|
Found this in the middle of the codebase today:code:
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
Ender.uNF posted:. My experiences with doctors and software have been absolutely horrendous. You'd think the same kind of thinking used for diagnosing medical conditions would transfer to being able to troubleshoot software, but it's clearly not the same kind of thinking at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
I don't think people are stupid if they don't have a certain skill level with computers. They're usually ignorant, lazy, or busy. Many are afraid of doing something damaging by accident.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
Nipplebox posted:Many are afraid of doing something damaging by accident.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Nipplebox posted:I don't think people are stupid if they don't have a certain skill level with computers. They're usually ignorant, lazy, or busy. Many are afraid of doing something damaging by accident. Specifically, a combination of willful ignorance and learned helplessness. By refusing to make an effort at learning, people quickly determine "I don't 'get' computers so there's no point in trying". People have similar attitudes towards lots of things perceived as "difficult", but computers seem to really exacerbate it. I think people with this attitude are making themselves stupid because of it. The decision that "this is hard, so I will never attempt to be competent with it, and instead do the bare minimum" is a conscious one, and extremely frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Has anyone here actually grown up without any real exposure to computers, and had to learn it all in their adult lives? I think most if not all of us are working with a pretty keen familiarity with the whole computer paradigm, and it's hard to imagine what it's like for people without that background. Like with the close button example - there's a whole lot of people who'll see a red box with an X on it, and clicking something like that is the last thing they'll want to do . To people who are comfortable with computers and familiar with UI patterns, it's fairly obvious what that does, and there are other contextual clues we can use to be more certain about it - where it's positioned, what other buttons are nearby, if we expect to have a close button somewhere, etc. We also have an idea of what will happen if we hit a close button - getting a warning if it means losing data, having an option to change your mind, and exactly what it will mean if it does close straight away. How hard will it be to get back to where you were? A lot of people just don't have that level of understanding and familiarity. They're working with something complex they don't fully understand, and they're terrified that pressing the wrong thing will make bad things happen. A big red box with X on it is a warning sign. That's why so many people break off what they're doing, and take time out of their day just to call someone with a bit of knowledge and ask them for help or advice. And that goes for people who really do make a conscious effort to learn too. There's a lot of skill and knowledge involved in knowing how to find the information you need, and be sure you've covered it. When you've grown up with it and you take it for granted, it's difficult to step back from that perspective. Hell people have trouble with remote controls, because they don't have the mental framework established to understand the system that's being controlled. Not everyone has a general background of thinking in abstract terms. There's a whole lot of baggage with technical stuff, and people aren't stupid for never having acquired it
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Nipplebox posted:I don't think people are stupid if they don't have a certain skill level with computers. They're usually ignorant, lazy, or busy. Many are afraid of doing something damaging by accident. I don't think that anyone has said that being able to use a computer is a requirement for intelligence
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:I don't think that anyone has said that being able to use a computer is a requirement for intelligence Uh, okay, happy to hear you don't think that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
*page of nerds complaining that users are confused by goddamn obvious things we nerds use 14 hours a day, heh*
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
It's 2014 and I still can't find the ANY key. gently caress you keyboard manufacturers!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
titaniumone posted:Specifically, a combination of willful ignorance and learned helplessness. By refusing to make an effort at learning, people quickly determine "I don't 'get' computers so there's no point in trying". People have similar attitudes towards lots of things perceived as "difficult", but computers seem to really exacerbate it. a lot of people don't have the time
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
ErIog posted:This ability to reset allows for more repetition and faster mastery. You know, I learned how to use a computer on a machine that booted in less than two seconds, had no problems with being turned off at any time (as long as you weren't writing to disk at that particular moment), and had the OS in ROM so there was nothing I could do to cause any damage to anything that I hadn't just made in the first place. Now if you turn off the computer at random it scolds you and takes minutes to boot back up. And you can click a couple of buttons and generate a few hours of work for yourself reinstalling, or cause your computer to start breaking the law on behalf of others. Wow, I wonder why people are afraid of computers if they're just learning them today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Dren posted:a lot of people don't have the time Learning how to use something you use on a regular basis is almost never a net consumer of time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Anyways... Surprised no one has posted this: http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2014/06/11/tweetdeck-users-xss-vulnerability-means-revoke-access-now/ Apparently the teenager who found it by accident decided to tweet this to the TweetDeck account publicly so everyone knew about it. Reminiscent of the Myspace worm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:Anyways... Surprised no one has posted this: Escaping user input just seems like such an absolute no-brainer that it's a little mystifying that it happens to such high profile sites.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Nipplebox posted:*page of nerds complaining that users are confused by goddamn obvious things we nerds use 14 hours a day, heh* That has 0 to do with a person's actual intelligence. It'd be like calling someone stupid for being a bad dancer Basically I think that we're all on the same page here, it sucks when users can't figure out an interface, and it's okay to vent about that, but being able to use computers effectively has nothing to do with that person's intelligence
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
We get it, your gimmick is to contradict your previous posts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
Nipplebox posted:We get it, your gimmick is to contradict your previous posts. Wow, you suck at reading comprehension. Maybe that's your gimmick
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
To get back to coding horrors, how about some nested for-else loops in Python. This is from code that supposed to analyze output of a learning algorithm which sorted feature values along particular dimensions. Here's what the person was trying to accomplish: 1. Check every feature value on every dimension 2. If any feature doesn't meet a threshold value, then don't bother checking any more features on that dimension 3. If #2 happened, don't check any more dimensions and return a failure code, but if every feature on every dimension meets the threshold then return success. code:FoiledAgain fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 09:18
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:It'd be like calling someone stupid for being a bad dancer I see it more as calling someone stupid for refusing to take the time to learn to dance ... in a world where half the planet communicates via dancing. ----- php:<?
function initClaimInfo($trno, $myuserID=""){
global $userid;
global $s_carriercode, $s_custcode, $s_shipperid, $s_credate, $s_checknum;
global $s_trackingno, $s_phone, $s_weight, $s_declaredvalue, $s_freightcharge;
global $s_reference, $s_ref_desc, $_REQUEST;
global $statuslist, $s_status, $s_id, $s_expdeldate;
global $s_ackdate, $s_paiddate, $s_remark, $s_carrierclaimid, $s_reason;
global $s_userid, $s_paidamount, $s_barcode, $s_delstatus;
global $s_c_description, $s_c_sku, $s_c_units, $s_c_weightperunit, $s_c_totalweight;
global $s_c_costperunit, $s_c_totalcost, $s_c_createdby, $s_c_dcr, $cntlines, $liveCount;
$s_trackingno = $trno;
$s_userid = $myuserID ? : $userid;
$s_carriercode=""; $s_custcode=""; $s_shipperid=""; $s_credate=""; $s_checknum="";
$s_phone=""; $s_weight=""; $s_declaredvalue=""; $s_freightcharge="";
$s_ref_desc="";
$statuslist=""; $s_status=""; $s_id=""; $s_expdeldate="";
$s_ackdate=""; $s_paiddate=""; $s_remark=""; $s_carrierclaimid=""; $s_reason="";
$s_paidamount=""; $s_barcode=""; $s_delstatus="";
for ($rc=1; $rc <= 5; $rc++) {
$s_reference[$rc]="";
$s_ref_desc[$rc]="";
}
}
?>
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
Plorkyeran posted:Learning how to use something you use on a regular basis is almost never a net consumer of time. The argument could be made that the system the user has to use on a daily basis is lovely if it can't cater to their needs to let them do the tasks they're paid to do as easily as possible. One of my favorite "holy poo poo that's annoying" moment comes from stuff as simple as filling in an insurance claim form. If I go the paper way:
This isn't an argument in favor of the good old days of yore, but that from a user perspective, the convenience given through a more technological solution often come with an indirect cost that is irrelevant to their work area or what they need to do, and not the user's fault at all. We're bleeding issues and details of our systems into their lives, when it wasn't always like that, and arguably shouldn't. It's not stupidity on the user's end, it's us shipping systems not always properly adapted to their users and having to deal with their grievances.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:The argument could be made that the system the user has to use on a daily basis is lovely if it can't cater to their needs to let them do the tasks they're paid to do as easily as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Requirement: The value to be calculated is: 1 divided by 3 multiplied added to 2 divided by 3 multiplied by B. At the end round this value to nearest hundredths. How it got implemented: double value = round(0.33 * A + 0.66 * B)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Wow, you suck at reading comprehension. Maybe that's your gimmick My buds in IT always have a good chuckle over those extremely stupid people using the computers. So loving stupid. It's an epidemic. *plays eve online*
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
IT BEGINS posted:I see it more as calling someone stupid for refusing to take the time to learn to dance ... in a world where half the planet communicates via dancing. Get out of there, get out as quickly as you can. edit: I'm noticing more and more shittiness of this thing  HFX posted:Requirement: I'll bite - what's wrong with this? edit: ah... hundredths. Oh dear. canis minor fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
eithedog posted:Get out of there, get out as quickly as you can. That isn't what is also wrong with it. The person writing the requirement most likely wanted [did want] the values to remain at max precision until the end. 0.33 != 1.0/3.0. HFX fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
HFX posted:That isn't what is also wrong with it. The person writing the requirement most likely wanted the values to remain at max precision until the end. 0.33 != 1.0/3.0. Speaking of precision, that double is totally being used effectively.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
HFX posted:That isn't what is also wrong with it. The person writing the requirement most likely wanted [did want] the values to remain at max precision until the end. 0.33 != 1.0/3.0. Hmm - it all depends upon the data you're dealing with; but yes, you've got a point there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:One of my favorite "holy poo poo that's annoying" moment comes from stuff as simple as filling in an insurance claim form. If I go the paper way: Or in the case of me this morning:
... I don't really have a point, other than ranting about printers being terrible and wasting me an hour today. Let's all go back to pen and paper.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Pen and paper is still superior to a shitload of stuff and it owns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Pen and paper is still superior to a shitload of stuff and it owns. The best flowchart/diagram program is still a whiteboard and a camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Pen and paper is still superior to a shitload of stuff and it owns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 02:04
|
|
ExcessBLarg! posted:Typewriters were (are) awesome for being legible and clean can you not read your computer screen? also, you can wipe the cheeto dust off your screen, I wont tell seriously, typewriters sucked trying to talk them up is hipster bullshit
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:Pen and paper is still superior to a shitload of stuff and it owns. These poorly cross-hatched 3d cubes aren't going to draw themselves! ... I love pen and paper to take notes on, it's a lot better and quicker and easier and just more fluid than actual computer, but lord if I won't fill up the entire margins with 2nd grade quality scribbles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
ExcessBLarg! posted:Typewriters were (are) awesome for being legible and clean, with the benefit of being able to type in the margins if needed. The typewriter is the worst of both worlds. It's not as portable and good for quick note-taking as pen and paper, and it's not quite as easy to use for legible and clean documents as a modern word processor (which lets you write in the margins with just as little effort as a typewriter, btw).
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 09:35
|
|
|
One of the best remote wireframing sessions a designer I work with had was when he set up a good webcam pointing at his desk and just ran a Skype session. Unfortunately there's just way too much friction to getting whatever the flavour of the month white boarding software set up with the client, when you can just point them at Skype which they usually already have, and just go lo fi from there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 10:02
|
|
|
Going back to the use of tech discussion up the page, I still find people who are wizard programmers but dont even know to use Windows-P to select the monitor config - (even works on Linux) people like to fit into small cubbyholes, for instance someone who is great at networking may suck at pc repair and the repair guy would suck at OS support etc. Computing is All of that so you should be as happy wiring networks as coding the next uber game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
TheresaJayne posted:I still find people who are wizard programmers but dont even know to use Windows-P to select the monitor config - (even works on Linux) I don't know what you're talking about here, I just tried hitting Windows-P and it did nothing at all. (on a Windows Vista machine)
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
It only works when you have multiple monitors connected, including, for example, attaching a projector for a presentation. It's pretty useful!
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
TheresaJayne posted:Going back to the use of tech discussion up the page, Not knowing about small shortcuts like Windows-P (and even better: Windows-Break) is not a measure of intelligence, it's a measure of just knowing various trivia like keyboard shortcuts. I will fully honestly admit that I had no idea about Windows-P before you told me (I used the Fn-F5 key with the little symbol of the monitors on it!). Also, it doesn't work on "Linux". It works on very specific desktop environments that implement that feature. I wrote that feature in GNOME (well, the Fn-F5 variant, at least. I'll go back and add in an additional default shortcut definition for Windows-P), and I can tell you exactly when I added it, and what version it started to work in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 16:13
|
|