explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

1299: I Don't Own a TV

2013-12-04T23:51:29Z

Kazim: /* Explanation */ Spelling + Americanization (sorry Brits :D )

{{comic
| number = 1299
| date = December 4, 2013
| title = I Don't Own a TV
| image = i_dont_own_a_tv.png
| titletext = Theory: Smugness is proportional to the negative second derivative of TV ownership rate with respect to time.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete | needs further information}}

This comic is a [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Charts yet another] graph, describing how people who don't own a television feel, throughout several time periods. While televisions have existed since 1928, regular scheduled broadcasts of television programs did not begin until the late 1940s. So before the 1950s, it was common not to own a television and therefore most people's feelings about it would be fairly neutral. This changed as televisions became cheaper and more people started owning televisions, meaning that if someone didn't own a television, it was generally because they couldn't afford one. This might lead to someone feeling embarrassment when admitting they don't have a television. But gradually, television ownership increased until eventually, nearly every household had at least one television, and those that did not were more and more likely to do so by choice rather than due to poverty. The graph therefore peaks at around the year 2000, when many people would be proud to say that they did not own a television. Randall is suggesting that these people would feel smug because they are resisting a popular trend (owning a television,) which the rest of the public take part in. The graph tails downwards at the end, suggesting that Randall believes that people are becoming less smug. This could be because of the abundance of video content on the internet and mobile devices, especially from locations such as YouTube, Netflix and iTunes. So, according to Randall, people are returning to not owning a television simply because it's not necessary and these people therefore feel neutral towards their lack of a television.

The initial upturn from embarrassment to smugness may also be a commentary on the quality of television programs over that period of time. In the 1950s and 1960s, television was a major source of news and information. People therefore discussed television programs frequently, as a major social activity. The limited number of stations and lack of recording devices meant that people tended to watch the same programs at the same time, meaning that those who had missed out on those programs might feel socially "out of the loop".

By contrast, by 2000, many programs were criticized as poor quality or "mindless", e.g. daytime talk shows such as Jerry Springer, and reality shows. So, someone might feel more smug for not watching so-called "mindless television". Similarly, as television viewership increased from the 1950s through the 2000s, it is possible that other activities such as reading has decreased; especially given that the younger generation today don't remember a time without television. So, someone who did not own a television set might feel more smug because they take part in more "beneficial" activities like reading, exercise, and studying.

The title text "smugness is proportional to the negative second derivative of TV ownership rate with respect to time" refers to the fact that smugness or embarrassment is based on how quickly TV ownership is becoming more or less trendy. If more people are buying TVs over time, it is embarrassing not to be one. As saturation is reached, it becomes a mark of pride to reject existing "conventional wisdom". However, as more people abandon TV for the internet, smugness is declining since everybody else is already doing it.

==Transcript==
:[A graph is shown with an x- and y-axis.]
:How people feel when they say
:"I don't own a TV"
:<small>by year</small>
:[The x-axis is labled: 1950, 2000, today.]
:[The y-axis is labled ''neutral'' at zero, ''smug'' at top, and ''embarrassed'' to the bottom.]
:[A negative sine curve is shown in red, starting at 1950, moving into negative values, reaching the zero level again at the beginning of the 1980s, reaching its maximum shortly after 2000, and decreasing again until today. An arrow shows the current direction.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Math]]

1299: I Don't Own a TV

2013-12-04T23:50:47Z

Kazim: /* Explanation */ Changing the derivative explanation. Commenters seem to agree that "sine wave" doesn't belong at all.

{{comic
| number = 1299
| date = December 4, 2013
| title = I Don't Own a TV
| image = i_dont_own_a_tv.png
| titletext = Theory: Smugness is proportional to the negative second derivative of TV ownership rate with respect to time.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete | needs further information}}

This comic is a [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Charts yet another] graph, describing how people who don't own a television feel, throughout several time periods. While televisions have existed since 1928, regular scheduled broadcasts of television programs did not begin until the late 1940s. So before the 1950s, it was common not to own a television and therefore most people's feelings about it would be fairly neutral. This changed as televisions became cheaper and more people started owning televisions, meaning that if someone didn't own a television, it was generally because they couldn't afford one. This might lead to someone feeling embarrassment when admitting they don't have a television. But gradually, television ownership increased until eventually, nearly every household had at least one television, and those that did not were more and more likely to do so by choice rather than due to poverty. The graph therefore peaks at around the year 2000, when many people would be proud to say that they did not own a television. Randall is suggesting that these people would feel smug because they are resisting a popular trend (owning a television,) which the rest of the public take part in. The graph tails downwards at the end, suggesting that Randall believes that people are becoming less smug. This could be because of the abundance of video content on the internet and mobile devices, especially from locations such as YouTube, Netflix and iTunes. So, according to Randall, people are returning to not owning a television simply because it's not necessary and these people therefore feel neutral towards their lack of a television.

The initial upturn from embarassment to smugness may also be a commentary on the quality of television programs over that period of time. In the 1950s and 1960s, television was a major source of news and information. People therefore discussed television programs frequently, as a major social activity. The limited number of stations and lack of recording devices meant that people tended to watch the same programs at the same time, meaning that those who had missed out on those programmes might feel socially "out of the loop".

By contrast, by 2000, many programs were criticised as poor quality or "mindless", e.g. daytime talk shows such as Jerry Springer, and reality shows. So, someone might feel more smug for not watching so-called "mindless television". Similarly, as television viewership increased from the 1950s through the 2000s, it is possible that other activities such as reading has decreased; especially given that the younger generation today don't remember a time without television. So, someone who did not own a television set might feel more smug because they take part in more "beneficial" activities like reading, exercise, and studying.

The title text "smugness is proportional to the negative second derivative of TV ownership rate with respect to time" refers to the fact that smugness or embarrassment is based on how quickly TV ownership is becoming more or less trendy. If more people are buying TVs over time, it is embarrassing not to be one. As saturation is reached, it becomes a mark of pride to reject existing "conventional wisdom". However, as more people abandon TV for the internet, smugness is declining since everybody else is already doing it.

==Transcript==
:[A graph is shown with an x- and y-axis.]
:How people feel when they say
:"I don't own a TV"
:<small>by year</small>
:[The x-axis is labled: 1950, 2000, today.]
:[The y-axis is labled ''neutral'' at zero, ''smug'' at top, and ''embarrassed'' to the bottom.]
:[A negative sine curve is shown in red, starting at 1950, moving into negative values, reaching the zero level again at the beginning of the 1980s, reaching its maximum shortly after 2000, and decreasing again until today. An arrow shows the current direction.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Math]]

Talk:1299: I Don't Own a TV

2013-12-04T12:49:55Z

Kazim:

Annual Data for households between 1958-1970
http://www.tvhistory.tv/Annual_TV_Households_50-78.JPG

Plotted next to a fitted logarithmic function
http://imgur.com/aVWmQ9z

The negative second derivative of this function
http://imgur.com/xywpEJZ

If someone can find more data for television ownership I'd love to see it :) {{unsigned ip|‎173.245.54.12}}

Can someone explain why Randall believes smugness at not owning a television is decreasing? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.138|199.27.128.138]] 08:31, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Because as TVs become less relevant, people don't feel smug for not owning one. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.216|141.101.99.216]] 11:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

;Current explanation - logistic curve

The current explanation is total bullshit. The thing with the negative second derivative is just saying, that the more embarrased people are, the more the change of the TV ownership rate will increase, which just means, more and more people will get themselves TVs.
The other point of view is, the more smug you will look like for not owning a TV, the more the change of the TV ownership rate will decline, which means, that less and less people are buying TVs.

It has nothing to do with a logistic curve. The function, which second derivative is depicted in this comic is totally irrelevant.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.19|108.162.231.19]] 08:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I have the strong feeling he is talking about a sine wave, not a logistic function. It fits the curve in the comic as well as the condition of f"=-f.
Also, it makes way more sense for the smugness to behave like this over time as for the first 30 years TV is culturally extremely significant and you therefore would want to own one in order to participate. But with declining quality of television and the emergence of the internet you might feel as if you were extremely progressive by not owning one anymore.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.189|108.162.254.189]] 09:25, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it definitely could be a sine curve. (see: [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=d%5E2%2Fdx%5E2%28sin%28x%29%29 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=d%5E2%2Fdx%5E2%28sin%28x%29%29]). If one would neglect the beginning of the function for simplicity, this could be a solution.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.19|108.162.231.19]] 10:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

We bid a tearful farewell to our friend the line break. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.216|141.101.99.216]] 11:50, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sin%283*pi*x%2F100%2Bpi%2F2%29+from+1945+to+2014 [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 12:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the commenter who said that the current explanation is bullshit, but I think he has the cause and effect reversed. Randall is saying that you feel more smug about not owning a TV as a result of observing how quickly TV ownership is becoming more or less trendy. In the 1950's, TV's were catching on quickly and becoming more popular, so you would feel embarrassed for not owning one. Later, the trendiness would start to decline as more people owned one, and you would head towards being smug. In the 2000s, people are giving up TVs because the internet makes them unnecessary. As this happens more and more, there's no point in feeling smug because you're no longer bucking a trend at all. --[[User:Kazim|Kazim]] ([[User talk:Kazim|talk]]) 12:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)