You're not the only one. I really like Java too. And I'm no newb - I've developed professionally in C, C++, Delphi, C#, VB, Javascript, Pascal, LISP and for a number of decades (three, to be exact). I do agree that there are some issues with Java - a little type inference would go a long way in my opinion. I quite like the idea of closures. Some of the deprecated packages should finally disappear... but these are all small issues. Java/JVM fills a gap that no other language does right now. It's not perfect and I'm sure it will eventually be superseded, but it's a mighty powerful beast right now. I like it a lot.
AHHHH.... Now those are actual FACTS and when you're playing this game, you steer away from facts like the plague. Everyone knows that truth has a well known liberal bias, right?:o) No, when you're doing political debate you spout jingoistic crap and try to paint your opponent with some catch-phrase.
Those FACT things are notoriously difficult, slippery and liable to work against you when people pay too much attention to them. Much better to prevent the voters from ever having to think that deeply about anything.
Its just one of those moronic catch-phrases like "Political correctness gone mad" that lazy people trot out to avoid having to think carefully about a situation they would like to be black and white, but isn't.
Any time I hear one of these phrases, I pretty much hear "I have nothing intelligent to say, but try this jingo on for size!"
Others: "Nanny state interference", "un-American", "socialist". I'm sure you can come up with a bunch more.
You perhaps need to re-read what I wrote since you seem to have misunderstood it.
I didn't say that everyone else in the western world was right and America is all wrong. What I said was that I don't think American's understand how foreign and odd American politics appears to others in the western world.
I know that the US has a Communist party. It also has Green party, as most countries do. But, because you run First Past the Post elections, either of those left wing parties getting a significant number of votes would hand victory to the right by splitting the left wing vote. This is how Bush got elected when Ralph Nader ran. This was what I was complaining about - not that I want the US to lurch left, right or anywhere in fact. I would like American politics to be more representative whereas currently it clearly only represents a very narrow band of beliefs (the difference between the Democrats and Republicans is very slight, for example). The FFP electorial system will weed out any third parties which gain any kind of traction. This is exactly what New Zealand was like under FFP. When we switched to MMP we ended up with a parliament with largely centrist politicians, but with some representation for the far right, far left and Maori representatives. This is a good thing - it actually represents society, whereas FPP never will.
"However, if you just want to snobbishly compare cultures and declare yours superior" Ummm..... never mentioned culture. Again, reread what I wrote, it seems to have escaped you.
"And maybe read up a bit on where your iPad, Internet, and space age materials come from before you decide our whole country is anti-science." Did I say that America was antiscience? I said American POLITICS. I was pretty clear about that. You really need to read things more slowly and think a little more before responding - your brain's not keeping up. If you didn't get that my post was about the US political system then I despair for you.
I think it's rather broad to say that Americans are anti-intellectual, but I'd certainly assert that the political discourse in America has become very much so. I'd like to be able to claim that New Zealand politics wasn't infected with the same malady, but I'd be lying. Shoddy jingoism too often trumps facts and scientific consensus. It's much easier to regurgitate tired slogans like "Political Correctness gone mad!", "Cutting the bureaucratic red tape", "Nanny state interference" than to actually engage one's brains and think through an issue. I think that unfortunately, most people would like a simple cookie cutter wrong solution than a nuanced, sophisticated, well reasoned point of view. People don't like shades of grey - they want black and white, even if that entirely misrepresents the world as it is.
Ummm, no, not from my external point of view nor a view "sold" to me by "your own media and politicans". For a start, New Zealand is too small to produce all our own media for world stories, so it sources media from all over the world - BBC, CNN, Al Jazera et al. But personally, I don't watch a lot of TV news - I compare sources online and see what the US channels are putting out from their own feeds directly. It's mainly Fox & Glenn Beck that gives me an insight into how warped America has become. So if you want to blame the media for my point of view - blame your own. When I was revolted at Tea Party members hurling abuse at Muslim Americans in Orange County, that was entirely brought to me by YOUR media. MY media didn't cover it at all.
Furthermore, my point of view is not external. I have been to America before - admittedly, just the south, mainly Birmingham, for work and even then, that was quite a few years back. I have also lived with Americans before and seen and discussed their viewpoints and heard their comments on the difference between American politics and the rest of the western world's politics. In fact, one of the really interesting comments I got was from a lovely Bostonian girl who said the difference between democracy in the US and in NZ was that in the US, everyone was free to make all the money they wanted (regardless of whether they had any actual ability or chance to do so) whereas in NZ, it was more of a democracy of opportunity, where everyone (relative to the US) had the opportunity to succeed.
You say "I'm sure it's pleasing to imagine that you hold some privileged frame of reference". Well, I'm sure it pleases you to denigrate my point of view by imagining motives for me... but I wasn't claiming a privileged frame of reference, I was claiming that politics in the rest of the western world makes sense to me. I know, having talked to many other Australians, British, French and German people that we all share broadly similar views on how democracy should work and we all pretty much think American politics is mad. My claim wasn't that my point of view was right (although, knock that strawman over if it makes you feel better) but that represents a very common western view of American politics.
But, paradoxically, with the FPP voting system, a successful new party on one side of the political spectrum will give the result to the opposite side, as a result of splitting the vote on their own side of the political spectrum. This is how Bush got elected in the first place.
Without changing FPP, you will never break out of two party politics and your options will forever be few.
His point was not that they have different party names, but that their policies are all but indistinguishable. Which is how it looks to me, too.
As a New Zealander, I have to say that the Democrats are more right wing than our current ruling right wing party. You have nothing as left as our left wing Labour party, who are not especially leftist, by NZ or world standards. I'm not sure I that most Americans appreciate just how right wing, conservative, pretty, ill-educated, reactionary, selfish, jingoistic, partisan, anti-intellectual, anti-science and anti-reason US politics appears from the external point of view. I look to politics in the UK, Australia, France, Germany. I understand what's going on there, it looks similar to what's going on here. I look at US politics and I'm thinking "What the.,..."
I really don't understand how a country that purports to be a democracy has allowed its political discourse to be so railroaded into one tiny spectrum of ideas. You have two parties which are largely indistinguishable. You change the name of the party in charge, but the ideas don't change. You guys really need to ditch first past the post elections - most of the rest of the world has already figured this out.
What's nuts, is if they had produced this... 15 years ago, it'd be amazing. Java promised this kind of functionality but was way too slow. These days, Java has all the safety, portability etc but the performance issues are gone. I don't see what problem Google are solving.
Not really, I was just saying that I understood what the word 'fascism' meant. I wasn't making an argument from authority because I wasn't saying "I'm right because I have a degree", I was saying merely that I understood what a word meant.
Please take into account that I was responding to a post that said, pretty much, "I can ignore you because you used the word 'fascist'". If we're going to discuss valid argument forms, clearly that's not one of them.
I fully agree with you that I know of no "philosophy of apple" courses at University but as stated, that's not really what anyone was talking about.
I apologise if the comment about the education system was misdirected when it came your way. I'd just point out that most of the response I'd got was along the lines of 'I don't have to think about what you said because you said "fascism"' which is especially annoying, stupid and utterly invalid as an argument. I genuinely do not understand why so many posters brains seem to turn off on account of me using that word. Your response at least made sense, even if I don't agree with your point.
You say that you can't use 'fascist' to describe Apple because they're not a country. My response is that you can - and I argued that could be previously (which you have ignored). Also, you fail to explain how labelling people or institutions as 'fascist' has been possible for a number of years but suddenly now is impossible when I want to apply the word to Apple. I'd argue that actual usage of the word is at odds with your assertion. If you are arguing that people or institutions have not been called 'fascist' before, then you are just simply wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
You're not the only one. I really like Java too. And I'm no newb - I've developed professionally in C, C++, Delphi, C#, VB, Javascript, Pascal, LISP and for a number of decades (three, to be exact). I do agree that there are some issues with Java - a little type inference would go a long way in my opinion. I quite like the idea of closures. Some of the deprecated packages should finally disappear... but these are all small issues. Java/JVM fills a gap that no other language does right now. It's not perfect and I'm sure it will eventually be superseded, but it's a mighty powerful beast right now. I like it a lot.
I guess the difference is that Mirah is fast. It's just a thin veneer over Java as far as I can tell.
"Header files implement an interface. That interface is a fact, not subject to copyright. "
Well, actually, no. There's nothing stopping you putting code in header files. Indeed, with C++ header files, this is pretty common.
It's only a convention that .h files are interfaces.
I explicitly referred to politics in Australia, Britain, France, Germany and New Zealand.
There are none so blind as those who will not see. Enjoy your ignorance, I'm done talking to you
AHHHH.... Now those are actual FACTS and when you're playing this game, you steer away from facts like the plague. Everyone knows that truth has a well known liberal bias, right? :o) No, when you're doing political debate you spout jingoistic crap and try to paint your opponent with some catch-phrase.
Those FACT things are notoriously difficult, slippery and liable to work against you when people pay too much attention to them. Much better to prevent the voters from ever having to think that deeply about anything.
Its just one of those moronic catch-phrases like "Political correctness gone mad" that lazy people trot out to avoid having to think carefully about a situation they would like to be black and white, but isn't.
Any time I hear one of these phrases, I pretty much hear "I have nothing intelligent to say, but try this jingo on for size!"
Others: "Nanny state interference", "un-American", "socialist". I'm sure you can come up with a bunch more.
You perhaps need to re-read what I wrote since you seem to have misunderstood it.
I didn't say that everyone else in the western world was right and America is all wrong. What I said was that I don't think American's understand how foreign and odd American politics appears to others in the western world.
I know that the US has a Communist party. It also has Green party, as most countries do. But, because you run First Past the Post elections, either of those left wing parties getting a significant number of votes would hand victory to the right by splitting the left wing vote. This is how Bush got elected when Ralph Nader ran. This was what I was complaining about - not that I want the US to lurch left, right or anywhere in fact. I would like American politics to be more representative whereas currently it clearly only represents a very narrow band of beliefs (the difference between the Democrats and Republicans is very slight, for example). The FFP electorial system will weed out any third parties which gain any kind of traction. This is exactly what New Zealand was like under FFP. When we switched to MMP we ended up with a parliament with largely centrist politicians, but with some representation for the far right, far left and Maori representatives. This is a good thing - it actually represents society, whereas FPP never will.
"However, if you just want to snobbishly compare cultures and declare yours superior" Ummm..... never mentioned culture. Again, reread what I wrote, it seems to have escaped you.
"And maybe read up a bit on where your iPad, Internet, and space age materials come from before you decide our whole country is anti-science." Did I say that America was antiscience? I said American POLITICS. I was pretty clear about that. You really need to read things more slowly and think a little more before responding - your brain's not keeping up. If you didn't get that my post was about the US political system then I despair for you.
I think it's rather broad to say that Americans are anti-intellectual, but I'd certainly assert that the political discourse in America has become very much so. I'd like to be able to claim that New Zealand politics wasn't infected with the same malady, but I'd be lying. Shoddy jingoism too often trumps facts and scientific consensus. It's much easier to regurgitate tired slogans like "Political Correctness gone mad!", "Cutting the bureaucratic red tape", "Nanny state interference" than to actually engage one's brains and think through an issue. I think that unfortunately, most people would like a simple cookie cutter wrong solution than a nuanced, sophisticated, well reasoned point of view. People don't like shades of grey - they want black and white, even if that entirely misrepresents the world as it is.
Ummm, no, not from my external point of view nor a view "sold" to me by "your own media and politicans". For a start, New Zealand is too small to produce all our own media for world stories, so it sources media from all over the world - BBC, CNN, Al Jazera et al. But personally, I don't watch a lot of TV news - I compare sources online and see what the US channels are putting out from their own feeds directly. It's mainly Fox & Glenn Beck that gives me an insight into how warped America has become. So if you want to blame the media for my point of view - blame your own. When I was revolted at Tea Party members hurling abuse at Muslim Americans in Orange County, that was entirely brought to me by YOUR media. MY media didn't cover it at all.
Furthermore, my point of view is not external. I have been to America before - admittedly, just the south, mainly Birmingham, for work and even then, that was quite a few years back. I have also lived with Americans before and seen and discussed their viewpoints and heard their comments on the difference between American politics and the rest of the western world's politics. In fact, one of the really interesting comments I got was from a lovely Bostonian girl who said the difference between democracy in the US and in NZ was that in the US, everyone was free to make all the money they wanted (regardless of whether they had any actual ability or chance to do so) whereas in NZ, it was more of a democracy of opportunity, where everyone (relative to the US) had the opportunity to succeed.
You say "I'm sure it's pleasing to imagine that you hold some privileged frame of reference". Well, I'm sure it pleases you to denigrate my point of view by imagining motives for me... but I wasn't claiming a privileged frame of reference, I was claiming that politics in the rest of the western world makes sense to me. I know, having talked to many other Australians, British, French and German people that we all share broadly similar views on how democracy should work and we all pretty much think American politics is mad. My claim wasn't that my point of view was right (although, knock that strawman over if it makes you feel better) but that represents a very common western view of American politics.
You think Americans are ready to start shooting their fellow Americans?
But, paradoxically, with the FPP voting system, a successful new party on one side of the political spectrum will give the result to the opposite side, as a result of splitting the vote on their own side of the political spectrum. This is how Bush got elected in the first place.
Without changing FPP, you will never break out of two party politics and your options will forever be few.
His point was not that they have different party names, but that their policies are all but indistinguishable. Which is how it looks to me, too.
As a New Zealander, I have to say that the Democrats are more right wing than our current ruling right wing party. You have nothing as left as our left wing Labour party, who are not especially leftist, by NZ or world standards. I'm not sure I that most Americans appreciate just how right wing, conservative, pretty, ill-educated, reactionary, selfish, jingoistic, partisan, anti-intellectual, anti-science and anti-reason US politics appears from the external point of view. I look to politics in the UK, Australia, France, Germany. I understand what's going on there, it looks similar to what's going on here. I look at US politics and I'm thinking "What the.,..."
I really don't understand how a country that purports to be a democracy has allowed its political discourse to be so railroaded into one tiny spectrum of ideas. You have two parties which are largely indistinguishable. You change the name of the party in charge, but the ideas don't change. You guys really need to ditch first past the post elections - most of the rest of the world has already figured this out.
That uses Unity, not HTML5
Minecraft runs in Java, not HTML5
Really? They have boot camp on iOS devices, do they sherlock?
Apple simple disallow competing products to run on their system. Thats WORSE than M$ announcing vapour-ware.
I see. So this really is your ONE argument, and you're going to spam the discussion with it? Is there really any need to repeat your invalid argument?
Ah! They old "I can't argue against you, so I'll DEFINE your position out of existence" ploy.
Well played, old chap. Now go find some books to burn or other ideas to repudiate.
Yeah. Ironically, Apple are acting in a far more anti-competitive manner than M$ ever did and I thought it was intolerable with THEY got away with.
Oh, I see. So they're kinda "Evil-Lite"?
What's nuts, is if they had produced this... 15 years ago, it'd be amazing. Java promised this kind of functionality but was way too slow. These days, Java has all the safety, portability etc but the performance issues are gone. I don't see what problem Google are solving.
I see nothing that this can do that Java couldn't - but safer and with portability.
Not really, I was just saying that I understood what the word 'fascism' meant. I wasn't making an argument from authority because I wasn't saying "I'm right because I have a degree", I was saying merely that I understood what a word meant.
Please take into account that I was responding to a post that said, pretty much, "I can ignore you because you used the word 'fascist'". If we're going to discuss valid argument forms, clearly that's not one of them.
I fully agree with you that I know of no "philosophy of apple" courses at University but as stated, that's not really what anyone was talking about.
I apologise if the comment about the education system was misdirected when it came your way. I'd just point out that most of the response I'd got was along the lines of 'I don't have to think about what you said because you said "fascism"' which is especially annoying, stupid and utterly invalid as an argument. I genuinely do not understand why so many posters brains seem to turn off on account of me using that word. Your response at least made sense, even if I don't agree with your point.
You say that you can't use 'fascist' to describe Apple because they're not a country. My response is that you can - and I argued that could be previously (which you have ignored). Also, you fail to explain how labelling people or institutions as 'fascist' has been possible for a number of years but suddenly now is impossible when I want to apply the word to Apple. I'd argue that actual usage of the word is at odds with your assertion. If you are arguing that people or institutions have not been called 'fascist' before, then you are just simply wrong.
That's the best argument you've put forward so far. You are very clever.