Unfortunately a moral and money rarely goes together as many history examples show. Do I understand correct that effectively in a modern economics it's only the US can print money (by Fed)? With that the ruling elite can do whatever needed to prolong its ruling, unfortunately far outside the US borders.
The article falsifies your assumption about Facebook’s strategy and tactics in Bangladesh:
> The wording was intended to circumvent a Facebook algorithm that, to prevent wildlife trafficking, automatically takes down posts with “buy” or “sell” in the description.
That's because Facebook obviously does not care. They remove the "buy" or "sell" posts due to laws, not because they themselves have issues with wildlife trafficking.
If FB did care, they'd not have a problem shutting it down until you have to go into really obscure code to pass by their systems, at which point it gets useless, because that code isn't known by the other side.
> That's because Facebook obviously does not care.
I seem to lack the ability to see what you find obvious. Perhaps we differ in what counts as supporting evidence or maybe our starting assumptions are drastically different.
Do you believe that Facebook is capable of adding a similar filter to match "to change hands"? If they were capable, what could the explanation be for why they don't?
Because there are many, many langauges and idioms in the world, and AI isn't good enough to do this accurately at the moment.
Given that Bangladesh is pretty poor and small, the likelihood is that if they were to pour resources into it, eventually the business would pull out of the country, as it wouldn't be profitable.
Note that if they block to change hands, then people will start using another idiom, so a mere filter isn't going to accomplish much here.
It's certainly a cat-and-mouse-game until you've added the obvious idioms, but that only lasts a few iterations, because the users will quickly have to come up with new ones that get less useful as their understanding gets less wide-spread. It's one of those situations where you can absolutely win by and large, even if you don't catch everything. If you catch 95-99%, you're done.
Bangladesh has a population of 160m, and almost all speak Bengali, which is also used in India by a significant minority. It's not like we're talking about ignoring Liechtenstein. It won't eat up the profits by having someone add 10 rules to a filter list for a target audience of 200m+, even if they are poor.
> ...astounding achievement from Redmond. It boasted interactive tools to create GUI drag and drop features users were accustomed to in VB6 but glaringly missing in the Java world. This was with Visual Studio 97
Thay were not "glaringly missing in the Java world" in 1997 when Visual Studio was released. By that time at least these 2 IDEs with "drag and drop" were released and used already: Symantec Visual Café (a good one!), and a beta of IBM VisualAge (second part of 96). VisualAge came with specific ibm's understanding of drag and drop, however the Visual Café's experience was really similar to VB and much easier than J++ from what I remember. I tried all of them at the time including JBuilder and Sybase. JBuilder was my best for quite time.
Correct. I myself used "eclipse's" parent (Visual Age) in the early days but the point I was making was not so much that "drag and drop" was missing - it was just too cumbersome and difficult even in that! In VB6, it was trivial to get a form to look the way you wanted it to look. Gridbag layout on Java Swing maimed many, and those that got off the VB6 boat soon realised that Java land was much much harder even with their GUI drag and drop tools.
BTW, I used JBuilder extensively. What a topnotch tool from Borland. Pity they didn't survive the virulent competition during those IDE wars period. I still remember settling an argument with a colleague about his insistence to use the newly arrived Netbeans, while I fired up my JBuilder IDE (Yellow Porsche splash screen IIRC), created a gui, added jdbc data controls, coded a few lines and hit compile - ALL while his Netbeans was still loading with that dastardly progress bar.
(These comments have been much needed catharsis for me.)
From memory JBuilder did have issues with its GUI builder.
Code emitted JBuilder's tools was not isolated from other code that was written for the application. It was easy to add a line of code that would make the included builder tool to not show the resultant GUI correctly.
This was from JBuilder 9 and JBuilder 2006, other than that issue it was a really nice IDE to use.
In 96 there was also Xelfi which later became Netbeans.
The original version was an attempt at Delphi for Java and I liked it far better than Netbeans later, but I came from Delphi to Java so that makes sense.
Doing .NET and Java nowadays, started using Borland products with Turbo Basic, jumped into Turbo Pascal 3.0, all the way up to Delphi 1.0 and C++ Builder, before caving in to the MFC world back then.
Delphi club membership is only for those who possess a ruthless, deep and time-transcending sense of commitment to these two aspects of software development:
1."No bullshit" - stick to the fundamentals and don't waste time over-engineering, relying on complex builds, producing ambiguous compiles (ok, we're still fixing this), relying on bulky runtime architectures. Have straightforward source code. Native. Straight-talking. Quick-compiling. Hard-hitting. Because Shipping Matters(tm). Only thing that matters. Shipping. No bullshit.
2. "Fiercely independent mindset" - Members know that they must use the right tools for the right job, but members must also display a strong ability to not be swayed by what employers are hiring for. Latest shiny flavour of tech, framework, language, might look good on your CV but many times the conclusion for "What is the right tool for this job?" can still be answered: "Delphi". Stand your ground.
So, if you are a CV-oriented programmer, you will most likely not want to do Delphi. There is an indelible and horribly misinformed meme out there that there are no Delphi jobs or that Delphi is dead, is old, outdated and irrelevant in modern software architectures. I have seen this ageist misinformation come out as lame attempts to ridicule Delphi programmers (jealousy?), branding them luddites and dinosaurs. We never retaliate. Quiet stoicism is a prerequisite for club membership.
Finally, the Delphi club also has a new membership protocol: always buy them a beer. No matter whether they eventually get accepted in the hallowed halls of this quiet corner. :-)
Still delivering stuff on ASP.NET Framework 4.7.x, have delivered a couple of Forms/WPF projects during the last decade to lifetime science R&D labs, own all Delphi books from Packt, I guess it kind of qualifies for the membership pitch. :)
I doubt there any thing today that even come close to Delphi in terms of RAD. It is unfortunate that Software as an industry is even worst than fast fashion.
That is what happens when one stays with AWT, does everything on the main thread, and doesn't bother to read Java UI design books like Filthy Rich Clients, or integrate component libraries like JGoddies.
However I do agree Visual Basic and Delphi were much better, and if Java hadn't happened we wouldn't have lost 20 years playing around with VMs and dynamic languages, to finally start paying attention to AOT, value types on type safe languages.
