The ASF left JCP
Jan Goyvaerts
Fabrizio Giudici
> ... although I guess we all have our own opinion about the role of ASF
> lately, I don't think this is good news for Java. A very sad day indeed.
>
> Not the least because the organisation deciding of Java's features is
> now only composed of interested commercials. With nobody left to
> oppose them non-commercial arguments (ie. academic, individuals, ...).
> But then again, does the Java community's opinion matter any more ?
>
to the non-commercial entities.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
Neil Bartlett
patent infringement, and so would you ;-)
No, I think we need to look at something old rather than something
new. A platform that can't be threatened by patents because it
consists entirely of prior art. Tech that was invented before the JVM
was but a twinkle in Joy and Gosling's eyes.
Smalltalk anybody?
Jan Goyvaerts
Ralph Goers
Many would argue that Android consists of only prior art.
If you are worried about patent infringement lawsuits don't write software. I guarantee it is impossible to write any without infringing someone's patent.
Ralph
Jan Goyvaerts
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
Ralph Goers
On Dec 9, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Jan Goyvaerts wrote:
> Anyway, Java's privatized now. With only OpenJDK left as the only 'approved' public implementation. That's not exactly reassuring, now is it ?
I'm expecting the JEE spec is going to go the same way. That is where Oracle wants to make its money.
Ralph
Jan Goyvaerts
Fabrizio Giudici
not recent news. The only viable Java platform was OpenJDK in the past
as well as it's now. So it's bad, but it's not worse than before.
Do we need something new? Generally speaking yes, but - patents apart -
I don't think any viable substitute can today be created by a bunch of
independent developers (of course we're not talking merely about languages).
So, rather than sighing about how things could have been better, let's
rather concentrate on making great things with the tools we've got today.
Cédric Beust ♔
That's kind of what Google did. It's called Android. They got sued for
patent infringement, and so would you ;-)
No, I think we need to look at something old rather than something
new. A platform that can't be threatened by patents because it
consists entirely of prior art. Tech that was invented before the JVM
was but a twinkle in Joy and Gosling's eyes.
Smalltalk anybody?
Cédric
Miroslav Pokorny
Ralph Goers
On Dec 9, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Miroslav Pokorny wrote:
> I also find it ironic, that Google wants freedom yo copy and yet they took trademarks on Android, the little robot logo and give guidelines on how and if others can use it.
>
Why is that ironic? Without trademarks and guidelines idiots will start to use the logos for all sorts of idiotic things that confuse the purpose of the trademark. How would you feel if every computer had Apple's logo on it but ran Windows? Or if every car had a BMW logo on it.
Ralph
Scott Finnie
On 09/12/2010 19:56, Neil Bartlett wrote:
> No, I think we need to look at something old rather than something
> new. A platform that can't be threatened by patents because it
> consists entirely of prior art. Tech that was invented before the JVM
> was but a twinkle in Joy and Gosling's eyes.
>
> Smalltalk anybody?
>
proven scalability and robustness, excellent multi-thread/multi-core
performance, support for Functional style and Actors, pattern matching,
virtual machine based, cross platform, open specification, multiple
implementations both open source and commercial... AND curly braces.
Erlang. The New Java.
:-)
Romain Pelisse
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
--
Romain PELISSE,
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett
http://belaran.eu/
Cédric Beust ♔
I also find it ironic, that Google wants freedom yo copy and yet they took trademarks on Android, the little robot logo and give guidelines on how and if others can use it.
Cédric
Kevin Wright
I thought that was bears...
> Is the pope catholic ? :-)
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 21:02, Ralph Goers <ralph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Jan Goyvaerts wrote:
>>
>> > Anyway, Java's privatized now. With only OpenJDK left as the only
>> 'approved' public implementation. That's not exactly reassuring, now is it ?
>>
>> I'm expecting the JEE spec is going to go the same way. That is where
>> Oracle wants to make its money.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Romain Pelisse
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
Cédric Beust ♔
For instance, when you install Chrome it is proposing you to change your default search engine from Google to Yahoo or even Bing !
Cédric
Fabrizio Giudici
> I would like to back up this point also. There is a growing trend
> since Google start being a success (8 years ago now ? At least...) to
> be state that Google is the new M$, but the fact is that up until now,
> Google has managed to remains fair and open. The free use of the robot
> is clearly a good example of that, but there is more. For instance,
> when you install Chrome it is proposing you to change your default
> search engine from Google to Yahoo or even Bing ! And there is
> probably more examples out there.
>
> Now I'm not saying that Google is perfect and that they do everything
> right, I just want to point out that despite the persistent legend of
> Google going to be the next M$ (or next Apple for that matters) this
> is still to be proven.
>
comparison with M$ is on a different basis, being Google omnipresent
(and wanting to be even more present) in any place where user data are
managed / stored / transmitted. The point is, Microsoft made money with
licenses, Google makes money with data traffic related stuff. In some
cases, the unfair use (e.g. sniffing WiFi communications with the Google
Cars) has been admitted by the company.
Kevin Wright
Heh heh, that summary of Erlang *does* also describe a certain language of my acquaintance quite well :)
More interesting though are the smalltalk references. Wasn't objectionable-C the disowned offspring of an illicit union 'twixt C and smalltalk?
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Romain PELISSE,
> insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett*
> http://belaran.eu/
Mark Volkmann
> No, I think we need to look at something old rather than something
> new. A platform that can't be threatened by patents because it
> consists entirely of prior art. Tech that was invented before the JVM
> was but a twinkle in Joy and Gosling's eyes.
>
> Smalltalk anybody?
I think that's an excellent suggestions! It's my favorite programming
language syntax.
--
R. Mark Volkmann
Object Computing, Inc.
Miroslav Pokorny
Miroslav Pokorny
Sent from my iPhone - 0412 88 52 35
Mark Volkmann
<miroslav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So why did Smalltalk "fail" to become mainstream ?
Lots of theories on that.
1) No good, reasonably priced or free development tools at the time
2) The whole image versus file-based concept
3) Perhaps fear of dynamic typing
Fabrizio Giudici
> I don't want to hijack this thtead... But isn't Oracle also protecting
> java from fragmentation by attempting to stop java with a different
> colour, in a similar way as the trademark usage stops one from
> altering android to cause confusion and fragmentation ....?
>
our freedom. It's a matter of trade-offs.
Kevin Wright
I think the main reason was performance. The language was too far ahead of its time, and powerful enough that the entire GUI paradigm was invented as a way to interact with it.
By the time hardware caught up, other languages were newer and so more fashionable.
Ralph Goers
Sent from my iPhone
Miroslav Pokorny
Because Java is free in many respects but there are limits, the same applies w/ Android Trademarks.
Serge Boulay
... although I guess we all have our own opinion about the role of ASF lately, I don't think this is good news for Java. A very sad day indeed.Not the least because the organisation deciding of Java's features is now only composed of interested commercials. With nobody left to oppose them non-commercial arguments (ie. academic, individuals, ...). But then again, does the Java community's opinion matter any more ?Maybe it's about time the former Sun JVM engineers gather to create Java's successor ? Espresso ?
--
hayden.p...@gmail.com
On Dec 9, 7:57 pm, Serge Boulay <serge.bou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> now that ASF has left the JCP, does Oracle have to have an Election for a
> replacement?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ... although I guess we all have our own opinion about the role of ASF
> > lately, I don't think this is good news for Java. A very sad day indeed.
>
> > Not the least because the organisation deciding of Java's features is now
> > only composed of interested commercials. With nobody left to oppose them
> > non-commercial arguments (ie. academic, individuals, ...). But then again,
> > does the Java community's opinion matter any more ?
>
> > Maybe it's about time the former Sun JVM engineers gather to create Java's
> > successor ? Espresso ?
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "The Java Posse" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > .
Ralph Goers
On Dec 9, 2010, at 4:57 PM, Serge Boulay wrote:
> now that ASF has left the JCP, does Oracle have to have an Election for a replacement?
>
Yes, but they already had to. Hologic wasn't elected and Tim Peierls resigned before the ASF did. The vote on JSR 336 was held with 1 empty seat. So they now have 3 seats to fill on the EC.
Ralph
Robert Casto
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
--
Robert Casto
www.robertcasto.com
Puybaret
First, a link to "The ASF Resigns From the JCP Executive Committee"
article would have been nice:
https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_asf_resigns_from_the
A simple question: ASF's problem regarding Java seems to have been
related to TCK licensing most of the time.
Why don't they buy a license? Or build their own TCK? Can't it be as
simple as that?
--
Emmanuel Puybaret
Jan Goyvaerts
--
Karsten Silz
> A simple question: ASF's problem regarding Java seems to have been
> related to TCK licensing most of the time.
doesn't go together with the Apache license and therefore can't be
accepted by Apache. This is all highly political, see here for
Apache's point of view: http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/sun_apache_ip_in_pictures
Puybaret
Puybaret
> > related to TCK licensing most of the time.
>
> Apache claims that the TCK included "field of use" restriction that
> doesn't go together with the Apache license and therefore can't be
> accepted by Apache. This is all highly political, see here for
> Apache's point of view:http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/sun_apache_ip_in_pictures
its own TCK?
If it's too much work, how about Harmony then? Isn't it even much
bigger?
Did they expect that one day Sun or Oracle will simply give away the
TCK or change the TCK license just because they built Harmony?
Does JVM certification process say that a certified JVM must conform
to TCK?
If yes, Apache shouldn't have never start Harmony until this very
first condition was removed.
I sincerely believe in free software but wouldn't build a project like
Harmony with the hope that Sun or Oracle would change some conflicting
license terms.
Would you?
--
Emmanuel Puybaret
Miroslav Pokorny
B Smith-Mannschott
>> > A simple question: ASF's problem regarding Java seems to have been
>> > related to TCK licensing most of the time.
>>
>> Apache claims that the TCK included "field of use" restriction that
>> doesn't go together with the Apache license and therefore can't be
>> accepted by Apache. This is all highly political, see here for
>> Apache's point of view:http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/sun_apache_ip_in_pictures
>
> Thank you for this information, but sincerely why Apache doesn't build
> its own TCK?
> If it's too much work, how about Harmony then? Isn't it even much
> bigger?
This doesn't make sense. The whole *point* of the TCK is to certify
that a particular implementation of Java conforms to the standard. If
everyone wrote their own TCK, how could that ever work? Even if you
were insane enough to write your own TCK, you'd still have to prove
that your TCK behaves the same as the official TCK -- so you'd need a
TCKTCK. Where whould that madness end?
> Did they expect that one day Sun or Oracle will simply give away the
> TCK or change the TCK license just because they built Harmony?
Yup. That's the expectation that the rules of the JCP and the open
sourcing of Java would engender.
> Does JVM certification process say that a certified JVM must conform
> to TCK?
Yes. *that*'s *the* *whole* *point* *of* *a* *TCK*.
> If yes, Apache shouldn't have never start Harmony until this very
> first condition was removed.
Huh?
> I sincerely believe in free software but wouldn't build a project like
> Harmony with the hope that Sun or Oracle would change some conflicting
> license terms.
I'm sure that Sun's refusal to provide access to the TCK under
non-discriminatory terms came as a surprise to Apache. The wording of
the documents governing the JCP and the open sourcing of Java did not
lead Apache to expect that Sun/Oracle block access to the TCK in order
to prevent an open independent implementation of Java.
> Would you?
> --
> Emmanuel Puybaret
>
Puybaret
> > Harmony with the hope that Sun or Oracle would change some conflicting
> > license terms.
>
> I'm sure that Sun's refusal to provide access to the TCK under
> non-discriminatory terms came as a surprise to Apache. The wording of
> the documents governing the JCP and the open sourcing of Java did not
> lead Apache to expect that Sun/Oracle block access to the TCK in order
> to prevent an open independent implementation of Java.
didn't follow until recently.
Trying to learn Harmony history, it's clear that its announcement on
2005-05-09 at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.classpath.devel/5521
was long before Sun even decided to choose the GNU GPL for Java on
2006-11-13 http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t84244.html
And anyway even if the TCK was finally available under GNU GPL, the
ASF wouldn't be probably satisfied because they would like it to be
under Apache license and not GNU GPL.
Sorry to be rude, but this fact makes me believe that Apache built
Harmony on promises.
--
Emmanuel Puybaret
CKoerner
entertaining presentation and he gives his interpretation on what
killed Smalltalk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX3iRjKj7C0
Greg Reddin
> Trying to learn Harmony history, it's clear that its announcement on
> 2005-05-09 at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.classpath.devel/5521
> was long before Sun even decided to choose the GNU GPL for Java on
> 2006-11-13 http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t84244.html
Yes, IIRC, when Harmony started there was not a fully open-source JDK
under any license. Many people believe that the existence of Harmony
put a lot of pressure on Sun to open-source the JDK, and that OpenJDK
would not exist if it were not for Harmony.
> And anyway even if the TCK was finally available under GNU GPL, the
> ASF wouldn't be probably satisfied because they would like it to be
> under Apache license and not GNU GPL.
No,. It's not an Apache-license vs. GPL issue. The issue is that
Apache was offered a TCK license that would not allow us to release
Harmony under the Apache license. This is a violation of the JSPA.
> Sorry to be rude, but this fact makes me believe that Apache built
> Harmony on promises.
Yes, Harmony was built on the promises contained in the JSPA, which is
a contract that all JCP members are bound by. Oracle broke those
promises, and the rest of the JCP EC did not hold their feet to the
fire. So Apache left.
Greg
Ralph Goers
The license that was offered to the ASF included "Field of Use" restrictions that would require that Harmony not be able to be released under the Apache License, which is the only license used for ASF projects. These restrictions would have restricted where Harmony could be used. The TCK for OpenJDK does not have these FOU restrictions. The JSPA specifically disallows this.
The JSPA also says that to implement a JSR and claim compliance an implementation must pass the TCK. You cannot write your own, but must use the one offered by the spec lead. Until you pass the TCK you cannot claim compliance and don't get any of the IP protection that comes with it.
The point is, the ASF is very much an organization that plays by the rules. If they sign an agreement they will adhere to it and expect others to do the same.
Ralph
Jan Goyvaerts
Ralph Goers
On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:57 AM, Puybaret wrote:
>>> A simple question: ASF's problem regarding Java seems to have been
>>> related to TCK licensing most of the time.
>>
>> Apache claims that the TCK included "field of use" restriction that
>> doesn't go together with the Apache license and therefore can't be
>> accepted by Apache. This is all highly political, see here for
>> Apache's point of view:http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/sun_apache_ip_in_pictures
>
> Thank you for this information, but sincerely why Apache doesn't build
> its own TCK?
> If it's too much work, how about Harmony then? Isn't it even much
> bigger?
> Did they expect that one day Sun or Oracle will simply give away the
> TCK or change the TCK license just because they built Harmony?
>
> Does JVM certification process say that a certified JVM must conform
> to TCK?
> If yes, Apache shouldn't have never start Harmony until this very
> first condition was removed.
Well, that is the beautiful thing about the Java Community Process. The Spec Lead controls the JSR. You go through the process and approve the specification and the TCK isn't voted on or anything but is released by the spec lead after the JSR has been approved. The ASF didn't know the terms of the TCK were going to suck so bad when the JSR for Java 5 was approved. They had promises from Sun that they were going to get the TCK under terms they could accept. Sun never kept their word.
>
> I sincerely believe in free software but wouldn't build a project like
> Harmony with the hope that Sun or Oracle would change some conflicting
> license terms.
> Would you?
I would if I was told that I was going to get it. This is the whole reason Java 7 took so long. Sun knew that if it brought up a vote for a Java 7 JSR is wouldn't pass. Most of the EC members would have voted "No" (from the comments in the most recent vote you can tell who they would have been). Oracle changed things by using its leverage to insure the vote would pass.
Ralph
Ralph Goers
Actually, a TCK under the GPL would be fine. ASF projects are free to use software under different licenses. They can only distribute software that is under the Apache license.
And yes, Apache started Harmony based on expectations and promises, neither of which were fulfilled. It was a breach of trust by Sun. It isn't a lot different than you having a contract with someone that they are going to perform work on your house and you then adopting a child with plans for the child to live in the new room being constructed. Only the contractor doesn't do the work. Unfortunately, in this case the ASF didn't have the option of getting a new contractor.
Ralph
Ralph Goers
On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:47 AM, Jan Goyvaerts wrote:
> Would checking out OpenJDK and rename "java" into "espresso" work ?
>
Go read the license for OpenJDK and the OpenJDK TCK - both of which can be found at http://openjdk.java.net/legal/. You can do whatever those allow.
Ralph
Cédric Beust ♔
Thank you for this information, but sincerely why Apache doesn't build
its own TCK?
--
Cédric
Steven Herod
actually matters to me are more in line with actual human rights (ala
Amnesty International) than with the machinations of the JCP.
Billionaires or idealists and their proxies fighting amongst
themselves leaves me indifferent.
What I care about in my technology world is workable, usable
technology which solves the hard problems for me and lets me get on
with the job at hand....
Ralph Goers
Well, you may care if what you can get for free today you have to pay for tomorrow.
Ralph
CKoerner
decision to quit the Java SE/EE Executive Committee, and is also
acknowledging the ASF's importance to Java's future."
http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=D0CBFE66-1A64-67EA-E4FB1D830180257C
Jan Goyvaerts
Matthew Farwell
Mark Derricutt
web based IDE is quite the awesome thing.
--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven
Wilson, Porcupine Tree
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Neil Bartlett <njbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Smalltalk anybody?
>
Mark Derricutt
--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven
Wilson, Porcupine Tree
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Jan Goyvaerts <java.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is the pope catholic ? :-)
Mark Derricutt
--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven
Wilson, Porcupine Tree
Fabrizio Giudici
>
> Sorry to be rude, but this fact makes me believe that Apache built
> Harmony on promises.
Adding to other comment, yes, it's true that Apache built Harmony on
promises. This is not a hidden thing nor the desire to create problems
for Sun/Oracle, rather the natural consequence of the reasons for which
the ASF exists. It's not that they founded anoter *SF because they
didn't like Stallman's beard. They don't like the GPL for precise
reasons, including the fact that GPL doesn't deliver all the freedom it
promises, and designed the ASF License as a correct way for delivering
freedom. In ASF's vision about Java freedom, having an open standard
with possible multiple alternate implementations is one of the
non-optional properties of freedom and that's why they embarked in the
Harmony project.
Of course, the whole TCK story proves that they are right.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
michael
okay, this is way off-topic but:
On Dec 10, 7:28 am, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it>
wrote:
> ... the unfair use (e.g. sniffing WiFi communications with the Google
> Cars) has been admitted by the company.
"unfair use"?? people were broadcasting radio signals carrying
*unencrypted* data and Google recorded them. what is unfair?
m
Fabrizio Giudici
"fair" for anybody to snoop me? Cool. People not aware with WiFi
encryption issues are naive, sure, but this doesn't give others the
right to peek their nose.
Brin in person acknowledged the fault BTW:
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/sergey-brin-says-google-screwed-up-as-u-s-weighs-wifi-spy-pro/19484338/
Note that I talked about "unfairness", and not legal issues. Which, of
course, are a matter of prosecutors and in function of local laws. As
far as I know, a few countries are still investigating Google about that:
BTW, from the above articles you learn that some countries (e.g.
Germany) consider Google View itself unfair, at the point that they
encourage people to "opt out" of the service; others, such as the Czech
Republic, even declared it illegal. I don't know whether to agree on
this... I think that taking photos from a public piece of land should be
allowed (with the exception of military installations and other specific
security-related facilities). But one thing is casual photography,
another a complete collection of samples with the detail level of Google
View. I repeat, I'm not saying that the latter is unfair; I'm saying
that I can't infer its fairness from the fairness of the former thing.
Craig Kelley
it. It would seem that they only care about open Java when a
significant group is at stake.
Apache and Google are huge parts of the Java ecosystem. If they (A&O)
decided to back a new horse (C# anyone?) it would cripple Java
adoption going forward. NHibernate is already a bifurcated example of
how things could possibly go...
Java has needed strong leadership for some time now. I think it's
becoming clear that Oracle is the wrong kind of strong leadership.
-Craig
Ralph Goers
On Dec 11, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Craig Kelley wrote:
> Strange that Oracle takes this seriously, but not everything preceding
> it. It would seem that they only care about open Java when a
> significant group is at stake.
>
> Apache and Google are huge parts of the Java ecosystem. If they (A&O)
> decided to back a new horse (C# anyone?) it would cripple Java
> adoption going forward. NHibernate is already a bifurcated example of
> how things could possibly go...
I'm not sure if you know how the ASF works. We don't "back" anything in particular. If 10 people share a common interest and want to start working on a project the Apache Incubator will welcome them provided that they are willing to follow ASF rules and the project doesn't significantly overlap something an existing project. The original Apache project, the HTTPD server, is written in C. Java projects came along simply because people started creating them.
>
> Java has needed strong leadership for some time now. I think it's
> becoming clear that Oracle is the wrong kind of strong leadership.
Why do you think Java needs strong leadership? If Java 6 was the last release ever would it really matter? What would be great is an organization that only deals in managing truly open specifications.
Ralph
Miroslav Pokorny
Because the inventor didn't have a beard.Matthew.
No wonder its tough for women to get into computer languages :) Cobol lasted quite a while yet i dont recall Grace Hopper having a beard.
Russel Winder
Sex (or gender if that is the noun you prefer) is not a determinant
here, it is down to whether you stick with your sex (gender) stereotype.
Women cannot grow beards so having a beard cannot be a factor for them.
Men can grow beards, some do, some shave. Shaving beards off is trying
to look more like a woman. Failure is therefore determined by being a
man trying to look like a woman.
Of course heart attacks are caused by televisions -- this is provable
statistically.
--
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel...@ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Kevin Wright
On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 19:44 +1100, Miroslav Pokorny wrote:Sex (or gender if that is the noun you prefer) is not a determinant
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Matthew Farwell
> <mat...@farwell.co.uk> wrote:
> Because the inventor didn't have a beard.
>
>
> http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/tamir/archive/2008/04/28/computer-languages-and-facial-hair-take-two.aspx
>
>
> Matthew.
>
>
>
> No wonder its tough for women to get into computer languages :) Cobol
> lasted quite a while yet i dont recall Grace Hopper having a beard.
here, it is down to whether you stick with your sex (gender) stereotype.
Women cannot grow beards so having a beard cannot be a factor for them.
Men can grow beards, some do, some shave. Shaving beards off is trying
to look more like a woman. Failure is therefore determined by being a
man trying to look like a woman.
Of course heart attacks are caused by televisions -- this is provable
statistically.
--
Kevin Wright
mail / gtalk / msn : kev.lee...@gmail.com
twitter: @thecoda
jitesh dundas
I doubt that. Back pains, obesty, blood pressure, stress..is so
commmon these days.
And yes, divorce rates have gone up too in IT industry.
JD
Kevin Wright
Do you think computers help change this?
Russel Winder
[ . . . ]
>
> People who didn't watch televisions would otherwise get up off the
> couch and find something less sedentary to do. The TV leads to
> inactivity, which leads to health problems - including heart attacks.
>
>
> I believe the statistics on this one...
The statistics are true (sort of), but . . . I think I had better knock
this one on the head before it turns into a 10,000 entry mega thread: I
added the line to ensure the hidden humour level was high, but it seems
it might have the undesired effect of being misunderstood.
Although you can show a high correlation between television ownership
and heart attacks, it is a statistical slight of hand, something akin to
the proof that 0 = 1.
The reality is that time and population are hidden variables: over time
population increases, increased population leads to higher incidences of
heart attacks, and increased population leads to increased ownership of
televisions.
Kevin Wright
On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 10:04 +0000, Kevin Wright wrote:
[ . . . ]
>The statistics are true (sort of), but . . . I think I had better knock
> People who didn't watch televisions would otherwise get up off the
> couch and find something less sedentary to do. The TV leads to
> inactivity, which leads to health problems - including heart attacks.
>
>
> I believe the statistics on this one...
this one on the head before it turns into a 10,000 entry mega thread: I
added the line to ensure the hidden humour level was high, but it seems
it might have the undesired effect of being misunderstood.
Although you can show a high correlation between television ownership
and heart attacks, it is a statistical slight of hand, something akin to
the proof that 0 = 1.
The reality is that time and population are hidden variables: over time
population increases, increased population leads to higher incidences of
heart attacks, and increased population leads to increased ownership of
televisions.
Russel Winder
>
> Now, if you had pointed out that rising ice cream sales cause a higher
> crime rate...
>
But it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Ice_Cream_Wars
Craig Kelley
(such as the ASF). They aren't mutually exclusive. I agree with the
ASF position in leaving.
If Java 6 were the last release, it would matter at least in the short-
term. People would have to choose between the enormous libraries of
solid code and using new technologies (see Perl 5). Would you like to
use lambdas, or Hadoop? You can't use both without something like
Scala -- which in itself is tied to the JVM, as now controlled by
Oracle.
-Craig
Reinier Zwitserloot
Robert Mark Bram
> ... although I guess we all have our own opinion about the role of ASF
> lately, I don't think this is good news for Java. A very sad day indeed.
>
> Not the least because the organisation deciding of Java's features is now
> only composed of interested commercials. With nobody left to oppose them
> non-commercial arguments (ie. academic, individuals, ...). But then again,
> does the Java community's opinion matter any more ?
And what does this mean for the other JVM languages too?