But none of these are real, in the real world IT won’t touch your issue unless you create a ticket, then when you do they just never do anything about it anyway
I encountered “lawful evil” once. My answer of “I know what the problem is. I know how to fix it. But because you have no clue about what this company actually does to make money, you took away my ability to do it. So now I’m here, wasting both our time” didn’t seem to go over very well.
Ehh. Depending on the industry and issue, thats wholley justified, not only from a “least privilege” sense, but from a regulatory one.
Step over into cybersecurity and you end up spending all day clamping down on usability because the company has legal requirements to meet to continue to exist. Many of the things we are compelled to do are overeager and overly pedantic, but it’s either “do it, pay up, or shut down.” The execs tend to prefer “do it” in my experience, which makes everyone’s day a bit more tiresome.
So its entirely possible that was out of their hands.
Not to mention, how frequently the “I can fix it on my own” guy ends up making things worse.
Like my coworker who insisted he knew how to install a monitor and then couldn’t figure out why the display port wouldn’t work with a usb-a adapter. It had a normal DisplayPort plug and didn’t have a thunderbolt adapter (it’s a desktop.)
Rather than update the ticket that got him the monitor, he created a new ticket.
I can’t complain too much. IT guy likes me so he took the extra monitor and gave me a third one.
In this case, none of that applies. I do industrial programming. 99% of the ethernet networks I have to connect to don’t have a router, and nothing is running DHCP. They locked out my ability to manually change my IP address.
That shit is why I bailed on the cybersecurity industry completely, with no thought of ever returning. I’m an engineer (software aside, I also have an aero engineering background). I wanna build cool shit!
Chaotic neutral: If you complain a lot and keep saying your ticket has high priority, you’ll automatically have lower priority than the guy that doesn’t really care when I do something
Their ranges are running dry. Nearly all address spaces are taken, so we will need to migrate eventually. However, since almost everyone still supports both, and ipv4 is much easier to read and maintain, adoption of IPv6 has been slow.
They went just a teeny tiny little bit overboard with the address space. Ipv4 is four groups between 0 and 255, ipv6 is eight groups of four digit hex, 0000 to ffff - e.g the Google DNS ipv4 address is 8.8.8.8. the ipv6 one is 2001:4860:4860:0:0:0:0:8888 (thankfully at least some devices allow using :: to skip all the zeroes, so it’s “just” 2001:4860:4860::8888)
But we now have enough ipv6 addresses to give more than 10 billion ipv6 addresses to every single grain of sand on earth, and still have some left over.
They never wanted to worry about address space size again. And this makes subnetting much easier. I have a /56 allocation so I could do 256 /64 subnets. I hope that at some point home routers will have the option for seperate subnets built in. This way you could easily have guest, IoT, work or whatever networks without NAT.
One thing you have to consider though is that the minimum network size that allows autoconf is /64 and that because of the privacy extension a device usually has 3-4 IPv6 adresses.
we already have enough IPv4 addresses thanks to stuff such as NAT and CG-NAT, these devices also protect the end-user by not directly exposing their IP to the internet
what’s the problem with broadcast? also afaik IPv4 also supports multicast
In my opinion NAT is a hack that makes lot of things harder than they should be. STUN and TURN are services that are created because there is no easy way to connect two hosts between different NATs. UPnP for port forwarding is another. CG-NAT is even worse. I have heard of so many people having problems with it.
Breadcast is messy. It is like screaming into a room and waiting for an answer. Multicast lets the computer decide if it wants and needs to listen to a specific group message.
IPv4 didn’t have cidr from the beginning. They only had classes. IPv6 was designed with complex routing and sub routing in mind.
Imagine getting out of phone numbers, so the solutions is for everyone to call the last remaining people with public/routable numbers 24/7 so those people would redirect messages to others.
With Internet, users does not see that easly, but if you host anything for others it’s getting harder and harder to accept incoming connections without many layers of hacks to bypass hacks that ISPs do to keep IPv4 network working.
IPV4 has a static ceiling for how many addresses can exist. We’re concerningly close to that ceiling already. If we were to run out, internet suddenly becomes a fucking nightmare.
I have to say, I’m getting more and more frustrated by the bad code I have to write due to bad business circumstances.
I want clean, readable code with proper documentation and at least a bit of internal consistency and not the shoehorned mess of hacks, todos and weird corner cases.
Don’t just put “TODO”. If they’re in the final pull request, they need to mention a ticket that’s intended to fix that TODO. If you/your team decides it’s not important, then remove it and close out the ticket. Either way, you’re required to do something with it.
Lawful good is asking for trouble. Before they know it, they'll be inundated with e-mails to their personal company address with poorly worded help requests. They'll spend half their time making and updating tickets on the user's behalf that would have been mostly automatic if they'd gone the Lawful Neutral route. They need to insist requests are sent to the main support address. I'm assuming that's tied directly to the ticketing system.
When I was being Lawful slightly-better-than-neutral, I'd create the ticket and then put a paragraph in the reply telling them to please not e-mail me directly in future, because one day I might be unavailable and their e-mail could go unseen for hours or even days.
Repeat offenders would eventually do it at a time when things were busy too, so I'd be concentrating on the tickets and not things to my personal address, so that slight delay often helped it sink in.
Funny, for me repeat offenders somehow always had a second request I couldn’t find until 430pm on a Friday. Strange how it always happened. Oh well, sucks to suck.
That, right there, is a perfect example of why folks need to stop trying to shoehorn web apps everywhere they don’t belong. It’s a use-case for a proper native mobile app if ever there was one.
That’s why you should’ve just handled arbitrary rotations instead of inventing a finite predefined set of orientation “modes” in the first place.
Things get a lot easier in the long run if you aggressively look for commonalities and genericize the code that handles them instead of writing bunches of one-off special cases.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.