explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1227: The Pace of Modern Life

2018-09-18T11:56:00Z

Briansage:

Is it sad that after reading the first few, I thought "TL; DR" and found myself skim reading most of them since I'm meant to be working right now and not reading xkcd? {{unsigned ip|‎90.152.3.226}}

Just finishing commenting on a special issue of the generational myth for a dedicated issue of Perspectives on Science and Practice. This here is a lovingly put together list of unique "life was better then" examples - which is exceedingly hard to do. Here's my commentary on why this occurs: "As Walker, Skowronski and Thompson (2003) review, autobiographical memory typically favors pleasant over unpleasant memories with bad memories fading with time, a notable exception to bad stimuli providing stronger reactions than good. This makes our recollection of our past biased towards the idyllic, and makes us very susceptible to the adage “Things were better then.” Combined with the “reminiscence bump” (Glück & Bluck, 2007), where people recall more events from their teenager and early adulthood years, which again tend to be recollected positively, the past will be a golden age for almost all of us, given time." Read this piece a day after getting our paper accepted, so neat timing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.114|108.162.215.114]] 19:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

That's obviously what's intended [[Special:Contributions/155.56.68.216|155.56.68.216]] 09:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree that this point was possibly intended and added text to the analysis, explicitly pointing it out. [[User:Jimbob|Jimbob]] ([[User talk:Jimbob|talk]]) 16:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

:It was not what was intended. Randall used all those quotes to build a compelling argument. The fact that some people "don't have time" to read them all is simply a supporting case, albeit one that each person will have to come to personally. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 18:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's sad. According to my 11th Grade Literary Analysis, the propensity to take shortcuts is a fundamental flaw in human nature, but introductory Psychology lauded our use of heuristics. I say you should find meaning in your humanity and ability to set your own priorities and allocate just enough resources to various aspects of your life in order to succeed in life where the objectives are unclear.[[Special:Contributions/98.166.43.28|98.166.43.28]] 12:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)DBrak

:Did you just... quote yourself? [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 05:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

::As I've often said: "You've got to listen to someone who quotes themself" [[User:Plm-qaz snr|Plm-qaz snr]] ([[User talk:Plm-qaz snr|talk]]) 13:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

The topic made me slow down, read, and understand. Perhaps the point was lost on me, but the expressions from a century ago seem much like those made today. One can't help but wonder if that means they were wrong then and wrong now or if our society was in a century long devolutionary spiral, terminating with Twitter or whatever is coming next. --[[Special:Contributions/108.34.230.242|108.34.230.242]] 10:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

:I think you're on the right track, and these are exactly the types of questions that Randall was seeking to raise. [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 05:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Had this continued to present day the most recent entry would be something like this:
:lol didnt read '''#tldr #boredalready #yawn'''
:::- Most of 'Civilisation', ''Social Media''
::::::::::2013
[[Special:Contributions/77.86.53.65|77.86.53.65]] 12:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Just added an explanation. Unfortunately, there's no transcript provided in the source code and I don't have time to type all that out (who does?). Also, I have no idea what to use for categories. Any suggestions? [[User:Smperron|Smperron]] ([[User talk:Smperron|talk]]) 12:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:Not a suggestion, but does anyone know if Randall types or writes it out, or copies and pastes? --[[User:Luckymustard|Luckymustard]] ([[User talk:Luckymustard|talk]]) 13:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
::Looks like the letterforms are identical -- my guess is a custom font. [[Special:Contributions/66.202.132.250|66.202.132.250]] 14:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

If this comic was meant to say that we should give up on these types of arguments, this comic did the opposite effect: I actually AGREE with all of this!

I mean, I tend to write long private messages, while the longest replies I get are also the most satisfying, since they tell me quite a bit of the recipient. Relatedly, I prefer to write long responses to pieces of artwork when I comment on art sites, telling people exactly why I like the art... what shines... what needs to be polished. (Of course, I am going to need to find a way to simply stay at a work and truly take in what is presented.) In fact, letter restrictions sometimes restrict me too much. I DO need to be more social, not having any reading material at hand (whether the material be a newspaper or a video game). I dislike people PUSHING me to look around myself; this is something I do automatically. In fact, while I like staying inside and exploring the wonders of the Internet hours on end, I also like going outside alone and looking around myself, seeing the wonders that other people ignore (probably because other people are too busy talking to yet other people). There really is a mental degeneration (You can see this for yourself in the comments other people leave in websites.) and addiction to stimulants. In fact, stress (and DIStress) is one of the main reasons why we have cancer far more often that the non-developed parts of the world, since stress compromises the body severely. Play, while easily abused, is never the less a necessary part of development, even while an adult. I wish I could keep up pace with the world, but I also hope, for the sake of the world and myself, that the world slows down to me. You can see for yourself how newspapers are being scandalous. I myself suffer from eating foods too quickly (yet there is the problem of ants and spoilage if I take TOO long when eating, a sad possibility due to me preferring to eat at the computer.) Rebellion (a problem that even I suffer) does cause people to want their own way, not knowing that they are just being a slave to impulses, their authorities having the experience to liberate them for the things that their subordinates really do want and shall really want. (The rebels do not want others to 'cramp their style,' but they fail to learn basic anatomy and lighting, much less on making a pleasing style!) There is an entropy in displayed morals, yet that is something that requires changing the hearts of people, though we can control this by 'starving' the problematic media (another bit of advice with which even I also struggle, my curiosity provoking me to see things that should not be seen), since they only proliferate if there are people to feed them. People all around us know that marriage feel into disarray. While legally-backed homosexuality (and, soon, polygamy), and, to an extent, abortion (regardless of the reason) have been causing their problems, marriage already fell in disarray when divorce (that is, breaking a lifetime vow), pornography (that is, selling the private bodies of people for your selfish desires), promiscuity, and birth control (that is, using a reproductive function for non-reproductive reasons and otherwise abusing the reproductive function) already led themselves to an array of evils.

Again, people would probably just skip my wall of text here, but I feel that I need to make my old-fashioned (whether for worse or better) opinion heard here. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 15:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

In my honest opinion, your wall of text is a work of art in itself. I wholeheartedly agree with you, and ''I am the next generation. '' Life has been sped up too fast for us, and it is too often that I see my peers on their devices, or trying to do too many things at once. You make many valid points and good observations. ~Alithia [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.5|108.162.241.5]] 14:15, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

--
So, the argument has been going on for a long time. Does this comic imply that (1) we perceive that the pace of life was slower in the old days, but has always been as fast as it is today, or (2) that the pace of life has actually been speeding up for a very long time now? [[Special:Contributions/194.176.105.141|194.176.105.141]] 15:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
: I think that the pace of life has been speeding up for a long time now. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 18:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

:: Perhaps it's the case indeed that the "pace of life" has been speeding up... but I wonder: to what end? Is this a problem? If so, why? In response to your "wall of text," I'm not sure that there are really so many negative repercussions to society today ''that we can quantify.'' Sure, cancer is more of a problem today than it was 100 yrs ago, but we are also living much, much longer today. So I have trouble imagining that it's due solely to "stressors" in our lives.

::I'm not so sure that Randall was necessarily for or against the "modern life is rubbish" judging by the comic's quotes. However, I do believe he was trying to spur questions and conversations about it. So, to that end it's a pretty important contribution. [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 06:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Added to the explanation, please correct any grammar, composition, or repetition mistakes, thank you. -- [[Special:Contributions/186.124.46.183|186.124.46.183]] 16:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Did anyone else notices that you can get the gist by only reading the bolded text? It's probably a just me. Anyone want to take the time to compile the bold text only and place it in the explination? [[User:Crsoccerfreak19|Crsoccerfreak19]] ([[User talk:Crsoccerfreak19|talk]]) 18:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

:I didn't see this before, but I think that work is a great idea. So my next job here is to work on that an checking if this does make sense. Thanks for your hint.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

------

I did an full update to the transcript. I used the existing parts here, many thanks to the contributors, the free web site [http://www.ocronline.com/ OCR Online] (the only one did work, in fact it did work as a hell) and {{w|LibreOffice Writer}} for changing the case to lower case. After that it was just some manual work without typing all that text.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The meaning I took from this comic was very much [[wikt:plus_%C3%A7a_change,_plus_c'est_la_m%C3%AAme_chose|Plus ca change]]. There are translated Roman messages that say very similar things about the current state of Latin, and I bet even ''that'' was merely an inadvertent echo of prior ages. As one who can be very verbose with (at least ''intended'') correct spelling, grammar and vocabulary, I ''could'' go on at great length about how this works for the current day, but on this occasion shall restrain myself. Yours faithfully  [[Special:Contributions/178.98.31.27|178.98.31.27]] 20:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Adding 'the sub text':
----
The art of letter-writing is fast dying out. We fire off a multitude of rapid and short notes, instead of sitting down to have a good talk oer a real sheet of paper.

In olden times it was different.

Men now live think and work at express speed. Sulkily read as they travel ... leaving them no time to talk with the friend who may share the compartment with them.

The age of leisure is dead, and the art of conversation is dying.

A craving for literary nips. There never was an age in which so many people were able to write badly.

The art of pure line engraving is dying out. We live at too fast a rate.

Nothing is left to the imagination. And human faculty dwindle away amid the million inventions that have been introduced to render its exercise unnecessary. Thirty pages is now too much. Fifteen pages. Further condensed. A summary of the summary. Those who are dipping into so many subjects and gathering information in a summary and superficial form lose the habit of settling down to great works. Hurried reading can never be good reading.

Mental and nervous degeneration among a growing class of people. Brain incapable of normal working... in a large measure due to the hurry and excitement of modern life. Almost instantaneous communication between remote points of the globe.

Teach the children how to play. Instead of shutting them in badly ventilated schoolrooms.

Increased demand made by the conditions of modern life upon the brain. We talk across a continent, telegraph across an ocean. We take even our pleasures sadly and make a task of our play.

The managers of sensational newspapers. Create perverted tastes and develop vicious tendencies.

To take sufficient time for our meals seems frequently impossible.

May I be permitted to say a word in favour of a very worthy and valuable old friend of mine, Mr. Long Walk? I am afraid that this good gentleman is in danger of getting neglected, if not forgotten.

People talk as they ride bicycles - at a rush - without pausing to consider their surroundings. The profession of letters is so little understood.

There is a tendency among the children of today to rebel against restraint.

Our modern family gathering, silent. Each individual with his head buried in his favourite magazine.

Deal openly with situations which no person would have dared to mention in general society forty years ago. Nude men and women in the daily journals.

Fitness and courtliness too often totally lacking.

A hundred years ago it took sol long and cost so much to send a letter that it seemed worth while to put some time and thought into writing it. A brief letter to-day may be followed by another next week - a "line" now by another to-morrow.
{{unsigned ip|209.217.94.93|21:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)}}
:Thanks [209.217.94.93], I will put in my version here and I am happy if you can correct possible mistakes.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Can anyone validate these are true quotes? I tried searching for the one in Google Books for Morley: Ancient and Modern and it came up with no results. They're great quotes, but is it possible they're made up?--[[Special:Contributions/119.224.37.9|119.224.37.9]] 07:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

At least one of the quotes is real: [http://books.google.com/books?id=nc_UAAAAMAAJ&lpg=PA265&ots=AAC4OimA5D&dq=%22So%20much%20is%20exhibited%20to%20the%20eye%20that%20nothing%20is%20left%20to%20the%20imagination%22&pg=PA265#v=onepage&q=%22So%20much%20is%20exhibited%20to%20the%20eye%20that%20nothing%20is%20left%20to%20the%20imagination%22&f=false "So much is exhibited to the eye that nothing is left to the imagination"]{{unsigned ip|216.55.56.42}}

The only point this comic is trying to make is that yes the olden times were different, but they were not as different as we suppose. The people had exactly the same intelligence and capacities as we do today, and apparently shared the same concerns about change, and the detrimental effect it will have on all parts of society. OF course, every generation puts itself in the position of greatest importance, and believes that the present moment is of the highest criticality. Sorry folks - get over yourselves. It isn't true. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 18:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

"Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit." -xkcd: Connoisseur. I once saw an experiment where they ask random people to, without a clock, tell them when they thought one minute had passed. Overwhelmingly the young came in under and the old over. The world isn't moving faster you're moving slower. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.112}}

While there might be a tendency to look at this and say "Ah, you see, the complaints about the increasing pace of life has always existed and may thus be safely ignored today!", it's also worth noting that the earliest of the excerpts here began well within the heart of the Industrial Revolution, a time when humanity was changing at a pace unheard of in the thousands of years that had come before. It would be interesting to see if letters from a pre-industrial period still hold much the same complaints. Perhaps such things are a symptom of industrialization, and not inherent to humanity? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.9|108.162.225.9]] 02:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

To be fair, the 1898 quote from Medical Brief was lamenting not newspapers in general, but rather tabloid-style 'yellow journalism', which is more obvious if you read the [https://books.google.com/books?id=uaJWAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA75 full piece] (under the header "Newspaper Sensationalism"). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.28|162.158.75.28]] 05:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Children grow up, the world knows how children differ with the pace of tech development, that depends first and foremost on parents, the family.
Further, children gradually learn to live by themselves, but the base, the family, the school, the team, friends and all, this chain is supplemented by other stuff, but there must be the right start. Look at the pace of current educational tools and general tech gadgets (comparing [http://essaywriting.ninja ninjaessays prices] on the market).
[[User:Briansage|Briansage]] ([[User talk:Briansage|talk]]) 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1293: Job Interview

2018-07-19T07:45:27Z

Briansage:

Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

:I completely agree, Whiskey. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
:::It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. [[User:Sulis|Sulis]] ([[User talk:Sulis|talk]]) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:My understanding of the outlet matter is that:
:# It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.
:# The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here ([http://e-promedia.com/go/_info/?user_id=1812&lang=pl example (in Polish)])
:# The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.
:# Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2551/3900578012_6534fb3fed.jpg Chinese-style instant noodles]
:It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Beret Guy's new business is an extremely low cost one... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.217|108.162.231.217]] 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
::I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel ''so'' strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know ''how'' he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does ''most'' of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, ''why''..?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.218|141.101.99.218]] 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Probably a play on "[[wikipedia:Ghostwriter|Ghostwriter]]" [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
::Realized that this is probably a reference to Call of Duty: Ghost. Often tech companies will refer to the fun environment they have, and how guys will get together for LAN parties on the company equipment, and mention the games they play. Beret Guy, having heard and misunderstood, stripped this down to, "We have ghosts." [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 05:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.213|141.101.98.213]] 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat

I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}
:I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.211|173.245.55.211]] 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
----
;/dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ or /dʒoʊb/
I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
:It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
::It's not a matter of opinion. The only word in English that is pronounced "job" with a long O, rhyming with ''globe,'' is the biblical figure. [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Well, there's also GOB from Arrested Development... -[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.160|199.27.128.160]] 07:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:To elaborate, I think he is saying /dʒoʊb/ (rather than /dʒɒːːb/) because he never heard anyone say it before. For example, let's say we reverse the roles of these two guys in the comic. Suppose Beret guy looked up some buzzwords to impress the interviewer. I think the result is that Beret Guy will pronounce things like Hadoop as "Had-dop", URL as "Earl", GUI as "Guy", @ as "ear", Apache as "'A'-patch", etc. Surely someone has this problem before, *cough*.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 05:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
::I like the connection further up that a long 'O' could also be how a ghost may pronounce this. Given the surrealism of the comic, could it be that [[Beret Guy]] *is* a ghost? The reference to himself, then taking soup out of the wall, then 'hoping' it's a real company... maybe we're missing the clear implication you'd get if you were the guy in the chair in front of him in this situation. Steve [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.224|141.101.99.224]] 13:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
:I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
::I know it's spelt "Job", but wanted to avoid being ambiguous. I don't see the "piles of connection mentioned by numerous users" you mention above; the explanation contains it (which could have been written by you) and you mention it in this discussion, that's it. This interview is in no way arduous and the interviewee is not really tested as Job was. Where do you see the connection between the comic and the Book of Job? As for the ghost explanation: as a user pointed out earlier, the Snapchat logo is a ghost, he mentions ghosts in the comic, the comic came out the same week as the Snapchat offers. This comic is clearly about Snapchat and the ridiculousness of the founder turning down an offer of billions of dollars for something that doesn't generate revenue. Where does Job fit into that story? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 09:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
:::I edited what had already been written about Job. Check the history. You're right - I may have exaggerated "numerous users". But I agree with whoever had written the comments/explanation about Job linking it to his job being a "trial of faith". I make no claim at all that it connects directly to most of the rest of the comic. As Randall often does, he's gone off on a tangent - he especially does this in title texts - switched gears so to speak. And the connection is not to the interview but to the job. Check the title text again. And it's not exactly the "book of Job" but the character/life of Job as described in that book. And as explained by whoever originally wrote in the explanation the connection to Job. And I'm not disputing that other aspects of the comic have other connections. I'm not saying that it doesn't connect in other ways as you are seeing. What I'm saying is the title text is clearly a reference to Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Perhaps the Job-experience allusion also refers to Snapchat being tempted by opportunities to sell out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.8|108.162.237.8]] 06:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The term "long O" is unambiguously used to denote "the long sound of O", the vowel of ''globe'' and ''Job'', as opposed to "short O" or "the short sound of O", the vowel of ''mob'' and ''job''. Since "long O" has that specialized meaning, to describe /dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ we must say something like "a lengthened short O". [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:13, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
:I wouldn't say unambiguous, but yes. This looks like the "English class" meaning of "long O", rather than the linguistics meaning, which has to deal with languages like Japanese where you ''can'' simply have a long vowel sound. [[User:Darekun|Darekun]] ([[User talk:Darekun|talk]]) 08:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
::The official term for the vowels described here would be a close or open O. Or more specifically close-mid and open-mid, since there are closer and opener vowels. And even more specific a close-mid back rounded and open-mid back rounded vowel. The O in globe isn't longer than that in job as far as I can tell. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 23:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
----

My initial impression of this strip related to [[288: Elevator]]; the link between apps and stickers on phones, the "SOUP" on a slip of paper taped over the outlet, and the job description "write on our computers" come together to suggest the business is built on the operation from 288. Of course, on a higher layer, attempting to rely on that operation is interview-hell madness — but it seems clear to me it's what's supposed to be going on on the lower layer. Anyone else think this has merit? [[User:Darekun|Darekun]] ([[User talk:Darekun|talk]]) 08:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
----

I think the person being interviewed steps into a virtual world during the interview. The stickers and the apps are both not real world goods and the job is likewise not real world. {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.137}}
:Why do people seem to have difficulty understanding when something is supposed to be surreal? It's not meant to represent a virtual world, or be an allegory for startups, or anything like that. It's just a surreal little escapade. Sheesh... -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 04:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

----
I think in a job interview there're always two kinds of people: those who think a company must be serious and official and the attitude must be the same. And the other half of applicants - who think it's just for fun (I mean the interview) and [http://essay-grader.com tool] development is something truly exciting and does not require any particular efforts.
[[User:Briansage|Briansage]] ([[User talk:Briansage|talk]]) 07:45, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Talk:1293: Job Interview

2018-07-19T07:43:18Z

Briansage:

Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "[http://xkcd.com/1032/ Networking]" [[User:Whiskey07|Whiskey07]] ([[User talk:Whiskey07|talk]]) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

:I completely agree, Whiskey. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Isn't it [[Beret Guy]] character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
:Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.208|141.101.98.208]] 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
::My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
:::It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. [[User:Sulis|Sulis]] ([[User talk:Sulis|talk]]) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:My understanding of the outlet matter is that:
:# It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.
:# The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here ([http://e-promedia.com/go/_info/?user_id=1812&lang=pl example (in Polish)])
:# The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.
:# Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2551/3900578012_6534fb3fed.jpg Chinese-style instant noodles]
:It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Beret Guy's new business is an extremely low cost one... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.217|108.162.231.217]] 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
::I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel ''so'' strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know ''how'' he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does ''most'' of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, ''why''..?) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.218|141.101.99.218]] 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.215|173.245.55.215]] 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --[[User:Dangerkeith3000|Dangerkeith3000]] ([[User talk:Dangerkeith3000|talk]]) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
:I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
::I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Probably a play on "[[wikipedia:Ghostwriter|Ghostwriter]]" [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]])
::Realized that this is probably a reference to Call of Duty: Ghost. Often tech companies will refer to the fun environment they have, and how guys will get together for LAN parties on the company equipment, and mention the games they play. Beret Guy, having heard and misunderstood, stripped this down to, "We have ghosts." [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.85|199.27.128.85]] 05:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.213|141.101.98.213]] 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.217|173.245.55.217]] 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat

I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.117|108.162.246.117]] 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.)
So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? {{unsigned|Amz}}
:I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.211|173.245.55.211]] 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
----
;/dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ or /dʒoʊb/
I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound".[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
:It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
::It's not a matter of opinion. The only word in English that is pronounced "job" with a long O, rhyming with ''globe,'' is the biblical figure. [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Well, there's also GOB from Arrested Development... -[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.160|199.27.128.160]] 07:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
:To elaborate, I think he is saying /dʒoʊb/ (rather than /dʒɒːːb/) because he never heard anyone say it before. For example, let's say we reverse the roles of these two guys in the comic. Suppose Beret guy looked up some buzzwords to impress the interviewer. I think the result is that Beret Guy will pronounce things like Hadoop as "Had-dop", URL as "Earl", GUI as "Guy", @ as "ear", Apache as "'A'-patch", etc. Surely someone has this problem before, *cough*.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.33|108.162.222.33]] 05:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
::I like the connection further up that a long 'O' could also be how a ghost may pronounce this. Given the surrealism of the comic, could it be that [[Beret Guy]] *is* a ghost? The reference to himself, then taking soup out of the wall, then 'hoping' it's a real company... maybe we're missing the clear implication you'd get if you were the guy in the chair in front of him in this situation. Steve [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.224|141.101.99.224]] 13:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.209|108.162.222.209]] 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
:I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
::I know it's spelt "Job", but wanted to avoid being ambiguous. I don't see the "piles of connection mentioned by numerous users" you mention above; the explanation contains it (which could have been written by you) and you mention it in this discussion, that's it. This interview is in no way arduous and the interviewee is not really tested as Job was. Where do you see the connection between the comic and the Book of Job? As for the ghost explanation: as a user pointed out earlier, the Snapchat logo is a ghost, he mentions ghosts in the comic, the comic came out the same week as the Snapchat offers. This comic is clearly about Snapchat and the ridiculousness of the founder turning down an offer of billions of dollars for something that doesn't generate revenue. Where does Job fit into that story? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.41|108.162.231.41]] 09:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
:::I edited what had already been written about Job. Check the history. You're right - I may have exaggerated "numerous users". But I agree with whoever had written the comments/explanation about Job linking it to his job being a "trial of faith". I make no claim at all that it connects directly to most of the rest of the comic. As Randall often does, he's gone off on a tangent - he especially does this in title texts - switched gears so to speak. And the connection is not to the interview but to the job. Check the title text again. And it's not exactly the "book of Job" but the character/life of Job as described in that book. And as explained by whoever originally wrote in the explanation the connection to Job. And I'm not disputing that other aspects of the comic have other connections. I'm not saying that it doesn't connect in other ways as you are seeing. What I'm saying is the title text is clearly a reference to Job. [[User:Grahame|Grahame]] ([[User talk:Grahame|talk]]) 00:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Perhaps the Job-experience allusion also refers to Snapchat being tempted by opportunities to sell out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.8|108.162.237.8]] 06:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The term "long O" is unambiguously used to denote "the long sound of O", the vowel of ''globe'' and ''Job'', as opposed to "short O" or "the short sound of O", the vowel of ''mob'' and ''job''. Since "long O" has that specialized meaning, to describe /dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ we must say something like "a lengthened short O". [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:13, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
:I wouldn't say unambiguous, but yes. This looks like the "English class" meaning of "long O", rather than the linguistics meaning, which has to deal with languages like Japanese where you ''can'' simply have a long vowel sound. [[User:Darekun|Darekun]] ([[User talk:Darekun|talk]]) 08:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
::The official term for the vowels described here would be a close or open O. Or more specifically close-mid and open-mid, since there are closer and opener vowels. And even more specific a close-mid back rounded and open-mid back rounded vowel. The O in globe isn't longer than that in job as far as I can tell. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 23:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
----

My initial impression of this strip related to [[288: Elevator]]; the link between apps and stickers on phones, the "SOUP" on a slip of paper taped over the outlet, and the job description "write on our computers" come together to suggest the business is built on the operation from 288. Of course, on a higher layer, attempting to rely on that operation is interview-hell madness — but it seems clear to me it's what's supposed to be going on on the lower layer. Anyone else think this has merit? [[User:Darekun|Darekun]] ([[User talk:Darekun|talk]]) 08:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
----

I think the person being interviewed steps into a virtual world during the interview. The stickers and the apps are both not real world goods and the job is likewise not real world. {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.137}}
:Why do people seem to have difficulty understanding when something is supposed to be surreal? It's not meant to represent a virtual world, or be an allegory for startups, or anything like that. It's just a surreal little escapade. Sheesh... -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 04:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

----
I think in a job interview there're always two kinds of people: those who think a company must be serious and official and the attitude must be the same. And the other half of applicants - who think it's just for fun (I mean the interview) and [http://essay-grader.com/ tool] development is something truly exciting and does not require any particular efforts.