XKCD Author's Unpublished Book Has Already Become a Best-Seller

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

XKCD Author's Unpublished Book Has Already Become a Best-Seller

Posted by samzenpus on Friday March 14, 2014 @12:02AM from the big-before-it-was-big dept.

destinyland writes "Wednesday the geeky cartoonist behind XKCD announced that he'd publish a new book answering hypothetical science questions in September. And within 24 hours, his as-yet-unpublished work had become Amazon's #2 best-selling book. 'Ironically, this book is titled What If?,' jokes one blogger, noting it resembles an XKCD comic where 'In our yet-to-happen future, this book decides to travel backwards through time, stopping off in March of 2014 to inform Amazon's best-seller list that yes, in our coming timeline this book will be widely read...' Randall Munroe's new book will be collecting his favorite 'What If...' questions, but will also contain his never-before published answers to some questions that he'd found 'particularly neat.'"

129 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:07 · Score: 0, Troll

It's about as funny as User Friendly. Awful, awful stuff. Navel gazing of the worst kind. I guess it's great if you have Asperger's.
1. Re:Don't get it by cyborg_zx · 2014-03-14 00:15 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  That's the comic, not What If? - which is all about things like how much power you'd need to illuminate the shadow of the moon or what happens to the Earth's geography if you drain the oceans of water.
2. Re:Don't get it by Sockatume · 2014-03-14 00:25 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The True Scotsman called, he wants you to know that you're a terrible human being.
  
  --
  No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
3. Re:Don't get it by JaredOfEuropa · 2014-03-14 00:25 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  You're right: you don't get it. But don't worry about it.
  
  Is XKCD overhyped and overrated? Sure it is... like pretty much everything else with a certain level of popularity in the geek crowd. Even so, I often find XKCD funny, sometimes thought-provoking or profound, and generally interesting. And it's often applicable to everyday situations (hence the many "oblig XKCD" references here on /. )
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
4. Re:Don't get it by Thanshin · 2014-03-14 00:25 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  For productivity reasons, you should have constructed your critic without details, so you could reuse the reply in many other cases.
  For example: "I don't like it. Therefore, it's stupid. And people who like it are stupid too."
5. Re:Don't get it by Dogtanian · 2014-03-14 00:33 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Whether you find it funny or not, XKCD at least has creativity and intelligence, and it's unfair to compare it with the awful "User Friendly". AFAICT, that only got where it was by targeting and pandering to the geek audience and being an online webcomic in the mid-to-late-90s when the former was still rare and the latter still somewhat novel.
  
  The fact that it was badly-drawn (*) and not actually that clever in itself- so much as giving its oft-maligned (**) target audience an excuse to feel superior to others- didn't seem to matter.
  
  As I once commented elsewhere:-
  
  Compare that to User Friendly. Aside from its "moderately-promising 14-year-old still showing too much influence from the Teach-Yourself-Cartooning book" drawing style, User Friendly has always relied on its geek-friendly subject matter and viewpoints to flatter the audience and obscure the fact that it's neither creative nor funny.
  
  Here's a good example:-
  http://ars.userfriendly.org/ca...
  
  There's nothing creative about this. The "news" was a real-life item reported in many tech outlets about a year back. The strip itself is just a lazy excuse to let the audience laugh again at that story- it adds nothing to it except an audience-pandering but uncreative aside.
  
  xkcd has a long way to go before it gets *that* lazy.
  (*) XKCD isn't exactly detailed in the artwork stakes either, but that comes across as an intentional style, whereas User Friendly just looks like a wannabe of better-looking cartoons.
  (**) This is before it was (allegedly) cool to be a geek.
  
  --
  "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
6. Re:Don't get it by Anrego · 2014-03-14 00:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Just about anything good eventually becomes over-hyped.
  Actually I don't think anything is described as exactly as good or as bad as it actually is. People either rain praise on something they like, or trash talk something they don't, and it's usually overdone.
  Personally, I like xkcd. Yes, it's not consistently ground shattering. The average day to day comic tends to range somewhere from meh to mild chuckle. But for something you get 3 days a week, that's actually pretty damn good.
  Then occasionally he goes all out and actually _does_ build something that lives up to hype, which then of course itself gets overhyped like everything else, so he really can't win.
7. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:49 · Score: 0
  
  No True Scotsman would draw some stick figures on a horribly pretentious blog and pretend it's a webcomic!
8. Re:Don't get it by hibiki_r · 2014-03-14 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  User Friendly feels extremely dated now, but that's not because it was a bad comic back then, but because it was trying to capture the geek mindset of the time. It's a bit like Dilbert, a comic that only really makes sense when you've spent enough time in a megacorp's big cubicle farm. The main difference is that User Friendly came from an upbeat world that, frankly, does not exist anymore, so today it just can't be funny.
9. Re:Don't get it by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-14 01:21 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Oh my god, it's you! Hey everyone, it's the guy whose opinion is also objectively true!
  I've got a list of questions I've been saving for you, now where did I put it...
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
10. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:24 · Score: 0
  
  I guess the problem most people have with it, is that xkcd merely spouts ideas, claiming them without going through the trouble of actually implementing them. It is a bit of an "idea troll", instead of a patent troll. So I'm not surprised about the reaction here.
11. Re:Don't get it by StripedCow · 2014-03-14 01:29 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Conjecture: everything that has been told by Xkcd has already been said at least once by someone on Slashdot prior to it.
  
  --
  If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
12. Re:Don't get it by SJHillman · 2014-03-14 01:30 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  And What If? follows Mythbusters in the sense that once the question is answered, he keeps pushing until something blows up.
13. Re:Don't get it by SJHillman · 2014-03-14 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  No, he actually built a critic to make critiques.
14. Re:Don't get it by interkin3tic · 2014-03-14 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  Ladies and gentlemen: it's official. Hipsterism has moved onto webcomics. Detonate the nukes. Perhaps the cockroach culture can do better than we did.
15. Re:Don't get it by RKThoadan · 2014-03-14 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not a big fan of xkcd, but I love the what-if series immensely. It's pretty much the highlight of Tuesdays for me... when I'm not out invading and destroying villages anyway.
16. Re:Don't get it by Chrisq · 2014-03-14 01:46 · Score: 2
  
  Conjecture: everything that has been told by Xkcd has already been said at least once by someone on Slashdot prior to it.
  By the number of "obligatory xkcd" posts we see a lot of what is said on Slashdot has already been said on xkcd. .... this could be circular!
17. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:55 · Score: 0
  
  Sheldon called, he said that even he understood the post was a joke.
  
  Unless... you posted the AC post just so you could follow up with your True Scotsman post.
  
  (And then you posted this post to continue on. Being AC is fun! No one knows whether you are just replying to yourself, or are merely pretending that you are replying to yourself!)
18. Re:Don't get it by StripedCow · 2014-03-14 01:55 · Score: 2
  
  If only Slashdot's comment form allowed input of stick-figures, it might be the case that we wouldn't need Xkcd...
  
  --
  If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
19. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:01 · Score: 0
  
  How do you know if different user names aren't just the same person?
20. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  We're all Mad here.
21. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:11 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I'm Spartacus.
22. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:14 · Score: 1
  
  Conjecture: everything that has been told by Xkcd has already been said at least once by someone on Slashdot prior to it.
  Simpecture: everything that has been said at least once by someone on Slashdot, Simpsons already did it.
23. Re:Don't get it by Runaway1956 · 2014-03-14 02:33 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Hell - even I have my off-days when I don't manage to do any earth shattering. I am my biggest fan, but even so, I'm not always amazed at myself.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
24. Re:Don't get it by nitehawk214 · 2014-03-14 02:34 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  If only Slashdot's comment form allowed input of stick-figures, it might be the case that we wouldn't need Xkcd...
  ------->O |Fuck| \|/ | You | | ------ / \
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
25. Re:Don't get it by TheCarp · 2014-03-14 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, it is called "having fun with it". If he didn't, it would be pretty boring.
  I was pretty hooked after reading the first one I ever saw, which was about what would happen if a pitcher could throw a baseball at a signficant fraction of the speed of light. I thought it was pretty hilarious to see see the breakdown.
  A simple "a huge explosion destroying the ball park and leaving a crater" would have answered the question, but, it wouldn't be very much fun, and wouldn't have anyone looking to buy his book.
  
  --
  "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
26. Re:Don't get it by TheCarp · 2014-03-14 02:42 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  That is some pretty wide open conjecture. I have personally been reading and commenting on slashdot for more than a decade and I have skipped or missed entire articles full of comments. Slashdot has contained comments on everything from Natalie Portman to Hot Grits.
  Conjecture: Most everything said on slashdot today has already been said by someone on Slashdot prior to it.
  
  --
  "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
27. Re:Don't get it by ericloewe · 2014-03-14 03:31 · Score: 2
  
  You swear a lot for someone with such a tiny head...
28. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 03:34 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  no, I'm Spartacus
29. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 03:56 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I'm Spartacus.
  
  no, I'm Spartacus
  We are Spartacus? What happend to Legion?
30. Re:Don't get it by suutar · 2014-03-14 03:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  which conveniently leads to my main worry about the book - how's he going to get image hovertext on paper?
31. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:00 · Score: 0
  
  What really makes that one in when he concludes that the thermonuclear explosion obliterating the batter (and everything else within miles) would count as "hit by a pitch" and allow the batter to advance to first base.
  captcha: "pansies"
32. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  This is why I read his What-ifs. He takes an answered question, and somehow uses it to obliterate humanity / the planet / existence / road laws.
33. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  He never said anything about science. And you're a homophobe, so DIAF.
34. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:23 · Score: 0
  
  Holy shit! Rayman posts on Slashdot?!
35. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  I'm Spartacus, and so is my wife
36. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:53 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  People with tiny heads tend to swear a lot.
37. Re:Don't get it by Tom · 2014-03-14 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  Which is why I pre-ordered the book, to get it while it's still good.
  I love the early Mythbusters, compared to them the recent ones are lame. Everything has its time and when it's done, then it's done.
  
  --
  Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
38. Re:Don't get it by TheCarp · 2014-03-14 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  which I question.... by the time the first matter which used to be the ball reaches the batter, the ball no longer conforms to the definition of a baseball by the rules of the game. I think the pitcher would be guilty of illegally modifying the ball.
  As such, according to a quick review, looks like the pitcher should be given a warning, and the pitch called as a ball.
  
  --
  "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
39. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 10:01 · Score: 0
  
  What really makes that one in when he concludes that the thermonuclear explosion obliterating the batter (and everything else within miles) would count as "hit by a pitch" and allow the batter to advance to first base.
  captcha: "pansies"
  The gold standard for not-a-pansy being hit by a pitch: Mike Matheny
40. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-16 22:02 · Score: 0
  
  Sometimes I'm Spartacus; sometimes shes Spartacus; sometimes we are both Spartacus
41. Re:Don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-16 22:06 · Score: 0
  
  Where is the +1 "Well played sir" mod when you need it.
42. Re:Don't get it by AbsGeekNZ · 2014-03-16 22:13 · Score: 1
  
  As both a Dilbert and XKCD fan, I appricaite them both for different reasons.
  
  DIlbert often highlights the funny / depressing work side of my life. (Control systems engineer) e.g. http://dilbert.com/strips/comi... recienlt just about made me choke on my coffee.
  
  Where as XKCD appeals to my geeky nature, though also applicable to work situations sometimes e.g. https://xkcd.com/927/ but there are so many others that come up in ever day life for those of us that are geeky
43. Re:Don't get it by StripedCow · 2014-03-16 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  I presume you tried to use ascii art to make a stick figure.
  However, using the fonts that are installed on my computer, that actually looks horrible.
  
  --
  If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
44. Re:Don't get it by nitehawk214 · 2014-03-20 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  It looks terrible either way.
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Obligatory xkcd by BisuDagger · 2014-03-14 00:09 · Score: 5, Funny

http://xkcd.com/1102/
I'm sure that's good news for Randall by rmdingler · 2014-03-14 00:11 · Score: 1

Two historical tomes by Rush Limbaugh are in the Top 6, and none of these are in the Kindle top 100.
How many dead tree books does Amazon sell now?

--
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
1. Re:I'm sure that's good news for Randall by blackjackshellac · 2014-03-14 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  I'm more gobsmacked that people would spend money on any kind of vile utterance by that revolting pile of shit Rush Limbaugh. At least Rob Ford isn't published and his nation is limited to a bunch of suburban rubes.
  
  --
  Salut,
  Jacques
2. Re:I'm sure that's good news for Randall by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 03:50 · Score: 0
  
  I'm more gobsmacked that people would spend money on any kind of vile utterance by that revolting pile of shit Rush Limbaugh. At least Rob Ford isn't published and his nation is limited to a bunch of suburban rubes.
  It's worse than that. This is a kids book. It's propaganda for children. Luckily most kids figure out that their parents are idiots when they are teens, so they'll probably look back and laugh about it.
3. Re:I'm sure that's good news for Randall by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 03:52 · Score: 0
  
  To defeat your enemy, you must first know your enemy. Of course, when knowing your enemy requires giving money to your enemy...
4. Re:I'm sure that's good news for Randall by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 09:44 · Score: 0
  
  You've clearly never read any of his books, nor listened to an hour of his radio show.
  You should stick to commenting on something you know a least some tiny bit about, but hey, it's the internet...
I'm sorry to say... by Kokuyo · 2014-03-14 00:16 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm not smart enough for some of the XKCD strips...
1. Re:I'm sorry to say... by nick.degraeve · 2014-03-14 00:23 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  That's why there is explain xkcd.
2. Re:I'm sorry to say... by laejoh · 2014-03-14 00:24 · Score: 1, Redundant
  
  OB www.explainxkcd.com, It's 'cause you're dumb ;)
3. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Thanshin · 2014-03-14 00:28 · Score: 1
  
  That's one of the best praises it could receive.
4. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  Ran out of mod points, which is **very** lucky for you. Otherwise I would have modded you -100: Wasting my time is an utterly funny way. Not because I fail to understand XKCD most of the time, but because you lured me into yet another way to see the huge number of comics.
  Damn you.
5. Re:I'm sorry to say... by PopeRatzo · 2014-03-14 01:19 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I'm not smart enough for some of the XKCD strips...
  Hell, I'm not smart enough for Garfield.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
6. Re:I'm sorry to say... by dargaud · 2014-03-14 02:44 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I'm not smart enough for some of the XKCD strips...
  Hell, I'm not smart enough for Garfield.
  And I'm clearly not smart enough for the Family Circus... I never even got one.
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
7. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:40 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe you'd like Garfield minus Garfield instead?
8. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:56 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not smart enough for some of the XKCD strips...
  Hell, I'm not smart enough for Garfield.
  And I'm clearly not smart enough for the Family Circus... I never even got one.
  Not me!!
9. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:57 · Score: 0
  
  But are you smart enough for Garfield Minus Garfield?
10. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 07:04 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe try http://garfieldminusgarfield.net/ instead?
11. Re:I'm sorry to say... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-15 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe you'll like this http://www.nietzschefamilycircus.com/
More questions by StripedCow · 2014-03-14 00:17 · Score: 3, Interesting

I wished he scientifically answered the following hypothetical questions:
1. What if patents were abolished.
2. What if copyright were abolished.
3. What if programmers ran Congress.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
1. Re:More questions by Sockatume · 2014-03-14 00:23 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Those aren't changes for which practical data or experimental models exist, so he's unlikely to ever cover them.
  
  --
  No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
2. Re:More questions by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  1. Economic and political upheavals, from vast and dangerous to slightly annoying. Some few posisitve things, too.
  2. As previous, though running from worrying to delighted consumer response. Many more positive results than above.
  (Better to ask what the results would be if they were overhauled, made saner and brought back closer to their original intent rather than being designed for keeping certain business models afloat).
  3. Proufound disruption and even worse performance due to ignorance of practical political tenets, economics and anything much more than being able to unroll loops for better performance. e.g. While Woz made one heckuvva great engineer for Apple, his runninng the company would have been a disaster for it.
3. Re:More questions by Shados · 2014-03-14 00:36 · Score: 2
  
  If programmers ran Congress the country would go under as no one would ever agree on minute details on a bill. You thought the current 2 parties never agreeing was bad. Now imagine every individuals never agreeing with each other...
4. Re:More questions by Arancaytar · 2014-03-14 01:13 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  3. What if programmers ran Congress.
  holy shit
  guys
  government is complicated.
5. Re:More questions by drinkypoo · 2014-03-14 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  Those aren't changes for which practical data or experimental models exist, so he's unlikely to ever cover them.
  On the third point, you are correct, perhaps. But the first two were the natural state before the invention of those legal fictions. There is certainly material to work from.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:More questions by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:34 · Score: 0
  
  1. Economic and political upheavals, from vast and dangerous to slightly annoying. Some few posisitve things, too.
  2. As previous, though running from worrying to delighted consumer response. Many more positive results than above.
  Considering you have no real evidence to back anything you said up, you just pulled that out of your ass. Come back to me when you have scientific evidence of your claims (not speculation) and can actually defend copyright and patents.
7. Re:More questions by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  Foolish American, legislatures are supposed to debate every minute detail of every bill. The process exists to discourage them from agreeing to pass laws that ruin our lives. If the voters elected a bunch of photogenic celebrities who all agree with each other, the country would go under.
8. Re:More questions by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:12 · Score: 0
  
  Remeber this:
  Since pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of progress?
  .
  Never in the history of the USA has the above been more true than it is today.
9. Re:More questions by Millennium · 2014-03-14 02:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That's not science: it's uncontrolled historical data. Not xkcd's thing.
10. Re:More questions by StripedCow · 2014-03-14 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  Are you saying he is not constructing any models in this book, and is merely filling in numbers?
  
  --
  If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
11. Re:More questions by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:36 · Score: 0
  
  Nay, history goes way back. Congress notoriously neglected to pay soldiers who served in the American Revolution.
12. Re:More questions by Sockatume · 2014-03-14 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  He's using the tools of physics, if that's what you mean.
  
  --
  No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
13. Re:More questions by tlhIngan · 2014-03-14 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  But the first two were the natural state before the invention of those legal fictions. There is certainly material to work from.
  True, but it wasn't generally a very pretty state. For #1,well, look at all the Da Vinci drawings. They all had mistakes in them because he knew people would steal it and try to build it.
  For #2, what happened was the US was the biggest pirate around because copyrights were enforced on a country level. Prior to that, well, books were only for the wealthy and scholars - most people didn't read or were illiterate so it didn't really matter to begin with.
  Of course, your real point is software, for which we have absolutely no historical data to deal with. Software is a very different form of IP that we've contorted into existing IP frameworks, and it fits badly.
  Copyrights are meant to protect creative works which generally until computers were around, generally enjoyed by other living things. You didn't write a poem for your toaster, for example, at least not for the enjoyment of your toaster.
  Likewise, patents were to protect things. Your toaster might have some interesting feature that's patented, That thing isn't for enjoyment, it's for utility.
  There is another category of patents called design patents which are used to highlight certain aesthetic features something might have. Do not confuse these with regular utility patents for the only similarities they have is the work "patent".
  Of course, software comes around and messes it up - for now we're creating works meant to be "enjoyed" by a machine. Or those creative works are for utility. So now we've got this new category of IP that we believe should fit on both domains, but that just means it's a new form of IP since neither copyrights nor patents adequately cover it. (For starters, no one work should be coverable by both patents and copyright since the intent of both are different. The fact software can means the system is broken at handling that kind of IP.
14. Re:More questions by AliasBackslash · 2014-03-14 07:16 · Score: 1
  
  What if deals with hypothetical physics questions.
Re:importance of being popular by Zaldarr · 2014-03-14 00:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

You about done being bitter about somebody else's success?

--
I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
Thanks for the Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:23 · Score: 1

This one doesn't even try to hide it. It's a literal freaking advertisement.
1. Re:Thanks for the Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:40 · Score: 0
  
  But it's an advertisement for Randall Munroe, so it must be good!
Re:importance of being popular by Sockatume · 2014-03-14 00:24 · Score: 4, Interesting

I would love to hear how that was supposed to work. Were human beings programmed to irrationally love things created by people called Randall Munroe, or are you arguing that he owns some sort of mind-control ray?

--
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Re:importance of being popular by Thanshin · 2014-03-14 00:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

Remember kids, don't fail, or you'll have to spend your time complaining about people who didn't.
Re:FUCK BETA! by kootsoop · 2014-03-14 00:35 · Score: 1

You've been hitting the "of beta" button. That means you become one with beta. Try something else if you want a different effect.

--
"Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get" - Jerry Avins
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:37 · Score: 1

So why don't you?
Unless he is not quite so talentless as you make out?
The What-If stuff is well written, informative and funny. It may even be accurate (I'm not smart enough to judge this). His comics are hit and miss (as are every body elses so...), but you know what they are popular and that is not down to his name, it is down to the fact the struck a cord with the readership.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 00:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try.
Re:importance of being popular by Arancaytar · 2014-03-14 01:11 · Score: 4, Funny

Exactly, he's just trading on his name. He would never have gained that many readers if he hadn't already been famous for... er... I'll get back to you.
Alt Text by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:16 · Score: 0

If I hold my finger over the pictures, will the alternate text appear?
Re:importance of being popular by hawkinspeter · 2014-03-14 01:17 · Score: 2

Will that work if I change my name to Randall Munroe? Why is his name special?

--
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
His name is Wednesday? by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-14 01:22 · Score: 1, Troll

Wednesday the geeky cartoonist behind XKCD
I thought his name was Randall.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
1. Re:His name is Wednesday? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  Wednesday Randall Munroe is ashamed of his girly first name.
2. Re:His name is Wednesday? by Threni · 2014-03-14 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Hopefully the lack of any sensible editorial control on this site won't be duplicated on http://soylentnews.org/
3. Re:His name is Wednesday? by petermgreen · 2014-03-14 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  ahh memories of the old slashdot where you lost your place on a page when trying to post a comment or read a post that was displayed as just a subject line.
  
  --
  note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
4. Re:His name is Wednesday? by wonkey_monkey · 2014-03-14 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  Javascript posting/expanding is coming, apparently. Personally I wouldn't have gone live without it in place (with fallbacks, obviously). It's not like it's hard to implement.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:27 · Score: 0

Anyone who criticizes anyone who's successful is just bitter, and being bitter invalidates someone's arguments.
People who throw/hit balls around on fields and make millions? Stop being bitter!
Re:importance of being popular by amalcolm · 2014-03-14 01:28 · Score: 1, Insightful

Says an even bigger ASSHOLE

--
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
Abject Objective Subjectivity. by VortexCortex · 2014-03-14 01:49 · Score: 1

Proving once again that "best" does not exist.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:57 · Score: 1

Well, yes, there are some xkcd readers who are pseudointellectual idiots who want to impress each other. But there are also all the other readers.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 01:58 · Score: 0

Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try.
Al Bundy?
That & by DRAGONWEEZEL · 2014-03-14 02:00 · Score: 1

Exploits of a Mom is probably the funniest thing in a web comic ever... :)

--
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:05 · Score: 0

Saying "stop being bitter" automatically invalidates your argument, because you believe in arbitrarily invalidating arguments.
Re:importance of being popular by devman · 2014-03-14 02:19 · Score: 2

Exactly. He build his brand off being famous for being a Physics undergrad at a small state school in south east Virginia. Yeah, a regular Paris Hilton he is. It is easy to be successful when you have that kind of background. /s
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:39 · Score: 0

Saying "stop being bitter" automatically invalidates your argument, because you believe in arbitrarily invalidating arguments.
You said it too, so your argument is invalid as well.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 02:44 · Score: 0

Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try.
Al Bundy?
Close... Homer Simpson.
Re:importance of being popular by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2014-03-14 02:45 · Score: 1

Why is his name special?
Because it's just like Elbereth except of scaring monsters away, it attracts nerds instead.

The only problem here is finding a tablet that you can stand on without destroying it in the process. Maybe one per foot? (Or do I just need to lose weight?)

--
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
Being beaten only by... by AdamHaun · 2014-03-14 03:04 · Score: 1

Currently at #1: Rush Limbaugh's self-insert U.S. history fanfic.
I swear to you I am not making this up.
Perhaps Randall should pass on publicizing this particular honor.

--
Visit the
1. Re:Being beaten only by... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  It's like "Wishbone" with American historical mythology instead of "the classics"
  That's actually pretty clever.
And now it's 3rd by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 03:05 · Score: 0

and falling. I did like his foul mouthed Honey Badger though.
I, Libertine by Bright+Apollo · 2014-03-14 03:11 · Score: 1

Shep did this even one better back in the 50s.
Range too small by srussia · 2014-03-14 03:29 · Score: 4, Funny

Slashdot has contained comments on everything from Natalie Portman to Hot Grits.
As I understand it, there is nothing between Natalie Portman and Hot Grits. Kinda like Brooke Shields and her Calvins.

--
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 04:22 · Score: 0

You realize that my argument was the exact opposite of what I was saying, right? Sarcasm, learn it.
Wow! by folderol · 2014-03-14 05:42 · Score: 1

There sure are a lot of jealous people on /. these days :(
Frequently Bought Together: by key45 · 2014-03-14 06:53 · Score: 1

"What If" and "Frozen (Two-Disc Blu-ray / DVD + Digital Copy)". Makes sense. I guess. They are both.... I mean the connection is..... Nope. I got nothing.
1. Re:Frequently Bought Together: by ledow · 2014-03-14 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  Dunno about you but when I go shopping I might well buy, say, a bag of potatoes as well as a DVD. It doesn't mean they are linked at all. I just needed potatoes and saw a DVD I wanted.
  There's an inherent problem that if you cater for a wide enough range of products, most correlations between them will be essentially random. Sure, you can spot trends, but the problem is finding the threshold where a trend is genuinely a trend and not just, say, two new products that people buy because they were both in the news / top sellers at roughly the same time.
2. Re:Frequently Bought Together: by orgelspieler · 2014-03-14 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  I enjoy both XKCD and Frozen. so... maybe there's something there that we just don't understand. Of course, my wife and I use the same Amazon account, so if you ever get a Debbie Macomber book suggested to you next time your order a 12V power supply, you'll know why.
  A bit off topic, but Netflix used to be good at that: suggesting things that you didn't know you would like. Too bad all they suggest these days are TV shows.
3. Re:Frequently Bought Together: by orgelspieler · 2014-03-14 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  That temporal-proximity / best-seller relationship suggestion used to happen all the time with DVD Barn, way back in the days when there was actually competition to Netflix. For a while, if Netflix noticed that you liked a TV show, it would suggest to you any random TV show, rather than the next season of the show you just finished.
Re:importance of being popular by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-14 08:45 · Score: 0

Just because you don't understand Munroe's jokes doesn't mean they aren't funny.

I'd like to direct your attention toward an actual artist with some humility about his work.
Ah, you're one of those "I'm too cool to like what other people like" sorts, aren't you? It isn't about the art but whether the artist lives your idea of an appropriate lifestyle. Is Bohemian still chic, you know, suffering for his art and all that, or is that now passe? Were you one of those suburban white kids who pretended he was black? Or maybe one of those rich college kids who dressed like he was a poor hippy? I suppose you could have been both.
I checked out your link, by the way. I guess it isn't my thing, or maybe it would click more if I was familiar with the characters, but it seems to take about three weeks of strips to get to where you could have in three panels.
Re:not smart enough for Garfield by TaoPhoenix · 2014-03-14 12:47 · Score: 1

Well, the existentialism of this variant of it is rather tough!
http://garfieldminusgarfield.n...

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine