Shirt.Woot

I am sooooo glad to see this print! One of the few shirts that's actually made me LOL.

I love the look on this guy's eyes. Apelad did a great job capturing a look that is a mix of both tired resignation and boredom.

Don't wear this shirt backwards unless you want a monkey on your back.

Does the text "friends, Romans" appear anywhere on the shirt?

CowboyDann wrote:

Okay, I both laughed out loud and felt bad at the same time when I saw this.

I've got 999,999 problems...

Poor bored monkey. I feel badly for him. He needs a drink.

Artist's self-portrait?

Just so long as that monkey isn't typing something like "All work and no play makes Jack a dull monkey" over and over and over and over and...

'Cause that would just be creepy

Quasiskunk wrote:Artist's self-portrait?

I haven't had so ample a hairline for some time now.

Thanks for the votes, everyone! I really appreciate it, from the bottom of my aedlrjqaewoif.

It's pretty clear that even if the observable universe were filled with monkeys the size of atoms typing from now until the heat death of the universe, their total probability to produce a single instance of Hamlet would still be a great many orders of magnitude less than one in 10183,800. As Kittel and Kroemer put it, "The probability of Hamlet is therefore zero in any operational sense of an event...", and the statement that the monkeys must eventually succeed "gives a misleading conclusion about very, very large numbers." This is from their textbook on thermodynamics, the field whose statistical foundations motivated the first known expositions of typing monkeys. (wiki:infinite monkey theorem)

"It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times."

Little does Woot know, but "Aedlrjqaewoif" is actually the Swedish word for a pickled herring and mayonnaise dish.

Fantastic winner, I imagine this will be a popular one at the Woot office.

robovox wrote:"It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times."

You stupid monkey!

bluejester wrote:Okay, I both laughed out loud and felt bad at the same time when I saw this.

woohoo! Mission accomplished :3 really almost considered not doing it, but I know the writers have thick skin

ApeLad wrote:I haven't had so ample a hairline for some time now.

Thanks for the votes, everyone! I really appreciate it, from the bottom of my aedlrjqaewoif.

Really a great design! Thank you for drawing it, but please keep whatever is at the bottom of your aedlrjqaewoif right where it is.

"Ford? There's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for 'Hamlet' they've worked out."

bluejester wrote:Okay, I both laughed out loud and felt bad at the same time when I saw this.

Considering woots obsession with monkeys I'm surprised the writers didn't make the joke.

Evening's entertainment by apelad...excellent.

"Strictly speaking, one immortal monkey would suffice." -- Jorge Luis Borges

Awesome! So glad this one made it, hope it comes back as a long sleeve too!

Odd that the write up nails the quirks of Winter's Tale, but gives Hamlet's nunnery line to Romeo.

This reminds me of this shirt I got from Woot! a few years ago in a random pack: http://shirt.woot.com/derby/entry/14004/monkey-play

I was surprised with how many people comment on it. Makes me tempted to get this one as well.

soliver wrote:It's pretty clear that even if the observable universe were filled with monkeys the size of atoms typing from now until the heat death of the universe, their total probability to produce a single instance of Hamlet would still be a great many orders of magnitude less than one in 10183,800. As Kittel and Kroemer put it, "The probability of Hamlet is therefore zero in any operational sense of an event...", and the statement that the monkeys must eventually succeed "gives a misleading conclusion about very, very large numbers." This is from their textbook on thermodynamics, the field whose statistical foundations motivated the first known expositions of typing monkeys. (wiki:infinite monkey theorem)

That's the easy part. here's what the yougins here need to know...

A typewriter is a mechanical or electromechanical device with keys that, when pressed, cause characters to be printed on a medium, usually paper. Typically one character is printed per keypress, and the machine prints the characters by making ink impressions of type elements similar to the sorts used in movable type letterpress printing.
(also taken from wiki)

That theory of infinite monkeys constantly typing eventually producing all the works of Shakespeare has pretty much been disproven by the a huge experiment. It's called, "The Internet."

greyhound989 wrote:Odd that the write up nails the quirks of Winter's Tale, but gives Hamlet's nunnery line to Romeo.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed (and was bothered by) this.

mrknobs wrote:a huge experiment. It's called, "The Internet."

I thought it was "/b/"

o:

I'm thinking this is funny for atheists because religious people think it's impossible for life to have been created randomly. Even though you have billions of years and an abundant supply of carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, and phosphorus.

These are fewer elements than the number of keys on a keyboard.

Even though you have billions of years to randomly assemble these 5 elements, some people think it was impossible but here we are -- proof it wasn't impossible.

Now the question is, how easy was it really? That's why we are exploring Mars to see if there's life there and then we will have one less variable in the drake equation.

Someone once told me, creating life is like having a tornado go through a junk yard and randomly assembling a 747 jumbo jet. I disagree since there are more than the 5 building blocks in a 747.

So in conclusion (while I'm on my evolution soap box), the infinite monkey theory typing an entire work of Shakespeare is not quite the same value in probability of creating life randomly.

Congrats Apelad!!

So long as they can't replace artists with monkeys I'm happy, wait... oh crap.

Nice shirt. a take on the Bob Newhart joke on the same subject back in the sixties, but he chose Hamlet.
"To be or not to be, that is the . . . gezornenplatt. . "
;-)

greyhound989 wrote:Odd that the write up nails the quirks of Winter's Tale, but gives Hamlet's nunnery line to Romeo.

Heh! I just assumed it was one of those oddball variants on the infinite stack of rejected scripts.

greyhound989 wrote:Odd that the write up nails the quirks of Winter's Tale, but gives Hamlet's nunnery line to Romeo.

I actually liked Winter's Tale. ._.

Love it, the artwork actually reminds me of the old Mad Magazine drawings.

I thought this was going to be a Robot Chicken shirt.

jonyen98 wrote:Does the text "friends, Romans" appear anywhere on the shirt?

I have a radical suggestion. Woot shirts should not have titles... at least not during the woot-offs.

greyhound989 wrote:Odd that the write up nails the quirks of Winter's Tale, but gives Hamlet's nunnery line to Romeo.

I did notice that too. Though they got the Act number and Scene number right, it's just it was Hamlet to Ophelia, not Romeo to Juliet.

This is what code monkeys looked like back in the day.