Right but this is called 'programmer humor'. Plus it's obviously not serious if you think about it for more than 60 seconds.
I just took a very quick look at the subreddit (absolutely awful stuff BTW, who finds this crap funny?) and already found 2 instances of people sharing "real" stories in the comments to joke posts. Should both of these be taken as jokes? They are not presented as such. https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/u0elnq/com... > I completely forget the example problem we were doing, but back when I was learning…
The point isn't that there aren't 'real' stories. It's that it makes a lot of sense to evaluate it as a joke, given that it's in a joke forum. And when you do that, it's not that hard to tell it's a joke or at least suspect that it is as likely to be a joke as anything else.
Hmm, it is true. There are many such people spreading misinformation about chickens crossing roads. They have very little evidence for their assertions about said chickens but they state these things with great confidence! Twitter should crack down on this misinformation.
> There are many such people spreading misinformation about chickens crossing roads. Do these people explain why the chickens were crossing the roads?
“Bok-bok-bok-b’CAUSE,” one chicken said, when asked why it crossed the road.
The crucial detail that is a little buried in the piece is that the original 'explanation' was posted in /r/ProgrammerHumor so it said right on the tin it was a joke. But the (seemingly clearly intended as a joke) details temporarily nerd-sniped a lot of people's senses of humor right out of their brains. The HN discussion discussion from back then is still fun reading with a number of commenters very invested in the…
Just looked into this and yeah, the original post to which the comment was responding was a programmer humor post. However, it looked as if the comment in question may have been an actual, legit attempt to explain the phenomenon. I don't think it's obvious or assumed that the comments responding to programmer humor posts are always intended to be jokes as well.
I'm also just asking myself what's more likely here. Think of the demographic of that forum. It seems to me like some up and coming nerd kid fancied themself an expert and cooked up a half baked theory about what was happening.
Why add entropy to the situation? We know people mid-understand satire and sarcasm. I do kind of feel much satire is deliberately harmful - people use it to say things and then hide behind ‘but I was just joking’ having already pushed the message out.
Something tells me you also regard stand-up comedy as harmful.
Nobody confuses a stand-up club as news - people do confuse Twitter as news.
There were lessons to learn here for all the parties involved. The author seems to have chosen to ignore theirs while wanting to pat themselves on the back for fooling news sites. The news sites learned nothing, they got what they wanted out of the deal. Reddit.. Reddit cannot learn, too many people involved.
Incorrect. It's the journalists' job to verify.
100% agree. They didn't, and will continue not to in the future.
Absolutely not. Should The Onion be considered fake news? It was a parody account, which was labeled as such. Journalists who can't even be bothered to tap through to the profile don't get my sympathy.
Ten years ago I would have agreed with you. These days I know that humans are too gullible to be able to understand obvious satire, and the consequences are deleterious for society. As someone who has long appreciated The Onion, I am now of the opinion that they should not legally be allowed to call themselves a news source, in the same way that someone cannot legally claim to be an expert in an accredited field. We…
I’m going to assume you’re not being sarcastic.
At some threshold we shouldn’t need to dumb it down any further. I think journalists being able to tell the difference between parody, that’s clearly labelled as parody, and real news is already lower than I’d set that bar.
Ask yourself what’s the value in journalism if they’re just going to build a story off of a tweet with no verification/ fact checking?
The crucial detail that is a little buried in the piece is that the original 'explanation' was posted in /r/ProgrammerHumor so it said right on the tin it was a joke. But the (seemingly clearly intended as a joke) details temporarily nerd-sniped a lot of people's senses of humor right out of their brains. The HN discussion discussion from back then is still fun reading with a number of commenters very invested in the…
I don't think something presented as fact in the comments to a joke is always going to be taken as a joke. Lots of people post their (supposedly) factual war stories in the comments of The Daily WTF and similar websites.
I don't think something presented by a clown dressed up like a ballerina is always going to be taken as a joke. If you based a actual news story around an anonymous DailyWTF comment, that would be strange.
> There are many such people spreading misinformation about chickens crossing roads. Do these people explain why the chickens were crossing the roads?
“Bok-bok-bok-b’CAUSE,” one chicken said, when asked why it crossed the road.
The Register: Cause for chicken road-crossing identified
HN: Clearly the original user who purported to have recorded what a chicken said is lying. He hasn’t learnt anything from the whole thing. What a misinformer. Practically Pravda.
Is there no registry of common network ports, protocols, and packet leading bytes? Similar to mimetypes...
On *nix systems there's a file (usually /etc/services) that maps protocol/service names to ports. Back in the 90s I was working as a solutions architect for a Bay Area software company and among other duties I occasionally would help install the software at client sites (think big telcos). One component of the system relied on a service name to identify a port to talk to another component (I think to do a licensing check). For some reason there was no direct way to just specify a port number, so the standard method of installation included editing /etc/services to add the mapping. Editing that file requires root permissions, which at most customers meant I had to get a sysadmin to actually do that step, but it's a simple text file (much like /etc/hosts) so it only takes them a minute to do it once I could get their attention. At one customer I ran into a sysadmin who simply refused, and said if we wanted to be in /etc/services we needed to get the IANA to allocate us a port and then we needed to get the Unix vendor (I think Sun in this particular case) to update their distribution. If even possible this process would take months at best. After wasting almost $20,000 of my time on this (what the client paid my employer, not what I got paid sadly) someone in the org finally arranged for that one particular machine to no longer be that sysadmin's responsibility, and found someone else to make the edit. His final passive aggressive act was to change the motd of that machine to something like "This machine is not managed by the sysadmin team and should not be used for any business critical operations".
Absolutely not. Should The Onion be considered fake news? It was a parody account, which was labeled as such. Journalists who can't even be bothered to tap through to the profile don't get my sympathy.
Ten years ago I would have agreed with you. These days I know that humans are too gullible to be able to understand obvious satire, and the consequences are deleterious for society. As someone who has long appreciated The Onion, I am now of the opinion that they should not legally be allowed to call themselves a news source, in the same way that someone cannot legally claim to be an expert in an accredited field. We…
So my Twitter, which does not claim to be a news source or post anything other than silly jokes, should also be disallowed because some journalists are too lazy to do their job?