explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-18T22:44:20Z

Afbach: casting doubt on K.K. vs Godzilla victor

Because I didn't know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic:_Ecks_vs._Sever - "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is a 2002 action thriller film directed by Wych Kaosayananda (under the pseudonym of "Kaos"). The film stars Antonio Banderas and Lucy Liu as opposing secret agents who team up to fight a common enemy. It is an international co-production between Canada, Germany and the United States.
The film has been called one of the worst ever made. At the box office, it made $19.9 million on a $70 million budget. With a total of 117 reviews, the highest for a film with a 0% score, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is the worst reviewed film in the history of Rotten Tomatoes." [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Re: King Kong vs Godzilla - the winner? WikiP notes: "After an underwater battle (off-screen) only Kong resurfaces from the water, and he begins to swim back towards his island home. There is no sign of Godzilla, but the JSDF speculates that it is possible that it survived." We never see another K.K. movie (from Japan, anyway) and plenty more Godzilla so maybe K.K. is just swimming home with his tail between his legs ... er, metaphorically speaking. Godzilla could just be taking a well deserved post-fight nap! Long live Godzilla!! [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Some of these matchups have relatively clear outcomes, e.g. Ford beat Ferrari (at least in the movie), and presumably we can say Kramer won Kramer v. Kramer (well, everybody lost, but...). That in mind, if we fill out the bracket with such nominal wins that lead to matchups, (Kramer v. Ford), do we learn anything interesting? And what does the resulting bracket look like? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 18:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
* Kramer vs. Ford
* Larry Flynt vs. Joe
* King Kong vs. Jason
* ? vs. Predator
* ? vs. Marge
* ? vs. Asterix
* Batman vs. Scott Pilgrim
* ? vs. Plants
(Also, the @xkcdbrackets twitter account is running a version of the tournament starting 2019-11-19.) [[User:Yomikoma|Yomikoma]] ([[User talk:Yomikoma|talk]]) 22:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Should a table of all the match-ups and their sources be made? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.246.28|162.158.246.28]] 19:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Should this be referencing the other time (or times?) Randall made a silly brackets where all first-round matchups are based on actual oppositions in a particular theme? I'm thinking of [https://xkcd.com/2037/|2037: Supreme Court Bracket]. Also I kinda wonder what happens when the winners of these two brackets clash. [[Special:Contributions/91.164.113.87|91.164.113.87]] 19:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Added this to the Tournament Bracket category for just that reason. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.145|172.69.63.145]]

I stole the description directly from [[2037|Supreme Court Bracket]], is that okay? [[User:Duraludon|Duraludon]] ([[User talk:Duraludon|talk]]) 20:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The winner of Freddy vs. Jason is unclear. Freddy's head is severed but he then winks and you hear his laughter implying it is another trick. That is a reoccurring thing with Freddy.

I was excited to see the winner of the bracket. Scott Pilgrim vs Kramer? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.28|172.68.34.28]] 21:09, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-18T18:04:16Z

Afbach: E vs S vs passage of time

Talk:2225: Voting Referendum

2019-11-06T19:49:27Z

Afbach: /* Lousiana Primary */ new section

{{Talk:2220: Imagine Going Back in Time/Ads}}

== Lousiana Primary ==

I didn't know - WikiP: The so-called Louisiana primary is the common term for the Louisiana general election for local, state, and congressional offices.[1] On election day, all candidates for the same office appear together on the ballot, often including several candidates from each major party. The candidate who receives a simple majority is elected. If no candidate wins a simple majority in the first round, there is a runoff one month later between the top two candidates to determine the winner. This system is also used for United States Senate special elections in Mississippi and Texas, and all special elections for partisan offices in Georgia.[2][[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Talk:2220: Imagine Going Back in Time

2019-10-28T15:21:50Z

Afbach: difference of opinion on the crux of "being mocked" between Cueballs (imagine saying that 20 years ago).

I wonder if Randall had a particular "frog pokemon" in mind? Croagunk, Toxicroak, Froakie, Frogadier, Greninja...? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.44.150|172.69.44.150]] 19:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
:Hint: First, Pokemon Go didn't finished deploying generation 5 pokemons yet. Second, Trump is totally toxic. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
::The Poliwhirl family dates from Generation 1 and is the "original" frog pokémon. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.36|162.158.122.36]] 23:59, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
:::Yes so fur sure the frog Pokémon Politoed from gen 2, since the Poliwag is tadpoles. I agree that Toxicroach or Croagunk would fit better with Trump in Randall's view, but it is a reelect Trump fan, so he would most likely use a green frog that is not "ugly". Have added this to the description with link to page with picture. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

"... and I suppose Marla Maples is the first lady!" [[Special:Contributions/172.68.38.88|172.68.38.88]] 20:04, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I know that Randall, and by extension Cueball, are not enthusiastic about the idea of dealing with a player who goes by "Reelect Trump 2020", but what does it mean that there is a frog Pokemon in the gym alongside? In other words, is Cueball's annoyance just that there is a Trump-promoting player in the game or is there more to it than that? --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.90.46|172.69.90.46]] 20:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
:I see that at least you made the connection to the original "Back to the Future" when Marty meets Doc in 1955 and tells him that Ronald Reagan is President. [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 06:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

:Definitely the Trump-promoting, as Toxicroak wouldn't be that hard pokemon to remove, with max CP 2488. Wait, "next to mine"? Ok, so he plays same team as Cueball and Cueball CANT remove it due to that. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
::And it is not a toxic pokémon when it is a fan of Trump that put it in! See above. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

:The frog Pokemon is likely a reference to Pepe the Frog, which is a meme popular with Trump supporters--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.90.112|172.68.90.112]] 20:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Trump was quite sufficiently (in)famous by 1999. Remember that he divorced his most famous wife, Ivana, in 1991. His various business and romantic <s>failures</s> ventures were regular tabloid fodder throughout the 90s. If you think a 1999 person would have never heard of Trump, you're obviously <s>too young to be using the internet</s> younger than I am. I think the main joke in this comic is that Cueball goes back expecting his younger self to go, "wait, re-elect WHO??", but his younger self doesn't even bat an eyelash at that part. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.175|173.245.52.175]] 21:03, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
:Famous, yes. Expected to became president, no. And young Cueball might be too young to care about tabloids and celebrities. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
:Nobody - not even Randall - is suggesting ANYBODY didn't know who Trump was in 1999. He's been quite famous for decades. The surprise here is that he's president, not who he is. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 03:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
:He was famous enough to be a recognizable cameo in ''Home Alone 2'' with no explanation (and ''Home Alone 2'' was basically ''the'' holiday movie at the time, since no one liked ''Home Alone 3''), but that fame was nothing compared to how famous he'd become later--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.36|162.158.122.36]] 15:07, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
::There is a ''Home Alone 3''? oO [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 14:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Has no one considered that we have been "dumbed down" to the point that so-called adults playing Pokemon and so-called adults voting for Trump are inextricably linked and are symptoms of the same malaise - a general inability to think for ourselves and a deep susceptibility to marketing, advertising and following the herd[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.148|108.162.241.148]] 03:05, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
:Yes, but nobody important. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.98|172.69.34.98]] 03:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
::Adults playing Pokemon just means they’re happy doing what makes them happy, why should someone be ashamed of it? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.141|162.158.166.141]] 10:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
:::Yes, I play Pokémon Go, I'm in my forties, and most of the other players I play with are adults although here it has had a revive with the kids in school again. I get a lot of fresh air and more exercise than I got before starting to play 2,5 year ago. And with Randall's obsession with Pokémon and his knowledge about the games mechanics he most likely plays it himself. There are millions of adults playing every day as it is one of the most downloaded apps in app store. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Just as I remember reading in a 1969 textbook that Ronald Regan was going to someday be elected President if (then current) political trends that became the “southern strategy” weren’t addressed, I also remember reading at least one op-Ed piece in the late 1990’s that if the political parties didn’t clean house and get rid of undue influence from big donors that someday Donald Trump would become President. There were people worried about Trump in 1999.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.129|162.158.62.129]] 04:13, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I can't help but wonder if the wording of the title text is meant to invoke another shocking reveal when considering what "trendy adults" really are into these days.--[[User:Henke37|Henke37]] ([[User talk:Henke37|talk]]) 15:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

What's with the width of this comic? It's too wide, and it breaks out of the standard xkcd.com layout a little bit. --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 16:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
:I noticed this, too. Has this happened before? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 14:47, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

20 years ago, I was a whiny little shit and would have probably ranted that I'm to cool for Pokemon, instead of just admitting that it looks interesting and would have wanted a gameboy to play it myself. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.22|172.69.55.22]] 10:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I am not sure which I find more disturbing. Randall's apparent unthinking Trump Derangement Syndrome (I would have imagined him too intelligent to fall for mere politics) or the fact that Explain XKCD seems to have been invaded by Goldman Sachs advertising. If you are going to use an ad rotator, could you at least set it to display DIFFERENT adverts on the same page? I don't need to see the same advert 3 times. [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 12:55, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
:In all fairness, I must point out that it is ''Cueball'' giving an kneejerk anti-Trump reaction in this comic, not Randall himself. While Randall does often project his own views through the characters of his comic, we cannot say for certain that that is the case here. In the past he has often created characters with incorrect or strawman positions in order to make a point or to satirize them. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 13:46, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, It seems to me that today's Cueball's (TP) dismay with the past's Cueball's (PC) reaction isn't about Trump, it's about calling him old and questioning his continued Pokemon-ing. This seems more in line with my impression of his priorities in life. With the two of them together, they could easily lose track of the 2nd half of the original odd statement and go off on the "what are you saying about me?" tangent - which makes the "I didn't come here to be mocked!" make a little more narrative sense. PC doesn't show any interesting in the Trump aspect, merely the idea of TP's still playing and being 20 years older, seems to be worth his consideration. I don't see it as changing the future sort of thing, don't you have to kill your grandfather or something to do that? [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

== Google ads ==

When looking at the article page, I'm seeing several Google ads splashed across the full width of the article space, breaking it up randomly and making it more difficult to read (it sometimes interrupts the Transcript, for example, and also randomly crops up in the already-hard-to-read Discussion box). It looks awful. Is anyone else seeing them? I understand that ads are needed to pay for Explain XKCD's server costs, but they're really detrimental to the article. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 13:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
: Yeah, I'm seeing them, too, and I agree. ExplainXKCD is one of the few pages on my AdBlock white list. Please don't make me reconsider my decision. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:47, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
: Thank you for creating the new section. Yes, not only am I seeing them invade the text, but invade the text three times with the same advert. Perhaps we need a new tag to make room for advertising [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.22|172.68.174.22]] 13:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2210: College Athletes

2019-10-03T22:16:07Z

Afbach: added a nit on carrying in bbal

This was posted ''way'' earlier than usual. Still technically Wednesday 00:02 UTC, but usual posting is mid-late afternoon UTC. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.134|172.69.22.134]] 01:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
:I noticed that too. That's really weird... I wonder what caused it? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.211.244|172.68.211.244]] 06:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
::It happens from time to time. See e.g. discussion of [[2188:_E_Scooters]]. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Note that the joke about how to pluralize names ("Steph Currys" vs. "Stephs Curry") is also present in "How to win an election" in the "How to" book. There it's in the form of "Bob Caseys" vs. "Bobs Casey". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.221|162.158.91.221]] 07:53, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

So glad this site exists! I came here thinking the explanation would be about how to cook curry :-)[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.185|141.101.99.185]] 11:28, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't think 'signature play' was an intentional pun on the signature (aka type) of a function, but great catch. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.181|162.158.62.181]] 12:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Is the category [[:Category:Comics featuring real people]] applicable here? It does seem to feature some comics where real people are only mentioned... Others with real people are not in that category... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
:Added to the category. Makes sense to me. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.107|172.69.33.107]] 18:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
::Yes if a real person is named it belongs in that category. But there will of course be comics where this has not been spotted. Well noted! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

;"... but he ''curries'' on..."?? ==
The explanation includes the sentence "Ponytail doesn't believe him but he ''curries'' on...".
I don't see a reason for the use of "curries" vs. the normal "carries", except that the explanation writer is adding an additional (unnecessary) pun. I'd suggest changing it back to the idiomatic "carries on". -- 16:34, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
:Yes it was a joke. Like in the incomplete reason etc. But I have not problem you removed it. Hope someone got a laugh first, and now it is preserved here ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

The explanation states that Cueball is implying that his school is from a state other than California, but I don't see any such implication in the comic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.35|162.158.79.35]] 18:20, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
:Second panel "Our state gave..." [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 19:13, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
::Yes pretty clear that California made this law, and Cueballs state made a better law! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:33, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

;The laws misunderstood?
First, the California law, which "gives athletes rights to their names and likeness". In reality the athletes always had rights to their names and likeness. What the new law allows is for the athletes to license their names/likeness to commercial companies, and receive renumeration for that. Thus, Cueball's summary of the law, even though not incorrect, if taken literally can be misunderstood that the athletes had no rights to their names before.

Then the "other state"'s law, which "gives players rights to use the names and images of ANY California athlete". This is not a real law, so there is a considerable latitude in its possible meaning. This law's summary is intentionally constructed in such a way as to mimic the California's law summary, but that doesn't mean its meaning should be taken literally. I believe that it is *unlikely* that Randall intended this law to be taken literally, mainly because such law would likely be unconstitutional (if one state recognizes name/likeness as a property, then another state may not violate those property rights). What I think the law actually means is that that state's athletes can use *as their own* the name/likeness of another player, provided that they licensed that name/likeness legally. Thus, it's a pun on the word "use": usually when companies "use athlete's name/likeness" means they produce ads featuring those athletes; whereas in the Cueball's state to "use athlete's name/likeness" would mean to adopt it as your own.

Such interpretation is confirmed in the last panel: "one player got the rights to his name, ...". Thus, the first player had to obtain those rights, presumably paying to the original name owner. However, once that player adopted the name as his own - he is now free to license the name to the next player on his team, and so on (presumably at a huge discount). {{unsigned ip|172.69.22.44}} (Also please do not add sections to the discussion...)
:Of course it is a joke law. But Cueball presents it to the others as a real law from his state. And no Randall did not intend this to be believed as a real law, and the explanation already mentions the flaw with other state vs own state and that it is either a mistake or Cueball just running along to setup for his currying joke! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Just a nit that, IMO, "carrying" in bball isn't about passing or not (that would be traveling) but its other name is "palming" Oddly, WikiP has it as "[carrying] occurs when
when the dribbling player continues to dribble after allowing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands." which makes it sound like double dribble. I guess they're all related somehow, I guess I thought of carrying/palming as holding the ball up, while dribbing, for an improper period of time. I guess it's com-pli-cated - see #5,6 & 7 https://www.sdhsaa.com/Portals/0/PDFs/Officials/Basketball/MostMisunderstoodBasketballRules.pdf [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

There have been a ton of changes since I made my fist version of the explanation where I did change some parts and added several new things... So I'm pretty happy to see that no one really changed the idea behind my explanation, but just added and improved. Cool :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2162: Literary Opinions

2019-06-12T17:27:03Z

Afbach:

let's see WS Burroughs = Tarzan, E.R. Burroughs = Naked Lunch.
CS Lewis Carol
Bruce Stirlling / SM Stirling

Is it just me, or was this comic released earlier than usual? Released just after midnight, EDT. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 08:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

:It's just you.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.100|162.158.214.100]] 10:33, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

::Yes, it's unusally early. It happened before, but most of the time the new comics arrived in the late afternoon (central european time). This one was already up when I turned on my computer ~8am. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 11:54, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Is there any value in adding info about the authors mentioned? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 13:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

: I wanted to add "Elements of Style" to show T.H., er, E.B. (whichever ;-) was more than just a "children's book author". Probably not worth it.[[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

I don't think this relates to the "Fregoli Delusion"(sp) - they think the same person is using more than one name. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Shouldn't we discuss authors with multiple pseudonyms? Like JK Rowling and Robert Galbraith, or Nora Roberts and JD Robb, etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.143.144|172.68.143.144]] 16:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Glad I'm not the only one who confuses former US vice president Gore Vidal with Vidal Sassoon the war poet. [[User:ColinHogben|ColinHogben]] ([[User talk:ColinHogben|talk]]) 16:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
: That's where I heard that name before! [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Talk:2162: Literary Opinions

2019-06-12T14:45:14Z

Afbach:

2162: Literary Opinions

2019-06-12T14:41:43Z

Afbach: typo

{{comic
| number = 2162
| date = June 12, 2019
| title = Literary Opinions
| image = literary_opinions.png
| titletext = If I really focus, I can distinguish between John Steinbeck and John Updike, or between Gore Vidal and Vidal Sassoon, but not both at once.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Hunter S Thompson was high while writing it. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[Megan]] is telling [[Cueball]] about a literary opinion she has: She believes that {{w|William S. Burroughs}}, {{w|Hunter S. Thompson}}, {{w|Chuck Palahniuk}}, and {{w|David Foster Wallace}} are different names for the same person. She then says that {{w|Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas}} (by Hunter S. Thompson) and {{w|Fight Club (novel)|Fight Club}} (by Chuck Palahniuk) are the same book with different covers. This could be the case, as some books have different covers and titles in different regions, and some have changed titles.

However, when Cueball says that he has both books and asks Megan if she wants to check, she says she does not, and continues by trying to tell Cueball another one of her opinions. This prompts Cueball to interrupt her, telling her that she should start a book club for discussing books she refuses to read. This implies that all her opinions are baseless, as she hasn't read any of the books she has opinions on.

Megan finishes telling him her opinion, which is that {{w|E.B. White}} and {{w|T.H. White}} are the same person. This is apparently an opinion that Cueball can agree with, as he tells her that he believes it. This is likely a joke that the two names are hard to distinguish due to the having the same last name with only initials instead of a first name. In reality, the books they authored are very different, with E.B. White writing children's books (Charlotte's Web, etc.) and T.H. White writing books about King Arthur (The Sword and the Stone, et al).

The title text continues with this, with [[Randall]] saying that he can distinguish between {{w|John Steinbeck}} and {{w|John Updike}}, as well as between {{w|Gore Vidal}} and {{w|Vidal Sassoon}}, but he can't do so simultaneously. Again this is likely due to the similarities in their names. Additionally, this could be a nod to the {{w|Heisenberg uncertainty principle}}.

To believe that different people are actually a same person is known as the {{w|Fregoli delusion}}; the person is usually believed to change appearance.

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

:[Megan is walking with a finger raised toward Cueball, who is seated in a chair with a book.]
:Megan: Literary opinion:
:Megan: I firmly believe that William S. Burroughs, Hunter S. Thompson, Chuck Palahniuk, and David Foster Wallace are different names for the same person.
:Cueball: ...I see.

:[Megan puts down her hand.]
:Megan: '''''Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas''''' and '''''Fight Club'''''? Same book with different covers, I bet.
:Cueball: I have both. Want to open them and check?
:Megan: I do not.

:[Cueball turns back to his book.]
:Megan: Moving on: my next opinion--
:Cueball: You should start a book club for discussing the books you refuse to read.
:Megan: --is that E.B. White and T.H. White are the same person.
:Cueball: Ok, ''that'' I believe.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2138: Wanna See the Code?

2019-04-17T18:28:17Z

Afbach: Question on "they" in " And because you're lucky that the people around you understand that they create more problems than they solve."

I'm puzzled by the "they" in this: " And because you're lucky that the people around you understand that they create more problems than they solve." I take the "they"s to be the people around him, but it almost makes some sense if it was " And because you're lucky that the people around you understand that it[code,dead body] create[s] more problems than they solve." but that's not right either. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

2120: Brain Hemispheres

2019-03-06T19:23:05Z

Afbach: typo

{{comic
| number = 2120
| date = March 6, 2019
| title = Brain Hemispheres
| image = brain_hemispheres.png
| titletext = Neurologically speaking, the LEFT hand is actually the one at the end of the RIGHT arm.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an AUTONOMOUS LEG and a CHICKEN. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
It is often said that the right half of the brain controls the left arm and left leg, and vice versa for the left half of the brain. Also, many people incorrectly say that different parts of the brain control logic and emotion. Randall joins and spoofs these by suggesting that the right brain instead controls the upper torso. This would mean both that your left leg moves independently of your brain, and that your right arm and right face have 'disputed' control within the brain. All 3 claims are false.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[A stick figure with the left half of the brain colored orange and the right half colored blue. A blue box is overlaid over the left half of the body, and an orange box is overlaid over the top half. An arrow labelled 'DISPUTED/DUAL CONTROL' points towards the overlapping area.]
'''Neuroscience Fact'''
The LEFT half of the brain actually controls the RIGHT half of the body... [arrow pointing to blue rectangle]
...while the RIGHT half of the brain actually controls the TOP half of the body. [Arrow pointing to orange rectangle]
This leg is fully autonomous.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]

Talk:2077: Heist

2018-11-27T22:36:49Z

Afbach:

You know, this isn't just a movie trope, this is an actual technique that is used ALL the time: https://youtu.be/rnmcRTnTNC8?t=2000 Is this worth mentioning in the explanation? [[User:Cgrimes85|Cgrimes85]] ([[User talk:Cgrimes85|talk]]) 16:42, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

:Probably because it works, and it probably works because real service people are really this bad authenticated. It's even worse in emergency: there is rarely time for proper authentication during emergency ... which is why the criminals would create or fake an emergency to get in. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:22, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

The movie Dope does a reverse cryptocurrency heist. That counts, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dope_%282015_film%29

There are no movies about cryptocurrency heists yet (to the best of my knowledge), but this is probably how one would look like.

Tweaked the grammar in the early, short explanation. Didn't fundamentally change the text, but I'm not sure that worrying about being "a minor character" is quite correct as the text of the comic quantifies that as being _in a heist_. Cueball's worries may not just be about his life being nothing more than a minor character in a movie, but possibly also of potential legal / professional liability as an accessory or accomplice. By knowing or supposing that the one asking for access is a criminal and/or should not have access -- and granting it anyway -- that may be enough to charge him with facilitation of the crime [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term)#Criminal_facilitation as it is (in some jurisdictions) a crime to "provide" a person with "means or opportunity" to commit a crime, "believing it probable that he is rendering aid to a person who intends to commit a crime."]

But he has a white hat! We don't have to worry if they wear a white hat, right? On the other hand, he's "from the building"? What the heck does that mean? Cueball best knock the white hat off to eliminate any cognitive dissonance and then call his supervisor. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.90.112|172.68.90.112]] 19:28, 26 November 2018 (UTC) SiliconWolf

: I interpreted “from the building” as meaning that (he claims) he’s with the people who own the building, while the people who Cueball’s affiliated with (presumably some corporation) just rent it from them. The building owners stand to lose a lot more than the renters if the building burns down, so they presumably want to deal with smoke detectors themselves.
:: From [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6264636/ |"The Building"] might _also_ refer to the TV series about people trapped in skyscaper which is actually an alternate reality. .. But I seriously doubt it. ..or do I? [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 21:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

: I thought "from the building" was a clue, like a badly worded phishing msg. I also thought the mouse-over was the typical clueless/naive, not sarcastic [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Is it just me or is that cap really nicely drawn? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.40|162.158.114.40]] 14:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

:I was thinking the exact same thing! Randall has really been upping his game over the years! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.244|108.162.245.244]] 15:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk:2052: Stanislav Petrov Day

2018-09-28T22:04:15Z

Afbach: posible citation for "not until later"

Wednesday was also Talk Like a Pirate Day [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
: What is a pirate's favorite letter?
: Aaaar!
: Many people think it's the 'R', but it's actually the 'C'! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.168|162.158.106.168]] 15:05, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
::...I feel like I've read that on a webcomic somewhere... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.16|172.68.174.16]] 15:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
:::Ye'd think they'd be the most fond if the 'C', but without 'P', they just be irate. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.100|108.162.241.100]] 16:01, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Ayyy, got this one pretty fast. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.13|162.158.154.13]] 15:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I just read about Mr Petrov the other day, maybe on Quora. I wonder if Randall received the same article in his daily digest :) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.78|141.101.107.78]] 16:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

'''History of Petrov Day as a holiday'''

My critics: Not explaining much to the comics content; even admires that a stupid citation is still needed; this Wiki isn't a link list; I can do more... But I don't want to do censorship so maybe we can put this into a single sentence belonging to an explanation. Otherwise some could be moved to a trivia section. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I can't find anything specific, but a couple other articles list this BBC link https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24280831 which states that his heroism was kept secret until after the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991ish) and that Mr. Petrov "kept silent for 10 years" - so 1993 or maybe 2001. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Talk:2029: Disaster Movie

2018-08-08T16:38:11Z

Afbach: Added FYI on volcanology

DATASETS is one word. {{unsigned ip| 172.68.59.24}}
:And ''data sets'' are two ;) (BTW: Please sign your posts) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
:[https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/data_set oxford] says it's data set(s) --[[User:Gusser93|Gusser93]] ([[User talk:Gusser93|talk]]) 21:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::Sorry for my sarcasm, both is possible as can be seen here at Wikipedia: {{w|Data set|A data set (or dataset) is a collection of data...}}. Oxford doesn't cover the US. And on the other hand {{w|Shapefile|shapefile}} is really a single valid term belonging to the geographical information system (GIS). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:08, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
::On a modem, there is a pin signal called "DSR" for "Data Set Ready," which would suggest that IBM (I think the terminology started with them) thought it should be two words (sometime back in the 1960's). (Side note: The "data set" in this case was the modem itself; "set" being used in the context of "a bunch of components in a box", as in "TV set") (side note, part II: Grammerly is marking all the "data set"s here and suggesting they be written as "dataset") [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 18:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Not by any means an expert, so I don't want to remove it without commenting, but I don't think the section on why "GIS survey team" is unrealistic holds up - I know the ShoreZone project (http://www.shorezone.org/) on the US and Canadian west coast uses almost exactly that kind of scientists-in-helicopters methodology. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.100|172.68.174.100]] 01:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
:That project sounds like it's collecting much more fine-grained data than simply coastal geometry - especially high resolution imagery, which does need to be taken from an aircraft. [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 02:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Cowboy Bebop, episode 24: "Hard Luck Woman." This is exactly what Radical Edward's father did. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.100|162.158.63.100]] 02:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Shapefiles are an actual format: .shp It is defined, released to the public and is the format that is used to share vector files in GIS [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.49|172.68.189.49]] 21:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
:Yes, hence this sentence: "A Shapefile is a proprietary data format for spatial data which remains in widespread use, despite being created in the early 90s, and based on an even older database format." Is there something you feel is missing from that? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 23:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Similar take on Hollywood tropes can be found in [[734: Outbreak]] (medical / zombie thrillers), and [[633: Blockbuster Mining]] (adapting stories, action movies). --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 08:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The Title Text notes that this would not be as urgent as the proposed movie would portray, since updates are made quarterly. I think the embellishment is similar to many Hollywood procedural shows, where test results (e.g., DNA matching) that take quite a bit of time in reality are available practically on demand. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.160|108.162.241.160]] 15:37, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Just for the record (from a HI volcanalogist (?) I know), they do actually publish new maps several times a week during events like this, with updated coastlines. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

2028: Complex Numbers

2018-08-03T20:29:49Z

Afbach: /* Explanation */ added math tags for the last a dot b = b dot a

{{comic
| number = 2028
| date = August 3, 2018
| title = Complex Numbers
| image = complex_numbers.png
| titletext = I'm trying to prove that mathematics forms a meta-abelian group, which would finally confirm my suspicions that algebreic geometry and geometric algebra are the same thing.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a MATHEMATICIAN - Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|complex number}}s can be thought of as pairs <math>(a,\ b)\in\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}</math> of real numbers with rules for addition and multiplication.

: <math>(a,\ b) + (c,\ d) = (a+c,\ b+d)</math>

: <math>(a,\ b) \cdot (c,\ d) = (ac - bd,\ ad + bc)</math>

As such they are two-dimensional {{w|Euclidean vector|vectors}}, with an interesting rule for multiplication. The justification for this rule is to consider a complex number as an expression of the form <math>a+bi</math>, where <math>i^2 = -1</math>, i.e. ''i'' is the square root of negative 1. Applying the common rules of algebra and the definition of ''i'' yields rules for addition and multiplication above.

Regular two-dimensional vectors are pairs of values, with the same rule for addition, and no rule for multiplication.

The usual way to introduce complex numbers is by starting with ''i'' and deducing the rules for addition and multiplication, but Cueball is correct to say that complex numbers are really just vectors, and can be defined without consideration of the square root of a negative number.

The teacher, [[Miss Lenhart]], counters that to ignore the natural construction of the negative numbers would hide the relevance of the {{w|fundamental theorem of algebra}} (Every polynomial of degree ''n'' has exactly ''n'' roots, when counted according to multiplicity) and much of {{w|complex analysis}} (the application of calculus to complex-valued functions), but she also agrees that mathematicians are too cool for "regular vectors."

In mathematics, a {{w|group (mathematics)|group}} is the pairing of an operation (say, multiplication) with the set of numbers that operation can be used on (say, the real numbers), such that you can describe the properties of the operation by its corresponding group. An {{w|Abelian group}} is one where the operation is commutative, that is, where the terms of the operation can be exchanged: <math> a \cdot b = b \cdot a</math> The title text argues that the "link" between algebra and geometry in "algebreic [sic] geometry" and "geometric algebra" is the operation in an Abelian group, such that both of those fields are equivalent.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Cueball (the student) is raising his hand and writing with his other hand. He is sitting down at a desk, which has a piece of paper on it]
:Cueball: Does any of this really have to do with the square root of -1? Or do mathematicians just think they're too cool for regular vectors?

:[Miss Lenhart (the teacher) is standing in front of a whiteboard, replying to Cueball's question]
:Miss Lenhart: Complex numbers aren't just vectors. They're a profound extension of real numbers, laying the foundation for the fundamental theorem of algebra and the entire field of complex analysis

:[Miss Lenhart is standing slightly to the right in a blank frame]
:Miss Lenhart: '''''And''''' we're too cool for regular vectors.
:Cueball (off-screen): I '''''knew''''' it!

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1970: Name Dominoes

2018-03-21T19:36:38Z

Afbach:

This comic is a long list of names overlayed onto black domino tiles, arranged so that each touching side corresponds with the first or last name of another person. This will be difficult to transcribe. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.53}}
:Would it be possible to use a fixed width format and try and transcribe like an actual scrabble board? I think there are unicode characters for upside-down and rotated text that we could use for the flipped names. But yes, definitely will be difficult.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.211.244|172.68.211.244]] 18:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
::The transcript doesn't need upside-down and rotated text. It should be enough to mention that some tiles are. A first draft with all names would be good, but even mentioning all the connections would be to complex to read. Think about the reader... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:39, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I see alternative names or nicknames sometimes matches together. But is the Chris Pratt/Chris Evans match with Topher Grace a bit of a stretch? I see that Topher is a variation of Chris'''topher''' and Chis is a shortening of the same. But I guess it must be an acceptable move if Randle put it in the comic. Maybe it’s worth special points or something. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.70|162.158.38.70]] 18:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC)TheStewart

Walter White/Walt Whitman is a reference to Breaking Bad. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.58.101|172.68.58.101]] 18:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)Pat

And Garnet being used to join Ruby and Saffire is clever...
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.64|141.101.98.64]] 18:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
This is a reference to Steven Universe where there is a character, Garnet, who is a fusion of Ruby and Sapphire.

"The title text spells out a rule that a player may only place a tile if they know who that person is" is mention as a reason for it not to be a fixed set of dominos, But I took it to mean you can't use "Jim Jones" unless you know of Jim Jones; as in, I could challenge your use of it by asking "okay who is he?". Maybe saying "oh, he went to school with me" or something wouldn't count, anymore than "crft is too a word!" works in Scrabble [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]]) 19:36, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1755: Old Days

2016-11-04T18:25:56Z

Afbach: further disagreement w/ "No C on punch cards"

[https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf Reflections on Trusting Trust] (pdf), Ken Thompson's acceptance speech for the 1984 Turing Award, in which he discusses creating a backdoor in the C compiler (yes, there was only 1 when he invented the language) that itself creates a second backdoor in the login program when it is compiled. Additionally, it reproduces itself when compiling the C compiler from un-tampered-with source code, so that anyone using the binary (compiled) compiler would be unable to avoid reproducing the backdoor in all its forms. This is the sort of thing that gives security programmers nightmares. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.168|108.162.221.168]] 04:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC) (bonsaiviking)

The "4-6 weeks" thing might be a reference to high-performance computing, in particular scientific calculations, a few decades back. From what I've heard from older people in my scientific field (I'm too young to have experienced it myself), you'd prepare your program on punch cards, mail these to an institution owning a fast computer (because your group or university didn't have one), and they'd run the program and mail the result back to you. This, I've been told, took a few weeks. Maybe someone with first-hand experience can give more information. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.98|141.101.104.98]] 10:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Source Code on Punched Cards: As an undergrad at Durham Uni I remember punching PL1 source code onto cards to be inserted into a batch queue to be compiled and run on an IBM360 at the nearby city of Newcastle, overnight.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.160|141.101.98.160]] 11:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

At the risk of emulating Dilbert's "Topper", I remember at school writing programs on coding sheets (effectively squared paper; one character in each box), which would get sent to the local university, where they would be punched onto cards and run on the mainframe. The following week, you'd get your coding sheets back, plus the cards and the printout from your batch job. Then you'd make your corrections, also on coding sheets... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.143|141.101.98.143]] 13:35, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm reminded of Frank Hayes' song, "When I Was a Boy": "And we programmed in ones and in zeroes / And sometimes we ran out of ones!" On a more serious note, C came out in the late seventies, and I was using punch cards as late as 1975. That's not "long" before, and I wouldn't be too surprised if there were C compilers that accepted punched card input. [[User:Gmcgath|Gmcgath]] ([[User talk:Gmcgath|talk]]) 12:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

: Punch cards 79-80 in the U.S. for C programming. We did have text editors too for other languages, but we'd punch up and submit decks to a queue for batch processing. Usually only waited minutes (though the when big projects were due, it could take an hour - the bad part was there wasn't any way to stop an infinite loop until the job limit ran out. We were given so much in "computer dollars" for the class (because the machines were also used for outside work for real money) and you'd have to ask for extra if you used it up. I miss the green bar paper though. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]]) 18:25, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the punched cards explanation is missing the point that C (or any language, that I know) didn't _require_ that it be on punched cards. I.e. there was nothing in the language specification that prohibited the program from being on paper tape, mag tape, disk, etc. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.70|162.158.74.70]] 14:22, 4 November 2016 (UTC)Pat

: I strongly echo 141.101's recollections. The second panel of 1755 is not far from the truth.

: I wrote my first program in FORTRAN IV in 1972 in an "enrichment" class at my school in Worthing - in the south of England (it calculated the average of 10 numbers). We wrote the programs out by hand on 80 column "coding forms" which were then snail-mailed to the regional computing center. When their keypunch operators had time, they'd punch our programs onto cards. On the following night, after the payroll software had been run, they'd stick our cards into the batch queue of their over-worked IBM 360. If they compiled, the programs would auto-run and would be allowed to produce at most 6 sheets of line-printer paper of output. If they didn't compile, then the first six pages of source code and error messages would go to the printer instead. The following morning, someone would collect our printouts and snail-mail them back to the school.

: If you had a compile error, you'd have to copy everything out onto fresh coding forms and re-submit it.

: When the "unofficial" project to teach programming to 14/15 year-olds ran low on cash, they switched to 2nd class mail in each direction. We did two programming classes a week but we'd be VERY lucky to get a turnaround time of less than a week. So the line on panel two: "To compile your code, you had to mail it to IBM, took 4-6 weeks"...isn't *that* much of an exaggeration! We mailed it to the regional computing center - and it rarely took more than 2 weeks...but what she says isn't very far from the truth!

: In practice, things never went smoothly. The keypunch operators didn't routinely type FORTRAN code - they mostly entered stuff like names and addresses, that are somewhat tolerant of typo's. If you were struck by a typo, you'd have to just resubmit the exact same coding forms and hope you didn't get a typo on the following week! Since it was only a 10 week course, you got VERY good at writing your coding forms up clearly, to NEVER forgetting to slash your zeroes and put serifs on your I's...making 100% sure your code would compile first time around was essential to getting anything to run. We quickly learned that using "I" as a loop variable was worse than (say) "COUNT" because it was more likely to get mis-typed as a '1'.

: I begged and pleaded to be allowed to do the same course for two years running but on the second year, the keypunch operators finally rebelled at the extra work we were giving them as our programs grew larger and more ambitious. So we were instructed to punch our own cards using a "hand punch" machine where you manually held down a "chord" of keys to punch raw binary into the cards. Get just one bit wrong, and you had to toss out the entire card and start again. It would take multiple hours to punch in even a very short program! Gone was the idea of using "COUNT" for a loop variable! The idea of commenting your code became simply ludicrous - so the teacher told us to write comments onto blank cards and stick them into the deck where needed!

: Because of that horrendous problem, the concept of "code-reuse" was important! If you could re-use some of the cards from a previous program, or '''''borrow''''' a subroutine from a friend (they'd want it back afterwards!), you'd save yourself a mountain of time! Decks of handy subroutines had value...you could exchange them for all sorts of playground "items-of-value" with the other geeks who did the class.

: I'm tempted to say that this taught me a lot about the art of programming and the importance of checking your code and writing for re-use...but I rather doubt it. When I finally got to my second year in college, I had access to a PDP-11/20 with DecTapes and a DecWriter terminal, that's about when I started to learn something useful...and in my final year, 1977 - I was finally granted access to the PDP-11/70, UNIX and a ADM 3a "glass teletype". I could really get to learning the craft that's still paying my mortgage 40 years later. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 14:25, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is there a parallel between sending you code off to be compiled and sending your code off to an app store. In both cases a required part of the build is sending your code off to a private company for approval. [[User:Olleicua|Olleicua]] ([[User talk:Olleicua|talk]]) 15:28, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Can someone please verify that it is "actually very difficult" to punch holes in floppy disks? Probably it should be attempted on at least 1000 different disks of different kinds to make sure. {{unsigned ip|162.158.75.64}}