Re: Box Tickers Anonymous United .......
I thought they all said that .... just in Legalese!
BOFH logo telephone with devil's horns "It's a clear-cut case of licence blindness," I say to the Boss. "What now?" he chips back. "Licence blindness. It's a term based on software licensing. Like when you're installing some software or another and a window appears with a scrolling box full of text in the background and …
I can't remember which tech company it was, but just to prove a point one of them included a clause along the lines of "you give X_COMPANY the right to use your soul as it sees fit" in the license blindness section of their EULA. A lot of people still ticked the box, and it was several months before a newspaper caught on. ....... My-Handle
My-Handle, you might like to realise, whilst those in the virtual frame for positive practical identification and rightly terrifying attention scamper and scurry to no safe and secure provisional hiding place and sanctuary for immunity and impunity of action, that there do be a delusional self chosen few stylised as members of a relatively small global elite doing God's work, who presume and assume to enjoy and employ and exploit the same supposition and presumptive permission as was scripted for X_COMPANY .....you give X_COMPANY the right to use your soul as it sees fit
However, the Abiding Persistent Troubling Problem is they are in no way ready, fit and able or enabled to use such largesse ..... and the cost of their failures in attempts to wield such powers are intelligently designed almighty crippling and catastrophically devastating to them first and foremost with a fervour that does sweet justice proud and which exempts and protects all others from the just exceptional desserts of their perverse and subversive labours.
Now, tell us all here that is not all perfectly fair nor right and there will be frenzies of laudable disagreement capable of manufacturing the most decisive of future fights.
... in Advancing Cyber Threat/Treat Territories/Virtual Field Team Terrain
And the ensued silence is golden, indicative as it is, of an empty echoing postmodern arsenal of effective stealthy weapons for either defence or AWEsome attack.
Such usually, quite understandably in a worldly war scenario, is a precedent for the fielding and wielding of a white ragged flag and agreement to non-conditional talks on the terms and conditions of surrender should one wish ideally to survive and again live to prosper rather than continue to perish and die a certain unpleasant death.
And some who would be exceptionally wise would realise that as one of the very best of outcomes, considering the madness and mayhem, havoc and despair that CHAOS and IDEntities* can both sow and reap and wreak in formerly all powerful, elite executive office systems of SCADA** Administration.
And, although it is oft said that forewarned if forearmed, to imagine there be weapons easily made available for delivery to escape from such fare/ware, is the feed of a folly from and to a field of frantic fools whenever their needs are oases of serene and supreme calm signed, sealed and delivered by A.N.Others likely forever to be practically unknown clad in cloaks of virtual invisibility supplying everything required and desired for its relatively anonymous autonomous metaphysicality.
* Clouds Hosting Advanced Operating Systems and IntelAIgently Designed Entities [such as in Merlins with EMPowering Sterling Stirling Virtual Machine Engines, Mega MetaDataBase Physicians and AIMagicians]
** Supervisory Control and Analysis of Data Acquisition
I routinely made hand-written changes (each initialled and dated) to clauses I didn't like on engagement contracts. I doubt the client ever read it when it arrived back in the post. Never had any change queried, nor any attempt to apply any of the said clauses. Some were related to liability insurance (I was never going to pay for insurance at the levels asked) or data retention (as far as I was concerned, it was their problem if they lost stuff after I'd submitted it).
I may be retired, but anonymous in case any previous client reads this...
"I routinely made hand-written changes (each initialled and dated) to clauses I didn't like on engagement contracts."
A year or two ago I was going to do some subcontract work for an agency, so they sent me a contract and their terms 'n conditions as a PDF to sign. Didn't like the liability clause which put all liability on me. So went to their website and copied the liability clause in their contract with customers - which pretty well excluded all liability. Pasted it into the contract PDF and they never noticed.
Oh yes, there are also those who still think that PDFs are immutable and thus blithely assume what you return is what they sent, just with an added signature.
Frankly, I have lost track of just how many ways there are to, er, "update" a PDF, especially because most are generated via the usual "print to" approach, as that gives you full access to the text blocks. In most cases you don't even need the specific font installed because they use the system default..
much to learn from the BOFH, partly on adding extra clauses to our contracts, but especially where to insert said clauses
Speaking of inserting, the departed PFY left me a present, all boxed up neat as you like and sealed in plastic... on unwrapping it I'll only use the word 'keyboard' for it as its rectanglar and has a USB lead hanging off it... dried up coffee and hobnob bits are the least of the things in there.
On the bright side though, we have a work experience guy starting monday so rather than calling Porton down's biological warfare department to get rid of the thing, I'll use work experience guy on monday... baptism of fire and all that..
We were running a small user conference about 20 years ago and during lunchtime someone got in and left with a trolley with 30 laptops on it. Our insurance fully covered the loss when you read the first page of the conditions, but when you read the last page of the agreements it said only individual computers with a value of more than $5k each were covered.
I'm a litigator, and have come across more than one instance of contracts having been negotiated between lawyers using tracked changes and comments, but missing an amendment that was not tracked. They become so used to looking for the tracking that they don't read the rest. Those changes either then get incorporated into the final document (very expensive to sort out), or negotiations fail when someone picks it up later and the other party thinks they're winding back the negotiations.
My wife hates the fact that I do read the terms and conditions on everything. After a few years you get to know if something's out of the ordinary without having to spend too long on it.
"You never put anything controversial in the first half of the document, when people are alert," I say. "And you never put anything dodgy on the last 2-4 pages."
Our Science and Maths teacher at school told us a story about one of his roommates at university, whose test and exam scores were way above his actual ability in one subject.
Upon asking him how he managed to do so well in that particular subject, his roommate told him that he had heard on good authority that the lecturer only read the first two or three pages and the last two pages of each paper (his roommate did a BA in history or something, so most of the exams and tests consisted of having to write lengthy essays).
So his roommate procured a number of old test and exam papers to see which were the most popular questions, and then proceeded to construct the most eloquent and insightful first three to four pages and ditto for the last two or three of a couple of questions that were (hopefully) bound to be asked. As for the rest, he wrote letters to his mother, or a transcript of a rugby or cricket match commentary, or whatever other drivel he could think of to amuse himself.
Apparently his average for the subject was well over 80%.
It was actually in a computer science lesson that I was in back in... must have been about 1981/2... I remember we had one Commodore PET for the previous year and had just received one BBC Micro... anyway, the teacher handed out a mock assessment paper under exam conditions and instructed the class that when they started the clock the students were to turn the test paper over and follow the instructions at the top very precisely.
The instructions said "Read all the questions carefully BEFORE beginning to answer question 1".
Question 1 was "What is your name? Write your answer on line one of the coding sheet provided, putting one character in each square."
Question 2 was something about a BASIC command, then there were some more obvious questions... at the end of the list there was some more advanced but also obvious stuff... and just before the 2/3 of the way mark down the page there was a question that said "Having read this far, answer question 1 only! DO NOT attempt to answer any of the other questions. Raise your hand when you have answered question 1."
The various questions just above the one telling you to stop and answer question 1 only had strange instructions like "Draw a picture of a chicken", "Take one shoe off" and "Make a noise like a duck".
Needless to say there were two people, including myself, who sat there with their hands up for about 30 minutes whilst the rest of the class were making duck noises and taking shoes off and drawing pictures of chickens etc etc.
Learnt a valuable lesson that day. I wonder who else could have been in that class...
@TRT
"I wonder who else could have been in that class..."
Not my teacher's roommate, if that was what you were wondering about. He told us the story in 1973 and had been teaching for about ten years by that time.
Another reason was that this was in South Africa, not the UK.
Good story, though.
University maths lecturer told the class something like "When you get a question in the exam that asks you to e.g. "derive the quadratic formula from first principles" and you get stuck, go to the last line and write the final formula, then work backwards until either you get to the finished answer or fill the available space, then write "therefore" in between both chunks of proof. Chances are the skim reading marker won't spot the line where the previous doesn't actually lead to the following and job's a good 'un.
When I was at school, in the mid 60's, we had a Maths teacher who was trying to teach us Statistics. He would write on the board a long and complicated formula, followed by another line which was only slightly different from the first, then another, then another, finishing off near the bottom of the board with "Therefor", and the expression that he was supposed to be proving. When any of us put their hands up and asked how he had made that ginormous leap, he would reply "But it's obvious, isn't it?" Not to us it wasn't. We never learned anything from him, and we called the course "Applied Guesswork". I don't think anyone in my year passed that course.
I often mutter (and sometimes shout) "Yes you can have my First Born child"* when agreeing to the utterly useless terms & conditions boxes on software installs. Almost nobody read or cares about that drivel, probably not even those who write them. Very few of them are enforceable in law so are a complete waste of time and money until someone finds a way to make them legally binding contracts, at which point chances are nobody would install their software and they would go out of business. Contracts are an entirely different kettle of fish. Read it all before you sign and if you find parts that you don't understand, either demand a clearer contract or get a lawyer. If you don't, be prepared to be the BOFHs personal foot-stool. <LOL>
Slightly off topic but still relevant...
Many years ago i worked at a certain UK company which conducted annual performance reviews.
We were told that they were all taken very seriously.
I know (because I saw the original and a photocopy) of one person who embedded in his "Objectives for the upcoming business review period" [seriously, it actually said that -- so much more efficient that 'next year'] one line of "slay or drive away dragons and rescue maidens". This was signed off by his manager and the 'grandfather manager' (ie his boss's boss) and registered with HR who duly checked it and approved it.
The next year, at appraisal time, he and his boss went through targets met/missed... Upon coming to that clause there was an outburst from the boss, to which he replied "it's all there in black and white - YOU approved it as did {boss's boss} and HR. It must be official".
"Well, did you do it?" said the boss, thinking of the chance to mark down a snarky smart-arse.
"I have to say, yes -- (1) have you seen any dragons recently? (2) there are no maidens needing rescue around here"
I understand that he got away with it. Somehow the annual appraisal forms got simpler and shorter after that!
A few jobs back, I was fairly sure my manager didn’t read the long and drawn out appraisal replies I had to read.
So in the middle of a long and tedious block of text (we had something like 30 objectives to fill in) I deliberately inserted a fatuous comment in the text.
Then I found out he did read it all….. and told me to remove the live before it went to HR.
Some people do read everything…..
Some people do read everything….. ..... Giles C
That's encouraging .... for such is designed to allow them, as it does, to jump on the bandwagon in the vanguard of a promising development or dive right out of the way and bury themselves deep underground and as far away from incoming missiles and missives as is made possible ...... destined to be confined and treated as mere spectators to the feats unfolding above.
That binary choice has only the one fabulously correct and engaging decision.
"Some people do read everything….."
Which is mandatory in several circumstances. Too bad if you spot clear instructions in the box on what additional peculiarities the chosen contact mat actually requires (send a test signal from your PLC and make sure the return signal is valid prior to ANY dangerous movement or the contact mat is not fulfilling any security requirement) and then get the wall of denial from your superior if the I/O ports of the current PLC are already full and nobody wants to add any additional modules nor change the existing ones.
Contracts and consequences are also always something to beware. Much more if the prospective new company that wants to hire you makes several "unintentional mistakes" in a row when "correcting" a contract that sounded decisively different in the negotiations. I offered them to write the contract as agreed for them to avoid further "mistakes" but they decided to have it their way so i left for companies without any tendency to onesided "mistakes".
I got caught trying that sort of thing with my non-English boss. He did says that if I had not used such unusual words he might have just skimmed past the text and missed the intent. (I can't now remember exactly what I wrote but "disinclined to acquiesce" was part of it.) However, the verbiage intrigued him, so he did actually look up the words I had used. I used plain Olde English in my response - "bugger!"
I served as secretary on the board of a small non-profit (charity).
The personal qualities that drive someone to volunteer with a charity are not the same qualities that make one enjoy Board meetings. Or taking minutes at meetings. Or reading those notes later.
I amused myself by inserting commentary like "motion was passed as quickly as possible," "we filled the position by appointment. All present voted in favor, except the poor soul who got appointed." "We discussed X. All agreed it is a problem. Next topic was...."
After a few months, someone noticed the comments and asked me to please stop. I agreed to stop if they agreed to read the minutes.
Do not taunt the happy fun ball. .... herman
Is not the Great Game to Energise and/or Weaponise IT Almightily, herman , rather than Taunt Progresses and Processes already Safe and Securely Home Made ?
What do you think of ITs AI Developments so far ‽ .
Wünderbar schön bordering on the Truly Heavenly ‽
In my last start up, my offer letter to candidates I was hiring had a clause which stated that if they pointed out this clause to me they would be awarded X amount of money (about one month salary for most people).
There wasn't any payout required cos noone seemed to have caught that clause.
I assumed that they will also skip steps if asked to RTFM.