752 karma · joined February 12, 2018
There are certainly no default repositories that include this code. The whole point (and it's been this way for years) is that you can't download the Oracle jdk without clicking through a license.
The new license (https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/license...) is very clear. It states in plain English: "Further, You may not: use the Programs for any data processing or any commercial, production, or internal business purposes other than developing, testing, prototyping, and demonstrating your Application;".
How is that not clear?
This entire article is just pure FUD. Oracle has stated over and over and over how the new licensing model works. It's clear to anybody who spends a couple of minutes reading the documentation.
> its remaining technical limitations will eventually be adressed
It's not clear there are any technical limitations that separate CE and EE. Supposedly EE is faster but I don't think anybody has proven this with real benchmarks. All of this is clearly documented in https://www.graalvm.org/docs/faq/.
Believe it or not there is a great deal of research about just these questions. You might want to actually review such research before you confidently declare these facts as false. As it is, you've been presented with several highly acclaimed books and responded with cherry picked statistics and banal pedantry. It is reminiscent of climate change deniers who love to link to the Koch-funded study of AFP data while also carefully ignoring the last 50 years of other research. If you or anybody really want to actually understand the dark years of "Tough on Crime" that define America from 1960 to now there's a lot of serious texts out there that presents mountains of data on everything from targeting to minorities to redlining.
In the media fantasy:
1. Amazon workers are so desperate for jobs they have no choice but to work for Amazon under prison-like conditions.
2. Amazon warehouse jobs are targeted at "left behind" workers who have no other options.
3. Amazon doesn't pay a living wage. Bezos' luxurious lifestyle is subsidized by taxpayer dollars.
In the real world:
1. US unemployment is so low right now that even employers of unskilled labor are looking at severe shortages. See the severe labor shortage in retail but also the real wage pressure across the board.
2. Amazon warehouse jobs are highly sought after. Amazon is unusually generous towards its warehouse associates offering them full benefits including healthcare, retirement, and even equity. Many investors really, really want Amazon to offer benefits comparable to their warehouse competitors (ie no benefits) but Bezos refuses to cut benefits for his unskilled employees every year.
3. America's minimum wage is criminally low but even still Amazon pays well above the minimum wage.
All of this obvious to anybody who does even a tiny bit of research [1] but it's not obvious to people who want to be deceived and so they buy into this baseless narrative.
Again, this is not about Amazon, or even about workers, this is about a media-political complex in which there is zero accountability. Like most things, from Iraq to China to basic scientific theories like climate change, you'll have to learn to separate the American media-political narrative (which is a fantasy that exists only to justify extreme inequality and the mass-murder of foreign brown people) from the actual facts in the real world.
[1] https://www.digitalcommerce360.com/2017/08/08/amazon-benefit...
I mean, really, you've got to be special kind of clueless to think the problem XML solves is syntax. Oh yes, it was all about avoiding having to write more parsers. Except that makes zero sense because each XML vocabulary does require writing custom code to process it or transform it and that custom code is just another high-level parser.
The key problem that XML solves, BTW, is namespaces. It is a mark-up language, after all, that lets people assign unique names to data in a document. Anybody who actually works on systems that involve multiple enterprises grasps this quite quickly. (Unfortunately we don't all do Web CRUD.)
As for blockchains the author is similarly misguided. Blockchains do not solve centralization. Systems like Bitcoin are centralization engines, they strongly incentive centralization at virtually every level, on a planetary scale. The blockchain platforms that show the most promise in real-world use are actually permissioned blockchains that introduce a central authority in order to prevent the race-to-the-bottom centralization incentives of Bitcoin and Eth.
Ironically, the author is correct that blockchains and XML are linked. Permissioned blockchains like eg Corda [1] work so well because they lower transaction costs across business. Blockchains at this level solve the biggest problem there is in business, the Auditing Problem (sometimes called the "Trust Problem" but this is a bad name because the problem is that businesses can't and never will trust other businesses).
I could go on but this sort of reddit-style ranting about technologies that the author clearly doesn't understand isn't valuable or productive. There are interesting problems and costs that XML and blockchains introduce but you're not going to find that here. This is just a dead end.
If people are interested in a rigorous treatment of ancient economics and their surprising modern relevance consider they should really look into Hudson [1].
[1] https://michael-hudson.com/2018/08/and-forgive-them-their-de...
The goal here is very much to beat the US at its own game [2]. The US and Western Europe have trapped the whole world in an extremely harsh intellectual property regime and China, rather than fighting this regime, intends to dominate it.
It's very sad because what's being ultimately being legitimized is just Feudalism 3.0. It's also very corrosive to China's real strength, it's entrepreneurial spirit, which, until very recently, gave fuck all about patents. Now many Asian VCs won't even talk to you unless you have some valuable IP. Many people view this rapid "IP enclosure" in China, where IP is becoming everything and often the only thing, to be a very bad thing.
[1] http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2018/article_0002....
[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world/china-watch/business/...
Do you have any evidence at all for this claim or is this just something you made up out of thin air?
I mean, no offense, but I remember when Brexiters were claiming the same [1] earlier this year and it was quickly proven to be nonsense.
Maybe you can do a better job?
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/13/housing-mini...
And you think immigrants are responsible for this?
Or are they simply being used as a sacrificial scapegoat because nobody wants to address the raging inequality in the West?
No it doesn't. This narrative is nonsense. There's a lot of research on the impact of immigration on, for example, Germany. None have concluded that such immigrants are doing anything but supplying desperately needed labor to Germany's economy and have had significant positive benefits [1].
The fact that it is so easy to learn about this (there's plenty of data, much of it free and easily available) and yet people continue to spout this narrative speaks volumes.
It strikes me as a really, really bad idea. Besides the obvious lock-in issues, I've found the only hope of keeping documentation uptodate is to either generate it from the code or keep it checked it in git besides the code.
What's really needed are (1) authoring tools that can produce decent documentation (ideally as docbook XML or maybe asciidoc) for checkin and (2) product guys who are willing to write docs for features before or during feature development and (3) translation services that can actually do a decent job between the big three business languages (English, Mandarin, Spanish).
It's frustrating that 1, 2, and 3 are so very hard to find. Many products live or die by their lack of documentation, but there don't be seem any simple solutions here.
It's not drivel if it's backed by actual data [1][2]. This always seems to come as a complete surprise because it's difficult for many people to grasp how profoundly unequal America is. America has most of the best colleges in the world and they produce probably the most dynamic minds out there... but on average the system is comparable to Poland.
[1] http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/Country%20note%20-%20United...
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/29/upshot/americans-think-we...
(It's not good that Wikipedia copies data like that. If only we had decent transclusion capabilities on the web.)
Here's a very, very simple chart that shows population with tertiary education [1]. The US is not significantly above other countries where education is paid for by the government.
What's more is that those numbers are very generous to the US because, as everybody knows, most private colleges in the US are shit. So called "non-selective schools" as well as the straight up for-profits and the religious schools will take anybody that applies and hand them a degree in 2-4 years.
Like much of the nonsense about free markets etc in this thread there's little understanding of actual facts. The American education situation exactly parallels healthcare: other OECD countries are able to provide better service for less cost by having the government direct the resources. But, yes, somehow we need to get the government out of education. That will surely fix everything.
(Though serious people know full well what will happen if the government stops funding higher education. Graduation rates will plummet and within a generation advanced education will abandon middle America. The rich, highly educated coasts will do just fine. The real question is, as always, whether the ideologues are committed enough to cut their children throats in the name of their god, the free market. Then again we already see rapidly decreasing graduation rates in America [2] and the increasing prevalence for worthless degrees from shitty schools so I guess we already know the answer that one.)
[1] https://data.oecd.org/eduatt/population-with-tertiary-educat...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decreasing_graduation_completi...
[1] https://github.com/xerial/sqlite-jdbc [2] http://www.h2database.com/
The funny thing is that many Americans are perfectly happy with this... but if you bring up, say, universal healthcare they rage against the very idea of the government spending so much money.
Let's review:
> Just as we're wired up to consume fat and sugar whenever we come across it, we're basically wired up to start marauding our neighbors if they're way richer than we are.
This is an extraordinary claim. JBP is irrelevant. I'd be interested in any citations to any literature that supports this claim.
I suspect you have zero reputable sources which is why you've fixated on JBP and "agenda"s etc.
Historically, massive inequality has been the norm. There's likely never been a landed society that did not exhibit severe inequality. If humans were "wired up" to commit violence in the face of inequality history would be very different. Instead massively unequal societies like Pharaonic Egypt can be stable for thousands of years. Revolts have always been rare and they don't emerge until (1) things get really bad eg biblical revolutions driven by famine and (2) the formation of a counter-elite that organizes the poor eg most modern revolutions, American, French, Russian.
Regardless of whatever nonsense JBP spouts and regardless of his academic work (absolutely none of which, on cursory glance, involve economics or history or politics) I would hope that the historical record is plain to all and "facts" that contravene the historical record are rejected prima facie.
By the way there is a strong link between poverty and violence but I think most researchers accept that this is very much a modern phenomenon.
Global corporations like Google and Microsoft are relentless mobile-driven because they don't have luxury of naively focusing on a single market. And when you look at all the fastest growing tech companies in the world, from Instagram to Wechat to gaming, what you are seeing is a landscape where virtually all speculative capital is invested in mobiles.
That said, the PC as a platform is seriously under-utilized. The PC could be so much more but, rationally, nobody is ever going to invest in a powerful PC if all they need to do is run chat and watch videos and fill out forms. This is the irony at the heart of the growing division between the technology masters and those who serve technology: the people who create the powerful mobile platforms and ever-more sophisticated algorithms are all using PCs.
Isn't it funny that you still can't answer the basic original question: where are JBP's sources for his extraordinary claims?
Instead of giving us a song and a dance about ideologies and other nonsense why not just answer the damn question?
Most actual surveys put Java 8 penetration at 70 - 80%. Dig deeper and the <20% of projects not on Java 8 aren't under active development and are purely in maintenance mode.
This is what makes the entire exercise a myth. People may want to believe this stuff but again it has no practical basis.
In the end it's difficult to imagine any kind of fundamental reevaluation of America's economic model and so the culture won't change. Instead I suspect we'll see more and more people turning to often toxic online communities to manage their anxieties. The problem here is that it's very easy for lonely, desperate people to be radicalized and this could put significant downward pressure on profits. I'd really like to see something done to address this issue before it's too late. The market can over commit on stuff like this and it introduces significant volatility into long term returns.
Out of curiosity is your wife college educated?
It's the radicalization of "average" people that is most interesting. I suspect what your wife discovered wasn't just a series of videos but a whole community of people deeply committed this nonsense. This is the secret of radicalization: it appears as just a (very rigid) community of like-minded souls. This shows up again and again in the literature and the news.
The internet is doing its job of bringing people together. What's not clear is whether any of these communities are actually beneficial.
I read a paper on this some time ago... and now can't find it. There are many blog entries that discuss the evolution of the Skeptic community and the whole anti-SJW out there but can't find the actual researcher who was quantifying this using YouTube data.