explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2942: Fluid Speech

2024-06-06T16:30:43Z

Chortos-2:

I've noticed that this doesn't seem to be the case in all languages. For example, when native Polish speakers talk rapidly (even when speaking English), they enunciate every sound accurately in quick succession while flattening out the tone and rhythm of their speech. I wonder if this is because Polish is an inflected language where the grammar of the sentence is determined by endings of words rather than word order. Does anyone know if there have been any studies on this? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.49|162.158.74.49]] 23:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

:I'm not linguists but based on how many those are, definitely. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

:Russian also has vowel reduction like English and it's a Slavic language like Polish, so I don't think so. Although someone who knows more than me might be able to chip in on whether the effect is stronger in English. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.198|162.158.114.198]] 03:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

::Russian vowels are a tangle of reduction indeed. I think they’re much more complicated than English vowels, but I may be biased as a native speaker of Russian who started self-studying phonetics, phonology etc. to improve his English pronunciation and only relatively briefly looked up Russian phonology for fun. But at any rate, Russian vowel reduction happens in slow and fast, formal and colloquial speech alike, pretty much universally except when articulating a word exceedingly clearly when someone can’t hear you well; and Russian consonants are generally unaffected outside of several specific clusters and morphemes, even if you include those that are fully codified in modern language but retain etymological spelling (чувство, счастье, солнце). [[User:Chortos-2|Chortos-2]] ([[User talk:Chortos-2|talk]]) 16:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I've just added a very barebones version of an explanation based on what I could understand from the comic. I can tell that the four diagrams depict that of the human mouth but since I am not a linguist, I lack the knowledge of various terms and thus, can't fully explain the comic. I understand what the comic is trying to convey, I just can't explain it. Looking forward to seeing how this progresses. [[User:OmniDoom|OmniDoom]] ([[User talk:OmniDoom|talk]]) 00:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think #4 is a real IPA symbol, but as I am not a linguist, I have no idea. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.36|162.158.91.36]] 01:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:/ə̃/ is a {{w|Nasal_vowel|nasalized}} {{w|schwa}} --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.92|172.71.160.92]] 08:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

The hovertext joke is that every English speaker fully pronounces the first "t" in "Hot Potato". It's at the end of "hot". Nobody says "ha potato". [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

:Unless you mean "the glottal stop should be considered an allophone of <t> at the end of syllables" then yes they do. It's /hoʔ/, not /hotʰ/. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.198|162.158.114.198]] 03:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

:(Edit conflicted with 162, above, so this is my own reply...) I thought it was that it isn't "ho T'p otato", with the "teh-peh" awkwardness. For me, the natural way to say it is to glottalstop the first T for more "ho'potato" (the other Ts, there I find awkward ''not'' to get the "t>s<" out of, the ">s<"-tail being what makes a full-T not a lazy one). But clearly a different accent involved, as "ha" doesn't work at all for me unless I try to use some sort of (probably awful) Goodfellas-type accent. And my native accent is notoriously good at glottlestopped Ts (that most people misinpersonate badly, by attaching them to the wrong adjacent syllable).
:As for "going to", experimentally holding my finger over the length of my tongue, it seems it barely has to move at all in "going" (the whole tongue wants to rise on the "i", but I can suppress that and do the tone-change from further back, if not straight from the vocal chords). Though continuing through to the "to", with my finger in there, it's no better than "going ku" as I prevent the tongue-tip doing the necessary small movement to fulfil any form of T. I can do better through basic gastromancy, but behind my unmoving jaw and lips (''without'' the finger almost down my throat, of course), I can feel the tongue tip doing it's small but vital "crossing the T" work. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 03:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:For me, it's more like "hobuh-deh-duh" - so none of the t's get pronounced properly. And I'd drop the n in 'going to' before I dropped the t.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.120|172.70.163.120]] 08:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:Wunber dayder, doober dayder, freeber dayder for. (But then, oddly, uh baguv tayterz.)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.58|172.70.162.58]] 13:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Unless someone's willing to start an "explain explain xkcd", I think this explanation still needs a lot of work to be intelligible to non-linguists (myself included). That aside, I do appreciate whoever took the time to type all that up. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.210|162.158.166.210]] 03:31, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:The current explain reads, to me at least, more like a 102 lecture than an explanation of the comic. I of course have no idea what is in a 101 first week lecture so shrug. (Aside, wth? This keyboard doesn't have a tilda. Copy and paste ftw) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.38|172.71.223.38]] 05:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:::Meta-response about the {{w|tilde}}: at the top of this editing window is a bar of formatting buttons (which I mostly just try to avoid accidentally clicking when I touchscreen-scroll). The second from the right gives <code><nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki></code>, having a depiction of a signature. (The "--" is not necessary, nor does anything with actual formatting/markup, but comes from quite old text communications standards.) Personally, in this current situation of using an onscreen keyboard, my configurstion hides the tilde behind the "?123" then "=\<" change-keyboard buttons.
:::(Ironically, all three of "=", "\" and "<" are already available as long-presses of the primary keyboard layout. But the much more useful "/" is hidden behind the "?123" press, ''except'' when it explicitly detects that I'm in a browser address field. Some UI designers have strange ideas that definitely mis-mesh with my usage!)
:::That's where I usually go, to sign-off. But on physical keyboards, depending upon internationalisation options, it might be either off the top-left (left of "1" key) 'triple-key, perhaps needing Shift or AltGr fingering (from experience of US (mis)configuring), or the key in the "hook" of the <Enter> key (all my physical UK keyboards, even the most squished-up laptop ones, have that as #~). If you're neither in US nor UK (and your device knows this), then where it gets shuffled out of the way of any ß, ē or ø type stuff, I wouldn't know for sure, but using the AltGr (right-Alt) ''might'' reveal characters you never ever knew you had... ;)
:::Copypasting out of the "<nowiki>Please sign your posts with ~~~~</nowiki>" Infobox or any residual from the {{template|unsigned}} templates is, of course, also a valid option. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.184|172.69.43.184]] 10:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
: I think it's fine if you can read/interpret the {{w|International Phonetic Alphabet|IPA}}. If you don't it's utterly incomprehensible. I think we need some examples here as to how the sounds written here are pronounced. Like "sound <x> as in <word>" [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 06:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:: Yeah, except [[2819]] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.120|172.70.163.120]] 08:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

>Alien impersonating a human

Sounds like a normal Runglish to me, just like the one you can hear in this clip: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXNKUo5MrbM]

I hate that he pointed this out, because I'm going to start pronouncing things the way they're supposed to sound and everyone will think I'm weirder. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 12:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
: How are you pronouncing 'Psychoticpotato'?[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.6|172.69.195.6]] 13:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
::Think of the words "psychotic" and "potato". [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 15:35, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I added a bit more detail to the first diagram, but I agree it's not really plain English right now. btw, maybe it's pedantic of me, but diphthongs such as /oʊ/ are one vowel, and the whole word /ɡoʊ.ɪŋ/ only has two vowels

As for "hot potato", the post-vocalic T *is* pronounced, it's pronounced as a glottal stop. T is simply pronounced differently in different positions, it's how the letter works. Randall's probably referring to the alveolar plosive /t/, which most people think of as "the T sound" and would make you sound like an alien. SMBC made the point better: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-05-08
[[User:FrustratedPhonetics|FrustratedPhonetics]] ([[User talk:FrustratedPhonetics|talk]]) 13:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
:Unless, like me, you just elide straight into the following consonant. Hock ross buns, hock ross buns, wunner penee tooer penee, hock ross buns.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.166|172.69.43.166]] 14:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
::This causes me physical discomfort. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 15:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

2922: Pub Trivia

2024-04-20T16:06:36Z

Chortos-2: make suggested planet question actually less ambiguous

{{comic
| number = 2922
| date = April 19, 2024
| title = Pub Trivia
| image = pub_trivia_2x.png
| imagesize = 422x666px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Bonus question: Where is London located? (a) The British Isles (b) Great Britain and Northern Ireland (c) The UK (d) Europe (or 'the EU') (e) Greater London
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A BOT ASKING BAD TRIVIA QUESTIONS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Many pubs have {{w|pub trivia|trivia nights}}, where patrons form teams and compete to answer questions about a range of topics. The typical goal for trivia games is that they be challenging, yet possible, and so the questions whose answers are too difficult or too easy generally make for a poor game. In addition, it's usually preferable that questions are clearly worded with a single, objective answer, so as to avoid disputes about which answers are correct.

Cueball has apparently been hired by one bar to infiltrate ''other'' bars' quiz nights and ask particularly bad questions. The implication is that this will make the games unpleasant, in the hopes that people will leave, and possibly go to the bar that hired Cueball.

Cueball uses a variety of strategies to write bad questions, including questions that are trivial (where the answer is painfully obvious), unanswerable (either because there is no answer, or because the answer is unknown), ambiguously worded or arguable.

Many of his questions could be altered slightly to make them more reasonable for such a game, but that would defeat Cueball's purpose.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Question !! Problem with the Question !! Explanation !! More Reasonable Alternative(s)
|-
|1. Which member of {{w|BTS}} has a birthday this year?||Multiple correct answers||All people have birthdays every year{{Citation needed}} (other than pedantic exceptions due to calendar issues or timezone alterations, or someone dying before their birthday, or being born on a leap day, none of which apply in this case). Therefore, all seven members of BTS have birthdays this year.||Which member of BTS has a birthday today/this week/this month? Which member of BTS turns [a specific age] this year?
|-
|2. How many sides does a {{w|platonic solid}} have?||Multiple answers, ambiguous language||There are five {{w|Platonic solids}}, with 4, 6, 8, 12 or 20 faces (colloquially called sides) in {{w|Euclid|Euclidean}} {{w|Euclidean geometry|3-space}}. The solids have, respectively, 6, 12, 8, 30 and 30 edges (also occasionally called sides colloquially). A more devious quizmaster might actually include this as a trick question with the correct answer being 'zero', since strictly speaking solids do not have 'sides'.||How many Platonic solids are there? What is the highest number of faces on a Platonic solid? How many faces does a [specific platonic solid] have? How many faces (or edges, or vertices) do ''all'' the platonic solids have (i.e., added together)?
|-
|3. What is the smallest lake in the world?||Arguable||While the largest lakes are relatively straightforward to categorize, smaller bodies of water range in size down to individual puddles. There is no clear, definitional line at which a body goes from being a lake to a pond, for example. In addition, the size of small lakes will fluctuate due to variability in precipitation, and other weather effects, and some lakes only exist for brief periods (intermittent lakes). Hence, which small bodies of water are "lakes" and which is the smallest can't be clearly answered, without specifying a whole list of parameters and standards.||What lake has the largest surface area in the world? What is the world's deepest lake? What lake is recognized by the Guinness World Records as the world's smallest? (Benxi Lake in China).
|-
|4. Which Steven Spielberg movie features more shark attacks, {{w|Jaws (movie)|Jaws (1975)}} or {{w|Lincoln (movie)|Lincoln (2012)}}?||Trivial||''Jaws'' is a famous movie about a killer shark, and features at least five fatal shark attacks. Lincoln is a movie about the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, containing zero shark attacks.{{Citation needed}} Anyone with even a passing familiarity with American popular culture should be able to get this one right, and someone with no knowledge could likely guess the answer from the titles alone. This might be mistaken for a silly trick question, as ''Lincoln'' is a much less famous movie.||How many times is a shark seen on screen in "Jaws"? Which film won more {{w|Academy Awards}}? How many fatal shark attacks occur in "Jaws"?
|-
|5. How many planets were there originally?||Ambiguous||The question doesn't specify a time frame or culture. It could be referring to the original meaning of the word, derived from the Greek planḗtai, meaning "wanderers", which in antiquity referred to the Sun, Moon, and five points of light visible by the naked eye that moved across the background of the stars — namely Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. It could also be referring to the meaning of the word prior to the International Astronomical Union (IAU) adopting an official definition of the term "planet" in 2006, which demoted Pluto to a dwarf planet. It also doesn't specify that it's referring to planets in our solar system alone (in the observable universe there are almost certainly trillions of planets). Additionally, it asks how many "were there", as opposed to how many planets "were known" (the number which we know of being far smaller than the true number of planets in the universe). The word "originally" could also imply the origin of the solar system, or the origin of the universe, in which case the answer would be 'zero' as no planets had yet accreted.||How many planets were known to Ancient Greece? How many planets were known to science prior to the invention of the telescope? How many planets were recognized in our Solar System at the end of the 20th century?
|-
|6. What {{w|NFL}} player has scored the most points outside of a game?||Ambiguous, Unknowable||The term "scored the most points" generally only applies within the context of a game, making it very unclear what kind of "points" the question is referring to. Does it mean points in non-NFL games? Points in games other than football? Points outside the context of any game at all (such as 'making a point' in conversation)? Even if this were clarified, points scored in official games in professional sports leagues are meticulously recorded and published, points scored in any other context are not, so the question is likely impossible to answer. Arguably, Brian Jordan would be an answer, with 121 Minor League and 755 MLB runs scored (points).||Which NFL player scored the most points in a game/season/career?
|-
|7. The {{w|Wright brothers}} built the first airplane. Who built the last one?||Unknowable||Orville and Wilbur Wright are widely credited with designing and building the first airplane (in the sense of a heavier-than-air flying machine that could take off, steer and land under its own power). In modern times, design and construction of airplanes has become a huge, international industry, with many airplanes of widely varying sizings being built each year. Since airplanes are built continuously, which one was made most recently depends on when the question is asked (and would be very difficult for the average person to know -- and not trivial for even a member of the aerospace industry to know). If it's asking about the last airplane ''ever'', that's impossible to know, since that plane hasn't been built yet (and hopefully won't for a very long time).||Who built the first airplane '''after''' the Wright brothers? When was the final Wright Model B aircraft built?
|-
|8. Is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?||Unknown, Possibly unknowable||This is a famous, centuries-old {{w|open question}} in math known as {{w|Goldbach's conjecture}}. Mathematicians widely believe that it is true, and it has held true for every number checked up to 4 ⋅ 1018, but since it's impossible to check every number, we can't assume it's universally true. No mathematical proof of its veracity exists at this point. Since it is {{w|Gödel's incompleteness theorems|known}} that something can be true but impossible to prove (and, being true, impossible to disprove), this may be the situation forever.||According to which mathematical conjecture is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?
|-
|9. Not counting {{w|Canberra}}, what city is the capital of {{w|Australia}}?||No answer exists||Australia has only one capital (unlike some countries, which divide the legislative and administrative capitals, for example), and that capital is Canberra. Hence, by definition, there is no national capital "not counting Canberra". Though each constituent state also has its state capital (inclusive of Canberra, which is the entirety of its {{w|Australian Capital Territory|own state territory}}), this would still leave us with an ambiguous choice. Before 1927, the answer could be Melbourne, as that was where the Parliament sat at that time. ||What city is the capital of Australia? What is currently the largest city in Australia? What is the smallest state capital in Australia? Not counting Canberra, what city was the most recently founded state capital of Australia? What city was the capital city before Canberra?
|-
|10. Who played the drums?||Trivial, yet unknowable without context||As worded, the question could be answered with anyone who's ever played the drums, in any context, whether professional or not, in all of history. This would include a huge number of people, most of whom would not be well-known. Most people would be able to offer a technically correct answer, and almost none of them would be interesting. Or maybe the host is wondering who it was that played drums that night, as part of the bar's live music.||Who played the drums for some specific band/album/track/concert?
|-
|(Title text) Where is {{w|London}} located? (a) the {{w|British Isles}} (b) {{w|Great Britain and Northern Ireland}} (c) the {{w|United Kingdom|UK}} (d) {{w|Europe}} (or 'the {{w|European Union|EU}}') (e) {{w|Greater London}}||Multiple answers||All choices are technically correct as they are various geographical areas that include the city of London, England. Also note that the City of London is different from the city ''named'' London, as the latter includes a large region around the former, hence (e) as an answer. Answer (d) is both correct and incorrect, as it conflates a geographic region, Europe, and a political body, the European Union. The United Kingdom (and therefore London) {{w|Brexit|left the EU}} in 2020, but is still geographically included in Europe. This also does not get into cities named London outside of the UK, so for example "Ontario" or "Canada" could also be possible answers if the test designer were truly evil, thus making none of the answers correct. ||What is the capital of the United Kingdom? (answer: London) Where is London, England '''not''' located? (a) the British Isles (b) Great Britain and Northern Ireland (c) the UK (d) Europe (e) the EU (answer: (e))
|}

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

:[Cueball, holding a wireless microphone in one hand and a pencil and notebook in the other, reading from the notebook]:
:Welcome to pub trivia! Round one is 10 questions:

# Which member of BTS has a birthday this year?
# How many sides does a platonic solid have?
# What is the smallest lake in the world?
# Which Steven Spielberg movie features more shark attacks - ''Jaws'' (1975) or ''Lincoln'' (2012)?
# How many planets were there originally?
# What NFL player has scored the most points outside of a game?
# The Wright brothers built the first airplane. Who built the last one?
# Is every even number greater than 2 the sum of two primes?
# Not counting Canberra, what city is the capital of Australia?
# Who played the drums?

:[Caption below the panel]:
:A local pub trivia place hired me to run bad quizzes at competing bars.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category: American football]]
[[Category: Astronomy]]
[[Category: Geography]]
[[Category: Math]]
[[Category: Music]]

2905: Supergroup

2024-03-13T16:23:12Z

Chortos-2: /* Potential connection to mathematical supergroups */ spelling: Dalmatian

{{comic
| number = 2905
| date = March 11, 2024
| title = Supergroup
| image = supergroup_2x.png
| imagesize = 335x321px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I love their cover of 1,200 Balloons, Dalmatians, and Miles.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SUPERSYMMETRIC SUPERGROUP THAT IS A GAY TRANS MALE (nothing against gay trans males) THAT OWNS 1200 BALLOONS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In popular music, a {{w|supergroup (music)|supergroup}} is a musical group formed by collaboration of existing solo artists and members of other musical groups.

This comic shows a marquee announcing a concert by a supergroup formed from members of 10 musical groups whose names all begin with a number. The name of the supergroup is the sum of all those numbers, 176, followed by the names of the original groups without their numbers. It's reasonable to estimate that there could be up to 32 members of the supergroup (see [[#band_member_numbers|below]]).

Musical groups mentioned in the comic:
* {{w|Twenty One Pilots}}
* {{w|5 Seconds of Summer}}
* {{w|4 Non Blondes}}
* {{w|2 Live Crew}}
* {{w|100 gecs}}
* {{w|3 Doors Down}}
* {{w|Nine Inch Nails}}
* {{w|OneRepublic}}
* {{w|One Direction}}
* {{w|Thirty Seconds to Mars}}

Sum: 21 + 5 + 4 + 2 + 100 + 3 + 9 + 1 + 1 + 30 = 176

The title text indicates that this supergroup performs a {{w|medley (music)|medley}} or {{w|mashup (music)|mashup}} of songs whose titles begin with numbers. The title of this "supersong" is similarly formed by adding the numbers and following with the rest of all the titles. Notably, none of the referenced songs were written by any of the referenced artists.

Songs mentioned in the title text:
* {{w|99 Luftballons}} (by {{w|Nena (band)|Nena}}). 99 Red Balloons is the title of the English-language adaptation of the song.
* {{w|One Hundred and One Dalmatians#Music|One Hundred and One Dalmatians}} (Disney film soundtrack). The titular song by the {{w|Sherman Brothers}} is not featured in the film, but was released in separate Disney recordings.
* {{w|A Thousand Miles}} (by {{w|Vanessa Carlton}}). Other songs titled "{{w|1000 Miles}}" or "Thousand Miles" also exist.

Sum: 99 + 101 + 1000 = 1200

"{{w|I'm Gonna Be (500 Miles)}}" by {{w|the Proclaimers}} is about walking "500 miles, and [...] 500 more", therefore a thousand miles in total. There are two more songs titled (or known as) {{w|500 Miles (disambiguation)|"500 Miles"}}, by Hedy West and Tori Amos, which could be added up to replace "A Thousand Miles" (or "1000 Miles") in the tally as well.

The supergroup could have 32 members:
* Twenty One Pilots: This band has 2 members, Tyler Joseph and Josh Dun.
* 5 Seconds of Summer: There are 4 members in this band, including Luke Hemmings, Michael Clifford, Calum Hood, and Ashton Irwin.
* 4 Non Blondes: Originally, this group had 4 members, but it disbanded in 1994. The lead singer was Linda Perry.
* 2 Live Crew: This group's core lineup included 2 to 4 members over different periods, with notable members being Luther Campbell, Brother Marquis, Fresh Kid Ice, and Mr. Mixx.
* 100 gecs: This band consists of 2 members, Laura Les and Dylan Brady.
* 3 Doors Down: This band typically has 5 members, although the number has varied with lineup changes over the years.
* Nine Inch Nails: Officially, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross are the only constant members of Nine Inch Nails, with a changing lineup of touring members and collaborators.
* OneRepublic: This band has 5 members, including Ryan Tedder, Zach Filkins, Drew Brown, Brent Kutzle, and Eddie Fisher.
* One Direction: Originally, there were 5 members in this band, but after Zayn Malik's departure in 2015, it continued with 4 members until their hiatus.
* Thirty Seconds to Mars: This band has had various lineups but is centered around Jared Leto and Shannon Leto, with other members joining and leaving at different times.

Sum: 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 5 + 4 + 2 = 32

These counts mostly reflect the bands' most well-known lineups and may vary with time due to changes in membership or the band's status. Combined groups may feature {{w|McBusted|fewer than}} the sum of their original memberships, even down to just single musicians/vocalists coming from any or all of their prior collaborations. On the other hand, especially for {{w|Charity supergroup|worthy causes}}, it is possible that groups with {{w|List of Hawkwind band members#Members|many changing lineups}} could perhaps rustle up far more members than they ever had at a given time, never mind any prominent artists who may guest-star in their own right.

=== Potential connection to mathematical supergroups ===
Randall may be making a subtle reference to mathematical physics, in which a {{w|supergroup (physics)|supergroup}} is a generalization of a group based on the concept of {{w|supersymmetry}}.

Readers with a background in mathematics or physics might find their expectations thwarted upon realizing that the comic is about mundane musical collaborations. But then, "every supergroup carries a natural group structure, but there may be more than one way to structure a given group as a supergroup"<ref name="wiki_supergroup">{{w|supersymmetry(physics)|Supersymmetry (physics) on Wikipedia}}, accessed 2024-03-13</ref>, which applies to both contexts.

100 gecs provides the most "bandname per member" (100/2=50), with OneRepublic and One Direction each vying for most "members per bandname" (both 5, at their most complete). Counting the songname mashup ratios is more complex: if it is not a single "1000 miles", ''perhaps'' the two Proclaimers can be said to be each singing 500 miles, to match the other solo artists' alternate 500s (depending upon which source(s) are chosen as canon), but a single luftballon requires just slightly over 1% of Nena (whether the {{w|Nena|eponymous singer}} or shared throughout {{w|Nena (band)|her band of five}}) and a lone Dalmatian slightly less than 1% split amongst {{w|101 Dalmatians|an uncertain number of originators}}.

== References ==
<references/>

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail, Cueball, Megan, Knit Cap, and Hairy are in line at a theater box office with Ponytail looking in at the window at the tickets sale. The window is partly shaded/reflectively-marked and cannot be seen through in the comic. There is a speaking grille in the window, plus a opening at the bottom for passing payment and tickets. To the left of the window are double doors and above all this there is a large theatrical billboard with small lights all around it. It reads:]
:<big>Playing Tonight</big>
:''The New Supergroup:''
:176 Pilots, Seconds of Summer, Non Blondes, Live Crew, gecs, Doors Down, Inch Nails, Republic, Direction, and Seconds to Mars

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Knit Cap]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Math]]

Talk:2658: Coffee Cup Holes

2022-08-13T13:01:16Z

Chortos-2:

I was confused for a moment. That's a coffee ''mug''. And the correct answer is either one (the handle) or none (because below the macroscopic level (and above the theoretical sub-Planck scale of string-theory loops) it's increasingly not even mostly holes but very, very barely anything 'solid' jostling about in empty space giving no real impediment to any theoretical quantum-scale cheesewire without even being cut through). A coffee ''cup'' has no holes (regardless) if you don't count any form of sippy-lid it might have. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.13|172.70.85.13]] 22:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
:Actually, the mug has two at the macro level (the hole that makes up the handle and the hole on the top). There could conceivably be more shallow holes inside the mug where the handle connects to the cup. At a plank-length level, the atoms could be viewed as holes in the vacuum bending space time around it.
::You're not a topologist, certainly. And a ''hydrogen-nucleus'' is approximately 10^20 times the planck-length. The whole atom on the order of 10,000 times larger, and the constiuent quarks 'only' 1,000th, or so, smaller, with the differences being the space betweenn that anything that cares isn't going to consider much of an obstruction. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 23:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
:There is no "hole" at the top - at best it count as an indention in the surface {{unsigned ip|172.70.211.134|23:38, 12 August 2022}}
::Hole has multiple meanings. A hole in the ground doesn't have to go all the way through the Earth. The point of panel three is that we don't know what definition the question is using, which makes it impossible to answer correctly.[[User:Zzyzx|Zzyzx]] ([[User talk:Zzyzx|talk]]) 00:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
:Do coffee “cups” not have handles wherever you are? Google image search shows white ceramic cups with rounded bottoms, wider than they are high, ''with round handles'' that a finger or two can pass through, on saucers; and that is indeed what I think of when I hear “coffee cup”. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_cup Wikipedia] shows similar examples in other colours and materials. In my understanding, it is entirely equivalent to a mug-with-a-handle topologically and has the same one hole. Oh, are you perhaps thinking of those cardboard cups you get from vending machines and cheap coffee shops? I wouldn’t call them “coffee cups” at all; just “paper cups”. [[User:Chortos-2|Chortos-2]] ([[User talk:Chortos-2|talk]]) 13:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Mug_and_Torus_morph.gif] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.179.4|172.70.179.4]] 23:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

For something to be a hole, you need to consider what is capable of passing through the hole. For instance, a mesh screen might have no holes that my fingers can pass through, but it is full of holes for water or air to pass through. And while atoms might be mostly space, other atoms can't usually just pass through that space, although high-energy particles may. Also, the space can be considered filled with forces, which may act as barriers to certain things. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.171|172.70.130.171]] 00:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
:Sure, for one definition of “hole.” That’s the whole point of the comic: there are multiple definitions, and no single definition is correct. [[User:Szeth Pancakes|Szeth Pancakes]] ([[User talk:Szeth Pancakes|talk]]) 01:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Is “cup” or “mug” better for the explanation? “Mug” is a better descriptor, but it’s described as “cup” in the comic, so that would be more faithful to what Randall intended. [[User:Szeth Pancakes|Szeth Pancakes]] ([[User talk:Szeth Pancakes|talk]]) 01:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Linguist: Zero to Two... mostly. Given linguistic variation and local functional style the object being referred to may not have a closed handle, or any handle at all (Cup vs Mug), and the top may be considered a hole in the common usage. --- [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.34|172.69.71.34]] 01:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Part of the joke is that all five methods don't discern between a cup and a mug, the original cliché being that topologists are unusual because they don't. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.134|172.70.211.134]] 03:06, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Someone should mention that part of the joke is that when the topologist says it has one hole, they're referring to the hole in the handle, while in the next panel the "normal person" assumes the one hole they mentioned is the opening and questions its validity. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.51|108.162.241.51]] 03:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

All frames except the first and last depict a mug; a topologist most definitely discerns between a a cup and a mug because they give different answers, the "normal" person is only questioning a specific feature, and the philosopher is clearly considering a mug. If it's part of the joke the only contrast is the question. Seems way too subtle for Mr Munroes normal style. probably just what he is used to calling it. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.208|172.69.69.208]] 07:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2634: Red Line Through HTTPS

2022-06-20T23:49:15Z

Chortos-2:

HTTPS was standardized in 2000 or so, so 2015 is quite a stretch for a site to not use it because the site was last updated before HTTPS was widely available.
With pretty much any browser now, a red line through HTTPS means that the site _is using HTTPS_, but it is _not trusted by the browser_ (due to e.g. the certificate being self-signed or expired).
[[User:Darrylnoakes|Darrylnoakes]] ([[User talk:Darrylnoakes|talk]]) 04:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:I think the intended joke is that the site's certificate expired in 2015, instead of the site is not using HTTPS. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.101|108.162.221.101]] 06:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:2015 is when the first Let's Encrypt certs were issued, and 2016 is when LE became generally available to the public and thus when free SSL/TLS became very very easy for just about anyone setting up a web server, hence the comic citing 2015. However even with a valid cert you might have a number of issues, like [https://www.mixedcontentexamples.com/ mixed content]. At least in Firefox, an expired cert gives a big warning screen that gives you an option to add a security exception; I don't care enough to install Chrom{e,ium} to test its UI. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.250|172.69.69.250]] 08:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

::Chrome has this warning screen including an option to bypass the warning as well. I believe all browsers do. I think the only exception to this is when a site has strict transport security enabled. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 10:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:::Until about 2015 no-one complained if you didn't offer HTTPS as long as you didn't request anyone's credit card number or offered .exe files: An internet site offers nothing but inherently untrustable text. It might contain ads that can execute any piece of javascript. It even could contain flash - so why pay a substantial amount of money to make the transport of that data more secure? Nowadays most web browsers tell on you if you don't secure connections and allowing the telco to see what data you download from where is felt as a privacy intrusion. On the other side not every hoster offers https for multiple domains...--[[User:Gunterkoenigsmann|Gunterkoenigsmann]] ([[User talk:Gunterkoenigsmann|talk]]) 15:03, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Not sure it's true that if there is a problem with HTTPS like an expired cert that the connection is made with HTTP instead. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.201|172.69.79.201]] 10:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:It's not, it still uses the https connection. It only indicates that the connection might not be secure anymore and anyone could be listening in at that point. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 10:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I actually am bemused by this. Not sure if I only visit the wrong (or right?) websites with the wrong (or right?) browsers, but I don't recall ever notably having seen struck-red links. (Perhaps I have, and assumed it was a site informing me that they were dead links, not now followable?) I ''do'' occasionally follow a normal-looking link (maybe locally CSSed in a over-riding manner of format?) and I get the browser load up a whole-screen "Problem with certificate (Are you sure? Jump through hoops for me to progress.)" which I may then take under considered advisement but mostly has me checking I'm not being spoofed as to the destination or something. Is this where the red strikethrough appears for others?
 I also have at least one site that is steadfastly still HTTP-only, and neither I nor my various browsers have any problem with it as I know what I'm doing, whilst the browsers just go there without particular complaint or anything more than usual addressbar clues... I might have "added to exception from warning" once or twice in the distant past, but not in every case. So I'm learning something here, but I don't know what. Sounds like something Edge would do, but I don't use Edge... I'm generally on Chrome, Firefox and a handful of 'lesser' flavours, all definitely updated. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 11:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:You can find some examples of the red line on https://badssl.com/, but pretty much in all cases you get a full page warning first that something is amiss. You can also try out the http connection at http://http.badssl.com/, http connections are a bit more complicated. Some browsers don't show a warning at all, while others only show a gray 'insecure' label in front of the url. And as can be seen here [https://blog.chromium.org/2017/04/next-steps-toward-more-connection.html], the plan is to eventually show similar warnings for HTTP sites as what is currently shown for HTTPS sites with a failed certificate. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 11:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::Ugh, I'd hate that. I have a little webpage of my own, and I'm not in a position to be able to go https, :( That "badssl" site has several example issues, which ones go red/strikethrough? I want to confirm no browser I have does that. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

:I was about to remark the same thing, :) NEVER seen a strikethrough. I'm rather assuming it's something Chrome does, because I about exclusively use Firefox, and Chrome likes to be weird and non-standard (main reason I generally don't use it), and too many people act like there's no other browser than Chrome. Likewise, most I get is "Security Risk!", then find out it's a Bad Certificate, then it turns out it expired and they just haven't updated it yet. Stop being so dramatic, LOL! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
::I'm a Chrome user (part of the time, being the "handful of lesser flavours" contributor, above, but using it this very second) and I don't see it. But then I turned off its look-ahead (downloading of pages it thinks I'll go to next) because I'd rather it not, and as some sort of pre-emptiveness seems necessary to know a link ''should'' be red-struckthrough, I probably (hopefully?) neutered that stupid potential exploit too... So don't take my experience as gospel. (But still sounds like an Edge thing, to me, the way that's the new IE in the current browser ecosystem.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.5|172.70.162.5]] 11:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
:::It's not links (to other pages) that get the strikethrough. It's the protocol/scheme name in the current page's address bar. See, for example, the picture in https://superuser.com/a/369839/93954. This is far less intrusive than any of the warning pages you've mentioned seeing; maybe you just haven't noticed when it does that? For a current live example, in Edge, I'm seeing the (not red) strikethrough e. g. on https://self-signed.badssl.com/ both on the warning page and after clicking through it to accept the bad certificate. And as it happens, I could swear that just within the last few days I've been on a mixed-content website that displayed the strikethrough, but I'm not certain what website it was and I can't reproduce this now, so I'm probably misremembering. [[User:Chortos-2|Chortos-2]] ([[User talk:Chortos-2|talk]]) 23:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I've made a rather large change to the page to better explain the meaning of a red line through https. I removed any mentioning of using the HTTP protocol as that is incorrect. If a browser uses the HTTP protocol it is shown in the url using 'http://'. Since the comic was talking about a red line through 'https' I'm assuming the usage of the HTTP protocol is unrelated here.
Though it's possible I removed some more information from the page that might still be desired. Such as the mentioning of AI-generated spam sites and man in the middle attacks. These seemed redundant to me for explaining the joke.
I also put some more emphasis on the red line usually meaning that something bad is going on. Browser venders put a lot of effort in security, and having everyone think that a red line is not that big of a problem is the last thing they'd want. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 11:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

While it's true that some browser security warnings are false alarms, I think that paragraph is missing the point of the comic. Cueball is assuming that any site that's been around for years must be operated well. But often the maintainers of the site get complacent and don't update to newer standards. And even if the real site is legit, the security warning can mean that traffic has been intercepted, so you're not actually going to the real site. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:40, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
: Also, someone who hasn't taken the trouble to keep their security certificates up to date is probably more likely to have neglected their server security generally, so it's more likely that someone could have hacked them and be serving you up all kinds of crap. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.177|172.70.85.177]] 08:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I presumed this was about using outdated protocols like TLS 1.0 or weak ciphers. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.121|172.70.110.121]] 00:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

You'd almost think Randall didn't live in the Boston metropolitan area. I was disappointed. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 04:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, at least two of us don't see this behaviour, so this is NOT as universal as Randall seems to think, could somebody figure out why and put it in the explanation? (I reject the possibility that we just haven't visited the right (wrong) sites. I, for one, go to WAY too many sites, LOL!). My leading theory is that instead of being universal, this behaviour is actually unique to Chrome (as I don't use it much and can easily have never visited an insecure website on it), since I use Firefox primarily, and many people seem to forget that there are other browsers than Chrome, and Google goes out of it's way to be as weird as possible, including being fancy for the sake of fancy (like the colour-coding and strikethrough). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Where is Cueball saying that websites with a red line through HTTPS are more secure than modern websites? In the comic he merely says that the red line means that the website is legit, he doesn't make any comparison at all. [[User:Kzkzb|Kzkzb]] ([[User talk:Kzkzb|talk]]) 22:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I think the current explanation is missing a key aspect of the humor. The fact is, it takes minutes to add HTTPS to your site for free (see e.g., https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/free-https-c051ca570324/). A phisher could set up a site with https and have it trick you into giving up your info for a while before being caught and brought down. I think the outdated-ness of the red line through the https indicates that the site has been around for a long time, and therefore is less likely to be a scam. I'll add something small to this effect, but let me know if you disagree, I'm not 100% sure about this. [[User:Jrfarah|Jrfarah]] ([[User talk:Jrfarah|talk]]) 23:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

:While you can set up HTTPS certificate for free in minutes, you need to have control over the domain to be able to. This is key aspect in the security - only I can control my domain, therefore if you see green HTTPS on my website, you can be sure it is a genuine one, whereas if you see anything else, it might not be [[Special:Contributions/89.177.163.36|89.177.163.36]] 16:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
::Aside from the issue of a previously controlled+certificated domain being hijacked... As far as I'm concerned a <code>style="text-color: green"</code> sort of thing would suffice to produce the exact same effect.
::Nobody has yet satisfactorily explained ''which'' browsers do this, and under ''which'' circumstances... No Chrome doesn't do this. (Not my Chrome, anyway, but maybe I'm just using the wrong one?)
::But, for when it ''does'' happen, does it not override inline/CSS styles, in which case the link 'warning' is entirely disguisable by the link-author. Even in the most incapable and hobbled version of newb-servicing CMS, and definitely with direct markup-editing capability.
::Or they do, in which case (not that I have much sympathy for the absolutist type) I hear the wailings of a thousand web-designers, unable to control every last visual element to their utter and complete desire because the browser spoils their desired pallette, even if they overlook the mythical strikethrough rendering.
::(The amateur web designer I knew who set up a pixel-perfect site by making the page he desired an ''image'' with ''image-mapped'' hotspot-links on the blue-underlined fully rasterised words... It sounds like he would have neutered the HTTPS warning. But in the most annoying and frustrating way.)
:: I assume it's a common sight for Randall, to have inspired him so (and write about it as if we should similarly have a good idea about it). For me, though, I assumed it was a broken-link thing, i.e. a non-available web resource, but then of course a page/site that is entirely offline cannot be so easily hacked. But I take it on trust that the current explanation (as far as it goes) is the real one. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.58|172.70.91.58]] 22:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Removed unnecessary line. The NSA is mentioned absolutely nowhere in the comic, nor any other intelligence agency, and it comes off as nothing more than an unnecessary conspiracy theory.

Talk:2634: Red Line Through HTTPS

2022-06-20T23:44:43Z

Chortos-2: line in address bar, not links on page

HTTPS was standardized in 2000 or so, so 2015 is quite a stretch for a site to not use it because the site was last updated before HTTPS was widely available.
With pretty much any browser now, a red line through HTTPS means that the site _is using HTTPS_, but it is _not trusted by the browser_ (due to e.g. the certificate being self-signed or expired).
[[User:Darrylnoakes|Darrylnoakes]] ([[User talk:Darrylnoakes|talk]]) 04:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:I think the intended joke is that the site's certificate expired in 2015, instead of the site is not using HTTPS. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.101|108.162.221.101]] 06:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:2015 is when the first Let's Encrypt certs were issued, and 2016 is when LE became generally available to the public and thus when free SSL/TLS became very very easy for just about anyone setting up a web server, hence the comic citing 2015. However even with a valid cert you might have a number of issues, like [https://www.mixedcontentexamples.com/ mixed content]. At least in Firefox, an expired cert gives a big warning screen that gives you an option to add a security exception; I don't care enough to install Chrom{e,ium} to test its UI. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.250|172.69.69.250]] 08:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

::Chrome has this warning screen including an option to bypass the warning as well. I believe all browsers do. I think the only exception to this is when a site has strict transport security enabled. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 10:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:::Until about 2015 no-one complained if you didn't offer HTTPS as long as you didn't request anyone's credit card number or offered .exe files: An internet site offers nothing but inherently untrustable text. It might contain ads that can execute any piece of javascript. It even could contain flash - so why pay a substantial amount of money to make the transport of that data more secure? Nowadays most web browsers tell on you if you don't secure connections and allowing the telco to see what data you download from where is felt as a privacy intrusion. On the other side not every hoster offers https for multiple domains...--[[User:Gunterkoenigsmann|Gunterkoenigsmann]] ([[User talk:Gunterkoenigsmann|talk]]) 15:03, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Not sure it's true that if there is a problem with HTTPS like an expired cert that the connection is made with HTTP instead. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.201|172.69.79.201]] 10:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:It's not, it still uses the https connection. It only indicates that the connection might not be secure anymore and anyone could be listening in at that point. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 10:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I actually am bemused by this. Not sure if I only visit the wrong (or right?) websites with the wrong (or right?) browsers, but I don't recall ever notably having seen struck-red links. (Perhaps I have, and assumed it was a site informing me that they were dead links, not now followable?) I ''do'' occasionally follow a normal-looking link (maybe locally CSSed in a over-riding manner of format?) and I get the browser load up a whole-screen "Problem with certificate (Are you sure? Jump through hoops for me to progress.)" which I may then take under considered advisement but mostly has me checking I'm not being spoofed as to the destination or something. Is this where the red strikethrough appears for others?
 I also have at least one site that is steadfastly still HTTP-only, and neither I nor my various browsers have any problem with it as I know what I'm doing, whilst the browsers just go there without particular complaint or anything more than usual addressbar clues... I might have "added to exception from warning" once or twice in the distant past, but not in every case. So I'm learning something here, but I don't know what. Sounds like something Edge would do, but I don't use Edge... I'm generally on Chrome, Firefox and a handful of 'lesser' flavours, all definitely updated. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.173|172.70.90.173]] 11:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

:You can find some examples of the red line on https://badssl.com/, but pretty much in all cases you get a full page warning first that something is amiss. You can also try out the http connection at http://http.badssl.com/, http connections are a bit more complicated. Some browsers don't show a warning at all, while others only show a gray 'insecure' label in front of the url. And as can be seen here [https://blog.chromium.org/2017/04/next-steps-toward-more-connection.html], the plan is to eventually show similar warnings for HTTP sites as what is currently shown for HTTPS sites with a failed certificate. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 11:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::Ugh, I'd hate that. I have a little webpage of my own, and I'm not in a position to be able to go https, :( That "badssl" site has several example issues, which ones go red/strikethrough? I want to confirm no browser I have does that. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

:I was about to remark the same thing, :) NEVER seen a strikethrough. I'm rather assuming it's something Chrome does, because I about exclusively use Firefox, and Chrome likes to be weird and non-standard (main reason I generally don't use it), and too many people act like there's no other browser than Chrome. Likewise, most I get is "Security Risk!", then find out it's a Bad Certificate, then it turns out it expired and they just haven't updated it yet. Stop being so dramatic, LOL! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
::I'm a Chrome user (part of the time, being the "handful of lesser flavours" contributor, above, but using it this very second) and I don't see it. But then I turned off its look-ahead (downloading of pages it thinks I'll go to next) because I'd rather it not, and as some sort of pre-emptiveness seems necessary to know a link ''should'' be red-struckthrough, I probably (hopefully?) neutered that stupid potential exploit too... So don't take my experience as gospel. (But still sounds like an Edge thing, to me, the way that's the new IE in the current browser ecosystem.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.5|172.70.162.5]] 11:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
:::It's not links (to other pages) that get the strikethrough. It's the protocol/scheme name in the current page's address bar. See, for example, the picture in https://superuser.com/a/369839/93954. This is far less intrusive than any of the warning pages you've mentioned seeing; maybe you just haven't noticed when it does that? For a current live example, in Edge, I'm seeing the (not red) strikethrough e. g. on https://self-signed.badssl.com/ both on the warning page and after clicking through it to accept the bad certificate. And as it happens, I could swear that just within the last few days I've been on a mixed-content website that displayed the strikethrough, but I'm not certain what website it was and I can't reproduce this now. [[User:Chortos-2|Chortos-2]] ([[User talk:Chortos-2|talk]]) 23:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I've made a rather large change to the page to better explain the meaning of a red line through https. I removed any mentioning of using the HTTP protocol as that is incorrect. If a browser uses the HTTP protocol it is shown in the url using 'http://'. Since the comic was talking about a red line through 'https' I'm assuming the usage of the HTTP protocol is unrelated here.
Though it's possible I removed some more information from the page that might still be desired. Such as the mentioning of AI-generated spam sites and man in the middle attacks. These seemed redundant to me for explaining the joke.
I also put some more emphasis on the red line usually meaning that something bad is going on. Browser venders put a lot of effort in security, and having everyone think that a red line is not that big of a problem is the last thing they'd want. [[User:Jespertheend|Jespertheend]] ([[User talk:Jespertheend|talk]]) 11:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

While it's true that some browser security warnings are false alarms, I think that paragraph is missing the point of the comic. Cueball is assuming that any site that's been around for years must be operated well. But often the maintainers of the site get complacent and don't update to newer standards. And even if the real site is legit, the security warning can mean that traffic has been intercepted, so you're not actually going to the real site. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:40, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
: Also, someone who hasn't taken the trouble to keep their security certificates up to date is probably more likely to have neglected their server security generally, so it's more likely that someone could have hacked them and be serving you up all kinds of crap. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.177|172.70.85.177]] 08:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I presumed this was about using outdated protocols like TLS 1.0 or weak ciphers. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.121|172.70.110.121]] 00:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

You'd almost think Randall didn't live in the Boston metropolitan area. I was disappointed. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 04:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, at least two of us don't see this behaviour, so this is NOT as universal as Randall seems to think, could somebody figure out why and put it in the explanation? (I reject the possibility that we just haven't visited the right (wrong) sites. I, for one, go to WAY too many sites, LOL!). My leading theory is that instead of being universal, this behaviour is actually unique to Chrome (as I don't use it much and can easily have never visited an insecure website on it), since I use Firefox primarily, and many people seem to forget that there are other browsers than Chrome, and Google goes out of it's way to be as weird as possible, including being fancy for the sake of fancy (like the colour-coding and strikethrough). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Where is Cueball saying that websites with a red line through HTTPS are more secure than modern websites? In the comic he merely says that the red line means that the website is legit, he doesn't make any comparison at all. [[User:Kzkzb|Kzkzb]] ([[User talk:Kzkzb|talk]]) 22:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I think the current explanation is missing a key aspect of the humor. The fact is, it takes minutes to add HTTPS to your site for free (see e.g., https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/free-https-c051ca570324/). A phisher could set up a site with https and have it trick you into giving up your info for a while before being caught and brought down. I think the outdated-ness of the red line through the https indicates that the site has been around for a long time, and therefore is less likely to be a scam. I'll add something small to this effect, but let me know if you disagree, I'm not 100% sure about this. [[User:Jrfarah|Jrfarah]] ([[User talk:Jrfarah|talk]]) 23:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

:While you can set up HTTPS certificate for free in minutes, you need to have control over the domain to be able to. This is key aspect in the security - only I can control my domain, therefore if you see green HTTPS on my website, you can be sure it is a genuine one, whereas if you see anything else, it might not be [[Special:Contributions/89.177.163.36|89.177.163.36]] 16:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
::Aside from the issue of a previously controlled+certificated domain being hijacked... As far as I'm concerned a <code>style="text-color: green"</code> sort of thing would suffice to produce the exact same effect.
::Nobody has yet satisfactorily explained ''which'' browsers do this, and under ''which'' circumstances... No Chrome doesn't do this. (Not my Chrome, anyway, but maybe I'm just using the wrong one?)
::But, for when it ''does'' happen, does it not override inline/CSS styles, in which case the link 'warning' is entirely disguisable by the link-author. Even in the most incapable and hobbled version of newb-servicing CMS, and definitely with direct markup-editing capability.
::Or they do, in which case (not that I have much sympathy for the absolutist type) I hear the wailings of a thousand web-designers, unable to control every last visual element to their utter and complete desire because the browser spoils their desired pallette, even if they overlook the mythical strikethrough rendering.
::(The amateur web designer I knew who set up a pixel-perfect site by making the page he desired an ''image'' with ''image-mapped'' hotspot-links on the blue-underlined fully rasterised words... It sounds like he would have neutered the HTTPS warning. But in the most annoying and frustrating way.)
:: I assume it's a common sight for Randall, to have inspired him so (and write about it as if we should similarly have a good idea about it). For me, though, I assumed it was a broken-link thing, i.e. a non-available web resource, but then of course a page/site that is entirely offline cannot be so easily hacked. But I take it on trust that the current explanation (as far as it goes) is the real one. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.58|172.70.91.58]] 22:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Removed unnecessary line. The NSA is mentioned absolutely nowhere in the comic, nor any other intelligence agency, and it comes off as nothing more than an unnecessary conspiracy theory.

Talk:2609: Entwives

2022-04-20T14:49:46Z

Chortos-2:

This seems like one of the earliest-released comics in recent history [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 14:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

There seemed to be two versions of the title text; on mobile, there is a youtube link visible, but this is not present on my chrome desktop view [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 14:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

The mouseover text in android devices is this youtube link - [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt2qCjL6-n4]] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt2qCjL6-n4 [[User:DefectedWBC|DefectedWBC]] ([[User talk:DefectedWBC|talk]]) 14:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Is LotR the lowest scoring major motion picture on the {{w|Bechdel test}}? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.95|172.70.206.95]] 14:37, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Unlikely, depending on how you define major motion picture.

As pointed out in YouTube’s comment section, the video seems to be a joke, not ''actually'' the only female interaction in the films. [[User:Chortos-2|Chortos-2]] ([[User talk:Chortos-2|talk]]) 14:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)