Talk:1293: Job Interview

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 07:37, 27 November 2013 by (talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

Wouldn't this be a continuation of the story in "Networking" Whiskey07 (talk) 09:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree, Whisky. That comic is clearly a prelude to this. Grahame (talk) 07:35, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Isn't it Beret Guy character, and not just "employer with a hat"? --JakubNarebski (talk) 10:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Why is the soup coming out of the electrical outlet (OK, it is label "soup", but that still does not explain it) Spongebog (talk)

Who said it was an electrical outlet? It's clearly a soup outlet, it's even labeled as such. 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
My first thought was that this was a modern soup kitchen of some sort with the basics of public supplies. But I've never seen or heard of such a thing? Does anyone know if they exist? Grahame (talk) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
It's definitely an electrical outlet. This reinforces that this is a virtual company, not a real one. Sulis (talk) 10:04, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
My understanding of the outlet matter is that:
  1. It is an actual U.S. - style electrical outlet.
  2. The coil of wire seen at the chair's leg in panel 2 which beret Guy uses is actually a handheld electric heater that was commonly used to heat water in Eastern Europe before electric kettles made their way there; such heaters are still being sold here (example (in Polish))
  3. The water in the bowl is already boiling in panel 4.
  4. Beret Guy is going to add some cheap instant soup to the water, e.g. Chinese-style instant noodles
It may be worth noting that such heaters are very cheap, you can get one for an equivalent of $3-5 on a flea market. The whole Beret Guy's new business is an extremely low cost one... 10:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
I'd think it's really just a soup (or whatever liquid it is) outlet. Reasons: 1. I don't see any heating attachments while the wire isn't plugged in. 2. To me, the drawing in the last panel rather looks like liquid pouring out of a hose. 3. It even says so in the official transcript: "Something one can only hope is soup streams out of the wire into Beret Guy's bowl" 11:25, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, I don't like doing it, but I feel so strongly that this is surreality, not the more 'mundane' water-heater idea, that I actually reverted the explanation change making it so. (We don't know how he gets the soup from the outlet, or what happens if you plug a vacuum cleaner/etc into that outlet, but then we don't know how Beret Guy does most of the stuff he does. Or, when we do, why..?) 14:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

"We can offer you a bunch of paychecks" - but not actual money? 16:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Anyone have an idea of what "There are ghosts here" means? --Dangerkeith3000 (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I assumed it was just part of a quirky interview. I feel it ties in to the later "interview from hell" stuff - it's not the sort of thing you want a job interviewer to raise in your interview. Even if the place does have ghosts, it's a terrible thing to mention. I think it just adds to the surrealism that others have mentioned and with which I agree. Grahame (talk) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I thought it was a reference to some buzz-word that Beret Guy misunderstood, such as virtualization or intangible benefits or high spirits. I just couldn't figure out for sure what the source was. 04:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Probably a play on "Ghostwriter" Spongebog (talk)
Realized that this is probably a reference to Call of Duty: Ghost. Often tech companies will refer to the fun environment they have, and how guys will get together for LAN parties on the company equipment, and mention the games they play. Beret Guy, having heard and misunderstood, stripped this down to, "We have ghosts." 05:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Could it be a reference to the Snapchat mascot? 07:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the joke here is just that this is an example of a "job interview from hell" or at least a very surreal/oddball job interview. Basically everything Beret Guy says or does is nonsensical or a non sequitur. E.g. "this real building I found" gives the impression that it may be a vacant building that he has somehow gained entrance to. It seems unlikely that a real company would make both apps and stickers for phones. Obviously you can't get soup out of a wall by plugging a cord into an electrical outlet. The humor derives from putting oneself in the position of the interviewee being confronted with this odd situation. 18:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Pat

I suspect he is being a bit dadaist on this one. 22:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

It is more accurate (theologically and biblically - assuming that the biblical account (which is the only one we have) is correct) to say that God allowed the trials but they were performed and initiated by Satan. (And to those who want to dispute it being a real story or question the accuracy of the Bible - that's not the point. The point is that it's the only account we have so let's be accurate about what the account portrays.) So I've changed the description to reflect the view that "God allowed" and "Satan did the horrible things" rather than that Job "was put through some horrendous ordeals by God to test his faith" which is partially true but technically inaccurate, but I kept that "God did it to test Job's faith". Grahame (talk) 01:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference in the explanation to "the countless humorous signs near wall outlets and faucets." I haven't run into such signs (or didn't realize they were humorous). Can someone fill me in? -- Amz (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I've only encountered one such sign in person. It was near the outlet powering the web server at my last job. The sign was labeled "DOES (sic) NOT PULG (sic) OUT" in meticulously-careful handwriting. It was hung in much the same manner as the comic. While the meaning was clear, I found it funny how poor the English was, given the care taken on the calligraphy. 05:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

/dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ or /dʒoʊb/

I don't think "job" is meant to be a religious reference. I think its similar that to how one might pronounce C# as "C-pound". 06:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

It very clearly is connected with Job in my opinion - there is piles of connection mentioned by numerous users here. Perhaps you don't see the connection because you don't know anything about Job. Grahame (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
It's not a matter of opinion. The only word in English that is pronounced "job" with a long O, rhyming with globe, is the biblical figure. Xhfz (talk) 13:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, there's also GOB from Arrested Development... - 07:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
To elaborate, I think he is saying /dʒoʊb/ (rather than /dʒɒːːb/) because he never heard anyone say it before. For example, let's say we reverse the roles of these two guys in the comic. Suppose Beret guy looked up some buzzwords to impress the interviewer. I think the result is that Beret Guy will pronounce things like Hadoop as "Had-dop", URL as "Earl", GUI as "Guy", @ as "ear", Apache as "'A'-patch", etc. Surely someone has this problem before, *cough*. 05:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

This, as well as networking, seem to me as commentary on the fragility of the 'typical' 'modern' job (and the 'typical' 'modern' company) - in terms of constancy of profession, livelihood security and permanency (and number of employees) - when compared to the 'typical' jobs of a few decades past. Many of today's SMEs and jobs live in economic bubbles, as well as credit bubbles: conventional metrics used to evaluate the strength of a job - monetary remuneration and monetary profit, no longer correlate well across career time-scales. Casting the quirky Beret Guy as the employer stokes cognitive dissonance (people expect a business owner/founder/employer to have the pulse of society, to be good strategists, etc.) 10:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this is completely misunderstood. The comic is about some startups and their lack of inherent value, as demonstrated by the ridiculousness of facebook's recent attempt to acquire Snapchat for $2bn. The office is called a "real building" to emphasize that the company's product is not real. Beret guy is just throwing out a bunch of buzzwords, which demonstrates that he clearly does not have a business plan. The ghosts reference, as well as the "long 'o'", or 'joooooobs' (nothing to do with Jobe from the bible) in the alt text, which is how a ghost would pronounce 'jobs', alludes to the fact that it's a ghost company (a company that doesn't break even). Finally, the fact the he can make food, a necessity for survival, come out of a wall socket (electricity, allusion to the virtual app world) demonstrates the misconception that these app companies have real value. 06:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I have no comment about most of what you've written but am completely convinced that Randall has Job from the bible in mind. It is not spelled "Jobe" in English. The comments Randall makes and which others have connected with the Job character make far more sense than connecting it with something which ghosts might say. Grahame (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I know it's spelt "Job", but wanted to avoid being ambiguous. I don't see the "piles of connection mentioned by numerous users" you mention above; the explanation contains it (which could have been written by you) and you mention it in this discussion, that's it. This interview is in no way arduous and the interviewee is not really tested as Job was. Where do you see the connection between the comic and the Book of Job? As for the ghost explanation: as a user pointed out earlier, the Snapchat logo is a ghost, he mentions ghosts in the comic, the comic came out the same week as the Snapchat offers. This comic is clearly about Snapchat and the ridiculousness of the founder turning down an offer of billions of dollars for something that doesn't generate revenue. Where does Job fit into that story? 09:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I edited what had already been written about Job. Check the history. You're right - I may have exaggerated "numerous users". But I agree with whoever had written the comments/explanation about Job linking it to his job being a "trial of faith". I make no claim at all that it connects directly to most of the rest of the comic. As Randall often does, he's gone off on a tangent - he especially does this in title texts - switched gears so to speak. And the connection is not to the interview but to the job. Check the title text again. And it's not exactly the "book of Job" but the character/life of Job as described in that book. And as explained by whoever originally wrote in the explanation the connection to Job. And I'm not disputing that other aspects of the comic have other connections. I'm not saying that it doesn't connect in other ways as you are seeing. What I'm saying is the title text is clearly a reference to Job. Grahame (talk) 00:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the Job-experience allusion also refers to Snapchat being tempted by opportunities to sell out. 06:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The term "long O" is unambiguously used to denote "the long sound of O", the vowel of globe and Job, as opposed to "short O" or "the short sound of O", the vowel of mob and job. Since "long O" has that specialized meaning, to describe /dʒɒɒɒɒɒɒɒb/ we must say something like "a lengthened short O". Xhfz (talk) 13:13, 26 November 2013 (UTC)