Now, I can see where you would get confused...

Picture this: Customer X calls up, wanting an additional domain authorised to service Y. Fair cop, easy job. All I need to do is to send an authorisation email to address Z on said domain, and all the customer needs to do is to reply back to the system from address Z. The authorisation will only be verified if the reply comes back from that address. Seems easy enough, right? I explained this pretty clearly to the customer and, to his credit, the customer seemed to follow. So I send the authorisation email off to address Z, and end the call.

...Three minutes later, I get a system generated email back, saying that authorisation was refused. Why, I ask?

Authorisation was rejected as the addresses are mismatched.

Sent to "Address Z"
Received From "Address A"

...

...Oh, for fuck's sake...

So I've just sent the customer an email (to address Z, A, and 17), explain that I had to resend the authorisation email, WHY I had to resend the email, and how to do it properly this time.

And a paraphrased "...this time, try listening the fuck up".

Violating the laws of possibility for both fun and profit.

So, I got back into work today from a five day weekend. Only missed three days of work, but as soon as I stepped in the door to my floor, a little part of my soul died.

Know anyone who's hiring at the moment?

I sat down, strapped myself in, and hoped for the best. I mean - how bad could the first issue be? Well...

I just had a customer given our internal number here, and prodded in our direction by an other department who don't have the skills or panache to solve the issue. This fucks me off to no end, 'cause it's the WRONG way to do it, but we're to do it ANYWAY. So, I grit my teeth, roll my eyes, and see just how bad it was.

"So you're saying you're being billed for cellular broadband access at these times?"
"Yes."
"...And you say that they are during times where the handset is not even physically connected to the laptop?"
"Yes."
"And you're absolutely positive of this?"
"Yes, certainly."

...

The way that cellular broadband works is that data traffic is registered against a handset's ESN - which is a unique identifier, much like a MAC address. It's possible to have two handsets with the same cellular number, but not the same ESN. Simply put - the data traffic showing on the account was applied to the customer's ESN - which cannot be hacked. It shows up on the bill, then those bits and bytes went through that handset. QED.

So this customer was assuring me that all these "strange" data charges were being registered by the system at times when the handset was not physically connected or interfaced with the laptop.

"...You know, the way that you've described the situation, and the information I'm seeing here are mutually exclusive. What you've just describe to me is physically impossible."
"I know!"

...

So what was I to do?

"Well then, if that's the case, I'd recommend having the handset serviced or replaced, because there is no way this could happen is everything is working as intend."

Then I sent him on his merry way.

Now, what was the point of all this? What was the moral of the story I just related to you? Well, it's a simple one, and universally constant;

The customer is always lying.

Don't doubt yourself, never second-guess the systems. The customer is just fucking lying. Remember this, and dealing with them is just a little bit easier.

Quick! Save yourself!

...

I read an abstract this morning for a study entitled 'Sparing effects of selenium and ascorbic acid on vitamin C and E in guinea pig tissues.'

I'm currently reading the full article, somewhat incredulously. For anyone not familiar with their vitamins, you probably won't see at first glance the reason I spent a good five minutes reading the abstract and giggling. I even showed it to a colleague to make sure I wasn't missing some subtle hidden nuance. But apparently not.

Ascorbic acid is vitamin C.

The title and abstract so far suggest that 13 scientists spent a good deal of time and several dead guinea pigs to establish that there was less vitamin C in the tissues of guinea pigs fed less vitamin C. Wow. Giving animals an essential nutrient causes a raise in that nutrient's level in the animal? Rocket science!

I'm currently reading the full article to see if there's some pressing reason why this needed to be established. So there may well be a relieved post from me later - I'd hate to think that people really sit down and waste time, money, and small cute mammals with adorable squeaking noises on the blatantly stupid.

I recommend against holding your breath.

As a side note, I really hope they didn't use Ribena as their source of C.

There's been some changes 'round here...

A ninja template change from the stealthiest sunflower around. Let's see how long it takes the Nihilist to notice we're no longer black and angsty.

No, now we're just the angst without the colourscheme!

What do you think? Do you find this more readable?

Note: proper post coming up this afternoon, in between digging myself out from under the pile of paperwork that keeps getting strategically 'stored' on my desk, and heading out to a work function. At this rate, 'this afternoon' may well mean 'sometime tomorrow'.

Short but sardonic

"Medical statistician: one who will not accept that Columbus discovered America ... because he said he was looking for India in the trial plan."

- Stephen Senn, Statistical Issues in Drug Development. (1997) (lifted from the British Medical Journal)


Since it's Wednesday and I have hump-day-itis, as well as far too much to do, you'll just have to make do with the quote rather than a rant. Still, if you're looking for amusingly dismissive off-the-cuff summations, it's a pretty good one!

Have a good day, everyone, and stay tuned for 'Five things that will make Stealthflower point and laugh at your research'.