this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
226 points (91.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

19987 readers
1680 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 89 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 32 points 2 days ago

I preferred the Facebook group "If 2,147,483,648 people join this group, then an integer overflow may occur" back in the day.

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That one xkcd about tautologies sure is that one xkcd about tautologies.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 days ago

It is one of the xkcds of all time.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Drag likes the punchline here, but the setup doesn't make sense

"So you're saying I should get a licence so I can drive a car, and I can drive a car because I have a licence?"

Having a qualification isn't tautological just because it can be phrased in two different ways

[–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

(a <=> b) <=/=> [(b => TRUE) <=> a]

This is a critique of honor societies which do not serve a point in proving someone's "honor". The college requirement is essentially: Join this club to prove you have joined this club. Anyone can join an "honor" society without demonstrating anything related to honor, meaning:

([Joining an honor society] => TRUE) <=> [Being allowed to join college]

Being allowed to drive a car implies having a license and having a license implies being allowed to drive a car. Neither of these implies TRUE - in an ideal world at least.

By the way, TRUE is a tautology because it is always true, which is the definition of a tautology. Unnecessary repetition is not a requirement of a tautology.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 2 days ago

(in the US) an organization for students with the best grades at school or college. Culture. They can be for general academic achievement or for some specific areas of study.

Did Oxford dictionary lie to drag?

[–] mspencer712@programming.dev 24 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I’m surprised I’m the first comment saying this, but all I see is a user who needs help expressing their needs but who is not getting that help. Sure they don’t have our experience with decomposing problems and anticipating technical issues, but that’s normal and expected.

[–] Souroak@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 days ago

All I see is 5 minutes of the protagonist not listening (yadda yadda) to expressed needs, then getting upset at the word active being used again.

[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

People bitch about the existence of Project Managers (I have myself) but then you see shit like this. Breaks in communication and one side needing the ability to express to the other. Some devs can bridge it, some can't.

[–] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world 48 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You don't need to know what they consider active, just give them a toggle so they can decide.

[–] laranis@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago

This so much. If you can't articulate it I'm going to make sure it stays your problem, not mine.

[–] kambusha@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 44 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The "active" status.

Any project with it set is active, any project with it not set isn't. And you set them all to active when you create the toggle.

If the users complain, you make them tell you an specific rule that can you can use to auto-change a subset of the projects in a cron job. Expecting anything like this to have a complete objective definition is delusional.

[–] HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What the fuck, is that a rage comic in the grimdark future of 2025?

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 10 points 2 days ago

I want more

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

This is why "sure" or "yes" are not part of my IT vocabulary. "Should" is king. "We should be be able to do" or "that should work."

In the idiocy of stakeholders that want IT to be a magic wand to fix their ineptitude instead of a helpful contributor to their well thought out process, you have to coach everything in the polite "no" that is "maybe" or "should."

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

One of my managers told me that I need to use words like "will" instead of "should" when talking discovery with clients. I told him only Siths deal in absolutes, which he didn't like as much as I did.

I'm not a yes man, and I'm not going to lie about something I can't guarantee. If something goes wrong, I'm the one that looks like a lying failure and gets to fix it. My clients are internal business users, not actual external customers. Words have meanings, and it's important to use the correct ones when communicating important information.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Fine. You WILL give me a 20% raise.

[–] MelodiousFunk@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How to piss off management with one simple word.

[–] r_thndr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Am manager, hate should.

Should presumes an ideal set of conditions with perfect context.

Could is a much better term as it implicitly accepts real world conditions and a lack of total context by couching the affirmation as contingent upon only the discussion (and prior references) at hand.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 12 points 2 days ago

In my experience, people want "it will work." They will not accept "it could work" at all.

"It should work" is the perfect amount of hedge, even when you know "it will work," because all of us have been burned by simple assumptions that were right 1000 times before and were somehow wrong this time.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Getting a bit in between the lines, "should" more often than not reads to me as "it's expected to work and we're working towards it".

While "could" sounds like a shrug: "it may work, but I/we have little to no control over it".

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Prefect modernized rage for the new era.

Might use a big red (hd) FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU at the end imho.

Also ... will AI be sorting projects by active (with data from screen-watching everybody)?
What a grand new world.

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You’re way smarter than me. I’m sure you can come up with something.

[–] i_dont_want_to@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Then you implement it.

Not like that. Obviously!

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You should really put a PTSD trigger warning on that quote.

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Dump to an Excel sheet and ask them to make a formula for "active". A client that can't use Excel deserves to be teased and be charged extra.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is how you end up with an excel sheet running the entire company.

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

But it's pretty fun when the customer says your program does it wrong and you pull out that old Excel, plug in the data and their Excel does exactly the same as your program. It makes the discussion about billable hours a lot easier.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago

If it's Jira, the answer is always yes, it can do that, but good luck figuring out how.