- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
That or their code is so crappy to not consider this possibility. If it is that critical, why the fuck don't they prevent it? At my last job, we created an email repository of potentially important messages using just this as the servers were backed up (yeah, don't get me started). No, I didn't go looking for their asinine technote to tell me whether it's a good idea or not. And, to make it more reliable, I created a mount point drive (B:). Obviously, I expected it to be slower over 100baseT vs a local hard drive. Duh. And yes, we didn't / weren't allowed to use expensive Exchange server space. Our dev box was perfect.
No, we never had problems.
They want you to buy. Full stop.
Sounds to me that M$, in their typical fashion, coded everything to run on the sever. I don't see why a local PST file needs to be managed by the server and not the client.
Admin
The fact that the building was exactly 4 floors high even though it was very wide, was in itself an indication on how cheap they were. By national (BR) laws, any higher than that and they would be enforced to have elevators for every employee. The real WTF is that they would even benefit from having a higher and narrower building because there would be more space for their trucks to move around at their parking area.
But the even worse WTF was the fact that our floor had circa 140 people and not even a single bathroom! Every time you wanted to "hit the johns" you would get to take the stairs down to the 3rd floor where another 140 employees shared the bathrooms with us!
Things added up and soon I left them with a big smile on my lips. I don't miss them even for a moment.
Admin
Tho of course I appreciate the point you're making, don't be ridiculous: americans pay far far far more for guns and bombs and soldiers than for any form of health care, or any universal coverage of any kind whatsoever.
Admin
The real WTF is that a techy actually got laid...
Admin
You see, YOU pay income tax TOO, but unlike us, you don't get anything back for it. Sounds to me like it's you getting the shaft, not us.
What particularly amuses me is that you get less for your money than we do, yet somehow you've been brainwashed into being a cheerleader for your own ripping-off. How does that make sense? Oh, that's right! Because if you don't voluntarily connive in your own exploitation, you'll be called names like "commie" or "socialist" and you can't hack the peer-pressure! You'd rather pretend you enjoy being ripped off than stand up for your rights!
Admin
Considering that I like to have my flight on the glideslope rather than below it, I have no problem keeping my phone off until I land, and I suggest everyone who feels the way I do about landings do likewise.
Admin
Actually, this is a WTF.
Take the time to watch "The Business of Being Born" (available on Netflix) and see how many WTFs you can find.
The biggest one is the cascade of events leading to C-sections:
Labor is hard work lying down. It's far better to be on all fours. Thus, hospitals force a long and difficult labor on women.
A long a difficult labor is eased by heavy painkillers. But this slows labor, and labor cannot take too long, because hospitals have a business to run, dammit, and you're taking up a bed.
Bring on the epidural - paralysis medication. Which means the mother can no longer respond to contractions. Whoops. That leads to:
Emergency C-section.
If anyone has managed to have a natural birth in a U.S. hospital, I applaud you.
So why don't women choose to see a midwife instead, if it's so great?
Can't, because birth centers are required by law to have medical backup. But hospitals don't want to support birth centers because they a) don't make as much money from them, and b) doctors like to schedule births. Natural birth is unpredictable, and they might miss their game of golf. No, don't reach for the "reply" button: that's absolutely the reason.
Hence, midwives don't get the medical support they need, so birth centers have to close.
Oh, and you can thank Democrat John Edwards for criminalizing breech births, making a C-section mandatory in most states. Thanks, chump.
And I bet Ray's son is on the cow milk formula. WTF? Cow milk is for cows. Human milk is for humans.
Another WTF? The fact you can elect, with no medical reason, to schedule a major medical intervention to prevent a natural birth from happening.
In this environment of actively turning a natural and wonderful event into a major medical emergency, there's no wonder Ray's boss was such a twerp.
Addendum (2008-12-11 15:30): Bitter? You bet I am.
In the UK, I would have paid less in health insurance contributions.
In the UK, I would not have had to pay about $20k for "uninsured costs".
In the UK, we would have been able to have a breech birth.
In the UK, when the hospital administration lied to us about uninsured costs and just plain didn't declare costs, I would have had legal recourse.
If the UK's so great, why wasn't I there? Because I was lied to about US health insurance, that, so long as you have a job, you're covered. Everything's paid for.
BS. The insurance companies only lower the costs, then pay a percentage of each item. They say "We cover 80%", but the footnote is that they only pay 80% of the items they choose.
But as others have said, socialized health care has been demonized here. Dammit, this is socialist health care, because every job is done by four or five different people -- "demarcation", we call it. And just like the unions have ruined Detroit, medical insurance companies have ruined health care.
Socialism is alive and well in the US.
Admin
Capitalism: an economic system in which capital goods are operated and traded chiefly by private individuals or corporations for the purpose of profit. Socialism: a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production.
Neither of those innately implies any particular modes of taxation or distribution of tax receipts. However, in the capitalist system, untold billions of YOUR taxes go every year to what is referred to as "pork": governmental spending at vastly inflated rates of profit for the purpose of putting large amounts of that public money into the pockets of already-immensely-wealthy private individuals. Under a socialist system, there would be no such thing as a "CEO" to give the money to in the first place, but we in the EU actually live in capitalist economies, despite our socialised health-care systems; nonetheless, the NHS does not have any CEO nor shareholders to take money out of the system; the taxes go on paying doctors and nurses' wages and buying medicine and bandages.
Your attempt to portray giving welfare to the starving as equivalent to handing over wealth to the already rich and privileged (through the phrase "more deserving, ie CEOs or the 'less fortunate'" reveals the moral bankruptcy of your position. To anyone not completely in hock to the "greed is good" philosophy, one of those is clearly a worthy use of taxation, the other an abuse of power.
Is your counterpoint that all hospitals in the US are perfect? Anecdotal evidence: The pathway to false conclusions and the conflation of correlation with causality.Admin
Admin
TRWTF is that every new parent thinks that everybody on the internet, across the country, and everywhere else wants to see their hideous little bastard spawn drooling all over itself. Keep the kid to yourselves until its old enough to talk.
Admin
Even then, keep it to yourself anyway, just to be on the safe side.
Admin
My daughter was born OK in 2004 in the U.S., but on the same day a server I administered remotely in Poland decided to die. Die as in the switching power supply developing a serious overvoltage on all output lines.
The only "backups" were the two RAIDed drives which went to the data recovery company. We got most of the data back. No, I wasn't in charge of setting up backup policies ;)
I did have to scramble soon after we came back from the hospital and figure how to restore the domain name services and the web presence. I guess it pays to design a website such that it'd be fully preserved on thewaybackmachine -- that's where I got my "backups" from at first :)
Admin
Imagine you have a building to raze. You can wait for it to deteriorate and collapse on its own, potentially sideways and knocking half the block over. You can also set up a demolition on a known date and know it's going down and not sideways.
Admin
Wow, that's incredible. I mean, my boss is an ass, and I'm sometimes an ass to my employees, but as soon as someone says "my wife is currently in labor" all bets are off.
Hell, expecting me to work the day after my wisdom tooth extraction is enough to make my blood boil. Glad you found a better job, hope that boss is still looking for someone to fix his mail server.
Admin
Admin
But similarly... all things die.
So when a child is born, you can leave it to be uncertain when it will die, possibly slowly and painfully, or you could schedule a date at some point in the future when you will end it's life.
Admin
You're sick.
Admin
Admin
Actually, we did use a midwife at a freestanding birth center that was near a hospital. There was meconium (fetal poop) in the amniotic fluid, so we had to go to the hospital due to the higher risk of infection for the baby. My wife labored for 12 hours before she got the epidural. We're pretty sure that the epidural brought on the lowered heart rate of our son, and thus the "need" for a c-section.
We have watched the Business of Being Born, and it was quite insightful. It's so hard to stick to your birth plan (no drugs, etc.) in a hospital setting like that. We attempted having our second son at home with a midwife (we live a few blocks from the hospital) and after 24 hours of labor, without pain killers, my wife was exhausted and decided to go to the hospital. After another 12 hours of labor we decided to have a c-section. I'm really proud of her, even though things didn't go the way we planned.
Oh, and we breastfed with both of our kids. There were a few times when we supplemented with formula, but that was very rare.
PS. I agree with a lot of what you said. I grew up in a very conservative part of the nation, but I've since come to realize that medical care is a right rather than a privilege.
Admin
Admin
Here's the thing - the top 1% of the population of the US own between 40% and 50% of the wealth. You're not seriously suggesting that that 1% collectively worked their asses off so hard that they produced the same amount of wealth as the bottom 95%? I mean, hot-damn, that's some productivity. Imagine the enormous leaps forward in civilisation you could have from studying their methods.
Oh wait, do you think they might have benefitted somewhat from the labours of those "beneath" them?
Having the power to create and maintain a system that ensures that wealth collects at the top, instead of with those who actually do the work to produce it, doesn't constitute a natural born right to that wealth.
Yes, the ability to manage, direct and channel the labours of others has value - without these people, Western society would be a lot worse off. No, it does not justify such a disparity in income. These people should rejoice that they can participate in the prosperity of their culture, and accept their just rewards.
Admin
Yes, but... even compiling with Visual Studio across a network is unsupported by Microsoft. Is there any non-noddy development company anywhere that doesn't do that?
Admin
Why would you ever do that? Seriously, what's wrong with source control?
Admin
dude, what?
Admin
That's really kind of cute the way you try to end the debate without actually winning it. But we're logicians here, are we not? If so, why do you insist on using faulty logic and strawman tactics?
First, you started off by telling us all about how the state needs to raise revenue, and so they have to get it from those who have it (paraphrasing). Notice that you conveniently skipped over the part where you justify the state's right to collect it by means of force in the first place. Don't insult my intelligence by trying to diminish that this is the operating principle - failure to comply is ultimately punishable by death; just ask anyone who went down defending their property against the state (oh, that's right, you can't ask them, now can you).
AC then tries to call you out on this, but you are totally oblivious to the principles he's alluding to, and so you go off on some rant about rich people, and how nobody is forcing them to be rich, and how he should get educated about what it's like to be a 'real' slave. But here again, you use words very carelessly. Slavery is: involuntary servitude; and you have absolutely no gripe with that.
Interestingly, your anti-rich-guy premise implies a basic lack of self-worth on your part, i.e. you have a complete us vs. them attitude, which suggests that you believe you will never be rich yourself. And that itself says alot.
At the end of the day, what you support can be summed up very simply: you condone the killing of innocent poeple (preferably rich, on utilitarian grounds), in order that the state coffers remain flush; a goal which you accept as self-justifying. Layer this in as many 'for-the-common-good' arguments as you wish, but that is the basis of what you support.
Admin
The state needs to raise revenue for its various institutions (health, education, defense, civil order, etc). If you want to argue the state's right to collect money, then I will argue your right to enjoy the protections of society - that money you made didn't just show up, and without a social framework, you wouldn't have it. There wouldn't even be money. So, by living in society, you are obligated in some way to support it. You don't have the option to GTFO, but hey, life isn't fair.
The anti rich guy thing isn't a lack of self worth, it's being realistic; you probably won't get rich if you aren't already. It isn't reasonable to plan your life around something that's unlikely, so don't.
Your rant about strawmen is hilarious when pair with you claiming that Dick advocates the killing of innocents for their money. You sort of take for granted that rich people have the right to not pay taxes, which is unsupported. It's the sort of thing I expect from the batshit wing of the libertarian party.
Admin
Mind you, I'm saying this from Oz where we just spend nearly 4.8 billion giving money to pensioners and families to "reinvigorate" the economy. My opinon is that if the Govt is going to throw money away anyway, I'd rather it go to health and welfare rather than millionaires.
Troll troll troll...
Admin
/Agree
Imagine having several morons talking loud in a cell phone while you are trying to catch some sleep, it is hard as it is to sleep in a plane.
Admin
a. that the state should exist b. that the state should operate some number of institutions c. that it would be impossible to have a currency without the state d. that it is just for the state to initiate aggression any way it sees fit
For each of these, you provide no rationale. So your argument seems to be that any existing reality is worth defending, simply on the basis that it exists. If everyone thought this way, we would still live under kings and popes; and you would be here arguing to keep it that way.
Also, dismissing a position as 'hilarious' is not really the same as refuting it. What I said still stands - it may be uncomfortable for you to contemplate, but it is true. I cannot comment much at all on your 'right to not pay taxes' concept, since you rely here on even more assumptions:
e. that your obligation to the state simply exists f. that the state holds the ability to arbitrarily grant 'rights'
As such, we are back to your unquestioning worship of the state. I'm obviously wasting my time here though; reality is, and I should just let you enjoy your mindless serfdom.
Admin
Your rant is hilarious because you built a strawman yourself. I have no need to refute those.
a. the state always exists. You can't get away from it, so may as well make it a good one.
b. if you don't operate most of those institutions, the state will be taken over by another one.
c. private currency has been tried. state currency works better and, besides, isn't something you're likely to change in your lifetime.
d. if the state isn't able to enforce taxation, how do you expect it to exist?
You seem to labor under the delusion that anarchy is anything more than transitory.
Hey look, another strawman. Moron.
e. you are obligated to pay taxes because you live in a society and we as a whole decided to fund these things through taxes.
f. says who? the state is obligated to recognize certain rights and is nominally limited to the powers granted it. Maybe if people like you focused on keeping the state properly shackled instead of entertaining pipe dreams about a stateless society, we'd be in better shape.
Admin
I find this quite the double sided WTF. Actually, i think that if the employer would have submitted his version of this tale, he could have successfully pushed the employee, and not him in the fools role. Don't get me wrong, the employer is quite the moron, but still...
1) Taking a new job offer with your wife being in end stage pregnancy, and life already incredibly hectic? It simply does not make sense. 2) Starting at that employer, and at the same time insisting on two weeks vacation before you even started/just started? 3) If i understood this correctly, the call for the hospital visit was only just before the trip to the hospital. I would not be surprised if my own boss would be less then charmed with me, if he would find out his mail server was down, with no one around to fix it. Especially not if he would not have been given the at least the possibility to find a replacement for me in advance.
All in all, i agree that the seems boss to be one of the managers you would never want to have. But still... from his viewpoint it would probably sum up as: Guy quiting his job at one of the worst times because its pays better, then not showing for hours when one of the important systems is down , followed by a two week vacation just after the job started, before coming back and asking me to PAY for his fun time? And this all while he only just started working here? Its quite obvious where the conclusion of "money grubbing kid" comes from.
And all in all, seeing that after that, you went back to your old employer, but not without first getting a higher salary, i have a hard time disagreeing with his conclusion. That, and i honestly doubt that the ridiculous door policy is a real factor in this.
Admin
I had a similar experience. I had just sent out a company-wide email 30 minutes after the birth of my child, announcing the successful work of my wife in delivering a new boy. Literally, within 5 minutes, I received a response to my birth announcement from a completely stupid coworker. Without even asking how it went or congratulating me, she asked when I was going to fix her grid servers for her.
I told her my wife was STILL BLEEDING, and that she would have to wait until I felt like it.
Admin
you must be a libertarian.
idiots like you always rant about keeping the state properly shackled, etc.
you are one step away from anarchy with your ideas. anarchy for everyone except you, of course.
you don't seem to mind trash collection or wastewater services. or would you leave that up to unregulated businesses?