Most active commenters
  • hinkley(5)

←back to thread

388 points zdw | 27 comments | | HN request time: 1.873s | source | bottom
1. Waterluvian ◴[] No.44367257[source]
These Easter eggs really give an “early desktop PC era” vibe to it all. It’s very human and connects you to the fact that you’re using something that people with faces and names made. Back when these were passion projects by a bunch of hardcore nerds.

But they’d rather you not really see through the product abstraction layer anymore. The Product People want to control the full image of the product and it’s just safest to de-humanize it in case that list is too big or people on that list become undesirables or whatnot.

I’m thinking about what this might look like today. Maybe a neat Easter egg in my iPhone that every time I activate it, it shows me a few people at random who played a role in development. I’d love it, but I imagine this would offend the high tastes of the Product People.

replies(4): >>44368086 #>>44368971 #>>44373830 #>>44375365 #
2. ulfw ◴[] No.44368086[source]
I don't know what your odd issue with product people is but this has absolutely nothing to do with Product (management). Software used to be done by a handful of people. Now there are thousands involved across an organisation. For better or worth that's how it is. An Easter Egg highlighting just a few people just doesn't make sense for a large software project nowadays
replies(3): >>44368118 #>>44371558 #>>44375040 #
3. rusk ◴[] No.44368118[source]
It’s more to do with Quality Control than Product Management
replies(1): >>44368539 #
4. ryandrake ◴[] No.44368539{3}[source]
Yea, Quality Control and Risk Management. You really don’t want even the slightest risk of messing up the build or the product just so that you can bury some secret treasure in the code! We’ve all at some point been responsible for a big goof-up in code that we believed to be harmless.
replies(3): >>44368979 #>>44369424 #>>44369649 #
5. hinkley ◴[] No.44368971[source]
I wonder too if there was more of this before Agile. With deadline driven development you can run into situations where part of the team is stuck waiting for their teammates to finish something so they can surpass a milestone. You can only poke at the backlog so much. Boredom and being able to rationalize that you aren't really affecting the roadmap by sneaking a little extra something in makes for a lot more 'motive and opportunity' situations.
replies(1): >>44371744 #
6. hinkley ◴[] No.44368979{4}[source]
Yeah but you write the easter egg in one product cycle and you put it in the code at the beginning of the next, so it has all the time in the world to 'bake'.
7. mikepurvis ◴[] No.44369424{4}[source]
Not that I don't also wish for a return of more whimsy to software development, but those risks are real— there have been some pretty high profile embarrassments over the years in connection with pranks and easter eggs. The GMail "mic drop" is an obvious one, also the Spider-Man PS4 proposal was another, plus of course stuff like the GTA Hot Coffee minigame.
8. iAMkenough ◴[] No.44369649{4}[source]
Also from a Risk Management perspective, you might be embedding the name/photo of a future sociopath or someone who is litigious. The "human" aspect cuts both ways.
replies(1): >>44370048 #
9. Waterluvian ◴[] No.44370048{5}[source]
A consequence of drawing the risk line that far to one end is that products end up having no soul. Perfectly valid for a business to decide that. But it just connects back to my main post and how 80s/90s apple had that vibe that today's apple lacks. They Risk Managed and/or Product Designed until they had a sterile, lifeless product.

I think it's what I pick up on when I feel annoyed at the emulated soul they try to instil with their design/branding/commercials.

I think another example, sibling to easter eggs, would be April Fools. Mind you I hate April Fools, but the soul was sterilized as they Risk Managed their way to jokes/pranks that were guaranteed to be safe.

10. zzrrt ◴[] No.44371558[source]
> Now there are thousands involved across an organisation… An Easter Egg highlighting just a few people just doesn't make sense

I don’t know if the message was edited, but GP addressed this with “Maybe… it shows me a few people at random who played a role in development.” Anyway, you could also show thousands of names/faces rapidly but still meaningfully, or let the user explore them slowly. Feels like the other responses are more accurate than it simply being about the quantity of people.

11. HenryBemis ◴[] No.44371744[source]
Today some auditor (like me) would fail your ITGCs because of the undocumented partition/file/change/etc (take your pick) and force you to submit a deviation to the SOC team, ask you to "review and update the Secure Design Document to reflect to the change", ask you to create a Jira and/or ServiceNow ticket, etc. etc. etc.

Oh, and you would get a red mark on your "HR P&D record" for the 'Secure Software Policy' violation.

(Shit.. I hated myself writing the above, but it's true)

In 2001 though, we would all laugh if we would have 'caught' the devs doing something cool like this!

replies(7): >>44371980 #>>44372823 #>>44374855 #>>44375074 #>>44375735 #>>44376546 #>>44382386 #
12. ahazred8ta ◴[] No.44371980{3}[source]
Yeah, the federal government used to pay extra for versions of Win/9x with the easter eggs taken out.
replies(1): >>44373949 #
13. echelon ◴[] No.44372823{3}[source]
Gross.

I hope we do shrink software companies down to the mythical "1-person unicorns" so we can be done with this madness.

I prefer the taste of small auteurs to the consensus of product orgs and their politicking. (Add to that whatever design refreshes we are faced with when the designers declare a new design language.)

14. dclowd9901 ◴[] No.44373830[source]
Having been at this long enough to have put Easter eggs of my own into works I've done, I can say that the biggest issue is the lack of stomach for introducing a possible failure point to the software for little more than shits and giggles, especially when software has gotten so complex and big. That and who has the time to build silly stuff at work anymore. I feel like we're constantly at 120%.
replies(2): >>44374511 #>>44392818 #
15. tobr ◴[] No.44373949{4}[source]
Oh, so in other words, there is business value in Easter eggs.
replies(1): >>44382387 #
16. indrora ◴[] No.44374511[source]
There are still places for good easter eggs.

In a past life I did technical writing and slipped all sorts of fun things into my documentation: Multiple 4/20 references, my birthday, in-jokes from the team that I was working with, even the occasional proper meme. When I needed a link? Something funny from the official corporate channel on YouTube that I could get away with. Needed a company name? I checked every trademark we had on file to find Something.

Never be afraid to hide something wonderful in your code. The header for UFS2 contains the author's birthday [0] and OpenVMS has several interesting exit code states [1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk_McKusick [1] https://www.parsec.com/os/openvms/undocumented.php?page=13

replies(1): >>44374923 #
17. FirmwareBurner ◴[] No.44374855{3}[source]
>"HR P&D record"

Let HR run your engineering, go broke.

replies(1): >>44382390 #
18. FirmwareBurner ◴[] No.44374923{3}[source]
>Never be afraid to hide something wonderful in your code.

In your own code or in your employer's code?

Because having some engineer years down the line spend hours figuring out some mystery WTF code, jut to realize it was some undocumented easter egg of another engineer who left years ago, would piss everyone off.

Easter eggs had their place when engineering teams would basically stay the same and work on the same product for years, so it would be like an inside joke the whole team was in on, but when teams are constantly changing with people job-hopping all the time, easter eggs are liabilities.

19. jibal ◴[] No.44375040[source]
For better or worse
20. dgfitz ◴[] No.44375074{3}[source]
> Oh, and you would get a red mark on your "HR P&D record" for the 'Secure Software Policy' violation.

What a time to be alive.

21. WesolyKubeczek ◴[] No.44375365[source]
> Maybe a neat Easter egg in my iPhone that every time I activate it, it shows me a few people at random who played a role in development. I’d love it, but I imagine this would offend the high tastes of the Product People.

Be careful what you wish for, lest a special hotkey on a new Mac brings up a fullscreen portrait of Craig Federighi in his full mighty hairy-chested glory with “infinite” zoom into the chest (available as a 5GB download).

22. iwontberude ◴[] No.44375735{3}[source]
That’s just how government work be, no shame.
23. xvilka ◴[] No.44376546{3}[source]
Meanwhile real bugs (security issues) would go unnoticed as it often happens.
24. hinkley ◴[] No.44382386{3}[source]
There's a black art to making organizations successful in spite of their best efforts.

They will, often enough, find ways to go on being successful without you, but at least you can cart your cardboard box away with a clear conscience.

Those same techniques can also be used for mischief, if you prefer.

25. hinkley ◴[] No.44382387{5}[source]
Oh no.
26. hinkley ◴[] No.44382390{4}[source]
IP Lawyers are almost as good. Accountants are a dismal third place.
27. out-of-ideas ◴[] No.44392818[source]
> I feel like we're constantly at 120%

sounds like a great way to burn out. if you do not take care of yourself properly, how are you expected to take care of anything else?

edit: oops late reply, but oh well