Unfunny April Fool's Joke from the Magic Lantern Developers
kukuruku.co
kukuruku.co
Is al3x also g3gg0?
so a warning to everyone being pranked yesterday:
you are not prepared for serious shooting with magic
lantern, if this was a real problem to you.
why?
if you use ML for business make sure a failure, no matter if serious issues or not so serious (like yesterday) wont get you in trouble!
- take ML-free backup-cards with you
- make yourself confident with rescue procedures and how to temporary disable ML
- ML, especially "latest" versions can introduce troublesome behavior
yes, its cool that ML is being used in a lot of serious stuff. we really love that.
but we expect users to be prepared for the moment when ML is going nuts for some reason.
this day will come.
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14850.msg14...There is also a picture in that thread (scroll up).
An April Fool's prank should be quickly evident to the victim, not make them spend hours wasting their time. Especially when the victims are strangers.
I wonder why it reminds me of http://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-31
Installing firmware onto thousand dollar machines is stressful enough, they shouldn't be "taught" a lesson just because the developers thought they should.
There's always the guys that will say that lighting a bunch of tires on top of a mountain to fake a volcano eruption was irresponsible, but then again, these are the things we talk about decades later.
None of that means he shouldn't have played a joke on the users, but it definitely means he ought to have thought it through more. And, as you say, he should have had a much better response to people's understandably somewhat panicked reaction.
"Your camera is now bricked" isn't exactly the message I'd like to send to my users.
An easter egg should make the user smiles and make him/her feels good and that the developer cares about the software. That one is just mean.
While I can understand the developer making an error in not thinking it through and making the joke, the handling of the case on the forum should have been "I make a stupid joke, sorry, I'll make a fix right away, just rollback for now".
To the people saying it's free software and the user is entitled to nothing, I'll just ask: "Is it the world you want?" a world where there is no trust and only the fear of being sued for money?
I install custom firmware on my Wi-Fi routers, my smartphone etc., never really thought about how it would affect me if it were to get bricked in the process.
Yes, users should know what they are getting into.
No, the developer has no obligation to be held to a higher standard of reliability.
Yes, the developer can really do whatever they want.
With all that said, can we at least agree that this shows extremely poor judgment from an engineering and product sense? Not only is this a terrible way to achieve user trust, but it also doesn't make any users feel good. As a user, why would I want to use a product that wants to make a fool out of me and throw wrenches in a core feature for chuckles?
I understand it doesn't make much sense to have tm_mday start from 0, but then again even 3 as April seems weird, maybe they should all start at 1.
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908775/xsh/time.h.ht...
For day of month, we don't have special names for them. We just use the day number. So tm_mday directly contains the day number.
Seriously, just how humorless and gullible do you have to be to not understand that this was an April Fools' joke?
First, BSoDs are specific to Windows OSes. OK, fair enough, non-tech people might not know this. But...
"Take a photo of a calendar, focusing on today's date."
If after reading this line you still don't understand that this is a joke, I feel sorry for you.
The "rand() % 1000 == 13" probably causes the "BSoD" every time for the OP because the RNG is not properly seeded, which is the real problem here.
I don't condone this joke or the developers' response, but I'm not going to blame them for anything either. The negativity in this thread, however...
Why is it a problem if I'm a doctor and I put a non-lethal poison into every few flu shuts on April 1st? Because April Fools.
This is how people who don't program view this sort of thing. You can say that you feel sorry for them, but, in reality, you lose, because they'll never trust you again. And they shouldn't.
But I was born in 1974, and I have never actually seen or heard a funny April Fool's joke in my entire life.
If you're paid to take photos, roll up to a gig with all the gear you tested yesterday, and get this...good god.
Get over it. Seems pretty funny to me.
1st rule: be prepared fro April 1st 2nd rule: you cannot expect anything from free software on the internet, it is free after all
Read it again: it is free. If you really need QoS, pay someone to develop and code review the firmware. I am not being a troll, some people just have so much self-entitlement on something that is free.
Also, in the specific case of FOSS, this kind of jackass-ery might soon come to an end anyway if/when the EU and UK follows through with their (relatively) recent moves to introduce stronger software liability provisions (eg [3]).
[1] http://www.ifross.org/en/what-legal-standard-liability-and-w...
[2] http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/21st_cen...
[3] http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/workspace/analysts-warn-[3] vendors-on-software-liability-7284
[2]: It doesn't say for sure one will be liable "it is difficult to determine with any certainty: (1) whether open source software licenses will be enforceable, (2) whether open source software copyright will be valid, or (3) whether open source software licenses will subject developers to tort liability." [3] is more on vendor, which quite specifically on transaction that carries monetary value. It is debatable if one still be regarded as vendor even if he doesn't sell stuff. I will give the article benefit of doubt.
Truth be told, the first successful litigation basically will turn off most contributors: no one can be sure their codes are totally bug-free. Even if that person totally wants to do good.
Self-entitlement would be expecting personal customer support. Finding out the firmware is buggy BY DESIGN is reason would seem to be a perfectly good reason to dismiss the firmware.