If even half this stuff is true, you ought to submit a complete article. Please!
Can anyone else corroborate this software's WTFery?
If even half this stuff is true, you ought to submit a complete article. Please!
Can anyone else corroborate this software's WTFery?
Not a technical or computer WTF, but I still found it amusing. I thought to look up the definition of sardonic on wikipedia. Wow, now I know exactly what it means!
(If you're curious, I think sardonic is like sarcastic, but without the humor.)
Even before I saw the Wired link at the bottom, I thought to myself, "Hmm, liberally biased techno news... Is this a Wired article?".
Nailed it!
Moving on though, 1/64th inch skin penetration doesn't sound bad, but what about the subject's eyes? If he/she tried to stand there and take the pain, could long-term vision problems result?
So, like, you know? Like, there's this thing, right? or, um,... yeah... So, dude, just, like, get over it, y'know? yeah...
I can think of no better explanation than the subject line above. Earlier today, whilst following the directions of some random, helpful programmer, I opened this microsoft kb article (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/147659) with VB code. I was actually surprised at so many obvious errors in a kb article. This thing won't even compile until you fix them.
(I'd say "see if you can spot the WTFs", but you won't bother. that's fine. I highlighted them for you)
Considering the purpose of kb articles is to TEACH something to young & budding code artisans, wouldn't it make sense for the code to be correct?
@ammoQ said:
E.g. your product table has a (redundant) field "average sales quantity" that is updated daily by a batch job running at night.Updating this field is, technically, an update to the product table, but some people might argue that the information "the nightly batch has updated the avg_sales field" is relatively unimportant and unnecessarily overwrites more important changes, like changing the product description.
Okay, I have to ask the obvious. Why does this data need to be overridden? What's wrong with a separate Log table that stores [i]all[/i] the product changes as distinct rows? Then you can just pull the most recent change & filter by the source of the change? (assuming the log table is sufficiently detailed, of course)
@neuralfraud said:
Am I right or am I wrong for thinking that this guy just flagrantly abused his position and our resources for his personal enjoyment?
Not really. You're talking about about the CEO! Just be glad he's not buying a personal plane (w/ pilot) and charging it back to the company.
How about a compromise?
cl_mds2_c_accounts
cl_mds2_d_employees
cl_mds2_c_addresses
This way, you can have 100,000 tables and still name the important ones. Of course, you still won't be able to filter/sort by the english names, but it's better than nothing.
Perfect example! This(!) is why I get queasy when I think about the entire concept of giving local gov't bodies the responsibility of counting votes. I'm not saying the locals are idiots, but there's a far greater variance in quality and opportunities for WTFery. Of all the responsibilities the Federal/State gov'ts can take on, this should be one of them.
@Smitty said:
I had to fight with this clown for 4 weeks to get a new $40 keyboard
Well, given that the new keyboard would last for at least 3 years, divide that $40 by 3 years and explain to him that it's peanuts especially compared to your salary (hell, most people's salaries). He'll realize that he's literally saving pennies and come to his senses. Then a utopia will slowly emerge at your company and you will be named the grand poobah.
Or not.