3 ms·

A product owner that asked that the content of our poker site be impossible to copy, incase someone should try to copy it. We explained that this wasn't a thin

A product owner that asked that the content of our poker site be impossible to copy, incase someone should try to copy it. We explained that this wasn't a thing - even newspapers, whose product is the written word, publish each day's paper online and don't apply these measures. Reluctantly they withdrew the request but made it clear they didn't agree. Later, that same product owner was asked to organise for content to be written for the customer help documentation. We received it in Microsoft word format and on closer inspection we could see that the content had been copied and pasted from a competitor's site.

cercatrova 7y ago
The owner brought up functionality to disable copying because they themselves were doing it and didn't want others to do the same; otherwise they would not have thought of such a detail. It only seems a bizarre request because we lack their thought processes to arrive to their conclusion that they should disable copying.
- fold_left 7y ago
  Would it be unreasonable to consider the owner to be a hypocrite?
  - jaredsohn 7y ago
    Based on this, yes. They would be a hypocrite if they made a moral argument. But they made a selfish one of "I'm going to copy and nobody should be able to copy us" which is not hypocritical.
    - eanthy 7y ago
      classic po
vanusa 7y ago
A product owner that asked that the content of our poker site be impossible to copy, incase someone should try to copy it. This isn't bullshit, so much as naivete. And it isn't even that naive, really. Most major news site (the ones that have paywalls at least) do invest a significant amount of resources in making it difficult to (wholesale) pilfer their content -- even though they know it won't be "impossible". Any more than it one could, say, design a security system for a store or a warehouse that would be "impossible" to break into.

cercatrova 7y ago

The owner brought up functionality to disable copying because they themselves were doing it and didn't want others to do the same; otherwise they would not have thought of such a detail. It only seems a bizarre request because we lack their thought processes to arrive to their conclusion that they should disable copying.

fold_left 7y ago
Would it be unreasonable to consider the owner to be a hypocrite?
- jaredsohn 7y ago
  Based on this, yes. They would be a hypocrite if they made a moral argument. But they made a selfish one of "I'm going to copy and nobody should be able to copy us" which is not hypocritical.
  - eanthy 7y ago
    classic po

vanusa 7y ago

A product owner that asked that the content of our poker site be impossible to copy, incase someone should try to copy it. This isn't bullshit, so much as naivete. And it isn't even that naive, really. Most major news site (the ones that have paywalls at least) do invest a significant amount of resources in making it difficult to (wholesale) pilfer their content -- even though they know it won't be "impossible". Any more than it one could, say, design a security system for a store or a warehouse that would be "impossible" to break into.