4,002 karma · joined February 4, 2010
The military industrial complex lobbying for billions of dollars of taxpayers money to be siphoned into their pockets is one example.
No, seriously, that sort of thinking is baked into Apple's DNA. Jobs once tried to intervene in memory bus layout on aesthetic grounds.
https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&stor...
"But look at the memory chips. That's ugly. The lines are too close together."
As valued employees, pairing with the Java devs on code, attending team lunches and other functions, generally integrated with the teams to which they were passing on their life's work?
Because to be honest I'm struggling to believe they were being treated as equal members of a team if they were behaving like that.
Realistically that wasn't going to end any other way :)
http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?Articl...
Not all, of course. Socialism is a broad camp. But many.
Edit: and in fact they're still at it in Australia, where I live:
https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/venezuela-solidarity-gr...
Edit:... and how about Castro? Is he your idea of a real socialist? https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/hugo-chavez-and-fidel-castro...
Venezuela, like Cuba, North Korea, China and the USSR were feted by socialists the world over, right up until their failings (often in the form of millions of people starving to death) became visible to the world.
Then of course they ceased being real socialists.
Yes, an arbitrary algorithm will probably perform significantly faster in C++.
But that probably won't matter in a real-world system built from multiple integrated components, when the performance is more likely to be determined by the abstractions chosen and the system architecture in use. And IMO Python and its surrounding ecosystem makes it easier to make good choices in those areas.
Consider the end to end performance of a system - from inputs in (say, timesheets and HR data) to outputs out (bank payment APIs called, emails sent).
Would you bet the end to end performance of a system built by mediocre C++ programmers would be better than that of a system built by mediocre Python programmers?
I certainly wouldn't.
I was programming back in '96 (recreationally and as a student, not professionally) and C++ would not have seemed like a good choice even then.
But then I wasn't leaving because the place was a train wreck; I was still engaged, and liked the team I was on. Had that not been true, it would have been a bad move on everyone's part.
Hmmm. Perhaps I wasn't clear. You are reading a _lot_ more into my post than I intended.
I'm an Objectivist Libertarian who thinks that (a) what China is doing in this case is positively evil, and (b) that any level of resistance up and to including violent revolution on the part of the Chinese people would be entirely moral and justified.
By explaining the pragmatic 'justification' for this abhorrent system, I was trying to make the point that the Chinese Government gives exactly no shits about the morality involved; they want to exercise power, and this is seen as a cost-effective means of doing so.
The implied point I was _trying_ to make (and, clearly, failing) was that pragmatism in politics is the devil.