Some of you may have seen this before but for the sake of those who have not…enjoy?
Creepy, for sure. But, lest anyone think it’s real, we have Snopes.
How about a ghoulishness warning in the title? Sheesh. :mad:
Sorry, will be sensitive next time.
Yes, I am quite familar with Snopes and knew what this was…but still :eek:
Um. Damn. I don’t know if I want to throw up or invite the guy dancing.
Holy shit, Gollum’s got some freaky moves. Sucks to hear about his stroke and related aphasia though.
(the chihuahua is looking into my… SOUL)
Feh. NoScript is blocking some Flash thingy on that website, which I probably don’t want to waste my time with.
On reading the title, I thought this thread was soliciting WTF moments from readers, rather than showcasing some already-debunked UL.
Which is kind of funny, because yesterday I just had a WTF moment. I discovered that Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, and only in bizarrely specific situations, measures time differently than the rest of the world when it comes to recording timestamps in software. Instead of using a big number to count the number of seconds since January 1, 1970, some parts of Windows apparently use an obscenely large number to count the number of nanoseconds since January 1, 1601. A programmer needs to jump through a number of annoying hoops to convert this obscenely large number into anything meaningful.
I mean, really. I can understand the need to use a bigger number to store time values, and I can understand that forward-thinking geniuses at Microsoft want to store time values with a nanosecond resolution (though daily applications for this, indeed computers capable of accurately measuring nanoseconds, are hard to find), but what the hell is up with January 1, 1601? Like I need to know if someone’s logged onto a server - any server - any time before 1970. Not to mention the fact that clock skew errors - a common occurance in computer networking - are grossly magnified when measuring time in nanoseconds.
Yeah, so, WTF. :dubious: