5 ms·

I did not expect to see so much contention about this. A company is paying him to do a job, and he is doing that job. Is the problem that he isn't miserable? Th

I did not expect to see so much contention about this. A company is paying him to do a job, and he is doing that job. Is the problem that he isn't miserable? This baffles me.

MrZongle2 9y ago
That was my first take as well, but it can be easy to overlook this part of the original post: "I even insert a few bugs here and there to make it look like it’s been generated by a human." The fact that he is engaging in deception to make it look like he's still doing it manually rubs a lot of people, myself included, the wrong way. You could also argue that by introducing bugs, he's intentionally degrading the end product.
- CRConrad 9y ago
  <blockquote>You could also argue that by introducing bugs, he's intentionally degrading the end product.</blockquote> He is intentionally <em>not</em> degrading the end product: The bugs are inserted into the version he sends out as a draft, before sending out a "corrected" final one (i.e, presumably, the same output from his script, but before he put in the fake errors). Two observations: 1) Hm, here's hoping he always remembers to date the "final fixed" version later than the "original to-be-fixed" one. 2) What is it with you -- not just MrZongle2, but pretty much everybody commenting here -- does "RTFA" mean anything to you...?
contravariant 9y ago
Well, the question was whether it was unethical, and the ethics to me seem pretty clear. He is lying to the company about what he's doing and when he's doing it. He also had an agreement with the company to work 40 hours for wages, which he has clearly broken. Neither of those things are ethical in any way shape or form. However resolving this in a just way is now extremely difficult (this is mostly his own fault but still). The way I see it he (morally) still retains the rights to the code, since the company didn't pay him to write it. However the company has also been wronged because he has lied to them and broken his contract. The question now is if the value of his code is enough to compensate the wrong he did to the company, and if so by how much. That's not an easy question to answer, hence the discussion.
- FLUX-YOU 9y ago
  >SO post: The system is really old - and although I was hired as a programmer, my job is pretty much glorified data entry To me, this is justification to not tell them about it. Programmers are almost always distinct jobs from data entry. That he is only being given this task is harmful to his career as a programmer. Take any discussion about interviewing or careers from here, and all of the discussion about bad programmers repeating 1 year of work over 10 years, and it's pretty obvious this is a weak position to grow in. Imagine this programmer was applying to a company from here, telling them his only task he was ever given was spreadsheet data entry. And he automated it. It's good, but not when it's the only thing you've done.
EpicEng 9y ago
He's willfully deceiving his employer by inserting bugs and lying about his status on a weekly basis. We can debate hours v results, but I can't ignore that bit.
romanovcode 9y ago
Developer problems.
- quickben 9y ago
  Very real ones though.

I did not expect to see so much contention about this. A company is paying him to do a job, and he is doing that job. Is the problem that he isn't miserable? This baffles me.

MrZongle2 9y ago

That was my first take as well, but it can be easy to overlook this part of the original post: "I even insert a few bugs here and there to make it look like it’s been generated by a human." The fact that he is engaging in deception to make it look like he's still doing it manually rubs a lot of people, myself included, the wrong way. You could also argue that by introducing bugs, he's intentionally degrading the end product.

CRConrad 9y ago
<blockquote>You could also argue that by introducing bugs, he's intentionally degrading the end product.</blockquote> He is intentionally <em>not</em> degrading the end product: The bugs are inserted into the version he sends out as a draft, before sending out a "corrected" final one (i.e, presumably, the same output from his script, but before he put in the fake errors). Two observations: 1) Hm, here's hoping he always remembers to date the "final fixed" version later than the "original to-be-fixed" one. 2) What is it with you -- not just MrZongle2, but pretty much everybody commenting here -- does "RTFA" mean anything to you...?

contravariant 9y ago

Well, the question was whether it was unethical, and the ethics to me seem pretty clear. He is lying to the company about what he's doing and when he's doing it. He also had an agreement with the company to work 40 hours for wages, which he has clearly broken. Neither of those things are ethical in any way shape or form. However resolving this in a just way is now extremely difficult (this is mostly his own fault but still). The way I see it he (morally) still retains the rights to the code, since the company didn't pay him to write it. However the company has also been wronged because he has lied to them and broken his contract. The question now is if the value of his code is enough to compensate the wrong he did to the company, and if so by how much. That's not an easy question to answer, hence the discussion.

FLUX-YOU 9y ago
>SO post: The system is really old - and although I was hired as a programmer, my job is pretty much glorified data entry To me, this is justification to not tell them about it. Programmers are almost always distinct jobs from data entry. That he is only being given this task is harmful to his career as a programmer. Take any discussion about interviewing or careers from here, and all of the discussion about bad programmers repeating 1 year of work over 10 years, and it's pretty obvious this is a weak position to grow in. Imagine this programmer was applying to a company from here, telling them his only task he was ever given was spreadsheet data entry. And he automated it. It's good, but not when it's the only thing you've done.

EpicEng 9y ago

He's willfully deceiving his employer by inserting bugs and lying about his status on a weekly basis. We can debate hours v results, but I can't ignore that bit.

romanovcode 9y ago

Developer problems.

quickben 9y ago
Very real ones though.