Upload
Login or register
x

Fuuuuuuture

 
Fuuuuuuture. needed to be censored. there are kids here. true saty Ile DD atme: cassie sta Fit: I can' t wait until our generation becomes teachers that actuall

**** needed to be censored. there are kids here

true saty Ile DD atme:
cassie sta Fit:
I can' t wait until our generation becomes teachers that actually know
how to make a video fut! screen and get out of
the way
Lol
cut to to years later"
Miss, you have to make the hologram ."
What? Hotel on, I' m trying to full semen this Where' s the cursor?"
There is no cursor, Miss. FEM: your wrest to make the hologram ."
entire otays sighs''
465, notes "MO at .
...
+1610
Views: 39320
Favorited: 70
Submitted: 03/13/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to nitricmike

Comments(79):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
79 comments displayed.
Reply
+42
User avatar #18 - pjflash (03/13/2015) [-]
How would a hologram be fullscreen anyways? I mean, there's no screen around a hologram.
Reply
0
#74 to #18 - anon (03/14/2015) [-]
That's why the class sighed.
Reply
+240
#20 to #18 - Lolinator (03/13/2015) [-]
That Detective, is the right question.
Reply
+9
User avatar #34 to #20 - charagrin (03/13/2015) [-]
117/10. I AM NOT A ROBOT!
Reply
+4
#77 to #20 - bluelightbebop (03/14/2015) [-]
That... Was Beautiful.
That... Was Beautiful.
Reply
+3
User avatar #73 to #20 - brenton (03/14/2015) [-]
******* genius, m8.
Reply
+2
#78 to #20 - thebigcountry (03/14/2015) [-]
Great quote from a great movie. Well played good sir
Reply
-2
#33 to #20 - anon (03/13/2015) [-]
le black robotman
le black robotman
Reply
0
User avatar #66 to #20 - becauseoprahsaidso (03/14/2015) [-]
I imagine that's what it would look like if you could combine a horse with a man.
Reply
-2
User avatar #28 to #20 - adu (03/13/2015) [-]
This got me thinking, man. What if a fullscreen hologram is just a virtual reality that you can't turn off? What if we're living in one right now? What if everything we touch, taste and smell looks completely differently in reality?
Reply
+1
#30 to #28 - scotophorus (03/13/2015) [-]
That's actually kinda how things work. For example you might say a pencil is blue or red, but the materials making up that pencil don't have a color in and of themselves, its just the light that's reflected off it and into our eyes that our brains process as red or [url deleted] fact all the other frequencies are absorbed into the material so you might more accurately say "that pencil is devoid of red"
Reply
0
User avatar #32 to #30 - adu (03/13/2015) [-]
I'm not sure if "devoid of red" is an accurate way of thinking of it, since our concept of color relies on what frequencies the object reflects.
Reply
0
#79 to #32 - scotophorus (03/16/2015) [-]
Well not 100% accurate, however the fact remains that it is absorbing everything in the visible spectrum that's not red and reflecting the red, and thus the thing you see as red is the absence of red photon absorption. Although, once absorbed these bits of light become little more than tiny increments of heat (i'm sure there are some other effects, but i haven't devoted enough time to studying light to list them off, and i think they vary by absorbing material), so really everything as a lone object lacks what we would call color, though it does have a preset list of what it would absorb/reflect, and the functional color is based on interpretation, which can be skewed. for example if you have a filter that spits out 100% blue light and shine it on that "red" pencil, it would appear to any observer as black, as there is no red light for it to reflect.
Reply
0
#31 to #30 - scotophorus (03/13/2015) [-]
the url there was actually "blue. In"
Reply
+331
#1 - charagrin (03/13/2015) [-]
Comment Picture
Reply
+2
User avatar #35 to #1 - zeunfunnyguy (03/13/2015) [-]
I don't get the gif.
is it something about cringing?
only thing i can come up with is that those are crunches and that sounds like cringe god im hopeless
Reply
+6
User avatar #36 to #35 - charagrin (03/13/2015) [-]
In the episode Squidward freaks out and starts doing those movements and saying future in a voice that keeps cracking.
Reply
+2
User avatar #57 to #35 - mahaiz (03/13/2015) [-]
Spongebob- Squidward Future Loop
Reply
+278
User avatar #7 - darksideofthebeast (03/13/2015) [-]
Holy **** , dude. Thanks for blurring out that ******* curse word.
That could have triggered me.
Reply
+1
User avatar #8 to #7 - nitricmike [OP](03/13/2015) [-]
i didn't censor it i just found it that way
Reply
+3
User avatar #9 to #8 - darksideofthebeast (03/13/2015) [-]
Well, whoever censored it. Thank **** that they did.
Reply
+3
User avatar #13 to #9 - nitricmike [OP](03/13/2015) [-]
it'd be ******* horrible if they left **** uncensored
Reply
+2
User avatar #14 to #13 - darksideofthebeast (03/13/2015) [-]
I ******* totally agree, I would get so ******* triggered that I would **** myself, probably.
Reply
+4
User avatar #15 to #14 - nitricmike [OP](03/13/2015) [-]
i would be so ******* triggered these kind of ********* need to piss off , goddammit
Reply
+60
#10 to #7 - gux (03/13/2015) [-]
Here have the flanders edit
Reply
+1
User avatar #11 to #10 - darksideofthebeast (03/13/2015) [-]
Thank ya
Reply
0
User avatar #12 to #11 - gux (03/13/2015) [-]
You're most welcome
-16
#2 - spongebobsenpai Comment deleted by nitricmike [-]
Reply
0
User avatar #62 to #5 - AnomynousUser (03/14/2015) [-]
What did he say?
Reply
+79
#3 to #2 - tinyhedgehog (03/13/2015) [-]
Comment Picture
Reply
+4
#6 to #3 - cauhgon ONLINE (03/13/2015) [-]
Comment Picture
Reply
+3
#17 to #6 - anon (03/13/2015) [-]
but that's not op
Reply
0
User avatar #39 to #6 - romuloid (03/13/2015) [-]
What did he say?
Reply
0
User avatar #40 to #39 - tinyhedgehog (03/13/2015) [-]
Some stupid **** like "this my bae so kawaii!!!1!1!1" and a picture of spongebob and sandy because he's trying to be a themed account I guess
Reply
0
User avatar #52 to #40 - creepydudewatching (03/13/2015) [-]
You da real MVP
Reply
0
#44 to #40 - innocentbabies ONLINE (03/13/2015) [-]
**** , some of my friends just recently started becoming weeaboos. Why is this **** happening to me?
Reply
+2
#45 to #44 - romuloid (03/13/2015) [-]
It's okay. We've all been there.
Reply
+3
#46 to #45 - innocentbabies ONLINE (03/13/2015) [-]
It's not okay, they used to be loud and obnoxious, but it was kind of funny. Now they're just screaming kawaii and it's all cringey and **** . I don't know why I would come to FJ to forget about weeaboos, though.
Reply
+1
#50 to #46 - romuloid (03/13/2015) [-]
My experience with friends who've just started watching anime is that they usually end up either A)Becoming the chill anime watchers who enjoy the content but aren't obnoxious about it or B)They increase their weeabooness and become the spawn of Satan, eventually going off to breed with other spawns of Satans.
My experience with friends who've just started watching anime is that they usually end up either A)Becoming the chill anime watchers who enjoy the content but aren't obnoxious about it or B)They increase their weeabooness and become the spawn of Satan, eventually going off to breed with other spawns of Satans.
Reply
+15
#49 - elaxx (03/13/2015) [-]
>implying we won't be using holograms for porn and we won't know every single setting

Reply
+4
User avatar #67 to #49 - kinchou (03/14/2015) [-]
Flick your wrist, eh? ;)
Reply
+60
#16 - tyroneisanigger (03/13/2015) [-]
Okay, but our generation was born to be familiar with rapidly changing technology and that's how most of use have grown up. Everything can be faster, more convenient, and better today and "this" generation of people born 1990> will always be constantly adapting to new technology. See when the generation of our parents technology didn't come out as quickly as it does today. Now on an unrelated note, I would be surprised if 4K UHD isn't the standard for most high quality TVs in five years. gif unrelated, I like this gif
Okay, but our generation was born to be familiar with rapidly changing technology and that's how most of use have grown up. Everything can be faster, more convenient, and better today and "this" generation of people born 1990> will always be constantly adapting to new technology. See when the generation of our parents technology didn't come out as quickly as it does today. Now on an unrelated note, I would be surprised if 4K UHD isn't the standard for most high quality TVs in five years.

gif unrelated, I like this gif
Reply
-4
#24 to #16 - comraderoboto (03/13/2015) [-]
******* mysoginist pig. The women was just trying to defend herself from being roughed by the police (before the gif takes place). Besides, it's just a little kick to the leg, is it worth kick her face like that? ******* disgusting, I sure hope she didn't ******* died from this.
Reply
-2
User avatar #27 to #24 - applejackhf (03/13/2015) [-]
Assaulting a police officer in any way gives them the right to use deadly force.
Reply
-2
#42 to #27 - hongkonglongdong (03/13/2015) [-]
Jesus Christ, is that how America does it? That's disgusting. The police should never kill anyone unless it's obvious that if they don't someone is going to die.
Reply
-1
User avatar #47 to #42 - applejackhf (03/13/2015) [-]
Except that in this instance the police officer didn't have to use it, because she was already in handcuffs. She made the dumb decision of kicking a police officer, and suffered the consequences.
Reply
+1
#48 to #47 - hongkonglongdong (03/13/2015) [-]
She made a dumb decision. You do not kick people in the head over a dumb decision. Especially not if you're meant to represent the law, especially not if they clearly did not pose a threat to anyone. Do not be stupid.
Reply
0
#29 to #24 - manofparody (03/13/2015) [-]
Wow, I wonder if you're a troll account...

hmmmmmm
Reply
-4
#43 to #16 - hongkonglongdong (03/13/2015) [-]
Holy **** that was an overreaction. The policeman better have been charged for that. He's a ******* cop, he's meant to protect people not hurt them.
Reply
+2
User avatar #56 to #43 - hazardpay (03/13/2015) [-]
He's meant to protect law abiding citizens, why the **** would he treat a criminal with respect if the criminal attacks him like that especially when he's protecting people from criminals like her?
Reply
+1
#58 to #56 - hongkonglongdong (03/13/2015) [-]
No, he's meant to protect citizens. Law abiding doesn't come into it. He just has to keep the law.

And kicking someone in the head for being tapped is police brutality, plain and simple.
Reply
0
User avatar #59 to #58 - hazardpay (03/14/2015) [-]
"tapped" Dingus, do you even see? she kicked him, it doesn't matter how hard it was, she attacked or attempted to attack an officer while she is being arrested, and if law abiding doesn't come into it then i guess i punch a cop and not worry about getting shot or hurt cause they have to protect me right?
Reply
0
#60 to #59 - hongkonglongdong (03/14/2015) [-]
...Yes. Of course. Why the **** would you worry about getting shot if you punched someone? You seem to be assuming this is impossible. Despite many police forces not having guns.

It obviously matters how hard you kick someone, because this relates to how much of a threat they are. If they are of no threat, like the woman in the gif, then they do not need to have force of this nature used against them. Now stop being an edgelord.
Reply
+1
User avatar #61 to #60 - hazardpay (03/14/2015) [-]
"edgelord" Really? Dude, who the **** kicks a cop while they are getting arrested?
Reply
+1
#63 to #61 - hongkonglongdong (03/14/2015) [-]
Do you think I'm taking the woman's side or something? Is it hard for you to understand that you can disagree with someone kicking a cop, but then disagree more with someone kicking someone else in the head?

You're the one defending shooting people for punches. Or kicking people in the head (which is really dangerous) for tapping someone and clearly not being a threat. If you were a normal person, and you kicked someone in the head in this situation, it would be you looking at a prison sentence, not the woman. With a policeman, it's even more severe, because he's in a position of authority, responsibility and he's meant to represent the law and the state.
Reply
0
User avatar #64 to #63 - hazardpay (03/14/2015) [-]
I'm defending the cop not because what he did was right but because the woman never shouldve kicked him in the first place like it was even remotely close to a good idea. She was arrested, you broke the law, sit the **** down, shut the **** up unless it pertains to you're innocence to the crime, and get in the cop car. I dont feel bad for her at all cause she shouldve sat still, like why kick the cop? He didnt break the law for you.
Reply
0
#65 to #64 - hongkonglongdong (03/14/2015) [-]
See, this is why you're an edgy faggot.

Firstly, defending the cop not because what he did was right but because the woman never should've kicked him in the first place is ******* retarded. I'm not arguing the woman should've kicked him in the first place, so why are you trying to defend it? I'm precisely arguing what you say you're not arguing against- that what he did was wrong. It was an overreaction. You do not need to kick someone in the head for what she did. You can immobilise someone bar better. And a cop's job is not to punish people, but to round them up so other people can punish them in public, through the law.

And clearly, from what we see the policeman doing next, he deserved a lot more than a small tap.
Reply
-1
User avatar #68 to #65 - hazardpay (03/14/2015) [-]
So all in all, You're saying the cop deserves punishment for an overreaction to someone breaking the law in the first place, breaking the law again with an act of anger by kicking the cop? Thats like blaming a tetherball for hitting you in the face after you hit it. Dont kick the cop and you wont get an overreaction. Easy.
Reply
0
#69 to #68 - hongkonglongdong (03/14/2015) [-]
>So all in all, You're saying the cop deserves punishment for an overreaction to someone breaking the law in the first place, breaking the law again with an act of anger by kicking the cop?
Yes. As is what happens, regularly. Otherwise you get widespread police brutality. Has the concept of "an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" not occurred to you? And it is not, as I've said, the policeman's job to punish people for acting against the law, nor should it ever be. The fact you think it is is disgusting.

It's obviously the policeman's fault he overreacted. If I slap someone on the face, and they shoot me dead, they're going to go to jail for murder. If I slaps someone on the face and they shoot me and I'm disabled for life, I'll be charged with battery, but they'll be going to prison for a ******** of time.

This whole "shouldn't have been an idiot if you didn't want to get badly injured" **** is why you're an edgelord.
Reply
0
User avatar #70 to #69 - hazardpay (03/14/2015) [-]
Funny how you were giving me **** for the punching example and you've lowered it to a slap. If i slap someone and they slap me back, I deserve it. I'm not defending the cop kicking her that hard, it was an overreaction, I'm defending the fact that its her own fault, don't kick the beehive, don't do anything that might instigate a reaction when you're in the wrong, I'm not an edgelord for saying to sit there and obey the law, that's the exact opposite of an edgelord, actually right now, you're the edgelord for saying she shouldn't be punished for kicking the cop, when thats respect 101, dont kick the person arresting you like a stupid ******* . To reiterate I'm not defending the cops overreation, but its the one who started the ******** that deserves the ******** .
Reply
0
#72 to #70 - hongkonglongdong (03/14/2015) [-]
If you slap someone and they slap you back, you're both ******* retards but you're a marginally worse retard. If you slap someone and they punch you back, you're a retard but the other guy is a full-blown ******* idiot.

You also can't read. I never said she shouldn't be punished. In fact I said the opposite. If you'd like to prove otherwise, please show me exactly where I said so. Otherwise- kindly don't bother talking about whether or not she deserves to be punished, because we've both already agreed what she did was wrong.

Edgelord goes both ways, faggot. Saying "hurr durr I'd cut any policeman I saw, ******* pigs" is edgelord. Saying "hurr durr that person got what they deserved when they were kicked in the head, shouldn't have broken the law if they didn't want to get grievously injured" is also full-on edgelord. It's also very wrong. Every western legal system has laws in place that oppose disproportionate retribution, that make sure that faggots like that policeman feel the full extent of the law.
Reply
0
User avatar #76 to #43 - slenderwolf (03/14/2015) [-]
Protect and serve a bitch her teeth.
Reply
0
#19 to #16 - artimax (03/13/2015) [-]
I used to think like you, but a few things changed my mind. 1. I grew up using VHS but like a year ago I tried using my grandparents VHS and I forgot there was no tray to put it in, you just shove that **** in there. Took me like 5 minutes to figure out how a vhs works. 2. Me and like 5 friends who have never used a Mac tried using one recently and it took us 10 ******* minutes to even turn it on, then another 10 just to change the wallpaper to Gaben's face.
I used to think like you, but a few things changed my mind.

1. I grew up using VHS but like a year ago I tried using my grandparents VHS and I forgot there was no tray to put it in, you just shove that **** in there. Took me like 5 minutes to figure out how a vhs works.

2. Me and like 5 friends who have never used a Mac tried using one recently and it took us 10 ******* minutes to even turn it on, then another 10 just to change the wallpaper to Gaben's face.
Reply
+6
#23 to #19 - swagmonstah (03/13/2015) [-]
If it took 6 people 10 minutes to turn a Mac on, then I've got bad news for you.
You are already sentenced to a life of retail/fast food/customer service. You'll never amount to anything.
Reply
+3
User avatar #25 to #23 - kyomaru (03/13/2015) [-]
To be fair though, I had a similar problem when I first tried to turn on a Mac at my schools production lab. Problem was that I didn't know the power button was on the back, because every compueter I've ever used up to that point had it's power button on the front. I don't have this problem any more.
Reply
0
User avatar #21 to #19 - sherlockbatman (03/13/2015) [-]
sounds like you might just be kinda dumb
Reply
0
#51 to #21 - artimax (03/13/2015) [-]
pretty much
pretty much
Reply
-1
#26 to #21 - anon (03/13/2015) [-]
sounds like your just kinda ignorant
Reply
0
User avatar #55 to #19 - greyhoundfd (03/13/2015) [-]
How do you forget how a V.H.S. works? There is something wrong with you.
Reply
+1
#53 to #16 - FAILtim (03/13/2015) [-]
Honestly it's been kind of disproven regarding storage capacity and processing speed. This phenomenon you're describing ( or atleast part of it ) is called "moore's law. Moore's law states that technology regarding storage capacity or processing speeds will double every 1.8 years. We're basicly slowing down when it comes to processing speeds or storage capacity because we can't invent better stuff that quick anymore. www.extremetech.com/computing/165331-intels-former-chief-architect-moores-law-will-be-dead-within-a-decade <-- unrelated my favourite gif
Honestly it's been kind of disproven regarding storage capacity and processing speed. This phenomenon you're describing ( or atleast part of it ) is called "moore's law. Moore's law states that technology regarding storage capacity or processing speeds will double every 1.8 years. We're basicly slowing down when it comes to processing speeds or storage capacity because we can't invent better stuff that quick anymore.
www.extremetech.com/computing/165331-intels-former-chief-architect-moores-law-will-be-dead-within-a-decade

<-- unrelated my favourite gif
Reply
+2
User avatar #54 to #53 - greyhoundfd (03/13/2015) [-]
While this is obviously true because of molecular limits, Google has apparently solved one of the major roadblocks in the development of quantum computing. My guess is that as soon as processing power increases slow down enough that it becomes a problem, quantum computing will become a viable technology.
Reply
+1
#75 to #53 - slenderwolf (03/14/2015) [-]
I ******* love that movie.
I ******* love that movie.
Reply
+5
#22 - anon (03/13/2015) [-]
Teacher here. By the time I show the clip in class I might have watched that thing a dozen times. My focus isn't on the screen so much as making sure students are paying attention and not screwing around so that's why a lot of teachers mightn't notice the cursor
Reply
+20
User avatar #41 to #22 - militaryexplain (03/13/2015) [-]
Student here. You of all people should know the infinatly small attention span kids seem to have. EVERYTHING distracts us. I suggest trying to sit at the back of the class next time you show a video and look at it through a students eyes to see if there is anything distracing them. Plus it has the added bonus of your eyes burning into the backs of the kids heads cause they know you are watching them.
Reply
+5
User avatar #38 - icameheretotroll ONLINE (03/13/2015) [-]
Yeah but for their age computers and **** weren't as popular so they didn't use them as they got more advanced, instead the first time they saw a computer was when it was already too advanced for them. but for this generation, they grew up with computers so I'm sure as the technology develops we will adapt to it
Reply
+3
#37 - ashampoo (03/13/2015) [-]
hfw there is no cursor
Reply
+2
User avatar #71 - thebritishguy (03/14/2015) [-]
Went to a course on british politics and history, youngest person there by at least 10 years, when they wanted to watch a DVD they went to me like I was the ******* magi.
-15
#4 - fedoralover Comment deleted by nitricmike [-]
 
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)