Why don't people like lisp?

[Robert L.]

Rmagere wrote:

> >>> (apply '+ (mapcar #'(lambda(x)(* x x)) numlist)).
> >> Well..
> >> sum (map (\x -> x ** 2) [1..10])
> >> in Haskell, or
> >> sum (map ((lambda x: x ** 2), range(1,11)))
> >
> > Too much line noise ;-)
> >
> > sum([x*x for x in range(1,11)])
> >
>
> Then I would say that a clearer way to express what a person think is:
> (loop for number in numberlist sum (expt number power))

(apply + (map (curryr expt power) numberlist))


--
The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may
find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition.... [W]e intend to
keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too,
until the social construct known as "the white race" is destroyed---not
"deconstructed" but destroyed. --- the Jew Noel Ignatiev
http://archive.org/details/nolies

[Joshua Lugo Mclellan]

I think in this case what your really doing is trying to reduce a list down into a single value, the X*X data transform is just an intermediate step, in CL we can articulate that pretty clearly using a reduce function with a sum as a reduce and that intermediate transform as the key value

(reduce #'+ numlist :key (lambda (x) (* x x)))

now to be fair, id say its pretty hard to complete with list comprehensions for expressiveness per character, but i think that using the correct higher order function can help drastically reduce the line noise we have to deal with

[Rainer Joswig]

Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2018 14:40:48 UTC+2 schrieb Joshua Lugo Mclellan:

> I think in this case what your really doing is trying to reduce a list down into a single value, the X*X data transform is just an intermediate step, in CL we can articulate that pretty clearly using a reduce function with a sum as a reduce and that intermediate transform as the key value
>
> (reduce #'+ numlist :key (lambda (x) (* x x)))
>
> now to be fair, id say its pretty hard to complete with list comprehensions for expressiveness per character, but i think that using the correct higher order function can help drastically reduce the line noise we have to deal with

I'm not sure why a) you argue with a Neonazi propaganda account and why b) you quote Neonazi propaganda content from him?

Any idea why you do that?

[Kaz Kylheku]

Because Google Groups news client cannot so much as remove a "-- "
delimited signature from the quoted article: the one standard-conforming
feature in a WJ posting?

[Sam Steingold]

> * Rainer Joswig <wbf...@yvfc.qr> [2018-05-10 13:41:00 -0700]:

I think he wants to join that account in my kill file.
;-)

--
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on darwin Ns 10.3.1561
http://childpsy.net http://calmchildstories.com http://steingoldpsychology.com
http://camera.org http://jij.org http://honestreporting.com
WinWord 6.0 UNinstall: Not enough disk space to uninstall WinWord

[Joshua Lugo Mclellan]

I'm not gonna lie, I dont know if a kill file is a useful think I should know about or not, but I was just really tired of seeing stupid scheme code everywhere (TBF I do really like scheme, this just feels like the wrong place to do it). In hindsight maby not the best approach to the problem.

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

You're wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev

> Any idea why you do that?

He didn't do what you're saying.
He's probably not what you're saying either.

--
__Pascal J. Bourguignon
http://www.informatimago.com

[Raymond Wiker]

He did, and he is - read the sig again.

Apart from that, WJ is just a pure and utter waste of carbon.

[Madhu]

* Raymond Wiker <m2po1zh...@gmail.com> :
Wrote on Sun, 13 May 2018 20:04:24 +0200:

>>> I'm not sure why a) you argue with a Neonazi propaganda account and
>>> why b) you quote Neonazi propaganda content from him?

snip

>>> Any idea why you do that?
>>
>> He didn't do what you're saying. He's probably not what you're
>> saying either.
>
> He did, and he is - read the sig again.

he did not. google did it for you automatically.

[Rainer Joswig]

Am Freitag, 11. Mai 2018 23:19:17 UTC+2 schrieb informatimago:

> He didn't do what you're saying.
> He's probably not what you're saying either.

Came across a few postings of somebody of your name with anti-semitic and racist content.

Coincident?

[Grumpy McLisper]

In comp.lang.lisp, you wrote:

> anti-semitic and racist.

You go Joswig!

Let's destroy what's left of this place. I think we all agree that a
German's inability to see the word "Jew" in print must trump all other
considerations.

Here, have another one to keep you motivated: Jew.

> Coincident?

[Kaz Kylheku]

On 2018-05-15, Grumpy McLisper <gm...@example.org> wrote:
> Let's destroy what's left [...]

:)

[Go Away W J]

Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:

> Rainer Joswig <jos...@lisp.de> writes:
>
> > I'm not sure why a) you argue with a Neonazi propaganda account
> > and why b) you quote Neonazi propaganda content from him?
>
> You're wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev
>
> > Any idea why you do that?
>
> He didn't do what you're saying.
> He's probably not what you're saying either.

Nothing in that wiki article changes my opinion of what WJ/RL does
and is. I don't understand why you think it should change Rainer's.

[Go Away W J]

Madhu wrote:
> * Raymond Wiker <m2po1zh...@gmail.com> :
> Wrote on Sun, 13 May 2018 20:04:24 +0200:
>

> > "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <p...@informatimago.com> writes:

snip

> > > He didn't do what you're saying. He's probably not what you're
> > > saying either.
> >
> > He did, and he is - read the sig again.
>
> he did not. google did it for you automatically.

Your use of "he" meant Joshua, but in the material that you quoted "he"
meant William James aka WJ aka Robert L.

[Marco Antoniotti]

On 2018-05-16 02:07:01 +0000, Madhu said:

> * "Go Away W J" <pdfuq0$15mp$1...@gioia.aioe.org> :
> Wrote on Wed, 16 May 2018 00:43:07 +0000 (UTC):

>
>> Your use of "he" meant Joshua, but in the material that you quoted
>> "he" meant William James aka WJ aka Robert L.
>

> Yes, I thought rwiker was criticising Joshua for something Joshua did
> inadvertently, while google is responsible for his mistake. rwiker was
> responding to Pascal and the referent was Joshua
>
> While it is acceptable to inform Joshua of the problem and to correct
> him ("do not reply to this poster" and "do not quote sigs in your
> reply"), it is not appropriate to shame Joshua as a `war criminal'.
>
> BTW I don't see WJ at all except when you feel compelled to respond to
> him. I may not have seen your posts until I changed my filter from a
> regexp to an exact match, since your From field also has those initials.

I went to a certain length to avoid Google Groups and having a nice
USENet reader with kill files. I am using Unison (which is "not under
development") and nntp.AIOE.org as server.

Not many free NNTP servers around.

Cheers
--
MA

[Rainer Joswig]

Am Montag, 14. Mai 2018 02:43:36 UTC+2 schrieb Madhu:

> he did not. google did it for you automatically.

If one is too dumb to delete it... All the Google UI does is quoting the text. Nobody forces me to post the unedited text as Google inserted it into the text field. Personally I don't see a reason to a) answer a racist Nazi and b) quote his propaganda signature content.

[Grumpy McLisper]

Joswig,

you have uncovered a vast conspiracy of people who say "Jew" in the
presence of a German; people who quote people who say "Jew" in the
presence of a German; and people who try to make light of the crime of
saying "Jew" in the presence of a German by linking to a random
academic's calls to genocide (a trifling nothing compared to even
thinking about saying "Jew" in the presence of a German.)

Well done!

Your next assignment shall be the establishment of a CODE OF CONDUCT
(COC) at the very nexus of the conspiracy, the following projects:

* Steel Bank Common Lisp
* Clozure Common Lisp
* Quicklisp

The Code of Conduct shall be named in your honor,

THE JOSWIG COC!

(I can assure you it's not because it will be short.)

You clearly are the best man for the mission.
Good luck.

[Paul Rubin]

Grumpy McLisper <gm...@example.org> writes: [blah]

WJ is that you?

[Grumpy McLisper]

Paul Rubin wrote:
> [blah]

Are you serious?

Between WJ himself; the guy who went ahead and quoted WJ; PJB the
Coincident[sic]; and the guy who tried to blame it all on google...
that's four(!) of them(!!) in the space of two or three days.

Even FreeBSD has a CoC these days.
Get with the times.

[Paul Rubin]

Grumpy McLisper <gm...@example.org> writes:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
>> Are you WJ?
> Are you serious?

Meh. We already have WJ trolling us. Are you the same troll or another
one? I ask because it's a slightly interesting question, but only
slightly. It works out about the same either way: go away, troll.

[Madhu]

* Grumpy McLisper <slrnpfpb3f...@example.org> :
Wrote on Wed, 16 May 2018 22:10:55 -0000 (UTC):

> Even FreeBSD has a CoC these days.
> Get with the times.

I had no idea what this was when I saw it, Then I had occasion to look
up

https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/blob/master/CODE-OF-CONDUCT.md
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/master/CODE-OF-CONDUCT.md

And reading it made also made realized why git-lfs is designed to be
unusable[1].

I guess the first thing MS will do with github is stop git:// access to
github. After all the first thing they did with linkedin was to make it
inaccessible without a linked in account. The service like all cloud
services isn't about supplying information to the user but about getting
and generating information on the user.

The alternative gitlab, already disables git:// access to its
repositories and provides a security-based argument (git protocol is not
secure), but the goal is only to kill off anonymous access to the
source.

git:// reduces transfer sizes, https:// is dumb and cannot do those
optimizations and often requires redundant transfers. Again a "cloud
technology", which benefits no one but the cloud investors at the
expense of all the inefficiencies forced on the end time generation of
cloud users.

BTW Ever since common-lisp.net moved to gitlab I have been unable to use
it. The old projects may have "migrated" to gitlab but there is no way
to get a full list of projects on gitlab, nor a way to access them. The
old pages are still available with defunct content. Now C-L is truly
"cloud ready" for the harvest.

</rant>
almost...


[1] It is also unusable for situations such as CCL encoutered when
moving from svn to git: ccl stored the binaries of a release in svn -
which would be used to bootstrap the sources, and git is designed not to
handle binaries well. I thought maybe git-lfs would keep the binaries
out of the main repo and handle them, it only seems to be another "cloud
economy" design so you rack up bandwidth bills in using the cloud when
your monkeys download a 2GB file each time.

[Paul Rubin]

Madhu <eno...@meer.net> writes:
> The alternative gitlab, already disables git:// access to its
> repositories and provides a security-based argument (git protocol is not
> secure), but the goal is only to kill off anonymous access to the
> source.
>
> git:// reduces transfer sizes, https:// is dumb and cannot do those
> optimizations and often requires redundant transfers.

You're saying https is less efficient, not that it kills off anonymity.
Is there a prospect of Gitlab killing off anonymous https?

Just how bad are those redundant transfers? I've used github https
links for years and not been aware of a problem. For my own stuff I
usually use ssh://. I thought git:// was a legacy thing that nobody
ever uses any more.

[Stefan Monnier]

> The alternative gitlab, already disables git:// access to its
> repositories and provides a security-based argument (git protocol is not
> secure), but the goal is only to kill off anonymous access to the
> source.

Hmm... AFAIK Git's https support includes support for an extension which
switches (after establishing the initial https connection) to the "git"
protocol, hence providing the same efficiency (modulo
authentication&encryption) as "git:...".

Of course, this relies on the server supporting this extension as well.
Are you saying that Gitlab dosn't use this extension?
Why wouldn't they? It'd just increase their monthly electricity and
internet-access bills without any obvious upside for them!?


Stefan

[Madhu]

* Stefan Monnier <jwva7s58aoq.fsf-mon...@gnu.org> :
Wrote on Fri, 08 Jun 2018 13:26:38 -0400:

>> The alternative gitlab, already disables git:// access to its
>> repositories and provides a security-based argument (git protocol is
>> not secure), but the goal is only to kill off anonymous access to the
>> source.
>
> Hmm... AFAIK Git's https support includes support for an extension
> which switches (after establishing the initial https connection) to
> the "git" protocol, hence providing the same efficiency (modulo
> authentication&encryption) as "git:...".
>
> Of course, this relies on the server supporting this extension as
> well. Are you saying that Gitlab dosn't use this extension?

I haven't checked but I expect you are right - There is the smart HTTP
protocol for both the server and client. I expect it is as efficient as
git:// minus the encryption overhead.

> Why wouldn't they? It'd just increase their monthly electricity and
> internet-access bills without any obvious upside for them!?

I don't have a reason, but it apparently exists. Increasing bandwidth
and introducing inefficiencies has been rewarded for the past 20 years
if you look past the primefacie narratives and the primefacie monetary
analyses

[Madhu]

* Paul Rubin <87lgbq9...@nightsong.com> :
Wrote on Thu, 07 Jun 2018 20:45:57 -0700:

>> git:// reduces transfer sizes, https:// is dumb and cannot do those
>> optimizations and often requires redundant transfers.
>
> You're saying https is less efficient,

I forgot the smart HTTP protocol when I made this statement. I
remembered it after I sent the message.

> not that it kills off anonymity. Is there a prospect of Gitlab
> killing off anonymous https?

SSL has I don't know how many dimensions on which to profile an
end-to-end connection - many more than a bounceable http connection, and
it better facilitates important surveillance communication data (start
stop times endpoints). This is not particularly relevant to git, but I
expect you have been through the rigmarole of having to upgrade your
browser because your bank switched to some new google-innovated security
"fixes", or you will soon. The framework is in place for the
steak-holders to control your hardware through the ssl protocol.

> Just how bad are those redundant transfers?

[I have to check my test case again from around 2010 but now I think of
i they probably exist with git:// too]

Git refusing to do restartable clones from the start is one cloud-ready
decision from day 1. Making push/pull symmetric would have solved it
without any state on the server from day 1.

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <m3in6st...@leonis4.robolove.meer.net>,

Madhu <eno...@meer.net> wrote:
>
>SSL has I don't know how many dimensions on which to profile an
>end-to-end connection - many more than a bounceable http connection, and
>it better facilitates important surveillance communication data (start
>stop times endpoints). This is not particularly relevant to git, but I
>expect you have been through the rigmarole of having to upgrade your
>browser because your bank switched to some new google-innovated security
>"fixes", or you will soon. The framework is in place for the
>steak-holders to control your hardware through the ssl protocol.

Yes the rigmarole is relevant already.
I've a stable release of Debian (but old) and it is fully up to
date, including firefox.
I constantly get warnings from github that I must update my browser.
In particular I cannot edit a readme in a freshly created archive,
and I cannot delete an archive I created with a wrong name.
(I have to reboot into a testing version of Debian, that is on a different disk)
I can do without Microsoft making this worse.


Groetjes Albert
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[Bruce Axtens]

On 5/12/2018 5:19 AM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:

> He didn't do what you're saying.
> He's probably not what you're saying either.
>

I'm not sure how reliable Wikipedia is, but it gives a completely
different angle to the OP's quotation
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev#%22New_Abolition%22_and_the_%22White_Race%22>

Bruce

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com