0715: "Numbers"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 am UTC

"I had sex with x women"
(all were typed as one, two, etc)
1: 9
2: 1,870,000
3: 9
4: 1
5: 1

"I had sex with x men"
1: 3,140,000 (note, includes "if" in the searches)
2: 3,470,000
3: 473,000
4: 4
5: 4

Dr_Revels
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:16 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Dr_Revels » Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:20 am UTC

katiekat wrote:The bra cup thing is actually really easy to explain. Among women, there are two main breast-size related communities on the internet where one may profess their size (and not for bragging):

1) A community of women who are smaller sized (ie, IBTC), who come together for support and tips on finding bras that fit and flatter and "give you curves"
Example: http://32aabra.com/

2) A community of women who are exceptionally busty, and come together for support and tips on finding bras that fit and are cute. (Just try finding well-fitting, cute bras when you're an E cup.)
Example: http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~cat/bra.html

Women who have "C" cups, which is generally indeed considered "the perfect size" need support neither in feeling better about themselves nor in finding bras or clothes that fit them. Thus they don't spend time on the internet talking about their breasts.


The Bra cup thing is even EASIER to explain. It is pure grammer. Any story that contains "A Cup" for a character or a reference to self as a cup will include the string, "I am A cup" or "I'm A Cup". The search string does not specify that it is asking for bra size.
Last edited by Dr_Revels on Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:40 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
eviloatmeal
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby eviloatmeal » Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:21 am UTC

Spoiler:
Image
Image

The general consensus seems to be that 7 tubes is the way to make a tasty meal.

Searches made without quotes and as singular in the case of A and 1.
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage

User avatar
Moz
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:57 am UTC
Location: United States

Re: Numbers

Postby Moz » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:02 am UTC

These should not be line graphs.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7573
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby phlip » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:04 am UTC

Moz wrote:These should not be line graphs.

They're not. They're scatter graphs, with trend curves.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

Panama1984
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:18 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Panama1984 » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:06 am UTC

So, is it odd that I'm 3 points higher than the internet average in IQ and only an inch off in penis size?

mirni
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:40 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby mirni » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:11 am UTC

2,830,000 for "i have too much time" ^^

-m-

-kp-
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:10 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby -kp- » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:15 am UTC

I see a clear correlation between the 99 problems and the 99 bottles of beer.

Benson
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:15 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Benson » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:16 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Results for "I can bench x pounds"

50 lbs: 2,570
100 lbs: 10,200
200 lbs: 18,700
300 lbs: 35,200
400 lbs: 439
500 lbs: 9

Almost nothing after this

First, searching on "I can bench $x pounds" is a poor choice. "I can bench press $x pounds" is much more popular, and with greater popularity comes greater resolution.

More importantly, and more generally, it would be a great improvement if these graphs were extended to include a datum for x="over 9000" in the numeric categories. Only 5 for bench, or 52 for bench press -- looks like even internet jocks are still jocks.

overrider
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:40 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby overrider » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:45 am UTC

I cannot reproduce the experiments.
Let's try "I have a 9-inch penis".
In order to find the exact matches, the query should be quoted.
I have a 9-inch penis - 1 670 000 results
"I have a 9-inch penis" - 26 400 results
None of them corresponds Randall's 180K.
How come?

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7573
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby phlip » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:49 am UTC

overrider wrote:None of them corresponds Randall's 180K.

Google wrote:Results 1 - 10 of about 179,000 for "I have a 9-inch penis". (0.23 seconds)

I suspect you might be doing it wrong.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

Calu
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 5:41 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Calu » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:11 am UTC

If by doing it wrong you mean surfing from the wrong country... Google censors the results based on the country your ip suggests. I'm surfing through a swiss proxy and I get "about 25,000" results for "I have a 9-inch penis".
Last edited by Calu on Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:12 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Glenn Magus Harvey
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:39 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Glenn Magus Harvey » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:12 am UTC

Very entertaining strip. :)

jaktheyak
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:14 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby jaktheyak » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:16 am UTC

I was a little surprised that there was not a spike at 4 for "There are x lights", then I realized he did trendlines and there is indeed an outlier there, just not enough to change the trend.

That one did indeed make the comic for me.

User avatar
JustTheBast
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:00 am UTC
Location: Oberhausen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby JustTheBast » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:34 am UTC

overrider wrote:"I have a 9-inch penis" - 26 400 results

SafeSearch(TM) turned on?

If the average Internet user has an IQ of 147, how come he's still in 7th grade at 18? Not having had a boyfriend may be explained by the combination of a 9-inch penis with E-cup breasts; difficult to find guys who like both (outside Japan).

All joking aside, even if people weren't liars (which they are), self-selection would skew the curves towards the extremes, since people with average attributes don't feel the need to brag or complain about them on the intertubes. In the case of IQ, it would skew upwards more strongly, since people with extremely low IQs are more likely to use crayons than the internet (your experience with people who are Wrong On The Internet notwithstanding).

TazTheTerrible
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:16 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby TazTheTerrible » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:35 am UTC

Ahhh, there are four lights. Man I feel like such a geek for getting that one.

User avatar
eviloatmeal
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby eviloatmeal » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:56 am UTC

overrider wrote:I cannot reproduce the experiments.
Let's try "I have a 9-inch penis".
In order to find the exact matches, the query should be quoted.
I have a 9-inch penis - 1 670 000 results
"I have a 9-inch penis" - 26 400 results
None of them corresponds Randall's 180K.
How come?

"i have a 9 inch penis"

Without the dash.
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage

Calu
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 5:41 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Calu » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:22 am UTC

eviloatmeal wrote:"i have a 9 inch penis"

Without the dash.

Doesn't make a difference here. Still about 25,000 results.

User avatar
duckshirt
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 am UTC
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Numbers

Postby duckshirt » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:25 am UTC

Panama1984 wrote:So, is it odd that I'm 3 points higher than the internet average in IQ and only an inch off in penis size?

No, that's completely normal. We pretty much all do.
lol everything matters
-Ed

yet another steven
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby yet another steven » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:44 am UTC

phlip wrote:On the other hand, there are a heap of sites out there that offer free IQ tests that massively overestimate your IQ, and then, while you're so excited about that, offer to sell you a more detailed analysis of just how much of a genius you are.


Reminds me of that line. "You're gonna feel a sharp pain. That's pride, fucking with you. Fuck pride!"

I had the same thing with an online "emotional intelligence" test. I had had a rotten day so I wanted the web to tell me how sensitive and emphatic I was. I scored about average, which the website emphasized should be cause for serious concern. Average results were clearly quite insufficient. So I subsequently decided that the test was bollocks.

Only then did I gain enough perspective to laugh at myself.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5588
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby Eternal Density » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:45 am UTC

This makes me feel small.

Intellectually, I mean.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

Jonny245
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:52 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: Numbers

Postby Jonny245 » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:55 am UTC

FreeIQTest scored me ~150 IQ.

Tell me it's true :(

User avatar
tastelikecoke
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 7:58 am UTC
Location: Antipode of Brazil
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby tastelikecoke » Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:57 am UTC

I'm still wondering if there are actually 945 000 smart people or 945 000 idiots over the internet.

Or 945 000 broken IQ tests.

PhilHibbs
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:18 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby PhilHibbs » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:05 am UTC

tastelikecoke wrote:I'm still wondering if there are actually 945 000 smart people or 945 000 idiots over the internet.

Or 945 000 broken IQ tests.

Or just that if you're going to write "My IQ is..." on the internet, then there is probably a reason - if I thought I had an IQ of 102 then I would not be inclined to brag about it. 100 is special because it's exactly average by definition, which is why there is a spike there. So the graph may well be an accurate indication of IQ range for the subset of society that is inclined to write "My IQ is..." on the internet.

Also, we all know that Google Search hits are not an accurate survey indicator, I doubt that 116,000 people have "died in a blogging accident".
Last edited by PhilHibbs on Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:08 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Ezzthetic
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:52 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Ezzthetic » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:08 am UTC

Well, better than the reverse, I guess.

Not if you're Jeffrey Dahmer.

User avatar
JustTheBast
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:00 am UTC
Location: Oberhausen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby JustTheBast » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:22 am UTC

phlip wrote:On the other hand, there are a heap of sites out there that offer free IQ tests that massively overestimate your IQ, and then, while you're so excited about that, offer to sell you a more detailed analysis of just how much of a genius you are.


Heheheh, yeah; I did one of those, back in the late 90s. When it came up "IQ 152! Omygosh, looks like you're a SUPAGENIUS! Now pay us $20 (plus shipping and handling) to get it in fancy writing," I thought, Riiiight, that's not suspicious at all.

My IQ may not be 152, but it's still high enough to recognize a certain ulterior motive here. :D

Rilian
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:33 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby Rilian » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:29 am UTC

There are four lights!
And I'm -2.

japro
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 10:10 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby japro » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:36 am UTC

PhilHibbs wrote:Or just that if you're going to write "My IQ is..." on the internet, then there is probably a reason - if I thought I had an IQ of 102 then I would not be inclined to brag about it. 100 is special because it's exactly average by definition, which is why there is a spike there. So the graph may well be an accurate indication of IQ range for the subset of society that is inclined to write "My IQ is..." on the internet.[/url].

What bothers me is, that there are significantly more people with an IQ over 140 on the Internet (over one million...) than there should be on the planet (like 200'000). We should call SETI...

User avatar
JustTheBast
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:00 am UTC
Location: Oberhausen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby JustTheBast » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:38 am UTC

Rilian wrote:There are four lights!


Aha! So you're the one responsible for that outlier in the graph! :wink:

User avatar
JustTheBast
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:00 am UTC
Location: Oberhausen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby JustTheBast » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:39 am UTC

japro wrote:What bothers me is, that there are significantly more people with an IQ over 140 on the Internet (over one million...) than there should be on the planet (like 200'000).


Or maybe they just write about their supposed IQ a lot. :)

I mean, if you honestly believed your IQ was 150+, wouldn't you begin every discussion with "My IQ is..."? :lol:

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7573
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby phlip » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:43 am UTC

JustTheBast wrote:Heheheh, yeah; I did one of those, back in the late 90s. When it came up "IQ 152! Omygosh, looks like you're a SUPAGENIUS! Now pay us $20 (plus shipping and handling) to get it in fancy writing," I thought, Riiiight, that's not suspicious at all.

Ha! The dodgy test said that I had an IQ of 153! Take that!

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
JustTheBast
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:00 am UTC
Location: Oberhausen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby JustTheBast » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:47 am UTC

phlip wrote:
JustTheBast wrote:it came up "IQ 152! Omygosh, looks like you're a SUPAGENIUS!

Ha! The dodgy test said that I had an IQ of 153! Take that!


Feh. Obviously that was a johnny-come-lately competitor, trying to grab a greater share of the gullible demographic by overestimating their IQ even further. By today, they're probably giving out numbers in the high 200's. :P

speedweasel
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:31 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby speedweasel » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:02 am UTC

Self-selection FTW. Really, how many people are going to brag about their 89 IQ?

User avatar
SomeRandomPyro
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:26 pm UTC
Location: Freakin' Texas
Contact:

Re: Numbers

Postby SomeRandomPyro » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:18 am UTC

PhilHibbs wrote:
tastelikecoke wrote:I'm still wondering if there are actually 945 000 smart people or 945 000 idiots over the internet.

Or 945 000 broken IQ tests.

Or just that if you're going to write "My IQ is..." on the internet, then there is probably a reason - if I thought I had an IQ of 102 then I would not be inclined to brag about it. 100 is special because it's exactly average by definition, which is why there is a spike there. So the graph may well be an accurate indication of IQ range for the subset of society that is inclined to write "My IQ is..." on the internet.

Also, we all know that Google Search hits are not an accurate survey indicator, I doubt that 116,000 people have "died in a blogging accident".


123,000 now, but the actual number's quite a lot higher. It's only since Randall used the phrase that people started describing the deaths as such. Before, they were considered unexplained deaths after not forwarding threatening blog comments.
I'm dedicated to binary because it makes all my numbers happy.

yet another steven
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby yet another steven » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:32 am UTC

I think having an IQ >= 125 is convenient, just so you can make enough sense of the world to be able to avoid some of the common pitfalls, get a reasonably interesting job and friends, and create a decent life for yourself. But anything >= 140 may lead to thinking too much, being "different" in school, and it is only really helpful if you want a career in science.

Unfortunately, I am in fact pursuing a career in science... lots of clever people to compete with... am I smart enough?
Sigh.

Btw, my IQ was measured when I was about 12 by my mom (who was training to be a school psychologist at the time). It was about 135. Smoking lots of pot when I was 18 can't have improved that figure. Currently, my IQ according to the web is usually between 140 and 150 (I did two or three of them over the years). So it seems they slap on about one standard deviation or so. I can now no longer be tested reliably because I've seen too many tests.

User avatar
a1s
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 11:56 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby a1s » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:37 am UTC

phlip wrote:On the other hand, there are a heap of sites out there that offer free IQ tests that massively overestimate your IQ.

Actually they don't. there are literally dozens of standards for measuring IQ out there, and many do not even have a median at 100 (like PhilHibbs suggested ), so yeah, by some IQ test out there you might have an IQ of 150 and qualify for the Triple Nine Society (it's like Mensa, but for actually smart people), so you can be proud of yourself. Also your penis will be over 2 times longer if you switch to metric units.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centimetre ... m_of_units

pv2b
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:33 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby pv2b » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:45 am UTC

This reminds me of something I thought up around december 5, 2007 (if file timestamps can be beleived).

Image

I wanted to know the "correct" number of a's in the interjection Khaaaaaaaan! Turns out, by crowdsourcing the information, that it was 8 with 8450 google hits to that effect.

Full data set here.

Note that this information is a bit old, and I'm not quite sure if I still have the python script I used to get the data left anywhere. The correct number of a's has changed since 2007.

A quick investigation to Google shows the correct number of A's now to be 5 - as in Khaaaaan, with 66000 hits. Strangely, though, google does *suggest* khaaaaaaan (7 a's with 33200 hits) as the correct spelling.

One thing that's sure - the number of pages about Khaaaaaaan! seems to have grown by a factor of.... somewhere around 4 to 8 or so by some lazy mental arithmetic, since 2007.
Last edited by pv2b on Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:47 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

jonamous
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:39 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby jonamous » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:46 am UTC

japro wrote:
PhilHibbs wrote:Or just that if you're going to write "My IQ is..." on the internet, then there is probably a reason - if I thought I had an IQ of 102 then I would not be inclined to brag about it. 100 is special because it's exactly average by definition, which is why there is a spike there. So the graph may well be an accurate indication of IQ range for the subset of society that is inclined to write "My IQ is..." on the internet.[/url].

What bothers me is, that there are significantly more people with an IQ over 140 on the Internet (over one million...) than there should be on the planet (like 200'000). We should call SETI...


There are probably a lot more than 200,000 with an IQ over 140. If you take the top 1% most intelligent humans on the planet you get 60,000,000+ (6bn*.01). I find it hard to believe that out of the top 1%, there would only be 200,000 people with an IQ over 140. If we further restrict that number to folks in the top .4%, we're still left with over 24,000,000.

yet another steven
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby yet another steven » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:49 am UTC

a1s wrote:
phlip wrote:On the other hand, there are a heap of sites out there that offer free IQ tests that massively overestimate your IQ.

Actually they don't.


It's true that the tests have to be recalibrated every now and then because people keep getting better at them. Also, averages tend to vary with region (and, sorry to say, race). Still I think it's safe to say that web based tests exaggerate performance.

Btw, it's always struck me as strange that they put the average at 100; why not just use a standard normal distribution with the mean at zero and standard deviation one? The current scale seems to suggest that if your IQ is 90 your brain operates at 90% capacity or something. If I'm allowed to go with this image for a while, all you clever xkcd readers are overclocked :D If your IQ is over 150 you would have to walk around with an ice pack on your head :D
Last edited by yet another steven on Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:51 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

marcel_proust
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:01 pm UTC

Re: Numbers

Postby marcel_proust » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:50 am UTC

Cup size is a number? Who knew?


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Leovan and 32 guests