explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

928: Mimic Octopus

2016-08-07T17:43:22Z

Adam Karlson: Added fish, Moorish idol

{{comic
| number = 928
| date = July 22, 2011
| title = Mimic Octopus
| image = mimic_octopus.png
| titletext = Even if the dictionaries are starting to give in, I refuse to accept 'octopi' as a word mainly because--I'm not making this up--there's a really satisfying climactic scene in the Orson Scott Card horror novel 'Lost Boys' which hinges on it being an incorrect pluralization.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a parody of fish and sea-life identification charts, referencing the {{w|mimic octopus}} which, as the name implies, is able to mimic other animals, so all animals and objects found in the sea could actually just be such an animal.

The identification chart for South East Asian sea life shows 13 creatures mimicked including eight individual fish (two of which are not yet recognized) and other objects and animals. Those that can be distinguished are: A {{w|Moorish idol}} (Gill, from {{w|Finding Nemo}}) A {{w|tuna}} (3rd), a {{w|clownfish}} (4th), a {{w|lionfish}} (6th, and from here the rest can be named), a {{w|shark}}, a {{w|crinoid|sea lilies}}, an {{w|angler fish}}, an {{w|anchor}}, a {{w|submarine}}, a {{w|scuba diver}} and {{w|Shoaling and schooling|school of 11 fish}}. Finally there is an {{w|octopus}}, but where all the other silhouettes are lapeled ''Mimic octopus'' the single octopus is labeled ''Two Mimic Octopuses'', which is the pun of this comic.

The {{w|Orson Scott Card}} novel that the title text refers to is ''{{w|Lost Boys (novel)|Lost Boys}}'': "A withdrawn eight-year-old in a troubled family invents imaginary friends who bear the names of missing children" (Publisher's Weekly). The part of the story that [[Randall]] is referring to (Chapter 7, Crickets) involves a situation where the protagonist, Stewie, is given a C grade for an otherwise impeccable diorama featuring underwater animals involving clay sculptures (when only a poster would have sufficed) and a well-written presentation supposedly because the other children had destroyed the diorama before the end of the day. To make matters worse, his teacher, Ms. Jones, had made fun of his project and given the ribbon for first prize to someone else.

On inquiring about, his father, Step, found out that the principal, Dr. Mariner, had already made the decision to hand Stewie the blue ribbon for first prize as she had reviewed the project before it had been destroyed, but Ms. Jones had secretly overruled her behind her back by announcing that another child (JJ) would receive the ribbon. So, the next day he met up with Ms Jones after school to have a word on the grading of his project. Needless to say, they ended up arguing about minor issues, with Mrs Jones justifying the reason for her decision on, among other things, the definition of a 'depiction', whether or not the amount of content was defined by the word count or the number of pages and of the importance of putting the report in a plastic cover. The argument finally comes to a head when Step points out that there was only one red mark on the project report, and that concerned an 'incorrect' pluralization of the word 'octopus'

:“But Mrs. Jones, surely you know that the plural of “octopus” is either ‘octopus’, with nothing added, or ‘octopuses’.”
:“I think not,” said Mrs. Jones.
:“Think again, Mrs. Jones.”
:She must have realized that she was not on firm ground here. “Perhaps ‘octopuses’ is an alternate plural, but I’m sure that ‘octopi’ is the preferred.”
:“No, Mrs. Jones. If you had looked it up, you would have discovered that ‘octopi’ is not the preferred spelling. It is not a spelling at all. '''The word does not exist, except in the mouths of those who are pretending to be educated but in fact are not.''' This is because the ‘us’ ending of ‘octopus’ is not a Latin nominative singular ending, which would form its plural by changing to the letter ‘i’. Instead, the syllable ‘pus’ in ‘octopus’ is the Greek word for ‘foot.’ And it forms its plural the Greek way. Therefore ‘octopoda’, not ‘octopi’. Never ‘octopi’.”
:“Well, then, octopoda. Your son’s paper said octopuses.”
:“I know,” said Step. “When he asked me the correct plural, I told him octopoda. But then he was still uncertain, because my son doesn’t think he knows something until he knows it, and so he looked it up. And to my surprise, octopoda is only used when referring to more than one species of octopus, rather than when referring to more than one actual octopus. What Stevie put in his paper is in fact the preferred dictionary usage. Which you would have known, too, if you had looked it up.”

After proving his case that his son did indeed deserve an A grade, he then threatened to bring the matter to the attention of the principal. He then warned Mrs Jones that while he wanted the grade to remain unchanged, he wanted her to inform the class that the ribbon would be awarded to Stewie, before revealing that he had been recording the conversation all along. And, after this, after Mrs Jones came crying for forgiveness before leaving, Step realized how vulnerable she was and how she was channeling her frustration at one particular student in each class to find some relief from that.

According to the [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFyY2mK8pxk Merriam-Webster Dictionary], 'octopi', 'octopuses', and 'octopodes' (UK English) are all correct plural versions of "octopus." Supposedly, Randall would very much like the word 'octopi' to remain unrecognized by major dictionaries as otherwise it would lessen the magnitude of the climactic conclusion of this argument by rendering Step's mockery of Ms. Jones' perceived intellectual superiority factually invalid. This also offers another reason, apart from the pun, why the octopus in the chart is named ''two mimic octopuses'', so Randall can use the correct pluralization of the word in the comic. This is an example of a comic where the title text seems more important to Randall than the actual comic.

It should be noted that, at least according to [http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=octopus Etymology Dictonary], Octopi is wrong for exactly the reasons that Step lists and first appears over 60 years later.

==Transcript==
:[Captions above the panel:]
:<big>Southeast Asian Sea Life</big>
:Identification Chart
:[The chart consist of 14 black silhouettes which includes eight individual fish and several other object/animals. From top left: A fish, a fish, a tuna, a clownfish, a fish, a lionfish, a shark, a sea lilies, an angler fish, an anchor with chain, a submarine, a scuba diver, a school of seven large and four small fish, and and at the bottom right a silhouette of an octopus displaying eight arms and a tilted head with large white eyes. All 14 are labeled the same except the octopus:]
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Mimic Octopus
:Two Mimic Octopuses

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Sharks]]

889: Turtles

2016-08-02T17:25:32Z

Adam Karlson: /* Alternative Explanation and Correction */

{{comic
| number = 889
| date = April 22, 2011
| title = Turtles
| image = turtles.png
| titletext = You're a turtle!
}}

==Explanation==
There's not a lot to this comic, and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill would kind of defeat the joke. Simply put, the turtle doesn't need to get worked up over anything. While an offscreen character is panicking over deleting a file, the turtle is content with just being a turtle. Fifty years later it is still content with being a turtle. Perspective, man!

==Alternative Explanation and Correction ==
The "turtle" shown in the comic clearly has small legs instead of the flipper-ish limbs of turtles. this actually makes it a tortoise! Also, the lifespan of a tortoise is approximately twice (100-150 years) as long as that of a turtle(~80 years) . So,the organism which would look somewhat similar after 50 Years must be a tortoise.
An alternative explanation could be that the satisfaction of knowledge that the creature has poses an obstruction to his venturing out and finding its true identity. It was told that it's a turtle, thus, it continues to believe, even though it's wrong. The minor panicking of humans actually is a driving force of our sentience. turtles

The title text is a reference to [[231: Cat Proximity]].

==Transcript==
:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: Oh, crap, I deleted the file!

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: No, wait, there it is.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:50 Years Later:
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:Turtles have it figured out, man.

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

889: Turtles

2016-08-02T17:24:23Z

Adam Karlson: Added alternative explanation

{{comic
| number = 889
| date = April 22, 2011
| title = Turtles
| image = turtles.png
| titletext = You're a turtle!
}}

==Explanation==
There's not a lot to this comic, and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill would kind of defeat the joke. Simply put, the turtle doesn't need to get worked up over anything. While an offscreen character is panicking over deleting a file, the turtle is content with just being a turtle. Fifty years later it is still content with being a turtle. Perspective, man!

==Alternative Explanation and Correction ==
The "turtle" shown in the comic clearly has small legs instead of the flipper-ish limbs of turtles. this actually makes it a tortoise! Also, the lifespan of a tortoise is approximately twice (100-150 years) as long as that of a turtle(~80 years) . So,the organism which would look somewhat similar after 50 Years must be a tortoise.
An alternative explanation could be that the satisfaction of knowledge that the creature has poses an obstruction to his venturing out and finding its true identity. It was told that it's a turtle, thus, it continues to believe, even though it's wrong. The minor panicking of humans actually is a driving force of our sentience. turtles
The title text is a reference to [[231: Cat Proximity]].

==Transcript==
:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: Oh, crap, I deleted the file!

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Off-panel: No, wait, there it is.

:[There is a turtle.]
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:[There is a turtle.]
:50 Years Later:
:Turtle (thinking): I am a turtle.

:Turtles have it figured out, man.

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

859: (

2016-07-24T19:00:56Z

Adam Karlson:

{{comic
| number = 859
| date = February 11, 2011
| title = (
| image = (.png
| titletext = Brains aside, I wonder how many poorly-written xkcd.com-parsing scripts will break on this title (or ;;"'<nowiki/>'{<<[' this mouseover text."
}}

== Explanation ==

In programming, punctuation is often used to mark sections of code. Paired punctuation marks must always be matched up with a corresponding closing mark, otherwise a so-called {{w|syntax error}} occurs. The programming language {{w|Lisp_(programming_language)|Lisp}} (also featured in [[224: Lisp]]) is known for large numbers of nested/paired parentheses. Even in literary works intended only for human consumption, the absence of a matching closing parenthesis (as appears in this sentence or other "balanced" punctuation sets creates a mental expectation of eventual closure and completion that remains unfulfilled even long after the unmatched mark is encountered. See what I mean?

There is also reference to [[312: With Apologies to Robert Frost]] which could contain the missing parentheses.

It can also be interpreted as a {{w|metaphor}}, which compares the reader with a Lisp {{w|Interpreter (Computing)|interpreter}}. The interpreter looks for the parenthesis until the end of the file, where it eventually halts, and prints out the error. The comic claims that if you read an unmatched parenthesis, you will look for it for the rest of the day too.

It also refers to this awkward feeling when you see something (like an unmatched parentheses, speling error or a randomly-placed, comma.

The title text refers to the same issue as already highlighted in [[327: Exploits of a Mom]]: if your scripts trust external input, you sometimes will be surprised. At the time of this comic, there were quite a few websites that would grab the xkcd comic three times a week and publish them on their own site. This comic likely broke at least some of the websites because of either the unmatched brace or the extra unmatched markup that is in the title text.

==Transcript==
:[A frame with only text.]
:(An unmatched left parenthesis creates an unresolved that will stay with you all day.

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

855: 1999

2016-07-24T18:47:57Z

Adam Karlson:

{{comic
| number = 855
| date = February 2, 2011
| title = 1999
| image = 1999.png
| titletext = 'Whoa, twenty-two in two hours!' 'Your site got twenty-two hundred hits in two hours?' 'No. Twenty-two. But still, that's like half the people on the internet!'
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a parody of the movie {{w|The Social Network}}, a movie about the founding of the popular social network site Facebook. Here, scenes from the movie are reimagined to feature {{w|Zombo.com}} instead. Zombo.com, also known as Zombocom, is a website that was created in 1999 and using only {{w|Flash animations}}. [[Randall]], like many others more, doesn't like this technique at all. The animation consists of a circle of quickly pulsating dots and a friendly{{citation needed}} deep male voice repeatedly welcoming the visitor to "Zombocom" and explaining that there was no limit to what could be done at the site, or rather, no limit except yourself. The message repeats while, ironically, there is absolutely nothing that can be done at the site.

Turn on your speakers and check [http://zombo.com zombo.com] for yourself.

The title text could also be a reference to the fact that, back in 1999, there weren't really that many people on the internet.

==Transcript==
:It's easy to forget, as we heap awards on ''The Social Network'',
:That before there was Facebook, MySpace, or even Friendster...
:One website dreamed bigger than them all.

:[Cueball and another are talking.]
:Cueball: People like doing stuff. So why not build a website that offers that?
:Another: Offers what? What would I do there?
:Cueball: Anything! The only limit is yourself!

:[Another scene. Hacker, wearing headphones and oblivious, working at computer. Cueball runs in to interrupt; Another holds him back.]
:Cueball: Hey, we need more—
:Another: Don't–he's wired in.
:Hacker: ''The infinite is possible.''
:Another: Or baked. It's hard to tell.

:[Cueball and another at table in bar.]
:Cueball: It's time to monetize. We could make millions!
:Another: No way. A million dollars isn't cool. You know what's cool?
:Cueball: A billio–
:Another: ''Circles.''

:[Long shot in bar. Drinks on table in foreground; dim figures in doorway in background; Cueball, alone, shouting into the distance.]
:Cueball: Hey–a tip: drop the dot.
:Cueball: Just "Zombocom".
:Cueball: It's cleaner.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

798: Adjectives

2016-07-23T15:09:45Z

Adam Karlson: Added meaning of the words in comic

{{comic
| number = 798
| date = September 27, 2010
| title = Adjectives
| image = adjectives.png
| titletext = 'Fucking ineffable' sounds like someone remembering how to do self-censorship halfway through a phrase.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a {{w|Plot_(graphics)|plot graph}} comparing how often certain adjectives are used alone versus in the phrases ''"fucking [adjective]"'' and ''"[adjective] as shit"''. Plot data is based on Google search engine result count, or ''hits''. The graph's formula uses the {{w|natural logarithm}} of the hits for the obscene phrase divided by the hits for the adjective alone.

It's a social observation of linguistics pointing out that the use of swear words as intensifiers is more common with everyday words (''eg. annoying, pissed, stupid'') than it is with more arcane words (''eg. piquant, fungible''). Two words are used as examples in a sentence shown to the right. These sentences are not something you would be likely to overhear. In the case of ''fucking fungible'' it is also a way to justify its relatively high occurrence online. Of course given the log scale, it is still very rarely used like this.

The only word included in the graph that's never found in either obscene phrase is ''[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/peristeronic peristeronic]''. Its definition ''("Of or pertaining to pigeons")'' is included due to its extreme obscurity. (The words was used again later as a [[1572:_xkcd_Survey#Difficult_words| difficult word]] in the survey part of comic [[1572: xkcd Survey]].

The title text mocks the use of the word ''fucking'' in combination with ''[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ineffable ineffable]'' since the colloquialism ''effing'' or ''F-ing'' is a way of censoring "the F-word", ''fuck''. The two used together resembles someone partially self-censoring the phrase "fucking unfuckable."

==Meanings of lesser known words==

'''Prosaic''' - lacking originality/creativity.

'''Ambivalent''' - having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone.

'''Evanescent''' - which disappears very quickly , transient/ephemeral

'''Piquant''' - Which has a tangy appetizing taste.

'''Jejune''' - naive, simplistic

'''Kafkaesque''' - Nightmarishly bizarre and surreal , read more about it [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Kafka#.22Kafkaesque.22 here]

'''Stochastic''' - Random and unpredictable, most often used in a technical sense

'''Fungible''' - Replaceable

==Transcript==
:Frequency with which various adjectives are intensified with obscenities (based on Google hits)
:[The legend above the plot reads:]
:Red marker: "fucking ____"
:Blue marker: "____ as shit"
:[Mathematical formula for scale next to the legend:]
:Scale: ln(hits for intensified phrase/hits for adjective alone)
:[The plot itself lists a series of adjectives in approximately descending order. Each has a red and a blue marker corresponding to the scale described.]
:[Horizontal axis starts with none, then has a vertical dashed line, then 'rarely' at -17, increasing to 'often' at -5.]
:[Each adjective is listed with approximate red and blue values, in that order.]
:Annoying -5 -4.5
:Pissed -5 -6
:Stupid -5 -8
:Bored -6 -6
:Sexy -5.5 -6.5
:Adorable -6.5 -9.5
:Disgusting -6.5 -12.5
:Calm -7 -10
:Delicious -8 -13
:Obscene -6 -14
:Prosaic -10 -13.5
:Bemused -8.5 -14
:Apropos -10.5 -16
:Ambivalent -12 -17
:Improper -12.5 -18
:Evanescent -14 -14.5
:Piquant -9.5 never
:Jejune -9 never
:Kafkaesque -10 never
:Stochastic -14 never
:Fungible -12 never
:Peristeronic ("Of or pertaining to pigeons") never never
:[There are two small scenes in the bottom right of the plot. The first shows a pair of women holding wine glasses.]
:Megan: Yes, the Cabernet is piquant as ''shit'' this year.
:[The second shows Cueball sitting at a computer desk.]
:Cueball: Whoa — these commodities are fucking ''fungible!''

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Language]]