You want a display layer, we are a physical layer • the record

Episode 18 There was a complaint. I know – color me agape.

Someone has obviously not enjoyed interacting lately with PFY or with me, and as a result they have indicated that our approach was somehow rude and not customer focused at all.

I know.

Not sure who the complainant is but it must be someone new to the company as no one who has been here for a long time would like to have the full attention of either PFY or me. However, I’m sure a meeting with HR will clarify all of this…

“…the substance of their complaint is that you didn’t solve their complaint, you didn’t make any effort to find the source of the problem, and you tricked them with some axiom about turning their device off and on to illustrate the problem.”

“How is that seen as pacifying them?” PFY asks. “If anything, toggling a set of tools, waiting 10 minutes, and then turning them back on again restores functionality 50 percent of the time.”

“Wait a minute!” I insert. “That’s not the time the president’s wife called me about why his life support was beeping, was it? Because that was totally on me. And I probably said 30 minutes instead of 10. Mi Kolpa.”

“But let’s not forget the positive side,” adds PFY. “The hospital in question was very close to achieving its energy saving goals that month.”

“We like to return the favor,” I agree, nodding his head.

“It’s not about that,” replies the HR manager.

“Not the guy from the crayon desk still pissed me off because I said liters when I should have said milliliters, right? Who in their right mind would use that much isopropyl alcohol to clean a cooling fan?”

“No, it’s not Keith from the drafting office,” HR says, “although he indicated he would file a complaint when the burns healed.”

I say, “Okay, I’m confused.”

“We received a complaint that you – both of you – refused to try to fix someone’s computer.”

I say “that doesn’t ring the bell”.

“last Tuesday?”

“Hmmmmmmmm, no?”

“Last Tuesday, someone else from the forging office?” HR hints, helpful.

“Nothing comes to mind.”

“They say they brought their MacBook Air and I refused to look at it.”

“Oh, I thought you said computer!” PFY says.

“A Mac is a computer.”

“I agree to disagree,” PFY replied.

“Look, the problem is with the OSI model,” I explain to the HR employee.

“Model…OSI?” Human Resources is required.

“Yes. You see, what you’re looking for is the presentation layer but we’re more…a physical layer.”

“I do not know what you mean”.

Well, I think what you would ideally see is that we have a user interface specifically designed for listening to pointless stories – an interface with almost infinite ‘listening time’.

“This could be an interface that can take packets of information, that are delivered out of sequence and contain a lot of spurious data. You might want to take the onion data in our packets, which may not meet even the most basic of data validations, and of all the data Mentioned above, compile an order.”

Go on, says HR, a little confused.

“And then you want to translate that data into a business plan, execute that action plan, and then create a response packet designed to deliver coherent data to the customer.”

“I think I understand what you’re saying.”

“But you want to translate that returned data into small packets that are easy to receive and deliver synchronously; able to cache response information whenever extraneous data is presented – also with data integrity issues.”

“I …”

“So, in the OSI model, most of this activity takes place in layers 4 through 7 — which do data sorting, aggregation, parity checking, and discarding before making a brief request to our layer. We call these host layers — or more commonly, the ‘Service Desk.’”

You mean the help desk.

“If you like. Anyway, our complainant wants us to work at those higher levels of the model, which is not our area of ​​expertise. We are at the lower levels, and we present our data to the upper layers for presentation to a user. We don’t really have a view layer as such.”

“But surely you can…”

“No, that would mix up the layers. That never goes well.”

“I still think you should…”

“But our class is optimal for the kind of work we do.”

“However, your employment contract does not say anything about these ‘layers’…”

“It’s not going to happen. It’s not a technical document.”

“Exactly — so how about doing what you’re supposed to do to remove the problem and we won’t start to wonder which layer of HR is — or not — paying you.”

“Okee dokee,” I say, a PFY reporter. “I’ll just wait here, right?”

“for what?” The HR department asks frankly.

… after two minutes …

“…tore it off the wall?” HR says to their caller.

I say “this will be the network layer”. “Or maybe it’s the data layer.”

“… hammer?” Human resources contributions.

I say “Ah. This is going to be the hardware layer.” “Do you want me to explain it? I just left the saw in the office…”