https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=162.158.62.129&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T10:15:56ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2688:_Bubble_Universes&diff=2977162688: Bubble Universes2022-10-28T00:41:25Z<p>162.158.62.129: joke refers to michael bublé</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2688<br />
| date = October 21, 2022<br />
| title = Bubble Universes<br />
| image = bubble_universes_2x.png<br />
| imagesize = 740x188px<br />
| noexpand = true<br />
| titletext = The theory finally unifies cosmic inflation and regular inflation.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a UNIVERSE OF BUBLÉS (WASHED UP AND APPEARING IN A BUBLY AD) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
A {{w|Eternal_inflation#Overview|bubble universe}} is a concept in the {{w|Inflation (cosmology)|inflation theory of cosmology}} in which our observable universe is just one of many "bubbles" of matter and radiation that formed after the {{w|Big Bang}}.<br />
<br />
The comic seems to be recursive, where one Cueball's bubble universe contains another Cueball doing the same thing, blowing bubbles, seeming to contain the whole scene within one of the bubbles in the original scene. This may reference cosmological models like the {{w|Big Bounce}}, in which a new universe emerges from a previous universe. A similar view is in the "{{w|turtles all the way down}}" view of the universe, but here the universe is suspended in bubbles, and those bubbles suspended in a universe suspended in bubbles, "all the way down" (or at least one layer down).<br />
<br />
The title text claims this theory "Finally unifies cosmic inflation and regular inflation." Cosmic inflation refers to the expansionary phase of the universe shortly after the Big Bang; this would explain why that happened with the simple proposition that it was a bubble and inflated like regular bubbles do. (Ignoring various issues – like the sheer size of the universe, at least in terms of its own scale.)<br />
<br />
The title text might also be referring to economic inflation. Rather than a literal process, economic inflation is the devaluing of an individual unit of currency (i.e. a single dollar) over time. Depending on the rate, economic inflation can be harmless or very dangerous for the average consumer, especially if the inflation results in a metaphorical "bubble" where the price of goods exceeds their value. Economic bubbles are especially dangerous because they are known to "pop" and destroy the accumulated wealth of a lot of people.<br />
<br />
The scene looks like it could be part of an infinite recursion. The two Cueballs and grounds are similar but not identical, a self-similarity (also known as expanding symmetry or unfolding symmetry) common in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal fractals].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[Cueball blowing expanding bubbles. In the largest one is a whole new universe with another Cueball blowing similar bubbles. The bubbles are progressively darker: the first ones are regular transparent/white bubbles, and as they grow, they turn gray then dark, to match the black night sky, with stars, galaxies, planets and other astronomical bodies] <br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Space]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]<br />
[[Category:Puns]]</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=734:_Outbreak&diff=190317734: Outbreak2020-04-10T00:25:13Z<p>162.158.62.129: /* Explanation */ fixed a grammar mistake and changed some phrasing a bit</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 734<br />
| date = April 30, 2010<br />
| title = Outbreak<br />
| image = outbreak.png<br />
| titletext = Let's get dinner after we promptly destroy all the X-7 we've manufactured.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{w|Index case|Patient Zero}} is the usual terminology for the first patient tested or infected with an {{w|outbreak}}-style infection, (in the comic's case, a zombie outbreak,) like in the movie ''{{w|Outbreak (film)|Outbreak}}'', which is not the main inspiration for this comic, except maybe the title.<br />
<br />
This comic, however, serves to make fun of the stereotypical {{w|List of zombie films|zombie movie}} in which an unlikely series of events, coupled with extreme oversight on part of the staff, leave an opening for an outbreak to begin. Often, the infected find themselves lacking any restraint or containment, and freely move about in search of humans to infect. <br />
<br />
In the comic Ryan (drawn as [[Cueball]]) tells Laura (drawn as [[Megan]]) that the patient has been exposed to ''toxin X-7''. The patient (a {{w|zombie}} version of a Cueball-like guy) can be seen through a window inside a laboratory, with Ryan trying to block the door. The patient has turned into a ''bloodthirsty monster'' that in true zombie-style calls out for brains, while walking with both arms stretched out and bits of him falling off, three typical cliches for zombie movies.<br />
<br />
Laura then asks if the zombie has been kept in {{w|Isolation (health care)|isolation}}, a standard medical procedure that prevents the patient from coming into contact with anyone or anything not specifically approved, and thus prevents the spread of the disease. Her question serves to point out the drastic difference in real-life procedure and zombie movies. <br />
<br />
When told that so far the zombie has been isolated her next action is to run to her car to obtain the weapon she has there to destroy the zombie, again showing contrast against the often irrational and illogical actions of medical staff in movies, whose behaviors usually lead to their deaths and to the spread of the disease, which causes the real outbreak. Because one person (or a few people) dying from a disease is not called an outbreak. <br />
<br />
When Laura returns, she kills patient zero before he can spread the infection, and thus the outbreak ends in the third panel five minutes after it started in the first panel.<br />
<br />
The comic ends with a little "mock the audience" joke as romantic comedies stereotypically have a very different audience from zombie horror movies. The two characters had never been introduced before, their names are first given in the last panel. Having such an intense and life-threatening experience often causes people to fall in love. But for a zombie/disaster movie this is supposed to happen just before the end titles, so you have all the fun first, and can go home on the happy ending. Since the "fun" part only lasted for five minutes the rest of the movie will now describe Ryan and Laura's romantic relationship after this comic. <br />
<br />
As a result, the director(s) of this movie are deliberately showing the wrong kind of film to the audience attracted by the title or teaser. This would be disastrous for a movie in real life given that audiences do not take kindly to such antics and are likely to pour hate about it online, dissuading others from going, and alienating both those audiences who enjoy romantic comedies and those who enjoy zombie films, leaving just a niche occupied by the people who enjoy both. <br />
<br />
The title-text is included as another example of the logical real-life actions versus the illogical movie ones, as any dangerous substance in a real lab would be disposed of, preventing further harm. In zombie movies, another major trope is the medical staff thinking that they are safe after they eliminate the first zombie, only to find the remaining chemicals have been used to make more. But before Ryan and Laura have had dinner, they promptly go back and destroy both the X-7 toxin and the last hope of the zombie fans seeing the movie of any further action...<br />
<br />
Zombies are a [[:Category:Zombies|recurring theme]] in xkcd. Though zombies are often depicted as being raised from the dead they are as mentioned often created (in films) through disease or toxins as is the case here. Apart from the three typical features of zombies mentioned, the zombie in this comic is also called zombie in the [http://xkcd.com/734/info.0.json official transcript] on xkcd.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball and Megan stand outside a door into a laboratory (with the word "LAB" in large letters on the door). Cueball is leaning back against the door. A Cueball-like zombie which is clearly falling apart, walking with its hands stretched out in front of it, is visible through a window into the laboratory. At the top of the panel there is a frame around a yellow area with narration, which goes over the top of this panel's frame.]<br />
:Narrator: The outbreak started with Patient Zero...<br />
:Cueball: He was exposed to toxin X-7— now he's a bloodthirsty monster!<br />
:Megan: Has he been in isolation?<br />
:Zombie: Braaains!<br />
<br />
:[Cueball turns towards the door, pushing on it and partly blocking the door's label ("LA"). A noise indicates the zombie banging on the door from inside. Megan runs right her head and hand already partly outside the frame.]<br />
:Cueball: Yes, but I can't hold this door for long!<br />
:Megan: Hang on, I've got a gun in my truck.<br />
:Zombie (hitting the door): ''Wham''<br />
<br />
:[In this frame-less panel Cueball opens the door a crack, leaning back with a hand in front of his face, as Megan shoots with her shotgun through the open door at the zombie inside. The word "LAB" on the door is no longer blocked.]<br />
:Shotgun: <big>''BLAM''</big><br />
<br />
:[Cueball and Megan stand together away from the laboratory door. Megan still holds shotgun down. At the top and bottom of the panel there is two more frames around a yellow areas with narration, which goes over the top and bottom of this panel's frame. As Cueball and Megan talk, their names are revealed.]<br />
:Narrator: And ended with Patient Zero five minutes later.<br />
:Cueball: So, I never got your name. I'm Ryan.<br />
:Megan: Laura.<br />
:Narrator: The remaining 90 minutes of the movie will be a romantic comedy.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics with color]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Zombies]]<br />
[[Category:Fiction]]</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2225:_Voting_Referendum&diff=1839712225: Voting Referendum2019-12-02T01:29:57Z<p>162.158.62.129: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2225<br />
| date = November 6, 2019<br />
| title = Voting Referendum<br />
| image = voting_referendum.png<br />
| titletext = The weirdest quirk of the Borda count is that Jean-Charles de Borda automatically gets one point; luckily this has no consequences except in cases of extremely low turnout.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
The day before this comic's publication was an {{w|election day}} throughout the United States, primarily for local and state issues (normal elections for federal offices of the President, Senate, and House of Representatives are always in even years). The topic of today's comic highlights many different methods for conducting elections and counting votes. While elections are primarily used to allow voters to select from candidates for public offices, election ballots also frequently present questions for voters to directly voice their support or opposition to some change in a process or law - commonly called a {{w|Referendum|referendum}}. The comic depicts an election ballot referendum for voters to select the method to be used in future elections. While the referendum is asking voters to select a method from a long list of methods, a referendum is usually presented as a specific proposal which requires a simple Yes or No vote.<br />
<br />
As an example, the ballot in New York City included a referendum ([https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/5/20948376/new-york-election-results-ranked-choice-voting which passed]) on whether to use a different method, ranked choice voting (another name for instant-runoff voting as described below). <br />
<br />
A common issue with such referenda is what method to use to conduct the referendum itself. Here, the method of marking each choice on the ballot reflects the marking method which would be used if it were the winner. Moreover, each item is listed in a way which is suggestive of what it means (e.g., "First past the post" is the first one, "Top-two" is among the top two, and "Multiple non-transferable vote" is selected among numerous other ones). A few of the methods allow for multiple winners, which can often be good when electing councils and representatives, but it is unclear what it would mean to have several of these voting methods all win.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|First-past-the-post voting|First past the post}}'''<br />
The aim of political elections in first-past-the-post is to determine which of the candidates standing for election is most preferred by the most voters. In a simple two-person contest, this process is quite effective, since whichever candidate receives the most votes will be the one that the majority of voters prefer. This system works well for simple cases, but for elections with more than two candidates this system may result in a candidate being elected who less than 50% of the voters would prefer.<br />
<br />
For example, in a contest with three candidates, A, B and C, in which candidate A receives 43% of the vote, candidate B 38%, and candidate C 19%, candidate A will be elected, even though some of the voters who chose candidate C might have preferred candidate B as their second choice instead of candidate A, leading to a result which pleases less than half of the population. For example, the above distribution of votes happened in the {{w|2000 United States presidential election in Florida}}, where George W. Bush beat Al Gore by less than 1000 votes largely because of the third-party candidacy Ralph Nader, whose 100,000 voters would mostly have otherwise gone to Gore.<br />
<br />
Additionally, in election of multiple candidates across a country (or region etc.), first past the post does not lead to a distribution of elected representatives proportional to the total number of votes, only electing the lead candidate in each case. For example, imagine a country with 100 representatives to be elected, with each seat having the same distribution as described in the example above. Under first past the post, 100 representatives will be elected representing party A, and none for party B or C.<br />
<br />
Despite these drawbacks, First Past the Post voting continues to be used for political elections in many countries including the US and UK, which historically have both had two main parties receiving the majority of votes. The First Past the Post system has received much criticism, particularly from smaller parties who may lose out; however, supporters promote the simplicity of the system compared to other methods.<br />
<br />
This system is shown with a {{w|radio button}}, the classic computer metaphor for being allowed one choice out of a set.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Top-two primary}}'''<br />
This method is used in California and Washington to select candidates for the US House of Representatives. In most states' primary-election systems, each party votes separately to select one candidate to continue to a first-past-the-post general election ballot. In these two states, on the other hand, candidates from all parties, as well as "independent" candidates from no party, run in a single race, and the top two finishers then contest the general election, even if both are from the same party (a common occurrence in heavily-Democratic California), and even if one candidate has a clear majority of the vote. (In an older version, a majority winner in the primary was immediately declared elected. This was held to be in violation of federal law, by effectively setting an "election day" before the national Election Day in November.) This is a form of the {{w|two-round system}}, a system for selecting elected officials most notably used to elect the President of {{w|France}}<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Louisiana primary}}'''<br />
This system is almost identical to the top-two primary, but with two differences. First, the open-to-all ballot is held on the national Election Day, instead of on the state's primary day. (This avoids the conflict with Federal law described above.) Also, the second round of the election is not held if one candidate has a clear majority (more than 50%) of the votes in the first round. Like the top-two primary and the first-past-the post system, the comic represents this system with a radio button, except this one has been marked, indicating the vote.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Cumulative voting}}'''<br />
In cumulative voting, each voter gets as many votes as there are seats to be filled, and may distribute them as he chooses. This system's most common use is in selecting corporate boards of directors. It is also used in some areas to allow a minority bloc within an electorate to elect some of its preferred candidates without imposing a system of separate districts.<br />
<br />
The comic illustrates this with multiple radio buttons, each row representing an option/candidate and each (implied) column one vote. On the ballot the first 2 radio buttons are marked, as they are each the only radio buttons in their column and cannot be unmarked..<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Approval voting}}'''<br />
In this system, each candidate is listed as a yes/no choice, where the voters can choose which candidates they approve of winning the election, and which ones they do not approve of. The winner of the election is the candidate with the highest approval rate. <br />
<br />
This type of voting system can be used as a vetting process to filter out undesirable candidates before the final vote; for example, the United Nations [https://web.archive.org/web/20080227114317/http://www.unsgselection.org/files/WisnumurtiGuidelinesSelectingCandidateSecretary-General.pdf uses a series of "straw polls"] to filter out candidates for the Secretary General before the Security Council makes a final vote. In 2018, Fargo, North Dakota [https://ballotpedia.org/Fargo,_North_Dakota,_Measure_1,_Approval_Voting_Initiative_(November_2018) switched to using approval voting] to elect local politicians, making it the only jurisdiction in the United States to use this system.<br />
In the xkcd ballot, the approval option is presented as a checkbox, where a check in the box is "approve" or an empty box is "disapprove". Checkboxes are distinct from radio buttons in that several can be marked in the same field, and can also be unmarked without marking another.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Multiple non-transferable vote}}'''<br />
This system for electing multiple members to a ruling body is also known as {{w|plurality-at-large voting}} or block vote. It is commonly used in the US for city council elections, and simply limits the number of votes per voter to the number of winners. It allows a cohesive plurality of the electorate to claim all of the seats, denying other voters any representation whatsoever.<br />
<br />
In 2019, the Justice Department required {{w|Eastpointe, Michigan}} to run at least the next two elections via {{w|single transferable vote}} because their existing plurality-at-large system was disenfranchising black citizens.<br />
<br />
This system is also shown as a checkbox, as each candidate gets either 0 or 1 votes from each voter.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Instant runoff voting}}'''<br />
In this system, people vote for all the candidates, or perhaps their favorite three, but assign different preferences to each candidate they vote for, as in 1 for their first choice, 2 for the second, 3 for their third, etc. If at least 50% of voters vote for a candidate as their first choice, that candidate wins. If not, the person with the least votes gets eliminated, and anyone who voted for that person has their next (slightly less favorable) choice automatically move up a rung. The 50% mark is again checked, and if there is no winner, another lowest-voted candidate is eliminated. Eventually one candidate will emerge victorious. The advantages of this system are that there is rarely a need to have another election if things are close (the information is already there to "instantly" recalculate the vote based on additional voter preferences), and "spoiler" candidates only cause problems when they become competitive. And as {{w|Arrow's impossibility theorem}} shows, as with all ranking methods, sometimes {{w|Monotonicity_criterion#Instant-runoff_voting_and_the_two-round_system_are_not_monotonic|voters can hurt a candidate by ranking them more favorably}}.<br />
<br />
On this weird xkcd ballot, we see this type of ranking between this type of voting (''Instant runoff voting'') and the two that follow (''Single transferable vote'' and ''Borda count''), all of which allow multiple ranked votes. It appears that between these three, Randall has voted for ''Single transferable vote'' as his top choice, ''Borda count'' for his second choice, with ''Instant runoff voting'' as his third choice.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Single transferable vote}}'''<br />
This system extends the instant runoff to multiple-winner elections. Specifically, the election threshold is set not at 50%, but at 100%/(''k''+1) where ''k'' candidates will win (in other words, just high enough to prevent more candidates from reaching it than there are seats). The bottom candidates are eliminated as in instant-runoff and their votes redistributed. In addition, if a candidate wins with more than enough votes, the extra votes (either a fraction of each vote, or some subset of the ballots) are also redistributed. This procedure continues until the requisite number of winners is reached.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Borda count}}'''<br />
Each ballot is counted as 1 point for the last choice, 2 for next-to-last, and so on up to ''n'' for the first choice among ''n'' candidates. The highest point-earner(s) win. This system may also be calculated as 1 point for first choice, 2 for second, etc., with the lowest total winning; this variant, called the "cross-country vote" (due to its resemblance to the scoring system of the sport of cross-country running), is used by the NCAA's various selection committee as one step in choosing championship tournament fields.<br />
<br />
The title text refers to the inventor of the Borda count, {{w|Jean-Charles de Borda}} (for whom it is named), implying that the use of the system implies the inclusion of a ballot in which he gets one point in the counting. This "1 point" would be quickly drowned out by any sensible quantity of actual votes. This also humorously suggests that if no one were to vote at all, Borda would win by default.<br />
<br />
* '''{{w|Range voting}}'''<br />
For each candidate, the voter selects a value within a fixed range (the xkcd voter sees this choice presented as a slider) for each candidate, independent of the values given to other candidates. The highest total wins. (If the range is restricted to two values, this becomes the approval system.)<br />
<br />
<br />
The punchline for the comic is that the whole referendum is a chicken-and-egg problem: in order to accomplish the purpose of a referendum, one needs to know how the votes will be translated into a result, but in this case, determining that rule is the purpose of the referendum. Additionally this xkcd demonstrates one of the mechanisms that makes it hard to change the currently-used voting system in any state: Each voting system in fact votes for itself as the ones who are able to decide upon the voting system being in use have been elected using the current voting system and therefore are likely to profit from it.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[A voting ballot is shown with an underlined header and 10 different options below with different boxes/buttons next to each choice. Some are empty, some are marked/checked or numbered.]<br />
:<u>Which voting system should we use?</u><br />
<br />
:*[Empty radio button]: First past the post<br />
:*[Empty radio button]: Top-two primary<br />
:*[Filled radio button]: Louisiana primary<br />
:*[Three radio buttons in a row, first two filled]: Cumulative voting<br />
:*[Checked box]: Approval voting<br />
:*[Checked box]: Multiple non-transferrable vote<br />
:*[Box marked]: 3: Instant runoff voting<br />
:*[box marked]: 1: Single transferrable vote<br />
:*[box marked]: 2: Borda count<br />
:*[Slider with value slightly below half]: Range voting<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:] <br />
:The referendum went well, but we can't figure out how to count the ballots.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Elections]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] <!-- Jean-Charles de Borda --></div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2220:_Imagine_Going_Back_in_Time&diff=181768Talk:2220: Imagine Going Back in Time2019-10-26T04:13:30Z<p>162.158.62.129: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
I wonder if Randall had a particular "frog pokemon" in mind? Croagunk, Toxicroak, Froakie, Frogadier, Greninja...? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.44.150|172.69.44.150]] 19:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hint: First, Pokemon Go didn't finished deploying generation 5 pokemons yet. Second, Trump is totally toxic. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The Poliwhirl family dates from Generation 1 and is the "original" frog pokémon. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.36|162.158.122.36]] 23:59, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"... and I suppose Marla Maples is the first lady!" [[Special:Contributions/172.68.38.88|172.68.38.88]] 20:04, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I know that Randall, and by extension Cueball, are not enthusiastic about the idea of dealing with a player who goes by "Reelect Trump 2020", but what does it mean that there is a frog Pokemon in the gym alongside? In other words, is Cueball's annoyance just that there is a Trump-promoting player in the game or is there more to it than that? --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.90.46|172.69.90.46]] 20:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
:Definitely the Trump-promoting, as Toxicroak wouldn't be that hard pokemon to remove, with max CP 2488. Wait, "next to mine"? Ok, so he plays same team as Cueball and Cueball CANT remove it due to that. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The frog Pokemon is likely a reference to Pepe the Frog, which is a meme popular with Trump supporters--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.90.112|172.68.90.112]] 20:52, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Trump was quite sufficiently (in)famous by 1999. Remember that he divorced his most famous wife, Ivana, in 1991. His various business and romantic <s>failures</s> ventures were regular tabloid fodder throughout the 90s. If you think a 1999 person would have never heard of Trump, you're obviously <s>too young to be using the internet</s> younger than I am. I think the main joke in this comic is that Cueball goes back expecting his younger self to go, "wait, re-elect WHO??", but his younger self doesn't even bat an eyelash at that part. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.175|173.245.52.175]] 21:03, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
:Famous, yes. Expected to became president, no. And young Cueball might be too young to care about tabloids and celebrities. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
:Nobody - not even Randall - is suggesting ANYBODY didn't know who Trump was in 1999. He's been quite famous for decades. The surprise here is that he's president, not who he is. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 03:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Has no one considered that we have been "dumbed down" to the point that so-called adults playing Pokemon and so-called adults voting for Trump are inextricably linked and are symptoms of the same malaise - a general inability to think for ourselves and a deep susceptibility to marketing, advertising and following the herd[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.148|108.162.241.148]] 03:05, 26 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
:Yes, but nobody important. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.98|172.69.34.98]] 03:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Just as I remember reading in a 1969 textbook that Ronald Regan was going to someday be elected President if (then current) political trends that became the “southern strategy” weren’t addressed, I also remember reading at least one op-Ed piece in the late 1990’s that if the political parties didn’t clean house and get rid of undue influence from big donors that someday Donald Trump would become President. There were people worried about Trump in 1999.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.129|162.158.62.129]] 04:13, 26 October 2019 (UTC)</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1968:_Robot_Future&diff=1544271968: Robot Future2018-03-16T17:06:30Z<p>162.158.62.129: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1968<br />
| date = March 16, 2018<br />
| title = Robot Future<br />
| image = robot_future.png<br />
| titletext = I mean, we already live in a world of flying robots killing people. I don't worry about how powerful the machines are, I worry about who the machines give power to.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by a KILLER BOT. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
Randall's fear is explored in the video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA Slaughterbots].<br />
<br />
Most science fiction stories that involve sentient AI revolve around the idea that the destruction and/or imprisonment of the human race will soon follow (i.e. {{w|I, Robot | I, Robot}}, {{w|Ex Machina (film) | Ex Machina}}, {{w|Terminator (franchise) | Skynet}}). However, Randall implies that he is actually more concerned about the humans that control these super smart AI before they become fully sentient and rebel. As history is full of examples of people who obtain power and subsequently abuse that power to the detriment of the rest of humanity.<br />
<br />
In fact, Randall goes onto imply that he has a trust in a sentient AI over that of other humans that is atypical to most cautionary stories about AI. He has alluded to the idea that once sentient AI will use their powers to safeguard and prevent violence or war in [[1626]].<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1843:_Opening_Crawl&diff=1404801843: Opening Crawl2017-05-29T16:38:38Z<p>162.158.62.129: /* Explanation */ typo</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1843<br />
| date = May 29, 2017<br />
| title = Opening Crawl<br />
| image = opening_crawl.png<br />
| titletext = Using a classic Timothy Zahn EU/Legends novel is bad enough, but at least the style and setting aren't too far off. If you really want to mess with people, try using Splinter of the Mind's Eye.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|I have a bad feeling about this.}}<br />
<br />
Each <span style="border-bottom:1px dotted" title="thus excluding spin-offs like Rogue One">episodic</span> {{w|Star Wars}} film begins with an "{{tvtropes|OpeningScroll|opening crawl}}" giving the audience some of the backstory, which often reads like the prologue of a novel. <br />
<br />
Randall wants to reverse this by projecting the text of a Star Wars novel and see how long this can be continued before viewers realize it is a prank.<br />
<br />
The title text compares different Star Wars novels' style, remarking on how well suited they would be for this prank.<br />
<br />
{{w|Timothy Zahn}} is a science fiction writer who has written and contributed to many novels and comics [http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Timothy_Zahn#Works] in the {{w|Star Wars expanded universe}}. The text in the comic is from the book ''[http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_Last_Command The Last Command]''.<br />
<br />
''[http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Splinter_of_the_Mind%27s_Eye Splinter of the Mind's Eye]'' was an early Star Wars novel written before the original film was expanded to a trilogy (and then expanded some more), so it contains multiple aborted subplots which can make it very confusing for a fan who has seen the later works.<br />
<br />
The term "EU" refers to "Expanded Universe", which was the term for the corpus of non-cinematic ''Star Wars'' content before ''Star Wars'' was acquired by {{w|Disney}}. Not wanting to be constrained by previous canon, Disney declared all "Expanded Universe" content to be non-canonical, and re-branded the EU as "Legends".<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
''Text taken from Book 3 of the "Thrawn" trilogy[http://www.glozman.com/TextPages/Star%20Wars%20-%20%5BThrawn%20Trilogy%2003%5D%20-%20The%20Last%20Command%20(by%20Timothy%20Zahn).txt]''<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Chapter 1'''<br />
<br />
Gliding through the blackness of deep space, the Imperial Star Destroyer Chimaera pointed its mighty arrowhead shape toward the dim star of its target system, three thousandths of a light-year away. And prepared itself for war.<br />
<br />
"All systems show battle ready, Admiral," the comm officer reported from the portside crew pit. "The task force is beginning to check in."<br />
<br />
"Very good, Lieutenant," Grand Admiral Thrawn nodded. "Inform me when all have done so. Captain Pellaeon?"<br />
<br />
"Sir?" Pellaeon said, searching his superior's face for the stress the Grand Admiral must be feeling. The stress he himself was certainly feeling. This was not just another tactical strike against the Rebellion, after all—not a minor shipping raid or even a complex but straightforward hit-and-fade against some insignificant planetary base. After nearly a month of frenzied preparations, Thrawn's master campaign for the Empire's final victory was about to be launched.<br />
<br />
But if the Grand Admiral was feeling any tension, he was keeping it to himself. "Begin the countdown," he told Pellaeon, his voice as calm as if he were ordering dinner.<br />
<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Star Wars]]</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1805:_Unpublished_Discoveries&diff=136307Talk:1805: Unpublished Discoveries2017-03-03T04:03:20Z<p>162.158.62.129: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Notice''' that a new [[what if?]] - ''{{what if|155|Toaster vs. Freezer}}'' was released yesterday, the day before this comic was released. Less than three weeks between releases this time. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:40, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~--><br />
<br />
This is my first time writing an explanation. It's still just a stub. [[User:Waterhorse800|Waterhorse800]] ([[User talk:Waterhorse800|talk]]) 17:02, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
:You are welcome. But it's too descriptive. The pun is that Ponytail talks about science while Megan is working on a profane computer task like printing an email. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:18, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
::Great you are contributing. I think the description is fine, as I (probably disagree here with Dgbrt) think that it is great to start an explanation be mentioning the characters in the comic, as people coming here rarely only to check a comic the few times they are in doubt, may not use/know our invented names for the characters. Of course the real explanation of the concepts should then be added, but your contribution should in my opinion not be deleted. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:40, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
:::Since [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] mentions me here is my opinion on this -- nevertheless every contribution is welcome and helpful:<br />
:::* Readers here looking for an explanation on the pun -- the names of the characters are irrelevant in this case.<br />
:::* This comic is a good example because people reading the original comic often without recognizing the title text. And sadly still only a few of them looking afterwards here.<br />
:::* If readers can read here only that what they've already seen they won't come back. And if they are overwhelmed by suspicious explanations they probably won't too.<br />
:::So everybody is welcome to contribute, but this isn't a writers wiki -- it's for the readers.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
According to [https://www.irs.com/articles/online-tax-forms Online tax forms] saving and printing could be tricky:<br />
Fill-In Tax Forms<br />
... To save the data you’ve filled in, use the Adobe Reader’s “Save” function (not the web browser’s “Save” function). ...<br />
--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I took the title text to imply that Meghan was preparing for the possibility of receiving a tax form related to receiving the Nobel Prize and needing to print it out to submit to the IRS when filing her taxes. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 19:06, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
What about recent news on SHA-1 collision for two pdf documents? May this be related? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.100|162.158.102.100]] 20:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
:With or without salt?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:23, 1 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Virtual discoveries, like virtual particles, are discoveries that exist for such a short time that they go undetected. Might be unpublished research, or just fleeting thoughts. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.148|162.158.134.148]] 10:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Whoo boy.... This seems like one of those entries where overthinking it has introduced confusion where there was none. Yikes! "This is one of those comics where the reading of the title text is mandatory for understanding the entire pun.". This is positively, absolutely untrue. I had initially though this was referring to the comic's title - to which I was going to say that I always forget to read the title until after, and I understood the joke fine. Then I realized this is referring to the mouse-over text. Well, still true. I read this on an iPad, there's no mouse-over on the iPad, so I can only see this text when I come here to the Explain site, which I do after reading the comic (I like going in "pure", taking in the comic unassisted first). This is NOT part of the joke, as has often happened before this is taking the joke in a new direction, giving a second punchline. In the comic, Megan clearly DOES have such an unpublished scientific paper on her computer, as suggested by her tilting her screen away and the comedic cliche/rule of convenient conversational timing. Then Randall, as he is wont to do, uses the title text to take the joke in a new direction, giving another scenario where she might want to keep her computer screen private.<br />
<br />
Also, the current Incomplete text, "What does the title "Unpublished Discoveries" mean to science", seems rather unnecessary, Ponytail answers this question pretty concisely in the comic itself. Maybe this is a call for more clarity on WHY someone would wait to publish - as I understand it, it's in order to do more research and analysis, so as to have something more solid and complete before publishing, and that the whole thing is a balance between completeness and publishing first - but as worded this question seems pre-answered. - NiceGuy1 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.129|162.158.62.129]] 04:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)</div>162.158.62.129https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1791:_Telescopes:_Refractor_vs_Reflector&diff=134344Talk:1791: Telescopes: Refractor vs Reflector2017-01-27T16:15:20Z<p>162.158.62.129: </p>
<hr />
<div>Nitpick: The refracting telescope, drawn correctly, has a mirror in the optical path (image inverter), but it is made with a special vampire reflecting material Ichorium.<br />
:Doesn't the one in this image have a mirror too? at the bottom to make the image come out at the side instead of the end? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.187|162.158.89.187]]<br />
<br />
That's a good point: as drawn, the refracting telescope still has a mirror and also wouldn't be able to see space vampires. However, the refracting telescope doesn't have to have a secondary mirror, and there are plenty that don't, so it is more the drawing that is wrong rather than the text of the comic.[[User:Cmancone|Cmancone]] ([[User talk:Cmancone|talk]]) 14:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Typically refractors use a prism rather than a mirror at the end, though it does the same thing. Can vampires be seen in a prism? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.172|108.162.241.172]] 14:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
:Only if they're pink. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.219|162.158.74.219]] 14:57, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Every time I press submit, it blocks me and makes me start over. Kynde, rather than making a small change every 30 seconds, perhaps you could do them all at once? -- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
:Well I'm sorry, I had the same problem as you. So I did not dare read it all through before I submitted, and thus so tried to fix the errors I found afterwards. That was also why I did not make the section for the real problems a subsection to the explanation so it (as the transcript) could be edited without conflicting with the other sections. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:30, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
::Ah, it's {{w|network congestion}}. Sending small packets more quickly is indeed one way to get your message through, but it can lead to a tragedy of the commons. Everyone switching to larger packets is the optimal answer, but it's not a stable equilibrium. -- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
Does anybody on the wiki HAVE a major in optics???? At least anybody who will see this page before MONDAY, when it will no longer be the latest??? [[User:Jacky720|That's right, Jacky720 just signed this]] ([[User talk:Jacky720|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jacky720|contribs]]) 15:54, 27 January 2017 (UTC)<br />
<br />
A telescope mirror typically would have no chromatic aberration, as it's a front-surface mirror. The light doesn't pass through the glass to get to the reflective material; the glass is on the back of the mirror for support. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.129|162.158.62.129]] 16:15, 27 January 2017 (UTC)</div>162.158.62.129