• Tom (unregistered)

    Do not overtighten the 6. Giving it an extra half turn can make it look like a 9!

  • IT Coward (unregistered)

    So long as I can roll it on my ass before anyone else - that's fine by me

  • joelkatz (cs)

    First(3rd)!

  • CaRL (unregistered)
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).
  • rohypnol (cs)

    jhgklhfgvlk ehvklejh kehv kehfv DUMMY COMMENT ekvekl vbekb elwhbv ejhbv jdfvdjvdf

  • monkeyPushButton (unregistered)

    Some comment about the post today. (Need better comment)

  • Lev (unregistered)

    No, that six(9) didn't defeat the purpose. The purpose is checking for errors, and indeed there was an error.

  • CodeReview (unregistered) in reply to joelkatz
    joelkatz:
    First(3rd)!

    Well played. golf clap

  • amischiefr (cs)

    Ahh Bush being mentally retarded? NOOOOOO who would have thought?

  • Self (unregistered) in reply to joelkatz
    joelkatz:
    First(3rd)!

    That was funny.

  • sibtrag (cs) in reply to CaRL
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

  • Mr B (cs) in reply to sibtrag
    sibtrag:
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

    Not much will have changed by the year 3000. It'll be pretty much the same, except everyone will live underwater.

  • bottomCoder (unregistered) in reply to sibtrag
    sibtrag:
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

    I think they figured that would be around the time Americans switched to a more sane date format.

  • Herman (unregistered)

    Perhaps the screws here numbered with 9 in the manual, and there were six of them.

  • Rob (unregistered)

    Unfortunately, the picture of Bush is intentional. I see photos like that come up on Google News from overthelimit.info almost every day.

  • Tenzing (unregistered)

    Guess I'll have to run out to the store for some fresh salt before the New Years Eve party.

  • mauhiz (unregistered)

    This is but numerology. When talking about screwing, a 6 need a 9 partner.

  • Tino (unregistered)

    Parenthetical figures following spelled-out numbers: Imagine this:

    Place one thousand, six hundred and [page break] forty-six (1646) screws into the holes...

    With the figures, the other 1640 screws are less likely to be left out because someone wasn't paying attention.

  • What the Frag? (unregistered)

    I wonder what happens to me if I eat something of that salt on 31.12.3000

  • Apostrophe'Man (unregistered) in reply to Mr B
    Mr B:
    sibtrag:
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

    Not much will have changed by the year 3000. It'll be pretty much the same, except everyone will live underwater.

    In that case your salt will dissolve, if the packaging hasn't met its comeuppance already.

  • Aaron (unregistered)

    Why does that placeholder use the entire alphabet except for "y" and "z"?

  • bilf (unregistered) in reply to Self
    Self:
    joelkatz:
    First(3rd)!

    That was funny.

    About three minutes too early to be really funny though.

  • dtech (cs)

    Isn't it obvious that it's a hint that the nonary system must be used? You know, so it won't be confused with 6 (10), 6 (8) or 6 (16).

  • DoubleMalt (unregistered) in reply to sibtrag
    sibtrag:
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

    (US) Americans! When will you understand that not writing the date in the right sequence is BAD?

    On a different note, as this is most probably a European product and there has to be a "best before" date on each food product sold in the EU the packager of the salt wanted probably to make (the quite accurate) point that this salt will always be usable.

  • Bernd (unregistered)

    Mindst holdbar til:" is the English "Best before:"

    Nope. It's the dutch "best before"...

  • Addison (unregistered)

    On the topic of expiration dates. . . I once opened a bank account and in some of the documents they printed off for me it said my BANK ACCOUNT expired in 3/6001. . . exactly 4000 years from when I opened it.

  • Zecc (cs) in reply to Aaron
    Aaron:
    Why does that placeholder use the entire alphabet except for "y" and "z"?
    varchar(30) ? ( repeated 3 times, plus "DUMMY TEXT" and commas = varchar(103) )
  • Another stupid commercial (unregistered)

    Sanex! Apply directly to the butt! Sanex! Apply directly to the butt! Sanex! Apply directly to the butt! (use only as directed)

  • Waffle (unregistered) in reply to Bernd
    Bernd:
    Mindst holdbar til:" is the English "Best before:"

    Nope. It's the dutch "best before"...

    actually, I'd go with some other northern language, as the dutch equivalent of this would rather be "Tenminste houdbaar tot"

  • Martin (unregistered) in reply to Bernd

    I think this isn't dutch but norwegian or swedish.

  • Mikkel (unregistered) in reply to bottomCoder
    bottomCoder:
    sibtrag:
    CaRL:
    they were able to figure out the expiration date down to the day
    Not just the day but the exact time! That's 30 hundred hours (military time).

    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.

    I think they figured that would be around the time Americans switched to a more sane date format.

    Actually the Danish format isn't that sane either, a sane format would be YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS - that is going from highest denominator to lowest, if everyone could agree on that quite a lot of cockups would be avoided.

  • jpaull (cs) in reply to Mr B

    And the new world currency will be Pink Himalayan Salt.

  • ArieLex (unregistered) in reply to Bernd
    Bernd:
    Mindst holdbar til:" is the English "Best before:"

    Nope. It's the dutch "best before"...

    Nope. It's the danish "best before"...

  • scando (unregistered) in reply to Martin
    Martin:
    I think this isn't dutch but norwegian or swedish.

    Not Swedish or Norwegian, it's Danish.

  • Code Dependent (cs) in reply to IT Coward
    IT Coward:
    So long as I can roll it on my ass before anyone else - that's fine by me
    God knows, it needs deodorizing.
  • Mark Bowytz (cs)

    DUMMY TEXT? That car is totally lame with its NaN cylinder engine.

    I test drove the 2009 Lorem Ipsum the other night and it was dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit in turpis eget justo egestas lacinia!

  • Vechni (cs)

    sjsafj sgondsgon sadfopnasof derp derp derp

  • weirded verber (unregistered)

    six(9) is clearly a Hendrix reference... "No, I don't mind"

  • Code Dependent (cs) in reply to weirded verber
    weirded verber:
    six(9) is clearly a Hendrix reference... "No, I don't mind"
    Go ahead on, Mr. Businessman.
  • self (unregistered)

    they clearly mean "man 9 six" when writing six(9)

  • Colorado (unregistered) in reply to Mr B

    Am I the only one who caught the song reference about "everyone will live underwater"? I laughed out loud at that one.

  • RBoy (unregistered)

    Screw Comments

  • Bob Dole (unregistered)

    Seems like only one other person noticed the text wasn't exactly random jibberish.

    \abc defg hijklmnop qrs tu vwx.

    Also, the same car 3 times? It wasn't enough to use dummy text, they apparently use a blue P.O.S. as a placeholder.

  • JuanCarlosII (unregistered) in reply to Colorado
    Colorado:
    Am I the only one who caught the song reference about "everyone will live underwater"? I laughed out loud at that one.

    Oh no, probably a little obscure for our transatlantic cousins though.

  • Dazed (unregistered)

    The practice of writing out numbers in both words and digits arose with hand-written legal documents. Using only digits offered too much scope for changing the document after it had been signed, but words only was hard to read for large numbers, so both were used. The practice still makes reasonable sense for printed legal documents when large numbers are involved. In any other circumstances it just shows that the author doesn't understand what he is doing.

  • Crystal (unregistered) in reply to bottomCoder
    bottomCoder:
    sibtrag:
    Oh. I thought they were predicting that by the year 3000 we'd be all using a calendar system with 30 months of 12 or 13 days each.
    I think they figured that would be around the time Americans switched to a more sane date format.
    Even better yet, by that time Americans will have switched to the Danish spelling of "net weight" as well!
  • Mcoder (cs) in reply to dtech
    dtech:

    Isn't it obvious that it's a hint that the nonary system must be used? You know, so it won't be confused with 6 (10), 6 (8) or 6 (16).

    That is assuring. One could get into a lot of trouble by confusing 6(9) with 6(8), 6(16) or even 6(60). Those are very different numbers.

  • Steeldragon (cs) in reply to RBoy
    RBoy:
    Screw Comments
    the double meaning in that is just too funny to write.
  • Maxx Delusional (cs) in reply to RBoy
    RBoy:
    Screw Comments

    I laughed out loud at THIS one.

  • regeya (unregistered) in reply to Bob Dole

    "Also, the same car 3 times? It wasn't enough to use dummy text, they apparently use a blue P.O.S. as a placeholder."

    I work in a newspaper office, and we do this sort of thing...well, I'd like to say "all the time" but we at least USED to do this sort of thing all the time. What happens is that the customer wants to see roughly what the ad looks like, so we'll draw one box, put in a photo, put in a dummy caption (I tend to use Lorem Ipsum, or for car places with an ad rep with a sense of humor, maybe a DeLorean with optional Mr. Fusion and flux capacitor ;-) and just dupe the box until you have the specified number of boxes.

    The real WTF is that someone approved that for publication...

Leave a comment on “Salty News Photos”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article