explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2030: Voting Software

2018-08-08T22:16:47Z

Da NKP: Atari Game Dump Question

I think this comic is referencing [https://twitter.com/GossiTheDog/status/1026603800365330432 this twitter thread] and the controversy behind it.
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.190.4|172.69.190.4]] 17:59, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
: The [https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/08/experts-criticize-west-virginias-plan-for-smartphone-voting/ Experts criticize West Virginia’s plan for smartphone voting] article on ArsTechnica has more information (as much as possible when the company in question does not provide any details (note that it is about overseas voting). --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 19:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Is he saying it's weird that we're so sophisticated in other areas of computer science but so far behind in voting technology, or is he making fun of the idea that electronic voting is somehow inherently unsafe?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 18:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
: No he is saying computer science is a mess and we should not trust it with voting(he is not making fun of the idea of it being unsafe, he is pressing on the point of it being unsafe[saying that all experts agree on that])18:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

: I think he's commenting on how in most fields, the experts are very sure that they do their job well, and all the angles have been tried and tested, but in computer science the experts are more certain than anyone that there is ''absolutely no way'' for a person to actually build a complex software system with no flaws or vulnerabilities, even if they controlled every aspect of the system. in practice of course they control very little of the system and understand even less of it. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.88|172.68.34.88]] 18:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

: He's saying that software development is a terribly buggy process, most likely because the majority of software out there can have bugs without very dire real-world consequences (unlike aircraft or elevators).

::Not to mention the fact that there are incredibly smart people with great interest in undoing the work that software developers do, whereas that isn't at all the case with airplanes or elevators. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.214|108.162.219.214]] 18:29, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

:: Plus there's the general issue that the public as a whole takes the view that "Computers are majykal" (misspelling deliberate) and therefore somehow automatically safe & infallible, despite experts trying very hard to disillusion people about...pretty much all of that. Compare that to the common assumptions about aircraft and elevators--people need the safety verified, instead of assuming it like they do with computers. [[User:Werhdnt|Werhdnt]] ([[User talk:Werhdnt|talk]]) 19:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

:::There's a logical fallacy here. To compare airplaneS and elevatorS to a voting system program is comparing plural to singular. There would be significant opportunity to break/modify a single instance of those objects, although without the relative anonymity of electronic access involved. Once a computer system is infiltrated, the break-in can be replicated to all instances of that program relatively instantaneously, assuming communication pathways are available.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.130|162.158.75.130]] 19:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

::::No logical fallacy; there have been ''multiple'' attempts to get people to accept a voting system program, and the 'done by a computer=infallible' problem is '''''not''''' unique to voting programs. Mr. Babbage was being confused by people who were thinking it was possible to get the correct answers from a computer despite putting the wrong data in back in the 1860s (at least!), and the computer at the time was not much more than a fancy calculator. [[User:Werhdnt|Werhdnt]] ([[User talk:Werhdnt|talk]]) 20:23, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

A blockchain node doesn't technically need to be connected to the internet in order to function. It needs to have some method for receiving messages from other nodes on the blockchain network, and most blockchain nodes do indeed get these messages via the internet, but some bitcoin nodes (for example) get updates about new blocks and new transactions from the Blockstream satellite. An internet connection is therefore not intrinsically necessary for a blockchain to work, it's just the most convenient way to do it.

Do you think that this comic had anything to do with the debacle in Johnson County, KS last night? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.231|162.158.62.231]] 19:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The comic ignores the fact that modern airplanes are heavily utilizing software of all kinds. A software failure in an aircraft could easily be fatal (and have been so various times in history already, while the consequences of a voting software working incorrect are ''relatively'' harmless), and still airplanes remain safe, as the comic recognizes. --[[User:YMS|YMS]] ([[User talk:YMS|talk]]) 21:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Seems to me that the last panel references the E.T for Atari Desert Burial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_video_game_burial), perhaps to draw some analogy as to the potential quality or likelihood of success of a Block-chain solution as compared to the ill-fated video game. Anyone think that's worth explaining? [[User:Da_NKP|Da_NKP]] 10:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC) Da_NKP

Talk:345: 1337: Part 5

2016-08-22T13:28:14Z

Da NKP:

Does anyone know if such an IP address really exists, where you can point a streaming audio player at the right time to hear her "rock out"? [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 05:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

127.0.0.1 [[User:HitiadlfElaineR|HitiadlfElaineR]] ([[User talk:HitiadlfElaineR|talk]]) 08:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

While this was a joke, I can find a more inspirational view. In this case, while Elaine Roberts is fictional, you (that is, the programmer who reads xkcd) can be excellent hackers. You have the potential to achieve exploits (not just cracking ones). You just have to work towards your goal. In other words, the reason why the IP address points to your home is because you have the 'spirit' of Elaine Roberts. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 21:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't we mention Dread Pirate Roberts a.k.a. Ross William Ulbricht, the Silkroad founder? {{unsigned ip|141.101.64.71}}

Also, the joke is that the sentence from the Princess Bride _isn't_ exactly mimicked. Cary Elwes says "you'd make a wonderful Dread Pirate Roberts," where DPR is the full title. Elaine is told that she make a "great dread Pirate, Roberts," - Roberts being Elaine's surname. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.86|173.245.52.86]] 23:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
* Rather pedantic bit of critique. The comma is just there so the joke makes sense as a line.- Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205|108.162.249.205]] 02:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
It should also be mentioned that the "Dread Pirate Roberts" was the nickname of the guy who ran Silk Road.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.150|108.162.219.150]] 18:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

according to Wikipedia, he Silk Road wasn't started until years after this comic was published. Interestingly enough, the titular comic 1337 was, which coincidentally also happens to be titled "Hack."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 17:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Someone needs to put a stop to all these incomplete tags that are really just demands for more and more information. I tried clearing out all the "Tell me more" incomplete tags, but someone reverted them, and then added MORE.

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 23:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:I reverted your changes. You removed every incomplete tag, including ones that were merited, within a time span that made it difficult to believe you were properly vetting the pages to make sure they were complete. The most telling part was your removal of the incomplete tag on [[1608]] without also removing the red text the tag was referring to, indicating that you weren't reading the messages on the tags either before judging that they were satisfied and removing them. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed the reasons given for the incomplete tags, and removed all the ones that boiled down to "more". Most of these were just things like "Needs more details", "It would be cool if" and even "Explain this complicated scientific concept to me". Hoverboard is an example of the last category I cleared, which was essentially "Please recreate this super-detailed thing Randall did with documentation of every single detail." That's not a realistic standard for a complete explanation, and therefore the incomplete project would *never* be finished.

657, for example, is a request that is both pointless and unfillable - you can't create a transcript for a chart. 1556 is "I don't like this explanation. 980 is "Reconstruct Randall's data".

These requests are entirely pointless and irrational for an explanation of the comic. The goal here is to EXPLAIN the comic, not simply create a second version.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 10:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:We transcribe charts because there are people who can't see them, due to physical condition or internet. A transcript that does not contain the contents of the comic is not sufficient to deliver the same content that sighted users experience, and it does not help us if someone comes by and deems vague transcripts good enough. We do aim to document every feature of large comics; see the pages for [[1110]] and [[1190]]. Also, some explanations are legitimately lacking in information and when you delete the tags from ~30 pages within the span of 10 minutes, it is very difficult for me to believe that you're checking to make sure the pages are actually finished. I bothered to read the pages instead of batch rolling back all your changes for the day, but it would have been nice if you'd taken the time to do it yourself when deleting tags. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

If I may ask, what are the specifics behind the incomplete explanation? Could we just say that Stallman wrote the GNU Manifesto (source: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.en.html) where he asked for help working on GNU and his goal was to share it with everyone - hence encourage sharing in the public mind? The bit about defacing websites makes sense because, unlike a normal human who would more or less likely just start a fight with whomever made one too many mom jokes, she uses her hacking skills to mess with their websites. Is there anything else we need to say about that? [[User:Da NKP|Da_NKP]] ([[User talk:Da NKP|talk]]) 13:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Talk:345: 1337: Part 5

2016-08-22T13:20:16Z

Da NKP:

Does anyone know if such an IP address really exists, where you can point a streaming audio player at the right time to hear her "rock out"? [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 05:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

127.0.0.1 [[User:HitiadlfElaineR|HitiadlfElaineR]] ([[User talk:HitiadlfElaineR|talk]]) 08:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

While this was a joke, I can find a more inspirational view. In this case, while Elaine Roberts is fictional, you (that is, the programmer who reads xkcd) can be excellent hackers. You have the potential to achieve exploits (not just cracking ones). You just have to work towards your goal. In other words, the reason why the IP address points to your home is because you have the 'spirit' of Elaine Roberts. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 21:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't we mention Dread Pirate Roberts a.k.a. Ross William Ulbricht, the Silkroad founder? {{unsigned ip|141.101.64.71}}

Also, the joke is that the sentence from the Princess Bride _isn't_ exactly mimicked. Cary Elwes says "you'd make a wonderful Dread Pirate Roberts," where DPR is the full title. Elaine is told that she make a "great dread Pirate, Roberts," - Roberts being Elaine's surname. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.86|173.245.52.86]] 23:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
* Rather pedantic bit of critique. The comma is just there so the joke makes sense as a line.- Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205|108.162.249.205]] 02:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
It should also be mentioned that the "Dread Pirate Roberts" was the nickname of the guy who ran Silk Road.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.150|108.162.219.150]] 18:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

according to Wikipedia, he Silk Road wasn't started until years after this comic was published. Interestingly enough, the titular comic 1337 was, which coincidentally also happens to be titled "Hack."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 17:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Someone needs to put a stop to all these incomplete tags that are really just demands for more and more information. I tried clearing out all the "Tell me more" incomplete tags, but someone reverted them, and then added MORE.

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 23:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:I reverted your changes. You removed every incomplete tag, including ones that were merited, within a time span that made it difficult to believe you were properly vetting the pages to make sure they were complete. The most telling part was your removal of the incomplete tag on [[1608]] without also removing the red text the tag was referring to, indicating that you weren't reading the messages on the tags either before judging that they were satisfied and removing them. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed the reasons given for the incomplete tags, and removed all the ones that boiled down to "more". Most of these were just things like "Needs more details", "It would be cool if" and even "Explain this complicated scientific concept to me". Hoverboard is an example of the last category I cleared, which was essentially "Please recreate this super-detailed thing Randall did with documentation of every single detail." That's not a realistic standard for a complete explanation, and therefore the incomplete project would *never* be finished.

657, for example, is a request that is both pointless and unfillable - you can't create a transcript for a chart. 1556 is "I don't like this explanation. 980 is "Reconstruct Randall's data".

These requests are entirely pointless and irrational for an explanation of the comic. The goal here is to EXPLAIN the comic, not simply create a second version.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 10:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:We transcribe charts because there are people who can't see them, due to physical condition or internet. A transcript that does not contain the contents of the comic is not sufficient to deliver the same content that sighted users experience, and it does not help us if someone comes by and deems vague transcripts good enough. We do aim to document every feature of large comics; see the pages for [[1110]] and [[1190]]. Also, some explanations are legitimately lacking in information and when you delete the tags from ~30 pages within the span of 10 minutes, it is very difficult for me to believe that you're checking to make sure the pages are actually finished. I bothered to read the pages instead of batch rolling back all your changes for the day, but it would have been nice if you'd taken the time to do it yourself when deleting tags. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

If I may ask, what are the specifics behind the incomplete explanation? Could we just say that Stallman wrote the GNU Manifesto (source: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.en.html) where he asked for help working on GNU and his goal was to share it with everyone - hence encourage sharing in the public mind? The bit about defacing websites makes sense because, unlike a normal human who would more or less likely just start a fight with whomever made one too many mom jokes, she uses her hacking skills to mess with their websites. Is there anything else we need to say about that? [[User:Da NKP|Da NKP]] ([[User talk:Da NKP|talk]]) 13:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Talk:345: 1337: Part 5

2016-08-22T13:18:40Z

Da NKP: Request for Clarification on Incomplete Explanation

Does anyone know if such an IP address really exists, where you can point a streaming audio player at the right time to hear her "rock out"? [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 05:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

127.0.0.1 [[User:HitiadlfElaineR|HitiadlfElaineR]] ([[User talk:HitiadlfElaineR|talk]]) 08:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

While this was a joke, I can find a more inspirational view. In this case, while Elaine Roberts is fictional, you (that is, the programmer who reads xkcd) can be excellent hackers. You have the potential to achieve exploits (not just cracking ones). You just have to work towards your goal. In other words, the reason why the IP address points to your home is because you have the 'spirit' of Elaine Roberts. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 21:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't we mention Dread Pirate Roberts a.k.a. Ross William Ulbricht, the Silkroad founder? {{unsigned ip|141.101.64.71}}

Also, the joke is that the sentence from the Princess Bride _isn't_ exactly mimicked. Cary Elwes says "you'd make a wonderful Dread Pirate Roberts," where DPR is the full title. Elaine is told that she make a "great dread Pirate, Roberts," - Roberts being Elaine's surname. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.86|173.245.52.86]] 23:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
* Rather pedantic bit of critique. The comma is just there so the joke makes sense as a line.- Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205|108.162.249.205]] 02:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
It should also be mentioned that the "Dread Pirate Roberts" was the nickname of the guy who ran Silk Road.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.150|108.162.219.150]] 18:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

according to Wikipedia, he Silk Road wasn't started until years after this comic was published. Interestingly enough, the titular comic 1337 was, which coincidentally also happens to be titled "Hack."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.76|108.162.216.76]] 17:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Someone needs to put a stop to all these incomplete tags that are really just demands for more and more information. I tried clearing out all the "Tell me more" incomplete tags, but someone reverted them, and then added MORE.

[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 23:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:I reverted your changes. You removed every incomplete tag, including ones that were merited, within a time span that made it difficult to believe you were properly vetting the pages to make sure they were complete. The most telling part was your removal of the incomplete tag on [[1608]] without also removing the red text the tag was referring to, indicating that you weren't reading the messages on the tags either before judging that they were satisfied and removing them. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed the reasons given for the incomplete tags, and removed all the ones that boiled down to "more". Most of these were just things like "Needs more details", "It would be cool if" and even "Explain this complicated scientific concept to me". Hoverboard is an example of the last category I cleared, which was essentially "Please recreate this super-detailed thing Randall did with documentation of every single detail." That's not a realistic standard for a complete explanation, and therefore the incomplete project would *never* be finished.

657, for example, is a request that is both pointless and unfillable - you can't create a transcript for a chart. 1556 is "I don't like this explanation. 980 is "Reconstruct Randall's data".

These requests are entirely pointless and irrational for an explanation of the comic. The goal here is to EXPLAIN the comic, not simply create a second version.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.30|173.245.54.30]] 10:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)JWB
:We transcribe charts because there are people who can't see them, due to physical condition or internet. A transcript that does not contain the contents of the comic is not sufficient to deliver the same content that sighted users experience, and it does not help us if someone comes by and deems vague transcripts good enough. We do aim to document every feature of large comics; see the pages for [[1110]] and [[1190]]. Also, some explanations are legitimately lacking in information and when you delete the tags from ~30 pages within the span of 10 minutes, it is very difficult for me to believe that you're checking to make sure the pages are actually finished. I bothered to read the pages instead of batch rolling back all your changes for the day, but it would have been nice if you'd taken the time to do it yourself when deleting tags. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:53, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

If I may ask, what is the specific behind the incomplete explanation? Could we just say that Stallman wrote the GNU Manifesto (source: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.en.html) where he asked for help working on GNU and his goal was to share it with everyone - hence encourage sharing in the public mind? The bit about defacing websites makes sense because, unlike a normal human who would more or less likely just start a fight with whomever made one too many mom jokes, she uses her hacking skills to mess with their websites. Is there anything else we need to say about that? [[User:Da NKP|Da NKP]] ([[User talk:Da NKP|talk]]) 13:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)