Moderators: Moderators General, Magistrates, Prelates
joefaith wrote:there used to be an expression 'never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes'
webgiant wrote:Sometimes the USB key doesn't work. Last week I was in a teacher's office and he wanted to give me a 17MB Google Sketchup file. I handed him a 8GB USB key formatted NTFS, and his Mac wouldn't read the USB key. I had just moved the contents of the USB key onto my laptop seconds earlier.
webgiant wrote:Sometimes the USB key doesn't work. Last week I was in a teacher's office and he wanted to give me a 17MB Google Sketchup file. I handed him a 8GB USB key formatted NTFS, and his Mac wouldn't read the USB key. I had just moved the contents of the USB key onto my laptop seconds earlier.
OP Tipping wrote:I really can't relate to this at all. There are any number of ways of doing this.
Your ISP probably gives you 100 MB or more of free space that you can use, perfectly good if the material is not secure.
It's piss easy to set up some FTP space, I have one that costs me $30 a year that I use for general storage and backup but can also be used for private FTP.
Or there are sites like yousendit.com, there's nothing really awkward about them, they are straightforward.
Mind you, I work in an industry where I sometimes need to get terabytes, or tens of terabytes, of data to clients, and seriously that still requires disk or tapes to physically be sent.
webgiant wrote:...USB key formatted NTFS...
Ayelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
gamnark wrote:Davecasa wrote:But seriously, is there any good way of doing this? I've been doing the dropbox + public link method, but it's kind of awkward.
FTP/web servers are perfectly good; it doesn't help those that don't have one though. NAT can be a real pain for exchanging files between two computers, I'm hoping the problem solves itself when IPv6 becomes more common.
chmod a+wx,go-r /var/ftp/dropboxAyelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
Ayelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
Davecasa wrote:But seriously, is there any good way of doing this? I've been doing the dropbox + public link method, but it's kind of awkward.
bigjeff5 wrote:In the US, Microsoft's legal troubles really had nothing to do with bundling software - that was simply the catalyst. What they did was coerce vendors into not bundling competing software (i.e. Netscape). Netscape managed to cut its own throat with Mozilla, in spite of winning that particular battle. However thanks to that we have a wonderful open source browser now.
bigjeff5 wrote:Europe, on the other hand, overreacts to everything, and so in Europe Microsoft can't bundle anything, including IE. That is bullshit, but not really important to me except that it pretty much guarantees that MS will not be bundling any new software with their OS, since it could trigger major anti-trust action in the unified countries that represent half of their install base. We'll just be getting slightly enhanced versions what is already there, and that's it. Thanks EU! Anyways...
bigjeff5 wrote:The problem with every Linux distribution I've ever experienced (and I've experienced several, but by no means anywhere remotely close to all) is when things don't work right, they are an absolute nightmare to fix. For example, back in the days when wireless was, shall we say "unreliable" (that's being extremely kind, if you are unfamiliar with the struggles of wireless in Linux over the years), if Linux didn't have your driver in the kernel, you had potentially days of troubleshooting in store to get it to work. Even if you had the driver available, you were probably looking at a kernel recompile. That's a bit beyond Grandma's capabilities. No distribution I've used deals with this, and the reason is because this is related Linux's core design. Whereas in Windows Grandma just pops in the CD, hits play, and everything works (well, 99% of the time, anyway - driver writers can be idiots on occasion).
The wireless is just an example, obviously in recent years wireless itself has gotten much better, though even three or four years ago it was rather difficult to set up a wifi connection without entering magic code from a web site (assuming you didn't know how to use the command line tools, which I didn't).
bigjeff5 wrote:The other problem with Linux is less than super popular software. If it isn't in a repository, you are invariably expected to compile it yourself. Configure/make/make install don't seem that difficult, but it is infinitely more difficult than double-clicking "setup.exe", and there is a large portion of the population who is either incapable or unwilling to deal with it. I still don't understand why this has not been dealt with. The job is almost done, just package everything up in a standardized setup file and it's done (sort of like the Windows MSI or the Mac DMG). But Linux devs seem to think it's "good enough" and don't make the next logical step to improve usability. This same attitude is -everywhere- in Linux development - just look at a Linux GUI compared to its Windows or Mac counterpart. There is almost always a significant dearth of features compared to the command line version of the same apps. Average users suck at command lines.
bigjeff5 wrote:There is certainly plenty to like about Linux (I for one love repositories - that idea was downright brilliant), and it is easily the most versatile OS available, but the occasional hard problems general lack of user friendliness (again, haven't tried the distros you mentioned, but I can't see the problems being fixed without some serious, serious work - the kind that isn't likely to happen in a free distro imo) make it not worth my time. If it isn't worth my time to deal with it, how can I then recommend it to people who are even less tech savvy than me?
jpk wrote:Laptops these days seem to be almost free if they're more than a few years old, and you can run current Linux installs on some pretty old gear. I'd suggest you get yourself a cheap machine, install the latest release of Ubuntu, and try using it for a few weeks before you tell us what Linux is like. I'm not speaking as a fan-boy here - I actually use a Mac, myself - but I just don't like this sort of "I tried Linux once and it didn't work" stuff. Keep current if you're going to bitch about it. You're complaining about solved problems.
jpk wrote:The neat thing is, because linux is so open to messing with it, ordinary users tend to get further into the machine than they do with Windows - or with a Mac, for that matter. Four years ago, my girlfiend was using a dying windows box that her friend had cobbled together for her - the thing would crash if you spoke to it in a harsh tone, it couldn't really do much, it was a TPOS, but she had it and she just kind of got along with it, and she knew nothing about how it worked. When it died, she asked a bunch of techy people, including me, what they thought she should replace it with, and we all said, you can buy a Dell with Linux installed, and it's reasonably priced and the things you do will run better than the equivalent machine with Windows installed*. So she bought the machine and now she's comfortable operating at the command line, tinkering with stuff, and the idea of writing a shell script to do something doesn't seem like an odd one, like it did a few years ago. She's not some sort of linux geek, but she's taken a lot more ownership of the machine than she ever did with the Windows machine, just because it's there to take. And this sort of transformation, I think is the result of a concerted effort to make the machine more accessible to ordinary people, not some conspiracy to complicate the thing.
mivadar wrote:It took me three days to configure my laptop to connect to the secured wireless in the building, mostly re-writing configuration files by hand. My VPN access is hit and miss, and I still can't connect to a single networked printer. (Setting the same thing up in windoze took me 15 minutes.)
The software I need to use for half my work simply doesn't exist on any other platform than windows - doesn't run under emulation (and it hasn't been for lack of trying), and writing my own is not an option.
etc.
(By the way, in places where there is a near-complete windows hegemony, often Mac users have similar problems ... My conclusion is not that Linux doesn't work - it is that if You need to be compatible with systems / work with people the majority of whom use a particular system, use the same, or You'll spend half Your life troubleshooting.)
mivadar wrote:As to home servers ... I haven't had a home ISP so far that allows setting one up (just out of curiosity now I checked the T&C of half a dozen providers around - all of them have a ban), and most "unlimited" internet subscriptions around have a "fair use" restriction, which is somewhere on the order of 100 GB traffic / month (after which they won't switch You off, but if it happens a few times, You need to give a darn good explanation what You've been doing with the connection, ideally not containing the words "file sharing", "server" or "work related" for them not to terminate the contract).
Anything which has less prohibitive terms is - prohibitively expensive.
Ayelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
bigjeff5 wrote:The wireless problem was just an example that I thought people would be familiar with (and hey you were!), it was actually the Atheros driver issue I was talking about, because it was an extremely common wireless card, especially for laptops, with any number of kludge fixes until a driver actually made it into the kernel (I think it's still done post-install on most distros, actually, because it's still legally questionable and they won't officially bundle it, but the problem is essentially well solved). After that was a shoddy GUI for the wireless, which was still horrible two years ago and hadn't gotten any better in the year that I'd been using Linux. It was not the problem that turned me off Linux the last time I used it (which, as I said, was about two years ago).
bigjeff5 wrote:The point is not that there are problems. Every OS has problems. The point is that when there is a problem in Linux, it is almost always an absolute nightmare to fix. These kinds of nightmarish problems may become rarer as the OS progresses, but there always seem to be a lot more of them than in Windows. Windows tends to have smaller problems more often that are a lot easier to fix (though these too becomes less common as the OS progresses). These issues are rarely, if ever, show stoppers, and less savvy users can deal with them. It just makes Windows easier to use as a desktop machine.
So yeah, your friend may be just fine on a Linux install, as long as she doesn't mess with things too much she probably won't run into the issues I have. However, she probably would have been even happier if you'd just given her a clean Windows install instead.
Like I said, I've got nothing against Linux. I think it's great that Linux is a viable alternative, and I do cheer for it whenever I can. However, I find myself wasting more time fixing problems than I am comfortable with when I use it as a desktop machine, so I don't use it as a desktop machine.
StClair wrote:There is a significant portion of the Linux userbase that is actively (or passive-aggressively) opposed to making it more user-friendly, because then stupid people would be able to run it, and then how would they be able to tell who has stars on their bellies?
Computing is a privilege, not a right; if you can't compile your own kernel or do everything from the command line, you don't deserve to use a PC or be on the internet. And you certainly don't deserve to run a real, manifestly superior (just like its users) OS.

Bureaucromancer wrote:It seems to be the most elegant solution is just to integrate an ad hoc FTP server hosting selected files from any directory into an IM client of some sort.
Unknownlight wrote:Google Docs is an excellent solution for anything under 1 GB.
jpk wrote:Sir_Read-a-Lot wrote:Sneakernet always wins.
(Sneakernet - you put your files on a USB, and then you walk (in your sneakers) over to the other computer...)
The time it would take me to dig up a USB stick, you could probably copy down the bits and enter them into the front-panel switches on your Altair. (And I don't own sneakers, so lacing up the boots adds a minute or two as well)
Fortunately, my phone is usually nearby, and it does the job nicely - but ftp is even quicker.
ManBearPig_06 wrote:You should use megaupload, I've never seen ads or porn etc on it, it's pretty fast for an uploading site, and I've downloaded over 7 gigs in a row with it without hitting any kind of limit.
TravDogg wrote:I've been using Windows Live Mesh to sync my computers. It's been working fine for me so far, as long as I remember to let the program run and sync my stuff. I'm always worried though that I'll accidentally delete something from one computer and then it might be deleted everywhere.
I also once used 4shared to put a large file online where my parents could download it, and that was okay for the single occasion.
izomiac wrote:Seriously, there should be some simple, 100 KB program that lets two people exchange public IP addresses, one selects a file/folder and clicks send, the other clicks receive, UDP packets get bounced off NATs until they traverse them, and the file is transferred at maximal speed without any external server (maybe throw in some compression/encryption). Sadly, when I Googled for such a thing I came up empty.
Idiotsss wrote:Anyone who agrees with this comic really is an idiot.
keppla wrote:Exactly for this reason i made my own open source file uploader, but when i was ready, everyone kept saying 'ah, like dropbox?' or 'oh, like rapidshare?', so i think, these are pretty ok for most people who need to send files.
On the bright side, i have a project to show in interviews :)
JimmyVolatile wrote:I'd recommend http://FileMail.com myself. Up to 2 GB files are supported. Simply fill in your e-mail, recipients e-mail and a message (essentially like writing a regular e-mail) and send it off. The recipient will get an e-mail with a link to the file.
You can both password protect the download and put restrictions on number of downloads or days available.
You'll also get an e-mail confirmation when the file has been uploaded and when it's downloaded from the other side.
This has saved me a couple of times when I've needed to transfer photos to friends and family and huge design files to the local print shop.
Simple as e-mail with 2 GB attachments. :D
PopandLocke wrote:I like Gett a lot for its simplicity (can't post links yet, so Google it). It's free, requires no account, has no ads, has persistent links, has a large file size limit, and the recipient can download while you're still uploading. The interface is fairly idiot-proof, too, so it's great for the less technically-inclined that need a solution. Not sure how they can offer it without ads for free, so I question how long it will stay that way, but hey, that's their problem.
Steem wrote:There IS a simple solution; https://www.wetransfer.com/
Multiple recipients, multiple files, up to 2GB, no pop-ups, fast up- and download and no accounts. You just have stylish ads in the background.
benshepherd wrote:Generally I agree with this comic. I tend to use YouSendIt, but they seem to have reduced the size limit for free accounts lately (although: no sign up required). I have a USB stick on my keyring so that's what I use if the recipient is nearby. For larger files, I'd be inclined to try BitTorrent, but I don't know how fast that would be.
Diadem wrote:At least we've finally got a good way of sharing pictures (lightshot). You know, come to think of it, the easiest way of sharing files at the moment is probably opening it in a hex editor and making a screenshot.
But I would love to have some kind of lightshot for files though.
koniczynek wrote:I recommend http://pipebytes.com - no registration, everything went better than expected ;)
khag7 wrote:FileDropper.com
On the one hand, its about as easy as it could possibly get.
On the other hand, it involves a middleman so you have to upload and then download (essentially doubling the time it takes) AND its not secure in any way.
There should be a simple file transfer client that doesn't require usernames. Two people have the software downloaded/installed. When you run the program it you are given a text box and an ID string, a random string of digits (different every time, approximately 9 characters long). The two people trade those ID strings, entering the other person's string into the text box. Upon hitting "connect" a server somewhere, (not sure who would run this for free, maybe google), would facilitate the secure connection between both parties. It would be great if it were a SSL connection. Once secure its like a very simplified chat client with the ability to drag & drop files. Chat would allow for verifying, "Hey is this Mike?" "Yeah, is this Kevin?" "Okay send me the video of your girls playing soccer."
I'd call it SECHAFT. SEure CHat And File Transfer. Okay, I know the name sucks, but it needs a name. Someone do one better please :)
Anyway, yeah, secure, quick and easy, maybe a buddy list but now we're venturing into AIM territory.. i like the 10 digit string idea. You call each other up, trade strings, and send files.
Schumi wrote:prasun wrote:The easiest method is to use bittorrent. That was what I did when I had to transfer over 2 GB of pics and videos to my friend after my last vacation. It took a while but it was pretty straightforward and we just left it to finish overnight.
That's the first thing I thought of when reading the comic but explaining it to your mother (or grandmother depending on your age/mother's computer knowledge) might not be as straightforward which was the idea of the comic I think.
Yoo wrote:Why dose nobody consider XMPP with out of band data or IRC with XDCC?
Works for me every time.
Facebook and Google are using XMPP... did anyone try to send a file over Google Talk and/or Facebook chat? XD
Eutychus wrote:No mention yet of IP over Avian Carriers?
A lot of firms I work with use YouSendIt. Seems to work, and not too many annoying "upgrade now" e-mails. Not too many...
metamorphosis wrote:Davecasa wrote:But seriously, is there any good way of doing this? I've been doing the dropbox + public link method, but it's kind of awkward.
Mediafire has, and always has, worked incredibly well. None of the problems he's mentioned.
BrianB wrote:I really don't get the title-text/alt-text.
The internet is simply a data pipe between computers, and sending a file (whether by email, ftp, torrent, etc) really has nothing to do with www/http. So why would Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of www) care?
tekacs wrote:Having tried almost everything anyone has mentioned over the years (from KickSend to SFTP to Dropbox to Mediafire to NetCat over SSH :D to ...) I haven't found anything as convenient as CloudApp (http://cl.ly/) - it's only useful for files up to 250MB (pro, or 25MB free, but subscriptions are preposterously cheap) but the official Mac app and FluffyApp for Windows are both utterly brilliant, with a keyboard shortcut or drag-and-drop being enough to share a file and get a shortlink (like http://cl.ly/2I463m0h3s1G1b1Z0p38 or http://cl.ly/9zOP at your discretion) on your clipboard in no more than the time it takes to upload. The API means that there are quite a few interesting uses of it out there and some of us write our own... :)
Just a happy user... :D
BAReFOOt wrote:PROTIP1: All instant messengers support file transfer. That has been the standard way since 1996 with ICQ. Nowadays everyone has something like a Google mail adress. And with MS there's MSN. Which always means they have an instant messenger account too, and can accept file transfers when loogged in. Even with the web interface.
PROTIP2: Opera Unite!! ’nuff said! (How the fuck is something like this not a common standard everyone has by now??)
PROTIP3: Me: “You can just upload it to my server using my web form here: http://me.server.tld/pub/upload.php. You’ll get a shortened link that you can send or tell him.”
I thought everyone did one of the above.
bobbbbbbby1234 wrote:Clearly some people here inhabit a bubble where the majority of their circel are programmers or highly computer literate. Some of the solutions mentioning setting up servers, or running Linux command line programs are way off the mark. In the vast majority of cases, web users don't even know what a browser is, never mind an OS. And they shouldn't have to. It should be as simple as sending an email with a file attachment. The average user doesn' care whether the file goes through a 3rd party server, or whether it's a direct connection. A lot of people I know use Skype to transfer files, but it's painfully slow.
BAReFOOt wrote:bigchiefbc wrote:Yeah, that is exactly the problem I would have with your solution. I have no desktop right now, just my laptop, which I do not leave on when I leave the house.
I think everyone should have either a small always-on home server (for audio/video playback, including streaming, as an answering machine for all forms of communication, etc), or access to an equivalent of that, hosted by someone else.
Like the Unity part of Opera, but separate and on another computer. As a default built into the OS. Like when you install the OS, you can either say that your own box will be the server, and then it will on shutdown not really shut down but go to server-only mode, or choose a provider via a automated API, that allows for offline message/file (same thing really) storage.
I will definitely consider building that into the graphical shell I’m programming right now. (Which has *nothing* to do with whatever you could imagine as a graphical shell. It doesn’t have applications, windows, buttons, start menus, task bars, files, or any of that shit. And while that’s hard to imagine if you haven’t seen it, that’s why it’s better for professionals and your grandma alike.)
dshigure wrote:No need to install anything with Dropbox though. I mean, you probably should if you use it all the time, but you can use the web interface and the public folder to transfer files better than the MegaDelayPopupUploadShare sites.
That, and for each person you get to use this, you get to add more space to your account.
6502programmer wrote:Wouldn't that be "Sir Tim Berners-Lee sheds a single tear"
eidako wrote:For those interested, some snippets from the Acceptable Use policies from some of the largest service providers in the United States:Comcast wrote:Technical restrictions
* use or run dedicated, stand-alone equipment or servers from the Premises that provide network
content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises local area network (“Premises
LAN”), also commonly referred to as public services or servers. Examples of prohibited
equipment and servers include, but are not limited to, e-mail, Web hosting, file sharing, and proxy
services and servers;Cox Communications wrote:5. Servers. You may not operate, or allow others to operate, servers of any type or any other device, equipment, and/or software providing server-like functionality in connection with the Service, unless expressly authorized by Cox.Charter Communications wrote:Customer may set up one (1) web page per service account for personal use of the Service, but Customer may not establish a web page using a server located at Customer's home. Customer will not use, or allow others to use, Customer's home computer as a web server, FTP server, file server or game server or to run any other server applications or to provide network or host services to others via Charter's network.
God forbid that you use the Internet for the reason it was created.
mojo-chan wrote:You can upload any file type to Google Docs now, including password protected 7zip archives. You then get an easy to share URL to pass on. Free accounts get 1GB of space, I pay $5/year for an extra 25GB.
Microsoft's Live thing gives you 25GB of free space too, but you have to use a shitty Silvershite browser plug-in to upload more than a couple of files at once.
rhomboidal wrote:Megaupload and mediafire are quite the awesome, especially mediafire. Just upload the file and share the link. They even support resuming paused/broken downloads.
That said, I'd still like to have instant transfer via quantum tunneling/entanglement. It might be offered as a premium service.
mivadar wrote:When I can arrange both parties to be online at once, I usually zip the files, and transfer them through some messenger service (yahoo messenger, skype, whatever).
When I can't arrange both parties to be online at once, for files under 1 GB, I tend to use googledocs (wait for it to be downloaded, then delete).
If the other party is completely computer illiterate, or I need to transfer larger files, trouble starts.
And yes, I actually mailed a USB stick internationally last week, and will probably mail another one soon.
(Different reasons -
case 1: I had to transfer 10 GB of data, and beside not knowing where the heck to upload it, the person I would send it to has a slow enough internet connection that it would probably take them 20 hours to download;
case 2: 750 MB of data, person on the other end doesn't seem to be able to open a googledoc link and successfully download a file :roll: )
But yes, it tends to be a hassle, and with every advance that's kicking around on the web, it's astonishing that it's a hassle.
soundandfury wrote:You mean there are still people who don't run an HTTP server on their local machine, which runs *nix continuously and has an uncrippled Internet connection?
Ayelis wrote:Us Web Developers know how to re-encode our digicam-encoded BMPs/TGAs as JPG files.
(And resample them at a reasonable resolution, instead of 36000x28800!)
Just sayin'. (++pwned!)
limecat wrote:Best method for file transfer that (im assuming) noone has mentioned yet:
Write an AutoIt script to convert the file from Binary to ASCII string, then paste the contents into pastebin (will they take 25MB of raw ASCII?)
Then the guy on the other end just needs to convert from ascii to binary again. Its a breeze. Really.
warcupine wrote:Torrents won't work over a network which blocks P2P traffic, such as any belonging to my university.
Rakshasa wrote:Well, 'File Transfer' has been a solved problem for a long time and only in the Windows world do people have any issue with this.
OP Tipping wrote:I really can't relate to this at all. There are any number of ways of doing this.
Your ISP probably gives you 100 MB or more of free space that you can use, perfectly good if the material is not secure.
It's piss easy to set up some FTP space, I have one that costs me $30 a year that I use for general storage and backup but can also be used for private FTP.
Or there are sites like yousendit.com, there's nothing really awkward about them, they are straightforward.
Mind you, I work in an industry where I sometimes need to get terabytes, or tens of terabytes, of data to clients, and seriously that still requires disk or tapes to physically be sent.
Ayelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
scarletmanuka wrote:Ayelis wrote:Anyone else notice that Opera actually downloads torrents now? Seriously, with the prolonged stability, the multi-tab loading start times, the torrenting feature Opera has built in, and whatever this "Unite" webserver thing is, (Not to mention how well it handles CSS most of the time) shouldn't we all be using Opera?
Funny you should mention that. The other day I decided that Firefox was irritating me enough that I'd try Opera as my replacement secondary web browser at work. (My main web browser at work has to be IE because we have a lot of stuff that requires it.) I downloaded it, installed it, imported my bookmarks from Firefox, then went to make the one last change I needed to make to set it up before I started using it: telling it not to use the web page's specified text and background colours, but always to use black text on a white background.
I looked all over the place for a setting to allow me to do this, and even thought I'd found one (Presentation Modes) - however, changing the settings there had no discernible effect (and I tried many combinations). A web search suggested the way to achieve this was to write a custom .css file (for instance, here). Are you kidding me? I didn't consider this acceptable, so I gave up and went back to Firefox.
Colin Fiat wrote:Why can't there be more real life feedback with data transfer other than time?
Mice should have more resistance when dragging large files.
USB sticks should weigh slightly more when they are full.
Windows with large data files should be more difficult to drag.
forbiddenSpell wrote:Not sure if this has been posted, but it's relevant to the comic:
http://www.news24.com/SciTech/News/Pige ... m-20090909
Carrier pigeon versus African ISP.
ManBearPig_06 wrote:You should use megaupload, I've never seen ads or porn etc on it, it's pretty fast for an uploading site, and I've downloaded over 7 gigs in a row with it without hitting any kind of limit.
Return to Individual XKCD Comic Threads
Users browsing this forum: Angelastic, Arky, BlitzGirl, Caswallon, Copernicium112, da Doctah, Earthling on Mars, HAL9000, kenmelken, Kit., mikrit, MobTeeseboose, Qalyar, StratPlayer, Ylbbin72 and 31 guests