Recently read: xkcd volume 0

Mar 03, 2010 15:43

xkcd volume 0, by Randall Munroe

This is a collection of various strips from the xkcd webcomic, along with some commentary and extra weirdness. For example, the page numbers are all in ternary, and there are extra drawings. The drawings are also presented in higher resolution than on the web, but that's not a particularly big deal ( Read more... )

books, xkcd

Leave a comment

Comments 4

songmonk March 4 2010, 00:35:35 UTC
I'll bite. Why is 2:53 much funnier than 2:07?

Reply

dushai March 4 2010, 02:28:49 UTC
I have no idea if this is why Jon found it funnier, but 2:53 is funnier to me by the following logic: 253 isn't that difficult to factor, by geek standards -- it's 11*23, and it's recognizable as a multiple of 11 (2-5+3=0). When it's changed to 24-hour time as in the comic, 1453 doesn't have any obvious factors at all (and in fact it turns out to be prime). In short, the antagonist did in fact make the problem much harder. On the other hand, factoring 207 makes me think "Oh, it's obviously 9 times... uh... something... let me subtract 27 from it... 9*23!" But changing it to 1407 makes it easier! 1407 is obviously 7*201, and 201 is 3*67 (because 66.666... is 200/3). So in this case, the antagonist has actually failed to make the problem harder, which confuses what's going on and why it's funny.

Original online version, for reference.

Reply

songmonk March 4 2010, 02:30:57 UTC
Thank you! I'm meta-amused by this thread. :-)

Reply

jon_leonard March 4 2010, 18:02:23 UTC
Yeah, that's pretty much it. 1453 is significantly harder to factor than 2:53 (it is prime), but 1407 isn't that hard.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up