Why is this image funny?

[Andelusion]

I can't believe this thread is still here!

 

[antijoke]

Hahahahahaha. (If why I think it's funny is indeed the reason it is funny).

Although it is rather childish.

 

[dekez]

 

[Vonhelmet]

Haha, I was thinking the same thing!

 

[willhub]

When I finally get it I'm going to post why on here.

 

[Lysander]

It's on another page here:

http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_jun2009/SpotTheClock.htm

I can't see anything wrong with it. Judging by the joke page's "similar clocks" [which show other clocks also with nothing wrong with them] I can only assume they think that the 'IIII' is funny when it's actually completely standard.

 

[mattheman]

Hahahahahaha

 

[The Dread Pirate]

HA! HA!


I'm still not getting it!

 

[mrk]

I jizzed in my pants.

 

[Emlyn_Dewar]

Lol @ Mornington Crescent shop.

 

[DAnDan]

Well when the minute hand is at twenty to, it will make a smily face with the "II".

 

[Kennysevenfold]

Fail.

 

[fornowagain]

I don't get it, IIII is quite normal.

http://www.ubr.com/clocks/frequently-asked-questions-faq/faq-roman-iiii-vs-iv-on-clock-dials.aspx

"There is a story that a famous clockmaker had constructed a clock for Louis XIV, king of France. The clockmaker had naturally used IV for four. When the clock was shown to the king, he remarked that IIII should have been used instead of IV. When it was explained to him that IV was correct, he still insisted, so that there was nothing to do but change the clock dial. This introduced the custom of using IIII for four. This is probably only a story, however, as IIII occurs long before the time of Louis XIV. And this same story is also told in connection with other monarchs. There is one reason why IIII is preferable to IV, and it may have caused the change. On the other side of the clock dial the VIII is the heaviest number, consisting of four heavy strokes and one light one, as it is usually made. It would destroy the symmetry to have the IV with only two heavy strokes on the other side. Thus IIII with four heavy strokes is much to be preferred. The change may therefore have been made for reasons of symmetry."

 

[aardvark]

nope - still don't get it.

 

[willhub]

So there is infact nothing wrong with it and it's perfectly normal? Just the funny thing is that people who find it funny are sad people?

 

[mcast123]

I'm sorry what? That's a pretty complex mathematical solution for what appears to be, for most people, a pretty simple funny picture!!!

And I don't get it...my head hurts. I've just spent 10 minutes trying to lean about regex which, up until 15 minutes ago, I'd never heard of in my life! Owww, my poor brain!!!

I swear I was crying at this

 

[DragonWoLf]

pfft canadians, always trying to seek attention, something aboot nothing
/thread

 

[mcast123]

The answer was post 4, read it.

The guy from the original website probably thought it was funny that they built such a complex clock, only to screw it up by putting the wrong roman numeral (IIII instead of IV). The reason it's caused so much confusion is "IIII" seems to be quite common on large clocks for aesthetic reasons.

...or is it?....

 

[BrightonBelle]

Fail

BB x

 

[Marky]

I can't believe some of you guys still don't get it! I showed it to a collegue at work this morning and he almost ****** himself