You are right, but for xkcd it's a concept to have a second joke in the alt text since forever. There used to be a transcript of all comics right on the site available for those that need it, but it has been discontinued, probably in favor of explainxkcd.com, where you'll still find a transcript for every comic.
In this case, it’s not really on OP; that’s what Randall puts in the xkcd alt text. There is a transcription for each comic on explainxkcd that ppl could copy to the post though
Regardless of the other comment, you’re right, the alt text is wrong. Alt text is used by visually impaired users to understand what the image is about and is not the place to put the title of the XKCD.
It’s not the title, but rather a sort of “bonus joke” that pops up when you hover a cursor over the image (or long press on mobile I think). It’s a staple of xkcd and other webcomics, but I’ll grant that it does present some confusion for those who rely on alt text.
I for one appreciated that being in the post so I didn’t need to click thru for the bonus joke as I usually would. Perhaps it’s just better to call it something other than alt text.
Sequoia Brussels sprouts are delicious but it’s pretty hard to finish one.
Yes, it’s a pretty obvious riff on the main joke, i.e. entertaining the idea that Brassica sequoia is a real thing, based on the fact that brussels sprouts, like cauliflower, collards, kohlrabi, cabbage and others, are all cultivars of B. oleracea.
If you didn’t know that last bit, I can see getting confused about the alt-text.
Alternative (Alt) Text is meant to convey the “why” of the image as it relates to the content of a document or webpage. It is read aloud to users by screen reader software, and it is indexed by search engines. [Harvard link]
Oh, I see what you mean! So strictly speaking, alt-text should be used for the intended purpose, i.e. in order to help certain users and searches, etc.
Fortunately or unfortunately, I suspect most webcomics makers, and no doubt others, are going to keep using it the way they are. I’m not sure there’s a real issue in this case, but maybe in others…
I usually ask people to name a food stuff that hasn’t been genetically manipulated in some way by human hands. You can’t. There really are none. Even non-gmo food stuffs are still selectively bred or clonal species.
You could probably make an argument that we’ve still put some sort of evolutionary pressure on game animals and affected the course of their evolution, though definitely on a much smaller scale than with the animals we have deliberately bred.
One example is there’s a mutation in African elephants that causes females to not have tusks, that gene has been around for a long time, there has pretty much always been some portion of female African elephants without tusks (Asian elephant females are usually tuskless or have very small tusks,) but because of ivory poaching we’re seeing more of those tuskless females than in the past in a lot of populations, because the tuskless females have more opportunities to reproduce and pass on their genes since they’re less likely to be targeted by poachers.
There are probably more examples, and a lot of them are probably a lot more subtle.
I debated on whether or not to list these, because the actual science to back them up is spotty at best, but I think they help to illustrate the kinds of effects we could potentially have on a non-domesticated species. Some people think deer antlers are shrinking due to hunting pressure, and that rattlesnakes have smaller rattles or rattle less than they used to because the ones that make a lot of noise are more likely to be noticed and killed by humans. Again the actual science to back those claims up is lacking, and even if they are happening, which isn’t a given, there’s a lot potential explanations like environmental factors that may be separate from evolutionary pressure.
I suppose the only one where the foodstuffs argument would kinda fit is the deer, but then people that eat them go for overall animal size as opposed to just the antlers.
Blackberries have grown wild in Europe for thousands of years. The US ones have been messed with by farmers and scientists, but in the UK they’re pretty much the original deal.
Yeah I was thinking about this recently. Wild blackberries you see all over the place growing like a weed are pretty much the exact same as the ones you see in a shop.
It’s nothing like, say, apples, which have been changed a lot by humans.
Possibly kangaroo meat? Boomers such as the Eastern Grey are pretty unmanipulated, and taste like venison.
Yeah, but not the Gen Z kangaroos. They’ve been manipulated by social media their entire lives. Some taste like beef, some taste like chicken, and some refuse to be eaten at all! When the older generations tell them to just let themselves be hunted, they say, “OK, Boomer!”
… I honestly can’t tell if you think I didn’t get that when I made a joke (apparently not a good one, judging from the downvotes) based on the double meaning, or if you are making a really, really dry joke in return. If it’s the latter, nicely done!
Is it not the case that kale, broccoli, cauliflower and cabbage are all basically derived from the same plant?
This is what I’ve been told, but I am very ignorant of such matters and while you will say that I can simply Google the issue, which is true, it’s never been enough of a priority for me to do so, goddammit.
As for Sequoia sempervirens or Sequoiadendron giganteum being forms of broccoli, I do in fact know enough dendrology to know that it’s bullshyte.
Add comment