https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=172.69.54.165&feedformat=atomexplain xkcd - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T08:11:37ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1907:_Immune_System&diff=1841451907: Immune System2019-12-04T10:11:45Z<p>172.69.54.165: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 1907<br />
| date = October 25, 2017<br />
| title = Immune System<br />
| image = immune_system.png<br />
| titletext = It also helps with negotiation. "Look, if it were up to me, *I'd* accept your offer, but my swarm of autonomous killer cells literally can't be reasoned with. It's out of my hands!"<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
In this comic, Ponytail is delivering an informative report to a group of listeners, likely important managers of some large company. She begins her lecture by stating she is the host of a microscopic autonomous swarm that will do anything to protect her. She is referring to the immune system, which could technically be defined as a "microscopic autonomous swarm" that will do anything to protect her -- i.e destroy pathogens such as viruses and bacteria, both of which cause multitudinous diseases in humans. Like many of the systems of the body, the immune system cannot be controlled by conscious thought, and should not be taken as unordinary. <br />
<br />
The caption below reveals the method behind her madness. Randall claims that beginning any business presentation with a surreal description of one's own immune system is guaranteed to strengthen your case. Whether or not this is actually the case is irrelevant, the point of the comic is about "how cool the immune system is", and explains its coolness through an unconventional description of how the process works. Additionally, Ponytail's description implies more potential power over external entities than an immune system typically has, perhaps to to gain more respect/fear from the speaker's audience.<br />
<br />
The title text elaborates further on this, stating that similar arguments can be used in negotiation. The description of the immune system is deliberately misleading, implying that the immune system may attack the other negotiator if the terms of the deal aren't satisfactory. While it is correct that your immune cells cannot be reasoned with{{Citation needed}} and theoretically it could cause an anaphylactic shock in the targeted organism, the veiled threat omits the fact that the immune system 1) is unaffected by external negotiations conducted by its host, 2) is incapable of attacking things outside of the body, and 3) would have to overcome the target's own immune system.<br />
: It is to note that stress can affect imune system in a negative way to the point of allowing maladies like gastritis happen. Therefore, the line in title text can be interpreteted as understanding the stress of accepting the deal beforehand.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Ponytail is standing in front of a boardroom meeting, pointing to a presentation on a screen. Cueball, Megan and Hairbun are in the audience, sitting at a long table; an extra, unoccupied chair is in the front.]<br />
:Ponytail: My body hosts an autonomous microscopic defensive swarm that will do anything to protect me.<br />
:Ponytail: I have no ability to restrain it and I don't know my own power.<br />
:Ponytail: So listen up.<br />
:Ponytail: Sales grew by 4% this quarter...<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:Business protip: You can strengthen any presentation by opening with a reminder about how cool immune systems are.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]<br />
[[Category:Protip]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2182:_When_I%27m_Back_at_a_Keyboard&diff=1772592182: When I'm Back at a Keyboard2019-07-30T16:24:40Z<p>172.69.54.165: Nedry mentioned</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2182<br />
| date = July 29, 2019<br />
| title = When I'm Back at a Keyboard<br />
| image = when_im_back_at_a_keyboard.png<br />
| titletext = [after typing 1,500 words on feathered dinosaurs, paleontology, sexism, lava, and dinosaurs as animals rather than movie monsters] Sorry to cut it short, I'm on my phone. When I'm back at a keyboard, I can give you another 5,000 words.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Created by someone who is away from their keyboard. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
[[Cueball]] is texting someone on his phone. However, since with a {{w|Computer keyboard|full sized physical keyboard}} you can type with all of your fingers, which is generally a much faster and more accurate way than using an on-screen keyboard on a smartphone, Cueball cuts off the conversation and says he will get back to whoever he was talking to when he can type on an actual keyboard, presumably at home and on his computer. While there are multiple techniques for making a smartphone increasingly easier to enter words into using it's on-screen {{w|virtual keyboard}}, such as keyboard swiping, on-the-fly spelling and grammar checkers, and voice recognition to minimize using the keyboard at all, the combination of a full-sized keyboard along with a generous sized screen is hard to beat for speed and accuracy when typing larger blocks of text.<br />
<br />
The joke is that despite claiming to be more proficient with a physical keyboard, rather than a digital one, [[Randall]] still [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BerserkButton goes into long rants] through text messages, whenever anybody brings up {{w|Jurassic Park}}.<br />
<br />
There might also be a reference on Dennis Nedry, a character from the first movie of the Jurassic Park. The programmer is responsible for a security sabotage and intends to be away from his keyboard only for a short while, but dies unexpectedly, worsening the situation in the park.<br />
<br />
The title text shows a typical sentence from Randall after having been in a chat over his phone. Before the sentence he has written 1500 words on his phone, all related to Jurassic Park, more or less. When he finally have written his fingers off he then says that he will have to stop now but once back at a keyboard, and even though he just typed 1500 words on his phone, he is ready to types even more (5000 words) using his keyboard.<br />
<br />
The widespread uptake of mobile devices has stark implications for {{w|user-generated content}} sites on the internet. According to [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/10/technology/wikipedia-vs-the-small-screen.html a 2014 ''New York Times'' article,] only one percent of the changes to Wikipedia articles were made via mobile devices, although they displayed about a third of all Wikipedia page views that year.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball is walking while holding his phone i both hand. A line from the screen on the phone goes to the text above him, indicating what he writes:]<br />
:Cueball (texting): Sure, I can reply once I'm back at a keyboard and can type more easily.<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the panel:]<br />
:I say this a lot for someone who routinely types thousands of words in text message conversations when someone brings up ''Jurassic Park''.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Jurassic Park]]<br />
[[Category:Smartphones]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1045:_Constraints&diff=165776Talk:1045: Constraints2018-11-10T14:25:32Z<p>172.69.54.165: quick note about a neat thing i noticed.</p>
<hr />
<div>Sometimes, seventeen<br />
<br />
Syllables are not enough<br />
<br />
To just express a '''[[User:Davidy22|<span title="I want you."><u><font color="purple" size="2px">David</font><font color="green" size="3px">y</font></u><sup><font color="indigo" size="1px">22</font></sup></span>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
But sometimes they are!<br />
<br />
I rewrote your third line as<br />
<br />
"To express a thought." --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.45|108.162.216.45]] 21:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: The first post works exactly the same way with "sixteen" :P --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.165|172.69.54.165]] 14:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
"Whoa." is also an example, but one word examples are particularly easy! --DrMath 06:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
I can't see the image... what's wrong with it ? --[[User:Koundelitchnico|KoundelitchNico]] ([[User talk:Koundelitchnico|talk]]) 14:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I just don't find the alphabetization thing to be all that impressive. Everything is written like that. Am I missing something about the very concept? (C comes before O, then jump back to the start, N, back to the start, C, E, P and T.)<br />
(I just don't find: I J U back to start S T back to start D O back to start N T back to start F I N back to start D)<br />
(Epigrams employing: G N back to start I Y back to start O back to start L P back to start M back to start E back to start S back to start M back to start A R back to start G I P back to start E) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.5|108.162.242.5]] 02:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
: Words wholly taken (not letters individually) do come backward alphabetized. --[[Special:Contributions/173.245.62.74|173.245.62.74]] 12:56, 28 October 2014 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Twitter allows up to 280 characters now. The explanation needs some updating. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.253.5|172.68.253.5]] 10:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)<br />
:Done. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 07:41, 5 May 2018 (UTC)</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2067:_Challengers&diff=165110Talk:2067: Challengers2018-11-02T08:17:52Z<p>172.69.54.165: more comic</p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
''Calling it now'': lots of complaining about campaigning, by folks who prefer jokes. [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 06:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There are hidden comics. I've found three so far: <br />
Attack ad comic in north half of Texas. <br />
Ballot measure comic in north half of California. <br />
Gerrymandering comic in north half of Washington.<br />
IronyIsGood 06:16, 2 November 2018 (AEST) {{unsigned ip|108.162.249.184}}<br />
<br />
: Steve King comic in north-western Iowa<br />
: St Louis comic on the border of Missouri and Illinois {{unsigned ip|162.158.90.144}}<br />
: "Abigail Spanberger for Congress", just below Richmond, Virginia [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.165|172.69.54.165]] 08:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2062:_Barnard%27s_Star&diff=1646072062: Barnard's Star2018-10-23T14:01:56Z<p>172.69.54.165: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2062<br />
| date = October 22, 2018<br />
| title = Barnard's Star<br />
| image = barnards_star.png<br />
| titletext = "Ok, team. We have a little under 10,000 years before closest approach to figure out how to destroy Barnard's Star." "Why, does it pose a threat to the Solar System?" "No. It's just an asshole."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Too much detail from Wikipedia about Barnard's star, hardly any explanation of the comic itself. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
<br />
[[File:Near-stars-past-future-en.svg|thumb|300px|Distances to the nearest stars from 20,000 years ago until 80,000 years in the future]]<br />
{{w|Barnard's Star}} is a very-low-mass red dwarf about 6 light-years away from Earth in the constellation of {{w|Ophiuchus}}. It is the fourth-nearest known individual star to the {{w|Sun}} (after the three components of the Alpha Centauri system) and the closest star in the Northern Celestial Hemisphere. It is a {{w|Red dwarf}} with a mass of 0.144 Solar masses and it is 7–12 billion years old. Because of this low mass the gravitational pressure in the core is much lower and thus the fusion rate is far smaller than in the core of the Sun. In fact this star is so dim, even though it's one of the nearest, it can't be seen by the naked eye. The low fusion rate also means that the lifespan of small stars is much longer. While the Sun might last about 10 billion years and huge stars only a few hundred million years, a small Red dwarf has a lifespan of about a trillion years.<br />
<br />
Barnard's Star is the star with the greatest proper motion in the sky. Proper motion is motion in the sky other than that caused by earth's rotation. Barnard's star is both very close to the sun (as these things go) and moving at a speed of more than 140 km/s toward the Sun. It will make its closest approach to the Sun in approximately 10,000 years, at a distance within about 3.75 light-years.<br />
<br />
The image on the right shows different stars near the Sun over 100,000 years and it can be seen that none of them are getting closer than 3 light-years. This is a safe distance to our Solar System and the stars will not influence the orbits of the planets or smaller bodies. It's also obvious that much closer approaches never have happened since the Solar System formed 4.5 billion years ago because otherwise the nearly circular orbits of the planets in the same plane wouldn't be possible.<br />
<br />
The title text emphasises that this close approach will not be any hazard to the Solar System, but someone is envious of the long lifetime of Barnard's Star and annoyed by its unpleasant behavior.<br />
<br />
=Transcript=<br />
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}<br />
:[A black sky is shown with a yellow spot near the bottom, left of the center. Three smaller red spots at the diagonal from top left to bottom right indicate a moving star over time. Above these red spots lines are connected to a text that starts and ends with many ''A''s, first growing, and at the end getting smaller:]<br />
:...AAAAHHi Sun! I was here billions of years before you formed and will shine for trillions of years after you dieEEEEEAAA...<br />
<br />
:[Caption below the frame:]<br />
:Sometimes, I wonder what Barnard's Star is saying to the Sun as it performs its 20,000-year-long high-speed flyby.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Comics with color]]<br />
[[Category:Astronomy]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2059:_Modified_Bayes%27_Theorem&diff=1643832059: Modified Bayes' Theorem2018-10-18T07:46:10Z<p>172.69.54.165: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 2059<br />
| date = October 15, 2018<br />
| title = Modified Bayes' Theorem<br />
| image = modified_bayes_theorem.png<br />
| titletext = Don't forget to add another term for "probability that the Modified Bayes' Theorem is correct."<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
{{incomplete|Please check the language, mention any other reason here, or remove this tag.}}<br />
The {{w|Bayes' Theorem}} is an equation in statistics that gives the probability of a given hypothesis accounting not only for a single experiment or observation but also for your existing knowledge about the hypothesis, i.e. its prior probability. Randall's modified form of the equation also purports to account for the probability that you are indeed applying Bayes' Theorem itself correctly by including that as a term in the equation.<br />
<br />
Bayes' theorem is:<br />
:<math>P(H \mid X) = \frac{P(X \mid H) \, P(H)}{P(X)}</math><br />
:*''P(H | X)'' is the probability that ''H'', the hypothesis, is true given observation ''X''. This is called the ''posterior probability''.<br />
:*''P(X | H)'' is the probability that observation ''X'' will appear given the truth of hypothesis ''H''. This term is often called the ''likelihood''.<br />
:*''P(H)'' is the probability that hypothesis ''H'' is true before any observations. This is called the ''prior'', or ''belief''.<br />
:*''P(X)'' is the probability of the observation ''X'' regardless of any hypothesis might have produced it. This term is called the ''marginal likelihood''.<br />
<br />
The purpose of Bayesian inference is to discover something we want to know (how likely is it that our explanation is correct given the evidence we've seen) by mathematically expressing it in terms of things we can find out: how likely are our observations, how likely is our hypothesis ''a priori'', and how likely are we to see the observations we've seen assuming our hypothesis is true. A Bayesian learning system will iterate over available observations, each time using the likelihood of new observations to update its priors (beliefs) with the hope that, after seeing enough data points, the prior and posterior will converge to a single model.<br />
<br />
The probability always has a value between zero and one, the latter value represents a 100% probability. Both extremes would be:<br />
*If ''P(C)=1'' the modified theorem reverts to the original Bayes' theorem (which makes sense, as a probability one would mean certainty that you are using Bayes' theorem correctly).<br />
*If ''P(C)=0'' the modified theorem becomes ''P(H | X) = P(H)'', which says that the belief in your hypothesis is not affected by the result of the observation.<br />
<br />
It is a {{w|Linear interpolation|linear-interpolated}} weighted average of the belief from before the calculation and the belief after applying the theorem correctly. This goes smoothly from not believing the calculation at all up to be fully convinced to it.<br />
<br />
Bayesian statistics is often contrasted with "frequentist" statistics. For a frequentist, ''probability'' is defined as the limit of the relative frequency after a large number of trials. So to a frequentist the notion of "Probability that you are using Bayesian Statistics correctly" is meaningless: One cannot do repeated trials, even in principle. A Bayesian considers probability to be a quantification of personal belief, and so concepts such as "Probability that you are using Bayesian Statistics correctly" is meaningful. However since the value of such subjective prior probablities cannot be independently determined, the value of P(H|X) cannot be objectively found.<br />
<br />
The title text suggests that an additional term should be added for the probability that the Modified Bayes Theorem is correct. But that's ''this'' equation, so it would make the formula self-referential, unless we call the result the Modified Modified Bayes Theorem. It could also result in an infinite regress -- needing another term for the probability that the version with the probability added is correct, and another term for that version, and so on. If the modifications have a limit, then a Modified<sup>&omega;</sup> Bayes Theorem would be the result, but then another term for whether it's correct is needed, leading to the Modified<sup>&omega;+1</sup> Bayes Theorem, and so on through every {{w|ordinal number}}.<br />
<br />
Modified theories are often suggested in science when the measurements doesn't fit the original theory. An example is the {{w|Modified Newtonian dynamics}} theory, among many others, in which some physicists try to explain dark matter with not much success.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[The comic shows a formula with a header in gray on top:]<br />
:Modified Bayes' theorem:<br />
<br />
:[The formula:]<br />
:P(H|X) = P(H) × (1 + P(C) × ( P(X|H)/P(X) - 1 ))<br />
<br />
:[Variables and functions are described also in gray:]<br />
:H: Hypothesis<br />
:X: Observation<br />
:P(H): Prior probability that H is true<br />
:P(X): Prior probability of observing X<br />
:P(C): Probability that you're using Bayesian statistics correctly<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Statistics]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=12:_Poisson&diff=16423312: Poisson2018-10-15T17:22:35Z<p>172.69.54.165: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 12<br />
| date = December 22, 2005<!-- Per http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http:////www.xkcd.com//Poisson.jpg - at least that was the first crawl date --><!--DO NOT ADD 2006-01-01 - this was NOT the actual post date of the comic, but merely the default date in the xkcd database. These comics do not have a known post date--><br />
| title = Poisson<br />
| image = poisson.jpg<br />
| titletext = Poisson distributions have no value over negative numbers<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]] expresses himself as a {{w|Poisson distribution}}.<br />
<br />
A Poisson distribution is a distribution that shows the probability of a given number of events occurring in a fixed interval of time or space. The X axis typically represents the "number of events" while the Y axis is a decimal representing the probability (i.e. 0.5 for 50% probability) a given number of events will occur in that fixed interval of time or space. It is commonly represented by a bar graph or a scatter graph (sometimes with a line connection to show a trend, even though there is no actual value for non-integers).<br />
<br />
What's important to note for this comic is that this distribution only has data points on non-negative integers and is not continuous through decimal numbers or (as the image text tells us) negative numbers because events can't occur 0.3 of a time, or &minus;2 times.<br />
<br />
After implying that the concept of a person being a mathematical distribution is irrational, [[Black Hat]] suggests he is "less than zero". Since the Poisson distribution doesn't exist or has no value at negative values, Cueball either leaves or disappears magically.<br />
<br />
Hence, the punchline is the same as the title text: Cueball doesn't exist to Black Hat anymore, because he has a value less than zero. Another one of the early comics where Randall explains the joke in the title text.<br />
<br />
Also, because a Poisson Distribution is memoryless, the figure claiming to be the distribution may simply be repeating the fact as a reference to this.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[Cueball talking to Black Hat]<br />
:Cueball: I'm a poisson distribution!<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Still a Poisson distribution!<br />
:Black Hat: What the hell, man. Why do you keep saying that?<br />
<br />
:Cueball: Because I'm totally a poisson distribution.<br />
:Black Hat: I'm less than zero.<br />
<br />
:[Cueball is gone; Black Hat whistles a half note followed by 2 eighth notes.]<br />
<br />
==Trivia==<br />
*This comic was posted on [[xkcd]] when the [http://www.escologics.com web site] opened on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.<br />
**It was posted along [[:Category:First day on xkcd|with the 41 comics]] posted before that on [[LiveJournal]].<br />
**But this comic, as well as [[5: Blown apart]] also released that day, were never posted on LiveJournal. <br />
*The release date is given from [http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http:////www.xkcd.com//Poisson.jpg - wayback.archive]. At least the 22nd of December was the first crawl date. <br />
**This also explains that it was "released" on a Thursday. <br />
**On xkcd, it was released for the first time to the public on Sunday the 1st of January 2006.<br />
*One of the original drawings drawn on [[:Category:Checkered paper|checkered paper]].<br />
*[[Randall]] was still experimenting with character design, as Cueball has a face in the first two frames.<br />
*This is the first appearance of Black Hat on xkcd.<br />
**However Black Hat appeared in [[24: Godel, Escher, Kurt Halsey]], which was released almost 3 months before this one on LiveJournal.<br />
<br />
{{Comic discussion}} <br />
<br />
[[Category:First day on xkcd]]<br />
[[Category:Checkered paper]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]<br />
[[Category:Statistics]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2042:_Rolle%27s_Theorem&diff=162338Talk:2042: Rolle's Theorem2018-09-05T15:51:02Z<p>172.69.54.165: </p>
<hr />
<div><!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--><br />
<br />
Now we wait for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munroes_theorem. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.165|172.69.54.165]] 15:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=175:_Automatic_Doors&diff=153878175: Automatic Doors2018-03-06T14:09:22Z<p>172.69.54.165: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number = 175<br />
| date = October 25, 2006<br />
| title = Automatic Doors<br />
| image = automatic_doors.png<br />
| titletext = I hope no automatic doors I know read this. I would be so embarrassed.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
[[Cueball]] has an uneasy suspiction that the automatic doors may have feelings, possibly due to their apparent sentience. This assigning of human characteristics to non-human things such as the doors is called {{w|anthropomorphism}}. Cueball extends the premise that the doors have feelings to those feelings being hurt by his not entering the opened doors. This is analogous to the social faux pas of ignoring someone who has waved to you, or purposefully failing to acknowledge someone who is trying to get your attention.<br />
<br />
The anthropomorphized doors are much like those in the starship Heart of Gold in Douglas Adams' ''{{w|Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy}}''. In the story, the characters find a brochure describing the ship, which states that "All the doors in this spaceship have a cheerful and sunny disposition. It is their pleasure to open for you, and their satisfaction to close again with the knowledge of a job well done." Such doors would not be given the "satisfaction" of the "knowledge of a job well done" if the figure passes close enough to trigger the doors, but does not actually go through them.<br />
<br />
In the title text, it is revealed that Cueball has made the acquaintance of a number of automatic doors and possibly hung out with them only because he doesn't want to hurt their feelings. His being embarrassed about hurting the feelings of any automatic doors who happen to read the comic and thus find out that what they thought was a genuine friendship was only Cueball trying not to hurt their feelings, in fact should more likely be embarrassment over making friends with mechanical doors who he believes have feeling that can be hurt in the first place.{{Citation needed}}<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:When I walk past an automatic door and it opens for me, I worry that if I don't go in I'll hurt its feelings.<br />
:[Automatic door whirrs open.]<br />
:''whirrrr''<br />
:Cueball: Oh, um, I'm sorry, I was just... um... I guess I can hang out for a bit.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]</div>172.69.54.165https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=204:_America&diff=153785204: America2018-03-05T14:48:18Z<p>172.69.54.165: /* Explanation */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{comic<br />
| number =204<br />
| date =January 1, 2007<br />
| title =America<br />
| image =america.png<br />
| titletext =The younger folk in the audience think this is a joke.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Explanation==<br />
On April 20, 1979, U.S. President {{w|Jimmy Carter}} was allegedly "{{w|Jimmy_Carter_rabbit_incident|attacked by a giant swimming rabbit}}" while solo-fishing on a boat in his hometown. The reality is a little more nuanced: According to Carter, the rabbit had actually been chased into the water by some hounds and swam near his boat. Carter splashed some water on it to compel the rabbit not to come any closer.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, the newspapers ate it up, reveling in the ridiculous notion that anyone would feel threatened by a rabbit (considered to be a small, harmless herbivore{{Citation needed}}), with respected paper ''{{w|The Washington Post}}'' putting the story "President Attacked by Rabbit" on the front page. Since the White House refused to release the photograph, the paper created a cartoon parody of the rabbit, calling it PAWS, in reference to the blockbuster film ''{{w|Jaws (film)|JAWS}},'' about a killer shark. Carter's opponents used it as fodder for their arguments that Carter's presidency was weak and ineffectual, and basically, the whole thing was blown way out of proportion by the American media, as so often happens with goofy events such as this.<br />
<br />
This comic treats the Killer Rabbit attack as a dark day for the United States and uses the phrase "America Must Never Forget," which usually applies to days like the {{w|Attack on Pearl Harbor|Pearl Harbor attack}} or {{w|September 11 attacks|9/11}}. It essentially shows that, for the entire history of the United States (which starts with the signing of the {{w|Declaration of Independence}}), it is the only event worth remembering.<br />
<br />
The rabbit incident is also referenced in [[1688: Map Age Guide]].<br />
<br />
The title text is an assumption that the event has not been remembered in the way the comic jokes that it should have been, and as a result, younger readers will think he is kidding when he says Carter was attacked by a rabbit.<br />
<br />
==Transcript==<br />
:[A timeline with only three ticks with years noted. Each tick is labeled with a line going to the tick. The second tick is much closer to the last on the right and has its year written below the line. The other two have it above the line and vice versa with the labels. Below in the middle there is a caption.]<br />
:1776<br />
::Declaration of independence<br />
:1979<br />
::Jimmy Carter attacked by giant swimming rabbit.<br />
:2007<br />
::Present day<br />
<br />
:[Caption:]<br />
:America must never forget.<br />
<br />
{{comic discussion}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Timelines]]<br />
[[Category:Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Comics featuring politicians]] <!-- Jimmy Carter --><br />
[[Category:Animals]] <!-- Rabbit --></div>172.69.54.165