WTF Bites
-
@error Yes, I know. I only had a limited exposure to that. I would join an I-Hate-Squal-Server club though (we have way too many folks who think it has some advantages at work).
-
is me--
: Why isn't this showing
widgets
that exist? I can clearly see that it's getting those from the back end, there's one that starts at 00:00 and ends at 00:01!
also : wrote a filter function to filter out somewidgets
based on time. Specifically, "don't show the ones that end before NOW".Side note: xCode sucks.
-
@error Yes, I know. I only had a limited exposure to that. I would join an I-Hate-Squal-Server club though (we have way too many folks who think it has some advantages at work).
Nah. It's time we senselessly bash someone besides microsoft.
-
@Arantor Has he done ever worked on anything more complex that Gorillas?
Good grief, that was bad English. But at least it was intelligible, so it's got that going for it.
-
-
@dkf sure, there are going to be the times and edge cases where this is true.
But fuck off will it be my stepdad. This is a guy who claims he can’t learn C. He has bought several books, and has “tried” to learn C.
And then can make the assertion that he could write better assembly than the compiler could anyway therefore that’s clearly the problem here.
And remember, he also asserts all developers should be using assembly (except not him because he’s just a hobbyist) because then software would be faster.
I had a phase like that as a teenager. The decision to learn C actually came when a friend showed me how a compiler created better code than I wrote. An then added "oh, but that's only the best way on the 68000 and 68010; for the 68020 it's the other way round. I can add a compiler switch and go have a spliff while you rewrite and re-debug your program".
-
-
@LaoC This is not twitter. We can actually have long text posts here.
-
Funnily enough, this picture containing a paragraph of text and the favicon in question is half the size of the favicon in question.
-
Funnily enough, this picture containing a paragraph of text and the favicon in question is half the size of the favicon in question.
Even though making it JFIF is a WTF in its own right.
-
@LaoC This is not twitter. We can actually have long text posts here.
Coulda shoulda woulda didn't OCR
-
-
@Gąska The NSFW thread is
-
Got an email from Elsevier that I need to confirm co-authorship of a submission before it can proceeed.
Read the following statement and confirm your agreement by clicking on this link.
Sure, I'll click the link.
Even though the link has an id in it, it doesn't actually just confirm things, or lead me to a page where I can click a "confirm" button. No, it leads me to the login page of editorialmanager.com, a website that looks suspiciously as horrible as all of Elsevier's stuff. Sigh
Now, I don't usually use Single Sign-On, because fuck Google, Apple, and Microsoft. And fuck Google specifically. But I'm not really feeling like registering another stupid account for this (and apparently I don't have one already, which surprised me, because I've definitely used this bullshit site before), so I click on "Login with ORCID", because they'll get that info anyway. Go through the SSO page, and instead of being signed in it tells me that I need to register that publication with this ORCID ID first before I can do that. Um, awesome, that's what I was trying to do, right? What was the point of this? So I guess I have to click register and create a new account anyway. But now there is again a button that I can do that with ORCID. I have no idea at this point what the difference to my previous SSO attempt was, but I click it again. It goes through, but throws me to a page where I have to provide login details. Among other things a username and password!! FUCK YOU, WHAT WAS THE POINT?!Oh, and besides information about myself and my institution, I need to provide information about my "areas of expertise".
Please indicate your areas of expertise either by selecting from the pre-defined list using the "Select Personal Classifications" button or by adding your own Personal Keywords individually using the "Edit Personal Keywords" button.
For "Personal Classifications" you can check stuff from a list, such as "Machine Learning" or "Software Engineering and Programming". "Personal Keywords" are free text entry, but despite what the text above says you need "5+" of them. And I have no idea what they're even asking for. "Blonde", "Single", TDWTF regular", ... ???
You can still click the "continue >>>" button if you don't fill it out, but then you get an error page.Fuck this shit. So I just type in the same things I selected from the list and be done with it. Check the box that's default left unchecked that I do not want their promotional garbage and continue to register.
Successfully registered, I get a warning along the lines that my confirmation of co-authorship is not complete, and I need to log in to complete that. Click again to get to the sign in page, choose "author login" (why are there 4 buttons for one account, you idjits? Couldn't you have a navigation between different categories of your site after logging in?) and it says "Thank you for verifying your contributing authorship on yada yada". Wait, what? Now, after all this trouble, it just gets confirmed by the mere act of logging in, without as much as a page saying here's the thing we want you to confirm?
As usual, Elsevier is a Babel sized tower of .
-
Elsevier
They are on the list of companies that manage to qualify as Worse Than Oracle.
-
@dkf at least with Oracle, your deal with the devil is self-inflicted in some way or another.
-
In case anybody ever wondered what happened to my appliances' delivery from about 3 weeks ago, it actually worked out (), with just one minor added .
I had ordered 2 appliances, and then got an email that simultaneously cancelled them (as out-of-stock), delayed them (as waiting for restocking) and scheduled a delivery. Both of them. The last post on the topic was when I got an email asking me to pick a delivery date for one of the two appliances, with no news of the other.
Well, a couple of days later I got a phone call to book a delivery for the second one. Yes, a phone call. Whereas for the other one I got an email. And the lady on the phone was not aware of the other delivery and said she couldn't see anything happening through the website.
Though that's where the weirdness stopped, more or less. I had no issue getting the same delivery time as for the other appliance. Well, in their system it was a different delivery so on the day I got each text message twice, one for each appliance, with slightly shifted time-windows. Funnily, while the delivery time windows were the usual 3-4 hours long "we don't know when the driver will be there", it was specified down to the minute e.g. "your delivery will arrive between 11:32 and 15:32").
And that's the end of it. The delivery driver did know he had two appliances to deliver, and couldn't give a shit about booking deliveries as long as he got to unload his truck. And I got the two appliances I wanted, and paid for them (only once). Success!
-
-
@topspin but also ORCID is somewhat the too in general. I have had some interactions.
-
@Arantor ORCID's better than the idiotic shit that preceded it, such as asking authors whether they wrote these other papers. No, I didn't publish in the South African Journal of Agronomics in 1947.
-
@dkf I can’t comment on that as I have no knowledge, but I have done integration work in the nearby vicinity and that was awful.
-
I didn't publish in the South African Journal of Agronomics in 1947.
-
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
I didn't publish in the South African Journal of Agronomics in 1947.
I wasn't born in (or prior to) 1947, I've never published a journal paper of any sort, and I don't even know WTF agronomics is. (I assume it's some unholy hybrid of agriculture and economics, but beyond that, I neither know nor care.)
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
I didn't publish in the South African Journal of Agronomics in 1947.
I wasn't born in 1947
I imagine no-one publishing a paper in 1947 was.
-
@loopback0 Happy now? Have a .
-
Damn, -ed.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
I don't even know WTF agronomics is.
Don't look at me. I've never done any work or published anything in that area.
-
Back to the genius' project.
Ok, so I learned how to debug stored procedures. With real breakpoints. But before I even started debugging, I found that the procedures in the db are not the same as in the setup script in the repo. At least one is different. The script has over 12kLOC. What shoud I do now? The staging database works, but judging from the observed differences a newly set up database wouldn't.
-
Looking for an optician. In the middle of the results list we find Lidl, german supermarket chain and Systembolaget, alchoholic beverage store. I mean, yeah, sure, stuff found at the latter would affect vision in one way...
-
@topspin but also ORCID is somewhat the too in general. I have had some interactions.
I've had run in with them. Festering pile of shit. Getting and proving gdpr compliance was a nightmare and a half. The person who intregrated with them was long gone but the fear was institutionalised.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
I didn't publish in the South African Journal of Agronomics in 1947.
I wasn't born in (or prior to) 1947, I've never published a journal paper of any sort, and I don't even know WTF agronomics is. (I assume it's some unholy hybrid of agriculture and economics, but beyond that, I neither know nor care.)
I've always imagined you've just existed. Kind of like the shrike or mountains.
-
Systembolaget, alchoholic beverage store. I mean, yeah, sure, stuff found at the latter would affect vision in one way...
And the optician is next door to the alcohol shop (unless the house numbers are in the Bohemian style...). A good choice by the shop owner!
-
Looking for an optician. […] Systembolaget, alchoholic beverage store.
Ready for beer goggles?
-
File System Navigator (fsn; pronounced "fusion")
Jaloopa's first rule of software: if you have to tell people how to pronounce or spell your software, you have failed at naming your software
Reminds of the old days when SCSI was new. They wanted it to be pronounced "sexy" and were upset when everyone started calling it "scuzzy"
-
File System Navigator (fsn; pronounced "fusion")
Jaloopa's first rule of software: if you have to tell people how to pronounce or spell your software, you have failed at naming your software
Reminds of the old days when SCSI was new. They wanted it to be pronounced "sexy" and were upset when everyone started calling it "scuzzy"
I pronounced it "s-kissy" until someone else said it and I was like "Sounds kinda buggy..."
-
About 2 years old but given the age of the systems involved it's probably still not fixed:
This guy sued his bank because they insisted on putting a Y in his name where it should read é. The bank argued its 1995 AS/400 used EBCDIC and therefore they couldn't.Court basically said, fuck you, its 2019, make it work!
-
1995 … EBCDIC
If they said 1980, EBCDIC would kinda make sense, but in nineteen-ninety-effing-five?
-
1995 … EBCDIC
If they said 1980, EBCDIC would kinda make sense, but in nineteen-ninety-effing-five?
AS/400
-
@error Yes, I know. I only had a limited exposure to that. I would join an I-Hate-Squal-Server club though (we have way too many folks who think it has some advantages at work).
Nah. It's time we senselessly bash someone besides microsoft.
Isn't that part of the
bash
license?
-
1995 … EBCDIC
If they said 1980, EBCDIC would kinda make sense, but in nineteen-ninety-effing-five?
AS/400
I would rather work with that than Adobe's AEM again.
-
1995 … EBCDIC
If they said 1980, EBCDIC would kinda make sense, but in nineteen-ninety-effing-five?
My first experience with EBCDIC is from 2006. And if I remember it correctly, migration to UTF-EBCDIC was just planned at that point in time.
-
@Kamil-Podlesak That deserves a
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in WTF Bites:
UTF-EBCDIC
-
@sebastian-galczynski said in WTF Bites:
I learned how to debug stored procedures. With real breakpoints.
Burn the witch!
-
I would rather work with that than Adobe's AEM again.
Someone understands my pain.
-
-
1995 … EBCDIC
If they said 1980, EBCDIC would kinda make sense, but in nineteen-ninety-effing-five?
AS/400
I would rather work with that than Adobe's AEM again.
I have no idea what that is but it's Adobe so, of course.
-
So Bernie decided to search thru the pages of the European Medicine Agency for studies on the mitochondrial toxicity of mRNA vaccines. They require you to create an account. Well, then, let's do it.
Aha.§
is not allowed. Hmpf. At least, they did not complain about theü
.
I selectedGermany
in the country list, but by doing so, I would be forced to enter my mobile number. The country was not a required field, so with several approaches on cleaning the combobox contents, I could eventually remove my selection, and continue without my mobile number.
Oh dear, those cutesecurity questions
! Really upto date. I enteredAbcdef
in every field, but that was not accepted. Had to take a different version then.
Bad things happened afterwards...Anyway, somehow I could access some documents, but none contains relevant information...
-
But what if, say, your mother’s maiden name was “Black” and it’s your favourite colour? (I don’t think “Black Street” would ever have thrived though). Ditto for white.
-
@BernieTheBernie I keep looking at that and thinking:
- What is you name?
- What is your quest?
- What is the mean flight speed of an unladen swallow?