Xah's Edu Corner: the bug-reporting attitude
Tue Jan 3 00:57:50 CET 2006
On 2 Jan 2006 13:16:26 -0800, "Xah Lee" <xah at xahlee.org> wrote:
>The Bug-Reporting Attitude
>Xah Lee, 2005-02, 2006-01
>There is a common behavior among people in software geek forums, that
>whenever a software is crashing or behaving badly, they respond by
>go file a bug report as if it is the duty of software consumers.
"software" found 3 x
>When a software is ostensibly incorrect, and if it is likely in
>connection to egregious irresponsibility as most software companies are
>thru their irresponsible licensing, the thing one should not do is to
>fawn up to their ass as in filing a bug report, and that is also the
>least effective in correcting the software.
"software" 3x ... "companies" 1 x
>The common attitude of bug-reporting is one reason that contributed to
>the tremendous egregious irresponsible fuckups in computer software
>industry that each of us have to endure daily all the time. (e.g.
>software A clashed, software B can't do this, C can't do that, D i
>don't know how to use, E download location broken, F i need to join
>discussion group to find a work-around, G is all pretty and
"software industry" found 1 x
>When a software is ostensibly incorrect and when the organization
>behind it is irresponsible with its licensing, the most effective and
>moral attitude is to do legal harm to the legal entity. This one can do
>by filing a law suit or spreading the fact. Filing a law suit is
>appropriate in severe and serious cases, and provided you have such
>devotion to the cause. For most cases, we should just spread the fact.
>When the organization sees facts flying about its incompetence or
>irresponsibility, it will immediately mend the problem source, or cease
>Another harm sprang from the fucking bug-reporting attitude rampant
>among IT morons is the multiplication of pop-ups that bug users for
>bug-reporting, complete with their privacy legalese infomercial
Since I work for a software industry, company, organization,
I thought I'd offer my 2 cents here.
The software industry/company/organization are run by
snake-oil salesmen/marketing who discard the programmers as fast
as they do bug reports. Given that, who do you think "cuts" out
the problem parameters for the programmer? Think its a master
problem solver programmer/manager who is not influenced by
marketing? Got a bright programmer who looks at the condition
then at the parameters for the fixes to implement who see's the
fallicy of the fix parameters. Why yes, yes you do. Well why
doesen't he jump up and down in the organization then?
Because his job hangs by a thread, with seasonal layoffs and
outsoursing, lessening pay/benifits, contract status, etc...
Contrary to popular belief the fixer has to research his part
of the code, and is forced to know more than what he is being
tasked to do. The falicy is that he has control of it, he see's
the big picture fopa's but can't do a thing about it.
So you see, when you say "software" so many times, you imply the
programmer is at fault. For simple bugs that may be true, however
in the face of induced snake oil marketing induced CONCEPTUAL ERRORS,
well brother, what have I got to do to just get my next paycheck?
Imagine that software designed by snake-oil salesmaen/marketing,
comercial ad agencies, conceptual designers without proof-of-concept.
In todays world, the word "software" is a mis-nomer. Its not
software anymore, its a concept of some dude on ACID !!!
More information about the Python-list