3 ms·

Are you really asking why a developer tasked with creating something intentionally deceptive didn't use best practices? I'm thinking not a lot of care or attent

Are you really asking why a developer tasked with creating something intentionally deceptive didn't use best practices? I'm thinking not a lot of care or attention to anything was paid that day.

zerostar07 14y ago
Probably wanted to make it more readable, it's not even minified.
- artursapek 14y ago
  I don't think a JSLint-compliant, file-minifying developer would need to resort to this kind of work.
  - zerostar07 14y ago
    I 'm implying s?he did it on purpose to shame his/her bosses.
    - artursapek 14y ago
      Ah, perhaps this is the case. Would have been fun to stumble across a "Help, I'm trapped in a bullshit factory!" comment or something. But that would not help one's career.
UnFleshedOne 14y ago
Different kind of ethics: "It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a DestroyBaghdad procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a DestroyCity procedure, to which Baghdad could be given as a parameter." (lost the source of the quote)
- MBlume 14y ago
  http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein To understand how these problems can be addressed, it is instructive to consider an analogy. Imagine, for a moment, that somewhere in the basement of the Pentagon there are two computers. They are identical hardware, and they run identical software; they are as alike as two peas in a pod. On each of them, there is an executable procedure called "DestroyBaghdad". On one of the machines, executing this procedure does nothing. On the other, the effects of executing the procedure are disastrous, at least for the citizens of Iraq. The only difference between the two machines is a single wire coming out of the back of the second machine.[1] The point, of course, is that nothing inherent to a computational language is dangerous; danger is posed only insofar as the effects of executing statements in a language include "side-effects" in the external world. If all the "wires" connecting a computational language to the outside world are cut, then executing programs in that language is harmless. (An exception to this claim is that such a program can still tie up the CPU, virtual memory, or swap space on a machine by going into an infinite loop; this can be handled via resource limitations.) [1]It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a "DestroyBaghdad" procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a "DestroyCity" procedure, to which "Baghdad" could be given as a parameter. http://www.guppylake.com/~nsb/CSCW-ATOMICMAIL.txt http://www.guppylake.com/~nsb/CSCW-ATOMICMAIL.txt
- ryanac 14y ago
  Had me laughing so I tried to find it: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein

Are you really asking why a developer tasked with creating something intentionally deceptive didn't use best practices? I'm thinking not a lot of care or attention to anything was paid that day.

zerostar07 14y ago

Probably wanted to make it more readable, it's not even minified.

artursapek 14y ago
I don't think a JSLint-compliant, file-minifying developer would need to resort to this kind of work.
- zerostar07 14y ago
  I 'm implying s?he did it on purpose to shame his/her bosses.
  - artursapek 14y ago
    Ah, perhaps this is the case. Would have been fun to stumble across a "Help, I'm trapped in a bullshit factory!" comment or something. But that would not help one's career.

UnFleshedOne 14y ago

Different kind of ethics: "It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a DestroyBaghdad procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a DestroyCity procedure, to which Baghdad could be given as a parameter." (lost the source of the quote)

MBlume 14y ago
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein To understand how these problems can be addressed, it is instructive to consider an analogy. Imagine, for a moment, that somewhere in the basement of the Pentagon there are two computers. They are identical hardware, and they run identical software; they are as alike as two peas in a pod. On each of them, there is an executable procedure called "DestroyBaghdad". On one of the machines, executing this procedure does nothing. On the other, the effects of executing the procedure are disastrous, at least for the citizens of Iraq. The only difference between the two machines is a single wire coming out of the back of the second machine.[1] The point, of course, is that nothing inherent to a computational language is dangerous; danger is posed only insofar as the effects of executing statements in a language include "side-effects" in the external world. If all the "wires" connecting a computational language to the outside world are cut, then executing programs in that language is harmless. (An exception to this claim is that such a program can still tie up the CPU, virtual memory, or swap space on a machine by going into an infinite loop; this can be handled via resource limitations.) [1]It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a "DestroyBaghdad" procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a "DestroyCity" procedure, to which "Baghdad" could be given as a parameter. http://www.guppylake.com/~nsb/CSCW-ATOMICMAIL.txt http://www.guppylake.com/~nsb/CSCW-ATOMICMAIL.txt
ryanac 14y ago
Had me laughing so I tried to find it: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Borenstein