"I'm a bit afraid that java may lose it's positions as simple OO language which can be used for teaching in schools."
I will be soooo happy when this happens. Python is the language that should be used for teaching in schools - you see, it's simple OO language, a simple functional language and has the real advantages of an interpreted/dynamic language : dynamic strong typing.
It also has a vastly more clearer syntax and is vastly more easier to read that any piece of Java crap.
Ditch Java, go Python.
In the end, Java is just the Cobol of the 90's and will die very slowly while causing a lot of pain and brain damage to a lot of poor programmers - and students. Sun deserves to be punished for that. They will be soon...
>The capitalist system is designed to produce what people want.
It's ADVERTISED to produce what people want.
Would you seriously endorse something like :
"all those people out of USA (and even inside to some extent,
just see how huge is the crowd in jail those days, and why
such an horrible state of things is allowed to persist) which
are slaughtered by milices born out of CIA-handled governments
and are made, in the short and in the long run/scale, unable to sustain
themselves - see Haiti for one of the worse : I mean REALLY DO
SOME SERIOUS RESEARCH)...
well, are those people just random bastards unwilling to get
this nice Corvette, or whatever ?"
They are part of the system. They belong to the side you have been
taught not to think about.
They may be enrolled on some assembly line by some capitalist
that seek low production costs to sell those Corvettes to some
wealthy USian citizen...
>If the people don't want to work in factories on assembly lines, they can go try to come up with their own idea of something to produce.
Don't you know about Flint (USA) ? Do you believe the car production
stopped here because workers wanted it to ?
Who's naive ? (me again, I'm sure...).
>You can't truly accurately predict what needs to be made without making it and seeing if people want it.
You mean : doing it in their back (designing some object,
slaughetring people somewhere
in the world, overexploiting the people when their
original way of life is destroyed, making them produce and assemble
those objects at the lowest costs, invoke the US army if they don't want to,
import the final product back...) and selling this
"Brand New Object (tm)", that was made only to SATISFY THE
CUSTOMERS NEEDS ?
Off course they will want it.
hmmm all these THINGS seem to impress the average slashdotter.
>How many little things does it take to build a refrigerator?
How many years does it take to make a creative programmer,
on a personal scale ? And in the long run, how long did it
take to achieve the possibility of programmers ?
I mean, hown many centuries ?
Just note that from the point where a refregirator was technically
doable on large scale to the point it became a reality... only
a short timespan was elapsed...
Material factors are not the problem. The army of people (slaves ?)
needed to built the material IS the problem. Capitalism is built
around this.
Most of./ readers seem to accept it without a second thought...
>Mass production and assembly lines can reduce cost to some extent but there is still a fixed cost associated with the production of physical goods.
Isn't this another kind of knowledge that would come with the
public domain Corvette design ? Such a design would provide
information about the object and about HOW to build it.
Since nowadays cars are built on assembly lines the question resorts
to WHO OWNS the assembly line, andn more, how can it be
reasonnably privately-OWNED ?
Don't you believe this is to FORCE people to work on the assembly line ?
Would they employ themselves in such jobs if they were given the choice ?
Isn't there some coercitive mechanisme at work ?
Those are the questions that flow out of my naive brain...
>I believe we see it more than ever these days though, in share options
This is an old trap ! You've fallen into !
The distribution of a big few shares to some of the upper-management
and EVEN to EVERY worker in a compagny does not empower them
(the workers). I've yet to see a case where it does.
Instead, it's a trick to make them feel they 'participate' to the game
and give them an incentive to accept their actual conditions.
It's more or less like a morphine take on them...
Alas it doesn't make them capitalists nor give them ANY REAL power
or control on what's going on.
That was never the purpose of Collectively Owned enterprises, which
are about the control over WHAT is going to be done, WHY and
HOW (are these not the right questions ?). Since profit-per-share
is not a motivation is this case, the actual response may vary
a lot from those who arise in a capitalist mindset.
>Money is just the abstraction layer we use instead of bartering for everything
Being an abstraction layer, it provides also an abstraction barrier.
It masks the very 'bartering' (or democratic chatting) that would
enable all involved parties to sign a valuable deal.
>The people you pay will want to buy 'real' goods, food, a house, etc.
The not only want it, they NEED it, as it is vital to them. A capitalist alwyas
makes a deal like : I will provide you whith what a bit of what you
NEED if you follow my DESIRES.
Workers so rarely decide what they have to do or even HOW
it should best done. They have no weight in such decisions.
>As long as physical goods require scarce and specilized physical resources, the economy can not be analysed in FS, OS concepts.
You really mean, muscles ? You believe the grey matter developpers
rely on to develop software is no some kind of muscle ?
Traditionnal capitalism rely on the exploitation of over-abundant
ressources not scarce ones. It locks the two essential factors :
Capital, as accumulated by previous exploitation or work based
on muscles...
Knowledge : how to do things, protected by traditional PATENTS.
Why would patents be an evil thing wrt (Free) Software and not
wrt traditional economics ?
ALL patents are evil in this regard : they are the very mechanism
that give the capitalists their grip over everyone's work (be it
muscle or brain-based).
>On the other hand producing physical goods require physical resources.
It requires Capital and Knowledge. Both are portable and 'not really'
physical...
> A physical good is not instantly transportable, infinitely reproduceable and generally doesn't stay the way it was during usage.
Given enough base materials AND mechanical work one can reproduce
any known physical object. The really important parts are the
Knowledge : how to do it, given the row material
Capital : the power to do it (pay the PEOPLE behind it : those who
made the raw material and those who build your final 'physical good').
Slashdot Mirror
Format, I don't know. But VB is not supported as a scripting language, so Gnumeric is imune to macro virus exploits.
"I'm a bit afraid that java may lose it's positions as simple OO language which can be used for teaching in schools."
I will be soooo happy when this happens. Python is the language that should be used for teaching in schools - you see, it's simple OO language, a simple functional language and has the real advantages of an interpreted/dynamic language : dynamic strong typing.
It also has a vastly more clearer syntax and is vastly more easier to read that any piece of Java crap.
Ditch Java, go Python.
In the end, Java is just the Cobol of the 90's and will die very slowly while causing a lot of pain and brain damage to a lot of poor programmers - and students. Sun deserves to be punished for that. They will be soon...
Cause it wasn't free, dude.
Google restores the correct signal-to-noise ratio.
>The capitalist system is designed to produce what people want.
It's ADVERTISED to produce what people want.
Would you seriously endorse something like :
"all those people out of USA (and even inside to some extent,
just see how huge is the crowd in jail those days, and why
such an horrible state of things is allowed to persist) which
are slaughtered by milices born out of CIA-handled governments
and are made, in the short and in the long run/scale, unable to sustain
themselves - see Haiti for one of the worse : I mean REALLY DO
SOME SERIOUS RESEARCH)...
well, are those people just random bastards unwilling to get
this nice Corvette, or whatever ?"
They are part of the system. They belong to the side you have been
taught not to think about.
They may be enrolled on some assembly line by some capitalist
that seek low production costs to sell those Corvettes to some
wealthy USian citizen...
>If the people don't want to work in factories on assembly lines, they can go try to come up with their own idea of something to produce.
Don't you know about Flint (USA) ? Do you believe the car production
stopped here because workers wanted it to ?
Who's naive ? (me again, I'm sure...).
>You can't truly accurately predict what needs to be made without making it and seeing if people want it.
You mean : doing it in their back (designing some object,
slaughetring people somewhere
in the world, overexploiting the people when their
original way of life is destroyed, making them produce and assemble
those objects at the lowest costs, invoke the US army if they don't want to,
import the final product back...) and selling this
"Brand New Object (tm)", that was made only to SATISFY THE
CUSTOMERS NEEDS ?
Off course they will want it.
Who really profit ? You need not respond...
Have you been brainwashed recently ?
hmmm all these THINGS seem to impress the average slashdotter.
./ readers seem to accept it without a second thought...
;-) ?
>How many little things does it take to build a refrigerator?
How many years does it take to make a creative programmer,
on a personal scale ? And in the long run, how long did it
take to achieve the possibility of programmers ?
I mean, hown many centuries ?
Just note that from the point where a refregirator was technically
doable on large scale to the point it became a reality... only
a short timespan was elapsed...
Material factors are not the problem. The army of people (slaves ?)
needed to built the material IS the problem. Capitalism is built
around this.
Most of
Have you been brainwashed today
>Mass production and assembly lines can reduce cost to some extent but there is still a fixed cost associated with the production of physical goods.
Isn't this another kind of knowledge that would come with the
public domain Corvette design ? Such a design would provide
information about the object and about HOW to build it.
Since nowadays cars are built on assembly lines the question resorts
to WHO OWNS the assembly line, andn more, how can it be
reasonnably privately-OWNED ?
Don't you believe this is to FORCE people to work on the assembly line ?
Would they employ themselves in such jobs if they were given the choice ?
Isn't there some coercitive mechanisme at work ?
Those are the questions that flow out of my naive brain...
>I believe we see it more than ever these days though, in share options
This is an old trap ! You've fallen into !
The distribution of a big few shares to some of the upper-management
and EVEN to EVERY worker in a compagny does not empower them
(the workers). I've yet to see a case where it does.
Instead, it's a trick to make them feel they 'participate' to the game
and give them an incentive to accept their actual conditions.
It's more or less like a morphine take on them...
Alas it doesn't make them capitalists nor give them ANY REAL power
or control on what's going on.
That was never the purpose of Collectively Owned enterprises, which
are about the control over WHAT is going to be done, WHY and
HOW (are these not the right questions ?). Since profit-per-share
is not a motivation is this case, the actual response may vary
a lot from those who arise in a capitalist mindset.
>Money is just the abstraction layer we use instead of bartering for everything
Being an abstraction layer, it provides also an abstraction barrier.
It masks the very 'bartering' (or democratic chatting) that would
enable all involved parties to sign a valuable deal.
>The people you pay will want to buy 'real' goods, food, a house, etc.
The not only want it, they NEED it, as it is vital to them. A capitalist alwyas
makes a deal like : I will provide you whith what a bit of what you
NEED if you follow my DESIRES.
Workers so rarely decide what they have to do or even HOW
it should best done. They have no weight in such decisions.
>As long as physical goods require scarce and specilized physical resources, the economy can not be analysed in FS, OS concepts.
You really mean, muscles ? You believe the grey matter developpers
rely on to develop software is no some kind of muscle ?
Traditionnal capitalism rely on the exploitation of over-abundant
ressources not scarce ones. It locks the two essential factors :
Capital, as accumulated by previous exploitation or work based
on muscles...
Knowledge : how to do things, protected by traditional PATENTS.
Why would patents be an evil thing wrt (Free) Software and not
wrt traditional economics ?
ALL patents are evil in this regard : they are the very mechanism
that give the capitalists their grip over everyone's work (be it
muscle or brain-based).
>On the other hand producing physical goods require physical resources.
It requires Capital and Knowledge. Both are portable and 'not really'
physical...
> A physical good is not instantly transportable, infinitely reproduceable and generally doesn't stay the way it was during usage.
Given enough base materials AND mechanical work one can reproduce
any known physical object. The really important parts are the
Knowledge : how to do it, given the row material
Capital : the power to do it (pay the PEOPLE behind it : those who
made the raw material and those who build your final 'physical good').
>like his idea of shareholders, being the workers in the companies, as opposed to the opportunist investors of >today
Could you elaborate on this ? I really don't understand how
such a proposition is in relation with Marx's...