"The income and payroll taxes, as well as all the rules and regulations are turning the once productive societies into the third world countries, by creating huge disincentives for people to produce, by moving capital out because societies with gigantic tax rates and so called 'social obligations' have produced entirely unsustainable parasitic governments of enormous size that are strangling the host economy."
The Scandinavian economies are the strongest in the world yet all are highly taxed and highly involved with 'social obligations'
The actual facts do not meet with your dogma, I'm afraid.
I have three decades of software engineering experience. I'm no newbie.
I've coded large systems in C, C++, LISP, Delphi, C#, Java, Javascript, Visual Basic.
It's my opinion that Java is an excellent language for many software engineering purposes. If I am going to work on large systems with other people, I'd gladly choose Java over Javascript or C++. And the reason that Java is a good choice for those contexts and Javascript or C++ isn't, is because Java is very well designed.
Being a good language is about getting stuff done not being buzzword compliant or "state of the art". If you judge the worth of a programming language by how cool it is rather than how useful then I'd say you're not the target market for Java anyway. It's used to actually make large stable systems, not for being pretentious about what whizzy features your language supports.
And, as it happens, I think that Java has made some significant contributions to software engineering. You mentioned making garbage collection acceptable. It's also a significant experiment in attempting "write once, run anywhere" - even the degree to which that goal were not met are instructive. The HotSpot JIT technology was extremely high tech and significant. For a VM to produce code that sometimes out performs C is extremely significant.
Anyway my actual claim was that the influence on the industry which you acknowledge that Java has is "something of value". Yes, a lot of the ideas came from Smalltalk and LISP, but neither of those languages managed to influence mainstream software engineering to almost ANY degree. Java *did* make their ideas popular and that is significant in it's own right. And post Java, those ideas are being re-examined and re-implemented in a number of new languages. I think Java helped make that happen.
I think that C was a very similar language - not at all the kind of thing that pretentious academic wankers would write papers about, but very good for getting stuff done. I'm a doer, not a wanker. I suspect that I know what camp you're in.
Exactly. Which is why this "all languages are equivalent" mantra is just so much bullshit. All languages have domains for which they are more or less suited.
I don't do script-like tasks in assembler, I don't do device drivers in Java, I don't write enterprise apps in Javascript or VB. Neither do most sane software engineers. This isn't a coincidence, it's because certain tools are better at certain jobs. People who argue that it doesn't matter what language you use cannot explain why good software engineers know why some languages are inappropriate for some jobs.
You have to be some kind of uber noob to think that Java and the ecosystem it has engendered could ever be called "nothing of value". There are more jobs in Java and open source projects on Source Forge in Java than in any other language. Java is not everyone's cup of tea - neither are other significant languages like C or LISP, but to pretend that Java, like any of these languages offers "nothing of value" is either arrogance or ignorance beyond belief.
I know that/. no longer caters to a technically literate crowd but you take the cake. I feel stupider for even bothering to reply to you.
Yeah, I agree. I use remote X sessions from time to time, but there's nothing I do that can't be run in a different way (VNC is fine). And, we've all been aware for a long time that Xwasn't the most efficient beast around.
The poster you were replying to was joking you dumb fuck.
And calling me "red neck" for being concerned about the definition of a political term seems like the exact opposite of how that term should be applied.
Oracle doesn't seem to have received that message.
They're aware of the legal status of the OpenJDK - Google isn't protected because they don't implement a full, certified Java stack. They take parts of Java and are not compatible with the whole Java stack. Google could have done this in a way to get patent protection but they chose not to.
Even if it turns out that Oracle's case is lost, OpenJDK isn't patent protected, it's only protected against the old Sun patents. It could still violate someone elses patent that Sun doesn't own.
Yes, but EVERY piece of software is in that situation! There MIGHT be a patent SOMEWHERE that you violate - that's the nature of our litigious times. However, the patents in question are those Sun patents and THEY are protected for OpenJDK.
You really are spreading a lot of FUD about this situation.
You are completely nuts if you think people are just going to drop Java because of this. There's way too much invested in Java for that to happen. This might affect people in FOSS world but it'll make SFA difference elsewhere.
I develop with Java commercially, I think Oracle are utter douchebags (especially Ellison, what a fuckwit) but that doesn't change Java's task suitability. You have to be pretty infantile to select your tools on that basis.
That's nothing like Communism, you moron. "ideal yet infested with the human nature" describes pretty much every human endevour. A free market could be described thusly showing how rediculous it is for you to claim to be describing Communism.
Too many Americans use "Communism" like a rubber stamp to whack on anything they don't like but don't want to have to think about too much, and without thinking at all whether it makes any sense to apply such a label. In New Zealand, our red-necks use "Politically Correct" in a similar manner. It's a catch-cry for the intellectually lazy.
No it isn't. Both parties in a symbiotic relationship benefit by it. Not so in a parasitic relationship wherein only the parasite benefits (and usually at the host's expense)
Slashdot Mirror
"The income and payroll taxes, as well as all the rules and regulations are turning the once productive societies into the third world countries, by creating huge disincentives for people to produce, by moving capital out because societies with gigantic tax rates and so called 'social obligations' have produced entirely unsustainable parasitic governments of enormous size that are strangling the host economy."
The Scandinavian economies are the strongest in the world yet all are highly taxed and highly involved with 'social obligations'
The actual facts do not meet with your dogma, I'm afraid.
C++ is an academic language???
FFS!
You are a moron. Goodbye.
So, you really think that HYPE has been powering enterprise for the last 15 years?
Man, HYPE is pretty damn effective
Maybe for the first half a decade
In the real world, Java gets a lot of shit done. Buzzwords don't.
I have three decades of software engineering experience. I'm no newbie.
I've coded large systems in C, C++, LISP, Delphi, C#, Java, Javascript, Visual Basic.
It's my opinion that Java is an excellent language for many software engineering purposes. If I am going to work on large systems with other people, I'd gladly choose Java over Javascript or C++. And the reason that Java is a good choice for those contexts and Javascript or C++ isn't, is because Java is very well designed.
Being a good language is about getting stuff done not being buzzword compliant or "state of the art". If you judge the worth of a programming language by how cool it is rather than how useful then I'd say you're not the target market for Java anyway. It's used to actually make large stable systems, not for being pretentious about what whizzy features your language supports.
And, as it happens, I think that Java has made some significant contributions to software engineering. You mentioned making garbage collection acceptable. It's also a significant experiment in attempting "write once, run anywhere" - even the degree to which that goal were not met are instructive. The HotSpot JIT technology was extremely high tech and significant. For a VM to produce code that sometimes out performs C is extremely significant.
Anyway my actual claim was that the influence on the industry which you acknowledge that Java has is "something of value". Yes, a lot of the ideas came from Smalltalk and LISP, but neither of those languages managed to influence mainstream software engineering to almost ANY degree. Java *did* make their ideas popular and that is significant in it's own right. And post Java, those ideas are being re-examined and re-implemented in a number of new languages. I think Java helped make that happen.
I think that C was a very similar language - not at all the kind of thing that pretentious academic wankers would write papers about, but very good for getting stuff done. I'm a doer, not a wanker. I suspect that I know what camp you're in.
Slashdot used to appeal to the technically literate. *sigh*
Exactly. Which is why this "all languages are equivalent" mantra is just so much bullshit. All languages have domains for which they are more or less suited.
I don't do script-like tasks in assembler, I don't do device drivers in Java, I don't write enterprise apps in Javascript or VB. Neither do most sane software engineers. This isn't a coincidence, it's because certain tools are better at certain jobs. People who argue that it doesn't matter what language you use cannot explain why good software engineers know why some languages are inappropriate for some jobs.
You have to be some kind of uber noob to think that Java and the ecosystem it has engendered could ever be called "nothing of value". There are more jobs in Java and open source projects on Source Forge in Java than in any other language. Java is not everyone's cup of tea - neither are other significant languages like C or LISP, but to pretend that Java, like any of these languages offers "nothing of value" is either arrogance or ignorance beyond belief.
I know that /. no longer caters to a technically literate crowd but you take the cake. I feel stupider for even bothering to reply to you.
Because it was written by a whiny bitch? I mean, did you read the article? It's basically "they took my favourite toy! wah!"
Yeah, I agree. I use remote X sessions from time to time, but there's nothing I do that can't be run in a different way (VNC is fine). And, we've all been aware for a long time that Xwasn't the most efficient beast around.
Let's see what Cannonical comes up with.
The poster you were replying to was joking you dumb fuck.
And calling me "red neck" for being concerned about the definition of a political term seems like the exact opposite of how that term should be applied.
At least you can spell 'moron'. Well done.
Oracle doesn't seem to have received that message.
They're aware of the legal status of the OpenJDK - Google isn't protected because they don't implement a full, certified Java stack. They take parts of Java and are not compatible with the whole Java stack. Google could have done this in a way to get patent protection but they chose not to.
Even if it turns out that Oracle's case is lost, OpenJDK isn't patent protected, it's only protected against the old Sun patents. It could still violate someone elses patent that Sun doesn't own.
Yes, but EVERY piece of software is in that situation! There MIGHT be a patent SOMEWHERE that you violate - that's the nature of our litigious times. However, the patents in question are those Sun patents and THEY are protected for OpenJDK.
You really are spreading a lot of FUD about this situation.
Uhhh.... The OpenJDK is GPL'd and patent protected.
You are completely nuts if you think people are just going to drop Java because of this. There's way too much invested in Java for that to happen. This might affect people in FOSS world but it'll make SFA difference elsewhere.
I develop with Java commercially, I think Oracle are utter douchebags (especially Ellison, what a fuckwit) but that doesn't change Java's task suitability. You have to be pretty infantile to select your tools on that basis.
The LOTR films were worth hundreds of millions to NZ. These films will be similar, no doubt.
Yeah, that's the way of a lot of human institutions. Religions often work in the same way. So do political parties and businesses.
You need unions, you just don't need to agree with everything they want. Just like politicians.
...and screw over the UK for years to come
Don't be sticking your stinking facts in the way of our mindless bigotry!
That's nothing like Communism, you moron. "ideal yet infested with the human nature" describes pretty much every human endevour. A free market could be described thusly showing how rediculous it is for you to claim to be describing Communism.
Too many Americans use "Communism" like a rubber stamp to whack on anything they don't like but don't want to have to think about too much, and without thinking at all whether it makes any sense to apply such a label. In New Zealand, our red-necks use "Politically Correct" in a similar manner. It's a catch-cry for the intellectually lazy.
Actually, I'd go with Confluence. It's not OSS, but it's and awesome Wiki. Choose what's the best tool for the job, not what suits your religion.
Yup, that was *exactly* what I was thinking. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/apr04/04-02sunagreementpr.mspx
I mean, yeah, what the fuck would James Gosling know, compared to you, eh?
Quite. My America's Army clan is more about talking to people than it is shooting them (although that helps!)
These Facebook games seem quite creepy to me.
No it isn't. Both parties in a symbiotic relationship benefit by it. Not so in a parasitic relationship wherein only the parasite benefits (and usually at the host's expense)