Comment On Dirty Laundry

"Your one o'clock is here," the receptionist said. [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3Next »

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:20 • by An Old Hacker (unregistered)
f.....r......i.....s
TIMEOUT ERROR

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:21 • by the CTO (unregistered)
frist! ololol

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:21 • by Anonymous (unregistered)
Inb4 anyone else.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:21 • by Anonymous (unregistered)
Oh god dammit...

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:26 • by Smitty
Akismet, I hate you with the heat of a thousand suns.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:37 • by Hollow (unregistered)
As technically incompetant as most management types are, it's unbelievable how often they make the right decisions.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:38 • by Severity One
340930 in reply to 340923
the CTO:
frist! ololol

Looks like your network was slow.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:42 • by some guy (unregistered)
Well, they were looking for a junior network admin. Sounds like they found one.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:44 • by brazzy
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't that a perfectly normal and correct setup for "corporate interet"?

Of course, it requires either a separate proxy at each location, or very good connections between the locations. So am I missing something or is the only WTF that Tyson didn't realize the performance implications of his policy implementation?

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:46 • by airdrik (unregistered)
It's never the fault of the design/software/implementation, the hardware just can't keep up with all of the things we are making it do. Faster hardware is the only way to make things faster.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:47 • by akatherder
340934 in reply to 340932
brazzy:
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't that a perfectly normal and correct setup for "corporate interet"?

Of course, it requires either a separate proxy at each location, or very good connections between the locations. So am I missing something or is the only WTF that Tyson didn't realize the performance implications of his policy implementation?


From a technical standpoint, that's the only goddamn WTF I am seeing. If he wasn't such a worthless asshole, he would have seen a connection between slow traffic and funneling the entire company's traffic through one server and a single fucking T1.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:55 • by Sudo
340935 in reply to 340922
So today's WTF is "sometimes management know what they're talking about"? Meh.

Tomorrow's WTF is going to be a snippet of well-written code.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:57 • by nonA (unregistered)
I don't see a big WTF here. The guy was telling the truth: "Get a better connection upstream".

//posted via single-entry-point corporate proxy some 4 timezomes away from where I'm sitting

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 10:59 • by renewest
Fortunately out central proxy allows thedailyWtf.com

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:08 • by kastein (unregistered)
"swirled the drain"?

Remy, put down the thesaurus and back away with your hands where I can see them. It's "circled".

Was actually a pretty good article other than that!

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:08 • by your name (unregistered)
The only WTF I see is that they iced him for 1.5 hours and he was *still* there for the interview at 1pm.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:14 • by Capt. Obvious
340940 in reply to 340939
your name:
The only WTF I see is that they iced him for 1.5 hours and he was *still* there for the interview at 1pm.

Hey, if you come 1.5 hours early for an interview, what do you expect? I mean, if I have nothing else going on, I probably don't mind moving it up. If I have a meeting or something... well, I'll get to you when I told you I would when we made plans. And if you move it up around lunch time, so I am hungry when I interview you, that may not be the best thing for you.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:21 • by Jabrwock (unregistered)
340942 in reply to 340936
nonA:
I don't see a big WTF here. The guy was telling the truth: "Get a better connection upstream".
But he was using that as a blanket suggestion to "shut up" his CTO. The WTF is that the guy didn't understand that that would actually solve the problem. The proxy at head office was the bottleneck not "some websites on the net" and "porno".

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:26 • by Nexzus
Hm. I was expecting the punchline to be that the former CTO and the Interviewer were friends, or at least acquaintances, and that CTO was actually a decent, smart guy.

But the jackass, self-assured, ignorant interviewee works just as good.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:27 • by Anon (unregistered)
From the bottom of the article:

Share Dirty Laundry


I've got some dirty underpants here, where do I send them?

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:28 • by Anon (unregistered)
Pro tip:

Shitting on your former boss in an interview is not endearing to anybody. If you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:32 • by nonA (unregistered)
340947 in reply to 340942
[quote user="Jabrwock]But he was using that as a blanket suggestion to "shut up" his CTO. The WTF is that the guy didn't understand that that would actually solve the problem. The proxy at head office was the bottleneck not "some websites on the net" and "porno". [/quote]

They wanted a junior network admin. I've seen junior network admins with even less understanding of their field — hired and working. It's his attitude that's the WTF here, not his knowledge — and I wouldn't hire him myself, personality-wise — but that's a minor WTF.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:39 • by Ernold (unregistered)
340951 in reply to 340924
Anonymous:
Inb4 anyone else.


inb4 'OP can't inb4'

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:39 • by slackz (unregistered)
Proxy Servers are like Domain Controllers -- A minimum of one per location, replicated from a central setup.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 11:47 • by sibtrag
340954 in reply to 340940
Capt. Obvious:

Hey, if you come 1.5 hours early for an interview, what do you expect? I mean, if I have nothing else going on, I probably don't mind moving it up. If I have a meeting or something... well, I'll get to you when I told you I would when we made plans. And if you move it up around lunch time, so I am hungry when I interview you, that may not be the best thing for you.


I can easily see myself in that sort of situation. Back when I was interviewing (many years ago), I would try to allow extra time for anything that could come up, especially if the interview was a distance away in an unfamiliar area. In fact, I was more than an hour early for the interview for my current job.

Then I would sit in my car for a moment & decide what to do. In my case it was an early morning interview, so I got coffee & a snack to calm my nerves. But, for a 1pm interview, I might have seen if the interviewer was available early. In the off chance that something had come up for the afternoon (an emergency meeting, a sick child, etc) s/he might be very grateful. Otherwise, I'd decline the conference room & go out for lunch.

In the exact situation given, however, I'd probably have sought out a department store & tried to find something off-the-rack which actually fit me.

Re: Kick 'em When They're Up

2011-03-15 11:53 • by School Bully (unregistered)
340956 in reply to 340938
kastein:
"swirled the drain"?

Remy, put down the thesaurus and back away with your hands where I can see them. It's "circled".

Was actually a pretty good article other than that!

"Swirled" is obscure? Have you never heard of a swirly? I'll bet the average reader of this site has been at the recieving end of a few...

Re: Kick 'em When They're Up

2011-03-15 12:03 • by C-Octothorpe (unregistered)
340958 in reply to 340956
School Bully:
kastein:
"swirled the drain"?

Remy, put down the thesaurus and back away with your hands where I can see them. It's "circled".

Was actually a pretty good article other than that!

"Swirled" is obscure? Have you never heard of a swirly? I'll bet the average reader of this site has been at the recieving end of a few...


NOOOO! All the memories flooding back! (pun intended)

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:13 • by Mason Wheeler
340961 in reply to 340931
some guy:
Well, they were looking for a junior network admin. Sounds like they found one.


+1. Someone please feature this.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:13 • by Alan (unregistered)
340962 in reply to 340933
airdrik:
It's never the fault of the design/software/implementation, the hardware just can't keep up with all of the things we are making it do. Faster hardware is the only way to make things faster.


As a hardware designer, I like that attitude a lot. Please keep coming up with more complex ways to do things.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:30 • by Mythran
Have your proxy contact my proxy.

Re: Kick 'em When They're Up

2011-03-15 12:37 • by Anon (unregistered)
340966 in reply to 340956
The economy might have been swirling around the drain, (like it might have been circling it), but I doubt very much that the economy was swirling the drain itself.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:41 • by airdrik (unregistered)
340967 in reply to 340962
Alan:
airdrik:
It's never the fault of the design/software/implementation, the hardware just can't keep up with all of the things we are making it do. Faster hardware is the only way to make things faster.


As a hardware designer, I like that attitude a lot. Please keep coming up with more complex ways to do things.


Oh, don't you worry, we can find plenty of ways to make more hardware do less. You keep making the hardware faster and we'll keep making the software [s]slower[/s] "more complex". >:)

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:44 • by Jack (unregistered)
If you are unable to detect which employees are actually doing work and which ones are slacking off watching teh p00rnies, you might have a bigger problem than your network architecture...

In other words, web filtering is a technical solution to a human problem, and hindering all the productive people in your company is TRWTF.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:51 • by dohpaz42
340971 in reply to 340935
Sudo:
So today's WTF is "sometimes management know what they're talking about"? Meh.
+1

Sudo:
Tomorrow's WTF is going to be a snippet of well-written code.
++1

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 12:52 • by anonymin (unregistered)
I work somewhere like one of those branch offices. Today the upstream squid proxy that authenticates and filters web access for our entire far-flung corporate VPN went on the fritz for several hours, issuing frequent protests about inability to create TCP connections probably due to overload. How can I tell, from inside my workplace, whether upstream is using some decent form of load balancing or is as clueless as Tyson?

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:04 • by Zaratustra (unregistered)
340974 in reply to 340934
ISSUE: The traffic is fucking slow

STATUS: Fucking resolved

NOTES: The entire fucking company's fucking traffic was being sent through a single fucking T1, worthless asshole said issue could not be described to fucking management

ACTIONS TAKEN: Worthless asshole fired, replaced with new asshole

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:18 • by Bushea (unregistered)
Not too shocked at the proxy concept. When I was working for a big multinational, this was their corporate policy - and they used to audit regularly.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:20 • by Don (unregistered)
The CTO complained about the -network- not the internet.... how is this related to the proxy?

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:22 • by Capt. Obvious
340979 in reply to 340954
sibtrag:

I can easily see myself in that sort of situation. Back when I was interviewing (many years ago), I would try to allow extra time for anything that could come up, especially if the interview was a distance away in an unfamiliar area. In fact, I was more than an hour early for the interview for my current job.

Then I would sit in my car for a moment & decide what to do. In my case it was an early morning interview, so I got coffee & a snack to calm my nerves. But, for a 1pm interview, I might have seen if the interviewer was available early. In the off chance that something had come up for the afternoon (an emergency meeting, a sick child, etc) s/he might be very grateful. Otherwise, I'd decline the conference room & go out for lunch.

In the exact situation given, however, I'd probably have sought out a department store & tried to find something off-the-rack which actually fit me.

Arriving early for an interview can be a good thing. I mean, building in a buffer, making sure you're on time, all good things. I was just reacting to the "OMG, you made him wait until the actual interview time" comment.

But yeah, if someone arrives for an interview an hour early cause they were worried they would get lost, the worst result I can imagine would be giving them a seat in the lobby with a coffee or tea until the scheduled time.

But I do try to schedule interviews so they don't interfere with lunch. Lunch time is when I go outside, clear my head or puzzle through a difficult problem (depending on whether the day is difficult or routine). Switching gears to interview someone before then just happens not to work well for me.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:24 • by Fred (unregistered)
340980 in reply to 340971
dohpaz42:
Sudo:
Tomorrow's WTF is going to be a snippet of well-written code.
++1


so... 2?

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:25 • by Fab (unregistered)
Click on "salty language" in the story.
It's wonderful !

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:31 • by Franz Kafka (unregistered)
340982 in reply to 340934
akatherder:
brazzy:
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't that a perfectly normal and correct setup for "corporate interet"?

Of course, it requires either a separate proxy at each location, or very good connections between the locations. So am I missing something or is the only WTF that Tyson didn't realize the performance implications of his policy implementation?


From a technical standpoint, that's the only goddamn WTF I am seeing. If he wasn't such a worthless asshole, he would have seen a connection between slow traffic and funneling the entire company's traffic through one server and a single fucking T1.


Really, that pales in comparison to the whole ego-fueled rant during the interview. Seriously, what the hell?

Also, the proxy setup was effing stupid. And not hosting the website in a colo.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:36 • by JV (unregistered)
I have a fun proxy story. So, this company I worked at for many years decided it was time to start tracking, filtering and reporting on all employee's Internet usage. Sure, I get it, that a company wants to make sure people are working and using the network for job-related functions, no problem.

However, they decided to use the reporting to go after people. Everyone had an allocated amount of "personal time" to browse the Internet. The company started using these numbers against people during reviews and weekly status meetings.

Enter my department: the developers. As a developer, you'll understand the Internet is "The Developer Handbook". Google is your best friend, and blogs are like the gold mines of the coder's treasure trove. Needless to say, our first few "reviews" by the CIO were not good. He was red in the face, on the verge of screaming and was ready to make heads roll (yes, it was a typical CIO that could barely utilize Outlook, let alone understand the needs of his developers).

So, after a month of dealing with this crap, I decided to take action. We had a co-location hosting facility down town, where we had our QA, staging and production servers for web-based applications. The web filters/reporting system was not monitoring these systems, so I installed a lightweight proxy server on the QA machine.

Fast forward a year later, all of our developers had zero (0) minutes of Internet time, and the CIO always referred to "his awesome team" when it came to the Internet usage report.

After the company was sold to a competitor and I left, I told the network engineer about it. He was pissed at first, but soon got over it and had a good laugh. Mr. CIO still doesn't know to this day.

Oh, and my current company blocks TheDailyWTF.com, but that doesn't stop me. Muhahaha.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:39 • by Codism
340985 in reply to 340972
Just disconnect VPN and surf.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:47 • by boog
"It was like trying to explain calculus to a dog."
That's an interesting thing to say, considering which would look like the bigger idiot.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 13:57 • by Bondo (unregistered)
Wow. I worked at a place that was just like that. Corporate was located in Los Angeles and we were in Spokane, WA. All network traffic was proxied through their server in LA, so we had to wait every Tuesday and Wednesday night for hours and hours while gigabytes of files were transfered from downtown Spokane to our print shop, which was only about 20 miles away. It was faster to drive downtown with a external hard drive and transfer the data via sneakernet.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 14:06 • by hoodaticus
To those who don't see the WTF, let's start from square one:

1. Interview Attire
2. Decorum
3. Not trash talking your old boss in the interview

And those are just the WTFs. Everything else is "meh".

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 14:11 • by Yazeran
340992 in reply to 340971
dohpaz42:
Sudo:
So today's WTF is "sometimes management know what they're talking about"? Meh.
+1

Sudo:
Tomorrow's WTF is going to be a snippet of well-written code.
++1


Parse errror Can't modify constant item in preincrement (++)

Couldn't resist :-)

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 14:15 • by A Gould (unregistered)
I've never quite understood what the purpose of filtering at work is in this day and age.

My workplace is the perfect example. Anything "fun" is blocked via proxy, but anyone with a smartphone (or in my case, iPad w/MiFi) has an free connection - and that includes the company provided phones! - so everyone's still screwing around, they just are taking more time doing it.

Re: Dirty Laundry

2011-03-15 14:28 • by C-Octothorpe (unregistered)
340996 in reply to 340993
A Gould:
I've never quite understood what the purpose of filtering at work is in this day and age.

My workplace is the perfect example. Anything "fun" is blocked via proxy, but anyone with a smartphone (or in my case, iPad w/MiFi) has an free connection - and that includes the company provided phones! - so everyone's still screwing around, they just are taking more time doing it.


Spoken like a true recent grad...
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3Next »

Add Comment