Slashdot will be swamped with nuclear power industry apologists pretending "Not much and nothing" happened. Dissent will be modded to oblivion.
Reality will continue to disagree.
That's a bunch of bullshit and a bold face lie. The simple fact is, the world is tired of the lies, propaganda, and scaremongering constantly pushed by anti-nuke idiots. Barely into the disaster at Fukushima, before anyone knew what it actually looked like, the anti-nuke idiots were already starting their political push and scaremongering campaigns. People are just tired of the lies and propaganda.
The simple fact is, even if Fukushima gets much, much worse, nuclear power is the cleanest, safest power source known to man kind. Idiocy associated with you propaganda doesn't change reality but it does, unfortunately, shape ignorant public opinion and policy.
I've not read a single post which says, "Not much and nothing", has happened. Not one. Which further highlights your ignorance, propaganda, and your general agenda. Believe it or not, stating fact, that the world is not ending, is not the same thing as, "not much and nothing." Nor is it the same thing as, "the sky is falling", as ignorant propaganda seems to be constantly pushing.
The reality is, nuclear power is extremely safe. The reality is, if we empowering irrational and scaremongering propaganda as you would have us do, then no one should live on a coastline and no one should live in tornado alley. Likewise, all coal plants should be immediately shutdown. That's ultimately what you're propaganda is spewing.
So which is it? Should we keep all energy prices low, provide the world's safest, cheapest form or energy, or destroy the world's economies, push energy prices up four multiples or more, endanger everyone, and displace millions from coastlines? I vote for sanity. Thus far, you vote for stupidity.
But the core logic of the debate doesn't make any sense and COMPLETELY ignores the root cause.
People are flocking to DRM free software not ultimately because of DRM but because of pirates. PIRATES necessitate the need for DRM. People who are not pirates are annoyed by DRM because its not addressing them. After all, they are not pirates so DRM to fight pirates is extremely annoying. In turn, people like you, justifiably so, seek a DRM free solution because ultimately, you're annoyed by idiot pirates. We (ethical users) all are. The bottom line, without bullshit propaganda which is constantly spewed on slashdot these days, people are annoyed by pirates and seek solutions which are not directly impacted by pirates.
At the end of the day, if you find you are seeking DRM-free solutions, start kicking every pirate you can find in the nuts until they start bleeding out their mouth. When everyone has finished with every pirate they can find, the need for DRM crap-ware is largely destroyed. Remember, DRM exists 100% in reaction to the unethical behavior of scumbag, criminal pirates. To blame anything other than pirates is to spread lies and propaganda.
At the end of the day, if you're mad or annoyed about DRM, you absolutely are mad and annoyed at pirates. Stop misplacing your anger people and blame the people who are ultimately responsible for everyone's misery - pirates!
Boundaries CAN be set on what is going to be possible.
And that's the problem. Limits can be set based on what we *think* is possible. The FACT is, what we think is possible is frequently shown to be false because we didn't know to account for something else because we didn't even know about the something else.
This is a FACT which theoretical physicists will even point out. We don't know what we don't know. And you can't prove you don't know what you don't know. As such, to condemn tomorrow knowing full well you don't know what tomorrow brings squarely classifies one as a fucktard. Furthermore, to rationalize that you know what you don't know is the height of concept of stupidity - which in turn brings us full circle to fucktards.
The reality is, we know very little. For your position to have any merit means you can prove a negative, seen the future, or are a fucktard. I'm betting on the later.
Well then, clearly we should use all the info garnered by perverse medical experiments and torture also, seeing as that it's so 'valuable'..
Welcome to the 20th century...on wait...
You do realize, there is almost nothing of the 20th century (post WWII) which didn't directly or indirectly benefit from the Nazi's medical and scientific endeavors... As such, living in the 21st century means you benefited from the horrors of the Nazi's experiments conducted during the 20th century.
Was a statement of hypocrisy actually intended to invalidate your own point? Or perhaps your point went over my head? Was your point something other than what you seem to be implying?
Hardly surprising that about one of the only posts which actually have anything to do with reality gets troll moderated.
Holy shit has slashdot fallen...and with it, the average IQ...
I'd honestly be surprised if the average IQ of the slashdot readership is above mid 100s these days. And based on posts I seriously doubt the average poster has an IQ above low 90s.
OK, so explain to me how you will get past the laws of physics then?
No need. Small minded much? Are you actually asserting mankind "knows" all the "laws" of physics? Well thankfully we need not do any more research in physics. Think of all the money and time you just saved humanity.
Your statement is equivalent to "All you assholes that say perpetual motion can't be achieved are just pessimistic fucktards."
Nope. That's completely, 100%, pure idiocy of your statement. I never said anything close to that - which further indicts you of your idiocy.
As for the rest of your reading, you fall squarely into the "fucktard" category. Seriously, you are limiting man kinds future based on today's understanding of a world which doesn't exist (tomorrow). For there to be any truth to such an assertion means you know in absolute terms what tomorrow bring. You're basically a fucking moron proudly stating man will suffocate should we ever travel in a car or be torn apart if we exceed the speed of sound.
I absolutely do not know what tomorrow brings. But what I'm absolutely sure of, you're an idiot if you believe you do; especially based on what you think mankind knows and understands today. Factually, everything you live today, was considered scientifically impossible yesterday. Learn some history and stop being a fucktard.
As I originally stated, please stop posting articles for fucktards by fucktards. Sadly, you entirely validated my post.
That's entirely the point. Basically, everything you do every day was once, "impossible." And it was believed in absolute terms, your daily life is literally impossible. And yet, they were all wrong.
An even better summary is, "small minded people get trapped in their own reality."
With Honeycomb, doesn't Google have a history of saying things will be released as open source, and then not releasing the source?
Troll much? No such history exists. You made that up.
Google has repeatedly stated when honeycomb is completed, thought to be the merge of 2.x and 3.x code base, it will be released to the public for general consumption.
How does Google saying something entirely different than you present, and a long, long history of them following through on exactly what they said, with Android itself in complete disagreement with your delusion, imply they have a history of doing what they've never done?
and may well make it impossible... at least with current technologies.
When you make a prediction about the future and balance your entire argument based on current technology, you basically confirmed you're an idiot. The same absolute fucking idiots all said we can't fly, you'll suffocate in a car when it moves, reaching orbit is impossible, small electronic radio devices are nothing but scifi.
The summary could have simply said, "today's technology has limits."
So please, can we stop posting articles by fucktards, for fucktards?
Except nosql brings absolutely nothing new to the table. Literally, the only thing new nosql brings is hype. Nosql is a re-release of long existing technology which was first used on mainframes and has continued to be used after decades of use.
Literally, there is no new pressure on SQL, aside from ignorant hype. Furthermore, time and time again, and indicated in modern tests, nosql solutions typically perform worse than sql solutions and even add poor support, a small talent pool, and a tiny subset of tools.
Made even worse, only a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, fraction of nosql users should even be using nosql solutions. The fact its being widely adopted and is receiving so much hype is not only validation of the hyper surrounding the technology, but the general ignorance and stupidity of those picking it as a solution.
At least the database technology, on which nosql solutions are based, are actually reliable and robust.
Wouldn't this indicate that this is the skeleton of a transgender person
I can think of endless reasons why this may have occurred, and not of them have anything to do with sexual orientation. It reads of propaganda rather than anything else.
The core question was, what is harder to cleanup, a nuclear plant, or a coal plant.
Unsurprising, you're not alone in your invalid position; given the responses by others. But that doesn't change the question wasn't answered. The original question was:
How long does it take to clean up the byproducts from a coal plant
Please note, that does not in any way mean the clean up of the plant itself; given that the "byproducts" are spread all over the region. That does not mean clean up a plant. That means, clean up all the waste which has been spread over the surrounding area; which includes heavy metals, toxins, radioactive elements, ash (which also changes soil pH). Even if he meant something else, that's not what he said. And what he said is most definitely not what you said.
environment passed a rather stringent test for pollutants easily
I read no such thing. Furthermore, if it was a former Soviet country, that test may have been a simple survey to verify people were still alive.
This is but one example. Its fairly well documented it is because the radioactivity from these plants are far more likely to be ingested; as clearly indicated. The fact the results from this story alone indicate radioactivity is up to 200x higher than living next to a nuclear plant. No, that doesn't mean its killing people in groves, but chances are it has to some degree. And we know for a fact the ash does contribute to respiratory illness and associated deaths. Furthermore, there are many stories of farm land being destroyed by coal ash. Once such story in Texas recently made its rounds. So clearly, its not an issue which should be completely dismissed as you seem to be conveying. The point remains, noteworthy waste is produces, even from "clean" plants and it doesn't simply disappear seconds after leaving the stack.
The reality is, there is no such thing as "clean coal."
Your story is interesting but I don't think it directly addresses the core question.
Coal plants spew poisonous/radioactive waste over a fairly large area of the life of its operation. The older the plant, the worse it tends to be. So while the plant my be gone, the question remains, how much of the surrounding area is still poisonous and/or radiative?
It doesn't sound like you know if the issue has been explored at that site or not. Even worse, if anyone is growing vegetables in the region, it can potentially be bad. Vegetables are excellent at absorbing both toxins and radiation; as are most fruiting/budding plants.
I'm not trying to scaremonger here, but the gp post is a very good question. Does anyone know how long it takes for the toxic and radioactive waste to be deemed, "clean", after the operations stop. Obviously the source of fuel and emission standards are a major factor here, but ballparks would be acceptable to me.
The bar has been set very, very high because SQL has proven it delivers and has repelled countless challengers. Let us know there actually has been innovation before declaring a high standard prevents innovation. In fact, its already looking, yet once again, there hasn't been innovation.
Innovation happens when you're better than what's already out there. That's not the same thing as saying what's out there is perfect. Even SQL purists will say SQL is far from perfect. Thus far, there is absolutely no indication the latest challenger has innovated anything. In fact, if you look, its more of the same which have previously been defeated - excellent now data is far more fragile with the competing solutions (nosql).
Guess what, rehashing previously failed attempts with yet more risk is anything but innovation.
Where is the problem with tying part of an employees bonus to the company's success?
None! But that's not what they did! They tied bonuses to a single product, not the successful of the company. One makes sense. The other is typically a power trip with cause to prevent paying out bonuses with the understanding the specific product isn't anywhere as ideal as they outwardly present.
The problem is, in the real world, its the best we got.
Technically the SQL specification is pointy and its far from perfect, but time and time again it prevails because, contrary to assertions by some, its likely to be the best we'll have for a very long time to come.
Using your favorite search engine is too technically difficult for you?
Deceptive practices are when you assert industry knowledge knowing full well its contrary to industry knowledge. Basically, its exactly as it sounds - being deceptive.
An example would be a lawyer telling his client the law very clearly protects a specific behavior, when in fact, he knows this instruction opens his client up to massive liability.
As for technical circles, an example would be a network consultant telling his client token ring is the preferred and defacto networking technology.
I know its shocking, but purposely being deceptive in a professional role is frowned on by the law.
why this isn't the exact same as the MS Java mess which everyone was cheering when Sun shut it down?
I'm sure you're get many an answer but here's the short answer.
Microsoft purposely failed to maintain currency as well as created incompatibilities. This had the effect of giving people a very bad taste in their mouth with Java since they were providing the defacto implementation on Windows; since it was bundled. This had the effect of damaging the Java brand; which was entirely Microsoft's intention, so as to push their own technology. It was part of their classic embrace and extend strategy and was extremely anti-competitive.
Google, on the other hand, is using the official java compiler and tools. Oracle's Java compiler then creates JVM bytecode. Google translates that JVM bytecode into Dalvik bytecode and packages it up into an application (apk). As such, its technically correct to say, Android programs are created using the Java language syntax and a subset of the Java framework. Their framework comes from freely available sources and is compiled using official, freely available, Java technology.
The differences are profound.
Basically it boils down to Oracle being pissed Google did an end-run around Oracle's Java ME implementation and licensing requirements by creating their own Java ME VM-like environment (Dalvik VM). Oracle simply doesn't have a case. At least not that I've seen so far.
The problem is, this "improvement" has be tried and failed repeatedly over the last four decades. Here's the cycle. Some douche says, "SQL sucks", and offers the world a "vastly superior solution." Ignorant masses flock to it because of the buzz; and frequently because they lack SQL knowledge. A half or full decade later, the flocks wake up and say, "Man, were we douches. What were we thinking..." Followed by the legacy systems they created being retired, ported back to a SQL solution, or some poor chump is left holding the bag, maintaining a slowly dying system without support.
And many benchmarks have shown, almost none of the nosql solutions provide performance advantages over SQL. Furthermore, those which do provide performance advantages do so by making fragility of data its most significant feature; typically exceeding any performance benefits. Made worse, going the nosql route means leaving being a massive pool of proven, fast, and reliable tools, not to mention a large talent pool.
So basically, to break down the two camps, you do so with fundamental labels; ignorance vs wisdom. Or, those who know history and those doomed to repeat it. Thus far, there is every indication those jumping on the ignorant nosql bandwagon are bending over to repeat history.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot will be swamped with nuclear power industry apologists pretending "Not much and nothing" happened. Dissent will be modded to oblivion.
Reality will continue to disagree.
That's a bunch of bullshit and a bold face lie. The simple fact is, the world is tired of the lies, propaganda, and scaremongering constantly pushed by anti-nuke idiots. Barely into the disaster at Fukushima, before anyone knew what it actually looked like, the anti-nuke idiots were already starting their political push and scaremongering campaigns. People are just tired of the lies and propaganda.
The simple fact is, even if Fukushima gets much, much worse, nuclear power is the cleanest, safest power source known to man kind. Idiocy associated with you propaganda doesn't change reality but it does, unfortunately, shape ignorant public opinion and policy.
I've not read a single post which says, "Not much and nothing", has happened. Not one. Which further highlights your ignorance, propaganda, and your general agenda. Believe it or not, stating fact, that the world is not ending, is not the same thing as, "not much and nothing." Nor is it the same thing as, "the sky is falling", as ignorant propaganda seems to be constantly pushing.
The reality is, nuclear power is extremely safe. The reality is, if we empowering irrational and scaremongering propaganda as you would have us do, then no one should live on a coastline and no one should live in tornado alley. Likewise, all coal plants should be immediately shutdown. That's ultimately what you're propaganda is spewing.
So which is it? Should we keep all energy prices low, provide the world's safest, cheapest form or energy, or destroy the world's economies, push energy prices up four multiples or more, endanger everyone, and displace millions from coastlines? I vote for sanity. Thus far, you vote for stupidity.
But the core logic of the debate doesn't make any sense and COMPLETELY ignores the root cause.
People are flocking to DRM free software not ultimately because of DRM but because of pirates. PIRATES necessitate the need for DRM. People who are not pirates are annoyed by DRM because its not addressing them. After all, they are not pirates so DRM to fight pirates is extremely annoying. In turn, people like you, justifiably so, seek a DRM free solution because ultimately, you're annoyed by idiot pirates. We (ethical users) all are. The bottom line, without bullshit propaganda which is constantly spewed on slashdot these days, people are annoyed by pirates and seek solutions which are not directly impacted by pirates.
At the end of the day, if you find you are seeking DRM-free solutions, start kicking every pirate you can find in the nuts until they start bleeding out their mouth. When everyone has finished with every pirate they can find, the need for DRM crap-ware is largely destroyed. Remember, DRM exists 100% in reaction to the unethical behavior of scumbag, criminal pirates. To blame anything other than pirates is to spread lies and propaganda.
At the end of the day, if you're mad or annoyed about DRM, you absolutely are mad and annoyed at pirates. Stop misplacing your anger people and blame the people who are ultimately responsible for everyone's misery - pirates!
Boundaries CAN be set on what is going to be possible.
And that's the problem. Limits can be set based on what we *think* is possible. The FACT is, what we think is possible is frequently shown to be false because we didn't know to account for something else because we didn't even know about the something else.
This is a FACT which theoretical physicists will even point out. We don't know what we don't know. And you can't prove you don't know what you don't know. As such, to condemn tomorrow knowing full well you don't know what tomorrow brings squarely classifies one as a fucktard. Furthermore, to rationalize that you know what you don't know is the height of concept of stupidity - which in turn brings us full circle to fucktards.
The reality is, we know very little. For your position to have any merit means you can prove a negative, seen the future, or are a fucktard. I'm betting on the later.
Well then, clearly we should use all the info garnered by perverse medical experiments and torture also, seeing as that it's so 'valuable'..
Welcome to the 20th century...on wait...
You do realize, there is almost nothing of the 20th century (post WWII) which didn't directly or indirectly benefit from the Nazi's medical and scientific endeavors... As such, living in the 21st century means you benefited from the horrors of the Nazi's experiments conducted during the 20th century.
Was a statement of hypocrisy actually intended to invalidate your own point? Or perhaps your point went over my head? Was your point something other than what you seem to be implying?
Does this re-enforce the conspiracy theories that Groklaw may have been a hired work by one of the parties in the SCO suit?
Blathering morons stand unitedly proud...The 9/11 Truthers are buying tickets to hear you in concert.
Hardly surprising that about one of the only posts which actually have anything to do with reality gets troll moderated.
Holy shit has slashdot fallen...and with it, the average IQ...
I'd honestly be surprised if the average IQ of the slashdot readership is above mid 100s these days. And based on posts I seriously doubt the average poster has an IQ above low 90s.
OK, so explain to me how you will get past the laws of physics then?
No need. Small minded much? Are you actually asserting mankind "knows" all the "laws" of physics? Well thankfully we need not do any more research in physics. Think of all the money and time you just saved humanity.
Your statement is equivalent to "All you assholes that say perpetual motion can't be achieved are just pessimistic fucktards."
Nope. That's completely, 100%, pure idiocy of your statement. I never said anything close to that - which further indicts you of your idiocy.
As for the rest of your reading, you fall squarely into the "fucktard" category. Seriously, you are limiting man kinds future based on today's understanding of a world which doesn't exist (tomorrow). For there to be any truth to such an assertion means you know in absolute terms what tomorrow bring. You're basically a fucking moron proudly stating man will suffocate should we ever travel in a car or be torn apart if we exceed the speed of sound.
I absolutely do not know what tomorrow brings. But what I'm absolutely sure of, you're an idiot if you believe you do; especially based on what you think mankind knows and understands today. Factually, everything you live today, was considered scientifically impossible yesterday. Learn some history and stop being a fucktard.
As I originally stated, please stop posting articles for fucktards by fucktards. Sadly, you entirely validated my post.
"There are things we can't do yet."
That's entirely the point. Basically, everything you do every day was once, "impossible." And it was believed in absolute terms, your daily life is literally impossible. And yet, they were all wrong.
An even better summary is, "small minded people get trapped in their own reality."
With Honeycomb, doesn't Google have a history of saying things will be released as open source, and then not releasing the source?
Troll much? No such history exists. You made that up.
Google has repeatedly stated when honeycomb is completed, thought to be the merge of 2.x and 3.x code base, it will be released to the public for general consumption.
How does Google saying something entirely different than you present, and a long, long history of them following through on exactly what they said, with Android itself in complete disagreement with your delusion, imply they have a history of doing what they've never done?
and may well make it impossible ... at least with current technologies.
When you make a prediction about the future and balance your entire argument based on current technology, you basically confirmed you're an idiot. The same absolute fucking idiots all said we can't fly, you'll suffocate in a car when it moves, reaching orbit is impossible, small electronic radio devices are nothing but scifi.
The summary could have simply said, "today's technology has limits."
So please, can we stop posting articles by fucktards, for fucktards?
Except nosql brings absolutely nothing new to the table. Literally, the only thing new nosql brings is hype. Nosql is a re-release of long existing technology which was first used on mainframes and has continued to be used after decades of use.
Literally, there is no new pressure on SQL, aside from ignorant hype. Furthermore, time and time again, and indicated in modern tests, nosql solutions typically perform worse than sql solutions and even add poor support, a small talent pool, and a tiny subset of tools.
Made even worse, only a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, fraction of nosql users should even be using nosql solutions. The fact its being widely adopted and is receiving so much hype is not only validation of the hyper surrounding the technology, but the general ignorance and stupidity of those picking it as a solution.
At least the database technology, on which nosql solutions are based, are actually reliable and robust.
Wouldn't this indicate that this is the skeleton of a transgender person
I can think of endless reasons why this may have occurred, and not of them have anything to do with sexual orientation. It reads of propaganda rather than anything else.
The core question was, what is harder to cleanup, a nuclear plant, or a coal plant.
Unsurprising, you're not alone in your invalid position; given the responses by others. But that doesn't change the question wasn't answered. The original question was:
How long does it take to clean up the byproducts from a coal plant
Please note, that does not in any way mean the clean up of the plant itself; given that the "byproducts" are spread all over the region. That does not mean clean up a plant. That means, clean up all the waste which has been spread over the surrounding area; which includes heavy metals, toxins, radioactive elements, ash (which also changes soil pH). Even if he meant something else, that's not what he said. And what he said is most definitely not what you said.
environment passed a rather stringent test for pollutants easily
I read no such thing. Furthermore, if it was a former Soviet country, that test may have been a simple survey to verify people were still alive.
If only I had a dime every time some idiot figured out how to post on slashdot...
Woosh?! Really? Considering the question wasn't answered, it would seem you posted about you're own reality. Sad.
Let's see. Question asked. Question not answered. Question re-asserted. Woosh?! If only your post came with a dime.
but there is no radiological concern.
Not completely true.
This is but one example. Its fairly well documented it is because the radioactivity from these plants are far more likely to be ingested; as clearly indicated. The fact the results from this story alone indicate radioactivity is up to 200x higher than living next to a nuclear plant. No, that doesn't mean its killing people in groves, but chances are it has to some degree. And we know for a fact the ash does contribute to respiratory illness and associated deaths. Furthermore, there are many stories of farm land being destroyed by coal ash. Once such story in Texas recently made its rounds. So clearly, its not an issue which should be completely dismissed as you seem to be conveying. The point remains, noteworthy waste is produces, even from "clean" plants and it doesn't simply disappear seconds after leaving the stack.
The reality is, there is no such thing as "clean coal."
Your story is interesting but I don't think it directly addresses the core question.
Coal plants spew poisonous/radioactive waste over a fairly large area of the life of its operation. The older the plant, the worse it tends to be. So while the plant my be gone, the question remains, how much of the surrounding area is still poisonous and/or radiative?
It doesn't sound like you know if the issue has been explored at that site or not. Even worse, if anyone is growing vegetables in the region, it can potentially be bad. Vegetables are excellent at absorbing both toxins and radiation; as are most fruiting/budding plants.
I'm not trying to scaremonger here, but the gp post is a very good question. Does anyone know how long it takes for the toxic and radioactive waste to be deemed, "clean", after the operations stop. Obviously the source of fuel and emission standards are a major factor here, but ballparks would be acceptable to me.
No, absolutely its not.
The bar has been set very, very high because SQL has proven it delivers and has repelled countless challengers. Let us know there actually has been innovation before declaring a high standard prevents innovation. In fact, its already looking, yet once again, there hasn't been innovation.
Innovation happens when you're better than what's already out there. That's not the same thing as saying what's out there is perfect. Even SQL purists will say SQL is far from perfect. Thus far, there is absolutely no indication the latest challenger has innovated anything. In fact, if you look, its more of the same which have previously been defeated - excellent now data is far more fragile with the competing solutions (nosql).
Guess what, rehashing previously failed attempts with yet more risk is anything but innovation.
Where is the problem with tying part of an employees bonus to the company's success?
None! But that's not what they did! They tied bonuses to a single product, not the successful of the company. One makes sense. The other is typically a power trip with cause to prevent paying out bonuses with the understanding the specific product isn't anywhere as ideal as they outwardly present.
The problem is, in the real world, its the best we got.
Technically the SQL specification is pointy and its far from perfect, but time and time again it prevails because, contrary to assertions by some, its likely to be the best we'll have for a very long time to come.
Using your favorite search engine is too technically difficult for you?
Deceptive practices are when you assert industry knowledge knowing full well its contrary to industry knowledge. Basically, its exactly as it sounds - being deceptive.
An example would be a lawyer telling his client the law very clearly protects a specific behavior, when in fact, he knows this instruction opens his client up to massive liability.
As for technical circles, an example would be a network consultant telling his client token ring is the preferred and defacto networking technology.
I know its shocking, but purposely being deceptive in a professional role is frowned on by the law.
That's an interesting position by flies in the face of their own statements.
why this isn't the exact same as the MS Java mess which everyone was cheering when Sun shut it down?
I'm sure you're get many an answer but here's the short answer.
Microsoft purposely failed to maintain currency as well as created incompatibilities. This had the effect of giving people a very bad taste in their mouth with Java since they were providing the defacto implementation on Windows; since it was bundled. This had the effect of damaging the Java brand; which was entirely Microsoft's intention, so as to push their own technology. It was part of their classic embrace and extend strategy and was extremely anti-competitive.
Google, on the other hand, is using the official java compiler and tools. Oracle's Java compiler then creates JVM bytecode. Google translates that JVM bytecode into Dalvik bytecode and packages it up into an application (apk). As such, its technically correct to say, Android programs are created using the Java language syntax and a subset of the Java framework. Their framework comes from freely available sources and is compiled using official, freely available, Java technology.
The differences are profound.
Basically it boils down to Oracle being pissed Google did an end-run around Oracle's Java ME implementation and licensing requirements by creating their own Java ME VM-like environment (Dalvik VM). Oracle simply doesn't have a case. At least not that I've seen so far.
Please flip a coin. Many people who professionally deal with technology fail to grasp many important aspects.
Ugh!
The problem is, this "improvement" has be tried and failed repeatedly over the last four decades. Here's the cycle. Some douche says, "SQL sucks", and offers the world a "vastly superior solution." Ignorant masses flock to it because of the buzz; and frequently because they lack SQL knowledge. A half or full decade later, the flocks wake up and say, "Man, were we douches. What were we thinking..." Followed by the legacy systems they created being retired, ported back to a SQL solution, or some poor chump is left holding the bag, maintaining a slowly dying system without support.
And many benchmarks have shown, almost none of the nosql solutions provide performance advantages over SQL. Furthermore, those which do provide performance advantages do so by making fragility of data its most significant feature; typically exceeding any performance benefits. Made worse, going the nosql route means leaving being a massive pool of proven, fast, and reliable tools, not to mention a large talent pool.
So basically, to break down the two camps, you do so with fundamental labels; ignorance vs wisdom. Or, those who know history and those doomed to repeat it. Thus far, there is every indication those jumping on the ignorant nosql bandwagon are bending over to repeat history.
Nothing you said invalidated anything I said. In fact, your post is a waste of space.