The Killing Job

« Return to Article
  • TheRider 2011-10-25 09:06
    Wow!

    As far as I'm concerned, IBM software always thinks, the equipment it is installed on is a mainframe and its software can hog up all resources. Examples? IBM Rational Software
  • An Old Hacker 2011-10-25 09:06
    [b]NO COMMENTS UNTIL FRIDAY[b]
  • Robert Hanson 2011-10-25 09:07
    Seriouosly? The guy wrote a POSTSCRIPT program to process his numbers? Where is excel when you need it?
  • Wild 2011-10-25 09:07
    No comments allowed till Friday
  • Severity One 2011-10-25 09:09
    It's not unheard of, though. An acquaintance of my once wrote a Mandelbrot set generator in PostScript and ran it on one of the university's printers. The queue was getting a bit long after that as well.

    And in my time, I've hand-coded PostScript as well... although I'm not daft enough to put that on my CV.
  • Anon 2011-10-25 09:20
    Bob stepped back like he'd been slapped with Schrödinger's Stupid


    Bravo sir! Bravo!
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 09:29
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.
  • evilspoons 2011-10-25 09:29
    I thought changing the idle prompt on the LCD screen of the HP Laserjet 5 in my seventh grade computers class was annoying. This certainly is another order of magnitude of retarded.

    (I changed the LCD to say 'ERROR' when it was sitting idle, ha.)
  • Bobby Tables 2011-10-25 09:30
    I didn't even know you could make a PostScript program.

    CAPTCHA: wisi, It's not wisi to make a PostScript program that holds up the print queue.
  • evilspoons 2011-10-25 09:31
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.
  • Bobby Tables 2011-10-25 09:31
    Printers are for printing. He wasn't printing, his job gets killed.
  • StMarc 2011-10-25 09:32
    Long, long ago I tried to print a document which was generated by an algorithm designed to take data from an x-ray experiment and create a very crude sort of 2-D CAT scan. The highfalutin' LaserWriter (no numbers, no letters - LaserWriter) in the university computer lab would happily accept the print job, then start to choke as its buffer filled. At the time I knew very little about how printers worked, so I just sat there like an idiot and watched it settle into a coma.

    After an hour or so the other users in the lab started to complain, and the lab monitor killed the job, let them print, and then let me restart mine.

    Same thing. The problem was not in our stars, it was in our jobs. In that the damn job was just never ever going to print.

    After a few hours of this, the lab monitor remembered that THAT VERY DAY, an even newer, bloodier-edge piece of tech had come in and was ready to be hooked up.

    A StyleWriter.

    (This was Apple's first inkjet printer, the equivalent of an HP Deskjet.)

    Unlike fancyschmancy Postscript laser printers, this little marvel rendered its prints one line at a time through its driver. (You can't print "part" of a laser print. The whole thing has to be rendered so it can be applied and fused in one go.) So we sent it and, after a few minutes, it printed a line.

    Then, after a few more minutes, it printed another.

    After an hour and a half, my shadowy blob of output slid neatly onto the print tray. And there was much rejoicing.

    Up until now, that was the worst story I knew about jamming up print jobs and screwing other people over. But this is way better. WAY better.
  • Bobby Tables 2011-10-25 09:33
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.

    Not sure if troll...
  • z 2011-10-25 09:35
    Of all the things "Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them" was, being a clear and comprehensible statement wasn't one of them.
  • frits 2011-10-25 09:35
    So, based on what I'm reading, some mysterious, unnamed person is tasked at protecting "Job". When Job's protection is relinquished, Job is forced into an existence of destitute starvation. However, Job continues serving his master, despite the circumstances.

    The conclusion I draw from this story is that Bob is in fact TRWTF, AKA Satan.
  • StMarc 2011-10-25 09:36
    geoffrey:
    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Dude, if I see a job comprising a few kilobytes (or less) that doesn't generate print output for several minutes, it's a hung job and I'm killing it. It's not my job to anticipate that you're running PS programs on a shared output device. It's my job to get my work done. If HR wants to march me out of the building for using common sense, they will find me extremely willing to march.
  • ThePants999 2011-10-25 09:38
    TRWTF is this sentence:

    Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them.


    Seriously. WTF. That sentence could be weaponised and deployed in surgical strikes.
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 09:39
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
  • StMarc 2011-10-25 09:43
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood that this guy was a whiny jerk who was prone to throwing tantrums and stealing equipment from shared resources which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    FTFY. HTH. HAND.
  • TheMostBoringManInTheUniverse 2011-10-25 09:47
    Almost all of that story was horribly written, stretching a not very well thought out hook to and beyond breaking point.

    But this made me forgive everything: "Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them." Genius.
  • GettinSadda 2011-10-25 09:47
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    +1
  • dpm 2011-10-25 09:47
    geoffrey:
    There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    You are assuming that. I think it equally, if not more, likely that they hung back because they did not want to get yelled at by a socially-inept bully.
  • GettinSadda 2011-10-25 09:49
    dpm:
    geoffrey:
    There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    You are assuming that. I think it equally, if not more, likely that they hung back because they did not want to get yelled at by a socially-inept bully.
    Unfortunately, this story includes two socially-inept bullies
  • Master Chief 2011-10-25 09:49
    geoffrey:
    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.

    I don't care how fucking self important someone is. He has no right to occupy the printer 24/7, I don't care how critical his needs are. If they were that critical, he'd have space on a real mainframe to use.

    His tiny-dick-syndrome reactions don't entitle him to anything except mockery, preferably continuous mockery. Hell, I might cancel a few of his actual print jobs just to watch him stomp helplessly.
  • Master Chief 2011-10-25 09:51
    GettinSadda:
    dpm:
    geoffrey:
    There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    You are assuming that. I think it equally, if not more, likely that they hung back because they did not want to get yelled at by a socially-inept bully.
    Unfortunately, this story includes two socially-inept bullies

    WHy is it unacceptable? The job by all accounts was some document or another that had a byte transmitted wrong and was hanging the printer. I doubt it ever crossed his mind that it might be an important financial calculation process, because WHY THE HELL WOULD THAT EVER BE IN A PRINT QUEUE? That's like complaining someone towed your car because it was parked on a sidewalk.
  • Lost 2011-10-25 09:53
    geoffrey:

    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    Notice that his co-workers have no brains and are simply following any crazy orders printed on a piece of paper by someone they don't even know.


    FTFY
  • QJo 2011-10-25 09:54
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are two distinct problems here, butting head-to-head. For one thing, Bob's just a little bit gung-ho, and perhaps should have checked what the job was before deleting it, but second, Mister Galloping Asperger should have taken the time to explain what he was doing in the first place, in order to arrive at the compromise which was the reduced-priority job, rather than just play the "I'm far too important to talk to you" card. In fact at that very point, Bob should have consulted either his boss or Galloping Asperger's boss to find out exactly what was going on. The fact that he didn't, and that he allowed the situation to extend beyond that first encounter, has seriously increased his own WTF quotient.

    So a two-way communication fail here, brought on probably by gallons of misdirected testosterone. If I were the boss I'd haul both of them into the office for a re-evaluation of their positions.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 09:56
    No, do not kill Job. Instead, take away his money, kill his livestock, servants and loved ones, and stick him with some horrible sickness. But be sure to keep him alive. Then lean back and prepare to be Very Offended when he has the audacity to be less than grateful.
  • frits 2011-10-25 09:57
    QJo:
    If I were the boss I'd haul both of them into the office for a re-evaluation of their positions.

    I'd have them leg kick each other until one of them gave up.
  • Bill 2011-10-25 09:59
    A print job that hangs without printing anything for a significant time is almost always hung. It's pretty routine for someone other than the job owner to kill it.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 10:03
    (Oh, frits did that one already. Sorry.)
  • Bobby Tables 2011-10-25 10:05
    Bill:
    A print job that hangs without printing anything for a significant time is almost always hung. It's pretty routine for someone other than the job owner to kill it.


    Don't mess with the SysAdmin.

    CAPTCHA: haero. The SysAdmin is my haero.
  • csrster 2011-10-25 10:06
    I'd probably have started by rebooting the printer.
  • C 2011-10-25 10:07
    Yes, but what was the Job doing?

    I'm guessing it was something like running the numbers on a DnD sim or something equally humorous and worthless.
  • Hortical 2011-10-25 10:11
    Master Chief:
    I don't care how fucking self important someone is. He has no right to occupy the printer 24/7, I don't care how critical his needs are. If they were that critical, he'd have space on a real mainframe to use.

    His tiny-dick-syndrome reactions don't entitle him to anything except mockery, preferably continuous mockery. Hell, I might cancel a few of his actual print jobs just to watch him stomp helplessly.
    The worst thing you can do when in Bob's situation is treat the guy like his feelings are important. Appeasing him only cements the idea that his ire is sufficient to validate his authority.

    But I especially liked the idea of pissing him off just for fun later. That puts a smile on my face.
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 10:16
    frits:
    QJo:
    If I were the boss I'd haul both of them into the office for a re-evaluation of their positions.

    I'd have them lick kick each other until one of them gave up.
    But if we selected employees this way, everyone would end up uber-gay. Unless you were trying to make the queer equivalent of the playboy mansion, in which case, as you were.
  • centurijon 2011-10-25 10:17
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 10:25
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
  • ceiswyn 2011-10-25 10:25
    GettinSadda:
    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority.


    Yes, yes you do. A print job may be vital for the running of the universe; but if it's not printing, it's not printing, and leaving it there to back up everyone else's jobs is not going to magically make it print, either. The only way to preserve the universe is to kill it and resubmit it; hopefully this time in a form that will actually print.

    And I am not going to check whether a print job is actually a print job before killing it, any more than I'm going to check whether an intruder in my house is actually a thief before slinging him out.
  • Robert 2011-10-25 10:26
    This is about communication. If you are using resources in a completely obscure way, an email needs to go out informing your coworkers that the printer is in use and why.

    It is not the job of your coworkers to read your mind. It is your job to disseminate information that's critical to get to everyone.
  • Anonymous 2011-10-25 10:27
    What? The guy who canceled the job already understood enough. A job has been on the queue for hours and the printer is not printing.

    Perhaps he should have asked the owner of the job what's going on with it , but that's only when you are in a very good mood and not in a rush at all. That does not happen in offices...

  • A Gould 2011-10-25 10:29
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Man, I'd be fired so many times by now if this was true - there are *counts* four printers in this building for several hundred users. Here it's the opposite - if you're planning on tying up a printer for even a half hour, you're expected to notify everyone in the area so they can reroute their jobs. If your job is tying up the machine (and not visibly printing)? Bzzt - job goes away and you can resubmit later.

    I will give the nut points for trying to offload his work onto a printer. It's creatively stupid, but still creative. And stupid.
  • ceiswyn 2011-10-25 10:29
    geoffrey:
    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    Any job that's actually that important will not be running on a shared printer. It will be running on the executives' personal printer.

    Also, anyone who troubles a manager with 'can I delete this print job please' will be out of that office within ten seconds with a flea in their ear and instructions to use some common sense and not bother them with trivial issues.

    You've never worked in a real office, either? And no, that little muddy space under the bridge doesn't count.
  • anon 2011-10-25 10:35
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    You're just grasping at straws now. There is literally no scenario where canceling a print job could "bring down the entire company". And the fact is, this was a common printer. Anyone important enough that you can't cancel their (obviously hung) print job has their own printer and/or a secretary to do their printing for them. You don't print some mysterious document upon which rests the fate of the entire company on the POS laser printer in the hallway.
  • TV John 2011-10-25 10:40
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    You could be right, but I get the impression from the story that Bob was the only one who knew how to kill the queue.
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 10:43
    Wow you would have thought I was advocating world war 3 by the tone of some of the responses! O.K. lets just all calm down and rewind.

    The central issue here is that the *printer* is company property, not Bob's property. The job itself is also technically company property since we can assume the submitter is a company employee. Whether to cancel a piece of work - an act which cannot be undone after the fact - therefore should be a management decision, not "bobs"
  • boog 2011-10-25 10:45
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 10:45
    TV John:
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    You could be right, but I get the impression from the story that Bob was the only one who knew how to kill the queue.


    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
  • Lockwood 2011-10-25 10:48
    That's quite ingenious, from a certain point of view.

    Captcha:
    (That's pretty much all I can add)
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 10:48
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.

  • Anon 2011-10-25 10:50
    dpm:
    geoffrey:
    There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    You are assuming that. I think it equally, if not more, likely that they hung back because they did not want to get yelled at by a socially-inept bully.


    Or that they lacked the technical know-how to cancel a job.
  • Hortical 2011-10-25 10:55
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!
  • Dr Bob 2011-10-25 10:55
    geoffrey:
    TV John:
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    You could be right, but I get the impression from the story that Bob was the only one who knew how to kill the queue.


    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.


    A large number of psychological experiments and studies have proven this statement to be flawed. In addition, a significant number of victims of crimes perpetrated in view of large numbers of by standers who did nothing, would take umbrage at this statement as well.
  • QJo 2011-10-25 10:56
    geoffrey:
    TV John:
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    You could be right, but I get the impression from the story that Bob was the only one who knew how to kill the queue.


    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.


    The fact that there's a shouty message attached to the terminal might also have something to do with it. From the tone of the behaviour of Bob, I suspect that he may have actually held a position of some seniority in the company, and therefore able to wield considerable responsibility, for example, the knowhow and chutzpah to make executive decisions about whether to kill print jobs that are holding up productivity.

    I still think he should have been somewhat more proactive at finding out what the story was behind the scruffy colleague and his difficult personality.
  • ceiswyn 2011-10-25 10:58
    geoffrey:
    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?


    If the job readout is in error then either the print server or the job are FUBAR and it's most likely not going to print anyway. Letting it sit there blocking the print queue is wasting valuable time in which to sort out the problem and resubmit the job. Why oh why do you want my company to fail?
  • QJo 2011-10-25 10:59
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    Then the sooner the job is killed and resubmitted the better. It's hung, so it is not printing.

    And, to reiterate, it should be printed on an Important Report printer.
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 11:02
    "Someone Bob didn't know rounded the corner, following the grunt like a disgruntled Doppler effect."

    But if you disgruntle a grunt, what are you left with?
  • Code Slave 2011-10-25 11:02
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    Something tells me that geoffrey was the Post Script Wizard (PSW) in question.

    The fact of the matter is the PSW has made a kludge and stopped cold the work of dozens of other people. It's like parking a car across two lanes of traffic on a two land bridge and pitching the keys over the railing; because it's very important (for him) to be able to safely herd his flock of ducklings across the bridge in safety. Most people would look at him as being nuts. Clearly it would have made more sense to carry them across in a cardboard box.

    To carry the analogy further, a cop coming buy would assume that the car was stalled, call a tow-truck and have it removed. No harm done to the car (it can cross the bridge again)... and he/she would have no idea that the PSW's ducklings were being squished by passing cars. Nor should they - wrong tool for the job.
  • anonymouser 2011-10-25 11:05
    geoffrey:
    TV John:
    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    You could be right, but I get the impression from the story that Bob was the only one who knew how to kill the queue.


    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.


    So, when a baby gets run over and I notice that everyone is standing around unwilling to help, I should assume that is would be immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised to take the initiative to help?

  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 11:09
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!


    obvious troll is obvious
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 11:10
    anonymouser:
    geoffrey:
    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    So, when a baby gets run over and I notice that everyone is standing around unwilling to help, I should assume that is would be immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised to take the initiative to help?
    Well, at that point the baby's already street pizza, so I wouldn't be surprised if no one wanted to go near that mess, except maybe to collect a souvenir.
  • Doc 2011-10-25 11:10
    QJo:
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    Then the sooner the job is killed and resubmitted the better. It's hung, so it is not printing.

    And, to reiterate, it should be printed on an Important Report printer.


    Well, to answer the curveball, I'm the guy in my department that runs those important jobs. That's why my boss said screw it to corporate policy and made sure that I had my own printer. No waiting because some nurse decided to print some 160 page document on the shared printer because she doesn't know how to select "current page" in the options. No worries that unauthorized people will kill my print jobs when I'm running off all the monthly reports for the management committee. I maintain it all myself, including the print queue. And if a job runs more than about 2 minutes without producing ANY output, it gets killed and I resubmit.

    When I see comments like this, it makes it seem like the people have never worked in a real office before. I have never seen a report that could bring down the company if it wasn't printed get sent to a shared printer. I've also never seen a situation where someone had the access to kill a job (either from their own PC or by going to the print server) but was not supposed to use it without first tracking down their manager. Especially in a lab environment, where you're expected to work with greater independence than a normal desk job.
  • kktkkr 2011-10-25 11:13
    I'm just waiting for someone to port distributed computing efforts to PostScript and make full use of the unharnessed 'power' of printers.

    (Also, else's is correct.)
  • neminem 2011-10-25 11:19
    geoffrey:
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!


    obvious troll is obvious

    I agree. You are indeed an obvious troll, and obvious.

    That Hortical person, on the other hand, makes a good point.
  • Anketam 2011-10-25 11:20
    Master Chief:
    geoffrey:
    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.

    I don't care how fucking self important someone is. He has no right to occupy the printer 24/7, I don't care how critical his needs are. If they were that critical, he'd have space on a real mainframe to use.

    His tiny-dick-syndrome reactions don't entitle him to anything except mockery, preferably continuous mockery. Hell, I might cancel a few of his actual print jobs just to watch him stomp helplessly.
    I also agree with Master Chief. At both my old high school, university, and my current job if you queue a job on a printer, leave it, and it is not printing something, it is treated as an abandoned job, and anyone can kill it (without asking or telling you).

    Also companies should always have multiple printers available, so if a printer gets stuck or worse broken you do not put your employees in such an unnecessary bind.
  • C# Guy 2011-10-25 11:21
    neminem:
    geoffrey:
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!


    obvious troll is obvious

    I agree. You are indeed an obvious troll, and obvious.

    That Hortical person, on the other hand, makes a good point.


    Not that obvious, judging by the number of responses he gets.
  • ceiswyn 2011-10-25 11:23
    C# Guy:
    Not that obvious, judging by the number of responses he gets.


    Some of us just like shooting fish in a barrel :)
  • Hortical 2011-10-25 11:26
    geoffrey:
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.


    obvious troll is obvious
    There, is that better? Tell me what do you think of the content of the message as opposed to complaining about its form.

    You're a really curious figure, you know that? And I can't say what my cynicism tells me about your veracity. I think that everyone here is a troll, so your persona must also be disingenuous, arguing incredibly stupid points of view just for fun, but I'm also well aware that there are people like that out there.

    What kind of company do you work at? Is everyone there similarly as incompetent, or are you a nepotistic hire? So many questions...
  • justsomedudette 2011-10-25 11:26
    Geoffrey admit it. You're the print job guy aren't you? You're the only one defending this ridiculous situation, and the only one who thinks running to management every time there's tiniest of problems is a sensible solution.

    Just be proud of your novel use of tech and admit you could have handle the situation better.
  • iToad 2011-10-25 11:30
    kktkkr:
    I'm just waiting for someone to port distributed computing efforts to PostScript and make full use of the unharnessed 'power' of printers.

    (Also, else's is correct.)


    MATLAB now automatically does this with your CPU cores. It takes them over to do parallel processing. I run scripts that make all six of my AMD CPU cores go 100% busy for about 30 seconds at a time, without any special coding needed to make this happen. The newest version of MATLAB can also take over the GPUs in your CUDA-compliant graphics card.

    Also, Postscript is indeed a programming language. It looks very like Forth.
  • Steve The Cynic 2011-10-25 11:30
    It occurs to me that in all this, we've lost sight of one essential WTF-worthy element of this. The owner of the rogue jobs clearly ran up against a compute-power limitation. OK, fine, (bad word) happens. However, I have some questions:

    1. What job was so compute-intensive that he needed to off-load it to the printer and stuff up the work of a whole department?
    2. What printer was it that actually had more compute power than a desktop PC?
    3. Why didn't he ask the relevant powers-that-be for more compute power of his own?
    4. If he did ask for this, and was refused, why didn't he take it as an indication that his vaunted "numbers" weren't so important?
    5. Were the vaunted numbers perhaps something not actually related to his job, such as something pronogaffic?

    Meh, whatever.
  • geoffrey 2011-10-25 11:33
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that
  • Rnd( 2011-10-25 11:33
    Who would even think of someone running some computational intensive on a freaking printer(apart from the one guy)? I might have believed it to be some manager comming up with "neat" way to save some paper and toners, missing the whole reason for printers existence. But, hanging up the computer for computation?
  • Steve The Cynic 2011-10-25 11:36
    Oh, yeah, and:

    6. How on earth is a virtual printer going to help numbers-boy? Allegedly nothing in the department except the real printer has enough compute power. The virtual printer is, presumably, not on the real printer, so won't benefit from the compute power of the real printer rather than the admittedly feeble print server...

    I smell a fictionalisation error. (It smells like a herring that's been left out on the kitchen counter for a week, by the way.)
  • gnasher729 2011-10-25 11:43
    It's a Postscript printer. When Apple released their LaserWriter, around 1985 or so, it was the most powerful computer that Apple had ever built. And Postscript is a programming language.
  • The butler buttles 2011-10-25 11:43
    Steve The Cynic:
    Oh, yeah, and:

    6. How on earth is a virtual printer going to help numbers-boy? Allegedly nothing in the department except the real printer has enough compute power. The virtual printer is, presumably, not on the real printer, so won't benefit from the compute power of the real printer rather than the admittedly feeble print server...

    I smell a fictionalisation error. (It smells like a herring that's been left out on the kitchen counter for a week, by the way.)


    The fictionalisation error is a Red Herring!
  • ņăĝęŠĥ 2011-10-25 11:44
    How exactly do you program the printer to do computation?

    This story is fishy.
  • Anon 2011-10-25 11:47
    Steve The Cynic:
    Oh, yeah, and:

    6. How on earth is a virtual printer going to help numbers-boy? Allegedly nothing in the department except the real printer has enough compute power. The virtual printer is, presumably, not on the real printer, so won't benefit from the compute power of the real printer rather than the admittedly feeble print server...

    I smell a fictionalisation error. (It smells like a herring that's been left out on the kitchen counter for a week, by the way.)


    I think the point wasn't to help numbers-boy, but to trick him into believing that his job was still running.
  • Hortical 2011-10-25 11:47
    C# Guy:
    neminem:
    geoffrey:
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!


    obvious troll is obvious

    I agree. You are indeed an obvious troll, and obvious.

    That Hortical person, on the other hand, makes a good point.


    Not that obvious, judging by the number of responses he gets.


    I think people know he's a troll, as we've encountered him before, but realize that it is not the man we're attacking, but the message. (I later went on to attack the man, I know, but that was for fun.)

    It's the idea that misinformation is being spread that is alarming. There's a human being on the other side of this internet, but since all I know of him is his promotion of this awful idea (speaking generically, it could be "Never cancel print jobs" or "Build your own database for each project" or "Linux Sucks!"), that's all there is to that person in my mind: a fountain of terrible ideas that must be killed.

    Cool reasonability fails though a process of spontaneous dereasonabilification and all that goes through one's mind is ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK!
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 11:54
    Steve The Cynic:
    6. How on earth is a virtual printer going to help numbers-boy?

    Your mistake is in assuming that anybody wanted to help him.
  • derrick 2011-10-25 11:54
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.



    That sounds fine in a normal environment with no deadlines. However in a Lab environment like that if I need to print pages for management...you better believe I will cancel a job that looks hung. But then again I'm one of "those people" who gets to deal with high priority projects and sic their boss's boss on them if they piss me off. But if you have projects that can handle being two or more days late, then by all means go ahead and wait.
  • Ganesha 2011-10-25 11:55
    tl;dr IHBT
  • ac 2011-10-25 11:56
    Steve The Cynic:
    It occurs to me that in all this, we've lost sight of one essential WTF-worthy element of this. The owner of the rogue jobs clearly ran up against a compute-power limitation. OK, fine, (bad word) happens. However, I have some questions:

    1. What job was so compute-intensive that he needed to off-load it to the printer and stuff up the work of a whole department?
    2. What printer was it that actually had more compute power than a desktop PC?
    3. Why didn't he ask the relevant powers-that-be for more compute power of his own?
    4. If he did ask for this, and was refused, why didn't he take it as an indication that his vaunted "numbers" weren't so important?
    5. Were the vaunted numbers perhaps something not actually related to his job, such as something pronogaffic?

    Meh, whatever.


    From wikipedia, cannot comment on its accuracy though...

    However, the cost of implementation was high; computers output raw PS code that would be interpreted by the printer into a raster image at the printer's natural resolution. This required high performance microprocessors and ample memory. The LaserWriter used a 12 MHz Motorola 68000, making it faster than any of the Macintosh computers it attached to. When the laser printer engines themselves cost over a thousand dollars the added cost of PS was marginal. But as printer mechanisms fell in price, the cost of implementing PS became an increasingly greater percentage of the overall printer cost, and thus it succumbed to cost competition in the lower-priced market tiers.
  • Coyne 2011-10-25 11:57
    Okay, I've heard of people implementing major process on everything from the sacrosanct IBM PC-that-must-never-be-moved to a major web service on one laptop to major accounting applications dependent on maxed-out dBase systems. (In fact, we have one of the latter running here now. Really.)

    But this is a new low: I had heard that Postscript could be used to program fancy things for printing. Never in my worst nightmares did I consider the idea that someone might use Postscript to develop an accounting application.

    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.

    Even worse than the worst combination you can imagine...
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 12:03
    Coyne:
    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.

    It's like using a calculator to do calculations? Wow, you sure told him.
  • Andrew Norman O'ther 2011-10-25 12:03
    Doc:

    No waiting because some nurse decided to print some 160 page document on the shared printer because she doesn't know how to select "current page" in the options. No worries that unauthorized people will kill my print jobs when I'm running off all the monthly reports for the management committee.

    When I see comments like this, it makes it seem like the people have never worked in a real office before.

    When I see comments like this, I wonder in what "office" a management committee's monthly report might be more "important" than a nurse might need in a hurry?
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 12:05
    geoffrey:
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that


    No, let's not. (and no, you're not)
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 12:06
    Coyne:

    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.



    Why not? It worked for the moon shots...
  • lesle 2011-10-25 12:06
    The first time there was no sign on the printer--I give him a pass on killing the job.

    The second time there was a sign and "that particular desk was empty." At this point I would have gone to an appropriate manager.

    My personal opinion is that both need better office social skills.
  • Joe 2011-10-25 12:10
    Severity One:
    And in my time, I've hand-coded PostScript as well... although I'm not daft enough to put that on my CV.

    The proper thing to do would be to code a PostScript Quine program that also happens to print your CV without reference to Postscript (with the PS program as a supplementary page).

    ObCap: If you do this, you'll be my haero.
    --Joe
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 12:15
    geoffrey:
    Hortical:
    geoffrey:
    Notice also they did not thank him afterwards. That's because they don't want to be seen as endorsing or encouraging that kind of behaviour and risk being hauled off to HR later.

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.
    What you're suggesting amounts to no more than allowing ourselves to be intimidated by blowhards.

    YOU SHOULD NOT POST THAT KIND OF THING ON HERE!!! THAT'S WHAT TERRORISTS DO!!! ARE YOU A TERRORIST!!?!


    obvious troll is obvious
    That's comedy gold! A troll calling someone else a troll (obligatory yo dawg meme)...

    Congrats, I didn't think you would get this many bites.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 12:20
    geoffrey:
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that
    Spent already? My, my... You know, there's a cream you could get for your premature troll defeation problem.
  • blah 2011-10-25 12:22
    DO NO KILL JOB UNTIL FRIDAY
    (or try to use the printer as your personal mainframe)
    Nice typo Lorne. :D

    I find it extremely ironic that the sign's author was indeed using the printer as a personal mainframe. He would be a woman in real life, if not for the fact that he can write a number-crunching PostScript job.
  • Lorne Kates 2011-10-25 12:22
    Coyne:

    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.

    Even worse than the worst combination you can imagine...


    Close-- it's like running a Mars-shot navigation via the brew-timer on Mission Control's coffee maker-- blocking the brewing of coffee for three and a half years. CAPCOM would be grumpy.
  • Lorne Kates 2011-10-25 12:24
    blah:
    DO NO KILL JOB UNTIL FRIDAY
    (or try to use the printer as your personal mainframe)
    Nice typo Lorne. :D

    I find it extremely ironic that the sign's author was indeed using the printer as a personal mainframe. He would be a woman in real life, if not for the fact that he can write a number-crunching PostScript job.


    Dang, almost made it through without one. You can't blame me, what with the text being so small... :|
  • tweek 2011-10-25 12:28
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    If it's so important, someone will be watching their computer tell them the job is borked. And in this day and age, such a report wouldn't need to be printed out to be processed. It's why we have PDFs, and why I was part of a team which implemented a report-catching software so we didn't have to print greenbar paper reports in ... 1997.
  • Mike 2011-10-25 12:29
    Doc:
    Well, to answer the curveball, I'm the guy in my department that runs those important jobs. That's why my boss said screw it to corporate policy and made sure that I had my own printer. No waiting because some nurse decided to print some 160 page document on the shared printer because she doesn't know how to select "current page" in the options. No worries that unauthorized people will kill my print jobs when I'm running off all the monthly reports for the management committee.

    Surely the managers don't want the schlebs to be reading their monthly management numbers anyway!

    TBH I was expecting the ending to be a Cunning Plan to stop other applicants for funding from getting their funding proposals printed, allocating all resources to the one project that actually did get printed (being the guy who blocked the printer). But this was much more interesting.
  • Josh 2011-10-25 12:38
    Am I the only one that thinks geoffrey is the guy from the story who had his "print job" killed? Why else would anyone take his position on this issue? (and how is this even an issue?)
  • boog 2011-10-25 12:41
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state.

    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error...
    Then the print server is in an error state. Not much of a curve ball.
  • redblacktree 2011-10-25 12:44
    geoffrey:
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that


    Translation: I now realize that I took a ridiculous position, and I can no longer defend it. However, my ego is much too large to admit defeat, so I will instead unilaterally declare a "draw."
  • Calli Arcale 2011-10-25 12:45
    Lorne Kates:
    Coyne:

    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.

    Even worse than the worst combination you can imagine...


    Close-- it's like running a Mars-shot navigation via the brew-timer on Mission Control's coffee maker-- blocking the brewing of coffee for three and a half years. CAPCOM would be grumpy.


    And then there would be hell to pay, oh yes, and it ain't just CAPCOM who'd be grumpy. If you follow Wayne Hale's blog (he was a Shuttle flight director for a long time, then became Shuttle program manager, then eventually retired from NASA), he talks of how sacred and practically mission-critical that coffee was. Keeping the coffeemakers supplying an endless flow of burnt brew was nearly as important as making sure the facility didn't lose power. They're all massive coffee addicts. Interfere with the coffee machine and you'd be lucky to get out of there alive!
  • Paul 2011-10-25 12:45
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    WTF geoffrey? If the job was so important that its failure would bring down the entire company, the moron should have been given enough compute power to get the job done without stopping everyone else from getting *their* jobs done.

    Anyone who thinks it's OK to hog a SHARED RESOURCE for several days doing something that resource was never intended to do in the first place and then act like a bullying brat about it would find their employment around here to be a short one. They have no business working in a place with other people.
  • Tom 2011-10-25 12:47
    Off all the things this comment is, being first is not one of them.
  • PedanticCurmudgeon 2011-10-25 12:52
    trtrwtf:
    frits:
    QJo:
    If I were the boss I'd haul both of them into the office for a re-evaluation of their positions.

    I'd have them lick kick each other until one of them gave up.
    But if we selected employees this way, everyone would end up uber-gay. Unless you were trying to make the queer equivalent of the playboy mansion, in which case, as you were.
    It seems that one of your alter-egos is leaking a bit.
  • boog 2011-10-25 12:53
    Josh:
    Am I the only one that thinks geoffrey is the guy from the story who had his "print job" killed?
    No, others have suggested it. Personally, I think it's a bit presumptuous and silly to suggest such a cynical possibility.

    Josh:
    Why else would anyone take his position on this issue?
    Poor reading comprehension, trolling, somebody canceled his print job once so he's here to rant, etc. Or more likely: to play devil's advocate, exercise his debate skills, balance the discussion, point out less-obvious WTFs*, etc. Take your pick; you'll probably guess wrong.

    * Ex: While I gladly support Bob's actions in the story, better communication would have helped the situation.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 12:57
    redblacktree:
    geoffrey:
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that


    Translation: You totally trolled the entire forum and you're bored with answering outraged posts. You're now going to log in as another sock puppet and get ready to do it all again tomorrow.
    FTFM
  • iToad 2011-10-25 13:01
    ņăĝęŠĥ:
    How exactly do you program the printer to do computation?

    This story is fishy.


    Normally, the printer driver for a postscript device writes a Postscript program to generate your printout. It then sends it (as a text file), to the printer. The printer runs the Postscript program and generates your printout.

    You can also cheat. You write your Postscript program in a text editor and send it directly to the printer, bypassing the printer driver. The printer can't tell the difference between a Postscript job to crunch numbers, and a Postscript job to print a page. Back in the olden days, I actually did this (on a DEC LaserWriter), and it worked. The only drawback to this was that Postscript was similar to Forth, and Forth skills were not very common.

    A lot of printers contain very capable CPUs to run the graphics engine. They could probably fly through a well-written Postscript program.
  • asdf 2011-10-25 13:06
    Ctrl^D or Ctrl^M
  • Bub 2011-10-25 13:18
    ThePants999:
    TRWTF is this sentence:

    Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them.


    Seriously. WTF. That sentence could be weaponised and deployed in surgical strikes.


    Something just dribbled out my right ear, and I think my right retina has become detached.
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 13:19
    PedanticCurmudgeon:
    trtrwtf:
    frits:
    QJo:
    If I were the boss I'd haul both of them into the office for a re-evaluation of their positions.

    I'd have them lick kick each other until one of them gave up.
    But if we selected employees this way, everyone would end up uber-gay. Unless you were trying to make the queer equivalent of the playboy mansion, in which case, as you were.
    It seems that one of your alter-egos is leaking a bit.


    Yeah, that's why I'm official now.
    It's a shame, I kind of liked being (unregistered)
  • Abso 2011-10-25 13:30
    C-Octothorpe:
    redblacktree:
    FTFM

    Isn't it traditional to pretend that your sockpuppets are different people?
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 13:39
    Abso:
    C-Octothorpe:
    redblacktree:
    FTFM

    Isn't it traditional to pretend that your sockpuppets are different people?
    Sorry, I don't follow...

    I was simply stating that, in my opinion, geoffrey wasn't admitting defeat and instead executed a successful trolling. If redblacktree thought something else I am not one to tell him what he meant. He meant what he said, which is why I fixed it for myself, not for him...

    Capeesh?! :)
  • fytrpylut 2011-10-25 13:40
    You don't "wield responsibility." You are saddled with responsibility and you wield authority.
  • Tzafrir Cohen 2011-10-25 13:48
    Obligatory link: ps-httpd: http://www.pugo.org:8080/

  • David 2011-10-25 14:00
    I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet- I stopped reading after the first page of circular arguments- but Geoffery is obviously a troll.

    He was quite successful recently with his massive derailing of another comment section by suggesting "Sometimes rolling your own custom database is more secure than the ones made by people who actually know what they are doing lewl!"

    Normally I don't mind the troll feeding, its basically all that happens in these comment sections. But I found the arguments to be especially boring and tame. If you're going to start arguments and stay stupid things (and by all means, please do) at least have the decency to make it entertaining for the rest of us to read.
  • Ryan 2011-10-25 14:03
    Yayyyy, another Penguicon story. These were great. Made my day to hear, too bad there weren't too many more.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 14:05
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.
  • Lucent 2011-10-25 14:10
    David:
    I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet- I stopped reading after the first page of circular arguments- but Geoffery is obviously a troll.

    He was quite successful recently with his massive derailing of another comment section by suggesting "Sometimes rolling your own custom database is more secure than the ones made by people who actually know what they are doing lewl!"

    Normally I don't mind the troll feeding, its basically all that happens in these comment sections. But I found the arguments to be especially boring and tame. If you're going to start arguments and stay stupid things (and by all means, please do) at least have the decency to make it entertaining for the rest of us to read.
    So if you're going to be indecent, at least we should have the decency to... You know what? Fuck you.

    Fuck You.
    Fuck Your Face.
    Fuck Your Job.
    Fuck Your Name.
    Fuck Your Khakis.
    Fuck Your Shoes.

    Fuck Your Mom.
    Fuck Your Dad.
    Fuck Your Sister.
    Fuck Your Brother.
    Fuck Your Kids.
    (I'll) Fuck Your Wife.

    Fuck Your Cat.
    Fuck Your Car.
    Fuck Your House.
    Fuck Your Goldfish.
    Fuck The Bushes Along Your Front Walk.

    Fuck Your Mailbox.
    Fuck Your Mailman.
    Fuck Your Refrigerator.
    Fuck Your Television.
    Fuck Your Star Wars Action Figure Collection.

    Fuck Everything About You.

    Fuck You...

    Fuck You...

    Fuck You.



    Seriously, go Suck A Caribou's Ass.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 14:13
    Nagesh:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.


    Pope is incarnation of Vishnu only, asshat. And stop to be using my name.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 14:17
    David:
    I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet- I stopped reading after the first page of circular arguments- but Geoffery is obviously a troll.

    He was quite successful recently with his massive derailing of another comment section by suggesting "Sometimes rolling your own custom database is more secure than the ones made by people who actually know what they are doing lewl!"

    Normally I don't mind the troll feeding, its basically all that happens in these comment sections. But I found the arguments to be especially boring and tame. If you're going to start arguments and stay stupid things (and by all means, please do) at least have the decency to make it entertaining for the rest of us to read.
    It's a delicate balance of stupidity and sincerity, really. You can't make it too obvious because fellow posters will see it for what it is and ignore it, and this includes follow-up responses. If it's too stupid or outlandish, he wouldn't get any bites.
  • David 2011-10-25 14:24
    C-Octothorpe:
    David:
    I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet- I stopped reading after the first page of circular arguments- but Geoffery is obviously a troll.

    He was quite successful recently with his massive derailing of another comment section by suggesting "Sometimes rolling your own custom database is more secure than the ones made by people who actually know what they are doing lewl!"

    Normally I don't mind the troll feeding, its basically all that happens in these comment sections. But I found the arguments to be especially boring and tame. If you're going to start arguments and stay stupid things (and by all means, please do) at least have the decency to make it entertaining for the rest of us to read.
    It's a delicate balance of stupidity and sincerity, really. You can't make it too obvious because fellow posters will see it for what it is and ignore it, and this includes follow-up responses. If it's too stupid or outlandish, he wouldn't get any bites.
    Do you even read posts do you just spit out whatever comes to mind from my first few words. Go back to the kiddie's table to practice your reading comprehension and we can try again later, alright?
    :)
  • Hortical 2011-10-25 14:27
    C-Octothorpe:
    It's a delicate balance of stupidity and sincerity, really. You can't make it too obvious because fellow posters will see it for what it is and ignore it, and this includes follow-up responses. If it's too stupid or outlandish, he wouldn't get any bites.
    What is it with you and giving people so much credit?

  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 14:33
    David:
    C-Octothorpe:
    David:
    I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet- I stopped reading after the first page of circular arguments- but Geoffery is obviously a troll.

    He was quite successful recently with his massive derailing of another comment section by suggesting "Sometimes rolling your own custom database is more secure than the ones made by people who actually know what they are doing lewl!"

    Normally I don't mind the troll feeding, its basically all that happens in these comment sections. But I found the arguments to be especially boring and tame. If you're going to start arguments and stay stupid things (and by all means, please do) at least have the decency to make it entertaining for the rest of us to read.
    It's a delicate balance of stupidity and sincerity, really. You can't make it too obvious because fellow posters will see it for what it is and ignore it, and this includes follow-up responses. If it's too stupid or outlandish, he wouldn't get any bites.
    Do you even read posts do you just spit out whatever comes to mind from my first few words. Go back to the kiddie's table to practice your reading comprehension and we can try again later, alright?
    :)
    Well played, good sir...
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 14:38
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 14:40
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.
  • willaien 2011-10-25 14:41
    geoffrey:

    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    Then it is a hung job that isn't ever going to print and needs to be resubmitted.
  • Postscripter 2011-10-25 14:42
    I've actually written postscript code that did nontrivial work in the printer. (It let us print cool graphs from stupid reporting software.) While the processors in early postscrip printers were fast, the actual PS interpreter wasn't a speed demon when it came to nonrendering tasks. The idiot would've been better off doing his number crunching in just about any compiled language.
  • David 2011-10-25 14:47
    C-Octothorpe:
    Well played, good sir...
    I can't tell you how pleasing it is to receive words of affirmation from you. I will never forget them. Or you.

    - An old friend

    Yes, it's real. Real as real can be. I don't want to hurt you C-Octo. I want you to stick around a long, long time.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 14:47
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
  • The Sane One 2011-10-25 14:48
    geoffrey:

    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.

    No, it's not better. That queue is costing the company a lot of money per minute. But more importantly, if indeed some business-critical calculation is being run on a printer in a hallway, and cancelling it brings down the entire company, then I'd say it's a completely justified mercy kill...
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 14:52
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 14:54
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?

    It's my imagination, hero. BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 14:56
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?

    It's my imagination, hero. BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 14:58
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?


    A good point.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 14:59
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?

    It's my imagination, hero. BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    Then again, based on the crap you write, I'm going to rescind the whole "smart guys like yourself" bit. Carry on lame-o. :P
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 15:00
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?
    Ahh yes, a grossly off-topic thread wouldn't be complete without an Internet Tough Guy (TM).

    Also, what makes you think he isn't morbidly obese and doesn't *have* a neck? Ever thought of that, tough guy?

    It's my imagination, hero. BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    Then again, based on the crap you write, I'm going to rescind the whole "smart guys like yourself" bit. Carry on lame-o. :P


    Oh, now you're just being mean. That's not nice at all.
  • talentless_newbie (too lazy to log in properly) 2011-10-25 15:00
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    Curve ball swung at and hit for a double:

    If you're a manager and you know you have an critically-important-but-large print job that will stop the rank and file from getting their work done, wouldn't you either print it off-hours (or, as the case may be, delegate it to someone else to print off-hours)? After all, if you're preventing your reports from getting their work done, chances are you also won't hit your quarterly numbers, rendering your 50 MB report useless.

    (4/10 - 3 for concept and incendiary first post, 1 for getting me to respond)
  • D Martensson 2011-10-25 15:07
    geoffrey:

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    No normal print job of a few KB should take hours to complete. So if that situation occurs the normal solution is to kill the job.

    If, for some strange reason, you decide to use the printer in a fashion it is not supposed to be used you SHOULD put a note up describing what and WHY you are doing it.

    Not doing that is compounding the already big error.

    If a car has broken breaks you do not glue the door lock, you put a note up warning about the broken breaks ;)

    Most normal printer problem solution charts recommends killing any job that looks hung in the queue.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 15:08
    The Mr. T Experience:
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    I never claimed to be smart, so your initial assertion was your own fault.
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Carry on lame-o. :P
    Glad I have your blessings!
  • the beholder 2011-10-25 15:09
    Lorne Kates:
    blah:
    DO NO KILL JOB UNTIL FRIDAY
    (or try to use the printer as your personal mainframe)
    Nice typo Lorne. :D

    I find it extremely ironic that the sign's author was indeed using the printer as a personal mainframe. He would be a woman in real life, if not for the fact that he can write a number-crunching PostScript job.


    Dang, almost made it through without one. You can't blame me, what with the text being so small... :|
    Then check again, because you've been fooled. There's no such typo.
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 15:13
    iToad:
    A lot of printers contain very capable CPUs to run the graphics engine. They could probably fly through a well-written Postscript program.

    One would hope, since that's what they were designed for.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 15:14
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    I never claimed to be smart, so your initial assertion was your own fault.
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Carry on lame-o. :P
    Glad I have your blessings!

    Am I write in assuming that as long as I keep typing stuff, your going to respond?
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 15:16
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    I never claimed to be smart, so your initial assertion was your own fault.
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Carry on lame-o. :P
    Glad I have your blessings!

    Am I write in assuming that as long as I keep typing stuff, your going to respond?
    Does your mom have a beard?
  • Matt Westwood 2011-10-25 15:16
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?


    Come on then fuckface, want to have a go? Think you're hard enough? You silly little wanker, just fuck off.
  • schmitter 2011-10-25 15:17
    Wasn't "The printer sat in the hallway, hooked up to an old PC that was the de facto print server."? Probably just Win98SE printer sharing. Since the tool wasn't printing anything, his print job should have been killed and his connection to the printer should have also been terminated.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 15:20
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    I thought smart guys like yourself don't go for lame mom jokes.
    I never claimed to be smart, so your initial assertion was your own fault.
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Carry on lame-o. :P
    Glad I have your blessings!

    Am I write in assuming that as long as I keep typing stuff, your going to respond?
    Does your mom have a beard?
    So that's a yes.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 15:20
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.


    Pope is incarnation of Vishnu only, asshat. And stop to be using my name.

    That what was previas Pope?

    Incarnation of vishnu is not to be taking form for anuther 2,000 years.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 15:23
    Matt Westwood:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?


    Come on then fuckface, want to have a go? Think you're hard enough? You silly little wanker, just fuck off.
    So some pommie bastid thinks he's tough, does he? Typical. Every Brit is a brawler as long as he's in Britain.
  • da Doctah 2011-10-25 15:26
    Lucent:
    Fuck You.
    Fuck Your Face.
    Fuck Your Job.
    Fuck Your Name.
    Fuck Your Khakis.
    Fuck Your Shoes.

    Fuck Your Mom.
    Fuck Your Dad.
    Fuck Your Sister.
    Fuck Your Brother.
    Fuck Your Kids.
    (I'll) Fuck Your Wife.

    Fuck Your Cat.
    Fuck Your Car.
    Fuck Your House.
    Fuck Your Goldfish.
    Fuck The Bushes Along Your Front Walk.

    Fuck Your Mailbox.
    Fuck Your Mailman.
    Fuck Your Refrigerator.
    Fuck Your Television.
    Fuck Your Star Wars Action Figure Collection.

    Fuck Everything About You.

    Fuck You...

    Fuck You...

    Fuck You.


    Uh-oh. Flaming is one thing, but now you've gone and committed a federal offense!
  • boog 2011-10-25 15:28
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    Hahaha!

    Normally I don't care much about the "your mom" jokes, but calling his mom a fat guy: +1
  • boog 2011-10-25 15:30
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    Oh boy! Yet another TDWTF-trollmeme! I can't wait to read this same comment tomorrow!
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 15:43
    boog:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    Hahaha!

    Normally I don't care much about the "your mom" jokes, but calling his mom a fat guy: +1
    Thanks! I was kind of disheartened when Mr. Toughguy told me he didn't like it.
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 15:50
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.


    Pope is incarnation of Vishnu only, asshat. And stop to be using my name.

    That what was previas Pope?

    Incarnation of vishnu is not to be taking form for anuther 2,000 years.


    Previous Pope is also avatar of Vishnu, jerknoodle. Do you think you are the one to tell Vishnu when or how to appear on earth? Perhaps you are even Vishnu himself?
    This would explain why you feel you may usurp my good name!
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 15:57
    The only thing worse than a troll is the FUCKING IDIOT (like C-Octothorpe) who continually responds to it.
  • Like Whoa Dude 2011-10-25 15:57
    This place is getting weird. I'd imagine reading these comments would seem like some kind of trip to newcomers.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 15:59
    Zylon:
    The only thing worse than a troll is the FUCKING IDIOT (like C-Octothorpe) who continually responds to it.
    So your at least better than C-Octomom, right?
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 16:03
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.


    Pope is incarnation of Vishnu only, asshat. And stop to be using my name.

    That what was previas Pope?

    Incarnation of vishnu is not to be taking form for anuther 2,000 years.


    Previous Pope is also avatar of Vishnu, jerknoodle. Do you think you are the one to tell Vishnu when or how to appear on earth? Perhaps you are even Vishnu himself?
    This would explain why you feel you may usurp my good name!

    Than perhaps u can be explaning how they both are being alive at seme times? Mintal mijit!
  • Dr.Evil 2011-10-25 16:05
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 16:08
    Dr.Evil:
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.
    I can stop anytime I want, really!

    *hands trembling*
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 16:11
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.

    I am thinking "road to hell is paved with good intentions." Lukily, we Hindu get multiple incarnashians rether than Pope-folowers.


    Pope is incarnation of Vishnu only, asshat. And stop to be using my name.

    That what was previas Pope?

    Incarnation of vishnu is not to be taking form for anuther 2,000 years.


    Previous Pope is also avatar of Vishnu, jerknoodle. Do you think you are the one to tell Vishnu when or how to appear on earth? Perhaps you are even Vishnu himself?
    This would explain why you feel you may usurp my good name!

    Than perhaps u can be explaning how they both are being alive at seme times? Mintal mijit!


    Perhaps u r thinking that Vishnu is bound by ur conception of space and time? Murkha! Is Vishnu, is not Bloody Martin Smith from Kolkata!
  • knight2k 2011-10-25 16:13
    geoffrey:
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.


    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Try explaining why there will be mass redundancies to your coworkers standing round the printer next week.



    I've been in IT for 16 years and I have never seen a job readout in error. That is Windows, linux, SunOS and AiX. Regardless, as others have said, you do NOT put a critical printout on a shared printer. You would print that mythical 50MB job in the CFO's office on his private printer or in accounting on their private printer or anywhere else than a shared hallway printer.

    There does not exist a scenario where ANY print job should take 2 days unless you are printing out the Library of Congress. Print Queues get hung all the time. It is standard procedure for anyone to kill the queue, but many users do not know how.

    If the job has not started it does not matter what it was printing or how important it was. Nothing was lost since it never started. You kill the job and you restart it. Even a 50mb file does not spool for days or even hours.

  • Corkscrew 2011-10-25 16:16
    s/pendants/pedants
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 16:23
    Dr.Evil:
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.

    I'll shove that doughnut straight up your taint.
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 16:24
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Dr.Evil:
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.

    I'll shove that doughnut straight up your taint.


    But there isn't a donut. Your not to smart, are you?
  • forgottenlord 2011-10-25 16:24
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    Any job that looks like a few bytes big that is taking much longer to print that should be deemed possible that is capable of taking down the entire company if killed should not be run on a shared resource. And if the company feels that the person who was using said shared resource without being given sufficient approval to effectively take the resource offline and properly inform staff that such resource was being taken offline deserves to fail.

    For that matter, anything that comes close to having a significant impact on the company that requires a shared resource to be dedicated to it for multiple days preventing other individuals from using said shared resource should be approved by management and passed on to everyone else.

    The reality is that if you've got a giant queue waiting for said shared resource to be available for 3 days and are unaware, at the very least, that it won't be, then you have a serious problem.

    If it's a huge print job and it's taking a while - that's one thing. That's not what was happening here. The normal operation of the printer has clearly been interrupted and under normal circumstances, any reasonable individual would assume that the printer's normal operation has been violated and need to be corrected first.

    Oh - and there's absolutely no way that the cost of buying the guy his own printer is outweighed by the cost of having that many people standing in line unable to do anything for 4 days. It's unlikely his numbers are worth that much either.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 16:25
    Zylon:
    The only thing worse than a troll is the FUCKING IDIOT (like C-Octothorpe) who continually responds to it.
    Meh, nothing other than vitriol ever comes from your cake-eater. Go fuck a dog.
  • That Guy 2011-10-25 16:27
    You're not allowed to pull that excuse two articles in a row right after multiple people call you out on your bullshit.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-25 16:32
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Dr.Evil:
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.

    I'll shove that doughnut straight up your taint.


    But there isn't a donut. Your not to smart, are you?
    Your going to respond to an obvious put-on and talk about smarts in the same breath? Dolt. :p
  • Nagesh 2011-10-25 16:35
    That Guy:
    You're not allowed to pull that excuse two articles in a row right after multiple people call you out on your bullshit.

    Someting tel me knew meme is being formed.
  • Mental Help 2011-10-25 16:40
    It appears some posters should seek help from professionals who can diagnose mental illnesses those posters have been picking up or developing over time. Living your life in a negative way, even temporarily on the internet, can have serious negative consequences on your quality of life.

    http://www.cracked.com/article_17522_6-new-personality-disorders-caused-by-internet.html
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 16:42
    Nagesh:
    That Guy:
    You're not allowed to pull that excuse two articles in a row right after multiple people call you out on your bullshit.

    Someting tel me knew meme is being formed.
    I thought memes are supposed to be funny?

    Wait, isn't asking this question a meme? Oh shit, I think I just heard space-time start to tear itself apart (not as loud as I thought it would be).
  • John Evans 2011-10-25 16:44
    "You fool! The print server isn't running my numbers. The PRINTER is! It's far more powerful than you can imagine!"

    Is anyone else picturing Emperor Palpatine?
  • appellatio 2011-10-25 16:45
    Steve The Cynic:
    Oh, yeah, and:

    6. How on earth is a virtual printer going to help numbers-boy? Allegedly nothing in the department except the real printer has enough compute power. The virtual printer is, presumably, not on the real printer, so won't benefit from the compute power of the real printer rather than the admittedly feeble print server...

    I smell a fictionalisation error. (It smells like a herring that's been left out on the kitchen counter for a week, by the way.)


    His job running on the printer had nothing to do with printer's CPU. Unless all computers in the building are from 1992 and the printer was from 2011, there is no printer in the world coming from the same age as computers around it that can do anything faster then any of those computers.

    The truth is that that fat dick somehow learned how to send a computation job to a printer, and he didn't know how else to do it. Those kind of pricks actually think they are amazing programmers for coming up with such an idea, while even Excel could do what they wanted. I bet his code was unnecessarily under-performing, too - again, cause he didn't know better.

    Reminds me of a guy who I worked with once. He jumped all excited cause he figured out how to change a background color of a web page. Yes, this was a longer time ago (e.g. 2004), but still; dude... That's the type of dumbass this guy, what's-his-name (not Bob) probably is...
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-25 16:47
    Mental Help:
    It appears some posters should seek help from professionals who can diagnose mental illnesses those posters have been picking up or developing over time. Living your life in a negative way, even temporarily on the internet, can have serious negative consequences on your quality of life.

    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.
  • Zylon 2011-10-25 16:51
    C-Octothorpe:
    Meh, nothing other than vitriol ever comes from your cake-eater.

    And yet, you're a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum who actively contributes to the sheer awfulness of these forums. You could get flattened by a city bus tomorrow, and not only would your absence go unmourned, the universe would be a better place for it.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-25 16:53
    Zylon:
    C-Octothorpe:
    Meh, nothing other than vitriol ever comes from your cake-eater.

    And yet, you're a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum who actively contributes to the sheer awfulness of these forums. You could get flattened by a city bus tomorrow, and not only would your absence go unmourned, the universe would be a better place for it.
    That made me feel warm inside... :)

    Also, thanks for proving my point.
  • HP PhaserJet 2011-10-25 17:05
    Like Whoa Dude:
    This place is getting weird. I'd imagine reading these comments would seem like some kind of trip to newcomers.
    Website is a collection of the stories that tell us just what it means to have lived, for once, and for all, in a world where the simian overlords are left without their easy-to-hold chains over our very hearts...

    and minds...

    and souls...

    and hands...

    and the lashes over our back...

    and the yokes over our shoulders...

    hateful, all of it. But the great, big ball a fire in the sky will always smile on us, no matter who or how or where or when or why or what we are.
  • William S. Sessions 2011-10-25 17:09
    HP PhaserJet:
    Like Whoa Dude:
    This place is getting weird. I'd imagine reading these comments would seem like some kind of trip to newcomers.
    Website is a collection of the stories that tell us just what it means to have lived, for once, and for all, in a world where the simian overlords are left without their easy-to-hold chains over our very hearts...

    and minds...

    and souls...

    and hands...

    and the lashes over our back...

    and the yokes over our shoulders...

    hateful, all of it. But the great, big ball a fire in the sky will always smile on us, no matter who or how or where or when or why or what we are.
    Winners don't do drugs.
  • boog 2011-10-25 17:16
    Zylon:
    C-Octothorpe:
    Meh, nothing other than vitriol ever comes from your cake-eater.

    And yet, you're a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum who actively contributes to the sheer awfulness of these forums. You could get flattened by a city bus tomorrow, and not only would your absence go unmourned, the universe would be a better place for it.
    C-Octomatopoeia may be a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum, but at least he's funny. And I'll take funny over hopeless whining any day.
  • Abso 2011-10-25 17:16
    C-Octothorpe:
    Abso:
    C-Octothorpe:
    redblacktree:
    FTFM

    Isn't it traditional to pretend that your sockpuppets are different people?
    Sorry, I don't follow...

    I was simply stating that, in my opinion, geoffrey wasn't admitting defeat and instead executed a successful trolling. If redblacktree thought something else I am not one to tell him what he meant. He meant what he said, which is why I fixed it for myself, not for him...

    Capeesh?! :)

    Ah, ok. That makes sense. I'm used to seeing folks use "FTFM" only on their own posts, and "FTFY" on others' posts even when they mean "changed what you said to what I would have said."
  • Seahen 2011-10-25 17:18
    TRWTF is that nobody thought of creating a time-sharing system for the printer so that it could work as both a mainframe *and* a printer. If they had, the company could have made money patenting it, and the don't-kill-my-job guy could have gone down in history as the inventor of GPGPU.
  • Abso 2011-10-25 17:20
    Corkscrew:
    s/pendants/pedants

    I assumed that was the joke.
  • Herby 2011-10-25 17:22
    I would have done what any normal person would have: Power cycle the printer. It removed all evidence of the "problem" and all evidence that I was the one who "fixed" it.

    Repeat as necessary.

    ObPrinters: Yes, the printer can be a powerful processor, but when you add a Postscript interpreter, the execution DOES slow down. Go back to your excel spreadsheet!
  • Chris 2011-10-25 18:05
    seriously?
    as an admin, I'd have that guy explain the misuse of a critical shared resource, have him reprimanded for he abuse of the colleagues, and wasting their time (and company money), have the he dish out a written warning for bfeeach of policy, after killing his job, and after the second breach, have his print rights revoked.
    removal of equipment would amount to sabotage, and an automatic pink slip for the guy at this stage.
    if he needs running numbers for that long, that late, preventing others from doing their job, then its just extremely bad planning, and you would question the abilities anyway.
  • Matt Westwood 2011-10-25 18:09
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Matt Westwood:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?


    Come on then fuckface, want to have a go? Think you're hard enough? You silly little wanker, just fuck off.
    So some pommie bastid thinks he's tough, does he? Typical. Every Brit is a brawler as long as he's in Britain.


    Stupid shithead can't even spell "bastard". Piss on you.
  • Matt Westwood 2011-10-25 18:11
    C-Octothorpe:
    Dr.Evil:
    All these pages of comments, and still no clear winner. Props to geoffery for bowing out gracefully and allowing the embers to continue smoldering in his absence. You know you have been trolled effectively when the troll leaves and the war continues.

    And Mr. T... bad troll, no donut.
    I can stop anytime I want, really!

    *hands trembling*


    Naah, leave him to me, he's breakfast.
  • Bob (not the same Bob) 2011-10-25 18:16
    Are you kidding me? The second time he pulled that crap I would have cancelled the print job and nuked his rights to the printer.

    What's he going to do? Complain to his boss that he can't use the printer as his personal mainframe?
  • B-dogg 2011-10-25 19:10

    Do Not Kill Job


    No one killed him, he died of pancreatic cancer. How insensitive.
  • Not Frist 2011-10-25 19:17
    Can't we all just get along? Sniff. Seriously though, what a great WTF. The guy saying that the 'print' job should not have been canceled is clearly a fucking idiot. If that guys wants to respond to me, don't. I don't argue with children. BTW, fuck you idiot. That is all.
  • kek 2011-10-25 19:43
    Ok. Then I get to throw one at you. At your head. From a gun. And instead of a ball, it's an egg. Except the egg is a live grenade. You're a contrarian moron
  • Oddball 2011-10-25 20:03
    The first PostScript printers were quite powerful computers, as rendering the PostScript language was not the easiest thing to do with '80 technology.

    But, I would personally like to have results for those huge calculations in digital form instead of paper.

    "Hmm, the left margin should be a bit wider..."
    (Re-printing...)
  • Oddball 2011-10-25 20:09
    Imagine sending an article to a science journal:

    "As the following image from the simulation proves:
    [simulation written in PostScript that takes 2 years to run]"
  • Smitty 2011-10-25 21:18
    redblacktree:
    geoffrey:
    I am tired so lets agree to disagree for now and leave it at that


    Translation: I now realize that I took a ridiculous position, and I can no longer defend it. However, my ego is much too large to admit defeat, so I will instead unilaterally declare a "draw."
    Don't get me wrong, I agree that geoofery was a tool or a troll at least, but is everything on forums about winning or losing? People express their opinion, and other people yell them down (we all do sometimes), but maybe geoffery really is tired. More to the point, I'm not sure having a go at him added anything useful one way or another...
  • Shea 2011-10-25 21:25
    I'd have created a ghostscript on the print server that deleted any job that had been running longer than an hour, as a scheduled task on an account he didn't have access to.

    "Did you delete my job?"

    "No."

    End of story.

    This is the worst kind of resource dictator, and then to presume you know more than others while causing appreciable harm to their workflow is cause for dismissal.

    If you don't have the resources to do your job on your computer you're either doing it wrong, or you need to requisition proper hardware or coding techniques. There IS a way, but this is not it.
  • Just Some Guy 2011-10-25 21:40
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority.


    Hell, I'd go back and check the printer every hour or so just to kill the effin job again and write Skroo U on the stupid note.
  • Mark 2011-10-25 21:41
    Frist

    This comment was added by a ps printer....
  • immibis 2011-10-25 23:09
    D Martensson:

    If a car has broken breaks you do not glue the door lock, you put a note up warning about the broken breaks ;)


    If the breaks are broken, does that mean the car is fine?
  • random person 2011-10-25 23:48
    For postscript running on a printer, I had a printer when (with 8MB of RAM in it) would do an OK Sierpinski triangle, but would choke if I turned up the # of points to high. Couple weeks later I had increased the RAM to 72 MB (8MB built in + 64 MB stick). Spent about 30 minutes and spat out this nicer triangle that it couldn't before. (Printer was a HP 1200. Parallel & USB, both PCL and PS, ~$300 when I got it in summer 2002. OK printer for the amount of paper I needed to print when at college)

    What does this have to do with the story? Not much. Look up Sierpinski triangle postscript on Google and you can find some interesting postscript programs out there. Towers of Hanoi also have some interesting postscript programs(although they just seem to use the error lines for the user output and nothing gets "printed" although I'm sure there must be some version which prints out each step). Using ghostscript you can save printer time and paper though.
  • Digger 2011-10-26 01:42
    I can't think of any important prints they might have.

    Can't they just freaking wait UNTIL FRIDAY?
  • Watson 2011-10-26 02:15
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Translation: good intentions alone aren't worth spit - they need to be backed up with deeds to count for anything.
  • Watson 2011-10-26 02:18
    trtrwtf:
    Coyne:

    It's like...it's like building Mars-shot navigation around an advanced scientific calculator.



    Why not? It worked for the moon shots...

    And the Space Shuttle.
  • da Doctah 2011-10-26 02:52
    Oddball:
    Imagine sending an article to a science journal:

    "As the following image from the simulation proves:
    [simulation written in PostScript that takes 2 years to run]"


    That would never pass peer review. Images don't "prove" anything, they only "illustrate" or "demonstrate".
  • QJo 2011-10-26 03:41
    Watson:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Translation: good intentions alone aren't worth spit - they need to be backed up with deeds to count for anything.


    Not necessarily. Except for the motto having been misquoted - it should be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith. It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them.

    Although your interpretation works as well.
  • Freddy 2011-10-26 04:00
    Ummm... Maybe going off on a tangent here, but where does the sys admin fit into all this? Surely s/he would have final say and the authority to keep all IT resources working and used correctly - and then I'd like to see Mr. "the world revolves around me" say or do anything.

    The fact that the sys admin wasn't made aware of the 'fault' was probably the first mistake Bob made!
  • caffiend 2011-10-26 04:11
    Sounds far more like he was competing with everyone else for scarce funding and his little print job was just a way of holding up other people's applications causing some to miss the deadline, increasing the likelihood of his project being approved.

    I mean honestly, though it may be possible to use Post Script to perform some computation, how are you going to get the result? Print it out then take a photo of each page sitting on a wooden table, submit it to a cloud based OCR service.
  • Hammo 2011-10-26 04:30
    Son, we live in a world with print servers, and those print servers need to be guarded by word documents with writing. I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom... We use words like postscript and code; We use these words as the backbone of a life spent number crunching something... I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the very blanket of print services I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you and stopped cancelling my print jobs. Otherwise, I would suggest you setup a print server and buy your own toner cartridges.
  • minime 2011-10-26 05:10
    geoffrey:
    centurijon:
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    There are times when you need a maverick, or at least someone to take initiative in a poor situation.

    Having a line of people waiting for a print queue (like sheep) is completely unacceptable - especially if the non-print job is expected to take two days to run. The article stated that he tried to find the person responsible for the print job and that person was missing. In that situation I would not have even hesitated to cancel the job either.

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.

    Indeed, and every sane manager would see that clearing up the situation would cost more than two days, and thus everyone should just continue to work unproductively. Solitaire and Minesweeper are installed for a reason.
  • minime 2011-10-26 05:14
    geoffrey:
    Wow you would have thought I was advocating world war 3 by the tone of some of the responses! O.K. lets just all calm down and rewind.

    The central issue here is that the *printer* is company property, not Bob's property. The job itself is also technically company property since we can assume the submitter is a company employee. Whether to cancel a piece of work - an act which cannot be undone after the fact - therefore should be a management decision, not "bobs"

    So should be the decision to occupy the printer for two days. Or maybe even to print something, since after all, its company property, not the property of the guy who wants to print something...
  • minime 2011-10-26 05:15
    boog:
    geoffrey:
    ...it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Bullshit. Say, let's all stop calling it "a job you know nothing about", shall we?

    1) The job was only a few bytes.
    2) It had been running for almost an hour.
    3) It hadn't started printing yet.
    4) It was holding up everyone else.

    On any normal print server, this would be an error state. And if cancelling a tiny blocking long-running non-printing print job could potentially bring down the entire company, you've really got bigger issues.

    Indeeed. A tiny *PRINT* job won't. When cancelled, it is trivial to resubmit it. No big deal for anyone.
  • minime 2011-10-26 05:18
    QJo:

    The fact that there's a shouty message attached to the terminal might also have something to do with it. From the tone of the behaviour of Bob, I suspect that he may have actually held a position of some seniority in the company, and therefore able to wield considerable responsibility, for example, the knowhow and chutzpah to make executive decisions about whether to kill print jobs that are holding up productivity.

    Given the following heated discussion with that guy when bob stormed to his desk, I strongly agree with that one. The other guy was certainly on the same "level" as Bob was, and both were certainly not at the end of the foodchain.
  • Luiz Felipe 2011-10-26 05:46
    Wasnt much more easy if the programmer just put a broken sign in the printer. Then people will not try to use it and complain.
    He is not much smart besides postscript (anyone that can program basic, can program fortran, can program postscrip also, just must be a fool to waste time is this kind of shit), i it was, then he will prevent people from using the printer, perhaps changing network port, and ductaping its inputs and outputs, and puting a sign, now it is broken and cannot be used anymore, then take away kboard and monitor, and put a sign dont touch. Perhaps even taking the printer to his room was the best response first.
  • SEMI-HYBRID code 2011-10-26 06:00
    ThePants999:
    this sentence:

    Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them.


    Seriously. FTW. That sentence was the most hillarious part of the whole story.


    FTFY
  • Osmood 2011-10-26 06:12
    From the sysadmins viewpoint
    1. The user was wasting everyone else's time & costing the company money as they waited for their printouts.
    2. Company equipment is meant to be used for the purpose for which it is provided - not days-long computations on a PRINTER! Misuse of company property is a matter to be taken up with a manager.
    3. Printers usually have slower processors and less RAM than a PC - wtf is a user doing wasting their own time writing a slow postscript program to crunch numbers that could be done more quickly and productively on equipment (a PC for example) that is MEANT for the job.
    4. The user needs a lesson in communications and the meaning of the word SHARED in shared resource.
    5. The sysadmin says DONT f*ck with the equipment. You don't get to do your own PC programming - if you run programs that aren't approved then out the door you go...
  • CoSYG 2011-10-26 06:33
    QJo:
    Watson:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Translation: good intentions alone aren't worth spit - they need to be backed up with deeds to count for anything.


    Not necessarily. Except for the motto having been misquoted - it should be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith. It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them.

    Although your interpretation works as well.
    "- it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith.
    - It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them."


    What difference?

  • yername 2011-10-26 06:39
    GettinSadda:
    dpm:
    geoffrey:
    There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    geoffrey:
    Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.
    You are assuming that. I think it equally, if not more, likely that they hung back because they did not want to get yelled at by a socially-inept bully.
    Unfortunately, this story includes two socially-inept bullies

    Yeah, the asshole who doesn't know that printers are used for printing and his supervisor.
  • yername 2011-10-26 06:43
    geoffrey:
    Let me throw a curve ball at you. What if the job readout was in error and the job was actually 50 megabytes of important company report - a report which management urgently needs to close the quarter?

    Resize images drastically if it takes hours to print the first page.
  • QJo 2011-10-26 06:45
    CoSYG:
    QJo:
    Watson:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Translation: good intentions alone aren't worth spit - they need to be backed up with deeds to count for anything.


    Not necessarily. Except for the motto having been misquoted - it should be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith. It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them.

    Although your interpretation works as well.
    "- it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith.
    - It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them."


    What difference?


    I'm sorry, beg your pardon - what's your point?
  • Nagesh 2011-10-26 08:19
    boog:
    Zylon:
    C-Octothorpe:
    Meh, nothing other than vitriol ever comes from your cake-eater.

    And yet, you're a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum who actively contributes to the sheer awfulness of these forums. You could get flattened by a city bus tomorrow, and not only would your absence go unmourned, the universe would be a better place for it.
    C-Octomatopoeia may be a troll-feeding attention-whoring sub-scum, but at least he's funny. And I'll take funny over hopeless whining any day.

    You are not being part of solution, but part of problem. When is the last time you r posting anything relevent, booger?
  • Lucent 2011-10-26 08:30
    Not Frist:
    Can't we all just get along? Sniff. Seriously though, what a great WTF. The guy saying that the 'print' job should not have been canceled is clearly a fucking idiot. If that guys wants to respond to me, don't. I don't argue with children. BTW, fuck you idiot. That is all.
    The hatred in this thread makes me feel all tingly.
  • Oslo 2011-10-26 09:01
    Witness the power of this fully configurable print server!
  • Bldsquirrel 2011-10-26 09:19
    I can't tell if you're retarded, a troll, or a highly intelligent Wally honing his art of staunchly defending an absurd decision which involves you not working.

    "I couldn't do any work boss, the printer was tied up and I was waiting on a management decision to fix it. You didn't want me to not respect management, did you?"

  • The poop of DOOM 2011-10-26 09:35
    boog:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    Oh boy! Yet another TDWTF-trollmeme! I can't wait to read this same comment tomorrow!

    There you go!
  • Bldsquirrel 2011-10-26 09:36
    C-Octothorpe:
    It's a delicate balance of stupidity and sincerity, really. You can't make it too obvious because fellow posters will see it for what it is and ignore it, and this includes follow-up responses. If it's too stupid or outlandish, he wouldn't get any bites.


    Honestly, if you want to piss people off on the internet, it's much easier just to find people with genuinely stupid opinions (and by "find" I mean "throw a rock") and tell how stupid those opinions are. Hell, you don't even have to be rude- the dumber and less informed somebody's opinion is, the more likely they are to react with violent rage to have the logical fallacies in their arguments pointed out to them.

    You basically know you've won when it devolves into them saying "I DIDN'T SAY THAT, RAGE RAGE!" and you copy-pasting the earlier post where they said exactly that.
  • The poop of DOOM 2011-10-26 09:41
    The Mr. T Experience:
    Matt Westwood:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    trtrwtf:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.


    Grammatically, that sentence is a disaster. Please try again.

    See what I mean? I just can imagine your nerdy expression on your smug nerd face, teetering over your stupid noodle neck.

    Who wouldn't punch this?


    Come on then fuckface, want to have a go? Think you're hard enough? You silly little wanker, just fuck off.
    So some pommie bastid thinks he's tough, does he? Typical. Every Brit is a brawler as long as he's in Britain.

    Oy wogbreath, go back to your manara!
  • polanski 2011-10-26 09:48
    Well, it is a problem when the printer freezes, or, in Polish, "drukarka wisi".
  • boog 2011-10-26 10:08
    Nagesh (copy of a copy):
    You are not being part of solution, but part of problem.
    Which problem?
  • Bronie 2011-10-26 10:11
    Osmood:
    From the sysadmins viewpoint
    1. The user was wasting everyone else's time & costing the company money as they waited for their printouts.
    2. Company equipment is meant to be used for the purpose for which it is provided - not days-long computations on a PRINTER! Misuse of company property is a matter to be taken up with a manager.
    3. Printers usually have slower processors and less RAM than a PC - wtf is a user doing wasting their own time writing a slow postscript program to crunch numbers that could be done more quickly and productively on equipment (a PC for example) that is MEANT for the job.
    4. The user needs a lesson in communications and the meaning of the word SHARED in shared resource.
    5. The sysadmin says DONT f*ck with the equipment. You don't get to do your own PC programming - if you run programs that aren't approved then out the door you go...


    You missing two points:
    a. That dork might be sysadmin himself
    b. His PC processing power might be busy with REALLY important things, like watching video in SVGA quality or running ADOM game
  • Hitman 2011-10-26 10:11
    boog:
    Nagesh (copy of a copy):
    You are not being part of solution, but part of problem.
    Which problem?


    You exist in this world, that one
  • boog 2011-10-26 10:14
    Hitman:
    boog:
    Nagesh (copy of a copy):
    You are not being part of solution, but part of problem.
    Which problem?


    You exist in this world, that one
    Well? Which is it, this world or that one?

    Make up your mind!
  • Ritchie70 2011-10-26 10:32
    Thanks to a recent "green initiative" we have three printers on our floor, and that's fairly typical in the building.

    Each floor has hundreds of people.

    And two of the three printers are the Sharp copiers.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-26 10:38
    boog:
    Hitman:
    boog:
    Nagesh (copy of a copy):
    You are not being part of solution, but part of problem.
    Which problem?


    You exist in this world, that one
    Well? Which is it, this world or that one?

    Make up your mind!
    Jeeze, don't confuse the poor guy. He's having enough trouble writing complete sentences with correct punctuation...

    What's next? You're going to ask him to chew his food before swallowing!
  • L. 2011-10-26 10:39
    QJo:

    There are two distinct problems here, butting head-to-head. For one thing, Bob's just a little bit gung-ho, and perhaps should have checked what the job was before deleting it, but second, Mister Galloping Asperger .

    wait what ? assburgers ?
  • trtrwtf 2011-10-26 11:08
    QJo:

    There are two distinct problems here, butting head-to-head. For one thing, Bob's just a little bit gung-ho, and perhaps should have checked what the job was before deleting it, but second, Mister Galloping Asperger should have taken the time to explain what he was doing in the first place, in order to arrive at the compromise which was the reduced-priority job, rather than just play the "I'm far too important to talk to you" card.


    This is not a communication problem, this is a moron problem. If the printer is backed up, you kill the job that's choking it and you move on. If someone keeps sending the job that chokes it, you beat them about the head and shoulders with a tire iron until they stop. Simple.
  • The Guy With the "Z" 2011-10-26 12:22
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-26 12:26
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    Says you.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-26 12:41
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    Says you.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    What makes you think he meant in the ass?
  • The Guy With the "Z" 2011-10-26 12:45
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    Says you.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    Yes I did. And yes, she did have her butt in the back, like most people, and it doesn't surprise me that you do too... what's your point?
  • The Mr. T Experience 2011-10-26 12:49
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    Says you.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    Yes I did. And yes, she did have her butt in the back, like most people, and it doesn't surprise me that you do too... what's your point?
    That's where me second set of teeth are. Our ewe to aspie two be able too parse text with homophone replacements?
  • boog 2011-10-26 13:02
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs...
    I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    ...what's your point?
    That's where me second set of teeth are.
    Based on everything I've read, Zuneberry prefers ears and eye-sockets.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-26 13:11
    boog:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs...
    I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    ...what's your point?
    That's where me second set of teeth are.
    Based on everything I've read, Zuneberry prefers ears and eye-sockets.
    I've also heard him state on occasion that he likes to create new orifices, too.
  • amischiefr 2011-10-26 13:15
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.

    No, they just didn't have the balls to go over there and do it themselves. You're creating a strawman argument here. Printer's job: print ink to paper.

    If (job.elapsestime > 5 hours) job.kill();

    Period. I don't care of Carmak, Gates, Gosling or God himself created the fucking job.
  • boog 2011-10-26 13:32
    C-Octothorpe:
    boog:
    Based on everything I've read, Zuneberry prefers ears and eye-sockets.
    I've also heard him state on occasion that he likes to create new orifices, too.
    Indeed. I have a sinking suspicion he's one of the Woodland Christmas Critters.
  • Jay 2011-10-26 14:04
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    I am always RELUCTANT to cancel someone else's job, but I can't agree that "you just don't".

    Suppose you saw a truck with no driver accelerating toward the kindergarten playground. Would the responsible thing to do be: (a) Do everything possible to get control of the truck and stop it before children are hurt; or (b) Do nothing, on the assumption that someone must have deliberately set the truck in motion for a good reason and you have no right to interfere?

    So okay, in this case no one is going to die if they can't get their printout. But no one is going to die if this mysterious print job doesn't run either. The stakes are lower but the principle is the same. It is bad manners and inefficient business practice to cancel someone else's job because you want the resource now. But it is equally bad manners and inefficient business practice to unreasonably hog a resource that others need.

    In real life, when I see a job hogging resources and denying service to others, I try to find the person who initiated the job and find out what they are doing. If I can't find the person, I'll kill the job. 9 times out of 10 they thank me later for fixing the problem that they accidentally created. (If the person insists on hogging a resource and they outrank me I'll talk to a bigger boss about it. Otherwise I'll kill the job.)

  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-26 14:09
    The Guy With the "Z":
    Fondle memories of childhood.
    ZTFY

    Oh dear god, what's happening to me?!?!?!
  • boog 2011-10-26 14:21
    The Guy With the "Z":
    boog:
    C-Octothorpe:
    boog:
    Based on everything I've read, Zuneberry prefers ears and eye-sockets.
    I've also heard him state on occasion that he likes to create new orifices, too.
    Indeed. I have a sinking suspicion he's one of the Woodland Christmas Critters.
    I always used to love watching that show with my stepdad on a hot summer night and we'd strip down to our underwear and all sweaty. Fond memories of childhood.
    Wow, that's pretty mild compared to what I was suggesting.
  • Buddy 2011-10-26 14:47
    In the old days, a PostScript printer processor might be running at 10MHz with the computers at half that speed, so it made some sense to use it as a number cruncher, especially if it was idle a lot.

    Just reading up on it -- looks interesting, especially the portability of the language, might play around with it for kicks.
  • BobD 2011-10-26 14:52
    The Apple LaserWriter, when it came out, had the fastest processor of any apple product. It was 50% faster than the Macintosh with four times more RAM. If you're crunching numbers, that's a serious improvement.
  • eric76 2011-10-26 15:47
    Maybe I'm being stupid or missing something obvious, but I have a question about this.

    In the end, Bob created a virtual printer for the job. In other words, the job wasn't sent to the actual printer for processing, but instead the processing was handled on the print server itself.

    Right?

    So did the job ever finish? If so, I assume that the output was to a file on the print server's hard drive instead of to the printer. Or can you have a virtual printer send the output directly to a real printer?

    Of course, if a virtual printer on an old machine retasked into a print server could do the job, then that would show that the piece of crap PC wasn't so piece of crap as imagined.
  • The Guy With the "Z" 2011-10-26 16:07
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    Fondle memories of childhood.
    ZTFY

    Oh dear god, what's happening to me?!?!?!

    Milhouse^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ZTFY is now a meme.

    You're actually pretty cool when you're not being a FUCKING ASSHOLE who responds to trolls.

    Not that I haven't waged a love affair with assholes.
  • C-Octothorpe 2011-10-26 16:16
    The Guy With the "Z":
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    Fondle memories of childhood.
    ZTFY

    Oh dear god, what's happening to me?!?!?!

    Milhouse^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ZTFY is now a meme.

    You're actually pretty cool when you're not being a FUCKING ASSHOLE who responds to trolls.

    Not that I haven't waged a love affair with assholes.
    The days that I'm dancing with the trolls are usually the days I'm in a bad fucking mood and need to have my access to this site blocked.
  • Mark 2011-10-26 17:09
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    Fondle memories of childhood.
    ZTFY

    Oh dear god, what's happening to me?!?!?!

    Milhouse^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ZTFY is now a meme.

    You're actually pretty cool when you're not being a FUCKING ASSHOLE who responds to trolls.

    Not that I haven't waged a love affair with assholes.
    The days that I'm dancing with the trolls are usually the days I'm in a bad fucking mood and need to have my access to this site blocked.
    Sounds like you'd never get to read an article...
  • Matt Westwood 2011-10-26 17:51
    C-Octothorpe:
    boog:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs...
    I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    ...what's your point?
    That's where me second set of teeth are.
    Based on everything I've read, Zuneberry prefers ears and eye-sockets.
    I've also heard him state on occasion that he likes to create new orifices, too.

    Pedicadio, it's called. Excellent call.
  • Matt Westwood 2011-10-26 17:53
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    The Guy With the "Z":
    The Mr. T Experience:
    All you nerds are a bunch of jerkoffs, and you deserve every punch you've ever received.
    ppfffft. You're hardly scary. I used to fuck guys like you in prison.
    Says you.
    You ever see the movie "teeth"? I'm like the protagonist, butt in the back.
    Yes I did. And yes, she did have her butt in the back, like most people, and it doesn't surprise me that you do too... what's your point?
    That's where me second set of teeth are. Our ewe to aspie two be able too parse text with homophone replacements?

    Oh yes, that's after I hit you so hard your teeth ended up in your arse.
  • lvl 2 support 2011-10-26 17:59
    You are all wrong, if someone has inadequate resources (standard pc) to do their job (2 days, use of a printer) they should plan in advance to have the adequate resources available. If they can't get what they need to do their job, they should be talking to management in advance.

    CAPTCHA: genitus - optimas primes gay brother
  • ContraCorners 2011-10-26 20:15
    boog:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    Hahaha!

    Normally I don't care much about the "your mom" jokes, but calling his mom a fat guy: +1

    Hey, let's have a little sensitivity here. I have a son who's mom was a fat guy...
  • Laserjet 2000 2011-10-26 20:48
    Great story, however the ending regarding the virtual printer solution seemed fishy to me as well. Surely the PostScript Wizard would have noticed that suddenly the number crunching was at 1/50th to 1/200th of the previous efficiency due to the virtualisation overhead.

    I've worked with people like the PostScript Wizard and they always cause trouble no matter what they're 'working' on. In all fairness sometimes they create brilliantly unexpected results due to their obsessive nature - but mostly they're remembered as 'that guy nobody ever wanted to end up stuck on a project with'. Sad.
  • Watson 2011-10-26 22:29
    QJo:
    Watson:
    geoffrey:
    Hell is paved with good intentions.
    Translation: good intentions alone aren't worth spit - they need to be backed up with deeds to count for anything.


    Not necessarily. Except for the motto having been misquoted - it should be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", it is often taken to mean that a lot of really bad stuff is done in good faith. It's often used as a defence against meddling busybody do-gooders who interfere in things a lot and break them.

    Although your interpretation works as well.


    But if the intended meaning as as an excuse for not doing anything - that doing nothing is preferable to doing something - then surely it would be "The road to Hell is paved with good deeds".

    I'm reminded of the generic Boy Scout helping the generic Little Old Lady across the street - whether she wants to cross or not. But on a more serious note (too serious for this forum by far, I'll wager), I'll cite the recent toddler-vs-van hit-and-run incident: I'm sure everyone who walked past had the best of intentions.....
  • Snow 2011-10-26 22:45
    QJo:
    Mister Galloping Asperger ...

    On behalf of all of us who have Asperger's syndrome I would like to say "FUCK YOU"
    Not every asshole has Asperger's syndrome, and not every person with Asperger's syndrome is a self-absorbed asshole.

    I am sick of being maligned by Asperger's being thrown around as a byword for medically-excusable sociopathic-jackassery by lawyers, the media and people like you.

    From this point forward I ask that you make an effort to call the assholes 'assholes' ane leave the medical diagnoses to the professionals, you 'jackass'.
  • rwtagh 2011-10-27 00:47
    Furthermore, there is no irony in the sign, because it was Bob who made the don't use as mainframe addendum.

    Also, to those who suggested the printer be powercycled... if you look closely enough, the "power-skirt" said she turned the printer on and off.
  • kvvbassboy 2011-10-27 02:09
    "Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them."

    I am adding that to my sig. Context doesn't matter, that sentence is just pure awesome.
  • dna 2011-10-27 05:10
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority.


    Your serious about this ?
    I'm helpdesk technician, and no matter what the priority is, every printing process waiting for more than 20 minutes in a SHARED printer is open for killing.
    even if the job originate from the CEO.

    the point here is the fact the printer is shared...
    so yes, it's like killing an locked session in a SHARED computer, and let me tell you, this happens a lot, because, well shared mean shared.

    I see it comming that the job was not printing.
    The real WTF here is not using the printer for some obscure meaning, it's just telling anyone : don't use this commun printer, without saying why (but may be it's because if he say why, someone will talk with his supervisor and find a "solution" to this problem...)
  • Martijn 2011-10-27 06:10
    geoffrey:
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:
    Surely the real problem here is that this guy just figured he could cancel someone's job without bothering to discover the nature of that job or its priority. That's much like someone coming along and disconnecting your terminal while you work. I believe that kind of behaviour should result in you being marched from the building. There is a reason why everyone else was hesitant around the printer - they knew cancelling the job was wrong.

    If anyone should be marching down to HR it should be the guy whose job was cancelled without warning. Oh you can add ignoring warning signs to the charges too.


    Seriously? The printer isn't FOR running computational jobs, it's for printing. There's a reasonable expectation of availablility for a resource like that. If it's sitting for hours doing nothing, you can safely assume it's broken because no pages are being printed by a device whose sole purpose is to make pages have toner on them.


    You are absolutely correct, I agree with you. We have the benefit of understanding the situation however, the guy who just cancelled the job did not.

    An unnamed person had submitted a job to the internal reader. You don't just cancel it unless you know it's purpose and it's priority. you just don't. In this case the guy who submitted the job was in the wrong it turns out, but the ends do not justify the means. "Bob" was equally in the wrong here for acting like a maverick and just pulling the switch. In certain situations that might result in disciplinary action. Notice that his co-workers understood this which is why they didn't take any action themselves.


    His co-workers didn't understand it at all. Possibly they were easily intimidated by the psycho idiot. Possibly they were intimidated by the technology itself. They certainly didn't understand the need to give up their printing ability for some moron, or they wouldn't be crowding around the printer.

    And Bob was entirely correct in canceling the job. When a tiny job occupies the print queue without printing anything, you cancel it. That's how it works. That's what the ability to cancel print jobs is for.

    In fact, Bob was accommodating far beyond reason by letting the guy's job run at low priority. Most reasonable people would have kept killing it and kept explaining to the idiot that the printer is not meant as a compute server, and tried to get him fired for blocking everybody's business with his sophomore pranks.

    Using PostScript for computation jobs is funny when you're in college, but in a real business, people get fired for blocking everybody's work for days with pranks like that. And if he really honestly thinks that this is a sensible way to use a printer, he needs to be kept away from any kind of computers at all costs. And be fired, of course.
  • Martijn 2011-10-27 06:37
    Bldsquirrel:
    I can't tell if you're retarded, a troll, or a highly intelligent Wally honing his art of staunchly defending an absurd decision which involves you not working.

    "I couldn't do any work boss, the printer was tied up and I was waiting on a management decision to fix it. You didn't want me to not respect management, did you?"

    Exactly. If it was my company, I'd have a serious talk with everybody who didn't cancel that job. Everybody carries responsibility for the proper functioning of the company.

    Well, assuming there wasn't a sysadmin right next door. In that case, people should go to him and he should kill the job, but considering people were merely queueing around the printer with no sysadmin in sight, leads me to believe that this company has no full-time sysadmin to watch over print queues, and therefore anyone moderately technically proficient is supposed to cancel hanging jobs.
  • Watson 2011-10-27 08:33
    Shared printers is one thing, but shared print queues?

    The company headquarters: I don't know how many printers there would have been in all the offices in total, but easily more than a hundred. Not a problem when it's printing your stuff and you're free to tie it up with PostScript apps as much as you like. For most people most of the time that was how they were used.

    But some jobs came straight from the site's AS/400. Poor thing could only deal with two printers concurrently, so it was given two virtual printers for which jobs would be switched to the appropriate physical printer as appropriate. The virtual printers had no spools, so could only start the next job when the physical printer it was switched to had finished.

    My personal record was four and a half hours. Not as bad as "until Friday", but without those manifests we wouldn't be shipping.
  • boog 2011-10-27 10:19
    ContraCorners:
    boog:
    C-Octothorpe:
    The Mr. T Experience:
    BTW-I'll punch a fat guy too.
    Sounds like fun. Lets start with your mom.
    Hahaha!

    Normally I don't care much about the "your mom" jokes, but calling his mom a fat guy: +1

    Hey, let's have a little sensitivity here. I have a son who's mom was a fat guy...
    Okay, I hate the Bob meme, but that was a fantastic application of it. Well played!
  • big picture thinker 2011-10-27 11:08
    Bill:
    A print job that hangs without printing anything for a significant time is almost always hung. It's pretty routine for someone other than the job owner to kill it.


    Agree. I work in a large office and print jobs get hung all the time. It's normal for people to either cancel the job or reboot the printer. It's a NETWORK printer - therefore accessible to everyone on the network and purchased for everyone's use. If you care about your print job, you will hit print and immediately walk over to the printer to make sure it prints and you get it. If not, then you lose your priority by default and anyone else who wants to use the printer has the right.

    If someone wants to lock it up for days, they can get their own crappy $75 ink-jet desk-side printer. Locking up a shared printer for any period of time is not going to fly... no matter how many angry signs are taped to it. If they expect people to just wait, they are out of touch with reality, not a team-player, and probably need to be let go.
  • JJ 2011-10-27 16:08
    I don't usually get all picky about things like this, but since no one else brought it up (that I saw), let's look at this line from the article:

    "I don't know," she said. "I tapped the paper, shook the toner-- I even turned it off and on. Nothing's printing!"

    If "it" is the printer, then turning it off and on would have killed the job and should have brought Mr. Grumpy doppling down the hall, so that part is a little...inconsistent.
  • SQLDave 2011-10-27 22:06
    ThePants999:
    TRWTF is this sentence:

    Of all the things the problem that wasn't his was, being not his problem wasn't one of them.


    Seriously. WTF. That sentence could be weaponised and deployed in surgical strikes.


    It reminded me of Douglas Adams. ("They hung in the air the way bricks don't", "It has been said that Vogons are not above a little bribery and corruption in the same way that the
    sea is not above the clouds", and so on)
  • The Crunger 2011-10-27 22:48
    Martijn:

    ... and tried to get him fired for blocking everybody's business with his sophomore pranks.

    Using PostScript for computation jobs is funny when you're in college, but in a real business, people get fired for blocking everybody's work for days with pranks like that. And if he really honestly thinks that this is a sensible way to use a printer, he needs to be kept away from any kind of computers at all costs. And be fired, of course.


    It's amazing how many people concluded this story was about a company (and replayed their own strong feelings about how such frustrations should be resolved in corporburbia).

    There be no managers in this story:

    * No for-profit can pay a crowd to stand around for hours (wtf?)
    * Businesses use managers to resolve resource conflicts, rather than intimidation, yelling, etc.
    * Paid employees are coached to avoid bottlenecks of any sort, let alone waiting on a print job
    * No one makes it their business to make sure _their_ department's projects get funded
    * There was no HR to fire Bob and/or Asp^Hsergeek for being the only rational actors

    This be a rime of academia, as you seem so close to guessing. In academia:

    * People do spend lots of time trying to get funding approved
    * Funding matters, since that might be your paycheck for the next year, so yes you might wait for hours (just like you might camp out overnight for concert tickets, too)
    * Resources are provided, but not always managed. What administrator got promoted for finding wise solutions to student's resource conflicts?




  • Watson 2011-10-28 02:56
    The Crunger:

    This be a rime of academia, as you seem so close to guessing. In academia:

    Evidence for the prosecution: this is taking place in a "lab" with a "head researcher"; someone writing their program in PostScript to take advantage of the printer's CPU.

    "You fool! You don't understand at all. That job is a piece of PostScript code. The print server isn't running my numbers. The PRINTER is! It's far more powerful than you can imagine! BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!"
  • QJo 2011-10-28 03:44
    Snow:
    QJo:
    Mister Galloping Asperger ...

    On behalf of all of us who have Asperger's syndrome I would like to say "FUCK YOU"
    Not every asshole has Asperger's syndrome, and not every person with Asperger's syndrome is a self-absorbed asshole.

    I am sick of being maligned by Asperger's being thrown around as a byword for medically-excusable sociopathic-jackassery by lawyers, the media and people like you.

    From this point forward I ask that you make an effort to call the assholes 'assholes' ane leave the medical diagnoses to the professionals, you 'jackass'.


    Apologies to all Asperger's people - it was an unworthy comment. Inexcusable of me.
  • QJo 2011-10-28 03:58
    The Crunger:
    Martijn:

    ... and tried to get him fired for blocking everybody's business with his sophomore pranks.

    Using PostScript for computation jobs is funny when you're in college, but in a real business, people get fired for blocking everybody's work for days with pranks like that. And if he really honestly thinks that this is a sensible way to use a printer, he needs to be kept away from any kind of computers at all costs. And be fired, of course.


    It's amazing how many people concluded this story was about a company (and replayed their own strong feelings about how such frustrations should be resolved in corporburbia).

    There be no managers in this story:

    * No for-profit can pay a crowd to stand around for hours (wtf?)
    * Businesses use managers to resolve resource conflicts, rather than intimidation, yelling, etc.
    * Paid employees are coached to avoid bottlenecks of any sort, let alone waiting on a print job
    * No one makes it their business to make sure _their_ department's projects get funded
    * There was no HR to fire Bob and/or Asp^Hsergeek for being the only rational actors

    This be a rime of academia, as you seem so close to guessing. In academia:

    * People do spend lots of time trying to get funding approved
    * Funding matters, since that might be your paycheck for the next year, so yes you might wait for hours (just like you might camp out overnight for concert tickets, too)
    * Resources are provided, but not always managed. What administrator got promoted for finding wise solutions to student's resource conflicts?


    OTOH you're got mention of HR, a power-skirt and a dress code, none of which are prevalent in the academic community. Having worked in such an institution, I would suggest a colossally large company in perhaps the late 1980's, early 1990's, where cheap printers (and indeed, cheap computers) were way ahead in the future, and the only technical people worked in "computer labs" doing "research". Nobody argued with the computer guys, because nobody really understood what they did. They were offered the sort of respect that regular army personnel would offer to ninja assassins, and as such the only people who could keep such nutcases in check were other computer people, who understood the BS.
  • Chirstopher 2011-10-29 09:40
    Then, as has been stated already, it would not be running on the shared printer because then any random joker could kill the job and doom the company. It would be on an executive's personal printer, and/or there would be a notice explaining this fact and suggesting an alternative printer for printing run-of-the-mill documents.
  • Chirstopher 2011-10-29 09:41
    Er, sorry... I was replying to a comment on the first page and didn't see there were more pages of comments.
  • method1 2011-10-29 10:22
    geoffrey:
    obvious troll is obvious

    Your comments, "geoffrey", are all an "obvious troll"
  • user 2011-10-29 18:45
    In 1988 when I was using the department Scriptwriter to do computations, it was more powerful (because Postscript is powerful) and more stable than the crappy Epson PC on my desk.

    At least I only ran my jobs after hours.
  • Anon 2011-11-06 10:22
    Are you an idiot?
  • mbourgon 2011-11-07 17:15
    Really? It's a PRINT JOB. That's what gets submitted to printers. I'm not to go bother my boss and ask if I should cancel a print job, unless it's my boss's boss. MY boss would wonder why I was wasting his time.
  • tgape 2011-12-06 19:17
    caffiend:
    Sounds far more like he was competing with everyone else for scarce funding and his little print job was just a way of holding up other people's applications causing some to miss the deadline, increasing the likelihood of his project being approved.

    I mean honestly, though it may be possible to use Post Script to perform some computation, how are you going to get the result? Print it out then take a photo of each page sitting on a wooden table, submit it to a cloud based OCR service.


    Email. Yes, networked PostScript printers can do email.
  • tgape 2011-12-06 20:40
    appellatio:
    His job running on the printer had nothing to do with printer's CPU. Unless all computers in the building are from 1992 and the printer was from 2011, there is no printer in the world coming from the same age as computers around it that can do anything faster then any of those computers.


    Not true.

    Back before GPUs were common, there were printers who could handle a particular class of processing better than an Intel CPU of similar vintage.

    In order to process PostScript even half-way efficiently, you need a vector processor. That is, one capable of decent Single Instruction, Multiple Data. Like the MMX instruction set, but more hard core - you give it one CPU instruction, it does the same thing on a whole line of data, rather than, say, two blocks of four bytes.

    That having been said, if this was even as recent as 2003, it was inexcusable, because the printer CPU to computer CPU gap had increased so far that the computer CPU could brute force through this stuff faster than the printer CPU, even without the SIMD. So even if you didn't know how to harness your GPU, you were better off keeping it local.

    But back around 1992, I wrote a little PostScript program to do some numerical analysis stuff for my CS class, and it ran in under half an hour, when the equivalent C program took about four hours to run on the (small and old) mainframe, while the mainframe was otherwise idle. The mainframe CPUs were about 2.5 times faster than the printer's CPU, in raw MHz, and it had ten of them (I said it was a small mainframe). Running the same program on my roommate's PC took about 10 hours, despite its CPU running at 10 times the MHz as the printer.

    I don't think it was all PostScript printers - just the good ones.
  • Michael 2011-12-09 23:10
    geoffrey:

    The real clue for Bob should have been to figure out why all those people were not willing to cancel the job. In life in general this is often the first sign that an action is immoral, criminal or otherwise unadvised.


    Or... (looks at state of the world) those persons are sheeple and unable to assert themselves. Just because everyone does/thinks something DOES NOT automatically make their actions/thoughts any of: moral, ethical (two separate concepts people), legal (for actions, we don't yet have thought-crimes), or advisable.

    Not in general nor in specific.

  • Toon 2011-12-10 14:53
    evilspoons:
    geoffrey:

    Sharing is caring, and number crunching on a printer is stupid.


    I disagree, it's far better to hold off and wait for management to deal with the situation then cancel a job you know nothing about which could potentially bring down the entire company. Hell is paved with good intentions.


    You show me a company that can be brought down by canceling a two day print job and I'll show you a firm destined to go bankrupt. And deserving to do so, too; I mean, if it's that important, why not just buy the guy his own printer?
  • El Oscuro 2012-05-11 18:59
    StMarc:
    Long, long ago I tried to print a document which was generated by an algorithm designed to take data from an x-ray experiment and create a very crude sort of 2-D CAT scan. The highfalutin' LaserWriter (no numbers, no letters - LaserWriter) in the university computer lab would happily accept the print job, then start to choke as its buffer filled. At the time I knew very little about how printers worked, so I just sat there like an idiot and watched it settle into a coma.

    After an hour or so the other users in the lab started to complain, and the lab monitor killed the job, let them print, and then let me restart mine.

    Same thing. The problem was not in our stars, it was in our jobs. In that the damn job was just never ever going to print.

    After a few hours of this, the lab monitor remembered that THAT VERY DAY, an even newer, bloodier-edge piece of tech had come in and was ready to be hooked up.

    A StyleWriter.

    (This was Apple's first inkjet printer, the equivalent of an HP Deskjet.)

    Unlike fancyschmancy Postscript laser printers, this little marvel rendered its prints one line at a time through its driver. (You can't print "part" of a laser print. The whole thing has to be rendered so it can be applied and fused in one go.) So we sent it and, after a few minutes, it printed a line.

    Then, after a few more minutes, it printed another.

    After an hour and a half, my shadowy blob of output slid neatly onto the print tray. And there was much rejoicing.

    Up until now, that was the worst story I knew about jamming up print jobs and screwing other people over. But this is way better. WAY better.


    Speaking of Apple II inkjet printers, back in about 1985-1986, We got a fancy new ink jet printer (not Apple brand) with special power point type software that you could use to print on transparencies (Powerpoint before its time). This printer could print really nice slides but required lots of special maintenance, mixing the ink, filling the cartridges, etc. It also had something called "print head maintenance liquid" which cost $30/quart. I bet my boss $1 that the "print head maintenance liquid" was plain water, and to win the bet, I drank some. I am not making this up. Of course, I had already figured that out by accidentally splashing some in my eyes. When it didn't sting, I tasted it to make sure.
  • HP LaserJet 2000 2012-11-05 18:49
    Bit off-topic here (and a year late) but just because you can drink the printer's magic "maintenance liquid" and not die does not mean you can use tap water in its place to clean a cartridge.

    Even the best drinking-quality water still contains micron-sized impurities in the form of bacteria & faecal matter at levels that are completely harmless to humans, but can totally clog up the fine nozzles in an ink cartridges. Our tongues are just not that good at detecting the purity of food/water below a certain level – otherwise we’d never get food poisoning.

    So $30 may seem a lot for magic water, but seeing as the equipment for filtration and deionisation can cost $5k, it may be reasonable.
  • G 2012-12-01 16:29
    Why? I found it hilarious! ; )