It's frustrating to see that 98% of the commentry on this article is clearly from people who don't understand the select vs single thread/poll trade off or who are just out and out ill-informed Java haters. *sigh* This *is* slashdot, I suppose.
You can't claim self selection as a reason for the selfish elite characterisation when the opposite camp was also selected from the VERY SAME sample population. Duh!
Jeez, I'm begining to think that "Think Different" really means "Dont think at all"
...which included a range of opinions both pro and anti. Of those pro/anti camps, some clearly identifiable character types were extracted.
Selection bias would be a meaningful criticism if you only characterised the pro camp from the facebook crowd - then you could claim that you might have been characterising facebook users instead, but they also characterised the anti-crowd which had different characteristics. Therefore the facebook crowd contains both character types and any concerns about selection bias are clearly misplaced.
Besides which, facebook has HALF A BILLION users. Thats a reasonable section of the population. Not exactly a narrow clique.
I hate to break it to you but your country doesn't have clean hands. You assisted the UK during the Boer Wars in South Park. You involved yourself in WW1 and WW2 even though there was no direct threat to New Zealand. You supported France and the UK during their attempt to seize the Suez Canal.
I certainly never claimed that we have never been to war, so I fail to see how any of that is relevant.
In no way does that equate to: "constantly in war with other countries, bullies them and has a history of supporting enemies of its enemies"
I'm proud of our involvement in WW2. And "no direct threat to NZ?" For fuck's sake, you have heard of the war in the pacific, haven't you?
What was under discussion was the kind of activities that the US was involved with in the bay of pigs, or Guantanamo, or the Contras etc etc...
See the difference?
The natives were suckered out of their land with a treaty that still isn't fully honored.
In what way isn't it honored? I've read the treat of Waitangi and I dispute your claim (which I'm sure you know nothing about and are merely apeing other's opinions)
Try opening a history book before you climb onto the altar of smug superiority.
I stand by my facts, dickhead.
You didn't disprove my first point - we don't involve ourselves in the kind of illegal activity that the US does (supporting 'freedom fighters')
We aren't constantly at war.
We don't go around constanly bullying other countries....and you follow up with a false assertion about a topic unrelated to the initial post.
If you think that creating a great recruting drive for terrorists is "solving the problem", then yeah, sure I agree with you. Let's bomb them into peace.
"Bullshit. Every combat action is subject to public scrutiny, and the commanders have to answer to a Congress that watches the news, right along with reading full reports from the front line."
Like the hundreds of hidden crimes revealed IN THIS VERY EPIDSODE in Wikileaks? Like all the critcal oversight that goes into hidden US actions that occur on foreign soil?
Um. I'm a New Zealander. We're not constantly at war with other countries, we don't bully much (but then, c'mon - that'd be farcical. Attack sheep, maybe?) and we don't support enemies of enemies to undermine them in the sense that the GP meant - by supporting 'freedom fighters'
And a lot of other countries could clain the same, so your claim that "every country in the history of humanity has done the exact same things" is utter bullshit.
I don't agree that you've pointed out a counter example to what I was saying. Yes, priorities are not able to work the same across platforms but that is by definition. They make no guarantee that priorities will work the same across platform.
It's like saying that C is broken because you get a different result by dereferencing null on different platforms. It ain't broken - the results are undefined. Ditto with Java threads - priorities explicitly NOT guaranteed to work across platforms.
Rubbish, Java *is* especially cross platform when compared to other languages. For example, C - which you cite.
If you write a simple command line app, then sure, C and Java are about as cross platform capable as each other. Write a GUI app in C and Java and the former has no cross platform options.
In C, you have to worry about endianness, in Java you don't.
In C, you have to allow that primitives types may have different sizes, in Java you don't.
In C, you have to allow that structures might pack differently, in Java you don't.
In C, critical issues like threading will be platform dependant or non-existent, in Java it's consistent and standard.
Java also has a consistent memory model, which provides a lot of value in working cross platform as well as the huge common library which is likewise valuable.
I could go on, but I think that's sufficient to call BS on your claim.
In Haskell or JavaScript, there are nowhere near as large *common* sets of libraries, so you can't as easily rely on your library of choice being supported on a client system.
Christ, JavaScript doesn't run the same browser to browser, let alone cross platform.
Bullshit. As early on as Java 1.17 I was producing GUI apps that ran on Windows from a Linux development environment.
If DEVELOPERS make assumptions about file names and directory locations then the DEVELOPERS are dumb. That doesn't make Java any more or less cross platform.
I have dozens of Sing Star games. I don't want to throw those away just because I've played them once.
Re:Was Not Impressed at All
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 1
It might sound arrogant, but I knew this was going to happen from the outset. In New Zealand, we got the original series after it had started making waves in the US. I thought 'Lost' sounded intriguing, but then listening to the hype I realised that the financial backers of the series would realise that they were on to a good thing and just spin it out more and more to keep viewers hooked. I knew this because I'd seen it happen with many good TV series previously - the X-Files is a great example: originally compelling, it turned into one conspiracy after another as the writers just spun the story out ad infinitum. Same thing happened with the Matrix 'sequels'.
My fervent wish is that writers would write a story arc at the *start* of a series and then actually stick to the bloody story so viewers won't get short changed like this. If they want to make more money from the series, do a spin off. Do a 'further adventures of...'. DON'T short-change all your loyal fans by never telling an actual story!
The reason I believe that this will never happen is always the same: money. greed. Networks see viewer numbers skyrocketing, their eyes do the cash register ker-ching thing, and that's the whole story. Bastards.
> Why assume the A4 is a dual-core PowerPC when it's built for an OS that restricts the use of multitasking?
"WTF" quote of the day. What does dual-core have to do with multitasking??????????????? Windows did multitasking long before dual core chips existed.
On a related note, the iPhone DOES multitasking; it just doesn't let the USER multitask. How do you suppose an incoming call gets through while you´re listening to music?
And MacOS did multitasking before Windows!
(Yay, the mid-90s flamewar subjects are back!)
And Amiga did pre-emptive multitasking before Macs
Who cares if Java is cool or not? It's getting a lot of actual work done. In fact, there's a crap load more stuff getting done in Java than Ruby or 'The Cloud' or whatever is supposed to be cool these days. In the end, 'coolness' has absolutely no engineering benefits whatsoever.
The fact that Java has lasted as long as it has and is as prevalent as it is now is testament to its ability to GetShitDone(tm)....along with a lot of other useful languages which are useful regardless of whether some hack or slashdot group-think thinks it's trendy or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Which illegal actions / support of rebels did you point out?
I had Bay of Pigs, Guantanamo Bay, Supporting the Contras. And that was just what came to mind off the top of my head, I could go on.
You pointed out that NZ had been to war - yes, no-one ever said otherwise. Where was the illegal military action or support of 'freedom fighters'?
I see you've refused to actually answer the points raised so I'll take that as you conceding them.
Exactly!
It's frustrating to see that 98% of the commentry on this article is clearly from people who don't understand the select vs single thread/poll trade off or who are just out and out ill-informed Java haters. *sigh* This *is* slashdot, I suppose.
Well, your bet is wrong.
You can't claim self selection as a reason for the selfish elite characterisation when the opposite camp was also selected from the VERY SAME sample population. Duh!
Jeez, I'm begining to think that "Think Different" really means "Dont think at all"
Oh well, that invalidates the whole study then.
The study does define what a selfish elite is. But you read it, right?
...which included a range of opinions both pro and anti. Of those pro/anti camps, some clearly identifiable character types were extracted.
Selection bias would be a meaningful criticism if you only characterised the pro camp from the facebook crowd - then you could claim that you might have been characterising facebook users instead, but they also characterised the anti-crowd which had different characteristics. Therefore the facebook crowd contains both character types and any concerns about selection bias are clearly misplaced.
Besides which, facebook has HALF A BILLION users. Thats a reasonable section of the population. Not exactly a narrow clique.
Then the same sampling bias would appeal to the critics, no?
I hate to break it to you but your country doesn't have clean hands. You assisted the UK during the Boer Wars in South Park. You involved yourself in WW1 and WW2 even though there was no direct threat to New Zealand. You supported France and the UK during their attempt to seize the Suez Canal.
I certainly never claimed that we have never been to war, so I fail to see how any of that is relevant.
In no way does that equate to: "constantly in war with other countries, bullies them and has a history of supporting enemies of its enemies"
I'm proud of our involvement in WW2. And "no direct threat to NZ?" For fuck's sake, you have heard of the war in the pacific, haven't you?
What was under discussion was the kind of activities that the US was involved with in the bay of pigs, or Guantanamo, or the Contras etc etc...
See the difference?
The natives were suckered out of their land with a treaty that still isn't fully honored.
In what way isn't it honored? I've read the treat of Waitangi and I dispute your claim (which I'm sure you know nothing about and are merely apeing other's opinions)
Try opening a history book before you climb onto the altar of smug superiority.
I stand by my facts, dickhead.
You didn't disprove my first point - we don't involve ourselves in the kind of illegal activity that the US does (supporting 'freedom fighters')
We aren't constantly at war.
We don't go around constanly bullying other countries. ...and you follow up with a false assertion about a topic unrelated to the initial post.
If you think that creating a great recruting drive for terrorists is "solving the problem", then yeah, sure I agree with you. Let's bomb them into peace.
"Bullshit. Every combat action is subject to public scrutiny, and the commanders have to answer to a Congress that watches the news, right along with reading full reports from the front line."
Like the hundreds of hidden crimes revealed IN THIS VERY EPIDSODE in Wikileaks? Like all the critcal oversight that goes into hidden US actions that occur on foreign soil?
You are incredibly naive.
Um. I'm a New Zealander. We're not constantly at war with other countries, we don't bully much (but then, c'mon - that'd be farcical. Attack sheep, maybe?) and we don't support enemies of enemies to undermine them in the sense that the GP meant - by supporting 'freedom fighters'
And a lot of other countries could clain the same, so your claim that "every country in the history of humanity has done the exact same things" is utter bullshit.
Yeah, because there was no innovation prior to the (fairly recent) introduction of patents to software.
Give me a break!
centripetal
I don't agree that you've pointed out a counter example to what I was saying. Yes, priorities are not able to work the same across platforms but that is by definition. They make no guarantee that priorities will work the same across platform.
It's like saying that C is broken because you get a different result by dereferencing null on different platforms. It ain't broken - the results are undefined. Ditto with Java threads - priorities explicitly NOT guaranteed to work across platforms.
Because Mac *wasn't* a major platform.
Rubbish, Java *is* especially cross platform when compared to other languages. For example, C - which you cite.
If you write a simple command line app, then sure, C and Java are about as cross platform capable as each other. Write a GUI app in C and Java and the former has no cross platform options.
In C, you have to worry about endianness, in Java you don't.
In C, you have to allow that primitives types may have different sizes, in Java you don't.
In C, you have to allow that structures might pack differently, in Java you don't.
In C, critical issues like threading will be platform dependant or non-existent, in Java it's consistent and standard.
Java also has a consistent memory model, which provides a lot of value in working cross platform as well as the huge common library which is likewise valuable.
I could go on, but I think that's sufficient to call BS on your claim.
In Haskell or JavaScript, there are nowhere near as large *common* sets of libraries, so you can't as easily rely on your library of choice being supported on a client system.
Christ, JavaScript doesn't run the same browser to browser, let alone cross platform.
Bullshit. As early on as Java 1.17 I was producing GUI apps that ran on Windows from a Linux development environment.
If DEVELOPERS make assumptions about file names and directory locations then the DEVELOPERS are dumb. That doesn't make Java any more or less cross platform.
I have dozens of Sing Star games. I don't want to throw those away just because I've played them once.
It might sound arrogant, but I knew this was going to happen from the outset. In New Zealand, we got the original series after it had started making waves in the US. I thought 'Lost' sounded intriguing, but then listening to the hype I realised that the financial backers of the series would realise that they were on to a good thing and just spin it out more and more to keep viewers hooked. I knew this because I'd seen it happen with many good TV series previously - the X-Files is a great example: originally compelling, it turned into one conspiracy after another as the writers just spun the story out ad infinitum. Same thing happened with the Matrix 'sequels'.
My fervent wish is that writers would write a story arc at the *start* of a series and then actually stick to the bloody story so viewers won't get short changed like this. If they want to make more money from the series, do a spin off. Do a 'further adventures of...'. DON'T short-change all your loyal fans by never telling an actual story!
The reason I believe that this will never happen is always the same: money. greed. Networks see viewer numbers skyrocketing, their eyes do the cash register ker-ching thing, and that's the whole story. Bastards.
I loved those days. The Amiga community rocked.
Android has grown swiftly and the iphone has dropped off over the same period. I'd say the trends don't look good for Apple.
> Why assume the A4 is a dual-core PowerPC when it's built for an OS that restricts the use of multitasking?
"WTF" quote of the day. What does dual-core have to do with multitasking??????????????? Windows did multitasking long before dual core chips existed.
On a related note, the iPhone DOES multitasking; it just doesn't let the USER multitask. How do you suppose an incoming call gets through while you´re listening to music?
And MacOS did multitasking before Windows!
(Yay, the mid-90s flamewar subjects are back!)
And Amiga did pre-emptive multitasking before Macs
Who cares if Java is cool or not? It's getting a lot of actual work done. In fact, there's a crap load more stuff getting done in Java than Ruby or 'The Cloud' or whatever is supposed to be cool these days. In the end, 'coolness' has absolutely no engineering benefits whatsoever.
The fact that Java has lasted as long as it has and is as prevalent as it is now is testament to its ability to GetShitDone(tm). ...along with a lot of other useful languages which are useful regardless of whether some hack or slashdot group-think thinks it's trendy or not.