Monday, April 30, 2012

Comics 1047-1049: Informative Updates

1047. In this comic we get a list of equations! I can't be bothered to check any of them to see if they are supposed to be funny or useful or what. I looked at this and basically lost interest immediately because I couldn't fathom a universe in which I would ever care about it.

1048. I AM SAD BECAUSE OF CANCER. HERE IS A CHART ABOUT MY SADNESS.

1049. As much as I hate to be even remotely negative of anything bashing Ayn Rand, I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't point out that Randy implies that he agrees with the majority of her philosophy except for the part about being a dick. This means he is a colossal moron.

And now, for your viewing "pleasure," here is a guest review of 1048 from possibly Jon Levi, possibly someone just pretending to be Jon Levi, who even cares:


Title: Emotion; Alt text: Fortunately, the internet has a virtually inexhaustible supply of code that doesn't work and people who are wrong, which bodes well for a return to normalcy. [Note: Click to read context for the cancer comics. She's doing well.]



Diagnosis report for Patient ID XKCD1048, who is hereafter to be referred to as 'Patient R'

During a productive therapy session on Friday 27th April, I asked Patient R to write down a list of all the things that made him emotional in the last six years. He quickly listed six items, but struggled to think of any more. I suggested he filled in the two blank spots with 'other' and '? ?'. He then insisted on plotting a graph of them, which is extremely troubling. If the graph is truly an accurate representation of how he feels, then Patient R is mentally ill and needs strong intervention.

At any one time in the last six years, Patent R has felt strong emotion continuously and persistently towards five or fewer things at any one time (according to the graph). These are clearly obsessions towards unimportant emotional triggers. Perhaps he spends hours at a time reading all the political articles on a news blog, or poring over a piece of broken code. In his mind he is pressing the same metaphorical buttons again and again because he lacks the capacity to be bored by them.

His emotional ritual has no room for other triggers such as music, nostalgia, and injustice (beyond the narrow categories he has defined). It is likely that he does not care for anything that does not ft his predefined pattern of emotions.

Patient R's condition degraded significantly in November 2010, when he emotionally latched onto an issue that was entirely beyond his control. At any one time since then, at least 75% of his emotions have been related to his wife's cancer. This combined with his older obsession of romance. Having such a complete infatuation with one person is unhealthy, and leaves him unable to respond emotionally to any other aspect of his life.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect is how well he hides it. In fact no one knew he had a problem until today. Patient R has put on a facade by pretending to care about other things, such as DRM, space exploration and feminism. Although looking back through his comic archive one can begin to see that some of his drawings were nihilistic cries of help. But he did not express the true nature of his problem until he decided to make a graph of it.

If he accepts the therapy, he will be pleased to know the condition is quite curable. He will be able to revert to a childlike emotional state, and rebuild himself from there. However the alt text of his comic exposes none other than a wish to return to the 'normalcy' of his pre-2010 period. If he declines, then I will refer him to Dr Ann Apolis M.D. for more intensive treatment.

Signed





Dr Jon Levi

The contents of this letter are private and confidential, and are not to be posted on any hate blogs.

226 comments:

  1. What happened to the real Jon Levi? Was he scared off by the rising Jon Levi hate? Did he completely blow his load with his ultimate worst post thing, never to raise his weary hand to keyboard again?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I kidnapped Jon Levi and stole his account. Does that answer your question?

      Delete
    2. Well your answer isn't implied so I don't know why you suggest it may not?

      Delete
  2. If Jon Levi really signs his name that way, it will help ease the Randall pain a little.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Stage 1 in Asperger recovery is to realise that Ayn Rand's conclusions are disconcerting. (In the same way that the most crude analysis of Mein Kampf might involve double-take at the spirit of "so that's why we have to eliminate the Jews" which emerges.)

    Stage 2 is to calculate that her reasoning is bullshit.

    Stage 3 is to observe that her premises are bullshit.

    Stage 4 is to study her work in the context of her troubled life, rather than as an "objective" philosophy.

    Stage 5 is to look back at yourself and see how your immaturity contributed towards your previous attitude.

    Congratulations, you now have an iota of self-awareness!

    ...

    Randall has passed Stage 1. A substantial part of America has not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What does Ayn Rand have to do with Asperger's?

      Delete
    2. the two are often contra-indicated. Objectivism is generally popular amongst those unable to understand life from perspectives other than their own.

      Delete
    3. What does Hitler have to do with Nazism?

      Delete
    4. What does my Dick have to do in your Ass?

      Delete
    5. Aww look, rejecting a philosophical system you've only learned about second-handedly, not on any rational basis, but by writing it off as a side-effect of a medical disorder. Which is the more relevant comparison to Nazi eugenics, again?

      Delete
    6. 6:05, great caricature of an "Objectivist". Well done. I particularly like:

      1) "Aww look" as an introduction to peer discourse;

      2) "Philosophical system", implying objectivism is a) philosophy b) a system;

      3) "second-handedly", implying that the problem with agnostics/atheists is that they haven't read the Bible hard enough;

      4) "rational basis", implying that there is a rational basis for reading Atlas Shrugged;

      5) "side-effect of a mental disorder", implying that Objectivism doesn't deserve its own separate DSM entry as a mental disorder.

      Delete
    7. Incidentally, Mein Kampf doesn't really go into the whole eliminating-the-Jews thing, though you can certainly see hints of the mindset that led to that conclusion.

      Delete
    8. Reader exercise: visit; Ctrl-F: jew

      The book "hints" like a thousand punches in the face.

      At least leaders were honest back then, even in their lies.

      Delete
  4. That is some cold hearted bullshit from Jon.

    This blog used to be funny. What happened?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You've only just realised?

      Delete
    2. It did? When?

      Delete
    3. The trouble with Rob is that he's the shy gay male equivalent of Catherine Tate's "am i bovvered?" character. If you tell him he's shit, he vigorously argues that he wasn't trying anyway.

      Having said this, Carl tried too hard, which is a worse offence.

      In conclusion, the only common thread here is that we all think xkcd is awful and that Randall is emotionally abusing his cancer-riddled milk factory of a wife. If you expect anything more, you'll only be disappointed, and you should commit suicide.

      Delete
    4. please don't mention rob being gay. please let me continue being deluded a bit longer

      Delete
    5. it's pretty much a universal fact that if someone calls someone gay on the internet it's meant as a slur, not a statement of fact

      Delete
    6. It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good hate blog must be in want of anal.

      Delete
    7. i am just challenging internet homophobia

      Delete
    8. "Homophobia" sounds so gay. What does it even mean

      Delete
    9. It's because of fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

      Delete
    10. all suffering is caused by love. love is the deliberate exclusion of things which you do not love.

      hate is the driving force which produces all change for the better.

      universal love, before you argue it, is exceptional.

      Delete
  5. Where does Jon Levi get off saying that Randall feels only 'five or fewer things at any one time'? The 'Other' category is literally EVERY. FUCKING. THING. ELSE.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes... And it doesn't exist before 2011...

      Delete
    2. no, it only exists before 2011, then it is overtaken by cancer because it is such an all-consuming thing you ignorant jackass. thats the whole fucking point of the comic.

      Delete
    3. 'other' is the blue bit at the bottom. there is 'other' before 2010 and then ??? afterwards. it is a very important artistic choice signifying that nothing will ever be the same, or something

      Delete
  6. 1) "Causes of emotions" doesn't include "Family" or "Friends". Bit of an omission, we all depend on one another for

    2) Ayn Rand. Ohhhh.


    And this is when I realise that Randy is failing harder at life than is ok to make fun of. I feel like someone who called the service retarded, and then my waiter turns out to have Down Syndrome. Whoops.

    ReplyDelete
  7. you people should be ashamed of yourselves attacking a man who puts his creativity and ideas on the line, you dont need to like his art, or his jokes, or even him personally, but you should be able to respect the fact that it is difficult to put yourself out there like that and just try three times a week to make something people will love. this blog is a disgusting testament to what the internet is capable of in the hands of ignorant children. and to your criticisms about the cancer chart comic, how dare you mock a man for trying to express his pain like that? who the hell do you people think you are? you represent the very worst of humanity and i hope you never have the chance to pass on your hateful, bile spewing ways to future generations. the people of the future will be much richer for having never met you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. posters like you should be ashamed of yourselves attacking a hate blog where people put their creativity, opinions and ideas on line, you don't need to like this blog, or the comments, or even the posters personally, but you should be able to respect the fact that it is difficult to put yourself out there like that and just try to think beyond the preconceived social barriers stifling free speech to make comments about things people should hate. your post is a disgusting testament to what the world will become in the hands of close minded sympathy nazis. and to your defense about the cancer chart comic, how dare you support a man for trying make money out of the pain and suffering of others like that? why the hell do you morons think we care? you represent the very worst of humanity and i hope you never have the chance to pass on your ignorant, mentally retarding genes to future generations. i have sent this post to you from the future where we are much richer thanks to the eradication of your kind.

      Delete
    2. cuddlefish like you should be ashamed of yourselves attacking a troll who puts his shitty opinion on the line, you dont need to like his comment, or his jokes, or even him personally, but you should be able to respect the fact that it is difficult to put yourself out there like that and just try one time ever to make a comment people will love. this reply is a disgusting testament to what the internet is capable of in the hands of ignorant cuddlefish. and to your criticisms about the ayn rand comic, how dare you mock a man for trying to express his pain like that? who the hell do you people think you are? you represent the very worst of humanity and i hope you never have the chance to pass on your hateful, bile spewing ways to future generations. the objectivists of the future will be much richer for having never met you.

      Delete
    3. Cuddlefish are tasty.

      Delete
    4. Haters gonna hate.

      Randy is a true artist, one able to touch us all in the most intimate ways. I weeped when I saw his emotion chart comic. It's just so, so, so true!

      Delete
    5. not that you're a real XKCD fanboy, but i have never understood the whole "haters gonna hate" thing. it's a mindless way of dismissing criticism of something you enjoy--people hate things for a reason, and that reason is not "they are a hater." sometimes it's not a very good reason--for instance, I hate Randy because I have a deep-seated milk fetish that I have concealed even from myself, so I turn this unacceptable feeling into hate for all people with milk fetishes--but it's a reason. calling someone a "hater" is this vapid tumblr-esque way of making sure you never have to leave your echochamber.

      Delete
    6. you all should embrace your milk fetishes. enjoy them. if they make you happy i say go for it. accept your kink. as kinks go, this one's kind of harmlessly cute. life is too short, etc

      Delete
    7. http://jp1.r0tt.com/l_134c4160-6ab5-11e1-860d-f73448f00001.jpg

      Delete
    8. weaselsoup:

      Harmless? HARMLESS? Clearly you have never met a woman whose breasts have been chewed off because of the insatiable need for more milk. Or a dairy farmer who has had to euthanize his cows because there is no longer any demand for his products. Or a breast cancer survivor whose husband leaves her because she can no longer produce milk (though in the long run, she's better off for it).

      Delete
    9. I have met all those people actually but they were all tossers so i didn't care.

      Delete
  8. leopards like you should be ashamed of leopards attacking a leopard blog where leopards put their creativity, opinions and leopards on line, you don't need to like this leopard, or the leopards, or even the leopards personally, but leopards should be able to respect the fact that it is difficult to put a leopard out there like that and just try to think beyond the preconceived leopard barriers stifling free leopards to make comments about things leopards should hate. your leopard is a disgusting testament to what the leopard will become in the hands of close minded leopard nazis. and to your defense about the leopard chart comic, how dare you support a leopard for trying make money out of the pain and suffering of leopards like that? why the hell do you leopards think we care? leopards represent the very worst of humanity and i hope leopards never have the chance to pass on your ignorant, mentally retarding genes to future leopards. leopards have sent this post to you from the future where leopards are much richer thanks to the eradication of leopards.

    ReplyDelete
  9. chris houlihan's leopard

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment was not removed by the author, but that was probably a mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What's going on in the last panel of 1049? is it just someone else about to go through the trap-bookcase? If so, that adds literally nothing to the comic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was confused by that at first too. I believe it's the same person. He was only in the trap room long enough to be told that his taste sucked and then revolved back out.

      Delete
    2. then why would the book "click" again? are we meant to believe that the "click" is the sound of the floor? The bookcase? fuck

      Delete
    3. Look where the motion marks are. These are little clues in the sophisticated art that indicate where the sounds are likely to be coming from.

      Delete
  13. I think that's just the same character after he gets spun back around. Though now that you mention it, it actually would be a funnier comic if everyone who was about to check out a crappy book got trapped in that little room forever.

    ReplyDelete
  14. When did comics get so bloody serious?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When did hate blogs about comics get so bloody serious?

      Delete
  15. If you think Randall is doing a terrible job, make your own webcomic and do a better job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No.

      No, no, no. I am not affronted at your suggestion that the reader of your comment make their own webcomic -- surely any reader of this blog would have the good sense not to churn out shit. No, what offends me about this post is the blatant disregard for the entire purpose of this website -- to criticize Randall's work. Yes, we do think he's doing a terrible job! And we have the right to criticize him for that! One minor webcomic won't make anything better, won't uphold the golden standard of webcomics in any meaningful way. We have every right to call Randall a hack for the crap he calls "comics", and suggesting we leave him alone and do our own work is insulting (especially since you don't have to be a comics artist to criticize a terrible comics artist!)

      Go read Rob's list of 10 terrible arguing techniques. Or just go away. If you don't like this hate blog, go make "a better one."

      Delete
  16. I do not have aproblem growing my nails long, and they are strong, however the free edges are almost clear. They are transparent, and i don't know how to keep get them white. Is ther anything I can do to help this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. he transparency is from moisture in the nail. Actually it's a fairly good thing. I know, I have the same problem with my nails because they are so flexible when they are see through, all they do is tear (not break, not crack,TEAR).

      I'm a nail tech and you just need to keep a nail hardener on them and avoid buffing if they are thin.

      Good luck!

      Delete
    2. I NAILed your mom.

      Delete
    3. french manicure is what you need

      Delete
  17. ATTENTION XKCDSUCKS

    Is 'Chris Houlihan's room' a meme specific to xkcdsucks? Also, has it always just been randomly tossed out, or did it have an actual meaning in the original context?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not a meme. Not anywhere.

      Delete
    2. parsimonious lens

      Delete
  18. xkcd will never suck as bad as Ayn Rand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as someone sucks me in the end, it's all good.

      I make inane sex jokes as a way to hide my sexual frustration, by the way.

      Delete
    2. I make inane cuddlefish jokes as a way to hide my Ayn Rand frustration, by the way.
      ....leopard.

      Delete
  19. I feel like making a list of all xkcd comics where the last panel is completely redundant. Don't have the time at the moment though. Someone else do it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Done; it's called goatKCD.

      Delete
    2. and it's the very best way to read XKCD.

      UANATES MEEDJECT

      Delete
  20. I had to hit the random button 8 times before I got to a redundant last panel. There's a lot of single panel comics though.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Rob, the cunt, said,

    "....but i have never understood the whole "haters gonna hate" thing....."

    Nor have I.
    Haters, obviously, do not hate hating now do they?

    Innit?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems you are implying that haters should hate everything, all the time. I'm assuming you expect "liars" to lie about everything all the time, "happy people" to be happy about everything all the time, "rude people" to be rude to everyone all the time, and so on?

      Well, if you do, then you're wrong. You're probably not wrong about everything all the time, though. Maybe it's just on this one, at this moment that you are wrong. But you're so wrong that it's skewing my judgment of you as a whole. I can't think clearly, my mind resounds with your words. Frankly? I think you should fucking die, pal, and rid us of your disgusting ways and stupid opinions. "Innit?" "Innit?" Looks like it's the only word you know.

      God do I hate your guts.

      Delete
    2. that's what a decadent hedonist would think, altc

      Delete
    3. ".....But you're so wrong that it's skewing my judgment of you as a whole....."

      As well it should, little man, for I am so wrong that compared to me the concept of wrongness itself attains a certain aura of correctitude.

      You are right about my guts though - they are indeed worthy of any and all divinity exclaimed hating.

      Delete
    4. ".....that's what a decadent hedonist would think, altc....."

      The truly decadent hedonist does not think - no pleasure in it.
      And it is ALTF.

      Delete
    5. Leopards gonna leop.

      Delete
  22. Shameless self promotion but also related to XKCD 1049... xkcdprime.blogspot.com/2012/05/xkcd-1049-bookshelf-one-panel-too-long.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. Such a thing! Christ alive!

    Begin to use such as Gamemaker! Return to Gamemakerdom! I'm sickida such as you 100%!

    You fuckin'! You fuckin'! You fuckin'! You fuckin'! You fuckin'! You fuckin' sandwich that never knew bread!

    ReplyDelete
  24. xkcd hater haterMay 1, 2012 at 1:39 PM

    You are pathetic. Don't you have anything better to do with your time? No one is forcing you to read xkcd! You're just biased against it because you're jealous; if you think you can do so much better, where's your webcomic? Besides, some comics aren't supposed to be funny, something you apparently fail to grasp. And all art is subjective, anyway. Dumbass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't you have anything better to do with your time? No one is forcing you to read this hate blog! You'r just biased against it because you're jealous; if you think you can do so much better, where's your blog? Besides, some blogs aren't supposed to be nice, something you apparently fail to grasp. And part of art being subjective means that people are allowed to not like it. Dumbass.

      Delete
    2. Given that xhh's post consisted ~90 percent of the titles of Rob's rants on the left side of the page or close approximations (excluding only the last one, "It's okay to copy jokes!"), I'm pretty sure s/he was kidding. But perhaps I have too much faith in humanity.

      Delete
    3. Given that 1:53's post consisted ~90 percent of xhh's original text or close approximations of it (excluding nothing, but I want to retain this parenthesis), I'm pretty sure s/he was kidding. But perhaps I have too much faith in humanity.

      Delete
    4. Given that 8:20's post consisted ~90 percent of 1:53's original text or close approximations of it (excluding nothing, but I want to retain this parenthesis), I'm pretty sure s/he was kidding. But perhaps I have too much faith in humanity.

      Delete
  25. This one was a low blow, too low.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I find it amusing that the bookshelf comic generated almost as many responses on the xkcd forums in 24 hours as the cancer comic did in 96, even with SirMustapha trolling up a shitstorm in the latter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is kinda funny, but it's worth remembering that the troll comic was over the weekend, which is a low traffic period for most forums, and that the bookshelf is disproportionately represented by a few people defending their honour on the field of internet battle.

      Delete
  27. Replies
    1. xkcd: volume 0 / Kill yourself.

      Delete
    2. from time to time in your life you have to face your shit, esp when you just noticed that what you uploaded was in the fact the raw comic, and that it's not what you intended. oh, you could act like all the other faceless cowards out there, and hope that your fail will be misconstrued as a clever joke of some sort, like "man i'd so wish randall to make comics sans his legendary verbosity, but it's too good to be true!" but no, that's not who you are, you won't stoop so low. you also have to admit that while your joke wasn't funny originally, it will be even less so now that you have to make it for the second time. but still, you face your shit because you're a man

      too good to be true

      and now you want to die. but you faced your shit

      Delete
  28. Comic 1050: "On the other hand, being bad at math is totally cool: "I'm so terrible at math I can't even add lololol," when mathematical ability correlates directly with intelligence, and skipping it serves no intelligible purpose."

    ReplyDelete
  29. How the fuck is cooking useless unless you're some kind of giant manchild (e.g. by demanding that your cancer-ridden wife prepare all meals, being too lazy to eat anything that requires any effort, getting all your nutrients through breastfeeding, etc)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He explained it before. Because it takes time to prepare and clean up, which directly translates into lost cash money via potential income, and because some ingredients will be wasted while you learn, it is actually cheaper to take out for all of your meals. Randall knows this because he is good at math, which may be unsuitable for Basic Life Skills majors.

      Incidentally, I'd love to see this guy's household budget. Hopefully his wife handles that.

      Delete
    2. In fairness, in the three to four minutes Randall would take to boil an egg he could shit out a poster that would sell for $40. That's a big opportunity cost.

      Delete
  30. I am ashamed at having learned various amounts of maths/wish i had spent that time learning how to feel emotions other than angst and sloth and vitriol. =[

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. get off of my hat, raven.

      Delete
  31. Regarding Randy's inability to cook: http://xkcd.com/854/

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't understand people who say they can't cook and so never cook. I mean, you just heat some meat and/or vegetables up and then eat it. Throw in some spices maybe, they're cheap so why not? At worst you'll throw them in at the wrong moment and the flavor will fail to integrate. Doesn't matter. You don't have to be dining on fine cuisine every meal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, at worst you'll overpower the meal with spices and find yourself unable to swallow the food.

      Delete
    2. You do that once, and never again. Trial and error.

      Delete
    3. Fine, maybe adding only a small amount of spice and possibly increasing that amount later on is one of the esoteric secrets that only true cooking masters know.

      Delete
    4. OR... Or you just use a fucking recipe unless you're also unable to read. Americans are so dumb. (inb4 "hurr im british" it's even worse, shut up)

      Delete
    5. Doesn't matter where I'm from. Don't need a fucking recipe. I never use them and my food turns out fine. Your food would turn out fine without them too. People were cooking long before anybody started arbitrarily following recipes. Plenty of cultures out there continue to neglect recipes. Unless you're cooking at a French restaurant, it's not as precise a science as you may believe. You don't need recipes any more than you need crib notes telling you how to wash your clothes.

      Delete
    6. you say that but there are a lot of guys out there who left a red sock in with their whites and who are now walking around in pink underwear.

      Delete
    7. "People were cooking long before anybody started arbitrarily following recipes. Plenty of cultures out there continue to neglect recipes."

      you're speaking of *written* recipes. i'm willing to bet recipes have pretty much always been passed on to later generations orally. only people who had to learn how to cook were adam and eve. but then again, since they never existed, nobody ever had to learn how to cook

      Delete
    8. cooking is just, like, applied chemistry or biochemistry or something which is just applied maths etc. i can't be bothered to work out why that makes xkcd hypocritical but I'm sure it does

      you only need to follow recipes accurately if you're baking. otherwise reading them gives you ideas for stuff that goes well together but yeah, I tend to find I adapt recipes a lot

      Delete
    9. Only an aspie would say that cooking is "easy", because only an aspie is so incapable of understanding that other people have different strengths and weaknesses to him. If you actually step back and spend a moment to gain self-awareness, you'll see that cooking involves lots of observation and judgment. And by cooking I don't mean emptying a tin of baked beans into a microwave - I mean combining ingredients to make a palatable, nutritious and presentable meal, whether breakfast, snack or dinner.

      My partner was once part of the kitchen staff at an award-winning restaurant in Scotland. Even the way she prepares scrambled egg today is a labour of love. And you can dismiss her processes only until you see and taste the difference between throwing something in a pan and what she does. We are intelligent animals. Our first imperative is to eat. If we are fully satisfied by what we eat, we are much more productive and content.

      Saying it's good enough to throw a few things together and add some random spices and seasoning is like saying it's good enough to pass junior high and spend your life as a casual labourer, never even trying to master any skill. (Or, more PERTinently, it's like doing an undergrad degree, giving up your vocation, then drawing unimproving stick figure comics about breast cancer for the rest of your life.)

      I feel that the reason more people don't cook is because of douches who imply that it is some innate ability like breathing. This makes people feel crap that they can't cook so they don't even try. But to cook well, as with any art, you have to try - and again, as with any art, because it's really unlikely that you're a natural genius (and even if you are) you start off by observing the work of others. "Following a recipe" is fair enough, but even a recipe assumes all sorts of things a beginner wouldn't know: what's "a pinch", how low is a "low heat", and how "brown" should it go? So, find the best woman^Wperson you know with cooking skill and ask them to teach you. They may enjoy the activity as much as you do.

      Penultimately, if you really enjoy your meals, you're much less likely to be too thin or too fat. Finally, weaselsoup, you know about too many guys' underwear - but I would still cook for you.

      Delete
    10. 1/ thank you very much, that is very kind
      2/ it has been decades since I have had the privilege of finding myself near a man's underwear :(
      3/ I am vastly fat
      4/ numbers 2 and 3 are no doubt related

      Delete
    11. @weaselsoup

      Anyone who wears red socks deserves to have pink underwear.

      Delete
  33. Plus, we have the internet now. There's so much stuff available in terms of recipes, plenty of places suited to different skill levels, some that describe things in ridiculous detail- and of course, it's the internet so you can look up stuff like what a 'moderate oven' is. There's even software to manage your ingredients for you which you can load recipe databases into and know how much to get and when to get more. You won't become a world-class chef but you'll be able to eat far healthier and far more cheaply than you would by ordering out.

    I couldn't cook either until I tried it. Absolutely no excuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One time, I was stranded in the middle of no-where. It started snowing and didn't stop. I realized I'd have to make a shelter or freeze. Long story short -- I learned how to cook fish over an open fire, and that frozen poo makes good stink-bait.

      Delete
    2. > so you can look up stuff like what a 'moderate oven' is

      My parents' ~40 year old oven is probably the best example I can bring up for why "moderate oven" will trip you up. Sure, you can set the dial to some figure on some web page's estimation of "moderate", but that'll be completely wrong. You'll need an oven thermometer. And it'll certainly depend on which shelf you put the item on - and even where you choose on the shelf. Depending on what you're cooking, you'll need to rotate/stir to prevent burning. And then you have to take account of how the temperature changes each time you opened the open.

      In short, you can make great cakes in this oven - but not if you actually follow a recipe.

      Would things be better with a well-insulated, well-calibrated, fan-heated oven? Perhaps. If the guy writing the recipe has the same model as you, you're in even better luck. If every student just graduating from Pot Noodles had a chef's class oven too, well, life would be dandy.

      There are lots of people who can't prepare a main meal - it's one of the disability yardsticks in the UK for the lowest rate of government help. But for those who are sufficiently physically and mentally able, you're right, there is no excuse. But you have to try, and you must not expect it to be easy.

      And I maintain the best help you can get is through being guided by someone who knows what they are doing - whether that's your partner, your folks, or the cute girl who probably *will* give you attention if you ask her to teach you to cook.

      Delete
    3. this is all very true. getting to know the idiosyncrasies of your oven is super important in baking. as is common sense. look at your cakes & take them out when they're done rather than after the exact amount of time the recipe says etc. practice & common sense is all you need. & willingness to try again if it goes wrong.

      if this post was xkcd it would be a comic about how cooking is the same as sex. there would be a lame double entendre, a terrible attempt at double bluffing - "you thought when i said 'put a bun in the oven' i was going to turn round and go 'lol I'm talking about sex!!!' but i have fooled you cos instead i'm going to bring in that beret wearing fuckwit and go 'aha! i was really talking about baking all along ahaha lololol'" even though Benny Hill would go 'man that trick is old as the hills'. luckily for all of you this post is not xkcd

      Delete
  34. hey guys i'm rob you can ask me any question you'd like i swear to god i'm him

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you hate freedom?

      Delete
    2. If you bought a horse would colour horse would you buy?

      Delete
  35. Err, not everyone lives in Soviet Russia - there's a great proportion of people who don't have to "make a living" to live, particularly those living off unearned income/capital. I'd include hucksters in this like Randall and other cult-preachers.

    Nor does everyone live in the USA - sane countries have a Pay As You Earn system for most workers so they don't have to ever fill in stupid tax forms.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We have that system in Australia, but we still have to fill in a form at the end of the year so the tax office can make sure the balance is right and either pay some back or ask for more. It's great for people who don't know how to save, because when they get some back they think they've gotten free money. Then they spend it all on beer and gadgets.

      Delete
  36. Since when do you have to know how to get your taxes done? That's what my accountant is for. I simply mail him all my forms and let him figure everything out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No-one reading this blog has sufficiently complex finances to need an accountant.

      Really, filling in a tax return yourself is appropriate for almost everyone - and almost anything you don't realise you can declare to reduce your tax burden is not going to be large enough to offset the cost of an accountant.

      Delete
    2. not true. I am massively stupid at that sort of thing. I pay a friend to do my tax return ever since he showed me I was about to pay like a thousand quid too much.

      Delete
    3. No contradiction. Asking a friend for help if you're a little dyscalculate - or even to check for silly mistakes - isn't the same as needing an accountant. I'm assuming your friend doesn't charge accountant rates. In the UK, unless you're S/E earning a lot or have a variety of unearned incomes, you hardly have to supply any detailed information.

      Delete
    4. I'm a single male caucasian living alone on a slightly-below-average income without work expenses, debts, investments, or dependents and I can definitively confirm that there is absolutely nothing complicated about doing a tax return.

      Delete
    5. after my first year as a freelancer they wrote me a letter - it said they were suckers, but it was also threatening to come and take away my computer and investigate everything i had ever earned. it was just a standard random audit thing, but the way they go about it is pretty scary. especially for the dyscalculic and easily intimidated. having an accountant to take that on for me was worth every penny. sure i probably could have managed, but the level of paranoia that such things can inspire is worth paying to avoid

      Delete
    6. I've never had an audit myself, but from speaking to others, it (in the UK at least) tends to be thorough but fair. From my understanding, despite the complexity of the system, the principle of the audit is very simple: (i) if money has gone into any of your accounts, they want to see that it's been declared; and (ii) you need a pile of appropriate receipts summing to expenses. Did you have a similar experience?

      But it remains, as anything the government feels like doing to you, intimidating. I'm of a nervous disposition and would probably be in a huff about it even though I tell the truth and I'm fairly sure I haven't ever made an uncorrected mistake. Ho hum. Hope it went OK for you and they've left you alone since.

      Delete
    7. The important question is : why would you want to pay less taxes when the government needs so much money ?!! You americans are so weird

      Delete
    8. Taxes are the balance between the two human fictions of private property and collective ownership.

      Delete
  37. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You will die a vir-YOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SLEEP TONIGHT.

      Delete
    2. You will die a vir-YOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SLEYOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SLEEP TONIGHT

      Delete
    3. You will die in your slCHRIS HULAHOOP'S ROOM

      Delete
  38. Turns out the discussion for the "MY WIFE HAS CANCER BUY MY SHIT" comic proved me wrong about the moderators on the forum. I thought they never banned me either because they didn't bother, or because it would open up a very bad precedent (dislike the comic = BAN). Turns out they banned me permanently, and they only did it now because they're a bunch of immature pussies. But then again, what could I expect from a forum like that?

    I KNEW that I was walking on thin ice by poking at the mods with such a short stick, but it's hilarious to see them stoop that low so quickly. "U BAN! ME WIN!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know, I thought you did a pretty shitty job. First post in that thread was fine, but then you started sounding very stupid. And now look at you, you're claiming victory because you got banned. WOW MAN INDEED YOU'RE AWESOME. One day I killed someone in front of a cop; I got tried and they put me to jail. Then I screamed: "GOTCHA HAHA".

      Delete
    2. Basically I got to the point that I really didn't care anymore. I was appalled by the immature, thick-headed attitude of some of the mods and the obtuseness of many of the arguments, and when they cut off my sig (oh, they just did it because it was funny. Yeah, right), I knew they could do anything to me any time they wanted. I'm not claiming victory. I am just stating that I didn't expect the mods to be such complete dumbasses, and I'm pretty shocked. Some of the members are plain idiots, but I always had the impression that the mods were at least a little bit more open minded and mature. I was proven wrong in the most shocking way possible.

      I don't think being banned = victory. I wasn't being a troll. Besides, claiming victory against THOSE guys? I'd rather stay away from any kind of competition or comparison.

      Delete
    3. Cry harder, jerk! hahahahaahahahaha

      Delete
    4. >immature, thick-headed attitude of some of the mods
      >I always had the impression that the mods were at least a little bit more open minded and mature

      wut

      Delete
    5. "Some of the members are plain idiots, but I always had the impression that the mods were at least a little bit more open minded and mature."

      Come on, they were looking for a good reason to ban you all along.

      Anyway, shitting on the comic is fine. Shitting on the comic *on the xkcd forums* is fine, depending on how you do it (yeah yeah I know you were actually doing it for xkcd to improve. Oh no wait you were doing it to enlighten the poor brainwashed xkcd fans. Ah, my bad again, in fact you just wanted to have interesting discussions with the other members. Wait, no, etc.) Shitting on the comic, its fans and its author, on what is more or less the official fanclub of this comic, while basically saying the author doesn't care about his wife except for the money he can cash in on her disease, on a thread filled mostly with posts by people who are struggling/have struggled/have relatives who are struggling with said disease, when additionally you know that some of the people there including mods are (possibly close) friends of the author and his wife, is the work of a Zealous Asshole. And now seeing you basically crying about how t-t-terrible the mods are for banning you, the Misunderstood Martyr, is just laughable. You are an attention-whoring troll. Or you're simply stupid. Either way, nobody cares you got banned -- and by nobody cares, I mean everybody's either "HAHA" or "YAY!!" about it. Lastly, we're not on the xkcd forums here; if I want to tell you "fuck you, you little piece of shit", "I hope you'll die", or "CAN YOU REPEAT PLEASE I DIDN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF YOUR DEAD MOM'S ANUS EXPLODING DUE TO MY COCK BEING A TAD TOO THICK" (<I just actually grossed myself out), I can! I'm not willing to start a debate here, just wanted to tell you that I think you were *really* being a dick, and that there's a huge difference between saying stuffs here and on the xkcd forums.

      AND YES I WROTE A SERIOUS REPLY BAD ME. Needless to say, I'm not speaking in the name of anyone but me.

      On another note, your music is interesting. BTW, notice how nobody left you hateful comments on YT.

      NOW LET'S GET BACK TO XKCD/RANDALL/CUDDLEFISH HATE

      Delete
    6. xkcd forum boring now. Anybody else care to step up to the plate?

      Delete
    7. parsimonious leopard

      Delete
    8. i got some people lining up to have a go gotta say though they've got pretty odd names. crazy names. anyway i'll tell you some of them: who's on first, what's on second, and i don't know is on third.

      Delete
    9. @5:33: that wall of text and CAPS - viz. DEAD MOM'S ANUS - confirms that you're probably overdue a masturbation session and/or long sleep.

      So Fernie Canto went into a bit of an unsophisticated babble because he was fed up with the fora. Who cares? You and I both know that Randall is exploiting his cancerous wife for profit in the most disgusting manner, and while the truth may hurt, it's nothing like "killing someone in front of a cop". As for the "and some of the mods KNOW CANCER too!" argument, oh, shut up. Like all families, mine's had a few cancer deaths. My gf's sister has terminal cancer right now. It doesn't mean that cancer is sacred or that you can't be dalliant in your discussions of cancer. Should a man who has suffered a fall demand to ban slapstick?

      As long as you don't strive to gain from suffering, i.e. do not behave like Randall, everything's cool.

      Delete
    10. the sacredness thing - that is interesting, just like the personality cult thing. You see it a lot, this sort of special category of awful undeserved suffering that people put cancer into. Sufferers are noble victims; they battle extreme injustice. (one friend who's had two separate cancers tells me she hates the language of 'battling' cancer and the assumptions and implications behind it, but that's one individual view only etc)

      But also it's a very common thing, isn't it, don't they say one in three people will get some sort of cancer? The huge variety of cancers - cancers caused by lifestyle, cancers caused by environmental or genetic factors, aggressive cancers and slow-moving curable ones - sure,the differences are somewhat represented in general attitudes, but not as much as they maybe would be if they didn't all share the terrifying name cancer.

      attitudes towards people with heart disease (even if it was genetic) are way less sympathetic for example. but someone suffering from it can suffer & die just as horribly as a cancer patient.

      Old guys with prostate cancer who are likely to die of something else first are perhaps not as saintly in public opinion as young women with ovarian or cervical or breast cancer, or children who lived under pylons and got leukaemia, true. but in general there's a lot less victim blaming than for say heart disease, and a lot more martyred 'this is the worst thing anyone could possibly be expected to suffer - how dare you not RESPECT them' than there is for say MS.

      I'm not saying that if there were comics about 'my wife has kidney disease' people would be less caring, of course, but I do think there would be something less of the 'you can't criticise' about some of the responses

      i'm not trying to minimise anyone's suffering or refer personally to anyone. it's general perceptions and attitudes that i'm talking about

      Delete
    11. I've had cases of cancer in my family too. Like I said in the forums, I've seen my share of suffering; and I'm not the kind of petty, egocentric asshole to pull the "my father had cancer, you can't criticise me" card, and I could have done it all the time, I could have explored the hell out of it. But I'm not that kind of asshole, and I won't play martyr with someone else's neck. Unlike Randall.

      And I think it was a given that what I was doing on the forum was really far fetched. That was precisely the fun of it: nobody else was doing it. And it was always great to see the "enlightened few of humanity" turn into complete creeps because of ONE grumpy guy. It's fun to come here, but you know, it made me feel a bit like a coward. But now I've seen the mods are worse, then fuck it.

      I'm not questioning your opinion that I was a dick (what am I, a cuddlefish?), but I'm saying that I just don't care. I didn't care back then, I care a lot less now.

      Delete
    12. Quite, weaselsoup. To put it in political terms, it's another one of those divide&conquer things. Ideally we would accept that all people are human and thus all get ill/disabled, with their condition and prognosis almost always being influenced by environmental and genetic factors. Instead we differentiate between "your poor thing!" (deserving poor) diseases and "you made your bed!" (undeserving poor) diseases. The Good AIDS v. Bad AIDS sketch of Chris Morris makes the point more hilariously than I can.

      The more we judge, the more we break unity. The less united people are, the closer each individual can get to the Ozymandian dream of being able to shit on the corpses of our vanquished enemies, or something.

      Delete
    13. So don't make any enemies.

      Delete
    14. 5:14, indeed. Don't listen to people who tell you that you should condemn anyone, because you're just condemning yourself.

      Delete
    15. People need to remember that Fernie Canto originally came to XKCDsucks to *defend* the comic. Then he realised that we were cooler over here, so he desperately started trying to fit into our culture instead of theirs. Here we see he overdid it on the XKCDforums and got banned. *yawn*

      Delete
    16. Anon, perhaps you ought to write a biography of Fernie Canto? You seem to be sufficiently interested in everything he does.

      Delete
    17. I don't write biographies, just fanfiction.

      Delete
    18. Write fanfiction inspired by a true story then.

      Delete
    19. You could depict a raging Fernie on the front cover and call it CANTO ALIT.

      (being an anagram of LACTATION, you slow fucks)

      Delete
  39. 1051: I don't really know what to think about it. Believe it or not, I still had some respect for Randall, but that is just... like I said, I don't know, words fail me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What 1051? Are you from the future, where xkcd is even worse? Did you come back to the past to stop Randall before he could manage 1051 and doom humanity forever?

      Delete
    2. prevent 1051...save the world...3 hours and 16 minutes left

      Delete
  40. Randy is desperately trying to redeem himself for comic 519. It's not working. Also, there are the typical problems of verbosity and delayed exposition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dead God, 519! I had completely forgotten about that one. Before, thought 1050 had a pretty solid point buried beneath the strawman shit and the condescension, but now, I'm just convinced that Randall is a hypocrite of the worst kind. So school is awful and INTELLIGENT people like Randall learn nothing on it, and everyone should hate school, but God forbid if you criticse your MATH teachers!

      Fuck you, Randall. Fuck you in the ass.

      Delete
    2. Too bad he can't mention it in the official thread, right Mr. Munroe?

      Delete
  41. Wow, I was wondering how he would criticize 1047... I loved that one. I can't imagine anyone even remotely interested in math not loving it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HI RANDALL

      Delete
    2. I can't imagine anyone even remotely interested in math not realising that almost any numerical can be simplified. Especially when you're taking a wide margin of accuracy.

      Delete
    3. I can imagine someone remotely interested in math loving it.

      I can imagine someone substantially interested in math having already done this sort of thing before he reached high school.

      There's no sophistication here - no attempt to identify some sort of pattern, which is what mathematics is actually about.

      I can remember in the '80s with my venerable BBC B Microcomputer letting it run for hours finding interesting ways of forming various numbers. And that was with a 1 MHz 8-bit 6502. Today the task is trivial.

      It's basically a fuzzy Countdown "numbers round" style competition - we had them at school. I think I was 9 or 10. Yes, it was a good school.

      Delete
    4. "not realising" ? I don't think being aware that one fraction might be really close to some other important number is the same as seeing a really cool list of them.

      "already having done this sort of thing" ??? SO!? You haven't seen all the approximations on this list. You are talking out of your ass. These are cool!

      "no attempt to identify a pattern" ... there's no fucking pattern. They're not even right. it's an oddity of math that they're so close.

      Delete
    5. I think you're trolling, but you're doing a sufficiently good impression of a cuddlefish that I'll bite.

      1) That's true. One is an irrelevant fact and the other is an aspie obsession with collecting irrelevant facts on a particular topic.

      2) Have you ever seen the number 1 million written down? I bet you haven't seen 1,000,000.000000000101 ever written down, though. What about 999,999.99999999999987654321? Think of all the numbers close to one million which you've never seen! Let's make a list!

      3) It's not "an oddity of math". It's not math at all. Mathematics is about patterns. All Randall is providing is a set of lulrandum statements that two numbers obtained by different methods are approximately equal. Christ, it's not even numerology!

      Delete
    6. 10:21 Sorry to break it to you, but the only thing you have to do to do a good impression of a cuddlefish is post anonymously. Write "fuck I hate xkcd so much" and post it anonymously, and you're playing cuddlefish.

      Delete
  42. I like 1051 -- not awesome, but still pretty decent.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I don't get this blog. I fully respect that you guys have a problem with the way that Randall does his comics, but why do you read them every week if they bother you? I know that it's popular and its hard to escape but don't you subject yourselves to this torment? You wouldn't be nearly exposed if you didn't read and analyze every aspect of a comic you claim to hate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because MST3K.

      Delete
    2. Because criticising something as trivial as a webcomic is entertaining in a way that xkcd never will be.

      Delete
    3. because all that is required for stupidity to prosper is for good people to do nothing.

      just read the thread for today's abomination of a 'comic' for proof. 'wow!!! omg!!! goomh!!! i too think it's edgy and cool rather than creepy to boast that I click links that say autoerotic asphyxiaton !!! quick, let's think of a way to vandalise wikipedia as is traditional!!!!'

      yeah so they're just a bunch of harmless idiots burbling harmlessly and congratulating each other on having nothing to say. if you can't see why that isn't immensely annoying then you're probably just a nicer person than me.

      Delete
    4. can't you understand that we're just slave to our immature emotions? we need to read xkcd, and we need to hate it clear and loud. we need the world to acknowledge that we are Not Happy about xkcd. we are like kids throwing a fit, except that our mommies don't care, so we indulge ourseves in unrestrained raging. but... could it be... that... we're waiting for God's intervention? maybe we just want Him to tell us in his stentorian voice: "son, quit raging, it is OK." oh my God, sorry for having ever disbelieved in you, i was so wrong... i will stop hating the world and randall munroe

      anyway, i liked 1051

      Delete
    5. I don't get this comment. I fully respect that you cuddlefish have a problem with the way that Rob does his reviews, but why do you read them every week if they bother you? I know that it's popular and its hard to escape but don't you subject yourselves to this torment? You wouldn't be nearly exposed if you didn't read and analyze every aspect of a blog you claim to hate.

      Delete
    6. I don't think it's fair to characterise autoerotic asphyxiation as creepy. It's just a method of enhancing your orgasms that happens to be a little dangerous. It doesn't hurt others.

      Delete
    7. it's showing off about being interested in it that's creepy. even tory mps try to hide their taste for that stuff.

      Delete
    8. Really, Randall is just picking it as a zany option. He's probably not interested in it at all. xkcd isn't entirely autobiographical, after all. He's playing into prejudice against a relatively harmless activity himself, really.

      Delete
    9. 'zany'. exactly. that's why it's so irritating. 'zany'. for fucksake. what next, you don't have to be mad and keraaaazy to enjoy xkcd, but it helps?

      Delete
    10. By all means weaselsoup, tell us what turns *you* on. (feel free to be veeeeeeeery explicit. Please)

      Delete
    11. I would, but it's been a while. i'm not sure i can remember much about it

      Delete
    12. in b4 ars amatoria

      Delete
    13. yeah. i go to the theatre, the circus, all the military fucking triumphs i can find. but do guys ever offer to bet on my favourite horse? do they lift my skirt from the dusty ground, brush away imaginary dust or offer me their cushions. do they heck as like. great advice, ovid

      Delete
  44. *sigh* another Wikipedia comic.

    ReplyDelete
  45. girllookatthatbody

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. girllookatthatsustainableleopard

      Delete
  46. 1051- no wikipedia article reads like that, and if it does it should be cleaned up. Couldn't he at least find a way to work the embarrassing links into an actual article instead of using "which is also" and "a few blocks from?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean he should have edited a Wikipedia article to read that way? You can be sure his fans have already done that.

      Delete
    2. look the only mistake here is that we all read this piece of crap

      Delete
  47. Autoerotic lactation

    ReplyDelete
  48. There's something very simple that most cuddlefish simply fail to grasp: reading xkcd is not bothersome. It's the fact that xkcd EXISTS that is bothersome. Whether we read it or not, that crap is still going around and people are still showing it off like a badge of True Geekiness. Reading xkcd is, in fact, a way of making that fact less bothersome. And having some fun.

    Is this REALLY hard to understand, or are the cuddlefish really that dumb? Well, they do enjoy xkcd, for starters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >are the cuddlefish really that dumb?

      Someone once said that it is difficult for us to grasp the concept of infinity (e.g. infinite space) because our mind is finite. Likewise, how could a person with an ounce of intelligence even begin to fathom the stupidity of cuddlefish?

      Delete
  49. Why are ALL his teacher called Miss Lenhart?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whatever the initial attraction, we can safely assume she had recently given birth when she was teaching him.

      Delete
  50. 1050 infuriated me in a way I haven't felt in a long time.

    ReplyDelete