@Karla said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
No, he does not. He just thinks you're wisely trying to dodge one of those infernal clbuttic filters.
@Karla said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
No, he does not. He just thinks you're wisely trying to dodge one of those infernal clbuttic filters.
@izzion said in SQL - easiest way to keep DRY:
Hm, yeah, I'm kind of doing that, I guess a lot of my problem with the queries i'm working on comes from the fact that my function is basically going out to one or more different tables (some remote) to try to translate a friendly name into an actual server or vice versa. So, the lack of being able to filter before applying the (multiple) functions is really fugly for performance
Well, YMMV, but if the function is foldable (which requires it be deterministic) and the engine is "paying attention" then it still should work.
Consider my TIMESTAMP() function above: it is deterministic. Since the input is constant for the life of the query, and the same input yields the same output always, then the function can be prefolded.
Addendum: Deterministic means given input yields given output for the life of the query: it's a contract that the engine is allowed to assume it doesn't have to be recomputed each row. It sounds like your functions should meet that requirement...unless you routinely flip servers in mid query. So I would declare the functions deterministic.
@izzion said in SQL - easiest way to keep DRY:
@Weng
So, then, what's the right way to accomplish things, if you need to basically accomplish a CASE statement, and then filter on the results of that statement? Or are you just SOL from a performance standpoint?
A case in the WHERE clause is pretty much always going to perform badly. But sometimes you can work around that with UNION, especially if you can do UNION ALL. Consider a stupid example:
WHERE
LIM < CASE
WHEN REVERSE='Y' THEN -AMT
ELSE AMT
END
Since a row is either REVERSE='Y' or not, this would be a candidate for UNION ALL:
SELECT COL1, COL2, REVERSE, -AMT AS AMT, LIM
FROM MYTAB
WHERE REVERSE = 'Y' AND LIM < -AMT
UNION ALL
SELECT COL1, COL2, REVERSE, AMT, LIM
FROM MYTAB
WHERE REVERSE <> 'Y' AND LIM < AMT
UNION ALL is efficient because there is no sort to eliminate duplicates. The individual queries should be efficient. So in theory this should be much faster than the CASE.
@ben_lubar said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Maybe it was really windy. Air can go through rocks, right?
When I was a kid there was a blizzard in Gillette, WY; with 60 MPH winds. They showed on TV how some hapless sap left his windows rolled down 0.25 inch and snow filled the whole car cab to the level of the opening in the windows.
So I would believe it.
@Tsaukpaetra said in Quotes Out of Context:
@accalia said:
BRB, i need to take a shower to wash this badness off with consecrated soap made from the fat of my former enemies
Just wondering, @accalia - Did you get it the traditional way? Or by raiding the liposuction clinic?
@Weng said in SQL - easiest way to keep DRY:
Another common query planning antipattern:
If you include a function in the WHERE clause along with several other conditions, too fucking bad, it's still going to execute that function on every goddamned row, including the ones excluded by the other conditions. Oh, and the overhead for calling a function is INSAAAAAAAAAAAANE.
Scalar valued functions are basically considered harmful anywhere but the SELECT clause.
It does depend strongly on the optimizer and the query engine. But some functions can be folded, which can make it tolerable
I use DB2, which has explicit types for TIMESTAMP (date plus time) and DATE (no time component). Suppose column T is TIMESTAMP and variable dtlow and dthigh are pure date. This is horribly inefficient:
SELECT *
FROM MYTAB
WHERE DATE(T) BETWEEN :dtlow AND :dthigh
That's because DATE() must be applied to each row to convert it for the comparisons, which basically means no indexing on T. That has to happen because T is not constant across all rows.
Now consider:
SELECT *
FROM MYTAB
WHERE T BETWEEN TIMESTAMP(:dtlow,'00.00.00') AND TIMESTAMP(:dthigh,'24.00.00')
The variables dtlow and dthigh are constant for the life of the query. Therefore, the TIMESTAMP functions can be pre-folded, which means this is equivalent to T between constant times. DB2 considers that eminently indexable, and efficiency will be high.
(As an aside, though, guess which form is preferred by my coworkers.)
@FrostCat said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Funny stuff: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20160819-00/?p=94125
Someone--I guess a Rust dev--complained about a Windows feature they were using that, it turns out, they shouldn't have, and ended his comment with "Thanks, Microsoft." Microsoft employee's response: "Let me get this straight. You intentionally invoked undefined behavior, and now you’re upset that the undefined behavior isn’t undefined in the way that you like, and somehow that’s Microsoft’s fault."
@Erufael said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@FrostCat Must be new to the company. Everyone knows everything is Microsoft's fault!
That's entirely wrong. It's always the user's fault. You read the @FrostCat post, and the Microsoft employee's response. All Windows behavior is intentionally undefined: if you use it, you're using it wrong.
@LB_ said in What is the deal with "Your ____ ran into a problem"?:
Not all bluescreens are software issues - maybe hardware is malfunctioning, which is not part of the OS but is part of the PC.
Oh, yeah, and what's the odds of that? About 9400 software failures per hardware failure?
I exaggerate of course, but crappy software yields failures...and there's sure a lot of crappy software. We are TD ... we have proof!
@Gurth said in What is the deal with "Your ____ ran into a problem"?:
At least that way it doesn’t leave the impression that there’s a bunch of people somewhere looking specifically into my problem.
Which is an important impression to leave when there is, in fact, no one looking into anyone's problem.
@Dragnslcr said in What is the deal with "Your ____ ran into a problem"?:
Maybe it's a regional thing, but "to run into" is pretty commonly used as a synonym for "to encounter". For example, "I ran into my old friend Joe last week." That doesn't mean that you physically collided with him.
And, you're right, of course. But I didn't even think of that usage, in either case where I saw a message like this (the other was a product we made). I guess it was just so out of context I didn't make the connection.
I will continue to think it sounds stupid.
To borrow from a post: @TimeBandit said in I'm getting tired of this npm shit:
@blakeyrat said in I'm getting tired of this npm shit:
Users deserve more respect than that.
Like this ?
This isn't the first time I've noticed this usage, "Your _____ ran into a problem." Is a "problem" now a physical object? As in (from the above), "Your computer ran into a [tree / truck / pothole / mudhole / rock / sign / cliff / lake]?" That kind of real, physical object?
We so PC now we can't say, "The operating system on your computer has failed?" So much so that we have to use "ran into a problem" as a euphemism for failed?
I swear I can hear the future exchanges now now:
is the deal?
@Tsaukpaetra said in 😈 The Evil Ideas thread:
@anotherusername said in 😈 The Evil Ideas thread:
OCR?
Speaking of, when converting an image pdf, word silently performs OCD on it in order to make it "editable". The results are... Less than astounding. I would have thought they just sucked up a company like ABBYY (or something, not sure if that's how it's spelled) and used that...
Microsoft never uses good things from other company: they "suck up" the company and then remake its products in their own crappy image. Visio, Skype.
@Scarlet_Manuka said:
Well, of course it is; it's learned how to use the microwave.
The platform Ezubao was shut down this year after the government declared the company was a "Ponzi scheme". Even more dubiously, the Chinese tabloid Global Times claims that the project's chief architect, only has a primary school level education.
Well, maybe so, but he's obviously smarter than all those investors.
@r10pez10 said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Should be cross-posted to BAD IDEAS thread. Especially the fuse with the "audiovisual alert."
Also, they totally omitted the old-style copper penny, which I recall hearing was good for 300 amps.
@Jaloopa said in The contractor that should not be:
@CoyneTheDup said in The contractor that should not be:
You remember last time, and how it came out being indefinite?
No. Was there a goat behind one of the infinite corners?
Whoa! No. The corners are not infinite, they're infinitesimal. And even though there's infinitely many of them, they definitely can'tcan't definitely hide a goat.
@Lorne-Kates said in Valid JPG and HTML in one file:
"infused with alcohol"? That's cheating.
No it's not, because they used the word "infused."
If they had "mixed in alcohol" or "poured in" or "dumped in" or "tossed in" or any of that low-brow stuff, then it would be cheating. But "infused" is one of those high-falutin' words that raises the action above mundane things like cheating.
Just ask any of those people making homeopathic remedies.
@dkf said in Signs your code is unmaintainable:
@CoyneTheDup Strictly that's the process that's a and nothing you've said indicates that the code itself is maintainable or not. If it was stripping the character by calling out to a web service hosted in the back of beyond and costing the earth while having unreliable network and DNS, that would be more of the sort of stupidity this thread is about. Especially if the fact that this is happening is “soft-coded” while still completely distorting the code to heck and back in order to make it possible at all.
You just aren't thinking along the right lines:
Well, maybe you can take the charge code and the two characters you have and try to reverse map...
Bottom line: You can't maintain code when you have no means of auditing that it does the right thing.
@Luhmann said in The contractor that should not be:
@CoyneTheDup said in The contractor that should not be:
Get out of here! This kind of sense is not tolerated around here!
Hey, I heard a joke: This round wheel rolls into a bar. The bartender yells, "Hey, you, out! You can't bring your pi in here."
@Jaloopa said in The contractor that should not be:
@CoyneTheDup said in The contractor that should not be:
round is
bestworst of all:zeroinfinite corners--and infinitely fewerbumps
Don't even get me started on the "infinite number of infinitesimal corners on the head of pin" argument.. You remember last time, and how it came out being indefinite?
@accalia said in The contractor that should not be:
what about using a regular megagon?
Didn't those go extinct at the end of the Cretaceous or something?
It's late, I'm tired, a little silly...
You find a program where...
For a more sensual experience, right?
The later is known to be totally insane.
@flabdablet said in The contractor that should not be:
@Luhmann I'm sorry, I just can't see how that justifies the extra complexity.
If four corners is good; if six corners is worse because more corners; if three corners is better because fewer bumps then...
...round is best of all: zero corners--and infinitely fewer bumps!
@cartman82 said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
!@$!!%**~#$!!!! broken-ass C syntax!!! And just where was the lint?
@Fox said in Valid JPG and HTML in one file:
@CoyneTheDup And yet a lot of them are
http://www.bank-of-america.money.check-balance.credit-alert.identity-theft-warning-notice.com-website.click-now-or-you-lose-the-right-to-file-a-claim.net.ru
Umm...yeah, that's a tad bit more obvious, isn't it? (Sheesh...!)
@cark said in The contractor that should not be:
And PHP is stupidly easy to misconfigure anyway, whether you're dealing with mod_php or php-fpm/FastCGI. Or even when you're just using the cli, really.
So? The whole purpose of having options on a thing is to allow people to mis-configure thing. That's why they are progressively taking the options out of all the things.
The only unusual aspect I see about PHP is it still has options.
@Lorne-Kates said in Valid JPG and HTML in one file:
@anonymous234 said in Valid JPG and HTML in one file:
@Lorne-Kates said in Valid JPG and HTML in one file:
we've been slowly and surely training our users to ignore URLs. Or should I say, undoing a decade of hard work that went into training users to look at an URL before clicking it.
- Users have never looked at URLs, and they never will no matter what you do
Bullshit. I had my grandparents looking at URLs before clicking.
- Looking at URLs does nothing for security so congrats on wasting everyone's times
Bullshit.
http://yourbank.com
vs.http://your-bank.com.ru
. Click here to check your bank!
- You're an idiot if you ever based any security around users remembering to do something
It's called defense in depth, and you're an idiot if you think removing layers is a good idea because UI needs to be "clean".
Not all of them are so blatant. Not even this one I encountered recently: https://www.bankofamerica-boa.com
(From a media message phish.)
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@bb36e said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
It's get worse
I've stated at it for a while, it doesn't seem to be changing...
It doesn't have to change, to take a turn for the worse.
Congratulations on your assimilation to...The Microsoft Way™®©.
It's clever, yes it is. But somehow I think this belongs on the BAD IDEAS thread.
Text message (based on 08/01 Frank and Ernest):
Cave woman, holding boulder as caveman struts away: "I'd like to think that, someday, when a man wants to get married, he'll offer more than just a rock."
Response:
Personally, I think she just feels taken for granite.
@boomzilla said in Is Your Brain a Democrat or Republican?:
Well, whatever you think, unions were definitely a tool of racists.
So were the corporations, the schools, the government, and the churches. Whatever came to hand was a tool of racists. Why does that justify singling out the unions? We don't like unions?
Someone/thing cannot count, and I don't think it's me. Isn't the notification counter supposed to count the outstanding (yellow) notifications?
My normal practice is to:
@Tsaukpaetra said in The MetaModal NonDialog:
@CoyneTheDup said in The MetaModal NonDialog:
To me, but it's just me, I think any modal dialog should always be in front. But obviously some psychotic sociopath at Microsoft doesn't agree.
All model dialog boxes are on top, but some non -modal Windows are on top of them!
No, not always. In one application, such as Outlook, the modal dialog should be in front of any application windows.
But Outlook can have multiple main and message windows open. Call each of those a "presentation". A modal dialog popped by one presentation can lock all the presentations. Say the modal is on presentation #1: as far as I know, the modal is always in front of presentation #1. But presentation #2 can be in front of #1, with the modal nicely hidden by the locked #2 window.
Fortunately, you can usually sort that out with alt-tab--or by clicking windows in the explorer bar--but you're left to hunt through presentations to figure out which one is locking all the others.
I've had the hid-a-system-modal 3 times I think (two times I'm left to guess). The third time I was able to see about a 1 mm square corner of the dialog window behind two other offset, locked, windows. So by luck I was able to click on it and bring it to the front, after I finally noticed the corner peeking out. (The other two times I think it was the same thing, but I wound up doing a reboot to get out of it.)
The hide-a-system-modal may be some kind of in-house thing; I'm not sure if our software management software is all MS or part home-grown. The time I was able to recover, it was a dialog for the management software.
I suspect this was an example of the new hide-a-system-modal-dialog that I've been fortunate enough to encounter in Windows on several occasions. That's when something posts a system modal dialog that locks everything on the screen, of course, but the system modal dialog is behind one of the other windows so you can't get to it.
Those are the worst.
But there's also the hide-a-window-modal dialog, which I suppose this could have been, where it's just a window-modal dialog but it's buried somewhere under all the other windows.
To me, but it's just me, I think any modal dialog should always be in front. But obviously some psychotic sociopath at Microsoft doesn't agree.
@DoctorJones said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
I named my first pet "Ab", but none of the sites will take it (too short). Fortunately, my next cat was "Bartholomew."
I totally made this up. My first pet was...you really didn't think I'd tell you, did you?
@Rhywden said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Doubt. I think he just lost his temper after someone stole his gold; and when a Leprechaun loses his temper...
@Maciejasjmj said in Why is it "disgusting" to drink breast milk?:
Seriously, is it worse to eat meat of a random woman than of a random cow?
So a suckling baby is committing cannibalism? Wow, that's a stretch. I think your comparative needs work.
Re: The Official Funny Stuff Thread™
@anotherusername said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/4tu0ir/stay_away_from_the_coffee_creamer_at_work/
The last post by "pelrun" struck me as particularly apt:
Do... do you worry about whether the cow the regular milk came from was pretty?
The general reaction seems to be that drinking some random woman's breast milk is "disgusting." With a huge swerve into a, "It depends on whether she was a 6 or above..."
Even my first reaction was in the realm of: "Ewwww...!"
But then we come back to the pelrun comment and, seriously, is it worse to drink milk from a random woman than from a random cow? Perhaps a cow that is a "5 or below"? Think about it: Cows and humans are mammals; the formula is different, but the fundamental design...is the same.
Hmmmmm....
I think maybe a few Disgust-O-Meters need adjusted, not excluding mine.
I mean, think about it...do you know where eggs come from?
@anotherusername said in The Tyranny of Customer Service Surveys:
@CoyneTheDup said in The Tyranny of Customer Service Surveys:
Some companies will sue.
Comments written publicly meant discourage future customers are quite different from comments written on a feedback survey meant for employees. I can see why they conceivably might feel justified in suing for the former, but not the latter.
No, but in that environment there's the quid pro quo syndrome. If I downrate someone, what happens if I need something in the future? My team? My manager is trying to work something out with their manager?
Even in the case of the question I got downrated on, I know who did it and--i hope--it won't affect my service to them in the future, but I can't help but remember...
Re: The Official Funny Stuff Thread™
@darth_llama said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Tsaukpaetra most hotel inkeeper laws make you show and ID in the us. I used to be front desk agent. They take a photo copy and keep it on file. So unless hes rolling fake credentials they just put it down. However there are enough shady places he just screwed up by choosing the wrong place.... Or was a dick to front desk agent.
More and more companies are adding "how are we doing" customer service surveys. Those surveys are not about ratings: give someone a 1 and watch the consternation. The surveys are about getting you to vote all 5's and thereby changing any possible "misconception" you might have about the business, so you will buy again.
Take what just happened to me. When I close a ticket, the "affected user" gets a survey. I have 3 tickets closed and each survey has 5 questions. One question out of 15 is answered with a 4 (instead of the maximum 5, which is perfect) so now my average is 4.93 and my team's average is 4.96. Otherwise our average would be a flat 5.
There 5 people on my team, who closed about 30 tickets. If the team average were across the tickets and one question is a 4, that would average 4.993. But the average isn't of all the tickets, but the individual member scores; so the team average came out 4.96.
So one 4 in all my 25 questions ruined my entire team's score. My manager tried to minimize it, but it's clear I am noticed.
Okay, first question, show of hands: how many of you think we earned 5 on every one of the 150 questions on 29 tickets?
How do you think I feel?
How do you think the average person is likely to respond? Never mind, I can tell you that: because I've been told by people who responded to tickets created by me: "Please vote all 5's." Oh, not in so many words, but the pleading is clear.
Do you think we are learning anything useful from these customer service surveys?
No? Then why have them?
This is why: they are about changing perception.
You're filling out a survey for the restaurant you just ate at. Do you give them a bad score? If you do, they will know who did that. (I know who gave me the bad score--that's right, not anonymous.) At best, they will give you dirty looks.They might give you sly bad service. Some companies will sue.
Decision time: you going to give anything less than a 5..perfect in all categories? No?
You just changed your own perception. Even if you got bad service, you argued yourself into giving them all 5's because giving them anything else is embarrassing and maybe worse. But if you argued yourself into giving them all 5's then any idea of bad service you had must have been exaggerated, right? So maybe the service was better than you first thought.
Absolute genius: getting the customer to change their own mind by giving them a survey they need to answer with 5's.
@darth_llama said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Tsaukpaetra most hotel inkeeper laws make you show and ID in the us. I used to be front desk agent. They take a photo copy and keep it on file. So unless hes rolling fake credentials they just put it down. However there are enough shady places he just screwed up by choosing the wrong place.... Or was a dick to front desk agent.
I started to respond here, but decided to turn it into a topic: The Tyranny of Customer Service Surveys:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNJ4lLKBEeI
The first song I remember liking as a kid, about 4-5 years old I think. I wasn't able to find out when this version was published exactly, but I think it was old when I first heard it, in a diner, with my Dad and someone he was meeting on business.
(The song was written in 1929. What I remember hearing was definitely not the Rooftop Singers version of 1962; there's a variation that is quite obvious. The Music City Singers version above is consistent with what I remember.)
I think that was also the first time I saw one of these:
@dkf I do believe I used that exact model.
@Onyx said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@CoyneTheDup but... You never told us if they were Linux light bulbs, embedded light bulbs, or if they keep nagging you to update!
It doesn't really matter...controversy just as loud.
@Greybeard said in Antivaxers:
@Gąska said in Antivaxers:
@Khudzlin besides - doesn't murder require motive?
In my state, murder requires malice aforethought.
Malice can be either express or implied. As I understand it, implied malice is for things like setting off a bomb in an occupied building--the prosecution doesn't have to prove the defendant deliberately intended to kill somebody when they can prove such egregious behavior.
I think the term you're reaching for is mens rea, which underlies all criminal common law.
But it's not only based on action, but sometimes on inaction. Willful failure to do something that a reasonable person would do to prevent harm--negligence--counts as mens rea most places.
@blakeyrat said in GTK's plan to fix everything: break compatibility every 6 months:
Anything to avoid just stopping work and doing some up-front design, I guess. Up-front design is for nerds!
Sounds like what is needed is a shim API to put a decent stable front on GTK. Of course there would have to be a version of the shim for every version of GTK...