If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Arpanet Dialogues)   1976: Jim Henson trolls Ayn Rand in an ARPANET chatroom   (arpanetdialogues.net) divider line 139
    More: Satire, Jim Henson, Ayn Rand, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, computer terminal, Roman mythology, Saigon, secret ballots  
•       •       •

8204 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Dec 2012 at 12:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



139 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-12 10:48:28 PM  
He didn't really troll her. She trolled herself.
 
2012-12-12 10:49:57 PM  
Wow, this is awesome.

So, Ayn Rand was as annoying in online chats as her followers were later?

Wonder how the Randroids will spin this.
 
2012-12-12 10:52:31 PM  
Wow.. what an uptight person.
'
This deserves a green. +1
 
2012-12-12 10:55:05 PM  
So, ARPANET was like Twitter?
 
2012-12-12 10:56:02 PM  
This actually happened

Sure didn't. And Steve Biko - a poor, South African anti-apartheid activist - didn't participate in one of the other ones posted on the site.

This is an art project.
 
2012-12-12 10:57:01 PM  
Yeah ... totally sounds legit.
 
2012-12-12 11:19:51 PM  

kronicfeld: This actually happened

Sure didn't. And Steve Biko - a poor, South African anti-apartheid activist - didn't participate in one of the other ones posted on the site.

This is an art project.


And not a very well-written one. I don't know about the philosophies of Nolan or Henson, but the lines from Rand and Ono were not believable at all.
 
2012-12-12 11:44:05 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: kronicfeld: This actually happened

Sure didn't. And Steve Biko - a poor, South African anti-apartheid activist - didn't participate in one of the other ones posted on the site.

This is an art project.

And not a very well-written one. I don't know about the philosophies of Nolan or Henson, but the lines from Rand and Ono were not believable at all.


In 1976 there were less than 80 public nodes on ARPANET and absolutely nothing that could be considered a "chat" protocol unless you counted serial handshakes.

farking kids these days are too lazy and stupid to even look up information for their own projects. What a waste of time.
 
2012-12-12 11:45:12 PM  
I am dumbstruck that the developers of ARPANET were so prescient in their realization that Ayn Rand was going to be the turd in the Internet punchbowl, that they went ahead and tested it.
 
2012-12-12 11:45:59 PM  

Triumph: I am dumbstruck that the developers of ARPANET were so prescient in their realization that Ayn Rand was going to be the turd in the Internet punchbowl, that they went ahead and tested it.

 
2012-12-12 11:51:57 PM  

kronicfeld: This is an art project.


I got Rick-rolled, then. It did seem too good to be true.
 
2012-12-13 12:05:15 AM  
This thread would have been a lot funnier if you people could have resisted the urge to point out it wasn't real before it even hit the main board. Even if it is in the Geek tab wasteland.
 
2012-12-13 12:07:06 AM  

Pocket Ninja: This thread would have been a lot funnier if you people could have resisted the urge to point out it wasn't real before it even hit the main board. Even if it is in the Geek tab wasteland.


Sorry. In my defense, I think it was still in black-font limbo when I posted.
 
2012-12-13 12:20:07 AM  
Please tell me that is fiction.  That was completely shameful.
 
What an upleasant git.
 
2012-12-13 12:21:40 AM  
i253.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-13 12:37:30 AM  
Ayn Rand, Jim Henson and Yoko Ono walk into a bar.

The bartender says, "What is this? Some kind of joke?"
 
2012-12-13 12:39:31 AM  
Jim Henson was too intelligent to use "do you have children?" as an argument.

And Yoko Ono is too stupid to communicate intelligibly.

IT"S A FAAAAAKKKKKEEEEE!!!
 
2012-12-13 12:40:34 AM  

Pocket Ninja: This thread would have been a lot funnier if you people could have resisted the urge to point out it wasn't real before it even hit the main board. Even if it is in the Geek tab wasteland.


If the "artist" in question had given half the amount of effort of any one of your normal posts, maybe we would have. As it exists, it's just lazy.
 
2012-12-13 12:42:07 AM  
It's like, they'll just greenlight anything around here.

/I thought it was kinda amusing.
 
2012-12-13 12:44:01 AM  

Lsherm:

If the "artist" in question had given half the amount of effort of any one of your normal posts, maybe we would have. As it exists, it's just lazy.


You remind me of the character Oscar the grouch. I'm laughing out loud at this.
 
2012-12-13 12:45:38 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: kronicfeld: This actually happened

Sure didn't. And Steve Biko - a poor, South African anti-apartheid activist - didn't participate in one of the other ones posted on the site.

This is an art project.

And not a very well-written one. I don't know about the philosophies of Nolan or Henson, but the lines from Rand and Ono were not believable at all.


for an art project, a+.
plausible.
 
2012-12-13 12:46:40 AM  

Flogster: Lsherm:

If the "artist" in question had given half the amount of effort of any one of your normal posts, maybe we would have. As it exists, it's just lazy.

You remind me of the character Oscar the grouch. I'm laughing out loud at this.


Thanks, I think.

It was meant to be a compliment to Pocket Ninja.
 
2012-12-13 12:51:34 AM  
Wait, Muppets aren't real?
 
*starts sobbing uncontrollably*
 
2012-12-13 12:55:28 AM  
Eh. Anyone who's actually familiar with Rand can see through a lot of that pretty easily. It clearly reads like it's been written by someone who's just been told what Rand believed, not heard or read her words himself.
 
2012-12-13 01:01:13 AM  
She must have been fun at parties.
 
2012-12-13 01:01:28 AM  
Real or not, Sidney Nolan was virtually unintelligible, and Ayn Rand was as twunty as ever.
 
2012-12-13 01:02:48 AM  

Lsherm: In 1976 there were less than 80 public nodes on ARPANET and absolutely nothing that could be considered a "chat" protocol unless you counted serial handshakes.


This reference says otherwise, although I can't comment on its accuracy. Unix and other multi-user systems have also had versions of the 'talk' command for a long time, and even if they weren't directly network-enabled they would work for a user logged in over telnet.
 
2012-12-13 01:06:33 AM  
Fake or not, I've been in far too many real conversations just like that on the internet.

/Seen a few 'shops in my day
//Get off my.... pixels?
 
2012-12-13 01:09:28 AM  
comparing nietzsche to rand is an insult to nietzsche. Rand is out of her depth in a kiddie pool, Nietzsche was a sarcastic critic of the status quo and blind obedience to tradition (thought himself fell victim to it sometimes - ex gender roles).
 
2012-12-13 01:12:35 AM  
Her followers behave just like her. How interesting.
 
2012-12-13 01:12:53 AM  
Yeah this totally happened, I read it on the internet.
 
2012-12-13 01:21:00 AM  
Someone's gotta make this into a one-act play.
 
2012-12-13 01:25:14 AM  
My god, if this doesn't convince every Randian idiot that she's a total worthless biatch and her philosophies are nasty, stupid shiat, then nothing will. Right from the start she's an anti-social moron, just trying to splatter her doom and gloom feces all over anybody else who dares to have a pleasant thought.

It comes through in her insane philosophies, too. Be an asshole wherever and whenever you can, and the world will be a better place! Makes total sense.
 
2012-12-13 01:26:37 AM  
I hope fake chat logs featuring Ayn Rand and assorted characters becomes a thing like those Hitler videos.

/Would like to see a Rand, Meow Said The Dog and Rugby Jock chat.
 
2012-12-13 01:33:42 AM  
Because Ayn Rand (whose philosophies suck, I'm not defending those) sounds like one of her characters in EVERY conversation she's ever had. Sure. That's totally true.
 
2012-12-13 01:33:50 AM  
Wait, scratch that. The conversation didn't really go anywhere and ended too abruptly.

Still, I like the concept.
 
2012-12-13 01:37:31 AM  

taurusowner: Eh. Anyone who's actually familiar with Rand can see through a lot of that pretty easily. It clearly reads like it's been written by someone who's just been told what Rand believed, not heard or read her words himself.


Actually, if you watch her old interviews and talk shows (I remember the big hour long one on Donahue) she talks and acts EXACTLY like that.

She hated dissent, was known to start a fit whenever someone disagreed with the self-evident superiority of her logic, and would not want to stick around in a discussion of that format.
 
2012-12-13 01:43:13 AM  
The dialogue seems too "expected". Too natural of a flow for a dialogue between different folks on a medium they weren't familiar with.

Rand doesn't seem to want to explain her philosophy in as much as just define it.

I want to believe it's real but I dont think it is.
 
2012-12-13 01:45:39 AM  

Ishkur: taurusowner: Eh. Anyone who's actually familiar with Rand can see through a lot of that pretty easily. It clearly reads like it's been written by someone who's just been told what Rand believed, not heard or read her words himself.

Actually, if you watch her old interviews and talk shows (I remember the big hour long one on Donahue) she talks and acts EXACTLY like that.

She hated dissent, was known to start a fit whenever someone disagreed with the self-evident superiority of her logic, and would not want to stick around in a discussion of that format.


But the ideas here are just caricatures of her actual ideas. It's like reading what a Farker thinks Rand believed instead of what she actually believed. You can see a lot of that in this very thread. There's no requirement that one must agree with Rand, but the sheer lack of understanding of what she actually thought is staggering. Caricature is the best description I can think of.
 
2012-12-13 01:45:43 AM  
Better fake chat room story.

Pocket Ninja: This thread would have been a lot funnier if you people could have resisted the urge to point out it wasn't real before it even hit the main board.


We pointed it out before it was green, didn't expect it to go. No idea why the ever-mysterious modmins went with it.
 
2012-12-13 01:48:02 AM  

vossiewulf: Better fake chat room story.

Pocket Ninja: This thread would have been a lot funnier if you people could have resisted the urge to point out it wasn't real before it even hit the main board.

We pointed it out before it was green, didn't expect it to go. No idea why the ever-mysterious modmins went with it.


Probably to spark an argument, which is as always, an admirable goal. The obvious forced and silly fakeness aside, it's garnering a respectable amount of frothy mouthed Rand hate, which was probably the intent of the greenlight.
 
2012-12-13 01:51:57 AM  
eminemBNJA: Oh I like that Baby. I put on my robe and wizard hat.
BritneySpears14: What the f*ck, I told you not to message me again.
eminemBNJA: Oh ****
BritneySpears14: I swear if you do it one more time I'm gonna report your ISP and say you were sending me kiddie porn you f*ck up.
 
2012-12-13 01:53:43 AM  

taurusowner: Ishkur: taurusowner: Eh. Anyone who's actually familiar with Rand can see through a lot of that pretty easily. It clearly reads like it's been written by someone who's just been told what Rand believed, not heard or read her words himself.

Actually, if you watch her old interviews and talk shows (I remember the big hour long one on Donahue) she talks and acts EXACTLY like that.

She hated dissent, was known to start a fit whenever someone disagreed with the self-evident superiority of her logic, and would not want to stick around in a discussion of that format.

But the ideas here are just caricatures of her actual ideas. It's like reading what a Farker thinks Rand believed instead of what she actually believed. You can see a lot of that in this very thread. There's no requirement that one must agree with Rand, but the sheer lack of understanding of what she actually thought is staggering. Caricature is the best description I can think of.


I think Colbert demonstrates fairly well that caricature doesn't always mean inaccurate nor inapplicable.
 
2012-12-13 02:02:45 AM  
How that would go down today:

USER AYN RAND: I am not isolated. I have no contempt for others. Millions of people read my books and find my thoughts inspirational. I hardly spend my time on the sidelines in a trash can grumping.

USER JIM HENSON: Not yet anyway.

USER AYN RAND HAS LOGGED OFF
 
2012-12-13 02:07:10 AM  
God, no wonder republicans worship her. What a literally evil and soulless coont.
 
2012-12-13 02:17:17 AM  

imgod2u: taurusowner: Ishkur: taurusowner: Eh. Anyone who's actually familiar with Rand can see through a lot of that pretty easily. It clearly reads like it's been written by someone who's just been told what Rand believed, not heard or read her words himself.

Actually, if you watch her old interviews and talk shows (I remember the big hour long one on Donahue) she talks and acts EXACTLY like that.

She hated dissent, was known to start a fit whenever someone disagreed with the self-evident superiority of her logic, and would not want to stick around in a discussion of that format.

But the ideas here are just caricatures of her actual ideas. It's like reading what a Farker thinks Rand believed instead of what she actually believed. You can see a lot of that in this very thread. There's no requirement that one must agree with Rand, but the sheer lack of understanding of what she actually thought is staggering. Caricature is the best description I can think of.

I think Colbert demonstrates fairly well that caricature doesn't always mean inaccurate nor inapplicable.


That's just not true. A caricature of ideas is simply a strawman by another name. It's presenting an inflated ridiculous image of what your opponent believes, not what they actually believe, and then attacking that. This "chat room" is a perfect example. This thread is ridiculing Rand not for anything she actually believed or said, but for the inflated, simplistic and skewed image of what someone thinks she might have believed.

Whether you agree with her or not, agreeing with presenting any ideas like that is a slap in the face to logical thought anywhere. it doesn't become "ok" to do that simply because it's being done to someone you don't like.
 
2012-12-13 02:17:38 AM  
WHAT IS WRONG WITH ASSHOLE AND FORMATTING???

FFS stop centering text. We dont read middle out. We read english left to right ...
AND FFS, black background and bright text?

sigh

I REALLY HATE these people
 
2012-12-13 02:18:27 AM  
Had it been real, it would have been interesting. Not being real, it is next to useless.
 
2012-12-13 02:31:50 AM  

swahnhennessy: Had it been real, it would have been interesting. Not being real, it is next to useless.


wait what
are you saying that that is not from something which really happened, but jsut plain fiction??
 
2012-12-13 02:32:22 AM  

taurusowner: But the ideas here are just caricatures of her actual ideas


No, not really. She was an Aspergers extraordinaire, she had no compulsion for socializing or small talk and if you let her, she would launch into a long-winded speech just as frequently as her characters. And she would consider it a grievous insult if you dared to interrupt her so you had to let her finish.

She was a very bitter person and even her closest friends could not stand to be around her for very long. She was only tolerable in small doses.
 
Displayed 50 of 139 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report