Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's always the number everyone thinks no one else will choose.
son of a bitch. I swear I thought I was being genuinely random.
56 and 77 - no reason.. they were just random thoughts.
The xkcd survey
131–140 of 281 posts
Re: The xkcd survey
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
My son just picks two in the dark and wears them. He wanted an outward sign of his nerd cred. If they matched, he used to pick again. But he stopped doing that, because if he really didn't care, he would wear matching socks too. Has he reached some higher level of Nerdvana?
I think technically caring about having socks that doesn't match rules him out. He's testing strongly for hipster though.
Hey, definitely a nerd. For fun he finds code races in Redis/Bayeux server failover. Also he fights in clubs, bashing his friends with sticks. And designs card/board games.
Re: The xkcd survey
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I have to match socks between several different styles Do I understand correctly that you throw all your socks into a drawer/container, and when you need a pair, you go and have to find two matching ones? This may be cultural (or even familial) thing, but I always curl two socks up into a ball so that they stay together. When I need a pair, I just take one ball, uncurl it, and voila.
But do you curl matching socks or not? If you have many different styles, you need to go hunt around and find matches. Curl or not just delays the matching problem, it does not solve it. Having all the socks be the same makes matching an O(1) problem.
Yes, I pair them after washing, and curl them after drying. Putting them together makes searching O(n) instead of O(n^2) if you have a particular style in mind.
Of course, homogeneity makes this even faster, but you lose the benefit of choice, variability and fashionableness. Quid pro quo.
Re: The xkcd survey
#134If you like this sort of thing, you may also enjoy: 1) My website Correlated.org ( http://www.correlated.org ), which has been generating weird correlations based on users' survey responses for more than four years. 2) Spurious Correlations ( http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations ) by Tyler Vigen, which also offers wacky correlations, but based on publicly available datasets rather than survey responses. 3)…
I think my favorite is Google Correlate. I have no idea what the motorola tundra is but it got super popular on 12/21/2008 and then slowly fell out of interest by 2014.
[deleted]
Re: The xkcd survey
#135Found out that gnome 3 has some keybinding for dynamically changing screen resolution. I don't know which keybinding that is, but I found it during the mash the keyboard test.
I discovered that SOME combination while mashing would close my tab in Chrome. Fortunately, ctrl-shift-t brought back not just the form, but __saved_responses__. What a pleasant surprise. I wonder if that saving is done by the browser, or by the website (local storage?).
Re: The xkcd survey
#136Re: The xkcd survey
#137I wonder how many responses of :
Cantaloupe');DROP TABLE Food;--
ol' Randal is going to get (or some permutation thereof). Figuring that Randal is pretty smart, I bet he has a piece of code to parse out that. Still, anyone here have a good hack that can just nuke days of his time whilst completing this form? Only other one I can think of him using is (for Matlab):
Cantaloupe'); clear all; clc; close all;
Re: The xkcd survey
#138=== SPOILER ALERT! === The most interesting question, to me, is the one about which words you know the meaning of. About half of them aren't real words. I assume this question is used partly as a gauge of vocabulary (how many of the real words do you recognize) and partly of honesty (how many of the fake words do you claim to recognize).
And not at all biased toward native english speakers...
Really? I thought it was biased toward native USAian speakers. What the fuck is Cilantro?
Re: The xkcd survey
#139I can't shake the feeling that this will just measure of how willing people are to follow instructions for no reason whatsoever.
Or as an alternative theory, Randall Munroe wants to know if it's OK to tell everyone when he throws away all his socks and buys a bunch of identical ones.
Re: The xkcd survey
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of them were definitely highly specific jargon to medical fields and the like. I'm betting fewer of them are made up than you think.
Are they un-googleable jargon? I googled all of them, and about half of those searches yielded bupkis. Phoropter was the only medical term I found.
Certainly some jargon is typical in spoken environments but rarely necessary in written contexts, just as vice versa. Not that I have any specific proofs on the specific words in the survey, but given at least one example of curious slang ("fleek"), I wouldn't put it past Randall to attempt to find some.
Also, the fun thing about pronounceable neologisms is even if Randall made them up, there's a curious tendency in English at least to actually start using some of them.