Everything is wrong with hate symbols, and that's kind of the point. The very notions of freedom and tolerance presuppose the existence of things that are detestable.
Coalition Theory 101 states that in any coalition, the largest party gets the worst deal. This is rarely, if ever, incorrect.
It's a bit rich for them to bitch at us, and insist on being given more money in the context of something they already abused to their advantage, whilst I'm sitting here unable to go to a specialist because I'm poor and my country (unlike Denmark) spent all of its billions on military bases instead of medical subsidy.
Actually MS Basic and variants were used heavily in manufacturing, finance and almost any domain you care to look at.
I take your point, however in my defence:
1. PC-era Basic isn't really the same language as 8-bit micro Basic. Visual Basic certainly isn't. 2. I stand by my point that you had to learn something else when you did university (typically C, Fortran, or a Wirth language such as Pascal). 3. If you weren't deep in the Microsoft world, you didn't use Basic in industry.
From a ubiquity standpoint JS really could fill the roll of BASIC, python could also work since it runs almost anywhere and is a joy to program in.
I respectfully disagree with you about Python. It is one of the most limiting programming languages that it's ever been my displeasure to fight with.
It's easy to install and does run almost everywhere, I'll grant you that. And it's arguably better at gluing bits of Internet and third-party library together than Perl was.
Maybe I just work in weird fields, heavy on the numerics and algorithmics. Maybe I rely too much on my compiler to find bugs for me, compared to having to find them myself (my time is valuable). Maybe I'm just so used to modern programming languages where the source text of a program statically determines that program's semantics (a property that even JavaScript has, but Python does not; WTH Guido?). Maybe I've weaned myself off Simula's broken object model and never want to go back.
You know the weirdest thing? The thing that most Slashdotters complain about with Python is the lexical syntax, which is the least objectionable thing about it. Wadler's Law of Language Design is true.
Python feels like an extremely old legacy programming language that got a modern syntax upgrade. I guess there's a critical mass of people who want that, but life is too short to spend your days fighting with archaic broken semantics no matter how shiny they look.
FYI, this may not have been clear, but I was neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you. What I was trying to point out was that this is one of those situations where rights compete and that makes it interesting, ethically speaking.
[...] supporting free speech generally means advocating that people who want to voluntarily read a political opinion that has been published through a general purpose communication platform should be able to.
Here's the problem with this: This definition of free speech denies the right to free association. A privately-owned and privately-run communication channel should (again, not talking legally, just "should") be able to refuse to associate with anyone they want. And yes, that runs into the racism problem, too! This middle ground, where competing rights and competing responsibilities clash, are part of what makes moral philosophy interesting.
But actually, this is beside the point. The big social media businesses do not have a monopoly on public communication. Milo will always find an outlet where people who want to hear what he has to say can hear it, right up to the point where that particular schtick no longer serves his purposes.
I would prefer if some version of LISP was "the beginner language", because even just bemoaning its shortcomings in comments on/. 20 years later will be a variety of torture.
Now there's an idea! With every copy of Windows, ship a copy of SICP.
For personal transportation the issue is and always will be recharging. Until we get 400kW chargers, it's kind of a step back in personal transportation. That is, basically until we get full-range (300mile / 500km) recharge times down to 15 minutes or less... boo.
BASIC is about the worst possible language for a beginner, because it infects naive users with bad habits that are difficult to unlearn.
I completely disagree. All first languages teach you bad habits that you have to unlearn for your second language. What made BASIC great is that nobody at universities or in the software industry ever used it, so you were forced to unlearn all those bad habits.
Oh, I don't know. I'd have chosen a beginner language that didn't get for loops wrong. 3 times. (range -> xrange -> range again).
When I was 20, I felt the same way about BASIC. Why the hell did we start with such a crapful brain-damaging language? And, of course, BASIC was never one language, either; every micro had its own incompatible implementation, and that's not even going into the incompatible hardware that you couldn't work around.
I'm older and wiser now. BASIC was a great start to the education of a whole generation of programmers. I think of three reasons:
First off, in the days of 8-bit micros, you could understand the whole computer, and in a sense you had to. Printing stuff on the screen was great, but as soon as you wanted to do anything nontrivial, you had to POKE around, which meant you needed to learn about chips and registers and so on.
Secondly, the act of typing in listings from books and magazines taught you a lot about the programs that good programmers gave you. Cut-and-paste just isn't the same, and "read these snippets then download the whole working program" is just wrong.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, when you made it to university or the software industry, you weren't using BASIC any more. Your first "real" programming language was your second programming language (third, if you managed to get an assembler for your micro), which forced you to unlearn all the bad habits which BASIC got you into.
So I wouldn't mind people using Python as a beginner language, if we all agreed, as a software industry, never to use Python in production. Not only would we all be more productive programmers and our software would be of far higher quality, it would give the kids of today the education they need. You can start today by referring to Python exclusively as a "beginner language" every chance you get.
Hit the nail on the head. But just one little comment...
I've yet to read a software patent include full source for an implementation of the idea - and nothing less than a working source implementation can count as 'blueprints' for a software program.
On what legal basis, other than patent infringement?
Copyright infringement, of course. You did put "you can't reverse engineer this" in the licence, right? Absent the licence, there is no legal reason why said reverse engineer is allowed to have your code.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything is wrong with hate symbols, and that's kind of the point. The very notions of freedom and tolerance presuppose the existence of things that are detestable.
Coalition Theory 101 states that in any coalition, the largest party gets the worst deal. This is rarely, if ever, incorrect.
It's a bit rich for them to bitch at us, and insist on being given more money in the context of something they already abused to their advantage, whilst I'm sitting here unable to go to a specialist because I'm poor and my country (unlike Denmark) spent all of its billions on military bases instead of medical subsidy.
Hold on there. The US spends a larger proportion of its GDP and more per capita on health care than Denmark does. It's not Denmark's fault that you as a nation mis-spend it.
Indeed.
If we did not force them to let us build there, I would argue that building it was also for their benefit.
Denmark's benefit, perhaps. Nonetheless, "it's for your own good" is the justification of colonists and abusers throughout history.
touchpads are capabable of multiple things besides emulating a mouse, that's what this is all about
Exactly. I've been trying to give a two-figure gesture to Windows for years, and it's about time it got the message.
Although I doubt that Soylent bars need seals.
How else will they get that delicious blubbery taste?
He'd still be more interesting to listen to than Shkreli.
No, the poster is confusing the religious-right-infected Republicans with Islamic terrorism. To be fair, that's an easy mistake to make.
Actually MS Basic and variants were used heavily in manufacturing, finance and almost any domain you care to look at.
I take your point, however in my defence:
1. PC-era Basic isn't really the same language as 8-bit micro Basic. Visual Basic certainly isn't.
2. I stand by my point that you had to learn something else when you did university (typically C, Fortran, or a Wirth language such as Pascal).
3. If you weren't deep in the Microsoft world, you didn't use Basic in industry.
From a ubiquity standpoint JS really could fill the roll of BASIC, python could also work since it runs almost anywhere and is a joy to program in.
I respectfully disagree with you about Python. It is one of the most limiting programming languages that it's ever been my displeasure to fight with.
It's easy to install and does run almost everywhere, I'll grant you that. And it's arguably better at gluing bits of Internet and third-party library together than Perl was.
Maybe I just work in weird fields, heavy on the numerics and algorithmics. Maybe I rely too much on my compiler to find bugs for me, compared to having to find them myself (my time is valuable). Maybe I'm just so used to modern programming languages where the source text of a program statically determines that program's semantics (a property that even JavaScript has, but Python does not; WTH Guido?). Maybe I've weaned myself off Simula's broken object model and never want to go back.
You know the weirdest thing? The thing that most Slashdotters complain about with Python is the lexical syntax, which is the least objectionable thing about it. Wadler's Law of Language Design is true.
Python feels like an extremely old legacy programming language that got a modern syntax upgrade. I guess there's a critical mass of people who want that, but life is too short to spend your days fighting with archaic broken semantics no matter how shiny they look.
FYI, this may not have been clear, but I was neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you. What I was trying to point out was that this is one of those situations where rights compete and that makes it interesting, ethically speaking.
[...] supporting free speech generally means advocating that people who want to voluntarily read a political opinion that has been published through a general purpose communication platform should be able to.
Here's the problem with this: This definition of free speech denies the right to free association. A privately-owned and privately-run communication channel should (again, not talking legally, just "should") be able to refuse to associate with anyone they want. And yes, that runs into the racism problem, too! This middle ground, where competing rights and competing responsibilities clash, are part of what makes moral philosophy interesting.
But actually, this is beside the point. The big social media businesses do not have a monopoly on public communication. Milo will always find an outlet where people who want to hear what he has to say can hear it, right up to the point where that particular schtick no longer serves his purposes.
The way I see it, if Milo is the "face" of the deal, he's more publicly acceptable than the widely hated Shkreli.
That should be his campaign slogan. "Milo: At least he's not Shkreli."
Otherwise, he's mostly harmless, just don't pay too much attention to him and he'll go away.
He's mostly harmless thanks to the infinite power of plausible deniability, but the people who do pay too much attention to him are not harmless.
Alice Cooper for President!
I hear he wants to be elected.
I would prefer if some version of LISP was "the beginner language", because even just bemoaning its shortcomings in comments on /. 20 years later will be a variety of torture.
Now there's an idea! With every copy of Windows, ship a copy of SICP.
I suspect it's also not in Germany, or even in Europe, so its relevance to this story is marginal at best.
You may not be aware (and it's okay, it's kind of local news) that as of the end of next year, Australia won't have a car industry.
Whatever. But FYI, the road in question is only one state wide, and not even at the state's widest point.
For personal transportation the issue is and always will be recharging. Until we get 400kW chargers, it's kind of a step back in personal transportation. That is, basically until we get full-range (300mile / 500km) recharge times down to 15 minutes or less... boo.
Not quite far enough for the Burke Developmental Road in Queensland, Australia.
BASIC is about the worst possible language for a beginner, because it infects naive users with bad habits that are difficult to unlearn.
I completely disagree. All first languages teach you bad habits that you have to unlearn for your second language. What made BASIC great is that nobody at universities or in the software industry ever used it, so you were forced to unlearn all those bad habits.
Oh, I don't know. I'd have chosen a beginner language that didn't get for loops wrong. 3 times. (range -> xrange -> range again).
When I was 20, I felt the same way about BASIC. Why the hell did we start with such a crapful brain-damaging language? And, of course, BASIC was never one language, either; every micro had its own incompatible implementation, and that's not even going into the incompatible hardware that you couldn't work around.
I'm older and wiser now. BASIC was a great start to the education of a whole generation of programmers. I think of three reasons:
First off, in the days of 8-bit micros, you could understand the whole computer, and in a sense you had to. Printing stuff on the screen was great, but as soon as you wanted to do anything nontrivial, you had to POKE around, which meant you needed to learn about chips and registers and so on.
Secondly, the act of typing in listings from books and magazines taught you a lot about the programs that good programmers gave you. Cut-and-paste just isn't the same, and "read these snippets then download the whole working program" is just wrong.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, when you made it to university or the software industry, you weren't using BASIC any more. Your first "real" programming language was your second programming language (third, if you managed to get an assembler for your micro), which forced you to unlearn all the bad habits which BASIC got you into.
So I wouldn't mind people using Python as a beginner language, if we all agreed, as a software industry, never to use Python in production. Not only would we all be more productive programmers and our software would be of far higher quality, it would give the kids of today the education they need. You can start today by referring to Python exclusively as a "beginner language" every chance you get.
Hit the nail on the head. But just one little comment...
You're welcome.
On what legal basis, other than patent infringement?
Copyright infringement, of course. You did put "you can't reverse engineer this" in the licence, right? Absent the licence, there is no legal reason why said reverse engineer is allowed to have your code.
I ain't paying $2 million for someone's first album.
I'm currently taking bets as to whether or not one of these "tech billionaires" was responsible for building a social media filter bubble.
Neither have I, but considering the mere mention of his name has triggered so many Slashdotters, he must be pretty awesome.
He prevented the world from hearing a Wu-Tang Clan album. That's pretty much unforgivable around here.