Member since: 2000-12-18 21:25:29
Last Login: N/A
Welcome to my Advogoto page.
WSWS - International News and Analysis
I believe splork is right, at least if I understand his point. The language popularity article has almost no special relevance to free software.
It is disappointing to see such a lack of a scientific approach in some of the posters. Equating language popularity with utility, spreading lies and misrepresenting benchmark results. In addition to this, far too many statements -- not at all obvious nor clear -- go completely without support or elaboration.
Somehow we are supposed to congratulate C++ for its source level compatibility with C. From what I have read, no one forced Bjarne to create language compatible with C, that was his decision. He has said that he likes C. C has not remained unchanged since its conception, if C was lacking in areas why not propose changes to C itself?
Free software has been compared to the scientific method. I think there is now an opportunity to look beyond monikers and build languages and programs combining the most effective features and methods in existence regardless of their source.
I don't know how you interpret any of my posts as a pissing contest. In the article, true claims that I have made have repeatedly come under dishonest attack. I have defended these claims because they are true, not for any other reason.
There is a fundemental problem with format of Advogato when dishonest attacks can distract from the substance of the article and any kind of substanial debate.
Many discussions here have no outcome or effect. This could be a product of this particular social group (perhaps the result of casting a rather wide net) or the format itself. The article/comments format encourages a certain form of interaction. For all the pretension this interaction is not fundamentally different from the interaction found on Slashdot. Comments and articles themselves don't carry much weight, individuals rarely invest the effort or consideration to provide thoughtful constructive posts. Once the article is off the front page it is soon forgotten.
The Wiki format in contrast has proven itself to be a constructive form of interaction. It is not ego centered, but content centered. I wonder what the effects would be if Advogato had a Wiki oriented format at the center, and open contribution (a Wiki should permit this). A much richer interaction might emerge. There might also be a more open collaboration between people who share similar interests but are associated with diverse projects and organizations. It might be an interesting experiment.
yeupou, yes, this my own subjective view of things. But don't take it personally, I don't mean to imply every post is ego driven or unthoughtful. The "off-the-front-page, soon-forgotten" principle can be seen by the activity of the article itself.
My proposal was only for the articles, not for diaries. And even then I am just wondering out loud what the effects would be of such a change. By the way, I've seen discussions on Wiki, these dialogues are interesting to follow for a topic that is not clearly resolved.
mslicker certified others as follows:
Others have certified mslicker as follows:
[ Certification disabled because you're not logged in. ]
Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.