• dnm (unregistered) in reply to donazea
    donazea:
    Anonymous:

    nothing on the internet should ever be taken seriously

    Yup, that pretty much sums it up right there.

    Am I the only one left that still cares that WWW != Internet?

    That has to be one of my biggest pet peeves, having been around since well before the Web. Sigh, I guess I'm just an old fogie.
     

    No, it's fitting.  You shouldn't believe anything you read on the WWW, IRC, NNTP, e-mail, ..... so on and so forth.

  • (cs) in reply to cconroy
    cconroy:

    I'm wondering about "Peter Devil"... was his real name Paul Satan or something?
     

    Or Dick Diablo

  • (cs) in reply to Imposter, indeed!
    Anonymous:

    My god!  It's the most Dilbert-esque solution I've heard thus far!  I like it. Thus, PD could simply chill and take his time reviewing his list of chocolate-covered multi-amputee midget pr0n sites.

    Rank Amateur:

    If Peter were the real Devil, he'd tell the Vancouver site that their chance to work on a new exciting project depending on completing a successful handover to the Toronto in two weeks. Then he'd fire the lot. When the rock stars told him the product couldn't possibly be finished in time, he's say, "Screw it. Just make a pretty-looking UI to show the client in 6 months." When the client says the app doesn't work, claim their hardware is too slow, but for half the price of upgrading, he'll "optimize" the code. Promise the rock stars big bonuses to make the UI actually do something in a year, while secretly building a dossier on each regarding misusing company resources (e.g., looking at ESPN online during lunchbreaks). With delivery of a working product, deny the bonuses on the basis of the dossiers and pocket the cash. There should be some blackmailing and sexual harassment involved too.

    --RA

    THAT sounds like an American TV show.

  • Claude Houle (unregistered) in reply to bhandy
    bhandy:

    Anonymous:
    It's just a shame that the original story got distorted by whoever edit this site... For the one that are really interested in the REAL story (Which is less spectacular but closer to reality), you can go to my blog: http://dailyitstories.blogspot.com/
     

    I found your blog post to be much more interesting. 

     Thanks!
     

  • Ownage Personified (unregistered) in reply to ParkinT
    ParkinT:
    cconroy:

    I'm wondering about "Peter Devil"... was his real name Paul Satan or something?
     

    Or Dick Diablo

     Or Joe Barbeque

     

  • n (unregistered)

    more grammar nazism. This sentence in the first paragraph of the post really confused me:

    But -- bad news -- it just wasn't his thing.

    If you understand how the dash is normally used, you would parse this as if "it just wasn't his thing" is the bad news alluded to between the dashes. You would see the "bad news" and think, "uh-oh, bad news is coming." Consider this similarly formed sentence: But -- and this is the scary part -- it just wasn't his thing. See what I mean? That doesn't mean "and this is the scary part" wasn't his thing, obviously.

    I'm pretty sure the author meant "But bad news just wasn't his thing." I'm not too stupid, but it did take me a while to figure that out at 9am in the morning.

  • Jman (unregistered) in reply to Claude Houle
    Anonymous:
    bhandy:

    Anonymous:
    It's just a shame that the original story got distorted by whoever edit this site... For the one that are really interested in the REAL story (Which is less spectacular but closer to reality), you can go to my blog: http://dailyitstories.blogspot.com/
     

    I found your blog post to be much more interesting. 

     Thanks!
     

     

    Agreed, the original story is much better.  Amazing how much the story is embellished by Alex.  Nice to see the original for a change. 

  • (cs) in reply to anon
    Anonymous:

    No! That's three sig. figs.... it would be 14e1. Goodness.

    Finally someone who gets it right. Sure took a while. Suggesting that 10M would only have one significant figure just because it ENDS with a zero is an extreme WTF. 

  • (cs) in reply to woohoo
    woohoo:

    Hm, I'm not a native speaker, but I suspect that "made" was not intended as perfect tense but as a subjunctive. If so, it was still not correct however ;o) Your proposition "...that they make it..." would in fact be the correct subjunctive form (albeit looking quite the same as the infinitive/present tense form), although most people would perhaps prefer "...that they should make it..."

    I'm not sure if the form "...that they had made it..." would also be correct somehow (perhaps that was intended in the first place) but as far as I can recall my school wisdom, the subjunctive always takes the infinitive form, for all persons and regardless of tense.

    Native speaker, anyone? ;o)

    The Real WTF here is that non-native speakers of English know more about our grammar than most native speakers (at least Americans; can't speak to the state of British education, though I hope it's better).  I had never even heard of things like "future perfect" and "subjunctive " until I started studying French in high school.  Kind of difficult to learn tenses in another language when you don't know what they're called in your own...

    For the record, I agree that "make" is correct, though I would probably rewrite the end of the sentence to make it more straightforward: "in order to get a free copy".
     

  • dasmb (unregistered)

    Making fun of the USD -> CAD exchange rate was hilarious when it was 1.6 and their salaries were equivalent to ours in local dollars.

    It is much less funny now that it is to 1.1.

    See, if Canadian salaries are 20% more than ours in local dollars, but their dollars are only worth 10% less than ours, they are richer than we are as a people.

    Not funny, so much as it is ignorant.

  • (cs) in reply to dasmb

    I think it's funny that the anyone expected the short-timers to actually be doing anything. Their prior reputation didn't seem to be all that great anyway, but then to expect AFTER they've been let go via email was extremely naive. I know my motivation would be sapped after being let go in a manner as cowardly as email.

  • Ed (unregistered) in reply to ERTW

    <spellingnazialert>

     When you say <grammernazialert>, I'm sure you mean <grammarnazialert>.  I'm just so sure.

    </spellingnazialert>

  • (cs) in reply to dasmb
    Anonymous:

    See, if Canadian salaries are 20% more than ours in local dollars, but their dollars are only worth 10% less than ours, they are richer than we are as a people.

    Not funny, so much as it is ignorant.

    I understand that the exchange rate is black and white. But to make a statement like this is just ignorant. Not only do I have no idea where you got your facts that their salaries are 20% more, this doesn't take into account things such as the cost of living or taxes. Your statement is pretty worthless
     

  • Matt (unregistered) in reply to KattMan
    KattMan:
    Anonymous:

    The real WTF is that the company paid one Canadian dollar for the junked up software. They should of demanded that they made it open source so they could of gotten a copy of it for free.

    Captcha: creative

     

    <grammernazialert> 

    It does annoy me how educated people here can't get the basics of language down, and yes it is only English speakers that butcher English in this fashion.

    They should have demanded that they made it open source so they could have gotten a copy of it for free.

    </grammernazialert> 

    <spellingnazialert>

    "grammar" is spelled with an 'a", not an "e"

    </spellingnazialert> 

  • Miss Manners (unregistered) in reply to Matt
    Anonymous:
    KattMan:
    Anonymous:

    The real WTF is that the company paid one Canadian dollar for the junked up software. They should of demanded that they made it open source so they could of gotten a copy of it for free.

    Captcha: creative

     

    <grammernazialert> 

    It does annoy me how educated people here can't get the basics of language down, and yes it is only English speakers that butcher English in this fashion.

    They should have demanded that they made it open source so they could have gotten a copy of it for free.

    </grammernazialert> 

    <spellingnazialert>

    "grammar" is spelled with an 'a", not an "e"

    </spellingnazialert> 

     

    <punctuationnazialert>

    *ahem*... mismatched quotes on the reference to the letter "a".   :-P

    *Church lady superiority dance*

    </punctuationnazialert>

  • woohoo (unregistered) in reply to cconroy
    cconroy:
    woohoo:

    Hm, I'm not a native speaker, but I suspect that "made" was not intended as perfect tense but as a subjunctive. If so, it was still not correct however ;o) Your proposition "...that they make it..." would in fact be the correct subjunctive form (albeit looking quite the same as the infinitive/present tense form), although most people would perhaps prefer "...that they should make it..."

    I'm not sure if the form "...that they had made it..." would also be correct somehow (perhaps that was intended in the first place) but as far as I can recall my school wisdom, the subjunctive always takes the infinitive form, for all persons and regardless of tense.

    Native speaker, anyone? ;o)

    The Real WTF here is that non-native speakers of English know more about our grammar than most native speakers (at least Americans; can't speak to the state of British education, though I hope it's better).  I had never even heard of things like "future perfect" and "subjunctive " until I started studying French in high school.  Kind of difficult to learn tenses in another language when you don't know what they're called in your own...

    Thankfully, in nearly all european languages technical terms derived from latin roots are used for tenses etc. mostly (although I learned the german ones as well in school, but still prefer the more concise latin ones), so you can re-use most of your knowledge from studying french ;o)

    For the record, I agree that "make" is correct, though I would probably rewrite the end of the sentence to make it more straightforward: "in order to get a free copy".
     

    captcha: mustache (do I have to grow one to pass the captcha?)

  • Imposter, indeed! (unregistered) in reply to NoName
    Anonymous:

    my *nix is better than your *nix is better than Windows

    Jumping on the "flame train"... All *nixes, aye?  No mention of any *nuxes.  Linux not good enuff 4 ya? :) 

  • (cs) in reply to donazea
    donazea:

    Am I the only one left that still cares that WWW != Internet?

    That has to be one of my biggest pet peeves, having been around since well before the Web. Sigh, I guess I'm just an old fogie.
     



    Nothing on usenet should be taken seriously either. Or email.
  • PseudoNoise (unregistered) in reply to Anonononymous

    As long as we're being pedantic, nobody worth his salt will ever seriously consider using significant figures in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significance_arithmetic">real world</a>.

     [captcha: quality]
     

  • Eeve (unregistered)

    That's right... keep making fun of the Canadian dollar... too bad it's rising in value and the US dollar is falling like a rock. Canada is paying off it's national debt, while US national debt grows by something like 1.2 BILLION per DAY. Mwaaaa hahaaa haaa.

    captcha: recession

    For reference: 10 Million Can = 8.7Million US (XE.com)

  • rgz (unregistered) in reply to Bibbo

    For several reasons, actually.

     
    Firstly, there are enough assholes out there willing to spew this shit that you can't safely assume it is in fact a joke or just plain stupid Canada-envy-complex.

    Then of course there are so many cluevoid people out there that you can't say for sure if they know what they are talking about.

    There are so many near dyslexic people out there that you can't say for sure if it was't a massive migration of typos heading south for the winter.

    There are so many brain farts (i don't like the term but you get the idea) that you can't tell one from a real joke.

    There are so many eough good yet imperfect second thonge English speakers that you can't assert if they mean what they say.

    And finaly there are so many sitcoms, sci-fi books, 30 year old songs and B-rated movies that you have no hope wondering if you are lacking context because no one can be everywhere and know everything.

    So yes, you need to end your sentences with "</sarcasm>" or a simple "j/k" 

     

    And I agree, there are too many "the real WTF is..." comentaries, so much that I wish this site could change its name to "www.therealwtf.com", i'm serious, concider setting up that domain! I'll make the new logo.

    captcha: creative

    Next captcha will be "insert text here".
     

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous Crowbar
    Anonymous:

    How do you know the 0 in $10M isn't significant?

     

    Trailing zeroes aren't significant, that's how.

  • AdT (unregistered) in reply to tster

    Anonymous:
    canadian dollars are so worthless they don't trade anything less than the $1,000 CAD amount therefore that are 5 significant digits, the same as the $US amount. ;)

    :-p

  • (cs) in reply to Fabian
    Fabian:
    Anonymous:

    No! That's three sig. figs.... it would be 14e1. Goodness.

    Finally someone who gets it right. Sure took a while. Suggesting that 10M would only have one significant figure just because it ENDS with a zero is an extreme WTF. 

    No, it's how counting significant digits work.  You count every non-zero number, and every zero that's between non-zero numbers.  You don't count trailing zeroes unless there's a decimal point involved.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_digits

     

  • Fabian (unregistered) in reply to FrostCat
    FrostCat:

    No, it's how counting significant digits work.  You count every non-zero number, and every zero that's between non-zero numbers.  You don't count trailing zeroes unless there's a decimal point involved.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_digits

    Nope, you're wrong. That's like saying 1km is as significant as 1000m. It is not. Accept it.
     

  • Anonymous Spelling Nazi (unregistered) in reply to rgz

    "There are so many eough good yet imperfect second thonge English speakers that you can't assert if they mean what they say."

    WTF? Would that be "enough," "tongue," and "ascertain?" You, sir, are worse than most of them by this metric.


  • (cs) in reply to Fabian

    Nope, you're wrong. That's like saying 1km is as significant as 1000m. It is not. Accept it.

    It is the same: they're both meaning the fridge is too far.

  • (cs) in reply to Anonononymous
    Anonononymous:
    donazea:

    Am I the only one left that still cares that WWW != Internet?

    That has to be one of my biggest pet peeves, having been around since well before the Web. Sigh, I guess I'm just an old fogie.
     



    Nothing on usenet should be taken seriously either. Or email.


    Good point. The first thing that popped into my head when I saw the OP was FTP and Gopher...
  • rgz (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Spelling Nazi

    "There are so many eough good yet imperfect second thonge English speakers that you can't assert if they mean what they say."

    WTF? Would that be "enough," "tongue," and "ascertain?" You, sir, are worse than most of them by this metric.

     Never said i was... neither good enough nor a native speaker! :P

    BTW I admit that I got "tongue" wrong but "eough" was a typo, it belongs to the other category, didn't you notice?

    The real WTF is that you say "assert" is not a valid word but I have been using it in python for so long! Who's wrong then?

  • Ken Hagan (unregistered) in reply to cconroy
    cconroy:

    The Real WTF here is that non-native speakers of English know more about our grammar than most native speakers (at least Americans; can't speak to the state of British education, though I hope it's better).  I had never even heard of things like "future perfect" and "subjunctive " until I started studying French in high school.  Kind of difficult to learn tenses in another language when you don't know what they're called in your own...



    Americans can relax. Most British speakers wouldn't know a subjunctive if it hit them in the face with a wet fish. Part of the problem in both countries is that the subjunctive is almost invisible in English, being written and spoken identically to the indicative except for a handful of stock phrases. Kind of difficult to learn grammatical distinctions that basically don't exist in your own language.

    But since pedantry is good for the soul, let me close by pointing out that whilst future perfect may be a "tense", subjunctive is a "mood".
  • arsewipe (unregistered)

    "...an oddity in and of itself".

    What does this mean - how is something an oddity of itself?
     

  • (cs) in reply to guy
    Anonymous:

    Anonymous:
    $10M CAD (or, $138.22 USD)

    Learn2math. kthx

     

    The joke is dated, the Canadian dollar is almost at 90 cents US ( 0.87 +/- ).  I guess it was funnier when the US economy was doing better...

     dons US-centric hat Wasn't every joke?
     

  • (cs) in reply to Matt
    Anonymous:
    KattMan:
    Anonymous:

    The real WTF is that the company paid one Canadian dollar for the junked up software. They should of demanded that they made it open source so they could of gotten a copy of it for free.

    Captcha: creative

     

    <grammernazialert> 

    It does annoy me how educated people here can't get the basics of language down, and yes it is only English speakers that butcher English in this fashion.

    They should have demanded that they made it open source so they could have gotten a copy of it for free.

    </grammernazialert> 

    <spellingnazialert>

    "grammar" is spelled with an 'a", not an "e"

    </spellingnazialert> 

    <countingnazialert>

    "grammar" is spelled with two "a", not an "e"

    </countingnazialert> 

  • (cs) in reply to Wierenfest
    KattMan:
    Anonymous:

    The real WTF is that the company paid one Canadian dollar for the junked up software. They should of demanded that they made it open source so they could of gotten a copy of it for free.

    Captcha: creative

     

    <grammernazialert> 

    It does annoy me how educated people here can't get the basics of language down, and yes it is only English speakers that butcher English in this fashion.

    They should have demanded that they made it open source so they could have gotten a copy of it for free.

    </grammernazialert> 


    <pedantryalert> 

    If we're all going to be so very pedantric: yes, it IS only English speakers who butcher English like this; it's hard to butcher a language if you don't speak it. You probably meant "it is only native English speakers that butcher English in this fashion." Leaving out, of course, the fashion in which non-native speakers butcher the language (www.engrish.com)

    </pedantryalert>

  • tq (unregistered) in reply to KattMan
    KattMan:
    Anonymous:

    [snip]They should of demanded ...[snip]

    <grammernazialert> 

    [snip]They should have demanded that they made it open source so they could have gotten a copy of it for free.

    </grammernazialert> 

    Didn't you hear?  "Should of" entered the language long ago as a perfectly acceptable replacement for "should've", a contraction of what you suggest.  Welcome to the 21st Century.  :-P 

  • tq (unregistered) in reply to Richard Head
    Anonymous:

    Sabotage doesnt mean they have to destroy the code.  By sitting around and not doing anything, thats sabotaging the project.  Your boss tells you to code a certain thing - you dont do it. 

    Yabut, removing the comments and leaving the code leads the hotshots on thinking it's potentially salvagable.  Well, the PHB would fall for it, anyway.

    [I wonder why the captcha's aren't intentionally misspelled.]

  • tq (unregistered) in reply to Nicolas

    And that's not to mention that "grammer" should be spelled "grammar," as that happens to be what the orthography of the english language dictates! 

    s/english/English/

    If you're going to point fingers, you'd better be good at it.  Some of us are always going to be better.  BTW, Preview and proofreading are your friends.

  • tq (unregistered) in reply to icelava

    management/work process

    icelava:

    Alex, i'd like to see management/work process WTFs placed into their own forums. I dunno about the rest, but i feel thedailywtf core forum has been "contaminated" with the rise of such topics amongst the pure technical ones.

    Management blunders are nice to read about once in awhile, but the gem to me about this site has always been the raw technical travesties committed by supposed computing professionals.

    Which one of those is this: 

        Private Sub Form_Close()
           'why is this still saving?
           save_data()
       End Sub

    "Management/work process" (HR/Interview fsckup) or "pure technical" ("I see you have Unix on your resume.  Ever used it?").

    It's tough to tell sometimes. 

  • hi (unregistered)

    hi

  • QBall (unregistered)

    Assholes who sabotage projects when they're going to be laid off have undoubtedly destroyed significant progress.

Leave a comment on “The Dreaded Peter Devil”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article