ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Tomlidich the second
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:38 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Tomlidich the second » Mon May 05, 2014 3:30 pm UTC

teelo wrote:
Tomlidich the second wrote:Xkcd phone + TOO MANY

Fixed:


*applauds*
Image

Who
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:53 am UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Who » Tue May 06, 2014 4:03 am UTC

Various variations on 1356 Orbital mechanics:
Orbital Mechanics Orbiter.png
And you thought NASA was strictly Orbiter out of brand loyalty.

Orbital_Mechanics NASA.png
As one would expect, doing rocket science makes you better at rocket science.

OrbitalMechanicsSunNova.png
Nothing teaches you Orbital Mechanics like living in space.

teelo
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby teelo » Tue May 06, 2014 11:31 am UTC

Took high school physics
Got physics degree
Actual job at NASA
Singularity

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Whizbang » Tue May 06, 2014 6:00 pm UTC

Took high school physics
Got physics degree
Actual job at NASA
Fell into a vat of quantum-goo and became Physics Man

Ubik
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:43 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Ubik » Tue May 06, 2014 7:56 pm UTC

I'm past my bedtime and have to get up early tomorrow so I'll do this text-only too:

Took high school physics
Got physics degree
Actual job at NASA
Bitten by a radioactive Carl Sagan

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Whizbang » Tue May 06, 2014 7:58 pm UTC

Ubik wrote:I'm past my bedtime and have to get up early tomorrow so I'll do this text-only too:

Took high school physics
Got physics degree
Actual job at NASA
Bitten by a radioactive Carl Sagan


Damn. I should have thought of that.

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

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Envelope Generator » Wed May 07, 2014 5:26 am UTC

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.

User avatar
Monika
Welcoming Aarvark
Posts: 3673
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:03 am UTC
Location: Germany, near Heidelberg
Contact:

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Monika » Wed May 07, 2014 9:15 pm UTC

Neat.
#xkcd-q on irc.foonetic.net - the LGBTIQQA support channel
Please donate to help these people

teelo
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby teelo » Wed May 07, 2014 11:14 pm UTC

Too lazy to photoshop it. Insert that picture changed to read "Teelo" here.

Burkitt
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:49 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Burkitt » Sun May 11, 2014 7:06 pm UTC

Image

Collect the full set of transportation cards in packets of Pork Loops, Mice Krispies, and Frosted Baconflakes!
Last edited by Burkitt on Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:34 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Djehutynakht » Sun May 11, 2014 9:33 pm UTC

Burkitt wrote:Collect the full set of transportation cards in packets of Pork Loops, Mice Krispies, and Frosted Baconflakes!


Should only use the same linguistic guidelines as the UpGoer comic.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby azule » Mon May 12, 2014 3:39 am UTC

Hello, everyone. At one point in the past I wanted to fully ketchup this entire thread. While I was willing, because of all the images, it just wasn't something I could do easily and...still haven't. I decided I'm just going for it, so here's one with a cat:

Image

Spoiler:
cat_proximity-sw.png
"You're a real jerk."


Obvious note: Nothing against furries, it's for a joke. It's also pronounced like Pinocchio saying "I'm a real boy!"
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Whizbang » Mon May 12, 2014 11:12 am UTC

Funny. :)

User avatar
e^iπ+1=0
Much, much better than Gooder
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:41 am UTC
Location: Lancaster

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby e^iπ+1=0 » Mon May 12, 2014 11:23 am UTC

azule wrote:Obvious note: Nothing against furries, it's for a joke.

"I'm not racist, but…"

Your intention doesn't really matter. The joke is based on the premise that being a furry is bad. Without that, there's no joke. It's just an offensive portrayal of people with a certain fetish.
poxic wrote:You, sir, have heroic hair.
poxic wrote:I note that the hair is not slowing down. It appears to have progressed from heroic to rocking.

(Avatar by Sungura)

User avatar
dzamie
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:12 pm UTC
Location: The land of crab cakes and Old Bay.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby dzamie » Mon May 12, 2014 2:43 pm UTC

e^iπ+1=0 wrote:Your intention doesn't really matter. The joke is based on the premise that being a furry is bad. Without that, there's no joke. It's just an offensive portrayal of people with a certain fetish.

Obligatory "I'm a furry and..."
there are very few jokes which function without offending anyone. I found this funny, because, while being a furry isn't bad, per se, it's certainly not normal. Also, I think the joke is best when you imagine the intersection of excitement and need for a mental checkup to occur when you are in physical contact with the suit, and the right edge of the graph is when you are in the suit with them.

Code: Select all

:Clrhome
:while 1
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16),randInt(0,9))
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16)," ")
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16)," ")
:End

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby eSOANEM » Mon May 12, 2014 3:50 pm UTC

I think it's worth noting that Randall's not exactly been unclear in the past about the fact that people being dicks to furries annoys him.

Also, need for mental checkup? Yay for trivialising mental health as well. And the alt text? :roll:
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby SecondTalon » Mon May 12, 2014 5:06 pm UTC

"Kicking Down" is a great way of describing humor in bad form, and "Kicking Up" describes the opposite.

Is the source of the humor coming from a situation wherein someone representing the everyperson is making a wry comment at the expense of someone representing the outsider culture?

If yes - you're probably Kicking Down and you're probably an asshole.

Is the source of the humor coming from a situation wherein someone from the outsider culture is pointing out an absurdity in the everyperson's situation?

If yes - you're probably Kicking Up and you're ... well, you're probably an asshole, but only because everyone is probably an asshole. Unlike me. I know I'm an asshole.

Comedy is hard, and figuring out what the joke is can also be hard. And the joke here seems to be "Being near furries - you're either crazy or they're driving you crazy, amirite?"

Just thinking of myself, children would be way, way more appropriate for that. Because children are great in small doses, but after a while I have to give them back to those that spawned them or I'm going to go a little nuts.

I'd suggest Awkwardness as the second one, but that also applies to anyone, what with close talking and all.

Then again, you'd be able to easily add on to the title text and make it not a joke about furries, but about someone who doesn't understand social norms who just happens to be a furry via a

"You're a real jerk."
"What, because I'm a furry?"
"YOU'RE THREE INCHES FROM MY FACE WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?"


sort of thing.

Comedy's hard. Azule failed.

dzamie wrote:there are very few jokes which function without offending anyone. I found this funny, because, while being a furry isn't bad, per se, it's certainly not normal. Also, I think the joke is best when you imagine the intersection of excitement and need for a mental checkup to occur when you are in physical contact with the suit, and the right edge of the graph is when you are in the suit with them.

I can agree to that.

What I can't agree is that because someone will be offended by anything at all, that everything is acceptable and fair game. Here, this applies to the kicking direction thing I rambled about earlier, but read section 3 of this. Or, read the whole thing. It's good. Patton's a neat dude. And... yes, he's specifically talking about Rape Jokes there, but the core of it applies here too -

You can and should make fun of anything subject. You can and should make sure you're not kicking someone who's down. "... think twice about who is the target of the punchline, and make sure it isn’t the victim."

Keeping the people the same - generic everyperson and generic everyfurry - you can change the data being graphed to make a joke that's not problematic to most furries nor problematic to most non-fur people.

The problem isn't that it's a joke about furries, the problem is that it's a joke at the expense of furries.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon May 12, 2014 6:18 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Then again, you'd be able to easily add on to the title text and make it not a joke about furries, but about someone who doesn't understand social norms who just happens to be a furry via a

"You're a real jerk."
"What, because I'm a furry?"
"YOU'RE THREE INCHES FROM MY FACE WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?"


sort of thing.

Unfortunately, this attempt at subversion also reads as a "lol minorities always see prejudice when it isn't there" joke, which are used to dismiss legitimate complaints of discrimination. It's hard to take a "kicking down" joke and subvert it into something worthwhile.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby SecondTalon » Mon May 12, 2014 6:30 pm UTC

Mm..good point.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

teelo
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby teelo » Mon May 12, 2014 11:57 pm UTC

dzamie wrote:there are very few jokes which function without offending anyone.

Solution: post jokes that offend all demographics simultaneously.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby azule » Tue May 13, 2014 7:40 am UTC

Whizbang wrote:Funny. :)
Thanks! Sometimes I consider something to be on the side of humor that might just be weird and also not funny.

e^iπ+1=0 wrote:
azule wrote:Obvious note: Nothing against furries, it's for a joke.

"I'm not racist, but…"

Your intention doesn't really matter. The joke is based on the premise that being a furry is bad. Without that, there's no joke. It's just an offensive portrayal of people with a certain fetish.
Oh boy. I caused a stink.

The joke is based on the reality that someone dressed up as a cat isn't a cat, and that someone that can't tell the difference probably needs a checkup. My first choice was going to be "needs glasses" but I didn't think that even the worst vision would cause that confusion.

I saw the Furry Safethread right before entering here, so I was aware of the possible sensitivity to this. The comic doesn't assume them to be bad, nor does it require it. Sorry that it doesn't exclude it, but I can't prevent misinterpretation.

dzamie, thanks for your help. I'm not sure what you mean about the right side of the graph and being in the suit with them. I didn't think of that, nor do I know what it would infer.

eSOANEM, first, I forgot to credit that comic you site as being the source of my furry, thanks. More importantly, I hope you weren't saying I was being a dick. The alt text refers to the act of jerking someone around. The non-furry thought it was a cat and felt jerked around when it turned out to be a furry. I'm not using the definition that also means "dick". Sorry for the confusion.

ST wrote:"You're a real jerk."
"What, because I'm a furry?"
"YOU'RE THREE INCHES FROM MY FACE WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?"
Nice extension, funny. But I'd never add that second line.

The joke does require that furry be an Outside culture, but the person at the center of the joke is the nonfurry because what is what should be obvious. I'm part of an "outside" culture, too, so I'm not trying to kick anyone down. The main reason for the comic was mainly the Pinocchio reading (which I thought of while not hating on furries) and thought how well it would work inside the xkcd comic. Presenting controversial things without backlash is hard, ST, I don't think comedy is that hard as long as I'm not worried about everyone laughing. I'd be a professional comedian if that were my goal. ^_^

teelo, funny point, but you know that wouldn't work either. hah.

I promise my next sw will be less controversial, just to show good faith, but I can't promise never to run into trouble again.
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
pkcommando
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby pkcommando » Tue May 13, 2014 12:40 pm UTC

1367:
installing1367SW.PNG
Alt: This might be why HR wants to see me.

Alt-alt: I found the best and most original words to describe my feelings for you, but I lack the courage to say them aloud.


Take your pick of alt-texts, funny/awkward, or painfully sad.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby azule » Wed May 14, 2014 8:06 am UTC

Funny one (with second alt)! I was wondering what was going on when I saw that it was blank, until I scrolled down.

On the previous issue:
Some non-rushed by outsider forces thoughts here. I'm seeing how when viewing the comic, the graph comes first and seems to be the important part. But, as with the original xkcd, this is secondary to the humor and explains the "comic" below, the part with the dialogue. If you viewed the comic top down, I can see now how it might seem harsh. Being fans of xkcd and this thread in particular (which should have plenty of sw's for this comic) I assumed everyone would view it in the "correct" order.

If that wasn't the issue at all...okay.

I didn't respond to the mental health issue...but it's not trivial. I think even the most "sane" person has issues of a mental nature. And those with it bad may need serious help. But getting checked out is probably not a bad idea, no matter what the catalyst was. I don't think here is the place to prolong a discussion on either that or furridom. I'm willing to be lured into another thread to further expound on the details. ;)

My last "explaining the joke", but the switcheroo was also part of the humor, which does not require either side being "bad".
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
pkcommando
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby pkcommando » Wed May 14, 2014 2:04 pm UTC

1368:
one_of_the1368sw.PNG
Alt: No, I won't "get over it". They know what they did.
one_of_the1368sw.PNG (28.15 KiB) Viewed 9468 times

Burkitt
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:49 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Burkitt » Thu May 15, 2014 10:10 am UTC

Image

Bigger pet peeve - the uninformed lackwits they interview.
Last edited by Burkitt on Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:35 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dzamie
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:12 pm UTC
Location: The land of crab cakes and Old Bay.

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby dzamie » Thu May 15, 2014 7:25 pm UTC

azule wrote:I saw the Furry Safethread right before entering here, so I was aware of the possible sensitivity to this.

Furry Safethread?

azule wrote:dzamie, thanks for your help. I'm not sure what you mean about the right side of the graph and being in the suit with them.

As proximity to furry increases, distance decreases. Therefore, something with a high x-value (right side of the graph) means being extremely close to the furry. Distances very close to zero imply being either in contact with the suit, or, more interestingly, being inside the suit.

Code: Select all

:Clrhome
:while 1
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16),randInt(0,9))
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16)," ")
:Output(randInt(1,8),randInt(1,16)," ")
:End

User avatar
chridd
Has a vermicelli title
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:07 am UTC
Location: ...Earth, I guess?
Contact:

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby chridd » Thu May 15, 2014 7:58 pm UTC

dzamie wrote:
azule wrote:I saw the Furry Safethread right before entering here, so I was aware of the possible sensitivity to this.

Furry Safethread?
http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=104702
~ chri d. d. /tʃɹɪ.di.di/ (Phonotactics, schmphonotactics) · she · Forum game scores
mittfh wrote:I wish this post was very quotable...

teelo
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby teelo » Mon May 19, 2014 10:50 am UTC

ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1451
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby mathmannix » Mon May 19, 2014 2:39 pm UTC

teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

User avatar
Tomlidich the second
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:38 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Tomlidich the second » Mon May 19, 2014 10:27 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:
teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.

MAKE IT HAIILLLLL.
Image

User avatar
roband
Posts: 2545
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:52 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby roband » Mon May 19, 2014 10:36 pm UTC

Tomlidich the second wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.

MAKE IT HAIILLLLL.

This is a serious problem in UK lap dancing establishments, where the smallest denomination note is £5 (nearly $8.50).

User avatar
Tomlidich the second
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:38 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Tomlidich the second » Mon May 19, 2014 11:09 pm UTC

roband wrote:
Tomlidich the second wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.

MAKE IT HAIILLLLL.

This is a serious problem in UK lap dancing establishments, where the smallest denomination note is £5 (nearly $8.50).


i never thought about it that way.

suppose the establishment could offer you paper notes worth exactly £1? and just give them whatever money you want to use at the door.
Image

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Whizbang » Mon May 19, 2014 11:16 pm UTC

Tomlidich the second wrote:
roband wrote:
Tomlidich the second wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.

MAKE IT HAIILLLLL.

This is a serious problem in UK lap dancing establishments, where the smallest denomination note is £5 (nearly $8.50).


i never thought about it that way.

suppose the establishment could offer you paper notes worth exactly £1? and just give them whatever money you want to use at the door.

But that would prevent people from spending more than they intended.

User avatar
Tomlidich the second
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:38 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Tomlidich the second » Mon May 19, 2014 11:34 pm UTC

810 + This thread:

Image

alt: I swear, any time i see a nice looking lady, I just can't resist giving her all of my money.
Image

speising
Posts: 2363
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby speising » Tue May 20, 2014 1:13 am UTC

Tomlidich the second wrote:
roband wrote:
Tomlidich the second wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
teelo wrote:ITT I make what-if slightly worse:

Suppose a debt collector came to my door. If I scrunch up a dollar bill and throw it at him, he probably won't even feel it. If I tie a wad of dollar bills together and throw it at him, it might be enough to make him say "ow" as it rebounds off him. How many of these wads would I have to throw for it to be fatal, or, how much would it cost me to kill someone?


It would be much more economic to use dollar coins. More bang for your buck, as it were.

MAKE IT HAIILLLLL.

This is a serious problem in UK lap dancing establishments, where the smallest denomination note is £5 (nearly $8.50).


i never thought about it that way.

suppose the establishment could offer you paper notes worth exactly £1? and just give them whatever money you want to use at the door.

i hear they sell fake 1$ bills here for exactly that.

teelo
Posts: 783
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby teelo » Tue May 20, 2014 11:03 am UTC

Well theres no dollar bills in my country, and yeah throwing a dollar coin would hurt more, but I was aiming to make it sound as expensive as possible to kill someone, so meh.

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

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby Envelope Generator » Tue May 20, 2014 11:42 am UTC

737 and the what-if front page
Image

alt: The XKCD hosting package is about the same size as a yogurt package. It's hosted in the cloud, and the cloud is over there.
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.

User avatar
pkcommando
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby pkcommando » Tue May 20, 2014 4:34 pm UTC

1370
president1370SW.PNG
Alt: Okay, I was wrong, it would be the same as it is now.

brenok
Needs Directions
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:35 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby brenok » Tue May 20, 2014 9:30 pm UTC

This thread + 910 + 463 + Smbc 3170

Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
pkcommando
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: ITT: We make xkcd slightly worse.

Postby pkcommando » Fri May 23, 2014 4:07 pm UTC

1372
smartwatches1372sw.PNG
Alt: I should've asked for help from someone who knew what he/she was doing. Turns out most technology doesn't work like LEGO.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests