0649: "Static"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Iridos
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:58 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Iridos » Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:07 pm UTC

Omegaton wrote:I'm a little confused about who's talking since it seems like the people might be switching places, but I can't tell.


It looks like it in the 3rd panel they switched position - but I think it's only sloppy drawing - the right-hand-side bubble points to the left... and would be just a bit further away from the person it belongs to if it was visible. It definitely _is_ confusing, though.


I also would like to point out, that using a condom to protect from static electricity MIGHT just have worked... supposing he used the correct type of condom:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5076287.html
(note pictures in the PDF version... my, what a nut "invented" this?)

I.

PS. we also learn that the esteemed writer of xkcd has "projects" when not alone in bed...

User avatar
tehol
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:25 pm UTC

Re: "Temp" Discussion

Postby tehol » Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:21 pm UTC

Whyareall wrote:
tehol wrote:if you link to comic 649 it still shows temp

wooh! messups. XD

EDIT: wooh! im up this hour. though... I guess I shouldnt be, ={

hi joee/glasnt (teehee)



I've wanted to do that kind of thing for ages, but I never set out to find someone. But now I found you, and I call dibs.

hi tehol!


hi whyareall!

I actually have been intermittently wanting to hijack that for awhile. I don't sign in frequently, but when I do I plan on saying hi to whoever comes to mind, =)

RandAlThor wrote:Erm, like others, I don't get it...

Was the joke that he wore a condom while changing ram? If so, why is the speech bubble coming from the other person?

Very confusing comic, Randall. As has been said before, if you have to explain your jokes to everyone before they become funny, perhaps you shouldn't be making jokes?


Great series you're from by the way, but I really think that you have identified one of the points to xkcd as a problem. =]
ACF Forum home--Lether lol, CN FTW Goodbye, O fiendish mind-thief Seems I can't escape
- tehol OR tehol this link kills spam?

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Platypodes » Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:24 pm UTC

msimswil wrote:
TheTedinator wrote:he's wearing the wrist strap thing so she won't get pregnant right?

How can you tell she's a she?

Well, it's well-known that there are non-barrier methods for preventing pregnancy. However, there are no non-barrier methods of preventing STD transmission, and the reasons for this are pretty obvious. So it's slightly less of a leap to imagine that a wrist strap would work as a contraceptive than to imagine that it would protect you from STD's.

Granted, Wrist Strap Guy might be capable of imagining *anything,* but I'm guessing he's wearing the wrist strap for contraception, meaning he has a female partner.

Why isn't he worried about STD's as well as pregnancy? Well, it *could* be because he and his partner are in a monogamous relationship and have both been tested... but... I kinda doubt it with these particular folks. It could be because he's just totally clueless--very possible. Or it could be because they're both virgins--well, I don't know about her, but in his case it seems pretty likely.

Edit: it just dawned on me that she saw a guy put on a condom to fix his computer, and then she decided to sleep with him. What was she thinking?
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

domino14
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:51 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby domino14 » Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:50 pm UTC

i don't know if someone pointed this out yet, but i also like how the chick is on top

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby SirMustapha » Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:52 pm UTC

Gah, the dialogue is confusing... it took me ages to understand what is going on, and I think I get it now... the guy with the wrist-strap is on the bottom, and the girl (supposedly) is on top... this is why it seemed to make little sense. The problem is, it's such a big effort to get what's going on, and the reward is awful... There's no humour in here! I feel ripped-off: such a messy delivery for a cheap, nonsensical, "edgy" joke. One thing is to dislike a strip, and another thing entirely is to be this frustrated!

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Platypodes » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:06 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:Gah, the dialogue is confusing... it took me ages to understand what is going on, and I think I get it now... the guy with the wrist-strap is on the bottom, and the girl (supposedly) is on top...

Yeah, to make out the dialogue you have to think vertically; horizontally it's not consistent. I had to read it through two or three times before I got clear on who was saying what. I guess Randall was so clear in his own mind that the distinction was between the upper and lower locations that he forgot to be mindful of left and right. It doesn't help that Wrist Strap Guy speaks last in the 3rd panel and first in the 4th, so that the speech balloons don't alternate between the two characters.
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

User avatar
mdog
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:51 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby mdog » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:09 pm UTC

Iridos wrote:
Omegaton wrote:I'm a little confused about who's talking since it seems like the people might be switching places, but I can't tell.


It looks like it in the 3rd panel they switched position - but I think it's only sloppy drawing...


The second panel is actually quite ingenious... In a sense, it could only be drawn in the dark, in that it is the equivalent of three separate panels. First, the woman/girl is on top, speaking (upper left balloon); second, there is the action of changing positions (note the word "fumble"); third, she is lying down, speaking (bottom right balloon, connected to upper left balloon). In the third panel, her misguided geek partner is now likely sitting up next to her, but that is up to your imagination. Very creatively done, IMO.
一期一會
This one time, this one opportunity to meet each other.

caje
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:01 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby caje » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:27 pm UTC

rocketrat wrote:Well, he had the strap-on properly during sex, so presumably had the condom on properly while changing ram.

hehe

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Platypodes » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:59 pm UTC

caje wrote:
rocketrat wrote:Well, he had the strap-on properly during sex, so presumably had the condom on properly while changing ram.

hehe

Do you suppose his confusion started when someone told him he couldn't get someone pregnant if he had sex with a strap-on?
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

Mxermadman
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 4:34 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Mxermadman » Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:30 pm UTC

Platypodes wrote:Do you suppose his confusion started when someone told him he couldn't get someone pregnant if he had sex with a strap-on?


Win. The thread is far more entertaining than the strip itself.

User avatar
Tachyon
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:00 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Tachyon » Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:28 am UTC

I've worked on countless computer projects and what not, building my own computer in no fewer than three different times, not to mention hardware changes or working on other people's computers.


I've never used one of those wrist thingies.
Not once.

The closest I got was hooking up an alligator cable to the body of the case and holding the other end in my hand, but I only did that once.

I'm absolutely terrified of shocking one of my components, which often results in me holding a spoon or any other metal object in my hand while working on a project, which doesn't even work and leads people to inquiring why I'm constantly ready for a bowl of cereal or ice cream whilst working on my computer. My room is heavily carpeted as well.

Yeah...my computer and I live fucking dangerously.

This comic was pretty good, although I can't imagine how RAM and condoms go together. I think it's funnier how many so called "geeks" or "nerds" around here don't get the geeky or nerdy comics, then bitch about how Randall sucks at making comics and should just go back to fucking physics already. Sort of says something about the general population of this forum. Not so much this comic (although a little bit), but case in point the RPN (or Reverse polish SAUSAGE) comic the other day (and many others), which i thought was actually funny and it wasn't till like the tenth reply for its thread that someone actually got it, while all of the posts above were just rants (okay not all, but some).


I personally don't care for the relationship/love/emotional related comics posted, but I certainly don't bitch about them. Furthermore, do you really think Randall, or any webcomic or writer will change what they write because their audience doesn't like their current work? Well, maybe, but it's a little presumptuous, especially in this setting, don't you think?

I'm not naming names or pointing fingers, fuck I don't even visit this place except for the comic let alone know the names of anybody here. All I'm saying is that the emotional people here should quite bitching about the geeky comics when they don't get them, and the nerdy peeps need to stop bitching about the emo comics because they aren't nerdy enough.


Maybe I'm misinterpreting here, or maybe not. Either way I'm not ranting I just want to state an observation.
I DON'T WANT NO PART A YO TIGHT ASS COUNTRY CLUB YA FREAK BITCH
~Buster

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Faranya » Thu Oct 15, 2009 1:20 am UTC

domino14 wrote:i don't know if someone pointed this out yet, but i also like how the chick is on top


Just pointing this out, there is no definitive proof of the gender (or number) of the participants, although it is highly probable that the number of males involved is >=1, due to the moderately unnecessary condom usage in the event that the number of males =0.

It wouldn't be completely unnecessary, but rather unnecessary.
Image

Halrandir
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 3:58 pm UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Halrandir » Thu Oct 15, 2009 1:57 am UTC

I just kinda assumed that this was a male/female pairing because as mentioned before a female/female pairing wouldn't require a condom, and Randall has yet to draw any comic with a male/male pairing. Plus, Randall is himself straight (if I'm mistaken, I'd LOVE an explanation for his obsession with cunnilingus :D), so the chances that he would be drawing a couple of gay men in a sexual situation are a little bit lower than the alternative.

User avatar
msimswil
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Kawasaki
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby msimswil » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:29 am UTC

Tachyon wrote:I've worked on countless computer projects [...]
I've never used one of those wrist thingies.
Not once.

Jeez - the paternity suits must be crippling! (That's assuming you're a guy)
It seems that on April 29th 2010 I was in bed... with your sister.

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Platypodes » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC

Halrandir wrote:I just kinda assumed that this was a male/female pairing because as mentioned before a female/female pairing wouldn't require a condom, and Randall has yet to draw any comic with a male/male pairing.

I'm pretty sure he has yet to draw any non-hetero pairing, whether male, female, or trans. We've had a reference to past female/female sex (http://xkcd.com/507/) not depicted, and we've had male/male unresolved sexual tension (http://xkcd.com/65/), but whenever we actually see a couple getting it on, or even going out, it's always been male/female as far as I can recall.

Halrandir wrote: Plus, Randall is himself straight (if I'm mistaken, I'd LOVE an explanation for his obsession with cunnilingus :D),

"He's bi" would be a pretty good explanation.

I don't particularly think he is, given that he's never drawn any guy/guy sex. But liking cunnilingus and liking men are in no way mutually exclusive.
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

User avatar
captain2obvious
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:34 pm UTC
Location: Standing in line, waiting for the Justice League to accept my application

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby captain2obvious » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:57 am UTC

There's also this comic that eludes to less than hetero sexual experiments. But as far as I know, the actual depiction of the dirty deed has been male-female.
Belial wrote:A misunderstanding? On the internet??!!? Say it ain't so, Superman!!!
Pseudonym wrote:Assuming we know everything is sheer arrogance, but assuming we know nothing is sheer absurdity.

allele
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:58 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby allele » Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:12 am UTC

Once again, I am amongst the hordes who created an account purely to reply on here at some point. I've had that urge several times, but have really only had smart-alec (misguided smart-alec) or complimentary things to say, perhaps a oh-I-geddit remark, but here? I feel I want to just make a small point of defense and express my concern in this regard.

As commented, the humour in these comics seems to be flagging slightly, which in itself I don't consider remarkable as we get three a week, so an unfunny run could be down to bad luck. However, the art-level - and these are stick figures we're talking about - has also been going downhill as of late. We've had some messy lines, dented heads and now a comic in the dark. Having a comic in the dark isn't always a sign of lowering art-levels, but given that the humour is a bit dry on this one, I cannot for the life of me properly interpret its use. I am not trying to criticize Randall here, I hasten to add.

Actually, I'm a touch worried about him.

His jokes seem a bit laboured and he doesn't seem to be drawing to his usual level (this is stick figures, stick figures) so I'm a'wondering if he's alright? His blog appears to have the same level of bounciness, and I can't see him just disliking his own comic. So, my own proposition at this point is the basic fact, that perhaps his humour has been having a bad spell and the criticism of us lot is making him a touch resentful (thus lower art-levels cropping up after dry humour spell, etc.).

Anyways, none of my business I'm sure.

I found this mildly funny in a light-hearted manner, and preferred build-up to anything else, simply because of the 'WTHDUDE?!' nature the couple's relationship shall take... Oh I can hear the wedding bell's now...I'm sure anti-static straps make bad wedding rings though :)

User avatar
Karilyn
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:09 pm UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Karilyn » Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:16 pm UTC

I'm kinda annoyed that so many people think you shouldn't need to wear a constant ground while working on a computer. I'd expect better out of ya'll.

It's not like ESD has to be strong enough that you feel a powerful shock, and can see a little zap of electricity, and your hair is standing up afterwards, and that the card is immediately fried and smells something not unlike burnt popcorn.

The reality is, you can damage circuitry with an ESD that is significantly weaker than the human body is capable of feeling. And that it can take weeks or months for the damage to become noticable in computer performance.

If you want your computer parts to last longer, and to have less decay in performance over time, you should ALWAYS use some type of anti-static protection. Hell, you can buy a cheap one for less than the price of a gumball. Heck, I think a dollar is worth spending on making sure your parts last longer, when you are already spending hundreds on your computer.
Last edited by Felstaff on Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:18 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Link removed.
Gelsamel wrote:If you punch him in the face repeatedly then it's science.

User avatar
dennisw
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:09 am UTC
Location: Appearing pro se AND pro bono!
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby dennisw » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:03 pm UTC

Karilyn wrote:I'm kinda annoyed that so many people think you shouldn't need to wear a constant ground while working on a computer. I'd expect better out of ya'll.

It's not like ESD has to be strong enough that you feel a powerful shock, and can see a little zap of electricity, and your hair is standing up afterwards, and that the card is immediately fried and smells something not unlike burnt popcorn.

The reality is, you can damage circuitry with an ESD that is significantly weaker than the human body is capable of feeling. And that it can take weeks or months for the damage to become noticable in computer performance.

If you want your computer parts to last longer, and to have less decay in performance over time, you should ALWAYS use some type of anti-static protection. Hell, you can buy a cheap one for less than the price of a gumball. Heck, I think a dollar is worth spending on making sure your parts last longer, when you are already spending hundreds on your computer.

In the course of my career, I've had my hands inside computers frequently over a period of thirty years and I've never worn a wrist strap. I think they're silly. However, I live in a humid climate, but that's beside the point (insist I). The same silliness can be seen when a phone company repair truck is parked in a marked parking space and still has safety cones on the ground at its corners.
Try the Printifier for xkcd. You can now scale the comic between 50 and 150%.

I find these very useful: Common Errors in English Usage (web site) and Eats, Shoots & Leaves (book). You may, too.

e pluribus unum
Unleash unlicensed ungulates!

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Faranya » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:39 pm UTC

Halrandir wrote:I just kinda assumed that this was a male/female pairing because as mentioned before a female/female pairing wouldn't require a condom, and Randall has yet to draw any comic with a male/male pairing. Plus, Randall is himself straight (if I'm mistaken, I'd LOVE an explanation for his obsession with cunnilingus :D), so the chances that he would be drawing a couple of gay men in a sexual situation are a little bit lower than the alternative.


Again, there is always the possibility that there are more than two people there. Just consider that "Why would you even think that" and "Yeah, I thought that was weird" come from two different people than the first comments...
Image

Mxermadman
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 4:34 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Mxermadman » Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:01 pm UTC

I'd venture to say that the vast majority of sex occurs between one male and one female. You guys must have very active imaginations to assume that the comic depicts male/male, female/female or greater than two partners.

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Faranya » Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:48 am UTC

Mxermadman wrote:I'd venture to say that the vast majority of sex occurs between one male and one female. You guys must have very active imaginations to assume that the comic depicts male/male, female/female or greater than two partners.


You can venture all you'd like, but the fact remains that until we see concrete evidence, it could go a number of different ways.

And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.

Yeah, that's hot. Or not...I really have no idea.
Image

User avatar
msimswil
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Kawasaki
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby msimswil » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:41 am UTC

Mxermadman wrote:You guys must have very active imaginations to assume that the comic depicts male/male, female/female or greater than two partners.

What sex? There's no sex happening here. They're fixing computers. In the dark.

Or not

Faranya wrote:And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.

Schrödiger's Orgy?
It seems that on April 29th 2010 I was in bed... with your sister.

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Faranya » Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:11 pm UTC

msimswil wrote:
Faranya wrote:And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.

Schrödiger's Orgy?


I dunno, he'd probably want to bring animals into it. That would just be weird.
Last edited by Faranya on Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:04 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
Cloud Walker
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 3:37 am UTC
Location: Midwest, USA, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Cloud Walker » Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

The switched word balloons/speakers totally confused me. I had to come here to understand what was going on. :?
Because I have loved life, I shall have no sorrow to die. - Amelia Burr

I make pretty pictures!: Photography & Video Production

User avatar
Platypodes
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:42 am UTC
Location: On a knot on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Platypodes » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:59 pm UTC

Faranya wrote:
msimswil wrote:
Faranya wrote:And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.

Schrödiger's Orgy?


I dunno, he'd probably want to bring animals into it. That would just be weird.

Well, he might. Or not.
videogamesizzle wrote:so, uh, seen any good arbitrary, high numbers lately?

User avatar
msimswil
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Kawasaki
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby msimswil » Sat Oct 17, 2009 4:36 am UTC

Platypodes wrote:
Faranya wrote:
msimswil wrote:
Faranya wrote:And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.
Schrödiger's Orgy?
I dunno, he'd probably want to bring animals into it. That would just be weird.
Well, he might. Or not.

I see what you did there!
It seems that on April 29th 2010 I was in bed... with your sister.

AlexanderRM
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 7:45 pm UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby AlexanderRM » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:56 pm UTC

Platypodes wrote:
msimswil wrote:
TheTedinator wrote:he's wearing the wrist strap thing so she won't get pregnant right?

How can you tell she's a she?

Well, it's well-known that there are non-barrier methods for preventing pregnancy. However, there are no non-barrier methods of preventing STD transmission, and the reasons for this are pretty obvious. So it's slightly less of a leap to imagine that a wrist strap would work as a contraceptive than to imagine that it would protect you from STD's.

Granted, Wrist Strap Guy might be capable of imagining *anything,* but I'm guessing he's wearing the wrist strap for contraception, meaning he has a female partner.


Indeed. In female/female there would be no condom in any case, and in male/male there would be no worry about getting pregnant; it seems rather likely that the intent is to prevent pregnancy, not STDs. Also, it's rather apparent only one of the people involved needs to wear a condom, since it's only 1 person being asked if they put one on- it's not a string of "check, check, check"...
So I suppose it could be 1 male (with the wrist strap instead of a condom) and more than one female... but then you'd still have "she's a she" and he's wearing the wrist strap so she, or none of the shes, will get pregnant. But that sounds quite unlikely. Also, the speech bubbles definitely look like 2 people.





SirMustapha wrote:the guy with the wrist-strap is on the bottom, and the girl (supposedly) is on top...


Or it's possible that the speech bubbles are going away from their mouths in the direction they're facing, so the guy is on top, and his speech bubbles have arrow-things pointing up towards his mouth, and the girl is on bottom, and her speech bubbles have arrows pointing down towards her mouth. But the girl is on top could also work once you've figured it out.




Halrandir wrote:I just kinda assumed that this was a male/female pairing because as mentioned before a female/female pairing wouldn't require a condom, and Randall has yet to draw any comic with a male/male pairing.


Indeed, most or nearly all XKCD comics have been 1 male and one female, apart from that being the general assumption (there's nothing in the joke that would make Randall think of anything else) and simply making the most sense in terms of what's going on.




Mxermadman wrote:You guys must have very active imaginations to assume that the comic depicts male/male, female/female or greater than two partners.


Yeah. I perfectly understand the idea that this would be possible (I.E. "it's not necessarily a girl"), but it's overwhelmingly likely that it's not so, and also for the sake of discussing what's going on it's best to assume the standard.




Faranya wrote:And frankly, until I observe it, I'd venture to say that they all must be happening simultaneously.


It's possible that it's simply not any of them (there really is no specific definition), but I'd say that Randall probably wrote this with standard guy-girl in mind.

Benson
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:15 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby Benson » Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:26 am UTC

Mxermadman wrote:I'd venture to say that the vast majority of sex occurs between one male and one female. You guys must have very active imaginations to assume that the comic depicts male/male, female/female or greater than two partners.

What about less than 2? Could be masturbation + MPD/DID. :lol:
(Yes, a condom doesn't make much sense for masturbation, but then, neither does a wrist-strap.)

doctapeppaman
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 3:58 am UTC

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby doctapeppaman » Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:04 am UTC

Darkness.
Person on left: "Hang on, I can't see. Did you put on a condom?"
Person on right: "It's okay. I've got a wrist thing on."
Left: A what? Let me see that.
*fumble*
Left: "This is an anti-static strap. You mean it doesn't?"
Right: "No. Why would you even think that?"
Left: "I guess I was mixed up. Wait, so when I was replacing that RAM last week..."
Right: "Yeah, I thought that was weird."
Left: "Oh, but it explains why the Geek Squad fired me."

scarletmanuka
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 4:29 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby scarletmanuka » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:09 pm UTC

doctapeppaman wrote:Darkness.
Person 1: "Hang on, I can't see. Did you put on a condom?"
Person 2: "It's okay. I've got a wrist thing on."
Person 1: "A what? Let me see that."
*fumble*
Person 1: "This is an anti-static strap."
Person 2: "You mean it doesn't..."
Person 1: "No. Why would you even think that?"
Person 2: "I guess I was mixed up. Wait, so when I was replacing that RAM last week..."
Person 1: "Yeah, I thought that was weird."
Person 2: "Oh, but it explains why the Geek Squad fired me."

FTFY. I hope it makes a little more sense to you now.

User avatar
dennisw
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:09 am UTC
Location: Appearing pro se AND pro bono!
Contact:

Re: "Static" Discussion

Postby dennisw » Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:41 pm UTC

I present, without further comment, this:
Image
Try the Printifier for xkcd. You can now scale the comic between 50 and 150%.

I find these very useful: Common Errors in English Usage (web site) and Eats, Shoots & Leaves (book). You may, too.

e pluribus unum
Unleash unlicensed ungulates!


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SuicideJunkie and 94 guests