Except, no one really worries about drunk drivers driving into a tree. If that happens, I'd say its all good, servers them right... The real problem is drunk drivers running into other drivers, pedestrians, property, etc. And even back in the days of horses and carriages, when forced to go at full gallop the horses would not be able to prevent such mistakes. 220.127.116.11 13:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say it serves them right. We have no idea why the drunk driver is behind the wheel. They could easily be an alcoholic who was never given adequate treatment. We can't be judgemental about these things. A drunk driver's death is just as tragic as a sober driver's death.
A horse is a low tech version of KARR. Surely we want a KITT? 18.104.22.168 14:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
"A badly-driven horse can toss-off its owner"... *fnar fnar*. Perhaps "throw off" or "buck" would mesh less easily with the remnants of immature adolescent brain that I still possess? 22.214.171.124 14:12, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Alert: your car has noticed a wolf. Initiating auto-ejection procedure. Notice: your car has driven over a rattlesnake. Initiating horn honking and spinning out. WARNING: your car has drawn the attention of a pickup of the opposite sex. Program Sexy-fun-times is now running. Sux to be you. ~~ Siliconwolf 126.96.36.199 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- White Hat -- salesman or owner?
I personally think white hat is a salesman because in the title text a different car is described. It could be a different person describing it, or that white hat owns multiple cars (though given his friendship with black hat, this seems unlikely). I further think that the incomplete tag should be either removed or moved to the transcript section, and a note made in the article. Vote: salesman, vote: remove incomplete tag Mikemk (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Being sexist, under normal circumstances my wife would rather watch Golf on TV than stand around being regaled by a proud car owner, so I'm voting for car salesman. :) RoyT (talk) 07:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure he is a sales man. Megan could be a horse girl thus interested in the horse aspect. Also it could just as well be the same car in the title text, why could a car not be represented with these two lines: This baby has 200 horses under the hood and 3.5 in the computer -- and it has -- 240% of a horse's decision-making ability and produces only 30% as much poop. No reason to assume it is two cars. I guess this depends highly on what you thought of the first time you saw the comic? But I can easily imagine both that he brags about his own car or that he tries to sell this one (and maybe that it's another in the title text). Too bad Randall has stopped making transcripts when he releases comics. They sometimes get up later, but recently they have been up for the wrong comic... I have fixed the transcript so it is not assuming it is his car. --Kynde (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Para 3: "A cars "poop" would be it's exhaust" should be "its" --188.8.131.52 11:40, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Note that current programmers are VERY far from making an AI as intelligent as horse. They currently struggle with making drones as good in avoiding obstacles as bees are. -- Hkmaly (talk) 13:42, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Not sure being very close to decomposing manure and urine is less toxic (or carcinogenic) than breathing our relatively dispersed modern car exhaust. Would be a very difficult thing to quantify. Might we change in some way "Of course the amount of pollution created by the cars of the world makes them much more toxic both for humans breathing the exhaust fumes and on the larger scale with the climate."? -- Jubal Harshaw (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
I'm removing the references to Randall as Ponytail for two reasons: 1) I haven't seen this done in previous comics, and 2) it's just a little weird having a guy playing a girl (this is not Shakespeare) --Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 04:16, 5 June 2017 (UTC)