Lord Bradenham vs The South Asian Technical Support Corporation (SMBC Comic Adaptation)

[ajshetty]

Bosdike you people can make fun of others thats it,,, you people talk as if someone thrust banan down your throat,,,, thius ius blah blah lol..

bosdike lauda thera.. gaandu.. thera language chodke kuch aur language seeka hai thu??? Gandu log.. we'll own you all soon. Any way call centre job is treated as leftover job in India, only people who don't succede in anything end up there ;) Anyway my LORD BLAH BLAH BRIT SUCK MY COCK.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@ajshetty It's ironic that you accuse me of making fun of others and THEN tell me I talk as if a banana is down my throat.

After that point, your comment collapsed into complete incoherence.

[ajshetty]

@Th1sWasATriumph Look i did not intend to use those harsh words.. I'm sorry. But since I ended up in your video after watching many such videos so I was pissed of people making fun of my countrymen when poor kids graduate with lot of difficulties & they don't get chance to study english as much as you/me still they make up within a year after doing such jobs within a years time. I hope I made my point.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@ajshetty Your point is fucking BOLLOCKS, and here's why: whilst you instantly leapt on my cliched interpretation of an Indian accent, you completely ignored my just as cliched interpretation of a BRITISH accent.

And let's not forget that a lot of people in call centres do ACTUALLY talk in accents as ridiculous as my parody. In fact it's NOT a parody, it's a direct imitation of the people who phone my work every day to sell me insurance, phone coverage and healthcare.

[ajshetty]

@Th1sWasATriumph I don't think you could manage to utter a single word in any of major Indian languages let alone in correct accent..you should google "PIE languages". I rest my case here anyway , I say sorry once again for those harsh words I uttered kid take care.BYE BYE..

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@ajshetty Wonderful. Ignore my point and then level an ad hominem. How can you rest your case when you've not proved or won your point?

Of course I can't speak any Indian. I never took any lessons. Does this somehow prove your point? I bet there's dozens of languages you can't speak as well. I know some Bulgarian; do you, glupav?

Now, are you going to acknowledge that I insulted British accents as much as Indian or just run off?

[priitsan]

My word, gentlemen! This discussion has been a strange reflection of the comic itself. I do hope neither you have gone mad as a result of it.

[puellanivis]

In a debate with the YouTube user Th1sWasATriumph in his video (this URL), there is an open and heated debate as to whether Lord Bradenham is to have written "unity" or "unit y".

Would be so kind so as to settle this debate with an explanation of which is the proper reading?

Zach (in quick response): Definitely "unity." It's a schmancy way of saying he has an "off by one error."

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis I think we need a Quake Arena-esque "humiliation" sound effect here. Ballsack!

However:

Penmanship was NOT the primary or only basis for my argument. As I said pretty clearly, I felt that the less-known definition of "one" as opposed to "unit y" was also pretty central. You were right in your initial surmise, but if you really want to tell me that the "bare truth" is that I ONLY based my argument on penmanship, you are wrong in the face . . .

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph My remark on the penmanship is that it was the only basis for your argument that there is sufficient spacing between "unit" and "y" so as to allow for a reading of "unit y". Obviously, the separate argument of "he wouldn't use such an obscure word for 'one' and lose his audience" has nothing to do with penmanship. I just thought it was a completely baseless argument, because obviously he has, does, and will again in the future. It's a geek comic, using obscure knowledge is in.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis And your counter-argument, which was "unity means one therefore there is no possible other reading for it" is not rendered reasonable by merit of simply being correct. If my argument was completely baseless and your reading was completely bulletproof, I probably would have had more people raising the issue.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph I didn't say that there was no possible other reading for it. I said there was no reasonable alternative. The spacing of words is in the magnitude of 20 or more pixels, while "unit" and "y" are separated by only 3~5 pixels. I wasn't rude in first pointing out your misreading, I just stated it plainly. Then you flew into a bunch of post-hoc rationalization about how your reading is valid, and correct. And it "couldn't be unity because that makes no sense." Which was also wrong.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis "clearly indicates that my reading is the proper and appropriate reading. Your continued insistence upon this false and illegitimate reading is quite frustrating." Does this read as if you "didn't say that there was no possible other reading for it"? You called my reading "false and illegitimate"!

Since the perceived gap 'twixt unit and y led me to pronounce it as such in the first place, I don't see how you can tell me I DON'T see a gap that I considered to be significant.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph "unity" was however the proper and appropriate reading. The words "false and illegitimate" were used for schmancy wording, as was the joke in the entire debate. See, at this point, I was JUST beginning to debate internally if you were actually being serious... I seriously thought your position was all part of a joke at first, because the reading of "unity" was as plain to me as the next word "Please". That you're still taking this so seriously surprises me a lot.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph Also, I didn't say that you don't see a gap, I said that such gap is insignificant, or insufficient to be a word boundary. That you see it, was analogized by me as seeing a mirage in the desert. Sure you might actually see something, but it's not actually there, it's an illusion.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis Yes . . . but that's a slightly unfair comparison. There IS a perceptible gap between unit and y, and I'm not perceiving it as something that isn't there, like I might with a mirage. And you DID call my reading "false and illegitimate"! Did you really accept that there was a possible other reading, even if this reading was false and illegitimate?

I should state, in case it's not obvious, clearly you were right. I just feel you're somewhat too sweeping in your statements.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph But a mirage actually exists as well, it's just not water. I should say that whatever gap you're seeing there is deceptive and misleading, just like an illusion is. And honestly, I really don't see this gap that you keep going on about. The word is exceedingly apparent to me as "unity" without any gap. And this is why I originally took your objections to be jocular, because it seemed like something so contrived that it made me think, "this _HAS_ to be a joke."

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis . . . so give me the respect of not lying about what I've actually written, or we can argue about that as well. Shall we continue?

[DeeDemonwitch]

hahaha, enjoyed this so much I phoned my partner and ordered him to watch it.

[inuyashaxx]

Is "nine and thirty weeks" 39 weeks, or 93? I'm afraid my grasp of Steampunk-ese is a little weak.

[mercatormac]

@inuyashaxx 39 I think. You can see the progression through the letters.

[puellanivis]

@inuyashaxx someone else have partial confirmation that it is "39", and it is indeed 39. It's an archaic way (for English) of counting that pretty much all Germanic languages used to use, and which is still in use by German and Dutch.

[EarlRegent]

A Lord adding Esq. at the end of his name?

[puellanivis]

It's off by "unity" not by "unit y".

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis I assure you it's not. For a start, "off by unity" makes no sense, whereas "unit y" does in the context of a machine that is used for analysis.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph My good sir, I do direct your attention to the archaic language of long-passed Mathematics which were at that time in use. You should be able to find on Wikipedia the article 1 (number), which contains the text: "One, sometimes referred to as unity, is the integer before two and after zero." You will then see that the text becomes "My cycle apparatus is consistently off by 1." Which makes significantly more sense than off by "unit y" where "y" is some variable of unknown value.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis My dear chap, do you honestly think that this knowledge is commonplace? I assert that it is not, and indeed the surreal nature of the webcomic would be entirely befitting of using the unknown variable "unit y" considering the very machine in question is undisclosed in terms both of design and purpose.

Additionally, one needs only study the graphology to see that "unit" and "y" are divorced by a space larger than those typically found at the end of other words in Bradenham's hand.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph Good SIr, I should mention that I am actually of the female gender, and the term "chap" find itself ill suited to my address. I grant you openly that such knowledge is not commonplace, and thus I presented the correction plainly. While I agree that the webcomic is quite surreal, the historical nature of the wording should have indicated the archaic form "unity". Although, I find your claim about the graphology to be little more than a post hoc rationalization, and without merit.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis Certainly my argument is WITH merit, for it is the clear spacing that divorces "unit" and "y" that led me to pronounce it as such in the first place. Quite ignoring the fact that, even if Zach Weiner is aware of the archaic meaning of "unity", for the purposes of transparent humour he would be profoundly unlikely to expect his followers to all know it.

Observe once more the words "recently", "consistently" and "sincerely". The "y" is far closer than in the case of "unity".

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph If we were lost in a desert, and I did perceive a puddle of water off in the distance, you would be right to inform me that my eyes are simply playing tricks on me. As such the distance between the "t" and "y" in question is not more than two pixels, and even if it were, you are witnessing the variation of penmanship. The distance between "l" and "y" in "Analytical" is 6 pixels! Should you persist, I shall be force to consult the source.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis And yet your counterargument is without merit, because my examples were all cases where - like "unit y" - the word ENDS with "y", in which case you can make some case to compare penmanship accurately. Quite how you could take a word where "y" occurs in the middle and then try to apply the same analysis is . . . well, it's hardly honest. Fact remains that there is a discernibly larger gap in "unit y" than in all other instances of y-ending words on this page.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis You also didn't respond to to my OR argument. As for consulting the source, please do! The only reason I haven't is because Zach Weiner is basically famous and busy. I emailed him this video as soon as I uploaded as I thought he might enjoy it, and no reply. However, when you DO question him, kindly do so in an unleading fashion - "is it unity or unit y?" for example.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis I would suggest that you are attempting to gain a high ground, however nugatory, in knowing something I did not and therefore assuming that because there COULD be a vaguely context-relevant mathematical meaning to "unity", there DEFINITELY is. I would invoke the Razor at this point; is it more likely that Zach included obscure terminology that would stunt the humour, or that he simply used a faux-algebraical phraseology that was in keeping with the obfuscated nature of the Engine?

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph The Razor to which you refer quite explicitly refers to "do not create entities unnecessarily", not to "simpler explanations are better" (except in such cases were a simpler explanation has fewer entities required for explanation.) The terminology throughout the video uses archaic terminology such as "three and sixty", and it is not unreasonable to assume that Zach oft inserting "in-jokes" of acquired knowledge would use the word "unity".

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis More specifically, studying the words "consistently" and "sincerely" shows the final y to be significantly closer than the final y in your purported "unity". 

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph The spacing between words is significant multiples of any purposed distance between the "unit" and "y". Having given you a valid archaic reading for the text, and spacing being insufficient between "unit" and "y" and all other spacing between words clearly indicates that my reading is the proper and appropriate reading. Your continued insistence upon this false and illegitimate reading is quite frustrating.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis I'm afraid you're mistaken. The gap is significant enough to allow for a reading as "unit y" especially when taken in context with other words, and when considering the generally unknown archaic definition of "unity", this compounds the unlikelihood of Zach leaving it in as an in-joke. Considering I've been reading SMBC for years, this would be the first time he's deliberately used archaisms or esoteric knowledge that are openly obscure as opposed to pleasingly rare.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph I am exceedingly sorry that this is the first occurrence of you lacking a specific piece of esoteric knowledge to properly divine the joke in an SMBC comic, however this has been the occurrence. Your entire argument is based on inconsistent penmanship, and thus an irrational post-hoc apology for your prior readings out of a desire to not admit that you perhaps have not gotten the joke. I'm sorry, but this is the bare truth of the situation as much as Creationism is wrong.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@puellanivis Now, I at least am open to the POSSIBILITY of unity . . . though I see it as highly, highly unlikely. And yet you are blinkered enough to state that "unit y" is a "false and illegitimate reading". You will not even CONCEDE the possibility of error on your part. This is hardly a healthy mindset, is it? Currently, my body of evidence outweighs yours. You should consult the source.

[puellanivis]

@Th1sWasATriumph I am failing to concede the possibility of error in my reading because I have consulted the source and "unit" and "y" are not at sufficient displacement to call for a reading of "unit y". As well, in combination with the Oxford English Dictionary's presentation of "Mathematics chiefly British the number one." for "unity", it is CLEARLY the intended reading as clearly as the next word is "Please", and I need not concede that I might be wrong in the reading of that word.

[DoomsdayR3sistance]

As a technician who has to occasionally deal with international clientèle I can say this goes no where near to describe just how bad some Indian/Pakistani/Etc technicians can really be. There is a reason why sourcing support to those places is cheap and that's because more often then not it's actually rubbish.

I remember once I told a customer from India five times that their hard drive had corrupted. Each time they ignored this until eventually they figured it out own their own... sigh.

[dmitriy40]

I almost peed myself

[trifelgeputinage]

God I hate crank phone calls.

[SAsgarters]

Having worked tech support, I've learned two things:

1. Lords frequently forget to even assign a man-servant to crank the mill.

2. They will do it again, and they will refuse to admit it.

There's a reason why tech support treats callers like idiots. Most of the time they are.

[MGsven]

lol, i work with indians, i can relate LOL!!!

i really lmao'd!!

[squirrelywrath2]

It is so so so hard not to be racist when talking to someone on telephone customer service

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@squirrelywrath2 I asked one why he was called John, as it seemed quite an anglicised name for someone from Calcutta. He said he'd been christened, and so obviously I went with that . . .

[squirrelywrath2]

@Th1sWasATriumph I always find it amusing when I get someone named "mark" who can clearly not pronounce the name "mark".

and then go on to clearly read off of a script and even misinterpret me telling him he isn't listening as a question about a deferred payment plan

[zarkoff45]

I've had similar problems with my Jacquard loom. And the thread seems outrageously expensive.

[jimthepleb]

bloody hell thats the last time i put my pedant hat on lol this corner is full of pedants

TWAT (funny:) u have a damn good point on the comedic thang

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb Pedantry is fine, but not generally in comedy.

[Klingschor]

Steampunk?

[evensgrey]

@Klingschor Yes, literally. Had they been built, the Analytical Engines would have been the basis for an information revolution in the 19th century.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@evensgrey I picture Bradenham's Engine as being similar to something that might appear in the Thief games.

[evensgrey]

@Th1sWasATriumph There's a 4th installment in the works. :)

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@evensgrey I didn't enjoy the third one too much, sadly . . . but who knows?

[evensgrey]

@Th1sWasATriumph Well, there are a lot of strange shortcomings on the third game (and some weird things in the second, at least some of which come from the unusual pedigree of the game engine). The more open environment was an improvement, I think.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@evensgrey I loved the first two, though I never finished the very final mission on Metal Age. I could have used walkthroughs, but not me! I just put the game away and never spoke of it again.

[evensgrey]

@Th1sWasATriumph That is a very tricky mission.

What I'd most like to see (although this is likely impossible due to the complexity of ownership) is the first three games, revised for a new engine, included as bonus material in the fourth. Perhaps in a special collector's edition?

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@evensgrey I don't think that would ever happen! And I liked the graphics of the first two games. Preferred them in many ways to the third, there was something about them.

[piprod01]

What does 3 and twenty weeks mean?

320 weeks?

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@piprod01 Facepalm

23 weeks.

[MrGarseys]

I bet Lord Bradenham Esq. has a moustache!

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@MrGarseys It certainly would make him the Captain, wouldn't it.

I love doing that voice. Maybe a little too much.

[meylina8]

Awesome!

[Skindoggiedog]

Great work on the voices.

Loved it.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@Skindoggiedog ILL FIGHT YOU MOTHERFUCKER

So sorry, force of habit :D

Appreciate it man, I got less and less sure of the voices as I carried on. Microphones sap my confidence.

[Artifactorfiction]

I've had this conversation - condensed - with more swearing.

[fnglcnessie]

Just to be fair, our Indian colleagues are sometimes bound by restrictive scripts or just plain lack of time/budget for proper knowledge transfer. That combined with cultural differences is a recipe for disasters like this... ;)

It is getting better, though... Lots. At least in my experience...

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@fnglcnessie I don't do fair! I know all about scripts, I did telesales for, well, two days. I've had real people but far worse talking to me on the phone at work. And poor Lord Bradenham needed help . . . MY cold callers KNOW no-one gives a shit. Fuck 'em.

[evensgrey]

@fnglcnessie Yes, the people doing this in India are starting to become other than worthless at it, just in time to be replaced by people in the Philippines. My last two tech jobs were moved there. (Note that outsourcing to India no longer gives the illusion of being cheaper, as Indians with the needed skills are paid as much as anyone else these days. Philippinos, on the other hand, still work cheap.)

[Nhurm]

Huzzahs !

[RevDevilin]

love it :D

[happyidiottalk]

I liked that so much I upvoted it.

[FatLingon]

Haha, initially I didn't read the title, just started watching thinking it was a serious correspondence... After a while I'm like "hey, thats just like the lame tech support of today"...

[TehCybernerd]

"don't comics have pictures?"

[TomSFox]

@TehCybernerd You are SO out of touch!

[gothoff]

Oh how I guffawed throughout. Bravo! Yours sincerely, Lady Fiona Denison-Barnett Cale,(L.R.A.M.) xxx

[dileepvr]

You forgot to say "shibboleet" !!

[EvenGodsSuffer]

Absolutely priceless!

[lc237]

Excellent! The accents were great and the subject matter unbelievable!

[sonvolt48]

That was quite amusing. My man-servant just shortened my crank and it seems to have solved the problem...except when I pee. Cheers!

[jimthepleb]

surely a Lord would not be Esq.?

s'ok im heading back to pedants corner now.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb Any complaints regarding the writing or art are NOTHING to do with me! Just so you know. . .

[jimthepleb]

@Th1sWasATriumph cheers for the link i think i my enjoy smbc:)

have you discovered the framley examiner?

framleyexaminer dotcom

I cant read it in bed, my chuckling wakes the missus

OI! its 3am 60miles down the road from me,

ive just finished the night-milking what's your excuse?

[ProphetTenebrae]

@jimthepleb You're not a very good pedant. The title has no specific meaning and could be used by anyone of high standing.

Kindly remove yourself from the pedant's corner.

[jimthepleb]

@ProphetTenebrae my understanding was that esq. denotes someone who is not of the aristocratic class and would therefore NOT be a lord, but im happy to be corrected. certainly at a purely etymological level it would suggest a man of middling rather than optimate rank.

[evensgrey]

@jimthepleb There are a BUNCH of uses. I can think of at least 3 scenarios where a person who is actually a Lord might also reasonably affect the title Esquire:

1: The heir of the Lordship dies childless, and the title passes to a younger brother. The younger brother would have already been an Esquire.

2: The Lord in question was also a serving military officer with a grade of Army Captain (or equivalent) or higher.

3: The Lord in question is also a Barrister or had one of certain degrees.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@evensgrey Hah. You are serving him, and I approve; I was about to go and research Esq. but you've saved me time.

Why can't people just go "huh, this word is clearly inserted for comedic purposes" (like the wonderfully ornate "sub-felicitious") rather than fucking the joke up the arsehole till it ruptures?

[jimthepleb]

@Th1sWasATriumph okaaay a light comment clearly taken too seriously my apologies; i hadnt realised the crux of the joke was based on a complex understanding of the social strata in british society in the C19, my bad. as Master, Mister, Sir, Lord, Alan Sugar Esq. would surely not say.

*tail between legs slinks away*

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb It's NOT a complex understanding of the social strata. It goes:

Zach of SMBC is a great writer and can pick whatever words seem funny.

Esquire has a ring of pomposity to it, especially when used repeatedly to signature letters that only have one or two words in them.

When used even at the height of anger, it gains overtones of surrealism compounded by the surreal narrative itself.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb If you post a comment as a self-confessed pedant, you cannot accuse people of taking you too seriously when suddenly everyone gets out the wordsticks and beats you with them. You made a pedantic point as a pedant; how can we then take that too seriously? YOU took it seriously! That's what pedantry, broadly speaking, IS!

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb And, to be pedantic for a moment, you have misunderstood the definition of the word "pedantry". To assert a pedantic opinion is to operate from knowledge acquired through learning rather than experience. For example, if I was to read a book called "Tactical Hints and Tips in Warfare" and then attempt to use this knowledge opposing a veteran soldier who has acquired his own knowledge through pure experience, THAT would be pedantry.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb I think your understanding needs to take into account the bending of context and meaning that is entirely permissible within language for the purpose of comedy. Esq., even if it is technically inaccurate, adds (when coupled with "sincerely") an extra layer of surreal humour in that the main protagonist remains true to written etiquette even when pushed to limits. It functions as a sudden, comedically unrealistic stop to any passion or anger in the body of the letters.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@jimthepleb And now I've had to go and explain the joke to you, which makes fools of us all, but mainly you. Sweet fucking christ, man.

[LunarMaira]

This is one of my favorite SMBC comics of all. :'DDDDDDD

[1stCainite]

You gotta love SMBC.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

I don't have to. But I do like to.

[pendulousphallus]

Okay, okay. I'll never complain again. 21 century living ain't bad.