8 ms·

Not very promising, it is written in a language which: - is controlled by Google. - doesn't support generics. Do we really want people to constantly rewrite b

Not very promising, it is written in a language which: - is controlled by Google. - doesn't support generics. Do we really want people to constantly rewrite basic data structure classes in 2021 and thereby reinvent bugs constantly (and waste time which could be spent on more meaningful purposes)?

BiteCode_dev 5y ago
I don't care, I want to use it not dev in it. If the people working for free to give me FOSS are happy with this stack, more power to them. No complaining.
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
  Do you use the same argument when purchasing consumer products from shady countries which abuse workers? "I only want to use it, I don't want to produce it"? We shouldn't support bad things by giving them publicity through using them. The least harm it will cause is disincentivizing someone else from creating something better, which is annoying enough already.
  - BiteCode_dev 5y ago
    Comparing people taste in language with slavery. That's... bold.
    - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
      Google doesn't pay anyone for the billions of recaptchas they force Internet users to solve for free - to then profit off by using them to train their AI which leaks into nobody-knows-how-many products. So I think it's pretty fine to put them into the bucket of entities which benefit from forced labor. They merely don't coax people into it by physical force but rather by locking them out of most of the Internet if they don't comply.
      - StandardFuture 5y ago
        Very valid points about recaptchas. Now, what does that have to do with the Go programming language that is FOSS? Or are you calling for developers to essentially put restrictive sanctions on any and all Google products/projects? And if so, are you actually holding yourself to the same standard? Never using a recaptcha? Never visiting a site that uses Google Analytics? Never watching a YouTube video? Never using a device which runs the Android operating system? etc., etc.? Because you seem to be demanding such a standard from the rest of us.
        eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
        > Or are you calling for developers to essentially put restrictive sanctions on any and all Google products/projects? Yes. > And if so, are you actually holding yourself to the same standard? Never using a recaptcha? Never visiting a site that uses Google Analytics? Never watching a YouTube video? Never using a device which runs the Android operating system? etc., etc.? I intentionally enter a large percentage of invalid data into recaptchas to spoil their dataset. Google Analytics is blocked by my ad blocker. Same goes for ads on youtube. With regards to using their stuff, I don't demand anyone should stop privately using it if they need it. You just shouldn't encourage any further people to use Google stuff by filling their ecosystem with more new software.
        StandardFuture 5y ago
        > I intentionally enter a large percentage of invalid data into recaptchas to spoil their dataset. So do a few others. You are easily selected out as anomalous data, just fyi. > Google Analytics is blocked by my ad blocker. Great. Are you also blocking Google Fonts? Are you sure that Google is not hosting anything you are touching on a website? > Same goes for ads on youtube. But advertisers pay YouTube based on the viewership reputation of YouTube. You are merely providing a reduced amount of value to Google in this way. > You just shouldn't encourage any further people to use Google stuff by filling their ecosystem with more new software. Very honest question: Do you think you would have actually said this same thing about the C programming language in the 70s, 80s? Maybe you would have. All in all, I am not sure that your stance justifies writing no code in Go which provides less value to Google's bottomline than even Google Fonts. Perhaps some advertiser somewhere in the tech industry benefits from Google's public-facing Go packages proxy data for reaching a developer audience to sell to? Who knows? But, developers can turn that off and/or use self-hosted proxies. Also, lone wolf retaliation is fine but not nearly as effective as just running for political office and being anti-Google.
  - Hammershaft 5y ago
    > Do you use the same argument when purchasing consumer products from shady countries which abuse workers? This analogy makes no sense. You are comparing a product made through coercion and abuse of workers to a product willingly made with tools that you happen to have differing preferences on.
    - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
      My point is NOT that Go would be made primarily through forced labor (although usage of money earned through the yield of the forced labor from ReCaptcha is rather likely). My point is that Google is an evil company, and we shouldn't support evil entities by using their stuff. And to make that point apparent, I mentioned other instances where people would think it is pretty obvious that "producer is evil = don't use their stuff", hoping that you would see there is no reason to act any different on Google just because they produce products which are of a type different from those that evil entities normal produce. Because it really doesn't matter whether it is software or clothes or diamonds, if you use something publicly of someone you support them, and Google should not be supported.
tfsh 5y ago
Neither of those criticisms pertain to the actual product itself. Go is a tried and tested product, used daily in critical infra and is FOSS
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
  Forced labor is also tried and tested and doesn't pertain to the resulting product, yet you wouldn't willingly purchase products made by it, would you? A malicious producer can taint their products solely by being the producer.
  - BiteCode_dev 5y ago
    There is no moral component in a dev choosing a language for themself, what are you even talking about?
    - anonuser123456 5y ago
      There is most certainly a religious component :p
mhaberl 5y ago
So anything made by tech controlled by a big corp is not promising? We should not use Go, Java, C#, Angular, React, Objective-C, Swift, Kotlin, Dart, .... ?
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
  I have no opinion on big corporations per se. I merely know that specifically Google needs to be anti-trust'ed into shreds and pieces and then some more. They control way too many parts of the public Internet, software and hardware. Giving them even more control by letting their programming languages permeate the fabric of the software ecosystem is a bad idea.
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    This is such an oversimplification. Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, etc. are all guilty of ecosystem lock-in. Google in many ways is the most generous when it comes to open source and most of the hardware utilizing Google is by other manufacturers.
thiht 5y ago
Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Go would just get forked by the community and that's it. As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, they don't matter at all regarding what a product can do. Also they're planned in Go for next year.
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
  > Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Have you ever used a library where the company who paid the development went "whoops, not our product anymore! poof goes the paid team, website, the community forums, the knowledgebase" ? Usually nobody continues to maintain these after 90% of the workforce behind them gets fired and the surrounding infrastructure disappears. Software is almost worthless without the brains behind it. > As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, So you propose people write the 100,000th implementation of linked lists, maps, etc. because what they want to stick into it is not class A but class B? > Also they're planned in Go for next year. The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It might have been nice as a toy to teach aspiring programmers. It shouldn't have ended up in production software. > Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Thanks. I consider yours as stupid too. How much progress exactly have we achieved with this wording now?
  - thiht 5y ago
    It's pretty clear you're trolling now, but FWIW: - slices and maps are already generic in Go - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners - Go is a language, not a library > The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It's not. Really.
    - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
      > It's pretty clear you're trolling now I am not. I genuinely think Google is evil and should be dismantled. > - slices and maps are already generic in Go So people are supposed to not rewrite 2 of the possibly infinite types of data structures and classes, and constantly rewrite all the rest of them? > - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners Enough other languages do as well. > Go is a language, not a library If Google abandons the funding it does not matter what it technically is. No money, no developers.
philipswood 5y ago
For interest sake: what language carries your blessing instead?
StandardFuture 5y ago
You are absolutely right! And this is why I avoid any and all software written in C due to AT&Ts prior evil monopolistic practices of the mid-20th century. /s

BiteCode_dev 5y ago

I don't care, I want to use it not dev in it. If the people working for free to give me FOSS are happy with this stack, more power to them. No complaining.

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
Do you use the same argument when purchasing consumer products from shady countries which abuse workers? "I only want to use it, I don't want to produce it"? We shouldn't support bad things by giving them publicity through using them. The least harm it will cause is disincentivizing someone else from creating something better, which is annoying enough already.
- BiteCode_dev 5y ago
  Comparing people taste in language with slavery. That's... bold.
  - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
    Google doesn't pay anyone for the billions of recaptchas they force Internet users to solve for free - to then profit off by using them to train their AI which leaks into nobody-knows-how-many products. So I think it's pretty fine to put them into the bucket of entities which benefit from forced labor. They merely don't coax people into it by physical force but rather by locking them out of most of the Internet if they don't comply.
    - StandardFuture 5y ago
      Very valid points about recaptchas. Now, what does that have to do with the Go programming language that is FOSS? Or are you calling for developers to essentially put restrictive sanctions on any and all Google products/projects? And if so, are you actually holding yourself to the same standard? Never using a recaptcha? Never visiting a site that uses Google Analytics? Never watching a YouTube video? Never using a device which runs the Android operating system? etc., etc.? Because you seem to be demanding such a standard from the rest of us.
      - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
        > Or are you calling for developers to essentially put restrictive sanctions on any and all Google products/projects? Yes. > And if so, are you actually holding yourself to the same standard? Never using a recaptcha? Never visiting a site that uses Google Analytics? Never watching a YouTube video? Never using a device which runs the Android operating system? etc., etc.? I intentionally enter a large percentage of invalid data into recaptchas to spoil their dataset. Google Analytics is blocked by my ad blocker. Same goes for ads on youtube. With regards to using their stuff, I don't demand anyone should stop privately using it if they need it. You just shouldn't encourage any further people to use Google stuff by filling their ecosystem with more new software.
        StandardFuture 5y ago
        > I intentionally enter a large percentage of invalid data into recaptchas to spoil their dataset. So do a few others. You are easily selected out as anomalous data, just fyi. > Google Analytics is blocked by my ad blocker. Great. Are you also blocking Google Fonts? Are you sure that Google is not hosting anything you are touching on a website? > Same goes for ads on youtube. But advertisers pay YouTube based on the viewership reputation of YouTube. You are merely providing a reduced amount of value to Google in this way. > You just shouldn't encourage any further people to use Google stuff by filling their ecosystem with more new software. Very honest question: Do you think you would have actually said this same thing about the C programming language in the 70s, 80s? Maybe you would have. All in all, I am not sure that your stance justifies writing no code in Go which provides less value to Google's bottomline than even Google Fonts. Perhaps some advertiser somewhere in the tech industry benefits from Google's public-facing Go packages proxy data for reaching a developer audience to sell to? Who knows? But, developers can turn that off and/or use self-hosted proxies. Also, lone wolf retaliation is fine but not nearly as effective as just running for political office and being anti-Google.
- Hammershaft 5y ago
  > Do you use the same argument when purchasing consumer products from shady countries which abuse workers? This analogy makes no sense. You are comparing a product made through coercion and abuse of workers to a product willingly made with tools that you happen to have differing preferences on.
  - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
    My point is NOT that Go would be made primarily through forced labor (although usage of money earned through the yield of the forced labor from ReCaptcha is rather likely). My point is that Google is an evil company, and we shouldn't support evil entities by using their stuff. And to make that point apparent, I mentioned other instances where people would think it is pretty obvious that "producer is evil = don't use their stuff", hoping that you would see there is no reason to act any different on Google just because they produce products which are of a type different from those that evil entities normal produce. Because it really doesn't matter whether it is software or clothes or diamonds, if you use something publicly of someone you support them, and Google should not be supported.

tfsh 5y ago

Neither of those criticisms pertain to the actual product itself. Go is a tried and tested product, used daily in critical infra and is FOSS

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
Forced labor is also tried and tested and doesn't pertain to the resulting product, yet you wouldn't willingly purchase products made by it, would you? A malicious producer can taint their products solely by being the producer.
- BiteCode_dev 5y ago
  There is no moral component in a dev choosing a language for themself, what are you even talking about?
  - anonuser123456 5y ago
    There is most certainly a religious component :p

mhaberl 5y ago

So anything made by tech controlled by a big corp is not promising? We should not use Go, Java, C#, Angular, React, Objective-C, Swift, Kotlin, Dart, .... ?

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
I have no opinion on big corporations per se. I merely know that specifically Google needs to be anti-trust'ed into shreds and pieces and then some more. They control way too many parts of the public Internet, software and hardware. Giving them even more control by letting their programming languages permeate the fabric of the software ecosystem is a bad idea.
- encryptluks2 5y ago
  This is such an oversimplification. Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, etc. are all guilty of ecosystem lock-in. Google in many ways is the most generous when it comes to open source and most of the hardware utilizing Google is by other manufacturers.

thiht 5y ago

Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Go would just get forked by the community and that's it. As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, they don't matter at all regarding what a product can do. Also they're planned in Go for next year.

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
> Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Have you ever used a library where the company who paid the development went "whoops, not our product anymore! poof goes the paid team, website, the community forums, the knowledgebase" ? Usually nobody continues to maintain these after 90% of the workforce behind them gets fired and the surrounding infrastructure disappears. Software is almost worthless without the brains behind it. > As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, So you propose people write the 100,000th implementation of linked lists, maps, etc. because what they want to stick into it is not class A but class B? > Also they're planned in Go for next year. The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It might have been nice as a toy to teach aspiring programmers. It shouldn't have ended up in production software. > Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Thanks. I consider yours as stupid too. How much progress exactly have we achieved with this wording now?
- thiht 5y ago
  It's pretty clear you're trolling now, but FWIW: - slices and maps are already generic in Go - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners - Go is a language, not a library > The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It's not. Really.
  - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
    > It's pretty clear you're trolling now I am not. I genuinely think Google is evil and should be dismantled. > - slices and maps are already generic in Go So people are supposed to not rewrite 2 of the possibly infinite types of data structures and classes, and constantly rewrite all the rest of them? > - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners Enough other languages do as well. > Go is a language, not a library If Google abandons the funding it does not matter what it technically is. No money, no developers.

philipswood 5y ago

For interest sake: what language carries your blessing instead?

StandardFuture 5y ago

You are absolutely right! And this is why I avoid any and all software written in C due to AT&Ts prior evil monopolistic practices of the mid-20th century. /s