The Bastard Operator from Hell (1999)

I remember seeing the early BOFH when I was working for Telecom GOLD (Dialcom) in the mid 80's.

I think the BOFH files may have come from the NZ Dialcom licensee originally.

-1?

I don't really have a hard time believing that running a used game store in what is clearly not the best part of town over the course of a couple decades would produce Gord's stories.

As the phrase goes, shit happens. Nothing interesting may happen on a normal day but there's a lot of days and eventually you roll up all manner of interesting occurrences.

I would recognize it and LOVE it. But I'm 46 so there is that. :)

I think I'd be too scared to approach you :-)

The one person was the PFY?

I tried to register GOSUB once, but it was taken.

Think of it as some sort of elaborate Dilbert, rather. The essence of it is the dysfunction of corporate office life.

The unfunny, mean frame around hacking things in unexpected ways probably seemed like a decent literary device, but turned out not to be.

But by then the series was a series, and like a bad Sunday-paper comic strip back when, just kept going. This seems to be a failure mode peculiar to syndication.

I agree there's a power fantasy element to them, but they're a reflection of sysadmins' lack of real power. They're at the bottom of the pecking order and are only noticed when things go wrong, or when users want to project their own frustrations onto somebody lower in the office pecking order. They have incredible destructive potential at their fingertips yet no way to use it in the protection of their own dignity, since doing their job well means taking abuse silently when it's directed at them. Pushing back against misdirected blame and anger would go against the real power structure and would be castigated as a lack of empathy for the poor users.

Honestly, the best sysadmins are probably the ones who resort to fantasies like this. Real unscrupulous sysadmins can force people to kiss their ass before they'll do their job. If you've ever worked in an office where the sysadmin is a highly visible and highly respected person, and everyone is keen to treat them well and be on their good side, it's because they've made it their policy to do the simplest aspects of their job grudgingly, theatrically, and only after a lot of cajoling. Meanwhile at another company there's somebody doing the same job ten times better but getting treated like an intern precisely because they do the job better, without forcing people to beg. And that sysadmin is the one who needs the power fantasy.

(I was not sure whether to use the present tense or past tense in this post. My memories of company sysadmins are from the 1990s and early 2000s, and I have no idea if sysadmins like that exist anymore.)

I'm pleasantly surprised to see this kind of sentiment at the top. I also like the posts you linked a lot. I used to like these kinds of bitter sysadmin revenge fantasies, but I no longer really get the appeal; they seem to exemplify a kind of "punching down or sideways because you can't punch up" behavior that I see IRL (outside IT) too often to find it funny.

I can't stop reading them because they so accurately depict the attitude and MO of a few real life BOFH that I used to work with. These guys, one in particular, would do anything in his power to torture people while averting any blame due to his technical skills. And then openly laugh and make fun of them with the other sysadmins...who all pretty much allowed him to get away with it all or even encouraged it. These stories do not look like fiction to me in any way.

> the underlying humor seems to be saying “Isn’t this what we all really think? Isn’t this how we would all wish we could behave?”

That's a bad take, for the simple reason that the BOFH series was written by a Kiwi, for primarily NZ and UK audiences.

The underlying message is, consequently, quite the opposite.

Seconding this. I didn't manage to get through one before it seemed absurd, beyond unethical and unprofessional, and petty. Reminded me of Comic Book Guy: so smart but no one can stand their misanthropy.

> Sure, the stories are parodies and written in an exaggerated manner, but the underlying humor seems to be saying “Isn’t this what we all really think? Isn’t this how we would all wish we could behave?”, which is an attitude I find deplorable.

No? Not everyone sees all types of humorous behavior as something to aspire to. Did people always look at Chaplin's antics as the fool and think "that's funny, I should act the same way"? Do people look at asshole comedians because that's how they wish they were?

I think it's more accurate to say that people find extreme behavior funny because we have urges sometimes to act the same, and while we recognize that's not a good way to act, it can be cathartic to see someone unrestrained by social norms in a fictional setting where nobody is actually hurt or upset.

I'll be the first to condemn someone for harmful behaviors to others without cause, but fiction is another thing entirely. Even if I didn't find this type of fiction humorous, I would be very careful not to ascribe motivations and idea about those that do. People have many reasons for enjoying stories, and they may be entirely alien to your own way of thinking, so generally I find it's best to deal with the individual (if needed) and not the source.

This sounds almost like "first they kill monsters in that new 'Doom' thing on a computer and then they go out and shoot people on the street!"

There's a difference between humorous escapist fantasy and the reality, and most adults are capable of recognizing it. We can watch "John Wick" without starting to shoot people, and we can read BOFH without being forced to act it out too. And as all escapist fantasy, there's an element of reality and its frustrations baked into it - that's why it works - but everybody knows it's not the reality itself.

The moral of the story is, for all of them: "This is why AWS ate corporate IT"

Yeah, I really do suspect that a lot of the rotten parts of programmer culture stems from things like this.

I think in this case that art imitates life.

Most people working in IT when these things came about were burned very hard by being a "cost centre", they were user facing and also had to be deeply technical.

It's difficult to be under appreciated, held to high standards for output but also be user facing (because support requires, more than anything else, patience) and maintain a positive demeanour, most people specialised into roles like "Helpdesk" but those always felt very entry level and were probably very unfulfilling.

Even if you had a Helpdesk: it probably felt that the implementor was "very far removed" from the user, which makes things even more annoying when something breaks down and you want things to move quickly.

BOFH is almost certainly a fantasy that follows the perception of an operations person. Certainly I believe that more than I believe it's a work of fiction that came from nowhere that people identified with and imitated.

I remember greatly enjoying BOFH when I was young, in the same way it’s fun to watch a movie with a deeply flawed character behaving poorly.

Then I worked at a company where the IT person modeled their personality on BOFH and it was, unsurprisingly, a miserable experience for everyone. Strangely, they got a free pass for the gruff behavior because there was this idea that “that’s just how IT people are”. Fortunately, that’s not the norm or even acceptable at any sane workplace and I went on to work with a lot of great and professional IT people since then.

But I’ve often wondered how much the BOFH fictions influenced some people who missed the point.

Nah, it's always been considered a revenge fantasy.

IRL BOFHs were BOFHs before it came around, they just didn't have a label. The omnipotence mania is built in the very concept of "administrator" or "root", and because this obviously doesn't translate directly in the real world for IT admins, there is always a friction, a source of frustration, for people in those jobs.

The real outcome of BOFH was to sensitize some bosses to the problems such personalities can produce, a concept that made it all the way to Sarbanes-Oxley. And despite that, the likes of Terry Childs [0] are still very much around.

[0[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Childs

I though that too until I brought up BOFH to actual BOFHs who had no idea the series existed.

Lol, welcome to the show, where half the contestants don't understand humor and the other half have to explain what it Actually means.

Any love for Hackles?

I have read them twice now from start to end: http://hackles.org/index.html

Danke!

The original and the best. After moving to The Reg it stretched from grmpy sysadmin deciding to delete peoples files to a machivellian character who murders people on a regular basis

I found the older BOFH stuff from early 90s Usenet days a lot more funny.

It's neither.

BOFH represents an angry, cathartic, antiheroic response to the social problems of the IT world. Anyone acting that way in the real world deserves the prison sentence that would immediately follow... just as anyone who behaved like an action movie star in the real world would go to prison for assault and murder.

The primary desired response is quiet sympathy and camaraderie, if appropriate.

I guess it differs for each person. I think it's funny, it's a way of saying that you don't take yourself too seriously.

Of course you could ask the coworkers in question, but do you want to bring your account to the attention of a BOFH?...

Unwelcoming for sure.

Why would I want to be welcoming or positive? While I'm not exactly aggressive person, I'm more like neutral person and I would never want to fake welcomeness or something like that. If someone will approach me with question from documentation, I'll never hesitate to answer RTFM and move on.

May be that's US thing that everyone must smile and be kind. I was not taught like that, I don't expect that from others and I'll not fake good mood being in a bad mood myself.

The term would be akin to system administrator now; the sysop was the one who was in charge of the computer (you know, the one computer on a business or school campus that everyone shared via terminals). They would be in charge of monitoring the computer, making sure that users weren't doing anything they weren't supposed to and impacting other users, managing backup tapes, and handling the equivalent of "support tickets" (mostly via phone or paper in those days)

Operator in this context is similar to administrator. A cognate being "sysop" from the 80s and 90s bulletin-board scene, meaning "system operator".

It means "computer operator": "a role in IT which oversees the running of computer systems, ensuring that the machines, and computers are running properly" [0] ― a rather interesting article to read even on its own.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_operator

"A computer operator is the person responsible for monitoring and controlling computer systems especially mainframe computer systems in a company or organization."

It's kind of archaic, now, but back in the day you used to have a computer that filled a whole room and there would be an operator in charge of compiling and running jobs, returning (printed) output, managing user accounts, resources, backups.

Sort of analogous to a system administrator on multiple smaller computers used as servers, or the IT guy on personal computers used for work, but much more direct, in that they would actually be the one who operated the computer. Users submitted typed programs that would be input into punchcards and run as a batch, or run on a scheduled basis.

Long time ago people could not use computers.

You would write down the program you want to get executed or punch it on punch cards.

The only people who could actually operate the computer were... the operators. These people (mainly women) would transfer the program to the computer, execute it and then transfer the answer back to the requestor.

This survived into later because an admin on the server is was the only person who could actually operate the server. The rest can only within whatever rights the admin gave them, but for any important operation (like adding a user) you still needed the admin (operator) to take action.

I remember reading in a book once:

Systems Operator: Maintains and runs systems, often works from runbooks, or automated UI's; does not write code, works within the constraints set by Administrators. Level 2 Helpdesk.

Systems Administrators: Responsible for writing documentation, addressing the needs of monitoring. Usually the person writing runbooks and scripts, works closely with a Helpdesk and their needs, automates recurrent problems. Level 3 Helpdesk.

Systems Engineer: Responsible for architecture, understanding complex systems, working on new projects, making Systems Administrators lives easier. Working with Architects on upcoming projects, likely designed and built the logging solution, database migration systems, job control systems.

Systems Architect: Same as a systems engineer except focused on business needs instead of technical ones. Usually works on a higher level of abstraction, often works across many teams to gather needs.

This was a book that was "old" when I read it in 2007, so, obviously this no longer reflects reality (if it ever did).

Operator as in System Operator or sysop- an archaic term for IT administrator from when the computer was a single “system”. Equivalent to root when used.

When I first encountered BOFH, I recalled TV commercials on KTLA Channel for Control Data Institute in order to give me context on the "Operator" term.

You could train to be a computer programmer, operator, or technician. Seems like a standard term of art for the 1970s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09y4zT18KXM

My first job was as an operator for a UK bank.

The work was:

* Putting paper on printers * Taking paper off printers * Decollating the paper that came off printers * Putting tapes into tape drives * Taking tapes out of tape drives

The slacking was

* Going to the pub before it closed on night shift * Having sword fights with the plastic swords we used to cut paper * Finding an unlocked office and using the phone to call party lines

The work highlights were:

* Going to a vault and back flanked by security guards to get the Queen's tape * Printing bank statements of the rich and famous (I've seen Mick Jagger's bank account)

Besides 'computer' operator, there used to be 'I/O operator's (tapes) and 'print pool operator' (run printers).

Also, in my experience 'computer operators' weren't really 'sysadmins' they were more like automated job scheduling services. Follow the run book, run batch jobs, check for errors sort of thing

Source: I've held all 3 positions at one time or another.

Oh , so just like any news site nowadays. Some (browser developer) people never learn. Or to put it another way: "Lusers, bless their little hearts, have simple minds. " [1]

[1] a.s.r. FAQ

It does not for me and actually modern browsers do not allow automatic sound playback without explicit user interaction.

The bound editions are nice as well.

https://www.amazon.com/Simon-Travaglia/e/B00JCJDZCU