Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

    http://blag.xkcd.com/2009/09/02/urin...vulnerability/
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
    [ redacted ]

  • #2
    Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

    I think the ICUP should be discussed at length, this is a very important issue. We should probably form an ICUP Governing Body to work out a list of proper standards.
    A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

      Covered in an older video:

      YouTube: Male Restroom Etiquette
      Last edited by TheCotMan; September 3, 2009, 21:29. Reason: Extra CR in my post broke markup of URL. Fixing.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

        Originally posted by streaker69 View Post
        I think the ICUP should be discussed at length, this is a very important issue. We should probably form an ICUP Governing Body to work out a list of proper standards.
        It needs to go farther than that, streaker. The Obama administration must appoint an ICUP "Czar" if you will. Without that crucial position filled, any governing body will fail before it has started. Perhaps this prospective Czar would be able to abolish those waterless urinals once and for all as well.

        Astonishing how few people actually follow proper man-law when it comes to public restrooms...
        Last edited by sintax_error; September 3, 2009, 22:13.
        "You have cubed asscheeks?"... "Do you not?"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

          Originally posted by sintax_error View Post
          It needs to go farther than that, streaker. The Obama administration must appoint an ICUP "Czar" if you will. Without that crucial position filled, any governing body will fail before it has started. Perhaps this prospective Czar would be able to abolish those waterless urinals once and for all as well.
          I agree with you completely. But who could possibly fill such a vital position? Obviously we'd need someone with extensive experience in the aspect of pissing in public as well as standing up.

          Do you think Pelosi would give up her current job to take that position?
          A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

            Originally posted by streaker69 View Post
            I agree with you completely. But who could possibly fill such a vital position? Obviously we'd need someone with extensive experience in the aspect of pissing in public as well as standing up.

            Do you think Pelosi would give up her current job to take that position?
            In a perfect world, my friend. In a perfect world.
            "You have cubed asscheeks?"... "Do you not?"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

              Originally posted by sintax_error View Post
              Extra "<br />" in yours, Cot.

              Ahh. My mistake. Sorry about that. Thank you for pointing out where I made a mistake. It is appreciated. :-)

              I've edited my post and removed the control-j from the URL forum markup tag at the end of the URL, but before the closing ']'.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                Originally posted by TheCotMan View Post
                Ahh. My mistake. Sorry about that. Thank you for pointing out where I made a mistake. It is appreciated. :-)

                I've edited my post and removed the control-j from the URL forum markup tag at the end of the URL, but before the closing ']'.
                Hehe, any time, Cot, any time. After all, typo's are one of my specialties. I, too, have edited my post to exclude the mistake that I pointed out, seeing as how the mistake has been rectified. Besides, what good is continuing to point out one's mistake after the fact? that does no one any good. I think we've all grown from this experience
                "You have cubed asscheeks?"... "Do you not?"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                  One question, will this be one of the talks at DefCon next year ? :)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                    Can't they just give it to the cyber security czar? I mean he already handles TCP and IP.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                      Originally posted by TheCotMan View Post
                      Covered in an older video:

                      YouTube: Male Restroom Etiquette
                      The problem is these rules lead to suboptimal allocaton of urinals depending on how many are available.

                      If there are 7 urinals allocation would be more effective in the case where urinals 1 and 7 are occupied if the third person were to take urinal 3 or 5 rather than urinal 4.

                      Taking urinal 4 per the protocol in the machinima video means if an additional urinal is required there will be no way to allocate it without two men occupying adjacent urinals.
                      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
                      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
                      [ redacted ]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                        Originally posted by bascule View Post
                        The problem is these rules lead to suboptimal allocaton of urinals depending on how many are available.

                        If there are 7 urinals allocation would be more effective in the case where urinals 1 and 7 are occupied if the third person were to take urinal 3 or 5 rather than urinal 4.

                        Taking urinal 4 per the protocol in the machinima video means if an additional urinal is required there will be no way to allocate it without two men occupying adjacent urinals.
                        Not only that, but soon we may have to compete for urinals with Women.

                        http://www.metacafe.com/watch/24532/...ion_for_women/
                        A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                          Add partitions to urinals like they exist for toilets, but skip inclusion of a door. This provides opportunity for adjacent occupancy of urinals without a social issue.

                          Additionally, the addition of a partition is probably cheaper than the installment of a urinal, if that urinal is not going to be used anyway, and is acting like a really expensive virtual partition.

                          Problem solved!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                            According to etiquette if one urinal, the end urinal, is in use, thou shalt utilise the urinal at the opposite end of the installation. What does one do when this urinal is of the half height child / midget kind?
                            I only drink because my friends are boring...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Vulnerability in the allocation of urinals

                              Originally posted by Lowie View Post
                              According to etiquette if one urinal, the end urinal, is in use, thou shalt utilise the urinal at the opposite end of the installation. What does one do when this urinal is of the half height child / midget kind?
                              you make a crude, self-inflating comment like "ah, thank god this bathroom has one fixture low enough that the tip of my massively long member isn't in jeopardy of touching the urinal cake. it's the trouble i have now, ever since ordering the maximum manhood pillz from my email tubes. would you like a link to them, sir? all women want more gushing load in teh bedroom for maximum humping monster quality."

                              ok, so maybe quoting spam subject lines isn't the best thing. speaking of, can someone please tell me... is the insanely and hilariously bad English featured on basically all spam today just a means of trying to get past filters or is all spam today generated by people with no clue how we talk? here's a small sampling of subject lines from my own mail, if i disable some of my own filters...
                              "With a bigger tool the confidence will be shown in your eyes."

                              "Dream to be a hero, in her bed?"

                              "Enhancing your rod will be the best gift for her for St. Valentine’s."

                              "The longer your instrument is the more power it has."

                              "You hate your male friend? After enlargement it can become your best friend."

                              "Every woman will find it hard to let you go if you enlarge your tool."

                              "How many orgasm can man do?"

                              "For humping-mania"

                              It's like... you can more or less tell what the senders are trying to say if you work at it just a little. But it comes across as patently fake and silly. I can't see what their reasoning is. It sure makes for some unintentional hilarity.
                              "I'll admit I had an OiNK account and frequented it quite often… What made OiNK a great place was that it was like the world's greatest record store… iTunes kind of feels like Sam Goody to me. I don't feel cool when I go there. I'm tired of seeing John Mayer's face pop up. I feel like I'm being hustled when I visit there, and I don't think their product is that great. DRM, low bit rate, etc... OiNK it existed because it filled a void of what people want."
                              - Trent Reznor

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X