Eclipse has and always had better support for what you spend most of your time doing in teh software development life cycle. For the fan bois and zealots out there that's not the designing the GUI part of writing your program. That's the debugging, refactoring, documenting, and deploying your product over and over again.
To a VS fanboi/zealot the only part of the SLDC that counts is designing the GUI.
"Without governmnet you would not have corporations."
That's not true. Maybe it's technically true in every country (including the weak ones) corporations exist because they are an efficient means of trade with the rest of the world.
"Unlike actual human beings, corporations themselves do not have first amendment rights."
Not according to the Supreme court. Makes one think, if corporations have first amendment rights, don't they have second amendment rights?
"If congress wishes to ban corporations from hiring lobbyists and directing employees to speak to congressmen on the company's behalf, as I understand it they are welcome to do so."
NO they can not. See above. Corporations do have first amendment rights. The supreme court said so.
So are you saying the entire country is full of madmen? Methinks your definition of madmen is "people I don't like" or "people who do things I disagree with"
Anyway you still haven't explained why only these "madmen" deserve to be invaded and occupied and why they were so bad iraq was first in line to be "liberated".
If I was bush I would have gone after china first because the madmen running china are ruining the lives of more people. Then North Korea, then all ones in africa (lots of them), and then I would go into the middle east but even then I would have started with Iran.
But hey that's just me, god doesn't tell me invade countries.
As I said before both of them have said (separately) that they pray together. I guess it's "pray together, prey together" huh?
Anyway Bush can't stop talking about god. Maybe it's an act but it doesn't seem that way to me. Didn't he say that god speaks through him? I think he did.
"Please ensure you capture context of Saddam the undeniable bad guy, engaging in systematic brinksmanship with the rest of the world. Counterfactuals about the two madmen-in-training, his sons, would also be interesting."
There are lots of madmen in the world, why go after saddam and his sons first.
For that matter if there are three madmen in a country why not simply kill them. Why invade and occupy a country? Why spend two hundred billion dollars and counting just to get rid three madmen.
DOn't get me wrong. I am all for getting rid of madmen but I am for getting rid of all of them, not just the ones with oil.
"I really wonder how my prime minister manages to get along with Bush, what do they have in common? "
They are both born again christians. Both of them have said they pray together.
Maybe they have other things in common but it seems to me that is the relevant one here.
"Why is Blair's government scared of finding out that it may have allowed CIA 'torture flights' to use our airspace and that the public may be pissed off about this,"
My theory is that these guys think they are fulfilling some sort of prophesy in the middle east. They are hastening the return of christ somehow.
"Did you know we have more forest now than before?"
Before what? Before a thousand years ago? Before a hundred years ago? Before yesterday?
Oh and are you talking about the entire world or just your backyard?
I think you have been listening a bit too much to Rush Limbaugh. He once quoted a study showing greater forestation in a tiny little northeastern state to extrapolate to the entire world. He is too stupid to realize that once the north east was stipped of it's forests logging moved westward. So if you measured the forestation of a tiny little northeastern state after deforestation to now you would show a greater forest coverage (although still less then before the area was settled). Lucky for him his listenres are just as stupid.
So why don't you go and see how much of the world was forested a thousand years ago, 500 years ago, 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 10 years ago, and 5 years ago and report me the trend.
Only a total ignorant retard thinks there is more forests today then there was a thousand years ago. Are you that guy?
"so get off your high-horse. I was simply stating that those who demonize the US while ignoring similar or worse acts by others are HYPOCRITES."
WHat's worse? Being a hypocrite or torturing people?
Really If the worse thing you can call them is a hypocrite then I don't think they have much to worry about. It's not like being a hypocite actually harms other people.
I'll take being a hyporcrite over being an evil uncaring murdering bastard any day.
"The government has a monopoly on the use of force to extract taxes and redistribute wealth and in the absence of that, Corporations cannot assume the same degree of influence and control over our lives and wallets."
Considering that you depend on corporations for food, water, gasoline, entertainment, information and just about everything else except for air I'd say that is an amazingly naive point of view.
Without strong govt you will be ruled by monopolies. The natural tendency of completely free markets is monopolies. History is full of examples all over the world. Hell in most third world countries half a dozen families own everything including the govt.
"Yes, they do. But this is not something unique to Christianity or unique to religion. "
Although I agree that it's not unique to christianity I do think it's unique to religion and Nationalism (which is no different then religion really).
I think this is why atheists and rationalists are often critical of all religions.
"You should try talking to some conservatives."
To me those people are no different then Osama Bin Laden. They are jihadists. Also like Osama they have set up their madrasas, not in pakistan but on talk radio, fox news, the internet and in newsletters.
It's important to realize that these people are at war. They believe that all of us should be subjugated to their interpretation of their holy text. Osama is going to force women to wear veils and the conservatives are going to force us to go to church and pray to their god and prevent homosexuals from getting teaching jobs or whatever else gets their panties in a wad.
A jihadist is a jihadist. Anybody who takes a two thousand year old document and interprets it literally is by definition insane and irrational. It's fine if you see a parable and think it's cute or has a point but to claim that the entire western world is based on the teaching of a guy who said "it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" is plain old stupid.
Western democracy is based on greed which is a sin. It's based on selfishness which is a sin. It's chuck full of gluttony, covetousness, pride, vanity, and envy. How can any rational person deny that capitalism and the western world is built on the seven deadly sins?
What would capitalism look like without interest? Interest is usury, that's a sin. Jesus spoke out against usury. Capitalism is anti-christian. There can be no doubt about that.
Love of money is the root of all evil. Remember that one?
"The original post was trying to say that because God supposedly committed infanticide, it implies that Christians are OK with infanticide."
No I think he was simply pointing out that god was excessively and sadistically cruel. Of course this should come as no surprise considering that god wiped off the entire planet except for noah when he got pissed off.
I think what happens is that often christians take this transcendence thing a bit too far. They believe that in the end god will take them into heaven and condemn others to hell so they don't seem to have too much of a problem with wars, brutal occupations of countries (see palestine) and whatnot.
"So I think its hard to start off by saying that religion is the cause of our ills, but then make the complete opposite argument and say that religion had nothing to do with our successes."
I don't think this analysis is quite right. God is given as a reason for doing aweful things but I don't think anybody tries to say God is the reason why the internet was invented.
"God also let his son die - do you interpret that to mean that the Bible teaches us to let our children die?"
What do you mean? Aren't your children going to die no matter what you do?
On a greater note. Look all you are saying is that certain passages in the bible should be ignored because of some interpretation or another. Other passages should be taken in context of what we think the ancient world looked like.
that's fine. Most people do that. All I ask is that you give other people the right to ignore passages of their choice and to interpret any pssage they like according to what they think the old world was like.
The bible clearly states that homosexuals should be killed on sight. Not even a trial is perscribed. If you see a homosexual you must kill him.
Even odder is that if you see a man laying (having sex) with an animal you must kill botht he man and the animal. This seems stupid to me. Why kill the poor animal, it's not like he was asking for it.
"One might make the argument that it's wrong for a person to amass great wealth in the abstract, and that therefore a person who accidentally amasses great wealth should do their best to divest themselves of it in a constructive way. But again, this falls to the person who makes the "mistake" of amassing this great wealth to judge, not to me."
I don't think I buy into this "we should not judge other people" line. I think it's perfectly acceptable to pass judgement on other people, what they do, how they act, what they say etc.
An interesting point.
All the major religions in the world advocate simple life if not a life of poverty and self sacrifice. Christ said it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. Budha preached a life of poverty. Mohammed was less harsh then both of them but he too preached generous giving (10%), caring for the poor, and fasting to remind yourself of what the poor go through.
On the other hand the only religion which preaches that accumulation of wealth is a virtue is satanism.
"That is indeed a very interesting thing to hang moral superiority on. The US isn't infallable but at least its citizens can learn from the US's mistakes because the US allows its citizens to pass information to each other freely."
I suppose if you are grasping at straws then anything will do. I mean if the best thing you can say about the US is that although we kill protesters (and torture, and invade, and occupy, and steal) we allow people to talk about then OK, I guess that's good enough for some people.
What's really interesting is that the days of you being able to pass information to each other freely are coming to an end. You know, DMCA, DRM, tightly controlled and manipulated media etc.
"Nobody made that argument. I never said anything about VS pre 2005, so this is a straw man. Oh and by the way, you can integrate Ant with VS if you wish, via a (trumpet fanfare) PLUG-IN!!!"
What? Didn't you say plug ins for eclipse made eclipse worse then VS. Didn't you say the fact that VS and the assorted languages it supports are all updated by MS and that made it better?
Oh and why would a windows shop use a tool not made by MS? Would a windows shop allow the use of non MS plug ins on VS.NET?
"The difference is that VS already comes with various things built into it that are supplied by plug-ins with Eclipse."
Well DUH!. Eclipse itself is nothing but a platform for installing and managing plug ins. The entire java development environment itself is a plug in.
"No matter which way you pitch it, Java's multi-platform nature makes it difficult to access Windows-specific features without stepping outside Java itself,"
Yeabut there is no real need to. Java has libraries for everything windows does and more.
""Eclipse had read debugging while VS had crappy debugging." "Eclipse had real build and deployment tools while VS had shit.""
Yes the fact that individual features of VS which are shitty and crappy is what makes eclipse so much better then VS. But hey go ahead and take things out of context, I fully expect that from a fan boi.
Only a windows zealot would argue that VS build tools pre VS2005 were anywhere near as good as maven and ant integrated with eclipse. Only a windows zealot would argue that VS had/has anything as good as xdoclet, javadoc, doxygen etc.
The comfort of the windows zealot is that although their tools are inferior at least they don't have to install a plug in or god forbid have their screen look different when programming for the web.
Finally. Any organization who believes that no matter what the problem is only tools made by MS can be used is by definition run by zealots. You know the old adage "best tool for the job"? Sometimes the best tool is actually available from a different vendor. People who refuse to evaluate or use tools simply because they are not made by MS are zealots. I don't know how any rational person can disagree with that.
"You say that Java + Eclipse is great, VS +.NET is crap, "
No, I simply said java+eclipse is better then VS. +.net.
So you are saying that it's OK to kill protesters if you let books about it get published afterwards. Interesting thing to hang your moral supreriority on.
Has there even been protesters killed in the US? I think I remember some in the sixties. I know many prisoners have been killed some in other countries after being tortured.
A corporation HAS to act evil(*). It has no choice. The only moral imperitive of a corporation is "make more money". That's it. There is nothing else (or at least everything else has to take a back seat.
* by evil I am using the biblical definition as in "love of money is the root of all evil" and "it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle".
How is appox one month pay punishment enough to deter? If you stole money from a 7-11 you would be put in jail how come these guys get to go free? Wouldn't jail be more of a deterrent while sparing the shareholders?
I say throw the entire board in jail. The buck stops with them and they get paid the big bucks. I bet the CEO can find 10 million between the cushions of his couch.
Slashdot Mirror
"What bullshit! By that logic, we've got a weak government now, because we are ruled by corporate interests already."
Obviously our govt is not strong enough to avoid a rule by corporations. I suspect this is due to legalized bribery scheme we have going.
SO in effect we are saying the same thing. The govt has been bought.
Eclipse has and always had better support for what you spend most of your time doing in teh software development life cycle. For the fan bois and zealots out there that's not the designing the GUI part of writing your program. That's the debugging, refactoring, documenting, and deploying your product over and over again.
To a VS fanboi/zealot the only part of the SLDC that counts is designing the GUI.
"Without governmnet you would not have corporations."
That's not true. Maybe it's technically true in every country (including the weak ones) corporations exist because they are an efficient means of trade with the rest of the world.
"Unlike actual human beings, corporations themselves do not have first amendment rights."
Not according to the Supreme court. Makes one think, if corporations have first amendment rights, don't they have second amendment rights?
"If congress wishes to ban corporations from hiring lobbyists and directing employees to speak to congressmen on the company's behalf, as I understand it they are welcome to do so."
NO they can not. See above. Corporations do have first amendment rights. The supreme court said so.
So are you saying the entire country is full of madmen? Methinks your definition of madmen is "people I don't like" or "people who do things I disagree with"
Anyway you still haven't explained why only these "madmen" deserve to be invaded and occupied and why they were so bad iraq was first in line to be "liberated".
If I was bush I would have gone after china first because the madmen running china are ruining the lives of more people. Then North Korea, then all ones in africa (lots of them), and then I would go into the middle east but even then I would have started with Iran.
But hey that's just me, god doesn't tell me invade countries.
As I said before both of them have said (separately) that they pray together. I guess it's "pray together, prey together" huh?
Anyway Bush can't stop talking about god. Maybe it's an act but it doesn't seem that way to me. Didn't he say that god speaks through him? I think he did.
Nah, he will just go get Osama. Does anybody believe that we have no idea where he is? A seven foot tall arab with a kidney problem?
"Please ensure you capture context of Saddam the undeniable bad guy, engaging in systematic brinksmanship with the rest of the world. Counterfactuals about the two madmen-in-training, his sons, would also be interesting."
There are lots of madmen in the world, why go after saddam and his sons first.
For that matter if there are three madmen in a country why not simply kill them. Why invade and occupy a country? Why spend two hundred billion dollars and counting just to get rid three madmen.
DOn't get me wrong. I am all for getting rid of madmen but I am for getting rid of all of them, not just the ones with oil.
"I really wonder how my prime minister manages to get along with Bush, what do they have in common? "
They are both born again christians. Both of them have said they pray together.
Maybe they have other things in common but it seems to me that is the relevant one here.
"Why is Blair's government scared of finding out that it may have allowed CIA 'torture flights' to use our airspace and that the public may be pissed off about this,"
My theory is that these guys think they are fulfilling some sort of prophesy in the middle east. They are hastening the return of christ somehow.
"Did you know we have more forest now than before?"
Before what? Before a thousand years ago? Before a hundred years ago? Before yesterday?
Oh and are you talking about the entire world or just your backyard?
I think you have been listening a bit too much to Rush Limbaugh. He once quoted a study showing greater forestation in a tiny little northeastern state to extrapolate to the entire world. He is too stupid to realize that once the north east was stipped of it's forests logging moved westward. So if you measured the forestation of a tiny little northeastern state after deforestation to now you would show a greater forest coverage (although still less then before the area was settled). Lucky for him his listenres are just as stupid.
So why don't you go and see how much of the world was forested a thousand years ago, 500 years ago, 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 10 years ago, and 5 years ago and report me the trend.
Only a total ignorant retard thinks there is more forests today then there was a thousand years ago. Are you that guy?
"so get off your high-horse. I was simply stating that those who demonize the US while ignoring similar or worse acts by others are HYPOCRITES."
WHat's worse? Being a hypocrite or torturing people?
Really If the worse thing you can call them is a hypocrite then I don't think they have much to worry about. It's not like being a hypocite actually harms other people.
I'll take being a hyporcrite over being an evil uncaring murdering bastard any day.
"The government has a monopoly on the use of force to extract taxes and redistribute wealth and in the absence of that, Corporations cannot assume the same degree of influence and control over our lives and wallets."
Considering that you depend on corporations for food, water, gasoline, entertainment, information and just about everything else except for air I'd say that is an amazingly naive point of view.
Without strong govt you will be ruled by monopolies. The natural tendency of completely free markets is monopolies. History is full of examples all over the world. Hell in most third world countries half a dozen families own everything including the govt.
Your govt is for sale to the highest bidder and you are worried aobut the latency for your online games?
"Yes, they do. But this is not something unique to Christianity or unique to religion. "
Although I agree that it's not unique to christianity I do think it's unique to religion and Nationalism (which is no different then religion really).
I think this is why atheists and rationalists are often critical of all religions.
"You should try talking to some conservatives."
To me those people are no different then Osama Bin Laden. They are jihadists. Also like Osama they have set up their madrasas, not in pakistan but on talk radio, fox news, the internet and in newsletters.
It's important to realize that these people are at war. They believe that all of us should be subjugated to their interpretation of their holy text. Osama is going to force women to wear veils and the conservatives are going to force us to go to church and pray to their god and prevent homosexuals from getting teaching jobs or whatever else gets their panties in a wad.
A jihadist is a jihadist. Anybody who takes a two thousand year old document and interprets it literally is by definition insane and irrational. It's fine if you see a parable and think it's cute or has a point but to claim that the entire western world is based on the teaching of a guy who said "it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" is plain old stupid.
Western democracy is based on greed which is a sin. It's based on selfishness which is a sin. It's chuck full of gluttony, covetousness, pride, vanity, and envy. How can any rational person deny that capitalism and the western world is built on the seven deadly sins?
What would capitalism look like without interest? Interest is usury, that's a sin. Jesus spoke out against usury. Capitalism is anti-christian. There can be no doubt about that.
Love of money is the root of all evil. Remember that one?
"The original post was trying to say that because God supposedly committed infanticide, it implies that Christians are OK with infanticide."
No I think he was simply pointing out that god was excessively and sadistically cruel. Of course this should come as no surprise considering that god wiped off the entire planet except for noah when he got pissed off.
I think what happens is that often christians take this transcendence thing a bit too far. They believe that in the end god will take them into heaven and condemn others to hell so they don't seem to have too much of a problem with wars, brutal occupations of countries (see palestine) and whatnot.
"So I think its hard to start off by saying that religion is the cause of our ills, but then make the complete opposite argument and say that religion had nothing to do with our successes."
I don't think this analysis is quite right. God is given as a reason for doing aweful things but I don't think anybody tries to say God is the reason why the internet was invented.
"God also let his son die - do you interpret that to mean that the Bible teaches us to let our children die?"
What do you mean? Aren't your children going to die no matter what you do?
On a greater note. Look all you are saying is that certain passages in the bible should be ignored because of some interpretation or another. Other passages should be taken in context of what we think the ancient world looked like.
that's fine. Most people do that. All I ask is that you give other people the right to ignore passages of their choice and to interpret any pssage they like according to what they think the old world was like.
Fair is fair right?
The bible clearly states that homosexuals should be killed on sight. Not even a trial is perscribed. If you see a homosexual you must kill him.
Even odder is that if you see a man laying (having sex) with an animal you must kill botht he man and the animal. This seems stupid to me. Why kill the poor animal, it's not like he was asking for it.
"One might make the argument that it's wrong for a person to amass great wealth in the abstract, and that therefore a person who accidentally amasses great wealth should do their best to divest themselves of it in a constructive way. But again, this falls to the person who makes the "mistake" of amassing this great wealth to judge, not to me."
I don't think I buy into this "we should not judge other people" line. I think it's perfectly acceptable to pass judgement on other people, what they do, how they act, what they say etc.
An interesting point.
All the major religions in the world advocate simple life if not a life of poverty and self sacrifice. Christ said it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. Budha preached a life of poverty. Mohammed was less harsh then both of them but he too preached generous giving (10%), caring for the poor, and fasting to remind yourself of what the poor go through.
On the other hand the only religion which preaches that accumulation of wealth is a virtue is satanism.
"That is indeed a very interesting thing to hang moral superiority on. The US isn't infallable but at least its citizens can learn from the US's mistakes because the US allows its citizens to pass information to each other freely."
I suppose if you are grasping at straws then anything will do. I mean if the best thing you can say about the US is that although we kill protesters (and torture, and invade, and occupy, and steal) we allow people to talk about then OK, I guess that's good enough for some people.
What's really interesting is that the days of you being able to pass information to each other freely are coming to an end. You know, DMCA, DRM, tightly controlled and manipulated media etc.
"Nobody made that argument. I never said anything about VS pre 2005, so this is a straw man. Oh and by the way, you can integrate Ant with VS if you wish, via a (trumpet fanfare) PLUG-IN!!!"
What? Didn't you say plug ins for eclipse made eclipse worse then VS. Didn't you say the fact that VS and the assorted languages it supports are all updated by MS and that made it better?
Oh and why would a windows shop use a tool not made by MS? Would a windows shop allow the use of non MS plug ins on VS.NET?
"The difference is that VS already comes with various things built into it that are supplied by plug-ins with Eclipse."
Well DUH!. Eclipse itself is nothing but a platform for installing and managing plug ins. The entire java development environment itself is a plug in.
"No matter which way you pitch it, Java's multi-platform nature makes it difficult to access Windows-specific features without stepping outside Java itself,"
Yeabut there is no real need to. Java has libraries for everything windows does and more.
""Eclipse had read debugging while VS had crappy debugging."
"Eclipse had real build and deployment tools while VS had shit.""
Yes the fact that individual features of VS which are shitty and crappy is what makes eclipse so much better then VS. But hey go ahead and take things out of context, I fully expect that from a fan boi.
Only a windows zealot would argue that VS build tools pre VS2005 were anywhere near as good as maven and ant integrated with eclipse. Only a windows zealot would argue that VS had/has anything as good as xdoclet, javadoc, doxygen etc.
.NET is crap, "
The comfort of the windows zealot is that although their tools are inferior at least they don't have to install a plug in or god forbid have their screen look different when programming for the web.
Finally. Any organization who believes that no matter what the problem is only tools made by MS can be used is by definition run by zealots. You know the old adage "best tool for the job"? Sometimes the best tool is actually available from a different vendor. People who refuse to evaluate or use tools simply because they are not made by MS are zealots. I don't know how any rational person can disagree with that.
"You say that Java + Eclipse is great, VS +
No, I simply said java+eclipse is better then VS. +.net.
So you are saying that it's OK to kill protesters if you let books about it get published afterwards. Interesting thing to hang your moral supreriority on.
Has there even been protesters killed in the US? I think I remember some in the sixties. I know many prisoners have been killed some in other countries after being tortured.
Bingo!.
A corporation HAS to act evil(*). It has no choice. The only moral imperitive of a corporation is "make more money". That's it. There is nothing else (or at least everything else has to take a back seat.
* by evil I am using the biblical definition as in "love of money is the root of all evil" and "it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle".
BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA.
that's Rich!. Rush wrote something in a book and you believed it. BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
How is appox one month pay punishment enough to deter? If you stole money from a 7-11 you would be put in jail how come these guys get to go free? Wouldn't jail be more of a deterrent while sparing the shareholders?
I say throw the entire board in jail. The buck stops with them and they get paid the big bucks. I bet the CEO can find 10 million between the cushions of his couch.