Topic: Shit that should not exist-- inanimate objects edition (Read 53196 times)

raoullefere · « **on:** 05 Mar 2009, 16:53 »

At the risk of this thread willing reality out of existence, what's the one thing (not person or creature!) that, did it not exist, would make this world a sweeter place for you?

Off the top of my head
Phillip's head and flathead screws (they should all be Robertson)
Screw-collar coaxial cables (they should invent a more effective push-on)

There's probably more, but these come easily to mind.

What would make your life better by not being?

Darkbluerabbit · « **Reply #1 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 16:58 »

TheViscount · « **Reply #2 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 17:06 »

Oh, that is so terribly bad of me.

J-cob9000 · « **Reply #3 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 17:24 »

http://www.divine-interventions.com/jackhammer.html
This?
Religious or not, I find this quite wrong.

Darkbluerabbit · « **Reply #4 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 17:50 »

I love that website so much.

Although the Baby Jesus disturbs me a little bit. Because it looks like a baby.

moshimoshi_haihai · « **Reply #5 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 19:05 »

http://www.lulu.com/content/4956212

the comments afterwards are what's horrifying.

LittleKey · « **Reply #6 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 19:09 »

pepsi shouldn't exist. coca-cola is just SO MUCH BETTER!

Darkbluerabbit · « **Reply #7 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:00 »

Yeah, but Pepsi doesn't murder union leaders in Columbia.

tania · « **Reply #8 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:07 »

i am sorry but if you can't cook your own bacon, you don't deserve to eat bacon.

Reed · « **Reply #9 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:15 »

I'm sorry for stealing from John Stewart, but I just had to one up Tania with this one:

Reed · « **Reply #10 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:17 »

No. You are wrong. I would vomit on your face if I actually tried baconnaise

Darkbluerabbit · « **Reply #11 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:19 »

Not to nitpick, but you don't need to quote the post directly above yours. It's just a thing.

MrBlu · « **Reply #12 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:25 »

Quote from: Dire bacterium on 05 Mar 2009, 20:17

No. You are wrong. I would vomit on your face if I actually tried baconnaise

Regardless of the fact that you've never tried it, and you don't really know, right?

Reed · « **Reply #13 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:26 »

I know that I have not eaten pork in 11 years and that I absolutely loathe mayonnaise, so it is a fairly good guess that I would despise the product.

MrBlu · « **Reply #14 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:28 »

Gotcha'.

ViolentDove · « **Reply #15 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:30 »

Quote from: MrBlu on 05 Mar 2009, 20:28

Gotcha'.

I'm so confused right now.

Reed · « **Reply #16 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 20:42 »

tl;dr bacon + mayonnaise = fucking disgusting

lprkn · « **Reply #17 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 21:11 »

Quote from: Ptommydski on 05 Mar 2009, 20:12

Apparently this is a new U2 record.
Album Cover Pic

I can think of literally no reason for there to be any U2 records, much less new ones.

What I am trying to communicate here is that there was already a massive surplus of U2 records and the existence of more is utterly redundant.

That album cover is just so fitting. "Equals? Equals what? Nothing Important? A gray shapeless mass with no substance?" - Yes

tania · « **Reply #18 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 21:12 »

you just don't get it because you're not as smart as bono.

Reed · « **Reply #19 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 21:15 »

Tommy.....how can you be so correct?

Humans are supposed to be flawed, but your statement makes me believe that there are a few of our species that don't follow this rule

Emaline · « **Reply #20 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 21:23 »

Quote from: tania on 05 Mar 2009, 20:07

i am sorry but if you can't cook your own bacon, you don't deserve to eat bacon.

But...but I was at work. And I didn't have access to a stove or pan. And I just wanted some bacon for my sandwich. I'm sorry

ecstaticjoy · « **Reply #21 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 22:17 »

Quote from: tania on 05 Mar 2009, 20:07

i am sorry but if you can't cook your own bacon, you don't deserve to eat bacon.

lolololol...so funny out of context.

Spluff · « **Reply #22 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 22:19 »

raoullefere · « **Reply #23 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 22:36 »

If we're going to get rid of quick-fix bacon substitutes, then I insist we apply the same logic to jars containing both peanut butter and grape jelly. How hard is it to open two jars?

Baconnaise sounds like a coronary in a jar. But I am very afraid I'd try it if I got the chance.

Spluff, what's wrong with the Warlock?

Emaline · « **Reply #24 on:** 05 Mar 2009, 23:37 »

There's nothing wrong with pbj all mixed together. It's easier/less messy(kind of) for kids. When you are taking care of 7 children, its always awesome if they can make their own food. PBJs are perfect for this. With the two products getting mixed together, its less of a hassle for the kid, opening two jars, one usually being stuck(I'm looking at you, Jelly), then getting a big gob of jelly on your spoon/butterknife, and smearing it on your bread/hands/face/clothes/kitchen counter/kitchen sink/table, and then getting a big gob of peanut butter and doing the same. With the peanut butter and jelly packaged together, not only do kids think its cool, but its less of a mess because they only get one big gob of sticky gloop all over the place instead of two. So I am all for that.

I would not, however, want my kids(kidlings. Siblings. Whatever) having easy access to bacon. They don't need to bacon whenever they please.

Patrick · « **Reply #25 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 00:19 »

Quote from: raoullefere on 05 Mar 2009, 22:36

Spluff, what's wrong with the Warlock?

If you can't tell, it's already too late for you. The disease has gone terminal.

The extra letter · « **Reply #26 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 01:24 »

Faux leather cushions.

Hell, faux leather in general.

pwhodges · « **Reply #27 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 02:46 »

snalin · « **Reply #28 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 05:20 »

Internet when I'm supposed to do important stuff. God damn you, internet!

God damn you, procrastinational habits!

Sox · « **Reply #29 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 06:46 »

Quote from: Dire bacterium on 05 Mar 2009, 21:15

Humans are supposed to be flawed, but your statement makes me believe that there are a few of our species that don't follow this rule

The implication here seems to be that Tommy is perfect and without flaw. There's one other entity that has been described like this over the ages, and I don't think it very smart to implicate Tommy as the creator of all existence.

Sox · « **Reply #30 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 06:47 »

If Tommy was the Lord, this thread wouldn't need to exist.

Sox · « **Reply #31 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 06:48 »

If Tommy was the Lord, every dog would be a cat.

Sox · « **Reply #32 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 06:51 »

If Tommy was the Lord, he wouldn't have hired a fan of monster movies to design the penis.

Sox · « **Reply #33 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 06:58 »

If Tommy were the Lord, changing the appearance of your car on your satnav would change the appearance of your actual car.

Sox · « **Reply #34 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 07:07 »

If Tommy were the Lord, you'd head over there instead of vice versa.

Sox · « **Reply #35 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 07:10 »

If Tommy were the Lord, people would ejaculate contraceptives.

pwhodges · « **Reply #36 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 07:12 »

Stryc9Fuego · « **Reply #37 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 09:37 »

Continuing the bacon thread: Bacon-wrapped hot dog with fried egg and cheese

A lot of the things on This is Why You're Fat shouldn't exist.

And a lot of the things on the same site are FRIKKEN' AWESOME.

Kazukagii · « **Reply #38 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 10:10 »

Yield signs. They're like indecisive stop signs. Either put a stop sign there or just let me turn dammit.

ledhendrix · « **Reply #39 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 10:44 »

Quote from: Stryc9Fuego on 06 Mar 2009, 09:37

A lot of the things on This is Why You're Fat shouldn't exist.

That site is awesome, really want to make the bacon cheese pizza burger.

Alex C · « **Reply #40 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 10:45 »

What? Yield signs? Have you ever been to or lived in a rural area that is mostly dependent upon the shipping industry before? Keep in mind that in flat areas like Oklahoma (where it was first proposed in the US) or northern Iowa the visibility is usually good enough that mandatory full stops in all cases is a complete waste of time. Yield signs are a fairly decent compromise when you have masssive differences between peak and standard traffic plus service roads, state high ways and interstates all mashed together within one small area.

Cartilage Head · « **Reply #41 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 10:51 »

BLT candles.

Patrick · « **Reply #42 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 12:36 »

Quote from: Alex C on 06 Mar 2009, 10:45

What? Yield signs? Have you ever been to or lived in a rural area that is mostly dependent upon the shipping industry before? Keep in mind that in flat areas like Oklahoma (where it was first proposed in the US) or northern Iowa the visibility is usually good enough that mandatory full stops in all cases is a complete waste of time. Yield signs are a fairly decent compromise when you have masssive differences between peak and standard traffic plus service roads, state high ways and interstates all mashed together within one small area.

Dude just do what we Californians do: California stop! Just roll through that motherfucker. You are moving significantly slower than you were going. So if you actually do need to stop you can still do it. But not a full stop, because fuck stopping unless you absolutely have to.

FourNineFoxtrot · « **Reply #43 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 15:01 »

Good call on yield signs. They cause confusion in the indecisive motorist. And a confused, indecisive motorist is far more dangerous than either a confused motorist or an indecisive motorist.

Okay, that was just an experiment to see how often I could say the word "motorist" in a few sentences. I'm satisfied with the results.

Anyway, on the same topic of street-sign and driving related nonsense that shouldn't exist:

In some states in the U.S., every left turn at a stoplight requires a green arrow to go. In other states, it is permissible to turn left on a green light with no arrow, or after the arrow has passed, if there is no oncoming traffic.

This pisses me off in busy intersections, when I'm turning left and the guy across from me is turning left, because we're blocking each others' view of traffic, so neither of us can see if we should go or not. If we hesitate, someone behind us starts up honking their horn, or makes some insane dash around us. If we just go, we run the risk of getting broadsided. I hate this. Stoplights at intersections should be green-arrow only. Maybe it takes an extra minute, but I don't risk death for a left turn.

Is there some trick to this that I should know? I'm from California, where we quite sensibly have arrows instead of deathtraps (perhaps the only sensible thing we do). Do natives develop some manner of ESP to detect oncoming traffic? Or do you just embrace the madness, and live every day to the fullest, knowing that any left turn could end in death? "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die at a stoplight"?

Alex C · « **Reply #44 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 15:25 »

Quote from: Patrick on 06 Mar 2009, 12:36

Dude just do what we Californians do: California stop! Just roll through that motherfucker. You are moving significantly slower than you were going. So if you actually do need to stop you can still do it. But not a full stop, because fuck stopping unless you absolutely have to.

...You realize that's like, the whole point of a yield sign, right? It just gives you the go ahead to do exactly that without having a cop riding your ass about it or teaching idiots that it's OK to roll through stop signs whenever you feel like it. Maybe there's a connection between that kinda thing and my cousin from Cali who keeps getting in low speed collisions while chatting on her cellphone and wearing gigantic sunglasses. Man, she is annoying.

Also, someone who can't figure out a yield sign is likely someone who is already confused pretty much all the time anyway. I really don't see how the yield sign is going to affect an idiot one way or the other. God forbid they get to an intersection at the same time as someone else; their head would probably explode.

Darkbluerabbit · « **Reply #45 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 16:51 »

We should really just stick traffic circles in a lot of intersections. I see no reason why they are not much more common. You come to traffic circle, you enter traffic circle, you exit traffic circle at appropriate point. No stopping or wondering if you should stop. They're not great for really busy intersections, but in residential areas they are awesome.

Shadic · « **Reply #46 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 17:03 »

Quote from: raoullefere on 05 Mar 2009, 16:53

Screw-collar coaxial cables (they should invent a more effective push-on)

Oh god yes. I hate these... So much. I've never NOT spent at least three minutes fucking with these things. And when you're reaching around a TV, covering yourself in dust trying to screw something in THAT YOU CAN'T EVER SEE. Urgh.

I'm gonna go ahead and say:

And hell, this in general:

FourNineFoxtrot · « **Reply #47 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 18:03 »

Quote from: Darkbluerabbit on 06 Mar 2009, 16:51

We should really just stick traffic circles in a lot of intersections.

Can I change my answer? Because my new answer is traffic circles.

It's like Russian Roulette. With cars.

Or maybe like playing Musical chairs, but the loser has to play Russian Roulette.

Seriously, I got zero education on these bastards when I was in Driver's Ed, they just started popping up a few years ago here, as far as I know. They pretty much always sneak up on me, so I'm trying to figure this thing out at the last second, wondering "Okay, who has the right of way, again? Are there two lanes in this thing? Is that an inner lane or, like, an inside shoulder? Wait, which direction was I going again?

Traffic circles. It's like they were designed to torment me. I hereby rename Traffic Circles as "Centrifuges of Death!"

Alex C · « **Reply #48 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 18:42 »

I am starting to think you just might hate good ideas. As long as we're into declarations, I hereby declare your driving skill set to be legacy tech.

FourNineFoxtrot · « **Reply #49 on:** 06 Mar 2009, 19:00 »

I distrust newfangled contraptions that the kids these days come up with. With their damn loud "rock and roll" music and their long hair and these confounded "Games on Video" or whatever the devil they are. Get a job, you lousy hippies!

*shakes fist at young people* Get off my lawn! Get a haircut! Stop thinking up new, scary ideas!

Also, what the hell is "legacy tech", and why should this be insulting or offensive? I'm aware that my motor vehicle operational competence is being called into question, I just don't know what the hell you said after that.

Do... do I need to state that as a more emphatic declaration, prefaced by the word "hereby"? I don't know what the rules are. Normally, when somebody impugns my driving skills I just shake my fist angrily at them and make broadly generalized statements about the worthlessness of their generation.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Shit that should not exist-- inanimate objects edition (Read 53196 times)

TheViscount

moshimoshi_haihai