Moving the furniture first would probably have made the job go faster.
Related
21 Comments
. . . but not be as funny or as ‘those kids, always doing things the lazy way’-ish.
I helped some friends of my wife move some 20 years ago and they had done the same thing. They painted their bedroom a horrible purple color but painted around the furniture so the left the room with outlines on the wall of where all their furniture used to be.
Faster…. but harder. Moving furniture back and forth is a lot harder than pushing paint rollers.
Actually not faster. The time lost on painting in contours is much more then made up for in time spent in moving furniture.
But why is Jeremy mixing paint in the first panel if they are almost done?
Moving the furniture won’t make things faster if you don’t bother to paint where the furniture is.
Mixing paint? I thought he was refilling a roller pan.
woozy, I’m assuming significant time passed between panels 1 and 2.
Two guys moving a couch, two end tables and two lamps? I’m thinking a minute moving them and a minute moving them back.
Come to think of it, I think this one calls for the “Kids are not that stupid” tag.
I clean this way.
But if you cart all the furniture out of the room, then you can use Mr. Bean’s “dynamite in the paint bucket” method. In a split second, the entire room will be green (including floor and ceiling).
Kilby, as a confirmed lazy person I was never so disappointed in the Mythbusters as when they busted that one.
@ Olivier – That same trick (with almost the exact same sprinkler) was used by the Pink Panther in his very first animated cartoon, “The Pink Phink” (1964). I considered providing a YouTube link, but Google insisted on reviewing my personal data before I could look at their website, so now I have yet another Internet system to avoid.
I like the effect. It sets off the Charlie-Brown-Shirt lamp nicely.
Kilby: You’ve never watched anything on YouTube before? I’m impressed!
WW: Google recently started posting a lot of annoying disclaimers and click-through agreements to use their sites when you connect from Europe; Kilby is in Europe, so he has to deal with these annoying and intrusive CYA documents Google is deploying to try and forestall their obligations under the GDPR. I was in Europe recently: it’s very annoying. Back in the states, they don’t bother me. But I was with Kilby there, couldn’t use Google maps anymore…
lark: Oh, GDPR. That makes sense, thanks for the info.
WW: I’m the female equivalent of that guy . . . well, I was ’til a ‘friend’ gave us her mother’s tv. Fortunately, it doesn’t work. However, today admitting that one doesn’t have a tv isn’t saying much, as one can “watch tv” on the internet. Not fair!!
@ WW – larK nailed it, but the worst part is not reading the “CYA” legalese, it is the fact that Google includes four separate (exceedingly lengthy) lists of cookie setters and monitoring spammers, as if anyone on the planet would have the slightest interest in allowing tracking from the 123rd spook, but preventing the 124th spook from collecting data. Approximately 1/3rd of these advertising spammers cannot be switched off with the forms, they require an explicit “opt-out”, meaning that the user has to permit enough tracking so that the spammers know that his system is not supposed to be tracked. To add insult to injury, the Google selection forms are intentionally designed in such a fashion that it is impossible to be 100% sure on which side of the toggle switch the “off” position is located. Theoretically, “off” should be on the left and “on” should be on the right, but these morons put the word “allow” on the left side of the toggle.
It wouldn’t be so bad if the whole ordeal was a one-time thing, but Google asks for this review repeatedly and incessantly. I have discarded all of my Google bookmarks, and have switched the default browser settings to DuckDuckGo, which is a superb replacement.
@Kilby: well, the Gaston Lagaffe comic is from around October, 1965: it was probably inspired by “La panthère rose”.
@ Olivier – Thanks very much for the date information. I thought the drawing style looked vaguely familiar and much older than the date that was posted above the strip.
Comics I Don't Understand 
. . . but not be as funny or as ‘those kids, always doing things the lazy way’-ish.
I helped some friends of my wife move some 20 years ago and they had done the same thing. They painted their bedroom a horrible purple color but painted around the furniture so the left the room with outlines on the wall of where all their furniture used to be.
Faster…. but harder. Moving furniture back and forth is a lot harder than pushing paint rollers.
Actually not faster. The time lost on painting in contours is much more then made up for in time spent in moving furniture.
But why is Jeremy mixing paint in the first panel if they are almost done?
Moving the furniture won’t make things faster if you don’t bother to paint where the furniture is.
Mixing paint? I thought he was refilling a roller pan.
woozy, I’m assuming significant time passed between panels 1 and 2.
Two guys moving a couch, two end tables and two lamps? I’m thinking a minute moving them and a minute moving them back.
Come to think of it, I think this one calls for the “Kids are not that stupid” tag.
I clean this way.
But if you cart all the furniture out of the room, then you can use Mr. Bean’s “dynamite in the paint bucket” method. In a split second, the entire room will be green (including floor and ceiling).
Kilby, as a confirmed lazy person I was never so disappointed in the Mythbusters as when they busted that one.
Kilby: this is less violent:
https://www.noenigma.com/2011/12/gaston-lagaffe-le-peintre.html
@ Olivier – That same trick (with almost the exact same sprinkler) was used by the Pink Panther in his very first animated cartoon, “The Pink Phink” (1964). I considered providing a YouTube link, but Google insisted on reviewing my personal data before I could look at their website, so now I have yet another Internet system to avoid.
I like the effect. It sets off the Charlie-Brown-Shirt lamp nicely.
Kilby: You’ve never watched anything on YouTube before? I’m impressed!
People used to be impressed that I don’t have a television (sorry, not to be this guy – https://www.theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-televisi-1819565469), but no one is now that an internet connection serves as equivalent.
WW: Google recently started posting a lot of annoying disclaimers and click-through agreements to use their sites when you connect from Europe; Kilby is in Europe, so he has to deal with these annoying and intrusive CYA documents Google is deploying to try and forestall their obligations under the GDPR. I was in Europe recently: it’s very annoying. Back in the states, they don’t bother me. But I was with Kilby there, couldn’t use Google maps anymore…
lark: Oh, GDPR. That makes sense, thanks for the info.
WW: I’m the female equivalent of that guy . . . well, I was ’til a ‘friend’ gave us her mother’s tv. Fortunately, it doesn’t work. However, today admitting that one doesn’t have a tv isn’t saying much, as one can “watch tv” on the internet. Not fair!!
@ WW – larK nailed it, but the worst part is not reading the “CYA” legalese, it is the fact that Google includes four separate (exceedingly lengthy) lists of cookie setters and monitoring spammers, as if anyone on the planet would have the slightest interest in allowing tracking from the 123rd spook, but preventing the 124th spook from collecting data. Approximately 1/3rd of these advertising spammers cannot be switched off with the forms, they require an explicit “opt-out”, meaning that the user has to permit enough tracking so that the spammers know that his system is not supposed to be tracked. To add insult to injury, the Google selection forms are intentionally designed in such a fashion that it is impossible to be 100% sure on which side of the toggle switch the “off” position is located. Theoretically, “off” should be on the left and “on” should be on the right, but these morons put the word “allow” on the left side of the toggle.
It wouldn’t be so bad if the whole ordeal was a one-time thing, but Google asks for this review repeatedly and incessantly. I have discarded all of my Google bookmarks, and have switched the default browser settings to DuckDuckGo, which is a superb replacement.
@Kilby: well, the Gaston Lagaffe comic is from around October, 1965: it was probably inspired by “La panthère rose”.
@ Olivier – Thanks very much for the date information. I thought the drawing style looked vaguely familiar and much older than the date that was posted above the strip.