Error'd from Embedded Systems Design



  • I wonder if "#email address#" would have been replaced correctly on an embedded system.

    Error'd from Embedded Systems Design



  • The true WTF is that, by the looks if it, they are probably using ColdFusion.

    Or perhaps it's that I actually can identify coldfusion code...



  • @NorseLaQuet said:

    The true WTF is that, by the looks if it, they are probably using ColdFusion.

    Or perhaps it's that I actually can identify coldfusion code...

     

    How can you possibly distill from a bad-quality JPEG image from an email* that coldfusion was used?

    I for one cannot see any characteristics from the email that would point to any language in particular, except from the cgi-bin in the URL's (which mean nothing, since there are a gazillion of languages which can use that)

     

     * Yes OP, that's -1 internets for you for: 1. making an image of some text-only thing and 2. Using a blurry, artifacty jpeg. (I don't get an erection from bashing JPEG's like some people here, but PNG, or even gif, is much better suited in this case since it uses such little color and it's simple layout. Or at least use a higher quality JPEG)



  • @dtech said:

    I don't get an erection from bashing JPEG's like some people here
     

    I like your style, you smooth operator.

     @dtech said:

    How can you possibly distill from a bad-quality JPEG image from an email* that coldfusion was used?

    That #varname# syntax is a hint, but just a small one.

     



  • @dtech said:

    1. making an image of some text-only thing

    I am not sure everyone would have understood my post if it was anything other than a screen capture.  Anyone can post a fake WTF of plain text.

    Arguably, someone could have faked the image I captured as well.  However, it would be more difficult.

    @dtech said:

    2. Using a blurry, artifacty jpeg.

    I am sorry about the image being blurry, but I think it is a side-effect of using Flickr.  The original image looks clear.  Apparently Flickr resizes the image and changes the JPEG quality factor.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @MountainRider said:

    @dtech said:

    2. Using a blurry, artifacty jpeg.

    I am sorry that you need new glasses and cannot afford them.  The image appears clear to me.

    Perhaps, if it does appear clear to you, it is not dtech who needs glasses.



  • @PJH said:

    @MountainRider said:

    @dtech said:

    2. Using a blurry, artifacty jpeg.

    I am sorry that you need new glasses and cannot afford them.  The image appears clear to me.

    Perhaps, if it does appear clear to you, it is not dtech who needs glasses.

    Ha!  He edited the text after you replied, making you look like a crazy person!

     

    Seriously, though, why would you need glasses if something looked clear?  To me, the image doesn't look great but it is certainly readable.  Maybe you are too old.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Ha!  He edited the text after you replied, making you look like a crazy person!

    lol!  Sorry for all the confusion!  I based my pre-edit comment on the fact that I could read the e-mail on my high-res monitor.  Then I realized that Flickr had changed the resolution and quality.  Message to Flickr:  "WTF?!"

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Seriously, though, why would you need glasses if something looked clear?

    I think the implication was that my vision was so poor that I could not distinguish a blurry image from a clear one.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.