blogs, longbets.org, and education of sociology

[Joshua Cranmer]

xahlee at gmail.com wrote:
> For about the past 10 years, i have been concerned in the programing
> community's level of education in social issues.

[ Adjusts killfile as necessary. ]

> I have found that recently, a news that would be of interest to
> programers.
> 
> There was a bet at longbets.org (run by Long Now Foundation) regarding
> the importance of blogs. The bet was made in 2002. The prediction has
> a resolution date in 2007.
> 
> In 2008, the bet is resolved. See
> 
> “Decision: Blogs vs. New York Times” (2008-02-01) by Alexander Rose
>  http://blog.longnow.org/2008/02/01/decision-blogs-vs-new-york-times/
                            ^^^^^^^^^^

Recently? Also, work on that spelling of yours.

> I'd like encourage, for many of you, who have lots of opinions on
> technical issues or social issues surrounding software, to make use of
> longbets.org. It can help shape your thoughts from blog fart to
> something more refined. In any case, your money will benefit society.

I am getting this sense that you have some sort of monetary connection 
to said site.

> • I bet that Java will be out of the top 10 programing languages by
> 2020.

FORTRAN was first used in the 1950s. IIRC, it's still in the top 10. 
Languages die hard.

> • I bet that the top 10 programing languages in 2015 (as determined by
> requirement from job search engine), the majority will be those
> characterized as dynamic languages (e.g. php, perl, python,
> javascript, tcl, lisp. (as opposed to: C, Java, C++, C#, F#,
> Haskell)).

Right, once again Java-bashing in a Java forum. There's one (actually 
two, but that's a different story) too many trolls in here!

I'd also like to point out that determining language use by "job search 
engine" requirements is setting one up to certain biases and is not 
sufficiently representative of the true patterns.

> Note, in almost all online forums where tech geekers gather (e.g.
> newsgroups, slashdot, irc, etc), often they are anonymous, each fart
> ignorant cries and gripes and heated arguments, often in a
> irresponsible and carefree way.

Okay, we already know that most /. users tend to act immature, but that 
can hardly be said about newsgroups or IRC. Just read c.l.j.p's postings 
for the last month to disprove your proposition.

> One of the longbets.org's goal is to foster RESPONSIBILITY.

How does making a bet make one responsible?

> In recent years, i have often made claims that the Python's
> documentation, it's writing quality and its documentation quality in
> whole, is one of the worst.

... Are you trying to be ironic on purpose?

> Among all the wild claims in our modern world, from the sciences to
> social or political issues, my claim about Python's technical writing
> quality or its whole quality as a technical documentation, is actualy
> trivial to verify by any standards.

Quality is subjective, so it's not trivial to verify.

> Some of these beer drinking fuckheads are simply being a asshole,
> which are expected by the nature of online tech geeking communities (a
> significance percentage are bored young males). However, many others,
> many with many years of programing experience as a professional,
> sincerely tried to say something to the effect of “in my opinion it's
> good”, or voice other stupid remarks to the effect of “why don't you
> fix it”, and in fact find my claim, and its tone too fantastical, to
> the point thinking i'm a youngling who are bent on to do nothing but
> vandalism. (the tech geekers use in-group slang for this: “troll”.)

Right, so in response to your complaints that something is poor, people 
who try to (IMHO validly so) claim otherwise, or suggest that you take 
the initiative to change the status quo makes them blithering idiots. 
Although I'm sure that I have already lost all credibility with you, I 
would like to point out one of the defining features of open source: if 
you don't like it, you can change it. No one is pointing a gun at your 
head and forcing you to use python's documentation.

Besides, you claim that longbets.org is fostering "responsibility." If 
you want to change the world, take some responsibility and do it yourself.

> By that i mean that there is no
> consensus on the subject among its experts, and the issue is complex,
> and has political implications.

I think all concerned would agree that crossposting a message to several 
groups (one of your examples) with the intent of criticizing those in 
one group and providing information at best tangential to the charters 
of other groups is of no merit, and is bad form.

> I think, the founding of Long Now Foundation with its longbets.org,
> shares a concern i have on the tech geeking communities. In
> particular, tech geekers need to have a broader education on social
> sciences, needs to think in long term, and needs to foster personal

Lesson 1: in public fora, screaming and using the most vulgar language 
at someone is poor social form. In olden times, such language as you 
have presented here might merit punishments like lashings, but in our 
more modern egalitarian society, the worst punishment you will receive 
is a stern glare.

Besides, I think in the long term. I'm already sorting out my retirement 
funds and I've not received a college diploma yet.

 > (note: not reading more motherfucking slashdot or
> motherfucking groklaw or more great podcasts on your beatific language
> or your postmodernistic fuckhead idols)

I read /. more to amuse myself on the idiots there, I don't read 
groklaw, and I don't listen to podcasts. What I do do is program, read, 
espouse my opinions on the current economic and political conditions, 
read, check my email, read, read the newspaper, read, and pick up 
another of McCullough's wonderful books and read some more.

> (One thing you can do, is actually take a course on philosophy,
> history, law, economics, in your local community college.)

And you should also take a course on Manners 101 at your local community 
college.

I would finally like to add that you seem to put yourself on the 
pedestal of being the sole person who is righteous in a quagmire of a 
world, while the truth could not be further. Anyone who must resort to 
base name-calling and mere obscenities when criticizing others has 
problems of their own. (In my defense, I do not place myself on such a 
pedestal: I respect the opinions of others in this newsgroup far above 
myself and would also like to add that they are capable of restraining 
themselves when reading provocative banter while I am not).

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth