The absolute dumbest startup advice ever



  • Forum's fucked. Wrote a long post. Can't post it. Short version: this article is retarded.



  • Hey, Community Server ate my post too! Short version: If you tone down your assessment of his rhetoric to about 10% of what you think it is, might you not disagree so vehemently? Because I think he's got some valid points, if used in moderation.

    TRWTF is rehashing the Slashdot discussion here.

    Also, there's worse ways to find talented developers than trolling Slashdot and the blogosphere at large ;)



  • Yeah sorry, I have /. in my RSS reader, that's how I found it. It would still be worth discussion if the fucking forums fucking worked. Fucking.

    His rhetoric sums to "the startup culture is prejudiced against MS" which I guess is fine as far as it goes, but you can't pretend it's rational.



  •  Is it just me or did that entire article just seem like a /. post expanded out and with good grammar and spelling.



  • I think we have the perfect canidate for them to hire. I find it very unlikely that he has ever touched .NET, he can clearly think outside the box, his build system doesn't use any of those complicated config files, and I'm pretty sure he can cook squirrels over a campfire, too.



  • Saw that post as well, and I'd be lying if I said I've ever seen a bigger load of hogwash. At least the /. editors had the sense to tag it as "troll".

    @PSWorx said:

    I think we have the perfect canidate for them to hire. I find it very unlikely that he has ever touched .NET, he can clearly think outside the box, his build system doesn't use any of those complicated config files, and I'm pretty sure he can cook squirrels over a campfire, too.

    Is said candidate's name SpectateSwamp? Because I dunno about the whole cooking/fire thing, I think it's too easy/mainstream/complicated for him, he probably just eats the squirrels while they're still alive.



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    Saw that post as well, and I'd be lying if I said I've ever seen a bigger load of hogwash. At least the /. editors had the sense to tag it as "troll".

    /. tags are community driven.




  • It mostly reads to me like it's missing some context. I have no idea what expensify is or does. There are many domains that aren't terribly well suited to .NET style coding, though web apps seem pretty appropriate. However, this update to the original post gives some additional clues:

    Because .NET is designed to extend, not disrupt. The same could largely be said about J2EE, but in general anybody who “grows up” with these self-contained, highly-automated platforms can’t help but view computers in a different way than those who start from a lower, less automated, more difficult level.

    And then we get into a whole 'nother flame war...like "Should you learn C," or something similar. At which point I wonder if what he really means is people with only .NET experience. Or maybe it's just post hoc rationalization, and he just likes to think he's better than the Windows people because he doesn't use it (comments about slashes in paths point to this conclusion).

    Or maybe he just should hire someone who knows about communicating with the public and stop trying to blog in public.



  • Alex emailed me saying he deleted some stuff to clear up space, so here's an attempt at reposting what I originally wrote:

    The ignorance in this blog entry is staggering. It starts out calling .net a language (it's not), and gets worse from there... look at this paragraph:

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    Programming with .NET is like cooking in a McDonalds kitchen. It is full of amazing tools that automate absolutely everything. Just press the right button and follow the beeping lights, and you can churn out flawless 1.6 oz burgers faster than anybody else on the planet.

    However, if you need to make a 1.7 oz burger, you simply can’t. There’s no button for it. The patties are pre-formed in the wrong size. They start out frozen so they can’t be smushed up and reformed, and the thawing machine is so tightly integrated with the cooking machine that there’s no way to intercept it between the two. A McDonalds kitchen makes exactly what’s on the McDonalds menu — and does so in an absolutely foolproof fashion. But it can’t go off the menu, and any attempt to bend the machine to your will just breaks it such that it needs to be sent back to the factory for repairs.

    Wow. Just wow.

    There's also these gems:

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    This decision — or this mandate for incompatibility, perhaps — has produced countless ramifications. Small things, like using backslashes in file paths rather than forward slashes like any dignified OS.

    1. That was never a "standard," Windows uses backslashes like it does because it evolved from OSes that used backslashes. OS X and Linux use forward slashes because they evolved from OSes that used forward slashes. Mac Classic used colons because it was independently developed. Cross-platform standards was not, repeat not even slightly a concern until about the mid-90s, at which time all these file separator conventions were already firmly established.

    2) The fact that there are different separators, though, is exactly why .net contains System.IO.Path.DirectorySeparatorChar. In other words, Microsoft fucking thought of that, and went out of their way to make .net compatible with non-Microsoft OSes.

    3) Wait a minute, does he think .net created this convention? Like... he's under the impression that Windows uses forward slash as a separator, but for some reason .net uses backslash? Is it possible to be that stupid?

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    or using a left-handed coordinate system with DirectX instead of right-handed as was used since the dawn of computer graphics.

    Utterly arbitrary. This is like saying he won't hire programmers who come from the UK, because they drive on the left-hand side of the road. "Your utterly arbitrary convention is the opposite of my utterly arbitrary convention! Get out of here!" Ridiculous.

    And again, has nothing at all to do with .net.

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    Big things, like obscuring the networking stack under so many countless layers of abstraction that it’s virtually impossible to even imagine what bytes are actually going over the wire.

    Yeah, because the System.Net.Sockets.Socket class is so fucking hard to understand. Oh, and BTW, you don't need to imagine what bytes are actually going over the wire because you can use debugging tools like NetMon to fucking look at them. Debugging tools which, AFAIK (and admittedly I'm no expert), don't exist on those lovely forward slash using OSes.

    Oh, and here's the punchline: his company is built on PHP.



  •  haha...

     

    Now let me clarify — .NET is a dandy language

    When the fuck did .NET become a language? I don't think I've ever managed to labelan author an asshat so early on in an article.

     

    However, if you need to make a 1.7 oz burger, you simply can’t.

    And that is of course pure horseshit. You can make whatever the fuck you want, except for shell extensions (well, except in .NET 4) The CLR is no worse off then the JVM, so I'm not sure why his rant is only against .NET. Hell Perl, Python, etc provide comprehensive libraries. What he is really saying is that people should reinvent the fucking wheel for everything they do, and goes off on wholly unrelated OS bashing tangents every few  sentences. Seems more like, as has been noted above, post hoc rationalization.



  • He lost me at 1.7oz burger…

    I'm with finding people who love to code. Some of them might choose to use .NET though.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Oh, and BTW, you don't need to imagine what bytes are actually going over the wire because you can use debugging tools like NetMon to fucking look at them. Debugging tools which, AFAIK (and admittedly I'm no expert), don't exist on those lovely forward slash using OSes.

    I've never used NetMon and I couldn't find a decent list of features in a minute of googling, but perhaps it's similar to tcpdump or Wireshark, the latter of which is available for both forward and backward slash using OSes?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @tdb said:

    I've never used NetMon and I couldn't find a decent list of features in a minute of googling, but perhaps it's similar to tcpdump or Wireshark, the latter of which is available for both forward and backward slash using OSes?
    It would appear to be less useful than those:
    There are two versions of Network Monitor. The full version is shipped with Microsoft Systems Management Server (SMS). A "lite" version is included with Windows NT Server and Windows 2000 Server and contains a subset of the features that are available in the full version.



    [...]


    The full version of Network Monitor also allows you to capture and display any frames from the network segment on which the computer that is running NetMon resides, regardless of whether they are addressed to the host computer.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Oh, and here's the punchline: his company is built on PHP.
     

    Why is that funny?  PHP has nothing to do with .NET.

     

    By the way, I agree with everything in that article.  Especially the McDonalds/squirrel part.

     



  • @TheChewanater said:

    Why is that funny?  PHP has nothing to do with .NET.

    Because PHP is several million times worse than .NET.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Yeah sorry, I have /. in my RSS reader

    I thought you hated /.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    1) That was never a "standard," Windows uses backslashes like it does because it evolved from OSes that used backslashes.
    Not to mention that Windows understands forward slashes too.

    @blakeyrat said:

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:
    or using a left-handed coordinate system with DirectX instead of right-handed as was used since the dawn of computer graphics.
    Wait, what the hell does this even have to do with what his startup does?  Last time I checked most expense reports did not use much in the way of 3D graphics.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Oh, and BTW, you don't need to imagine what bytes are actually going over the wire because you can use debugging tools like NetMon to fucking look at them. Debugging tools which, AFAIK (and admittedly I'm no expert), don't exist on those lovely forward slash using OSes
    Sorry, but you are now making the same mistake as the guy you're ripping to shreds -- making completely incorrect assertions about things that are apparently well outside your areas of expertise.

     



  • @tdb said:

    I've never used NetMon and I couldn't find a decent list of features in a minute of googling, but perhaps it's similar to tcpdump or Wireshark, the latter of which is available for both forward and backward slash using OSes?

    They're even available for historically colon-using OSs!



  • @Enterprise Architect said:

    @tdb said:

    I've never used NetMon and I couldn't find a decent list of features in a minute of googling, but perhaps it's similar to tcpdump or Wireshark, the latter of which is available for both forward and backward slash using OSes?

    They're even available for historically colon-using OSs!

    There are no historically colon-using OSes left. OS X is closer to NeXT than it is to MacOS Classic. You can tell due to the UI shittiness.

    Yah I should have deleted that, since I've never really done packet inspection on non-Windows. Actually when you think about it, this makes him even more idiotic, because if you can do packet inspection on every OS, there's no situation where you need to (or should) "guess" what bytes are going over the wire.

    (I'd feel better about judging Wireshark's capabilities if they had a SINGLE screenshot on their website... what kind of software website doesn't have screenshots? Christ, I hate open source. TCPDump doesn't appear have a GUI at all, so I can safely say it's shit.)

    (Edit: I found one in the help section: based on this screenshot I'm arbitrarily declaring it identical to NetMon. My arbitrariness has spoken!)



  • The thing is, he's right isn't he. There is a learned helplessness that's a giveaway sign of a .NET developer. Have you ever tried to use a, say, SOAP service created by a .NET team? Sure they know how to hit the "export as web service" button, but they've no understanding of the underlying technologies - Schema, WSDL etc. .NET makes sure to hide that away from them. So when something doesn't quite work, or needs tweaking, they're lost.

    And you can't get away with that in a startup environment, that's his point. It's all very well for Mr. Smug up there to make sweeping, uninformed statements about other languages, but look at the biggest most successful former startups - your Wikipedias and your Facebooks and whatnot: not one .NET shop there, the majority being PHP-based.

    There's no such thing as "better" when it comes to programming languages, but there certainly is such a thing as "more suitable to a given problem". Programmers have a surprisingly hard time seeing that, hence the ensuing shitstorm.



  • @bertram said:

    The thing is, he's right isn't he. There is a learned helplessness that's a giveaway sign of a .NET developer. Have you ever tried to use a, say, SOAP service created by a .NET team? Sure they know how to hit the "export as web service" button, but they've no understanding of the underlying technologies - Schema, WSDL etc. .NET makes sure to hide that away from them. So when something doesn't quite work, or needs tweaking, they're lost.

    Ok, but again: you're blaming bad users of the tool on the tool itself. You're welcome to do that, as long as you realize you're being completely irrational.

    And, more to the point, he's using PHP! If his argument is, "I don't hire .net programmers because a lot of .net programmers are bad"... well, almost all PHP programmers are shit, right? So let's add hypocrisy to the offenses here.

    And, guess what, if the .net person gets the SOAP service done in a small fraction of the time, and it turns out it *doesn't* need tweaking (which is the case 99% of the time), hey look, you just saved a shitload of time! Measuring productivity requires... measuring. You can't just say "oh that one .net programmer screwed up that one .net service and took a week to fix it", you have to look at his *total* productivity over time. And I can practically guarantee it's higher than the PHP guy.

    @bertram said:

    And you can't get away with that in a startup environment, that's his point.

    You can't get away with not knowing what you're doing in PHP or Java, either. What does that have to do with .net?

    @bertram said:

    It's all very well for Mr. Smug up there to make sweeping, uninformed statements about other languages, but look at the biggest most successful former startups - your Wikipedias and your Facebooks and whatnot: not one .NET shop there, the majority being PHP-based.

    1. As I've already said, there's a predujice against Microsoft technologies in the startup world

    2) Stack Overflow is written in ASP.net

    Maybe if Wikipedia was written in ASP.net (or Python or Ruby or whatever), it'd have a rich-text edit field by now. Maybe it'd have a way to "soft delete" articles to remove all the controversy over their deletion policies. But... wait a second, Wikipedia hasn't had a single new feature added in, what, a decade? Gee, why do you think that is?

    @bertram said:

    There's no such thing as "better" when it comes to programming languages, but there certainly is such a thing as "more suitable to a given problem".

    I would argue there is such a thing as "better". C# is a better language than C++.

    @bertram said:

    Programmers have a surprisingly hard time seeing that, hence the ensuing shitstorm.

    I think even good programmers, even good programmers who have never touched .net, should be shitstorming against a guy saying, basically, "I don't hire people based on my own arbitrary prejudices and an acute ignorance of how technology actually works."

    Even if you hated, absolutely despised, .net... how could you defend this ass?



  • TRWTF is that this biased, factually incorrect article, one that manages to obscure whatever grain of truth it may have, has taken so much of people's time. Trolls should worship this guy.



  • @bertram said:

    The thing is, he's right isn't he. There is a learned helplessness that's a giveaway sign of a .NET developer. Have you ever tried to use a, say, SOAP service created by a .NET team? Sure they know how to hit the "export as web service" button, but they've no understanding of the underlying technologies - Schema, WSDL etc. .NET makes sure to hide that away from them. So when something doesn't quite work, or needs tweaking, they're lost.
    You've worked with bad .Net teams.  For example, .Net encodes SOAP method parameters in literal format by default.  If you want to use the encoding scheme from section 5 of the SOAP spec, then simply add an attribute to the method.  If a .Net team doesn't know this stuff, they haven't read the documentation.  An advantage of the way Microsoft does SOAP is all of the debugging hooks put into the framework.  If you want to see the actual on-the-wire data sent to or from a .Net SOAP service, just add a SoapExtension to the processing chain and override the ProcessMessage method.  This is especially handy if the call is over https, because you can't simply whip out WireShark.

    The reason there are so many bad .Net developers is that .Net is so easy that a bad developer can hold a job and be productive.  This doesn't imply that all .Net developers are bad, but it does bring the average down.  So, sure, a random .Net developer is more likely to be a bad developer than a random C developer.  But, who hires a random developer?  A decent interviewer should be able to weed out the bad ones pretty quickly.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    There's also these gems:

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    This decision — or this mandate for incompatibility, perhaps — has produced countless ramifications. Small things, like using backslashes in file paths rather than forward slashes like any dignified OS.

    1. That was never a "standard," Windows uses backslashes like it does because it evolved from OSes that used backslashes. OS X and Linux use forward slashes because they evolved from OSes that used forward slashes. Mac Classic used colons because it was independently developed. Cross-platform standards was not, repeat not even slightly a concern until about the mid-90s, at which time all these file separator conventions were already firmly established.

    2) The fact that there are different separators, though, is exactly why .net contains System.IO.Path.DirectorySeparatorChar. In other words, Microsoft fucking thought of that, and went out of their way to make .net compatible with non-Microsoft OSes.

    3) Wait a minute, does he think .net created this convention? Like... he's under the impression that Windows uses forward slash as a separator, but for some reason .net uses backslash? Is it possible to be that stupid?

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:

    or using a left-handed coordinate system with DirectX instead of right-handed as was used since the dawn of computer graphics.

    Utterly arbitrary. This is like saying he won't hire programmers who come from the UK, because they drive on the left-hand side of the road. "Your utterly arbitrary convention is the opposite of my utterly arbitrary convention! Get out of here!" Ridiculous.

    And again, has nothing at all to do with .net.

     

     You missed his point (which was fairly poorly stated, and a terrible point). He is maintaining that Microsoft has a business strategy of intentionally going against standards and compatibility with other software to ensure that their customers become beholden to the Microsoft Way and there is a significant cost to change to some other company's competing product because the competitor uses another standard. So these examples that he is mentioning are not intended to be examples of .NET, but rather examples of Microsoft pursuing this conspiracy theory business strategy.

    So he is claiming that Microsoft chose their slash standard intentionally so that it would be difficult to change from Microsoft products to some "dignified OS". And he is claiming that Microsoft chose to make DirectX left-handed so that prograamers would get used to that system and then have difficulty moving to a right-handed system. He then is arguing that Microsoft is continuing this strategy with .NET. I'm not a .NET programmer but it sounds like the points he makes immediately after these ones are attempts to include .NET examples.

     His argument may be stupid, butthat's what it is.



  • BTW, I love the "edits" at the top. 

     "Saturday edit: hey, people are posting comments to this blog. I'll bet you've never seen comments on a blog before, so I had to include this edit to let you know it was happening."

     "Sunday edit: Whoa, people are still commenting. It turns out people can keep on commenting over multiple days! Just wanted to let you know this was happening, in case you had never visited a blog before and didn't understand the commenting system."



  • The right sort of person is so passionate about coding, they can’t be stopped from doing it. They typically started before high school — sometimes before middle school — and never looked back. They write everything from assembly to jQuery, on PCs to mobile phones, doing hard core computer graphics to high level social networking. They’ve tried everything.

    Everything, that is, but .NET.

    This guy is an idiot. He's filtering out the very coders he's looking for -- the ones can pick up anything and know there's a right tool for the job. He can hate on Microsoft all he wants but they are everywhere out there in the business world and sometimes the best way to work with their products it to use their other products. Any decent coder that wants to demonstrate their ability to code in anything is going to put that on their resume.



  • @Bumble Bee Tuna said:

     His argument may be stupid, butthat's what it is.
     

     butthat, what a sweet typo



  • @bertram said:

    The thing is, he's right isn't he. There is a learned helplessness that's a giveaway sign of a .NET developer. Have you ever tried to use a, say, SOAP service created by a .NET team? Sure they know how to hit the "export as web service" button, but they've no understanding of the underlying technologies - Schema, WSDL etc. .NET makes sure to hide that away from them. So when something doesn't quite work, or needs tweaking, they're lost.

     

    Clearly you've never worked with WCF.  It allows you to manipulate wsdl, schema, etc. as well as any lower-level, non-framework language.  And if you don't need to do any manipulation, it is a piece of cake to take an interface and turn it into a service.

     WCF is a great product.  It's great because dumb people can make it work, but it doesn't limit what the smart people can do with it.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @David Barrett, AKA Retardio said:
    This decision — or this mandate for incompatibility, perhaps — has produced countless ramifications. Small things, like using backslashes in file paths rather than forward slashes like any dignified OS.

    1. That was never a "standard," Windows uses backslashes like it does because it evolved from OSes that used backslashes. OS X and Linux use forward slashes because they evolved from OSes that used forward slashes. Mac Classic used colons because it was independently developed. Cross-platform standards was not, repeat not even slightly a concern until about the mid-90s, at which time all these file separator conventions were already firmly established.
     

    DOS 1.0 had no concept of directories or drives.

    Microsoft's Larry Osterman has a blog post behind the reasoning of using \ as a path separator.



  • @toth said:

    @TheChewanater said:
    Why is that funny?  PHP has nothing to do with .NET.

    Because PHP is several million times worse than .NET.

    PHP is a terrible programming language that has been used to create many useful products.

     

    Polar opposite of .NET.



  • @TheChewanater said:

    @toth said:

    @TheChewanater said:
    Why is that funny?  PHP has nothing to do with .NET.
    Because PHP is several million times worse than .NET.

    PHP is a terrible programming language that has been used to create many useful products.

    Polar opposite of .NET.

    .Net is not a programming language



  • @blakeyrat said:

    2) Stack Overflow is written in ASP.net

    Maybe if Wikipedia was written in ASP.net (or Python or Ruby or whatever), it'd have a rich-text edit field by now. Maybe it'd have a way to "soft delete" articles to remove all the controversy over their deletion policies.

     

     

    Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Tell me, what the hell does a client-side Javascript library have to do with a server-side language? And what do abstract features have to do with a language? Does .NET (any of its underlying languages) have built-in "soft delete" for articles? 

    You sound like a troll that is trolling a trolling.



  • @dohpaz42 said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    2) Stack Overflow is written in ASP.net

    Maybe if Wikipedia was written in ASP.net (or Python or Ruby or whatever), it'd have a rich-text edit field by now. Maybe it'd have a way to "soft delete" articles to remove all the controversy over their deletion policies.

     

     

    Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Tell me, what the hell does a client-side Javascript library have to do with a server-side language? And what do abstract features have to do with a language? Does .NET (any of its underlying languages) have built-in "soft delete" for articles? 

    You sound like a troll that is trolling a trolling.

    if(!trolling) FacePalm(); //This post is one of the most retarded I have read in ages, not only lacking basic knowlodge about programming but common sense. It reminds me of Spectate, great #1 post



  • @dohpaz42 said:

    You sound like a troll that is trolling a trolling.

    Actually, I'm a troll that's trolling a trolling troll. But you were close.



  • GoDaddy.com is largely built on C#, but we all know that start-up didn't go anywhere. 

    @Jaime said:

    If you want to see the actual on-the-wire data sent to or from a .Net SOAP service, just add a SoapExtension to the processing chain and override the ProcessMessage method.  This is especially handy if the call is over https, because you can't simply whip out WireShark.

    Hey, we do that here!



  •  @Sutherlands said:

    GoDaddy.com is largely built on C#, but we all know that start-up didn't go anywhere. 

    @Jaime said:

    If you want to see the actual on-the-wire data sent to or from a .Net SOAP service, just add a SoapExtension to the processing chain and override the ProcessMessage method.  This is especially handy if the call is over https, because you can't simply whip out WireShark.

    Hey, we do that here!

     Even better with WCF...just add a configuration element to enable WCF tracing, and open up the resulting log file in the service trace viewer.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    "I don't hire people based on my own arbitrary prejudices and an acute ignorance of how technology actually works."

    Even if you hated, absolutely despised, .net... how could you defend this ass?

    Well, I'd defend him based on the fact that he didn't say that, and his post doesn't read that way. Except perhaps to a butthurt .NET person.

    But why, rhetorically, am I trying to reason with a guy that thinks that the mark of a good programming language is whether a given site built in it has a "rich-text edit" field. And who hasn't visited Wikipedia in a decade.



  • @ShatteredArm said:

    Clearly you've never worked with WCF.  It allows you to manipulate wsdl, schema, etc. as well as any lower-level, non-framework language.

     WCF is a great product..

    Clearly you've never worked with a FUCKING TEXT EDITOR. You've pretty much proved the guy's point there.



  • Sorry for the multipostage, one last point while I'm still awake.

    Blakeyrat, you're a terrible debater. You don't engage, you just talk longer and louder than everyone else, which isn't the same as winning: people just lose the will to spend time on you.

    I'm not flaming and I don't think you're not intelligent, I just wish you could think rather than just type.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @dohpaz42 said:
    You sound like a troll that is trolling a trolling.

    Actually, I'm a troll that's trolling a trolling troll. But you were close.

     

    Redundant much? A troll trolls, hence why they are trolls. Saying that a troll is trolling is a sad attempt at being a troll.

     

    Q. How many trolls does it take to change a light bulb?

    A. None; they are too busy flame-baiting the next troll.



  • @bertram said:

    Well, I'd defend him based on the fact that he didn't say that,

    Ok...

    @bertram said:

    But why, rhetorically, am I trying to reason with a guy that thinks that the mark of a good programming language is whether a given site built in it has a "rich-text edit" field. And who hasn't visited Wikipedia in a decade.

    But I didn't say that.

    Why does he get the benefit of the doubt but not me? Hypocrite.

    @bertram said:

    I'm not flaming and I don't think you're not intelligent, I just wish you could think rather than just type.

    Ah! But then I wouldn't be able to type as fast!



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Why does he get the benefit of the doubt but not me?

    Because we know you?



  • Better topic:

    Why does the chick in the lolpic have 4 eyebrows?



  • @dhromed said:

    Better topic:

    Why does the chick in the lolpic have 4 eyebrows?


    You're not concerned that her eyes are as large as her open mouth?



  • @dhromed said:

    Better topic:

    Why does the chick in the lolpic have 4 eyebrows?

    Hmm, two of those lines are eyelids contours



  • @Xyro said:

    You're not concerned that her eyes are as large as her open mouth?
     

    Well.

     

    @serguey123 said:

    Hmm, two of those lines are eyelids contours
     

    Then it is poorly drawn.

     



  • @Xyro said:

    @dhromed said:

    Better topic:

    Why does the chick in the lolpic have 4 eyebrows?


    You're not concerned that her eyes are as large as her open mouth?

    Or that her name is Stocking?



  • @bertram said:

    @ShatteredArm said:

    Clearly you've never worked with WCF.  It allows you to manipulate wsdl, schema, etc. as well as any lower-level, non-framework language.

     WCF is a great product..

    Clearly you've never worked with a FUCKING TEXT EDITOR. You've pretty much proved the guy's point there.

     

    If you enjoy wasting your time and other people's money, and you would like to use a text editor to write up your own mistake-riddled wsdl, you are perfectly free to do so within the confines of wcf.  I'm not sure how I've proved the guy's point, unless his point is that you are an utter tool bag.



  • @PSWorx said:

    I think we have the perfect canidate for them to hire. I find it very unlikely that he has ever touched .NET, he can clearly think outside the box, his build system doesn't use any of those complicated config files, and I'm pretty sure he can cook squirrels over a campfire, too.

     Nagesh?

     



  • @hoodaticus said:

    Nagesh?
     

     gesundheit

     


Log in to reply
 

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