xkcd To Be Released In Book Form 198
History's Coming To writes "xkcd creator Randall Munroe has revealed on his blag that the acclaimed stick-figure comic will be produced in real dead-tree book form. Fantastic news for all fans of comedy, maths, science, and relationship screw-ups — especially given that the book will be sold in aid of the charity 'Room To Read.' Rumors that the book contains a joke in the ISBN remain unconfirmed." The NY Times article that Munroe links (registration may be required) is from April of this year, and I am amazed that this community didn't note the story at that time. The book will be published by breadpig, which was created by Alexis Ohanian, one of the founders of reddit.
The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Insightful)
The NY Times article that Munroe links (registration may be required) is from April of this year, and I am amazed that this community didn't note the story at that time.
Well, using a very simple search (xkcd book) in the firehose, I found spongedaddy's submission [slashdot.org], my own submission [slashdot.org] and even one of the bin spammers submitted it [slashdot.org]. And we all linked to the same NYTimes story.
... yet you yourselves do not use this tool to your advantage when looking for duplicates.
Your firehose search tool is there, yes it's slow and clunky. I don't care that you rejected my submission of this story three months ago but don't say I didn't notice one of my favorite web comics being published in book form. I mean, go ahead and say "slow news day" in your summary, I don't care if you feel obligated to dig up old news for stories at 12:25 AM EST on a Tuesday. Also, it confuses me greatly that you provide for us a means to make sure we don't submit a URL that's already been submitted as the primary link by another individual
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
How does XKCD work as a book?
A book? Who said anything about a book? Its being released in book form. If it were to be released as a book, surely the headline would read:
XKCD Author Publishing Book.
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe it's going to be a pop-up book? Pull the slider, see the alt text?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe it's going to be a pop-up book? Pull the slider, see the alt text?
When I was a kid, there were puzzle books that used invisible ink and a special highlighter pen that made it visible. [googles] Like this [kellisgifts.com]. I'm sure it would add a lot to the cost, but it would be the perfect way to do web-comic "alt text" in a printed book.
Um, excuse me. I have to go file a patent application...
Re: (Score:2)
Ooh ooh! glow-under-blacklight ink!
Re: (Score:2)
When I see a printout from XKCD I wave my finger (Score:2)
When I see a printout copy of XKCD I have this urge to hover my finger over the surface of the page, waiting for a bonus punchline to appear.
It's a really weird feeling.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Half of the joke is only seen when you hover over the cartoon.
Man..., after all this time following xkcd, and i just learned that from you (I wondered what you meant, and i just checked it with monday's strip). I wonder what i've been missing all this time (not gonna recheck them). I guess i'll wait until i buy the book and hope they use the hover-over text as a bottom note.
I feel dumb. And judging by your +5 Informative, i'm not the only one who learnt something today.
Cheers!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Randall attaches a text comment to each comic that appears as a tooltip when you leave your cursor sitting on the image for a few seconds. It's almost always directly related to the comic, although it may or may not be directly related to the story presented.
--- Mr. DOS
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto.
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right, of course, but - it's kdawson. That's all that need be said.
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Interesting)
Before I didn't like the negativity being pointed squarely at kdawson, but now I'm 100% in the anti-kdawson camp.
Don't shit on your readers mate.
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Funny)
> Don't shit on your readers mate.
I can't tell if that sentence is missing a comma or an apostrophe...
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Funny)
The article was posted by kdawson from the 'my-normal-approach-is-useless-here' dept.
'here'?
Re:The Fans DID Notice It Though (Score:5, Funny)
Hey can you fix the Slashdot CSS while you're here?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.reddit.com/search?q=xkcd+nytimes [reddit.com]
Yes, we noticed on Reddit and talked about it when it was NEWs.
Oblig xkcd reference (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oblig xkcd reference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oblig xkcd reference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oblig xkcd reference (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us have reversed modifiers (half the time flamebait really isn't, so it gets +5 for me. My subscriber bonus? -1.) A natural five overcomes that if the negative bonuses aren't too high.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oblig xkcd reference (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Brings up a good point. Just how are you supposed to link to a book? I can see it now, There's an xkcd for that (page 30).
The standards compliant way. [wikipedia.org]
I might buy this book... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I might buy this book... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or you could just, you know, visit the website [xkcd.com].
So much environmental stuff. Climate change, pollution, rampant deforestation etc... And here we are. Making books of websites.
Re:I might buy this book... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I might buy this book... (Score:5, Funny)
I don't always have the internet with me, in a form convenient for viewing xkcd or anything similar
Randall take note. This guy is a rich source of meta tech culture irony.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is the perfect subthread to do this...
"There's an XKCD for that".
Re:I might buy this book... (Score:5, Funny)
That, and turning pages and reading is faster than mindless clicking a next button that's never in quite the same spot
And listening is faster and less mindless than turning pages so yeah I'll wait for the audiobook.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That, and turning pages and reading is faster than mindless clicking a next button that's never in quite the same spot.
And you call yourself a webcomic reader!? Anyone even halfway sensible will head to the archives [xkcd.com] and open a bunch of the pages in tabs, and then just CTRL+W for the next comic (which is faster than turning pages). The added benefit is that you have a buffer just in case you get disconnected.
More importantly, xkcd belongs to the advanced class of webcomics that put the movement links both above and below the comic, which means that the next link will be in the same spot unless you need to scroll.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never seen those work except on IE.. even if they're on the page Firefox/OSX doesn't seem to support them. By the time you've worked out which combination of alt/shift/cmd to press and guessed at the key code you might as well have pressed on the icon anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
1. It's a three button combination (for Firefox anyway, ALT+SHIFT+P/N) which is not comfortable to use with one hand, and you have to press enter after that. Compare to just two buttons of CTRL+W and no subsequent enter press needed.
2. Most webcomics don't have accesskeys, whereas closing a tab works on (pretty much) every type of page.
3. I'd still have to wait for the page to load, whereas with tabs they'll be loaded in the background ahead of time.
Seriously, why would I use them?
Re: (Score:2)
Because not every computer can load six hundred and eighteen tabs? And that way you wont have to go back to the archives sixty times and right click or middle click 618 times?
I said 'open a bunch of the pages in tabs', not 'open them all in tabs'. And if you're going back to the archives 60 times for a comic with 618 pages, you're not opening them in bunches.
The thing is that you're going to have to click something 618 times, no matter which way you do it. I prefer to do the clicking in bursts of 30-60, giving me 30-60 strips of uninterrupted reading, temporary invulnerability to disconnections, and (in my experience) less time wasted on waiting for the pages to load.
You're missing instructions in your instruction set!
What's wron
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I might buy this book... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or you could just, you know, visit the website [xkcd.com].
So much environmental stuff. Climate change, pollution, rampant deforestation etc... And here we are. Making books of websites.
Print N books, cut down N/x trees. Keep a website running for N days, burn y kilograms of carbon for each one of those N days. (Or do you think all that bandwidth and server/routers usage is pollution-free?)
We all pollute the environment. I just don't think printing books is the greatest form of pollution.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Printing books is actually very low on pollution and could even be carbon negative. You have some pollution with the equipment to cut the tree down, pulp it and the printing presses and such - but that's once off.
The paper in the books, assuming they don't get burned are... you guessed it: carbon, not carbon dioxide and not in the atmosphere.
You have a permanent safe and useful storage of carbon where it doesn't pollute. Running a website uses energy all the time, meaning a constant pollution, even if books
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily separate, carbon output is now considered one form of pollution.
Some nasty chemicals might be used in paper production, but my impression is that it's mostly recovered and reused. It's only pollution if it gets out of the system.
Paper production uses a lot of water, but most of it is recovered. Not that water is necessarily a pollutant, just saying that it's another thing that is recovered.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
So much environmental stuff. Climate change, pollution, rampant deforestation etc... And here we are. Making books of websites.
Here's an interesting question for ya: How long does it take to read the book? And how much energy does your computer take to run for that amount of time? And for that matter, how much carbon is sequestered in the book that would otherwise be released by decomposition or burning? I'd be interested to see whether an oft-read book is a net carbon gain or loss, assuming your alternative is reading the comic on your beefy gaming PC.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he has a solar panel in the ceiling. Here in Portugal, with the government help and all, they're getting very tempting.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Uhh,
I bought one of the PhD Comics book for two reasons:
1. I really liked the comics and therefore wanted to give back something to the author
2. It is really good stuff to have in the toilet while taking a dump. It provides real inspiration!
The book is made on recyclable paper (IIRC) for your eco-freak needs. And you can even give it another use after you finish ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Your computer, on the other hand, is running on electricity, which is guaranteed to be, in some part, powered by a coal plant somewhere. So, your computer is producing CO2, but that book is sequestering it.
So,
Obligatory... (Score:2, Funny)
What about Qwantz? (Score:2, Funny)
Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
So if I look at the pictures in the book long enough will the alt text pop up?
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe it will be printed in margin, or perhaps the endnotes?
More importantly to me, at least, I hope the format is small enough to fit one per page, so that the page numbers match up. I'm not weird for knowing the strips by their numbers, right?
"Oops, you got an injection attack! 327! [xkcd.com]"
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
"Oops, you got an injection attack! 327! [xkcd.com]"
I almost tried that IRL. My wife wouldn't let me pick our daughter's name.
Re: (Score:2)
My ex wouldn't have gotten it if I had attempted it, so I suggested a good name from mythology (yet fits in well with modern kids names). Now, how old does she have to be before I try to explain the ancient meaning to her name? I'm thinking 4 years old are a good time to start teaching children dead mythologies with stacks of deities. :) At very least, it'll really throw her kindergarden teacher. Most kids will be learning to spell "cat". Mine will be referencing mythology and trying to
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe TFA actually explains how it will be printed?
One trick in transferring the material from online to print has been how to recreate the âoetitle textâ that comments on the strip when your cursor hovers over it. "It's not supposed to be a punch line, but hopefully if you didn't laugh, you'll laugh at this," he said. The title text will appear where the tiny copyright notice would appear on a traditional strip.
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
So if I look at the pictures in the book long enough will the alt text pop up?
Yes.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you have to hit F5 a couple times.
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:4, Funny)
Fatal realization (Score:2)
So if I look at the pictures in the book long enough will the alt text pop up?
There's an image alt text [htmlhelp.com] on the comics?!?
I've been reading them to years... never noticed that. I mean in order to display that alt text I would have had to stay absolutely still for one second! Impossible!
You see I never let go of my mouse - and as its a one of those precision ones it'll pick up the pulse from my hand and remain in constant motion. And the cursor! I don't bring the cursor around where I'm looking at the page; I keep it where it belongs, at the tab bar there, and only move it away to click
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
More likely she will kill him with her brain!
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:5, Insightful)
I realised the guy is a fraud.
Um ... how exactly is someone who does a webcomic a "fraud"? WYSIWIG: little stick figures doing goofy things. You liked his earlier comics, you don't like his later ones, fine. But he's not lying to anyone about what he's doing.
Re: (Score:2)
I've read a lot of Goldbergs posts, but after reading http://entertainment.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1324427&cid=28936679 [slashdot.org] I realised that he was a dick and added him to my foe list.
There we go, a more honest version of his comment :)
Re: (Score:2)
Me too, I think the noise ratio is going up for at least a year. But then he is not at NASA anymore, so he probably does less math stuff. I think another problem is that honest criticism [blogspot.com] is not taken into account -- actually I asked Randall on IRC and he said that he fears getting obsessed with quality and prefers not worrying. While I see that this might be enjoyable, I think a little more thought couldn't be that damaging; just compare his approach [xkcd.com] to the Debian/OpenSSL disaster to m [dieweltistgarnichtso.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That you don't understand why his comics are funnier than yours despite your claim of depth explains why his comics are funnier than yous. For reference, see Calvin and Hobbes vs. Anything Printed in The New Yorker.
Also, there's something to be said about a blog that takes 13 paragraphs to mock a 4 panel comic strip.
Re:Limitations of Dead Tree (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Finally (Score:3, Funny)
This book will be for fans only (Score:2, Insightful)
Still, great news! May the force be with Randall.
Surprised at /. falling down again? (Score:5, Insightful)
So the editor is surprised no one told /. about the recent news? Hey, they only missed that story by a few months. Surprise? That's a funnier laugh than the best of XKCD, which is saying a bit, since some of them are pretty funny.
Gee, you don't suppose the so-called editor could be in a position to do something to improve /. to the point where interesting news and humor would again be visible around here?
Of course personal recollection is just one data point at best, but... Some years ago I used to visit /. quite often, perhaps several times a day versus several times a week these days--unless a month or two has gone by. On an average visit I expected to see at several very interesting articles and at least one first report that I hadn't seen elsewhere versus my current expectation of seeing one or two non-boring stories and nothing that I haven't seen elsewhere one or two days earlier. A typical visit would reveal a number of very witty comments and usually one or two actually funny and new jokes versus the current crop of a scattering of very tired memes. I remember looking at a relatively large thread (which are relatively rare these days) and finding exactly one comment that had even been moderated as funny--and that one wasn't even amusing.
Most importantly, the moderation used to be pretty poor instead of downright horrendous. Apparently the lousy moderators have won that game--and I expect the moderation of this post to prove my point (yet again).
But the so-called editors are apparently quite satisfied with the devolution of the system. I guess lower traffic on /. means less so-called work for them?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's kdawson. The summary somehow has to create outrage and be worded in needlessly inflammatory language.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
kdawson dude.
Like "que pasa" except use a troll voice.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the lousy moderators have won that game--and I expect the moderation of this post to prove my point (yet again).
And you're complaining about tired memes? I'm pretty sure that particular meme has been around since, oh, about the time a bunch of us got banned from moderating for participating / moderating the first slashdot troll post investigation [google.com] thread. Complaining about what the mods will do to your post in order to get modded up isn't quite the oldest trick in the book, but it's certainly in the first chapter.
That said, I agree with most of your post. And, of all the non-editors here, kdawson is probably the wo
Helpimtrappedintheisbndatabase (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
But... (Score:2)
Subject (Score:2)
Neato, a comic which is funny maybe 15% of the time (but to be fair, it is VERY funny when it does get it right) is going to hit bookshelves.
Coffee Table Fodder (Score:2)
Or just throw it on the throne and enjoy.
All the people tagging this article (Score:4, Interesting)
I think they must just be suffering from the curse of hating things just because they're popular. I know I have a tendency to do the same thing, but I generally actually do a bit of investigation to find out if it's popular for a reason I can appreciate first.
The other possibility is hating something just because everybody else discovered it and now you can't be cool for knowing about this obscure but fantastic thing that nobody else knows about. Considering this crowd, I expect that's the more likely scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just because it doesn't tickle your sense of humor doesn't mean it's not funny to others.
Good news everyone! (Score:2)
I know there's quite a bit of hate in the comments about the late submission, but here are my comments on the actual news bit:
[See comment subject]
Also, I hope Randall doesn't dick his reader fan-base by pullng a Scott Adams and pulling the content that's made its way into the book, OFF his site.
Dear Scott, I know you want to make bajillions of moneys through book deals, but you lost this reader when you sold out to your publisher and removed all the blog posts that went into your book. "Oops" [mediabistro.com] just doesn't
Please without Paypal (Score:2)
Not really interested (Score:2)
I'm not that into Pokemon.
Re:Is XKCD Shitty Today? (Score:5, Insightful)
I like that you need somebody else's opinion to know whether something is enjoyable or not. I'd like you to check out my new websites: isslashdotshittytoday.com and arehatersshittytoday.com. I'm working on an iskdawsonshittytoday.com, but I keep getting divide by zero errors in the rss.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the shittiness that's xkcd's real problem, it's the general smugness and smart-arsed nature of a lot of it.
Being smug and smart-assed is the real problem? And here I thought it was the whole point.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Which sums up the impression I get reading your average xkcd strip, if I'm not about to hurl at Munroe's insipid melancholy. It turns out you don't need to be that clever; nevertheless I am in xkcd's presumed target audience, and despite getting many of the gags still don't find them that funny. Moreover, I cannot see what the hell my peers think is so great about it. Seriously, do they need a bunch of mathsier-than-thou stick drawings to reaf
Re: (Score:2)
Which sums up the impression I get reading your average xkcd strip, if I'm not about to hurl at Munroe's insipid melancholy. It turns out you don't need to be that clever; nevertheless I am in xkcd's presumed target audience, and despite getting many of the gags still don't find them that funny. Moreover, I cannot see what the hell my peers think is so great about it. Seriously, do they need a bunch of mathsier-than-thou stick drawings to reaffirm their abilities? Roughly speaking, xkcd is to geeks what The Mighty Boosh is to trendy undergrads. As far as I can see, they're both guilty of flattering their respective audiences to the point where the latter forgets that anything comic should, at least once in a while, make one laugh.
This is exactly how I feel about xkcd. It doesn't seem to exist as an honest form of expression for its own sake, but rather as a series of attempts to get its readers to go "yeah! I get that reference! go me!" When it tries to be sentimental or romantic, it ends up being syrupy-sweet glurge. When it tries to make a statement, it comes off preachy. Most of the time, it's just warmed-over references to year old memes and random, bizarre situations that are weird for the sake of being weird rather than actual
Re: (Score:2)
That is probably the one aspect that I find annoying about XKCD. Munroe often comes across as the guy who would cock-block you with tears and then laugh to himself, thinking that he had somehow gamed natural selection.
Otherwise, I enjoy the strip. Odds are if I don't find the strip funny, it means that he is referencing something I'm utterly clueless about. So then I get a little joke to help the new factoid stick in my memory. Win-win.