1301: "File Extensions"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:59 am UTC

Image

Mouseover caption: I have never been lied to by data in a .txt file which has been hand-aligned.

Reminds me of a blog post I once read about judging people's résumés based on format.

I'm not getting the distinction between .jpeg and .jpg; honestly I've never seen a .jpeg file out in the wild. Though I always use .jpeg for JPEG images just to prove to anyone who gives a shit that I, unlike apparently every software developer on the planet, am aware that Windows has been able to accept filenames with more than three-character extensions since 1995 and every other OS in existence has been able to since their inception so why aren't we using all of them?

On a related note,
Image
anyone know what's up with this banner?
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 797
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby rhomboidal » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:03 am UTC

For safety's sake, I just assume that anything with a video extension is the Devil's disinformation.

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:09 am UTC

I've once received a report in ppt format. Wanted to kill him

Eutychus
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Eutychus » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:17 am UTC

Yes, when I saw that .ppt was on the plus side of the graph, my immediate thought was "Randall must never have read Death by Powerpoint".

Which, ironically enough in view of the new banner ad on the main page, could be subtitled "why you will not go to space today"...
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

WilliamLehnsherr
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:58 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby WilliamLehnsherr » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:26 am UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:Reminds me of a blog post I once read about judging people's résumés based on format.


I don't know, in my experience most employers would expect a .doc file. Then again, I don't and never have worked as an engineer.

On topic... well, I have nothing relevant to say.

scarletmanuka
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 4:29 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby scarletmanuka » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:43 am UTC

Just wanted to say that the reliability score given for .xls/.xlsx is way too high.

Mansoon
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:03 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Mansoon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:06 am UTC

I don't know.... I miss the days when XKCD told stories and had emotions... It seems like most of the comics now are one-panel data mashes....

User avatar
BlitzGirl
Posts: 9098
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby BlitzGirl » Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:37 am UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:On a related note,
Image
anyone know what's up with this banner?

It's an Umwelt-image. I don't see that one. I see this one:
Spoiler:
Image
Using Chrome browser on an iPad. I see a different one using Safari that's in Up Goer Five style.
I thought .png file extensions were supposed to be trustworthy!
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image<Profile
~.Image~.FAQ->Image

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:04 am UTC

BlitzGirl wrote:
Steve the Pocket wrote:On a related note,
Image
anyone know what's up with this banner?

It's an Umwelt-image. I don't see that one. I see this one:
Spoiler:
Image
Using Chrome browser on an iPad. I see a different one using Safari that's in Up Goer Five style.
I thought .png file extensions were supposed to be trustworthy!


The image is retrieved via the following js script:
http://dynamic.xkcd.com/test?_=<random number>

Where random number is something like 10950793589435.
Changing the number doesn't seem to make a difference.

For the record, the one I'm getting on chromium browser in linux is store_gd_e13_tY59.png
Image
and the one on firefox in linux is store_gd_e14_W4R0.png
Image
chromium browser "incognito" and firefox private mode in linux: store_gd_e4_YLkf.png
Image
Last edited by dalcde on Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:07 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
patzer
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:48 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby patzer » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:06 am UTC

The store image I get is
store_gd_e15_8Fjv.png
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands. –Douglas Adams

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:22 am UTC

Related information: The banner is not displayed on the Umwelt comic page, but is found everywhere else (afaik)

User avatar
3rdtry
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:46 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby 3rdtry » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:30 am UTC

Code: Select all

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 -256 1792 1792" version="1.1">
  <g transform="matrix(1,0,0,-1,129.08475,1346.1695)" id="g3890">
    <path d="m 256,192 q 0,26 -19,45 -19,19 -45,19 -26,0 -45,-19 -19,-19 -19,-45 0,-26 19,-45 19,-19 45,-19 26,0 45,19 19,19 19,45 z m 1152,576 q 0,51 -39,89.5 -39,38.5 -89,38.5 H 928 q 0,58 48,159.5 48,101.5 48,160.5 0,98 -32,145 -32,47 -128,47 -26,-26 -38,-85 -12,-59 -30.5,-125.5 Q 777,1131 736,1088 714,1065 659,997 655,992 636,967 617,942 604.5,926 592,910 570,883.5 548,857 530,839.5 512,822 491.5,804 471,786 451.5,777 432,768 416,768 H 384 V 128 h 32 q 13,0 31.5,-3 18.5,-3 33,-6.5 14.5,-3.5 38,-11 Q 542,100 553.5,96 565,92 589,83.5 613,75 618,73 829,0 960,0 h 121 q 192,0 192,167 0,26 -5,56 30,16 47.5,52.5 17.5,36.5 17.5,73.5 0,37 -18,69 53,50 53,119 0,25 -10,55.5 -10,30.5 -25,47.5 32,1 53.5,47 21.5,46 21.5,81 z m 128,1 q 0,-89 -49,-163 9,-33 9,-69 0,-77 -38,-144 3,-21 3,-43 0,-101 -60,-178 1,-139 -85,-219.5 -86,-80.5 -227,-80.5 h -36 -93 q -96,0 -189.5,22.5 Q 677,-83 554,-40 438,0 416,0 H 128 Q 75,0 37.5,37.5 0,75 0,128 V 768 Q 0,821 37.5,858.5 75,896 128,896 h 274 q 36,24 137,155 58,75 107,128 24,25 35.5,85.5 11.5,60.5 30.5,126.5 19,66 62,108 39,37 90,37 84,0 151,-32.5 67,-32.5 102,-101.5 35,-69 35,-186 0,-93 -48,-192 h 176 q 104,0 180,-76 76,-76 76,-179 z" id="path3892" style="fill:currentColor" />
  </g>
</svg>

User avatar
najodleglejszy
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby najodleglejszy » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:47 am UTC

Image

knotpossible
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:17 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby knotpossible » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:00 am UTC

The first thing I thought of when I saw the chart was comic 833. I think I can do better. Goodbye.

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:09 am UTC

knotpossible wrote:The first thing I thought of when I saw the chart was comic 833. I think I can do better. Goodbye.


I'd consider the chart to be well-labeled. Apparently the vertical axis is the file extensions, and the horizontal must be the trustworthiness according to the title. Absolute measurements of trustworthiness are not needed (and not possible)

J. Curwen
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:45 am UTC
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby J. Curwen » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:23 am UTC

I get this one (Firefox on ubuntu 12.04)
Image
Toast, being an inanimate object, obviously lacks both the ability and the desire to right itself.
-- Wikipedia on the "Buttered cat paradox"

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:28 am UTC

J. Curwen wrote:I get this one (Firefox on ubuntu 12.04)
Image

Weird. I get a different one using Firefox on Mint 16 (Ubuntu 13.10)

Jinksy
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:38 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Jinksy » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:19 am UTC

Am I the only one who immediately clicked 'copy image location' to find out how self-consistent the comic was?

User avatar
Gregoreo
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:43 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Gregoreo » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:32 am UTC

Insightful. Except PDF in my experience is near the mean of the others, since it derives from those sources.

There's also a tendency for trust decay as a file ages.

cout
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:55 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby cout » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:08 pm UTC

Glaringly missing: .ps.gz

(which should be at the top of the list)

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Klear » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:13 pm UTC

So what about *.odt? In my experience the data itself is trustworthy, but you'll never get to it.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 834
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:21 pm UTC

dalcde wrote:Related information: The banner is not displayed on the Umwelt comic page, but is found everywhere else (afaik)

For some reason it (like the Umwelt comic) doesn't show up in my firefox browser in https... It does show up in arora and konqueror, but not in chromium. I think I found the culprit, it's the new mixed content blocking in firefox and chromium (where they block http requests from an https site).

EDIT:
Klear wrote:So what about *.odt? In my experience the data itself is trustworthy, but you'll never get to it.

You tried to use Microsoft products to open it didn't you?

Carteeg_Struve
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:56 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Carteeg_Struve » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:25 pm UTC

Fell off the bottom of the list: exe :D

dalcde
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:49 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby dalcde » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:26 pm UTC

Klear wrote:So what about *.odt? In my experience the data itself is trustworthy, but you'll never get to it.

I like to receive .od* documents, although my office suite handles them just as well as their Microsoft counterparts. Feels better to be open.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3074
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby orthogon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:33 pm UTC

Presumably html was omitted because there is no one single value: the trustworthyness depends on the background colour and number of different fonts.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
samandiriel
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:30 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby samandiriel » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:34 pm UTC

Or, to put it another way: "The ease of ornamenting information in a medium is inversely proportional to it's truth." Feel free to call this "Munroe's Law", it's my saturnalia gift to you :)

stickler
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 12:40 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby stickler » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:35 pm UTC

And yet .pdf has about the same position in "likelihood of file having a hidden bit of code that runs without permission, by file extension".

Now that there are ads on xkcd, I shall have to create a white list for Adblock Plus in case they start getting blocked.

I get the bobcat one on Win8 and the blue paper on Win7, whatever browser I use (FF or IE).

Bossi
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:37 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Bossi » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:47 pm UTC

.ppt and .doc files consisting of nothing but .jpgs, however...

User avatar
Envelope Generator
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:07 am UTC
Location: pareidolia

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Envelope Generator » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

I get a random store banner every time I load the page. Check these out:

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Judging by the image urls there must be at least two more variants.
I'm going to step off the LEM now... here we are, Pismo Beach and all the clams we can eat

eSOANEM wrote:If Fonzie's on the order of 100 zeptokelvin, I think he has bigger problems than difracting through doors.

uncleroy
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: New York City

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby uncleroy » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:22 pm UTC

Chrome on OS X consistently shows this one:

Image

Turning Adblock Plus on and off seems to have no effect. I didn't even know there were other possibilities until I read this thread.

Monday musings I guess.

TrueNarnian
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:49 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby TrueNarnian » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:26 pm UTC

Bear in mind though, this whole chart is only as trustworthy as a PNG

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2052
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby cellocgw » Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:42 pm UTC

dalcde wrote:I've once received a report in ppt format. Wanted to kill him


I get those all the time. I can't figure what the author was thinking. Worse, I send back a note asking for a text document, and some third-party wiseguy tells me not to denigrate the author's personal style.


Meanwhile, to add to the list (all w/ tongues firmly in cheeks) :
+20 : .R (R-language files)
+10 : .apk
-5: .m (Matlab files)
-200: file.DOC, or worse file.DOC.doc
-400: file.jpg.exe
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 834
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:50 pm UTC

uncleroy wrote:Chrome on OS X consistently shows this one:

Image

Turning Adblock Plus on and off seems to have no effect. I didn't even know there were other possibilities until I read this thread.

Monday musings I guess.

I don't think the browser, or OS has anything to do with it beyond the property of allowing or disallowing cookies from dynamic.xkcd.com...

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Flumble » Mon Dec 09, 2013 3:12 pm UTC

I wonder where .BAT.MY%20OSX%20DOCUMENTS-INSTALL.EXE.RAR.INI.TAR.DOÇX.PHPHPHP.XHTML.TML.XTL.TXXT.0DAY.HACK.ERS_(1995)_BLURAY_CAM-XVID.EXE.TAR.[SCR].LISP.MSI.LNK.ZDA.GNN.WRBT.OBJ.O.H.SWF.DPKG.APP.ZIP.TAR.TAR.CO.GZ.A.OUT.EXE is on this scale.

Ekaros
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:37 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby Ekaros » Mon Dec 09, 2013 3:47 pm UTC

Flumble wrote:I wonder where .BAT.MY%20OSX%20DOCUMENTS-INSTALL.EXE.RAR.INI.TAR.DOÇX.PHPHPHP.XHTML.TML.XTL.TXXT.0DAY.HACK.ERS_(1995)_BLURAY_CAM-XVID.EXE.TAR.[SCR].LISP.MSI.LNK.ZDA.GNN.WRBT.OBJ.O.H.SWF.DPKG.APP.ZIP.TAR.TAR.CO.GZ.A.OUT.EXE is on this scale.


http://xkcd.com/1162/ and the alt text is relevant here, I believe.

EugeneStyles
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:59 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby EugeneStyles » Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:12 pm UTC

scarletmanuka wrote:Just wanted to say that the reliability score given for .xls/.xlsx is way too high.


I think xlsx should be substantially lower on the list than xls.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3074
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby orthogon » Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:30 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:
dalcde wrote:I've once received a report in ppt format. Wanted to kill him


I get those all the time. I can't figure what the author was thinking.

Folklore in our office has it that drawing in Powerpoint is slightly less broken than Word (or, ironically, Visio), so sometimes you see Powerpoint slides embedded as diagrams in documents.

I like to imagine that Microsoft has a Japanese-style fifty-year plan involving fixing the grid in Office products and making it possible to select Only Label and Number as the default, with an elite team of top researchers working on it.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
BAReFOOt
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:48 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby BAReFOOt » Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:33 pm UTC

What? NO!

.jpg exists only for those losers whose operating system couldn’t handle anything beyond 8+3 file names! (Like old versions of Windows.)
.jpeg is the only correct extension for image/jpeg (/^JFIF/) files!

P.S.: Why doesn’t this forum have an inline-[code]?

User avatar
BAReFOOt
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:48 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby BAReFOOt » Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:01 pm UTC

orthogon wrote: Folklore in our office has it that drawing in Powerpoint is slightly less broken than Word (or, ironically, Visio), so sometimes you see Powerpoint slides embedded as diagrams in documents.


Y'all motherfuckers need some .dot!
(Or SVG if it’s not [just] a diagram.)

User avatar
BAReFOOt
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:48 am UTC

Re: 1301: "File Extensions"

Postby BAReFOOt » Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:06 pm UTC

Flumble wrote:I wonder where .BAT.MY%20OSX%20DOCUMENTS-INSTALL.EXE.RAR.INI.TAR.DOÇX.PHPHPHP.XHTML.TML.XTL.TXXT.0DAY.HACK.ERS_(1995)_BLURAY_CAM-XVID.EXE.TAR.[SCR].LISP.MSI.LNK.ZDA.GNN.WRBT.OBJ.O.H.SWF.DPKG.APP.ZIP.TAR.TAR.CO.GZ.A.OUT.EXE is on this scale.


Well XHTML, TAR and even O, are perfectly fine. RAR, ZIP and GZ are way below bz2, let alone xz. And I don’t know if the correct extension of Lisp files is LISP, but in that case it would be good too. INI is barely bearable. OBJ is OK if it’s a 3D file format, I guess.
Assuming all of them are in lower case.

The rest can burn in hell.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 105 guests