So. what - you got a ticket once and it made you have a bad day so it must be the same for everyone everywhere? The evidence does not support your position. Even if these fines were not being disproportionately levied against poor communities (I see that as the real factor, not race, but boy are those 2 tangled up in a big ol' Ooruboros / rat king type situation), the fact that there is 0 fucks given that a person can actually pay the fine as opposed to entering a downward spiral of late fees (which they also can't pay) is utterly ridiculous.
It's like the asshole who jacked up the price of a pill 4000x. It's a blatant, disgusting cash grab that is totally unsustainable and leaves devastation in it's wake, ensuring that these already struggling populations will be permanently stuck in the rat maze. Sure, lots of the problems in poor and black communities are perpetuated from within, but this is the kind of shit that is perpetrated upon them and they have every right to be pissed about it, particularly when it is occasionally seasoned with a police shooting or 10.
Great, so it's the headline --> comment section 2ms attention span for science. I'm sure this won't lead to isolated observations being turned into headlines and massively misconstrued as ammunition for people's agendas. I look forward to when this journal replaces Wikipedia as the most laughable thing one could possibly supply as a source to back up their lunatic ravings on/.
First of all, 'Obamacare' is not a financial entity that has the capacity to go bankrupt. I suspect you know that, but for some reason you are A-OK with sounding like an idiot, or else you may have gone 10 seconds past the headline that gave you a republi-chubby and read this:
Some are weighing turning over part or all of their troubled marketplaces to the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov, which now works smoothly.
Even as a supporter of the program, I am shocked at how well it is actually working given that the ACA was run through a congressional blender and it has been getting torpedoed at every turn both as a law and as a practical implementation. You know, the best way to prove something doesn't work is to let it fail on it's own. When you piss in somebody's test tubes that is not disproving their experimental hypothesis - that is just being an asshole. Remember when all the conservative talking heads were gleefully calling for everybody to execute low-tech DDoS on the new healthcare.gov? Meanwhile my mother was trying to get fucking healthcare. And not once did anybody ever propose a better idea than ACA that could be taken seriously.
So if childish bullshit like this is the best you have to offer as an alternative to ACA, then I think I will side with Barry thank you very much.
Um, no. 'The Job' is what I am hiring you to do. These are the things required to do that job, they are not matters of personal preference and working style. Without these things, there is no other alternate route to arrive at a satisfactory outcome for 'The Job', Bully for you for getting away with that attitude for so long, but you may want to either reconsider it or hold on to your current job for as long as you can, because that 'this is how I do things now stay out of my way' shit does not fly in a real, large-scale enterprise software delivery ecosystem. Particularly when the little turds made by guys like you who sidestep QA and standards to 'do your job' result in the melting of a high voltage transmission line somewhere in Saudi Arabia when they float to the surface, all because you couldn't be bothered to participate in the processes by which we ensure consistency and quality among the 100s of software components that make up the platform we deliver. Oh, but you're a real rockstar who goes his own way though, so that's cool - what's a few million dollars, when we might risk cramping your style?
I think it's funny that his complaint is not that the PI requires all these accessories, but that the mere knowledge of their existence and that they must be managed is going to turn away a student. Bullshit.
This kind of thing may actually make it all the better for a teaching tool. I think one of the primary reasons people bounce off the surface of a complex subject area is when you are lied to up front in a teaching environment that something is simple, then are hit with an exponential increase in complexity and general pain-in-the-ass-ness when you try to do it on your own from scratch. Learning how hard and tedious it can be to make something from scratch is part of the learning process, and helps harden you against despair when you are doing it for real and it's not all fun in Imagineering land.
This, for example, is the reason I bounced off of chemistry - first it's all nice rules and predictable properties of elements and how they bond, then they hit you with all the crazy shit and you realize you will need to memorize a tome of special cases and branching conditionals to have anything more than trivial knowledge on the subject. Or like learning a foreign language, when in the second year they start telling you how there are almost fewer verbs that conjugate nicely than there are silly ones that don't (or noun genders - I will never understand why that is a thing).
Now, I think dealing with cabling hell is not necessarily the best way to imbue this particular lesson, but the lesson is nonetheless a valuable one for anybody starting out in an advanced hobby/profession. I've lost count of the number of interns we have had go all wobbly when they come in with some decent coding skills but then get exposed to Maven, CI pipelines, SCM, coding standards, architectural guidelines, etc. and they realize that they can do literally nothing the way they are accustomed to doing in their learning vacuum.
Making stuff is hard, or else everybody would do it.
Whenever the stark reality of data flies in the face of warmists agenda they get hostile and to ad hominem.
That was quite masterful the way you used satire to demonstrate the same logical fallacy you were decrying. And with a dash of strawman thrown in, too - are you a former Colbert writer?
I also love the way you use ridiculous hyperbole to lampoon the layman who thinks he knows so much about such a vastly complicated issue that he is fully confident in calling it black or white, and calling anybody an idiot who does not agree with the stark color of his vehemently stated but argumentatively void comments.
The more I read your post, the more I think you might just be this century's Voltaire - a true master. I mean you lit this fucker up like a winning bingo card:
To be fair, the left hurls plenty of reductionist garbage insults as well. In my personal observation I would say less so (or at least less rabidly), but I acknowledge this could just be sample bias based on what I read.
What I do notice is that from the right it does seem more often very intelligence / education centric (you are an idiot, a know-nothing, a sheep). When couched in a 3 line shit sandwich of insults with no actual intellectual content, I have to agree that it reeks of projection and insecurity. Kind of like trying to head off any valid discussion on racial inequality by calling everybody racists for talking about race. If you are truly such a goddamn genius that will be borne out in your rhetoric, but so far you are on the level of a human bumper sticker. Kind of hard to take your claims of intelligence seriously.
I see (and cringe at) Liberals do a lot of foaming at the mouth too, but this seems to be more centered in moral outrage. I think the kids are calling it 'SJW' now, speaking of reductionist garbage.
My favorite part (talking about both sides) is how the insult is always followed up with a straw man profile of the other person that is the WWI propaganda-poster-of-the-enemy version of whatever they represent, showing that this is about the level of understanding that the commenter has for the world outside their bubble. This one really cracks me up since part of the supposedly insulting profile is that this person has a high level of education in the field about which we are all arguing, which I guess makes him dumb somehow? Or is it because all they can do is ape opinions from an idealogue authority source (hmm, think I just caught another whiff of projection).
Your mistake is that you seem to think that agnosticism is a position on a linear spectrum somewhere between the fundamentalist and atheism extents, where the 'God' on the left side is one of your dictative, vengeful, scripture-dispersing types. Personally, I think it is as silly to state with certainty there is no larger force or entity at work in the universe as it is to state that you have any clue as to what that entity is thinking. If such an entity exits, its patterns of thinking or action would be so impossible to distinguish from the general workings of the universe as to make its existence irrelevant to us. It sure as hell isn't telling us to eat fish on Friday, of that I feel quite certain. I can't possibly prove/disprove know what to make of this entity if it exists, consequently I waste very little time worrying about whether or not it does. This strikes me as a far more rational position than either fundamentalism or atheism, who both spend far more time arguing this question than it deserves. If it turns out the universe is a hologram projected on the back of a turtle, both fundies and atheists will be proven to have wasted so much energy being wrong, and I will just say 'Oh, shit that's pretty cool'.
Yeah, you were thinking of this comment:
"God bless America for being the land of opportunity for my ancestors who came here for religious or economic reasons. Fuck all those people trying to get in to escape a horrifying wave of violence and death"
Don't worry though, you won't have to wait but a few minutes before it comes up again.
No, I understand it quite well (see below). I also understand that saying you are trained in UX (actually being good at it I mean, not just Shingy-ing your way around the office pissing everybody the hell off) is like saying you have a degree in being a virtuoso genius composer. Immensely valuable when true, almost always false.
Yes. I fully recognize the power of an inspired, well thought out user experience and the immense difficulty involved in creating one. My beef is with the incredibly watered down term 'UX' and the amount of facepalming it tends to herald when spoken in an actual work environment. And yes, UX != UI. Note that the OP was already failing at this distinction, hence my statement to look within, not dress the pig up with a new UI and some documentation. Your definition of UX really just furthers my point - you cannot manufacture a good user experience on top of a messy back-end. You also can't make one that is at odds with the fundamental natures and behaviors of the back-end just to suit your designs, which is what just about every UX 'design-fu ninja' or whatever I have ever worked with tries to do. So yeah, I guess you could say I have a bit of a chip on my shoulder about it. I mad bro.
Yep. It sounds like at this point you have a veritable Shoggoth-worth of organically introduced additions to this platform over time with no pauses in between to refactor and clean things up. Sensible, modular, architectures with APIs for common patterns and behaviors are what make intuitive UIs work well, you can't just make it up from the outside. The magnitude increase of cost and complexity for trying to develop a UI that 'translates' your legacy crazy into modern sexy is easily 50-100x. If this is what you are proposing your team is absolutely right that it is insane, and frankly you should be fired if you portrayed that to management as a possible solution. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant a refactor/redesign would be implied in this effort, but you used "UX" which, just as a knee-jerk reaction, makes me want to kick you in the balls, take your wallet, get your address from your license and go burn your house down. For the love of god don't use that term with your developers, and if it is in your job title somewhere please go back to school for something real, like 'Communications'.
I was just listening to the 'In Our Time' podcast episode about Godel's incompleteness theorem as it applies to the card/liar paradox, so I already had a brain primed for nonsense.
Oh OK, like hillbillies losing their goddamn minds over the removal of a flag? Or a fictitious war on Christianity?
Yes, and it also includes people who use idiotic terms like 'migroaggression', perpetrators of reverse-discrimination, and dipshits co-opting the real life pain of some group so they can spout some 'my people' bullshit.on their college site's discussion forum.
My point is that your definition describes anybody who has ever become uppity over a state or societal policy which they think impinges on their world view or system of morality. Pretty fucking broad, therefore a useless term reserved only for brain stem operating morons,
Seriously. I don't think I've ever seen a term go so quickly from inception to dilution to the point where when somebody invokes it I truly have no idea what the fuck they are talking about. I get that there are a bunch of professional victim crybabies out there (news flash: they show up on both the 'PC' and 'bigoted assholes butthurt they can't be bigoted assholes anymore' sides), but now it just seems to mean anybody that has ever once called for a basic modicum of respect for other people.
'SJW' is now just a self-ambiguating term that calls out anybody using it as a simple-minded tool. It's the new Nazi metaphor. Can we please just stop it, and go back to using actual words to describe our thoughts and feelings?
Non-facetiously, I do think it also has to do with many of the technical / app store factors already listed here.
But,
It takes all of 5 minutes to run through every possible customization option in iOS, which leaves you turning to games that much quicker in your eternal quest to find more ways to stare at your phone. On Android you have a solid week ahead of you of trying out every possible flavor of the settings and apps that customize your phone. And that's just on the 'legit' app store.
Not denigrating either experience, this is just based on my experience switching between the two. I always found gaming on phones to be a frustrating waste of time. Never once considered putting anything but crosswords on my Android. But with iOS it gets stale so much faster that I ended up buying a number of games just because there isn't really any fun dinking around with the phone itself to be had.
Just wait until a bug in your software is responsible for forcing an operator of a 5 state regional power grid to have to revert to manually operating a 5 minute energy dispatch / reliability study cycle. I assure you that the threats will start very quickly, and that 24 hours would be a very generous allowance in that scenario. They will not give the least of shits that the bug is in 3rd party code or whether that code is open/closed source.
The thing is though, when your dependency code base is OSS, you are actually capable of finding and fixing the problem yourself, often just by subclassing something or creating an alternate implementation of an interface. Many times being able to see the anatomy of the issue allows you to work around it from the outside. I can't imagine turnaround like this ever being possible in a closed-source system, at least not without requiring enormously expensive contracts with not just the delivering company but each vendor supplying any part of the solution.
No, you must not be a big Java fan (or person who is the least bit aware of how it works or what it is good for). You do realize that it is not the language that would be patched but a commonly used open source project, right? And that such projects can be written in any language to have vulnerabilities? Hmm...how many vulnerability-inducing DLLs/SOs have ever been created vs.jars? Which one is more likely to allow arbitrary code execution vs. just offering somebody the ability to destabilize the application itself? Yeah, we really need to 'patch' that Java menace. And, to do a compare/contrast of Java / C++ based on syntax and the basics of object allocation just severely misses the point of why you would use one or the other.
Holy shit. Do you actually think that this has anything to do with the Java that is installed on your computer? To be safe, better go ahead and delete that OS too!
So let me get this straight:
You ban commons.
You copy what you were using from commons into your own codebase (hint: this also was all you were using of commons it when you still had it).
To hold to your insane 'not invented here' paranoia, you must also have banned all other projects that use commons as a dependency.
So, you copy from those projects what you use, then make it use your own 'commons', or maybe you re-implement them wholesale.
You rest assured in the knowledge that nasty commons code which you were not invoking will not wake up and start doing evil things all on its own, and that all of the wonderful proprietary wheels which you have re-invented are all sure to be 100% vulnerability-free because you wrote them.
???
Profit
You are a genius.
The garbage collector only obscures memory leaks if you look for them in the wrong place. If you actually took the time to learn how something works before dismissing it, you might find that profiling the JVM heap and backtracking excessive object allocations / orphanings is about the easiest problem one can detect / solve in a Java application.
And who the hell is using Java for gaming/multimedia? No wonder you disliked the screwdriver with which you attempted to hammer a nail. I might as well say that C++ is shit because it takes too long to build a web UI or implement an enterprise BPM engine.
I am almost impressed at your epic failure of both reading comprehension and logic.
Also, who the hell chooses Java for speed? Java has benefits and detriments. If you think you can say C++ > Java just because you wrote some big loopy tests, you are even dumber than your above statement makes you look.
Slashdot Mirror
It's like the asshole who jacked up the price of a pill 4000x. It's a blatant, disgusting cash grab that is totally unsustainable and leaves devastation in it's wake, ensuring that these already struggling populations will be permanently stuck in the rat maze. Sure, lots of the problems in poor and black communities are perpetuated from within, but this is the kind of shit that is perpetrated upon them and they have every right to be pissed about it, particularly when it is occasionally seasoned with a police shooting or 10.
Great, so it's the headline --> comment section 2ms attention span for science. I'm sure this won't lead to isolated observations being turned into headlines and massively misconstrued as ammunition for people's agendas. I look forward to when this journal replaces Wikipedia as the most laughable thing one could possibly supply as a source to back up their lunatic ravings on /.
Don't forget Xenu.
Some are weighing turning over part or all of their troubled marketplaces to the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov, which now works smoothly.
Even as a supporter of the program, I am shocked at how well it is actually working given that the ACA was run through a congressional blender and it has been getting torpedoed at every turn both as a law and as a practical implementation. You know, the best way to prove something doesn't work is to let it fail on it's own. When you piss in somebody's test tubes that is not disproving their experimental hypothesis - that is just being an asshole. Remember when all the conservative talking heads were gleefully calling for everybody to execute low-tech DDoS on the new healthcare.gov? Meanwhile my mother was trying to get fucking healthcare. And not once did anybody ever propose a better idea than ACA that could be taken seriously.
So if childish bullshit like this is the best you have to offer as an alternative to ACA, then I think I will side with Barry thank you very much.
Um, no. 'The Job' is what I am hiring you to do. These are the things required to do that job, they are not matters of personal preference and working style. Without these things, there is no other alternate route to arrive at a satisfactory outcome for 'The Job', Bully for you for getting away with that attitude for so long, but you may want to either reconsider it or hold on to your current job for as long as you can, because that 'this is how I do things now stay out of my way' shit does not fly in a real, large-scale enterprise software delivery ecosystem. Particularly when the little turds made by guys like you who sidestep QA and standards to 'do your job' result in the melting of a high voltage transmission line somewhere in Saudi Arabia when they float to the surface, all because you couldn't be bothered to participate in the processes by which we ensure consistency and quality among the 100s of software components that make up the platform we deliver. Oh, but you're a real rockstar who goes his own way though, so that's cool - what's a few million dollars, when we might risk cramping your style?
This kind of thing may actually make it all the better for a teaching tool. I think one of the primary reasons people bounce off the surface of a complex subject area is when you are lied to up front in a teaching environment that something is simple, then are hit with an exponential increase in complexity and general pain-in-the-ass-ness when you try to do it on your own from scratch. Learning how hard and tedious it can be to make something from scratch is part of the learning process, and helps harden you against despair when you are doing it for real and it's not all fun in Imagineering land.
This, for example, is the reason I bounced off of chemistry - first it's all nice rules and predictable properties of elements and how they bond, then they hit you with all the crazy shit and you realize you will need to memorize a tome of special cases and branching conditionals to have anything more than trivial knowledge on the subject. Or like learning a foreign language, when in the second year they start telling you how there are almost fewer verbs that conjugate nicely than there are silly ones that don't (or noun genders - I will never understand why that is a thing).
Now, I think dealing with cabling hell is not necessarily the best way to imbue this particular lesson, but the lesson is nonetheless a valuable one for anybody starting out in an advanced hobby/profession. I've lost count of the number of interns we have had go all wobbly when they come in with some decent coding skills but then get exposed to Maven, CI pipelines, SCM, coding standards, architectural guidelines, etc. and they realize that they can do literally nothing the way they are accustomed to doing in their learning vacuum.
Making stuff is hard, or else everybody would do it.
Whenever the stark reality of data flies in the face of warmists agenda they get hostile and to ad hominem.
That was quite masterful the way you used satire to demonstrate the same logical fallacy you were decrying. And with a dash of strawman thrown in, too - are you a former Colbert writer?
I also love the way you use ridiculous hyperbole to lampoon the layman who thinks he knows so much about such a vastly complicated issue that he is fully confident in calling it black or white, and calling anybody an idiot who does not agree with the stark color of his vehemently stated but argumentatively void comments.
The more I read your post, the more I think you might just be this century's Voltaire - a true master. I mean you lit this fucker up like a winning bingo card:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.c...
I'm truly impressed. A+.
What I do notice is that from the right it does seem more often very intelligence / education centric (you are an idiot, a know-nothing, a sheep). When couched in a 3 line shit sandwich of insults with no actual intellectual content, I have to agree that it reeks of projection and insecurity. Kind of like trying to head off any valid discussion on racial inequality by calling everybody racists for talking about race. If you are truly such a goddamn genius that will be borne out in your rhetoric, but so far you are on the level of a human bumper sticker. Kind of hard to take your claims of intelligence seriously.
I see (and cringe at) Liberals do a lot of foaming at the mouth too, but this seems to be more centered in moral outrage. I think the kids are calling it 'SJW' now, speaking of reductionist garbage.
My favorite part (talking about both sides) is how the insult is always followed up with a straw man profile of the other person that is the WWI propaganda-poster-of-the-enemy version of whatever they represent, showing that this is about the level of understanding that the commenter has for the world outside their bubble. This one really cracks me up since part of the supposedly insulting profile is that this person has a high level of education in the field about which we are all arguing, which I guess makes him dumb somehow? Or is it because all they can do is ape opinions from an idealogue authority source (hmm, think I just caught another whiff of projection).
Your mistake is that you seem to think that agnosticism is a position on a linear spectrum somewhere between the fundamentalist and atheism extents, where the 'God' on the left side is one of your dictative, vengeful, scripture-dispersing types. Personally, I think it is as silly to state with certainty there is no larger force or entity at work in the universe as it is to state that you have any clue as to what that entity is thinking. If such an entity exits, its patterns of thinking or action would be so impossible to distinguish from the general workings of the universe as to make its existence irrelevant to us. It sure as hell isn't telling us to eat fish on Friday, of that I feel quite certain. I can't possibly prove/disprove know what to make of this entity if it exists, consequently I waste very little time worrying about whether or not it does. This strikes me as a far more rational position than either fundamentalism or atheism, who both spend far more time arguing this question than it deserves. If it turns out the universe is a hologram projected on the back of a turtle, both fundies and atheists will be proven to have wasted so much energy being wrong, and I will just say 'Oh, shit that's pretty cool'.
Yeah, you were thinking of this comment: "God bless America for being the land of opportunity for my ancestors who came here for religious or economic reasons. Fuck all those people trying to get in to escape a horrifying wave of violence and death" Don't worry though, you won't have to wait but a few minutes before it comes up again.
No, I understand it quite well (see below). I also understand that saying you are trained in UX (actually being good at it I mean, not just Shingy-ing your way around the office pissing everybody the hell off) is like saying you have a degree in being a virtuoso genius composer. Immensely valuable when true, almost always false.
Yes. I fully recognize the power of an inspired, well thought out user experience and the immense difficulty involved in creating one. My beef is with the incredibly watered down term 'UX' and the amount of facepalming it tends to herald when spoken in an actual work environment. And yes, UX != UI. Note that the OP was already failing at this distinction, hence my statement to look within, not dress the pig up with a new UI and some documentation. Your definition of UX really just furthers my point - you cannot manufacture a good user experience on top of a messy back-end. You also can't make one that is at odds with the fundamental natures and behaviors of the back-end just to suit your designs, which is what just about every UX 'design-fu ninja' or whatever I have ever worked with tries to do. So yeah, I guess you could say I have a bit of a chip on my shoulder about it. I mad bro.
Yep. It sounds like at this point you have a veritable Shoggoth-worth of organically introduced additions to this platform over time with no pauses in between to refactor and clean things up. Sensible, modular, architectures with APIs for common patterns and behaviors are what make intuitive UIs work well, you can't just make it up from the outside. The magnitude increase of cost and complexity for trying to develop a UI that 'translates' your legacy crazy into modern sexy is easily 50-100x. If this is what you are proposing your team is absolutely right that it is insane, and frankly you should be fired if you portrayed that to management as a possible solution. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant a refactor/redesign would be implied in this effort, but you used "UX" which, just as a knee-jerk reaction, makes me want to kick you in the balls, take your wallet, get your address from your license and go burn your house down. For the love of god don't use that term with your developers, and if it is in your job title somewhere please go back to school for something real, like 'Communications'.
I was just listening to the 'In Our Time' podcast episode about Godel's incompleteness theorem as it applies to the card/liar paradox, so I already had a brain primed for nonsense.
Most people have at least one deeply held belief that is wrong. What's yours?
That I have a deeply held belief that is wrong...oh shit I think I just fell into that wormhole from the end of 2001.
Yes, and it also includes people who use idiotic terms like 'migroaggression', perpetrators of reverse-discrimination, and dipshits co-opting the real life pain of some group so they can spout some 'my people' bullshit.on their college site's discussion forum.
My point is that your definition describes anybody who has ever become uppity over a state or societal policy which they think impinges on their world view or system of morality. Pretty fucking broad, therefore a useless term reserved only for brain stem operating morons,
'SJW' is now just a self-ambiguating term that calls out anybody using it as a simple-minded tool. It's the new Nazi metaphor. Can we please just stop it, and go back to using actual words to describe our thoughts and feelings?
But,
It takes all of 5 minutes to run through every possible customization option in iOS, which leaves you turning to games that much quicker in your eternal quest to find more ways to stare at your phone. On Android you have a solid week ahead of you of trying out every possible flavor of the settings and apps that customize your phone. And that's just on the 'legit' app store.
Not denigrating either experience, this is just based on my experience switching between the two. I always found gaming on phones to be a frustrating waste of time. Never once considered putting anything but crosswords on my Android. But with iOS it gets stale so much faster that I ended up buying a number of games just because there isn't really any fun dinking around with the phone itself to be had.
The thing is though, when your dependency code base is OSS, you are actually capable of finding and fixing the problem yourself, often just by subclassing something or creating an alternate implementation of an interface. Many times being able to see the anatomy of the issue allows you to work around it from the outside. I can't imagine turnaround like this ever being possible in a closed-source system, at least not without requiring enormously expensive contracts with not just the delivering company but each vendor supplying any part of the solution.
No, you must not be a big Java fan (or person who is the least bit aware of how it works or what it is good for). You do realize that it is not the language that would be patched but a commonly used open source project, right? And that such projects can be written in any language to have vulnerabilities? Hmm...how many vulnerability-inducing DLLs/SOs have ever been created vs .jars? Which one is more likely to allow arbitrary code execution vs. just offering somebody the ability to destabilize the application itself? Yeah, we really need to 'patch' that Java menace. And, to do a compare/contrast of Java / C++ based on syntax and the basics of object allocation just severely misses the point of why you would use one or the other.
Holy shit. Do you actually think that this has anything to do with the Java that is installed on your computer? To be safe, better go ahead and delete that OS too!
Once, just once I would like to see somebody here discuss Java that actually knows how the fuck it works.
So let me get this straight: You ban commons. You copy what you were using from commons into your own codebase (hint: this also was all you were using of commons it when you still had it). To hold to your insane 'not invented here' paranoia, you must also have banned all other projects that use commons as a dependency. So, you copy from those projects what you use, then make it use your own 'commons', or maybe you re-implement them wholesale. You rest assured in the knowledge that nasty commons code which you were not invoking will not wake up and start doing evil things all on its own, and that all of the wonderful proprietary wheels which you have re-invented are all sure to be 100% vulnerability-free because you wrote them. ??? Profit You are a genius.
The garbage collector only obscures memory leaks if you look for them in the wrong place. If you actually took the time to learn how something works before dismissing it, you might find that profiling the JVM heap and backtracking excessive object allocations / orphanings is about the easiest problem one can detect / solve in a Java application. And who the hell is using Java for gaming/multimedia? No wonder you disliked the screwdriver with which you attempted to hammer a nail. I might as well say that C++ is shit because it takes too long to build a web UI or implement an enterprise BPM engine.
I am almost impressed at your epic failure of both reading comprehension and logic. Also, who the hell chooses Java for speed? Java has benefits and detriments. If you think you can say C++ > Java just because you wrote some big loopy tests, you are even dumber than your above statement makes you look.