λ Tony’s blog λ

In my recent post, I made the following introductory statement:

Scala is a far superior language to Java.

Sadly, but most predictably, some people took issue with this fact. It seems I have “stepped on someone’s meme” so-to-speak. Programming languages, unfortunately, have formed cliques who defend their territory with classic religious devotion.

It is certainly not difficult to conceive two programming languages where one is inferior to the other, and so long as neither language has any devoted followers, it is acceptable and makes perfect sense to anyone willing to hear it. I invent a language called Plus and it has one function + and integral literals; I invent another language PlusMinus and it has two functions, + and - and integral literals also. PlusMinus is superior to Plus.

We can traverse the futile path of “Actually, whether PlusMinus is superior to Plus depends on whether - is of any value. The non-existence of the - function in Plus may make it superior under some circumstances”, but I’m hoping, perhaps too optimistically, any objectors can see straight through this misnomer.

It is cases like these where the similarities to the typical religious organisations becomes astounding. I am charged with religiosity, because I am completely atheistic (i.e. null hypothesis) about my meme membership, by those who themselves are more religious than ever! Something about pots, kettles and blackness seems apt here. Furthermore, it is quite often the case that when the charges roll in, in defence of Java, those making the charges know Java quite poorly anyway (most so-called Java programmers do in my observations) — another religious theme that seems to be deeply embedded.

The status of “Java” has been artificially elevated by its groupthink members such that any attack or suggestion of inferiority is reviled, even if the suggestion is perfectly rational and able to be supported with evidence. I could simply discredit their understanding of their belief system by demonstrating how little they know about it (I am always surprised at how easy this is), but it does seem somewhat distasteful. Alternatively, I could present aforementioned evidence, only to have it (predictably so) misunderstood and misrepresented in various forms of logical fallacy.

No, I’d rather work toward abandoning religiosity itself and demonstrating that reason trumps. After all, like most religious memberships, I don’t think these charges have any kind of malicious intent or deceptive techniques behind them, invoke Hanlon’s Razor:

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

The expected tripe has rolled in after my previous post was publicised on reddit (thanks gst whoever you are ;)).

Here are some of the wonderful accusations:

What a controlling, elitist piece of shit. Worthless article.

Elitist? I’ll accept that and so what? There is nothing wrong with elitism; in fact, I encourage it. Of course, bragging about it publicly is a little distasteful, but that was never the intention. Controlling? I seem to have controlled you, but nobody else. What else can I say? The response is full of gems of insight!

What else did you expect? It is Tony Morris, after all.

Ever heard the term, Ad Hominem fallacy? Such… a critical examination, um, yeah.

…here we have a Haskell zealot…

WTF? I use many languages, one of which is Haskell, but certainly nothing that could be described as ‘zealous’. This seems to be an outright statement of ‘I have tricked myself into describing something other than reality’, since I find absolutely no evidence to support it.

…banned Java from his 6 year-old son’s computer, lest it pollutes his mind. And then he criticises people for being closed-minded!

I concede on this one and should have made my point clear. I have no intention of hiding Java from my son indefinitely. I’m not going to show him a horror film until he a sound moral basis to conduct himself with his peers for the same reason that I will not show him Java until he has a sound basis with which to apply reason and understands the foundations of what it is he is doing (programming).

Well I think we’ve all seen this kind of attitude to some extent, but it all seems to proliferate quite extensively from the ivory towers of academia, i.e. the functional programming community.

They look down on other people who dirty their hands doing “real work” instead of spending time worrying about how pure their language is.

This one is a classic! First, I’d like to dissolve the apparent rift between ‘the functional programmers’ and ‘the imperative programmers’. There simply is no clear distinction and it’s a pointless exercise anyway. Second, I am a member of both communities.

Finally, I’d like you to describe for me what “real work” is. Is it repeating yourself indefinitely because your programming language demands it? No really, I’m asking for a formal definition that we can have a discussion about. You do realise that almost all of Java’s language features started off in “the academic world” (i.e. someone though of a clever idea) and were subsequently perverted before finalising in a JSR (i.e. they were dumbed down to appeal to the masses), right? The results of these JSR teams are merely acts of intellectual fraud. I wish they gave public tours of these circuses so you could see for yourself.

So Tony hangs around mediocre programmers. Big deal.

Perhaps I do, but there is no evidence supporting this position. I have only described quite a small subset of all programmers that I could potentially know of. I think that most people only know one language, but I could be mistaken (from the samples I have anyway). i.e. Java, C#, VB, C, etc. are all the same language under this description. How many people do you know who look to advanced languages for insight?

He only hit the grey mass of average programmers. These used to program in C++ and Visual Basic, and before that in FORTRAN. This grey mass of programmers never have in depth knowledge of the programming language or tools they are using, and are too intelectually lazy to actually learn it. I don’t think java create this kind of guys, but it seems to have the qualities that attracts them.

On a positive note, this response is one that I have not considered enough to my own satisfaction and I thank that respondent for it! Specifically, the response that Java may not create self-delusion, but attracts those who seek it. I’ll have to think about it some more, thanks again.

Thanks for some of the other positive responses that attempt to refute my argument (read: outburst of frustration) with a rational response, it is most appreciated.
THINK

Finally, the mainstream media is starting to consider the possibility that Java is not only the crappiest language available on this planet (or at least up there with others such as C#), but also has the capacity for adversely affecting one’s learning capacity.

My 6 year old son is learning computer programming by first understanding the mathematical foundations, then applying what he has learned using Haskell, because it is short and natural (he doesn’t even know what Haskell is). I know many people claim to struggle with this language, but I have always held the position that this is because they are tainted will ill-conceived ideas that are internalised to the point of failing critical examination. My son uses a Linux machine for his work (read: fun), but importantly, Java is and has always been banned on his computer. As his trusted carer, I have a moral obligation to protect him from what could cause possible harm and from my observations, potential self-delusion.

Yes, that’s right. Java appears to me to cause an extreme state of delusion. Too often, I find myself in a conversation with someone who only knows one language (or a few others that are superficially different i.e. strict, imperative, poor type system), but most importantly, they don’t know it that well. I have the unfortunate and shameful scar of knowing Java quite well having worked on the implementation, but it always fascinates me to watch someone argue against what I am telling them even though they are not introducing any new information into the discussion. The conversation often quickly denigrates into chest-beating nonsense by making outlandish claims such as “my having never worked on a large Java application” (so what? and, I’ve worked on the largest Java application on the planet, but again, so what?) and various other forms of logical fallacy. I think we’ve all seen this behaviour to some extent, but it seems to proliferate quite extensively from the bottom of the intellectual pool i.e. the Java community.

It is a logical notion that the most well-versed person on the origins of Christianity is an Atheist (and observations support this), likewise, the most well-versed Java programmer wouldn’t touch such a useless (albeit popular) tool unless under extreme duress. This naturally leads to a conclusion where one attempts to explain the observed irrational behaviour from the Java Junkies who don’t understand the ins and outs of Java that well anyway (seriously, this boggles my mind). I certainly don’t think these people are committing acts of intellectual fraud by trying to deceive me. I am convinced that they have deceived themselves (again, Monotheistic belief systems — such a sound analogy), but to this extent?

The psychology of the human brain continues to fascinate me. The ability for self-delusion is extraordinary. I throw out the hypothesis that Java potentially causes brain damage for examination by anyone who cares. Certainly, I find no other explanation for such irrational behaviour.

Finding reason to explain the outward and proactive denial of the evidence that surrounds us by members of religious organisations has always fascinated me. How could an apparently rational person be suffering a sickness of such a magnitude? I have watched Christians deny Evolution without even knowing what it is! I have watched Muslims deny the origin of the Quran. I have wondered what a Christian would say to the charge that the bible is nothing more than a mythological personification of cosmological events and that we still celebrate the birth of the Sun/Son 3 days after its death on the winter solstice (December 22 in the northern hemisphere by the way fellow Australians :)). These questions and many more have fascinated me since I can remember even having independent thoughts as a child.

Aside from those who are not genuine in their delusion for the obvious gains in money and power (i.e. their pawns), I have always been in awe when observing a person suffer such severe delusions with incredible conviction. Having a keen interest in Psychology, I have also wondered if we would ever have a rational explanation for this observation.

Maybe we have found one? As many are now outwardly hypothesising (and others, once did it in silence), religious conviction and psychological disorder are not that unlike.

http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=434D7C62-E7F2-99DF-37CC9814533B90D7

Of course, this does not detract from the sheer awe.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22427799-5007200,00.html

PHILIP Lamattina’s spectacular effort at Willowbank near Ipswich on Saturday night has already assumed legend status among Australia’s drag racing fraternity.

He miraculously escaped unscathed from the 500km/h smash that destroyed his $250,000 Top Fuel dragster.

The publisher(s) of this story oughtta be ashamed of themselves. Everyone knows (note: I am exempt from accusations of argumentum ad populum fallacies because I am (and circular reasoning too, got it?)) that SPEED KILLS! Here these journalists are implicitly refuting the known established perversion… er… correction, of the laws of Physics and our understanding of space and time! This is nothing short of failure of reason and I now expect deaths on our roads to increase substantially. All because of some irresponsible journalist(s)!

Actually, I take it back. You see, it was a miracle. Yes, notice the use of the adverb, ‘miraculous’ in the second paragraph. Instead of contradicting our government’s established scientimplistic (yes, I made that up :)) understanding, the article exonerates itself by attributing the whole affair to a miracle. This is permitted under the laws of illogic, which any person is free to invent for themselves, right? Of course.

So you see, that makes sense now. Phew!

Kathy Griffin goes from being annoying at worst to an international hero overnight!

a lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus.

Check it out!

Kathy, you have redeemed yourself of any debt that you may have owed the community. I take my hat off to you for your courage. Well done.

On a lighter and hilarious note, check this comment out:

The comedian’s remarks were condemned Monday by Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who called them a “vulgar, in-your-face brand of hate speech.”

OK, you can stop laughing at the irony now, STOP!

I am just keeping note of a great talk given by one of the most important people alive today on issues relating to the future of humanity, Sam Harris.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

It is Saturday night and I get to sit at home and read a book by one my favourite authors, Sam Harris. Half my family are currently suffering from influenza, so I’m bound to the house tonight.

I thought I’d take a peek at a news website and I notice that Gwen Stefani is not permitted to wear “revealing costumes” when she performs in Malaysia because of a protest by a “Muslim student group”. Apart from all the usual absurdities of theistic dogma (and particularly, Islamic and Judæo-Christian dogma), this quote cracked me up in laughter:

She [Stefani] will abide by the Malaysian authorities’ guidelines to ensure that her show will not be offensive to local sensibilities.

The funny part, from my humble perspective, is the use of the word “sensibility”.

Watching a religious establishment manipulate its victims with such absurd and utterly transparent, blatant abuse of language usually causes me the most extreme alarm (because of the consequences to humanity), but on this night, after a couple of lonesome wines, I thought I’d take a laugh at just how sick and sad this world truly is. Sensibility!! Can you believe that!? You poor, sick bastards. Yes you, who has been robbed of the ability to think, yeah YOU.

Cheers

I came across a thread today on javalobby. Actually, I was referred by Ricky Clarkson who seems to challenge the Java Religious Establishment with seemingly greater patience than I could possibly exercise. Here is a link to the thread.

I have long postulated that programming in general and Java particularly, exhibits some strikingly similar attributes of religious establishments. I have discussed this hypothesis with a few people and we have even come up with the idea of finding a correlation between preferred programming language and religious conviction. Of course, this was all discussion and no “doing”, but it’s an interesting discussion nevertheless. We even entertain conjectures about what we believe the outcome to be. Mostly, correlating religious ideologies that are founded on the most powerful delusions and programming languages that are also founded on extreme delusion and then extrapolating along less mature religions with more transparent delusionary characteristics.

Many people point to some of the absurdities that come out of religious establishments for humiliation, because they are well, quite blatantly in violation of sound logical reasoning. As a side note, I often observe this violation being resolved by resorting to Fideism — a symptom of the religion sickness that I hope to write about soon. I actually empathise with the people who have been manipulated into such extreme delusions. I do not encourage human suffering and I do whatever I can in terms of self-discipline to ensure that I do not denigrate to the perverted practice of esteem boosts by pointing at the weaknesses of others — mostly, because I hope and expect the same from others (I am a moral Altruist).

I encourage you to do so as well as you read the following quotes from the aforementioned thread:

• Other languages have lots of problems that java just doesn’t have.
• Most language concurrency models are inferior to Java’s.
• Most languages don’t have as good functional programming as Java.
• Java’s type system is precise and predictable, more so than many languages.

Notice how this person is convinced that these statements are true. There is no act of conscious intellectual fraud here. Ask yourself why? How on earth could someone have been led into believing such absurdities? My point is for example, there are some very plausible explanations and methods of counselling for believers in the Judæo-Christian delusion; can we use these lessons to describe the behaviour of the person quoted above, and therefore, offer counsel to this person, who is also suffering delusions? Is the approach that Ricky Clarkson is taking — assumingly to heighten the awareness of the audience of his words — a sound one? Can we make predictions about its outcome?

The infamous Robert M. Pirsig (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance) quote seems apt:

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion.

Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.

– Michael Rivero