I guess I just don't get it because the before & after cases don't seem to be showing remotely comparable use cases. In the "before" use-cases, the programmer

I guess I just don't get it because the before & after cases don't seem to be showing remotely comparable use cases. In the "before" use-cases, the programmer has accidentally written a bug and gets back a single NaN from a logical operation they performed as a result. In the "after" cases, the programmer already has some data and explicitly decides to convert it to a NaN encoding. But instead of actually getting back a NaN that is secretly carrying their data, they actually get a whole array of NaN's, which duck type differently, and thus are likely to disappear into another NaN or an undefined if they are propagated through an API. Like.. I get that the whole thing is supposed to be humorously absurd but... It just doesn't land unless there's something technical I'm missing to connect up the pieces.