• Yuval (unregistered)

    So why is your logo a set containing the empty set?

  • (cs)

    Lets everybody get some SLOCs and gift them to Alex, so he could offset typos and grammar mistakes in TDWTF articles.

    And then, everybody buys some more to offset his own ones.

  • (cs) in reply to aaaaaargh
    aaaaaargh:
    Apparently TDWTF readers are without humor. D'oh
    Some of us actually want it to be successful. I don't see the average person being willing to donate 4-figures, even though most programmers, especially career ones, would easily fit into the appropriate range. Sure, the certificates don't mean much, but they're a nice little semantic offering. Something to show off to colleagues and peers and help it spread.
  • Bill (unregistered)

    As a large software vendor, I fail to see how this proposal will allow me to further strengthen my monopoly. We have an established enterprise capable of producing 100K bad SLOC/day. If we are forced to scale back we will have to lay off a lot of people during already tough economic times. This will have a ripple effect throughout the world because we are Too Big To Fail (TM).

    Therefore, we, and others like us (but there aren't any, muhahaha) should be granted an exemption for our established level of 100KBSLOC/day. If we cut back to 97KBSLOC/day then the revenues from 3KBSLOC/day should be diverted to us inasmuch as we are being good corporate citizens and helping to save the planet and all that rot.

    Whatever you do just make sure to rig the system so that new competitors can't come in with better code and smarter people and disturb us from our perch. Our lobbyists would not like that, no, not one bit. (Get it? Bit?) Nor would our Congresscritters.

  • Steven (unregistered)

    Oh dear. $0.50 per SLOC is inexpensive? I'll never make enough money to offset every single bad SLOC I've ever written.

  • (cs)
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about.
    2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny.
    3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
  • (cs)

    "I never write bad code."

    "If I had two quarters for every time I heard that..."

    "Hmm..."

  • NutDriverLefty (unregistered) in reply to aaaaaargh
    xtremezone:
    10000 contributors at 0.5¢/SLOC is worth the same as 100 contributors at 50¢/SLOC.

    Reminds me of the old joke that ends "Fat chicks need love, too. But fat chicks gotta pay"

  • Laughing Jack (unregistered) in reply to Zylon
    Zylon:
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about. 2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. 3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
    Where can I buy some humorless programmer offsets?
  • Digby (unregistered) in reply to Zylon
    Zylon:
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about. 2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. 3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
    1. While the comments suggest there are some that don't, I think most is a bit of a big call
    2. The joke has only needed to be explained to a few people. It appears (judging by the comments) that most people here saw a funny side to it
    3. If you don't like it, ignore it. Just because you don't find it funny, doesn't mean anyone else doesn't

    Why, time and time again, do people insist that things are lame because they don't like it? why do they insist that everyone else should miss out because it doesn't fit their taste? do people not understand that they are free to ignore absolutely anything they read on the net if they don't like it?

  • KleanKoder (unregistered)

    Someone suggested that this is a software analog of Al Gore's carbon offset credits. It's not. A portion of the carbon offsets go to plant tree such as palm tree, which are good carbon sinks. The plantations are located in South America, mostly Brazil. And since land for trees is in short supply, it's purchased from the Brazllian government as parcels of unfarmed land. Which means the rain forest. So to offset pollution, you clean-cut the rain forest. Clearly, CodeOffsets doesn't do that kind of devastation.

    An analog was needed. That's why I created the KleanKode foundation. My foundation takes money from code-conscious developers and uses it to hire the best OSS authors in a temp agency that is then sending them as contractors for Microsoft where they maintain VBScript code, thus assuring their minds are destroyed forever - just like palm trees planted from carbon offsets destroy the environment forever.

    Donate today. Stop the useless forking and the wasteful me-too distros.

  • (cs)

    A round of applause to Alex for this one.

    My wife runs fund-raising for a nationwide medical/support nonprofit organization, and so I have seen quite the variety of get-the-word-out/get-the-cash-in tactics over the past few years; some wonderfully successful... some not.

    It is very difficult to organize a campaign which actually makes people eager to donate, as opposed to just playing on their "guilt instincts". The former is much more likely to engender a continued positive relationship with the foundation, even if the latter results in more up-front cash flow.

    I have to say, the Alliance for Code Excellence certainly falls into the former category. You'll certainly get something from me... once I actually set up a PayPal account, that is.

  • Basement Programmer (unregistered)

    I don't have any money, but I asked my mom if I could donate some pizza. She said it would go bad in the mail.

    What is this "mail" of which she speaks? I'm afraid to ask her because she always acts like I'm stupid.

  • (cs)

    Noble effort, but your offset mechanism is wrong. By funding open source software projects, you are generating more lines of code, some of which will be bad. That's like racing hybrid cars to offset a coal plant. Yes, they emit less pollution than conventional cars, but it's still a net increase in pollution relative to a world without a hybrid car race.

    Carbon offsets work by funding a carbon sink for every carbon emitter. For code, you need to destroy a bad line of code for each line generated. You could do that by rewriting bad lines to make them good, cutting features that rely on those bad lines, or erasing from existence some software that has bad lines of code.

  • Anon (unregistered)

    It's just stupid.

  • Carl (unregistered) in reply to AlpineR
    AlpineR:
    Noble effort, but your offset mechanism is wrong. By funding open source software projects, you are generating more lines of code, some of which will be bad. ... you need to destroy a bad line of code for each line generated. ... by ... erasing from existence some software that has bad lines of code.
    That's the ultimate goal of most open source software.
  • Hah (unregistered)

    One can turn all bad code into good code by commenting them out. No need to purchase offsets.

  • (cs) in reply to Digby
    Digby:
    do people not understand that they are free to ignore absolutely anything they read on the net if they don't like it?
    Physician, heal thyself.
  • Zapakh (unregistered)
    Bad Code Offset: One SLOC

    Before reading the fine print on the certificate, I had a totally different idea of what the "S" might stand for.

    /bought

  • Nerevar (unregistered)

    Is there some parallel to pre-Trent indulgence market? A simony of current age?

  • Karbon Kenny (unregistered)

    Where are the free ones?

    They have free carbon offsets.

    One of you slick programmer types should get right on that.

  • sjakie (unregistered)

    Dudes,

    I came across a couple of on-the-street dealers, hooking me up with some of these offsets, but I already ran out after an hour or so. Damn those co-workers!

    I'm out gettin' another shot of these to get me through the rest of the day...

    Anybody got an address for knock-offs?

  • Rene (unregistered)

    Good code can still produce some very poor software and vice versa.

  • Lurker (unregistered)

    The real WTF is a link to an "Untitled Page" and requiring Silverlight to show content.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Zylon
    Zylon:
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about. 2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. 3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
    The joke only has to be explained to retards. Unfortunately, they seem to make up about 70% of this site's readers.
  • Lee K-T (unregistered) in reply to Lurker
    Lurker:
    The real WTF is a link to an "Untitled Page" and requiring Silverlight to show content.

    The real WTF is being a computer guy and not having the funkiest technology of all times installed.

  • nmp0906 (unregistered) in reply to Calculator Ftvb from Futuramerlin.com

    Then you couldn't give them out as Windows launch party favors!

  • Paul A. (unregistered) in reply to NightDweller
    NightDweller:
    The naysayers will mock this wonderful initiative, but i have one word to describe it (and then some more) brillant!

    May it be as successful as Al-gore's plan! Hell, May it even be actually successful! Seriously, I'd even give you some money if i had a PayPal account (and money to waste).

    You spelled brilliant wrong.

  • AndrewB (unregistered)
    1. Where is teh funney?
    2. Why is everyone talking about this in a serious way?
  • Dr Headdesk (unregistered) in reply to HurrDurr
    HurrDurr:
    Wow, lots of people who are both humorless and too stupid to see this is a fun way to drive donations to open source projects. Now imagine these people in charge of your scrum team, your office, your government, your life. WTF, indeed.

    Imagine? I doubt many of us need to imagine we're managed by humourless morons

  • Dr Headdesk (unregistered) in reply to Samuel A. Falvo II
    Samuel A. Falvo II:
    What the fsck? No, really, WTF?

    The last time I checked, "Nettlesome bugs and poorly written code" have never prevented an engineer from reaching his full potential, for these are the result of an engineer who has already reached his limited potential to begin with. The whole idea of "code offsets" just smacks of dumb-ass profiteerism to me.

    Instead, what's needed is a profit sharing system mediated by an independent and disinterested third party -- something of a slight tweak on fairsoftware.net concept. For a project P, contributors to P are assigned a number of shares, such that as revenue accrues from sales or services related to the product, that revenue gets distributed to all parties according to their shares, after expenses of course. Each bug filed against P which goes unaddressed for a negotiated period of time, however, constitutes an expense to be determined in cooperation with the disinterested third party, thus reifying the concept of "technical debt" into something which can be accounted for on the books.

    In this case, you have economic incentives for bug-free code, to offer excellent customer service, and to keep shipping product. No stupid offsets are necessary.

    Moron? Or the ultimate troll? You decide!

  • J. "Lennon" Gosling (unregistered)

    Instant karma's gonna get you Gonna knock you right on the head You better get yourself together Pretty soon you gonna be dead What in the world you're thinking of Laughing in the face of love? What on earth are you trying to do? It's up to you - yeah you

    Instant karma's gonna get you Gonna look you right in the face Better get yourself together darling Join the human race How in the world you gonna see Laughing at fools like me? Who in the hell do you think you are? A superstar? Well, right you are

    Well we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun Well we all shine on Everyone come on

    Instant karma's gonna get you Gonna knock you off your feet Better recognize your brothers Everyone you meet Why in the world are we here? Surely not to live in pain and fear Why in earth are you there When you're everywhere? Come and get your share

    Well we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun Well we all shine on Come on and on and on on on

    Well we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun Yeah we all shine On and on and on on on

    Yeah we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the s Yeah we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun Well we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun Well we all shine on Like the moon and the stars and the sun

  • Andreas (unregistered)

    There will be a cyclic loop once the Apache foundation starts paying up for their sins (unless they dedicate their money to PostgreSQL).

    BTW, here's a C++-program without any semicolons (does that mean it's bug-free?):

    void main(){ if(int a = printf("Hello World!\n")) {} }
  • fw (unregistered) in reply to Paul A.
    Paul A.:
    NightDweller:
    The naysayers will mock this wonderful initiative, but i have one word to describe it (and then some more) brillant!

    May it be as successful as Al-gore's plan! Hell, May it even be actually successful! Seriously, I'd even give you some money if i had a PayPal account (and money to waste).

    You spelled brillant correctly.

    FTFY

  • (cs) in reply to Calculator Ftvb from Futuramerlin.com
    Calculator Ftvb from Futuramerlin.com:
    Cool way to donate to FLOSS. One suggestion though — email the certificates, so I can snag a copy off the 'net and print it myself without paying a dime.
    ftfy
  • Paul A. (unregistered) in reply to fw
    fw:
    Paul A.:
    NightDweller:
    The naysayers will mock this wonderful initiative, but i have one word to describe it (and then some more) brillant!

    May it be as successful as Al-gore's plan! Hell, May it even be actually successful! Seriously, I'd even give you some money if i had a PayPal account (and money to waste).

    You spelled brilliant wrong.

    FTFY

    No. FTFY! My handle wasn't "Paul A" by accident, old bean.

    [image]
  • Dr Headdesk (unregistered) in reply to Andreas
    Andreas:
    There will be a cyclic loop once the Apache foundation starts paying up for their sins (unless they dedicate their money to PostgreSQL).

    BTW, here's a C++-program without any semicolons (does that mean it's bug-free?):

    void main(){ if(int a = printf("Hello World!\n")) {} }

    Well, of course. I can't see any bugs in it.

  • (cs) in reply to Bob
    Bob:
    Wait....WTF?....I thought this was just a good joke. You're not really selling these, are you? More importantly, there really aren't people dumb enough to think they would be accomplishing anything substantive by purchasing them, are there?

    Oh Lord....run for the hills

    See, there are some people -- they usually like to quote Monty Python films -- who cleave together by common interest in some fad or other. They identify with other faddists so much that they believe everyone they mix with must be interested in something that has become part of their own identity.

    So in among the claims that something is an ex-something (and possibly that no, in fact, it's just sleeping, and there, they just saw it move), you'll hear snippets of something that is not so commonly known as to be part of the Western consciousness. Sometimes it'll be a reference to TDWTF; other times it'll be a Digg story that recently aired, or a trending Tweet, or (heaven forbid), Star Wars.

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Zylon:
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about. 2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. 3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
    The joke only has to be explained to retards. Unfortunately, they seem to make up about 70% of this site's readers.
    Take your head out of your fundament for a second and consider that context is oxygen to the joke. Divorced from the context of TDWTF, it reads like a simplistic and shallow lampooning of carbon offsets. So yes, in your world, anyone who doesn't read TDWTF is a "retard".
  • (cs)

    I know I don't write any bad code. That's because my job consists entirely of writing custom date/time logic and string-manipulation, and we all know that stuff is so easy it's nigh-impossible to write bad code doing it.

  • Paul A. (unregistered) in reply to rfsmit
    rfsmit:
    Anonymous:
    Zylon:
    1. Most people do not understand WTF all that cap/trade nonsense is about. 2. If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. 3. Therefore, this isn't funny. It's just lame and awkward.
    The joke only has to be explained to retards. Unfortunately, they seem to make up about 70% of this site's readers.
    Take your head out of your fundament for a second and consider that context is oxygen to the joke. Divorced from the context of TDWTF, it reads like a simplistic and shallow lampooning of carbon offsets. So yes, in your world, anyone who doesn't read TDWTF is a "retard".

    It's no more a simplistic and shallow lampoon than a charity slave auction. Nobody at those literally believes they're buying, say, a burly fireman for £3000. It's a way to make basic fund-raising a bit less mundane. How much less mundane varies with your mileage, but if anybody doesn't get the joke here, they need their head examined. Context be damned.

  • Capndan (unregistered) in reply to Bumble Bee Tuna
    Bumble Bee Tuna:
    I know I don't write any bad code. That's because my job consists entirely of writing custom date/time logic and string-manipulation, and we all know that stuff is so easy it's nigh-impossible to write bad code doing it.

    That sounds like a challenge to me!

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Cynical Sam
    Cynical Sam:
    My sarcasm meter is pegged with this one... even though it could be implemented semi-seriously. The outright cynicism about our world that this displays nearly makes my head spin.

    This reminds me of a cartoon I saw once, where a dictator is brooding as he stares out a window and says, "Yes, I guess I am paranoid. But am I paranoid ENOUGH?"

    So, yes, I am cynical about our world. But am I cynical ENOUGH?

  • Bim Job (unregistered) in reply to Nerevar
    Nerevar:
    Is there some parallel to pre-Trent indulgence market? A simony of current age?
    This is good and wise and eloquent -- and (intentionally, I think) funnier than the OP. Interested readers may now divert to the obligatory Wikipedia page.

    Leaving aside the prior fact that Luther's "95 Theses" nailed (ahem) the weak point of indulgences, it's a fair point that carbon offsets operate in a remarkably similar way. It's more than a fair point. Apparently, it's very difficult to get German industry (say) to agree to such a scheme unless they get bunged an unreasonable amount of offsets for free.

    It isn't really simony, though, is it? That would involve actually paying to be an evil code polluter. There's no need to do that. You can join an Open Source project for free...

  • JohnB (unregistered) in reply to Just Another Unskilled Perl Hacker
    Just Another Unskilled Perl Hacker:
    kitikat:
    And what 'bout perl one-liners? They would be less affected by such 'offsets' ;)
    True dat. Some of the Perl software I've hacked together would be completely debugged with 3 or 4 offset certificates. The coverage density would be amazing. A one-SLOC offset would paper over half-a-dozen bugs, easy.

    Now if I could find a way to make the users believe it...

    "No, no, the script is perfect. See? All of these pieces of paper say so!"

    And what happens when you get to APL? Do we need offsets for each and every program written in APL or is there a way to purchase an offset for the language-and-everything-ever-developed-in-it?

  • offroad (unregistered)

    How about some stupid idea offsets? That's what this world really needs...especially our elected officials.

  • Jason Y (unregistered)

    It's like buying indulgences from the Open Source Church.

  • iToad (unregistered) in reply to JohnB
    JohnB:
    Just Another Unskilled Perl Hacker:
    kitikat:
    And what 'bout perl one-liners? They would be less affected by such 'offsets' ;)
    True dat. Some of the Perl software I've hacked together would be completely debugged with 3 or 4 offset certificates. The coverage density would be amazing. A one-SLOC offset would paper over half-a-dozen bugs, easy.

    Now if I could find a way to make the users believe it...

    "No, no, the script is perfect. See? All of these pieces of paper say so!"

    And what happens when you get to APL? Do we need offsets for each and every program written in APL or is there a way to purchase an offset for the language-and-everything-ever-developed-in-it?

    For languages like Perl and APL, you need to buy the -special- certificates, which generate offsets for single characters only, instead of entire lines of code.

  • Bob (unregistered) in reply to JG
    JG:
    Are you seriously this dumb? Or just trying real hard.
    There's a lot of dumb people out there.

    Given that most of us idiots seem to be using the traditional definition of the word "dumb" (specifically, "does not agree with my obviously superior intellect") that probably won't be changing any time soon. :)

  • MooseDontBouce (unregistered)

    I have never written a line of bad code either. But I have included many "undocumented features".

Leave a comment on “Introducing Bad Code Offsets”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article