explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3020: Infinite Armada Chess

2024-12-05T04:57:22Z

172.71.160.70: Space invaders

== Did I do well? ==

Added a very very basic explanation.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.147.132|172.68.147.132]] 04:25, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, yes but I wonder if just one tiny fix is needed. If you replace the white side with a simplyfied artillery tower, you reinvented space invaders.

Talk:2986: Every Scientific Field

2024-09-18T08:16:22Z

172.71.160.70:

My reading of the comic is completely opposite to the current explanation. Rather than the large section being what 'a disproportionate amount of time is spent on', it's the small section, which is why we've heard of that stuff. To me, the large section represents the bulk of what is there to be studied, but is relatively poorly understood, so the point of the comic is emphasising how little we actually know about stuff in relation to what there is to be known. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.136|172.70.160.136]] 11:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
: I didn't like the word 'disproportionate' either, because to me it sounded like an accusation of too much time being spent in the wrong branch, which is not what Randall is saying. I reworded and fleshed out the description. Better now? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.167|172.70.111.167]] 11:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
: I disagree with "poorly understood" being the central issue, though, rather the branches the general public finds fascinating are often not the scientificially dominating ones. Wasps laying eggs in other insects isn't "poorly understood" at all. It's just that cute baby elephants or pandas draw huge crowds in zoos, whereas 'icky' wasps don't. And e.g. a gyroscope makes for great YouTube videos, but it's no longer a subject of fundamental physics research. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.238|162.158.154.238]] 13:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
: It's not really a matter of understanding, it's whether most of the public has even heard of it and knows that scientists are studying it. Randall's point is that most of what scientists study doesn't get much mention in the mainstream press and lay people don't know about it. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
: I disagree with "dark energy" being a no-interest-for-the-broad-public theme. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.70|172.71.160.70]] 08:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

== This stupid site is malfunctioning. ==

Hi chat. I'm the infamous #FreePalestine "troll". I would go into another rant, but there is a more pressing matter on our hands here. Whenever I try to access this site, I frequently encounter some "technical difficulties" message, claiming that I can't access the database. It occurs both on the school computers and my own device, so it's probably server-side. Can someone get to the bottom of this?

Cheers! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.48|141.101.105.48]] 19:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

:This has been happening to me too. Reloading the tab almost always fixes it, but it’s still annoying nonetheless. [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User_talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 23:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
::seems to have been fixed now :) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.33.237|162.158.33.237]] 07:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
:::Can we make it so that it it only does this for trolls and vandals?[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.27|172.69.195.27]] 08:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
::::Vunny, I zougt Mossad already did zis :-) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.70|172.71.160.70]] 08:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

2957: A Crossword Puzzle

2024-07-10T21:03:43Z

172.71.160.70: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2957
| date = July 10, 2024
| title = A Crossword Puzzle
| image = a_crossword_puzzle_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x937px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hint: If you ever encounter this puzzle in a crossword app, just [term for someone with a competitive and high-achieving personality].
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|CreAAAAAAAAted by AAAAAAAAAA BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

* 1 across. Famous pvt. wilhelm quote: Reference to the {{w|Wilhelm scream}}.
* 11 across. An IPv4 record is an "A" record, an IPv6 record is four times the length and is designated an "AAAA" record.
* 22 across. Unary's when you get to use just the one symbol. E.g. 32 in unary would be 11111111111111111111111111111111. The first four strings in unary, if you used A as the first (and only) symbol, would be A, AA, AAA, AAAA.
* 24 across. [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-63/subpart-AAAAAAA 40 Code Fed. Regs. § 63.11559], et seq., "Subpart AAAAAAA — National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing"
* 36 across. I.e. "open up". Or an expression of pain; particularly the only kind you can make with dental tools in your mouth. (As Autechre put it: [https://youtu.be/UppsLKz1iD4 "Now, I don't want you to panic... just lean back and relax."])
* 41 across. Macaulay Culkin's review of aftershave: Famously in the movie {{w|Home Alone}} he puts it on because he's home all alone and dislikes it, emitting a scream, which could be transcribed like A's.
* 50 acress. In Frozen2, Elsa hears spirits singing to her in a way that could be transcribed as "A A A A"
* 1 down. {{w|AaAaAA!!! – A Reckless Disregard for Gravity}} - notably the title is commonly extended in promotional material beyond 6 A's.
* 9 down. Decoded from Base10 to Base26 with A being 1 you get AAAAAA
* 34 down. 440Hz is an "A" note. 7 pulses would be AAAAAAA

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

{{comic discussion}}

285: Wikipedian Protester

2024-07-05T11:04:34Z

172.71.160.70: /* Trivia */

{{comic
| number = 285
| date = July 4, 2007
| title = Wikipedian Protester
| image = wikipedian_protester.png
| titletext = SEMI-PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] holds up a sign reading "[Citation needed]" during a political speech. The sign text is based on the {{w|Wikipedia:Citation needed|Wikipedia template}} that can be placed next to statements that need citations, (that look like this[citation needed]) usually because of questionable validity. Cueball is using this template to challenge the politician's speech, as political speakers often throw out claims having dubious or no factual basis. This comic was posted on Independence Day in 2007.

The title text represents an alternative sign the protester could be holding. It is a pun on popular phrase "protect the Constitution", which urges politicians to pass and enforce laws in a way that preserves the rules and rights set down by the {{w|Constitution of the United States|U.S. constitution}}. "Semi-protect" is a reference to the {{w|Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy|Wikipedia semi-protection policy}}, which is used to prevent important articles from being edited anonymously or by new users. Semi-protection on an article is shown by displaying this lock [[File:semi-protection-lock.png|12px]] on the top right of an article. Constitutional amendments are proposed by Congress, which isn't anonymous, meaning that in effect, all articles of the Constitution are technically already semi-protected. Funnily enough, the "{{w|Constitution}}" and "{{w|Constitution of the United States}}" articles on Wikipedia are now semi-protected due to excessive vandalism.

==Transcript==
:[A man with dark flat hair is standing at a podium. He is speaking to a crowd while standing behind a lectern. The lectern has a microphone on the top and sports an American flag in color on the side. He holds an arm on the lectern and the other arm is held up in front of him with a finger pointing upwards. There are four red stars on the side of the podium below him and behind him something that could be high curtains. There is an empty gap between the podium and the first people in the crowd followed by a stick with a red top, which indicates a fence to keep the crowd at a distance from the podium. After the fence there is a large crowd of people listening, most of them only partly drawn, only a few has hair. Three signs can be seen above the heads of the crowd, but they are all empty white signs. Except in the middle of the crowd, where Cueball has been raised above the rest of the crowd. He is holding a large sign up over his head in both hands. The sign has a blue text in black square brackets:]
:<big>[Citation needed]</big>

==Trivia==
* The ''[[what if? (blog)|what if?]]'' blog and this wiki use the {{Template|Citation needed}} template as a joke after statements that are blatantly obvious. For example, "The light from the Sun illuminates the Earth.{{Citation needed}}". On this wiki, the template has been used in [[:Category:Pages using the "citation needed" template|{{PAGESINCAT:Pages using the "citation needed" template}} pages]] and clicking on it leads to this comic's explanation.
* Randall {{w|User_talk:Xkcd#http://xkcd.com/c285.html|re-licensed this comic}} under [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ the CC-BY 2.5 license] so that it could be {{w|File:Webcomic xkcd - Wikipedian protester.png|used on Wikipedia}}. By default, xkcd comics are licensed under [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ CC-BY-NC 2.5], which is considered too restrictive for Wikimedia content.{{Citation needed}} On Wikipedia, this comic was featured as the {{w|Template:POTD/2018-11-23|picture of the day}} on November 23, 2018 and is used in the "{{w|Citation needed}}" article, the "{{w|Wikipedia:Citation needed}}" information page, and the "{{w|Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia cannot claim the Earth is not flat}}" essay.
* The template in this comic used to be [https://web.archive.org/web/20211215010112/https://store.xkcd.com/products/citation-needed-sticker-pack available as a sticker pack] in the xkcd store before it was [[Store|shut down]].
* xkcd fans have made [https://blog.xkcd.com/2007/10/01/the-meetup/comment-page-2/#:~:text=There%20were%20several%20gallant%20protesters%20insisting%20that%20all%20assertions%20be%20fully%20backed%2Dup. "Citation needed" signs in real life] as a joke.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:CC-BY-SA comics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Comics with xkcd store products]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Public speaking]]
[[Category:Wikipedia]]

2950: Situation

2024-06-24T19:00:07Z

172.71.160.70: Structure the explanation

{{comic
| number = 2950
| date = June 24, 2024
| title = Situation
| image = situation_2x.png
| imagesize = 578x306px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = We're right under the flight path for the scheduled orbital launch, but don't worry--it's too cold out for the rockets to operate safely, so I'm sure they'll postpone.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Shark, the iceberg of the sea - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The airship is a reference to the airship LZ 129 Hindenburg, which was destroyed in a fire on May 6, 1937

The boat is a reference to the Titanic

The bridge is a reference to?

The nuclear power plant is a reference to Chornobyl

Rhe title text also alludes to the Challenger, which is an orbital launch that failed because of cold temperatures and was not postponed.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[An airship flying, labelled] Hydrogen-filled scout airship for iceberg spotting
[The airship is chained to a ship, going along a river, labelled] Unsinkable ocean liner

[In the background on the coast a nuclear power plant, labelled] Soviet-era nuclear reactor undergoing a turbine test
[The boat and airship are steering towards a bridge, labelled] Bridge prone to aeroelastic flutter in high winds

[Caption]
In retrospect, we should have noticed how nervous the situation was making the engineers.

{{comic discussion}}

2948: Electric vs Gas

2024-06-20T08:27:37Z

172.71.160.70: /* Explanation */ There are many more bikes than vehicles with ICEs [citation needed]

{{comic
| number = 2948
| date = June 19, 2024
| title = Electric vs Gas
| image = electric_vs_gas_2x.png
| imagesize = 284x385px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = An idling gas engine may be annoyingly loud, but that's the price you pay for having WAY less torque available at a standstill.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a HYDROGEN INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE RUNNING A GENERATOR. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Internal combustion engines (ICE) are the most common technology used to propel motor vehicles. In US vernacular, the most common motor fuel is known as "gasoline", or "gas" for short, leading to these engines being referred to as "gas engines". Gasoline is a product of petroleum refinement, leading to the name "petrol" being used in other dialects. (The word "gasoline" does not actually refer to any gaseous state, but derives from the brand-name fuel "Cazeline" or "Cazelline" sold by a man called John Cassell, and "Petrol" has also been a registered brand-name for another business's motor-fuel product.)

Electric motors would seem the more obvious method for propelling a vehicle, and as early as 1885 were an actual form of motor-car engine with which the fledgling internal combustion engine had to compete. Despite this early popularity, over most of the 20th century electric motors were sidelined in everyday car design, as supplying the electricity was considered to be impractical for most forms of transportation. Modern forms are rapidly rising in popularity, and now constitute 18% of all global vehicle sales. [[Randall]] has long been a strong proponent of electric vehicles.

In this strip, [[White Hat]] claims to be comparing the pros and cons of electric motors and gas engines. The joke is that every point he makes goes in favor of electric motors. Despite it being posed as a dilemma, it may be very clear which side of the debate White Hat is promoting. On the other hand, it may indicate that one of the things we might consider a pro in electric motors (the instantaneous power now available, exceeding that of many non-electric engines) he would consider a problem - perhaps more accurately, a problem with the ''drivers'' of such vehicles, recklessly using the enhanced capabalities to accelerate to high speeds at all opportunities, whether safe to do so or not.

The strip offers the following points in favor of electric motors:

* "Cleaner and more efficient". Internal combustion engines produce and vent harmful combustion products and toxic chemicals, while electric motors produce no emission byproducts at the point of use. The efficiency of both gas and electric motors vary, but the typical ICE vehicle in the US converts around 25% of available energy into motion, while the typical electric vehicle is in the neighborhood of 80%. It should be noted that all of this refers to the motors only, and ignores how the fuel and electricity are produced. Even when considering inefficiencies in the source production and transmission and storage and release of energy, battery driven electric vehicles are generally more efficient than internal combustion propelled vehicles[https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/electric-vehicles-contribute-fewer-emissions-than-gasoline-powered-cars-over-their-lifetimes/].

* "More powerful". Electric motors are able to deliver a lot of power from a small motor '''if''' an ample energy supply is available, and can do so 'on demand', often far quicker than a fuel-powered engine that has to put its power through a gearbox in order to service a wide range of road velocities, from standstill to the eventual top speed. Due to battery limitations, short or partial runtime use cases, such as dragsters, hand tools, yard tools, toys, and electric scooters net the most benefit from the small size of a high-powered electric motor.

* "Annoyingly loud". Internal combustion engines, by their nature, produce significant noise. Despite noise attenuation measures (such as mufflers), they contribute significantly to urban noise. Properly designed electric motors are nearly silent. In particular, turbo-charger blow-off valves make particular noises that are completely lacking in an all-electric vehicle being driven under a similar performance level. This might legitimately be considered a problem, though, when everyone is used to a rapidly approaching vehicle providing a very noisy warning of its approach. EV makers have sometimes added [https://www.businessinsider.com/electric-car-ev-fake-engine-sound-hyundai-dodge-toyota-2023-7 fake ICE noises] to appeal to older drivers and {{w|Electric_vehicle_warning_sounds|warning sounds}} for bystanders.

* "WAY less torque available at standstill". Internal combustion engines need to continually operate within a specific range of rotational speeds, which means that a complex system of transmission gearing is needed to convert this motion into the specific speeds needed at the wheels. When starting from a stand-still, this means that torque must be applied to the wheels relatively gradually to avoid stalling the engine. Electric motors, by contrast, generally produce their peak torque when at a standstill. This results in electric vehicles having significantly better acceleration and engine responsiveness. Again, this could cause a legitimate problem with drivers changing from ICE to electric motors, because the new cars accelerate more than the driver is used to and provide different feedback. The audible clues of gear-changes, whether from automatic or manual systems, are part and parcel of what many people have grown up with, in anticipating what vehicles might need paying explicit attention to.

It should be noted that White Hat is deliberately confining his arguments to electric vs gas ''motors'' rather than electric or gas-powered ''vehicles''. Doing so ignores the basic reason why internal combustion vehicles have long dominated transportation: hydrocarbon fuels are a very dense and fairly easy to handle form of energy ''storage''. Providing electrical power to a moving vehicle requires either that the vehicle remain in contact with a power line, like a train does, or a high-capacity battery and the ability to recharge that battery in a reasonable amount of time. More popular in the USA is a hybrid system, where a combustion engine provides at least some of the power to an electric motor, which was impractical until comparatively recently. Other methods, such as hydrogen fuel cells (a form of "combustion" that can be used more directly to form electricity), have been proposed, but remain experimental.

A more comprehensive comparison would include the cons of electric vehicles, including:

* Higher cost of purchase (primarily due to the cost of batteries and, in the USA, now a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs), although partially offset by lower costs of operation
* Long charging times compared to refilling a gas tank (there are some approaches which mitigate this by operating a battery swap model, rather than charging in-car, but these are not widely adopted)
* Relatively limited range
* Shortened range in hot weather and significantly shortened range in cold weather (although ICE vehicles also have this problem)
* Limited charging infrastructure in some places
* Higher vehicle weight, and resulting higher particulate emissions
* Reliance on various mineral and metal extraction industries in the building of batteries
* Issues disposing of/recycling batteries at end of life
* Increased demand on electricity production

Advancing technologies may change how serious these cons are, but they currently remain genuine issues.

Other pros of electric vehicles aren't mentioned
* Lower costs of operation (partially offset by higher costs of purchase)
* Higher reliability
* Lower maintenance and repair costs
* Lower carbon footprint

==Transcript==
:[White Hat, with his palm raised, is talking to Cueball.]
:White Hat: Electric motors and gas engines each have their pros and cons.
:White Hat: On one hand, electric motors are cleaner and more efficient. On the other hand, electric motors are more powerful.
:White Hat: So it's hard to say which is better overall.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Engineering]]
[[Category:Climate change]]

Talk:2939: Complexity Analysis

2024-05-30T07:35:52Z

172.71.160.70:

I could be mistaken, but I think the "Best case" doesn't actually describe a situation where the algorithm takes the minimum amount of time. Rather, it describes that the algorithm wasn't necessary in the first place, possibly due to something like the list incidentally already being sorted. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.23.74|172.68.23.74]] 23:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I think, in the best case scenario the Congress would need to make a surprise revert of Daylight Saving Time to really gain an hour. As during Daylight Saving the clock is set into the future it still would be virtually one hour later if suddenly Daylight Saving starts. But if it stops suddendly, you gain one hour on the clock. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.238|162.158.94.238]] 05:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like a matter of conventional definition among those familiar with Deep Algorithm Magicks. As a mere initiate, I'd say that defining an algorithm's performance in terms of factors outside the algorithm's context, such as the possibility that it might not need to run at all, brings in a host of reference problems that I'd rather not take up arms against.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.121|162.158.41.121]] 06:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I'd say using Big-O for the average case if a very bad one exists is NOT an abuse. Big-O in first place defines the behavior
of a *function*, not a set of functions. Thus, I wouldn't have the slightest problems if a publication writes, say, "Algorithm A takes O(n) steps if x!=y, but unfortunately, O(n^n) steps if x=y, which happens very rarely..." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.70|172.71.160.70]] 07:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2801: Contact Merge

2023-07-13T15:47:30Z

172.71.160.70: /* three dots */ my two cents

Same person.
:All three of them...[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 08:32, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Why is he only using John's first name when talking about him, as if Surf King should know who that is, when it's clear they've "never met"?
Shouldn't it be: My phone keeps wanting to merge you with my friend John Smith? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.30|172.71.178.30]] 07:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
: Because he's spectacularly unaware, and assumes that everyone that he 'knows' also know each other?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.110|172.70.90.110]] 08:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
: Because "my friend John" is perfectly specific enough. It could have (if not for the needs of the joke) just as easily been: My phone keeps trying to merge you with one of my other friends. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.51|172.69.247.51]] 13:40, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

This is the first XKCD in a long time that I have absolutely no understanding of. Who is Surf King? Even Google doesn't bring anything up (I assumed it was someone well known in the USA but unknown to the few of us that don't live in that country). Please someone post an explanation soon! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.46|162.158.74.46]] 09:06, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
:No one in particular. Just someone named John. The short explanation is that his phone figured out that "Surf King" and "John" are the same person/contact while Cueball remains ignorant. [[User:627235|627235]] ([[User talk:627235|talk]]) 09:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
::I see now. I think I was reading too much into it. I usually assume Randall is operating on a level far above my own! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.146|172.69.79.146]] 10:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I took the "4 years" thing to mean that Cueball had been chatting with SurfKing for 4 years (not an idle chat, but still actively used), and has somehow missed the fact that it's his friend John he's been talking with the whole time. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.38.25|172.70.38.25]] 11:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
:Yes, and I think it's probably a group chat. It might not be that unusual for someone to use a nickname in a group chat (maybe because someone else gave them that nickname). The group chat context might also make it more likely that a context would have been established where Cueball might expect that everyone would know who "John" was, though as pointed out above, Cueball is pretty clueless.[[User:Mwphil|Mwphil]] ([[User talk:Mwphil|talk]]) 11:56, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
:: Adding, I think it has to be a group chat because it would be too strange even for Cueball if he started a one-on-one chat with Surf King without knowing who he was, but if some friend added them both to a chat this situation might make sense. [[User:Mwphil|Mwphil]] ([[User talk:Mwphil|talk]]) 12:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
::: One more, sorry: This *has* to be a group text because Cueball is @-ing Surf King. You don't need to @ someone if they're the only other person you're talking to. (Also Surf King must be pretty annoyed if he's managed to break out the bold italics in a group text, I don't think most texting services support that.) [[User:Mwphil|Mwphil]] ([[User talk:Mwphil|talk]]) 12:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
::(Comment below edit-conflicted by sub-thread thisnisvindented to... Adding this replybafter, but same timestamp.)
::I deliberately left "group chat" unsaid (i.e. leaving it open) because of the lack of correspondants' avatars on the non-self side of the conversation, which seems to be a standard for both actual and xkcdified representation. Though 'tagging' SurfKing might indicate a more broadcast chat, it's as possible/polite to say in a one-to-one (like starting a letter "Dear Aunty Emma", though the envelope it was in was clearly addressed to her). ((This bit written before edit-conflict with Mwphil's triple-indent, above. But answers it anyway, possibly.))
::Anyway, likely possibly its a grouping-agnostic 'chatroom' type thing (or conversation handler) whereby you invite/include at least one other person and it threads all messages with the same full set of contacts together for easy reading (and possible separation from derivative conversations with additions/removals from that set, unless it allows retroactive inclusion/chucking). As said below, I've used many different chat-type methods (though not directly with the "speech bubble" UI as visual theme) and I think we can't pin this down to a particular family of P2P interfaces. But I find the respective thought processes of the two participants (both inside and outside the screenshot shown) more interesting than the more nebulous decisions as to UX/functionality. Strangely for me, being that I'm much more comfortable thinking about code than people where it's just something involving myself.
::But, of course, open to be re-rewritten. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.35|172.70.85.35]] 12:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Done a significant rewrite/expansion to the explanation. My experience of "bubble chats" like the comic is restricted only to screenshots (or illustrations, like this) so I'm extrapolating a lot from all the variations that exist, plus adding extensive IRC/BBS experience which is linked by cross-pollination (pre-web/Web-1.5/etc forming a clear basis for Web2.x and App-based paradigms now handle instant/asynchronous short-form messaging conventions). If I'm totally wrong, I'm sure you'll rip out the bad bits. Wanted also to suggest the possibility that if John hasn't actually been seriously using Surf King for a while (but still has pull-/push-notifications active), it was only Cueball's necro that got him to go back into whatever chat-handler that was set up to handle his surf-dude chat. But it was already very unweildy an Explanation, so I'll only leave this bit of my imagination here - to be more easily ignored/dismissed. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.35|172.70.85.35]] 12:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

''The title text implies that Cueball (still unaware of the reality of the sitution) has had second thoughts about the compatability of Surf King/John with himself'' - I disagree with this. I think what the title text is saying that even though Cueball now knows John and Surf King are the same person, he still thinks they wouldn't like each other - this is philosophically confusing to Cueball, and suggests that John has subtle self-hatred issues which only became obvious thanks to Cueball's mistake. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 13:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Came here because I didn't understand the comic. Now I am even more confused. It would be great if someone could explain the comic in a clear and understandable way. It is possible that there are multiple interpretations, but at the moment they are intermingled. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.55|172.71.160.55]] 14:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

== three dots ==

I don't think the three dots are Surf King not deigning to respond. Aren't three dots (in some chat things?) what you get when someone is typing but hasn't sent the message yet? So Surf King has started to try to respond to this but is too flabbergasted to finish his comment. [[User:Mwphil|Mwphil]] ([[User talk:Mwphil|talk]]) 12:03, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
:I thought there could be three things they could represent:
:*Surf King "had no words" to Cueball's inane reality-ignoring comment, it's his version of 'eye rolling'. Which Cueball didn't understand (fully/correctly).
:*The "your party is typing" symbol. (Although that shouldn't be still there once further messaging (to and from that party) have been added to the chat-sequence.)
:*It's a conversation-manager indication of time passed.
:**And/or that further messages existed in this spot but that are ellided in this view (leaving intro message, for context, and the current foot of the conversation).
:To me, the first makes most sense (flabberghasted and ''did'' type something). The second looks wrong (reason given). The third is clear from context (the time passing), though there's a problem with the alternate/additional 'third' point being that it doesn't help the joke of this being a four year (mostly no-contact?) conversation where Surf King has seemingly forgotten things while Cueball has no grasp of the temporal dislocation.
:But YMMV. And because I wasn't ''totally'' sure I tried to write what I wrote to cover all three main ideas. (It wasn't really dealt with at all when I started my edit regarding it. Any further informed change is of course perfectly welcome, but at least you now have my half-considered lines of thought about all this.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.153|172.71.178.153]] 12:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
:...Forgot to mention the fourth (separate) interpretation I also had.
:*It's a response so long that it's been collapsed behind an icon. Though usually that'd be the first bit of it being shown with an "<expand>" or "<read more...>", as a tappable hotspot, this might not be the case here.
:But ''if'' it's a collapsed paragraph of a long "no, they're both me, you know this because when we last met I..." reply, then it seemingly ''also'' went Whoosh==>Cueball's head, at least by the time four further years had passed. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.62|172.70.85.62]] 13:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
::About the "Your party is typing" message disappearing, I do think that it's within reasonable comics convention to show things that happen in temporal sequence within the same panel within reasonable limits. (https://readgraphicnovels.blogspot.com/2017/04/read-understanding-comics-graphic-novel-chapter-4-page-2.html) So Randall could be depicting the three dots symbol because it had appeared in the chat before, even though not everything in the panel appears at once. I don't know how much he uses this convention though (well I'm pretty sure there are panels in the strip depicting passage of time within a panel, but I don't know if any work this way).
::My take on John/Surf King typing three dots is that that would be a sort of passive-aggressive reaction, and I think John/Surf King is supposed to be a pretty normal person. Albeit one who's friends with Cueball. This is admittedly my interpretation [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.92|172.70.110.92]] 14:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
On reading it, I at least was convinced that this was a conversation taking place today, with John actually typing the three dots. It is true that the "Hey" suggests that this could be a (much) later text, but there is no reason to suppose it is four years later.

Talk:2798: Room Temperature

2023-07-06T08:18:31Z

172.71.160.70: addition

Isn't there actually quite a lot of funding available for uncontrolled hot fusion? https://www.icanw.org/squandered_2021_global_nuclear_weapons_spending_report ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.32|162.158.38.32]] 23:29, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Note that '''controlled''' hot fusion (e. g. a functioning Tokamak) would also be really valuable. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Someone explain why superconductors are a big deal

Arguably the temperature has to change for a semiconductor to work. For it to work at room temperature alone would be pure magic.

A note about the fusion connection. In recent years, there have been breakthroughs in high temperature superconductors, which theoretically would allow to build controlled hot fusion reactors at a much smaller scale (because they can create much higher magnetic fields). There are seveal private companies that attempt to do that, most notably CFS with their [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC_(tokamak) SPARC Tokamak]. I think this is what is being referenced here. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 08:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)