|
That is an insanely aggressive case of old-man-face-itis. But the comic looks neat though, so  .
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 04:54 |
|
|
This is cute. Norwegian, swedish, or danish?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Isn't that exactly why they stopped using the skull and crossbones as a poison symbol decades ago, and moved to things like Mr. Yuk? In the US perhaps. Here in norway it's still very much pirate-juice. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
Since Alhazred is posting a good norwegian comic, I figured I'd try to post some of a .... Introducing Lunch There's not much to say, it's norwegian Dilbert. My primary exposure to it has been strips printed up and hung around the office sometimes. (Though to be fair, I'm not sure how many jokes will survive getting translated by me, but I guess we'll just have to see.)       
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
FrumpleOrz posted:Kevin & Kell So, I guess it's safe to assume that pheromones: A: Are magic DNA magic, like in safe havens. or B: Convince characters in the strip, as well as the camera/reader/perspective that she is actually a rat. Which is why she quickly reverted visually into a rabbit as the pheromones wore off. I'm going with A.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:This is the strongest evidence to date that Dilbert guy is a stupid rear end in a top hat who merely thinks that he is smart at science and stuff. Ye, just matching humanmade emissions would leave you with ~10-20 Gigatons of wood/cellulose construction material a year, ignoring any energy needed for said process to actually happen. For reference, the world production of concrete is like 4.5ish gigatons a year. You could also replace all wood for the use as fuel, paper, construction, etc. With just a small fraction of it. Running out of CO2 is quite possibly the least realistic of all the issues you'd face in that scenario. SubNat fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Feb 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:I know some nerds have done it, I wanna see the math behind all that concept. Some wikipedia + napkin math here. (And I probably took a wrong turn somewhere, the numbers involved are so staggeringly large it's just nonsensical.) Well, ignoring any current production of it, CO2 makes up roughly 0.04% of the atmosphere. (Ignoring water vapour.) Earth's atmosphere is roughly 5.15×10^18 kg, or ~ 5,150,000,000 gigatons. That leaves us with a measly 2,060,000 gigatons of CO2. ( 2.06*10^15kg ) And there's around 12,875,000 gigatons of water vapor in the atmosphere. Since wood/construction materials is a pretty complex material, I'll instead have Dilbert's amazing miracle machine produce glucose/sugar instead, since then I can simplify it down to a single chemical. (And honestly, cellulose is basically just glucose in chains anyhow. ) Dilbert's amazing machine also produces it through a magic, 100% efficient reverse-aerobic resperation cycle. Those 2,060,000 gigatons of CO2 can be converted to 2,809,090.90 gigatons of glucose. This would also require 842,727.27 gigatons of water, though that's just 6.5% of the water vapor in the atmosphere, so that's probably nothing to worry about. (The output of oxygen from this is not massively relevant, but it would increase the atmosphere's oxygen content by some fraction of a percent.) 2.8 petatons of glucose is a lot. If it were shaped like a cube, it would be 122km on each side. ( 75.8 miles.) And would be visible from 1253.5km away, accounting for the earth's curvature. ( 778.8 miles.) If it were a sphere, it would be 75.8 km in diameter, and visible from 986.2 km. If you were in western Phoenix, you'd hypothetically be able to see the top of it on a clear day. In Los Angeles it would be 16 times bigger than the moon is in the sky, and easily visible provided you didn't stand near a mountain or building. The required energy to convert that much CO2 + water into glucose would be around 44,940,959,998,454.6 TJ/W. Or 1,248,359,999.6 TWh. Total worldwide gross power generation in 2016 was 25,082 TWh. The amount of energy the earth recieves from the sun in an hour is ~626,400,000 TWh. Which means that if you grabbed the entirety of the sun's output hitting the earth and rammed it into Dilbert's magic sugarcube maker, it would demand 2 hours worth of it. (e: sorry copied over an incorrect value previously.) Even if you ignored the power usage entirely, this would still mean removing a good ~20-30% of the earth's greenhouse effect, perhaps more. Which would have the immediate effect of palmslamming worldwide temperatures down by ~10C and thrust us into an ice age. Where it would go from there, I have no idea. A lot of CO2 stored in water (ocean acidification, etc.) would probably start getting released back into the atmosphere. If humanity ramped up CO2 production massively ( like for example re-burning up the giant sugarcube. ) it could probably start re-adding to the atmosphere pretty quickly. But yeah, all plant photosynthesis would effectively stop, and once they ran out of their energy stores they would start dying off in swathes. Only ones in environments where we could supply them with additional CO2 would survive honestly. Massive CO2 leeching from oceans + lakes and back into the atmosphere would likely cause massive die-offs of water-based plants as well. Though I imagine the instant ice age would be more of a worry. (Also all of San Fran/San Jose + Sacramento getting crushed under a giant sugar cube/ball. I guess.) e: Or if he just used a magic scrubber that pulls carbon directly out of the air, bypassing the 'construction material' part from a few days ago: You'd get a far more reasonable 561 818 gigatons of carbon/graphite, though at a significantly higher cost of 5 098 311 077.33 TWh. ( Or 8.13 hours worth of total sunlight energy capture. ) SubNat fucked around with this message at 18:06 on Feb 12, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Pentaro posted:Love to get kielbasas with Gramma while Mother is at home cooking laudanum. I'm puzzled myself. With the way these things usually are, I assume that the small bubble is things 30 years ago. (1900s) Where there might have been a health craze about keeping strict tabs on what your children ate exactly, while in the 1930s they care less about it, and the child is just getting showered with sweets and snacks. A lot of these seem to be about how much more relaxed people are now, and not as obsessed with appearances or other things as they were when the artist was younger. But you could also read it as mother vs grandmother at the same time. Or how the mother was super strict about dietary stuff with her child 30 years ago, but is currently smothering her grandchild with sweets and rewards now. (And how her daughter would probably have preferred her current gift showering to her strictness previously.) It's a lot less clear cut than a lot of the previous ones, so I'm at a loss as well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
BigDave posted:I remember we had some Blondie strips from '42-'43, had a bunch of rationing jokes. Weren't there a lot of Wartime Everett True strips as well? (Oh, that was apparently WW1, since the strip ended in the 20s. ) I do remember there have been quite a few Nancy strips from the war as well, which were pretty much like the Blondie stuff, with a lot of rationing jokes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Poil posted:I know this isn't actually the proper place to ask... but do I need to get a credit card or something to sign up for that? I have a bank card I use when buying poo poo on steam and gog and so on, would that work and is it a good idea? It's like on bag of chips less a month. Way better use of my money. Patreon? Ye, any card you can use online should work without issue, paypal too. Since it's a monthly patreon it'll process at the start of every month, with a single charge, much like any online subscription.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2019 00:32
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Nancy So, how many weeks of 'Neurotic & Extremely Online Artist Whining' Nancy are we on, now? It feels like that's all it's been ever since the robotics club arc thing. It just feels so insanely petty of a syndicated artist to whine about laziness, from a medium defined by laziness. Extra so since there's always the constant reminders that 'oh the other girl who's really good at drawing is nice and modest, unlike Nancy the terrible online artist strawman.' I get that artists want to vent, but it just goes on and on and on and on and on. Looks like we started seguing into it towards the end of feb, so ~3ish weeks at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
Zereth posted:... who is this guy I'm pretty sure it's Diana's dad, though her parents haven't been relevant for ages. And this detour of him just being smugly dismissive of a couple agents hasn't achieved anything of note.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
Manuel Calavera posted:Family Circus American/english easter lilies are white? Weird. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Weird, those flowers are named easter lilies here in Norway. (Presumably also in scandinavia, not entirely sure.) Maybe it's a European/US split kind of thing? Seems like a couple UK sites refer to the daffodils as easter lilies as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
EasyEW posted:Out Our Way (June 27-29, 1932) With the Toonerville, I can understand it, because at the time there was a lot of worry about people getting boats so that they could smooch in privacy. And how canoes and boating pretty much filled the 'getting some privacy and seclusion' role that cars would for later generations once they became more affordable. (Which was of course scandalous, young people without supervision? Unthinkable.) But what is the Out our Way referring to? Just another keeping up appearances thing, or related to some kind of gambling crackdown that made cards as a whole look like a vice?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
Tendales posted:Miss Lisa that is a spindown die! Those are not suitable randomizers! Hwurmp posted:Cheap dice tend to be slightly off-balance and more likely to roll to a certain side. Spindown dice are meant to just show a number rather than actually be rolled, so they're the cheapest dice around. They also have all their high numbers on one side, which doesn't help. Hypothetically they're statistically weighted, and the numbers being grouped by side of dice makes it easier to cheat/aim high/low with a simple throw. In practice, the difference is neglible, but it's the kind of 'technically there' difference that is enough to make some people seethe over it. Especially since dice from different manufacturers have different 'statistical skews' from expected due to imperfections from manufacturing, thus making the argument pointless anyhow. (And varying between different dice, materials, etc.) http://www.markfickett.com/stuff/artPage.php?id=389 Here, have fun reading, you can get cases of 'normal, non spindown' dice where certain values only happen ~30% as often as they should. tl;dr: It's just people obsessing over details that aren't particularly significant. Just use a dice cup if you're worried about non-randomization. People are really bad about random numbers and statistics, intrinsically. Especially so when you couple it with games where they engage in it and throw confirmation bias into the mix.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
Selachian posted:... wait, so this guy thinks mutts are produced by multiple male dogs impregnating a female? Maybe it's more that since he's not a purebreed / not from a breeder, his dad might be any of the multiple dogs in his mother's neighbourhood, and he's sending a card to each of them to be sure he's covering all his bases?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2019 12:31
|
|
|
The theme of unfreezing makes me wonder if it's just the publisher finally getting him to agree to re-publish things online. As opposed to him actually making things again. (Or posting things he's made since he retired at age 45.) Which would mean that even if his current opinions are toxic as all get out, they won't be visible, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
Ah yes, the Pomato, tomapotato, or tomtato, is apparently a genuine thing. Which makes sense, grafting is common in fruit trees, but it's surprising that the potato and tomato are close enough to be able to do that as well. (It does seem like a lot of work for something that's just going to be grown as an annual though, considering all the grafting has to be done in a lab, then the finished plant gets shipped out to be grown. As opposed to fruits, where that Granny Smith branch is going to keep on making apples for years.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Kennel posted:Surgeon's Tales As true today as it was back then.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
amigolupus posted:Ahhhh, so this feeling of Yeah, pretty much.  Though that was hammed up extra by having her be hit on a saturday, then re-hit for the sunday panel. (Though as part of the cutaway which might not be present in all newspapers.) The pose is quite reminiscent.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2019 21:18
|
|
is what you goons must've felt when you mentioned that old plot beat of Rex's genius kid having her intelligence reset by being run over by a car.
|
EasyEW posted:Not The Greatest Follow-Up In The World To That Particular Peanuts Strip loving hell, how many weeks of 'These other people's issues are trivial, and they aren't truly suffering like me, Matyress von Darkroom.' are we in for? I may not be a successful comic strip writer, but surely this is the worst possible way of trying to ham up additional sympathy for someone? 'Everyone else's issues and experiences are trivial compared to -mine-.' she gripes, endlessly hammering away on her pineapplebook with the lights turned off. Johnny Walker posted:Prelude to a Loss Edit Speaking of drumming up faux sympathy out of the air for an impending -dramatic- storyline, how dangerous is this actually? I can imagine a later-in-pregnancy fall having a massive potential to hurt the mother &/or kid, but she was early enough in that she wasn't even considering that she might be pregnant.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Oh, I wasn't even aware this was in a flashback, thus I was parsing all in the 'semi-realtime' a lot of these strips seem to do. Yeah then it's all a lot more understandable that it's a big issue. The Morgans seemed pretty chill about the news of them going into labour though, so either this fall happened around the expected time of labour and led to her going into labour. (Thus them not being surprised.) Or this is a bit of a non-event, ahead of the labour itself, I guess? Thanks for clearing up this incredibly important issue for me. (Also the lady martyring herself up in the dark just completely distracted me from the whole 'all other writers at panels are terrible stereotypes, to be made fun of, unlike me.' thing going on with the old lady author @ a con.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
It does make me curious, how was it actually handled? This time we basically know he's writing it one-handed, though I imagine cancerwife was stretched out for as long as possible once people started getting interested. I can only imagine he was as self-satisfied about that as he seems to be about this. (Looking it up, he apparently dragged it out for 8 years, though the primary arc was like half a year. (Some in 1999, then cancer popping back up in 2007, then her passing away half a year or so later.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 04:54 |
|
|
On the topic of Moomin, does anyone have vol4 and up? I have 1-3 and I think I've posted all of them, though years ago. I could take a swing at rescanning them and post, if someone else can bring up the rear with vol4 and up once the time comes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2020 05:37
|
|