So law enforcement needs all the tools possible, but the NSA's power is too great, so it needs to be depoliticized, although this sort of unconstitutional monitoring is inevitable?
Why do your own points contradict each other?
Ladies and gentlemen, the 50 Cent Party comes to America.
This is a common (and racist) but incorrect generalization about Chinese culture. Look up the history of China and you will find millennia of successful rebellions against authority percieved as having lost a "mandate." Contrast that to Europe or America.
The thing I think is really important but often falsely confused with a lack of willingness to protest is a general distaste for the sort of personalized politics prevalent in the West. Chinese political participation in the US is lower than average. It seems like the culture in that sense is more focused on success economically and academically.
It's important to remember that the only reason the Communists have managed to last so long is because of their "support" from the start of the farmers, i.e., not killing and stealing from them like the KMT. As soon as that support is lost en masse, we will see another percieved experation of a mandate and another revolution in a long series of revolutions. What that will mean for the Chinese or whether that will mean more democracy we will have to wait and see.
> The code is overbloated with complexity thus close to unmaintanable (evolution and correction) and there are stuff that feels wrong in my guts: https://github.com/rmccue/Requests/blob/master/library/Reque.... the naming is WRONG: flattening a list is not what he is doing: it is transforming a nested data structure in a level 1 associative array. Each wrong naming is a landmine waiting to explode at your face.
Uh, ok? What would you propose naming it then? transformNestedDataStructureIntoALevelOneAssociativeArray? The only person this might seem fundamentally wrong to would be a first-year computer science student prepping for a test on a standard library - names are chosen by the author for the context.
> This language now strikes me as an odd frankenstein that has no advantages anymore for coding.
What a novel idea. Perhaps it "strikes" you that way, despite the fact that many people still use PHP for some reason.
> And this code is hiding its weakness in ridiculously complex OOP
Static methods are "complex OOP"?
> every single methods are static for me it is the sign it should have been a namespace exporting functions.
That "strikes me" as a design choice. Furthermore, in PHP the autoloading convention is to translate the class and the namespace to a file path (PSR-0); there isn't a convention like this for namespaced functions. Furthermore, namespaced functions are not that backwards compatible.
I am not a PHP fan myself, although I have used it in the past, and it seems to me like you just want to jump on the anti-PHP bandwagon for fun. Your criticism is pedantic and shallow.
The sad part of that being, of course, the fact that while Lincoln had half of the country in rebellion and offensive war to deal with, Obama has something that is less deadly than bathtubs to deal with. It is almost farcical.
AFAIK most of the major Scheme implementors are involved in the development of the Revised Reports, and most implementations implement the report to such an extent that libraries can and are written for multiple runtime with little modification (many SRFIs specify standard Scheme implementations of the APIs they suggest). SRFIs (which specify additional functionality like binary io and more complex list functions etc.) are more pick and choose, but the ones that are implemented are pretty standardized. (srfi 1 for lists, srfi 13 for strings, etc.)
I think there was a bit of disagreement over R6RS in that many implementors felt it was too bulky and un Scheme, which is why there is a R7RS small and a R7RS large. Because of that some implementations decided to stay on R5RS and extend it with sometimes de facto standards.
I think most people will write for only one scheme implementation if it is for a project and not a library, though. Racket for example seems like a sort of extended scheme, though they still participate in the standards process. Libraries supply notes on how to adapt them to various implementations and it is normally trivial to do so as long as the required SRFIs or extensions are available in some form.
And you're not some sort of "intellectual" idolizing ghettos? I have to go in and around one very often, and hearing "learn to appreciate your local ghetto" from some Random Internet Dude is almost farcical.
I agree with the vast majority of your comment, but please stop saying that North Korea is communist and that "communism can never produce a high standard of living." the former is patently false - North Korea is a Juche (which is not communist) dictatorship that uses communist theory as a carrot to keep its population hopeful. Read the Communist Manifesto if you doubt me.
The latter is unknown, as there has never been a true communist country (this isn't a "No True Scotsman fallacy" - a true state of communism is pretty clearly defined in the Manifesto).
I don't consider myself a communist (if anything more of a socialist) but reading this sort of FUD about communism is almost as painful as reading about blind hate for socialism in America.
It seems to me like a lot of the "required coding class" idea is based on a misguided desire to increase the competitiveness of our country internationally. Learning to program is good, yes, but to be honest, what goal are you trying to achieve? The article suggests that the goal might be to allow people to enter the job market more quickly.
The fact is that "programming" in and of itself is just grunt work. Forcing an entire generation to learn how to put strings together to do stuff won't help any of them when they go to a job interview and see a hundred other interviewees with the exact same proficiency for copying snippets from websites.
Problem solving is the much more important thing here, and that is already focused on in high school (remember word problems?). Programming allows students to explore problem solving more interactively, yes, but requiring schools to teach programming won't help in the long run any more than emphasizing a more comprehensive and intuitive approach to solving problems - I'm sure there'll be enough of those by the time these guys graduate to last forever. :)
Heh, that's not entirely untrue - the majority of people on lowendbox and lowendtalk seem to have some sort of strange fetish for running things on as little resources as possible. I've seen some people there that actually use the LEBs for things like cheaper redundant hosting, etc., but they're the exception.
Since it seems like you're talking about visual activity now instead of visual clarity, I agree that Java will be more "hard to read" under your definition. But aside from the two lines for the class declaration & method declaration and the other two for the ending brackets, there really isn't much bloat.
All that you have to implement for a simple numerical sort is some logic if a > b return 1 else if a == b return 0 else return -1.
Why do your own points contradict each other?
Ladies and gentlemen, the 50 Cent Party comes to America.