26
Condor
17d

For several years now, I have been writing programs for myself. I have been publishing the source code for them, but none of them ever got much traction. Then I wrote a program that existing users on social media could just interact with without installation (because even that is too much apparently).

When I wrote the programs for myself with others secondary, I had logic problems to solve and dealt with fucked up API's. Now I still have that problem, but I also have to deal with user retardation. They are not using the program in the way I wrote it to be used, at all. They are not passing arguments where there should be, they are running commands that are still under development and therefore (rightfully IMO) available to only me. I am the one being blamed, why doesn't this thing work?

I'd like to rephrase their question to me. Why are you user not using the goddamn program properly? Why should I need to make half the goddamn code account for users' sheer level of retardation?

Yes, users are retarded. And it's not a battle we can win. Earlier I heard this saying that "every time you make your tools more foolproof, the universe invents a better fool".

Comments
  • 5
    That’s one beautiful saying!
  • 4
    Don't try to adapt to those idiots. You're making a tool for yourself
  • 11
    Making stuff robust is what takes some effort - the absolute minimum is proper error handling and input validation. A program that fails here is either in a very early alpha phase, i.e. intended for preliminary testing (but rather not with users), or it's flat out bad software.
  • 3
    There's another way to look at this I think.

    I think Im also unlikely to use all the tools properly all the time, often just to see how far I can push a tool and what sort of powerful things I can do with it if I manage to push it just a little further!

    Though I wouldn't complain about it not working if I do that obviously. I'm just saying that proper input sanitization is important even if your users aren't retarder
  • 4
    @Hazarth Honestly I would be happy to have a user that pushes the software to the limits. Some of my friends do that with my website / DNS services and whatnot too, security audits almost. For example my DNS servers were tested against open resolver behavior, which they didn't have. I liked that said friend put in the effort and let me know regardless of the result.

    You're right that input sanitisation is important either way, since this is exactly what fuzzers would do too. Right now there's some erroneous requests being sent to an API or the bot just doesn't respond to a user's message when things go wrong. Not quite a security issue I would say, but correctness does indeed matter.
  • 2
    Instructions not clear enough – became a dick and complained about thing not working
  • 1
    If you're trying to make money, you have to remember, people want to solve their problems by pushing a button.

    Your button shouldn't take more effort than clicking it once.

    Otherwise they'll click someone else's button, one that doesn't make you money.
Add Comment