Hi guys.
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
Justin, if your ISP doesn't give you service, switch. Even if you don't, stop using their email address - get a forwarding account elsewhere. That way you're not advertising them, and you're not tying yourself to them by giving people your address there. This way you can switch later on.
Refering back to the ([OT]) topic, by way of conjecture - I don't think MS views Smalltalk anything like the way they view Java. Java is a large competitor platform, that's pretty consolidated around industry standards they're excluded from controlling. Smalltalk is a bunch of small, independent players of different kinds, none religiously adherent to any specific competing strategy. Smalltalk has always adapted - by encapsulating (Squeak, VW) or by tying in (Digitalk, Smallscript). MS loves (to have - no sentiments implied) adapters. Smallscript is a showcase for how a Smalltalk adaptation helps MS - by using the .Net class library, Smallscript is yet another way to for people to tie themselves into MS control.
What Sarkela refers to is something that is pretty control-neutral, and otherwise positive - MS is making it's VMs pretty language agnostic. Yes, Smalltalk will feel at home on that VM, and so does Mercury, a Logic/Functional language, and quite a bunch of other research platforms that MS has paid to port to it, and which appear to have affected the VM spec.
This might make it more likely people will be using applications written in something other than a syntactic variant of Java/C#, which is good.
I say control neutral becuase that ties in only whoever does the adaptations over their VM, not the users of the language. Maybe weak-control would be better.
Daniel P.S. - not that I would ever bring such a trojan horse into my home, of course, but it's good to be aware how exactly they're tightening their vice on most of the industry.
Bert Freudenberg bert@isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Justin Walsh wrote:
Hi Sarkela, No offence but, [...]
Justin,
that was pretty rude. You're on this list for a very short time, you don't know who John Sarkela is, so why do you attack him in such a way?
I don't think this list is the place for such unfounded rants (which have even less to do with Squeak or Smalltalk than the philosophical quarreling flooding in here lately).
-- Bert
PS: No, I'm no MS advocate, I think they're evil, too. But it's way better to do something about it: I for my part try to help Squeak run on a Free OS. There's a lot to do, still - you just might want to join us.
Yes I agree ranting is a good description. Add desperate. Most of you guys live in the free-est nation on earth and enjoy unbelievable CHOICES and outlets for opportunity (the downside is that freedom, like fast food, can lead to intellectual obesity). An earlier Britannica broadly describes society as models: Culture Pattern (Nth America_ Structure Function (Europe) ....Conflict (Marxist) ....Physical Science (Burocratic) (concentration camp) J.W. ....Logical A priori, Mathematical (WWW) J.W.
You decide which one I'm in. Australians existence rides on the back of sheep. Perhaps in the mind too. Thanks for the defence. Ciao
----- Original Message ----- From: danielv@netvision.net.il To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:20 AM Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Hi guys.
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
Justin, if your ISP doesn't give you service, switch. Even if you don't, stop using their email address - get a forwarding account elsewhere. That way you're not advertising them, and you're not tying yourself to them by giving people your address there. This way you can switch later on.
Refering back to the ([OT]) topic, by way of conjecture - I don't think MS views Smalltalk anything like the way they view Java. Java is a large competitor platform, that's pretty consolidated around industry standards they're excluded from controlling. Smalltalk is a bunch of small, independent players of different kinds, none religiously adherent to any specific competing strategy. Smalltalk has always adapted - by encapsulating (Squeak, VW) or by tying in (Digitalk, Smallscript). MS loves (to have - no sentiments implied) adapters. Smallscript is a showcase for how a Smalltalk adaptation helps MS - by using the .Net class library, Smallscript is yet another way to for people to tie themselves into MS control.
What Sarkela refers to is something that is pretty control-neutral, and otherwise positive - MS is making it's VMs pretty language agnostic. Yes, Smalltalk will feel at home on that VM, and so does Mercury, a Logic/Functional language, and quite a bunch of other research platforms that MS has paid to port to it, and which appear to have affected the VM spec.
This might make it more likely people will be using applications written in something other than a syntactic variant of Java/C#, which is good.
I say control neutral becuase that ties in only whoever does the adaptations over their VM, not the users of the language. Maybe weak-control would be better.
Daniel P.S. - not that I would ever bring such a trojan horse into my home, of course, but it's good to be aware how exactly they're tightening their vice on most of the industry.
Bert Freudenberg bert@isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Justin Walsh wrote:
Hi Sarkela, No offence but, [...]
Justin,
that was pretty rude. You're on this list for a very short time, you
don't
know who John Sarkela is, so why do you attack him in such a way?
I don't think this list is the place for such unfounded rants (which
have
even less to do with Squeak or Smalltalk than the philosophical
quarreling
flooding in here lately).
-- Bert
PS: No, I'm no MS advocate, I think they're evil, too. But it's way
better
to do something about it: I for my part try to help Squeak run on a Free OS. There's a lot to do, still - you just might want to join
us.
Daniel,
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
If you believe this, than Justin has you fooled. AFAICT, Justin is pretty much the same as the spam bot we had on the list a few months ago. Dribbles on endlessly, using the list as a medium to hear itself speak. Not quite sure what he's on about, but seems pretty upset about it none the less.
In some sense, that's the beauty of the Squeak mailing list. Jump on the list, you get your say, and some very smart people usually respond with well thought answers. However, at some point you need to be able to add something meaningful back to the community, or else you're ignored.
Justin strikes me as a good example as to what email filters are for ;-)
My opinion of course,
Jim
Or could this, Jim, be the "intruders" from the C# .net-ist camp, financed by you know who, fossicking for recruits? It seems that if you had anything intelligent to say you would have said it by now instead of the tirade of personal abuse against me and less than subtle advertising for .net-ism. Stop right there and tell me what I have said that is abusive. And as before I will apologise. I don't think the genuine Smalltalkers are fooled by you at all. At least one among you knows the difference between freedon of speech and libel. Thank you Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Benson" jb@speed.net To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Daniel,
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
If you believe this, than Justin has you fooled. AFAICT, Justin is pretty much the same as the spam bot we had on the list a few months ago.
Dribbles
on endlessly, using the list as a medium to hear itself speak. Not quite sure what he's on about, but seems pretty upset about it none the less.
In some sense, that's the beauty of the Squeak mailing list. Jump on the list, you get your say, and some very smart people usually respond with
well
thought answers. However, at some point you need to be able to add
something
meaningful back to the community, or else you're ignored.
Justin strikes me as a good example as to what email filters are for ;-)
My opinion of course,
Jim
take
intruders, .net-ist camp recruits .net-ism genuine Smalltalkers
and add
anything intelligent to say tirade of personal abuse against me freedom of speech libel
and you have a nice highly provocative email ... It's a kind of generic email in that you just need to replace "Smalltalk" with the name of any other programming language and you can reuse it on any other mailing list ...
... which makes me wonder if Justin's mom's name's Eliza ;->
so let's just stop talking politics and concentrate on squeak, unless, of course, you have problems creating a Justin-emulator in squeak ;->
s.
Justin Walsh (2001-11-01 13:22):
Or could this, Jim, be the "intruders" from the C# .net-ist camp, financed by you know who, fossicking for recruits? It seems that if you had anything intelligent to say you would have said it by now instead of the tirade of personal abuse against me and less than subtle advertising for .net-ism. Stop right there and tell me what I have said that is abusive. And as before I will apologise. I don't think the genuine Smalltalkers are fooled by you at all. At least one among you knows the difference between freedon of speech and libel. Thank you Justin
Does anyone remember the so-called 'Zumabot' and "Serdar Argic", of USENET fame? This thread is bringing back strange memories...
;)
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 08:36:57AM +0100, Stefan Schmiedl wrote:
take
intruders, .net-ist camp recruits .net-ism genuine Smalltalkersand add
anything intelligent to say tirade of personal abuse against me freedom of speech libeland you have a nice highly provocative email ... It's a kind of generic email in that you just need to replace "Smalltalk" with the name of any other programming language and you can reuse it on any other mailing list ...
... which makes me wonder if Justin's mom's name's Eliza ;->
so let's just stop talking politics and concentrate on squeak, unless, of course, you have problems creating a Justin-emulator in squeak ;->
s.
Justin Walsh (2001-11-01 13:22):
Or could this, Jim, be the "intruders" from the C# .net-ist camp, financed by you know who, fossicking for recruits? It seems that if you had anything intelligent to say you would have said it by now instead of the tirade of personal abuse against me and less than subtle advertising for .net-ism. Stop right there and tell me what I have said that is abusive. And as before I will apologise. I don't think the genuine Smalltalkers are fooled by you at all. At least one among you knows the difference between freedon of speech and libel. Thank you Justin
<This will be my only response on this thread, may it rest in peace.>
There is a danger when one binds emotional polarities to a structure of labels. After all, the map is *not* the territory.
I don't approve of Mr Gates and his very effective business tactics any more than I approve of the late Mr Edison and his very effective business tactics. (cf life of Nicola Tesla)
You may say and do what you will, and your words and works will stand as testimony to the consequence of your action and intention.
Your vitriolic diatribe will cause many to stop listening to you. I don't think you are abusive, merely reactive to the label structure you have confused with reality.
OTOH, I do find the notion of "genuine smalltalkers" offensive. Smalltalk is a language for any entity that can draw a distinction between self and others.
Any other distinction misses the point of a language designed to model the way in which we enrich our cognitive structure as we correlate with the world at large.
Cheers, John Sarkela :-}>
PS sorry to be so off topic. I am many thousands of emails behind in the squeak lists and did not intend to trigger these reactions.
From: "Justin Walsh" jwalsh@bigpond.net.au Reply-To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:22:12 +1100 To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Or could this, Jim, be the "intruders" from the C# .net-ist camp, financed by you know who, fossicking for recruits? It seems that if you had anything intelligent to say you would have said it by now instead of the tirade of personal abuse against me and less than subtle advertising for .net-ism. Stop right there and tell me what I have said that is abusive. And as before I will apologise. I don't think the genuine Smalltalkers are fooled by you at all. At least one among you knows the difference between freedon of speech and libel. Thank you Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Benson" jb@speed.net To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Daniel,
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
If you believe this, than Justin has you fooled. AFAICT, Justin is pretty much the same as the spam bot we had on the list a few months ago.
Dribbles
on endlessly, using the list as a medium to hear itself speak. Not quite sure what he's on about, but seems pretty upset about it none the less.
In some sense, that's the beauty of the Squeak mailing list. Jump on the list, you get your say, and some very smart people usually respond with
well
thought answers. However, at some point you need to be able to add
something
meaningful back to the community, or else you're ignored.
Justin strikes me as a good example as to what email filters are for ;-)
My opinion of course,
Jim
"The moving finger writes and having writ moves on nor all your piety or wit can bring it back or cancel out a single line" O.K. (from memory) Amen Sarkela I have already done that. Thanks Justin
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarkela" sarkela@home.com To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 3:07 AM Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
<This will be my only response on this thread, may it rest in peace.>
There is a danger when one binds emotional polarities to a structure of labels. After all, the map is *not* the territory.
I don't approve of Mr Gates and his very effective business tactics any more than I approve of the late Mr Edison and his very effective business tactics. (cf life of Nicola Tesla)
You may say and do what you will, and your words and works will stand as testimony to the consequence of your action and intention.
Your vitriolic diatribe will cause many to stop listening to you. I don't think you are abusive, merely reactive to the label structure you have confused with reality.
OTOH, I do find the notion of "genuine smalltalkers" offensive. Smalltalk is a language for any entity that can draw a distinction between self and others.
Any other distinction misses the point of a language designed to model the way in which we enrich our cognitive structure as we correlate with the world at large.
Cheers, John Sarkela :-}>
PS sorry to be so off topic. I am many thousands of emails behind in the squeak lists and did not intend to trigger these reactions.
From: "Justin Walsh" jwalsh@bigpond.net.au Reply-To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:22:12 +1100 To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Or could this, Jim, be the "intruders" from the C# .net-ist camp,
financed
by you know who, fossicking for recruits? It seems that if you had anything intelligent to say you would have said
it
by now instead of the tirade of personal abuse against me and less than subtle advertising for .net-ism. Stop right there and tell me what I have said that is abusive. And as
before
I will apologise. I don't think the genuine Smalltalkers are fooled by you at all. At least one among you knows the difference between freedon of speech
and
libel. Thank you Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Benson" jb@speed.net To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [OT] Interview about C#
Daniel,
Bert, it didn't sound to me like Justin was attacking John, just ranting. Which, as you say, is very close to the "noise" side of the scale, but not really malevolent.
If you believe this, than Justin has you fooled. AFAICT, Justin is
pretty
much the same as the spam bot we had on the list a few months ago.
Dribbles
on endlessly, using the list as a medium to hear itself speak. Not
quite
sure what he's on about, but seems pretty upset about it none the less.
In some sense, that's the beauty of the Squeak mailing list. Jump on
the
list, you get your say, and some very smart people usually respond with
well
thought answers. However, at some point you need to be able to add
something
meaningful back to the community, or else you're ignored.
Justin strikes me as a good example as to what email filters are for
;-)
My opinion of course,
Jim
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
danielv＠netvision.net.il -
Jim Benson -
Justin Walsh -
Kevin Fisher -
Sarkela -
Stefan Schmiedl