explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3064: Lungfish

2025-03-18T18:12:00Z

Jarvik: /* Explanation */ added a couple of useful wiki tags

{{comic
| number = 3064
| date = March 17, 2025
| title = Lungfish
| image = lungfish_2x.png
| imagesize = 317x403px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I know having so many base pairs makes rebasing complicated, but you're in Bilateria, so shouldn't you at LEAST be better at using git head?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COPY OF COPY OF COPY OF COPY OF LUNGFISH (FINAL) - looks mostly sound, but could probably use an authority to sign off before clearing the tag.}}

{{w|Lungfish}} (the class ''Dipnoi'') have the largest known {{w|genome}} among the {{w|vertebrate}}s (133 billion {{w|base pair}}s), and the third-largest known genome of all species. The comic relates this to a common issue when editing documents or coding, where the author accidentally makes changes to {{w|Fork (software development)|two separately created versions of documents}}, when they meant to only edit one, which can result in changes to both (or all) resulting documents becoming functionally essential parts of the completed project, or at least present as development artefacts in the 'final' product. This may happen if documents are sent for review (or updating) to different editors, or at different times, and the changes from the earlier one(s) aren't properly integrated with the later one(s). The comic posits that Lungfish has a habit of doing this with its own genome, making both genes essential and increasing the amount of base pairs.

When Cueball confronts Lungfish about this bad habit of mismanaging files, Lungfish dismisses him by saying he'll just "buy more storage". This is likely alluding to when people are faced with an increasing number of files on their storage media, they just buy more storage, either by adding another media drive or paying additional monthly fees for online storage (ex: [https://www.apple.com/ca/icloud/ iCloud] or [https://one.google.com/about/plans Google Drive]). Because of the relatively low cost of storage, this often seems like any easy 'solution', but doesn't actually address the problems of information fragmentation and management. As well as being an issue in their [[1718: Backups| own right]], a failure to deal with these can lead to a repeating pattern that ratchets up storage cost over time. If part of the process is to buy 'fresh' storage space, perhaps to ''attempt'' to rationalise the new and historic files from where they were previously, an even worse legacy of 'temporary' copies (or near-copies) of old files may end up littering [[1360: Old Files|various layers of storage]], in ways that may later confuse matters further.

The names of the "files" reference several things about computer files:
* Older versions of Windows, when copy-and-pasting a file within the same folder, would automatically prepend "Copy of" to the filename, resulting in a file named "Copy of ''x''". (This was previously referenced in the title text of [[1459: Documents]].) If the resulting file was then copied, it would be likewise prepended, thus producing "Copy of Copy of ''x''". Newer versions of Windows instead append "- Copy" the filename, which produces the same effect but keeps things in roughly the same order when sorted by name. Google Docs automatically prepends "Copy of ''x''" to document names, when copied. Other systems may apply their own conventions that interact badly (or fail to sensibly do so) as duplicated and manually renamed files are accessed across differing systems with differing conventions.
* Numbered labels in brackets can be produced by a couple different actions:
** If multiple files are highlighted and a Rename action is performed, all of the files will be given the same name with a number label, starting with the one clicked on for the Rename action and then proceeding from the top of the list down as originally sorted. For example, if three files named "Alpha", "Beta", and "Gamma" are highlighted, and the user right-clicks on "Gamma" and renames it to "Alphabet", then "Gamma" will be renamed to "Alphabet (1)", followed by "Alphabet (2)" [formerly Alpha] and "Alphabet (3)" [formerly Beta].
** If a copied file is pasted multiple times into the same folder, it will also receive number labels in the same format. This includes copies that are also appended as such in the above points, so a newly-pasted file might end up with a "Copy of" prefix AND a "(2)" suffix, or the next available value that does not clash with documents currently held in the same location.
** If a file is downloaded from a web-page (such as webmail, or intranet/internet repository) and a file with same name already exists in the download folder, most modern browsers similarly append a number such as "(1)", or other number as necessary.
* Some users will keep older and newer drafts of a file in case of a need to revert back to an older version; this can be done with a number label (i.e. "v1", "v2", etc.) or a proper word (i.e. "draft", "edited", etc.). This is often entirely at the user's discretion; there may be conventions or even official team policies to follow, but it relies upon editors sticking to those. However well defined, this can be useful if it's discovered that an edit breaks something important, or in the event that a mistaken save loses data, but it can also lead to file hoarding and the possibility of revisiting older documents when newer ones aren't more obviously available. The naming-version is also far from foolproof, as a "(Newest)"-named file can't itself know when it is superseded (perhaps by a "(Final)" file) and even a "(Final)" one cannot be sure that the project hasn't been revisited (perhaps with an update to "(Newest)"). Such a manual method of attempting to keep sequential versions in line can easily be open to misuse and ambiguity of status, especially when any changes have apparently not been so obviously important to the person(s) involved that it has had no "version number" updated — or else ''both'' were (separate!) refinements of some "v2" revision(s), or earlier, without proper regard/awareness of the other update.

In short, the file names "Copy of Copy of Gene v3 (Newest) (2)" and "Copy of Copy of Gene v3 (Final) (2)" strongly hint at a very poorly organized method of version tracking, as especially evidenced by both existing as 'current' versions, with a tendency of the lungfish to copy-paste inconsistently, certainly explaining why it keeps editing and maintaining multiple documents instead of a single one.

For anyone curious about the science, it's important to note that [https://www.science.org/content/article/odd-fish-has-30-times-much-dna-humans-new-record-animals this is absolutely not why lungfish have a large genome]; while some organisms do contain many copies of genes as a diversification strategy, this mostly occurs only in some plants and single-celled {{w|eukaryotes}}. Lungfish have roughly the same number of genes as a human (and likely slightly fewer), and the large size of the lungfish genome is likely due to poor {{w|transposon}} control causing their chromosomes to fill up with junk.

The title text further compares the biology of lungfish to managing versions of files in a popular version control system called {{w|Git}}, which includes a facility called [https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/git-head/ "head"] that assists in keeping track of the latest available version of a particular project resource, across all updating and forking. Rebasing, in Git, is the act of moving changes from one file branch to another, which Cueball says is complicated due to the large number of 'base pairs' - a pun since base pairs are elements of chromosomes. {{w|Bilateria}} is a clade of animals characterized by embryonic bilateral symmetry, giving their bodies distinguishable "head" and "tail" ends. Since this applies to lungfish, Cueball says, in another pun, that the lungfish should at least know how to use the "head" branch with Git.

==Transcript==
:[A lungfish is sticking its head out of the water close to a wooden dock. It is looking up at Cueball, standing on the dock looking down, and they are talking.]
:Lungfish: It turns out I've been editing both '''''Copy of Copy of Gene v3 (Newest) (2)''''' and '''''Copy of Copy of Gene v3 (Final) (2)''''' so now I can't delete either one.
:Cueball: You have '''''got''''' to stop doing this.
:Lungfish: It's fine, I'll just buy more storage.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Why lungfish have such enormous genomes

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Version Control]]

2944: Magnet Fishing

2024-06-17T12:30:33Z

Jarvik: /* Explanation */ added tautology link

{{comic
| number = 2944
| date = June 10, 2024
| title = Magnet Fishing
| image = magnet_fishing_2x.png
| imagesize = 522x356px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The ten-way tie was judged a ten-way tie, so no one won the grand prize, a rare fishing monopole.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Magnet fishing}} is the act of using a magnet to find ferrometallic objects in a body of water. It can be used to recover specific lost items, help to clear a stretch of water of dumped items and/or simply to see what interesting (perhaps valuable) items can be found. This is reminiscent of magnetic fishing games (such as [https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/13166/lets-go-fishin "Let's Go Fishing"] and [https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/172530/go-fishing "Go Fishing"]) where players use fishing rods with small magnets on the ends to "catch" fish.

A World Magnet Fishing Championship was apparently only held once, because of the contestants' magnets getting stuck together. This resulted in the fishing lines becoming tangled together, or "tied", for a pun on the competition being declared "tied". It also looks like a {{w|Tautology_(language)|tautology}}, though the first "ten-way tie" depicts how the ten lines are 'knotted' together, and the second indicates the equality of the final score. This suggests that nobody 'fished' anything ''other'' than "all the other nine magnets", prior to the inevitable conclusion.

It's unclear why the World Magnet Fishing Championship has contestants competing simultaneously. Participants go one at a time in a great variety of sporting competitions -- such as diving, figure skating, gymnastics, equestrian -- and the individual performances are graded and compared to determine a winner. If the World Magnet Fishing Championship contestants took turns, it wouldn't have to be cancelled.

The title text states that the competition's prize would have been a "fishing monopole" which typically means the right to fish a certain area exclusively. It has several more meanings though as it could as well refer to a {{w|fishing rod}}, also called a fishing pole, with only a single rod rather than multiple. Most fishing rods only have a single pole so this would not be considered rare. It could also refer to a magnet fishing rod where the magnet is a {{w|magnetic monopole}} rather than a {{w|magnetic dipole}} like all known magnets. This would certainly be rare since no magnetic monopoles have been found and thus would be a certainly be a valuable prize for a competition. The irony of this is that such a magnet would have alleviated the issue of the magnets attracting while fishing. The currently known laws of physics require that if magnetic monopoles exist, electric charge must be quantized. Electric charge ''is'' quantized which is consistent with (but does not prove) magnetic monopoles existing. Finally, 'pole position' (usually in Motorsport) is awarded to the first place qualifier in a competition. With all competitors coming joint first, this is a 'monopole' result.

==Transcript==
:[Ten people are standing on a bridge connecting the steep banks on either side of a body of water. They have all cast strings with magnets over the edge and are holding on to them. All their magnets have, however, got stuck together and as they are pulling them up they hang in a bunch above the water under the middle of the bridge, with all ten lines going out from the bunch of magnets. The characters from left to right are: Hairbun, a person with white hair, Cueball, Megan, another Cueball, White Hat, another Megan, a guy with spiky hair, Ponytail, and Hairy.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:The first, and last, World Magnet Fishing Championship

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:2876: Range Safety

2024-01-04T12:08:43Z

Jarvik:

The 'standard' and '2x' sized images had unexpected sizes, so a Trivia section has been automatically generated, and an imagesize parameter has been added (at half size) to render the image consistently with other comics on this website. --[[User:TheusafBOT|TheusafBOT]] ([[User talk:TheusafBOT|talk]]) 14:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
:Okay, so, today we learned modern xkcd comics are drawn entirely with the pencil tool, with the brush size for the text averaging 22 pixels, and then downscaled to 1/15th of the size before final publication. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.91|162.158.103.91]] 15:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::The text is a font...
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:03, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
:::"...is a font..." https://github.com/ipython/xkcd-font [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 20:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::::No, I think you missed the context from that page. It states that "''xkcd-font'' is a font derived from Randall's handwriting...", ''not'' that the text placed in the comic drawings is rendered with a font. If you study the comics text, there are brush stroke variations between different instances of the same character, e.g. in this day's comic it is noticeable in "T" and "R" --[[User:Jarvik|Jarvik]] ([[User talk:Jarvik|talk]]) 12:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Why is the tower missing in the second panel?
:If the other buildings weren't in the same place, and the tower weren't back in panel 3, I'd have guessed that the rocket was moved back to the VAB to wait for the next launch window. Maybe this was more activity of the Range Mischief Officer? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 17:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::Seems to be back. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
:::It was just an optical illusion - haze from the launch site causing tricks of the light. As is the fact that the various protuberances from the tower appear to change from panel to panel. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.14|172.69.194.14]] 11:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Is it worth adding a guess of what kind of rocket it is to the explanation? The phallic design seems like one of Blue Origin's. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 17:06, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
:The thin "neck" makes it look like somewhat like a Long March 4 when carrying a large fairing, but it's a bit exaggerated in how much thicker the lower stages are. The ratio looks more like a Vega-C, but then the neck is way too short.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.40|172.69.247.40]] 17:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
::Hard to tell, in silouhette. Often a two(-or-more)-side-booster configuation is used to increase the payload capabilities for a normally 'straight-up' main stack. And the reason why the stack needs boosting may be the increased weight (and/or fairing-size) of the extra-large payload section.
::The fins off the base of the broad 'body' are typical parts of add-on-boosters (which may have various top ends, some matching the 'shoulders' as seen) to aid with both the assisted phases of the launch (keeping the stack trimmed without excessive gimballing of the engines equipped to gimbal) ''and'' to ensure their eventual ejection is safe (adds a further force to ensure the expelled boosters consistently tumble safely away from the still-ascending, maybe boosting, central stack). There's not enough pixels to be sure if it's a typical Russian/European booster-profile (if it's an Arianne, sheer length make it closer to Arianne 5 (typical 2-booster stacking) to either Arianne 4 (A42P/44LPA/44P/etc) or 6 (A62/A64), though it's borderline even for a 5G/G+, and Proton-M has 'very low shoulders' too), and so many 'private' vehicles exist that I wouldn't want to check them all just for this. Not a Falcon 9 variant, however.
::The outsized header-fairing tends to happen for large loads that don't need a broad stack (JWST needed no comparatively huge head, it already needed power enough to get to L2!), something big-and-buslike that maybe a Delta-II might launch to sub-GEO (although the D2's boosters clearly do not match this profile, either).
::Unless I (or anybody else) happens upon a stack-shot that matches it, I think it's just an ad-hock composite. A Platonic 'form' of a rocket (or an Aristotelian one, if you prefer). But it does raise interesting questions.
::...as does why "uprange" is redlinked (currently!) in the wiktionary page for "downrange". (Launching ''uprange'' into thunderstorms would be the suggestion for yet another range non-safety officer to make... :p ) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.104|141.101.98.104]] 01:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Is "Why do we even HAVE that position?" a throw-back to The Emporer's New Groove? [[User:Hymie|Hymie]] ([[User talk:Hymie|talk]]) 04:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
: I doubt it's a specific reference - it's a pretty common joke - cf. 'What do we even pay you for?'

;SpaceX?
My first thought was SpaceX, e.g. the 2020-12-09 SN8 flight: https://www.google.com/search?q=spacex%20sn8%20faa

There was also some coverage of the 2022-02-03 Starlink launch which implied it would've been more prudent to "wait out the storm": https://time.com/6146986/space-x-satellites-solar-storm/, but skimming academic articles makes it sound like losing so many satellites was surprising to forecasters: https://www.google.com/search?q=february+3+2022+starlink+launch+space+weather
[[User:Mikey.r|Mikey.r]] ([[User talk:Mikey.r|talk]]) 08:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

2876: Range Safety

2024-01-04T10:15:26Z

Jarvik: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2876
| date = January 3, 2024
| title = Range Safety
| image = range_safety_2x.png
| imagesize = 565x272px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The Range Mischief Officer has modified the trajectory to add a single random spin somewhere in the flight, but won't tell us where.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a RANGE EXPLOSION OFFICER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

A {{w|Range Safety}} officer is responsible for ensuring the safety of the flight of a missile or launch vehicle – such as the rocket in the comic. This involves tasks like creating a launch corridor clear of any aircraft or ships, as well as ensuring that atmospheric conditions are favorable for a launch.

In this comic, the Range Safety Officer has noticed reports of thunderstorms downrange, and has ordered a hold as conditions are no longer favorable.

Randall continues on by imagining the opposite position, a "Range Danger Officer," responsible for ensuring that the flight of the vehicle is dangerous. Flying into the biggest thunderstorm may qualify as dangerous - in 1987 an ATLAS rocket launched into thunderstorm conditions by NASA was destroyed by lightning strikes that caused electrical malfunction. Someone on the staff justifiably wonders what reason there is for that position to exist.

The title text imagines a Range Mischief Officer, responsible for mischief – generally defined as minor/playful annoyance. Introducing a random unknown spin may qualify, since the spin shouldn't affect the flight too much, but would make all the flight engineers nervous about the flight as they seek to understand why telemetry is inverted (or why it is not!), as they work out the cause and whether it is symptomatic of bigger underlying issues or just a technical change of reference to an otherwise correct flight trajectory. Whether the spin is purely axial or end-over-end would probably matter greatly!

The Range Danger Officer and Range Mischief Officer both sound like suitable positions for [[Black Hat]], xkcd's resident [[classhole]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A rocket is on a launchpad with a tower next to it, with a few birds flying around them. Voices are coming from a nearby building. The scene is shown in black silhouette on a white background.]
:Voice: There are reports of thunderstorms in the downrange area.

:Voice: The Range Safety Officer has ordered a launch hold.

:Voice: But the Range '''''Danger''''' Officer wants to launch the rocket toward the biggest thunderstorm.
:Voice 2: Okay, why do we even '''''have''''' that position?

==Trivia==
* '''This trivia section was created by a BOT'''
* The [https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/range_safety.png standard size] image was uploaded with a resolution/size larger than the supposed 2x version.
* This may have been an error.
* The tower next to the rocket was also missing from panel 2.
* These were later corrected.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Weather]]

2307: Alive Or Not

2020-05-16T00:44:04Z

Jarvik: /* Things ranked as not alive */

{{comic
| number = 2307
| date = May 15, 2020
| title = Alive Or Not
| image = alive_or_not.png
| titletext = Computer viruses currently fall somewhere between prions and fire.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SLIME MOLD. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There is no thorough definition of "life"; all definitions thus far proposed have either excluded some things commonly understood to be alive or included some things commonly understood to not be alive. Take reproduction, a trait commonly assumed to be essential and unique to life; by this definition, anything which cannot reproduce (including mules, worker bees, and postmenopausal women) would be considered nonliving, while anything which can duplicate itself (including computer viruses, advanced 3D printers, and fire—see below) would be considered alive.

Many more elaborate definitions of life have been attempted over the decades. Some common additional factors include:

* {{w|Homeostasis}}, the ability to control an internal environment to maintain a constant state;
* {{w|Metabolism}}, converting nutrients into energy and building blocks for growth, reproduction, and so on; and
* {{w|Adaptation}} through heredity and natural selection.

Despite all of this, the only definite definition of "life" is "something everyone agrees is alive". This comic attempts to rank several types of things by how likely people are to perceive them as "alive".

=== Things ranked as alive ===

* '''Animals (normal)'''
* '''Animals (weird ones like jellyfish and coral)''': Randall's categorization of animals as "normal" or "weird" is a simplified version of the {{w|Great chain of being}}, a philosophical framework in which humans are seen as the most "advanced" form of life, followed by a divine or otherwise justified hierarchy of progressively lesser life-forms (mammals, birds, fish, lizards, insects, and so on).
* '''{{w|Fungi}}''': Fungi are organisms that are part of a separate grouping than other organisms. They are neither plants nor animals. Fungi "eat" by absorbing dissolved molecules, like animals, but like plants, they are typically unable to move on their own. Mushrooms, yeasts, and molds are common types of fungi.
* '''Plants''':
* '''{{w|Slime mold}}s''': Slime molds are eukaryotic single-celled organisms (so "more advanced" than bacteria) which are most notable for their occasional congregation into macro-sized colonies which can appear to move as a single creature. It's interesting that Randall ranks them as "less alive" than fungi (which they were once thought to be), especially given some of their curious behaviors (e.g. [https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/feb/18/slime-mould-rail-road-transport-routes optimizing transportation networks] when presented with a collection of food flakes and obstacles).
* '''Bacteria''':
* '''{{w|Archaea}}''': Archaea (misspelled as ''Archea'' by Randall) is a {{w|domain (biology)|domain}} of organisms, which do not fall under eukaryotes or bacteria. They are single-celled organisms that lack a nucleus.
* '''{{w|Virus}}es''': Viruses are infectious agents consisting of a genome surrounded by a protein or lipid shell. When a virus contacts a cell, it delivers its genome inside the cell which causes the cells' reproductive machinery to create more viruses. As viruses are incapable of reproducing without the aid of larger cells, it is often debated whether or not they are actually alive. Randall has ranked viruses as "alive".

===Things ranked as not alive===
* '''{{w|Prions}}''': Prions are misfolded proteins that can spread and change the structure of other proteins. Similarly to viruses prions require something else to replicate
* (from title text) '''{{w|Computer virus}}es''':
* '''{{w|Fire}}''': Fire is a common example of something which meets many common definitions for life; it grows, reproduces by spreading seeds (sparks), and consumes energy and excretes waste (ashes and smoke). However, while fire can be a necessary part of the life cycle of other organisms (e.g. redwood trees), it does not maintain a constant environment within itself, nor does it perform
* '''Clouds
* '''{{w|Fossils}}''': Fossils are the petrified remains of once-living organisms, so in that sense they are more connected to life than "regular rocks", and some may hold DNA that could theoretically be used to clone the fossilized life-form.
* '''Rocks shaped like faces''': Humans have an extremely advanced capability for seeing patterns, and one of the most powerful patterns we seek is {{w|Face perception|faces}}, so much so that we see faces even where they don't exist (a common form of {{w|pareidolia}}). Humans instinctively anthropomorphize any object which vaguely resembles a face as having a sense of attention and mood, and so a rock shaped like a face would likely be treated differently than a rock not shaped like a face. Randall does not distinguish between rocks intentionally carved to look like faces (such as the famous {{w|Moai}} sculptures) or rocks that happen to look vaguely like faces under the right lighting conditions (such as the famous {{w|Face on Mars}}.)
* '''Regular rocks''': Modern taxonomy originates from Carl Linnaeus, who categorized all objects on Earth as animals, plants (often stated as "''vegetable''" in quiz games like Twenty Questions), or minerals. Minerals are most obviously not alive, although some cultures and works of fiction have creatures that turn to stone and will return later to life.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[A vertical line, with various objects and entities marked as points on the line. A horizontal dashed line is drawn across the list, with "Alive" items above the line and "Not Alive" items below.
*Animals (Normal)
*Animals (Weird ones like Jellyfish and Coral)
*Fungi
*Plants
*Slime Molds
*Bacteria
*Archea
*Viruses
*[Up-arrow: Alive]
*[Dashed line]
*[Down-arrow: Not Alive]
*Prions
*Fire
*Clouds
*Fossils
*Rocks shaped like faces
*Regular rocks
{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Charts]]

2307: Alive Or Not

2020-05-16T00:43:28Z

Jarvik: /* Things ranked as not alive */

{{comic
| number = 2307
| date = May 15, 2020
| title = Alive Or Not
| image = alive_or_not.png
| titletext = Computer viruses currently fall somewhere between prions and fire.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SLIME MOLD. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There is no thorough definition of "life"; all definitions thus far proposed have either excluded some things commonly understood to be alive or included some things commonly understood to not be alive. Take reproduction, a trait commonly assumed to be essential and unique to life; by this definition, anything which cannot reproduce (including mules, worker bees, and postmenopausal women) would be considered nonliving, while anything which can duplicate itself (including computer viruses, advanced 3D printers, and fire—see below) would be considered alive.

Many more elaborate definitions of life have been attempted over the decades. Some common additional factors include:

* {{w|Homeostasis}}, the ability to control an internal environment to maintain a constant state;
* {{w|Metabolism}}, converting nutrients into energy and building blocks for growth, reproduction, and so on; and
* {{w|Adaptation}} through heredity and natural selection.

Despite all of this, the only definite definition of "life" is "something everyone agrees is alive". This comic attempts to rank several types of things by how likely people are to perceive them as "alive".

=== Things ranked as alive ===

* '''Animals (normal)'''
* '''Animals (weird ones like jellyfish and coral)''': Randall's categorization of animals as "normal" or "weird" is a simplified version of the {{w|Great chain of being}}, a philosophical framework in which humans are seen as the most "advanced" form of life, followed by a divine or otherwise justified hierarchy of progressively lesser life-forms (mammals, birds, fish, lizards, insects, and so on).
* '''{{w|Fungi}}''': Fungi are organisms that are part of a separate grouping than other organisms. They are neither plants nor animals. Fungi "eat" by absorbing dissolved molecules, like animals, but like plants, they are typically unable to move on their own. Mushrooms, yeasts, and molds are common types of fungi.
* '''Plants''':
* '''{{w|Slime mold}}s''': Slime molds are eukaryotic single-celled organisms (so "more advanced" than bacteria) which are most notable for their occasional congregation into macro-sized colonies which can appear to move as a single creature. It's interesting that Randall ranks them as "less alive" than fungi (which they were once thought to be), especially given some of their curious behaviors (e.g. [https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/feb/18/slime-mould-rail-road-transport-routes optimizing transportation networks] when presented with a collection of food flakes and obstacles).
* '''Bacteria''':
* '''{{w|Archaea}}''': Archaea (misspelled as ''Archea'' by Randall) is a {{w|domain (biology)|domain}} of organisms, which do not fall under eukaryotes or bacteria. They are single-celled organisms that lack a nucleus.
* '''{{w|Virus}}es''': Viruses are infectious agents consisting of a genome surrounded by a protein or lipid shell. When a virus contacts a cell, it delivers its genome inside the cell which causes the cells' reproductive machinery to create more viruses. As viruses are incapable of reproducing without the aid of larger cells, it is often debated whether or not they are actually alive. Randall has ranked viruses as "alive".

===Things ranked as not alive===
* ''{{w|'Prions}}''': Prions are misfolded proteins that can spread and change the structure of other proteins. Similarly to viruses prions require something else to replicate
* (from title text) '''{{w|Computer virus}}es''':
* '''{{w|Fire}}''': Fire is a common example of something which meets many common definitions for life; it grows, reproduces by spreading seeds (sparks), and consumes energy and excretes waste (ashes and smoke). However, while fire can be a necessary part of the life cycle of other organisms (e.g. redwood trees), it does not maintain a constant environment within itself, nor does it perform
* '''Clouds
* '''{{w|Fossils}}''': Fossils are the petrified remains of once-living organisms, so in that sense they are more connected to life than "regular rocks", and some may hold DNA that could theoretically be used to clone the fossilized life-form.
* '''Rocks shaped like faces''': Humans have an extremely advanced capability for seeing patterns, and one of the most powerful patterns we seek is {{w|Face perception|faces}}, so much so that we see faces even where they don't exist (a common form of {{w|pareidolia}}). Humans instinctively anthropomorphize any object which vaguely resembles a face as having a sense of attention and mood, and so a rock shaped like a face would likely be treated differently than a rock not shaped like a face. Randall does not distinguish between rocks intentionally carved to look like faces (such as the famous {{w|Moai}} sculptures) or rocks that happen to look vaguely like faces under the right lighting conditions (such as the famous {{w|Face on Mars}}.)
* '''Regular rocks''': Modern taxonomy originates from Carl Linnaeus, who categorized all objects on Earth as animals, plants (often stated as "''vegetable''" in quiz games like Twenty Questions), or minerals. Minerals are most obviously not alive, although some cultures and works of fiction have creatures that turn to stone and will return later to life.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[A vertical line, with various objects and entities marked as points on the line. A horizontal dashed line is drawn across the list, with "Alive" items above the line and "Not Alive" items below.
*Animals (Normal)
*Animals (Weird ones like Jellyfish and Coral)
*Fungi
*Plants
*Slime Molds
*Bacteria
*Archea
*Viruses
*[Up-arrow: Alive]
*[Dashed line]
*[Down-arrow: Not Alive]
*Prions
*Fire
*Clouds
*Fossils
*Rocks shaped like faces
*Regular rocks
{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Charts]]

2306: Common Cold

2020-05-14T17:50:40Z

Jarvik:

{{comic
| number = 2306
| date = May 13, 2020
| title = Common Cold
| image = common_cold.png
| titletext = Not even metapneumovirus, easily the common cold virus with the coolest name, warrants our sympathy. Colds suck. No mercy.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is another in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] related to the {{w|2019–20 coronavirus outbreak|2020 pandemic}} of the {{w|coronavirus}} {{w|SARS-CoV-2}}, which causes {{w|COVID-19}}.

Many of the measures humans have undertaken to fight SARS CoV-2, such as careful hand-washing and sanitizing of frequently-touched surfaces, are effective against most pathogens. Hence, one of the ironic silver linings of the coronavirus pandemic is that the aggressive implementation of these measures are likely to slow the spread, not only of SARS CoV-2, but of many common illnesses. If these measures become long-term social expectations, they may improve public health long after the current pandemic has passed.

In this strip, [[Randall]] addresses the matter from the point of view of viruses. Specifically, those that cause the {{w|common cold}}, imagining them as sentient entities, with spreading infection as their conscious goal. Much like in [[2287: Pathogen Resistance]], the humor comes from the perspective flip, where health measures intend to protect us are seen by the pathogens as terrifying attacks. In this strip, the cold viruses become aware that more aggressive hygiene measures are putting them at risk, and hope to negotiate with humanity, on the grounds that, unlike CoV-SARS-2, they are rarely fatal. Their hope seems to be that, once the current pandemic is brought under control, humanity will abandon these measures, and allow them to freely spread, once again.

Cueball's adamant refusal likely reflects Randall's hope that this pandemic will result in lasting changes, slowing the spread of all diseases, including those which are merely very unpleasant, as opposed to actually fatal. By treating this like a conscious battle, people may be more inclined to be vigilant, and not allow the enemy any opportunity to recover.

While colds are unlikely to kill otherwise healthy humans, they still cause symptoms which can be painful, even debilitating, in the short term. Previous strips made reference to the miserable nature of the disease. In December 2015, Randall released both [[1612: Colds]] and [[1618: Cold Medicine]].

The ''[[what_if?|what if?]]'' book previously dealt with the plausibility of eliminating the common cold through aggressive physical distancing alone. The section in that book concluded that total elimination would be impractical. However, the current situation suggests that minimizing the spread of disease by careful hygiene measures is realistic.

In the title text Randall mentions a virus with the name {{w|Human metapneumovirus|metapneumovirus}}. He states that this is easily the common cold virus with the coolest name. But that does not mean it warrants our sympathy (as it is present in up to 40% of colds, and can be deadly in vulnerable populations). And he finishes by stating that "Colds suck. No mercy". So Randall would not be sorry to see the common cold eliminated, or at least substantially contained, by our coronavirus precautions.

==Transcript==
:[Three large viruses hangs in the air in front of Cueball. The one closest to Cueball looks a bit like the virus causing the corona pandemic, although it is made clear it is no this type of virus. The other two are put together by small circles. The one behind the corona-like virus has 7 small circles, four in a group, one above and two below. The other has three circles. They are not so closely knit together, and may instead represent three smaller viruses rather than one large. The corona type virus addresses Cueball with a starburst above it indicating it speaks the lines above.]
:Coronoa-like virus: Hi there! We're the viruses that cause the common cold.
:Coronoa-like virus: This handwashing ...
:Coronoa-like virus: It stops when this is all over, right?

:[Same setting in a slimmer panel.]
:Coronoa-like virus: It's just, it's making things really hard for us, too.
:Coronoa-like virus: Maybe we could make a deal?

:[Same setting in a frame-less panel. The large virus also speaks as indicated with a star burst above it.]
:Large virus: We won't kill you!
:Large virus: We just want to get back in your throat and make you feel gross now and then.
:Coronoa-like virus: Show us some mercy?

:[Zoom in on Cueball, beat panel.]

:[In the close up off Cueball he lifts his hand up, which has been balled into a fist. He shouts his reply.]
:Cueball: '''''No.'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]