explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

1800: Chess Notation

2017-03-02T15:25:40Z

Waterhorse800: Page looks pretty good to me. Removed tag.

{{comic
| number = 1800
| date = February 17, 2017
| title = Chess Notation
| image = chess_notation.png
| titletext = I've decided to score all my conversations using chess win-loss notation. (??)
}}

==Explanation==

[[Cueball]] begins a conversation with [[White Hat]] with the declaration that he will be scoring his conversations using chess notation. White Hat is not interested, so the conversation dies out, with both Cueball and White Hat saying "Fine". And just as promised, Cueball has scored this particular conversation, giving it a '''½-½''', as he believes that this is a drawn conversation. The reasons for the draw, as explained below too, may be due to a stalemate (the conversation isn't going anywhere), draw by repetition (both players have played the same moves over and over again, and cannot improve their position - probably if "Fine" had been repeated more times), 50-move rule (the conversation has been going on fruitlessly for too long - unlikely here since it is only 4 dialogues long) or something else.

The title text contains the same assertion that Cueball is scoring all his conversations in chess notation, followed by a (??). In chess notation, (??) means the move in question was a very bad, or losing, move - a blunder. Cueball scores this part of the conversation as a blunder, which is understandable as it immediately turned the conversation against him. (Or alternatively is scoring his idea to score all conversations in chess win-loss notation as a blunder.) If Cueball is treating his conversation itself like a chess game (memorizing openings, using tactics, and evaluating various possible things to say), then he will avoid ever opening a conversation with this statement again. If he was scoring his idea to score his conversations as a blunder, then that itself may yet be another blunder. Either way, quite a ?? indeed!!

The (??) may also be interpreted not as chess notation, but as regular interpunction, in which case it would denote a confused reaction by someone who doesn't know what chess notation is (like White Hat in the comic). This makes it a double entendre, covering both the case when either the conversation party or the reader doesn't understand what chess notation is (and thus reacts with confusion to Cueball's announcement), and the case when chess notation is understood, and actually used to comment on the soundness of Cueball's move as being a blunder.

=== Chess notation (and annotation) ===

{{w|Chess}} players and critics use certain {{w|chess notation|notations}} to write down chess games in a very short fashion (for example the {{w|Forsyth–Edwards Notation}}, which is both computer- and human-readable). In addition, ''{{w|chess annotation symbols}}'' like ! and !? help to comment certain moves in a similarly short fashion. That way it is possible to print or discuss a chess game (or a chess opening) in a limited space, for example in printed reference manuals.

A short synopsis about common chess annotation symbols:

!! – brilliant move: Very strong and counter-intuitive move. A sound sacrifice. 
! – good move: A surprisingly good move. 
!? – interesting move: Risky, or worthy of attention and analysis. 
?! – dubious move: Designates a move that may be bad, but it is hard to explain why. 
? – mistake: Poor move that should not be played. 
'''??''' – {{w|blunder (chess)|blunder}}: Exceptionally bad move, usually designates a move that turns a winning position into a draw, or a draw into a losing position. 

The score of the "white" player is always given first, followed by the score of the "black" player. Possible {{w|Chess tournament#Scoring|notations}} for the game outcome are: 

1-0 – a win (for white) 
0-1 – a loss (for white) 
'''½-½''' – a draw 

Because every chess game begins by moving a white piece, the following can be observed: When Cueball ends a conversation with 1-0,
* he either began the conversation, and won it;
* or he responded to a communication request, and lost the conversation.

=== Draws in chess ===
A chess game can be won (and lost for the other party) or {{w|draw (chess)|drawn}}. It should be noted that draws most commonly occur by {{w|Draw by agreement|agreement}}, or very rarely by {{w|stalemate}}. A stalemate is a situation where the opponent's king is not in check, but none of the opponent's pieces can be moved in a legal way. In a human conversation, what amounts to a draw, and what amounts to a stalemate?

If agreed draws should be allowed (and under which circumstances) is a matter of some discussion among chess players, thus adding another point to Randall's comic. For example, some tournament rules (e.g. the so-called "{{w|Draw by agreement#Only theoretical draws allowed (Sofia Rules)|Sofia Rules}}") do not allow a draw to be offered directly - any player has first to announce the intention of drawing to the arbiter (referee), who then decides if the position should be played out further or not.

The official chess rules offer some ways the concept of a "draw" could be applied to a human conversation. According to the {{w|World Chess Federation}} (FIDE) rules, a draw can occur:
#by agreement. Any player can offer a draw when it is his turn to move.
#by stalemate. As explained above: The king is not in check, but no legal moves are available.
#when the same position (with the same possible legal moves) occurs at least three times, with the same player having the same possibilities of moving his pieces. This draw must be requested by the player. According to the FIDE rule 9.6, the arbiter himself declares the game drawn when the same position occurs five times.
#when 50 moves have passed without a capture or a pawn move. Again, the draw occurs only upon request. According to the same FIDE rule 9.6, the arbiter declares the game drawn when 75 moves have passed, without a request by either player.
#when one of the players has used up his time, but his opponent has not enough material to mate. For example, king and pawn mate against a king in certain situations, while king against king leads to a draw by the 50-move-rule.
#when both players have used up their time, but the arbiter cannot determine who did so first. This is impossible with modern electronic chess clocks, though.
#upon request, when the opponent does not play seriously and attempts to win the game by timeout.

=== So, what's a "draw" in a conversation? ===
*Draw agreed: As pointed out by Randall in his cartoon, a drawn conversation is one where all participants agree.
*50-move-rule: Conversation is drawn, based on the excessive duration of the talk.
*Draw by repetition: Both participants have talked in circles, arriving at the same conclusions all over again. No progress has been made.
*Draw by stalemate: When A cannot convince B, but B doesn't have any legal argument left, and would have to resort to lies or logical fallacies in order to continue.

=== Chess games and conversations ===
The notion of applying chess scores to conversations raises the question if and how chess play and conversations can be compared.

Chess games and human conversations do have some things in common:
*The outcome fully depends on the behavior of the partner/opponent.
*As in chess, there is no certainty that a certain statement will have the desired effect. The opponent can always react in a surprising way.
*Chess players, like conversation partners, do not "calculate" the opponent's next move(s). They don't compute anything. They are not cold-blooded machines. They do, however, similar to conversation partners in a job interview or a televised debate:
**create a plan, and revise and refine it as necessary
**try to get a good feel of the situation, and try to remember how they dealt with a similar situation in the past
**try to identify the opponent's weaknesses, and try to remedy one's own weaknesses. Prepare against surprises and pitfalls.
**focus on a few promising moves, and quickly spot if they're easily refutable. "You see, I spent 8 years programming {{w|BANCStar programming language|BANCStar}} applications at..." - "Anybody with that experience is dangerous and should be locked up." - "Oh."
*The question of what is considered a good move (or statement) can only be answered in a subjective way. Chess engines though use algorithms to assess the position, and they can calculate the value of different possible moves. In human conversations, social norms help avoid making bad moves.
*It is difficult to win against an experienced, alert partner or opponent. Competent exploitation of the opponent's errors is often the only way to win.
*In both, you will try to find moves that make your win more probable, while avoiding deleterious moves. Due to inadequate computing power, it is hitherto impossible to calculate all possible ways a chess game (or a conversation) could play out. See also [[1002: Game AIs]]. Therefore it is impossible to design a path that leads to a guaranteed outcome - except when the situation has been simplified enough. There are handbooks to play endgames, explaining how to secure either a win or a draw, no matter the capability of the opponent. Nowadays, computer-generated {{w|endgame tablebase}}s exist for six-piece and seven-piece endgames. Those for six pieces are freely available and are about 1 terabyte large.

Differences:
*Chess games are inherently competitive, zero-sum ventures; if one player wins, the other loses. In contrast, conversations aren't usually competitive, so there isn't really a concept of a winner and loser unless the conversation was an argument or debate. Often, both people in a ''friendly'' conversation will benefit ("win") from having had the conversation.
*Both chess games and conversations are turn-based, but lacking time controls, people's statements sometimes go on and on and on ...
*Especially in disputes, (agreed) draws are extremely rare.
*It is difficult to judge the winner of a conversation.
*In chess, every position of the pieces can be analyzed completely independent of the previous moves. It does not matter how the situation evolved. After 1.e4 e5 and 1.e3 e6 2.e4 e5, there is an identical situation. Due to human emotions, though, this is not the case for conversations. No situation is ever exactly the same.
*Chess games are extremely constrained by a set of rules. Players are expected to behave gentlemanly, and arbiters can hand out punishments for any behavior that brings the game into disrepute.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and White Hat facing each other.]
:Cueball: I've decided to score all my conversations using chess win-loss notation.
:White Hat: I don't know or care what that means.
:Cueball: Fine.
:White Hat: Fine.

:[Caption below the frame:]
:½–½

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Chess]]

Talk:1804: Video Content

2017-03-02T15:16:57Z

Waterhorse800:

This was my first time writing a transcript, so let me know if I did anything wrong. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.88|108.162.219.88]] 16:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
:Nice, but it's called a panel, not a frame. [[User:Jtvjan|Jtvjan]] ([[User talk:Jtvjan|talk]]) 17:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

::sorry, my fault, I exchanged "comic" by "frame" instead of "panel" - solved :-) --[[User:LaVe|LaVe]] ([[User talk:LaVe|talk]]) 17:12, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
:::Well done ;) -- please have a look at my changes to the layout.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:57, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Who is Neil Cicierega? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.160|141.101.98.160]] 18:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
:[//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Cicierega Lemon demon]'s real name [[User:Jtvjan|Jtvjan]] ([[User talk:Jtvjan|talk]]) 18:20, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I understood this comic as being a parody on how news organizations decide their content and media regardless of how annoying it is to actually try to get all your news information out of videos (which I think annoys Randall) https://xkcd.com/1280/ [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.214|108.162.215.214]] 19:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I've added information on a real example of "sexy news", and in the process extended our wikinfrastructure with [[Template:Hov]] (for hovertext) and [[Template:NSFW]] (for potentially NSFW links which belong on the wiki- like the link to Naked News's Wikipedia article). [[User:Hppavilion1|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1|talk]]) 00:23, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
:I'd recommend adding a dotted bottom-border to Hov and changing the cursor it shows to "help". [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]]
::I considered the dotted bottom, but decided against it because I'd prefer to be able to ''not'' have that border when necessary, and to add a template derived from Hov that incorporates the bottom. Perhaps having a dotted underborder by default which can be disabled with an option would fill both needs? [[User:Hppavilion1|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1|talk]]) 16:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Obviously the presenters need to be skilled in tactile signing (see Wikipedia's [[wikipedia:Deafblindness|Deafblindness]] article). No problem there. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.64|108.162.221.64]] 01:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

"This concept has not, for some reason, spread to the mainstream..."
...possibly because naked women are a fairly narrow and [[305|arbitrary]] definition of "sexy". --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.18|141.101.107.18]] 12:33, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

'''Notice that a new''' [[what if?]] - ''{{what if|155|Toaster vs. Freezer}}'' was released yesterday, the day after this comic was released. Less than three weeks between releases this time. Maybe Randall will begin to release more than one a month. It has been three this year since January 30th. (vs. only 5 other going back a year from today!) Cool :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:58, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I couldn't find any "good idea" comics. Do you think we can just remove the tag? [[User:Waterhorse800|Waterhorse800]] ([[User talk:Waterhorse800|talk]]) 15:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1803: Location Reviews

2017-03-01T17:04:17Z

Waterhorse800:

;TO ALL EDITORS HERE
Please do not remove the incomplete tag on your first edit. This tag is used to identify all incomplete comics or transcripts here.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

;Further discussions go here
Could he be referencing some other location? Is there enough data on the map to find a real-world map location that would fit the shape of the river, streets and shaded polygon? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.78.34|172.68.78.34]] 16:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Martin

I'm surprised that Randall didn't reference the discovery of the Trappist-1 system maybe it will come up soon or in a what-if.{{unsigned ip|XFez}}
:He often has a couple comics in queue (and probably needs a day or two to draw one up and get it in and also have something XKCD-ish about it), so we may see one Monday or further afield.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.22|162.158.75.22]] 23:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The idea behind the website and ordering is probably absurdist humour in that the commenter finds the idea of nuclear missiles good and desirable, but the referenced website for such a facility is confusing in that the commenter cannot find out how to order some for him/herself. --[[User:Toonarmycaptain|Toonarmycaptain]] ([[User talk:Toonarmycaptain|talk]]) 16:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

He is actually referring to something that is pretty fun to do, and that is exactly what he says: reading reviews of places that shouldn't have reviews. This one made me laugh in the past: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tokyo+Electric+Power+Co.+Fukushima+Daiichi+Nuclear+Power+Plant/@37.4213402,141.0258843,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x6020dd3801b3fc69:0xa6090708f3cbc4cd!8m2!3d37.421336!4d141.0280783 {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.196}}

Here's another good one: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pripyat+amusement+park/@51.4066963,30.0361971,14z/data=!4m7!3m6!1s0x0:0x87aa178315dd0d18!8m2!3d51.4078931!4d30.0556487!9m1!1b1 [[User:Waterhorse800|Waterhorse800]] ([[User talk:Waterhorse800|talk]]) 17:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

"Looks cool but you can't get in" can also be a comment for an exclusive club/restaurant [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.6|172.68.65.6]] 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay has surprisingly positive reviews: https://goo.gl/maps/tQ4bzttkdeE2 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.101|162.158.79.101]] 03:25, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
:Hmmm, all the reviews have disappeared. Only one now. Maybe *someone* saw your comment. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

""Despite this enormous pressure some organisms live in the Mariana Trench. ""
Nonsense! The pressure is no problem if you do not have holes filled with air in your body.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.52|162.158.92.52]] 11:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Isn't "scathing" a pun on how these locations are typically associated with hot temperatures?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.225|162.158.62.225]] 00:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
: No. The air in the jet stream and the water at the bottom of Mariana Trench are quite cold. Places on the Equator may seem hot for a person unused to the climate there, but they're not so hot in absolute numbers. Chernobyl reactor core is not particularly hot anymore in terms of temperature; it is "hot" in terms of radiation level. {{unsigned|Malgond}}
Note to self: Find out where Randall lives on Google Maps and leave a review for Garfield. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1803: Location Reviews

2017-03-01T17:03:37Z

Waterhorse800:

;TO ALL EDITORS HERE
Please do not remove the incomplete tag on your first edit. This tag is used to identify all incomplete comics or transcripts here.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

;Further discussions go here
Could he be referencing some other location? Is there enough data on the map to find a real-world map location that would fit the shape of the river, streets and shaded polygon? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.78.34|172.68.78.34]] 16:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Martin

I'm surprised that Randall didn't reference the discovery of the Trappist-1 system maybe it will come up soon or in a what-if.{{unsigned ip|XFez}}
:He often has a couple comics in queue (and probably needs a day or two to draw one up and get it in and also have something XKCD-ish about it), so we may see one Monday or further afield.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.22|162.158.75.22]] 23:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The idea behind the website and ordering is probably absurdist humour in that the commenter finds the idea of nuclear missiles good and desirable, but the referenced website for such a facility is confusing in that the commenter cannot find out how to order some for him/herself. --[[User:Toonarmycaptain|Toonarmycaptain]] ([[User talk:Toonarmycaptain|talk]]) 16:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

He is actually referring to something that is pretty fun to do, and that is exactly what he says: reading reviews of places that shouldn't have reviews. This one made me laugh in the past: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tokyo+Electric+Power+Co.+Fukushima+Daiichi+Nuclear+Power+Plant/@37.4213402,141.0258843,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x6020dd3801b3fc69:0xa6090708f3cbc4cd!8m2!3d37.421336!4d141.0280783 {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.196}}

Here's another good one: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pripyat+amusement+park/@51.4066963,30.0361971,14z/data=!4m7!3m6!1s0x0:0x87aa178315dd0d18!8m2!3d51.4078931!4d30.0556487!9m1!1b1 [[User:Waterhorse800|Waterhorse800]] ([[User talk:Waterhorse800|talk]]) 17:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
"Looks cool but you can't get in" can also be a comment for an exclusive club/restaurant [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.6|172.68.65.6]] 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay has surprisingly positive reviews: https://goo.gl/maps/tQ4bzttkdeE2 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.101|162.158.79.101]] 03:25, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
:Hmmm, all the reviews have disappeared. Only one now. Maybe *someone* saw your comment. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

""Despite this enormous pressure some organisms live in the Mariana Trench. ""
Nonsense! The pressure is no problem if you do not have holes filled with air in your body.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.52|162.158.92.52]] 11:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Isn't "scathing" a pun on how these locations are typically associated with hot temperatures?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.225|162.158.62.225]] 00:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
: No. The air in the jet stream and the water at the bottom of Mariana Trench are quite cold. Places on the Equator may seem hot for a person unused to the climate there, but they're not so hot in absolute numbers. Chernobyl reactor core is not particularly hot anymore in terms of temperature; it is "hot" in terms of radiation level. {{unsigned|Malgond}}
Note to self: Find out where Randall lives on Google Maps and leave a review for Garfield. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1805: Unpublished Discoveries

2017-03-01T17:02:35Z

Waterhorse800:

This is my first time writing an explanation. It's still just a stub. [[User:Waterhorse800|Waterhorse800]] ([[User talk:Waterhorse800|talk]]) 17:02, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

1805: Unpublished Discoveries

2017-03-01T17:00:46Z

Waterhorse800: Tried to explain title text and added links to character pages.

{{comic
| number = 1805
| date = March 1, 2017
| title = Unpublished Discoveries
| image = unpublished_discoveries.png
| titletext = If you must know, I'm currently researching how to save this emailed tax form as a regular PDF so I can print and sign it. Our work isn't a lock for the Nobel, but we're in the running.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Rough Draft}}
[[Ponytail]] walks up to [[Megan]], and makes the observation that when a scientific discovery is made, it then takes a while to publish it. She then goes on to note that there are probably research teams making {{w|Nobel Prize|"Nobel-Prize-worthy"}} discoveries that have simply not been published. She is obviously curious if Megan is working on something like this, and tries to see what Megan is working on. When that fails, she asks Megan what she is doing, who tells her that she isn't the one working on a project like this and to "Go bother someone else."

In the title text, Megan reveals that she is trying to convert an emailed tax form to a PDF. She sarcastically states that this is in the running for a Nobel Prize, perhaps because she considers it an incredibly difficult task.
==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
[Ponytail walks up to Megan, who is sitting at a desk, using a computer.]

Ponytail: When you make a big scientific discovery, it takes a while to get it published. Right?

Megan: Mm hmm.

Ponytail: So there are probably several research teams out there who are sitting on Nobel-Prize-worthy discoveries, but haven't told the rest of us yet.

Megan: Makes sense.

[Ponytail leans over desk, trying to see Megan's computer's screen]

Ponytail: Sooo... What are you working on?

Megan: It isn't me!

Ponytail: I promise I won't tell.

Megan: Shoo! Go bother someone else.
{{comic discussion}}

1805: Unpublished Discoveries

2017-03-01T16:57:28Z

Waterhorse800:

{{comic
| number = 1805
| date = March 1, 2017
| title = Unpublished Discoveries
| image = unpublished_discoveries.png
| titletext = If you must know, I'm currently researching how to save this emailed tax form as a regular PDF so I can print and sign it. Our work isn't a lock for the Nobel, but we're in the running.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Rough Draft}}
Ponytail walks up to Megan, and makes the observation that when a scientific discovery is made, it then takes a while to publish it. She then goes on to note that there are probably research teams making {{w|Nobel Prize|"Nobel-Prize-worthy"}} discoveries that have simply not been published. She is obviously curious if Megan is working on something like this, and tries to see what Megan is working on. When that fails, she asks Megan what she is doing, who tells her that she isn't the one working on a project like this and to "Go bother someone else."
Title text: Apparently converting documents to PDFs is such a complicated endeavor that Randall considers such a feat Nobel Prize-worthy.
==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
[Ponytail walks up to Megan, who is sitting at a desk, using a computer.]

Ponytail: When you make a big scientific discovery, it takes a while to get it published. Right?

Megan: Mm hmm.

Ponytail: So there are probably several research teams out there who are sitting on Nobel-Prize-worthy discoveries, but haven't told the rest of us yet.

Megan: Makes sense.

[Ponytail leans over desk, trying to see Megan's computer's screen]

Ponytail: Sooo... What are you working on?

Megan: It isn't me!

Ponytail: I promise I won't tell.

Megan: Shoo! Go bother someone else.
{{comic discussion}}

1805: Unpublished Discoveries

2017-03-01T16:56:27Z

Waterhorse800:

{{comic
| number = 1805
| date = March 1, 2017
| title = Unpublished Discoveries
| image = unpublished_discoveries.png
| titletext = If you must know, I'm currently researching how to save this emailed tax form as a regular PDF so I can print and sign it. Our work isn't a lock for the Nobel, but we're in the running.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Rough Draft}}
Ponytail walks up to Megan, and makes the observation that when a scientific discovery is made, it then takes a while to publish it. She then goes on to note that there are probably research teams making {{w|Nobel Prize|"Nobel-Prize-worthy"}} discoveries that have simply not been published. She is obviously curious if Megan is working on something like this, and tries to see what is on Megan is working on. When that fails, she asks Megan what she is doing, who tells her that she isn't the one working on a project like this and to "Go bother someone else."
Title text: Apparently converting documents to PDFs is such a complicated endeavor that Randall considers such a feat Nobel Prize-worthy.
==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
[Ponytail walks up to Megan, who is sitting at a desk, using a computer.]

Ponytail: When you make a big scientific discovery, it takes a while to get it published. Right?

Megan: Mm hmm.

Ponytail: So there are probably several research teams out there who are sitting on Nobel-Prize-worthy discoveries, but haven't told the rest of us yet.

Megan: Makes sense.

[Ponytail leans over desk, trying to see Megan's computer's screen]

Ponytail: Sooo... What are you working on?

Megan: It isn't me!

Ponytail: I promise I won't tell.

Megan: Shoo! Go bother someone else.
{{comic discussion}}

1805: Unpublished Discoveries

2017-03-01T16:55:45Z

Waterhorse800: Drafted first explanation, needs more detail

{{comic
| number = 1805
| date = March 1, 2017
| title = Unpublished Discoveries
| image = unpublished_discoveries.png
| titletext = If you must know, I'm currently researching how to save this emailed tax form as a regular PDF so I can print and sign it. Our work isn't a lock for the Nobel, but we're in the running.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Rough Draft}}
Ponytail walks up to Megan, and makes the observation that when a scientific discovery is made, it then takes a while to publish it. She then goes on to note that there are probably research teams making {{w|Nobel Prize|"nobel-prize-worthy"}} discoveries that have simply not been published. She is obviously curious if Megan is working on something like this, and tries to see what is on Megan is working on. When that fails, she asks Megan what she is doing, who tells her that she isn't the one working on a project like this and to "Go bother someone else."
Title text: Apparently converting documents to PDFs is such a complicated endeavor that Randall considers such a feat Nobel Prize-worthy.
==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}
[Ponytail walks up to Megan, who is sitting at a desk, using a computer.]

Ponytail: When you make a big scientific discovery, it takes a while to get it published. Right?

Megan: Mm hmm.

Ponytail: So there are probably several research teams out there who are sitting on Nobel-Prize-worthy discoveries, but haven't told the rest of us yet.

Megan: Makes sense.

[Ponytail leans over desk, trying to see Megan's computer's screen]

Ponytail: Sooo... What are you working on?

Megan: It isn't me!

Ponytail: I promise I won't tell.

Megan: Shoo! Go bother someone else.
{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1803: Location Reviews

2017-03-01T15:44:44Z

Waterhorse800:

;TO ALL EDITORS HERE
Please do not remove the incomplete tag on your first edit. This tag is used to identify all incomplete comics or transcripts here.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

;Further discussions go here
Could he be referencing some other location? Is there enough data on the map to find a real-world map location that would fit the shape of the river, streets and shaded polygon? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.78.34|172.68.78.34]] 16:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Martin

I'm surprised that Randall didn't reference the discovery of the Trappist-1 system maybe it will come up soon or in a what-if.{{unsigned ip|XFez}}
:He often has a couple comics in queue (and probably needs a day or two to draw one up and get it in and also have something XKCD-ish about it), so we may see one Monday or further afield.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.22|162.158.75.22]] 23:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The idea behind the website and ordering is probably absurdist humour in that the commenter finds the idea of nuclear missiles good and desirable, but the referenced website for such a facility is confusing in that the commenter cannot find out how to order some for him/herself. --[[User:Toonarmycaptain|Toonarmycaptain]] ([[User talk:Toonarmycaptain|talk]]) 16:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

He is actually referring to something that is pretty fun to do, and that is exactly what he says: reading reviews of places that shouldn't have reviews. This one made me laugh in the past: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tokyo+Electric+Power+Co.+Fukushima+Daiichi+Nuclear+Power+Plant/@37.4213402,141.0258843,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x6020dd3801b3fc69:0xa6090708f3cbc4cd!8m2!3d37.421336!4d141.0280783 {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.196}}
Here's another good one: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pripyat+amusement+park/@51.4066963,30.0361971,14z/data=!4m7!3m6!1s0x0:0x87aa178315dd0d18!8m2!3d51.4078931!4d30.0556487!9m1!1b1
"Looks cool but you can't get in" can also be a comment for an exclusive club/restaurant [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.6|172.68.65.6]] 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay has surprisingly positive reviews: https://goo.gl/maps/tQ4bzttkdeE2 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.101|162.158.79.101]] 03:25, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
:Hmmm, all the reviews have disappeared. Only one now. Maybe *someone* saw your comment. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

""Despite this enormous pressure some organisms live in the Mariana Trench. ""
Nonsense! The pressure is no problem if you do not have holes filled with air in your body.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.52|162.158.92.52]] 11:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Isn't "scathing" a pun on how these locations are typically associated with hot temperatures?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.225|162.158.62.225]] 00:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
: No. The air in the jet stream and the water at the bottom of Mariana Trench are quite cold. Places on the Equator may seem hot for a person unused to the climate there, but they're not so hot in absolute numbers. Chernobyl reactor core is not particularly hot anymore in terms of temperature; it is "hot" in terms of radiation level. {{unsigned|Malgond}}
Note to self: Find out where Randall lives on Google Maps and leave a review for Garfield. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 12:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

1802: Phone

2017-03-01T15:33:18Z

Waterhorse800: Made some changes in formatting and wording to the main comic explanation. Still need someone to do the title text.

{{comic
| number = 1802
| date = February 22, 2017
| title = Phone
| image = phone.png
| titletext = [*disables social networking accounts*] [*social isolation increases*] Wait, why does this ALSO feel bad?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Check for grammar errors and organize paragraphs.}}

When someone asks you if you want to go for a walk they often expect to have a conversation, while enjoying both the exercise, the fresh air and the company. Thus any disturbance not related to the walk is not welcome. Going for a walk is often seen as a way to relax from all the daily stress, as it takes the walkers away from work and chores.

[[Cueball]] agrees to go for a walk, but not to all the associated expectations. His first instinct is to bring along his smartphone, though rather than call it such, he opts for a lengthy description detailing all the functions he intends to use. He describes the phone as a device that gives him a continuous ({{w|24/7 service|24/7}}) stream of information, much of which is often out of context. The stream contains people's opinions, context-free but scary news, and other random stimuli. Conspicuously, long-distance communication (ostensibly the primary function of a smartphone) is not listed. This may be a sign that Cueball is {{w|Mobile phone overuse|addicted to his phone}}.

The stream of opinions mentioned could be from news or bloggers but it could also just be from his friends on social media platforms. News stories that are shared on social media are often scary, which becomes even worse because news outlets are likely to use a title that exaggerates the topic to create a fear reaction. The random emotional stimuli could be from many things such as text messages/emails and pictures of kittens and babies on social network, and shared internet memes or viral videos. All things that could cause a quick shift in emotions.

As if all this was not enough, Cueball even says he will also take his spare battery, so he won't risk that his {{w|Web feed|constant feed}} could be interrupted, because he will not be able to recharge his phone during the walk.

All in all, his choice and constant need for staying updated and being online violates all the usual expectations, that his friend could have expected from asking him out for a walk.

The title text shows it would be possible to take an action to avoid this feed. In the first bracket a person (could be Cueball or [[Randall]]) ''disables all his social networking accounts''. Most of his news feed will thus disappear. But this leads to the next bracket which states that such a choice would lead to ''increased social isolation'', since he will no longer be in contact with any of his online friends. And today many people also get into contact with their "real" local friends through social media. One might thus miss out on events like parties or get-together, plus his friends not sharing a dislike for social media will not understand the decision. And this leads to the final sentence ''Wait, why does this ALSO feel bad?''

This clearly refers back to the main comic, thus saying that it also feels bad to have this constant stream of input, which could often be disturbing. So there is no good choice listed in the comic, because it is bad to be completely offline, but being online all the time is also bad. And it is hard to find the right balance. This problem with finding the right balance between two things seems related to the recent [[1796: Focus Knob]]

A related comic was posted long ago with [[77: Bored with the Internet]]. In this comic Cueball go for a walk to escape the internet, only to be thinking about the next post to make once back online.

This comic is also related to the recent comic [[1773: Negativity]], as both deal with the inability to escape the media during objectively peaceful pastimes. While in the former, the nature attacks Cueball with the types of comments he wishes to avoid, here, he brings along his phone even though it will ruin the goal of the walk he is going to take. Negativity seemed to be a kind of follow up on [[1761: Blame]] where Cueball feels sad because of all the bad things that are happening, typically that which could be described as scary news, which in that case was posted by his friends on {{w|Facebook}} so Cueball blames his friends. This comic thus, for the third time in about three month, express a dislike for online societies and its reaction to lots of bad news, also refereed in other comics during those three months. (See more on this [[1756:_I'm_With_Her#Sad_comics|here]].)

This is the second comic in a row where having access to the internet on a smartphone while out walking is a major part of the plot, the first being [[1801: Decision Paralysis]], where Randall mentions how access to the internet when having two similar options to choose from can cause a decision paralysis while he researches the best option.

==Transcript==
:[Someone off-panel asks Cueball a question which he answers while walking to a small table with some items laying on it.]
:Off-panel voice: Wanna go for a walk?
:Cueball: Sure, just need to grab my device that feeds me a 24/7 stream of opinions, context-free scary world news, and random emotional stimuli.
:Cueball: Plus a spare battery so the feed won't be interrupted.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Social networking]]
[[Category:Smartphones]]

1803: Location Reviews

2017-03-01T15:23:47Z

Waterhorse800:

{{comic
| number = 1803
| date = February 24, 2017
| title = Location Reviews
| image = location_reviews.png
| titletext = Google and Yelp keep deleting my scathing reviews of the Mariana Trench, the Chernobyl reactor core, the jet stream, and the equator.
}}

==Explanation==

Many online advertising services and social media networks (like {{w|Google}} and {{w|Yelp}} mentioned in the title text and for instance {{w|Facebook}}) allow users to leave reviews of stores, businesses and locations. For various reasons these sites often find themselves with pages dedicated to, as Randall puts it, "places that really don't need reviews" such as municipal works installations, government property, and natural landmarks. This naturally attracts both clueless people and lots of self-styled comedians leaving less-than-helpful comments on such review pages.

[[Randall]] is just poking fun at this phenomenon by inventing possible reviews for the (fictional) location ''Canyon River Nuclear Launch Facility'', depicted with a {{w|Google Map|Google Maps}}-styled map page along with a series of so-called reviews. (There does exist a {{w|Canyon River (Ontario)|Canyon River}} located in Ontario/Canada and one in Washington/USA. Canada does not maintain nuclear weapons since 1984, so that may be a defunct launch site). See explanations for the 11 visible (out of 22) reviews in the [[#Reviews|table below]]. Of course those responsible for such a facility with {{w|nuclear missiles}} would not like the attention they would be getting in this way, especially not when one of the comments mentions a hole in the fence...

In the title text Randall mentions that both Google and Yelp keep deleting his scathing reviews of several locations like the above. And while Canyon River Nuclear Launch Facility appears not to exist, the places/phenomena he lists in the title text certainly do, and are places that you either cannot or would not normally visit as destinations. This explains why:

{{w|Mariana Trench}} is the deepest area of the world's oceans, about 10,994 meters (36,070 ft) deep, located between Japan and Australia. The pressure in the Mariana Trench is about 1,086 bars, more than 1,000 times the standard atmospheric pressure of about 1 bar at sea level. Despite this enormous pressure some organisms {{w|Mariana_Trench#Life|live in the Mariana Trench}}. Humans can reach the ground only by special deep-sea submarines, like Jacques Piccard did in 1960 with the {{w|Bathyscaphe Trieste}}. See reviews for the Mariana Trench at [https://www.google.com/maps/place/Mariana+Trench/@17.75,142.4978113,17z/data=!4m7!3m6!1s0x67328f3cd57de715:0x1bbe64e7a21aa7fc!8m2!3d17.75!4d142.5!9m1!1b1?hl=en Google Maps] and [https://www.facebook.com/pages/Marianengraben/108402422518280 Facebook].

The {{w|Chernobyl}} reactor core is the most dangerous part of the {{w|Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant}}. It is located in the North of Ukraine. In the reactor No. 4 there was a nuclear disaster that happened on 26 April 1986. It caused devastating damage and massive radioactive contamination. There is still an {{w|Chernobyl Exclusion Zone}} 30 kilometers around the power plant. See reviews for the Chernobyl power plant at [https://www.google.com/maps/place/Chernobyl+Nuclear+Plant/@51.3852262,30.1003411,15z/data=!4m14!1m6!3m5!1s0x472a7d09e1ec5ef3:0x6b27a13ab968d17c!2sChernobyl+Nuclear+Plant!8m2!3d51.3889447!4d30.0988421!3m6!1s0x472a7d09e1ec5ef3:0x6b27a13ab968d17c!8m2!3d51.3889447!4d30.0988421!9m1!1b1?hl=en Google Maps] and [https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kernkraftwerk-Tschernobyl/118179298239715?rf=116556918391753 Facebook].

{{w|Jet stream}}s are a meteorologic phenomenon about 9 to 16 kilometers above the ground. A stream consists of air currents with speeds from 92 km/h (50 kn; 57 mph) to over 398 km/h (215 kn; 247 mph). Such jet streams are routinely used for reducing fuel usage for long distance plane travels. As it is a ribbon rather than a point, it could not have a single point on the map. Also, the jet stream fluctuates north and south; so even if it could be pinpointed, the location would be constantly changing.

The {{w|equator}} is, as with the jet streams, not a singular place but a circumference around the Earth. Reviewing the equator as a singular location is rather pointless, though there is a whole range of specific (and interesting) locations around the equator, with countries with {{w|tropical rainforest climate}}, which many people from European and North American countries struggle with. That said, most of the equator goes over water.

===Reviews===
Note that any or all of the reviews could be sarcastic or "trolling", as is fairly typical on the internet, as an alternative explaination. This table assumes all the reviews are played straight.
{| class="wikitable"
! Rating
! Review
! Explanation
|-
| ★★★★★ || Greatest country on earth || A patriotic review (5/5), though provides no information on the actual nuclear site. The location is in the "greatest country", although this makes fun of people who go too specific, because all places in that country could be rated like this. Probably somebody who loves her or his country for having nuclear missiles.
|-
| ★★☆☆☆ || Looks cool but you can't get in || This reviewer, although initially positive, attempts to highlight what they perceive as a major flaw with the site: namely, that it is off-limits to unauthorized personnel and heavily-guarded, so it's impossible to actually go inside (thus only 2/5 stars). This is typical of a nuclear facility, but this kind of review could also be seen for a fancy restaurant that needs very early pre-booking.
|-
| ★☆☆☆☆ || What is this store || Reviewer really, really has no idea what this facility actually is, mistaking it for a store, and thus giving it only 1 star.
|-
| ★★★★☆ || My cousin worked here || If true, this review is a serious security risk (e.g. kidnapping the reviewer to extort information from his cousin). The comment may also just be a way for the reviewer to pretend he knows someone who works in the higher levels of the government. Usually this kind of comment together with a four star rating is to signal that you know more about the location than a regular reviewer does. Of course you could then also be perceived as partial.
|-
| ★★☆☆☆ || Waitstaff heavily armed and very rude || This review mistakes the facility's security guards for a restaurant's waitstaff. Since the guards are protecting some of the most dangerous weapons in existence, and would not let unknown outsiders into the facility, it follows that the guards would be heavily armed, and quite rude to those who sought entry without proper permission. Thus they earn the place only 2 stars.
|-
| ★☆☆☆☆ || Stop doing chemtrails || This reviewer believes in the {{w|chemtrail conspiracy theory}} and is urging the government to cease spreading the chemtrails. Believing this place has something to do with it of course leads to only one star. This conspiracy was earlier mentioned both in [[966: Jet Fuel]] and [[1677: Contrails]].
|-
| ★☆☆☆☆ || This place is a symptom of the {{w|military-industrial complex}} strangling our democracy and...(read full review-1184 words) || A slightly tongue-in-cheek reference to essays against 'The Military-Industrial complex' and how they are often copy-pasted by people who don't really understand them in inappropriate places. Or just to people who rant far beyond anything that people would ever read, except if they are already agreeing with the writer. Of course such an activist would only give one star.
|-
| ★★★★☆ || Anyone else notice the hole in the west fence? || The adventurer's travel guide to government installations... Posting a comment like this would (at best) bring the hole to the attention of the site staff to be repaired and (at worst) bring the writer unwelcome attention from the authorities for publicizing a security vulnerability at a missile site. This might also be a reference to {{w|Richard Feynman}}'s account of finding a hole in the fence surrounding the {{w|Los Alamos, New Mexico|Los Alamos}} facility during the {{w|Manhattan Project}}. Using the hole to get in, this reviewer had an excellent time and gives 4/5 stars.
|-
| ★★★★★ || Whoa, missiles! || The writer is impressed and apparently surprised to discover that the site has missiles. Seems like the reviewer just love anything with missiles and hands out five stars. This may also be a reference to the "Whoa, technology!" meme, which originated when YandereDev, a Youtuber, uttered the phrase in one of his videos.
|-
| ★★★☆☆ || Good idea but confusing web site. How do I preorder? || This reviewer thinks that one can order a nuclear missile launch here, but can't find a preorder form on the website. He loves the idea but since he cannot find out how to order there are only 3/5 stars. In reality, the decision to launch nuclear missiles often rests with the heads of state or government, and outside persons are not allowed to control them.
|-
| ★☆☆☆☆ || Please don't launch these || A plea to the facility owners not to launch the nuclear missiles, due to their deleterious effects on human life. That Randall seems this is relevant to write, could be due to the cold relationship between Russia and the United States at the time of this comics release. Two weeks prior to this comics release [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/world/europe/russia-cruise-missile-arms-control-treaty.html?_r=0 Russia Deploys Missile, Violating Treaty and Challenging Trump]. This was less than a month after {{w|Donald Trump}} became president. He has been positive towards {{w|Vladimir Putin}} earlier, but after the violation USA condemned the new missile. That Randall was not in favor of Trump becoming president was made clear here: [[1756: I'm With Her]]. Even his predecessor {{w|Barack Obama}} stated, before Trump was elected, that [https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/obama-if-trump-cant-handle-twitter-then-he-cant-handle-nuclear-codes/2016/11/06/be398272-a463-11e6-ba46-53db57f0e351_video.html If Trump can't handle Twitter, then he can't handle nuclear codes]. Randall has earlier mentioned the codes indirectly in [[1242: Scary Names]], where he mentions the {{w|Nuclear football}}, which is much more scary than the name... It is a year ago he finished a "series" of four comics in a short period about nuclear weapons with [[1655: Doomsday Clock]] (see about the other comics at the bottom of that explanation). But it seems that [[1756:_I'm_With_Her#Sad_comics|recent events]] have made him think about it again.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Inside the main panel there is a frame with a Google location map with the typical red pin stuck in the center of the map inside a large gray region of the map. A river goes from the north through the gray region and out to the west. East and south of the river some roads and other items are shown, several of them also outside the gray region. The red pin is stuck next to a corner in one of the roads.]

:[Below the map is the name of the location at the red pin, and below that there are three lines of unreadable text:]
:<big>Canyon River Nuclear Launch Facility</big>

:[Below that there is broken line with text in the break, and below that follows 11 reviews with yellow stars to the left:]
:Reviews (22)
:★★★★★ Greatest country on earth
:★★☆☆☆ Looks cool but you can't get in
:★☆☆☆☆ What is this store
:★★★★☆ My cousin worked here
:★★☆☆☆ Waitstaff heavily armed and very rude
:★☆☆☆☆ Stop doing chemtrails
:★☆☆☆☆ This place is a symptom of the military-industrial complex strangling our democracy and...(read full review-1184 words)
:★★★★☆ Anyone else notice the hole in the west fence?
:★★★★★ Whoa, missiles!
:★★★☆☆ Good idea but confusing web site. How do I preorder?
:★☆☆☆☆ Please don't launch these

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I love finding reviews of places that really don't need to have reviews.

==Trivia==
*Only 11 of the 22 reviews posted are shown. For those 11 the average star rating is 2.6/5 stars. All five possible ratings are represented at least once.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Google Maps]]
[[Category:Conspiracy theory]]