The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

RayS · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

OK, I'm late to the party here, but sweet jeebus what were these guys thinking??

A Word Document???? I think we all know that powerpoint would have been far more appropriate.

enders · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

This is a 3-tier application. You need 3 applications to make it work.

dhromed · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

What's I'd do, is create a hash map to hold all the data.

Then stick it in a Session variable for safe-keeping.

As backup for the Session, store everything in a temp table in an intermediate database.

I'm sure I can factor in some stored procedures, somehow.

Richard Nixon · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

emptyset:
Richard Nixon:

Keep in mind that you're getting the libertarian's argument from the guy on the other side of the argument and previously mentioned guy is still discussing that argument.

no i'm not. there was a clear winner.

Richard Nixon:

Furthermore, this is very similar to when someone tries to tell me about a game they played and how cool it was when they shot the other guy or some such nonsense. Sure, it might have been fun at the time for that player but hearing about it is incredibly boring and uninteresting to me and raises a few red flags in my mind about the person who feels the need to discuss such exploits.

there are a lot of red flags raised often in a lot of minds. ironic words on a forum making fun of people's programming incompetence. isn't *all* incompetence fair game, Richard Nixon?

You're not still discussing the argument? Then how come I know about this fabled argument you had with this libertarian? It appears you misunderstood me because your reply makes no sense. What does being "a clear winner" have to do with the fact that you're still discussing this argument some time later on a message board completely separate from where it took place?

All incompetence is fair game but I question the incompetence you are citing. Political arguments on the Internet are very rarely of any value and both sides usually come away believing they were the winner and that the other side is just plain stupid. Incompetence in code is fair game because the code can be posted and discussed. Incompetence in some political view is both boring and you're not citing any evidence to show the incompetence. All we have is your claim, which is obviously biased because you disagree with the person you were arguing with. My final point is that your discussions of some political argument you had previously are arguably out of place but, clearly in my mind, completely uninteresting. I thought I made that clear with my comparison of you to someone who goes on and on about playing a video game. Video games and political arguments do not make good stories to relate to others. Learn it.

Have a good day!

Not Registered · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

The application meets all of the criteria of a WTF but this diagram is almost as big a WTF as well...

The diagram is a hack, UML does not stand for Unidentified Modeling Language... granted, one does not need to make a full blow UML diagram to describe a system, but at least provide sufficient/correct information to describe a system.

Hasn't anyone picked up on the fact that COM only runs on a single machine? Are there any Firewalls in this system? Does the system go over the internet? What protocols and ports are being used? How is SQL Server invoking a VB dll? What piece of the application runs on the clients machine and what runs on the server? C# is managed code, the diagram indicates it running as a COM object -- is it really a COM+ object or is it using the PIAs?

We need to remember that the author of this diagram calls themself an Integration Analyst.

2005-08-26 Reply Admin

I want a poster sized image of this. For some reason I want to put it on my office wall.

whojoedaddy · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

That's kinda cool, in a wtf way. I want to create an application that uses all the latest buzz stuff.

Irrelevant · 2005-08-26 Reply Admin

> > I've always wondered where "far" was...

> +1, on behalf of all the grammar nazis out there.

Make that +2.

I'm with the poster idea. If we could get a hi-res version of this in the CafePress shop, I'd buy it. Classic.

2005-08-26 Reply Admin

dubwai:
Ken Nipper:
The only thing missing is the sneakernet to transport the data from one location to another[;)]

We had a client that would mail floppy disks from office to office. This was only a couple years ago.

Why not faxing, then ?

2005-08-27 Reply Admin

I don't get this at all. They should have used XML. All the SAMS "how to program for the internet" books I have been reading lately tell me that to have a really screwed-up overcomplicated solution you need XML.

mjr.

2005-08-27 Reply Admin

could we replace that xml document with a SOAP interface, cause that would be sweet!

2005-08-27 Reply Admin

OK, I know I'm a bit late, but this is something that reminds me of an old computer game called "The Incredible Machine", maybe it's is developed by the very same company!!!!

2005-08-27 Reply Admin

Really, this is just a resume building application. They want to be able to add cool stuff like C# and COM and ATL to their resumes. Really. I mean. People can't get paid to write this crap.

Dylan · 2005-08-28 Reply Admin

Not Registered:
We need to remember that the author of this diagram calls themself an Integration Analyst.

No, I'm the Integration Analyst. Alex drew the diagram, based on my description.

Unfortunately, I wasn't involved in the design of this integration. What Alex drew, is better than any of the documentation I've seen from the vendors! However, I am wrestling this beast back onto the correct path at present, with acknowledgement that I should have been involved a lot earlier. Wish me luck.

emptyset · 2005-08-29 Reply Admin

Richard Nixon:

You're not still discussing the argument? Then how come I know about this fabled argument you had with this libertarian? It appears you misunderstood me because your reply makes no sense. What does being "a clear winner" have to do with the fact that you're still discussing this argument some time later on a message board completely separate from where it took place?

how did you know about the libertarian? are you in his envoy? did they put you up to this?

Richard Nixon:

All incompetence is fair game but I question the incompetence you are citing. Political arguments on the Internet are very rarely of any value and both sides usually come away believing they were the winner and that the other side is just plain stupid.

from your poorly constructed dialogue, i'd pin you as either puerto rican or samoan, but we'll continue nonetheless. we'll start with some basic facts about the world and apply modus ponens until we reach nirvana.

0. silver has no intrinsic value.
1. ayn rand and her books are completely wrong.
2. at least (2) grand-parents believe the atlanta journal-constitution is "liberal media", in spite of its "faith and values" daily section.
3. a pack of camel cigarettes costs $3.47 (tax included) at buddy's convinience store at the corner of north and highland avenues.
4. upwards of 20 people have passed out on my sofa, but only seven have been officially tea-bagged.
5. in the movie "mitchell", joe don baker plays a cop, and fucks yanni's (future, at the time) wife, linda evans.
6. every male graduate student from India has in his possession at least (1) horizontally striped shirt.

so, as you can see, i merely made inferences from my world and applied them directly into a new domain. using just these seven basic facts, i reached the conclusion i was communicating with a 21st century confederate sympathiser. i'll admit the beagle was of my own invention. i recalled this story (the brain functions at times to retrieve "past experiences" from "memory") because we were discussing whether or not goods had this "real value". since the image was of particular interest to me (the brain can release chemicals which cause "euphoria" and "joy") i felt with all the talk of free market this and that it was appropriate to engage in a little bit of libertarian bashing.

i've clearly offended you in ways i possibly won't be able to understand for the rest of my life. then again, you can homeschool your children and make them hyper-intelligent social cripples, destined to marry the first capricorn with a heart of gold. you may also mention (occasionally) private charities in the hope they'll help the homeless, but won't offer any donations. additionally, you'll be locked in the belief that your job in the software industry is the result of an agreement between individuals, and that society and universities had nothing to do with it. you'll desire every road you travel on have a toll, but by then, you'll be half-way through the book on eliminating the income tax.

Richard Nixon:

Incompetence in code is fair game because the code can be posted and discussed. Incompetence in some political view is both boring and you're not citing any evidence to show the incompetence. All we have is your claim, which is obviously biased because you disagree with the person you were arguing with.

of course all you have is my claim. why should i go to great lengths to present the other side of the issue in way that's "fair and balanced"? sweet zombie jesus. i bet you're one of the kids who runs around trying to set up the "academic bill of rights" to defend "traditional values" against the tide of "liberal professors".

Richard Nixon:

My final point is that your discussions of some political argument you had previously are arguably out of place but, clearly in my mind, completely uninteresting.

oh. well, clearly in my mind right now is a bunch of technicolor panda bears that have emerged from the walls and are setting up all around my desk what appears to be a variant of cricket.

redwards · 2005-08-29 Reply Admin

Dear emptyset:

I've taped this post to my cubicle wall.

Dear Richard Nixon:

Richard Nixon:
Your humor fails to deliver on a number of levels.

Then it shares a remarkable resemblance to your analogy.

More thoughts. The word 'and' is not a period. A period looks like this:

"."

Now you try.

Not Registered · 2005-08-29 Reply Admin

Dylan:
Not Registered:

We need to remember that the author of this diagram calls themself an Integration Analyst.

No, I'm the Integration Analyst. Alex drew the diagram, based on my description.

Unfortunately, I wasn't involved in the design of this integration. What Alex drew, is better than any of the documentation I've seen from the vendors! However, I am wrestling this beast back onto the correct path at present, with acknowledgement that I should have been involved a lot earlier. Wish me luck.

I apologize for the remarks

2005-08-29 Reply Admin

It's amazing how many people have an opinion on how bad this is and why it sucks so much having ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the application does, or how and when people interact with the automated process, or how these applictions evolved and ended up linked together

While this application seems like it may be more complex than it needs to be if you had the luxury of starting with a clean slate, I think the real WTF here is that IT people ALWAYS know what the right solution is even when they don't know what problem they need to solve, or know anything of the environment in which they need to solve the problem.

JThelen · 2005-08-29 Reply Admin

Anonymous:

It's amazing how many people have an opinion on how bad this is and why it sucks so much having ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the application does, or how and when people interact with the automated process, or how these applictions evolved and ended up linked together

While this application seems like it may be more complex than it needs to be if you had the luxury of starting with a clean slate, I think the real WTF here is that IT people ALWAYS know what the right solution is even when they don't know what problem they need to solve, or know anything of the environment in which they need to solve the problem.

Looks like we found the induhvidual responsible for this POS.

emptyset · 2005-08-29 Reply Admin

Anonymous:

It's amazing how many people have an opinion on how bad this is and why it sucks so much having ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the application does, or how and when people interact with the automated process, or how these applictions evolved and ended up linked together

why are people interacting with "the automated process"? wouldn't that be the exact opposite of automated? am i missing something?

i don't know much about appliction evolution, but here is something that also managed to evolve but became extinct:

http://www.nature.com/news/2002/020225/images/dodo_160.jpg

Anonymous:
 
While this application seems like it may be more complex than it needs to be if you had the luxury of starting with a clean slate, I think the real WTF here is that IT people ALWAYS know what the right solution is even when they don't know what problem they need to solve, or know anything of the environment in which they need to solve the problem.

it sounds like you've become emotionally attached to the software which you may have had a hand in creating. although it's easy to rely on such a relationship for comfort and self-esteem, i suggest you take up a hobby. you know, something that can define you for who you are, so you don't run amok on public forums and embarass yourself. i think both you and the software need to give yourselves some time and space. being so clingy can make the software flee from you like a burning building. learn to let go of it a little. don't get upset if the software decides to spend some time with the people in support. take that time to casually explore other coding projects. who knows? you might find the software of your dreams! [Y][Y]

2005-08-29 Reply Admin

>>The diagram is a hack, UML does not stand for Unidentified Modeling Language... granted, one does not need to make a full blow UML diagram to describe a system, but at least provide sufficient/correct information to describe a system.

I think most readers get the point that the diagram was intended to convey, and as such the diagram is a success.

Not Registered · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

Anonymous:

>>The diagram is a hack, UML does not stand for Unidentified Modeling Language... granted, one does not need to make a full blow UML diagram to describe a system, but at least provide sufficient/correct information to describe a system.

I think most readers get the point that the diagram was intended to convey, and as such the diagram is a success.

In one posting you are defending the design claiming that we need to know more about the system and in this posting you are defending poor documentation.

Isn't your arguement "The system may have some merit, but the diagram fails to convey that information."?

Check me if I am wrong, but your first statement supports my remarks -- "the diagram lacks the necessary information to adequately describe the system ". You seem to be contradicting yourself with this new statement.

Chris F · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

emptyset:
so, as you can see, i merely made inferences from my world and applied them directly into a new domain. using just these seven basic facts, i reached the conclusion i was communicating with a 21st century confederate sympathiser. i'll admit the beagle was of my own invention. i recalled this story (the brain functions at times to retrieve "past experiences" from "memory") because we were discussing whether or not goods had this "real value". since the image was of particular interest to me (the brain can release chemicals which cause "euphoria" and "joy") i felt with all the talk of free market this and that it was appropriate to engage in a little bit of libertarian bashing.

That's great and all, but others have already pointed out that the concept of intrinsic value is contrary libertarian ideals, so your whole tirade makes you sound really stupid. The funniest part is how you're simultaneously fervent and unaware of your inductive error.

devdas · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

Are you the real MJR? The real MJR would not be reading SAMS books.

emptyset · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

Chris F:

That's great and all, but others have already pointed out that the concept of intrinsic value is contrary libertarian ideals, so your whole tirade makes you sound really stupid. The funniest part is how you're simultaneously fervent and unaware of your inductive error.

the funniest part is the growing number of illiterate people in the world.

no, this was the entire reason i was poking fun at the libertarian: his belief silver had an intrinsic value. it would sort of be like making fun of a PETA member for holding a hunting license, or a programmer that can't read.

Chris F · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

emptyset:
the funniest part is the growing number of illiterate people in the world.

no, this was the entire reason i was poking fun at the libertarian: his belief silver had an intrinsic value.

I don't care about this individual's misconceptions. You clearly took his belief and went on to make an inductive error, claiming "this is why libertarians will lose." and "...it was appropriate to engage in a little bit of libertarian bashing". Your mistake is crystal clear.

Mike R · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

devdas:
Are you the real MJR? The real MJR would not be reading SAMS books.

I am a real MJR. And nope, never touched a SAMS book in my life. I looked at one and ran as far away as possible, it was something along the lines of "teach yourself C++ in 2147483647" days or some such...

emptyset · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

Chris F:
I don't care about this individual's misconceptions. You clearly took his belief and went on to make an inductive error, claiming "this is why libertarians will lose." and "...it was appropriate to engage in a little bit of libertarian bashing". Your mistake is crystal clear.

coincidentally, i randomly opened up a book i had and found the words "humorless" and "pedantic" right next to each other. the book's title is "strategies for deflating fun and being a tool", and the chapter was called "misunderstanding off-the-cuff expressions to your advantage".

Chris F · 2005-08-30 Reply Admin

emptyset:
coincidentally, i randomly opened up a book i had and found the words "humorless" and "pedantic" right next to each other. the book's title is "strategies for deflating fun and being a tool", and the chapter was called "misunderstanding off-the-cuff expressions to your advantage".

Oh I get it: I'm illiterate in one post and pedantic in the next. Careful not to break your neck backpedalling so quickly.

I actually think your views and arguments are hilarious. Hilarious in much the same way that the coyote zooming off a cliff on a pair of Acme Rocket Skates is hilarious. But sometimes we need to put the funnies aside and put our foot down when people like you are being intellectually dishonest.

You're not funny because you've got rocket skates. You're funny because you were going so fast and so completely failed in your goal.

2005-08-30 Reply Admin

(Note: my response here is a little more wordy than I would probably have the patience to read. I've higlighted in bold the main points of this rambling for the comfort and safety of those with attention spans similar to mine)

In one posting you are defending the design claiming that we need to know more about the system and in this posting you are defending poor documentation. 

Isn't your arguement "The system may have some merit, but the diagram fails to convey that information."? 

Check me if I am wrong, but your first statement supports my remarks -- "the diagram lacks the necessary information to adequately describe the system ". You seem to be contradicting yourself with this new statement.

It is a reasonable argument that "The system may have some merit, but the diagram fails to convey that information", but I would point out that the diagram presented here is not intended show the merits or even the purpose of the system. My sense is that the purpose of the diagram is to show the wacky way that one particular message in what may be a very large system works it's way through the goose. The diagram does a good job of illustrating the path of the message in a way that IT and non IT people can grasp quickly, even without devoting a few sleepless nights to learn UML before they can look at the document and holler out loud "W-T-F?!?!?!"



So if I were to paraphrase your statement to make it my own, I would say "This diagram does an excellent job of illustrating the circuitous path one particular piece of information takes through that Enterprise [collection of] system[s]".

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

I should also point out that when I saw this diagram, I too gave it an 8 out of 10 on my own personal WTF scale. Without any other knowledge of this system it does seem like Rube Goldberg contraption http://www.rube-goldberg.com/html/gallery.htm. Again, the point here is “Without any other knowledge…” 



The point I initially intended to make is that analyzing system architectures and designs, particularly in a distributed environment is not always straightforward and often requires a lot of domain-specific knowledge. When you read this website and you see some code that has an execution path that allows a divide-by-zero or endless loop, the solution can be quite obvious, even in the absence of any other information “WTF?!?! Aren’t you going to check if the denominator is 0 before you do that?!?!?”. 



Typically, when you look at Distributed Systems and Business Process Integration, you’re often looking for easy on/ off ramps to the applications you’re integrating. What those are will depend on the skills, existing infrastructure and the propensity to spend more time and money on those applications. Also, from an application perspective, application managers are often only mildly interested in getting some data to another application, their primary concern is getting their applications to serve the people they perceive to be their users. Sometimes you get a hack for an interface point and the application manager justifies it with “that’s the best I can do for ya buddy, I gotta roll this site to 13 new markets next week, then it’s on to…” and that passes muster with his management.



So you see a diagram like this and you rightly exclaim “WTF?!?!?”, but it is an error in judgment to assume that you know exactly what is wrong with it.

dhromed · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

but it is an error in judgment to assume that you know exactly what is wrong with it.

Ah, I must disagree.
I understand that in this IT-commerce age, you sometimes (often) have to patch things instead of actually healing the wounds of your still broken system.

I also understand that things can get taken out of context.

But for both situations, there are limits. Beyond that limit is the vast ocean of WTF.

For example, seeing a Word document obviously used as data-transport file may by itself easily be filed under the same WTF category as allowing division by zero or risking infinite loops.

Seeing a piece of information get handed down roughly and along the way get translated into over 5 different formats for 9 different systems is just as WTF, regardless of the domain in which it is used.

emptyset · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

Chris F:
But sometimes we need to put the funnies aside and put our foot down when people like you are being intellectually dishonest.

so, the great intellectual dishonesty here is that you think i extrapolate stupidity to the class of libertarians based on one instance? well, there are more instances to speak of, but that would prove nothing. do you honestly think i'm unaware of how logic works? if i had the constitution in my back pocket and well-formed intellectual arguments on a variety of debatable topics, then i would never be accused of intellectual dishonesty but then again i wouldn't get laid. ever. unless of course, i became the captain of a high school debate team and scored with girls that look like the secretary from ghostbusters. but that would be a far greater offense than an "induction error".

so, of all the intellectual dishonesty in the world, you choose my so-called "induction error" and "put your foot down". if you really want a carefully thought-out, well written argument for why it is my belief "libertarians will lose" i suggest the following: http://www.cix.co.uk/~morven/libertarian.html. with a little research, i would probably write something similar and it already hits the same points i would make.

and if you really want to put your foot down on intellectual dishonesty, i suggest you join the fight against supporters of intelligent design, and others that want to turn the US into a theocracy.

Chris F · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

emptyset:
Chris F:
But sometimes we need to put the funnies aside and put our foot down when people like you are being intellectually dishonest.

so, the great intellectual dishonesty here is that you think i extrapolate stupidity to the class of libertarians based on one instance?

There's nothing wrong or dishonest about making mistakes. Happens to everybody. It is dishonest when you make a mistake, are told that you've made a mistake, and then you perpetuate conclusions derived from it.

emptyset:
if i had the constitution in my back pocket and well-formed intellectual arguments on a variety of debatable topics, then i would never be accused of intellectual dishonesty but then again i wouldn't get laid. ever.

I find that my integrity is far more important than a few shallow sexual escapades. Your perspective usually changes when you grow older and get married. But to each his own.

emptyset:
so, of all the intellectual dishonesty in the world, you choose my so-called "induction error" and "put your foot down".

Yes. What can I say; I'm an opportunist.

emptyset:
and if you really want to put your foot down on intellectual dishonesty, i suggest you join the fight against supporters of intelligent design, and others that want to turn the US into a theocracy.

How do you know I haven't already?

emptyset · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

Chris F:
There's nothing wrong or dishonest about making mistakes. Happens to everybody. It is dishonest when you make a mistake, are told that you've made a mistake, and then you perpetuate conclusions derived from it.

you do realize that i've already said the induction error was intentional, for the purpose of humor? the conclusions i perpetuate don't come from this; i've already provided a good source for why i feel that way.

you must be as bored as i am this morning.

Not Registered · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

Anonymous:

... So you see a diagram like this and you rightly exclaim “WTF?!?!?”, but it is an error in judgment to assume that you know exactly what is wrong with it...

I think we are arguing the same point... my postings have not attacked the system. I have focused on the flaws in the information describing the system. On the surface the entire system is a WTF, but I cannot dismiss the entire system. I believe that the documentation is misleading and it is skewed to make the system look like a complete joke.

A person cannot criticize the use of MS Access (IMHO one of the worst platforms) Was it a legacy system? If it was and it was meeting its business need, don’t try to fix something that’s not broken. Adding the word "Existing" or "Legacy" to the diagram is not a major undertaking.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

People have focused on the use of MS Word. If part of the system needed to produce a Claims forms, Contract or some other printable document, MS Word makes sense. How/Why Word accesses the C# Webservice is a mystery. (I am assuming it is a web service but the diagram doesn't give one enough information to be sure) <o:p></o:p>

A C# Service sending XML to a C++ application is not a WTF. But the diagram makes it look like a WTF.

A C++ application calling a Java application MAY not be a WTF either. I assume that the Java System is a legacy system, and that is what the development team had to work with.<o:p></o:p>

In short, the application looks like a hodge-podge of languages and technologies. If the diagram indicated the legacy systems it COULD be less of a WTF. If the diagram provided additional information on the MS Word piece, that MIGHT also proved to not be a WTF.

I agree with you that many people are throwing stones before they have the facts. The diagram provides almost no worthwhile information about the system. All it does is make a functional system look like a WTF.

In the end the only thing that counts is that the system works. Companies are not paying us to write code, they are paying us to write applications that support their business needs. Many of the developers who write monuments to the Code Gods, loose focus and write WTFs, or worse write systems that never make it to production.<o:p></o:p>

brazzy · 2005-08-31 Reply Admin

Not Registered:

People have focused on the use of MS Word. If part of the system needed to produce a Claims forms, Contract or some other printable document, MS Word makes sense. How/Why Word accesses the C# Webservice is a mystery. (I am assuming it is a web service but the diagram doesn't give one enough information to be sure)

Using word to generate printable forms is fine. Not the best solution, but acceptable. What is a complete WTF and NOT possibly justifiable by anything is that the Word document becomes an active part of the system and passes on information to another system on its own.

2005-09-06 Reply Admin

dubwai:
Really there's no such thing as intrinisc value. Things are worth what we think they are worth.

No, you're confusing market value with intrinsic value. Imagine you're marooned on a desert island. A can of beans would have intrinsic value - you can eat it. Likewise a fishing rod. A gold bar wouldn't. A million dollars would, though - you could burn it to keep warm.

2005-09-06 Reply Admin

Anonymous:

dubwai:
Really there's no such thing as intrinisc value. Things are worth what we think they are worth.

No, you're confusing market value with intrinsic value. Imagine you're marooned on a desert island. A can of beans would have intrinsic value - you can eat it. Likewise a fishing rod. A gold bar wouldn't. A million dollars would, though - you could burn it to keep warm.

You could club fish to death with your gold bar

2005-09-07 Reply Admin

Anonymous:
That can't possibly be right, there is no Oracle.

It'd be a LOT funnier if they'd somehow managed to send it through the Usenet Oracle at some point in the process too.

2005-09-08 Reply Admin

This belongs in every dictionary under 'friggin miracle'.

ML

Richard Nixon · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

emptyset:
Richard Nixon:

You're not still discussing the argument? Then how come I know about this fabled argument you had with this libertarian? It appears you misunderstood me because your reply makes no sense. What does being "a clear winner" have to do with the fact that you're still discussing this argument some time later on a message board completely separate from where it took place?

how did you know about the libertarian? are you in his envoy? did they put you up to this?


Richard Nixon:

All incompetence is fair game but I question the incompetence you are citing. Political arguments on the Internet are very rarely of any value and both sides usually come away believing they were the winner and that the other side is just plain stupid.

from your poorly constructed dialogue, i'd pin you as either puerto rican or samoan, but we'll continue nonetheless. we'll start with some basic facts about the world and apply modus ponens until we reach nirvana.

0. silver has no intrinsic value.
1. ayn rand and her books are completely wrong.
2. at least (2) grand-parents believe the atlanta journal-constitution is "liberal media", in spite of its "faith and values" daily section.
3. a pack of camel cigarettes costs $3.47 (tax included) at buddy's convinience store at the corner of north and highland avenues.
4. upwards of 20 people have passed out on my sofa, but only seven have been officially tea-bagged.
5. in the movie "mitchell", joe don baker plays a cop, and fucks yanni's (future, at the time) wife, linda evans.
6. every male graduate student from India has in his possession at least (1) horizontally striped shirt. 

so, as you can see, i merely made inferences from my world and applied them directly into a new domain. using just these seven basic facts, i reached the conclusion i was communicating with a 21st century confederate sympathiser. i'll admit the beagle was of my own invention. i recalled this story (the brain functions at times to retrieve "past experiences" from "memory") because we were discussing whether or not goods had this "real value". since the image was of particular interest to me (the brain can release chemicals which cause "euphoria" and "joy") i felt with all the talk of free market this and that it was appropriate to engage in a little bit of libertarian bashing.

i've clearly offended you in ways i possibly won't be able to understand for the rest of my life. then again, you can homeschool your children and make them hyper-intelligent social cripples, destined to marry the first capricorn with a heart of gold. you may also mention (occasionally) private charities in the hope they'll help the homeless, but won't offer any donations. additionally, you'll be locked in the belief that your job in the software industry is the result of an agreement between individuals, and that society and universities had nothing to do with it. you'll desire every road you travel on have a toll, but by then, you'll be half-way through the book on eliminating the income tax.

Richard Nixon:

Incompetence in code is fair game because the code can be posted and discussed. Incompetence in some political view is both boring and you're not citing any evidence to show the incompetence. All we have is your claim, which is obviously biased because you disagree with the person you were arguing with.

of course all you have is my claim. why should i go to great lengths to present the other side of the issue in way that's "fair and balanced"? sweet zombie jesus. i bet you're one of the kids who runs around trying to set up the "academic bill of rights" to defend "traditional values" against the tide of "liberal professors".

Richard Nixon:

My final point is that your discussions of some political argument you had previously are arguably out of place but, clearly in my mind, completely uninteresting.

oh. well, clearly in my mind right now is a bunch of technicolor panda bears that have emerged from the walls and are setting up all around my desk what appears to be a variant of cricket.

You spent a lot of time on that. Congrats. I didn't read it.

Richard Nixon · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

redwards:
Dear emptyset:

I've taped this post to my cubicle wall.

Dear Richard Nixon:

Richard Nixon:
Your humor fails to deliver on a number of levels.

Then it shares a remarkable resemblance to your analogy.

More thoughts. The word 'and' is not a period. A period looks like this:

"."

Now you try.

You're very cute. It's a shame you're also so stupid.

2005-09-08 Reply Admin

Since Microsoft Word's document format is becoming XML, you could replace the entire VBA-calling-C#-dll-to-create-xml with an xslt transformation. Hire me as a consultant and I'll bolt a few more things onto that architecture. If adding an xslt to this doesn't make them happy enough, we could do something like host the xslt as a 'web service' at some offsite service provider who will transform the document then mail it back to some well-specified email address. I could write another component (in Ruby or Python, just to get the buzzword count up) that can poll the email address and send the xml file to the C++ ATL Interface.

emptyset · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

Richard Nixon:

You spent a lot of time on that. Congrats. I didn't read it.

you did, you just thought i would care more if you hadn't.

Richard Nixon · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

emptyset:
Richard Nixon:

You spent a lot of time on that. Congrats. I didn't read it.

you did, you just thought i would care more if you hadn't.

No, I really didn't read it.

Cyresse · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

Richard Nixon:
emptyset:

Stuff involving testicles at one point... 

You spent a lot of time on that. Congrats. I didn't read it.

Mr Nixon, if you're going to pick/perpetuate arguments, you are taking upon yourself a responsibility to come up with rebuttals better than a reworking of the familiar childhood refrain of

"nahnahnahnah, I'm not listening."

Richard Nixon · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

Cyresse:
Richard Nixon:
emptyset:

Stuff involving testicles at one point... 

You spent a lot of time on that. Congrats. I didn't read it.

Mr Nixon, if you're going to pick/perpetuate arguments, you are taking upon yourself a responsibility to come up with rebuttals better than a reworking of the familiar childhood refrain of

"nahnahnahnah, I'm not listening."

Where's the argument? The guy is an idiot whose life is so shallow that he still talks about some discussion he had with a libertarian on a different message board months ago. It wouldn't be sporting of me to argue with him very strongly.

So I attempted to defuse the situation by offering congratulations on a job well done with the sheer volume of words he assembled and then informed him that it was of no interest to me. I took the high road. You sir, may now go pound sand.

Cyresse · 2005-09-08 Reply Admin

Out of curiosity, what does 'pounding sand' mean? It's one of those regional things, I guess.

Richard Nixon · 2005-09-09 Reply Admin

Cyresse:
Out of curiosity, what does 'pounding sand' mean? It's one of those regional things, I guess.

Did Google cease to exist recently?

http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorp.htm

emptyset · 2005-09-09 Reply Admin

Richard Nixon:
Where's the argument? The guy is an idiot whose life is so shallow that he still talks about some discussion he had with a libertarian on a different message board months ago. It wouldn't be sporting of me to argue with him very strongly.

yet you insist on having the last word of some sort. i'm confused. i think i've just offended your libertarian views, and this has upset you.

i find it hilarious you resurrect a dying thread in order to post "nope! didn't read any of it!"

as for shallow, posting about old threads doesn't hold a candle to carrying around minature labrador retrievers in man-purses, so i'm failing to see the connection here.

Richard Nixon:

So I attempted to defuse the situation by offering congratulations on a job well done with the sheer volume of words he assembled and then informed him that it was of no interest to me. I took the high road. You sir, may now go pound sand.

the high road of insulting people? after reading the side bar thread on insurance, it's pretty evident you're just trying to antogonize people. so who's the shallow/rude one here?

Integration Nation

Leave a comment on “Integration Nation”