step 3 should come before step 2?

== add non-numbered comics ==

idea: for the "We have an explanation for all [number] xkcd comics..." make the number include the non-numbered comics like five minute comics part 4, Syndication, Blue Eyes, and that one book-publishing-rate one. what do you guys think? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.93|108.162.221.93]] 17:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)Bumpf

:Good point, also as of right now even only including the numbered comics it's not up-to-date, as the newest comic is 2555 and it says "We have an explanation for all 2554 xkcd comics" -- [[User:256 256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256 256.256.256|talk]]) 09:38, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

:: That is likely due to:
<nowiki></nowiki>
:: -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.65|108.162.237.65]] 17:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

== fix these articles please! ==

[[What If chapters]] should be a redirect, not a mirror of [[What If? chapters]] ! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.10|172.69.71.10]] 17:38, 19 November 2021 (UTC)Bumpf
:Done. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 07:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

== lol ==

https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/6xbc78/reading_xkcd_comics/ 13:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

== Top 10 includes no more than 9 people? ==

[[File:Top_10_but_it's_just_nine.png]]

have only nine users edited in the past seven days (unlikely) or does that top ten list really show no more than nine users? [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk]]) 09:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
:My guess is that it is because currently place 10 and 11 have a tie with a score of 4 due to 3 edits on 2 pages and the top 10 table can show a maximum of 10 entries and cannot "decide" which one to show as no 10.
:You can view the full list by clicking the "lots of people" below the table. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

::That would make sense, except right now it alternates between ElijaRock and Asdf who both have two edits, two points and two unique pages edited, and pure chance seems to decide which one of the two gets 10th place every time I hit F5 [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk]]) 14:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
:::PS: The actual 10th place right now is neither Asdf nor ElijaRock, it´s Jack (or at least it should be and sometimes, when the wind is blowing in the right direction, it even is) [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk]]) 14:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

== Countdown Timer? ==

What’s the timer at the top right of the xkcd site counting down to? Apologies if there’s already a page on this; I didn’t look very hard :P

See https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Talk:2566:_Decorative_Constants -- [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.39|172.70.114.39]] 02:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Now here: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Countdown_in_header_text.

== Set up X-Forwarded-For for correct IP address reporting ==

(I already posted this on David's talk, but I noticed he's no longer active... Hopefully an admin will read this here) This should be done server-side, as right now (and for a very long time) it's been reporting load balancer / cache IP addresses for all the users. With recent vandalism, it'd help. [[User:BytEfLUSh|BytEfLUSh]] ([[User talk:BytEfLUSh|talk]]) 22:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

== Vandalism ==

To think that the seventh user on the all time list is a vandal… [[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 22:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

35: Sheep

2022-05-04T21:01:24Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 242810 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 35
| date = November 26, 2005
| title = Sheep
| image = sheep.jpg
| titletext = I think it's the sheep zapping the cactus and not vice-versa
}}

==Explanation==
Due to Randall's vacation, he picked out comics from his old high-school notebooks. This is the second in a row. It was also released a day too late.

It is a very weird drawing, especially with the title text proclaiming that it may be the sheep that is zapping the cactus. The comic [[520: Cuttlefish]] may be a reference to this comic.

It may also be a {{w|Pokémon}} reference, with the sheep being the Electric-type Mareep or its evolution Flaaffy, and the cactus being Cacnea or Cacturne.

==Transcript==
:[Caption in a black frame above the image written in normal letters not all caps:]
:Another from my high-school notebooks.
:[A sheep and a green saguaro cactus in a brown pot are linked by an arcing yellow electricity bolt.]

==Trivia==
*This was the 37th comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]].
**The previous was [[41: Old Drawing]].
**The next was [[42: Geico]].
*Original title: "Friday's Drawing - Sheep"
*Original [[Randall]] quote: "I'm still on vacation, sorry this is a bit late. I forgot what day it was. Anyway, I'll be back Monday, possibly with new drawings about cereal!"
**This was the reason the Friday comic came out on a Saturday for the second week running.
**The one about cereal came out on Wednesday: [[38: Apple Jacks]]
*This comic was posted on [[xkcd]] when the web site opened on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.
**It was posted along [[:Category:First day on xkcd|with all 41 comics]] posted before that on LiveJournal as well as a few others.
**The latter explaining why the numbers of these 41 LiveJournal comics ranges from 1-44.
*One of the original drawings drawn on [[:Category:Checkered paper|checkered paper]].

===Poem by Scott===
In the comment to the original [[LiveJournal]] post there was a user called Scott who posted this original poem:
:I had a little cactus and I treasured it with pride,
:admiring its spines and dainty flowers.
:Until the day - oh tragic day! - when it was RAMIFIED,
:by a ram with strange psychokinetic powers.

:Baaing deep, this shaman sheep came whiffling through the brambles.
:It gazed upon my cactus and, with yellow flash and thudrous crash,
:with dashing, brash, and rash panache,
:it blew the plant to shambles.

:I was, I confess, horrified - I sat and cried my eyes out!
:Oh stupid sheep, satanic sheep, so wrong and rash and willful!
:I nursed the cactus best I could, till finally it came about.
:It grows apace now, once again, but all it blooms is steel wool!

[And then in another post beneath this posted four minutes after the poem at 4:57 UTC (AM?) he finished with:]
:Oh God I need sleep!

If this is the [[Scott]] who is a friend of Randall, it is not entirely clear....

===Other poems===
:Mary had a little lamb
:She tied it to a pylon
:Ten thousand volt went up its a**
:And turned its wool to nylon.

{{Comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics posted on livejournal| 37]]
[[Category:First day on xkcd]]
[[Category:Checkered paper]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Scott]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

33: Self-reference

2022-05-04T21:01:07Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 242678 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 33
| date = November 21, 2005
| title = Self-reference
| image = self-reference.jpg
| titletext = I think about self-reference a lot. Example: this comment.
}}

==Explanation==

{{w|Self-reference}} is a situation where something (a comic, a drawing, a musical work, a novel, a mathematical theorem) refers to itself in some manner. This can be a powerful technique in art, music, mathematics, and computer science (it is the basis of recursion).

In this comic, [[Cueball]] promises not to use self-reference for humor, and then realizes after a beat panel that, since this comic is referring to the series of comics he is part of, he is using self-reference, thus breaking his promise.

Without the last panel, this comic wouldn't be funny, and therefore wouldn't break the promise about using self-reference for humor. But with it, and his realization that he is breaking his promise, it does break that promise. (Do you get it?)

The title text is just another humorous self-reference.

Self-references has been used most famously later in [[688: Self-Description]], but was already used in [[6: Irony]] and also in [[:Category:Self-reference|other comics]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is standing alone.]
:Cueball: I promise to never again squeeze humor out of self-reference.

:[Beat panel.]

:[Cueball is standing alone.]
:Cueball: God dammit.

==Trivia==
*This was the 35th comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]].
**The previous was [[32: Pillar]].
**The next was [[41: Old Drawing]].
*Original title: "Friday's Drawing - Self-reference"
**Randall had some issues around this time. The Friday comic from the week before (and also this week) came out on a Saturday.
**And this comic is a '''Monday''' comic, released on a Monday morning.
*There was no original [[Randall]] quote for this comic.
*This comic was posted on [[xkcd]] when the web site opened on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.
**It was posted along [[:Category:First day on xkcd|with all 41 comics]] posted before that on LiveJournal as well as a few others.
**The latter explaining why the numbers of these 41 LiveJournal comics ranges from 1-44.
*One of the original drawings drawn on [[:Category:Checkered paper|checkered paper]].
*The web comic Comic JK made this spoof of the comic:
**The [https://web.archive.org/web/20140323234759/http://comicjk.com/comic.php/44 xkcd self reference].
{{Comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics posted on livejournal| 35]]
[[Category:First day on xkcd]]
[[Category:Checkered paper]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Self-reference]]
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

34: Flowers

2022-05-04T21:00:53Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 242836 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 34
| date = November 9, 2005
| title = Flowers
| image = flowers.jpg
| titletext = This is actually pencil on paper, just inverted and colored
}}
==Explanation==
This is a drawing of flowers that [[Randall]] made. It seems the flowers are based on his imagination, rather than being a real species - see the original quote in the [[#Trivia|trivia]] section.

The title text explains that Randall originally drew the flowers in pencil on normal paper; he did not paint them. Instead, he used the invert feature of a photo-editing program to reverse it from black-on-white to white-on-black. After that, he added color to the flowers.

==Transcript==
:[A sketch of flowers, drawn in green, red, and yellow on a black background.]

==Trivia==
[[File:flowers_inverted.jpeg|Inverted and desaturated version of the comic.]]

*As noted in the title text, the original drawing for the comic was made in pencil, then inverted and colored. The image above is a re-inverted, desaturated version of the comic, which gives a good approximation of what the original drawing might have looked like.
*This was the 30th comic originally posted to [[LiveJournal]].
**The previous was [[30: Donner]].
**The next was [[29: Hitler]].
*Original title: "Wednesday's Drawing - Flowers"
*Original [[Randall]] quote:
::"Original drawing is pencil on {{w|graph paper}}.
::Bonus points if you can identify the flowers. 'cause I sure can't."
*This comic was posted on [[xkcd]] when the web site opened on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.
**It was posted along [[:Category:First day on xkcd|with all 41 comics]] posted before that on LiveJournal as well as a few others.
**The latter explaining why the numbers of these 41 LiveJournal comics ranges from 1-44.

{{Comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics posted on livejournal| 30]]
[[Category:First day on xkcd]]
[[Category:Checkered paper]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]

2195: Dockless Roombas

2022-05-04T20:58:05Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 245152 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 2195
| date = August 28, 2019
| title = Dockless Roombas
| image = dockless_roombas.png
| titletext = The company started out exploiting a loophole in the law banning scooters. The city was mad at first, but then they noticed how much they were saving on street cleaning.
}}

==Explanation==
In this comic [[Cueball]] discovers two {{w|Roomba|Roombas}} outside, and [[Megan]] explains that they are dockless Roombas for rent. Cueball is confused, but then [[Beret Guy]] walks in, activates one with an app on his {{w|smartphone}}, and rides away standing on it.

A Roomba is a small automated (robotic) vacuum cleaner designed to clean a room or other bounded area by repeatedly and automatically going over the floor, vacuuming, until it has made multiple passes, and either runs low on power or is turned off. The "intelligence" of various models can vary from relatively random operation with basic techniques to get around obstacles, to models that generate a general mental map of the area and contents and attempt to be deliberate in passing over all reachable areas. A Roomba generally includes a recharging "dock", which it can find and automatically connect with when it gets low on power, allowing it to recharge and perhaps automatically begin another round of cleaning. Roombas are a [[:Category:Roomba|recurring theme]] on xkcd. In [[1193: Externalities]] it was [[Ponytail]] that drove a Roomba. And in [[1486: Vacuum]] Beret Guy flew on a regular vacuum cleaner.

A {{w|Scooter-sharing_system|dockless scooter}} is a system of sharing personal scooters whereby they can be left anywhere for someone else to use, rather than returned to a particular home location. They are typically activated via a smartphone app. The term "dockless" in the name refers to the fact they have no predefined home, or place to dock. Like a Roomba, they do need recharging, but no special station is needed for that -- anyone can pick them up and recharge them overnight from a standard power outlet, receiving a fee from the scooter company for this service. In the past several years they have become popular in many large cities around the world. Scooters have recently been featured in [[2188: E Scooters]].

The humor here is replacing the scooters with Roombas, which people would then ride. There are multiple problems with this idea:

* A Roomba is not powerful enough for someone to ride. At best, a small animal like a cat or squirrel might be able to ride atop one.

* A Roomba has small wheels and is designed for relatively flat and uniform surfaces. Even if a person could successfully ride on one, sidewalks have cracks and unevenness and bumps which would lead to a rough ride with lots of opportunities to [https://what-if.xkcd.com/5/ get stuck]. (But riding Roombas has come up on xkcd before, in the Externalities comic)

* A Roomba requires a way to recharge its batteries and, unladen, generally runs for an hour or so before it needs to be recharged. That is why it always comes with a dock. Dockless would imply it would not have a way to recharge. With a heavy load like a human, one would expect the run time to be drastically less.

* The cleaning capabilities of a Roomba require that it be confined to a bounded area and that it go over the surfaces to be cleaned in multiple passes. A "free range" Roomba would not be very effective at cleaning.

* A Roomba's dirt canister is quite small and needs to be emptied when it fills up. This would happen quite quickly if it were operated on streets and sidewalks.

The title text refers to the {{w|Scooter-sharing_system#Controversy_around_kick_scooters|controversy}} in many cities surrounding dockless scooters, which can be dangerous to pedestrians when in use and can block sidewalks and driveways when not. Dockless scooters were introduced in many cities before there were any regulations about scooter use, with some critics claiming scooters exploited loopholes in existing law and regulation, and leading some cities to pass legislation to specifically ban or curtail the use of dockless scooters. Here it is the Roombas that exploit loopholes in those scooter laws, which initially bothers city officials before they realize the positive benefit of the Roombas cleaning their streets as they are ridden.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan walk in from the right and sees two Roombas on the ground in front of them.]
:Cueball: Are those... Roombas?
:Megan: Yeah, the dockless rental apps have really taken off.

:[Cueball stops and turns to look at Megan, who has also stopped, as Beret Guy comes walking in from the left with his smartphone in his hand.]
:Cueball: What?

:[As Cueball and Megan turn to look at Beret Guy, he stops between the two Roombas, looking down at the Roomba to his left. He taps his smartphone and the Roomba makes a sound.]
:Smartphone: Tap tap
:Roomba: Unlock

:[Beret Guy is squatting down on the Roomba as it drives him away, while Cueball and Megan turns to stare after him,]
:Roomba: ''Whirrrr''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Roomba]]

862: Let Go

2022-05-04T20:57:25Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 245020 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 862
| date = February 18, 2011
| title = Let Go
| image = let go.png
| titletext = After years of trying various methods, I broke this habit by pitting my impatience against my laziness. I decoupled the action and the neurological reward by setting up a simple 30-second delay I had to wait through, in which I couldn't do anything else, before any new page or chat client would load (and only allowed one to run at once). The urge to check all those sites magically vanished--and my 'productive' computer use was unaffected.
}}

==Explanation==
It is human nature to lose interest in difficult or boring tasks, and instead do something easier, more interesting or more rewarding in the short term. While procrastination and distraction from more important tasks has always been present, this comic casts a light on the internet and the huge potential for distraction which it provides.

The first two frames in this comic are the set-up, and contain the websites {{w|CNN}} and {{w|Reddit}} and thoughts over the top of them. These types of websites are regularly updated with new content are prime candidates for distraction. The thought bubbles indicate that the reader is fully aware that they shouldn't be looking at these websites, but is unable to stop himself. Even the very rational thought that checking news stories more than once a day is bordering on pointless doesn't seem to stop him.

In the third frame, it starts to look a little different as the screen is not a computer but is in fact the targeting computer from {{w|Luke Skywalker|Luke Skywalker's}} {{w|X-wing}}. At this point it becomes clear that there are ''far'' more important tasks at hand, namely flying the craft. Even then, Luke has an internal conflict and considers checking {{w|Facebook}}, but mentally checks himself, and to prevent himself from further compulsive browsing shuts down the system. The thought bubble at the bottom is one that is probably familiar to many people (especially students), where he realizes that he has to turn off the computer to actually concentrate on the important task.

In the fourth frame, we finally get the movie reference from {{w|Star Wars}} as {{w|Princess Leia}} and one of the Rebel Alliance's officers are gathered around the holographic table that allows them to follow the battle. In the movie, Luke turns off his targeting computer because he uses the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Force_%28Star_Wars%29 force] to fire the torpedoes at the right time. But in this comic, Luke turns off the computer because he keeps getting distracted by Reddit and CNN. When they ask whether he is alright, he responds in the way most people would who have nearly been caught wasting time on the internet. This is however a quote of what he actually replies in the movie.

See the [http://youtu.be/DOFgFAcGHQc Destruction of Death Star] scene on YouTube. The ''Let Go'' remark from {{w|Obi-Wan Kenobi}} that had given the title to this comic occurs about [http://youtu.be/DOFgFAcGHQc?t=2m two minutes into the clip]. Though here it is a reference to let go of refreshing websites...

The headlines on CNN read 'Bees?', 'Where is {{w|Oman}}?', and 'iReport (we mean you, that is.)'.

The headline ''Bees?'' could be a reference to {{w|Cards Against Humanity}}. One of the white cards says exactly that. It could also just be a question to the picture above - if it was bees following the guy.

The headline ''Where is Oman?'' is below a map where land is white. It shows Cyprus, Northern Egypt and the Middle East with the Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf (seas are grey). Oman is not on this map as it is not situated on the Persian Gulf; it's on the Gulf of Oman and on the Arabian Sea, both of which can be considered parts of the Indian Ocean.

The title text is a serious solution to a procrastination problem that we see in the comic, [http://blog.xkcd.com/2011/02/18/distraction-affliction-correction-extensio/ later explained] to take the form of simply rebooting the computer. Randall just used the honor system, rather than enforcing this behavior with a program, but he solicited suggestions from his commenters for browser addons, for people who could not simply reboot their computers for whatever reason. At the time, a commenter suggested DelaySites, but that addon is no longer available; nowadays, Mozilla recommends [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/leechblock-ng/?src=search LeechBlock NG] (also [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/leechblock-ng/blaaajhemilngeeffpbfkdjjoefldkok?hl=en-US available for Chrome]), which can be configured to implement the loading delay or block websites entirely, with additional parameters for adjusting time limits for browsing and the time of day and days of the week that each behavior is active.

==Transcript==
:[Reddit page.]
:Luke (thinking): I shouldn't be looking at Reddit. Why can't I stop?

:[CNN page.]
:Luke (thinking): Refreshing CNN again. Do news stories so affect my life that I benefit from checking them more than once a day?

:[Shutdown screen.]
:Luke (thinking): I should at least check Faceb... no. Screw it. I can't do my job when I'm distracting myself every five minutes like this.

:[Cueball and Princess Leia looking at a battlefield screen.]
:Cueball: His computer's off. Luke - You've switched off your targeting computer. What's wrong?
:Luke: Nothing. I'm all right.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Star Wars]]
[[Category:Internet]]

2412: 1/100,000th Scale World

2022-05-04T20:56:03Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 244680 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 2412
| date = January 15, 2021
| title = 1/100,000th Scale World
| image = 1_100000th_scale_world.png
| titletext = The floor should be slightly curved, but we haven't figured out artificial gravity yet, so for now we just added a trace intoxicating gas to the air that messes with your inner ear and gives you a sense that the ground is tilting away from you.
}}

==Explanation==

This comic is the second in the [[:Category:Scale World|Scale World]] series.

[[Randall]] has another seemingly complete {{w|scale model}} of {{w|Earth}}, this time at a smaller {{w|Scale (ratio)|scale}} of 1:100,000 – that is, 1 meter in this scale world represents 100,000 meters in the real world. (This is one tenth the size of his [[2411|previous scale world]].) Again, real-world features and phenomena are depicted at scale and labeled with warnings. Details on the various remarks are in the [[#Table|table]] below.

The title text states that the floor should be slightly curved. In fact, given that the model in the comic is about 10 meters long, it represents about 1000 km of Earth, which spans about 9 degrees of a great circle. Therefore, if the model wasn't larger than the part shown in the panel, its edges would have a very noticeable slope of 4.5 degrees. What's more, the note that they haven't invented artificial gravity reveals that the scale worlds are nothing more than a mundane model, rather than some supernatural phenomenon that allows giants to roam about the surface of the Earth.

===Table===
{| class="wikitable"
!Rule
!Explanation
!Notes
|-
|Our aurora are probably non-toxic but please stop trying to taste them
|{{w|Aurora|Auroras}} are colorful discharges of light in the ionosphere, roughly 50-1000 km (30-600 mi) above the Earth's surface, or 50 cm-10 m (1.5-30 ft) in this scale model. The specific aurora in the image is now temptingly at head height, and presumably looks a lot like cotton candy or other inviting foodstuffs.
| The plural of "{{w|aurora}}" should actually be "auroras" or "aurorae".
|-
|No breaking off pieces of the ice caps to put in your drink
|An ice cap is a mass of ice that covers less than 50,000 km2 (19,000 sq mi) of land area. At about 2-3 km thickness in real world, 1/100,000 scaled ice caps have a 2-3 cm (about 1 inch) thickness, which is a convenient size to put in drinks.
|Breaking off pieces of somebody's models is rude.{{citation needed}} In addition, removing pieces of ice caps would affect the climate of the scale world.
|-
|Warning: Limited cell network coverage above the ionosphere, crouch down to get more bars
|The ionosphere reflects radio signals, including those used by cellphones. The ionosphere would be at around 50 cm-10 m (1.5-30 ft) in the scale world, so visitors would need to place their phones below it to receive cellphone signals.
|Usually, people try to get as high as possible to get better cell coverage, so this is a comic twist to that. As another comic twist, It's unlikely that ordinary cellphones would respond to the very short radio frequencies being transmitted by cell towers in this scale model.
|-
|Do not step on Mt. Everest
|Mt. Everest, the highest peak on Earth at 8849 m (29,032 ft), is about 9 cm (3.5 in) tall at 1:100,000 scale.
|Mt. Everest would probably be extremely sharp and hurt or puncture your foot.
|-
|Caution! Ocean floor slippery when wet
|The average depth of the ocean is about 3.7 km (2.3 mi), which would come out to 3.7 cm (1.5 in) in this world. This amount of liquid would cause more of a 'slippery surface' than a 'water region'.
|The ocean floor is generally wet.{{citation needed}}
|-
|Wear sunscreen; the ozone layer only protects you below the knees.
|The ozone layer is a layer of the Earth's stratosphere that shields the Earth from the Sun's ultraviolet (UV) rays. It is approximately 15-35 km (9-22 mi) above Earth, or 15-35 cm (5.7-14 in) in this scaled world, which is below knee height. To protect themselves from UV rays, visitors would need sunscreen on exposed parts of their body above that level.
|Visitors may also choose to wear sunscreen on the exposed parts of their body below the ozone layer as well. This is where most people actually do it.
|-
|Beware of chest-level meteors
|Meteors happen when meteoroids enter the Earth's atmosphere and start to burn up. This typically occurs in the mesosphere at altitudes from 76 to 100 km (250,000 to 330,000 ft). In the scale world, meteors would occur at 76 to 100 centimeters, around chest height.
|Above the atmosphere, meteoroids typically travel at tens of thousands of km/h (mph), which at this scale would work out to 20-70 cm/s (8-30 in/s). They're usually no larger than a meter (3 ft), but a very large one might be up to 100 m (300 ft), which in this world would be about 1 mm (1/25 inch). This would sting if it hit a visitor in the eye, which is another reason that safety glasses (see below) might be a good idea.
|-
| -100°C mesopause vest recommended
|The mesopause is the boundary in the earth's atmosphere between the mesosphere and the thermosphere. Due to the lack of solar heating and very strong radiative cooling from carbon dioxide, it is the coldest region on Earth with temperatures as low as -100 °C (-148 °F).
|Without protection, visitors would succumb to hypothermia, in addition to extreme discomfort, due to the extremely low temperature.
|-
|If Lake Tahoe or the Dead Sea dries up, refill them with this 5oz wine glass
|Five ounces, times 100,0003 (because this is volume, so the linear scale factor applies to each of three dimensions), would be about 150 cubic kilometers, which is the approximate volume of {{w|Lake Tahoe}}; the {{w|Dead Sea}} is recently about 115 cubic kilometers, though it used to be somewhat larger.
|Five fluid ounces (US customary) is a tad below 148 cubic centimeters, or milliliters. (Elsewhere, if used, it is actually nearer 142cc.) Modern wine glasses may actually hold 450ml (filled to the brim), but 150ml is typical of a late 19thC antique glass or a modern 'serving' level that is more tasteful/economic than an overgenerous 'drown your sorrows' one. The reason Randall gives this rule is because the Dead Sea is drying up and Lake Tahoe has experienced recent low water levels due to drought, making this pertinent.
|-
|Safety glasses required for protection from reentering spacecraft
|It is at approximately head height in this model that de-orbiting spacecraft are at their fastest, depending upon where their decayed or departed original was. At scale, they'd probably equate to a metalworking fragment, perhaps more dangerous in quantity than individually.
|We also tend to know about satellites and fairings returning to Earth and most (unless intended to) won't significantly survive. Meteoroids (see above) are hard to spot in space unless particularly big, may only be detected when spotted burning up, may be significantly denser/less fragile, and could be traveling five times faster. General head protection may be advised, just in case.
|-
|Do not anger the sprites
| {{w|Sprite (lightning)|Sprites}} are poorly understood electrical phenomena in the upper atmosphere. They are enormous but very short-lived.
| Sprites are also a name given to a form of forest spirit known for mischievous and sometimes harmful behavior. In some fairy tales, a warning would be given to not anger the spirits in case of grave repercussions.
|-
|Please stop digging through the Moho. Staff are tired of cleaning up large igneous provinces.
|Short for the {{w|Mohorovičić discontinuity}}, the Moho is the boundary surface separating the Earth's crust from the mantle. It can be found at a depth of about 10 km (6-7 mi) under the ocean bed, and about 40-50 km (24-30 mi) under the continents.
|In Randall's 1/100,000th scale world, this would be approximately 10 cm (4 in) or 40 cm (16 in) respectively, making the Moho easily accessible via digging. This would get messy and dangerous lava all over the place and create {{w|Large igneous province|large igneous provinces}}, which have been linked with mass extinctions. "Large igneous provinces" may be a reference to [[2061: Tectonics Game]], where making them is "the worst."
|-
|ISS (14 feet up) Returns every 90 minutes - Hit it with a nerf dart, win a prize!
|The {{w|International Space Station}} is the largest human-made object in space and orbits the Earth once every 90 minutes.
|This idea of treating modern research as a toy is in the same general panel area as the weather balloon smacking from the previous comic, except instead of a rule preventing people from doing so, this time the visitor is being incentivised to attempt it, similarly to a {{w|carnival game}}. Hitting the ISS with a nerf dart in this scaled world would have a potentially devastating effect on the ISS; however, at this scale, the ISS would be about a millimeter across, so that hitting it so far above your head as it goes by would be very difficult. Rather like a target in a typical carnival-game, the scale ISS is moving past at a moderate speed, about three inches per second (7.7 cm/s), so you can have several attempts before it's entirely out of range till its next orbit.
|}

==Transcript==
:[At the top of the image, inside the panel, a large title is floating in the air.]
:RULES
:For visitors to my 1/100,000th scale world
:1 meter = 100 km, 1 ft=100,000ft≈20 miles

:[Each of the following rules is written near a character or point of interest on the map.]

:[Dark-colored aurorae are floating in the air.]
:Our aurora are probably non-toxic but please stop trying to taste them

:[Ponytail is kneeling and breaking off part of an ice cap. In her other hand, she holds a wine glass.]
:No breaking off pieces of the ice caps to put in your drink

:[At around ankle height, a mountain is shown.]
:Do not step on Mount Everest

:[A relatively small ocean is shown on the right of Mount Everest.]
:Caution! [A pictogram of a person slipping.] Ocean floor slippery when wet

:[A cell coverage icon with one cell bar.]
:Warning: Limited cell network coverage above the ionosphere. Crouch down to get more bars

:[Megan is facing the aurorae. Thin horizontal lines are at her knees.]
:Wear sunscreen; the ozone layer only protects you below the knees.

:[Cueball is standing with three meteors whizzing both at and away from him.]
:Beware of chest-level meteors

:[A dotted line is at the Cueball from the last rule's chest.]
:-100°C mesopause vest recommended

:[A wine glass is resting on the ground near a shallow depression.]
:If Lake Tahoe or the Dead Sea dries up, refill them with this 5oz wine glass

:[Another Cueball is standing, holding both hands up to his face.]
:Safety glasses required for protection from reentering spacecraft
:Cueball: ''OW!''
:(off-panel voice): What?
:Cueball: I got a Soyuz in my eye

:[A tornado-shaped lightning sprite is hovering over a cloud.]
:Do not anger the sprites

:[A dotted line weaves belowground.]
:Please stop digging through the Moho. Staff are tired of cleaning up large igneous provinces.

:[An arrow pointing above the panel top.]
:ISS (14 feet up)
:Returns every 90 minutes
:Hit it with a Nerf dart, win a prize!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Scale World]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|1/10]]
[[Category:Illustrations of scale]]
[[Category:Geography]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]

1297: Oort Cloud

2022-05-04T20:55:53Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 244684 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 1297
| date = November 29, 2013
| title = Oort Cloud
| image = oort_cloud.png
| titletext = ...I wanna try. Hang on, be right back.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|Oort cloud}} is a hypothesized sphere containing many {{w|small Solar System bodies}}, reaching out to roughly 50,000 {{w|Astronomical unit|AU (astronomical units)}} or nearly one {{w|light-year}} from the sun. Gravitational forces from passing stars or collisions with other objects sometimes perturb one of these bodies enough to let it fall into the inner solar system. When it gets closer to the Sun, which is just a bright dot at that far distance, it warms up and some of its mass is lost as gas and dust, making it more visible as an object commonly referred to as a comet. This is what has happened to a comet called {{w|C/2013 UQ4}}, AKA Comet Catalina. And although this is not what will happen to Catalina, comets that get close enough to the sun may break up entirely.

There seems to be no definitive astronomical definition of the word "comet", and definitions can be challenging and problematic [http://suitti.livejournal.com/56460.html?nojs=1], but in general terms a comet is a celestial object consisting of a nucleus containing a huge amount of ices and dust which, when near the sun, has an atmosphere (called {{w|Comet#Coma and tail|coma}}) and perhaps a 'tail' of ionized gas and dust particles pointing away from the sun.

The comet pictured here upon its return strangely resembles the unusual asteroid {{w|P/2013 P5}}. That object sported six comet-like tails, but it's not a comet. Rather, the six comet-like tails were suspected to be caused by rapid spinning of that object.

Randal has drawn the hapless Oort Cloud object with its tails generally left of frame, i.e. away from the sun. Comet tails point away from the sun regardless of their direction of movement, as they are blown out by the solar wind which moves much faster than the comet. As neither of the other two objects have tails, this lends the picture a comical cartoon-like quality, as when Yosemite Sam is blasted by his own gun and it leaves his moustache tails statically pointing away from the direction of the blast.

{{w|C/2012 S1|Comet ISON}} presumably came from the Oort cloud and reached its closest approach to the sun ({{w|Apsis|perihelion}}) on the day before this comic was published. The comet passed very close to the sun, at a distance of 1,860,000 kilometers or 1,150,000 miles from the centre of the sun. It was thus within one sun-diameter of the surface of the sun itself (diameter of sun = 1,391,000 km). At that distance the temperature, at approx. 2,700 degrees Celsius, vaporizes rock as well as ice and can break the comet apart entirely.

The broken-up object here is presumed to be ISON, and is labeled as such in the transcript, even though Randall hasn't unambiguously identified it. Note that it's not realistic that ISON still would have a tail so far away from the sun.

On December 2, 2013 NASA released a statement that ISON did not survive its close perihelion with the sun. The Comet ISON Observing Campaign posted a delightful biographical sketch (In Memoriam Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON) Born 4.5 Billion BC, Fragmented Nov 28, 2013, age 4.5-billion yrs old) which touches on its early years, retreat to the Oort Cloud, career as a Sungrazer, "dynamic and unpredictable life, alternating between periods of quiet reflection and violent outburst", delicate inner working, and its tragic demise.

The closest approach of ISON to the earth was predicted for December 27, 2013 at a distance at approx. 60 million kilometers or 37 million miles, 170 hundred times more than the moon. The {{w| Hubble Space Telescope}} [http://www.universetoday.com/107407/hubble-looks-but-finds-no-trace-of-comet-ison/ looked for it on December 18] but saw nothing.

This video shows an animation of the encounter at the sun: [http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2013/11/28/ahead_20131128_cor2_rdiff_512.mpg ISON 28.11.2013].

===Perspective===
Some more information about comets will help put the comic in perspective:
*The surface of cometary nuclei reflects less sunlight than asphalt. Telescopes can't identify or find them until they have a coma.
*An object at a distance of one light-year would only have an orbital speed about 100 meters per second; the speed of the Earth is about 30 kilometers per second.
*One revolution at that distance would last approximately 20 million years.

==Transcript==
:[Three asteroids float in space.]
:ISON: Have you noticed that bright dot in the distance?
:Asteroid: Yeah. What's the deal with it?

:ISON: Dunno. I'm gonna go check it out.

:[Pause while ISON checks it out off screen.]

:ISON (broken up, with multiple tails): Wow. Do NOT go over there.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Astronomy]]

975: Occulting Telescope

2022-05-04T20:55:19Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 244683 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 975
| date = November 09, 2011
| title = Occulting Telescope
| image = occulting_telescope.png
| titletext = Type II Kardashev civilizations eventually completely enclose their planetary system in a Dyson sphere because space is way too big to look at all the time.
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] takes the useful practice of {{w|occulting}} stars beyond its intended purpose. Occulting is used in astronomy to block the light from a star under observation so that adjacent dim objects, such as any surrounding {{w|Exoplanet|extrasolar planets}}, might be more easily detected and examined. This refers to a proposed {{w|New Worlds Mission|starshade mission}}, envisioned for space telescopes like the {{w|James Webb Space Telescope}}, in which a large occulter would fly in formation with that telescope.

Instead of blocking the light of a single star for the purposes of observation, Cueball proposes blocking the light from all stars, for the purpose of making him feel comfortable with the night sky. Cueball feels, some might say irrationally, that "there are too many stars", and "it's been freaking me out". This may be a reference to Isaac Asimov's "Nightfall" which explores in depth the psychological implications by which stars make some people feel small and insignificant because they demonstrate just how vast is the universe.

The title text refers to both a {{w|Kardashev scale|Type II Kardashev civilization}} and a {{w|Dyson sphere}}.

A Dyson sphere is a theoretical construction consisting of a network of satellites that orbit and completely surround a star. The purpose to capture and transmit all of the available solar energy back to a planet.

A Type II Kardashev civilization is a theoretical civilization that has advanced to the point where it has harnessed the energy radiated by its own star (for example, the stage of successful construction of a Dyson sphere).

For comparison purposes:
*A Type I Kardashev civilization is one that has harnessed the energy of their entire planet.
*A Type III Kardashev civilization is one that has harnessed the energy of their entire galaxy.
*We are currently less than I.

The title text reveals that Type II Kardashev civilizations construct Dyson spheres not for the purposes of capturing all solar energy, but merely to block the view of all that hideous space. This may allude to Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy novel series, where a planet called Krikkit is completely obscured by a dust layer. Upon building a spacecraft to explore what lies behind that dust cover, they decide to destroy all living beings in the rest of the universe. See http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Krikkit.

The concept of an occulting space telescope was visited again in [[1730: Starshade]], and the idea of the vastness of space being frightening was revisited in [[2596: Galaxies]].

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is presenting his new telescope in front of a white board, pointing to the diagram of said telescope with a pointer. He is standing on a raised podium facing a crowd off-panel]
:Cueball: The occulting observatory consists of two parts—the telescope and the discs.

:[A frame-less panel with a black center with white drawings that shows the diagram from the white board in the first panel. It shows a satellite with solar panels above and below the main body which has a front end that looks wider like a telescope. The satellite is labeled with a small arrow pointing at the front end. 11 light waves are indicated as coming towards it from the right, and below these they are labeled. Three of the waves is blocked in the middle by a small vertical line which is also labeled with a small arrow. Above and below the diagram outside the black area Cueball is narrating.]
:Cueball (narrating): When the telescope sees a star, a disc is carefully steered to block its light.
:Label: Telescope
:Label: Light from star
:Label: Disc
:Cueball (narrating): This procedure is repeated until all stars are covered.

:[Back to Cueball on the podium who now looks down on the audience from where a question emanates at the top of the left frame.]
:Person #1 (off screen): Wait, ''all?'' Why?
:Cueball: I'll feel better.

:[Close-up on Cueball. as two different persons talks to him, from the lower left frame.]
:Person #2 (off-screen): I thought the point was to image extrasolar planets.
:Cueball: The point is that there are ''too many stars.''
:Cueball: It's been freaking me out.
:Person #2 (off-screen): What?
:Person #3 (off screen): He has a point...

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Exoplanets]]
[[Category:Public speaking]]
[[Category:Telescopes]]

76: Familiar

2022-05-04T20:54:36Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 242741 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 76
| date = March 15, 2006
| title = Familiar
| image = familiar.jpg
| titletext = :(
}}

==Explanation==
[[Megan]] tells her boyfriend ([[Hairy]]) her reservations about their relationship: she's happy with him, she thinks he doesn't compare to anyone else, and they have a strong connection built up over the course of years, but she's worried that all this is just because they've been dating so long that she hasn't had the opportunity to experience potentially better relationships. However, she recognizes that what she has should be enough, and resolves to stop worrying. Hairy responds to this by saying that he doesn't even like her, recognizing that it's relatively poor timing to say so after her expression of love (albeit a rather ambivalent one).

The title text is a sad-face emoticon, representing either Megan's sadness about his dislike of her, his (possibly disingenuous) sympathy for her, or the narrator's recognition that he's depicted a sad situation.

==Transcript==
:[Hairy and Megan are talking]
:Megan: I worry that I'm just with you because it's familiar. Of course no one else compares. I've known you for so long that I'd have to spend years with someone to build up this kind of connection and I daren't let you go of you long enough to let that happen.
:Megan: But I guess this is really all I can ask for. I'm happy with you; I should stop worrying.
:[Megan takes Hairy's hand.]
:Hairy: This is probably a bad time to bring this up, but I don't actually like you.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Romance]]
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

1492: Dress Color

2022-05-04T20:22:23Z

192·168·0·1: Undo revision 242633 by Ex Kay Cee Dee (talk)

{{comic
| number = 1492
| date = February 27, 2015
| title = Dress Color
| image = dress_color.png
| titletext = This white-balance illusion hit so hard because it felt like someone had been playing through the Monty Hall scenario and opened their chosen door, only to find there was unexpectedly disagreement over whether the thing they'd revealed was a goat or a car.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic shows two drawings of a woman wearing the same dress, but with different background (and body) colors. The two drawings are split with a narrow vertical portion of an image from the web.

The comic strip refers to a {{w|the dress|dress}} whose image went viral on [http://swiked.tumblr.com/post/112174461490/officialunitedstates-unclefather Tumblr] only hours before the strip was posted and soon showed up also on [http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xaprc/eli5why_does_this_dress_appear_whitegold_to_some/ Reddit], [https://twitter.com/hashtag/thedress?src=hash Twitter], [http://www.wired.com/2015/02/science-one-agrees-color-dress/ Wired] and on [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/28/business/a-simple-question-about-a-dress-and-the-world-weighs-in.html The New York Times].

Due to the dress's particular color scheme and the exposure of the photo, it forms an {{w|optical illusion}} causing viewers to disagree on what color the dress actually seems to be. The xkcd strip sandwiches a cropped segment of the photographed dress between two drawings which use the colors from the image against different backgrounds, leading the eye to interpret the white balance differently, demonstrating how the dress can appear different colors depending on context and the viewer's previous experiences.

Both dresses have exactly the same colors actually:
*RGB 113, 94, 58 (orange) <div style="display:inline-block; height:1em; width:1em; background-color: #715E3A"></div>
*RGB 135, 154, 189 (blue) <div style="display:inline-block; height:1em; width:1em; background-color: #879ABD"></div>

Below is an illustration demonstrating that the "colors" of the [https://nvuvu.com/collections/sparkly-dresses/ dresses] are the same by connecting them with two lines with the above-mentioned colors (all the way!) and another which has one side flipped and merged into the other:

[[File:dress.png]] [[File:dress2.png]]

Similar types of illusions can be seen at Wikipedia's {{w|Optical illusion#Color_and_brightness_constancies|optical illusion page}} and for instance here at [http://www.echalk.co.uk/amusements/OpticalIllusions/colourPerception/colourPerception.html echalk] (the latter page requires Flash®player).

This image has sparked surprisingly heated debate in many internet communities. A select few individuals may have prior experience with optical illusions of this ilk, but because this particular image went viral - it got heavy exposure over such a short amount of time - it reached millions of people who aren't so familiar with these sorts of mind tricks. To the uninitiated, the color of the dress seems immediately obvious; when others cannot see it their way, it can be a surreal (even uncomfortable) experience.

As an aside, the retailer Roman Originals would later [http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/921/267/de3.png confirm the dress was blue with black lace], and that a white dress with gold lace was not offered among the clothing line.

The title text refers to the game show {{w|Let's Make a Deal}}, hosted by Monty Hall, which was famous for having contestants pick among several doors which either had a real prize (for example, a car) or a joke prize (for example, a goat). [[Randall]] states that people find the dress color issue just as baffling as if upon opening the chosen door no one can agree if the item behind the door is a car or a goat. This is a reference to what has become known as the "{{w|Monty Hall problem}}:" if there are two goats and a prize behind three doors, the contestant has chosen a door, and one of the unchosen doors is opened to reveal a goat, should the contestant change his/her choice? Statistically, the answer is yes, but many people find this counterintuitive; discussion of this problem in ''Parade'' magazine touched off public outrage similar to the viral dress image.

Randall is presumably pointing out how ridiculous it is for people who don't understand the underlying science to become so adamant in defending their beliefs. A spoof of the "Monty Hall problem" previously appeared in [[1282: Monty Hall]], where [[Beret Guy]] decides to take the goat.

==Transcript==
:[Two images of a woman in a dress on each side of an image of a close up of a real dress with the same colors. On the left, she is colored blue on a dark blue background, while on the right, she is brown against a white background. Her dress is the same color in each panel - the same as the real one in between.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]

Talk:2599: Spacecraft Debris Odds Ratio

2022-03-29T12:46:53Z

192·168·0·1: THREE comments. That's a 300% increase from my usual comment risk.

correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe 300 - 30 is 270, not 280? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.85|172.68.50.85]] 22:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
:something something percentage points maybe? idk [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.91|172.70.134.91]] 22:56, 28 March 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:Most likely there is an unstated chance of death by not going outside... presumably ~10% but there's no way to know the breakdown (could be nearly all cardio, could be nearly all ursine if they live in a cave next bears) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.127|172.69.70.127]] 23:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
::300% increase is multiplying by (1+3), 30% decrease is multiplying by (1-0.3) , %increases are multiplicative so the increase is by a factor of 4*0.7=2.8, which is 280% of the original value (or a 180% increase). {{unsigned ip|162.158.146.69}}
:::Yeah, barring a total mistake, that must be where the number came from, but it seems odd by the inconsistent way it is expressed, as it assumes the 300% increase for the bear attack is added to the initial value for a final amount of 400%, along with a similar treatment for the 30% decrease, but the 280% is simply the final value skipping past that step to the conclusion afterwards that is not even shown for the previous numbers. But with the improper grammar, if it's not an actual typo, it may be trying to show the speaker acting dumb or irrational, as it doesn't make sense to end with "increased" instead of "increase" without changing part of the words before that number. Someone thinking that poorly though likely wouldn't be able to multiply things properly to produce that 280% number though.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 01:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
::::Someone who do understand this method of getting to 280% should add that to the explanation. I'm not quite sure what is meant here above, so an even better explanation would be preferable. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:::Joke proof: ''Assume'' that every year 400 people are killed by bears in the world, of which 100 are killed inside and 300 are killed outside. Then, indeed, by going outside, the probability that you will be killed by bears increases from 100 to 300: that is 300%. On the other hand, we know that walking outside every day will reduce your risk of death from cardiovascular disease by 30%. Therefore, by walking outside properly, 30% of the above-mentioned 400 people, i.e. 120 people, could in theory avoid death from the said disease, ''if'' not attacked by bears. This implies that, even if everyone in the world walked outside every day, only 120 out of the 400 bear attack victims would be potentially saved, while 280 would die anyway. Since by hypothesis only 100 are killed inside by bear attacks, going outside will clearly increase the probability of deadly bear attacks, from 100 to 280: that is 280%. —[[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 09:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:::As said above, 300% increase and 30% decrease gives a factor ×2.8 which is a +180% increase (not 280%) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.50.176|162.158.50.176]] 10:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
::::It's a joke :) Since the title text is obviously a joke, maybe we shouldn't over-analyze it, except we can enjoy ourselves by “analyzing” it half-jokingly. Seriously, though, there is also some ambiguity in a natural language itself: e.g. by “one-and-a-half times larger than”, one may mean “one-and-a-half times as large as” (150%), or one may mean “150% larger than” (250%). When spoken informally, this kind of ambiguity is not uncommon. Another example would be “five hundred one thousandths” which may mean 501/1000 or 500/1000. Take it easy & take care :) — [[User:Yosei|Yosei]] ([[User talk:Yosei|talk]]) 11:38, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:::This is what I love about XKCD, the jokes come with proofs. Does it depend on what order you apply them in? If you decrease the risk by 30%, you have 70%, then increase it by 300%, you get... 210%? Or 270%? Percentage points vs. percent again isn't it. Why is life so complicated? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 12:46, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

"That's a 280% increased" has a typo/grammaro. The last word should be "increase". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
:I think the actual typo is the "a" so should be "That's 280% increased" {{unsigned ip|162.158.146.69}}

Also what's an odds ratio?? ~~Bumpf {{unsigned ip|172.70.38.41}}
:I assume something like "million to one". But the units of the horizontal axis clearly don't correspond to that. I don't know what those units are, they're not a percentage, either. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 00:40, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:: if you say "this is 4 times as likely" then "4" is the "odds ratio", this is the type of number appearing on the horizontal axis {{unsigned ip|162.158.146.69}}
:An odds-ratio is a way of reporting the results for predictions of binary outcomes. It's a transformation of the (not easily interpretable) regression coefficient. For example, if the OR for "males" (vs females) is "0.70", they're 70% as likely to have the outcome as females; if it's "1.32", then males are 1.32x as likely (equivalently: 32% more likely) to have that outcome as females. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.75|108.162.249.75]] Gye Greene

Did something happen to the size of the image after the initial posting? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 00:40, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

What's with the asterisks on the right side? [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 00:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:I think the asterisks denote that the value at this range is "significant" because its error bars do not overlap with the baseline. If you stay outdoors 5 hours or more in a day, there is a nonzero chance that you will be hit by flying space debris. [[User:Laura|Laura]] ([[User talk:Laura|talk]]) 08:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

There should probably be an explanation of what "Monte Carlo Simulation" means, as many people who would actually want an explanation of this strip would likely be unfamiliar with that term.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.122|172.70.131.122]] 01:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:Yes, exactly! I got as far as finding {{w|Monte Carlo method}} via a redirect but have no idea how the bars are supposed to work, what the reference point is supposed to mean, or why the columns get skinnier toward the right. Not dumb, but next to no statistics education. [[User:Yngvadottir|Yngvadottir]] ([[User talk:Yngvadottir|talk]]) 07:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

::Yes, I added some links to try to make the graph a little more explore-friendly for folks willing to click and read what's beyond, but I don't have the smarts to really explain it. [[User:Laura|Laura]] ([[User talk:Laura|talk]]) 08:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is the x-axis of the chart in logarithmic spacing? Any particular reason for this, or is it part of the joke? [[User:Captain Nemo|Captain Nemo]] ([[User talk:Captain Nemo|talk]]) 09:29, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if it's deliberate that there's actually less risk if you go outside 1 hour per day. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 12:46, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

==Odds ratio confusion?==
I am very confused by the X axis of this comic, I feel like I must be misunderstanding how this works, but I thought I understood how odds ratios worked. Maybe not.
The graph "reads" that "In the reference situation, with zero hours spent outside, the odds ratio for head injuries from falling spacecraft debris is 1.0 ± 0." A 1.0 odds ratio means 1.0:1.0, or that either possibility is 50% likely. That is, there's an even chance your head will be injured by spacecraft debris or that it will not, ''if you stay indoors.'' That does not seem like it could be right, so can someone point me to my error? Thanks! [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 09:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
:As best I can tell, this is taking odds as a ratio between ''any'' two events. Rather than the usual "success : failure" (or "happens : doesn't happen"), it's "this scenario happens : control scenario happens". By definition, the control scenario is set at 1.0, and something at a ratio of (say) 2.0 is twice as likely to happen. -- [[User:Peregrine|Peregrine]] ([[User talk:Peregrine|talk]]) 10:50, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

I definitely think we need to put something explaining what an odds ratio is. But since I feel the need to have it explained, I'm not going to be the one to explain it. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 12:46, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

== Per day ==

Looks like the comic has been updated to clarify that the number of hours is per day. I'll leave it to someone more experienced with this website to update it, but in any case it makes the note "It is very difficult to avoid being outside for more than four hours in a total lifetime" moot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.147|172.70.114.147]] 12:31, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-24T13:34:04Z

192·168·0·1:

The second panel is me every time I haggle for something, and I have to make sure I don't end up haggling the wrong way. Or starting above my desired price when I mean to start below so that I can meet in the middle at my desired price.

[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.36|172.70.91.36]] 23:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
:It's not a one-time negotiation, anyway. During an annual review I'd have to suggest any pay adjustments. Was useless at it, too self-effacing. I left one job after ten years and later on found my exact same old position (which I had felt now wasn't adding much to the team, part of the reason I left) readvertised with a suggested salary range starting at ''twice'' that of what I had actually departed with. Seems they needed me (or someone quite like me) more than any of us knew. That experience didn't improve my assertiveness, though. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.211|172.70.90.211]] 10:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

They should offer him $61,333.33 plus a penny extra once every three years.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.198|162.158.107.198]] 23:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
:The way a friend solved it was to cut a penny into six pieces (like a pizza), and then give me two of them. [[User:Ruffy314|Ruffy314]] ([[User talk:Ruffy314|talk]]) 09:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:: This raises more questions than it answers. Why was your friend giving you 1/3 of a penny? Why two sixths rather than one third? How did they cut it? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 13:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Any idea how Cueball arrived at the figure of $61 1/3 thousand?--[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 03:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. In the UK, I was taught to call them recurring decimals. Never heard of repeating decimals. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.20|141.101.99.20]] 08:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:I just assumed the usual trans-Atlantic difference in terminology. In general I'd also say "point three three three recurring" to establish the (unvarying) pattern, or something like "point one nine one nine recurring" for a bistable pattern, etc, so that it doesn't look like all-nines to infinity. But, to be honest, I'd be glad if people didn't use "point thirty-three" or the like. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.211|172.70.90.211]] 10:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think the 15% is meaning a 15% cut in the (offered) salary, as the current explanation has it. I think this is referencing agent-type negotiations, where the agent might take 15% of the salary negotiated for the person they're representing.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.209|172.69.79.209]] 09:15, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:Fixed. [[User:Justhalf|Justhalf]] ([[User talk:Justhalf|talk]]) 10:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
:Also inappropriately used/ill-formed, in this negotiation, but "15% of the gross" might be a given film-star's deal for appearing/cameoing in a movie, i.e. variable according to the success, tying directly into the money it earns the studio - potentially quite lucrative, without scaring off the studio by risking it (excessive) debts in the event of a flop or other failure to cash in. So long as the {{w|The Producers (1967 film)|total percentages are not excessive}}!
:A salary that is a set percentage (other than 100%) of one's own salary is, of course, nonsensicle and paradoxical (though one could suggest an introductive percentage 'discount' for the first year, as a wary employer's inducement/guarantee, perhaps in direct exchange for a corresponding bonus against the measure of productivity that is expected/hoped to be massively increased by being hired), but muddled Cueball seems to be grasping at apt-sounding fragments of such 'business language' yet mashing them together in various wrong ways. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 12:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

User:192·168·0·1

2022-03-23T23:52:06Z

192·168·0·1: Created page with "This exists in order that my name goes blue and my subterfuge is brought closer to perfection 😈"

This exists in order that my name goes blue and my subterfuge is brought closer to perfection 😈

Talk:2591: Qua

2022-03-23T23:42:28Z

192·168·0·1:

As i've never seen anyone use this, we can safely assume that exterminating these people would not affect the world one bit [[Special:Contributions/162.158.191.131|162.158.191.131]] 10:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

If Megan's not careful, this pattern can quickly spiral to infinity: "Nice use of qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua." "Nice use of qua qua qua qua qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua qua qua qua qua." "Nice use of..." --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.93|172.70.178.93]] 16:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:Or perhaps "Nice use of 'Nice use of ... '" although new forms of quote mark would need to be invented. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 19:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
::From what I've seen, you just alternate between " and '. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.65|172.70.126.65]] 23:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:Hey, [[244|no recursing]]. [[User:Ruffy314|Ruffy314]] ([[User talk:Ruffy314|talk]]) 21:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
'''qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua''' [[User:New editor|New editor]] ([[User talk:New editor|talk]]) 20:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:eh, close enough.[[User:Lettherebedarklight|youtube.com/watch?v=miLcaqq2Zpk]] ([[User talk:Lettherebedarklight|talk]]) 12:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I feel like there should be a duck somewhere. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:05, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Buffalo everywhere are concerned.

Maybe one could note that the two uses of "qua" are different: While in the meaning of "as"/"in capacity of", qua is a preposition, it is a relative pronoun in the Latin expression "sine qua non".
So, actually, the explanation of the title text given so far is slightly incorrect: The correct use of "qua" (as a preposition) is NOT essential to the correct use of "sine qua non" (where we use only the Latin relative pronoun). Instead, "qua" is essential to build the complex expression "sine qua non qua sine qua non", where the middle qua is indeed the preposition!
I also feel that Randall is making fun of "pretentious" people by demonstrating how quickly their talk turns into something like "blablabla" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.246.153|172.70.246.153]] 21:51, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

:But the explanation of the title text is not claiming that it is specifically as a proposition that “qua” is essential, is it?
:[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 04:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:: Well, basically, you're right. But to clarify it better, you would at least have to point out that the title text is talking of two different "qua"s then, BOTH the preposition and the relative pronoun. And in order to use them correctly, you ought to differentiate between the both, i.m.h.o. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.171|162.158.90.171]] 07:38, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:::I agree with you.

:::[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User talk:While False|talk]]) 08:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Even after reading the comic, title text & the explainxkcd.com description, I am still confused. I've never heard of that word/phrase.

:Agreed, I feel that the explanation qua it stands leaves me almost qua confused qua I was before coming here and reading it. If qua roughly means “as” or “for the purpose of” then would someone please explain why this not an example of someone using sine qua non: “I could have left work after the accident if I wanted, but decided sine, bore the pain, and stayed.” I don’t get it.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.214|172.70.131.214]] 06:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:Yeah, it's only really familiar to people who speak Higher Academic. I think at least three nines of all uses of the word "qua" in English-language writing are in the phrase "sine qua non", which is itself too prolix to really qualify as common. The main thing that saves "sine qua non" from being jargon, is that it's not in any way discipline-specific. It's as likely to show up in a formal academic paper related to algebraic topology, as it is to show up in a formal academic paper related to medieval literature. This puts it into the same general category as e.g. "albeit", "je ne sais quoi", or "prolix". As for uses of the word "qua" outside the context of the phrase "sine qua non", I believe this may be the first I've ever encountered, so it's difficult to generalize. --Jonadab (not logged in).
::Hey, I actually use "albeit" all the time! (British English? Possibly even regional dialect. But I also use "whilst" a lot, and know that people like to assume that I mean "while", never mind the occasional confusion between the usage as meaning "during" or the one that means "until" ({{wiktionary|while#Conjunction|c.f. usages 3 and 4!}}) Not that I've used a "naked ''qua''" at all, that I can recall, only really used ''je ne sais quoi'' when speaking yer actual French, whilst ''prolix'' is unknown to me and out of context I'd have thought it a medical term... ;)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 21:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

On this you are not alone.

If you say "Qua Qua Qua Qua" really fast, it kind of sounds like you are saying "quack quack quack". Thus Megan would sound like she is saying "Nice use of quack quack quack quack..." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.230|162.158.107.230]] 00:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

: “Qua qua qua” is how in Italian you write the duck sound. [[User:Vdm|Vdm]] ([[User talk:Vdm|talk]]) 21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

This comic is most likely inspired by this week's Sunday puzzle on NPR, which asks for an English word that starts with the "kw" sound but doesn't contain Q,U,K, or W. See https://www.npr.org/2022/03/06/1084744124/sunday-puzzle-may-the-odds-be-in-your-favor
:Well, apart from the u...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.153|172.69.79.153]] 17:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:My answer to the puzzle is "choir" [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 20:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Quamvis sint sub aqua sub aqua maledicere temptant. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.251.88|172.70.251.88]] 06:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Randall is not using qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua qua, he's using it to sound funny and play with words. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 07:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:I think Randall is just trying to sound pretentious coûte que coûte ;-P --[[User:IByte|IByte]] ([[User talk:IByte|talk]]) 10:33, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

No reference here to Waiting for Godot?

:People only reference Waiting for Godot in order to sound pretentious. Nobody has ever actually read it.

::Because it's a play? … You usually don't read a play. … Especially one … with so many … pauses.
::(Well, at least five people will then read the play. Whosoever play Estragon, Vladimir, Pozzo, Lucky and the boy(s). Nobody who plays Godot.)
::You can always tell people you read ''Waiting For Godot'' in the original French, if you really want to sound pretentious. … Or French. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 21:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I am anxiously awaiting the day when I come to explainxkcd and the content for that day's comic is just "...look, I don't know man"
:Yes. and I am waiting for someone to answer, "...it's just funnier that way." [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 20:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it would help to explain to use angle brackets:
- Cueball: <qua> qua <qua> ''("qua-word" _used for_ "qua-meaning"), but also ("any word/expression" _used for_ "its own meaning") with the two outer "qua" = abbreviation of "aliqua" in the meaning of "something"''
- Megan: <<qua> qua <qua>> qua <<qua> qua <qua>> ''("qua qua qua"-wording _used for_ "qua qua qua"-meaning)''
- Title Text: <Qua> qua <qua> is the <sine qua non> of <<sine qua non> qua <sine qua non>> ''"qua qua qua"-meaning/construct is the _indispensable essence_ of "sine qua non"-wording _used for_ "sine-qua-non"-meaning''
Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.207|172.70.242.207]] 06:02, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

I have trouble reading the word <code>qua</code>, my brain seems to automatically reorient it, so I can comfortably read <code>end</code>. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.193|162.158.92.193]] 17:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I am guessing that "Badger badger Badger badger badger badger Badger badger" is just as valid as "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"? [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 00:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
: No, because the plural of "badger" is "badgers", not "badger". Also "Badger" isn't a well-known city, if it is indeed a place. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 05:34, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::If we are going to accept the use of "buffalo" as the plural form of buffalo [https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-plural-of/buffalo.html when it is actually "buffalos/buffaloes"], then "badger" as a plural should also be valid. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badger,_Alaska Badger, Alaska] has the largest population of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badger_(disambiguation) seven places with that exact name](~19,000). However, the popularity of the location doesn't matter to the validity of the sentence, as long as it exists. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
:::"{{wiktionary|buffalo#Noun|buffalo (plural buffaloes or buffalos or buffalo)}}" vs "{{wiktionary|badger#Noun|badger (plural badgers)}}" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.44|172.70.86.44]] 12:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
::::OK, I admit that I stopped after I found a link that I thought supported my argument. I resubmit it as: ''Badger badgers Badger badgers badger badger Badger badgers.'' [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 20:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::Can mushroom mushroom? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 23:42, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

The second, third, and fourth sentences still need a lot of work, folks. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.72|172.70.211.72]] 09:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-23T23:33:20Z

192·168·0·1: Cross-references, this is an encyclopedia after all (isn't this Wikipedia? I'm lost again)

{{comic
| number = 2597
| date = March 23, 2022
| title = Salary Negotiation
| image = salary_negotiation.png
| titletext = "We can do 0.33 or 0.34, but our payroll software doesn't allow us to--" "NO DEAL."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SALARY OF $61,333.3333333333 PER YEAR (ROUGHLY) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball has been offered a new job, with a starting salary of $55,000. He is flummoxed by this high-stakes situation and starts to ramble with decreasing coherence.

When offered a new job, it is common to negotiate on aspects of the offer such as salary, and employers may offer below the market rate initially in the expectation that the final negotiated amount will be higher. Given that one's future income depends on the outcome of a one-time process requiring skills unrelated to the job one is hired for, it is advisable to take one's time and do as much research as possible. Cueball has clearly done some research, but perhaps too much as he takes out several sheets of paper and confuses himself further.

Eventually he settles on an irrational number, which cannot be paid in whole cents. However, if he would be happy with an arrangement such as a leap cent every three years, the issue would be resolved.

This can be read as a cautionary tale about taking time to compose one's thoughts before responding to a situation. The confusion caused by the wad of papers also reminds us that more information does not necessarily mean more clarity.

For more interview-related XKCDs, see: [[125: Marketing Interview]], [[1088: Five Years]], [[1094: Interview]], [[1293: Job Interview]] and [[1545: Strengths and Weaknesses]].

==Transcript==

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

[Ponytail sits at an office desk, with Cueball sitting on the other side. It appears as though he is being interviewed]

Ponytail: We'd like to extend an offer! The starting salary is $55,000.

Cueball: Wow. I guess I'm inside a negotiation!

Ponytail: I ... weird to phrase it like that, but--

Cueball: I can do this.

Cueball: I won't accept a penny over $50,000. Sorry, I mean under. Under $60. I mean, $600. Thousand. $600,000. I want a 15% cut of the salary. Raise. Double down. Fold. Pass. Fill it up with regular.

Ponytail: Are you--

Cueball: Sorry, sorry. Let me start over. Ok, my chart says... ...can I borrow a calculator? What's 20% of $55,000?

Ponytail: Listen, if you need to--

Cueball: I won't take this job for less than $61,333 point 3 repeating!

Ponytail: Sure, $61,333 is fine. That's actually--

Cueball: POINT 3 REPEATING OR I WALK!

{{comic discussion}}

2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-23T23:27:12Z

192·168·0·1:

{{comic
| number = 2597
| date = March 23, 2022
| title = Salary Negotiation
| image = salary_negotiation.png
| titletext = "We can do 0.33 or 0.34, but our payroll software doesn't allow us to--" "NO DEAL."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SALARY OF $61,333.3333333333 PER YEAR (ROUGHLY) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball has been offered a new job, with a starting salary of $55,000. He is flummoxed by this high-stakes situation and starts to ramble with decreasing coherence.

When offered a new job, it is common to negotiate on aspects of the offer such as salary, and employers may offer below the market rate initially in the expectation that the final negotiated amount will be higher. Given that one's future income depends on the outcome of a one-time process requiring skills unrelated to the job one is hired for, it is advisable to take one's time and do as much research as possible. Cueball has clearly done some research, but perhaps too much as he takes out several sheets of paper and confuses himself further.

Eventually he settles on an irrational number, which cannot be paid in whole cents. However, if he would be happy with an arrangement such as a leap cent every three years, the issue would be resolved.

This can be read as a cautionary tale about taking time to compose one's thoughts before responding to a situation. The confusion caused by the wad of papers also reminds us that more information does not necessarily mean more clarity.

==Transcript==

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

[Panel 1]

[A company representative and a job candidate sit on opposite sides of a desk.]

Representative: We'd like to extend an offer! The starting salary is $55,000.

Candidate: Wow. I guess I'm inside a negotiation!

Representative: I ... weird to phrase it like that, but--

Candidate: I can do this.

[Panel 2]

Candidate: I won't accept a penny over $50,000. Sorry, I mean under. Under $60. I mean, $600. Thousand. $600,000. I want a 15% cut of the salary. Raise. Double down. Fold. Pass. Fill it up with regular.

[Panel 3]

Representative: Are you--

Candidate: Sorry, sorry. Let me start over. Ok, my chart says... ...can I borrow a calculator? What's 20% of $55,000?

[Panel 4]

Representative: Listen, if you need to--

Candidate: I won't take this job for less than $61,333 point 3 repeating!

Representative: Sure, $61,333 is fine. That's actually--

Candidate: POINT 3 REPEATING OR I WALK!

{{comic discussion}}

2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-23T23:25:48Z

192·168·0·1: /* Explanation */ Moar morals of the story

{{comic
| number = 2597
| date = March 23, 2022
| title = Salary Negotiation
| image = salary_negotiation.png
| titletext = "We can do 0.33 or 0.34, but our payroll software doesn't allow us to--" "NO DEAL."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SALARY OF $61,333.3333333333 PER YEAR (ROUGHLY) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball has been offered a new job, with a starting salary of $55,000. He is flummoxed by this high-stakes situation and starts to ramble with decreasing coherence.

When offered a new job, it is common to negotiate on aspects of the offer such as salary, and employers may offer below the market rate initially in the expectation that the final negotiated amount will be higher. Given that one's future income depends on the outcome of a one-time process unrelated to the job one is hired for, it is advisable to take one's time and do as much research as possible. Cueball has clearly done some research, but perhaps too much as he takes out several sheets of paper and confuses himself further.

Eventually he settles on an irrational number, which cannot be paid in whole cents. However, if he would be happy with an arrangement such as a leap cent every three years, the issue would be resolved.

This can be read as a cautionary tale about taking time to compose one's thoughts before responding to a situation. The confusion caused by the wad of papers also reminds us that more information does not necessarily mean more clarity.

==Transcript==

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

[Panel 1]

[A company representative and a job candidate sit on opposite sides of a desk.]

Representative: We'd like to extend an offer! The starting salary is $55,000.

Candidate: Wow. I guess I'm inside a negotiation!

Representative: I ... weird to phrase it like that, but--

Candidate: I can do this.

[Panel 2]

Candidate: I won't accept a penny over $50,000. Sorry, I mean under. Under $60. I mean, $600. Thousand. $600,000. I want a 15% cut of the salary. Raise. Double down. Fold. Pass. Fill it up with regular.

[Panel 3]

Representative: Are you--

Candidate: Sorry, sorry. Let me start over. Ok, my chart says... ...can I borrow a calculator? What's 20% of $55,000?

[Panel 4]

Representative: Listen, if you need to--

Candidate: I won't take this job for less than $61,333 point 3 repeating!

Representative: Sure, $61,333 is fine. That's actually--

Candidate: POINT 3 REPEATING OR I WALK!

{{comic discussion}}

2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-23T23:23:22Z

192·168·0·1: /* Explanation */ Correct opening bid

{{comic
| number = 2597
| date = March 23, 2022
| title = Salary Negotiation
| image = salary_negotiation.png
| titletext = "We can do 0.33 or 0.34, but our payroll software doesn't allow us to--" "NO DEAL."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SALARY OF $61,333.3333333333 PER YEAR (ROUGHLY) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball has been offered a new job, with a starting salary of $55,000. He is flummoxed by this high-stakes situation and starts to ramble with decreasing coherence.

When offered a new job, it is common to negotiate on aspects of the offer such as salary, and employers may offer below the market rate initially in the expectation that the final negotiated amount will be higher. Given that one's future income depends on the outcome of a one-time process unrelated to the job one is hired for, it is advisable to take one's time and do as much research as possible. Cueball has clearly done some research, but perhaps too much as he takes out several sheets of paper and confuses himself further.

Eventually he settles on an irrational number, which cannot be paid in whole cents. However, if he would be happy with an arrangement such as a leap cent every three years, the issue would be resolved.

This can be read as a cautionary tale about taking time to compose one's thoughts before responding to a situation.

==Transcript==

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

[Panel 1]

[A company representative and a job candidate sit on opposite sides of a desk.]

Representative: We'd like to extend an offer! The starting salary is $55,000.

Candidate: Wow. I guess I'm inside a negotiation!

Representative: I ... weird to phrase it like that, but--

Candidate: I can do this.

[Panel 2]

Candidate: I won't accept a penny over $50,000. Sorry, I mean under. Under $60. I mean, $600. Thousand. $600,000. I want a 15% cut of the salary. Raise. Double down. Fold. Pass. Fill it up with regular.

[Panel 3]

Representative: Are you--

Candidate: Sorry, sorry. Let me start over. Ok, my chart says... ...can I borrow a calculator? What's 20% of $55,000?

[Panel 4]

Representative: Listen, if you need to--

Candidate: I won't take this job for less than $61,333 point 3 repeating!

Representative: Sure, $61,333 is fine. That's actually--

Candidate: POINT 3 REPEATING OR I WALK!

{{comic discussion}}

2597: Salary Negotiation

2022-03-23T23:22:29Z

192·168·0·1: /* Explanation */ Well, I guess I'm inside a wiki edit page

{{comic
| number = 2597
| date = March 23, 2022
| title = Salary Negotiation
| image = salary_negotiation.png
| titletext = "We can do 0.33 or 0.34, but our payroll software doesn't allow us to--" "NO DEAL."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SALARY OF $61,333.3333333333 PER YEAR (ROUGHLY) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball has been offered a new job, with a starting salary of $50,000. He is flummoxed by this high-stakes situation and starts to ramble with decreasing coherence.

When offered a new job, it is common to negotiate on aspects of the offer such as salary, and employers may offer below the market rate initially in the expectation that the final negotiated amount will be higher. Given that one's future income depends on the outcome of a one-time process unrelated to the job one is hired for, it is advisable to take one's time and do as much research as possible. Cueball has clearly done some research, but perhaps too much as he takes out several sheets of paper and confuses himself further.

Eventually he settles on an irrational number, which cannot be paid in whole cents. However, if he would be happy with an arrangement such as a leap cent every three years, the issue would be resolved.

This can be read as a cautionary tale about taking time to compose one's thoughts before responding to a situation.

==Transcript==

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

[Panel 1]

[A company representative and a job candidate sit on opposite sides of a desk.]

Representative: We'd like to extend an offer! The starting salary is $55,000.

Candidate: Wow. I guess I'm inside a negotiation!

Representative: I ... weird to phrase it like that, but--

Candidate: I can do this.

[Panel 2]

Candidate: I won't accept a penny over $50,000. Sorry, I mean under. Under $60. I mean, $600. Thousand. $600,000. I want a 15% cut of the salary. Raise. Double down. Fold. Pass. Fill it up with regular.

[Panel 3]

Representative: Are you--

Candidate: Sorry, sorry. Let me start over. Ok, my chart says... ...can I borrow a calculator? What's 20% of $55,000?

[Panel 4]

Representative: Listen, if you need to--

Candidate: I won't take this job for less than $61,333 point 3 repeating!

Representative: Sure, $61,333 is fine. That's actually--

Candidate: POINT 3 REPEATING OR I WALK!

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2594: Consensus Time

2022-03-17T18:46:37Z

192·168·0·1:

What if there's, like, a group of trolls that all press the button at like 9:00 pm? [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 17:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Less than a day should be enough time for a team of people to notice and override the trolls' attempt to game the system.
Unless the trolls decide to push the button right before midnight.
--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 23:11, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
:Presupposes that an executive decision that "oh, that was just sabotage, we can ignore all those 'votes'" by an oversight panel is deemed ok to occasionally enforce. As with actual election votes, that shouldn't be taken lightly (for fear of top-down skewing of the actual sincere wish of those casting their opinions).
:As it's a median (in itself a good idea, as there's no reason to cast very extreme outliers — it doesn't do anything more to the result than a barely marginal outlier) all you need to do is ask enough people (in excess of any counter-aiming participation, if there's a fight over it) to merely adjust their 'feeling' to half an hour later (or earlier, if that's your aim) than they normally would.
:Added to the 'natural' variation in feeling (spread statistically amongst your participating group) it would be practically impossible to decide that a distinct tapering-lump of results exists, to possibly disqualify. Whereas if results show clear 'lumps' hours apart (e.g. around 3AM and/or 9PM, as well as the standard bunch around the 'honest' opinion point), there might be a case to officially intervene. Or at least officially review the procedure. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 09:14, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
: It's basically Wiki-Time, the same principles apply as a Wiki... and Wikis are always 100% accrate, rite? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 18:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably a reference to the Senate DST thing[[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.237|172.70.210.237]] 17:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I feel like this could supersede time-zones as well, by weighting reports by relative longitude, so you could have a kind of continuous change in time as you travel. I'm sure this wouldn't cause any problems at all, since every single computer would effectively be in its own mini time-zone, with its clock going at a slightly different speed, and both current time and speed of time would vary continuously with position.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.11|162.158.159.11]] 17:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I have to feel that the night shift people would really not like this. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

My take on this is that Midnight is a fixed point, it's always at the same time, and the day compresses and expands around it based on the median 9AM location. So, some days will have long hours in the morning, then compressed hours in the afternoon and evening. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.52|162.158.107.52]] 20:37, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

See also consensus new year https://xkcd.com/2092/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.237|172.70.210.237]] 20:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I think he's also ripping on the concept of "wisdom of the crowd". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

If someone makes this app, I'd use it. I might not follow its clock, but I'd be interested in seeing what happens. [[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] ([[User talk:Draco18s|talk]]) 00:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

The sociologist in me wants to see this... The computer scientist in me could not be reached for comment and only mumbled something about "checking stock in the bomb shelter" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.62|108.162.246.62]]

Hmm... Does this probably mean 9AM today could theoretically be '''after''' 9AM tomorrow in some cases!? Talk about a new approach to time travel. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.147.9|172.70.147.9]] 05:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Working example: https://matthewminer.name/projects/consensus-time/
: 👏 excellent work --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 18:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I've often thought the answer to the arguments about daylight saving time could be solved by going back to something like the old Canonical Hours with the period from sunrise to sunset divided into 12 hours, with short hours in winter and longer ones in summer. Incidentally, in the late sixties, an experiment was tried in the UK to keep the country on daylight saving all year round, called British Standard Time. I remember going to school in the north of England in December and it was still dark to well past nine o'clock in the morning. It apparently reduced road deaths, but it was abandoned after three years. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 09:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Re. "the next vote would occur sooner or later respectively": This doesn't make sense - by definition, the vote takes place at no fixed time. Everybody votes at different times, depending on when they feel like it's 9am. They could, if they wished, do this capriciously, with no relation at all to the previous day's vote. One possible outcome of this is that the consensus view could drift so far from that of some individual views that it becomes impossible to determine which 'day' they're voting in respect of, and therefore which vote they should be counted in.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.239|162.158.34.239]] 11:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2594: Consensus Time

2022-03-17T18:42:41Z

192·168·0·1:

What if there's, like, a group of trolls that all press the button at like 9:00 pm? [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 17:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Less than a day should be enough time for a team of people to notice and override the trolls' attempt to game the system.
Unless the trolls decide to push the button right before midnight.
--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 23:11, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
:Presupposes that an executive decision that "oh, that was just sabotage, we can ignore all those 'votes'" by an oversight panel is deemed ok to occasionally enforce. As with actual election votes, that shouldn't be taken lightly (for fear of top-down skewing of the actual sincere wish of those casting their opinions).
:As it's a median (in itself a good idea, as there's no reason to cast very extreme outliers — it doesn't do anything more to the result than a barely marginal outlier) all you need to do is ask enough people (in excess of any counter-aiming participation, if there's a fight over it) to merely adjust their 'feeling' to half an hour later (or earlier, if that's your aim) than they normally would.
:Added to the 'natural' variation in feeling (spread statistically amongst your participating group) it would be practically impossible to decide that a distinct tapering-lump of results exists, to possibly disqualify. Whereas if results show clear 'lumps' hours apart (e.g. around 3AM and/or 9PM, as well as the standard bunch around the 'honest' opinion point), there might be a case to officially intervene. Or at least officially review the procedure. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 09:14, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
: It's basically Wiki-Time, the same principles apply as a Wiki... and Wikis are always 100% accrate, rite? --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 18:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably a reference to the Senate DST thing[[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.237|172.70.210.237]] 17:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I feel like this could supersede time-zones as well, by weighting reports by relative longitude, so you could have a kind of continuous change in time as you travel. I'm sure this wouldn't cause any problems at all, since every single computer would effectively be in its own mini time-zone, with its clock going at a slightly different speed, and both current time and speed of time would vary continuously with position.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.11|162.158.159.11]] 17:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I have to feel that the night shift people would really not like this. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

My take on this is that Midnight is a fixed point, it's always at the same time, and the day compresses and expands around it based on the median 9AM location. So, some days will have long hours in the morning, then compressed hours in the afternoon and evening. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.52|162.158.107.52]] 20:37, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

See also consensus new year https://xkcd.com/2092/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.237|172.70.210.237]] 20:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I think he's also ripping on the concept of "wisdom of the crowd". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

If someone makes this app, I'd use it. I might not follow its clock, but I'd be interested in seeing what happens. [[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] ([[User talk:Draco18s|talk]]) 00:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

The sociologist in me wants to see this... The computer scientist in me could not be reached for comment and only mumbled something about "checking stock in the bomb shelter" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.62|108.162.246.62]]

Hmm... Does this probably mean 9AM today could theoretically be '''after''' 9AM tomorrow in some cases!? Talk about a new approach to time travel. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.147.9|172.70.147.9]] 05:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Working example: https://matthewminer.name/projects/consensus-time/

I've often thought the answer to the arguments about daylight saving time could be solved by going back to something like the old Canonical Hours with the period from sunrise to sunset divided into 12 hours, with short hours in winter and longer ones in summer. Incidentally, in the late sixties, an experiment was tried in the UK to keep the country on daylight saving all year round, called British Standard Time. I remember going to school in the north of England in December and it was still dark to well past nine o'clock in the morning. It apparently reduced road deaths, but it was abandoned after three years. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 09:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Re. "the next vote would occur sooner or later respectively": This doesn't make sense - by definition, the vote takes place at no fixed time. Everybody votes at different times, depending on when they feel like it's 9am. They could, if they wished, do this capriciously, with no relation at all to the previous day's vote. One possible outcome of this is that the consensus view could drift so far from that of some individual views that it becomes impossible to determine which 'day' they're voting in respect of, and therefore which vote they should be counted in.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.239|162.158.34.239]] 11:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2591: Qua

2022-03-09T19:11:54Z

192·168·0·1:

If Megan's not careful, this pattern can quickly spiral to infinity: "Nice use of qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua." "Nice use of qua qua qua qua qua qua qua ''qua'' qua qua qua qua qua qua qua." "Nice use of..." --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.93|172.70.178.93]] 16:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:Or perhaps "Nice use of 'Nice use of ... '" although new forms of quote mark would need to be invented. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 19:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2575: What If? 2

2022-02-10T18:57:27Z

192·168·0·1: A massive thank you to the person who saw my commit message and went out of their way to manually sign a comment for me. Unfortunately the comment they signed was't made by me so I removed that. Thanks though it warmed my heart!

Yay! \o/ [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 15:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Note that there is actually a term for the 13th month of the year, and it's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecimber Undecimber].
[[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 15:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
:And the Jewish calendar has a 13th month every 2-3 years, since it's a lunar calendar. But rather than a completely different month name, the month Adar is doubled to Adar I and Adar II. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

This is awesome! I really hope one of the answers is about cotton candy breaking one's fall, since it was foreshadowed in book one. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.90.23|172.69.90.23]] 15:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT YAYAYAYAYYAY!!!! [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 16:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

According to the Simpsons the 13th month is Smarch. What do we do when Simpsons and Randall disagree?
Also, pretty sure 2021 was the first year that 13th month aligned with our reality. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.18|172.70.211.18]] 17:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I can't shake the feeling that he announced it on 31/01 because it's coming out on 13/09 and that's nearly 13/10 which is 31/01 with the month and day digits switched. But I might be one of those numerology people without realising it --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
:If you're not, you should count yourself lucky! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.68|172.70.86.68]] 18:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
:: :D great pun, you win 1 internet 🎁 --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

The pre-order through all the different sources is good, but **What if** someone wanted a hard copy of the book autographed by Randall? I don't see any provision for that. [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 00:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it just me, but is 7 months in advance a bit early to announce a book release? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.228|108.162.250.228]] 01:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
: Seems an oddly advanced announcement to me too, but I guess with transport lines being so messed up, it's an attempt to be prepared well ahead for anything. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.87|108.162.249.87]] 05:12, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

: Yes. Especially in the world of ebooks and audiobooks which have no distirbution delays. With such a delay between completion and release, I'm expecting an ebook and audiobook edition to be available on the release day. I wonder if this sort of delay is normal in the publishing world, or if Randall is just a low priority for his publishers? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.234|108.162.250.234]] 05:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
::I think it's the opposite. Books have always needed months to actually fully be published, at least properly without resorting to letrasetting and sneaking time on the office photocopier/Gestetner for ultra-small initial runs - and definitely on a simultaneous worldwide release arranged from the start.
::What we see here is not a delay from the announcement, but the earlier and earlier time at which the announcement gets to the wider public, even the avid fanbase. Even so, there's probably been at least a month or three since Randall signed the contract and submitted the first proofs (of presumably already a roughly compiled proposal that got him that contract to sign), and distributors like Amazon clearly were tipped off enough to prepare for the release...
::And while it might be fairly easy to get the digital print-proofs into eBook format, save for some slight adjustments necessary to make it properly sellable, I imagine the fuss of getting an audiobook recorded (''without'' the complications of sufficiently audio-describing what will surely be an illustration-heavy book) is a task in itself.
::I don't know if they've even put ink to paper yet (or given any audiobook narrator the studio time) except for the proof-run. Even if they have started the mass-printing they probably are far from being able to put sufficient stock into shops tomorrow to meet expectations. We're just learning about it once it is officially inevitable (or even a day before!) rather than wandering into a bookshop in mid-September and getting a pleasant surprise, much like has happened for most ordinary consumers of literature across the entire extent of the book-publishing history. (IMO) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.225|141.101.98.225]] 09:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

This is one of the few times, it is quite explicit that Randall himself is in the comic instead of him as fictional narrator. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.68|172.70.86.68]] 07:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
:Is it now canon that going forth any character in the actual comic with that appearance is in fact Randall himself? [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:59, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

It comes out on my birthday! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.95|172.70.214.95]] 09:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
:Happy birthday! ...in advance. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 12:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

It's a crummy commercial? Son of a glitch.

This seems like an oddly-specific date to me. When I was at IBM it wasn't unusual for rumors about a product to start circulating more than a year before it would be released, and then IBM would announce that yes, it really was happening and specify something like mid-year of the next year for FCS (First Customer Ship) but the actual FCS date wouldn't be firm until a month or two before the FCS happened . . . and sometimes the FCS would get slipped, even by months like in the case of the S/38 which was the first product I was involved with. Of course, a book is a little bit of a smaller project, but still . . . . [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 10:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
:I think for tech releases, you could benefit from juggling the practical (official) release-date much closer to that point, rather than stockpiling a lot of potentially useful items uselessly in a warehouse just to make sure you have them.
:Alternately, promising a date based on Just-In-Time estimates then suffering delays that push release back is not a good thing either. (Also misestimating demand, see XBox/etc problems.) So, to stop too much of either, you get the rumour-mill going but make it officially official closer to the confirmed/confirmable delivery time.
:A book, probably deliberately scheduled explictly for a particularly popular (pre-)pre-Christmas purchase slot, has less issue being sent to storage for months at a time, and gives you leeway to organise additional print-runs from other partners if any (not uncommon) printing/binding places suffer problems (unlike what we've seen if issues hit one or more of the few specialist chip-fabricators).
:There are probably similar pressures and opportunities. But at different scales which changes the optimal buffer-times between various stages (hint, rumour, confirmation, official confirmation, near-certainty, actuality), and all under the microscope of the modern information-led world.
:(I remember the early days of Discworld series publication. Suddenly there would be a new Pratchett book in the bookstores, without knowing anything of it in advance, even when it was becoming a twice-yearly probability. By the end, attendees of the Discworld Conventions, and then thus all the readers of various official/fan-led online resources, would know roughly what books were in the pipeline a couple of years in advance and were counting down the days for several of them at a time, pretty much knowing the subject and main characters of them already and wildly speculating about storylines long since set in stone while Pterry had already started to work on the successor's successor, or beyond...)
:Not that I know the inside-out of the book industry, and also not so much of the electronics one as yourself, but this is my extrapolation from what I do know/think about them both. I think there's a wide range of possible schedules, with this one not at all being an outlier. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.126|172.70.91.126]] 15:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

No comic today (Wednesday 2022-02-02)? When's the last time Randall missed a comic? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.219|172.70.250.219]] 23:54, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

The 13th month is called [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcMTHr3TqA0 Gormanuary].--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.63|172.70.230.63]] 23:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
:[https://dwwiki.mooo.com/wiki/Calendar#The_months Ick]... (...or [https://wiki.lspace.org/Discworld_calendar#Months_Of_The_Discworld_Year December], depending upon your chosen version of canon.)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.121|172.70.90.121]] 01:16, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

2579: Tractor Beam

2022-02-10T18:52:57Z

192·168·0·1: Added amazing pun

{{comic
| number = 2579
| date = February 9, 2022
| title = Tractor Beam
| image = tractor_beam.png
| titletext = Did you base the saucer shape on pop culture depictions of aliens, or was that stuff based on your ships? Does the rotational symmetry help with ... hey, where are you going?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by EX-TRACTOR FAN - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Cueball is being pulled into a spaceship by a beam of light, called a {{w|tractor beam}} in the title. This is a {{tvtropes|AlienAbduction|common trope}} in science fiction, and usually pretty scary for the person involved. However, while Cueball is being pulled up, he asks a series of questions about the beam, about the force on the ship, and about the ship itself. The punch line is the caption - the aliens, frustrated by Cueball's questioning, release him and move on, to presumably find a different human to abduct and study. Many people have reported {{w|Alien abduction|being abducted by aliens}} in real life, though none of these have been confirmed.{{citation needed}}

The first three questions deal with the properties of the beam – how it can be controlled to pull only him (and his clothes), not anything else. He also wonders whether the beam would still continue to lift his shoes if he took them off midway. Perhaps his apparel is only rising with him because it normally stays attached to him, perhaps it is similarly levitated with equal force or impulse. Theoretically, it could only lift his clothing, with enough force to hoist him along with it, though if this was done with insufficient finesse, it could cause damage to the clothing or the person. (One would be tempted to call this a {{tvtropes|NegativeSpaceWedgie|Space Wedgie}}.) It is highly unlikely that this type of tractor beam could be used on Cueball without him realizing it, which would likely lead to him asking how the tractor beam lifted the clothes and not him.

Next, Cueball asks if his weight is pulling the ship downward. This would be the case, for example, if he were hoisted upwards by a rope instead of the beam, as equal but opposite forces act against each other, but not if the beam alters the nature of his surroundings such as with {{w|The First Men in the Moon|Cavorite}} or another means of {{w|gravitational shielding}} or alteration.

Then he asks what will happen if a bat flies through the beam. Things that could happen include the beam breaking (and him falling downward) due to the projected effect being interrupted, the bat being pulled up ahead of him as it enters the effective volume of the levitating beam or else nothing at all as it is outside the actual volumetric segment of the beam that is more than ambient light-effects. It may presumably have a relationship with the same focal effect as that which avoids the ground upon which he previously stood being drawn upwards. Also, the shadow of the bat on the ground might make the light beam look like an inverted {{w|Bat-Signal}}.

As the ship leaves, Cueball continues asking questions, as shown in the title text.

Whether Cueball actually arrived onboard the ship is uncertain. If he started badgering the aliens with questions during the lift and then (as stated) was immediately set down again then he did not. Either way, they got fed up and decided to return him to the ground instead of sharing their knowledge, or just because they preferred someone less talkative. They may prefer or expect more scared, overawed, or surprised abductees but, by whatever alien criteria they judge their catches, it seems he isn't what they want.

This was the third comic in less than three weeks featuring aliens using this type of flying saucer type spaceship. The other two came two comics in a row just 6 and 7 comics before this one, [[2572: Alien Observers]] and [[2573: Alien Mission]]

==Transcript==
:[A flying saucer type spacecraft hangs in the air above a flat area with scattered rocks and two hills in the background. A beam of 'light' emerges, a conical region textured with wavy lines radiating along its length, from a small square opening beneath the bottom of the craft going down to the ground a bit right of the saucer where its conceivably circular cross-section is rendered elliptic by both its angle of projection and our own viewing perspective. Cueball hangs suspended within the middle of the beam, above the ground but still some way from the saucer. His arms are held out to either side and his legs are bent up behind him. He is looking up at the saucer while talking.]
:Cueball: Does this beam only lift me? How do you avoid pulling up dirt and leaves and stuff? If I kick off my shoes, will they fall?
:Cueball: Is my weight pulling your ship downward? What will happen if a bat flies through the beam?
:Cueball: Hey, why does your ship have those blinky lights? Are they...

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Moments later, the aliens set me back down and left.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aliens]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:2575: What If? 2

2022-02-01T15:09:32Z

192·168·0·1: Signing didn't work. Really should 'show preview'

Talk:2575: What If? 2

2022-02-01T15:08:56Z

192·168·0·1: Forgot to log in

Talk:2575: What If? 2

2022-01-31T17:38:17Z

192·168·0·1: Numerology

2554: Gift Exchange

2021-12-14T14:05:45Z

192·168·0·1:

{{comic
| number = 2554
| date = December 13, 2021
| title = Gift Exchange
| image = gift_exchange.png
| titletext = In addition to having all their budgets in a spreadsheet with consistent formatting, they just love expressing preferences on a well-calibrated numerical scale.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SURVEY - Please rank this comment on a scale of <thunderstruck frowny face> to <maniacally grinny face> when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon: Title text is not fully explained}}

Many political scientists would see creating a fair gift exchange as a really tricky problem, since it involves different valuation of various goods (one person might like socks while another person would not), a possible incentive to misrepresent how much you value things ("You're going to have to offer me a LOT to give up these socks, because I really like them"), arbitrary order effects (who goes first matters), and more. These problems have a lot of political analogues in the political science topics of social choice and institutional design, and many political scientists dedicate years of their life to figuring out the best solutions. Therefore, a political scientist would enjoy the challenge of creating a fair gift exchange; it is the best gift that Ponytail could have given them.

The fact that the family loves surveys implies that a favourite method of political scientists, surveying the electorate, would be greatly appreciated. The "It's okay if it's complicated" line is funny because many of the theoretically best solutions a political scientist might come up with would be very complicated--far more so than the typical person would want to think about.

In the title text, having well-formatted budgets makes a scientist's job much easier since it is better for data manipulation. In the same way, expressing preferences on a well-calibrated numerical scale makes data manipulation simple and straightforward. Therefore, Ponytail's scenario is an excellent gift for the political scientist. It also extends the humorous scenario of the nerdy family who enjoy filling in complex surveys - the same family would be likely to enjoy a well-formatted budget spreadsheet.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Ponytail is talking to Cueball.]
:Ponytail: Ugh, I have to organize a fair gift exchange for my survey-loving family.
:Ponytail: Do you want to help?
:Ponytail: They said it's "okay if it's complicated."

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The perfect gift for a political scientist
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Christmas]]

Talk:2552: The Last Molecule

2021-12-10T15:23:46Z

192·168·0·1:

Unsuccessfully tried to search for a match to the image of the chemical compound. Did find this, which is difficult to use on a cellphone: OSRA: Optical Structure Recognition: https://cactus.nci.nih.gov/cgi-bin/osra/index.cgi [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.172|1 not72.70.211.172]] 07:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I've tried to search for SMILES of the molecule, but also got nothing: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=C1(C2CC(CCC)C(CC)C2(CCCC))C%3DCC(C(%3DCCC(%3DC)CC)C(C)C)%3DC1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.137|162.158.222.137]]
::Let's name it Excacidin ;) [[User:256 256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256 256.256.256|talk]]) 07:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I truly don't understand the God part of the current explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.121|172.68.110.121]] 07:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:There is an article at [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/humans-make-110000th-earths-biomass-180969141/ Smithonian Magazine] that sums it up quite nicely: Of the 550 gigatons of biomass carbon on Earth, animals make up about 2 gigatons, with insects comprising half of that and fish taking up another 0.7 gigatons. Everything else, including mammals, birds, nematodes and mollusks are roughly 0.3 gigatons, with humans weighing in at 0.06 gigatons.
::About half of all known living species on earth are insects. Therefore if there was a god who created all life, it would be reasonable to assume he likes them. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: 1 Ton = 10^3 kg = 1 Mg → 1 gigaton = 1 Pg (note, not pentagram!) --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 02:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Chemistry. I love chemistry :-) There is a concept called "Chemical Space" that I learned about in school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_space may help, in short: Chemical space is a huge but finite space of all possible atom arrangements in molecules. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.106|162.158.91.106]] 07:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I've heard the claim, that we know less about our own ocean floor than we do about the surface of Mars several times before. Is there actually a credible source for this and how do we even quantify how much we know about either area? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:This essay might shed some light on the question. [[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-how-little-do-we-know-about-the-ocean-floor/ Just How Little Do We Know about the Ocean Floor?]] From a geographical perspective, our maps of the ocean floor are much less detailed than those covering Mars. (5km resolution for ocean floor, 100m resolution for Mars - radar doesn't work underwater). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.18|162.158.107.18]] 09:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The current explanation says that there are an infinite number of chemicals. Is that true? Source? Explanation how that is possible?
Obviously the number of possible molecules is huge, but is it actually a literal, mathematical infinite? Given a finite observable universe, with presumably a finite number of atoms in it. There appear to be a finite number of elements which are stable for any appreciable amount of time and capable of forming molecules.
It seems like there might be practical limitations to the size of a molecule, so that you can't keep making bigger and bigger ones just by adding more atoms/subunits?
If you just keep adding carbon atoms to a diamond will you eventually reach a point where forces such as gravitation become a factor and the molecular bonds fail? I can imagine that long chain molecules light years long might reach point where other forces overwhelm the bond strength? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.76|108.162.246.76]] 09:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:For obvious reasons, as long as you limit the number of atoms involved the number of possible "molecules" is - in a mathematical sense - finite. (As there is only a finite number of reasonable stable elements.) But already simple things like polymers can bind millions of atoms in a single molecule. Together with the possible variations intrinsic to such polymers a simple "material" like phenolic resin [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenol_formaldehyde_resin]] is a mixture of more different chemical compounds (in a strict sense) than mankind can ever describe. For all practical application this compexity is not relevant, so no one really cares about.
Additionally there is no clear boundary between typical molecules and other types of condensed matter, like crystals. Same applies to biochemistry. Does chemistry include bio-molecules? If yes, the chemistry guy have to include all the gene sequencing in their to-do list.

"how fast does light travel in one direction?" is not a good example for incompleteness in physics, because this question was settled by Michelson and Morley in the 19th century (answer: it travels with the speed of light)
: It's not clear to me either what was meant here - seems out of place.
:We know how fast light travels when it goes somewhere and comes back – that's ''c'' – but we don't know how fast it goes when only traveling in one direction. For example, light going at ''c''/2 in one direction and returning instantaneously in the other would still match our observations. We also can't reliably synchronize clocks over a distance because we'd either have to do it with a speed-of-light delay, or separate two clocks and find that relativity changed the timings. Of course, Occam's razor indicates that a consistent speed is more likely, but that's not proof. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.87|172.70.126.87]] 12:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:Observing two points (nominal source and nominal destination) from a third point perpendicularly off the mid-point between thoss two points, at an arbitrary distance, you ought to see if there's slowness or instaneity involved (at least make a comparison between bidirectional traversal). This does not remove a response bias in the signal from either end as sent towards the recorder at the observation point, but as the stand-off is increased it makes both observation paths nearer and nearer to parallel and so significantly removes the quantifiable initial 'sideways bias' that may exist.
:I leave it as an excercise to the reader to produce the reasons why this might not practically work to quash all such 'inbuilt universal asymmetry', but it's a good start! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.141|172.70.90.141]] 13:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I genuinely don't understand the confusion being proposed here; in practice it's trivial to synchronize a single photon emitter with a single photon detector (such as a PMT) and confirm the speed of light across a single path, with no return trip involved. As far as I know there is know precidence in QM to suspect bidirectional travel could be a special case.
:I like Veritasium as much as the next guy, but I don't think that this one is a serious debate like the other examples. If you're going to consider something like this a great unsolved mystery in physics, I'm sure there are countless other questions just like this for almost every topic in physics and not everything can be a great unsolved mystery.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 17:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

To quote Randall Munroe in https://what-if.xkcd.com/114/, "The whole universe is matter, as far as we can tell. No one is sure why there is more matter than antimatter, since the laws of physics are pretty symmetrical, and there's no reason to expect there to be more of one than the other. Although when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything at all." Antimatter aside, this shows that the laws of the universe are sometimes asymmetrical. I also like the point that "when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything." Why should we expect the speed of light to be symmetrical? There's no real reason to. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 14:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:On the contrary, without any such thing as the æther (the fundament through which we would be passing) there is no reason to expect the speed of light (in any given frame of reference) to be asymmetrical. Relativistic frame-dragging and other distortions due to (or resulting in!) accelerative forces will act accordingly, but not change ''c'' itself, in proper calculations, as a function to direction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 16:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_speed_of_light In any case, the point is that there is no reason to expect light speed to be symmetrical, either. Asymmetry in this case is not due to frame dragging, it would be some fundamental feature of photons or the universe. There is currently no experimental way to test this. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 17:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we can cite one of some famous declarations of physicist saying the physics is almost done [https://nautil.us/blog/the-comforting-certainty-of-unanswered-questions (taken from this site)] :

:The British scientist William Cecil Dampier recalled his apprenticeship at Cambridge in the 1890s: “It seemed as though the main framework had been put together once for all, and that little remained to be done but to measure physical constants to the increased accuracy represented by another decimal place.” British physicist J. J. Thomson: “All that was left was to alter a decimal or two in some physical constant.” American physicist Albert A. Michelson: “Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.”
:My physics professor from freshman year: "If you're ever in a room with physicists who say that the physics of Earth are done, and there's nothing else left to calculate, ask them "what about turbulence?". You'll be sure to get some dirty looks."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 21:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
--[[User:Marceluda|Marceluda]] ([[User talk:Marceluda|talk]]) 15:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd argue that fusion on earth is an engineering problem, not a matter of physics completeness (yeah, engineering is just applied physics and math just theoretical physics and biology what happens when you close two physicists in a room for too long, but still). Also, the problem of the symmetry of light speed is, from the present understanding of physics, a matter of metaphysics. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.94.143|172.68.94.143]] 13:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
:Having worked in fusion research, I'd say it's still a physics problem because we don't yet know if it's physically possible for a burning plasma to be confined for long enough on a small enough scale to create a viable power plant. It's not necessarily just a question of designing the right machine, if you see what I mean. And if it was, I'd like to think we'd find a few hundred billion of dollars of funding and just get it done. IMO the reason it's not a funding priority is that we can't be sure it would work with _any_ amount of money. That said, while it's potentially a question of great value to humanity, I don't think it's significant in terms of the completeness of physics as a field. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
:To rant further about fusion funding, we don't know whether we can win any given war either but that doesn't stop us spending trillions of dollars on them. Maybe if we called fusion research "the war on paying for electricity / wrecking the environment" maybe we'd get it sorted. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2552: The Last Molecule

2021-12-10T15:20:43Z

192·168·0·1:

Talk:2552: The Last Molecule

2021-12-10T15:19:53Z

192·168·0·1:

Unsuccessfully tried to search for a match to the image of the chemical compound. Did find this, which is difficult to use on a cellphone: OSRA: Optical Structure Recognition: https://cactus.nci.nih.gov/cgi-bin/osra/index.cgi [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.172|1 not72.70.211.172]] 07:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I've tried to search for SMILES of the molecule, but also got nothing: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=C1(C2CC(CCC)C(CC)C2(CCCC))C%3DCC(C(%3DCCC(%3DC)CC)C(C)C)%3DC1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.137|162.158.222.137]]
::Let's name it Excacidin ;) [[User:256 256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256 256.256.256|talk]]) 07:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I truly don't understand the God part of the current explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.121|172.68.110.121]] 07:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:There is an article at [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/humans-make-110000th-earths-biomass-180969141/ Smithonian Magazine] that sums it up quite nicely: Of the 550 gigatons of biomass carbon on Earth, animals make up about 2 gigatons, with insects comprising half of that and fish taking up another 0.7 gigatons. Everything else, including mammals, birds, nematodes and mollusks are roughly 0.3 gigatons, with humans weighing in at 0.06 gigatons.
::About half of all known living species on earth are insects. Therefore if there was a god who created all life, it would be reasonable to assume he likes them. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: 1 Ton = 10^3 kg = 1 Mg → 1 gigaton = 1 Pg (note, not pentagram!) --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 02:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Chemistry. I love chemistry :-) There is a concept called "Chemical Space" that I learned about in school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_space may help, in short: Chemical space is a huge but finite space of all possible atom arrangements in molecules. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.106|162.158.91.106]] 07:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I've heard the claim, that we know less about our own ocean floor than we do about the surface of Mars several times before. Is there actually a credible source for this and how do we even quantify how much we know about either area? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:This essay might shed some light on the question. [[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-how-little-do-we-know-about-the-ocean-floor/ Just How Little Do We Know about the Ocean Floor?]] From a geographical perspective, our maps of the ocean floor are much less detailed than those covering Mars. (5km resolution for ocean floor, 100m resolution for Mars - radar doesn't work underwater). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.18|162.158.107.18]] 09:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The current explanation says that there are an infinite number of chemicals. Is that true? Source? Explanation how that is possible?
Obviously the number of possible molecules is huge, but is it actually a literal, mathematical infinite? Given a finite observable universe, with presumably a finite number of atoms in it. There appear to be a finite number of elements which are stable for any appreciable amount of time and capable of forming molecules.
It seems like there might be practical limitations to the size of a molecule, so that you can't keep making bigger and bigger ones just by adding more atoms/subunits?
If you just keep adding carbon atoms to a diamond will you eventually reach a point where forces such as gravitation become a factor and the molecular bonds fail? I can imagine that long chain molecules light years long might reach point where other forces overwhelm the bond strength? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.76|108.162.246.76]] 09:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:For obvious reasons, as long as you limit the number of atoms involved the number of possible "molecules" is - in a mathematical sense - finite. (As there is only a finite number of reasonable stable elements.) But already simple things like polymers can bind millions of atoms in a single molecule. Together with the possible variations intrinsic to such polymers a simple "material" like phenolic resin [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenol_formaldehyde_resin]] is a mixture of more different chemical compounds (in a strict sense) than mankind can ever describe. For all practical application this compexity is not relevant, so no one really cares about.
Additionally there is no clear boundary between typical molecules and other types of condensed matter, like crystals. Same applies to biochemistry. Does chemistry include bio-molecules? If yes, the chemistry guy have to include all the gene sequencing in their to-do list.

"how fast does light travel in one direction?" is not a good example for incompleteness in physics, because this question was settled by Michelson and Morley in the 19th century (answer: it travels with the speed of light)
: It's not clear to me either what was meant here - seems out of place.
:We know how fast light travels when it goes somewhere and comes back – that's ''c'' – but we don't know how fast it goes when only traveling in one direction. For example, light going at ''c''/2 in one direction and returning instantaneously in the other would still match our observations. We also can't reliably synchronize clocks over a distance because we'd either have to do it with a speed-of-light delay, or separate two clocks and find that relativity changed the timings. Of course, Occam's razor indicates that a consistent speed is more likely, but that's not proof. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.87|172.70.126.87]] 12:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:Observing two points (nominal source and nominal destination) from a third point perpendicularly off the mid-point between thoss two points, at an arbitrary distance, you ought to see if there's slowness or instaneity involved (at least make a comparison between bidirectional traversal). This does not remove a response bias in the signal from either end as sent towards the recorder at the observation point, but as the stand-off is increased it makes both observation paths nearer and nearer to parallel and so significantly removes the quantifiable initial 'sideways bias' that may exist.
:I leave it as an excercise to the reader to produce the reasons why this might not practically work to quash all such 'inbuilt universal asymmetry', but it's a good start! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.141|172.70.90.141]] 13:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I genuinely don't understand the confusion being proposed here; in practice it's trivial to synchronize a single photon emitter with a single photon detector (such as a PMT) and confirm the speed of light across a single path, with no return trip involved. As far as I know there is know precidence in QM to suspect bidirectional travel could be a special case.
:I like Veritasium as much as the next guy, but I don't think that this one is a serious debate like the other examples. If you're going to consider something like this a great unsolved mystery in physics, I'm sure there are countless other questions just like this for almost every topic in physics and not everything can be a great unsolved mystery.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 17:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

To quote Randall Munroe in https://what-if.xkcd.com/114/, "The whole universe is matter, as far as we can tell. No one is sure why there is more matter than antimatter, since the laws of physics are pretty symmetrical, and there's no reason to expect there to be more of one than the other. Although when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything at all." Antimatter aside, this shows that the laws of the universe are sometimes asymmetrical. I also like the point that "when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything." Why should we expect the speed of light to be symmetrical? There's no real reason to. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 14:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:On the contrary, without any such thing as the æther (the fundament through which we would be passing) there is no reason to expect the speed of light (in any given frame of reference) to be asymmetrical. Relativistic frame-dragging and other distortions due to (or resulting in!) accelerative forces will act accordingly, but not change ''c'' itself, in proper calculations, as a function to direction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 16:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_speed_of_light In any case, the point is that there is no reason to expect light speed to be symmetrical, either. Asymmetry in this case is not due to frame dragging, it would be some fundamental feature of photons or the universe. There is currently no experimental way to test this. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 17:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we can cite one of some famous declarations of physicist saying the physics is almost done [https://nautil.us/blog/the-comforting-certainty-of-unanswered-questions (taken from this site)] :

:The British scientist William Cecil Dampier recalled his apprenticeship at Cambridge in the 1890s: “It seemed as though the main framework had been put together once for all, and that little remained to be done but to measure physical constants to the increased accuracy represented by another decimal place.” British physicist J. J. Thomson: “All that was left was to alter a decimal or two in some physical constant.” American physicist Albert A. Michelson: “Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.”
:My physics professor from freshman year: "If you're ever in a room with physicists who say that the physics of Earth are done, and there's nothing else left to calculate, ask them "what about turbulence?". You'll be sure to get some dirty looks."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 21:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
--[[User:Marceluda|Marceluda]] ([[User talk:Marceluda|talk]]) 15:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd argue that fusion on earth is an engineering problem, not a matter of physics completeness (yeah, engineering is just applied physics and math just theoretical physics and biology what happens when you close two physicists in a room for too long, but still). Also, the problem of the symmetry of light speed is, from the present understanding of physics, a matter of metaphysics. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.94.143|172.68.94.143]] 13:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
:Having worked in fusion research, I'd say it's still a physics problem because we don't yet know if it's physically possible for a burning plasma to be confined for long enough on a small enough scale to create a viable power plant. It's not necessarily just a question of designing the right machine, if you see what I mean. And if it was, I'd like to think we'd find a few hundred billion of dollars of funding and just get it done. However, while it's potentially a question of great value to humanity, I don't think it's significant in terms of the completeness of physics as a field. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2552: The Last Molecule

2021-12-10T15:18:56Z

192·168·0·1:

Unsuccessfully tried to search for a match to the image of the chemical compound. Did find this, which is difficult to use on a cellphone: OSRA: Optical Structure Recognition: https://cactus.nci.nih.gov/cgi-bin/osra/index.cgi [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.172|1 not72.70.211.172]] 07:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I've tried to search for SMILES of the molecule, but also got nothing: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=C1(C2CC(CCC)C(CC)C2(CCCC))C%3DCC(C(%3DCCC(%3DC)CC)C(C)C)%3DC1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.137|162.158.222.137]]
::Let's name it Excacidin ;) [[User:256 256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256 256.256.256|talk]]) 07:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I truly don't understand the God part of the current explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.121|172.68.110.121]] 07:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:There is an article at [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/humans-make-110000th-earths-biomass-180969141/ Smithonian Magazine] that sums it up quite nicely: Of the 550 gigatons of biomass carbon on Earth, animals make up about 2 gigatons, with insects comprising half of that and fish taking up another 0.7 gigatons. Everything else, including mammals, birds, nematodes and mollusks are roughly 0.3 gigatons, with humans weighing in at 0.06 gigatons.
::About half of all known living species on earth are insects. Therefore if there was a god who created all life, it would be reasonable to assume he likes them. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: 1 Ton = 10^3 kg = 1 Mg → 1 gigaton = 1 Pg (note, not pentagram!) --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 02:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Chemistry. I love chemistry :-) There is a concept called "Chemical Space" that I learned about in school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_space may help, in short: Chemical space is a huge but finite space of all possible atom arrangements in molecules. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.106|162.158.91.106]] 07:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I've heard the claim, that we know less about our own ocean floor than we do about the surface of Mars several times before. Is there actually a credible source for this and how do we even quantify how much we know about either area? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:This essay might shed some light on the question. [[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-how-little-do-we-know-about-the-ocean-floor/ Just How Little Do We Know about the Ocean Floor?]] From a geographical perspective, our maps of the ocean floor are much less detailed than those covering Mars. (5km resolution for ocean floor, 100m resolution for Mars - radar doesn't work underwater). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.18|162.158.107.18]] 09:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The current explanation says that there are an infinite number of chemicals. Is that true? Source? Explanation how that is possible?
Obviously the number of possible molecules is huge, but is it actually a literal, mathematical infinite? Given a finite observable universe, with presumably a finite number of atoms in it. There appear to be a finite number of elements which are stable for any appreciable amount of time and capable of forming molecules.
It seems like there might be practical limitations to the size of a molecule, so that you can't keep making bigger and bigger ones just by adding more atoms/subunits?
If you just keep adding carbon atoms to a diamond will you eventually reach a point where forces such as gravitation become a factor and the molecular bonds fail? I can imagine that long chain molecules light years long might reach point where other forces overwhelm the bond strength? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.76|108.162.246.76]] 09:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:For obvious reasons, as long as you limit the number of atoms involved the number of possible "molecules" is - in a mathematical sense - finite. (As there is only a finite number of reasonable stable elements.) But already simple things like polymers can bind millions of atoms in a single molecule. Together with the possible variations intrinsic to such polymers a simple "material" like phenolic resin [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenol_formaldehyde_resin]] is a mixture of more different chemical compounds (in a strict sense) than mankind can ever describe. For all practical application this compexity is not relevant, so no one really cares about.
Additionally there is no clear boundary between typical molecules and other types of condensed matter, like crystals. Same applies to biochemistry. Does chemistry include bio-molecules? If yes, the chemistry guy have to include all the gene sequencing in their to-do list.

"how fast does light travel in one direction?" is not a good example for incompleteness in physics, because this question was settled by Michelson and Morley in the 19th century (answer: it travels with the speed of light)
: It's not clear to me either what was meant here - seems out of place.
:We know how fast light travels when it goes somewhere and comes back – that's ''c'' – but we don't know how fast it goes when only traveling in one direction. For example, light going at ''c''/2 in one direction and returning instantaneously in the other would still match our observations. We also can't reliably synchronize clocks over a distance because we'd either have to do it with a speed-of-light delay, or separate two clocks and find that relativity changed the timings. Of course, Occam's razor indicates that a consistent speed is more likely, but that's not proof. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.87|172.70.126.87]] 12:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:Observing two points (nominal source and nominal destination) from a third point perpendicularly off the mid-point between thoss two points, at an arbitrary distance, you ought to see if there's slowness or instaneity involved (at least make a comparison between bidirectional traversal). This does not remove a response bias in the signal from either end as sent towards the recorder at the observation point, but as the stand-off is increased it makes both observation paths nearer and nearer to parallel and so significantly removes the quantifiable initial 'sideways bias' that may exist.
:I leave it as an excercise to the reader to produce the reasons why this might not practically work to quash all such 'inbuilt universal asymmetry', but it's a good start! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.141|172.70.90.141]] 13:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I genuinely don't understand the confusion being proposed here; in practice it's trivial to synchronize a single photon emitter with a single photon detector (such as a PMT) and confirm the speed of light across a single path, with no return trip involved. As far as I know there is know precidence in QM to suspect bidirectional travel could be a special case.
:I like Veritasium as much as the next guy, but I don't think that this one is a serious debate like the other examples. If you're going to consider something like this a great unsolved mystery in physics, I'm sure there are countless other questions just like this for almost every topic in physics and not everything can be a great unsolved mystery.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 17:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

To quote Randall Munroe in https://what-if.xkcd.com/114/, "The whole universe is matter, as far as we can tell. No one is sure why there is more matter than antimatter, since the laws of physics are pretty symmetrical, and there's no reason to expect there to be more of one than the other. Although when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything at all." Antimatter aside, this shows that the laws of the universe are sometimes asymmetrical. I also like the point that "when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything." Why should we expect the speed of light to be symmetrical? There's no real reason to. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 14:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:On the contrary, without any such thing as the æther (the fundament through which we would be passing) there is no reason to expect the speed of light (in any given frame of reference) to be asymmetrical. Relativistic frame-dragging and other distortions due to (or resulting in!) accelerative forces will act accordingly, but not change ''c'' itself, in proper calculations, as a function to direction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 16:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_speed_of_light In any case, the point is that there is no reason to expect light speed to be symmetrical, either. Asymmetry in this case is not due to frame dragging, it would be some fundamental feature of photons or the universe. There is currently no experimental way to test this. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 17:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we can cite one of some famous declarations of physicist saying the physics is almost done [https://nautil.us/blog/the-comforting-certainty-of-unanswered-questions (taken from this site)] :

:The British scientist William Cecil Dampier recalled his apprenticeship at Cambridge in the 1890s: “It seemed as though the main framework had been put together once for all, and that little remained to be done but to measure physical constants to the increased accuracy represented by another decimal place.” British physicist J. J. Thomson: “All that was left was to alter a decimal or two in some physical constant.” American physicist Albert A. Michelson: “Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.”
:My physics professor from freshman year: "If you're ever in a room with physicists who say that the physics of Earth are done, and there's nothing else left to calculate, ask them "what about turbulence?". You'll be sure to get some dirty looks."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 21:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
--[[User:Marceluda|Marceluda]] ([[User talk:Marceluda|talk]]) 15:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd argue that fusion on earth is an engineering problem, not a matter of physics completeness (yeah, engineering is just applied physics and math just theoretical physics and biology what happens when you close two physicists in a room for too long, but still). Also, the problem of the symmetry of light speed is, from the present understanding of physics, a matter of metaphysics. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.94.143|172.68.94.143]] 13:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
:Having worked in fusion research, I'd say it's still a physics problem because we don't yet know if it's physically possible for a burning plasma to be confined for long enough on a small enough scale to create a viable power plant. It's not necessarily just a question of designing the right machine, if you see what I mean. However, while it's potentially a question of great value to humanity, I don't think it's significant in terms of the completeness of physics as a field. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2552: The Last Molecule

2021-12-10T15:18:34Z

192·168·0·1:

Unsuccessfully tried to search for a match to the image of the chemical compound. Did find this, which is difficult to use on a cellphone: OSRA: Optical Structure Recognition: https://cactus.nci.nih.gov/cgi-bin/osra/index.cgi [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.172|1 not72.70.211.172]] 07:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I've tried to search for SMILES of the molecule, but also got nothing: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=C1(C2CC(CCC)C(CC)C2(CCCC))C%3DCC(C(%3DCCC(%3DC)CC)C(C)C)%3DC1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.137|162.158.222.137]]
::Let's name it Excacidin ;) [[User:256 256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256 256.256.256|talk]]) 07:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I truly don't understand the God part of the current explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.121|172.68.110.121]] 07:55, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:There is an article at [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/humans-make-110000th-earths-biomass-180969141/ Smithonian Magazine] that sums it up quite nicely: Of the 550 gigatons of biomass carbon on Earth, animals make up about 2 gigatons, with insects comprising half of that and fish taking up another 0.7 gigatons. Everything else, including mammals, birds, nematodes and mollusks are roughly 0.3 gigatons, with humans weighing in at 0.06 gigatons.
::About half of all known living species on earth are insects. Therefore if there was a god who created all life, it would be reasonable to assume he likes them. [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
::: 1 Ton = 10^3 kg = 1 Mg → 1 gigaton = 1 Pg (note, not pentagram!) --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 02:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Chemistry. I love chemistry :-) There is a concept called "Chemical Space" that I learned about in school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_space may help, in short: Chemical space is a huge but finite space of all possible atom arrangements in molecules. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.106|162.158.91.106]] 07:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I've heard the claim, that we know less about our own ocean floor than we do about the surface of Mars several times before. Is there actually a credible source for this and how do we even quantify how much we know about either area? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 08:26, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:This essay might shed some light on the question. [[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-how-little-do-we-know-about-the-ocean-floor/ Just How Little Do We Know about the Ocean Floor?]] From a geographical perspective, our maps of the ocean floor are much less detailed than those covering Mars. (5km resolution for ocean floor, 100m resolution for Mars - radar doesn't work underwater). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.18|162.158.107.18]] 09:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The current explanation says that there are an infinite number of chemicals. Is that true? Source? Explanation how that is possible?
Obviously the number of possible molecules is huge, but is it actually a literal, mathematical infinite? Given a finite observable universe, with presumably a finite number of atoms in it. There appear to be a finite number of elements which are stable for any appreciable amount of time and capable of forming molecules.
It seems like there might be practical limitations to the size of a molecule, so that you can't keep making bigger and bigger ones just by adding more atoms/subunits?
If you just keep adding carbon atoms to a diamond will you eventually reach a point where forces such as gravitation become a factor and the molecular bonds fail? I can imagine that long chain molecules light years long might reach point where other forces overwhelm the bond strength? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.76|108.162.246.76]] 09:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:For obvious reasons, as long as you limit the number of atoms involved the number of possible "molecules" is - in a mathematical sense - finite. (As there is only a finite number of reasonable stable elements.) But already simple things like polymers can bind millions of atoms in a single molecule. Together with the possible variations intrinsic to such polymers a simple "material" like phenolic resin [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenol_formaldehyde_resin]] is a mixture of more different chemical compounds (in a strict sense) than mankind can ever describe. For all practical application this compexity is not relevant, so no one really cares about.
Additionally there is no clear boundary between typical molecules and other types of condensed matter, like crystals. Same applies to biochemistry. Does chemistry include bio-molecules? If yes, the chemistry guy have to include all the gene sequencing in their to-do list.

"how fast does light travel in one direction?" is not a good example for incompleteness in physics, because this question was settled by Michelson and Morley in the 19th century (answer: it travels with the speed of light)
: It's not clear to me either what was meant here - seems out of place.
:We know how fast light travels when it goes somewhere and comes back – that's ''c'' – but we don't know how fast it goes when only traveling in one direction. For example, light going at ''c''/2 in one direction and returning instantaneously in the other would still match our observations. We also can't reliably synchronize clocks over a distance because we'd either have to do it with a speed-of-light delay, or separate two clocks and find that relativity changed the timings. Of course, Occam's razor indicates that a consistent speed is more likely, but that's not proof. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.87|172.70.126.87]] 12:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:Observing two points (nominal source and nominal destination) from a third point perpendicularly off the mid-point between thoss two points, at an arbitrary distance, you ought to see if there's slowness or instaneity involved (at least make a comparison between bidirectional traversal). This does not remove a response bias in the signal from either end as sent towards the recorder at the observation point, but as the stand-off is increased it makes both observation paths nearer and nearer to parallel and so significantly removes the quantifiable initial 'sideways bias' that may exist.
:I leave it as an excercise to the reader to produce the reasons why this might not practically work to quash all such 'inbuilt universal asymmetry', but it's a good start! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.141|172.70.90.141]] 13:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:I genuinely don't understand the confusion being proposed here; in practice it's trivial to synchronize a single photon emitter with a single photon detector (such as a PMT) and confirm the speed of light across a single path, with no return trip involved. As far as I know there is know precidence in QM to suspect bidirectional travel could be a special case.
:I like Veritasium as much as the next guy, but I don't think that this one is a serious debate like the other examples. If you're going to consider something like this a great unsolved mystery in physics, I'm sure there are countless other questions just like this for almost every topic in physics and not everything can be a great unsolved mystery.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.23|172.70.134.23]] 17:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

To quote Randall Munroe in https://what-if.xkcd.com/114/, "The whole universe is matter, as far as we can tell. No one is sure why there is more matter than antimatter, since the laws of physics are pretty symmetrical, and there's no reason to expect there to be more of one than the other. Although when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything at all." Antimatter aside, this shows that the laws of the universe are sometimes asymmetrical. I also like the point that "when it comes down to it, there's no reason to expect anything." Why should we expect the speed of light to be symmetrical? There's no real reason to. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 14:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
:On the contrary, without any such thing as the æther (the fundament through which we would be passing) there is no reason to expect the speed of light (in any given frame of reference) to be asymmetrical. Relativistic frame-dragging and other distortions due to (or resulting in!) accelerative forces will act accordingly, but not change ''c'' itself, in proper calculations, as a function to direction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 16:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_speed_of_light In any case, the point is that there is no reason to expect light speed to be symmetrical, either. Asymmetry in this case is not due to frame dragging, it would be some fundamental feature of photons or the universe. There is currently no experimental way to test this. [[User:Beret|Beret]] ([[User talk:Beret|talk]]) 17:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe we can cite one of some famous declarations of physicist saying the physics is almost done [https://nautil.us/blog/the-comforting-certainty-of-unanswered-questions (taken from this site)] :

:The British scientist William Cecil Dampier recalled his apprenticeship at Cambridge in the 1890s: “It seemed as though the main framework had been put together once for all, and that little remained to be done but to measure physical constants to the increased accuracy represented by another decimal place.” British physicist J. J. Thomson: “All that was left was to alter a decimal or two in some physical constant.” American physicist Albert A. Michelson: “Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.”
:My physics professor from freshman year: "If you're ever in a room with physicists who say that the physics of Earth are done, and there's nothing else left to calculate, ask them "what about turbulence?". You'll be sure to get some dirty looks."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.122|108.162.246.122]] 21:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
--[[User:Marceluda|Marceluda]] ([[User talk:Marceluda|talk]]) 15:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd argue that fusion on earth is an engineering problem, not a matter of physics completeness (yeah, engineering is just applied physics and math just theoretical physics and biology what happens when you close two physicists in a room for too long, but still). Also, the problem of the symmetry of light speed is, from the present understanding of physics, a matter of metaphysics. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.94.143|172.68.94.143]] 13:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Having worked in fusion research, I'd say it's still a physics problem because we don't yet know if it's physically possible for a burning plasma to be confined for long enough on a small enough scale to create a viable power plant. It's not necessarily just a question of designing the right machine, if you see what I mean. However, while it's potentially a question of great value to humanity, I don't think it's significant in terms of the completeness of physics as a field. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 15:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

2524: Comet Visitor

2021-10-05T11:25:32Z

192·168·0·1: Created by a PACIFIC GARBAGE PATCH

{{comic
| number = 2524
| date = October 4, 2021
| title = Comet Visitor
| image = comet_visitor.png
| titletext = It's a myth that the Great Wall of China is the only human-made structure visible from space--there are LOTS of structures for us to feel self-conscious about!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a PACIFIC GARBAGE PATCH - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{{w|C/2014 UN271 (Bernardinelli-Bernstein)|Comet C/2014 UN271}} is a large comet that was discovered in 2014 almost as far from the Sun as the orbit of Neptune, and it will reach its closest approach in 2031, near Saturn's orbit. It's an {{w|Oort Cloud}} comet, with a period of more than 4 million years. Since modern humans ({{w|homo sapiens}}) evolved about 300,000 years ago (although tool-making ancestors were around about 2.5 million years ago), the last time it was among the planets was long before humans evolved.

When a long-period comet comes into the inner Solar System, it's often figuratively called a "visit". But Megan and Cueball treat this more literally. Just as one usually neatens up their home when they're expecting guests, to make a good impression, they realize they need to clean up the Earth and its vicinity in preparation for this "visitor". Cueball starts handing out assignments -- he'll clean up the {{w|Pacific Garbage Patch}}, and suggests that Megan take care of all the debris in orbit. It's also common to put some useful objects out of view without throwing them away (perhaps to prevent someone damaging them), planning on returning them to their normal place after the visit; Cueball suggests doing this with the Mars rovers. And he suggests sweeping up the footprints that NASA astronauts left on the Moon during the Apollo missions. However, since the comet will never be anywhere near Earth and Mars, all this hardly seems necessary; it would be like cleaning up your home because the President or some other dignitary will be somewhere in the same metropolitan area. Furthermore, sweeping footprints in the Moon, that Cueball sees as a way of tidying up, would be seen as [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/nasa-looks-to-protect-historic-sites-on-the-moon-47186092/ destroying an invaluable archaeological sites by NASA and other people].

The title text debunks the claim that the {{w|Great Wall of China}} is the only human-made structure visible from outer space; in fact the Great Wall cannot easily be distinguished from space (as it is very long but not wide), but some other human constructions such as the Pyramids can (and cities are easily visible at night because they emit light).

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

:[Megan sits at a desk in front of a computer, looking to the left off-panel and pointing at the screen]
:Megan: Have you seen this big comet, C/2014 UN271? It'll pass near Saturn's orbit in 10 years.
:[Cueball stands behind Megan, who is now looking at the computer and typing]
:Cueball: Wow, look at the orbital period.
:Megan: Yeah, it hasn't been to this part of the solar system since humans evolved. At '''''least.'''''
:[Cueball starts running off-panel, holding his finger in the air. Megan looks towards him with both arms resting on the back of her chair]
:Cueball: Well, we definitely need to tidy up. I'll start on the Pacific Garbage Patch, you tackle orbital debris.
:Megan: What about the moon footprints?
:Cueball: Sweep them up. Collect the Mars rovers, too! We can put them back once it's gone.

{{comic discussion}}

2524: Comet Visitor

2021-10-05T11:21:09Z

192·168·0·1: Let's not get dragged into that

{{comic
| number = 2524
| date = October 4, 2021
| title = Comet Visitor
| image = comet_visitor.png
| titletext = It's a myth that the Great Wall of China is the only human-made structure visible from space--there are LOTS of structures for us to feel self-conscious about!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SELF-CONSCIOUS HUMAN CLEANING UP FOR A VISITING CHUNGUS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{{w|C/2014 UN271 (Bernardinelli-Bernstein)|Comet C/2014 UN271}} is a large comet that was discovered in 2014 almost as far from the Sun as the orbit of Neptune, and it will reach its closest approach in 2031, near Saturn's orbit. It's an {{w|Oort Cloud}} comet, with a period of more than 4 million years. Since modern humans ({{w|homo sapiens}}) evolved about 300,000 years ago (although tool-making ancestors were around about 2.5 million years ago), the last time it was among the planets was long before humans evolved.

When a long-period comet comes into the inner Solar System, it's often figuratively called a "visit". But Megan and Cueball treat this more literally. Just as one usually neatens up their home when they're expecting guests, to make a good impression, they realize they need to clean up the Earth and its vicinity in preparation for this "visitor". Cueball starts handing out assignments -- he'll clean up the {{w|Pacific Garbage Patch}}, and suggests that Megan take care of all the debris in orbit. It's also common to put some useful objects out of view without throwing them away (perhaps to prevent someone damaging them), planning on returning them to their normal place after the visit; Cueball suggests doing this with the Mars rovers. And he suggests sweeping up the footprints that NASA astronauts left on the Moon during the Apollo missions. However, since the comet will never be anywhere near Earth and Mars, all this hardly seems necessary; it would be like cleaning up your home because the President or some other dignitary will be somewhere in the same metropolitan area. Furthermore, sweeping footprints in the Moon, that Cueball sees as a way of tidying up, would be seen as [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/nasa-looks-to-protect-historic-sites-on-the-moon-47186092/ destroying an invaluable archaeological sites by NASA and other people].

The title text debunks the claim that the {{w|Great Wall of China}} is the only human-made structure visible from outer space; in fact the Great Wall cannot easily be distinguished from space (as it is very long but not wide), but some other human constructions such as the Pyramids can (and cities are easily visible at night because they emit light).

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

:[Megan sits at a desk in front of a computer, looking to the left off-panel and pointing at the screen]
:Megan: Have you seen this big comet, C/2014 UN271? It'll pass near Saturn's orbit in 10 years.
:[Cueball stands behind Megan, who is now looking at the computer and typing]
:Cueball: Wow, look at the orbital period.
:Megan: Yeah, it hasn't been to this part of the solar system since humans evolved. At '''''least.'''''
:[Cueball starts running off-panel, holding his finger in the air. Megan looks towards him with both arms resting on the back of her chair]
:Cueball: Well, we definitely need to tidy up. I'll start on the Pacific Garbage Patch, you tackle orbital debris.
:Megan: What about the moon footprints?
:Cueball: Sweep them up. Collect the Mars rovers, too! We can put them back once it's gone.

{{comic discussion}}

2063: Carnot Cycle

2021-08-20T09:49:56Z

192·168·0·1: lint

{{comic
| number = 2063
| date = October 24, 2018
| title = Carnot Cycle
| image = carnot_cycle.png
| titletext = The Carnot cycle is more properly known by its full title, the "Carnot-Tolkien-Wagner Ring Cycle."
}}

==Explanation==

This comic shows a {{w|Pressure–volume diagram}} which is used in this case for a {{w|Carnot cycle}}, a theoretical thermodynamic cycle covered in most thermodynamics classes which looks a lot like the figure drawn. The most common example of a (suboptimal) Carnot cycle is the {{w|Heat_pump_and_refrigeration_cycle|vapor compression cycle}} used in {{w|Refrigerator|refrigerators}}. However in this case, [[Randall]] has replaced the labels of the 4 stages of the real Carnot cycle with new ones.

Pressure–volume diagrams were first developed to understand the efficiency of steam engines and plot the change of pressure ''p'' with respect to volume ''V'' for a specific process. The process forms a cycle and the amount of energy involved can be estimated by the area under the curve on the chart. The Carnot cycle describes the ideal efficiency that such an engine can achieve during the conversion of heat into work, or vice versa like in a refrigeration system. The real steps are called (explained in short):
#'''Isothermal expansion''' (An external heat source causes an increase of volume and an antiproportional lowering of pressure, driving the motor. It's more efficient if this step is performed slowly.)
#'''Isentropic expansion''' (The volume of the gas goes down further while the pressure decreases dramatically, as the external heat source is now absent, transforming heat directly into work, lowering the Temperature. This step is more efficient, if it goes quicker.)
#'''Isothermal compression''' (External cooling and a small amount of work from another part of the machine decreases the volume of the gas and leads to the last step:)
#'''Isentropic compression''' (Now the gas is sharply compressed, using part of the work from step two to return the gas to the beginning of step one, raising the Temperature back up.)

An isothermal process is a change of a system, in which the temperature remains constant. In this diagram the volume increases (expansion) or decreases (compression). The term isentropic describes a lossless process where no heat leaves the gas, here the increased volume only causes a further decrease in pressure; it is also called an adiabatic process and is the thing which warms air when you compress it quickly. Isentropic means "doesn't cause the heat death of the universe", which is a rare thing.

The prefix ''iso-'' is derived from the Ancient Greek word ''ísos'' which translates to ''equal'' and used widely in modern days in science like here to indicate a process at the same temperature (-thermal) which is not shown in the graph. The prefix ''is-'' to the term {{w|Entropy|entropy}} is used because isoentropic sounds stupid.

In the comic, the cycle also has two phases of expansion followed by two phases of contraction (or "decline"), but the names of steps one to three are replaced with other words beginning with the prefix "iso-" meaning same or equal, and the factors that are held constant are absurd.

Each step in this comic is explained below:

'''1. Isometric expansion.''' When heated, the gas becomes larger due to increasing volume

Isometric (literally "equal dimensions") can refer to a property or process that is symmetrical in all dimensions (i.e. the gas is expanding radially) or to a [[wikipedia:Isometric process | type of thermodynamic process]] where volume is held constant but temperature is free to vary, the exact opposite of the first step in the real Carnot cycle. Additionally, the comic text uses a circular argument (become larger due to increasing volume).

In mathematics, an {{w|isometric mapping}} (between metric spaces) is a map that keeps all the distances intact. If we measure the distance the same way throughout the cycle, then isometric expansion (or for that matter, isometric compression) is not really an expansion (or a compression).

'''2. Isotonic expansion.''' The gas expands further due to dark energy while percent milkfat remains constant.

{{w|Isotonic}} is a descriptor commonly associated with sports drinks (and not thermodynamics), which contain similar concentrations of salt and sugar as in the human body. {{w|Dark energy}} is hypothesized to be a cause for the expansion of the universe, which obviously isn't relevant to thermodynamics.(Yet.) The [https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/AliciaNoelleJones.shtml density of milk] depends on milkfat and solids-non-fat, which includes lactose. Fortified milk has increased solids-non-fat but the same percentage of milkfat, resulting in increased calories and an increased density. So the fortification of milk results in increased calories, possibly referred to as dark energy, and a contraction, as less space is needed for 1 kg of milk. However, this explanation does not match the expansion suggested in the comic.

Later Randall again combined dark energy (and also dark matter) with milkfat in [[2216: Percent Milkfat]].

'''3. Isopropyl compression.''' While inflation is held constant, the gas contracts due to tightening interest rates.

{{w|Isopropyl alcohol}} is commonly used for cleaning. Inflation and contraction could refer to changes in gas volume, but the reference to {{w|interest rate}}s puts them in the context of {{w|macroeconomics}}. Raising ("tightening") interest rates tends to reduce {{w|inflation}} and/or "contract" the economy. High interest rates are a feature of the third stage (recession) of the {{w|Juglar cycle}}. In economics (and other sciences) to better understand model parameter relations, some parameter may be held constant in theory. This could refer to the {{w|Fisher equation}}. Holding one parameter constant is also done in the Carnot cycle (for a physical parameter): not only in theory but also in practice! (In free market economies the inflation cannot be directly held constant).

But inflation may also refer to ''dark energy'' mentioned at the ''isotonic expansion'' section above. {{w|Inflation (cosmology)|Inflation}} in cosmology is a theory of the exponential expansion of space in the early universe, an effect associated with the "accelerating universe" and for which findings the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics was given. The NationalGeographic blog entry [https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2011/10/12/nobel-prize-in-physics-2011-the-accelerating-universe/ Nobel Prize in Physics 2011 – The Accelerating Universe] explains that "...Today, most physicists, influenced by inflation, would ... call it dark energy."

'''4. Decline and fall.''' The gas diminishes and goes into the West while remaining Galadriel, completing the cycle.

{{w|Galadriel}} is a character in ''{{w|The Lord of the Rings}}''. She is one of the leading {{w|Elf (Middle-earth)|elves}}, a race that in the time of the book is said to be dwindling (in number and importance) in {{w|Middle Earth}} and migrating westward to {{w|Valinor}}. Galadriel is one of the last elves to leave, after successfully resisting temptation to take the One Ring and become an all-powerful queen who dominates Middle-earth, instead saying "I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel." The title may be a reference to {{w|Edward Gibbon}}'s 18th century masterpiece ''{{w|The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire}}'', or to the novel ''{{w|Decline and Fall}}'' by {{w|Evelyn Waugh}} (which is itself a reference to Gibbon's book). This stage is present in the cycle because in the real cycle, at this stage, volume of the gas decreases without exchange of heat. It is the last stage after which the gas has its original value of variables, thus completing the cycle.

The title text refers to {{w|Richard Wagner}} and {{w|J.R.R Tolkien}}. Wagner's ''{{w|Der Ring des Nibelungen|Ring Cycle}}'' consists of four operas. Tolkien wrote ''{{w|The Lord of the Rings}}'', which some have [[wikipedia:J. R. R. Tolkien's influences#Wagnerian_influences|suggested]] was inspired by Wagner's Ring. Their works are known as {{w|literary cycle}}s.

==Transcript==
:[A cartesian plot in the first quadrant with axes labeled "P" on the vertical axis and "V" on the horizontal axis, with a rhombus-shaped set of four points with arrows between them.]
:[Caption above the graph:]
:The four stages of the
:'''Carnot Cycle'''

:[The first line starts at the top-left point and goes right and slightly downwards to the next point. The label is:]
:'''1. Isometric Expansion'''
:When heated, the gas becomes larger due to increasing volume

:[The next line starts at the last point and goes downwards and a little to the right.]
:'''2. Isotonic Expansion'''
:The gas expands further due to dark energy while percent milkfat remains constant

:[The next line starts at this last point and goes to the left and slightly upwards.]
:'''3. Isopropyl Compression'''
:While inflation is held constant, the gas contracts due to tightening interest rates

:[The last line goes upwards and slightly to the left, returning to the first point.]
:'''4. Decline and Fall'''
:The gas diminishes and goes into the west while remaining Galadriel, completing the cycle

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:LOTR]]

Talk:2504: Fissile Raspberry Isotopes

2021-08-20T09:39:24Z

192·168·0·1: I signed up, so changed this sig to be my account

This joke is like a visual pun, a raspberry fruit looks sorta like a nuclear model, and so it behaves the same (ie can go supercritical). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.72|172.69.35.72]] 20:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
:Along with an actual pun: pi in "pi meson" sounds like pie in "raspberry pie". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:43, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
::If it isn't also an intentional tertiary reference to the Raspberry Pi computer board, I'll eat my [https://thepihut.com/collections/raspberry-pi-hats hat]! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.109|141.101.98.109]] 21:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
:::I'd say you would have to eat it. Cannot see what this comic has to do with a computer board, just because it is named after a raspberry pie. This joke is obviously about the berries looking like nuclear cores, and pie mesons. Not about anything with a computer. So take some salt an eat (or swallow one the hats in your link, along with a camel :p ) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
::::I interpreted 'tertiary' to mean that randall was [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology) 'primed'] to talk about raspberry pies due to his exposure to the board, and similarly for readers finding it interesting and humorous. [[User:Baffo32|Baffo32]] ([[User talk:Baffo32|talk]]) 08:28, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Though raspberries resemble the common ''depiction'' of nuclei, perhaps we need to explain that in reality, nuclei are rather different..? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
:I think anyone reading xkcd and this page, will figure it out via the links ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
::I tend to forget that nuclei aren't little raspberries made of nucleons, even though I used to be a fusion researcher. In fact I'm sure I was only ever half-aware they weren't (I didn't study the actual nuclear physics, ok!)... so +1 from me in favour of adding a bit about the 'real' nature of nuclei, that would be interesting. --[[User:192·168·0·1|192·168·0·1]] ([[User talk:192·168·0·1|talk]]) 09:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I would suggest referring to the raspberry parts as 'drupelets' rather than 'ovaries'.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.173|172.70.114.173]] 12:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
:I love eating the juiciest and sweetest of fruit ovaries, raspberries and strawberries are my favorite but I also enjoy apples and grapes --[[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 17:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
::I looked this up briefly and I _think_ that the ovaries are what develop into the drupelets, here, not certain, judging by phrasing on wikipedia. So I changed it. Don't eat the ovaries, eat the part that's designed for eating. [[User:Baffo32|Baffo32]] ([[User talk:Baffo32|talk]]) 08:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
The page says "Of course, in real life raspberries don't do that.[citation needed]" - where is one supposed to find a useful citation to state that fields of raspberries ''don't'' explode? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.101|108.162.229.101]] 22:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
:That’s the point! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.45|108.162.215.45]] 02:55, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
:It's a joke, and you are free to remove it if you so judge. Others may disagree. Sometimes raspberry farms have some pretty hard to describe explosive activity when their parts combine in rare chain reactions. [[User:Baffo32|Baffo32]] ([[User talk:Baffo32|talk]]) 08:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)