Hmm... I guess I agree with the moderation after all, though I'm taking "interesting" in the "provocative" sense, and I don't know how the tie was broken against "insightful". (MEPR could resolve it better...)
I think you started on some of the right tracks, but didn't go deep enough.
People are here BECAUSE they are genetically programmed to like reproducing. The potential ancestors who didn't put enough priority on reproducing have left the gene pool (and the building, atAJG).
When you follow the money, you realize that the RoI for human beings is not so good. Much better to invest in machines, but I've read that perhaps the highest RoI is for investing in the cheapest politicians. If I were a gambling man, then I'd be gambling on GAI, because an actually useful artificial intelligence has the potential for the highest RoI of all. Too bad that's the solution to a fake problem and I can safely predict that the corporate cancers will remain dissatisfied.
Is there any potential solution involving better people? I predict you don't want me to get into eugenics, even passive eugenics.
I still feel like I'm failing to express myself clearly... *sigh*
The design of Java was different from what it became, but what I'm trying to figure out is whether the fatal problems were inevitable or were basically a result of the Oracle acquisition. I'm inclined to blame Oracle for a lot of evil, but I can't think of any purely good corporate cancers.
However I admit that some parts of the discussion did help me somewhat in understanding what happened to Java. Most of my prior knowledge was based on editing research papers about Java, mostly JIT enhancements and related benchmarks, and I was never actually using Java for much. I do think it would help in this case if the MEPR existed and helped me to assess which contributors to the conversation actually had some technical chops...
Now I think you're being sarcastic or trying to bait me. Java had some good ideas under it. I am unaware of any positive aspects of Flash.
The incurable problem with Flash is that the underlying idea was gawdawful and there was fundamentally no way to accomplish the goals of infinite attention grabbing, so even a standard platform could not help. I sort of feel the early HTML versions were kind of asking for the abuse. Then again, I am also unable to assess whether or not HTML has matured well or has routed itself into a dead end... I can say that I am biased in favor of content over presentation, but the advertisers bed to differ, and most of the time they are paying the piper.
Well, at least I think there was an era on Slashdot when your sort of comment might have appeared early enough to earn some insightful mods, but I'm not able to assess whether it actually deserves such. Based on the work the research lab was doing, I would be inclined to think that Java could have run well on smartphones if someone had made the efforts. That would suggest the underlying problem (and locus of possible insight) might be the rapid evolution (AKA instability) of Android.
Sometimes I wish I got a mod point to bestow. In the absence of mod points, let me express my approval of your well written and funny comment. I'm even feeling a bit gratified at my out-of-context but provocative question that apparently helped trigger the story. Several actually funny comments emerged.
However the corporate cancers are still winning and we're still losing. I even feel that the REAL issue is the internal crisis, almost a civil war, in the FAKE Republican Party. Today's mainstream GOP (McConnell's side) just wants government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%, while #PresidentTweety just wants government of, by, and for the Donald. One of the best ways to figure out who is worse is to look at who Ellison is bribing. The RoI on bribed politicians is hard to beat, and I can assure you that Ellison will NEVER have enough moolah to "solve" his "problem".
I was seriously curious about the status of Java when I discovered that it was apparently uninstalling itself and vanishing from my browsers. My sincerely curious question was combined in an odd way with another story someone else submitted about the relative popularity of Java, which obviously is a call for popcorn.
I really haven't learned what I was hoping to, but my current theory (slightly modified by this discussion) is that Oracle basically murdered browser-based Java. Sun's original charitable model obviously failed as part of the collapse of Sun that allowed Oracle to acquire Sun and maul its assets. I'm not sure Sun really had much beyond Java and OpenOffice... I think the hardware and Solaris are mostly gone or irrelevant, but it scarcely matters since Oracle's real interest was in how many of Sun's customers could be converted to Oracle.
Didn't know there were any such deep people still on Slashdot. Reminded me of IBM's research work on Java implementations. If IBM had picked up the ball when Oracle started fumbling with Java then maybe the language would have survived better...
By the way, I feel like my original question wasn't well formed. However it does seem to be accurate as regards browsers, which was most of my personal usage of Java in recent years. I'm not sure any computer language can really die. I'm sure there are some people still working with Lisp and FORTH and *gasp* dBase II out there... (That was a trick comment, since I'm the person who is still running one dBase II application (because I'm too lazy to port it to Python).)
This is actually the aspect of the question that triggered my submission, but not even sure how the AC came to my attention. In an attempt to update Java on one of my machines, I realized it was uninstalling itself completely, which got me to check and realize that it was already gone elsewhere. Apparently the browser plug-ins are no longer supported, so bye-bye. Thanks, Oracle. For nothing. Literally.
I definitely noticed that almost none of my students last semester were doing much with Java, which surprised me. Lots of Python and C++ and various other languages were mentioned, but almost one of them were primary in Java. These are seniors and graduate students at a top university, with a heavy delegation from China, too.
So time to probe the discussion a bit more to see if I can find any actual insights into what's going on. Or at least a few jokes?
Your comment was barely modded into visibility, but I don't see why. I was actually looking for any reference to Player Piano and stumbled across your accidentally relevant "joke".
In 1952 one of the characters in Vonnegut's book threatens to replace a woman by creating a sexbot. Overall the book is shockingly prescient from before I was born... I'm still in the middle, but it's an remarkably plausible dystopia.
Context is everything, especially for humor--but you may note I that I rarely earn any "funny" points.
You, as the 4-digit UID, suggested that the AC's UID was visible, and I attempted to make a joke on that theme. I don't think I even looked at the AC comment you were commenting on (since I ignore ACs), but now I see that there was an earlier reference to a 5-digit UID.
However these days I'm actually kind of suspicious of small UIDs... Overly juicy targets, and possibly orphaned years ago.
I think we are largely in agreement, but you still seem somewhat unclear on some of the underlying issues. Most of the problems you addressed are within the scope of Models (2) and (3) in my little ontology. Model (2) (Advertising) is a search for eyeballs, while Model (3) (Propaganda) is most effective when it can pretend to be using another model, which is often a fake version of Model (2). I do NOT believe that FAUX actually cares about the advertising revenue, but they have to pretend it matters (though it is also true that some of the people paying for the propaganda are cheapskates).
Skipping over the other models and focusing on your "what the public wants". As a member of the public, what I want are solutions to the problems the journalists keep telling me about. That's what (theoretical) Model (7) is about.
No, I would rather say that the Internet trolls and their herds of sock puppets are exploiting our civilized tendencies to grant a certain amount of credibility to each stranger. We greet strangers politely and listen to them. In a civilized society, we should not greet all strangers with loaded guns pointed at their faces. Accidents would happen, and it would be quite awkward on the buses and trains, too. Now I'm thinking about escalators and elevators...
My solution approach would essentially add a layer of insulation so that strangers would be less visible, but more importantly the nice people of established favorable reputations would become more visible. Not so important to me, but negative behaviors would also render them less visible, but all I care is that they are sufficiently less visible that they are not wasting my time.
One of the costs of my approach is that I would start missing the comments from people who enjoy playing with trolls. It's a cost that I'd be willing to bear, but certain dimensions might override.
Can't understand how your [amicusNYCL's] long argument with such an obvious troll earned an insightful mod.
I think we'll turn this over to an expert:
t is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
I think you should have included the source (as in the name of the expert (though it may be one of those quotations of confused provenance)).
I think the way to interpret your comment is that you mean the troll is getting a salary. If so, then it is not a matter of understanding and the troll quite probably knows the truth, the better to muddle it.
My focus is on the folly of feeding them. I wish that Slashdot would help them in rendering themselves invisible. However I have no serious expectations along such lines. I no longer hope for Slashdot to get better, but just hope it gets worse slowly.
Can't understand how your [amicusNYCL's] long argument with such an obvious troll earned an insightful mod. Special credit for verbosity?
I don't particularly care if you feed the trolls, but if Slashdot had a MEPR system then I would penalize you on some dimensions related to troll feeding. Hopefully I would be less likely to see your comments in the future...
It isn't at all clear to me that Stone will go to jail unless they can stick him on some state charges, too. If it's only a federal rap, then #PresidentTweety is certain to pardon him for his "brave" silence.
Actually I think there is a strong relationship between journalism and technology in general. Also some sort of relationship between Wikileaks and Slashdot in particular.
It is clear that journalism is in trouble these years. I think most of the problems are related to bad economic models. For example, Slashdot can't be improved because the economic model is so broken. Also, much of Wikileaks destructive behavior was driven by the need to generate the kind of publicity that would produce funding.
Don't want to spend too much time on this, but I'll just summarize some of my ontology of economic models:
(1) Public service. Broken (2) Advertising. Broken. (3) Propaganda. Not only broken, but trying to break society. (4) Winner take all. Most broken after the winner is decided. (5) Big-donor charity. Broken by bad decisions. (6) Small-donor charity. Can't find a good one. (7) Solution driven. Amusing theory, that.
Former President Park of South Korea tried that defense a few years ago, and she didn't get the funny mod points. She got a long prison sentence.
Right now I think there are two big differences here: (1) She's young enough that she may get out of prison someday. (2) The South Korean government is much more honest than America under #PresidentTweety.
I'm not sure how similar Roger Stone is to Choi Tae-min, but it was the close advisor's arrest that soon led to the arrest of Park. I want to refer to her as Inmate #x, but I can't find the number.
If that is a request for clarification of MEPR, then it is insufficiently polite. However, just because you would go down on the politeness dimension, that is not a reason I would reduce your visibility. You apparently need to drop on the dimensions related to intelligence and logic. Can't yet decide which way you should go on the funny dimension, though it is a dimension that I would personally weigh heavily.
Can you convince me that this is an actual discussion?
Regarding your sig, they are not Russian agents. They are just interns hoping to become Russian agents.
Actually, I don't care what motivates the trolls. I just wish Slashdot would help them render themselves invisible before I see them. And if I do see a troll, then I should be able to help the troll become less visible in the future. Ask me about MEPR. I dare ya.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm... I guess I agree with the moderation after all, though I'm taking "interesting" in the "provocative" sense, and I don't know how the tie was broken against "insightful". (MEPR could resolve it better...)
I think you started on some of the right tracks, but didn't go deep enough.
People are here BECAUSE they are genetically programmed to like reproducing. The potential ancestors who didn't put enough priority on reproducing have left the gene pool (and the building, atAJG).
When you follow the money, you realize that the RoI for human beings is not so good. Much better to invest in machines, but I've read that perhaps the highest RoI is for investing in the cheapest politicians. If I were a gambling man, then I'd be gambling on GAI, because an actually useful artificial intelligence has the potential for the highest RoI of all. Too bad that's the solution to a fake problem and I can safely predict that the corporate cancers will remain dissatisfied.
Is there any potential solution involving better people? I predict you don't want me to get into eugenics, even passive eugenics.
Time's up, so I bid you ADSAuPR, atAJG.
I still feel like I'm failing to express myself clearly... *sigh*
The design of Java was different from what it became, but what I'm trying to figure out is whether the fatal problems were inevitable or were basically a result of the Oracle acquisition. I'm inclined to blame Oracle for a lot of evil, but I can't think of any purely good corporate cancers.
However I admit that some parts of the discussion did help me somewhat in understanding what happened to Java. Most of my prior knowledge was based on editing research papers about Java, mostly JIT enhancements and related benchmarks, and I was never actually using Java for much. I do think it would help in this case if the MEPR existed and helped me to assess which contributors to the conversation actually had some technical chops...
Now I think you're being sarcastic or trying to bait me. Java had some good ideas under it. I am unaware of any positive aspects of Flash.
The incurable problem with Flash is that the underlying idea was gawdawful and there was fundamentally no way to accomplish the goals of infinite attention grabbing, so even a standard platform could not help. I sort of feel the early HTML versions were kind of asking for the abuse. Then again, I am also unable to assess whether or not HTML has matured well or has routed itself into a dead end... I can say that I am biased in favor of content over presentation, but the advertisers bed to differ, and most of the time they are paying the piper.
Back in the 'ol days...
Well, at least I think there was an era on Slashdot when your sort of comment might have appeared early enough to earn some insightful mods, but I'm not able to assess whether it actually deserves such. Based on the work the research lab was doing, I would be inclined to think that Java could have run well on smartphones if someone had made the efforts. That would suggest the underlying problem (and locus of possible insight) might be the rapid evolution (AKA instability) of Android.
Sometimes I wish I got a mod point to bestow. In the absence of mod points, let me express my approval of your well written and funny comment. I'm even feeling a bit gratified at my out-of-context but provocative question that apparently helped trigger the story. Several actually funny comments emerged.
However the corporate cancers are still winning and we're still losing. I even feel that the REAL issue is the internal crisis, almost a civil war, in the FAKE Republican Party. Today's mainstream GOP (McConnell's side) just wants government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%, while #PresidentTweety just wants government of, by, and for the Donald. One of the best ways to figure out who is worse is to look at who Ellison is bribing. The RoI on bribed politicians is hard to beat, and I can assure you that Ellison will NEVER have enough moolah to "solve" his "problem".
I was seriously curious about the status of Java when I discovered that it was apparently uninstalling itself and vanishing from my browsers. My sincerely curious question was combined in an odd way with another story someone else submitted about the relative popularity of Java, which obviously is a call for popcorn.
I really haven't learned what I was hoping to, but my current theory (slightly modified by this discussion) is that Oracle basically murdered browser-based Java. Sun's original charitable model obviously failed as part of the collapse of Sun that allowed Oracle to acquire Sun and maul its assets. I'm not sure Sun really had much beyond Java and OpenOffice... I think the hardware and Solaris are mostly gone or irrelevant, but it scarcely matters since Oracle's real interest was in how many of Sun's customers could be converted to Oracle.
Didn't know there were any such deep people still on Slashdot. Reminded me of IBM's research work on Java implementations. If IBM had picked up the ball when Oracle started fumbling with Java then maybe the language would have survived better...
By the way, I feel like my original question wasn't well formed. However it does seem to be accurate as regards browsers, which was most of my personal usage of Java in recent years. I'm not sure any computer language can really die. I'm sure there are some people still working with Lisp and FORTH and *gasp* dBase II out there... (That was a trick comment, since I'm the person who is still running one dBase II application (because I'm too lazy to port it to Python).)
This is actually the aspect of the question that triggered my submission, but not even sure how the AC came to my attention. In an attempt to update Java on one of my machines, I realized it was uninstalling itself completely, which got me to check and realize that it was already gone elsewhere. Apparently the browser plug-ins are no longer supported, so bye-bye. Thanks, Oracle. For nothing. Literally.
I definitely noticed that almost none of my students last semester were doing much with Java, which surprised me. Lots of Python and C++ and various other languages were mentioned, but almost one of them were primary in Java. These are seniors and graduate students at a top university, with a heavy delegation from China, too.
So time to probe the discussion a bit more to see if I can find any actual insights into what's going on. Or at least a few jokes?
Or perhaps the deeper question is why the Slashdot editors thought anyone would be interested. Let me strain my brain a bit...
(1) Future-proof software. It's called upgrades.
(2) Future-proof goods and services. It's called people, as in people don't actually change that much.
(3) Future-proof fashions. Only if advertising is outlawed.
Question over-answered.
Oh noooooo.
Your comment was barely modded into visibility, but I don't see why. I was actually looking for any reference to Player Piano and stumbled across your accidentally relevant "joke".
In 1952 one of the characters in Vonnegut's book threatens to replace a woman by creating a sexbot. Overall the book is shockingly prescient from before I was born... I'm still in the middle, but it's an remarkably plausible dystopia.
Z^-2
Z^-1
Context is everything, especially for humor--but you may note I that I rarely earn any "funny" points.
You, as the 4-digit UID, suggested that the AC's UID was visible, and I attempted to make a joke on that theme. I don't think I even looked at the AC comment you were commenting on (since I ignore ACs), but now I see that there was an earlier reference to a 5-digit UID.
However these days I'm actually kind of suspicious of small UIDs... Overly juicy targets, and possibly orphaned years ago.
I think we are largely in agreement, but you still seem somewhat unclear on some of the underlying issues. Most of the problems you addressed are within the scope of Models (2) and (3) in my little ontology. Model (2) (Advertising) is a search for eyeballs, while Model (3) (Propaganda) is most effective when it can pretend to be using another model, which is often a fake version of Model (2). I do NOT believe that FAUX actually cares about the advertising revenue, but they have to pretend it matters (though it is also true that some of the people paying for the propaganda are cheapskates).
Skipping over the other models and focusing on your "what the public wants". As a member of the public, what I want are solutions to the problems the journalists keep telling me about. That's what (theoretical) Model (7) is about.
No, I would rather say that the Internet trolls and their herds of sock puppets are exploiting our civilized tendencies to grant a certain amount of credibility to each stranger. We greet strangers politely and listen to them. In a civilized society, we should not greet all strangers with loaded guns pointed at their faces. Accidents would happen, and it would be quite awkward on the buses and trains, too. Now I'm thinking about escalators and elevators...
My solution approach would essentially add a layer of insulation so that strangers would be less visible, but more importantly the nice people of established favorable reputations would become more visible. Not so important to me, but negative behaviors would also render them less visible, but all I care is that they are sufficiently less visible that they are not wasting my time.
One of the costs of my approach is that I would start missing the comments from people who enjoy playing with trolls. It's a cost that I'd be willing to bear, but certain dimensions might override.
Z^-1
Can't understand how your [amicusNYCL's] long argument with such an obvious troll earned an insightful mod.
I think we'll turn this over to an expert:
t is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
I think you should have included the source (as in the name of the expert (though it may be one of those quotations of confused provenance)).
I think the way to interpret your comment is that you mean the troll is getting a salary. If so, then it is not a matter of understanding and the troll quite probably knows the truth, the better to muddle it.
My focus is on the folly of feeding them. I wish that Slashdot would help them in rendering themselves invisible. However I have no serious expectations along such lines. I no longer hope for Slashdot to get better, but just hope it gets worse slowly.
Can't understand how your [amicusNYCL's] long argument with such an obvious troll earned an insightful mod. Special credit for verbosity?
I don't particularly care if you feed the trolls, but if Slashdot had a MEPR system then I would penalize you on some dimensions related to troll feeding. Hopefully I would be less likely to see your comments in the future...
It isn't at all clear to me that Stone will go to jail unless they can stick him on some state charges, too. If it's only a federal rap, then #PresidentTweety is certain to pardon him for his "brave" silence.
Actually I think there is a strong relationship between journalism and technology in general. Also some sort of relationship between Wikileaks and Slashdot in particular.
It is clear that journalism is in trouble these years. I think most of the problems are related to bad economic models. For example, Slashdot can't be improved because the economic model is so broken. Also, much of Wikileaks destructive behavior was driven by the need to generate the kind of publicity that would produce funding.
Don't want to spend too much time on this, but I'll just summarize some of my ontology of economic models:
(1) Public service. Broken
(2) Advertising. Broken.
(3) Propaganda. Not only broken, but trying to break society.
(4) Winner take all. Most broken after the winner is decided.
(5) Big-donor charity. Broken by bad decisions.
(6) Small-donor charity. Can't find a good one.
(7) Solution driven. Amusing theory, that.
Time's up, so I bid you ADSAuPR, atAJG.
Anonymous cowards have UIDs?
Says the 4-digit UID.
However, given the current state of Slashdot, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there's a bug that exposes the AC's user ID.
Former President Park of South Korea tried that defense a few years ago, and she didn't get the funny mod points. She got a long prison sentence.
Right now I think there are two big differences here: (1) She's young enough that she may get out of prison someday. (2) The South Korean government is much more honest than America under #PresidentTweety.
I'm not sure how similar Roger Stone is to Choi Tae-min, but it was the close advisor's arrest that soon led to the arrest of Park. I want to refer to her as Inmate #x, but I can't find the number.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No.
If that is a request for clarification of MEPR, then it is insufficiently polite. However, just because you would go down on the politeness dimension, that is not a reason I would reduce your visibility. You apparently need to drop on the dimensions related to intelligence and logic. Can't yet decide which way you should go on the funny dimension, though it is a dimension that I would personally weigh heavily.
Can you convince me that this is an actual discussion?
Regarding your sig, they are not Russian agents. They are just interns hoping to become Russian agents.
Actually, I don't care what motivates the trolls. I just wish Slashdot would help them render themselves invisible before I see them. And if I do see a troll, then I should be able to help the troll become less visible in the future. Ask me about MEPR. I dare ya.