Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

xkcd, Devotion To Duty

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the a-different-breed dept.

Idle 167

xkcd really hit the nail on the head today.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

news? (3, Insightful)

MrSpiff (515611) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230504)

I know it's idle, but where is the news..? I don't come to slashdot for comics, that's what RSS feeds are for.

Re:news? (1)

drachenstern (160456) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230530)

Or if you twitter, you can just skip checking the front page all day, just wait for story announcements to come to you. (yeah, soviet meme joke waiting there, but too lazy to reach out and touch it, even with this long soliloquy).

However, I think that today's XKCD _really is_ that good, so I agree with the desire to post this particular one to the /. front-page. Glad now that we finally have an idle section for this sort of thing tho ;).

Bonus points to whoever can name a Bruce Willis role that shows him as a sysadmin!

Re:news? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230594)

die hard!

Re:news? (1)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231210)

... even with this long soliloquy).

That's not a long soliloquy. Boy, back in my day, a long soliloquy was a long soliloquy. Why, I remember one time when Dave, we knew him as one of the group The Lone Soliloquyers, started to talk about how soliloquies, even if they were called long soliloquies, weren't really long soliloquies like they used to be. Read more... [slashdot.org]

Re:news? (1)

drachenstern (160456) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231618)

yeah yeah yeah and then there was this one time when I tied an onion to my belt because it was the fashion ... ;)

Re:news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231350)

You mean 'if you tweet'. Learn to recognize the difference between a noun and a verb,

Re:news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230794)

I got slashdot in RSS feeds ...
so I guess it's okay to have RSS feeds content on slashdot because it goes through my RSS reader!?

Re:news? (5, Funny)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230922)

no... apparently you come to slashdot to bitch and whine. Well done on that front my friend. Mission accomplished.

Re:news? (2, Funny)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231248)

You forgot about not reading the article no matter how brief.

Re:news? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231690)

Not all of us have a RSS jack in their brain, you insensitive clod!

I don't come to slashdot for the stories (1)

ModernGeek (601932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231988)

I come for the discussions. I for one, welcome our XKCD overlords.

Re:I don't come to slashdot for the stories (1)

eleuthero (812560) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232532)

given that a number of us read the xkcd strips, I would rather enjoy having a comment section on a number of the more intuitive / technical posts to allow for discussion.

Re:news? (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232784)

I know it's idle, but where is the news..? I don't come to slashdot for comics, that's what RSS feeds are for.

Maybe they figure they'll be posting an article about cut cables later in the day and are trying to head off the "OBxkcd" posts. Speaking of which, OBxkcd: http://xkcd.com/33/ [xkcd.com]

Excellent timing (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230518)

Having just spent 17 hours bringing a server back online after a third party team blew up a data center move I am greatly amused. Note to data center migration teams teams when moving large production databases, copy, don't cut!!!!!

Re:Excellent timing (3, Funny)

auntieNeo (1605623) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230672)

Having just spent 17 hours bringing a server back online after a third party team blew up a data center move I am greatly amused.

Did you crawl through ventilation ducts or kill anyone in the process? CmdrTaco must have, unless I misunderstood the phrase "hit the nail on the head."

Re:Excellent timing (5, Funny)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231566)

no, but i climb through an SSH tunnel and kill -9 zombie procs on the regular. that's the same thing, right?

Re:Excellent timing (1)

rpetre (818018) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231786)

Well, kill-ing with SIGCHLD the zombie parents is more efficient and elegant, usually. The first rule of kill -9 is that you should not use kill -9 in the first place.

Re:Excellent timing (2, Funny)

saiha (665337) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233134)

Yeah, but they are most likely just user processes, who cares?

Re:Excellent timing (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233348)

    Users, clients, other admins. Who cares. All I care is that my tasks keep going.

    For some reason, no one else saw the humor of changing all the passwords but my own, and then "chattr +i /etc/shadow"

    It really makes you some new fans when you reboot a machine, and then ask anyone else if they mind. Oops, sorry, you should have said something.

Re:Excellent timing (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233126)

You fool! You can't kill -9 zombies! They'll just laugh it off and then suck out your brain! You have to kill the parent!

Re:Excellent timing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231638)

I feel your pain, got exploited by a botnet yesterday and when the hosting provider reinstalled the OS they gave the machine the wrong IP, creating a conflict within our cluster taking the whole farm down until they could walk their asses over and change the IP, which somehow took over an hour.

Incompetence is our biggest enemy nowadays, to say nothing of the initial security breach. It would have been cheaper for everyone involved if I had flown down and done all the host's work myself.

Re:Excellent timing (1)

CompMD (522020) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232720)

"a third party team blew up a data center"

So a sysadmin and John McClane traded jobs for a day is what you're saying.

Thanks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230520)

Thanks for the content dude.

no doubt (5, Interesting)

pootypeople (212497) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230524)

Myself and another admin at my company remarked that hostage situations were unlikely in our data rooms, but not an impossibility.

Re:no doubt (3, Funny)

hitmark (640295) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230932)

i am guessing the hostage would be a middle manager, and the admins would be the hostage takers?

oh wait, middle managers make for lousy hostages...

Re:no doubt (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231744)

(cue top boss during the negotiation phone call) "A million and you let him go. Mmmhmm... Ok ... Say, how much so you keep him?"

Re:no doubt (1)

ajrs (186276) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232354)

accidental moderation - parent funny

Re:no doubt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233350)

um no, not really..

Re:no doubt (1)

isorox (205688) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233144)

Myself and another admin at my company remarked that hostage situations were unlikely in our data rooms, but not an impossibility.

I'm currently on a hostile environment training course, as I'm shortly off to various mid-asia countries to install various servers in data rooms.

Surviving being taken as a hostage is Thursday

Seriously... (2, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230526)

What. The. Fuck?

Re:Seriously... (4, Funny)

keithpreston (865880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230628)

I agree XKCD shouldn't make the front page of slashdot, but the last 2 XKCD's have been some of their best (top 5%) and the ones before that not too shabby. Either way, with the principle of explosion, I'm going to call your mom and report that you have a dirty mouth among other things to discuss with her over box wine.

Re:Seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231446)

Re:Seriously... (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231026)

Yes... that is the proper response to Idle. If you find yourself in an uncontrollable state due to this or related responses, the next action is to hide Idle.

Seriously... (4, Insightful)

auntieNeo (1605623) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230540)

Who reads Slashdot without checking xkcd? Anyone? I just happened to check Slashdot first today.

Re:Seriously... (4, Informative)

pootypeople (212497) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230582)

A good point, but today's xkcd was a real winner. Perhaps there are a few unenlightened souls that visit /. but not xkcd who needed a push in the right direction.

Re:Seriously... (2, Informative)

rjolley (1118681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231080)

I much prefer http://xkcdsucks.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] Not everyone is a fan.

Re:Seriously... (5, Insightful)

AlecC (512609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231382)

It baffles me that anybody thinks it worth the time to write a blog like this. OK, you don't like xkcd? Don't visit it. There is a whole web out there, people. There are probably more webcomics alone than any one person can read. Move along, leave this one behind. For me, it is funny enough often enough to justify the energy spent in clicking on the link to it. Which is not the highest of praise.

Re:Seriously... (2, Insightful)

twidarkling (1537077) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231610)

It baffles me that anybody thinks it worth the time to write a blog like this. OK, you don't like xkcd? Don't visit it. There is a whole web out there, people.

Except for those of use who don't like it, we keep getting shit like slashdot today. The fawning fanboys shove it down our throats. The worst of it is every time something's mentioned in a strip, there's immediately some dumbass trying to put an "in popular culture" reference on its wikipedia page saying "OMG XKCD MENTIONED THIS!" So, no, it's not as simple as "not visiting it." Unless you're prepared for a blanket moratorium on people mentioning XKCD on the rest of the Internet. Somehow, I doubt that, so in the meantime, I'll continue to visit that blog.

Re:Seriously... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231966)

It's mentioned in popular culture if it was mentioned in some sort of popular contemporary that could be considered cultural (basically anything that serves no real purpose or goal...).

Where's the big deal? It was mentioned in XKCD. Like the page, find it noteworthy. Don't like it, find it noteworthy that it's not noteworthy.

It's not like the internet tells you what you should think. Or rather, it tries, but there's no need for you to listen.

Re:Seriously... (5, Funny)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232368)

I hate broccoli. You know what I do when someone who loves broccoli starts fawning over some dish they recently ate which had broccoli in it? Nothing really, I just enjoy the conversation and talk about something I like in response. I don't even have to mention I don't like broccoli.

It's not like you need to burst a vein every time you see XKCD mentioned somewhere. If you do you can't really call it dislike anymore.

Although maybe I'm doing it wrong. The next time I'm in a restaurant and I see someone at another table with broccoli, I'm going to turn beat red and throw a hissy fit about how horrible broccoli is and how terrible it is that I have to see the stuff in public because of those damned broccoli lovers who think it's some miracle cancer curing vegetable or something. Yeah, that "Don't sweat the small stuff" crap won't be for me anymore. I'm going to make a big deal out of absolutely nothing.

Starting with your comment. How am I doing?

Re:Seriously... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31232734)

It's not like you need to burst a vein every time you see XKCD mentioned somewhere.

Have you ever heard of "getting sick of" something? xkcd has been going around for ages, and we're constantly coming across it in anything that's marginally related to computers or science. Besides, the maliciousness of your post omitted one of the most important points: the vandalism on Wikipedia. There is already a page on Wikipedia creates SPECIFICALLY because of the xkcd vandalism. Clearly it's not just one person who's "bursting a vein" because of that webcomic; this thing has gotten out of hand.

There's nothing absurd with maintaining a blog like that. It doesn't take much time, it's a good way for relieving stress, and, quite simply, it's fun. Besides, it's worth to point out that pretty much all active participants of that blog were once fans of xkcd (me included). So, people are not just vomiting random rage, but putting out honest opinions and pondering why it was once seen as good, and seems so awful today. The overall conclusion is that Randall Munroe has clever ideas sometimes, but is an incredibly bad writer. Maybe he had several ideas for inspiration in the early days, but the well's run dry, and now all we get is bad writing, lazy humour without obvious targets, and much, much pandering towards the people who want to be science/computer geeks and feel better than everyone. There are grounds for disagreement, but I think that argument of "don't like it, don't read it" is weak and lazy, just like xkcd. It's like complaining about negative reviews on IMDb; the Internet's a free place, people.

  - Fernie Canto, Anonymous Coward

Re:Seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31232856)

I hate broccoli. You know what I do when someone who loves broccoli starts fawning over some dish they recently ate which had broccoli in it? Nothing really, I just enjoy the conversation and talk about something I like in response. I don't even have to mention I don't like broccoli.

The next time CmdrTaco frontpages a broccoli fanboy story I'll keep that in mind.

Re:Seriously... (1)

mpicker0 (411333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233262)

The next time I'm in a restaurant and I see someone at another table with broccoli, I'm going to turn beat red

That's beet red. Or do you have something against beets, too?

Re:Seriously... (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233308)

Funny, thats what they did here recently to ban public smoking.

Since that worked, sounds like doing it to ban broccoli probably has a fairly good shot at working.

Re:Seriously... (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232898)

Yeah, it's tough to ignore things. The natural human drive to tell everyone about how you don't like something and how the entire Internet is oppressing your right to not like something is truly a hardship.

Re:Seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233120)

I'm sure Slashdot will be happy to send you a refund for what you pay to access the site.

Re:Seriously... (0, Flamebait)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233288)

Do you have any idea what so ever of how big of a loser that makes you? Do you have any idea how mentally fucked up you have just shown us all that you are?

You have an abnormal response to something that should be a non-stimuli.

Reading or hearing someone talk about a comic on the Internet or updating a Wikipedia page doesn't do anything. It doesn't mean anything. Its like listening to '*BSD is dying', 'Year of the Linux desktop', 'meme', 'lolcat', 'pwn', 'keke' or any of a million other absolutely retarded fucking things that get said or discussed on the Internet. Those are mostly normal things to be tired of, they've been over used. XKCD isn't THAT fucking common.

Whats really sad is that you are so 'anti-xkcd' that you go read some other retarded anti-xkcd website and get yourself more worked up over something that normal well adjusted people would just ignore. So either you're in highschool and having hormone imbalance issues, or you're a nutjob who needs to do a reality check and get some fucking perspective.

I ask that you seek medical attention. You are unstable. I'm sorry, life doesn't have to be as depressing as what you're used to. If you are that compelled to read an anti-xkcd blog and announce to everyone that you do, then your attention and angst issues need to be addressed before you hurt someone innocent.

Re:Seriously... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231626)

There is an already an answer to your concerns here [blogspot.com]

For me, xkcdsucks is funny enough often enough to justify the energy spent in clicking on the link to it. Which is not the highest of praise.

Re:Seriously... (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231996)

Considering the number of comments on some of those posts outnumbers a few Slashdot articles, it seems he's doing decently well. Not that I agree with him, but I might start up xkcdsuckssucks in response.

Re:Seriously... (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232112)

Then I guess you'd really like this masterpiece [goatkcd.com] , made by a poster on somethingawful. Yeah, it's exactly what you think it is based on the domain, but it's also completely hilarious. I linked to the SFW version so it should be safe to view.

It's dynamically generated, so it's always up to date and works for all past strips. Even for somebody who occasionally enjoys reading xkcd, I'd say some of the strips are actually improved by this treatment.

Re:Seriously... (3, Insightful)

Razalhague (1497249) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231552)

So you prefer a blog which complains about such atrocities as "Something happens in fiction that would not happen in real life"?

Re:Seriously... (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231722)

Just out of curiosity, what webcomics do you prefer?

Re:Seriously... (1)

rjolley (1118681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231804)

Dino Comics [qwantz.com]
Saturday morning breakfast cereal [smbc-comics.com]
Akimbo Comics [akimbocomics.com]
Subnormality [viruscomix.com]
In that order.

Re:Seriously... (1)

rjolley (1118681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231840)

Sorry, you weren't asking me. Slashdot email made me think you were.

Re:Seriously... (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231896)

So you're not a fan. Ok. I'm not a fan of Apple. I'm not a fan of ... whoever won the latest American Idiot contest. I'm not a fan of a million other things that other people think are just too cool.

But why bother starting a website about something you don't want to deal with? Is people's life so empty, so devoid of anything that they really have the time to devote to things they do not like?

It's not like xkcd (or whatever else you don't like) has any impact on your life. I don't like some of the laws out there, and I'm certain to stand up and speak out against them because they can and sometimes do affect me. But a webpage? A computer brand? Hell, even a singer I can't stand would have more impact on me if I ever forgot to load my MP3 player and had to tune in to a radio station while driving!

Yet I manage to just ignore them.

Re:Seriously... (2, Funny)

rjolley (1118681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232004)

Don't worry, there's a blog for you too: http://xkcdsuckssucks.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Re:Seriously... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232282)

Why should I care that someone thinks that some other page sucks because they say some other page sucks?

That's worse than the bickering about some teenage pop bands. "Oh they're so cute." "Nah, they suck". "Oh, you hate me!" Dramaramaramarama...

Or is it just the usual "let's troll them 'cause they like their page so much that we get some attention out of it easily"?

Re:Seriously... (1)

WrongMonkey (1027334) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232206)

My kingdom for a mod-point! xkcd fails at the most basic level: being funny. I have gotten far more laughs from xkcd sucks than from the actual comic.

Re:Seriously... (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232780)

Wow, for something that reads like an elaborate troll, that guy sure is dedicated.

Re:Seriously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31233112)

Wanna know the ultimate formula for easy comedy material and instant cult-classic status? Criticize something popular. Shred it to pieces at every opportunity. Why create anything original when you can ride the coat-tails of someone else while appearing edgy and non-conformist?

Re:Seriously... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230898)

Quite a few of us in the geekverse find xkcd to be terribly overrated.

Re:Seriously... (0)

Imaria (975253) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231100)

And the rest of us find you guys overrated, so it balances out like a big bitchy yin-yang.

Re:Seriously... (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231694)

I think AC is aiming for informative. Though I do find your reply a good, satisfying rebuttal.

the news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230596)

the point is that we need to step our game. whether that means in counter strike, or in real life, we all have responsibilities. I refuse to believe the reason I learned to use a computer was so I could shell out x amount of dollars to world of warcrack.

Don't anger the sysadmin (5, Funny)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230612)

Or he'll kill you with his bearded chin

Re:Don't anger the sysadmin (1)

ZeroExistenZ (721849) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231410)

Epic beard guy, is that you?

Re:Don't anger the sysadmin (1)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231504)

Don't bother my beard, you insensitive clod!

Are we Digg Now? (5, Insightful)

nefus (952656) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230764)

Honestly....

Re:Are we Digg Now? (1)

weirdcrashingnoises (1151951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230910)

Sincerely...?

Re:Are we Digg Now? (4, Informative)

Eil (82413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232398)

Uh oh, another confused commenter. To the Slashdot FAQ [slashdot.org] !

Why did you post story X?

Slashdot is many things to many people. Some people think it's a Linux site. To others, it's a geek hangout. I've always worked very hard to make sure that Slashdot matches up with my interests and the interests of my authors. We think we're pretty typical Slashdot readers... but that does mean that occasionally one of us might post something that you think is inappropriate. You might be interested in my Omelette rant.

Personally, I have a pet peeve when people post comments saying things like "That's not News For Nerds!" and "That's not Stuff that Matters!" Slashdot has been running for almost 5 years, and over that time, I have always been the final decision maker on what ends up on the homepage. It turns out that a lot of people agree with me: Linux, Legos, Penguins, Sci (both real and fiction). If you've been reading Slashdot, you know what the subjects commonly are, but we might deviate occasionally. It's just more fun that way. Variety Is The Spice Of Life and all that, right? We've been running Slashdot for a long time, and if we occasionally want to post something that someone doesn't think is right for Slashdot, well, we're the ones who get to make the call. It's the mix of stories that makes Slashdot the fun place that it is.

(Emphasis mine.)

Re:Are we Digg Now? (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232466)

Should have highlighted "Slashdot matches up with my interests" bit.

Some of us got older.

Who does this remind everyone of? (1)

bernywork (57298) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230806)

What's your favourite datacentre where this is their attitude?

Jesus fucking christ (-1, Troll)

deathtopaulw (1032050) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230856)

I hate xkcd so god damn much. There's probably 5 truly funny comics out of hundreds of joke-less nerd references that serve only to generate traffic from the pathetic clicks of a social class desperate for attention. Even when one of his shitty references does attempt a joke it's usually the most simple and obvious "kick in the cunt" of a punchline that the subject offers. Absolute shit.

Re:Jesus fucking christ (1)

llvllatrix (839969) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231028)

In Soviet Russia, system administrates you.

Re:Jesus fucking christ (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231096)

So... what you're saying is that you don't get the jokes? That's ok. Not everyone has what it takes. For the rest, there's always Heathcliff.

Re:Jesus fucking christ (3, Interesting)

Imaria (975253) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231124)

You seem angry about something. I can't put my finger on it...

Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (3, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230954)

... but it's also blatant flattery of his core audience!

Re:Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (3, Interesting)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231132)

... but it's also blatant flattery of his core audience!

Only if you think being so fixated on your job to dismiss more important things (the hostages, in this case) is a good thing.

Re:Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232090)

Hostages are human. Uptime is access to internet. Internet is where you get porn. Human is (in this case) coworker who probably eats away bandwidth you could use to get more porn faster.

Get your priorities straight!

Re:Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232010)

I'm no sysadmin, I'm a programmer. The admins are my mortal enemies, for they try to take away my root access lest only them be the ones with the power. But revenge will be mine, for I create their tools and their feeble brains cannot see how I can easily circumvent and backdoor any protection they put up against my potting and scheming against them. Muahahahahah!

'scuse me, gotta go to the server room, one of these bastards just cut off my torrent connection.

Re:Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (1)

Eil (82413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232306)

Yeah, how *dare* he try to appeal to his most ardent followers...

Re:Yeah, yeah, it IS funny (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232930)

Syadmin fanservice... hmmm...

Someone disagrees ... (1, Funny)

kryten_nl (863119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231074)

http://www.isxkcdshittytoday.com/ [isxkcdshittytoday.com]

Re:Someone disagrees ... (3, Funny)

Fozzyuw (950608) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231418)

Someone seems to frequently disagree... [isxkcdshittytoday.com]

Re:Someone disagrees ... (2, Informative)

ticklemeozmo (595926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231910)

See, xkcd is clearly getting better. Not a shitty comic for over a year!

Re:Someone disagrees ... (0)

saiha (665337) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233090)

xkcd has about 10 funny comics. I think people spam it to to sites like digg and slashdot because it gives them hope that they too can create a webcomic. Somehow xkcd doesn't rely on good art or good jokes so there has to be this third factor.

paid to care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231180)

pfffft, as if....I work for the government. "Sorry, the job description doesn't say anything about terrorists. I will have to transfer your outage report to our terrorist response team, maybe they will be able to fix it." They only barely pay me enough to come into work...actually caring about the job is at least another $15k a year away.

almost perfect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231184)

I misread the title text as "... your cat's blog servers." which seemed all the funnier to me.

oblig (0, Redundant)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231242)

best xkcd ever!

re: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231300)

Everyone should go to http://www.goatkcd.com as it makes xkcd slightly funny instead of bad. Be cautioned, this is very nsfw.

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231782)

Everyone should go to http://www.goatkcd.com as it makes xkcd slightly funny instead of bad. Be cautioned, this is very nsfw.

I hate you.....

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31232016)

Replace the last panel with the Goatse Guy, oh my, that's really clever and original, right.

(No, it isn't. Really it's not.)

Hit the nail on the head (1)

awshidahak (1282256) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231796)

xkcd really hit the nail on the head today.

Strange, one of my friends was hit on the head with a nail yesterday. XKCD IS TEH EBIL!!!

Obligatory xkcd reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231838)

Obligatory xkcd link (2, Insightful)

Rigrig (922033) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232854)

Best xkcd comic ever [xkcd.com] (Well, if you're lucky.)

Actually, I suppose someone should've made an 'Obligatory article' reply...

Sadly xkcd is terrible, but goatkcd is good! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31232870)

Seriously xkcd is awful, there are the rare times it is amusing but more often it is horrendous. Fortunately someone invented http://goatkcd.com/ which makes xkcd funny everytime! NWS mind you.

This happened to us once (1)

c0y (169660) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232950)

Well, not the hostages part. But we lost a T1 circuit at a client site when burglars attempted to break into the Credit Union next door. Being wholly unclear of the purpose of an alarm circuit, they cut all the copper going into the business park. That didn't work out so great for them, since it cause an alarm that the police responded to.

buried (1)

saiha (665337) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233040)

oh wait, you mean this isn't digg?

Meta-comment (2, Insightful)

dorre (1731288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31233160)

This is comment about comments and I realize I might be doing the same thing I'm complaining that other's are. Actually I'm pretty sure I am. Overall I dont like when comments like 'what's this doing on slashdot?'. Give attention to topics that are interesting to you personally. If a comment is not interesting, why do even bother giving it time? That's a waste of time. Reading an a boring article and then complaining about it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?