explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1735: Fashion Police and Grammar Police

2016-09-21T15:29:12Z

Psu256:

This sentence of the explanation is confusing: "Grammar police are people who are 'sticklers' to grammar rules and get mad or contradictory if someone uses non-standard grammar in a sentence." What is meant by the grammar police getting 'contradictory' when non-standard grammar is used? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.140|108.162.237.140]] 19:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)->

I added a basic explanation to this comic. I also changed the incomplete to say "Needs more on the explanation". Maybe you guys can help connect the dots and extend the explanation? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

It should be noted that he uses literally wrong, just to anger the grammar police he's mocking, it's a nice touch.[[User:Trives|Trives]] ([[User talk:Trives|talk]]) 14:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

In my eyes the 2 groups are not standing together in this comic. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 15:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
: Yeah I'd have said they were just being presented graphically, the intention isn't to display them as protesting alongside each other. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 15:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there an extra joke in the Title Text, "* Mad about jorts"? If it's something which both Grammar Police and Fashion Police would find distasteful, it would add an extra layer to the assertion that they are the same people. {{unsigned ip|172.68.35.71}}
:Yes for sure and this is now in the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Incidentally, I find it ironic and probably unintentional that the Title Text demonstrates the importance of grammar and undermines Randall's own assertions that Grammar Police are superfluous and annoying. Is he saying that he really likes jorts, or is he saying that he is really angered by them? If only there was some formal ruleset which allowed meaning to be more effectively conveyed, rather than being a system of glorious chaos... https://xkcd.com/1576/ {{unsigned ip|172.68.35.71}}
:I think the comment above is inaccurate: "Title Text demonstrates the importance of grammar and undermines Randall's own assertions that Grammar Police are superfluous and annoying". The "*" represents a bullet point so it is clear that "* Mad about jorts" is an additional bullet point that both groups would find offensive. The irony now is that I'm not familiar with how to structure my wiki comments. ~~dizzydan~~ {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.103}}
::Yes very intentionally and thanks for pointing out it is an extra bullet point ;-) That is why the grammar police would hate that sentence where the other police just hate jorts. And would be mad if they realized it could be understood like they loved jorts. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Technically, the grammar police wouldn't care about jorts, since that is a spelling error, not a grammatical error. Please contact the spelling police. Sincerely,
:The Semantics Police {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.216}}
::Jorts is not a spelling error it is a real term used on Wikipedia and now linked in the explanation. They are mad about the use of "mad about". Because in this case it can be misunderstood as either really loving jorts or being upset about jorts. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
:::Then it would be "* mad about 'mad about jorts'", thus I lean for the portmanteau explanation - Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.167|162.158.86.167]] 03:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
::::When I first read it I just took it in the same context for both. I found it funnier to think that the "Grammar Police" are inexplicably mad at people wearing jean-shorts. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 14:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

'''Judgemental''' A spelling of the word 'judgmental,' infrequently used in the UK (which is widely regarded to be more fashionable than the US)? 
'''Deeply Arbitrary''' Internally inconsistent? Arbitrary means based on random chance or whim and as such cannot be strong or deep? 
'''Appreciate . . . are . . . is ''' Subject/verb disagreement with a plural/singular shift? 
'''Cool and casual''' vague use of an indefinite pronoun & a 'cool and casual' fashion choice is likely entails a significant amount of work, meaning it is not casual at all.--[[User:GotWilLeibniz|GotWilLeibniz]] ([[User talk:GotWilLeibniz|talk]]) 18:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
:Arbitrary is more 'not based on physical phenomena', and is not necessarily based on chance. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 06:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

: 'judgment' v. 'judgement' - I was taught that the first is used as in "using one's judgment," while the latter is "the court issued a judgement." [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 08:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

"Fashion Police and Grammar Police and ExplainXKCD Contributors" {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.69}}
:True ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Just dropping a couple links here re: the "uncomfortably transparent proxies for race and class" in language. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.227|162.158.214.227]] 21:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
http://wordtree.com/what-the-victorians-did-to-english-grammar/
http://www.languagejones.com/blog-1/2014/6/8/what-is-aave {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.227}}

Por simpliĝi gramatikon, nur lernu Esperanton! Ĝi ne havas arbitrajn regularojn. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.158|108.162.249.158]] 22:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

In reality, I support the grammar police. Language is a set of shared rules allowing us to understand each other. Speaking in improper grammar produces misunderstandings and throws off listeners/readers, as well as making the speaker sound incompetent. Imagine if people started piping garbage down TCP connections! Servers wouldn't understand a thing! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.190|108.162.215.190]] 22:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Rich white people being in high places is not really the point. Classism is the easiest to demonstrate: the grammar police frown on non-prestige dialects, and the fashion police consider poor people's clothing to be unfashionable. Racism is harder to demonstrate simply, but with language you have AAVE being treated as just "bad English" and, to a lesser extent, fashion popular in certain races being considered bad. (See, the literal fashion police of some French towns in reaction to burkinis. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 03:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
:Hostility to burkini in France has nothing to do with fashion police. This is not a reaction to alleged bad taste in clothing (attemps to make them more fashionable are even well received), but to other things that the French are not comfortable with: public display of rigorist religious behaviour in a strongly secular country, perceived provocation by muslims in a context of islamist terror attacks, considerations around women's liberties (burkini seen as an enslavement to men/husbands)... Or for some it's simply knee-jerk racism... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.14|141.101.98.14]] 11:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Isn't this an example of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing Duck Typing]? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.21|141.101.104.21]] 10:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Kudos to all who uses badder grammar for this explanations.[[User:Nerdman1|Nerdman1]] ([[User talk:Nerdman1|talk]]) 12:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm all for using words in a way that makes them more performant, regardless of the rules, or whether or not they are in the dictionary. [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 15:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1735: Fashion Police and Grammar Police

2016-09-21T15:28:22Z

Psu256:

This sentence of the explanation is confusing: "Grammar police are people who are 'sticklers' to grammar rules and get mad or contradictory if someone uses non-standard grammar in a sentence." What is meant by the grammar police getting 'contradictory' when non-standard grammar is used? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.140|108.162.237.140]] 19:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)->

I added a basic explanation to this comic. I also changed the incomplete to say "Needs more on the explanation". Maybe you guys can help connect the dots and extend the explanation? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 14:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

It should be noted that he uses literally wrong, just to anger the grammar police he's mocking, it's a nice touch.[[User:Trives|Trives]] ([[User talk:Trives|talk]]) 14:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

In my eyes the 2 groups are not standing together in this comic. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 15:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
: Yeah I'd have said they were just being presented graphically, the intention isn't to display them as protesting alongside each other. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 15:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there an extra joke in the Title Text, "* Mad about jorts"? If it's something which both Grammar Police and Fashion Police would find distasteful, it would add an extra layer to the assertion that they are the same people. {{unsigned ip|172.68.35.71}}
:Yes for sure and this is now in the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Incidentally, I find it ironic and probably unintentional that the Title Text demonstrates the importance of grammar and undermines Randall's own assertions that Grammar Police are superfluous and annoying. Is he saying that he really likes jorts, or is he saying that he is really angered by them? If only there was some formal ruleset which allowed meaning to be more effectively conveyed, rather than being a system of glorious chaos... https://xkcd.com/1576/ {{unsigned ip|172.68.35.71}}
:I think the comment above is inaccurate: "Title Text demonstrates the importance of grammar and undermines Randall's own assertions that Grammar Police are superfluous and annoying". The "*" represents a bullet point so it is clear that "* Mad about jorts" is an additional bullet point that both groups would find offensive. The irony now is that I'm not familiar with how to structure my wiki comments. ~~dizzydan~~ {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.103}}
::Yes very intentionally and thanks for pointing out it is an extra bullet point ;-) That is why the grammar police would hate that sentence where the other police just hate jorts. And would be mad if they realized it could be understood like they loved jorts. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Technically, the grammar police wouldn't care about jorts, since that is a spelling error, not a grammatical error. Please contact the spelling police. Sincerely,
:The Semantics Police {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.216}}
::Jorts is not a spelling error it is a real term used on Wikipedia and now linked in the explanation. They are mad about the use of "mad about". Because in this case it can be misunderstood as either really loving jorts or being upset about jorts. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
:::Then it would be "* mad about 'mad about jorts'", thus I lean for the portmanteau explanation - Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.167|162.158.86.167]] 03:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
::::When I first read it I just took it in the same context for both. I found it funnier to think that the "Grammar Police" are inexplicably mad at people wearing jean-shorts. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 14:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

'''Judgemental''' A spelling of the word 'judgmental,' infrequently used in the UK (which is widely regarded to be more fashionable than the US)? 
'''Deeply Arbitrary''' Internally inconsistent? Arbitrary means based on random chance or whim and as such cannot be strong or deep? 
'''Appreciate . . . are . . . is ''' Subject/verb disagreement with a plural/singular shift? 
'''Cool and casual''' vague use of an indefinite pronoun & a 'cool and casual' fashion choice is likely entails a significant amount of work, meaning it is not casual at all.--[[User:GotWilLeibniz|GotWilLeibniz]] ([[User talk:GotWilLeibniz|talk]]) 18:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
:Arbitrary is more 'not based on physical phenomena', and is not necessarily based on chance. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.80|172.68.35.80]] 06:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

: 'judgment' v. 'judgement' - I was taught that the first is used as in "using one's judgment," while the latter is "the court issued a judgement." [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 08:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

"Fashion Police and Grammar Police and ExplainXKCD Contributors" {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.69}}
:True ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Just dropping a couple links here re: the "uncomfortably transparent proxies for race and class" in language. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.227|162.158.214.227]] 21:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
http://wordtree.com/what-the-victorians-did-to-english-grammar/
http://www.languagejones.com/blog-1/2014/6/8/what-is-aave {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.227}}

Por simpliĝi gramatikon, nur lernu Esperanton! Ĝi ne havas arbitrajn regularojn. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.158|108.162.249.158]] 22:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

In reality, I support the grammar police. Language is a set of shared rules allowing us to understand each other. Speaking in improper grammar produces misunderstandings and throws off listeners/readers, as well as making the speaker sound incompetent. Imagine if people started piping garbage down TCP connections! Servers wouldn't understand a thing! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.190|108.162.215.190]] 22:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Rich white people being in high places is not really the point. Classism is the easiest to demonstrate: the grammar police frown on non-prestige dialects, and the fashion police consider poor people's clothing to be unfashionable. Racism is harder to demonstrate simply, but with language you have AAVE being treated as just "bad English" and, to a lesser extent, fashion popular in certain races being considered bad. (See, the literal fashion police of some French towns in reaction to burkinis. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 03:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
:Hostility to burkini in France has nothing to do with fashion police. This is not a reaction to alleged bad taste in clothing (attemps to make them more fashionable are even well received), but to other things that the French are not comfortable with: public display of rigorist religious behaviour in a strongly secular country, perceived provocation by muslims in a context of islamist terror attacks, considerations around women's liberties (burkini seen as an enslavement to men/husbands)... Or for some it's simply knee-jerk racism... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.14|141.101.98.14]] 11:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Isn't this an example of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing Duck Typing]? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.21|141.101.104.21]] 10:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Kudos to all who uses badder grammar for this explanations.[[User:Nerdman1|Nerdman1]] ([[User talk:Nerdman1|talk]]) 12:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm all for using words in a way that makes them more performant, regardless of the rules. Or if they are in the dictionary. [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 15:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1726: Unicode

2016-08-30T17:45:43Z

Psu256:

# Proposal by Courtney Milan - 3 dinosaurs: [http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf]
# Feedback by Andrew West - 13 dinosaurs: [http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf]
# Article by Becky Ferreira - they should have feathers: [http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dinosaur-emojis http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dinosaur-emojis]

Sebastian [[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.168|162.158.83.168]] 12:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)--
:Regarding the brontosaurus reference, there is also some material in the intro of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brontosaurus wikipedia page]. [[User:Chtit draco|Chtit draco]] ([[User talk:Chtit draco|talk]]) 14:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
:Comic could be a reference to WE’RE ALL USING THESE EMOJI WRONG - http://www.wired.com/2015/05/using-emoji-wrong/ where the 😪 emoji is supposed to be a sleepy emoji and not a side-tear emoji - http://emojipedia.org/sleepy-face/ - see facebook's interpretation vs Samsung's{{unsigned ip|162.158.49.60}}
::Indeed. However IMHO the problem lies not in the standardisation attempt, but on the choice of non-obvious pictograms (which is a font-designer problem). The sleepy emoji would not be used wrong if it unquestionably looked like sleepy. Chinese solved this problem long ago by switching from pictograms to abstract ideogram designs. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 14:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.

I thought it was funny that the two people in the upper left (who, at the time of this comment, were noted to be "helping" Cueball) are actually impeding the quixotic quest by arguing amongst themselves. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.222|108.162.237.222]] 23:38, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I'm still dumbfounded by the lack of a marijuana leaf. There are pills, a syringe, a cigarette, rice wine, plus *multiple* Emoji for both wine & beer. I hate the fact that Emoji are *not* implemented in a sensible, standardized fashion: For instance, the guy Emoji may or may not have a mustache, or gray hair. The "short hair" female may be blonde, or brunette & may even have a coiffure instead of short hair! I think they should be far more specific with their definitions. Personally, I'm sticking with emoticons until they get this sorted out. ; P As for dinosaur Emoji, contrary to my previous statement about specificity, I believe you only need three dinomoji: Carnivore head (raptor or T-rex, non-specific), long-neck herbivore in profile, & winged. Anything more specific than that should probably be expressed with, y'know, WORDS. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.87|108.162.221.87]] 07:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
:Words? Weird concept ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
:There's already a winged dinosaur emoji and has been since 2010 http://emojipedia.org/bird/ [[User:Jeremyp|Jeremyp]] ([[User talk:Jeremyp|talk]]) 09:33, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

There is a good amount of detail regarding why/how the Unicode people are arguing over Emojis (In reference to the title text) but there is not much information provided regarding what Randall is referring to in the main strip, e.g. an example of what kind of language regulations the Unicode group try to impose. While the current explanation does a good job of explaining why there is a lot of drama regarding a Brontosaurus Emoji, the meat and potatoes of the article is in reference to language itself. I have never encountered anyone trying to communicate in English using letters that are not part of the current alphabet. Since English uses predefined Roman symbols for sound representation, and the Unicode people only deal with the representation of symbols, I am having a difficult time comprehending how the group in charge of rendering English into text would have any part in the changes that (at least English) is undergoing (which are largely related to spelling and grammar, not the symbols itself). [[User:Snowblinded|Snowblinded]] ([[User talk:Snowblinded|talk]]) 08:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
:I think the main point of this comic is about using characters from different alphabets to get a funny look (or fool anti-spam). In Unicode, characters sharing the same design but from different alphabets have separate code-points. For example: U+0041 (latin "A"), U+0391 (greek "Alpha") and U+0410 (cyrillic "A") look exactly the same but are not interchangeable... neither in Unicode nor in real live since writing English with Greek letters doesn't make sense anyway. Example 2: U+0049 (latin "I"), U+2160 (roman numeral 1) and U+30BC (japanese "E") have a similar yet different look (and very different meaning), and so have different code-points (seems logical). One may want to mix them to get a funny typing... as long as writing proper English is not a concern. Conclusion: I hardly see how Unicode restricts anything, since the "consistent technical standards" pretty much already exist in any language. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.

I feel like he isn't trying to steer the river but the two confused looking people across the river. What else are their role if it's not the case?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.39|162.158.166.39]] 14:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
:They have another sign laying down on the ground, so they seem to be fighting about where to put said sign. [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 17:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

1712: Politifact

2016-08-01T15:37:32Z

Psu256: /* Transcript */

{{comic
| number = 1712
| date = July 27, 2016
| title = Politifact
| image = politifact.png
| titletext = "Ok, I lit the smoke bomb and rolled it under the bed. Let's see if it--" ::FWOOOSH:: "Politifact says: PANTS ON FIRE!"
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Updated slightly, could probably use further overseeing.}}

The website {{w|PolitiFact}} rates political claims based on how true they are. The rulings from the Truth-O-Meter™ at PolitiFact are:
*True
*Mostly True
*Half-True
*Mostly False
*False
*Pants on Fire!

This comic presents a woman pretending to come from PolitiFact.com, annoying people (in this case especially [[Megan]], but also her living partner [[Cueball]]), by rating everything they say on the Truth-O-Meter. When Megan, apparently just having gotten out of bed, says she had trouble sleeping, the PolitiFact.com woman (called PolitiFact from now on) appears at an open window and observes (directly to Megan's face) that she is telling the truth with the rating of "''Mostly True!''" (So according to PolitiFact she did not sleep well most of the night, but may have slept OK for some parts of the night...)

Megan appears distressed, which is not improved when PolitiFact enters their house through the window, which caused Megan to chase after PolitiFact. They run by Cueball whose comment makes it clear that this is not the first time PolitiFact has been in their house like this, and he tells PolitiFact to get out. Megan even swears she had locked the window, which would imply that PolitiFact had opened a locked window (breaking and entering), but PolitiFact denies the claim with the rating of "''False!''", indicating that the window was not locked (not that this makes it acceptable to enter other peoples houses).

After the chase, PolitiFact ends up hiding under the couples bed; Cueball's claim that Politifact "can't stay under there forever" is promptly rated "''False''". Megan remarks, however, that no one likes Politifact, is rated "''Mostly True!''" This indicated that PolitiFact actually knows that what she/they do annoy most people, but she/they keep on doing it anyway.

The comic may be commenting on the fact that many people become very defensive when claims they make in political discussions are debunked by PolitiFact.com. There is a phenomenon where the people most influenced by an erroneous claim are the least likely to believe a fact checker. For example, The Washington Post [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/18/what-was-fake-on-the-internet-this-week-why-this-is-the-final-column/ shut down their internet rumor fact checker] because, "institutional distrust is so high right now, and cognitive bias so strong always, that the people who fall for hoax news stories are frequently only interested in consuming information that conforms with their views — even when it's demonstrably fake." Many people like the idea of a fact checker, until they disagree with it.

PolitiFact.com has been accused of being both [http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/03/14/mostly-true-ted-cruz-attack-proves-politifact-is-run-by-gigantic-assholes/ liberally biased] and [http://www.rifuture.org/politifact-ri-once-again-shows-right-wing-bias.html conservatively biased] at various times and has angered politicians on both sides of the aisle. The summary statistic "rulings" are especially troublesome; often the critics will agree that the information presented by the fact check is correct, and may agree that all relevant information has been included, but will disagree as to the importance of context omitted by the original speaker or the interpretation of ambiguous language. Hence, the statement that no one likes PolitiFact is "mostly true".

The title text makes a play on PolitiFact.com's most untrue rating, "Pants on Fire!" - a reference to the childhood accusation "{{w|Pants on Fire|Liar, liar, pants on fire!}}"

As it is very likely that Cueball has a {{w|smoke bomb}} on his person, as shown in another comic with Megan and Cueball as a couple, see [[486: I am Not a Ninja]], it will below be assumed that he says the first line in the title text. But it could also have been Megan, who seems even more eager to smoke PolitiFact out. She could have borrowed the one Cueball has...

In the title text Cueball says that he lit a {{w|smoke bomb}} and rolled it under the bed near PolitiFact. When it goes off it was apparently near enough to ignite PolitiFact's pants - thus, PolitiFact's pants are ''literally'' on fire and she yells "PANTS ON FIRE!".

Alternatively (but maybe less likely?) Cueball just says this out loud (he could even roll something other that is not a bomb in under the bed) and maybe he himself makes the loud FWOOOSH sound to represent the bomb going off. Then he would be telling an outright lie and that would be rated as "Pants on Fire!" as well.

The fact that PolitiFact seems to yell it could be interpreted to fit better with real pants on fire, but if Cueball tries so desperately to "smoke" her out, that he lies about a smoke bomb, she might also choose to yell "PANTS ON FIRE!" out loud. Maybe it is intended that both interpretations should be possible.

It may be a coincidence, but the fact that PolitiFact.com was {{w|PolitiFact.com#Reception|rewarded}} the {{w|Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting}} in 2009 for work done already in their first full year of work (after it was started in August 2007), and that this comic was released right after [[1711: Snapchat]] that mocks the strange prize categories of the {{w|Pulitzer Prize}} seems related. National Reporting is probably also not one of the best known categories, although it may rank above the [[1711: Snapchat|Pulitzer Prize for Snapchat]].

==Transcript==
:[Megan with messy morning hair is walking right and rubs her eyes.]
:Megan: I did ''not'' sleep well last night.

:[A woman with hair like Megan (but a bit longer) wearing a white hat with brim and a small card attached to the hat (like a press card) crawls up on the pane of an open window. She begins all her sentences with the word PolitiFact. When she says this it is written in the color and style of the PolitiFact.com logo with blue ''Politi'' and red ''Fact''. Megan has just walked past the window and has turned to look at the woman. She is still holding one hand up and her hair is still messy.]
:PolitiFact: PolitiFact says ''mostly true!''
:Megan: Oh no...

:[In a frame-less panel Cueball is walking right, while Megan, arms stretched out and hair flowing behind her, runs by him chasing PolitiFact who is running with a hand up to hold her hat in placehair also flowing behind her.]
:Cueball: Not again. Get out of here, PolitiFact!
:Megan: I '''''swear''''' I locked that window.
:PolitiFact: PolitiFact says: ''False!''

:[Cueball and Megan looking downwards are standing at the foot of a well made bed with two pillows, and the bedsheets drawn tight. PolitiFact's voice emanates from a starburst at the edge of the shadow under the bed.]
:Cueball: You can't stay under there forever.
:PolitiFact (voice from under bed): PolitiFact says: ''False!''
:Megan: Nobody likes you, Politifact.
:PolitiFact: PolitiFact says: ''Mostly true!''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Characters with Hats]]
[[Category:Politics]]

Talk:1701: Speed and Danger

2016-07-05T19:32:06Z

Psu256:

;Worst Comic
I think this might be a strong contender for worst comic on xkcd. Although [[1384: Krypton]] definitely makes for stiff competition. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.102|108.162.216.102]] 14:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
:Perhaps "in worst taste" might be a better term than simply "worst". Certainly the fatality '''rate''' (in fatalities/crash) for rocket crashes is higher, but placing motor sports crashes to the extreme end of the safety-danger axis is a bit suspect in light of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_deaths_in_motorsport . [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.242|108.162.237.242]] 02:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
::This is a great comic, but taste differs. It's not like he is making a joke of people who die in NASCAR crashes, but on this scale it is just not dangerous compared to crashing with a rocket heading for space. This is exactly the same as if he had put in the coconut in on of his most controversial comics, and another scatter plot [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]]. In the title text of that comic he mentions that the whole charts would have lost meaning if he included the coconut. But here he did put it in (the rocket) since he likes rockets and will not use the F word on those like he did with grape and coconuts. It may not be one of the best, but I like it :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The worst? Have you looked at the first few hundred? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.119|108.162.246.119]] 15:09, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I think this comic is actually enlightening on a certain (albeit narrow level). People frequently lack a proper sense of perspective, and this comic illustrates this fact. While we might say "Wow, that Indy car is really moving fast!", it pales in comparison to other vehicles that some fortunate few travel in. {{unsigned|BobTheMad}}
:And I totally wanted to learn that from a '''comic''' that's supposed to be humorous... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.7|108.162.219.7]] 16:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
::::Yeah well there are countless people who learned everything they know about space travel from 'The Martian' (as well as a ''lot'' of wrong things). So I really don't think that it's that uncommon for information on a subject to come from popular culture, however unfortunate it may be.--[[User:Snewmark|Snewmark]] ([[User talk:Snewmark|talk]]) 03:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

[[1699]] and [[1680]] would like to have a word with you. Also [[1675]].
Actually, all of the last 25 or so comics would. I really don't know how the xkcd forums put up with being 500x smarter than all the comics they praise every day. [[User:Youforgotthisthing|Youforgotthisthing]] ([[User talk:Youforgotthisthing|talk]]) 17:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

; Referencing Something?
Is there something this is referencing? [[User:Saklad5|Saklad5]] ([[User talk:Saklad5|talk]]) 14:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I believe this is in response to the recent crash of a Tesla car while running on autopilot - possibly the first recorded fatality of an autonomous car. {{unsigned ip|108.162.249.156}}
:Seems unlikely, as there is no mention of normal cars or Tesla. And although Elon Musk also do rockets launches (so far without humans as far as I know), there seem to be no relation to Tesla. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

To me the reference seems to be the Formula 1 "Halo" discussion. The last month I saw a few news articles about prominent F1 people calling this new safety measure "too safe" etc. To me this is a ridiculous argument and the comic is spot-on about it. The title text also seems to refer somewhat from that discussion. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.72|141.101.104.72]] 19:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

;Sarcasm
Is sarcasm to be encouraged in explanations? “Here, Randall makes the '''truly astounding''' observation that the danger of a crash is directly proportional to its speed….” [Emphasis mine.] ''— [[User:Tbc|tbc]] ([[User talk:Tbc|talk]]) 15:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)''
:In this case it's definitely warranted...Jesus Randall, this wouldn't exactly have been hard to make funny/interesting. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.7|108.162.219.7]] 15:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
:No it should not be in the explanation. Keep the sarcasm here ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Well a rocket to achieve orbit hits about 18,000 MPH http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/basics/launch.html
Where as NASCAR is only ~200 MPH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_car_racing
Formula 1 is only ~257 MPH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_car#Top_speeds
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.68.71|162.158.68.71]] 16:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm kinda shocked Randall didn't reference Star Trek for this comic, considering the number. - Michael C. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.85|141.101.98.85]] 17:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

;Why only 4 examples?

Why not put things like biking, driving a regular car, WWI planes, WW2 planes, supersonic jets, satellites, Apollo, New Horizons... {{unsigned ip|108.162.244.67}}
:It was not interesting as they would all overlap and there would be not enough place for labels. The whole idea is that any sport bound to Earth is slow compared to a rocket launch. 100 m dash or Formula one is on the same scale when comparing. Reminds me of when he compared the speed of New Horizon to the speed of a bullet, which would also have been in the left side if New Horizon had been entered... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

;Sports or Sports Cars?
I don't think the comic intended to say "Normal Sports CARS," as the explanation currently says, I think it means what it says, "Normal SPORTS" like foot ball, or hockey. On the linear scale of 0-to-rocket, running or walking is close to race car speed, compared to how fast a rocket is, and the graph illustrates that. Also, crashing a normal sports CAR is far more dangerous than crashing a professional race car because of all the safety equipment, so a sports car would be more toward the dangerous side. {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.81}}
:Agreed. I was assuming the reference was to various contact sports such as football, hockey, and quidditch where collisions between players regularly happen. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.132|108.162.237.132]] 20:52, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
::Yes of course. My bad, I just read the three dots like different types of car, and did not think further about it. For sure I see now that it is any sports not using motor powers (maybe also not anything about going fast down-slope like bobsleigh etc.) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

;What is the point of this comic and where is the fun

I don't know, I feel like people is missing the point of the comic, where is the funny on it.

I think finding Formula one on the slow an secure quadrant of the chart is surprising, so near to regular sports, until you understand that it is only compared to a rocket launch. People sure think of F1 as fast and dangerous, so this comic plays with our expectations.

Not exactly hilarious, but neither the worst XKCD comic.

[[User:Inconexo|Inconexo]] ([[User talk:Inconexo|talk]]) 20:19, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

<hr>
One thing I think it might be interesting to indicate is how this is the first one of these plots where everything is in only two quadrants. There is no slow but dangerous crash nor fast but safe crash. Usually at least one these quadrants would have an entry, and probably a facetious one.
:True but there has only been three (with this) comic with a four quadrant scatter plot, the other being [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]] and [[1501: Mysteries]]. The other scatter plot are either in one square or not really scatter plots that can be compared to this one. So it may be too slim a data set to say this is special for xkcd. But still interesting enough that there are no fast safe or slow dangerous crashes. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
::I didn't mean just scatter plots. I mean any time he's compared to variables. There was a recent one where it was a just a table with four entries, one for each "quadrant." The joke is usually one silly item. [[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 14:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I also think the part about scale could be expanded to more than just the "relative to the speed of light." Something like "While we tend to speak of race cars as going fast, they are slow compared to rockets." --[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 22:27, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
:Please feel free to improve with better examples. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure why that line about the speed of light is in the explanation. What's it relevant to in the comic?
Speaking of it, though, if you DID want to chart fast/safe collisions, visible light photons hitting something would probably rate!
(And if you wanted slow/dangerous, maybe the Titanic hitting crashing into an iceberg, or an army tank crashing into...anything.) {{unsigned ip|108.162.219.56}}

Fatality rate is not 100% as shown by [[wikipedia:List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents#Non-fatal_incidents_during_spaceflight|Non-fatal incidents during spaceflight]] [[User:Wyrme|Wyrme]] ([[User talk:Wyrme|talk]]) 03:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
:None of those events resulted in a crash. All crashes have been fatal as far as I can see. A crash involves the rocket hitting something. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
::By that definition, has there ever been a fatal rocket crash (excluding rockets fired as weapons hitting their target)? Thinking of the US space program: Apollo 1 was a fire in the capsule on the ground, not a crash. Challenger was an explosion in mid air, not a crash. Columbia was a break up on re-entry, not a crash. [[User:Jeremyp|Jeremyp]] ([[User talk:Jeremyp|talk]]) 13:05, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
:::Columbia crashed into the atmosphere. [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 19:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

When I saw this comic, I immediately though of Little Bobby Tables (https://xkcd.com/327/) {{unsigned ip|141.101.70.193}}

'''Fewest data points?''' [[605: Extrapolating]] shows a scatter plot with only two points (and a line extrapolating them). --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.240|198.41.242.240]] 11:27, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1684: Rainbow

2016-05-25T15:54:46Z

Psu256:

How do I find the official transcript?[[User:Transuranium|Transuranium]] ([[User talk:Transuranium|talk]]) 11:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Transuranium
:Most recent comics do not have official transcripts. {{User:17jiangz1/signature|11:13, 23 May 2016}}
::But now there is one here ;-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 11:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
:::Actually the transcript seems to appear with a lag of abut 10 comics at this time. But also for some time the transcript has been messed up so for instance [http://xkcd.com/1673/info.0.json this official transcript page]] for comic [[1673: Timeline of Bicycle Design]] actually displays the transcript for comic [[1670: Laws of Physics]], but still has the correct title and the title text for 1673. Wonder if Randall has never noticed this, even though it has been an issue for at least most of this year (see the [[1644: Stargazing#Trivia|trivia]] for [[1644: Stargazing]].) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:19, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Religion... geez. It's some weird stuff, huh. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.10|108.162.219.10]] 17:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Now that XKCD adopts the voice of God, it's time to write him off and move elsewhere. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.109|141.101.70.109]] 11:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
: Nice of you to decide for everyone. Just like god would do, right? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.27|141.101.80.27]] 13:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
:Word of God has appered before, as in Comic 224 or 258. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.161|162.158.86.161]] 17:09, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

For the sake of doctrinal accuracy, God (assuming the comic is in fact referring to the Jewish God who set his war bow in the cloud after the Flood) never promised not to destroy the earth by fire. Christian theology (2 Peter 3:10) implies God fully intends to destroy the earth by fire - or at least by unprecedented universal nuclear fission. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.87|108.162.221.87]] 11:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

: Good point, but for universal respect you should capitalise His pronouns. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.109|141.101.70.109]] 12:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

:: Ok, really? So the bible says "I will destroy the earth by '''universal nuclear fission'''" ? I must have missed something on the first reading -- could you tell me the page number? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.219|162.158.255.219]] 19:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

::: "And the elements shall melt with a fervent heat." 3500ºC is enought to melt everything, but when combined with Colossians 1:17 "in Him all things are held together" that implies he could stop holding things together - voila, every single element on the table separates into a soup of protons, neutrons, electrons, and enough free energy to destroy a universe - oh wait that's the point. Okay, so that's just speculation, but it sounds cool to watch. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.87|108.162.221.87]] 11:48, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

:: It doesn't mention a nuclear catastrophe in so many words. It does mention a massive asteroid will destroy the planet and that angels will collapse the pillars of reality which are all the rules God built the universe on. It's actually an incredibly visual passage for such abstract concepts, wonderfully well written. [[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 20:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

When the conditions are right, various types of [[wikipedia:Rainbow#Variations|multiple rainbow]] may be visible. [[User:Rhubbarb|Rhubbarb]] ([[User talk:Rhubbarb|talk]]) 12:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drabkikker Atmospheric optics enthusiast] signing in. That's right. Although the "third faint bow near the sun" Cueball mentions might indeed refer to the 22° halo, another possibility is that he means the (very rare) ''tertiary'' or ''third-order'' rainbow. See [[wikipedia:Rainbow#Higher-order_rainbows]]. [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111005111001.htm Here]'s a picture of one. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.78|141.101.104.78]] 13:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Should we mention multiple rainbow discussion in [http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/ today's What If?]? [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
:Yes it is now included in the explanation. Given that the third panel halo has sun dogs it is not a third order rainbow that Noah sees though. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:14, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

There is nothing within the Bible to indicate that the earth was destroyed by fire before the flood. As already mentioned, there is mention in the Bible that God intends to destroy the world by fire in the future. Second Peter 3 contains a number of references to this, especially verses 7 and 10. note the phrase "and the elements will be dissolved (or melt) with fervent heat" which could mean nuclear holocaust, or worse. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.230|162.158.2.230]] 04:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the what if. Does anyone now which video it is he will not make any reference to in the image with Megan touching the rainbow. It seems like it should be easy to find it, but unless it is the commercial for touching the rainbow (which shows nothing like in this picture), it does not seem to be easy to find. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:14, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
:You mean the "double rainbow" meme? This should probably explain it - [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/double-rainbow Double Rainbow at KYM] [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 15:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

While I agree that mentioning Noah is probably worthwhile, nothing in the comic directly indicates that Cueball is in fact Noah as opposed to just some random fellow talking to God. In the Genisis account (Genesis 9) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+9&version=NIV God tells him about the covenant and the rainbow, rather than being asked about it - thus Cueball is clearly someone other than a person familiar with the whole deal. [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 23:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
:Perhaps, but most people only have a passing familiarity with the bible and many assume they have a greater knowledge than they do. Also the author has changed how things happen before for the sake of the comic. In the past we would have the official transcript to settle the matter but lately this hasn't been included. While the person in the comic may not be Noah I would say Noah is notable enough to reference and for the moment we should refer to him as Noah because it wouldn't serve to make the explanation clearer if we don't, it would just be pointless nitpicking which clutters up an otherwise alright explanation. [[User:Lackadaisical|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical|talk]]) 00:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
::I think it is clearly Noah, it is right after the flood so there are only him and his family, and Noah would not know what it is until God tels him. And given that god generally only rarely speaks, it is most likely that Noah has though what it was before God tels him about it. And if Noah thinks about it, then God know that he had the though... This is of course for the fairytale fluff of the bible, but in that context it must be clear that this is Noah. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I feel like the section on "halos" is fairly irrelevant (and to a lesser extent the following section for the final panel). Cueball doesn't say he sees a ring AROUND the sun, he says "what about that faint third bow near the sun", "bow" being short for rainbow. He's seeing a third rainbow near the sun, probably faint because of being close to the sun in the sky. I believe the gag here isn't describing real life conditions, it's that god is rather incorrigable, constantly apologizing but never improving, continuously putting up apology rainbows. After all, even a second rainbow is rather uncommon. It's a silly image for Cueball to be seeing rainbows all over the sky. I think that's the gag, and the current explanation is just overthinking it. - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.77|108.162.218.77]] 04:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
:Read the What-If. It was over-thought before the explanation was ever written. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.232|108.162.210.232]] 05:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
::Well the rainbow clouds on either side of the sun, where a "bow" around the sun is seen, is almost certainly referring to sun dogs. And they appear together with halos! And since Noah did not even now what a rain bow was and asked "what that colored band was", then anything he sees in the sky will now be called a bow, and not a ring/halo. It is not impossible to have rainbow in one direction and halo with sun dog in the other! But to see the third bow with your eyes is all but impossible! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1683: Digital Data

2016-05-23T17:12:12Z

Psu256:

Ewww, Verizon? **** them [[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 04:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
::Don't forget the whole "Verizon Math" incident and Randall's much passed around check image. I'd be surprised if it isn't on 9GAG somewhere.... [[User:Psu256|Psu256]] ([[User talk:Psu256|talk]]) 17:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Ironically, the title text on explainxkcd is different from the one on xkcd.com, demonstrating the reinterpretation of text encoded in UTF-8 as if it were encoded in ISO 8859-1. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.231|162.158.85.231]] 05:45, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

-Exactly; this nicely proves Randall's point. On my computer, different characters appear in different browsers, but of course in one browser the characters are reproducible.--[[User:Jkrstrt|Jkrstrt]] ([[User talk:Jkrstrt|talk]]) 07:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Here is the decoded title text:
“If you can read this, congratulations–the archive youʼre you're using still knows about the mouseover text”!
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.16|108.162.229.16]] 07:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

:Grungy details:
:*â€œ -> ''convert to hex'' -> E2-80-9C -> ''UTF8 decode'' -> 0010-000000-011100 -> [http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/201C/index.htm U-201C "LEFT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK"]
:*â€” -> ''convert to hex'' -> E2-80-94 -> ''UTF8 decode'' -> 0010-000000-010100 -> [http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2014/index.htm U-2014 "EM DASH"]
:*â€™ -> ''convert to hex'' -> E2-80-99 -> ''UTF8 decode'' -> 0010-000000-011001 -> [http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2019/index.htm U-2019 "RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK"]
:*â€! -> ''convert to hex'' -> E2-80-9D -> ''UTF8 decode'' -> 0010-000000-011101 -> [http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/201d/index.htm U-201D "RIGHT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK"]
:[[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 17:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

::The ''convert to hex'' step is really ''encode with Windows-1252''. Also, in the last sequence, the "!" is not part of the encoded quotation mark. The third byte of the quotation mark comes from an unprintable U-009D between the "â€" and the "!". U-009D isn't a valid Windows-1252 character, so either the encoding is actually a superset of Windows-1252 that includes U-009D, or the encoding process just allowed it.
:: [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.103|162.158.255.103]] 17:26, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

He's written you're twice, but one is with a curly apostrophe, often favoured by americans (and maybe brits?), possible because of their keyboard. The simple apostrophe is “just” html-formatted, whereas the curly one has been molested by a UTF-8 / ISO-8859-1 misreading.
--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.16|108.162.229.16]] 07:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
: I'm British, and I don't have the curly apostrophe anywhere on my keyboard. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 11:01, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

: I'm American, and I also don't have the curly apostrophe anywhere on my keyboard, but word processing programs (like MS-Word) are configured by default to automatically replace an ASCII apostrophe in a conjunction with the fancy right-single-quote mark. Also when using quotation marks around text those programs automatically replace the repeated single ASCII quotation marks with the fancy left and right quotation marks (single if using single quotes, double if using double quotes). Most people don't care enough to disable that "feature"... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.252.143|162.158.252.143]] 15:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

:: Ok. I've never experienced that from any text processor (incl. MS Word), so maybe it's dependant on the system locale or another mysterious factor. I've just noticed a prevalence in english language texts online, but an absence in other european languages. Not even french, which has as many or more contractions. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.16|108.162.229.16]] 08:11 21 May 2016 (UTC)

This is a phenomenon that has always both fascinated me and frustrated me. I find it fascinating how, even today, data degrades as more and more people copy it (remember the old days when people used to copy VHS tapes, and the further you were from the original tape the more copying artefacts your copy had in it?). It also frustrates me, though, when I'm trying to find an original, undegraded image or video and it seems impossible to find. It's also annoying because it's actually pretty easy to copy something without causing any quality loss, yet practically every copied image on the internet has been degraded in some way or another. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 07:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

:If you haven't yet, you should check out this guy who ripped and reuploaded his own Youtube video 1000 times: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEIzS_27Vt0 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.150|162.158.222.150]] 08:28, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

::...and after 100 iterations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6GMvihskBQ ...and the summary of all of them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icruGcSsPp0 [[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 16:50, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

:It can be frustrating to try to convince new people drawing schematics on the computer to not use 4-way junctions because they don't expect digital images to degrade over multiple generations of copying. This xkcd demonstrates the way multiple generations can degrade even digital images, potentially making it difficult to differentiate two crossing (but electrically separate) signal lines from a 4-way junction on a schematic. Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now. ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.252.143|162.158.252.143]] 15:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

It's also funny because just a few moments ago I was trying to compress some video to send to someone. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 07:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=274fcf46426f2da31b057f1652ae5269cfdbd70a.190103 this page highlights the encoding blocks so that the degration of quality can be seen better. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.205|141.101.91.205]] 09:42, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

:Nice example. Their picture is already a bad copy. While it's still a PNG, it's already reduced in size (600x228 instead of 720x282, 131381 byte instead of 190103). Btw. the file used in this wiki is also slightly different from what I see on xkcd. It's just 3 minutes older and 308 bytes larger. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.48|162.158.83.48]] 01:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

The phenomenon that Randall is making fun of in this comic is actually called a "shitpic" http://www.theawl.com/2014/12/the-triumphant-rise-of-the-shitpic The explanation should probably make reference to that. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 10:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I think the watermarks on the last frame are from an unregistered screenshot tool, not "9gag" or similar. The references to shit pics are interesting, but aren't you over interpreting the whole thing? {{unsigned ip|162.158.83.174}}
: ...You realise that over-interpreting is what this wiki is ''for'', right? Also, not really, since all I said was that a "shitpic" is what this type of degraded image is called. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 15:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

There's a 9gag thing in the image, clean your glasses and look again. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.46|173.245.54.46]] 12:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Both screenshots from iOS definitely. Safari browser and… anybody knows? Some kind of other web browser? Maybe Chrome or Opera? <Need to finally create account> [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.152|162.158.202.152]] 15:32, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Apparently Russians have been getting this a lot, as they (up to the point of the existence of UNICODE) have had to deal a lot with people using bad codepages. Example of their post office dealing with a physical package addressed with a bad codepage: http://worldlanguages.wikia.com/wiki/Mojibake?file=Letter_to_Russia_with_krokozyabry.jpg [[User:Odysseus654|Odysseus654]] ([[User talk:Odysseus654|talk]]) 16:54, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Here is the progression as I see it:
*Frame 1 - The original PNG
*Frame 2 - The PNG converted to a JPEG
*Frame 3 - The JPEG as viewed on a mobile browser (Safari on iOS in this case)
*Frame 4 - A screen-shot of the mobile browser uploaded to Tumblr and then stolen by 9GAG
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.62|173.245.52.62]] 19:37, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Note that while the term "digital" is new, first digital format of information appeared long ago, with the development of standard alphabet. Images hand-drawn on paper can't be copied without loss, but if you write letters in fixed alphabet, it can be copied without errors forever (not counting errors caused by some letters getting out of use through history). Egyptian literature is probably lost due to us not knowing the (very big) full set of hieroglyphs, but [https://el.wikisource.org/wiki/%CE%9F%CE%B4%CF%8D%CF%83%CF%83%CE%B5%CE%B9%CE%B1/%CE%B1 Odyssey] could (and hopefully even was) be stored exactly how it was written. Wouldn't help read it, of course, language changed since then and it would need to be translated which, again, can lose some meaning ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 16:16, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

There's a much much older example. RNA and subsequently DNA are digital representations of the protein structures (also digital representations of 3-D molecular shapes). Degradation through copying is 1 source of variation which evolution selects over.[[User:MerlinMM|MerlinMM]] ([[User talk:MerlinMM|talk]]) 11:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)