I liken this to more how TV resellers adjust the color and contrast settings on televisions so customers think one has a better picture compared to one next to it.
True. Knowing HP, I'm sure refilling will require some special "tool" that only comes with HP ink refills (part of bottle). If you do not use certified HP ink and tool the printer will refuse to print until the ink well is emptied on your head and refilled with HP ink.
Encryption is that difficult eh? How about using a simple XOR of a key on the data. Takes like 2 or 3 lines of code. Not the most complicated encryption, but atleast its SOMETHING! Theres more complicated ways of doing encrytion but having none at all is just stupidity in action.
Currently, yes. They could always change that. Its *their* software so they can charge for it.
GPLFlash is not attempting to create one (and I doubt they ever will).
Does Macromedia's development suite run on something other than x86 windows? Won't that need to be cloned too for 64-bit computers running some obscure, hardly used operating system? As for making the development tools "more valuable", there are alternative development tools for creating Flash today. But they are noticeably different.
If anything, the effect of this project will be that more people will be able to view Flash, since Macromedia only has a player for 32-bit x86 Linux.
Supporting 32-bit Linux was quite a stretch for Macromedia. They built software that will be used on less than half a percent of computer desktops. Why would they do this? They like penguins? No. It's because they wanted to be *the* standard plugin for supporting Flash on all major desktop operating systems. Their reward for doing this? A bunch of OSS fanatics creating a clone that can run not only on odd operating systems but on systems they Macromedia Flash plugin currently supports. I'm sure they will just say screw it, patent the file format, and stick with Macs and Windows. Thanks GPLFlash!
So your entire argument is pretty much unfounded.
Sorry, lack your crystal ball and tarot cards for predicting the future.
I usually love the OSS movement. This one smacks in the face of stupidity. Its just a bad project. Cloning proprietary software to make it "open" will only make companies (1) less likely to standardize their file formats without patents and (2) hurt companies who have invested R&D to bring us new and innovative products. GPLFlash should instead focus on building a competitive alternative to Flash. OpenOffice, for example, is not a clone of Microsoft Office. It is similair but have obvious differences. It is a competitor. Firefox is not IE. But its growing usage has forced Microsoft to start improving IE. Competition is good. Trying to replace proprietary products with open source clones is bad business.
Try to make a small change to a document and save it, enjoy the sound of your disk trashing as the whole file is saved and compressed
Sounds like you have a computer problem. I've used OpenOffice on-and-off and never experienced what you are talking about. I had a similiar problem with MS Word on my work computer but, after doing some investigation, found that there was a problem with the hard drive. Replaced, problem went away.
I agree with you about the countries in close proximity voting for each other. But have a conflict with this idea:
The songs will tend not to appeal as widely among its neighbours or other european countries as the smaller, more exposed, countries.
People in the United States rarely listen to European music. On the reverse, European countries listen to quite a bit of American music. Big countries seem to have more influence over smaller countries tastes. Probably has much to do with marketing I would guess. For example, the U.S. labels probably spend more marketing their music in the U.K. than the U.K. labels spend on marketing in their own country.
SWT basically suffers from the same performance bottleneck as Swing: the event queue and rendering logic share the same thread. This means that lengthy event handling code blocks the UI.
SWT has no thread for the event queue. You have to do the loop yourself (see readAndDispatch method on swt.Display). Rendering, since SWT uses native widgets, is done by the host windowing system. Because of this, SWT is generally always quicker and more responsive *graphically*.
Opening/closing a large project tree is a good example. In netbeans there's no delay no matter how big your project is, in eclipse there is a noticable half second freeze even on small projects.
SWT is not to blame for this delay on opening and closing projects. Eclipse does numerous operations (check for project dependencies, etc) whenever you open or close projects. NetBeans is either not doing these checks or is just doing them better.
If you read the changelogs you'll see they are full of performance fixes. Apparently there are lots of performance issues to fix.
Changelogs reflect completed changes, not changes needing to be done. With that said, it is possible Eclipse has less performance issues needing completion as compared to NetBeans. We'll never know.
Swing can create some really unique user interfaces because it is not tied down to the host windowing system's widgets. But these pretty interfaces have serious flaws. First, Swing has horrible issues with true type fonts outside Windows almost to the point being unreadable. Second, the user interface often operates in a manner foreign to other native applications. Third, I have found that windowing systems like Gnome, KDE, and OSX can cause wierd issues with it.
There are other downsides to NetBeans. NetBeans is ONLY a Java IDE. Eclipse on the otherhand is a platform for developing in various languages. NetBeans also has no capability, or desire for that matter (hello Sun), to run with FOSS implementations of the Java runtime. To me this is not a big deal but to others it might be.
SWT has problems too. I will not leave without mentioning its major flaw: JNI. Luckily, 1.5 introduced some performance improvements in this area.
Now, with the TCP transport in place, I2P is essentially thread-limited (2 threads per connection) to about 250-300 nodes.
Quick solution: don't use threaded connections. Use NIO instead. I will look in to this.
Luring people to I2P now is not useful for development
I2P is an open source project. "Luring" people is essential for its growth. If I2P core team did not want outside input they should close the project until a future time. This is unlikely their belief since they are posting bounties and requesting peer review to reach version 1.
But for now, don't join it yet, and don't announce it here.
Sorry. Already joined. I even download the source and starting to fiddle. I just can't help myself. As for official posting, you can do a slashdot search where I2P has been mentioned several times in the past. Thats how I found out about it to begin with.
I2P can do bittorrents. Unlike magnetic links, the original file is hidden behind a series of tunnels. Theres some encryption in there too for good measure. Check it out at www.i2p.net.
It's only "well documented" in the sense that there's a nifty little tool that turns all public methods into pretty HTML pages.
The documentation covers the public and protected methods that are available for use by programmers. Private methods, fields, etc. are not important when writing your own classpath since no one should access them anyways unless they are extending your implementation. GCJ contains many private methods within the classes that are not in Sun's JVM, and vice versa.
If you tried to write a (non-trivial) program that used the non-trivial parts of the Java APIs (like Swing), using only the API documentation, it wouldn't work
I've written parts for GCJ by only using the API documentation supplied by Sun. I won't say it's an easy task. What the documentation says it's suppose to do and what the Sun JVM actually does requires some work on the implementors part. The only way around this is if Sun would allow JVM writers to view their source without worrying about the license concerns.
There are many projects that do it this way. Look at Mono. Working from only a specification is quite common.
OO.o issues, from my understanding, are because the free implementations of the JVM do not work as they should. With some tweaking, this is very correctable.
The Java API *is* well documented. The problem with the extensions is that the open source JVMs (GCJ in particular) did not handle them correctly. This is not a big deal. Someone should report the bugs with GCJ to the project's bugzilla -or- help fix GCJ to get it to work. This was the result of the conflict anyways:
The FSF, Stallman explained, did not have a preference for other programming languages over Java. It simply wanted assurance that any Java code would be compatible with free implementations of Java. After discussion options with Carr, he suggested that the Free Software Foundation would concentrate on expanding the GCJ efforts
Yep. Conflict solved. OO.o can stay free of Sun's JVM if it wishes and GCJ gets some bugs exorcised. Everyone wins.
It was difficult. Took me two months of working with greasemonkey, of 3 minutes stolen here, and 5 minutes borrowed there in between calls (did I mention I'm only a phone monkey for a DSL ISP?).
I worked in one of those apps departments. When I was young and naive users like yourself would piss me off. But now I would welcome users taking charge of their work as long as they at least give me notice to what they are doing. Users, I have found, often times have individual needs that are not applicable to the whole. If this makes their work any easier I say more power to them.
Yep. Blackdown was more of a "cool name" for a branch project where a bunch of Sun programmers ported the Sun JVM to Linux. They were even branded, humorously, hackers by Sun. Kinda silly in my opinion.
They should have an operating system that is secure and isn't open to viruses.
Many viruses that hit people have nothing to do with the operating system. Take for instance Firefox. Firefox is not bundled with Windows but it can be installed by the user. Before 1.0.4, there are several known security holes. Is the operating system to blame for any of these?
When I read that my first thought was that I used the word "wittier" incorrectly. So I checked the old trusty dictionary to make sure I wasn't going nuts. The dictionary only confirmed it was used correctly. So I followed by asking an English major to look it over for me. She spotted the obvious missing "t" in rebuttal (Slashdot could use a spellchecker) but said it was otherwise 100% correct in its usage. I then followed by showing her your prior post with the continuous requests to review words. We had quite a laugh. I didn't even bother to give your recent reply any more thought at that point. I'm sure it consists of attempts to prop yourself up as some superior intelligence compared to myself and that, in some strange way, makes your prior statements indisputable. I've seen this defense plenty of times before when someone's beliefs are shattered by another. Like I said in my last post I expected that type of behavior from you and was not very surprised by how your recent reply started. Oh well. I will go seek others who can at least start an intelligent dialog without retorting to angry and childish outpourings.
This is completely and naively incorrect. Companies make money by selling goods and services at a profit.
You are incorrect. Some businesses, such as government agencies for example, do not "sell" anything. A good example is a police officer. They are paid by taxpayers for services rendered. But the police do not actively sell this service. Selling and production are seperate practices. Many forms of business receive monetary reimbursement (not always profit) for simply producing.
Profit is a null concept in science.
But profit is paramount to most businesses. These businesses care very little in science outside its application to produce profit. Why should they?
You need to review the definition of science.
You need to review the definition of science. You need to review the hiring practices of those who employ violinists. You need to review the definition of teacher. You need to review the practices of schools. In short, I think you need to review your education. It seems to have left some holes. You may, of course, choose to deal with this by vigorously defending the quality of your education, but if you're smart (and I have no reason to believe you are not just because you have been let down by your educators) you will instead choose to deal with it by fixing your education.
I was hoping for a wittier rebutal. Apparently this is outside your facilities. As for my education, I neither need nor care to defend. In fact, I have no idea why my education is even being brought in to this conversation unless you are trying to display some view that you have a superior education and are thus immune from approach for this reason. That would be comical at best since you can have a doctorite and still be wrong.
The Java code in the newest OO.o, however, does not compile well with open-source Java compilers like the GCJ (GNU Compiler for Java Programming Language).
GCJ is still a work in progress. If OO.o does not work well with it, there is probably a problem in GCJ. GCJ is *suppose* to be compatible. Doing this is difficult work but there is nothing saying that it will not occur, atleast to the point of working with the latest OO.o.
There are also several other free-as-in-beer JVM's. Classpath and Kaffe to name just a few. Have these been tried? Apache has a purposal for a BSD licensed JVM called Harmony that only shows that there is more JVM's on the way.
Sure, the latest OO.o may only run with Sun's JVM. But this is not to say that this will change in the very near future. With that said, the imagined Java Trap by Stallman is only a scare tactic used by a person with his own motivations.
Quite frankly, the one thing we're up to arses in is apps programers, and, ironically, the one thing in the computer field we're desperately short of right now is computer scientists.
We are up to our "arses" in computer apps programmers for a very good reason. Companies make money by producing goods and services. They do not make money by having a gaggle of employees sitting around discussing computer concepts. So those types of people are not hired. Those who know computer science must apply their skills in a manner that is of interest to an employer. This usually translates to apps writers. So, with that said, many of those apps writers you speak poorly of are actually computer scientists.
I do not piss and moan if a kid isn't interested in programming. I try my damndest to find that out, and then direct them to something they are interested in.
Well, I guess it's good that you have taken a personal agenda to weed out those that are not interested in programming. But I am completely mystified to what institution you are teaching from. Teachers in public and private schools in the United States do not "pick and choose" who they teach and do not teach courses to. If you tried to remove a student from your class you'll end up getting removed yourself. This only leaves private teaching. Since most companies only hire employees who have received degrees from credited institutions, I find it unlikely you will ever get students. This is a sharp contrast from violin players who, in truth, do not have such a high requirement on having college degrees. To summarize, I find it hard to believe your claim that you are a teacher.
The market's adjusting, and foreign labor is generally cheaper now.
Foreign labor has always been cheaper. That is not the issue. This is not outsourcing. This is moving foreign labor into domestic market to replace domestic labor.
I say let the genuinely talented or hard working into the US and give 'em a green card.
A green card? Citizenship? H1B visas are not citizens. They are merely foreign workers working in the United States.
The US immigrant policies have really bad problems;
Again, this is not about imigration. Imigration gains citizenship. H1Bs are not citizens. They have the *possibility* of citizenship if granted by their employer. But there is no incentive for employers to do such since by keeping them as non-citizens the H1B is stuck with them to do their bidding.
It's a two faced, dishonest system at the moment... immigrants can get in and when their visa expires noone looks for them...
If they are caught, they are deported. Problem is the sheer number makes it impossible to handle.
if they get pulled over for speeding (after paying 10 years of social security and other taxes), they're deported without a chance to return.
Many illegal immigrants work in jobs where they are paid "under the table". Paying social security would alert INS.
the numerous Hollywood movies seem to make it clear that most American's believe they were single handedly responsible for the victory in Europe.
I do not base my view of history off of Disney. Hollywood aims to entertain rather than educate.
You will find that UK pride in their achivements during WW2 stems mainly from the fact that we held out as long as we did against incredible odds.
Yes, the United States is mentioned in British history books. But after flipping through one of these (for school children), I was surprised how it glorified British victories and often left out U.S. involvement in those very same conflicts. I will admit that U.S. history books are just as biased.
You will find that UK pride in their achivements during WW2 stems mainly from the fact that we held out as long as we did against incredible odds. Remember... you did not experience the kind of attacks that London did during the blitz. Your war was far more conventional.
That would be ignoring the sacrifices of the American Merchant Marine fleet. Conventional? Thousands died sending boatloads of supplies on unarmed boats to the U.K. so they could "hang in there".
http://www.usmm.org/ww2.html
but ever since the 2000 election I lost most of that respect.
The U.S. government, and many of its people, believe we are world leaders. Such a role requires responsibilities that our current administration has approached in a rather ignorant , aristocratic fashion. Democracy should not be confined to only being applied within countries, but should be used in a global fashion too.
capitalism is now drawing closer to its inevitable failure, and the cracks are beginning to show.
Capitalism is a tool of greed. We can only hope it collapses in upon itself and dies a horrible death.
an even greater pity is american's disengagment from constructive political discourse. instead of deciding a future, you have enshrined your past leaders as gods in your cult-of-america religion.
I'm not a flag flying American and I might be jaded by our current political issues, but don't start on bashing the founding fathers. Government based of French and English thinkers? Bullshit. Those founding fathers designed a government that the French and English later model their own governments from, not the other way around. While they were playing around with Kings and Queens the United States formed a representive government. Those founding fathers built the foundation of a government that would become the most powerful country in human history. And during World War II, when both the French and English were struggling against the Germans, the United States quickly drug its ass out of a recession and came to their rescue. Your history books, I am guessing your not of the United States, probably dodges around these simple truths. Brits still try to label the U.S. the "colony" despite it being a country formed from a combination of peoples from many countries.
Slashdot Mirror
I liken this to more how TV resellers adjust the color and contrast settings on televisions so customers think one has a better picture compared to one next to it.
True. Knowing HP, I'm sure refilling will require some special "tool" that only comes with HP ink refills (part of bottle). If you do not use certified HP ink and tool the printer will refuse to print until the ink well is emptied on your head and refilled with HP ink.
Encryption is that difficult eh? How about using a simple XOR of a key on the data. Takes like 2 or 3 lines of code. Not the most complicated encryption, but atleast its SOMETHING! Theres more complicated ways of doing encrytion but having none at all is just stupidity in action.
Answer: None. It's free.
Currently, yes. They could always change that. Its *their* software so they can charge for it.
GPLFlash is not attempting to create one (and I doubt they ever will).
Does Macromedia's development suite run on something other than x86 windows? Won't that need to be cloned too for 64-bit computers running some obscure, hardly used operating system? As for making the development tools "more valuable", there are alternative development tools for creating Flash today. But they are noticeably different.
If anything, the effect of this project will be that more people will be able to view Flash, since Macromedia only has a player for 32-bit x86 Linux.
Supporting 32-bit Linux was quite a stretch for Macromedia. They built software that will be used on less than half a percent of computer desktops. Why would they do this? They like penguins? No. It's because they wanted to be *the* standard plugin for supporting Flash on all major desktop operating systems. Their reward for doing this? A bunch of OSS fanatics creating a clone that can run not only on odd operating systems but on systems they Macromedia Flash plugin currently supports. I'm sure they will just say screw it, patent the file format, and stick with Macs and Windows. Thanks GPLFlash!
So your entire argument is pretty much unfounded.
Sorry, lack your crystal ball and tarot cards for predicting the future.
I usually love the OSS movement. This one smacks in the face of stupidity. Its just a bad project. Cloning proprietary software to make it "open" will only make companies (1) less likely to standardize their file formats without patents and (2) hurt companies who have invested R&D to bring us new and innovative products. GPLFlash should instead focus on building a competitive alternative to Flash. OpenOffice, for example, is not a clone of Microsoft Office. It is similair but have obvious differences. It is a competitor. Firefox is not IE. But its growing usage has forced Microsoft to start improving IE. Competition is good. Trying to replace proprietary products with open source clones is bad business.
Try to make a small change to a document and save it, enjoy the sound of your disk trashing as the whole file is saved and compressed
Sounds like you have a computer problem. I've used OpenOffice on-and-off and never experienced what you are talking about. I had a similiar problem with MS Word on my work computer but, after doing some investigation, found that there was a problem with the hard drive. Replaced, problem went away.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/001/248ipzbt.asp
I agree with you about the countries in close proximity voting for each other. But have a conflict with this idea:
The songs will tend not to appeal as widely among its neighbours or other european countries as the smaller, more exposed, countries.
People in the United States rarely listen to European music. On the reverse, European countries listen to quite a bit of American music. Big countries seem to have more influence over smaller countries tastes. Probably has much to do with marketing I would guess. For example, the U.S. labels probably spend more marketing their music in the U.K. than the U.K. labels spend on marketing in their own country.
Your such an optimist!
SWT basically suffers from the same performance bottleneck as Swing: the event queue and rendering logic share the same thread. This means that lengthy event handling code blocks the UI.
SWT has no thread for the event queue. You have to do the loop yourself (see readAndDispatch method on swt.Display). Rendering, since SWT uses native widgets, is done by the host windowing system. Because of this, SWT is generally always quicker and more responsive *graphically*.
Opening/closing a large project tree is a good example. In netbeans there's no delay no matter how big your project is, in eclipse there is a noticable half second freeze even on small projects.
SWT is not to blame for this delay on opening and closing projects. Eclipse does numerous operations (check for project dependencies, etc) whenever you open or close projects. NetBeans is either not doing these checks or is just doing them better.
If you read the changelogs you'll see they are full of performance fixes. Apparently there are lots of performance issues to fix.
Changelogs reflect completed changes, not changes needing to be done. With that said, it is possible Eclipse has less performance issues needing completion as compared to NetBeans. We'll never know.
Swing can create some really unique user interfaces because it is not tied down to the host windowing system's widgets. But these pretty interfaces have serious flaws. First, Swing has horrible issues with true type fonts outside Windows almost to the point being unreadable. Second, the user interface often operates in a manner foreign to other native applications. Third, I have found that windowing systems like Gnome, KDE, and OSX can cause wierd issues with it.
There are other downsides to NetBeans. NetBeans is ONLY a Java IDE. Eclipse on the otherhand is a platform for developing in various languages. NetBeans also has no capability, or desire for that matter (hello Sun), to run with FOSS implementations of the Java runtime. To me this is not a big deal but to others it might be.
SWT has problems too. I will not leave without mentioning its major flaw: JNI. Luckily, 1.5 introduced some performance improvements in this area.
Now, with the TCP transport in place, I2P is essentially thread-limited (2 threads per connection) to about 250-300 nodes.
Quick solution: don't use threaded connections. Use NIO instead. I will look in to this.
Luring people to I2P now is not useful for development
I2P is an open source project. "Luring" people is essential for its growth. If I2P core team did not want outside input they should close the project until a future time. This is unlikely their belief since they are posting bounties and requesting peer review to reach version 1.
But for now, don't join it yet, and don't announce it here.
Sorry. Already joined. I even download the source and starting to fiddle. I just can't help myself. As for official posting, you can do a slashdot search where I2P has been mentioned several times in the past. Thats how I found out about it to begin with.
I2P can do bittorrents. Unlike magnetic links, the original file is hidden behind a series of tunnels. Theres some encryption in there too for good measure. Check it out at www.i2p.net.
It's only "well documented" in the sense that there's a nifty little tool that turns all public methods into pretty HTML pages.
The documentation covers the public and protected methods that are available for use by programmers. Private methods, fields, etc. are not important when writing your own classpath since no one should access them anyways unless they are extending your implementation. GCJ contains many private methods within the classes that are not in Sun's JVM, and vice versa.
If you tried to write a (non-trivial) program that used the non-trivial parts of the Java APIs (like Swing), using only the API documentation, it wouldn't work
Its been done before. Heres an example: http://swingwt.sourceforge.net/
I've written parts for GCJ by only using the API documentation supplied by Sun. I won't say it's an easy task. What the documentation says it's suppose to do and what the Sun JVM actually does requires some work on the implementors part. The only way around this is if Sun would allow JVM writers to view their source without worrying about the license concerns.
There are many projects that do it this way. Look at Mono. Working from only a specification is quite common.
OO.o issues, from my understanding, are because the free implementations of the JVM do not work as they should. With some tweaking, this is very correctable.
The Java API *is* well documented. The problem with the extensions is that the open source JVMs (GCJ in particular) did not handle them correctly. This is not a big deal. Someone should report the bugs with GCJ to the project's bugzilla -or- help fix GCJ to get it to work. This was the result of the conflict anyways:
The FSF, Stallman explained, did not have a preference for other programming languages over Java. It simply wanted assurance that any Java code would be compatible with free implementations of Java. After discussion options with Carr, he suggested that the Free Software Foundation would concentrate on expanding the GCJ efforts
Yep. Conflict solved. OO.o can stay free of Sun's JVM if it wishes and GCJ gets some bugs exorcised. Everyone wins.
It was difficult. Took me two months of working with greasemonkey, of 3 minutes stolen here, and 5 minutes borrowed there in between calls (did I mention I'm only a phone monkey for a DSL ISP?).
I worked in one of those apps departments. When I was young and naive users like yourself would piss me off. But now I would welcome users taking charge of their work as long as they at least give me notice to what they are doing. Users, I have found, often times have individual needs that are not applicable to the whole. If this makes their work any easier I say more power to them.
Yep. Blackdown was more of a "cool name" for a branch project where a bunch of Sun programmers ported the Sun JVM to Linux. They were even branded, humorously, hackers by Sun. Kinda silly in my opinion.
http://www.blackdown.org/
They should have an operating system that is secure and isn't open to viruses.
Many viruses that hit people have nothing to do with the operating system. Take for instance Firefox. Firefox is not bundled with Windows but it can be installed by the user. Before 1.0.4, there are several known security holes. Is the operating system to blame for any of these?
You need to review the definition of wit.
When I read that my first thought was that I used the word "wittier" incorrectly. So I checked the old trusty dictionary to make sure I wasn't going nuts. The dictionary only confirmed it was used correctly. So I followed by asking an English major to look it over for me. She spotted the obvious missing "t" in rebuttal (Slashdot could use a spellchecker) but said it was otherwise 100% correct in its usage. I then followed by showing her your prior post with the continuous requests to review words. We had quite a laugh. I didn't even bother to give your recent reply any more thought at that point. I'm sure it consists of attempts to prop yourself up as some superior intelligence compared to myself and that, in some strange way, makes your prior statements indisputable. I've seen this defense plenty of times before when someone's beliefs are shattered by another. Like I said in my last post I expected that type of behavior from you and was not very surprised by how your recent reply started. Oh well. I will go seek others who can at least start an intelligent dialog without retorting to angry and childish outpourings.
This is completely and naively incorrect. Companies make money by selling goods and services at a profit.
You are incorrect. Some businesses, such as government agencies for example, do not "sell" anything. A good example is a police officer. They are paid by taxpayers for services rendered. But the police do not actively sell this service. Selling and production are seperate practices. Many forms of business receive monetary reimbursement (not always profit) for simply producing.
Profit is a null concept in science.
But profit is paramount to most businesses. These businesses care very little in science outside its application to produce profit. Why should they?
You need to review the definition of science.
You need to review the definition of science.
You need to review the hiring practices of those who employ violinists.
You need to review the definition of teacher.
You need to review the practices of schools.
In short, I think you need to review your education. It seems to have left some holes.
You may, of course, choose to deal with this by vigorously defending the quality of your education, but if you're smart (and I have no reason to believe you are not just because you have been let down by your educators) you will instead choose to deal with it by fixing your education.
I was hoping for a wittier rebutal. Apparently this is outside your facilities. As for my education, I neither need nor care to defend. In fact, I have no idea why my education is even being brought in to this conversation unless you are trying to display some view that you have a superior education and are thus immune from approach for this reason. That would be comical at best since you can have a doctorite and still be wrong.
The Java code in the newest OO.o, however, does not compile well with open-source Java compilers like the GCJ (GNU Compiler for Java Programming Language).
GCJ is still a work in progress. If OO.o does not work well with it, there is probably a problem in GCJ. GCJ is *suppose* to be compatible. Doing this is difficult work but there is nothing saying that it will not occur, atleast to the point of working with the latest OO.o.
There are also several other free-as-in-beer JVM's. Classpath and Kaffe to name just a few. Have these been tried? Apache has a purposal for a BSD licensed JVM called Harmony that only shows that there is more JVM's on the way.
Sure, the latest OO.o may only run with Sun's JVM. But this is not to say that this will change in the very near future. With that said, the imagined Java Trap by Stallman is only a scare tactic used by a person with his own motivations.
Quite frankly, the one thing we're up to arses in is apps programers, and, ironically, the one thing in the computer field we're desperately short of right now is computer scientists.
We are up to our "arses" in computer apps programmers for a very good reason. Companies make money by producing goods and services. They do not make money by having a gaggle of employees sitting around discussing computer concepts. So those types of people are not hired. Those who know computer science must apply their skills in a manner that is of interest to an employer. This usually translates to apps writers. So, with that said, many of those apps writers you speak poorly of are actually computer scientists.
I do not piss and moan if a kid isn't interested in programming. I try my damndest to find that out, and then direct them to something they are interested in.
Well, I guess it's good that you have taken a personal agenda to weed out those that are not interested in programming. But I am completely mystified to what institution you are teaching from. Teachers in public and private schools in the United States do not "pick and choose" who they teach and do not teach courses to. If you tried to remove a student from your class you'll end up getting removed yourself. This only leaves private teaching. Since most companies only hire employees who have received degrees from credited institutions, I find it unlikely you will ever get students. This is a sharp contrast from violin players who, in truth, do not have such a high requirement on having college degrees. To summarize, I find it hard to believe your claim that you are a teacher.
The market's adjusting, and foreign labor is generally cheaper now.
Foreign labor has always been cheaper. That is not the issue. This is not outsourcing. This is moving foreign labor into domestic market to replace domestic labor.
I say let the genuinely talented or hard working into the US and give 'em a green card.
A green card? Citizenship? H1B visas are not citizens. They are merely foreign workers working in the United States.
The US immigrant policies have really bad problems;
Again, this is not about imigration. Imigration gains citizenship. H1Bs are not citizens. They have the *possibility* of citizenship if granted by their employer. But there is no incentive for employers to do such since by keeping them as non-citizens the H1B is stuck with them to do their bidding.
It's a two faced, dishonest system at the moment... immigrants can get in and when their visa expires noone looks for them...
If they are caught, they are deported. Problem is the sheer number makes it impossible to handle.
if they get pulled over for speeding (after paying 10 years of social security and other taxes), they're deported without a chance to return.
Many illegal immigrants work in jobs where they are paid "under the table". Paying social security would alert INS.
the numerous Hollywood movies seem to make it clear that most American's believe they were single handedly responsible for the victory in Europe.
I do not base my view of history off of Disney. Hollywood aims to entertain rather than educate.
You will find that UK pride in their achivements during WW2 stems mainly from the fact that we held out as long as we did against incredible odds.
Yes, the United States is mentioned in British history books. But after flipping through one of these (for school children), I was surprised how it glorified British victories and often left out U.S. involvement in those very same conflicts. I will admit that U.S. history books are just as biased.
You will find that UK pride in their achivements during WW2 stems mainly from the fact that we held out as long as we did against incredible odds. Remember... you did not experience the kind of attacks that London did during the blitz. Your war was far more conventional.
That would be ignoring the sacrifices of the American Merchant Marine fleet. Conventional? Thousands died sending boatloads of supplies on unarmed boats to the U.K. so they could "hang in there".
http://www.usmm.org/ww2.html
but ever since the 2000 election I lost most of that respect.
The U.S. government, and many of its people, believe we are world leaders. Such a role requires responsibilities that our current administration has approached in a rather ignorant , aristocratic fashion. Democracy should not be confined to only being applied within countries, but should be used in a global fashion too.
capitalism is now drawing closer to its inevitable failure, and the cracks are beginning to show.
Capitalism is a tool of greed. We can only hope it collapses in upon itself and dies a horrible death.
an even greater pity is american's disengagment from constructive political discourse. instead of deciding a future, you have enshrined your past leaders as gods in your cult-of-america religion.
I'm not a flag flying American and I might be jaded by our current political issues, but don't start on bashing the founding fathers. Government based of French and English thinkers? Bullshit. Those founding fathers designed a government that the French and English later model their own governments from, not the other way around. While they were playing around with Kings and Queens the United States formed a representive government. Those founding fathers built the foundation of a government that would become the most powerful country in human history. And during World War II, when both the French and English were struggling against the Germans, the United States quickly drug its ass out of a recession and came to their rescue. Your history books, I am guessing your not of the United States, probably dodges around these simple truths. Brits still try to label the U.S. the "colony" despite it being a country formed from a combination of peoples from many countries.
I never said to port anything. Porting has never been mentioned and is not required. Read the posts before responding blindly.