• Michael G (unregistered) in reply to Kef Schecter

    "Hey, you misspelled persistent as 'presistent'"

    "OK--I'll just go to that line and overwrite the first three characters with the text 'per' but I won't look at the screen as I do it. Let's hope I'm on the right line otherwise I'll turn 'will' into 'perl'."

  • (cs) in reply to Sol
    Sol:
    hallo.amt:
    Cathilic Comdoms need microwaving.

    No, they don't. They need to be Sanctified.

    No, they don't. According to the previous Pope, they need to be hole-y.

  • (cs)
    M Welch:
    "Only glass, only cans, or only waste?
    Well, yes, I'm afraid so. This is a website for computer programmers; we expect you to be familiar with the concept of exclusive-OR.
    M Welch:
    How do you use this recycle bin/garbage can!?"
    You place into it only glass, or only cans, or only waste. I.e., you do not mix different materials.
  • Planar (unregistered) in reply to Kef Schecter
    Kef Schecter:
    I'm sure there's an interesting story behind how Perl ended up on that sign, but I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is.

    My guess: someone tried to fix the typo in the first line by changing the first three letters to PER, but edited the second line instead.

  • (cs) in reply to Kef Schecter
    Kef Schecter:
    I'm sure there's an interesting story behind how Perl ended up on that sign, but I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is.
    Printer: Hey boss, I finished that sign you wanted. Wanna take a look?

    Boss: Sure. Wait a second you've got a typo. The first three letters should be "Per"

    Printer: Ok, I'll fix that right up and print 'em off.

    Hmmm... maybe there's another definition of "interesting."

  • (cs) in reply to Kef Schecter
    Kef Schecter:
    I'm sure there's an interesting story behind how Perl ended up on that sign, but I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is.
    My theory is that they caught the typo on "presistent", but were a bit clumsy and selected the first three letters of "will" to replace instead.

    How they didn't notice this afterwards, on the other hand, is another question entirely. Perhaps the sign was made in some non-English-speaking country...

    Edited to add: And I should really refresh the page to make sure two or three other people haven't said the same thing above me before posting.

  • (cs) in reply to ATimson
    ATimson:
    It does indeed sum up that chain's customer service desires; that said, I didn't know that "nationwide" now meant "from Michigan with sprinkles of stores in other Midwestern states".

    Well, that reminds me when I was in Colorado my parents and I went to this local italian restaurant. Turns out that apparently it's a chain (don't remember name though unfortunately) and that they had locations all over the world!

    At least, according to this huge map in the entrance of the restaurant that said "world wide locations" or something to that effect in very large letters and right below that was a map of the United States.

  • (cs) in reply to Kermos
    Bob:
    Well, that reminds me when I was in Colorado my parents and I went to this local italian restaurant. Turns out that apparently it's a chain (don't remember name though unfortunately) and that they had locations all over the world!

    At least, according to this huge map in the entrance of the restaurant that said "world wide locations" or something to that effect in very large letters and right below that was a map of the United States.

    TRWTF here is the United States. They are megalomaniacs enough to declare local (U.S.) events to be covering either the world or the universe. I have yet to see a texas style wrestler from Uganda or a Miss Universe from the Andromeda galaxy.

  • Dan (unregistered) in reply to dsckeld
    dsckeld:
    Bob:
    Well, that reminds me when I was in Colorado my parents and I went to this local italian restaurant. Turns out that apparently it's a chain (don't remember name though unfortunately) and that they had locations all over the world!

    At least, according to this huge map in the entrance of the restaurant that said "world wide locations" or something to that effect in very large letters and right below that was a map of the United States.

    TRWTF here is the United States. They are megalomaniacs enough to declare local (U.S.) events to be covering either the world or the universe. I have yet to see a texas style wrestler from Uganda or a Miss Universe from the Andromeda galaxy.

    Then there was that movie, Demolition Man, where apparently Los Angeles was the entire world...

  • (cs) in reply to Michael G
    Michael G:
    "Hey, you misspelled persistent as 'presistent'"

    "OK--I'll just go to that line and overwrite the first three characters with the text 'per' but I won't look at the screen as I do it. Let's hope I'm on the right line otherwise I'll turn 'will' into 'perl'."

    DING DING DING!

    WINNAH!

  • (cs)

    the spreadsheet with the web server built in sounds totally fucked up... but it's got python, so its gotta be cool... right?

  • See a shell (unregistered) in reply to Technical Thug

    I thought "Perl" was better than having "shell" instead of "shall". Was it just my Engrish failing me or would "shall" be acceptable there?

  • (cs) in reply to See a shell
    See a shell:
    I thought "Perl" was better than having "shell" instead of "shall". Was it just my Engrish failing me or would "shall" be acceptable there?
    I believe 'shall' would be technically acceptable, but you'd very rarely, if ever, see that on a sign. (And, after trying to remember the difference I found the wiki article - I'm off to read that, it looks interesting)
  • Kef Schecter (unregistered)

    Ahh, I was so distracted by the Perl part that I didn't even notice the "presistent" typo, even after looking at the sign several times. Now it makes sense.

    OK, there would have been an interesting story if there hadn't been an obvious typo above it...

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous

    If you're going to microwave your condoms, word of advice: it works much better if you do it while wearing them.

    Anonymous:
    Nice try, but I'm blocking images based on their location and their href target. So all the advertising banners are successfully blocked but the additional images further down the page all come through just fine. Maybe you should link the additional images to random sponsors? I'd be pretty much f*cked on the ad-blocking front in that case...
    I was quite glad to see he moved the images out of the "ads" directory, so that they could still be seen with AdBlock on.

    Regardless, here they are for anyone who... well because I already copied the URLs before noticing that and don't want my efforts to go to waste. https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/1025081257.jpg https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/kabelgoot.jpg https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/PIC-0047.jpg https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/2008-12%20Imaginiff%20game%20typo%20in%20their%20own%20name.jpg https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/DSC00390.JPG https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/DSC00457.JPG https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/WorksChopForLease.JPG https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/imagesadopteddawg.jpg https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/IMG_0111.JPG https://thedailywtf.com/images/200901/photo.jpg

  • Nigel (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Mike:
    ATimson:
    It does indeed sum up that chain's customer service desires; that said, I didn't know that "nationwide" now meant "from Michigan with sprinkles of stores in other Midwestern states".
    You're talking about Target, right? They started in Minnesota and have over 1,500 stores across 48 states. That's nationwide to me.

    Obviously not Target. Target's carts are all red. These carts are blue, not unlike an even more massive chain of discount stores that spread out of Arkansas are cover the whole world.

    There its fixed.

  • Mr A (unregistered)

    The real wtf is...

    Trying to download the OPEN SOURCE version of Resolver and getting told that all SPREADSHEETS are therefore open source (rather than linked applications). Where does the GPL allow this?

    To paraphrase: Use OUR product to create YOUR work and YOU don't own it any more.

    What a joke - I think I'll pass on Revolver

  • holli (unregistered)

    Well, the good thing about offering hand jobs from a garage is that they didn't need to invest in extra massage oil =)

    Captcha: oily

  • (cs) in reply to Mr A
    Mr A:
    The real wtf is...
    Your ignorance of the difference between "open source" and "freeware"?
    Mr A:
    Trying to download the OPEN SOURCE version of Resolver and getting told that all SPREADSHEETS are therefore open source (rather than linked applications). Where does the GPL allow this?
    Well, you're right and wrong. The GPL doesn't allow that, in fact it is utterly opposed to the spirit of the GPL to attempt to place restrictions on the way people use software - that's the whole damn idea, forgawdsake!

    http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutput

    But... what does the GPL have to do with it? Resolver is not licensed under the GPL. Resolver is licensed under a proprietary license, invented by Resolver One, that governs how you may use their software. It is not an Open Source license and Resolver is not an Open Source product, Resolver is a proprietary product. The lack of any way to download the source code should have been a big clue!

    So it is a proprietary product - of which they'll give you a free copy to use if you're willing to give away the stuff with you produce with it. If you want to do commercial work with it, that will make money for you, you have to pay for the professional version.

    Mr A:
    To paraphrase: Use OUR product to create YOUR work and YOU don't own it any more.
    Not quite, more like ...
    Mr A:
    Resolver One:
    To paraphrase: Use OUR product to create YOUR work and YOU have to pay us for it. Use OUR product to create something YOU give away for free and we'll let you have OUR product for free in exchange.
    NOT FAIR! I WANT TO HAVE IT FOR FREE AND USE IT COMMERCIALLY!!! WAAAAAH!!! WAAAAAHHH!!! WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN ORDER TO GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING? BAAAAWWWW!!!
    Honestly, it's like a shop having a buy-one-get-one-free offer and seeing you standing at the checkout complaining that you can't just have the one free without having to buy one first. Somebody call for a WAAAAHmbulance!
  • Mr A (unregistered) in reply to DaveK

    Oooh - a nasty comment.

    Actually, I'd like to try it as part of an open source, non commercial, project. But, their FAQ says this:

    The free version of Resolver One is for non-commercial, open-source or personal use only.

    OK - sounds good, but...

    When you hit save, it asks you which open-source license you want to release your spreadsheet under.

    What nonsense is this? If I create a spreadsheet, a document, a presentation or whatever then I am the copyright owner and I get to decide the rights. Since when does a 3rd party company get to say otherwise?

    My point is that the clause is unreasonable. I have no problems with a legitimate product owner enforcing conditions on their product (why would I - it's their product). However, to enforce ownership conditions on the creative works produced with the help of a product is unreasonable.

    Or am I just being picky?

  • (cs) in reply to Mr A
    Mr A:
    Oooh - a nasty comment.
    A nasty comment? In MY internets?

    It's more likely than you think!

    Mr A:
    Actually, I'd like to try it as part of an open source, non commercial, project. But, their FAQ says this:

    The free version of Resolver One is for non-commercial, open-source or personal use only.

    OK - sounds good, but...

    When you hit save, it asks you which open-source license you want to release your spreadsheet under.

    I don't understand your surprise. You *said* you were going to use it for open source works when you downloaded the free instead of paying version. Why is this not just a convenience feature to help you specify the license you want to use?
    Mr A:
    What nonsense is this? If I create a spreadsheet, a document, a presentation or whatever then I am the copyright owner and I get to decide the rights. Since when does a 3rd party company get to say otherwise?
    But they didn't say otherwise, YOU did. When you entered into that contractual arrangement with them in which you accepted their offer of a free copy of the software in exchange for their future expectation of material benefits in the form of the open source creative works you will use it to generate and disseminate to the community.
    Mr A:
    My point is that the clause is unreasonable. I have no problems with a legitimate product owner enforcing conditions on their product (why would I - it's their product). However, to enforce ownership conditions on the creative works produced with the help of a product is unreasonable.
    But they're not "enforcing" anything on anyone: you VOLUNTEERED.
    Mr A:
    Or am I just being picky?
    Well, I believe the logical rigour of your reasoning has been undermined by an unjustified sense of entitlement.
  • methinks (unregistered) in reply to bells on

    "Hand job":

    Well, I'm not a native speaker - but couldn't it be that this was (and probably in the UK it still is?) a completely innocent phrase prior to being taken possession by dumb (US?) porn-speak?

    Ha ha. Very funny.

    So far for cheap laughs.

    Reminds me that I got once dissed in school by my own english teacher for using the word "carefree" in an essay. The reason being that this perfectly correct english word is used as the name for a brand of panty liners.

    Great. Sooner or later we'll end up with half of the word pool being unusable because they are double entendres in either sexuality or marketing...

  • (cs) in reply to methinks
    methinks:
    "Hand job":

    Well, I'm not a native speaker - but couldn't it be that this was (and probably in the UK it still is?)

    LOL, no, not a chance. The people who wrote that sign knew exactly what they were saying.
    methinks:
    a completely innocent phrase prior to being taken possession by dumb (US?) porn-speak?

    Ha ha. Very funny.

    So far for cheap laughs.

    Reminds me that I got once dissed in school by my own english teacher for using the word "carefree" in an essay. The reason being that this perfectly correct english word is used as the name for a brand of panty liners.

    Great. Sooner or later we'll end up with half of the word pool being unusable because they are double entendres in either sexuality or marketing...

    *snicker* You said "panty liners", mheheheeeheheheheehh...
  • Andy L (unregistered)

    The most amazing part of that door is the hinges! That door opens towards the camera.

    How simple it would have been to have installed the door facing the other way so that at least you could still use it, even if you had to step over the cables.

  • (cs) in reply to Andy L
    Andy L:
    The most amazing part of that door is the hinges! That door opens towards the camera.
    I guess the carpenter figured that QA would spot any bugs during the pre-release testing.
  • Mr Smith (unregistered)

    The real wtf is that the conduit doesn't have hinges too.

    Captcha: genitus

    Sounds itchy.

  • (cs) in reply to Andy L
    Andy L:
    The most amazing part of that door is the hinges! That door opens towards the camera.

    How simple it would have been to have installed the door facing the other way so that at least you could still use it, even if you had to step over the cables.

    I call shenanigans on that door. The conduit must have been placed after the door was installed.

    Anyone who ever installed a door knows that the hinges have to be open for you to screw them to the wall. How could the carpenter do it while there was a conduit blocking the door opening?

  • (cs) in reply to dsckeld
    dsckeld:
    I have yet to see ... a Miss Universe from the Andromeda galaxy.

    It's the fins and tentacles - the chicks from Canis Major keep finishing ahead of them, even though they're real dogs...

  • AdT (unregistered)

    The moron who added the door should be banned from using PU foam for life.

  • carpenter (unregistered) in reply to Smash King
    Smash King:
    Andy L:
    The most amazing part of that door is the hinges! That door opens towards the camera.

    How simple it would have been to have installed the door facing the other way so that at least you could still use it, even if you had to step over the cables.

    I call shenanigans on that door. The conduit must have been placed after the door was installed.

    Anyone who ever installed a door knows that the hinges have to be open for you to screw them to the wall. How could the carpenter do it while there was a conduit blocking the door opening?

    Make hole in wall.

    Make hole slightly larger than doorframe.

    Attach hinges to doorframe.

    Put door into frame.

    Close door.

    Put frame into wall.

    Fill remaining hole with foam.

  • (cs) in reply to carpenter
    carpenter:
    Make hole in wall.

    Make hole slightly larger than doorframe.

    Attach hinges to doorframe.

    Put door into frame.

    Close door.

    Put frame into wall.

    Fill remaining hole with foam.

    Yep, that's what I think as well. Obviously done by some smart-alec joiner.

    The foam was obviously applied while the conduit was there (look how the foam overlaps the conduit on the right-hand side)

    If the joiner was asked to put a door in and there were cables over the door-hole, there's no way any sensible joiner would try to cut/move the wires. So, he has two choices: (a) don't do anything until the wires are moved, or (b) put the door in anyway. Maybe he was only hired for one day, so had to do the job that day, or not at all.

    Maybe it was specified that the door had to open towards the camera, in which case he did it the only way he could think of.

    (Of course, in a few years when the foam has aged, the door will just fall down when someone uses it, but that's not THAT joiner's problem...)

  • (cs) in reply to methinks
    methinks:
    "Hand job":

    Well, I'm not a native speaker - but couldn't it be that this was (and probably in the UK it still is?) a completely innocent phrase prior to being taken possession by dumb (US?) porn-speak?

    Right. Tell that to all the UK people who get a snicker when they visit the US and drive past sod farms.

  • KD (unregistered) in reply to Smash King
    Smash King:
    Andy L:
    The most amazing part of that door is the hinges! That door opens towards the camera.

    How simple it would have been to have installed the door facing the other way so that at least you could still use it, even if you had to step over the cables.

    I call shenanigans on that door. The conduit must have been placed after the door was installed.

    Anyone who ever installed a door knows that the hinges have to be open for you to screw them to the wall. How could the carpenter do it while there was a conduit blocking the door opening?

    Or, simply remove the hinge from the door, attach the hinge to the frame, and then hang the door. You've been doing it the hard way.

  • (cs) in reply to dsckeld
    dsckeld:
    Bob:
    Well, that reminds me when I was in Colorado my parents and I went to this local italian restaurant. Turns out that apparently it's a chain (don't remember name though unfortunately) and that they had locations all over the world!

    At least, according to this huge map in the entrance of the restaurant that said "world wide locations" or something to that effect in very large letters and right below that was a map of the United States.

    TRWTF here is the United States. They are megalomaniacs enough to declare local (U.S.) events to be covering either the world or the universe. I have yet to see a texas style wrestler from Uganda or a Miss Universe from the Andromeda galaxy.

    TRRWTF is that euroslobs are concerned about this.

  • Mr A (unregistered) in reply to DaveK
    DaveK:
    I don't understand your surprise. You *said* you were going to use it for open source works when you downloaded the free instead of paying version. Why is this not just a convenience feature to help you specify the license you want to use?
    OK - I'll go slowly so you get it.

    For the 'free' version, the contents of a spreadsheet must be open even though:

    • the application is not open source.

    • the format is not open (it's Excel and Microsoft seem quite protective of that).

    If the application, format and content are indivisible, how can you grant rights to one without the other? There's no need to answer that as I doubt Microsoft are quaking at this legal onslaught.

    Therefore - these must be divisible. Big deal maybe, but you should consider that a license is a grant of rights where, in law, you do not have any by default (as opposed to a contract which defines behaviour on which the law affirms or is neutral).

    A license condition can only assert on matters that are directly related to, or indivisible from, a product.

    Take OpenOffice - it can insist that anybody embedding the code in another product must release THEIR product as OpenSource, but it cannot demand that anyone creating spreadsheets must, or mustn't, do anything. The contents of a spreadsheet are independent of it's expression and are therefore divisible (they can be expressed in other ways and still be valid). They can insist that the spreadsheet has "Created By OpenOffice" somewhere but they cannot insist that I grant rights to the contents.

    No license can make that demand as it would require a contract to enforce.

    DaveK:
    But they're not "enforcing" anything on anyone: you VOLUNTEERED.
    Nope. I didn't. I specifically said I don't volunteer. The conditions specified show the company is either legally naive or else is using a pointless version of the system to incorrectly claim OpenSource credentials.
  • Mambo (unregistered) in reply to RayS
    RayS:
    Clearly the correct way to have installed that door was steps up on either side to a raised door.

    Or two lifts and a walkway over the cables if disabled accessability is a requirement.

    With a toilet in each lift for convenience.

  • Gavin (unregistered)

    Re the waste bin: I think they mean for you to cover over the options you don't want. That way they don't have to make 3 separate waste bins....

  • (cs) in reply to GalacticCowboy
    GalacticCowboy:
    dsckeld:
    I have yet to see ... a Miss Universe from the Andromeda galaxy.

    It's the fins and tentacles - the chicks from Canis Major keep finishing ahead of them, even though they're real dogs...

    And the Wraith Queens from Pegasus were disqualified for using their mental powers to influence the judges. So they fed on the judges in revenge. Pity, really.

  • Craig (unregistered)

    The real WTF is...

    "This about sums up the customer service desires for a certain nation-wide retailer," notes Brian

    Meijer is not nation-wide, they are only located in about 5 states in the entire country.

  • Anonymous Hacker (unregistered) in reply to Steve

    ROFL. Yeah, your people left the lift issue boiling in Singapore when you left. They still have a posted fine for Brits, err, people who pee in the lift.

  • oddyseus (unregistered)

    "Only glass, only cans, or only waste? How do you use this recycle bin/garbage can!?"

    Sounds like a garbage CAN'T, then, doesn't it?

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    I wonder how that works...

    tow ($vehicle, $illegal_spot, $impound_yard) or die "Someone's parking brake is on";?

    There is nothing you can't do in perl...

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to ContraCorners

    My guess is it's to avoid a lawsuit, as you can't actually have people towed, which probably breaks some law somewhere.

    If you don't look at it closely, you still won't park there, so it still functions.

  • (cs) in reply to Mr A
    Mr A:
    Oooh - a nasty comment.

    Actually, I'd like to try it as part of an open source, non commercial, project. But, their FAQ says this:

    The free version of Resolver One is for non-commercial, open-source or personal use only.

    OK - sounds good, but...

    When you hit save, it asks you which open-source license you want to release your spreadsheet under.

    What nonsense is this? If I create a spreadsheet, a document, a presentation or whatever then I am the copyright owner and I get to decide the rights. Since when does a 3rd party company get to say otherwise?

    My point is that the clause is unreasonable. I have no problems with a legitimate product owner enforcing conditions on their product (why would I - it's their product). However, to enforce ownership conditions on the creative works produced with the help of a product is unreasonable.

    Or am I just being picky?

    I'm split on this.

    On the one hand, I could understand an open source compiler/IDE combo saying you must make only open source content with it. It's the saying you can't sell software compiled by the Express Edition of Visual Studio.

    However, this is a spreadsheet. This isn't creating software or other tools. This is content only.

    Which means that the spreadsheet could have sensitive data.

    If Google said that any documents saved or held by their Google Docs software was owned by them, that's a nasty situation.

    If Notepad++ said that any document saved using their software was open to the public.

    I think in the case where software creates content and not structure, I think that content is owned by the creator regardless of what was used to create it. I can understand saying you can't sell the content, but I don't agree that the content should then be public. That could be a nasty trick to circumvent IP laws, and one that could wait until the user has no choice but to publish using the software they're using.

    So, short version:

    1. You can say someone can't sell content created using their freeware/open-source software.
    2. You can't say someone must make content public created using their fw/os software.
  • eric bloedow (unregistered)

    one of the comments reminded me of an old Beetle Bailey comic: the character Zero had been told to paint a new sign for the laundry room...it wound up saying LAWNDRY RUME

Leave a comment on “Sponsor Appreciation, Service Bells, Service Doors, & Much More”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article