explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2133: EHT Black Hole Picture

2019-04-06T21:55:37Z

Jlc:

...someone edited the page to describe the EHT as "This comic references the non-existent "Event Horizon Telescope", an international project dedicated to deceiving the masses into thinking that black holes are real, in accordance with the whims of the Zionist conspiracy." wot? [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 17:43, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:Seems like there are a lot of vandals nowadays... I don't think I would be against requiring registration to edit pages. [[User:Linker|Linker]] ([[User talk:Linker|talk]]) 19:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::I totally agree. It doesn't really detract from the ability to edit a page, it's still easy, but it just adds an extra step for vandals. [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 19:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::I am also in favor of a registration requirement. I don't see a great proportion of helpful edits from users who aren't logged in. Requiring registration to edit seems like it could potentially be more effective & easier to implement than other moderation tactics. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::::As someone who has made a half dozen or so edits (including once writing the first draft of a description of a comic) and probably two dozen comments over the past 5 years without ever creating an account I won’t say you are wrong, but there will be fewer people editing and making comments if registration is required. Will registering keep vandals from vandalism? I very much doubt it. Who will enforce the termination of accounts?and what’s to stop vandals from creating multiple accounts? Again, I’m not saying you are wrong, but I will suggest that registration isn’t the panacea you might hope it to be... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.82|162.158.78.82]] 04:31, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
:::::I'm honestly surprised it isn't a requirement already...--[[User:Jlc|Jlc]] ([[User talk:Jlc|talk]]) 21:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
I probably wouldn't register but I do like to make the occasional comment. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.28|162.158.214.28]] 11:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
:It's true, and you know that it's true, fucking shill. {{unsigned|108.162.246.215}}
::I know that it exists, and I'm not going to argue it. Oh, also not signing a post doesn't hide your IP. You can literally see the IPs of anyone who edits the page, Mr. 108.162.246.215 [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 17:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::The IPs are irrelevant anyway, they're CloudFlare's -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.36|162.158.90.36]] 18:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::"Shill" implies that someone's paying us to correct these fallacious & bigoted statements. Do you really think any of us get paid to remove these blatantly offensive & frankly ridiculous assertions that space exploration is somehow a worldwide Jewish deception? Personally, I just enjoy accuracy. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::Couldn't "shill" also mean somebody acting as if they weren't part of the group, to test that somebody was loyal and obedient? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.210|172.68.65.210]] 22:28, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
In the transcript, Cueball is described as standing behind a podium. He may be standing /on/ a podium, but he is standing /behind/ a lectern.
[[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 17:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:Arent podiums and lecterns the same thing? [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 17:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::No - https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-lectern-and-vs-podium/
::No. Podium (from the Latin root meaning "foot") is the thing you stand on, a raised platform or dais. Lectern (from Latin "to read") is the stand that provides a place for notes or other written prompts, from which a speaker may read during a lecture or presentation. It's not uncommon for people to conflate them. [[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 18:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::If enough people conflate them, it's not a mistake any more, it becomes another definition. And lexicographers often use written uses as confirmation, so anyone who wants to see podium get this sense should forward this URL to all the dictionary publishers.[[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 18:15, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::::What's the threshold for "enough people" (itself a grammatically incorrect phrase; see https://grammarist.com/usage/amount-number/)? In any case, I'm not getting into a debate about prescriptive vs. descriptive lexicography as it's off-topic and trollish. Besides, the transcript has been updated. [[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 18:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
"Enough people" is fine grammatically because "enough" can refer to either an amount or a number; it the case of "enough people" it's referring to a number of people. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.28|162.158.214.28]] 02:42, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
::[[1661: Podium]] [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 19:15, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::Heh. I'd forgotten that. Thanks, Jacky720! [[User:Seezee|Seezee]] ([[User talk:Seezee|talk]]) 19:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:::Totally forgot! Awesome [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 20:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
:Thank ''goodness'' someone corrected that. A million people using the wrong word doesn't mean it's the right word (especially when the root words have obviously different meanings); It just means a million people are using unclear\inaccurate language. Common usage ≠ correct usage. It's utility that matters: In this case, if a lectern is also a podium, what is the thing you stand on??? Podium is a common error, but it's still an error. Popularity doesn't equal truth. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
::That is very incorrect. Language is not a natural resource; it can't be measured or described outside of how it is used. If podium commonly used and understood to mean the thing you stand behind, and it's been used that way by many people for a long tome, the thing you stand behind is a podium. You can disagree with that usage all you like, it isn't any less correct. [[User:HisHighestMinion|HisHighestMinion]] ([[User talk:HisHighestMinion|talk]]) 13:26, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there really anything else we need to add to the explanation? It seems complete.[[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 19:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, Pinterest. That website where you have to create an account to view pictures. And then once you do that and get to the post you want, you discover the original “pinner” literally just posted a photo from somewhere with zero indication of where it came from or how to find it so now you’re back to square one but have wasted a bunch of time, been spammed to death by emails and sold your soul to Pinterest. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 06:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Tha's why whenever I do a Google search I add -pinterest . . . . [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.28|162.158.214.28]] 11:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Talk:557: Students

2018-11-30T02:54:57Z

Jlc:

The project dream is so true. To this day I have dreams where I signed up but didn't even attend a class that was necessary for graduation. I dream that I'll likely fail the course and need to attend one more semester. [[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 17:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

There are studies that people successfully passing tests/exams have this dreams way more often. Often also something in the lines of every achievement after college would be nullified when it came out that the testresult was not correct. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.230.221|108.162.230.221]] 10:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I had the dream of fighting the green ranger (The original one) in Crisco once, it was weird, and I do not know how or why I had that dream.
-Swaphero[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.25|173.245.54.25]] 02:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I graduated 15 years ago and I still have annoying dreams that I can't remember which locker was mine. - [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.58|162.158.214.58]] 19:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Same here. Graduated long ago, still have this nightmare from time to time. (not the "green monster" though) Why? Are we really part of a computer game? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.4|162.158.63.4]] 03:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

I have this dream where I'm stranded on a random planet and start counting rocks and placing them in neat little piles. By the time I wake up, I've normally got over half a million rocks.
:How long do you sleep? --[[User:Jlc|Jlc]] ([[User talk:Jlc|talk]]) 02:54, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk:525: I Know You're Listening

2018-11-30T02:11:13Z

Jlc: comment

Whether or not this is what the Citation request needs, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager#Criticism would be helpful. Most people tend to go for the "What if it's the ''wrong'' god that you believe in?" counter to the wager. i.e. the parts of your religious observance that most please Zeus might well anger Odin greatly, or something similar for any two gods (pantheonic ''or'' sole Authority, this factor also being a major issue of choice) that you might care to compare between. This is mostly covered in the "Argument from inconsistent revelations" section of the above, it appears.

Personally my favoured counter-argument is that any sufficiently omniscient god worth his pillar-of-salt should ''know'' whether you are Wagering, and probably has a special area of Hell (or Tantarus) reserved for those that try to toady up to him by faking a belief (covered by the "Argument from inauthentic belief" section). I choose to believe that an honest non-believer might at least get a look-in at any middle-ground afterlife (regardless of their lack in belief of same), but I also don't have amy great reason to believe that this attitude is going to reward me, either.

(c.f. also the assumption that 'innocents', and people who have never been exposed to the Word Of GodTM are entitled to a free pass to some non-Hell level of afterlife, the punishment only applying after having been introduced to the whole Judeo-Christian system of post-death existence. On this basis, missionaries that go out and inform remote tribespeoples and oceanic islanders of the state of affairs are actually potentially making things a lot worse for their target audience than they ''would'' have been... Assuming that they're right in the first place.)

But note that, for every philosophical argument, there's an equal and opposite philosophical argument. I just plan on being good in the mortal world (where I know I will be rewarded, or at least regarded in a reasonably good light, if perhaps a bit of a doorstep) and if this doesn't help out when I hypothetically find myself at the Pearly Gates then I probably wouldn't have hit on the right form and combination of observances anyway so its not a wager that I could have reasonably 'won'.

This is, of course, way heavier an edit than I had intended, and I'm not suggesting that this is the best intepretation, just my own, and probably not worth a discussion over. [[Special:Contributions/31.111.87.233|31.111.87.233]] 09:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

(Forgot to say... non-deity eavesdroppers probably wouldn't have the omniscience, so go ahead and randomly profess your belief in them! [[Special:Contributions/31.111.87.233|31.111.87.233]] 09:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC))

:"Wouldn't have hit on the right form and combination of observances anyway"? Hmm. If only this hypothetical God had hypothetically given us some hypothetical information... like a book or something. That would have been helpful. --[[User:Jlc|Jlc]] ([[User talk:Jlc|talk]]) 02:11, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

:My best argument against pretending to believe something you doesn't is: do you really want to spend an ethernity with people whose belief you faked? For (extreme) example, if only Jehovah's witnesses go to heaven (and assuming you are not one), do you WANT to go there? Similarly, abstinents probably don't want to end in Valhalla. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

::This is a lot of unnecessary talk, even realized to be such by the one who wrote it. The explanation, as written, is fine without this extraneity. [[Special:Contributions/152.119.255.250|152.119.255.250]] 16:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Since you did remove the incomplete tag I did add some more explains for Pascal's Wager. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

You get the record for longest expoundition of a title text.[[Special:Contributions/72.70.180.234|72.70.180.234]] 18:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

:Yes, check your e-mail. (Not you; him.)

[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 19:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. Since there is only one Cueball that "talks" it is obvious to keep him listed as Cueball. Just made a note that the other guy also looks like Cueball. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:43, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Cueball's calculation here is wrong. Yes, if there's nobody listening, he doesn't lose anything. But if there is, what happens when they think he's on to them could get unpleasant for him. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.64}}

I'd do this on the internet but there's a good chance they actually are listening. Though they can't arrest commies for being commies, they can still watchlist them and monitor them closely, especially those who admit to plotting revolution. So yes, I know the government is listening, and the government knows I know they're listening. My only wonder is what are the consequences going to be? And how much faster will it be because I know they're listening?

Perhaps Cueball shouldn't be so quick as to say such... [[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 05:25, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

It is funny how embarrassing doing this actually feels, and how hard it seems to be to utter out. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.11.88|172.68.11.88]] 22:14, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk:169: Words that End in GRY

2018-11-21T03:59:46Z

Jlc:

Ok, everything on this page, I already got. The bit I came here for, is the exact nature of the ambiguity. What is 'the phrase'? 
"The English language that end in gry", he's wrong because there are more than three words. 
"The English language", he's wrong because none of them end in gry. 
"There are three words in the English language ...", wrong again because language isn't the third word. 
So...? -- Zergling_man [[Special:Contributions/58.96.88.83|58.96.88.83]] 15:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

:The second paragraph in the explanation is what you are looking for. But as a brief overview: The reason it's easy to miss is that the words are written as a dialog would happen. If it had been properly punctuated it would have read "There are three words in 'the English language' that end with gry: 'Angry' and 'Hungry' are two. What's the third?" Cueball is saying there are three words in the phrase 'the English language' but to distract his intended victim he continues the sentence so the phrase is hidden among other words that, when taken as a whole, have a seeming continuity. This is why Black Hat cuts off Cueball's hand. Because the "joke" is not funny and being intentionally ambiguous and then being smug when the ambiguity has its intended effect is not humor. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

::But this doesn't actually answer my question. Take it without the distraction. "There are three words in the English language that end in gry. What's the third?" Even then, it still doesn't make any sense. If you take it as "there are three words in the English language. What's the third?", then you're left with "that end in gry: Angry and hungry are two", and that doesn't make any sense at all. I'm not seeing how there's any way both meanings can be valid, whatever you do to this, it seems at least one is completely nonsensical. -- Zergling_man [[Special:Contributions/58.96.88.83|58.96.88.83]] 13:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

::: The trouble is that Randall told the joke incorrectly... it should be (with proper punctuation) "There are three words in 'The English Language'. Ending in 'gry' there are 'angry' and 'hungry' What is the third word?" [[Special:Contributions/190.214.5.29|190.214.5.29]] 04:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

:::: I think a better way to say it is:
:::: There are at least 3 words in "the English language that end with 'gry'. 'Angry' and 'hungry' are two". What is the third word? [[Special:Contributions/81.23.24.39|81.23.24.39]] 08:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

:::: For anyone who is curious, the answer is "gryphon." [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 20:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

::::: They have to end with "GRY", an answer can be "unangry", but "gryphon" does not end with GRY (source:http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=words+that+end+in+GRY){{unsigned|79.40.128.128}}

:::::: No; the original question asked for 3 words that had 'gry' in the end. 'Angry' and 'hungry' have 'gry' in the back end. 'Gryphon' has 'gry' in the front end.
:::::: Also, sudo sign all your comments by adding 4 tildes in the back end of your comment. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 19:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: You are not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported. --[[User:Jlc|Jlc]] ([[User talk:Jlc|talk]]) 03:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
:::::::: actually, as you van read in the explanation, the entire question is wrong, the joke should not have the requirement of English words ending with gry, but have the question simply be ''there are only three words in the English language, what is the third, prefaced by a misguiding comment about words that end with gry, like angry and hungry. The point of the joke is that this preface is not part of the question, and as such it creates a hilarious intentional misunderstanding. [[Special:Contributions/145.44.88.75|145.44.88.75]] 10:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

:I fear you are missing the point. The comic is intentionally written ambiguously to highlight the frustration caused when one misuses grammar in retelling the joke. The original joke is grammatically correct: the third word of the phrase "the English Language" is "language." The reference to words ending in "gry" is just a distraction. However, if the distraction is combined with the phrase, then the grammar becomes confusing, ruining the joke. [[User:Lanejb24|Lanejb24]]
I really doubt this is Cueball, as he is seen later with both arms, and he is nowhere near as much of an asshole (or an idiot) to tell this joke incorrectly. [[Special:Contributions/75.185.176.214|75.185.176.214]] 18:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC) tildes for the win

:There are many Cueballs, just read the page on him. However, this doesn't exactly fit the normal Cueball's character. [[User:Gman314|Gman314]] ([[User talk:Gman314|talk]]) 16:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

----

The title text is missing. Am I right that Randall states that {{w|Postmodernism|postmodernists}} are not clever?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:31, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:Well, postmodernists are pretty much thrashed in [https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=postmodernism&defid=3758855 Urban Dictionary]...[[User:Pacerier|Pacerier]] ([[User talk:Pacerier|talk]]) 19:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
:No, I would say that Randall is making a joke about postmodern art. Stereotypically, postmodern art is very subtle and symbolic and doesn't look like much, but there is still a message hiding underneath. Randall is saying that they're not conveying their point well, but are still acting smug when people don't understand their poorly communicated point. [[User:Gman314|Gman314]] ([[User talk:Gman314|talk]]) 16:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

::What makes you think that it '''only''' refers to postmodern art and not postmodernization in general? [[User:Pacerier|Pacerier]] ([[User talk:Pacerier|talk]]) 19:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
:No, but almost. Randall does feel that post-modernists are prone to this behavior, and this behavior is not clever. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58|108.162.219.58]] 01:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

::And where is the source for "Randall does feel that post-modernists are prone to this behavior"?[[User:Pacerier|Pacerier]] ([[User talk:Pacerier|talk]]) 19:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia has an entire page devoted to the -GRY joke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/-gry) {{unsigned ip|66.46.112.60}}

;Cueball's hand
:Can someone explain what is the '''significance''' of BlackHat cutting off Cueball's hand?[[User:Pacerier|Pacerier]] ([[User talk:Pacerier|talk]]) 19:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

:He's punishing Cueball for being smug. It's not significant that it's the hand in particular (that just seems to be the limb closest to BlackHat). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.38|108.162.216.38]] 23:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

He's trying to give Cueball an easy way to remember to not behave this way in the future. It's funny because the lesson is a failure, it causes more long term harm than long term benefit. Also it is unlikely that Cueball is paying attention to the lesson anyway, being distracted by the pain and loss.
Or possibly it's funny because Black Hat is just causing his usual mayhem, and pretends to be a teacher to hide his intention, and does an unconvincing job. [[User:Shingleslant|Shingleslant]] ([[User talk:Shingleslant|talk]])

Talk:1728: Cron Mail

2018-11-12T22:58:27Z

Jlc: added comment

I think the "MAILTO" variable in "/etc/crontab" is meant, so only only cron-mails would go to this address, not all mails for the user

[[User:Rincewind|Rincewind]] ([[User talk:Rincewind|talk]]) 13:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

The huge question is whether adding an email message to crontab would result in cron producing even more mail - or whether it would cause cron to fail in some way. The latter would do damage by killing some (possibly critical) cron tasks - the former could rapidly fill up the hard drive with an exponentially-growing crontab. An intermediate situation would be that cron simply ignores the junk and continues to function as before - in which case Cueball's change will have little practical impact on disk space consumption - but probably gradually slow cron's crontab parser to a crawl, which would also have rather severe effects. On most Linux setups, the mail directories are on a different partition to /etc. There is often very little spare space on the partition with /etc on it - so it's likely that Cueball's change will eventually do terrible damage in that case too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.98|162.158.69.98]] 14:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
:On my Mint/Ubuntu/Debian-based Linux system, adding junk to /etc/crontab put a message is /var/log/syslog about "cron[1495]: (*system*) ERROR (Syntax error, this crontab file will be ignored)". So it looks like appending garbage to the crontab will just break cron entirely (or at least those handled by /etc/crontab; it may be private cron and /etc/cron.d/* jobs may continue to run, but cron.hourly, cron.daily, and cron.weekly jobs on my system are initiated through /etc/crontab so they would not run with a broken /etc/crontab). I don't know if other non-Debian distributions have a cron that behaves differently, however. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 15:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
:Seems like it wouldn't break the existing stuff, they'd still get run and then cron would start parsing the noise and complaining - the "intermediate" situation, though the "export MAILTO" seems wrong. If Cueball did it in his .bashrc, it might get into some of *his* cron jobs but unless it's in /etc/crontab (and there, no "export" is needed/used), it wouldn't matter. His jobs probably wouldn't have rights to write to /etc/crontab either. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.73|173.245.48.73]] 17:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
::I just checked the source of Paul Vixie's cron-3.0, which is the version that Debian uses. Turns out that the config variables in a crontab file are not actual environment variables when it comes to the cron daemon (which is what matters), so there's no way that putting "export MAILTO=foo" anywhere can change cron's behavior. More importantly, setting the MAILTO variable does not result in /etc/crontab being modified, it merely designates the e-mail address the report is sent to. On most systems, e-mails to "/etc/crontab" will be undelivarable, so Cueball will get bounce messages of the cron mailings instead of the mailings themselves. Interestingly, many mail servers limit the size of the original message contained in the bounce, so depending on the details, the storage used by the e-mails is increased or reduced compared to the previous situation. In any case, Cueball's action displays misconceptions about cron on several levels, which seems to make perfect sense in the context of the strip. [[User:guest|guest]] ([[User talk:guest|talk]]) 14:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
:::All this discussion and nobody has tried it in a VM? --[[User:Jlc|Jlc]] ([[User talk:Jlc|talk]]) 22:58, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
:Unfortunately this huge question is undecidable (by trivial reduction to halting problem) --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.126|172.68.54.126]] 08:10, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
The current explanation misses a part of the joke present in Cueball's last statement: he is considering the cron program to be somehow sentient and able to make a decision between sending the email (is it really important?) and its self-preservation by not trashing its own config file. He is thus daring cron to continue sending emails at the risk of 'self-destruction'. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.90}}

- I also feel like the part of the joke is the cron has been sending him useless mail for 15 years. So now, he is sending cron useless mail {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.83}}
:: (Also that Cueball is evidently using a 15 year old laptop! This deepens the question because he's probably never upgraded it and therefore has 15 year old copy of cron) [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 15:20, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

This states it can be run as infrequently as once a year, however by using February 29th, you can have it run once every 4 years (exc ever 100 inc every 400). But I think you might be able to get better by also setting it to run on a day of the week. e.g. February 29th, which is a Monday, which would then (after this year) not run for another 28 years, next running on February 29th, 2044.

Should that be noted in the article or is it a needless complication? (Also, I don't know what day of the week is what for this syntax).[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.156|108.162.250.156]] 21:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
:That's interesting! but I don't think it's relevant to the joke. [[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 23:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

:If you specify a day of week and a day of month it runs on both, so "11 59 29 2 1" would run at 11:59 on every Monday in February, as well as on February 29, not just on any February 29 that happened to be a Monday.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.11|108.162.219.11]] 05:18, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to make substantial edits as a random non-registered IP address, but I do feel like this explanation could be improved if a lot of the technical details were removed. For example, the format of a crontab file and how it is parsed distracts a bit from the joke. For a non-technical audience, it would be much more concise to simply note that the file has a specific format, and piping random emails to it would probably break all of cron. In my opinion, the current explanation loses the forest for the trees. For me, the key part of the joke is Cueball doesn't know cron, Ponytail explains it, Cueball conducts a response which is intuitive in the real world ("okay, cron, if you think it's that important then you deal with it!") which would be horrible in a computer. Ponytail's comment on it being harsh, and that it would accidentally solve the problem is the punchline. I think all the other technical details distracts from that simple explanation. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.87}}
: I would agree. Understanding how exactly cron works isn't really necessary to understand the comic and its humor. Perhaps linking to some "cron for dummies" tutorial for those interested[[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.223|141.101.91.223]] 04:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

What exactly does "hardball" mean? Is it a US slang term or such?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.223|141.101.91.223]] 04:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
:"Playing hardball" is an idiom, meaning "to act strong & aggressive about an issue" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.114|108.162.245.114]] 05:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

With "YOUR MOVE, CRON." Cueball adapts a famous movie quote ("Your move, creep.") from Robocop (1987) as if he would strike back against "the machine" from a similar age (admitted, cron is slightly older, but then again Robocop also plays 20 minutes into the future). [[User:Renormalist|Renormalist]] ([[User talk:Renormalist|talk]]) 06:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, useless crap. I have smartd on my harddrives and still don't get any warnings that they are about to fail. Well except for all the cron emails I have been ignoring for a decade.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.240|162.158.83.240]] 09:15, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

A few corrections: (1) Setting MAILTO=/etc/crontab only affect the system-wide crontab. User crontabs will continue to run as normal. Cueball's cronjob runs under his account (we know that because "he has mail") therefore nothing will change as far as he is concerned. (2) MAILTO appends to the named file, therefore the existing lines in /etc/crontab will not be deleted and will continue to run as normal - the worse that can happen is that new, spurious, cronjobs can be introduced (3) in most modern versions of cron, you can run use a /X syntax which will cause X-1 executions to be skipped (for example 20 10 2 1/5 * will run once every 5 years - assuming the system has not been rebooted in the interim) [[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 11:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the explanation is overly technical, especially considering this Wiki exists largely as a resource to laypeople. A succinct explanation of the joke (the crux of which being that Cueball is actively trying to threaten a computer program) would be preferential to passing off a man page as an ExplainXKCD article. Although linking to a more detailed breakdown of how Cron functions isn't a bad idea at all. This is a pretty good one http://www.unixgeeks.org/security/newbie/unix/cron-1.html {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.148}}

: The joke hinges on a technical matter - and without the technical detail, this would not be an explanation.

: As is often the case with xkcd humor, this cartoon is "layered" so that people with a little knowledge get a joke - but people with deeper knowledge get a bigger joke - or possibly multiple jokes.

: At the topmost layer, Cueball takes a typically unconventional approach to computer problems and is feeding cron with it's own junk - which seems like a small victory - if only a moral victory. Good joke.

: At the second layer, if Cueball can indeed choke cron with it's own junk, then whatever important work that cron is doing will not be done, and this will have a deleterious effect on his computer - so he'll lose out by doing this...but possibly in only a very minor way. This is a better joke because we all love it when an idiotic move results in payback!

: At the third layer, the key to the humor for me is that Cueball has fired the first volley in a "war" - and it is one that he may or may not win. The outcome depends subtly on how his version of cron works...and the outcome is far from certain. If his version of cron ignores errors in the crontab file - then he may cause a violent "explosion" in the number of messages sent by the tool - resulting in his hard drive filling up with crap much more quickly than it was before he knew this was happening...and he'll open up an exploit into his system (the bad guy can send his old-school UNIX account an email containing a cron job request to do something evil (like erasing his entire hard drive, for example). On the other hand if cron refuses to do any work whatever when there is an error then cron's normal activities (mostly organizing and pruning logfiles and such) will be disabled and the hard drive will fill up with those instead. But the idea that there are multiple cron files - per user and per day/week/month - along with personal crontab files that may now fail, or may continue to spew crap, makes this a rather subtle (and DEEPLY technical) question.

: Now this isn't just a joke - it's a deep puzzle with surprising consequences...we have to work hard to decide what the outcome would be. Geeks enjoy that kind of thing - so at the third level, this is a deep and interesting question...and an even better joke for those "in the know".

: Viewed as a "war" between Cueball and cron, I very much doubt that Cueball's first shot will be sufficient to "win" - or indeed improve his situation in any useful way. But unlike most things you can do to screw up a computer, this one could take months or even years to play out...cron's revenge will likely be slow - but possibly devastating.

:* If cron dies because of crap in crontab - and if Cueball's computer doesn't do much of any importance using cron - then Cueball wins.

:* If cron merely ignores the crap at the end of the crontab - then Cueball's hard drive will still slowly fill with crap (albeit in an obscure system file rather than in an obsolete email system)...we can regard this as "draw" between Cueball and cron.

:* If cron produces more error messages because of the crap - and decides to email it to Cueball, then the hard drive may fill up at an exponential rate and cron will steal increasing amounts of CPU time until the laptop locks up and life for Cueball becomes much harder! Cron "wins" and the crowd goes wild! :-)

: But the reasons behind that are very subtle - and need to be explained. Since the role of explainxkcd is to provide these explanations to the semi-layperson - some significant amount of technical information is indeed required here in order to fully understand all of the layers of the joke.

: One often wonders whether Randall fully understands all of the layers! I've been using UNIX, then MINIX, now Linux since around 1976 - and predicting the outcome of Cueball's actions is far from obvious without diving into the manuals. (And, if I'm honest...trying it on an old Raspberry Pi that I happen to have lying around! :-)

: Another problem here is that if Cueball has been getting these messages for 15 years - then he's using a 15 year old laptop that's probably never been upgraded. Hence all discussion of what "modern" versions of cron might do could be entirely moot. What did circa 2001 versions of cron do?
: [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 15:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

::What makes you think he never upgraded? Lot of distributions allow to be upgraded without losing /var/spool/mail, and if the problem is caused by bad configuration, it can similarly "survive" several upgrades, especially if done by Cueball ("configuration file was changed - update? Nah ...")
::Oh, and one think cron is CERTAINLY doing is rotating log files. And because linux computer ALWAYS generates at least some log files, killing cron can still fill the disk. Only way Cueball can win is if the problematic command is in /etc/crontab, the useful commands are in /etc/cron.d/ and adding mail to /etc/crontab will make cron ignore /etc/crontab. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:22, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

::: I think you can explain the purpose of cron quite well without having to explain how every parameter in it works. The format of the crontab is never addressed in the comic itself, and in fact going that deep into the explanation kinda ruins the humor. You could just as easily explain the joke like this:

:::: "In Unix-based systems, the 'cron' utility is used to run system tasks on a schedule. The '/etc/crontab' file is a configuration file that specifies each scheduled job - specifically at what times the job will run, which user account under which to run the job, and the command-line for the job itself. Cueball apparently believes that sending the output of the cron program to this file will either break cron or cause it to start spamming itself with exponentially more jobs. In reality, the former would be true, as the new lines of output would not be in a format that cron understands, resulting in it ignoring the whole file."

::: People who aren't familiar with cron really only need to know what it does and its default behavior (to send mail to a file) to understand the joke. I don't think the purpose of this wiki is to reproduce man documents. [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 05:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
:::: Agree. I - as a specimen of "People who aren't familiar with cron" - think that the syntax of cron files doesen't really matter for understanding the joke. In fact I skipped the box and the paragraph below entirely after realising there's only explanation of how a cron command is set up. And I don't feel like I've missed something. After eventually reading the paragraph I think the only part worth mentioning is the last sentence. So I vote for removing that box/paragraph or at least replacing it with your proposal. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
::::: Done. I incorporated other parts of the original explanation into what I think is a pretty complete discussion about the essence of the comic, without going too deep into the technical details. Feel free to fine-tune. :) [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 07:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
:::::: Much better :) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:30, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I like the comics about the tech-inept Cueball and the embarrassed/condescending Ponytail. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.196|108.162.210.196]] 04:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Wait, so that means cron's move is the return to sender. Boom! [[User:Jacky720|Jacky720]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]]) 21:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)