explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1576: I Could Care Less

2015-09-12T17:28:33Z

Zoyd: Negation by association in French

Another excellent comic by Randall. In case of interest to anyone a different perspective, David Mitchell did a wonder rant on this... "Dear America... | David Mitchell's SoapBox"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw {{unsigned ip|‎141.101.98.100}}

The only people who complain about this phrase are pedantic morons who have never heard such things as "head over heels".

Here, I've composed a list of common vernacular/slang idioms which are valid, clear, and diametrically opposed to their original meaning:
* "Head over heels"
* "Break a leg"
* "It's the shit"
* "That's bad"
* "She's phat"
* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"
* "Irregardless"{{unsigned|Cwallenpoole}}
:The reason I dislike "I could care less" is because it just grates me. It disrupts the flow of parsing language in my brain, throwing up a "wait, what?" exception that I have to expend far more mental energy than usual to correctly interpret the meaning of something in my head. I'm not being pedantic for the sake of uptight rule adherence and feeling superior (I play around with language and use it in non-standard forms all the time), I'm pedantic because it causes my brain real difficulties in processing the meaning of what a person's said. I mean I'm a woman with Asperger's (and a British one at that) so maybe things are a little different for me, but that's just why I personally strongly dislike this usage. The things on your list though are all different in some way to "I could care less", at least for me, for example:
:* "Head over heels" - How is this an opposite meaning, exactly? Doesn't it give a rather nice metaphor for being giddy about something? Being hyperbolic and metaphorical doesn't make it an opposite meaning.
::*Because your head is ''normally'' over your heels. Nothing special about it. Heels over head would be much more interesting...[[User:Silverpie|Silverpie]] ([[User talk:Silverpie|talk]]) 17:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "Break a leg" - This is closer to being an opposite, but the exact opposite to wishing an actor good luck would be to wish them bad luck. The mutation to a slightly absurdist statement marks it out as having a different meaning, especially as "break a leg" isn't really used in any other context than to wish a person good luck. While it may be the case that "I could care less" is rarely (if at all) used in its literal form, there's still nothing to mutate it and obviously mark it out as a linguistic special usage case. It's also still how I'd expect someone to phrase it if they were actually telling me they could care less about something.
::: The "Vaudeville theory" on this page is where I got my understanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Break_a_leg --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "It's the shit" - Again, this is mutated. People aren't saying "it's shit", the word "the" handily tags it for my brain parser to handle differently.
:* "That's bad" - Well, you've got me here actually. I mean, context (and tone) makes the meaning obvious but I can't objectively understand why this phrase doesn't cause me the same sort of difficulties at all. Perhaps because I grew up in the 80s, and a big part of my musical upbringing was Michael Jackson. ''♬ A-hee-hee! Hoo! ♬''
:* "She's phat" - This is completely literal, "phat" is a slang term meaning excellent or attractive. It may be a mutation of the word "fat" or not, its etymology is uncertain, but it is indisputably a very different word now (much like how "orchids" means a species of flower rather than testicles, and "sinister" hasn't meant left in centuries).
::: I understand it's an acronym: Pretty Hot And Tempting. --EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:* "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" - This is also completely literal, Freud meant that while he believed many things ''could'' have hidden, psychosexual meanings... that while sometimes a person might be puffing on a cigar due to some suppressed phallic desires... they could also just be puffing on a cigar because they're enjoying a nice cigar. That is to say, not everything has a hidden subconscious meaning, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, not a substitute object to fellate.
:* "Irregardless" - Well yes, the suffix added to "regardless" here would usually invert its meaning, but "irregardless" isn't actually a word that existed before it came into use with its current meaning so it's not like saying a previously established and defined word (or phrase).
: Anyway, while I do believe language is flexible and mutable, this particular phrase fails the easily interpretable test for my brain. I try not to be too uptight about it, but it really does irritate me in a way I can't help. Obviously my opinion is not the only one, so that's just my 1.29587 British pence on the matter :D [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::(In response to Cwallenpoole, not 141.101.98.195, who makes good points that I didn't actually read first!) "Head over heels" is of course "head over (and down), heels (upwards) (...and continue this rotation to its logical conclusion)"; "Break a leg" has {{w|Break_a_leg|a number of possible origins}} (I always assumed wishing luck was unlucky, thus the inverse, but several "the leg not being yours" versions also ring true); "It's the shit" is using a somewhat unfortunate object (certainly if you miss out the "the") that is a short-cut off-colour superlative like "the dog's bollocks"; "bad==good" I always assumed was "what's bad to the establishment is good for our own clique"; "phat" is far too modern for me, but probably arises a similar positive superlative with some counter-culture anti-standard spelling; Cigars being cigars don't sound diametrically opposed, to me, although who knows ''what'' went on in Freud's head!; "Irregardless" is an obvious portmanteau/malapropism blend that is so easy to create. - Or so I would personally explain these.
:: Here's an additional one, though, if you care for it: "Cheap at half the price". It sounds wrong if you dig deep and work out that it must mean "It is not more than or equal to twice the actually fair price you should have been asking" (i.e. it's less than double the price). But I've always internally rationalised it as really saying "If this figure you mention actually were only half of the full price you are ''truly'' asking for, the real price would still be considered cheap" (i.e. it's less than half price). Or it could just be obfuscated salesman patter, i.e. telling the truth (still making a profit, but less than a 100% mark-up) but using weasel-words and terminology that create misleading imagery in the listener's mind. i.e. No crime, no foul, should Trading Standards happen to come-a-visiting, one day... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:::''Actually'', to follow-up on myself: "It's cheap(, it being in this instance) at half the price (I would normally charge)" works best. Why has that only just occured to me? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:::Attempting to interpret "head over heels" to somehow mean "head down, heels up" isn't etymologically accurate; it's simply a reversal of the original expression, which was "heels over head." There's a similar expression in German ("Hals über Kopf") and Scandinavian (Norwegian "hals over hode", Swedish "hals över huvud") literally "neck over head," which means "in great hurry or disarray, without thinking" and is also sometimes (particularly in Norwegian) reversed for no particular reason: perhaps it's just the "mouth feel" that makes it tempting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'I couldn't care less' is the standard formulation in the UK, for one. I always assumed that the US version was originally a variant on this which was later contracted, eg 'I could care less, but not much'.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.106|141.101.99.106]] 07:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Given that xkcd is so pro-science, I don't think the analysis here should endorse the peeve that there's anything wrong with "I could care less" (or use of "literally" as an intensifier), since most actual linguists, experts on how language works, think it's fine. See for example the list of posts dealing with the question here: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=21170#more-21170 And of course, the comic itself points out how petty an besides the point this kind of "correction" is. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:43, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

: As a linguist, regarding the claim that most actual linguists think it's fine, I'd have to respectfully say HELL NO! There is a difference between acknowledging the pragmatic implementation of the phrase, that is, its use in common parlance and the general acceptance and understanding of it, and the question wether or not it is "fine". The comic exemplifies a rather extreme version of the idea "Whatever people use is proper language" - in other words, as long as everybody involved in a conversation gets what is meant, there is no point in arguing semantics, grammer, etc. This is, however, neither the only, nor the dominant approach to language and linguistics. For exapmle, it doesn't answer the question how such an ostensibly paradox use of this phrase came to happen, where (geographically, socially, etc.) the phrase might have originated, and other puzzless regarding the origin of the phrase; this attitude also dismisses any inquiry into how humans process (or ignore) such discrepancies between literal meaning and actual use, and in general, how humans organise, structure, and conecptualise language. Additionally, this comic adds a radical deconstructional (and maybe existential) twist to this perspective by basically saying, "We're all alone, and can never really know or understand anybody else".
: Such an attitude of total relativism ("Every experience ist entirely subjective and unique") makes my skin crawl. It is by far more presumptious than being a little pedantic about grammar and the use of expressions.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.176|162.158.114.176]] 11:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Agreed. Words have meanings and reducing the amount of trust you can place in those meanings decreases the value of the language. "You could never understand me, so I might as well not even try to make myself understood" is a cop-out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.23|108.162.219.23]] 15:22, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:: I stand by my comment that most linguists would argue that the phrase does not warrant censure, on the grounds that it is (1) in very common use, probably about 5 times as common as "couldn't care less" in American speech, including educated speech, and about half as common in writing, (2) long established, with the OED's first reference back in 1966, only twenty years after it first notes "I couldn't care less" (and with Google Book Search, we can push this back to the 1940s: it occurs repeatedly in the official transcript of a House Congressional Hearing in 1947, for example), (3) idiomatic, so that logical analysis of its strict literal content is not helpful, and (4) analogous to other constructions (in English and other languages) that don't raise any eyebrows or hackles. That does not mean that they don't consider it interesting and worthy of explanation, of course. Indeed, almost all the work of actually trying to explain how "could care less" arose has been done by people who are at pain to point out that they find the phrase unobjectionable (while those who disapprove of it don't seem to get much further than calling it "an ignorant substitution" or a result of "sloppy speech and sloppy writing"). It's of course hard to prove that this is the majority view in academic circles, but I refer to Lawler, Liberman, Pullum, Okrent [http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/03/18/why_i_could_care_less_is_not_as_irrational_or_ungrammatical_as_you_might.html], Pinker, the various dictionaries that list it without deprecation (e.g. RH Webster's: "usage: could care less, the apparent opposite of couldn't care less, is actually used interchangeably with it to express indifference. Both versions occur mainly in informal speech."), and linguistic popularizers such as Grammarist [http://grammarist.com/usage/could-care-less/]. This clearly reflects the descriptivist paradigm that seeks to understand language as it actually occurs, and looks skeptically on attempts to impose "rules" that are often demonstrably wrong. In other words, treating linguistics as an empirical science. The version of this position that Megan argues in the comic is obviously heightened for comic effect (she's also using a sort of mock-Gricean analysis to impute a possible helpful intent to Ponytail). You can find most of these points endorsed in a very reasonable [http://blog.dictionary.com/could-care-less/ blog post by dictionary.com]. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.152|141.101.105.152]] 09:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As it's currently written, the explanation seems to suggest that "I could care less" is the American form and "I couldn't care less" British. In fact, both forms are in use in the US, and it wouldn't surprise me if "I could care less" occurs occasionally in British English as well. There are also other English-speaking countries in the world. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 07:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:As a Brit, I can't think of any time I've heard a fellow Briton say "I could care less", it's always seemed very much an American phenomenon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.195|141.101.98.195]] 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

:Another American chiming in here to say that I never, ever, ever say "I could care less" when I mean "I couldn't care less". Characterizing it as "*the* American form" is incorrect. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.167|173.245.56.167]] 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

As for the title text, I'd disagree with "The sentence is also ambiguous, as it may mean that literally or figuratively, the speaker could or couldn't care less." I think that Randall is pretty clear here: he ''should'' ('could' as in polite request) care less about irrational idioms instead of wasting time drawing comics about it. But he just can't resist. And without him doing so, we wouldn't be here. So in fact, it is nonsense for Randall to care less, and this contradiction is the point of the title text joke. But then again, I'm not native English speaker, and even less of a thought reader to understand what was on his mind. -- kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.224|141.101.96.224]] 08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:I had an alternate take on the title text. Since I could care less literally means I care some but could stand not to care as much, I took it to mean that for all the comic says about the true spirit and nature of communication and the evils of forcing linguistic absolutism onto other people, at the end of the day Randall still does care about people using correct phraseology. Yes, language is so much more than words and sounds but without clear grammatical usage rules communication could descend into chaos. This is actually one of the pivotal points in Jet Li's movie Hero which is a great commentary on this comic's profundity. The deep resonating pools of meaning that communication stores is only useful for peace and coexistence if we can all understand each other and come together as one. --[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
::I'm solidly with the IP. Randall is saying that, evidently, this is something which is important to him, and something he's put a lot of thought into. [[User:FourViolas|FourViolas]] ([[User talk:FourViolas|talk]]) 17:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I think "I could care less" is completely unheard of in Britain - I had to come here to find out what this was all about! In the UK the correction wouldn't be seen as pedantic, but rather that you had said something really rather odd, possibly for effect. I'm guessing in the US this doesn't stand out, and the phrase is "familiar" so the brain will run with it, but it just sounds really weird and jarring to me. That's not being pedantic, we toss double negatives around all over the place. Randall's point is that it how you interpret the words, rather than exact rules. So if ponytail is British then she is genuinely just trying to check that it wasn't a slip of the tongue and not meant for effect. To experience how odd it sounds its like a similar phrase "I don't give a s**t", but someone saying "I do give a s**t" (unless you guy's say that as well?!). {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.205}}

: You're right, the British National Corpus has essentially no hits for "could care less" [http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/]. However, Ponytail's "correction" doesn't sound like she's unfamiliar with the expression, but more like the common pedantic objection to it, so I doubt that she's intended to be British, or that it's anything other than "showing off how well she knows some mental checklist." The Lawler link above ([http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html]) discusses the example "They could give a damn about Whitewater" (as in they '''don't''' actually give a damn about it). I think you could get away with "I give a shit?" or "[Like] I give a shit!" (with the "like" elided) as implicitly negative, but no, you can't put in an affirmative "do." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.19|162.158.92.19]] 10:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm fighting a long lost battle, I know, but can I mention my fight against the (long-standing) misuse of Decimation when the speaker/writer probably means Devastation? These days it's often assumed to be its own mathematical complement (around ~10% survival, rather than the intended ~10% depletion). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 13:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I am right with you on this one. Although I don't think the users are mistaking the Dev- for the Dec-, they have just forgotten or never learned that "decimate" had anything to with percentages. Heck, many English speakers don't grasp that percent has anything to do with percentages. [[User:NoniMausa|NoniMausa]] ([[User talk:NoniMausa|talk]]) 15:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Either one works, depending on how the sentence is finished:
* I could care less...about this than other things.
* I couldn't care less...about this than I already do.
--EE [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.135|108.162.216.135]] 13:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:Indeed, but "I could..." also begs the question "...but will I?" and so does not actually affirms that "I ''will'' care less (than with other things)", whilst "I couldn't..." is more imperative as in "...and therefore I wouldn't". (Unless you want to read the latter as "I couldn't care less because I actually care quite a lot already and I know that this will never change", I suppose! Oh dear, we uregently need to start using one of those totally-umambiguous ConLangs based upon predicate logic!) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.32|141.101.98.32]] 15:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

On a different note: The way the panels are set up is pretty interesting. Anyone a idea, why he set it up like that? Does he want to tell us something? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.196|162.158.92.196]] 17:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
:The panels seem to form a logical story progression: introduction / development / conclusion, each on 3 lines. The panel on solitude and darkness is inverted -- it's literally dark -- which is a common comics idiom to emphasize a specific panel and break monotony {{Citation needed}}. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

This is starting to feel like the [http://english.stackexchange.com/ English Language & Usage Stack Exchange] :-)

It's quite amusing as most of the discussion here is about the pedantic usage solely focused on how the listener perceives the expression irregardless (;-p) of what the speaker tried to express, which is is exactly what the comic is ranting about.
If we want to be all pedantic, I'd offer the alternative that "I could care less" is a literally (;-p) perfectly sound form in itself. It's all about expressing the emotional value that someone attaches to a concept or thing -- think of it as an emotional energy or charge. Since everything is inter-dependent, there is no such thing as an absolute zero, it's the relation to other things that matters. The expression "I don't care" would imply the speaker devotes a neutral emotional energy value to the subject. Since it's a relative value, there are no boundaries in either direction and consequently "I could care less" and "I couldn't care less" are perfectly valid. It's all relative, as used to say Frank. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 20:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

'I know what you're thinking about,' said Tweedledum; 'but it isn't so, nohow.'
'Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, 'if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 23:26, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

"I could care less, but I would have to try" is the phrase as I have always known it (shortened to "I could care less...). I always took this to mean that someone was indifferent to a thing. It is a bit of an oxymoron since to try would mean you care more when your goal is to care less. My assumption has always been that the way someone feels about something generally exists on a scale from love to hate with the dead center being indifference. To care more from an indifferent standpoint is too move towards one of the poles (love or hate) and thus the oxymoron.--[[User:The elusive pickle|The elusive pickle]] ([[User talk:The elusive pickle|talk]]) 22:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Is it proper to use citations or should we just link to the source? {{User:17jiangz1/signature|10:44, 12 September 2015}}

== Negation by association in French ==

The [http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/giveadamn.html assertion] that ''could care less'', or ''give a damn'', is "negative in its own right" in the same way as ''pas'' in French sounds dubious to me to say the least, if not downright bovine excrement. In French, the original word for negation is ''ne'', it came to be associated with ''pas'', so that there was a perceived redundancy. Dropping ''ne'' when ''pas'' is used clearly conserves the negative meaning (it is only usual in oral French though, and frowned upon in written French). The same applies with adverbs that have a negative meaning, like ''jamais'' (never). But this is a very generic process, and thus completely different from very specific cases like ''could care less''. [[User:Zoyd|Zoyd]] ([[User talk:Zoyd|talk]]) 17:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

1569: Magic Tree

2015-08-26T12:09:23Z

Zoyd: /* Explanation */ typo

{{comic
| number = 1569
| date = August 26, 2015
| title = Magic Tree
| image = magic_tree.png
| titletext = Since people rarely try to cut down cell phone towers, after millions of years, as cell phone towers have gotten more treelike, trees have started growing fake cell phone tower attachments and shiny gray bark to protect themselves. This is a standard textbook example of convergent evolution.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}
This comic features a running theme in the XKCD comics, [[Beret Guy]]'s naive and/or odd ways of thinking. In the beginning of the comic, Beret Guy shows [[Megan]] what he believes to be a tree, and explains that it grew there because he placed magic beans in that spot yesterday. This is a reference to the fable "{{w|Jack and the Beanstalk}}", where the protagonist plants several magical beans he acquired, resulting in a beanstalk growing which ascends into the atmosphere. Megan, however, tells Beret Guy that the "tree" is actually a {{w|cell site|cell phone tower}}. Beret Guy disagrees, pointing out that it has branches, to which Megan tries to explain that this was in an attempt to make the towers look like trees. She gives up, however, as Beret Guy has already begun climbing the tower.

Later, Megan complains that her {{w|mobile phone signal|cell reception}} was nonexistent. Beret Guy responds by saying that he had to cut down his "tree" because there were "scary giants with yellow hats" in it. This mirrors, again, the "Jack and the Beanstalk" fable, where the protagonist has to cut down his beanstalk to prevent the giant, whose lands the beanstalk connects to, from climbing down and chasing him. In reality, the "giants" were probably utility workers.

The title text refers to a concept in evolution referred to as "convergent evolution". This theory is somewhat incorrectly referred to, as {{w|convergent evolution}} deals with multiple species acquiring similar characteristics to fulfill their role. The title text explains that, over time, trees would start to look more like cell phone towers in order to avoid people cutting them down, as cell phone towers are rarely cut down at all. However, this scenario more closely mimics {{w|Batesian mimicry}}, where a defenseless creature mimics the appearance of a creature with strong defenses, in order to ward off predators. In this scenario, the more defenseless trees attempt to mimic cell phone towers, which have the defense of people not wanting to cut them down or they would lose cell service (and likely a significant amount of money through fines). This may be a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flora_and_fauna_of_the_Discworld#Counting_pines counting pine], Terry Pratchett's tree that evolved to display its age so that humans would not cut it down. Randall has already [https://xkcd.com/1498/ referenced Pratchett] in the past.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
:(Beret Guy and Megan stand next to a large pole with a note on it.)
:Beret Guy (Pointing at pole): Check it out! I threw my magic beans on the ground here yesterday, and this big tree appeared!

:(Zoom out, the pole is revealed to have branches. Around the pole are trees about 1/9th of the height of the pole.)
:Megan: That's a cell tower.
:Beret Guy: No way - it has branches! See? I'm gonna climb it!

:(Same as frame 1. Beret guy has now started climbing the pole.)
:Megan: No, they just put those there to make it look- ...Never mind.

:(A caption above the frame says "Later...")
:Megan: Why do I have no signal?
:Beret Guy (Holding axe): There were scary giants with yellow helmets in that tree! Luckily I cut it down before they ate me.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Biology]]

1569: Magic Tree

2015-08-26T12:08:47Z

Zoyd: /* Explanation */ counting pine reference

{{comic
| number = 1569
| date = August 26, 2015
| title = Magic Tree
| image = magic_tree.png
| titletext = Since people rarely try to cut down cell phone towers, after millions of years, as cell phone towers have gotten more treelike, trees have started growing fake cell phone tower attachments and shiny gray bark to protect themselves. This is a standard textbook example of convergent evolution.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}
This comic features a running theme in the XKCD comics, [[Beret Guy]]'s naive and/or odd ways of thinking. In the beginning of the comic, Beret Guy shows [[Megan]] what he believes to be a tree, and explains that it grew there because he placed magic beans in that spot yesterday. This is a reference to the fable "{{w|Jack and the Beanstalk}}", where the protagonist plants several magical beans he acquired, resulting in a beanstalk growing which ascends into the atmosphere. Megan, however, tells Beret Guy that the "tree" is actually a {{w|cell site|cell phone tower}}. Beret Guy disagrees, pointing out that it has branches, to which Megan tries to explain that this was in an attempt to make the towers look like trees. She gives up, however, as Beret Guy has already begun climbing the tower.

Later, Megan complains that her {{w|mobile phone signal|cell reception}} was nonexistent. Beret Guy responds by saying that he had to cut down his "tree" because there were "scary giants with yellow hats" in it. This mirrors, again, the "Jack and the Beanstalk" fable, where the protagonist has to cut down his beanstalk to prevent the giant, whose lands the beanstalk connects to, from climbing down and chasing him. In reality, the "giants" were probably utility workers.

The title text refers to a concept in evolution referred to as "convergent evolution". This theory is somewhat incorrectly referred to, as {{w|convergent evolution}} deals with multiple species acquiring similar characteristics to fulfill their role. The title text explains that, over time, trees would start to look more like cell phone towers in order to avoid people cutting them down, as cell phone towers are rarely cut down at all. However, this scenario more closely mimics {{w|Batesian mimicry}}, where a defenseless creature mimics the appearance of a creature with strong defenses, in order to ward off predators. In this scenario, the more defenseless trees attempt to mimic cell phone towers, which have the defense of people not wanting to cut them down or they would lose cell service (and likely a significant amount of money through fines). This may be a reference to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flora_and_fauna_of_the_Discworld#Counting_pines counting pine], Terry Pratchett's tree that evolved to display is age so that humans would not cut it down. Randall has already [https://xkcd.com/1498/ referenced Pratchett] in the past.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
:(Beret Guy and Megan stand next to a large pole with a note on it.)
:Beret Guy (Pointing at pole): Check it out! I threw my magic beans on the ground here yesterday, and this big tree appeared!

:(Zoom out, the pole is revealed to have branches. Around the pole are trees about 1/9th of the height of the pole.)
:Megan: That's a cell tower.
:Beret Guy: No way - it has branches! See? I'm gonna climb it!

:(Same as frame 1. Beret guy has now started climbing the pole.)
:Megan: No, they just put those there to make it look- ...Never mind.

:(A caption above the frame says "Later...")
:Megan: Why do I have no signal?
:Beret Guy (Holding axe): There were scary giants with yellow helmets in that tree! Luckily I cut it down before they ate me.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Biology]]

1363: xkcd Phone

2014-05-07T09:15:37Z

Zoyd: removed wrong statement (as per my comment below)

{{comic
| number = 1363
| date = May 2, 2014
| title = xkcd Phone
| image = xkcd_phone.png
| titletext = Presented in partnership with Qualcomm, Craigslist, Whirlpool, Hostess, LifeStyles, and the US Chamber of Commerce. Manufactured on equipment which also processes peanuts. Price includes 2-year Knicks contract. Phone may extinguish nearby birthday candles. If phone ships with Siri, return immediately; do not speak to her and ignore any instructions she gives. Do not remove lead casing. Phone may attract/trap insects; this is normal. Volume adjustable (requires root). If you experience sudden tingling, nausea, or vomiting, perform a factory reset immediately. Do not submerge in water; phone will drown. Exterior may be frictionless. Prolonged use can cause mood swings, short-term memory loss, and seizures. Avert eyes while replacing battery. Under certain circumstances, wireless transmitter may control God.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a parody of a multitude of mobile-technology related issues that, when brought together, create a general satire of smartphone advertising. The advertised features here either make previously useful capabilities useless or add features nobody wants. Except for "your mobile world (going) digital", which is old news.

From bottom left, going clockwise:

* '''FlightAware partnership:''' This is a reference to the [http://www.flightaware.com/ FlightAware] flight tracking service. This FlightAware partnership results in the phone playing airplane engine noise whenever a flight passes over the phone's current location, an annoying and arbitrary feature. It may also be superfluous, as such noise may be heard from the plane itself, depending on altitude.
* '''Realistic case:''' possibly a joke on various audiovisual devices like gaming consoles that advertise realistic sound, graphics, etc. Of course, applying "realistic" to an actual physical case is ridiculous. Either the case is actually real, or it doesn't actually function as a case. Possible reference to [[331: Photoshops]], where [[Cueball]] finds a physical object to not look realistic.
* '''Clear screen:''' This is a pointless descriptor from the perspective of the consumer. Of course the screen is clear. This joke works in tandem with the previous joke, as a play on "clear case, realistic screen," which are both hypothetically viable selling points.
* '''Side Facing Camera:''' There was a recent controversy surrounding an [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/spy-cam-peek-i Indiegogo for a surreptitious, side-mounted camera device] for smartphones due to the advertisement of the device as a good way to take creep shots, which are illegal in many places. Widespread dissemination of these devices as a built-in feature would likely result in a sharp increase in delinquency of this nature. May also be an ''ad absurdum'' extension of devices with both forward and backward facing cameras.
* '''Custom blend OS:''' iOS and Android are offered by different conglomerates and run on different kernels. A "custom blend" would probably be a nightmare to work with.
* '''Simulates alternative speed of light:''' This renders the clock useless. The {{w|speed of light}} is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. Relativistic effects, such as {{w|time dilation}}, are only noticeable at significant fractions of the speed of light. Since the phone is simulating a much slower speed of light, driving at even highway speeds will cause a significant amount of time dilation. For example, driving at 90mph (90% of the default simulated speed of light) will give a time dilation factor of about 2.29, causing the clock to advance only 26 minutes for each hour; driving at exactly 100mph makes the dilation factor infinite and will stop the clock entirely. Driving beyond 100mph...would make the clock start advancing through imaginary/complex time rather than real time. Somehow. (Let's not go there.)
* '''Wireless:''' as in cordless phone. This is the bare minimum a phone has to have in order to be a mobile phone, so advertising it as a feature feels dated by decades.
* '''Accelerometer screams in free fall:''' Another useless function. Rather than having some sort of feature to prevent breakage or cracking when a drop is detected, the phone just makes you more aware of its potential imminent doom.
* '''When exposed to light, phone says "hi":''' Bait and switch, and also a build from the previous joke. The implied feature is that the screen or camera will automatically adjust, but instead the phone is weirdly anthropomorphized.

The ominous warnings and disclaimers in the title text are probably a reference to the ''Saturday Night Live'' parody ad for {{w|Happy Fun Ball}} ([http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/pictures/50-greatest-saturday-night-live-sketches-of-all-time-20140203/happy-fun-ball-0459912 original video hosted on rollingstone.com]).

* '''Presented in partnership with {{w|Qualcomm}}, {{w|Craigslist}}, Whirlpool, {{w|Hostess}}, LifeStyles, and the US Chamber of Commerce.''' Qualcomm is a semiconductor company that designs and produces chips for mobile phones. {{w|Whirlpool Corporation}} is a large American multinational manufacturer and marketer of home appliances, while {{w|Whirlpool (website)|Whirlpool}} is a prominent Australian tech forum website, originally created for discussion of Australian broadband providers but now extending to cover general tech topics, including mobile phones. The other companies mentioned here have no association with mobile phones, though there is a long history of unrelated companies attempting to leverage their respective brands to help promote each other.
* '''Manufactured on equipment which also processes peanuts.''' A warning often seen on candy and other foods for people with a peanut allergy. It is highly unlikely that equipment used to produce mobile phones would also process food.
* '''Price includes 2-year Knicks contract.''' Mobile phones are often sold by phone companies in combination with a cell phone plan, but a contract with the {{w|New_York_Knicks|Knicks}} would only appeal to pro basketball players.
* '''Phone may extinguish nearby birthday candles.''' A rather oddly specific capability, which might also be annoying for anyone attempting to host a birthday party. As to how it would do this, a very powerful directional speaker would be able to blow out a nearby candle, but the speakers in mobile phones aren't going to be that big.
* '''If phone ships with {{w|Siri}}, return immediately; do not speak to her and ignore any instructions she gives.''' {{w|Siri}} is a virtual personal assistant application for Apple devices. Not speaking to it and not following its instructions would defeat its purpose. It may suggest that a malevolent "Siri AI" has sneaked itself onto some devices, at the manufacturing stage, for some diabolical purpose. May be a reference to the Companion Cube in the game Portal, in which the player is instructed to disregard its advice if the cube appears to be animate.
* '''Do not remove lead casing.''' A mobile phone encased in lead would not function because it could not transmit or receive data. Devices that emit high levels of ionizing radiation are often encased in lead, but a phone that would emit that level of radiation would be unhealthy to carry around. If encased in sufficient lead to mitigate the danger, it would be uncomfortably heavy. This might be reference to [https://xkcd.com/925/ xkcd comic no 925: Cell phones] where Randall makes fun of the WHO claiming that cell phones might cause cancer despite huge studies showing the opposite. This could also mean the device is an actual bananaphone as regular phones emit no ionizing radiation ([http://xkcd.com/radiation xkcd Radiation Dose Chart]). Regrettably, the lead casing would render the phone inedible, although this somewhat mitigates the issues with having been manufactured on equipment that also processes peanuts.
* '''Phone may attract/trap insects; this is normal.''' Some plants, like the {{w|Venus_flytrap|Venus flytrap}}, attract and trap insects, but mobile phones are not known to exhibit this behaviour. May be a reference to "crazy ants" which are attracted to electronics.
* '''Volume adjustable (requires root).''' {{w|Android_rooting|Rooting}} is the method to gain privileged access on Android phones. Adjusting the volume should be available to any user and would not be restricted to root access only.
* '''If you experience sudden tingling, nausea, or vomiting, perform a factory reset immediately.''' These symptoms are usually associated with chemical or radiation poisoning. Neither of these would be cured by a {{w|Factory_reset|factory reset}}.
* '''Do not submerge in water; phone will drown.''' Most phones are not waterproof and will probably short-circuit when submerged. Drowning however, would imply that the phone breathes air (which actually would be possible if it had a {{w|Lithium–air battery|Li-air battery}}).
* '''Exterior may be frictionless.''' The front of a smartphone is usually made of glass and should have a surface with very low friction. The back of a phone is usually made from a material that has higher friction to make it pleasant to hold and to make sure it doesn't slide off objects it is placed on. A [[669: Experiment|completely frictionless surface]] would make it almost impossible to hold and would make it very susceptible to drops (at which point the phone will scream).
* '''Prolonged use can cause mood swings, short-term memory loss, and seizures.''' These are all side effects that are associated with certain kinds of medication or radiation treatment of the brain and would not be acceptable for mobile phones.
* '''Avert eyes while replacing battery.''' Actions that would warrant averting your eyes are usually associated with high-intensity light capable of causing eye damage. Depending on the specific energy source, this may be accompanied by high levels of other types of radiation (e.g. making an {{w|X-ray}} photo). This may hint that the phone might be powered by a radionuclide battery which would explain the lead casing and the possible radiation side effects. A phone that emits X-ray radiation would not be healthy to be around. Alternately, this may be a reference to the {{w|Ark_of_the_Covenant|Ark Of The Covenant}}, implying that gazing upon the battery or the compartment wall behind it is forbidden on pain of severe punishment. Or merely that with its back removed the phone would be naked, and the user should avert their eyes to preserve the phone's modesty.
* '''Under certain circumstances, wireless transmitter may control God.''' According to most religions, God (or Gods) are usually in control of us. God(s) are usually viewed as not directly controllable.

==Transcript==
:Runs custom blend on Android and iOS
:Side-facing camera
:Simulates alternate speeds of light (default: 100 miles per hour) and adjusts clock as phone accelerates
:Clear screen
:Realistic case
:Wireless
:Accelerometer detects when phone is in free fall and makes it scream
:Flightaware partnership: Makes airplane noise when flights pass overhead
:When exposed to light, phone says "hi!"

:''Introducing''
:'''The xkcd phone'''
:Your mobile world just went digital®

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1363: xkcd Phone

2014-05-06T12:25:47Z

Zoyd:

This seems like an SCP artifact [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.220|108.162.249.220]] 10:09, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

I really dislike the tone of the explanation. I mean it's so negative about the features! Not that they are all useful, but isn't this a wiki and should be neutral? It takes also the fun out of it. I would like a screaming while falling phone and the relativity thing would be great for teaching relativity! [[User:RecentlyChanged|RecentlyChanged]] ([[User talk:RecentlyChanged|talk]])

Where can i get one of these? :D [[User:UniTrader|UniTrader]] ([[User talk:UniTrader|talk]]) 04:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the "scream when falling" thing and the "flightaware" stuff can be done somehow with Tasker. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.103.206|141.101.103.206]] 04:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

;Designer?

I suspect it was either Black Hat or Beret Guy, but I'm not sure which. A collaboration? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.45|173.245.54.45]] 04:47, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

This sounds like something straight out of aperture. {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.55}}

;Simulates alternate speeds of light

Yes, useless as a feature on all the time; but it would be a cool app. [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 05:57, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
:Absolutely. Where can I get an app like that?[[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.157|108.162.225.157]] 06:22, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Travelling at above the simulated speed of light should give an imaginary time dilation, not a negative time dilation.
gamma = 1/sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}
Thus, after such travel, the value of the clock would be a complex number. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.35|108.162.219.35]] 15:42, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Changed the speed of light to 2.99x10^8'''
:You guys should probably clarify that the relativisic affects actually depend on how long your trip is or how long you wait to sync your phone. For relativity to be observable on a 12 hour trip, Minimum speed for a phone would have to be 300 m/s or 3000 m/s for the clock to measure even a microsecond/millisecond difference in time. This is well known thanks to the certain [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Velocity_and_gravitational_time_dilation_combined-effect_tests time dilation experiments with planes]. Your GPS chip helps account for an error of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System#Relativity 7 to 47 microseconds per day]. My point is in terms of time dilation, relativity mattering depends on how long a trip or waiting for synchronization is. By synching, I literally mean with the atomic time clock or with a GPS satellite. The synchronization of your phone with satellites is actually a couple of hundred microseconds, so normally even a light changing clock might not have as noticable changes as you might think. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.225|108.162.238.225]] 13:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.225|108.162.238.225]] 13:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah sorry forgot to login. does anyone know how to do the indices formatting other than eg 2.99x10(littlex) rather then 2.99x10^x? [[User:Jonv4n|Jonv4n]] ([[User talk:Jonv4n|talk]]) 06:29, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
: Whas<sup>sup</sup>? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.220|141.101.89.220]] 07:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

; relativistic effect
Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm not a physicist but the above explanation says that relativistic time dilation affects only occur at a significant fraction of the speed of light. It is my understanding that time dilation occurs at any speed, but is only perceptible/noticeable/measurable at very large fraction of the speed of light. Unless I'm mistaken the above it should reflect this. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.91|173.245.56.91]] 22:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

; putting "Relative" back into relativity
First time poster, please forgive my transgressions :)
My understanding regarding relativistic effects is that, for a given frame of reference (e.g. phone operator travelling at 0.9c) would be absolutely none. Relativistic effects (as I understand them) would only apply between two different frames of reference. The only effect I can see in this case is if you are moving towards, or away from the phone while operating, and red/blue shift of the radio frequencies. In general, wifi and bluetooth are used locally so wouldn't apply; only the phone network would be affected.

Also, perhaps the adjustable speed of light is a reference to the the game "A slower speed of light" by MIT Game Lab http://gamelab.mit.edu/games/a-slower-speed-of-light/ (in which you walk around collecting objects; each object slows light down, and increases relativistic effects).
[[User:Jaybee|Jaybee]] ([[User talk:Jaybee|talk]])

'''Phone may attract/trap insects; this is normal.'''
Funnier if you take it as a reference to the [http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/04/07/mazda_issues_recall_because_spiders_invade_fuel_tank_causing_fire_risk.html spider problems] Mazda keeps on having... {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.64}}

About the attracting insects ... I would expect this to be normal feature in night. Trapping, however ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 09:08, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
: There are other indications that the phone is at least partly biological, this being the strongest evidence of that. Insects could be the power source for the biological part(s). [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.45|173.245.54.45]] 14:07, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Siri'''

Could the Siri bit be a reference to Portal? When I first read it, I remembered this GLaDOS quote: "Your Aperture Science Weighted Companion Cube will never threaten to stab you, and in fact cannot speak. If your Weighted Companion Cube does speak, please disregard its advice." Could be completely wrong; just a thought. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.51|173.245.54.51]] 10:09, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
:Perhaps Siri is beling likened to the "ATMOS" device in the Doctor Who episode "The Sontaran Stratagem" [[User:Esp666|Esp666]] ([[User talk:Esp666|talk]]) 11:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Lamest. Comic. Ever. And I'm not just saying that because he doesn't mention the Ubuntu Touch OS. ''– [[User:Tbc|tbc]] ([[User talk:Tbc|talk]]) 12:22, 2 May 2014 (UTC)''

'''Realistic case'''

Car telephones and the first cellphones were rather expensive, at least in Germany fake "realistic cases" were sold without any working electronics in it. Usage was to impress silly friends. {{unsigned ip|173.245.52.204}}

I thought this was aimed at the iPhone. Apparently these have an elegant case, but I have never actually seen one. Everyone I know covers their iPhone with some hideous plastic monstrosity, since the design is not practical.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.59|108.162.218.59]] 14:10, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Could possibly be a reference to the "Realistic" brand, which was used on various products sold by Radio Shack (U.S. electronics retail chain) from 1954 to some time in the '90s.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.76|108.162.219.76]] 16:14, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I am not a native speaker of English. I thought the joke was on the double meaning of "case", meaning both "something that happened or might happen" (like "realistic scenario") and "something that covers something else". Does that make sense to you guys? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.17|108.162.219.17]] 10:06, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Screaming when in free fall: my first Android app!'''

I love the bit about screaming when in free fall: that was the first Android app I hacked together back in 2009 (based on the tricorder app). [[User:Nealmcb|Nealmcb]] ([[User talk:Nealmcb|talk]]) 13:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Title Text'''

Hover-over title text was truncated; love it.
14:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[[User:Pocono Chuck|Pocono Chuck]] ([[User talk:Pocono Chuck|talk]])
: you must have an really old firefox browser -- you should update !!! [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.210|199.27.130.210]] 16:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
:: Happened to me. Using whatever the latest IE is at the moment. It cut off at nause-. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.54|173.245.54.54]] 17:13, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Price includes 2-year Knicks contract.''' ... but a contract with the Knicks would only appeal to pro basketball players.

Nonsense. Lots of "regular" folks would buy this phone it it meant they got to play in the NBA. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.84|199.27.128.84]] 16:26, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

: I agree with this. A whole lot of people who think they have "skillz" would buy the phone if they got into the NBA. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.54|173.245.54.54]] 17:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

This may also be an indirect way of stating that it is incredibly expensive, seeing as those sort of contracts usually involve ''you'' getting compensated. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.33|108.162.216.33]] 13:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

"Your mobile world just went digital" is an inversion of the marketing-speak that was common when what we'd now regard as smartphones first began to be adopted by the mainstream (iPhone/G1 era, since Symbians, Blackberries, and early WinMo tended to be business or enthusiast devices). People already ubiquitously e-mailed, browsed the Web, etc...what was presented as 'new' was that you could now do it from your phone. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.58|173.245.54.58]] 19:09, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I think the "Under certain circumstances, wireless transmitter may control God" statement might be a reference to how transmitting devices have to comply with FCC regulation and not interfere with aircraft or government communications. Perhaps this phone is intended to be noncompliant so as to control high-level electronics, even at supernatural levels. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.66|173.245.56.66]] 21:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Dbrak

'''Frictionless'''

You could hold a frictionless phone just by hooking your little finger under the bottom edge, regardless of friction gravity will hold it into your hand. Just like you could leave it in a bowl without it jumping out. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.72|108.162.229.72]] 19:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Unless you held your pinky perfectly balanced, horizontal and motionless, a frictionless object would slide right off it, as it would off any flat surface that is not perfectly horizontal.
14:13, 3 May 2014 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.4|108.162.242.4]] 13:15, 3 May 2014 (UTC)DCollins

Wouldn't you be able to hold it somewhat like a normal phone, if you hold a finger under the bottom of it? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.54|173.245.54.54]] 17:08, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Saying a frictionless phone can't be held is like saying prisoners would slide out of prisons if they had frictionless surfaces. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.218|108.162.237.218]] 14:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

;Why the hell this funny phone isn't available at the xkcd store?
I would buy if the price would be in the range of other articles there. Just for fun...--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:30, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Root needed'''

I think that needing root for ajust the volume may be a allusion people needing to root Android to change fonts or to take screenshots (untill version 4.x). [[User:FlavianusEP|FlavianusEP]] ([[User talk:FlavianusEP|talk]]) 23:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Alternative meaning: The spirit of xkcd'''

I think there's a secondary possible interpretation for this comic -- that the various features of the phone represent the overall "spirit" or "attitude" of xkcd, in a way reminiscent of an early strip -- http://xkcd.com/207/ -- about "what xkcd means." More specifically, a common theme in xkcd is taking advanced concepts in science and technology, and applying them to whimsical, humorous, impractical, or outright impossible uses. Several of phone's features -- such as the simulated speed of light -- touch on the same theme. Wordplay, another common xkcd theme, is present as well; and the anthropomorphism of technology, along with making devices appear 'cute', is also present, and also is something that has come up in xkcd many times in the past.

The comic is called "xkcd Phone", after all -- I think simultaneously with being a parody of phone advertisements, the comic is also meant to show us what a phone that fits into the xkcd world would be like. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.114|108.162.241.114]] 17:52, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Blowing out candles....'''

For the birthday candles thing: I do remember seeing a video ad for an app back when the iphone was first opened up to outside developers that would turn the phone into a fan, and it demonstrated that it was strong enough to blow out a birthday candle. Seemed quite useless at the time. Still does today for that matter {{unsigned ip|108.162.215.47}}

'''Side-facing camera'''

I thought the joke here was that the camera ''only'' contained a side-facing camera rather than a side camera in addition to a front and back camera. While you can see the camera on the side, you don't see a camera on the front and they don't talk about a rear camera. It'd be pretty annoying to use a side-facing camera for anything but the surreptitious case you described. [[User:S|S]] ([[User talk:S|talk]]) 16:58, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Do not submerge in water'''

I assumed this was also referencing the 4chan, etc pranks with the waterproof iPhone [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.79|173.245.55.79]] 18:41, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

'''Wireless'''

A completely wireless phone would not be unuseable. The only wire phones need nowadays is for recharging their battery, but this can be done by induction, like with the Qi system with which some Nokia and Google (Nexus) phones are compatible. [[User:Zoyd|Zoyd]] ([[User talk:Zoyd|talk]]) 12:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)