> Before cars, people used vehicles called "horses"... the market was never going to accept 1HP
Funnily enough, horses actually produce much more than 1 horsepower. I think the story goes that James Watt estimated it would take a team of 10 horses resting and taking turns to pull a tractor/mill/whatever that keep 2 horses constantly busy, so that's how he calculated it.
But over shorter durations, horses can produce much more.
I don't buy that it was ever an intended meaning of the joke, but:
Sense 1: "The other side" is... just the other side of the road. The joke is that you were given a joke set-up question (and, if encountering the joke for the first time in your life, perhaps put some thought into trying to puzzle out the correct joke-answer) but then the punch line was the straightest possible non-joke answer.
Sense 2: (the double-meaning) "The other side" is the afterlife. The chicken is courting death by crossing the road. I dunno, maybe a lot more chickens used to get run over on roads or something, but I don't think this is a strong reading. Tons of other common animals would work better here, I think, if it were intended. Even cows, if we want to stick to livestock, as I've seen or heard-of way more cows obliterated on roads than chickens... not sure I've ever seen a dead chicken on a road, in fact, and I've lived years in various parts of farm country before, had a grandmother who kept chickens that ranged rather freely, and keep chickens myself. I expect the most common cause of chicken-roadkill would be from trucks full of chickens crashing or losing some of their cargo, not from a loose chicken crossing a road like a deer or dog (or cow, or fox, or skunk, or armadillo, or various non-chicken birds, or cat, or bobcat, or possum, or any of the other animals I've seen plenty of dead on roads, which animals none of them were chickens). In fact, I'd go a little further and say sense 1 works as well as it does in part because chickens tend not to cross roads so often, preferring familiar lawn-space near their coop, which sets one to wondering what has enticed a chicken to essay such a crossing which, though not unheard-of, does seem like it must have some compelling motivation.
I think the piece is arriving at this reading by a bit of free-association, not seriously advancing it as a sensible way to read the joke.
He "mysteriously" disappeared. "They" did kill him.
But hundreds did die, and the tanks were used to roll back and forth over the bodies until they could be washed into the sewers. Your note is pedantically semi-true, and insensitive. It was a massacre scene.
iI noticed a great surge in pro china sentiment lately. I kinda get it, it seems like the most "sane" geopolitical player at the moment, but it doesn't justify whitewashing all the horrible things done by the PRC
> Before cars, people used vehicles called "horses"... the market was never going to accept 1HP
Funnily enough, horses actually produce much more than 1 horsepower. I think the story goes that James Watt estimated it would take a team of 10 horses resting and taking turns to pull a tractor/mill/whatever that keep 2 horses constantly busy, so that's how he calculated it.
But over shorter durations, horses can produce much more.
> But over shorter durations, horses can produce much more.
A human can generate more than a horsepower, too, for short times. I used to have how fast you'd have to go up a flight of stairs to have done so.
You can redline a car, too, but that's not the engine's working horsepower.
However, Watt was a salesman, and intentionally misrepresented "mine pony power" as "horse power".
No but HP specs are always peak power in ICEs, and usually peak power in electric.
Some more honest ones state steady state in electric, but they are the exception.
A nit to pick: It's Tiananman Square (Tian-an-men)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square
Or Tian'anman, for disambiguation.
> Or Tian'anman
"Tian'anmen"
touché!
> It's Tiananman Square
"Tiananmen"
facepalm emoji
I'm embarrassed to say that it has taken me approximately $AGE years to notice the double-meaning in the punchline.
It took me sitting here thinking for a few seconds to figure out the double-meaning (that I missed for more than 4 decades, apparently).
I'm still sitting here thinking for a few minutes to figure it out. Don't leave me hangin'!
I don't buy that it was ever an intended meaning of the joke, but:
Sense 1: "The other side" is... just the other side of the road. The joke is that you were given a joke set-up question (and, if encountering the joke for the first time in your life, perhaps put some thought into trying to puzzle out the correct joke-answer) but then the punch line was the straightest possible non-joke answer.
Sense 2: (the double-meaning) "The other side" is the afterlife. The chicken is courting death by crossing the road. I dunno, maybe a lot more chickens used to get run over on roads or something, but I don't think this is a strong reading. Tons of other common animals would work better here, I think, if it were intended. Even cows, if we want to stick to livestock, as I've seen or heard-of way more cows obliterated on roads than chickens... not sure I've ever seen a dead chicken on a road, in fact, and I've lived years in various parts of farm country before, had a grandmother who kept chickens that ranged rather freely, and keep chickens myself. I expect the most common cause of chicken-roadkill would be from trucks full of chickens crashing or losing some of their cargo, not from a loose chicken crossing a road like a deer or dog (or cow, or fox, or skunk, or armadillo, or various non-chicken birds, or cat, or bobcat, or possum, or any of the other animals I've seen plenty of dead on roads, which animals none of them were chickens). In fact, I'd go a little further and say sense 1 works as well as it does in part because chickens tend not to cross roads so often, preferring familiar lawn-space near their coop, which sets one to wondering what has enticed a chicken to essay such a crossing which, though not unheard-of, does seem like it must have some compelling motivation.
I think the piece is arriving at this reading by a bit of free-association, not seriously advancing it as a sensible way to read the joke.
The Other Side = the "afterlife" apparently
thank you
just a note: the man didn't die, they didn't kill him (i'm not supporting the tank side)
The tanks didn't kill him.
He "mysteriously" disappeared. "They" did kill him.
But hundreds did die, and the tanks were used to roll back and forth over the bodies until they could be washed into the sewers. Your note is pedantically semi-true, and insensitive. It was a massacre scene.
iI noticed a great surge in pro china sentiment lately. I kinda get it, it seems like the most "sane" geopolitical player at the moment, but it doesn't justify whitewashing all the horrible things done by the PRC
https://youtu.be/HrZ8HbhnXYM?si=bc9DdHa7b8UFvHkj
Because it was trying to run away from the guy with the chopping block.