The programming "profession" is roughly 95% incompetent, uneducated
code monkeys (like blowman and DuFuS), and the code monkeys have fucked
it up yet again.

Leap year threw a monkey wrench (ha, ha!) into their machinery:

https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/29/fuel_pump_leap_year_bug/

If only these clowns would use GNU/Linux and the time facilities
of the GNU C Library then this inexcusable shit would never happen.

But that would require the possession of actual brains. Nope.
The code monkeys are stuck with Microslop Visual Studio.

Incidentally, the above article is dead wrong when it mentions
the Unix 2038 problem. On GNU/Linux this was solved years and
years ago by moving to 64-bit time registers.

On 3/3/2024 7:18 AM, Lying Larry Piet wrote:

> The programming "profession" is roughly 95% incompetent, uneducated
> code monkeys (like blowman and DuFuS), and the code monkeys have fucked
> it up yet again.

Every "code monkey" is a better programmer than you.

On 3/3/2024 7:18 AM, Lyin' Larry wrote:

> The programming "profession" is roughly 95% incompetent, uneducated
> code monkeys (like blowman and DuFuS), and the code monkeys have fucked
> it up yet again.

What would you know about professional programming, fraud?

On 3/3/2024 6:18 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> The programming "profession" is roughly 95% incompetent, uneducated
> code monkeys (like blowman and DuFuS), and the code monkeys have fucked
> it up yet again.
>
> Leap year threw a monkey wrench (ha, ha!) into their machinery:
>
> https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/29/fuel_pump_leap_year_bug/
>
> If only these clowns would use GNU/Linux and the time facilities
> of the GNU C Library then this inexcusable shit would never happen.
>
> But that would require the possession of actual brains. Nope.
> The code monkeys are stuck with Microslop Visual Studio.
>
> Incidentally, the above article is dead wrong when it mentions
> the Unix 2038 problem. On GNU/Linux this was solved years and
> years ago by moving to 64-bit time registers.
>

Iranians handled the leap year issues correctly a thousand years before
GNU became an entity. See the Jalali Calendar.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sun, 03 Mar 2024 12:18:34 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Incidentally, the above article is dead wrong when it mentions the Unix
> 2038 problem. On GNU/Linux this was solved years and years ago by
> moving to 64-bit time registers.

If you were a working programmer you would appreciate how much legacy code
is using 32bit variables. It's like the Y2K patches. Everybody knew the
21st century was coming and they'd have to get around to fixing the code
eventually -- like sometime in 1999. IPv4 addresses are running out so one
of these days we'll move to IPv6.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 10:30:33 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> Iranians handled the leap year issues correctly a thousand years before
> GNU became an entity. See the Jalali Calendar.

How are the Iranian elections going? They can't possibly be more crooked
than US elections.

On 3/3/2024 2:17 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 10:30:33 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> Iranians handled the leap year issues correctly a thousand years before
>> GNU became an entity. See the Jalali Calendar.
>
> How are the Iranian elections going? They can't possibly be more crooked
> than US elections.

The elections in Iran are very critical events. Iranians, unwillingly
participate in it to only show that they do not wish the Americans to
interfere. Cause if they abandon their government, American forces will
kick the only government in the world who resists Americans' atrocities,
to the other side of the Moon.

So the results of the elections don't matter one bit. It is the scale of
the participation in it which matters, both to the Iranians (people as
well as the government), and to you Americans.

And Iranians know what to do.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:25:47 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> So the results of the elections don't matter one bit. It is the scale of
> the participation in it which matters, both to the Iranians (people as
> well as the government), and to you Americans.
>
> And Iranians know what to do.

The press knows what to do too. There was a photo of a woman proudly
holding up her inked finger. Unlike a couple of other photos that showed
fully kitted up women voting she was blonde, had the bare minimum hijab,
and long fingernails with purple polish that almost matched the ink.

The US propaganda machine would like us to believe every woman in Iran is
dressed in a black niqab that covers her unibrow, like our gallant allies
the frigging Saudis.

On 3/3/2024 7:42 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:25:47 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> So the results of the elections don't matter one bit. It is the scale of
>> the participation in it which matters, both to the Iranians (people as
>> well as the government), and to you Americans.
>>
>> And Iranians know what to do.
>
> The press knows what to do too. There was a photo of a woman proudly
> holding up her inked finger. Unlike a couple of other photos that showed
> fully kitted up women voting she was blonde, had the bare minimum hijab,
> and long fingernails with purple polish that almost matched the ink.
>
> The US propaganda machine would like us to believe every woman in Iran is
> dressed in a black niqab that covers her unibrow, like our gallant allies
> the frigging Saudis.
>
>
>

The woman you described looks to me like an Iranian government agent :)

The scale of participation in this one was the 4th highest since 1979,
25 million people, about 29 percent of population. It's not bad, but
it's not what was 80 percent once either. So I don't think (neither do
the Americans) Iranians want to throw their funky government under your
bus, yet.

They're tolerating their government with grudge only because it is
still, to them, the lesser of the two evils, compared to the Sheep which
the USA would prefer to be there and run that country. Their government
is still better than you for Iranians.

You're the one in their way, not their government. If you didn't exist,
that government wouldn't have a chance to stay in power two year.

This isn't just what _I_ think. All my folks, all the Iranians I know in
Iran and in this country, and all no-nonsense journal papers also have
been saying this for decades. You're the problem.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 23:16:21 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> This isn't just what _I_ think. All my folks, all the Iranians I know in
> Iran and in this country, and all no-nonsense journal papers also have
> been saying this for decades. You're the problem.

Watch how you use 'you'.

https://www.cia.gov/static/The-Economics-of-Overthrow.pdf

The US should have let Britain swirl down the toilet. It was all downhill
from there propping up Pahlavi and letting him into the country. The
Iranian students didn't help matters either with the hostage situation.
Carter had been negotiating but after that his hands were tied. The fiasco
of a rescue attempt gave the presidency to Reagan and Iraq became the new
proxy allegedly receiving the WMDs that Bush couldn't seem to locate.

Before the Brits pissed away their empire they did show some skill with
international intrigue that the US doesn't seem to be able to master.

I suppose you don't include your self in 'you're'.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 20:16 this Sunday (GMT):
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2024 12:18:34 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>
>> Incidentally, the above article is dead wrong when it mentions the Unix
>> 2038 problem. On GNU/Linux this was solved years and years ago by
>> moving to 64-bit time registers.
>
> If you were a working programmer you would appreciate how much legacy code
> is using 32bit variables. It's like the Y2K patches. Everybody knew the
> 21st century was coming and they'd have to get around to fixing the code
> eventually -- like sometime in 1999. IPv4 addresses are running out so one

Another Y2K bug is coming in 2038.

> of these days we'll move to IPv6.

Come to think of it, I wonder how much code that references
127.0.0.1 will have to be rewritten because of that.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 16:10:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:

> Come to think of it, I wonder how much code that references 127.0.0.1
> will have to be rewritten because of that.

I assume there is a solution now but a problem I ran into with a node.js
webserver using the socket.io package was a failure to parse IPv6 remote
addresses correctly. In context, when a client sends requests you can
query its IP. Put that on a list and then you can process a request coming
from an app on a device and send the results to a browser on the same
device.

Browsers started using IPv6 addresses when they connected and the other
clients were using IPv4. There is no way to get from one to the other. The
solution at the time was a browser configuration to make it use IPv4.

There probably will be a lot of glitches like that. Years ago one subnet
on our LAN went to IPv6 more or less by mistake when it was configured.
That was a real charlie foxtrot.

I actually was hired to patch the code for Y2K. I liked the company and
stuck around for a lot longer than I anticipated. I had enough challenges
and freedom to keep me happy. I've found that for many programmers job
hopping isn't strictly about money; when the job becomes the same old same
old they're gone with the wind.

On 3/4/2024 12:14 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 23:16:21 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>
>> This isn't just what _I_ think. All my folks, all the Iranians I know in
>> Iran and in this country, and all no-nonsense journal papers also have
>> been saying this for decades. You're the problem.
>
> Watch how you use 'you'.
>
> https://www.cia.gov/static/The-Economics-of-Overthrow.pdf
>
> The US should have let Britain swirl down the toilet. It was all downhill
> from there propping up Pahlavi and letting him into the country. The
> Iranian students didn't help matters either with the hostage situation.
> Carter had been negotiating but after that his hands were tied. The fiasco
> of a rescue attempt gave the presidency to Reagan and Iraq became the new
> proxy allegedly receiving the WMDs that Bush couldn't seem to locate.
>
> Before the Brits pissed away their empire they did show some skill with
> international intrigue that the US doesn't seem to be able to master.
>
> I suppose you don't include your self in 'you're'.

The link doesn't open.

I don't read "CIA" for matters of information anyway. Nobody does but
the Sheep.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:41:12 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> The link doesn't open.

Shit, I should have saved the pdf when I had it. It was a truthful
analysis of why the CIA worked to overthrow Mossadegh. The US oil
companies had agreed to a 50/50 split with the Saudis which was all Iran
wanted.

Britain was in debt up to its ears, the pound was increasingly shaky, and
the people Britain owed money to were getting nervous. I knew it was
about saving the AIOC (now BP) but didn't realize how close Britain was to
the edge.

I was surprised to find it with a simple google search but the CIA must
have realized its bra straps were showing and took it down. It's enough to
make a person paranoid.

On 3/4/2024 7:11 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:41:12 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>
>> The link doesn't open.
>
> Shit, I should have saved the pdf when I had it. It was a truthful
> analysis of why the CIA worked to overthrow Mossadegh. The US oil
> companies had agreed to a 50/50 split with the Saudis which was all Iran
> wanted.
>
> Britain was in debt up to its ears, the pound was increasingly shaky, and
> the people Britain owed money to were getting nervous. I knew it was
> about saving the AIOC (now BP) but didn't realize how close Britain was to
> the edge.
>
> I was surprised to find it with a simple google search but the CIA must
> have realized its bra straps were showing and took it down. It's enough to
> make a person paranoid.

The excerpts of it is on the web, but not the whole article. Anna's
Archive doesn't have it either.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com