[HN Gopher] Including "And. And. And. And. And." in a Google doc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Including "And. And. And. And. And." in a Google doc causes it to
       crash
        
       Author : patneedham
       Score  : 1398 points
       Date   : 2022-05-05 20:25 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (support.google.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (support.google.com)
        
       | Normal_gaussian wrote:
       | Perfect prank document to send to the team. I'm just hoping it
       | holds up until the morning so everyone can join the fun and not
       | just those of us with bad work time habits.
        
       | analog31 wrote:
       | An odd coincidence, I recall that pressing an operator button on
       | an older HP calculator would also cause an error, because the
       | stack was 4 levels deep.
        
       | selimthegrim wrote:
       | Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man. Man has
       | nothing good with which to recompense Heaven.
        
       | loxias wrote:
       | I _LOVE_ stuff like this. Reminds me of  "OpenOffice does not
       | print on Tuesdays"
       | https://beza1e1.tuxen.de/lore/print_on_tuesday.html
        
         | cybertoad wrote:
         | Haha, thanks for sharing
        
         | apanloco wrote:
         | Thanks for sharing, that's hilarious :D
        
         | below43 wrote:
         | This is another classic from his list "We can't send mail more
         | than 500 miles":
         | https://beza1e1.tuxen.de/lore/500mile_email.html
        
       | jrd79 wrote:
       | That is an amazing bug.
        
         | vldx wrote:
         | I'm very curious what may be the root cause of this.
        
           | baisq wrote:
           | Probably something to do with the grammar check (blue
           | squiggly line)
        
           | the_biot wrote:
           | My guess is on an easter egg gone wrong.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | t_mann wrote:
           | My money is on some conflicting rules in grammar / style
           | checks.
        
       | likortera wrote:
       | Wonder if this was discovered because of a Mars Attack ET using
       | it.
        
       | ronald_raygun wrote:
       | I can't get the bug to reproduce. But maybe someone else could
       | try
       | 
       | Wouldn't the sentence 'I want to put a hyphen between the words
       | Fish and And and And and Chips in my Fish-And-Chips sign' have
       | been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish, and
       | between Fish and and, and and and And, and And and and, and and
       | and And, and And and and, and and and Chips, as well as after
       | Chips?
        
         | mike_d wrote:
         | "And." x 5+, case sensitive, new line at the end. Hit refresh
         | in your browser and it will throw an error.
        
           | erwincoumans wrote:
           | It has been "Fixed. Fixed. Fixed. Fixed. Fixed." now.
        
       | X6S1x6Okd1st wrote:
       | Replicated on my end on OSX & firefox
        
         | oliwary wrote:
         | Replicated on Windows 10 and Chrome too!
        
         | pinewurst wrote:
         | OSX and Safari replicated
        
       | sharmavinu0024 wrote:
       | good tool for everyone.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | AlexMuir wrote:
       | Took me right back one of many detentions I served at school,
       | when Mr B Swales set us the challenge of finding a grammatically
       | correct English sentence with five ands in a row.
       | 
       | The answer was as follows:
       | 
       | The landlord of the "Dog and Partridge" pub commissioned a
       | signwriter to letter a new board outside. On looking at the work,
       | the landlord declared that he liked the colour but would prefer
       | more spacing between Dog and and, and and and Partridge.
        
         | onionisafruit wrote:
         | Why did that lead to detention?
        
           | splatzone wrote:
           | I could be wrong, but I think it was a task the teacher set
           | during detention
        
         | paconbork wrote:
         | It's easy enough to use a single "and" in a sentence, but "and
         | and" and "and and and" and so on are more difficult
        
           | hoosieree wrote:
           | Clearly you've never taught intro boolean logic.
           | 
           | Try saying "a Nand and an And" in a way that your students
           | can understand you.
        
             | porbelm wrote:
             | a NAND, and an AND with proper stresses and pauses, it's
             | not that hard to say clearly...
        
             | wildmanx wrote:
             | May depend on pronounciation .. do you pronounce the NAND
             | gate as /aen-aend/ or as a one-syllable world /naend/ ?
        
         | coreyp_1 wrote:
         | I heard it with "Fish and Chips".
        
         | IIAOPSW wrote:
         | '''Between (("Dog" and "and") and ("and" and "partridge"))'''
         | for those of you trying to parse along at home.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | busterroni wrote:
         | > "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo
         | buffalo" is a grammatically correct sentence in English
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffal...
        
         | atxbcp wrote:
         | A russian equivalent based on the fact that foreign words
         | aren't declined: Chelovek cheloveku volk, a zombi zombi zombi
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | chatmasta wrote:
         | It seems like cheating to omit the double quotes around the
         | literal instances of "and" while still including them around
         | "Dog and Partridge."
        
           | astrobe_ wrote:
           | They said grammatically correct, not typographically correct
           | ;-)
        
         | elliekelly wrote:
         | I would love to know what other tasks Mr B Swales had in his
         | detention assignment rotation!
        
         | Affric wrote:
         | Curiously, if someone wanted to put that on a sign suddenly you
         | can take the story to as many "and"s as one might want...
         | 
         | So, the the trick is using it as a conjunction and a noun.
        
         | nicooo wrote:
         | My homework was to write a sentence with 5 ands in a row, so I
         | wrote "and and and and and."
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Moru wrote:
         | Swedish sort of joke-sentence you get to learn in school:
         | 
         | "Far, far far far?"
         | 
         | "Nej, far far inte far, far far lamm."
         | 
         | English would be:
         | 
         | "Father, does sheep get sheep?"
         | 
         | "No, sheep does not get sheep, sheep gets lambs."
         | 
         | No, google translate does not make it unscathed through that
         | sentence :-)
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | The The or Adam and the Ants or Bananarama?
           | 
           | I always wanted to start a Yello cover band called Purple,
           | just to perform a song called "Oh No!"
           | 
           | Mmmmm, Ugly... More ugly... Such a bad time... A really bad
           | time...
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jJkdRaa04g
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | Aaron earned an iron urn.
        
             | albrewer wrote:
             | This really only gets people with a certain accent though.
        
               | dredmorbius wrote:
               | https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Oj7a-p4psRA
        
           | Kosirich wrote:
           | For doing that on hard/impossible setting, try doing it in
           | Danish as a foreigner. Every person in Denmark I discussed
           | language with, at one point gives this example.
        
         | justinpombrio wrote:
         | Here's 21 in a row, by Martin Gardner:
         | 
         | Wouldn't the sentence 'I want to put a hyphen between the words
         | Fish and And and And and Chips in my Fish-And-Chips sign' have
         | been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish,
         | and between Fish and and, and and and And, and And and and, and
         | and and And, and And and and, and and and Chips, as well as
         | after Chips?
        
           | hackernewds wrote:
           | This one does not follow as well
        
           | CaptainNegative wrote:
           | Can't one just keep recursing further?
           | 
           | Only with very careful intonation and appropriate pauses
           | after a comma can someone read Gardner's above sentence aloud
           | such that a listener can fully grok the connection between
           | "and" and "and,", and "and," and "and", and "and" and "and",
           | and "and" and "and", and "and" and "And,", and "And," and
           | "and", and "and" and "And", and "And" and "and", and "and"
           | and "and,", and "and," and "and", and "and" and "and", and
           | "and" and "and", and "and" and "And,", and "And," and "and",
           | and "and" and "And", and "And" and "and", and "and" and
           | "and,", and "and," and "and", and "and" and "and", and "and"
           | and "and".
           | 
           | (sentence due to Python 3).
        
             | stevage wrote:
             | I mean, if you're allowing that, what's wrong with:
             | 
             | > You should have seen this sign, it had 1000 ands in a
             | row, and there was too much space between and and and and
             | and and and and and ...
        
               | rolandog wrote:
               | He has multiplied the ands. Pray he does not multiply
               | them any further.
        
               | vijayr02 wrote:
               | The ands justify the means
        
               | zelphirkalt wrote:
               | It is called the "and bomb".
        
               | eightails wrote:
               | "I am become and"
        
               | noisy_boy wrote:
               | The Andalorian.
        
             | abelaer wrote:
             | If you want to draw the graph where nodes are words from
             | your comment, and two nodes are connected when they contain
             | the same letters, you would have to draw edges between and
             | and and, and and and and, and ...
             | 
             | Explodes even faster.
        
       | mc4ndr3 wrote:
       | Grammar check problems strike again.
        
       | blueberrychpstx wrote:
       | When I come across posts like these, I just wonder, "How in the
       | world did the user discover this in the first place?!"
       | 
       | Let's place bets:
       | 
       | A) The user just let autocomplete "take it away" (not sure about
       | this one since they were able to access the console)
       | 
       | B) Pen Testing?
       | 
       | C) Error copy and pasting?
       | 
       | D) Actual dialog in a sci-fi post-apocalyptic love story where a
       | robot discovers the Turing test and attempts to set itself into
       | an infinite loop.
        
         | avgcorrection wrote:
         | This is just a transcript of a stutter. Too much for modern
         | technology to handle. :)
        
         | quickthrower2 wrote:
         | The same way a lottery winner discovers the correct numbers
        
         | a-dub wrote:
         | E) fidgeting/futzing with stuff mindlessly while in
         | conversation/doing something else
         | 
         | personally, i've happened across some pretty serious security
         | bugs this way.
        
         | dkarl wrote:
         | I've heard people say it, speaking like this: "This would be a
         | great solution to the problem, except that it would break the
         | admin dashboard. And billing. And SSO. And partner test
         | environments. And. And. And. And. And. This would break so many
         | things I'm sure I could only name half of them if I tried."
        
           | rhizome wrote:
           | Yep. I've written that formulation many many times.
        
           | marcusverus wrote:
           | Agreed--it seems likely that the user was writing dialogue,
           | taking minutes, or something similar.
           | 
           | Skilled speakers frequently use repetitions of a word (like
           | 'and') as an interjection[0]. It's a handy way of giving
           | yourself a second to think without saying 'uhh' or 'umm'
           | (which, for whatever reason, are considered 'bad'
           | interjections), and seems to be a kind of defense against
           | being interrupted.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna42822623 (a Meet the Press
           | transcript which contains eight "and, and"s and one "and,
           | and, and"!)
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Fuzzing?
        
         | matthberg wrote:
         | Apparently from a poem:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31278566
         | 
         | That comment is from the submitter of the issue (and HN post),
         | the poem is from Eliza Callahan (copy found here):
         | https://durationandthebodyelizacallahan.cargo.site
         | 
         | The relevant excerpt: "I thought about my body. It's past. It's
         | present... Which made me think about the word and. And. And.
         | And. And. And. Then."
        
         | OhSoHumble wrote:
         | Writing a novel and a character within the novel has a stutter
         | or is stammering.
        
         | orblivion wrote:
         | C seems very likely to me. I often compulsively copy and paste
         | things. You might not call it an error as such.
        
         | fnord123 wrote:
         | E) Children playing on the tablet/computer.
        
         | t_mann wrote:
         | Some more options: Just a demonstration of how Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V
         | works. Literal transcript of a stammered conversation. Poetry /
         | word-based art.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | technothrasher wrote:
         | Years ago in school, maybe about 1992 or so, I managed to make
         | xdm (X Display Manager) crash and dump me a root window by
         | simply holding down a key until the buffer ran out. I remember
         | wondering how anybody _didn 't_ discover this before me.
         | Similar behavior with the university phone system (repeatedly
         | pressing '0') eventually dropped me an outside line that I
         | didn't have to pay for (yes, for you young folks, we used to
         | have to pay for long distance phone calls, on phones that
         | didn't fit in our pockets).
        
           | hnick wrote:
           | You just reminded me what we found in college (on campus). We
           | could dial out to the other college, then back into ours, and
           | then externally to get free long distance calls.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | I've had a stint or two doing QA.
           | 
           | At one such position (reasonably well-known product within
           | the tech world), there was clear pushback not to file bugs of
           | this nature.
           | 
           | I didn't stick with that position long.
        
           | hawski wrote:
           | I always suspect that software I'm using is not really
           | tested. If there are animations or whatever is happening
           | asynchronously monkey bashing will trigger lots of issues.
        
           | joseda-hg wrote:
           | I seem to remember that a few years ago some versions of
           | either TouchWiz or Android, that you could overflow into
           | unlocking the phone.
           | 
           | The number required was pretty high, but you could get to it
           | by copy pasting an already typed (In the emergeny dialer)
           | number for a while, crashing the lockscreen until the next
           | reset
        
             | karlding wrote:
             | Sounds like CVE-2015-3860 [0].
             | 
             | [0] https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-3860
        
           | spullara wrote:
           | When I was a teenager, I got dropped into a shell on a VAX by
           | doing the same thing when it was trying to identify the
           | terminal type.
        
           | merlinscholz wrote:
           | Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25843874
        
             | technothrasher wrote:
             | Good to know the new guard is still leading the fight :)
        
             | Thorrez wrote:
             | And another one:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7531140
        
         | glitchc wrote:
         | Option D is rather romantic. Poor robot fell in love with an
         | NFA. He'll never hear the end of it.
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | Who. Who. Who. Who. Who.
       | 
       | However. However. However. However. However.
       | 
       | Why. Why. Why. Why. Why.
        
         | js8 wrote:
         | Google engineers should ask "Why." five times to get to the
         | root cause.
        
       | dr_dshiv wrote:
       | Whhhhhy
        
         | schmeckleberg wrote:
         | did you decide to compress the "5 Whys" into one Why with 5 hs?
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys
        
           | a_cardboard_box wrote:
           | I just repro'd the bug with 5 whys: "Why. Why. Why. Why.
           | Why."
        
       | rikeanimer wrote:
       | omg I tried to post a reply on that support page and it errored
       | out saying "you need to be signed in ..." while I could literally
       | see my sign in logo top right corner of the page.
       | 
       | fking google.
       | 
       | there are good [as well as technical humurous] comments on the
       | page.
        
       | valenaut wrote:
       | Reproduced in Safari on macOS Monterey.
       | 
       | "And. And. And. And." caused no problems.
       | 
       | "And. And. And. And. And. And." also crashes (5 "And."s is a
       | substring, so makes sense).
       | 
       | I cannot imagine how this bug is occurring.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | pmichaud wrote:
         | My wild-ass guess is a grammar check bug. Since it words on
         | both "and" and "but," I'm thinking it's some check related to
         | conjunctions.
        
           | aimor wrote:
           | I think this is the right track. "However. ", "Therefore. ",
           | "Also. " cause the crash too.
        
       | twism wrote:
       | Repro'd
        
       | dropit_sphere wrote:
       | lolwhat, replicated w/Linux and Chrome just now.
        
       | edgyquant wrote:
       | This doesn't work on the iOS app, I've pasted it and typed it
       | manually
        
       | strictfp wrote:
       | And?
        
         | wardedVibe wrote:
         | worth a shot, I tried it, and it worked fine. Then again, I
         | couldn't reproduce the original
        
       | shreyansh26 wrote:
       | Reproduced on Edge on Windows 11 as well. What a bug! Really need
       | to know the root cause of this.
        
       | endisneigh wrote:
       | I wonder if this is crashing due to some auto completion
       | shenanigans
        
       | mikotodomo wrote:
       | OMG I showed this to my friends and now someone in my class keeps
       | adding it to our documents.
        
       | zciwor wrote:
       | Will 100% be pasting this into a coworker's Google Doc with a
       | white font color.
        
         | glitchc wrote:
         | Sounds like a totally collaborative/supportive workspace.
        
         | fdgsdfogijq wrote:
         | haha please do this
        
         | mattrighetti wrote:
         | Evil
        
         | ffhhj wrote:
         | Send it in your resume to annoy recruiters.
        
           | agitator wrote:
           | Yes, yes, let's all put this in our resumes.
        
           | achenet wrote:
           | but... I write my resume in markdown and compile it to PDF
           | with pandoc ...
        
         | _wldu wrote:
         | That's probably a cyber crime in most US states.
         | 
         | Edit: You guys have no sense of humor.
        
           | jjeaff wrote:
           | You joke, but comparing to past cases, I see no reason to
           | believe it couldn't be considered a crime depending on who
           | you do it to. All depends on the existence of some grumpy
           | idiot with too much power.
        
           | cyral wrote:
           | Sounds like a job for the Highway Patrol
        
           | rawoke083600 wrote:
           | Haha
        
           | buryat wrote:
           | Hackernews is not a place for jokes
        
             | quickthrower2 wrote:
             | It is if the jokes are _really_ sophisticated or clever. No
             | reddit style stuff.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | So why are you here?
             | 
             | (gotem)
        
           | smarx007 wrote:
           | Only if it crashes MS Word 2007.
        
           | kappuchino wrote:
           | try /s at the end of "offending" sentence, most people will
           | look at it more kindly.
        
             | TMWNN wrote:
        
               | loxias wrote:
               | Huh, that's confusing to me.
               | 
               | _Big_ Adams, Twain, Barry, Pratchett, and most things
               | sardonic, sarcastic, and satiric right here, who's also
               | "autistic AF" as the kids say.
               | 
               | "/s" is stupid, always has been. I'm not sure if sarcasm
               | _is_ sarcasm if it comes with metadata, but if you 're
               | gonna use metadata, use balanced tags!
               | 
               | Edit: I read the link, and laughed at it. If anything, I
               | get into trouble using sarcasm /too/ often (esp. as a
               | kid), I know a few other aspies like this too. I think
               | all one can say on the topic is that if you're on the
               | spectrum your "sarcasm center" might be poorly deficient
               | OR pumped up into overdrive.
               | 
               | I know it's a long rant on this point but I really wish
               | more people understood that with ASD sometimes these
               | things manifest as a deficiency...but sometimes as the
               | opposite of a deficiency (a surfeit?).
        
               | impendia wrote:
               | > Consistently having trouble identifying sarcasm in
               | print--without the "help" of idiotic illiterate marks
               | like "/s"--is one of the signs of autism
               | 
               | Autistic people exist, and read things on the internet.
               | Attempts to help them are neither "idiotic" nor
               | "illiterate".
        
               | c1ccccc1 wrote:
               | Not many people know this, but similar to image alt text,
               | the <s></s> tag was originally introduced for
               | accessibility reasons, so that people with autism and
               | similar conditions can experience the web in the same way
               | as more neuro-typical folks do. The tags should be
               | invisible in the average browser, unless you've got
               | sarcasm highlighting turned on. Unfortunately, the
               | feature hasn't really caught on, and it remains
               | unsupported by most software.
        
               | bregma wrote:
               | Why does this post appear in yellow?
        
               | TMWNN wrote:
               | You're using a sarcasm markup-compliant browser.
        
               | D-Coder wrote:
               | This is sarcasm, right?
               | 
               | Right?
        
               | jkhdigital wrote:
               | :chef's kiss:
        
             | mellavora wrote:
             | Huh, I totally missed that "/s" was a sarcasm flag. I was
             | thinking that usually it is ":s/" not "/s", and was looking
             | for the completion, or if they really did mean "/s" that's
             | not the best way to find ands.
        
             | dorkwood wrote:
             | I'm surprised the SarcMark(tm) never took off:
             | https://www.sarcmark.com/
        
               | saagarjha wrote:
               | I am incredibly upset by the difference in speed of
               | writing the text and drawing the SarcMark.
        
             | ManBlanket wrote:
             | I'm sure you're great. Nothing against you, but please
             | don't do that. Just write what you mean if you can't handle
             | some people misinterpreting a sarcastic remark. Let's think
             | about this for a second. What's the point of sarcasm? If
             | you have to tell people you're being sarcastic, are you
             | still being sarcastic? Not sure what territory, "/s"
             | blunders into, but I'm confident it's not sarcasm. It's
             | something else that seems kinda... dumb... like on a
             | fundamental level. Did people think themselves above
             | saying, "jk"? Mostly I've just seen, "/s" beg the question
             | of why someone would go and ruin a good sarcasm, or whether
             | the thing they labeled as such was ever sarcasm to begin
             | with. Like the parent comment here for example, it's not
             | sarcasm. There's no biting irony, mockery, or criticism.
             | It's just a silly non-sequitur joke remark. You'd have to
             | be like legitimately autistic or something to not see that,
             | and at that point, "/s" is just a drop in a bucket. I mean
             | hot-take here, sorry, but let's think twice before adopting
             | social queues from reddit.
        
               | u2077 wrote:
               | Just as a side note, I thought /s meant serious. I think
               | I've might've have seen it used in both contexts.
        
               | c1ccccc1 wrote:
               | As the "end of sarcasm" marker, it means both:
               | 
               | "{sarcasm here} /s {seriousness here}"
        
               | ineedasername wrote:
               | We need an emotional tone markup language. ETML.
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | I've never seen that interpretation, but I have to say --
               | as someone who is not a fan of the /s, I find the fact
               | that it could be interpreted as the exact opposite of the
               | standard meaning pretty funny. In fact I think I will
               | start using it this way, to sow discord among the /s
               | fans. /s
        
               | nephanth wrote:
               | Indicating sarcasm is not necessarily ruining it though.
               | Look at IRL sarcasm, it will generally be accompanied
               | with the right tone of voice and expression / body
               | language that make its presence unequivocal. That doesn't
               | necessarily ruin it
        
               | Fogest wrote:
               | It's the same reason why I often throw a emoji on the end
               | of a sentence to a friend. Sometimes the sentence on its
               | own can sound aggressive or hostile and a quick fix for
               | that is a little emoji that can help make sure my tone is
               | clear. I view something like "/s" as being quite similar
               | to this. You're not ruining the sarcasm, but instead
               | ensuring your tone is properly understood.
        
               | hnick wrote:
               | Written works have had sarcasm, irony, and related forms
               | of wit for as long as they've existed. While people might
               | miss the mark, it doesn't mean we should just give it up
               | as impossible just because we're now writing comments
               | online.
               | 
               | And it probably says more about me than the writer, but I
               | always cringe when I see /s since it seems to be implying
               | "Hey, _in case you 're a bit slow_, this is sarcasm. Glad
               | to help."
               | 
               | Sarcasm is by definition kind of elitist. You get it, and
               | you're in the cool group, or you don't and you go on your
               | way. It's a puzzle to solve. Removing all uncertainty
               | removes its fundamental essence.
        
               | eyelidlessness wrote:
               | /s is just a wink, you still have to figure out whether
               | the person did really fart and if so how they concealed
               | it. You're just here farting and calling it higher
               | smelling because you think you're the only one smelling
               | it.
        
               | marvin wrote:
               | The very best sarcasm is so perfectly balanced and
               | indistinguishable from the real deal, that it will leave
               | its audience wondering but not missing the _potential_
               | for sarcasm. Then the person that delivered it will
               | promptly move on, before the audience gets a chance to
               | really think about it.
        
               | IggleSniggle wrote:
               | Social "cue" (as for an actor or musician) not "queue,"
               | by the way.
        
               | ViViDboarder wrote:
               | To be fair, when vocalizing sarcasm, it is often marked
               | by a particular tone. That tone is not easily conveyed
               | online.
        
               | porbelm wrote:
               | Unless other techniques like bolding/italics etc are
               | employed, or you work for DC Comics... because using MORE
               | WORDS to correctly convey meaning is SO hard, YESSIR
        
               | eyelidlessness wrote:
               | > You'd have to be like legitimately autistic or
               | something to not see that, and at that point, "/s" is
               | just a drop in a bucket.
               | 
               | I read up to this point thinking you're being overly
               | pedantic about the specific use of a sarc mark and overly
               | dismissive of the benefit of intent-clarifying hints in
               | text. All the while thinking "I'm going to comment about
               | how much I value intent-clarifying hints in text... and
               | then I have to decide whether I want to mention I'm
               | autistic, and prepare for all of the ways I might be
               | misconstrued or dismissed further."
               | 
               | So here we are, you've saved me the trouble of making
               | that decision. I personally very much appreciate when
               | people signal intent when their meaning can be ambiguous.
               | It doesn't always feel necessary _for_ me, but it's never
               | once felt like it taken away from something I otherwise
               | understood as obvious.
               | 
               | My take, which is much cooler than it was when I was
               | gathering thoughts leading up to this but still mildly
               | hot is: what harm does it do to you if someone
               | voluntarily makes something more accessible to someone
               | who's not you? If you already grokked /s from a sarcastic
               | remark, it's a tiny bit of information you can scroll
               | past. I understand not explicitly recognizing and
               | endorsing how it might benefit autistic readers, but
               | explicitly rejecting it because it might is baffling.
        
               | mtVessel wrote:
               | I agree in principle, but if there's one thing internet
               | commenting has taught me, it's that a tragically large
               | number of people are somehow getting though life with
               | broken sarcasm detectors.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | A lot of people have a particularly tough time
               | understanding sarcasm in a language other than their
               | mother tongue.
        
           | iinnPP wrote:
           | You can say this and express it as a joke but the text reads
           | like poor criticism.
        
             | eyelidlessness wrote:
             | I read it as a joke, but I started with an assumption of
             | good intent.
        
               | Diesel555 wrote:
               | Following the guidelines I see
               | 
               | > Please respond to the strongest plausible
               | interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one
               | that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith
        
               | eyelidlessness wrote:
               | Well not for that reason, but it's always a good reminder
               | :)
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | Is there a stronger plausible interpretation than:
               | 
               | It is a joke, poking fun at our overly aggressive cyber
               | crimes laws.
               | 
               | ?
        
               | Diesel555 wrote:
               | Not that I know of. I really meant that he is following
               | the guidelines. What were you assuming I meant?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | elektrons wrote:
         | I'm curious what this will do to a google form.
        
       | LordDragonfang wrote:
       | If I had to guess, I suspect this is due to some very weird edge
       | case with their recently implemented grammar checker.
       | 
       | Doesn't appear to be an issue for the android app, but that might
       | be a cache thing.
        
       | aliljet wrote:
       | And here's a link to a document where you can see the bug in
       | action. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KKZHZpKRFRBddEvjFc-
       | au2LM...
        
         | MiddleEndian wrote:
         | Google Docs crashes in Firefox on Windows 10 with your link.
         | 
         | When I re-create the document from scratch, it does not crash.
         | 
         | When I copy the link to my non-crashing document and load it in
         | a new tab, the crash then occurs when I edit the document in
         | the new tab but not when I edit it in the original tab.
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | Maybe your "spelling and grammar" isn't on by default? Try
           | toggling it on in your "from scratch" document (little "A"
           | icon with a checkmark).
        
             | MiddleEndian wrote:
             | No, it's on, just tried it again, got the blue underlines
             | and everything. Original tab doesn't crash, new tabs crash
             | (although I can usually get a few characters in before the
             | crash), once I close the original tab obviously the crashes
             | are permanent.
        
         | aliljet wrote:
         | And changing this link to a view-only authorization. It appears
         | the bug is fixed.
        
         | sillysaurusx wrote:
         | It's interesting seeing how many people interact with that
         | link. +40 users in a matter of minutes, and some instant spam
         | suggestions too. Kind of funny.
         | 
         | Thank you for the repro case!
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | wardedVibe wrote:
       | didn't happen in firefox on Ubuntu
        
       | yashg wrote:
       | Nothing is happening. Tried in both Firefox and Chrome.
        
       | oblosys wrote:
       | Here's a bug I discovered in MS Word in 2004, which has survived
       | the past 18 years of updates and is even present in the web
       | version: https://1drv.ms/w/s!AgYiBqBjIZZpfkcvO9jnOel9T2o?e=tFA4wp
       | If you join the two lines using a backspace at the start of the
       | second line, the second line turns into gibberish.
        
         | MauranKilom wrote:
         | But it's not some form of this? https://xkcd.com/2109/
        
           | pbhjpbhj wrote:
           | Aw man, the way MS Word leaves bold/italic markers lying
           | around [the subject of that comic] and greedily applies
           | formatting to stuff you purposefully didn't select, drives me
           | bonkers ... mind you I caught LibreOffice emulating this
           | behaviour the other day (after an update), I hope it can be
           | retamed ...
           | 
           | RIP WordPerfect 'reveal codes'.
        
           | oblosys wrote:
           | Unfortunately, I lost the recipe (18 years is a long time),
           | but I vaguely recall that the first line had markup that got
           | canceled out, and that trying to delete the newline somehow
           | deleted the end tag for that markup instead of the newline.
           | It also happens when pressing delete at the end of the first
           | line.
        
           | HPsquared wrote:
           | Show all styles, then select all instances of style where
           | it's bold and/or italic.
        
         | Jap2-0 wrote:
         | Rewritten for clarity (and because I now actually know what's
         | happening):
         | 
         | If you look at the XML (change .docx to .zip) in styles.xml you
         | see the declaration of the style "BodyText3":
         | <w:style w:type="paragraph" w:styleId="BodyText3"><w:name
         | w:val="Body Text 3"/><w:basedOn
         | w:val="Normal"/><w:semiHidden/><w:rPr><w:rFonts
         | w:ascii="Wingdings"
         | w:hAnsi="Wingdings"/><w:i/><w:iCs/><w:strike/><w:color
         | w:val="FF0000"/><w:sz w:val="52"/></w:rPr></w:style>
         | 
         | The first line ("paragraph") has its style set to "BodyText3",
         | but also has formatting on that section of text itself,
         | overriding it. Once the lines are joined into one paragraph,
         | the paragraph formatting appears in the second part because
         | that text does not have a style to override it.
        
           | oblosys wrote:
           | Cool! This was pre-XML Word, and since introducing it became
           | impossible at some point, I always just figured it had been a
           | bug. Probably the bug was only in the creation, as I do
           | remember the sequence of edit actions made no sense. I think
           | it even had to include an undo.
        
           | mgdlbp wrote:
           | Steps to reproduce:
           | 
           | 1. Create a Word document (most likely using the Blank
           | document template, Normal.dotm)
           | 
           | 2. Type text of first line; press Enter; type text of second
           | line (technically Word calls these 'paragraphs'--Shift+Enter
           | inserts a newline within the same paragraph)
           | 
           | 3. Place cursor on first paragraph
           | 
           | 4. Click a Paragraph Style from the Styles ribbon section to
           | apply it (e.g., the second one, No Spacing)
           | 
           | 5. Right click the style; choose Modify...
           | 
           | 6. Change the formatting (e.g., the font to Wingdings)
           | 
           | 7. Confirm the dialog
           | 
           | 8. Select the entire first paragraph (doesn't matter whether
           | you include the end-of-paragraph/newline)
           | 
           | 9. Use manual formatting to override your changes to the
           | style so the text matches the default style, Normal (e.g. use
           | the listbox in the ribbon to change the font back to Calibri)
           | 
           | Done; if you now delete the newline, the second paragraph
           | merges with the first and takes on its style, as parent
           | points out.
           | 
           | Styles are the "proper" way to format Word documents
           | (interesting to see what fraction of users actually use
           | them). They're like a mix of HTML tags and styles: each
           | paragraph (div) must have exactly one Paragraph Style, and
           | each span of text can only have one Character Style. "Manual"
           | formatting has highest precedence, followed by Character
           | Style, followed by Paragraph Style. The benefits are the same
           | as in HTML: semantic correctness and easy restyling of the
           | entire document (e.g., by applying Themes from the Design
           | tab). This sequence of steps is a fairly good demonstration
           | of how they're used.
           | 
           | Edit: clarify
        
             | oblosys wrote:
             | Just to clarify, this is not how I created the original
             | document in 2004 :-) There were certainly no paragraph
             | styles involved, and the edit actions had to include an
             | undo, or it wouldn't happen. There was also no style
             | inspector yet.
        
             | oblosys wrote:
             | Just noticed that with this method, the backspace joins the
             | two lines, whereas in the original it reveals the markup,
             | but the newline between the lines remains.
        
             | usrn wrote:
             | This is why I prefer just writing html/markdown and letting
             | pandoc generate docx. Fiddling with the Word GUI when I
             | know what I want and how to type it is just frustrating.
        
           | HPsquared wrote:
           | So... Working as intended then, seems like.
           | 
           | This kind of thing can be easily debugged using the style
           | inspector, "reveal formatting" which shows the formatting
           | applied to the selected text and whether it's from paragraph
           | formatting or direct text formatting.
        
         | kingcharles wrote:
         | How did you create the document? When I hit backspace it does
         | "turn into gibberish", but because it seems to inherit the type
         | choices from the ether between the two lines to put it into
         | Wingdings in red with italic and strikethrough. Did you create
         | that type setting?
        
           | oblosys wrote:
           | I ran into it while editing an interview text that had colors
           | for people's names. It was surprisingly easy to reproduce,
           | but creating the buggy documents got fixed at some point. The
           | font and styles were altered slightly for dramatic effect.
        
       | fedeb95 wrote:
       | lol
        
       | mxuribe wrote:
       | Wow, this is pretty silly, odd! :-)
        
       | seangrogg wrote:
       | "And." I wrote. "And. And. And. And."
       | 
       | That was the part that led to the apocalypse.
       | 
       | This was not a coincidence, because nothing is ever a
       | coincidence.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ricardobayes wrote:
       | I'm glad I was here when this historical event happened.
        
       | ineedasername wrote:
       | Buffalo. Buffalo. Buffalo. Buffalo. Buffalo. doesn't crash it
        
       | queuebert wrote:
       | I tried this on my typewriter, and nothing happened.
        
         | peterburkimsher wrote:
         | I tried this on my typewriter, And. And. And. And. And.
         | <nothing></nothing>
         | 
         | Probably because it's out of paper.
         | 
         | Related: how is paper fed into an Apple Magic Keyboard -
         | Hebrew?
         | 
         | Edit: Tried to reproduced with Arabic keyboard, plugged in now.
         | Accidentally inverted right-to-left in brain.
         | 
         | dnA. dnA. dnA. dnA. dnA.
        
       | Nitramp wrote:
       | I think the engine is just offended by your terrible writing
       | style.
        
       | blatherard wrote:
       | It's been fixed.
       | 
       | > May 6, 2022 Update: We have fixed an issue in Docs related to
       | repetitive use of the word 'and.' This fix should soon be in
       | place for all customers.
        
         | glouwbug wrote:
         | Maybe we can push to the front page all the issues with gmail
         | so they can fix that too
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | I wonder if "James where John had had had had had had had had had
       | had had a better effect on his teacher" does someone's grammar
       | checker up in knots. Or any of the old standbys, like "Police
       | police police police police police".
        
         | queuebert wrote:
         | Or "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo
         | buffalo".
        
           | jethkl wrote:
           | This topic also came up a few weeks ago. I speculate there is
           | no upper bound. A similar example using "Hawking":
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30626497#30653029
        
       | petters wrote:
       | I had an exam in image analysis once. There was a photo of a text
       | "Sea and land".
       | 
       | The task was to "determine the cross ratio between sea and and
       | and and and land".
        
       | skerit wrote:
       | That was fun!
        
       | mark_prutskyi wrote:
       | lol
        
       | daniel_iversen wrote:
       | Reminds me of this episode from IT Crowd :-)
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqxLmLUT-qc
        
       | kodeninja wrote:
       | Big Andian bug.
        
       | bspear wrote:
       | How random. Can't wait to try this
        
       | piemadd wrote:
       | sounds like a markov chain going berserk
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | thekiptxt wrote:
       | > Google Docs uses a "Markov Chain" to predict the next word for
       | autocompletion purposes. In this case, of course, since we've
       | already written "And" 5 times, the only logical next word would
       | be "And", as showed in Djikstra's 1989 paper on the subject.
       | Therefore, the Markov Chain never terminates and hence the memory
       | chain overflows with infinite ands.
       | 
       | Does anyone know why this bug doesn't repro for some words other
       | than And if this is the case?
        
         | ghayes wrote:
         | That statement follows with:
         | 
         | > Obviously, this is partly intentional- Gregory Markov
         | modelled his famous Chain after his younger brother, who would
         | try to finish all of Gregory's sentences for him. The one way
         | Markov could fool him would be to repeat the same word multiple
         | times, and then say "Jinx", also I made all of this up, good
         | luck Google Docs team
        
         | akersten wrote:
         | How is it not code review first comment to limit that lookup to
         | like, 10 steps at most? Baffling
        
         | timando wrote:
         | Probably because that commenter just made it up.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
         | I'm not sure that comment is true based on the second paragraph
         | of it:
         | 
         | > Obviously, this is partly intentional- Gregory Markov
         | modelled his famous Chain after his younger brother, who would
         | try to finish all of Gregory's sentences for him. The one way
         | Markov could fool him would be to repeat the same word multiple
         | times, and then say "Jinx", also I made all of this up, good
         | luck Google Docs team
        
         | Voloskaya wrote:
         | That comment is a joke. SmartCompose does not use a Markov
         | Chain, it is either still an LSTM or got upgraded to a small
         | transformer based model.
        
         | noduerme wrote:
         | That was one of the funniest tech comments I've read in awhile.
        
       | sillysaurusx wrote:
       | Sort of related, last night I managed to make Clang crash by
       | feeding it a certain C++ program: https://i.imgur.com/r5MC2aK.png
       | 
       | It was very surprising that there was a way to get Clang to
       | segfault. Should I report it somewhere?
       | 
       | The code is basically doing a recursive template expansion with
       | some C++20 concept constraints. So it's not quite as simple as
       | "And. And...", but it's similar in that certain input text causes
       | a crash. I just have no idea whether to report it, or where.
        
         | tylerhou wrote:
         | Clang segfaulting is somewhat common. It usually doesn't
         | happen, but sometimes when I write some cursed template
         | metaprogramming code it crashes and I'm not surprised. In your
         | case, especially because you are using C++20 concepts, that is
         | a newer feature and you probably hit some less-tested codepath.
        
         | nopakos wrote:
         | By chance, I was just reading that typing "x = 4.725" on Atari
         | ST Basic crashed the computer. Still not fixed 35 years later
         | :) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_ST_BASIC#Bugs]
        
         | dzaima wrote:
         | Note that it might be worth trying the latest clang version
         | first. The latest proper version is 14.0.0 from Mar 25, which
         | is only a month old compared to the 7 months of 13.0.0, but if
         | it's something that's condensable to a single file, you could
         | test it on https://godbolt.org/z/hv41441jK, which has daily
         | builds.
        
         | mtoner23 wrote:
         | Definitely report it, it'll be fun to see what happens.
         | https://llvm.org/docs/HowToSubmitABug.html
        
           | sillysaurusx wrote:
           | Thank you for the link! Maybe that should've been obvious to
           | me, but it really wasn't -- I had no clue where to start. The
           | segfault just said "Please attach these files to the bug
           | report" with no more info. Really appreciated.
           | 
           | In that case I'll spend some time to clean up the repro case
           | and submit it. Thanks again.
        
             | D-Coder wrote:
             | > The segfault just said "Please attach these files to the
             | bug report" with no more info.
             | 
             | The message should include the URL.
             | 
             | Sounds like a bug that should be reported.
        
         | mshockwave wrote:
         | > Should I report it somewhere?
         | 
         | Please do. You can open an issue (Bugzilla has been deprecated)
         | on LLVM's github repo: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
        
         | hoten wrote:
         | You should report it to their GitHub repro:
         | https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
        
       | mintplant wrote:
       | Relatedly, I have a string of text that, when pasted into Windows
       | 11's Notepad, consistently causes it to crash. I don't know who
       | to report this to.
        
         | rdudek wrote:
         | Don't keep us hanging like this, what's the string?
        
           | mintplant wrote:
           | Unfortunately I can't share, as it's related to a not-yet-
           | public project.
        
             | neerajsi wrote:
             | Do you get the standard reporting error to Microsoft dialog
             | when it crashes? Hopefully someone will be able to look at
             | that. In typical cases only a small summary with the stack
             | is uploaded so your content should not be visible to
             | whoever is looking at the dump.
        
         | nograpes wrote:
         | Okay, I'll bite. What is the string?
        
       | whoevercares wrote:
       | someone cut a sev2
        
       | magneticnorth wrote:
       | Reproduced on Brave browser on Mac OSX.
       | 
       | Hypothesis from chatting about this with people nearby - somehow
       | this string makes the grammar engine search space too large
       | (that's the AI that predicts your next words) and it's running
       | out of memory.
        
       | captaincaveman wrote:
       | has anyone tried "Or. Or. Or. Or. Or."?
        
         | 8bitben wrote:
         | Actually yes. Didn't crash it!
        
         | soperj wrote:
         | or "&&. &&. &&. &&. &&."?
        
       | AccountAccount1 wrote:
       | I find it very poetic that this crash was triggered by a poem,
       | here's the poem:
       | 
       | > Duration and the body: I thought about something I had read a
       | while ago which said that a body, the body, is defined by
       | duration. That a body in the present is inseparable from its
       | previous state, that a body is linked in a continuous strand...
       | and so on and so on... I thought about my body. It's past. It's
       | present... Which made me think about the word and. And. And. And.
       | And. And. Then.
       | 
       | > Now. Now. Now. Now. Now, I felt in the present like I was
       | living always alongside a previous body. This is why I had
       | expected to find myself in the apartment when I returned home
       | from California.
       | 
       | https://durationandthebodyelizacallahan.cargo.site/
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | quakeguy wrote:
         | Your username screams for an equal exploit tbh.
        
           | BizarroLand wrote:
           | Their password is probably PasswordPassword2
        
             | AccountAccount1 wrote:
             | Well shit
        
             | tsukurimashou wrote:
             | HunterHunter
        
             | meshaneian wrote:
             | Why not PasswordPassword1?
        
               | mellavora wrote:
               | naw, it is *** That's what I see, anyway
        
       | eek2121 wrote:
       | Guess they already fixed it.
        
       | nofunsir wrote:
       | James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a
       | better effect on the teacher. (1)
       | 
       | Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
       | (2)
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_while_John_had_had_had_h...
       | 
       | [2]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffal...
        
       | mtgx wrote:
        
       | graderjs wrote:
       | What if you put it in a spreadsheet cell, calendar description,
       | drawing text or email?
        
       | iagocds wrote:
       | The Android App does not crash, but if i try to open the file at
       | the web version it crashes
        
       | calebegg wrote:
       | Something I recently found out about is you can go to
       | https://docs.new to create a new Google doc.
        
       | jonnycomputer wrote:
       | Favorite comment on that page: "Google is a small indie company
       | btw"
       | 
       | So, more seriously, what might cause this (mis)behavior?
        
       | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
       | Typing "And. And. And. And. And." did not reproduce the bug, but
       | copy/paste the "And [...]" from the title of this post did.
       | 
       | EDIT: Ah, I had to reload the page, thank you child comments.
        
         | mshockwave wrote:
         | on my side it didn't trigger the crash right away but if you
         | refresh the page, a popup with "Something went wrong" will show
         | up
        
         | lopatin wrote:
         | Typing worked for me. You have to refresh.
        
           | noobermin wrote:
           | Refreshing was the key. Just typing it in does nothing, but
           | refreshing or opening a saved document from your documents in
           | docs with the text in it already leads to the crash.
        
             | Helmut10001 wrote:
             | Does not work for me in Google Docs, no matter if copied,
             | or reloaded, refreshed etc. Perhaps they fixed it already.
        
       | draxil wrote:
       | Sounds like a feature, not a bug.
        
       | fareesh wrote:
       | Did this bug emerge after their Orwell word policing update?
        
       | truly wrote:
       | It seems to be fixed now. It would be fascinating to read an
       | analysis of what exactly leads to the bug.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | westonjackson wrote:
       | Disable spelling and grammar checks in a separate doc and return
       | to the broken doc is a possible workaround
        
       | okaydeveloper wrote:
       | The engineer at Google will be sweating now. The secret is out.
        
       | metalliqaz wrote:
       | The following also triggers the bug:
       | 
       | Also. Also. Also. Also. Also.
        
       | pipeline_peak wrote:
       | I couldn't reproduce the bug. Just five and's with periods and
       | spaces in the body of a document?
        
       | tnli wrote:
       | Little Andy we call him.
        
       | dreamcompiler wrote:
       | Reminds me of this old Star Trek chestnut:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WRtqmHpLvg
        
       | croddin wrote:
       | "Also. Also. Also. Also. Also.\n" also breaks it.
        
       | sam1r wrote:
       | I'm willing to bet it's related to this. Google docs is trying to
       | guess something for autocomplete, similar to their gmail feature
       | to complete your sentences.
       | 
       | Which means, on a privacy standpoint, whatever you're writing and
       | guessing, they are absolutely processing something.
       | 
       | We the user are the product, apparently. This is mildly creepy to
       | me because, I do vent on google docs sometimes. And assume only I
       | can read it..
        
         | simonh wrote:
         | It's literally called a word processors, so I suppose it
         | processes the words. I don't have a problem with that, as long
         | as my data is only used for purposes I have approved and to
         | provide features I use.
        
           | sam1r wrote:
           | How is my comment downvoted?
           | 
           | Top comment mentions it being grammar related, which requires
           | processing however many written words before, to provide a
           | possible suggestion.
           | 
           | Considering an "and" clause to meet all possible cases of
           | suggestions may cause the program to crash.
        
             | nl wrote:
             | I think you are probably getting downvoted because it's
             | Google Docs, running on Google's Servers, with Google's
             | autocomplete and grammer checkers and spell checkers and
             | auto-templates and everything else running against it.
             | 
             | Of course "Google" can read your doc. That has nothing to
             | do with "you being the product" (infact it's the opposite
             | since free Google Docs is a loss leader for their paid
             | GSuite product).
             | 
             | That doesn't mean a person _is_ reading it.
        
               | sam1r wrote:
               | That is a great point. Thanks for typing this out!
               | Appreciate it.
        
       | ayashko wrote:
       | Reminds me of an old joke;
       | 
       | - I bet you a beer you can't make a logical, grammatical sentence
       | with five ands in a row
       | 
       | - I used to be a sign writer in a previous life and one of the
       | jobs I had was to repaint the sign hanging over the door to this
       | very pub. Except the publican was adamant that he wanted more
       | space between the words. Where exactly I asked? In between the
       | Pig and and, and and and Whistle he replied.
        
         | interestica wrote:
         | And this joke reminds me of a Garden-path sentence:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence
        
       | rossdavidh wrote:
       | Looks like HN is able to handle it just fine, though. :)
        
       | croddin wrote:
       | "Anyway. Anyway. Anyway, Anyway. Anyway.\n" will break it too.
       | Anyway...
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | vesinisa wrote:
       | I remember discovering that pasting a specific emoji to Google
       | Slides causes the slide to become "poison". You could not view or
       | edit it, the web UI would crash if you clicked on the slide. I
       | discovered this by accident, but did not think much of it as I
       | was able to work around by deleting the slide from the document
       | overview.
        
       | herpderperator wrote:
       | Google has responded:
       | 
       | > Dear Google Docs users, we are aware of the issue and working
       | on a fix right now. Thank for surfacing this issue and sharing it
       | with us. We will keep you posted!
       | 
       | > Deving
       | 
       | > Google Employee
        
       | throw7 wrote:
       | I've had emails crash gmail on my phone still to this day.
       | Typically it's stuff like output logs. My guess is something to
       | do with the repetitive lines, but who knows.
        
       | smcnally wrote:
       | "And And! And." was Outspan Foster's band before joining "The
       | Commitments"[0] and later The Frames (as Glen Hansard). The
       | screenplay was written before gDocs.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/quotes/qt0310982
        
       | kklisura wrote:
       | ``` TypeError: Cannot read properties of null (reading 'C') at
       | Ccf
       | (https://docs.google.com/static/document/client/js/157553674-...)
       | at Bcf
       | (https://docs.google.com/static/document/client/js/157553674-...)
       | ```
       | 
       | Has something to do with grammar. The document does not fail when
       | `Show grammar suggestion` is turned off.
        
         | sharmavinu0024 wrote:
         | google doc. is well used for typing.
        
         | croddin wrote:
         | Also, Therefore, And, Anyway, But, Who, Why, Besides, However.
         | 
         | Each in caps 5 times with the same word with a period and space
         | after each word and newline at the end is what I have found so
         | far.
         | 
         | Can anyone find others?
         | 
         | Edit: added words that work found in other comments, and found
         | more.
        
           | JoshuaDavid wrote:
           | Probably the weirdest one I've found is "Dearness."
           | 
           | "Although", "Besides", and "Moreover" also trigger the
           | behavior.
        
             | ineedasername wrote:
             | How did you stumble on Dearness?
        
               | JoshuaDavid wrote:
               | Started running through the entire dictionary in batches
               | of 500 words to see if each batch of 500 triggered the
               | behavior, then binary search within the batch to find the
               | problem word(s). Got bored partway through D.
               | 
               | Edit: Got unbored. Discovered that "Firstly", "Secondly",
               | "Thirdly", and "Fourthly" trigger the bug, but "Fifthly"
               | and above do not.
               | 
               | Edit 2: The first word can actually be any of the
               | "problem" words -- "Also. And. And. And. And." also has
               | the issue.
        
               | ineedasername wrote:
               | That sounds about right for HN, well done.
        
               | hnaccount_rng wrote:
               | Upvote for unbored. And a perfect illustration for HN xD
        
           | rob74 wrote:
           | How about "Whereas", "Insofaras", "Notwithstanding",
           | "Thetruthofthematter", or "Despiteallobjections"? Didn't try
           | them, but these were "reserved words" in Go (actually an
           | easter egg) until 2017 (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2
           | 489803/notwithstanding-...).
        
             | bradfitz wrote:
             | They weren't reserved words. The lexer just discarded those
             | tokens entirely.
        
               | cormacrelf wrote:
               | Given the gay abandon with which people like to sprinkle
               | them in fancy sounding sentences, perhaps this was for
               | the best.
        
               | Cthulhu_ wrote:
               | whomst'd've'ly'yaint'nt'ed'ies's'y'e
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | This is the strangest parsing fact I've learned since PHP
             | having a token named T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM. (Because the
             | parser was developed in Israel.)
             | 
             | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/592322/php-expects-t-
             | paa...
        
               | nonsince wrote:
               | I don't speak hebrew but someone online said that this is
               | an unnecessarily literal translation of "double colon"
               | and it's not what most developers would call it. Take
               | that with a grain of salt though.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Oooh now I wonder if it literally means "dual intestine".
        
               | Pyrious wrote:
               | Nope, it's literally "twice colon" where colon is
               | specifically the punctuation mark. p`mym nqvdvtyym
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Ahh dreams dashed.
        
               | raverbashing wrote:
               | Dashed? Em-dashed? Hyphenated? Or just subtracted?
        
               | cobbal wrote:
               | U+1F4A8
        
               | CSSer wrote:
               | I thought we were talking about colons?
        
               | pferde wrote:
               | The history of that entire fiasco is quite comprehensivly
               | summarized at https://phil.tech/2013/wtf-is-t-paamayim-
               | nekudotayim/ .
        
               | inimino wrote:
               | What a childish rant that blog post is though...
        
               | krageon wrote:
               | If you look it up, this token can have two names. It is
               | indeed a double colon :)
        
               | mike_hock wrote:
               | Seems plausible since afaik the other constants were in
               | English, so this seems to be a developer's joke.
        
               | omnicognate wrote:
               | Widely known because the token names were surfaced to
               | users in error messages, so some common syntax mistakes
               | would produce deeply unhelpful "Unexpected
               | T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM" errors. Hopefully they eventually
               | did something about it, but it was like that for years
               | and was one of the many things that put me off PHP for
               | life.
        
               | JadeNB wrote:
               | > Widely known because the token names were surfaced to
               | users in error messages, so some common syntax mistakes
               | would produce deeply unhelpful "Unexpected
               | T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM" errors. Hopefully they eventually
               | did something about it, but it was like that for years
               | and was one of the many things that put me off PHP for
               | life.
               | 
               | One can like or dislike PHP for a variety of reasons, but
               | surely being put off it for life because a non-English
               | string is exposed to the end user is a bit much.
        
               | omnicognate wrote:
               | As another commenter said it was "one of many things".
               | Also, it's not the fact that it was non-English that was
               | off-putting. It's more the fact that the T_ identifier
               | was used, presumably via a macro.
               | 
               | People are often defensive about PHP, but at the end of
               | the day we choose our tools. I wrote a significant amount
               | of PHP for a brief period and out of maybe 20 or so
               | languages I've used professionally I found it by a wide
               | margin the least pleasant to work with. Supposedly it has
               | improved a lot, and I'm glad if so. But I have no desire
               | to use it again, and am unlikely to ever have a reason
               | to.
        
               | chris_wot wrote:
               | No, it shows a certain sloppiness around the language.
               | This has all been cleaned up and a lot of effort has gone
               | into resolving most issues in PHP.
        
               | j0057 wrote:
               | "One of the many things", so not the only thing, but a
               | thing nonetheless.
        
               | josefx wrote:
               | Also the only information available to the developer when
               | it was added in PHP 3 in 1997, good luck Googling that
               | error. They didn't add the actual token to the error
               | message until PHP 5.4 over a decade later.
        
           | cmg wrote:
           | Interestingly, "Or. Or. Or. Or. Or." doesn't trigger it.
        
             | hoosieree wrote:
             | By DeMorgan's laws, typing this in a Google Doc causes
             | OneNote to crash.
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | By DeMorgan's Law and Bill and Ted's Excellent Low
               | Precedence Right Associative Postfix Sarcastic Not, "Or.
               | Or. Or. Or. Or. Not!" crashes.
        
               | chris_wot wrote:
               | I love this comment and I live Bill and Ted's Excellent
               | Adventure so I transitively love you.
        
         | greggsy wrote:
         | Presumably people will start running having all sorts of fun
         | fuzzing Google Docs now that they know that it's not an
         | infallible, opaque product...
         | 
         | Any web app pentesters here willing throw in their 2c? Could
         | this offer insights into the way data is parsed in the backend,
         | or might result in something more interesting than a crash?
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | dr-detroit wrote:
        
         | the_snooze wrote:
         | Parsing arbitrary user-provided input? What could possibly go
         | wrong?
        
         | jonnycomputer wrote:
         | Ah. So not something with the text data model.
        
         | a-dub wrote:
         | does it talk to a grammar check api endpoint or is it done
         | locally?
         | 
         | would be funny if it were a remotely exploitable bug in an api
         | endpoint.
        
           | r0snd0 wrote:
           | Remotely exploitable bug causing grammar check api to fail to
           | perform grammar checks? Doesn't sound too exciting.
        
           | a-dub wrote:
           | > Remotely exploitable bug causing grammar check api to fail
           | to perform grammar checks? Doesn't sound too exciting.
           | 
           | famous last words. finding security relevant bugs is often a
           | game of identifying what the original developers might have
           | found to be not "too exciting" or places they were out of
           | their depth and then focusing intense effort on finding their
           | mistakes.
        
         | Alex3917 wrote:
         | Probably just getting triggering excessive backtracking on some
         | regex.
        
           | ikiris wrote:
           | You just triggered probably 50 sres involved in this bug.
        
           | KMag wrote:
           | Ironic, from the authors of RE2. They know the correct way to
           | implement regexes.
           | 
           | Though, when I worked on Google's indexing system, some
           | researchers were having machine learning generate regexes to
           | run on every page in the visible web... and mis-implemented
           | the feature to re-compile the regex to DFA (which re2
           | effectively lazily converts to NFA via memoization) for every
           | single page load. The speed of the indexing system dropped in
           | half one day, and <Edit: Name Witheld> dug into it. <Name
           | Withheld> took the gperf graph showing the giant node for
           | regex compilation and wrote a savage meme "Your mother
           | doesn't work here. Optimize your own code.", and sent it out
           | to the researchers in question and also the indexing team.
           | Maybe 6 months earlier, I cut into the same researchers for
           | writing and approving C++ header file changes that defined
           | (and leaked) macros "DO" for "{" and "OD" for "}" so that
           | they could write C++ a bit more like Bash. As I remember, the
           | macro leak for DO caused compilation errors in SpiderMonkey,
           | which I fixed. After fixing the breakage, I just left an
           | extra comment on the code review "Really? Leaking DO and OD
           | macros to avoid typing curly braces?" without emailing any
           | lists. They were really embarrassed removed DO and OD within
           | a couple of days, and <Name Withheld> didn't know that I had
           | laid into them a bit 6 months earlier.
           | 
           | (I had implemented some very coarse-grained super-lightweight
           | type-based data flow analysis into SpiderMonkey, which is why
           | some of the Google headers were being included while
           | compiling SpiderMonkey.)
        
             | dllthomas wrote:
             | > "DO" for "{" and "OD" for "}" so that they could write
             | C++ a bit more like Bash.
             | 
             | Bash (like Bourne shell before it) uses do/done. I think
             | DO/OD was in an Algol (68?). I'm not sure where else?
             | 
             | Bash does do the reversing for if/fi and case/esac, though.
        
               | fanf2 wrote:
               | Steve Bourne wanted to use `od` to match Algol 68, but
               | there was already an `od` utility for printing octal
               | dumps.
               | 
               | The original bournegol macros for DO and OD were a bit
               | different:                 #define DO ){       #define OD
               | ;}
               | 
               | https://www.tuhs.org/cgi-
               | bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/src/cmd/sh...
        
             | rad_gruchalski wrote:
             | > Ironic, from the authors of RE2. They know the correct
             | way to implement regexes.
             | 
             | > Probably...
             | 
             | Conclusions.
        
             | Alex3917 wrote:
             | Re2 is also slower, so they might not be using it for high
             | volume stuff.
             | 
             | Also I've heard that Google automatically fails people who
             | use regex in interviews, so their average engineers
             | probably aren't the best at it.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | > Also I've heard that Google automatically fails people
               | who use regex in interviews,
               | 
               | Hmm... I don't remember that, and I conducted over 100
               | interviews back when I was at Google. A blanket failure
               | for using a regex sounds like it's missing some nuance.
               | But, maybe that was before or after my time.
               | 
               | I wouldn't be surprised if they start out with some
               | interview questions that are easy to implement as
               | regexes, but then gradually make the question harder and
               | more general, where a pushdown automaton is necessary for
               | a general correct solution, and fail people who either
               | don't get a correct answer or end up implementing a
               | pushdown automaton by dynamically generating larger and
               | larger regexes.
        
               | Alex3917 wrote:
               | I think it's more that you need to give the O(n) of your
               | answer, which is generally very difficult to do with
               | regex. And even if it's possible, it might not be an
               | acceptable O(n).
               | 
               | In general regexes finish instantly for normal sized
               | inputs, but the actual O(n) might be quadratic or
               | whatever.
        
             | haliskerbas wrote:
             | Some people might get off on that kind of culture. But this
             | story makes me glad I don't work there for some reason.
        
               | jiggawatts wrote:
               | Conversely I would prefer to work in a place like that.
               | Professionalism at scale isn't achievable by tolerating
               | idiotic behaviour and being nice to everyone no matter
               | how dangerously stupid they are being.
               | 
               | There is a point where _someone_ has to put their foot
               | down and demand things be done properly, otherwise the
               | inevitable consequence is a giant mess leading to
               | disaster.
               | 
               | You might be used to small startup teams with
               | responsible, experienced developers.
               | 
               | Out there in larger industry you get people doing
               | absolutely crazy things that break huge, expensive
               | systems.
               | 
               | There's a difference between "oops I didn't realise this
               | library doesn't scale the way I assumed it did" and
               | "rewriting language symbols because I'm too stupid to use
               | more than one syntax forever and ever."
               | 
               |  _The standard you walk past is the standard you accept._
               | 
               | Are you saying you would walk past C code with DO...OD
               | instead of {...}?
               | 
               | Would you accept that standard just to be "nice" all the
               | time?
        
               | rawoke083600 wrote:
               | >things be done properly
               | 
               | Now if only we could all agree how that looks _exactly_
        
               | runlevel1 wrote:
               | There was a time when I would have agreed with that.
               | 
               | What I've learned since then is that, with a healthy
               | company culture, you can give frank feedback -- even
               | about stupid mistakes -- without it being a rebuke.
               | 
               | It's also important that you target the right problem.
               | It's only human for smart people do stupid things
               | sometimes. In the specific DO...OD example, I'd be more
               | interested in how it got through a code review than the
               | mistake itself. (Funny enough, early versions of the C
               | source for Bash itself had macros like that.)
               | 
               | Now, if someone exhibits a _pattern_ of ignoring good,
               | constructive feedback, that 's a problem. The folks I've
               | seen like that both gave terrible feedback and took
               | feedback terribly. That's a behavioral problem, and you
               | only get so many chances to correct that before it's time
               | for them to find other employment.
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | > There is a point where someone has to put their foot
               | down and demand things be done properly, otherwise the
               | inevitable consequence is a giant mess leading to
               | disaster.
               | 
               | This is what management is for, too bad tech companies
               | are too cool for that and prefer to live out lord of the
               | flies.
        
               | alasdair_ wrote:
               | I'd rather have software engineers make the decisions
               | about software engineering than insist managers do that
               | job.
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | What if the manager is a software engineer?
               | 
               | I would just like to know exactly how are the engineers
               | going to make the decisions, and the key point here being
               | that they are in plural.
               | 
               | They all have different opinions, preferences, levels of
               | ambition etc, how does this spontaneously merge into a
               | cohesive team that pulls into the same direction?
               | 
               | It doesn't, in any other type of group in all of society.
               | Every group needs a leader, so how is this spontaneously
               | going to "just work" in software engineering?
               | 
               | If you don't want to have a manager, you have to have
               | something else. Democracy? Plutocracy? Gerontocracy?
               | 
               | I think it's pretty obvious that just leaving it to
               | chance is not going to be efficient or any type of
               | healthy environment, and will probably quickly start to
               | resemble something pretty nasty, especially because their
               | livelihood is on the line.
        
               | a-dub wrote:
               | having spent time on both sides of the fence, i've
               | noticed that there can be a rivalry of sorts between
               | software engineers and ml/ds/researcher types.
               | 
               | researcher types often get to work on problems that swe
               | types find interesting, so some swes get grumbly.
               | researcher types also tend to write pretty horrific code
               | which adds salt to the wounds.
               | 
               | but there also can be a sort of envy that emanates from
               | the research side. many are fully aware of their
               | shortcomings and are envious of the swes ability to get
               | things done on computers cleanly.
               | 
               | it often seems that there can be yearning to wear each
               | other's hats from the two groups. if i were running a
               | company i think i'd try to break down that wall as it
               | would probably make a lot of people happier.
               | 
               | of course, the right answer here isn't a meme... it's
               | performance regression tests in the ci suite. and maybe a
               | little training on why customizing a programming language
               | with macros is bad.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | > maybe a little training on why customizing a
               | programming language with macros is bad
               | 
               | Both the author and the reviewer had passed C++ style
               | certification. They knew why it was bad. They just got a
               | little lazy and wanted to write their code in a way that
               | felt familiar to them, and figured it was harmless. I got
               | a bit grumpy at having to drop what I was doing right
               | away to fix their mistake due to their laziness.
        
               | a-dub wrote:
               | also, just to be clear. the macro only included open and
               | close curlies?
               | 
               | if so that's silly, as it is literally 2x the work to
               | type.
               | 
               | if they also included some sort of state that had to be
               | managed, then it starts to verge towards reasonable.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | I think that maybe the author felt like finding the end
               | of a loop stood out much better that way, instead of
               | trying to distinguish the ends of conditional blocks from
               | the ends of loops. If you're used to poorly formatted
               | code in an ML PhD program, it does make some sense. I've
               | worked with a bit of academic Fortran code for my
               | mechanical engineering degree and can sympathize. Also, D
               | and O are shorter reaches on the keyboard than { and }.
               | 
               | Yes, "OD" was definitely just "}". DO might have been ")
               | {" to allow                 while (a < b DO          ...
               | OD
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | That's _hideous_. The unbalanced parenthesis just grates.
               | 
               | The real answer is to just do something like
               | }  // while
               | 
               | to show that it's the end of the loop rather than the end
               | of an if, and not play ridiculous games trying to hide
               | the curly braces.
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | It would be sorta reasonable in a header that only your
               | code uses and is unlikely to be transitively included
               | from elsewhere.
        
               | sgtnoodle wrote:
               | You'd be surprised where your code ends up getting used
               | in a monorepo when you have thousands of software
               | engineers all working on it.
        
               | a-dub wrote:
               | that's the downside. nobody owns anything, dependencies
               | and deployments become opaque.
               | 
               | i once had a team lead in a quasi monorepo situation tell
               | me straight up to copy-paste some functions i was
               | interested in from their code. they made up some fishy
               | story about deployments. was the story true? did they
               | even know? did anyone know? who even owned it? would they
               | even know?
               | 
               | or the guy who got up in arms because i touched his
               | team's code and didn't write the unit tests that they
               | didn't write when they originally wrote the code.
               | 
               | oh, monorepos.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | Icathian wrote:
               | It's funny you should say that, I definitely was the DS
               | who wanted to be an SWE. I switched hats and am just
               | thrilled, but I do run into a lot of my new peers who
               | wish to go the other direction.
               | 
               | Finding some perfect compromise for those groups would
               | probably be a superpower for whichever org pulled it off,
               | I agree.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | This is STEM culture in general, the closer you get to
               | the "pure sciences" the more nasty and harsh the
               | environment is, and vice versa.
               | 
               | When you go far away from the humanities, you lose some
               | humanity.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | There's a good deal of responsibility in writing code
               | that is going to run over every single page (and PDF
               | document, MS Word doc, the higher ranked Flash
               | animations, etc.) in the visible web.
               | 
               | For my part, I once made a bad assumption about how the
               | Google SAX-style parser handled callbacks for zero-length
               | XHTML start-stop tags. I presumed that <title/> would get
               | a callback with the end-of-open-tag and start-of-close-
               | tag pointers being equal, at the character after the
               | close of the tag. Instead, the parser called the callback
               | with the start-of-close-tag pointer after the start-of-
               | close-tag pointer. (I had misinterpreted the API as
               | passing pointers to the start and end of enclosed
               | content.) I had test cases for un-closed <title> tags and
               | <title></title>... but when my code hit production, the
               | few pages (fewer than 1 in a million) that expressed an
               | empty title as <title/> caused my code to try and
               | construct a string with negative length and crashed that
               | portion of the indexing system. I was right to feel very
               | embarrassed for my oversight.
               | 
               | I remember the savage meme so clearly because it was
               | quite out of the norm, and I felt bad for the guys since
               | they were so quick to fix things even when not publicly
               | shamed. (Only the author and reviewer got notified when I
               | left a comment on their code review.)
        
               | cscurmudgeon wrote:
               | Really?
               | 
               | Is there any science showing rude reviews improve some
               | metric or some greater good?
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | It wasn't the best way to criticize the code review. If I
               | could go back in time 15 years, it's also not the first
               | mistake I would fix. It stuck in my mind because I felt
               | bad about it. I was frustrated that I had been hounded to
               | drop what I was doing and fix the build because of clear
               | style guide violations that a reviewer let slip. (A
               | couple years later, Google implemented every commit
               | getting a full compilation and run of all tests that
               | code-coverage showed affected the covered code. These
               | days, I wouldn't have been hounded to fix a build break
               | caused by someone else.)
        
               | jolux wrote:
               | What does it mean that you were right to feel
               | embarrassed? You were wrong to make the mistake, sure,
               | but that happens. That's what a mistake is. It's not
               | clear to me what shame helps in this instance. If
               | somebody has a pattern of not meeting a quality bar with
               | their code that's one thing, but otherwise cutting people
               | up for mistakes really seems like bad culture. Aren't you
               | supposed to practice blameless postmortems and all that
               | at Google?
        
               | mannykannot wrote:
               | This may all be a matter of different nuances on words
               | like "embarrassment" and "shame", but personally, I would
               | put higher trust in someone who firstly recognizes that
               | they could have done better and secondly regrets that
               | they did not, and I would prefer to be that way myself,
               | without being rendered ineffective by it.
               | 
               | One can never, however, be sure that someone really feels
               | that way ("The secret to success is sincerity - once you
               | can fake that, you've got it made!") Nevertheless, faking
               | it involves never saying certain things, and that turns
               | out to be hard, so the fallible approach that I aspire to
               | is to assume sincerity unless given evidence to the
               | contrary.
               | 
               | In this view, blameless postmortems are the right way to
               | go, at least up to a point: neither embarrassment nor
               | regret are things that can truly be imposed from outside,
               | and definitely not sincerity.
        
               | wutbrodo wrote:
               | My recollection from my time there, as well as one of the
               | biggest cultural differences noticeable between my and my
               | workplaces since, is that big chunks of the company
               | really do believe in the blameless postmortem ideal.
               | 
               | But culture isn't a magic tool that completely
               | neutralizes assholes, and there are assholes in _every_
               | organization of sufficient size, like the "[name
               | redacted]" character in the previous post
        
               | dang wrote:
               | (I've redacted the person's name from the parent comment
               | and other comments in this thread. I realize you didn't
               | introduce it originally. Probably best not to leave up
               | though, and it isn't necessary for any of the substantive
               | points here.)
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | It's also ironic that the original engineering culture at
               | google was explicitly breaking away from this type of
               | pennalistic shaming culture, and was seen as a big factor
               | in the initial success.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | I probably should have left [redacted]'s name out of it.
               | He's a nice guy, but a bit cynical and rough on the
               | edges, at least he was 15 years ago. He fit in well in
               | New York, brutally honest, but actually generally nice.
               | 
               | Edit: I should point out that we were in Google NYC, as
               | were the researchers. We had lunch with them some times.
               | I remember the first name and face of the guy who
               | submitted the slow code, but forget his family name and
               | intentionally left his name out.
               | 
               | New Yorker to New Yorker adds a lot of context. Google's
               | corporate culture is generally very Californian, but this
               | happened all within the New York office between people
               | who generally got along pretty well and knew each other
               | decently.
               | 
               | In context, there was a heavy note of respect for
               | someone's abilities and disappointment that they weren't
               | performing at a top level. He wouldn't have been so harsh
               | with someone who was new or was a weaker engineer, or
               | someone who wasn't used to New York culture.
        
               | the-rc wrote:
               | Yeah, that might have made it sound as if he's always
               | like that. To his credit, he was one of those that had to
               | be involved when things got desperate, e.g. the insane
               | and massive data recovery to prevent the index from
               | growing stale during a PCR that wasn't properly planned
               | for (if you were around, you know what I'm talking
               | about).
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | Yea, nice guy and solid engineer. He was actually my TA
               | for a systems engineering class back in school. He was
               | actually very helpful in solving other people's problems,
               | but a bit blunt in encouraging people to reach their full
               | potential.
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | "What happens in New York stays in New York"? What kind
               | of bullshit is this
        
               | wutbrodo wrote:
               | > New Yorker to New Yorker adds a lot of context.
               | Google's corporate culture is generally very Californian
               | 
               | As a lifelong Californian who moved to NY, this makes
               | sense.
               | 
               | Though I don't know if it's a blanket excuse... There's a
               | reason that my friends at Goldman would agree that
               | Google's culture is better, and a lot of it has to do
               | with the difference between CA and NY culture. I
               | completely dismiss the claims that the difference is just
               | about surface-level abrasiveness, instead of noticeable
               | differences in how unkindly people treat each other. I
               | regularly see strangers here treat each other in ways
               | that I didn't see in 30+ years in California.
               | 
               | Ie, "he's from New York" isn't quite a rebuttal to "he's
               | being an asshole at work". The work culture is more
               | tolerant of assholes, but that barely makes it better.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | I grew up in the upper Midwest, went to school outside
               | Boston, and spent most of my adult life in New York and
               | Hong Kong. I haven't spent much time in California, so
               | maybe I'm placing too many of the cultural problems I saw
               | at Google at the foot of Californian culture. I saw lots
               | of pressure to "be Googly", which seemed to result in a
               | lot of passive-aggression. That matches the stereotypes
               | I've heard of LA and SF cultures.
               | 
               | New York and Hong Kong are both very impatient places
               | that don't suffer fools lightly. They're both brutally
               | honest places, but with strong shared identities. Both
               | places have lots of people from elsewhere who are
               | sympathetic to being new to the city.
               | 
               | The quintessential New York story is the woman pushing a
               | stroller (buggy, for my overseas friends) out of a subway
               | car. A man in a hurry is passing her, looks over his
               | shoulder, they make eye contact and silently agree he
               | should help. He grabs the front of the stroller, they
               | carry it up the stairs, and he sets the stroller down at
               | the top of the stairs. They give each other a nod, and he
               | runs off. Never a word is spoken. On the other hand, if
               | you stop in the middle of the sidewalk to read a map or
               | talk on the phone in New York, don't be surprised if
               | people bump into you, perhaps on purpose.
               | 
               | I just left Goldman after more than a decade. I actually
               | really preferred the corporate culture to the Google
               | culture, but most of my time was in Hong Kong. I even
               | knew a couple of people who worked at Goldman, went to
               | Google, and came back to Goldman. I don't doubt that
               | there are some assholes there, particularly in trading,
               | but my experience in both Strats and Technology was
               | overwhelmingly positive. In my experience, abusive MDs
               | didn't last long, but maybe I was very lucky. If you're
               | having a tough time, I don't want to give out full names,
               | but some pretty unique names: Laurent, Jia, Dunstan, and
               | C.K. all really seem to care for their folks. The heads
               | of SRE, One Delta Strats, and Flow Strats in Hong Kong
               | also seem to be really great managers, but Grahaeme,
               | Nick, and Alain are pretty common names.
               | 
               | At Google, a friend of mine managed a couple of small
               | teams (on a shoestring budget, using mostly interns) and
               | completed a couple of projects ahead of time, only to get
               | them cancelled by middle management right before launch.
               | One of the projects even had heavy buy-in from upper
               | management, but he got essentially zero credit for either
               | one because they were cancelled before launching. It was
               | incredibly frustrating for him and he left. In my
               | experience, Goldman runs projects much better,
               | particularly using "Projito" internal contracts that list
               | the value proposition, deliverables, timetable, and whose
               | budget is paying for it.
               | 
               | Also, despite Goldman's reputation, I saw a lot less
               | arrogance at Goldman than at Google. Goldman has a much
               | more healthy respect for its competitors, though with
               | good reason. I've also seen a few people transition from
               | Google to Goldman and take a bit of time to adjust to the
               | idea that Google's way of doing things is best in
               | Goldman's operating environment. At Google, I got the
               | sense that lots of people thought that Google was better
               | than its competitors because they were smarter. At
               | Goldman, I got the sense that lots of people felt they
               | were better than their competitors because they had
               | higher expectations of themselves.
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | Why am I not surprised that you are actually not a New
               | Yorker, always the transplants that project their most
               | negative sides onto the city culture as an excuse
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | There wasn't a post-mortem in my case.
               | 
               | I had thought of the case for <title/> but basically out
               | of laziness talked myself out of writing a separate test
               | case for it, presuming the test cases for a zero-length
               | title and an un-closed title covered the corner cases.
               | (The entire document was guaranteed to be converted to
               | valid UTF-8, perhaps with invalid character substitution
               | characters, by that late in the Content Converter
               | pipeline.)
               | 
               | So, as soon as someone asked me if I had changed the
               | title parsing code, I was 50% sure of which corner case I
               | had screwed up before looking at any code. It took me
               | about 30 minutes to submit a code fix with updated test
               | cases. I think less than 1 billion documents had been
               | processed, resulting in less than 1,000 pages missing
               | updates due to my bug.
        
               | andrewljohnson wrote:
               | I don't think laziness (in this comment or the ones about
               | the bash-like C macros) is the right word.
               | 
               | I guess there is some
               | pressure/tiredness/newness/taste/external factors driving
               | the choices, test count, and style guide aberrations.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | Yes, "laziness" is unfair and imprecise, a laziness on my
               | part. :(
               | 
               | I think it was an issue of familiarity and comfort, not
               | newness. The author joined Google before I did. If you're
               | basically working with one other person, and you're
               | rarely getting code reviews from outside your coding
               | pair, and few other people interact with your code, it's
               | easy to develop some bad habits and forget that your code
               | choices have externalities. To be fair, the externalities
               | were usually rather small.
        
               | andi999 wrote:
               | Probably typing on a non english keyboard. When I learned
               | C a long time ago, I read somewhere 'isnt it nice that
               | one doesnt need a lot of keystrokes like for begin and
               | end', and I thought pls give me begin and end instead of
               | this unpleasent slow hand movement.
        
               | atq2119 wrote:
               | Spot on. It's the reason many non-native speaker
               | developers I know nevertheless use an English keyboard
               | layout. I personally made my own hybrid layout that is
               | basically an English US layout with the letters
               | rearranged according to my native layout.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | The author was born and raised in Brooklyn and went to
               | Cornell, if I remember correctly. As far as I know,
               | English was his only language, and he was almost
               | certainly using either US QWERTY or Dvorak keyboard
               | layout.
        
               | danuker wrote:
               | Parent comment is onto something. You sound traumatized.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | I was a couple years out of school, and felt a lot of
               | responsibility. It wasn't really a big deal, but it
               | didn't feel like it at the time.
        
               | quakeguy wrote:
               | What a great story nevertheless.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | It helped me empathize with young engineers dealing with
               | their first high responsibility bug.
               | 
               | About 4 years ago, I was managing a guy right out of
               | school who pushed a minor bug that broke real-time risk
               | calculations for a major multinational financial
               | institution in the middle of the European trading day,
               | prior to the NYC open, and people were yelling over email
               | that they were trading blind. Someone had committed an
               | important change right after his, so a simple rollback
               | was highly sub-optimal.
               | 
               | Remembering how I felt years ago, I reassured the new guy
               | that people were yelling over email because it was
               | important, not because they were mad at him. I told him
               | that I thought he was the most familiar with his change
               | and the most capable person to fix it, and that he should
               | do his best to calm down and focus, but he should let me
               | know if he needed help, and I would do my best to calm
               | folks down. I told him he would probably remember that
               | mistake the rest of his life, but nobody else was going
               | to remember it a week later. He had the bug fix in
               | production in under an hour.
               | 
               | He sent me an email from home that night worried that he
               | had let the team down, and I reiterated that he was going
               | to be the only one who remembered the mistake longer than
               | a week. The post-mortem follow-up was just to reiterate
               | to authors and reviewers the importance of corner-case
               | tests, and nobody brought it up later.
               | 
               | I really only remember it because my manager sent me an
               | email that night praising how well I handled the new
               | guy's first big production bug.
        
               | mattclarkdotnet wrote:
               | "I reassured the new guy that people were yelling over
               | email because it was important, not because they were mad
               | at him"
               | 
               | This is outstanding advice, and very well put. I shall be
               | borrowing it, thank you!
        
               | jseban wrote:
               | It's your fault, you were the manager, the yelling should
               | not even have leaked to the developer, it should have
               | stopped with you.
               | 
               | Edit: if you are managing someone who is new in a job,
               | it's your job to make sure they don't push bugs to break
               | important stuff in the first place.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | The "yelling" was coming to the team email list, asking
               | for ETAs and progress updates for when real-time risk
               | would be back up. Roughly 4 people at the time knew the
               | bug could be traced to the new guy's commit, and none of
               | those people were doing the "yelling". And it was
               | Goldman, so the "yelling" was kept very professional (no
               | swearing, strictly enforced). But, there were literally
               | tens of billions of dollars that needed to be dynamically
               | hedged, but that wasn't possible without real-time risk,
               | the European markets were open, and markets in the
               | Americas were going to be open within a couple of hours.
               | Trading and management were making sure that that
               | everyone on the team email list understood that this was
               | drop-everything important, perhaps using all caps.
               | 
               | Yes, I and the person who reviewed the change bear more
               | responsibility than the new developer. Also, I say "new
               | guy", but the person who had interned with us the Summer
               | after "the new guy" had already joined full time at that
               | point, so "the new guy" had been working full time with
               | the team for at least 9 months at that point. I also
               | remember the room where it happened, which wasn't the
               | first room we were in, so maybe he had been with us full
               | time more like 18 months. In any case, it was the first
               | time when he was trying keep the weight of billions of
               | dollars out of his head and calmly but quickly fix a bug.
        
               | BolexNOLA wrote:
               | Did you consider the fact that you probably know nothing
               | about the dynamics of their workplace, the structure of
               | their management/leadership, etc. before assigning blame?
        
               | webmaven wrote:
               | _> It 's your fault, you were the manager, the yelling
               | should not even have leaked to the developer, it should
               | have stopped with you._
               | 
               | That's impractical in organizations with flatter
               | structures and general purpose communication channels.
               | 
               | What would you suggest, kicking everyone off of internal
               | IRC/Slack/mailing lists/etc.?
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | I don't think we can assign blame in a complicated
               | situation based on a two-paragraph retelling, please have
               | a bit more empathy.
        
               | bobbieie wrote:
               | I have to say you tell good stories about how wonderful
               | you are.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | That's a fair criticism. Deep down, I usually have a
               | pretty high opinion of my abilities. I think I'm pretty
               | good at hiding it in person, but I'm less good at hiding
               | it in my writing. I feel happiest and most excited to
               | write when I'm thinking about some of my happiest
               | memories. I try to also be open about the mistakes I've
               | made. I've generally been much more lucky than skilled.
               | 
               | I've definitely written more than one bug where post-
               | mortem estimates were over $10,000 in losses.
               | 
               | August 20, 2013, I finished a code change (in Hong Kong)
               | to Goldman's global algorithmic trading system and sent
               | it out to a colleague in Europe to review. A friend of
               | mine was a machine learning person in our Tokyo office
               | and was in town for work, so a bunch of us had dinner and
               | a small number of drinks. I stopped by the office on my
               | way home to check if the change had been approved. It
               | had, and I hesitated a bit to put it in production,
               | because I had a couple of drinks and it was late at
               | night. However, rationalized that I had written all of
               | the code while awake and without a drop of alcohol, and
               | pushed the change into production.
               | 
               | I woke up the next morning to read news [1] that Goldman
               | had lost up to 100 million dollars in an automated
               | trading problem within 1-2 hours after I pushed my
               | change. I couldn't see how my change could possibly have
               | caused that error, but was still a bit panicked until I
               | reassured myself that my cell phone would have been
               | called once a minute until I woke up if I had made a
               | change that caused a loss of that magnitude.
               | 
               | I went into the office and saw that a chat window I had
               | open with a friend in the NY office showed "presence
               | unknown". An email sent to them bounced. So, I walked
               | over to the derivatives (Flow) Strats desk, sat down in
               | an empty chair next to one of my friends, and just
               | quietly said "... so " and the name of my friend in NY.
               | My friend on the Flow desk's eyes got wide and he said
               | "how did you know?". I actually didn't know until the
               | Flow Strat's reaction confirmed my guess.
               | 
               | My friend in New York was actually very careful, but he
               | had been working under time pressure late at night and
               | pushed a bug into production. He'd been more responsible
               | than I had the night before. I got really lucky, and he
               | got really unlucky. He's actually a really solid
               | engineer. He caught plenty of very subtle bugs in other
               | people's code, at least once when he hadn't been asked to
               | review the code.
               | 
               | After August 20, 2013, if at all possible, I push changes
               | into production before noon, and not on Fridays.
               | 
               | If memory serves the "maybe $100 million" ended up being
               | around $28 million.
               | 
               | And that's the time that I could have easily caused a $28
               | million loss.
               | 
               | There was also a time I misplaced a paren and had a bad
               | actor noticed, they could have used 60 million customer
               | computers in a DDoS UDP traffic amplification attack. My
               | test cases weren't matching my hand-worked-out examples,
               | but I eventually just gave up and assumed my code was
               | correct and put incorrect values in the message
               | authentication code test vectors. Never roll your own
               | crypto, especially if your test vectors aren't coming out
               | as you expect. That was 2004.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.cnbc.com/id/100976404
        
               | koide wrote:
               | For someone who sort of justified a humiliating response
               | to a mistake a few comments above, this seems really well
               | done! Congratulations.
        
             | vl wrote:
             | But why it even happened?
             | 
             | Typically you run Flume over docjoins in your project's
             | quota. If you screw up, all that should happen is that your
             | Flume job is out of quota.
        
               | KMag wrote:
               | This was in the Borg days, pre-Flume. As I remember, we
               | had at least one Borg cluster to ourselves for indexing.
               | Our quota was a cluster.
               | 
               | We cared because indexing latency is important. Engineers
               | get paged and woken up in the middle of the night when
               | indexing latency gets high. Doubling CPU usage meant
               | doubling indexing latency. The pre-Percolator indexing
               | system ran roughly 1,000 threads per box on roughly 1,000
               | Warp18 boxes. Of course, most of those threads were
               | blocked on I/O. (Warp18 was something like 16 cores per
               | box... I think those were the RevE Opterons that had the
               | memory fence bug that caused the glibc semaphore
               | implementation to not actually synchronize operations.) I
               | personally would have written things using more async
               | and/or non-blocking I/O, but the main reasoning in Google
               | at the time was that massively multithreaded blocking I/O
               | is a simpler programming model and closer to what was
               | being taught in school those days.
               | 
               | Also, the indexing system's quota is huge. Someone made a
               | mistake in their benchmark program that they thought got
               | maximum utilization out of the Warp18 hardware. The
               | indexing system actually got higher utilization than the
               | hardware stress-test, resulting in cooling being under-
               | provisioned in the Atlanta datacener (more than a decade
               | ago, I'm sure indexing has moved now). There was a couple
               | day stretch one hot Summer where we needed to stay on the
               | phone with staff inside the Atlanta DC to keep track of
               | the temperature inside the datacenter. When the
               | temperatures started to get above something like 80 F, we
               | needed to dial back on the number of workers in our Borg
               | jobs.
               | 
               | While testing the prototype for the Percolator indexing
               | system, we were luckily sitting right next to an engineer
               | who planned datacenters. We luckily overheard him saying
               | he couldn't figure out why the power usage seemed to be
               | swinging so wildly. It was literally the power usage of a
               | decent sized town suddenly ramping up and down. We asked
               | him the exact times power usage was ramping up and down,
               | and figured out it was when Frank and Daniel were
               | starting and stopping the Percolator prototype.
               | 
               | My best guess is that the indexing system right before
               | Percolator was a bit more energy efficient than
               | Percolator, but maybe not. In any case, doubling CPU
               | usage was a big deal. Real money, and in Atlanta,
               | probably real carbon footprint. (The Dales was hydro, but
               | I don't think much of Atlanta's power was renewable at
               | that time.)
        
               | caffeine wrote:
               | Hey, I just wanted to say that your comments in this
               | discussion are awesome and I'm having a lot of fun
               | reading them. Thanks!
        
               | exikyut wrote:
               | Regarding the Percolator prototype's energy usage, that's
               | a really interesting scheduling and coordination problem.
               | I'm curious how you solved that - perhaps by teaching
               | Borg to correlate CPU load with physical energy usage and
               | stagger task initiation.
               | 
               | It _sounds_ like it would be even cooler to coordinate
               | with the local electricity suppliers to spin up and shed
               | extra load a few minutes in advance, but I 'm not sure if
               | this would actually have a practical benefit.
        
               | the-rc wrote:
               | > As I remember, we had at least one Borg cluster to
               | ourselves for indexing. Our quota was a cluster.
               | 
               | > Also, the indexing system's quota is huge.
               | 
               | Well, it might no longer be the case, but for a number of
               | years the indexing cluster was the largest in the entire
               | fleet, especially when it came to memory. I don't know if
               | you were around in the days of yl-i (I think), but it was
               | edifying to rank it against the Top500...
               | 
               | Was the datacenter engineer Peter P?
        
         | tus666 wrote:
         | Makes sense. I was thinking something to do with document
         | compression but that sounds more likely.
        
         | deltarholamda wrote:
         | I see Google has finally implemented the Zombie Strunk & White
         | AI like I requested years ago.
         | 
         | I did not expect them to weaponize it, but Skynet does as
         | Skynet does.
        
         | lqet wrote:
         | Yup, it is also partially underlined in blue and a popup
         | suggests to replace "And. And." with "And And" just before it
         | crashes.
        
       | srinathkrishna wrote:
       | What's pretty annoying is that users are providing free QA for
       | Google!
        
       | tmalsburg2 wrote:
       | Can't replicate this bug in current Firefox on Ubuntu 21.10.
       | They've probably fixed it.
        
       | goody71 wrote:
       | Will Pat Needham get any Google Bux for finding this?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bufferoverflow wrote:
       | I'm surprised Google didn't fuzz Google Docs.
        
       | patneedham wrote:
       | Discovered by Eliza Callahan triggered by a poem in the middle of
       | her novel. (Friend of a coworker) That poem can be found here:
       | https://durationandthebodyelizacallahan.cargo.site/ - if viewing
       | on mobile you have to Request Desktop Site for some reason, at
       | least on Android it initially shows up as a Lorem Ipsum page
        
         | roughly wrote:
         | As arguments for the thesis that the tech world needs to
         | embrace the humanities go, an author discovering a bug in a
         | google product by writing a poem is pretty good, if maybe a bit
         | too on the nose.
        
           | hackernewds wrote:
           | Perhaps that is the missing link for why tech is so
           | artificial and not humanly. we could use some more art than
           | capitalistic efficiency in the Apple logo
        
         | pvillano wrote:
         | it appears to be bugs all the way down
        
         | raldi wrote:
         | On iPhone Chrome it doesn't show up either way.
        
         | _rf wrote:
         | I know you didn't write that poem, but I'm 99% certain the
         | apostrophes in "I thought about my body. It's past. It's
         | present." have no business being there :)
        
           | burkaman wrote:
           | Might be intentional, simultaneously talking about the past
           | and present of a body and also literally that it is past. It
           | is present. It would not be weird to have that kind of
           | wordplay in a poem.
           | 
           | But also this was from an early draft so it could be a
           | mistake.
        
           | fluoridation wrote:
           | Seems like it could go either way.
        
       | munk-a wrote:
       | And thus has Eliza Callahan suddenly found themselves a poet with
       | a lot more name recognition among tech workers.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | We detached this subthread from
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31278734.
        
         | JasonFruit wrote:
        
           | arjvik wrote:
           | At the very least, you're forgetting that non-binary
           | individuals can have feminine-sounding names.
        
           | munk-a wrote:
           | I've found gender to be generally irrelevant to most of my
           | social interactions. I'm, personally, in a committed
           | relationship and not picky genderwise anyways so, as a habit,
           | I've been trying to remove any and all gendered pronouns[1]
           | from my speech. I find it pretty silly that gender plays so
           | central a role in grammar. It, IMO, elevates it above how we
           | should conceive of it - just one of many attributes a person
           | has and a not particularly central one at that.
           | 
           | I'm sorry if this habit of mine caused you offense but it's a
           | pretty silly thing to get annoyed by.
           | 
           | 1. Edited - originally just pronouns (not gendered pronouns).
        
             | JasonFruit wrote:
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | "Themselves" is, at least as far as I learned english, a
               | proper usage in that context. I adjusted "pronoun" to
               | "gendered pronoun" above just in case, in this modern
               | world, the meaning wasn't somehow clear. This feels like
               | an unnecessary amount of pedantry for a simple comment.
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | "Someone came into this room. I don't know them, but they
               | took it upon themselves to take everything."
               | 
               | What would be the correct pronouns here in your view?
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | I'm suddenly very interested in the distinction here - as
               | yea themself also works in both of these contexts but
               | themselves feels like a very distinct connotation and not
               | incorrect. I can't point to a specific grammatical rule
               | or learning to base this feeling off though - I don't
               | know why it feels correct it just does.
        
               | OJFord wrote:
               | Not who you're asking, but I would say 'themself' here. I
               | can't see that it's ('themselves' is) not plural.
               | 
               | (Edit: Actually the more I think about that the less I'm
               | sure what I'd say..)
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | Unfortunately themself is a spelling error according to
               | my browser, and I have to admit it sounds like the most
               | jarring option.
        
               | JasonFruit wrote:
               | Honestly, while I might _say_ such a sentence, I wouldn
               | 't allow myself to _write_ it.
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | I'm curious what the closest sentence you would allow
               | yourself to write would be.
        
               | JasonFruit wrote:
               | I'd go with, "Someone I don't know came into this room
               | and took everything," or even, "Someone came into this
               | room. I don't know them, but they took everything." I'm
               | not against a neuter pronoun where it's justified, but
               | there was no need for "themselves" here, and it was worse
               | than several alternatives.
        
               | dataflow wrote:
               | Okay, I guess that answers my immediate sub-question, but
               | it misses the point about the plurality of the pronouns.
               | 
               | > or even, "Someone came into this room. I don't know
               | them, but they took everything."
               | 
               | "Them" would still be plural by your earlier logic
               | though. Unless you're suggesting that you think
               | "themselves" is plural and "themself" would be the
               | singular?
        
               | rilezg wrote:
               | it's pretty common to use 'they' when gender is unknown
               | or irrelevant
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | CharlesW wrote:
               | > _" Themselves" is still a pronoun, and a plural one, at
               | that._
               | 
               | https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/themselves,
               | see "Can they, their, them, and themselves be used as
               | singular pronouns?"
        
             | mgdlbp wrote:
             | I've contemplated a sort of 'minimally offensive' register
             | of language where you _do_ remove any and all pronouns
             | (that is, the ones someone might object to, along with all
             | other language that might be objected to) while being as
             | natural as possible so that no one notices your _lack_ of
             | usage of any bit of language (though someone analysing the
             | corpus of your writing certainly would). Seems like a
             | technique a corporation seeking to avoid controversy would
             | employ, though I suppose by its very nature I wouldn 't
             | notice if one were successful in doing so!
             | 
             | I always find it interesting to consider other languages
             | when discussing things like this. It's generally easy to
             | eliminate arbitrary words from your personal dialect, but
             | grammatical gender can't be so simply ignored in most Indo-
             | European languages, nor can it be eliminated, the status
             | quo of gender agreement (e.g., of adjectives and the nouns
             | they modify) being a crucial part of the evolved flow of
             | information in each natural language.
             | 
             | However, I still think there's an 'elegant' resolution,
             | which is to consider grammatical gender as 'yet another
             | noun class system'. You can then, in a language-neutral
             | way, move all people (optionally also animals, etc.) to one
             | grammatical gender (now we argue over whether the 'one
             | gender' should be the existing masculine or feminine--not
             | all languages have the neuter!). All other words would
             | retain current their grammatical genders (and m/f/n might
             | be renamed to something like class 1/2/3). Words for people
             | (e.g., man/woman) could also be moved, but _don 't have
             | to_, since their noun classes would now be entirely
             | orthogonal to people's gender.
             | 
             | This is still too large of a change to convince people to
             | actually adopt, but it's certainly more reasonable than the
             | drastic alternative and more elegant IMO than the other
             | proposals I've seen. Plus, it was never the case that
             | grammatical genders could be always be made to agree (take,
             | for example, two nouns of differing gender in apposition or
             | coreference), and there's already a case like this in the
             | German 'Madchen' ("girl"). As a diminutive, it's
             | grammatically neuter, so words modifying it also take the
             | neuter. Distant anaphors formally also do, but colloquially
             | they're often feminine.
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | I think that would probably end up with us in a generally
               | better place from a technical perspective than reusing
               | the gender neutral pronouns but given how aggressive some
               | people have been at misgendering folks I think it'd take
               | a rather long time to actually gain adoption.
               | Additionally, unlike say German, there isn't really any
               | standard board of English and it's an international
               | language so getting countries to actually agree to such a
               | change seems difficult.
               | 
               | I also, honestly, don't think it'd be significantly more
               | difficult to switch each gender over to he or she than to
               | use one of the novel pronouns like "ye" or "xhe" though
               | pronunciation would take a while to normalize.
               | 
               | Themselves/themself is a bit tricky (as pointed out in a
               | sibling thread) but they are tools that exist today and
               | are pretty serviceable - I really don't think you could
               | put "And thus has Eliza Callahan suddenly found
               | themselves a poet with a lot more name recognition among
               | tech workers." in front of anyone and get genuine
               | confusion about what I was saying back - it's perfectly
               | legible, even if some of the grammar might be off.
        
               | bbhunt wrote:
               | > _Seems like a technique a corporation seeking to avoid
               | controversy would employ_
               | 
               | I expect it would backfire quickly, as people notice
               | their attempts at language modification and this rapidly
               | becomes controversial in itself.
               | 
               | Sort of similar to the uproar over using purportedly
               | gender-neutral language to discuss women's reproductive
               | issues, as we've seen recently in discussions on _Roe v.
               | Wade_ - women being referred to as  "birthing bodies",
               | "pregnant people" and suchlike. Which of course many find
               | to be offensively dehumanizing or an example of female
               | erasure.
        
       | iamyatin wrote:
       | 6th May, with the "And. And. .." crash found on Google Docs
       | Skynet rose to the surface.
        
       | Ansil849 wrote:
       | This reminds me of when Google claimed that the number one was
       | copyrighted [1]
       | 
       | [1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/google-drive-flags-text-files-
       | con...
       | 
       | I don't recall that the reason for that bug was ever explained. I
       | wonder if the reason for this one will be.
        
       | kabes wrote:
       | Is this fixed? Can't seem to reproduce this (chrome on ubuntu)
        
       | Patrol8394 wrote:
       | Once a customer was able to destroy an old ES cluster because
       | they copy pasted some text from a PDF into a search box ... that
       | text got sent directly to the ES cluster without much escaping
       | ... there were lots of "*" in there.
       | 
       | The query complexity exploded, ES ran out of memory, and the
       | index got corrupted and I don't remember why, it could not
       | recover.
       | 
       | We had to re-index all the data. Lots of fun.
       | 
       | Lesson learned: prepare for the impossible, keep your
       | infrastructure up to date, escape queries :)
        
         | rawoke083600 wrote:
         | Yup seen that in a few online "stores" or companies where they
         | use SOLR or ES. Putting in ' _' will make boxes _ explode* (ok
         | not really).
         | 
         | What is twice is bad as that the worst of these, fail (at least
         | to my eye) on two fronts.
         | 
         | 1) Allowing SINGLE character searches. I.e No min query-length.
         | 
         | 2) Not escaping querying - lucene(solr/es) syntax.
         | 
         | You can sometimes see the front-facing "html/js/api" is just a
         | thin layer over ES/SOLR.(Which is not bad by itself) it's when
         | you don't know the limitations or what sort of queries are x100
         | harder to do than orders.
        
         | ffhhj wrote:
         | Maybe escaping the character wouldn't help if every * is
         | telling the server to process a long loop, but some max range
         | or time to perform the task. I can't tell which company, but I
         | managed to do exactly that you described a few months ago, with
         | a valid query, and it's one of those companies you can guess if
         | I tell you the first letter of its name.
        
       | fortran77 wrote:
       | It crashes for me in Chrome on windows 11, but not Edge.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-06 23:02 UTC)