Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

nvie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 427 posts

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#101

Post by LauraMedia »

anonymous908213 wrote: post #91
aftergibson wrote: post #82

Archive.org shows this went live last September: https://web.archive.org/web/20250108142456/https://learn.mic... It took ~5 months for anyone to notice and fix something that is obviously wrong at a glance. How many people saw that page, skimmed it, and thought “good enough”? That feels like a pretty honest reflection of the state of knowledge work right now. Everyone is running at a velocity where quality, craft and…

> readers don’t have time to read properly > So we end up shipping documentation that nobody really reads I'd note that the documentation may have been read and noticed as flawed, but some random person noticing that it's flawed is just going to sigh, shake their heads, and move on. I've certainly been frustrated by inadequate documentation before (that describes the majority of all documentation, in my experience),…

I usually would post it in our dev slack chat and rant for a message or two how many hours were lost "reverse-engineering" bad documentation. But I probably wouldn't post about it on here/BlueSky.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#102

Post by shit_game »

quietbritishjim wrote: post #64
yoz-y wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow it’s even worse than I thought. I thought that convictungly morhing would be the only problem. The nonsense and inconsistent arrowheads, the missing annotations, the missing bubbles. The “tirm” axis… That this was ever published shows a supreme lack of care.

The turn axis is great! Not only have they invented their own letter (it's not r, or n, or m, but one more than m!), it points the wrong way.

Lots of the AIisms with letters remind me of tom7's SIGBOVIC video Uppestcase and Lowestcase Letters [advances in derp learning]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLRdruqQfRk

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#104

Post by sixeyes »

amdivia wrote: post #92

I'm failing to understand the criticism here Is it about the haphazardous deployment of AI generated content without revising/proof reading the output? Or is it about using some graphs without attributing their authors? if it's the latter (even if partially) then I have to disagree with that angle. A very widespread model isn't owned by anyone surely, I don't have to reference newton everytime I write an article on g…

did you read the article? this is explicitly explained! at length!

not at all about the reuse. it's been done over and over with this diagram. it's about the careless copying that destroyed the quality. nothing was wrong with the original diagram! why run it through the AI at all?

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#105

Post by hansmayer »

This is hilarious actually. I am starting to lean into "AI-dangerous" camp, but not because the chatbot will ever become sentient. Its precisely because of increasingly widespread adoption of un-reliable tools by the incompetent but self-confident Office Worker (R).

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#106

Post by kuerbel »

adityaathalye wrote: post #34
ChrisArchitect wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was reading the word morged thinking it was some new slang I hadn't heard of. Incredible.

Same! I was about to go duck-searching for meaning, but thanks to jezzamon for pointing it out. brb, printing a t-shirt that says "continvoucly morged"

You could add one of those Microslop memes that are going around.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#107

Post by tharos47 »

pointlessone wrote: post #89
prmoustache wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In either case -- no review process, or a failed review process -- the failure is definitionally systemic. Ortho and grammar errors should have been corrected, but do you really expect a review process to identify that a diagram is a copy from another one some rando already published on the internet years ago?

It’s not just a copy. It’s a caricature of a copy with a plenty of nonsense in it: typos and weird “text”, broken arrows, etc. Even a cursory look gives a feeling that something’s fishy.

Weird text was already deemed acceptable by microsoft in their documentation as they machine translated most screenshots instead of recreating them in different locales, leading to the same problems as this image.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#108

Post by michaelt »

prmoustache wrote: post #68
anonymous908213 wrote: post #32

Microsoft employee (VP of something or other, for whatever Microsoft uses "VP" to mean) doing damage control on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/scott.hanselman.com/post/3mez4yxty2... > looks like a vendor, and we have a group now doing a post-mortem trying to figure out how it happened. It'll be removed ASAFP > Understood. Not trying to sweep under rugs, but I also want to point out that everything is moving very f…

> In either case -- no review process, or a failed review process -- the failure is definitionally systemic. Ortho and grammar errors should have been corrected, but do you really expect a review process to identify that a diagram is a copy from another one some rando already published on the internet years ago?

Here is the original: https://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

Here is the slop copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20251205141857/https://learn.mic...

The 'Time' axis points the wrong way, and is misspelled, using a non-existent letter - 'Tim' where the m has an extra hump.

It's pretty clear this wasn't reviewed at all.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#110

Post by bonesss »

thunfischtoast wrote: post #39
anonymous908213 wrote: post #32

Microsoft employee (VP of something or other, for whatever Microsoft uses "VP" to mean) doing damage control on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/scott.hanselman.com/post/3mez4yxty2... > looks like a vendor, and we have a group now doing a post-mortem trying to figure out how it happened. It'll be removed ASAFP > Understood. Not trying to sweep under rugs, but I also want to point out that everything is moving very f…

Microsoft seems to have thrown quality assurance overboard completely. Vibe generate everything, throw it at a wall, see what sticks. Tech bros are so afraid of regulation they even drop regulation inside their own companies. (just kidding)

Just a thought: the timeline of the vibe techs rolling out and the timeline of increasing product rot, sloppiness, and user-hostile “has anyone ever actually used this shit!?!” coming out of MS overlap.

Vibing won’t help out at all, and years from now we’re gonna have project math on why 10x-LLM-ing mediocre devs on a busted project that’s behind schedule isn’t the play (like how adding more devs to a late project generally makes it more late). But it takes years for those failures to aggregate and spread up the stack.

I believe the vibing is highlighting the missteps from the wave right before which has been cloud-first, cloud-integrated, cloud-upselling that cannibalized MS’s core products, multiplied by the massive MS layoff waves. MS used to have a lot of devs that made a lot of culture who are simply gone. The weakened offerings, breakdown of vision, and platform enshittification have been obvious for a while. And then ChatGPT came.

Stock price reflects how attractive stocks are for stock purchasers on the stock market, not how good something is. MS has been doing great things for their stock price.

LLMs make getting into emacs and Linux and OSS and OCaml easier than ever. SteamOS is maturing. Windows Subsytem for Linux is a mature bridge. It’s a bold time for MS to be betting on brand loyalty and product love, even if their shit worked.

Post reply on HN