The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

These wankers have ruined it for the rest of the folks. Trust Alex will be getting a hold of these scoundrels soon.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

I breath a sigh of relief as we reach page 3 of this train wreck.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

VB's RNG is so dreadful that this function may actually improve it. Nah, just download a real one.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

C-Octothorpe:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Like ROT26...
Side note: someone actually created a site about ROT26.

Pure. Genius.

Anketam · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

For those who are wondering I can confirm that you can break Internet Explorer with all those nested quotes specially when you resize to a narrow width.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Anketam:
For those who are wondering I can confirm that you can break Internet Explorer with all those nested quotes specially when you resize to a narrow width.

What kind of narrow sighted moron uses Internet Explorer in 2011? The only good use for Internet Explorer is to download another browser.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

nag-geoff:
I

nag-geoff:
breathe

nag-geoff:
a

nag-geoff:
sigh

nag-geoff:
of

nag-geoff:
relief

nag-geoff:
as

nag-geoff:
we

nag-geoff:
reach

nag-geoff:
page

nag-geoff:
3

nag-geoff:
of

nag-geoff:
this

nag-geoff:
train

nag-geoff:
wreck.

Triply trpping on truple pshw s ha ha tro[lr wtfd svit!

trtrwtf · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Arrgggg! The Bells!:
nag-geoff:
I

Triply trpping on truple pshw s ha ha tro[lr wtfd svit!

Let me guess... Zunesyphilis got bored with trying to gross people out, so he/she/it has found a new nuisance to be. Amiright?

PedanticCurmudgeon · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

nag-geoff:
What kind of narrow sighted moron uses Internet Explorer in 2011? The only good use for Internet Explorer is to download another browser.

Apparently, trolls have something in common with stopped clocks.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Donald Knuth discussed how random numbers should be generated in Art of Computer Programming (Volume 1).

It boiled down to this:

Law RNG3: One should not use a random method to generate random numbers.

And now you know.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

C-Octothorpe:

Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Like ROT26...

Or 13 iterations of ROT4.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
blah blah I'm better than everybody bitch whine moan blah blah
Fuck off. You're not clever.

You might want to see a doctor about that sand in your vagina.

RichP · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

'yo dawg, I heard you like quotes so I BANG ^$&(* NO CARRIER

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Philipp:
Mike:
For 99% of what you are doing, the built in rand() functions of most languages are fine. If you are working in the 1%, you probably already know what you are doing and your code wont wind up here anyway.
These only cases I could think of which fall into this one percent are:

Anything where guessing the number could compromize security (generation of paswords, session-id's or cryptographic keys, for example)

Creation of random sample data for a model used for research purpose (a bad pseudorandom number generator can introduce artifacts you can mistake for significant patterns proven by your model)

Even in 1 that's less of a problem - although the pseudo random numbers have a pattern, seeding them with something like time would make them very difficult to determine unless they can find the time the number was generated and the algorithm used. Additionally, they still need to know how you used the number to generate the password (if there are some sort of rules that affect what a password can be, then it's probably more complicated than simply returning the first 8 random bytes.

Lets suppose a hacker has access to some 'last update time' on my account for some forum, he still has to work out how long before that I generated the password (to the second) or try quite a few passwords, most likely locking my account. Of course, if he has such access, he can probably see the hashed version of my password, which makes the task easier (because he doesn't have to try logins, just generate hashes), but I suspect if he already has that sort of access to the site his ability to crack my password is a somewhat moot point...

Of course, using such a password for an admin account that can never lock is fraught with more danger, but accounts that can't be locked are reasonably dangerous anyway - some other mechanism is needed...

bgodot · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Don't feed the trolls

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

test:
It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "random_number" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post shows the kind of unoriginal, uninspired, idiot is making the post.
It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

Did you consider that perhaps it was intended not for you, but for people who have yet to read that particular xkcd comic?

I'm surprised that such a simple statement ("this reminds me of ...") would provoke such vitriol. Maybe avoiding the comments section altogether would make you happier.

IO'm sure 18 people beat me to this, but did you ever consider his vitriolic reply might have been a common meme on this site?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

QJo:
another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

[snip]

Cool down, fellows. This is an old "meme" which someone gets out and dusts down whenever xkcd is invoked. It catches loads of people.

So this is a thing now? Someone acts like an asshole and then feels clever when people call him out for being an asshole? "Ha ha! I'm so hip! I repeatedly act like a total douchebag, and then you losers think I'm a total douchebag! Boy I sure fooled you!"

To quote Yelling Bird: This is what western civilization has come to folks. Join me in welcoming the incoming nuclear missiles.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

FFS:
another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

test:
It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "random_number" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post shows the kind of unoriginal, uninspired, idiot is making the post.
It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

Did you consider that perhaps it was intended not for you, but for people who have yet to read that particular xkcd comic?

I'm surprised that such a simple statement ("this reminds me of ...") would provoke such vitriol. Maybe avoiding the comments section altogether would make you happier.

IO'm sure 18 people beat me to this, but did you ever consider his vitriolic reply might have been a common meme on this site?

Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).

Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?

Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Fucking tool.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?
Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....

Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

bgodot:
Don't feed the trolls

Such wisdom at so early an age! Colour me impressed!

Pim · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read red text, I would change my fucking BROWSER DEFAULTS TO RED?!?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Schweppes:
HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?
Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....
Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll

OOps...he's right 8 "Faro" shuffles will do it

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...

Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Jim:
You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...
Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....

You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...

Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Schweppes:
Schweppes:
HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?
Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....
Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll
OOps...he's right 8 "Faro" shuffles will do it

Schweppes:
HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?

Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....
Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll

OOps...he's right 8 "Faro" shuffles will do it

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Pim:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read red text, I would change my fucking BROWSER DEFAULTS TO RED?!?

Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read red text, I would change my fucking BROWSER DEFAULTS TO RED?!?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

nag-geoff:
bgodot:
Don't feed the trolls

Such wisdom at so early an age! Colour me impressed!

bgodot:
Don't feed the trolls

Such wisdom at so early an age! Colour me impressed!

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
FFS:
another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

test:
It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "random_number" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post shows the kind of unoriginal, uninspired, idiot is making the post.
It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

Did you consider that perhaps it was intended not for you, but for people who have yet to read that particular xkcd comic?

I'm surprised that such a simple statement ("this reminds me of ...") would provoke such vitriol. Maybe avoiding the comments section altogether would make you happier.

IO'm sure 18 people beat me to this, but did you ever consider his vitriolic reply might have been a common meme on this site?
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Actually, no. Did you ever consider that the way people find new sites is often after being directed from another site?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Schweppes:
HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?
Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....
Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll

HoHoHo and a bottle of rum:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Wouldn't 2 perfect riffle shuffles return the deck to the original state?

Assuming, of course, that either both are in shuffles or both are out shuffles....

Uhm, no. Although I'm not convinced about 8 either...the OP may have been a troll

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

jverd:
ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Fucking tool.

ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Fucking tool.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

FFS:
ted:
FFS:
another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

test:
It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "random_number" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post shows the kind of unoriginal, uninspired, idiot is making the post.
It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

Did you consider that perhaps it was intended not for you, but for people who have yet to read that particular xkcd comic?

I'm surprised that such a simple statement ("this reminds me of ...") would provoke such vitriol. Maybe avoiding the comments section altogether would make you happier.

IO'm sure 18 people beat me to this, but did you ever consider his vitriolic reply might have been a common meme on this site?
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?
Actually, no. Did you ever consider that the way people find new sites is often after being directed from another site?

ted:
FFS:
another unoriginal hipster doofus:
ted:
renewest:
Reminds me of this XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

I didn't even click on the link and knew it was some fag linking xkcd.

Yes, well done. It's not like he explicitly said "Reminds me of this XKCD comic". You must be very proud of that deduction.

test:
It's not clever. It's not funny. Just the word "random_number" with a link under it and the short, useless, one sentence post shows the kind of unoriginal, uninspired, idiot is making the post.
It was funny to read when it came out. It's even funny when clicking on the Random button on the site and seeing it. It's NOT funny when someone links to it from a one-sentence post and thinks they're so fucking clever to have discovered xkcd.

Did you consider that perhaps it was intended not for you, but for people who have yet to read that particular xkcd comic?

I'm surprised that such a simple statement ("this reminds me of ...") would provoke such vitriol. Maybe avoiding the comments section altogether would make you happier.

IO'm sure 18 people beat me to this, but did you ever consider his vitriolic reply might have been a common meme on this site?
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Actually, no. Did you ever consider that the way people find new sites is often after being directed from another site?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Arrgggg! The Bells!:
Jim:
You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...
Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....
You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...

Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....

Point proved.

Hope Alex IP bans everyone who has posted anything nested more than some random number deep...

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

jverd:
sand in your vagina.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Alex:
case 0 c="A" case 1 c="4" case 2 c="Z" case 3 c="7" case 4 c="C" case 5 c="1" case 6 c="K" case 7 c="6" case 8 c="B" case 9 c="9" case 10 c="Y" case 11 c="2" case 12 c="D" case 13 c="8" case 14 c="F" case 15 c="3" case 16 c="N" case 17 c="5" case 18 c="G" case 19 c="7" case 20 c="J" case 21 c="1" case 22 c="M" case 23 c="P" case 24 c="#" case 25 c="Q" case 26 c="2" case 27 c="R" case 28 c="X" case 29 c="T" case 30 c="U" case 31 c="V" case 32 c="W" case 33 c="4" case 34 c="H" case 35 c="E"

Nothing wrong here, it's Dvorak

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Jim:
Pope Alex Pans everyone who nested more than some rum reep...

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Jim:
Arrgggg! The Bells!:
Jim:
You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...
Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....
You know we're getting toward the end of the year, when all the bored little skool kiddies appear online and think it's exciting to be wankers...

Maybe someone needs to start a toolieschoolie.com playground where they can have fun showing their l33t skills....
Point proved.

Hope Alex IP bans everyone who has posted anything nested more than some random number deep...

Point proved.

Hope Alex IP bans everyone who has posted anything nested more than some random number deep...

C-Octothorpe · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Arruuugggghhh! The Bulls!:
<snip bullshit>

So it seems our little troll is actually a defective script. You see, now *this* is why Alex needs to use recaptcha and abandon that red-headed step child akismet...

And to think I initially thought it was just a bored basement dweller with a touch of the downs.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Quoteth nevermore.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

jverd:
ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Fucking tool.

Please attempt some sensitivity. I had a son who was retarded, and let me tell you: it is no laughing matter.

Matt Westwood · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

C-Octothorpe:
Uncle Al:
Ah yes -- shuffle for randomization since, after all, more shuffles are guaranteed to increase randomization. Just like shuffling a deck of cards with eight perfect riffle shuffles instead of one (for those who happen not to know this result, eight perfect shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards returns it to the original state).
Like ROT26...
Side note: someone actually created a site about ROT26.

Fucking classic! I'm pinching the link for my own website ...

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

jverd:
ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Read the original damn post. You don't see people linking to Google or Wikipedia at every dumbass opportunity and thinking they discovered some site noone had ever heard of.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
jverd:
ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Read the original damn post. You don't see people linking to Google or Wikipedia at every dumbass opportunity and thinking they discovered some site noone had ever heard of.

As a side note, did anyone know that we have had a new President since 2008? And the weird thing is: he's a black guy! I bet no one had heard of that either.

Matt Westwood · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

nag-geoff:
I breath a sigh of relief as we reach page 3 of this train wreck.

I don't agree - a burst of unrestrained nutcasery was just what I needed to cheer me up on a pretty fucking miserable day at the arse end of the shittiest year I've had for a long time. So, nag-geoff, with love and best wishes, fuck you.

Matt Westwood · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

Socio:
Donald Knuth discussed how random numbers should be generated in Art of Computer Programming (Volume 1).
It boiled down to this:

Law RNG3: One should not use a random method to generate random numbers.

And now you know.

Bollocks, man, it was Volume 2. Chapter 3 to be precise.

Matt Westwood · 2011-11-30 Reply Admin

RichP:
'yo dawg, I heard you like quotes so I *BANG* ^$&(* NO CARRIER

SML

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
Read the original damn post. You don't see people linking to Google or Wikipedia at every dumbass opportunity and thinking they discovered some site noone had ever heard of.

I read it fine the first time. You're a dick. End of story.

2011-11-30 Reply Admin

ted:
ted:
jverd:
ted:
Did you ever consider that if I wanted to read xkcd, I would, I don't know, GO TO THEIR SITE!?!?!!?

Going on the theory that you are actually this big a dicktard, and not just trolling, did you ever consider that, I don't know, PEOPLE POST FOR REASONS OTHER THAN TO CATER TO YOUR IMMEDIATE PERSONAL WHIMS AND DON'T GIVE A FUCK IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!?!?!?!?!?!!!?

But yeah, you're right, the whole concept of links is retarded. Why would anybody ever want a reference to a site other than the one they're on right now?

Read the original damn post. You don't see people linking to Google or Wikipedia at every dumbass opportunity and thinking they discovered some site noone had ever heard of.
As a side note, did anyone know that we have had a new President since 2008? And the weird thing is: he's a black guy! I bet no one had heard of that either.

Link Source, or I no believe it....

Random Char and Triply-Random Double

Leave a comment on “Random Char and Triply-Random Double”