Error'd Bites
-
-
@Applied-Mediocrity
S
stand forsado
,M
forMaso
, and then comes the Persian ending denoting a country; just a new-stylish tail-upper case applied.
So, you likely would normally writeSmstan
.
-
@BernieTheBernie
StringComparer.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Error'd Bites:
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
smsTAN
What country is that?
Maybe related to
-
@BernieTheBernie you are dealing with DATEV, you have my deepest, deepest sympathies for dealing with that barrel of shit.
-
@Arantor I do not need to write programs against their FORTRAN mainframes. No, just download my fucking salary statement. Bad enough.
-
@BernieTheBernie Iâve collected enough hatred for it owing to an extended family member running an accountancy office in Germany and being a âyouâre good with computersâ person that had to debug the fuck theyâd done when I was visiting a few years back.
Everything being in German didnât exactly help.
-
@Arantor And beyond (natural) language, the worse things is that it is about taxes. Which are a of their own.
-
-
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
When you write the job description page, please make sure that the link to the job application actually works...
Bernie did then a copy/paste of the address, and violĂ , that worked.
Let's wait and see how many applications they'll receive.
The first captcha just tested your capacity for dealing with superiors. This is the actual one.
-
So Firefox tells me that I granted a website some additional permissions:
Ah, yes, dear website, you were granted with the permission to play videos when demanded only, no need to automatically start that. And that you do not need to send me audio and video content at all.
These areadditional permissions
I really agree with.
-
Which sale?
-
@hungrier looking outside the window, it's winter sale.
-
@Gustav steam.co.au?
-
Can you tell me what BBC tries to tell me here?
(That's some odd popup menu, any of the 3 items can be selected, but nothing happens...)
-
@Gustav said in Error'd Bites:
@hungrier looking outside the window, it's winter sale.
According to the calendar it isn't yet though.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
Can you tell me what the streaming media player BBC uses tries to tell me here?
(That's some odd popup menu, any of the 3 items can be selected, but nothing happens...)The first is the build artifact string, part semver, commit hash, and build mode.
The second is stream info, in this case that it's apparently a stream running at 96 kbps using the DASH system.
The third is apparently some kind of error code. If you open up the dev tools and choose this option, it should (in theory) print out some stuff on the console:
HTH HAND TYVM
-
I have read the ?
From a job application form:
-
Dear
onlyfy by XING
,
could it be that I am more uptodate than you can cope with?
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
onlyfy
-
@Applied-Mediocrity Did you expect
OnlyFans
?
-
@BernieTheBernie If it was a weirdly verbed adverb presumably intended to mean "to exclude all others", I would expect the short i instead of the long y (
onlify
). As it stands, I conclude it's either hipsterspeak or an attempt at marketing. I wonder how many cases of inadvertent have happened.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Error'd Bites:
If it was a weirdly verbed adverb presumably intended to mean "to exclude all others",
It appears to be some kind of HR recruitment/hiring software.
hipsterspeak or an attempt at marketing
Hipster marketing and product naming.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
Dear
onlyfy by XING
,
could it be that I am more uptodate than you can cope with?
I tried to find this to see what it
's goodsucks for, and found the most legit plugin developer ever,
Badgerbadgerbadgerbadger! Bitcoin Bitcoin!
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
I have read the ?
. Nobody reads those anyways, everyone just clicks the checkbox.
-
@Zerosquare So did I...
-
@LaoC bitcoin price tracker, powered by pornhub??
^
-
@Zerosquare When I come across a business that makes users/customers state that they have read the TOS, I leave. A contract is just as valid by simple agreement to the terms - there is no added value in requiring people to state that they have read something that no one reads. It is a bizarre and unethical custom that has arisen in the past 20 years or so.
-
@jinpa said in Error'd Bites:
@Zerosquare When I come across a business that makes users/customers state that they have read the TOS, I leave. A contract is just as valid by simple agreement to the terms - there is no added value in requiring people to state that they have read something that no one reads. It is a bizarre and unethical custom that has arisen in the past 20 years or so.
The only bizarre part is that it has become custom, completely expected that you have to agree to thousands of pages of legalese that nobody reads.
Sure, it says theyâll own your firstborn child, but they probably donât mean it, right?
-
-
@topspin And in Germany, we have the "Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen-Gesetz" (law on Terms and Conditions) which protects us quite well from the crap some companies write into it.
So I just tick the box and think:
-
No, I did not anonymize a part of that screen shot:
That's part of the Stepstone website where I wanted to tell them not to send me one oh so very interesting blah bla blah job offer per hour, not at all fitting to my ideas.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
we have the "Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen-Gesetz"
Gesundheit!
-
@topspin said in Error'd Bites:
@LaoC bitcoin price tracker, powered by pornhub??
^ik, r?
OTOH, What belongs together grows togetherâ˘.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
@topspin And in Germany, we have the "Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen-Gesetz" (law on Terms and Conditions) which protects us quite well from the crap some companies write into it.
So I just tick the box and think:Iff the company is German. If some random website's TOS say
Attorney.translate(
"your email address, sexual preferences and anything we can glean from our complete and all-encompassing analysis of your behavior belongs to us and we'll sell it to as many spammers as we can find")
they will probably not care much about unpronounceable laws from half a globe away.
-
In 2022, non-ASCII characters like
Ăź
are still an issue:
Anyways: Mahlzeit!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Error'd Bites:
@BernieTheBernie said in Error'd Bites:
smsTAN
What country is that?
The one at the top of the towers.
-
-
Also, a nice example of why testing can't catch all defects, as 1999 is the only likely value that triggers it.
-
@Zerosquare said in Error'd Bites:
Also, a nice example of why testing can't catch all defects, as 1999 is the only likely value that triggers it.
2000 would like to have a word.
-
A nice example of why internal testing didn't catch all defects in my post.
-
@Zerosquare said in Error'd Bites:
Also, a nice example of why testing can't catch all defects, as 1999 is the only likely value that triggers
itthe moronic rule that shouldn't even need testing because it shouldn't be there to begin with
-
@jinpa said in Error'd Bites:
@Zerosquare When I come across a business that makes users/customers state that they have read the TOS, I leave. A contract is just as valid by simple agreement to the terms - there is no added value in requiring people to state that they have read something that no one reads. It is a bizarre and unethical custom that has arisen in the past 20 years or so.
Why is it unethical though? (Assuming that you can actually read the TOS before agreeing)
The software I'm working on allows people to invite others to collaborate in a sort of wizard-like flow (based on nothing but an email address + name), so the people seeing our UI might be returning or seeing it for the first time. Originally we proposed just a couple of small TOS links which are always visible in the bottom of the view.
However, there's a bit of a ladders-and-walls thing going on. People apparently used the "nobody reads those small links in the bottom" in a legal defense, so now the legal and accessibility team want it so that there is no way you can continue the wizard without acknowledging that the TOS exist and that you have read them. The checkbox in our case also needs to default to Unchecked so that the user is unlikely to click "Continue" without having interacted with the checkbox. The accessibility angle is that the reminder can include the TOS links in the regular sized fonts and so might be less likely missed.
It's obnoxious, but if anybody is going to use the "everybody checks those checkboxes without reading anyway" defense then we will see the next level of walls and ladders. I imagine it would look like yet another confirmation screen which holds a textbox with the caption "Prove that you have opened the TOS by citing article 5 clause 2, and article 99 clause 7b."
-
@JBert I think the point isn't making people explicitly agree with the terms, it's the phrasing "I have read and agree with the terms". Simply stating "I agree with the terms" should be sufficient. And "I agree with and shall abide to the terms" seems like it would be more powerful than either, but IANAL.
-
@JBert said in Error'd Bites:
It's obnoxious, but if anybody is going to use the "everybody checks those checkboxes without reading anyway" defense then we will see the next level of walls and ladders.
We already have walls of not enabling the checkbox/continue button without scrolling to the bottom of the TOS/EULA text. This doesn't, of course, enforce actually reading the text. The next step might be requiring a minimum time on each screenfull before scrolling to the next.
-
@HardwareGeek Or camera access such that you can be observed while reading the T&C.
Greetings from where party members have to spend lots of time with the thoughts of the Ruler.
-
@JBert said in Error'd Bites:
@jinpa said in Error'd Bites:
@Zerosquare When I come across a business that makes users/customers state that they have read the TOS, I leave. A contract is just as valid by simple agreement to the terms - there is no added value in requiring people to state that they have read something that no one reads. It is a bizarre and unethical custom that has arisen in the past 20 years or so.
Why is it unethical though? (Assuming that you can actually read the TOS before agreeing)
It is unethical because the person who decides to require that people state that they have read the terms (for no good reason to boot) knows full well that 99.9% of the people do not. So they are deliberately pressuring people into lying. They are punishing honest people. Dishonest people simply click the button without a thought. Only honest people have qualms.
It would not be unethical if it stated something like, "I have been given the opportunity to read the TOS if I wish."
-
@HardwareGeek said in Error'd Bites:
We already have walls of not enabling the checkbox/continue button without scrolling to the bottom of the TOS/EULA text. This doesn't, of course, enforce actually reading the text. The next step might be requiring a minimum time on each screenfull before scrolling to the next.
Which is going to sit extremely well with people who have indeed read them, just elsewhere.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Error'd Bites:
This doesn't, of course, enforce actually reading the text.
This, thankfully, is also the case with all the documents we're required to "read and understand". Amounting to probably several thousand pages of stuff. Gotta love FDA controlled industries.
edit: For instance, I really don't care about the procedures for trapping rats/etc (that's a problem for maintenance), but we have a document that I have to sign off on. (Yeah, I understand that for us non-maint people, it's more about "be careful, thar be poison")