31 replies to this topic

[Kingdaro]

I didn't think this would be actually implemented, but I'd like your opinions regardless, even though I can already see what's probably coming.

What would be both hilarious and fitting is if computers and turtles caught fire on a "too long without yielding" error. Not the entire computer and everything around it, just one flame on top of the computer, as though someone just triggered flint and steel on the top surface. And maybe if the top is covered, have the fire on the computer's screen side instead, or just the first empty side.

A lot of people uninterested in the mod would get a kick out of this, I bet. Just watching someone screw around on their little gray box and suddenly they're on fire, haha.

[TheOddByte]

That sound really fun i think
But your probably right about that you can see what's coming...
But it would be fun to troll those who tries to hack the computer by making a programs that does that if we say that
we have a startup that needs a User and Pass input and if they enter wrong the computer catches on fire.(Since they probably tries to Enter a User And Pass Input before using a floppy or something)

[Cloudy]

Nah.

[UltraHex]

Hey, RP2 did it, why not? and what if it catches on fire if you try to divide by zero?

[Cloudy]

It's one thing to make Computers catch fire from the start. It's another to implement it randomly into existing builds - some of them flammable.

[AnthonyD98™]

One thing you could do which In my opinion which would be better is to have it when you get the 'too long without yielding' error the computer displays a fire animation in the terminal. Much more sensible isn't it?

[Kingdaro]

AnthonyD98™, on 11 February 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

One thing you could do which In my opinion which would be better is to have it when you get the 'too long without yielding' error the computer displays a fire animation in the terminal. Much more sensible isn't it?

THERE'S NO FUN IN SENSE

AHAHA

AHAHAHAHA

[AnthonyD98™]

Kingdaro, on 11 February 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

AnthonyD98™, on 11 February 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

One thing you could do which In my opinion which would be better is to have it when you get the 'too long without yielding' error the computer displays a fire animation in the terminal. Much more sensible isn't it?

THERE'S NO FUN IN SENSE

AHAHA

AHAHAHAHA

Would you rather the computer explode in your face when you get the error?

[Kingdaro]

Woah man, there's a line, bro. That's too far outside the realms of what's not okay.

[Cranium]

Meh, I would much rather have the computer display a BSOD rather than catch fire. Still fun, but much less destructive.

[theoriginalbit]

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

Meh, I would much rather have the computer display a BSOD rather than catch fire. Still fun, but much less destructive.

Wouldn't it be better if it was the RROD... since RROD has to do with heat and BSOD doesn't

[Cranium]

TheOriginalBIT, on 12 February 2013 - 04:28 AM, said:

Wouldn't it be better if it was the RROD... since RROD has to do with heat and BSOD doesn't

BSOD would be more relevant. Considering that any critical failure on Windows will result in either a BSOD or a complete shutdown.

[theoriginalbit]

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

BSOD would be more relevant. Considering that any critical failure on Windows will result in either a BSOD or a complete shutdown.

But when a real computer over heats it just turns it off... try it, get your CPU to about ~90 degrees Celsius and see what it does, i bet there will be no BSOD... thats why i think RROD would be better

[Cranium]

TheOriginalBIT, on 12 February 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

But when a real computer over heats it just turns it off... try it, get your CPU to about ~90 degrees Celsius and see what it does, i bet there will be no BSOD... thats why i think RROD would be better

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

BSOD would be more relevant. Considering that any critical failure on Windows will result in either a BSOD or a complete shutdown.

[theoriginalbit]

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

BSOD would be more relevant. Considering that any critical failure on Windows will result in either a BSOD or a complete shutdown.

Missed that... lol...
i still think something other than a seemingly random shutdown would be nice though.

[Orwell]

TheOriginalBIT, on 12 February 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

Cranium, on 12 February 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

BSOD would be more relevant. Considering that any critical failure on Windows will result in either a BSOD or a complete shutdown.

But when a real computer over heats it just turns it off... try it, get your CPU to about ~90 degrees Celsius and see what it does, i bet there will be no BSOD... thats why i think RROD would be better

The original statement wasn't that it would get overheated, but rather that some error occurs. Though even that isn't the original statement because that was about computers catching fire without actual reason (zero division doesn't overheat your computer or anything ).

[theoriginalbit]

Orwell, on 12 February 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

about computers catching fire without actual reason

In my mind fire === heat.........

[Orwell]

TheOriginalBIT, on 12 February 2013 - 04:49 AM, said:

Orwell, on 12 February 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

about computers catching fire without actual reason

In my mind fire === heat.........

Yeah, but someone started arguing that fire should be a reaction to critical errors and then others like Cranium said that an BSOD or similar would be a more appropriate reaction to critical errors. So the discussion kinda drifted away from the fire/heat part. Just how I see it, it hardly matters.

[Cranium]

I was just saying that making the computer light on fire is a little extreme.

[PixelToast]

> someone sets up a firewolf server
> unsuspecting victim visits it
> house burns down