FUnctional programming languages are incabable of writing "efficient business applications". One presumes by "business applications" you mean database interaction and some gui component.
What is it about functional languages that prevent them being efficient for database access and gui applications?
"Guess what - shunning him and not interacting him are not going to prevent him from killing somebody else."
How do you know that? Sure some people are insane but for most people the threat of fines keep them from shitting in the park and paying their taxes. OUr society is now based on violence so it may not seem possible to you but human being need each other. All of us need support from others and the govt. For example in a pacifist society maybe murderers would be marked somehow and that people bearing that mark would be shunned by everybody else. This means they could not buy food, they could not rent an apartment, they could not talk to people. Perhaps there could be some institutions that these shunned people could go to obtain certain requirements but they nobody else would ever interact with them. This would be kind of like jail but not really. Now could they murder more people? Maybe but would that act as a detterent to murder yes it would. Right now if someone murders you throw them in jail for a few years and they come out and murder anyway. Nothing is perfect but again there are non violent ways of dealing with murderers.
I still haven't gone into things like raising non violent children (which is certainly possible) and therefore having a non violent society in the first place. We can also talk about a society where mentally ill are recognized early and treated so they don't kill and such.
There are many, many, many ways to avoid violence. If the entire society was pacifist maybe nobody would murder in the first place.
"A non-pacifist society would be able to stop him faster, and thus save lives."
Maybe, maybe not. Violence more often then not tends to begat more violence. We see that all around us.
"You are saying, Israel has no problem of survival because it has a large army it can use. Then you are saying, Israel must not use that army, because it should be more compassionate."
No I am saying it should not abuse that army or use it to enforce apartheid.
"Israel obeys every reasonable resolution of the UN. The UN has a history of bias against Israel in its resolution, and many of them are not implementable, not without tramendous risk to the interests and even survival of Israel."
Is that like only obeying "reasonable" laws or only obeying laws you approve of. Israel should obey all resolutions.
"Israel uses torture only in the rare cases of "ticking time bombs" where the torture is necessary to save lives. Do you agree with the use of torture in "24", where Pallmer uses torture to find out the location of the nuke?"
Bullshit. Israel routinely tortures people. I mean every day.
"Israel will stop arresting Juveniles, when the Palestinians stop sending Juveniles to try and kill Israelis"
Does it charge them and try them or simply jail them and torture them?
"One of the main incentives for suicide bombers is that their families are financially rewarded. Being unable to retaliate against a suicide bomber, a proper retaliation and a counter-measure to the financial reward is to destroy the homes of the families that send terrorist bombers to kill civilians."
Civilized nations don't do this. If I murder or rape or steal the govt does not destroy my parents house even if they fed me or gave me money. Only barbaric states do this.
" * Retreated to internationally recognized borders, despite the offensive rocket threat by Hezbollah.
* Ceased all hostilities.
* Ignored and passed by many attacks on Israel.
* Even did a diplomatic exchange after Hezbollah killed 3 of its soldiers and kidnapped another.
* Israel can not ignore further acts of war by Hezbollah"
Well that's a pack of lies.
Anyway you have proved my point. You are a jewish supremacist. You are willing to justify any action, any act of barbarism, torture, stealing land, destroying property (are all lebanese your enemy? were every one of those million homeless lebanese your enemy?), any and all kinds of horrible things done as long as they are done by jews against arabs.
Just another racist pig in a world full of them. There is no difference between a nazi white supremacist or a member of the KKK and you. Both of you see yourselves as victims in a "war" and both of you don't see your "enemies" as human beings who suffer. Only the suffering of the jew matters to you and killing or harming all arabs in order to ease that pain is reasonable to you because "they are the enemy". Congratulations a billion muslims all over the world is now your enemy, a fifth of the world hates your guts and most the rest find you repugnant, uncivilizes, brutal, uncaring scum. Good luck with that.
"How can Israel be more compassionate to the Lebanese and Palestinians, and still survive?"
Only people who are completely detached from reality believe that the survival of israel is at stake. Israel has one of the biggest armies in the world, it also has over 300 nukes. Israel is backed by the US who is willing to kill every single human being on the planet in order to assure the survival of israel.
"If Israel stops shooting at Hezbollah, to stop harming citizens, then Hezbollah will continue to kill and kidnap Israelis."
"So, how do you propose Israel should act?"
Obey all 50+ UN resolutions it's in violation of. Stop tortuing people. Stop stealing land. Stop jailing people without charges and trials. Stop jailing children. Stop assassinating people. Stop destroying other peoples property.
In other words act like civilized people. Those things are immoral you know, I think even the god of the jews probably doesn't approve of torturing and stealing.
I don't expect any of these words to have any effect on you however. You are a bigot and a supremacists. You don't register the suffering of any human being who is not a jew. To you the only suffering that matters is that of the jew and in order to ease their suffering the jews are justified in causing any degree of harm to any number of non jews. Two soldiers kidnapped? Destroy an entire nation, kill a thousand people, displace a million people. To you that's fair because "the fingernail of one jew is worth the lives of every arab in the world".
Atheism is a religion in the same way as darkness is light.
If you believe in multiple gods then stand corrected, either way I believe in less gods then you. The fact you think atheism is a religion seems to point to you being some sort of a religious fundamentalist, most likely a xtian fundamentalist, probably from one of the red states, probably a republican. Statistically speaking of course.
WMD stands for "weapons of mass destruction". In order to qualify as a WMD it has to be able to cause "mass desruction". A few inert canister of chemicals from thirty years ago don't qualify. Sorry.
Fox hyped that up because they are a propaganda arm of the republican party, it was not really a newsworthy find.
"The question here is: "if someone starts using violence to achieve their evil ends, who will oppose them?" "
Your presumption is that the only way to respond to violence is with more violence. I don't accept that premise. For example let's say you have a society which is a pacifist society. There is one violent person and he kicks somebody or kills somebody. You presume that the only appropriate response to that person is to react violently towards them. The society could do many other things. They could shun him for example. They could stop interacting with him.
Being a pacifist does not mean you just stand there and get hit. It's your inability to conceive of any non violent response that is messing you up here. You only see a world where only response to everything is violence.
To me both java and c# suck (well they are almost the same after all). They are both entirely too wordy and impossible to use without a really heavy duty IDE. Can you imagine trying to code a java app without netbeans or eclipse or IDEA? Can you even imagine trying to code a c# app without VS? These IDEs provide workarounds for the cumbersome way these languages go about doing things. I guess I just prefer more elegant approaches like those provided by other languages.
To me the biggest shame in this industry is the unwillingness by corporations to adopt superior technology. Proven superior technology like erlang or haskell or something. The herd mentality of CIOs and the really the programmers themselves holds the industry back. The wide adoption of silly bondage languages like java and c# when functional languages have been shown over and over again to be more robust, more stable and more productive is stupid.
As a side note. When some kid writes a perl6 interpreter in haskell in six weeks shouldn't the perl6 people have thrown up their hands and said "OK we give up, please use haskell instead"?.
So if everybody can't be a pacifist then nobody should be a pacifist. If everybody can't be a christian then nobody should be a christian. If everybody can't be kind then nobody should be kind. If everybody can't be generous then nobody should be generous. If everybody can't obey the law then nobody should obey the law.
Vote for whatever you want. If everybody was a pacifist there would have been no WWII. If pacifism was a worldwide philosophy countries would not be able to gather up enough armies to do their bidding.
In WW2 violence defeated hitler. This gave rise to russia, china, communism, vietnam, cold war etc. Whatever was saved by defeating nazis was paid for by the purges and progroms that followed in russia and china.
In the long run maybe pacifism would have worked the same, maybe better, maybe worse. Nobody knows.
"Castro, Pol Pot, and the Iranian president have several "checkmarks", but none have them all."
Yes. So do Bush and Sharon.
"If this is mindless Bush bashing: most don't apply at all to Bush, especially "Hitler was charismatic and had a fervent following amongst his people""
It's a matter of degrees mostly. Bush tortured less people, rounded up less people, killed less people, invaded less countries, disliked homosexuals less, subjugated less countries, etc. He did most of the same things just less. Kind of hitler lite. Same great taste, less filling.
"What if the millions of people who live in that country refuse to submit to the ethnic cleaning? Will you shoot them if they do not get into their cattle-cars peacefully? "
Maybe the same thing could be done to them that they are doing to the palestenians. Make their lives misrable for thirty years or so and see if they leave on their own. Also kill a thousand or so every year, torture a bunch of them every year, and lock up 10 thousand or so without charges and trials. Deny them water, deny them movement, deny them ambulance service.
"Why not level Tehran and build "The New Israel" there?"
Same problem as before. They would be surrounded by people who hate them most (granted most the world dislikes them). In the US they would be loved.
Hitler set up concentration camps where he rounded up religious minorities. Hitler hated homosexuals. Hitler invaded neighboring countries. Hitler had an official policy of torturing prisoners. Hitler rounded up people without trials or juries or charges. Hitler had a couple of allies but most of the world hated him although they were too scared or weak to attack him. Hitler has a vision of a racially pure state and was a supremacist. Hitler was charismatic and had a fervent following amongst his people. Hitler occupied other people for extended periods of time subjugating the people who live there to humiliation and bondage.
"nd slavish adherence to a pretty obviously false religion."
Is there is a true religion? All religions are obviously false.
To me this guy reads smarter, saner, better spoken and more rational then GW. They are both delusional and they are both religious fundamentalists so they have a lot in common except that this guy hasn't really killed a lot of people (yet?). GW has already killed over 100,000 people in iraq and afghanistan so he is way ahead.
"The fact that we are not animals. We are rational and, therefore, we become conscious of the suffering of others."
But not the palestenians or the lebanese right?
"Why do you assume Brazilians would be more willing to give up part of their territory than the Arabs? If that's a solution, then why doesn't Iran or Syria give part of their countries to the Palestinians"
Why doesn't the US give up land to host israel? That would make a lot of sense. We have a lot of land, we love the jews and the jews love us. It's a marriage made in heaven.
No he has specifically asked both the US and Germany to relocate israel to their land. I think that's a reasonable request the arabs had it long enough. The US can easily move it someplace in Nevada and nobody would even notice.
"Jews and other non-Muslims are denied equal participation in society. They remain 2nd class citizens unless they convert to Islam. "
THis is the same as muslims in israel. They don't enjoy full rights as jews do. For example they can be denied housing. They are treated differently in the courts.
Slashdot Mirror
Why excel? Shouldn't visicalc or lotus123 be in that spot? Java??? WTF? Where is C or FORTRAN or COBOL?
Sounds like an article written by somebody who doesn't know jack.
So let me get this straight.
FUnctional programming languages are incabable of writing "efficient business applications". One presumes by "business applications" you mean database interaction and some gui component.
What is it about functional languages that prevent them being efficient for database access and gui applications?
"Guess what - shunning him and not interacting him are not going to prevent him from killing somebody else."
How do you know that? Sure some people are insane but for most people the threat of fines keep them from shitting in the park and paying their taxes. OUr society is now based on violence so it may not seem possible to you but human being need each other. All of us need support from others and the govt. For example in a pacifist society maybe murderers would be marked somehow and that people bearing that mark would be shunned by everybody else. This means they could not buy food, they could not rent an apartment, they could not talk to people. Perhaps there could be some institutions that these shunned people could go to obtain certain requirements but they nobody else would ever interact with them. This would be kind of like jail but not really. Now could they murder more people? Maybe but would that act as a detterent to murder yes it would. Right now if someone murders you throw them in jail for a few years and they come out and murder anyway. Nothing is perfect but again there are non violent ways of dealing with murderers.
I still haven't gone into things like raising non violent children (which is certainly possible) and therefore having a non violent society in the first place. We can also talk about a society where mentally ill are recognized early and treated so they don't kill and such.
There are many, many, many ways to avoid violence. If the entire society was pacifist maybe nobody would murder in the first place.
"A non-pacifist society would be able to stop him faster, and thus save lives."
Maybe, maybe not. Violence more often then not tends to begat more violence. We see that all around us.
"You are saying, Israel has no problem of survival because it has a large army it can use.
Then you are saying, Israel must not use that army, because it should be more compassionate."
No I am saying it should not abuse that army or use it to enforce apartheid.
"Israel obeys every reasonable resolution of the UN. The UN has a history of bias against Israel in its resolution, and many of them are not implementable, not without tramendous risk to the interests and even survival of Israel."
Is that like only obeying "reasonable" laws or only obeying laws you approve of. Israel should obey all resolutions.
"Israel uses torture only in the rare cases of "ticking time bombs" where the torture is necessary to save lives. Do you agree with the use of torture in "24", where Pallmer uses torture to find out the location of the nuke?"
Bullshit. Israel routinely tortures people. I mean every day.
"Israel will stop arresting Juveniles, when the Palestinians stop sending Juveniles to try and kill Israelis"
Does it charge them and try them or simply jail them and torture them?
"One of the main incentives for suicide bombers is that their families are financially rewarded. Being unable to retaliate against a suicide bomber, a proper retaliation and a counter-measure to the financial reward is to destroy the homes of the families that send terrorist bombers to kill civilians."
Civilized nations don't do this. If I murder or rape or steal the govt does not destroy my parents house even if they fed me or gave me money. Only barbaric states do this.
" * Retreated to internationally recognized borders, despite the offensive rocket threat by Hezbollah.
* Ceased all hostilities.
* Ignored and passed by many attacks on Israel.
* Even did a diplomatic exchange after Hezbollah killed 3 of its soldiers and kidnapped another.
* Israel can not ignore further acts of war by Hezbollah"
Well that's a pack of lies.
Anyway you have proved my point. You are a jewish supremacist. You are willing to justify any action, any act of barbarism, torture, stealing land, destroying property (are all lebanese your enemy? were every one of those million homeless lebanese your enemy?), any and all kinds of horrible things done as long as they are done by jews against arabs.
Just another racist pig in a world full of them. There is no difference between a nazi white supremacist or a member of the KKK and you. Both of you see yourselves as victims in a "war" and both of you don't see your "enemies" as human beings who suffer. Only the suffering of the jew matters to you and killing or harming all arabs in order to ease that pain is reasonable to you because "they are the enemy". Congratulations a billion muslims all over the world is now your enemy, a fifth of the world hates your guts and most the rest find you repugnant, uncivilizes, brutal, uncaring scum. Good luck with that.
"How can Israel be more compassionate to the Lebanese and Palestinians, and still survive?"
Only people who are completely detached from reality believe that the survival of israel is at stake. Israel has one of the biggest armies in the world, it also has over 300 nukes. Israel is backed by the US who is willing to kill every single human being on the planet in order to assure the survival of israel.
"If Israel stops shooting at Hezbollah, to stop harming citizens, then Hezbollah will continue to kill and kidnap Israelis."
"So, how do you propose Israel should act?"
Obey all 50+ UN resolutions it's in violation of. Stop tortuing people. Stop stealing land. Stop jailing people without charges and trials. Stop jailing children. Stop assassinating people. Stop destroying other peoples property.
In other words act like civilized people. Those things are immoral you know, I think even the god of the jews probably doesn't approve of torturing and stealing.
I don't expect any of these words to have any effect on you however. You are a bigot and a supremacists. You don't register the suffering of any human being who is not a jew. To you the only suffering that matters is that of the jew and in order to ease their suffering the jews are justified in causing any degree of harm to any number of non jews. Two soldiers kidnapped? Destroy an entire nation, kill a thousand people, displace a million people. To you that's fair because "the fingernail of one jew is worth the lives of every arab in the world".
Why not?
Atheism is a religion in the same way as darkness is light.
If you believe in multiple gods then stand corrected, either way I believe in less gods then you. The fact you think atheism is a religion seems to point to you being some sort of a religious fundamentalist, most likely a xtian fundamentalist, probably from one of the red states, probably a republican. Statistically speaking of course.
WMD stands for "weapons of mass destruction". In order to qualify as a WMD it has to be able to cause "mass desruction". A few inert canister of chemicals from thirty years ago don't qualify. Sorry.
Fox hyped that up because they are a propaganda arm of the republican party, it was not really a newsworthy find.
Why couldn't a pacifist sociaty fine people? Why couldn't they deny services to people who commit crimes?
"The question here is: "if someone starts using violence to achieve their evil ends, who will oppose them?" "
Your presumption is that the only way to respond to violence is with more violence. I don't accept that premise. For example let's say you have a society which is a pacifist society. There is one violent person and he kicks somebody or kills somebody. You presume that the only appropriate response to that person is to react violently towards them. The society could do many other things. They could shun him for example. They could stop interacting with him.
Being a pacifist does not mean you just stand there and get hit. It's your inability to conceive of any non violent response that is messing you up here. You only see a world where only response to everything is violence.
To me both java and c# suck (well they are almost the same after all). They are both entirely too wordy and impossible to use without a really heavy duty IDE. Can you imagine trying to code a java app without netbeans or eclipse or IDEA? Can you even imagine trying to code a c# app without VS? These IDEs provide workarounds for the cumbersome way these languages go about doing things. I guess I just prefer more elegant approaches like those provided by other languages.
To me the biggest shame in this industry is the unwillingness by corporations to adopt superior technology. Proven superior technology like erlang or haskell or something. The herd mentality of CIOs and the really the programmers themselves holds the industry back. The wide adoption of silly bondage languages like java and c# when functional languages have been shown over and over again to be more robust, more stable and more productive is stupid.
As a side note. When some kid writes a perl6 interpreter in haskell in six weeks shouldn't the perl6 people have thrown up their hands and said "OK we give up, please use haskell instead"?.
So if everybody can't be a pacifist then nobody should be a pacifist. If everybody can't be a christian then nobody should be a christian. If everybody can't be kind then nobody should be kind. If everybody can't be generous then nobody should be generous. If everybody can't obey the law then nobody should obey the law.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
You think it would have been worse then mao?
"I vote for "worse""
Vote for whatever you want. If everybody was a pacifist there would have been no WWII. If pacifism was a worldwide philosophy countries would not be able to gather up enough armies to do their bidding.
In WW2 violence defeated hitler. This gave rise to russia, china, communism, vietnam, cold war etc. Whatever was saved by defeating nazis was paid for by the purges and progroms that followed in russia and china.
In the long run maybe pacifism would have worked the same, maybe better, maybe worse. Nobody knows.
"Castro, Pol Pot, and the Iranian president have several "checkmarks", but none have them all."
Yes. So do Bush and Sharon.
"If this is mindless Bush bashing: most don't apply at all to Bush, especially "Hitler was charismatic and had a fervent following amongst his people""
It's a matter of degrees mostly. Bush tortured less people, rounded up less people, killed less people, invaded less countries, disliked homosexuals less, subjugated less countries, etc. He did most of the same things just less. Kind of hitler lite. Same great taste, less filling.
I am an atheist. This means I believe in one less god then you.
"Can Israel be more compassionate to the Lebanese?"
Yes. They can also be more compassionate towards the palestenians.
Again you just don't care about the suffering of arabs. Most likely because you are a jewish supremacists.
"What if the millions of people who live in that country refuse to submit to the ethnic cleaning? Will you shoot them if they do not get into their cattle-cars peacefully? "
Maybe the same thing could be done to them that they are doing to the palestenians. Make their lives misrable for thirty years or so and see if they leave on their own. Also kill a thousand or so every year, torture a bunch of them every year, and lock up 10 thousand or so without charges and trials. Deny them water, deny them movement, deny them ambulance service.
"Why not level Tehran and build "The New Israel" there?"
Same problem as before. They would be surrounded by people who hate them most (granted most the world dislikes them). In the US they would be loved.
Why does that matter? They still don't have the same rights as jews.
I am really going to get it for this but....
Hitler set up concentration camps where he rounded up religious minorities.
Hitler hated homosexuals.
Hitler invaded neighboring countries.
Hitler had an official policy of torturing prisoners.
Hitler rounded up people without trials or juries or charges.
Hitler had a couple of allies but most of the world hated him although they were too scared or weak to attack him.
Hitler has a vision of a racially pure state and was a supremacist.
Hitler was charismatic and had a fervent following amongst his people.
Hitler occupied other people for extended periods of time subjugating the people who live there to humiliation and bondage.
Now which modern nation/leader is like hitler?
"nd slavish adherence to a pretty obviously false religion."
Is there is a true religion? All religions are obviously false.
To me this guy reads smarter, saner, better spoken and more rational then GW. They are both delusional and they are both religious fundamentalists so they have a lot in common except that this guy hasn't really killed a lot of people (yet?). GW has already killed over 100,000 people in iraq and afghanistan so he is way ahead.
"The fact that we are not animals. We are rational and, therefore, we become conscious of the suffering of others."
But not the palestenians or the lebanese right?
"Why do you assume Brazilians would be more willing to give up part of their territory than the Arabs? If that's a solution, then why doesn't Iran or Syria give part of their countries to the Palestinians"
Why doesn't the US give up land to host israel? That would make a lot of sense. We have a lot of land, we love the jews and the jews love us. It's a marriage made in heaven.
No he has specifically asked both the US and Germany to relocate israel to their land. I think that's a reasonable request the arabs had it long enough. The US can easily move it someplace in Nevada and nobody would even notice.
"Jews and other non-Muslims are denied equal participation in society. They remain 2nd class citizens unless they convert to Islam. "
THis is the same as muslims in israel. They don't enjoy full rights as jews do. For example they can be denied housing. They are treated differently in the courts.