The main thing that's happened is that simple horizontal applications are approaching a price of $0. The answer is don't code simple horizontal applications if you are looking to make money. That doesn't mean the whole model is broken but that there is massive oversupply of particular types of applications.

Apple app store payouts are about $5b growing at a rate of about $1b / year. I'm having a hard time seeing a medium sized and rapidly growing revenue stream as not existing. It is absolutely concentrated though that's true. Where it isn't concentrated is money from vertical and custom applications which far exceed the app store payouts.

They filed they aren't threw the bankruptcy yet. A trustee has been appointed and the trustee decided there still are outstanding legal issues.

Languages that don't have hardware specific features are easy to another set of hardware. I'm not sure how you are seeing this as the opposite.

Python = Imperative
VBA = Imperative
SQL = Functional

LISP is fairly considered to be in the functional family. While it isn't purely functional it is functional.

Relational data is a terrible fit for OO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Not having this mismatch is one of the arguments for using an object database. What's right for OO isn't going to be right for relational and solving the relationship representation problem doesn't solve the object hierarchy problem.

There certainly is no reason they can't merge if things like function composition get more popular with OO languages and type classes allow for chains of inheritance to work.

In terms of the Java compatibility and some of the functional aspects I'd say Clojure. In terms of low level compile details you have some control with the JVM but it is limited. That's a pure choice either you get to decide how the hardware responds at a low level in the language or you don't have that control and you operate cross platform. You can't add functionality to the JVM.

Maybe if he hadn't said Python 3x he wouldn't have gotten stuck with Java. Boss in the first line is asking for:

a) Graphical abstraction (i.e. very complex data types without a specific binary representation being easy to manipulate)

b) Good ties to big data systems i.e. being able to abstract big data results as a native mathematic operation

Sounds to me like Python is a terrible choice. Haskell, LISP, Prolog ... Suggesting Python means you aren't listening.

____

His second comment is that Python isn't going to be robust (i.e. abstract) enough. It doesn't create enough ability to tie do various entries. Again you need to listen.

RPN = reverse Polish LISP.

It was a nice stack based LISPish with lots of tacit programming. PostScript (which was very cool for humans not just computer generated code) was like that as well. I've heard Factor is like that but haven't played with it.

Not really. BBSes started as closed communities. AOL provided a large basket of services for their users as did competitors like Prodigy. There were at the time pure ISPs who just offered internet but mostly people wanted BBS services. Internet was added to AOL's services around 1995 and proved very popular as an add on, eventually replacing all their other products in the basket.

So not really the same thing.

Some of the comments from the article are nuts like:

"We'd hate to see ISPs and Facebook police these workarounds, which would show that they care less about users' access to the internet and more about the terms of the deals, open internet be damned," Levy told Motherboard.

What does Josh Levy think? User access to Facebook is what is paying for this access. Or course they care about the terms! Why would they want to fund someone using Tumblr, Yelp, Google+, Twitter...?

Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?

Because there were compensating advantages to those shows. Life is about grey and tradeoffs. And her wanting particular products and getting upset about it while a negative was not a game changer. Your ID is low enough that you are about my age. I'd assume you know this and should be sounding like a teen that hasn't made these tradeoffs.

Yes. I could easily see it making things much worse.

I remember when my daughter was about 2.5-4 commercials were unbelievable effective. Even those commercials that targeted the mother watching with the kid had an impact and my daughter would often get upset we didn't have the right products. I'd love to just see a ban on advertising for kids under 10, and public financing.