Name: UrielReincarnated 2015-09-07 22:31
I found out about Uriel just recently and never knew who he was until a few days ago (he was not super famous, not as many people knew about him as you would think).
His arguments about baroque complex crapware are definitely sane and correct, but I think he didn't realize something basic: you can't just rant about stuff, you have to actually contribute logical articles that prove your point using computing science and code. I.e. just ranting that java sucks, is correct, but you have to show people exactly how it sucks in what ways, with code snippets, in a computing science article. Just ranting about it, is not as effective as logically reasoning and demonstrating with code that it is inferior to other languages.
An example of a rant supported by real evidence is "Why such and such is not my favorite programming language". Often one will back up his statements with code, and experience, proving that the language is lacking and is inferior. What I saw with Uriel is mostly ranting and making references to other people who also ranted (his references were just quotations of other people ranting about the language).
Although I agree with Uriel about software basically sucking majorly, I think he should have backed up more of his arguments with code snippets and computing science articles that actually demonstrated WHY, HOW, and WHERE those languages went wrong. I will be writing some articles about how java sucks, c++ sucks, and not just ranting about it, but providing code to back up my claims. Uriel has inspired me to do some writing. Instead of just saying Java sucks on some mailing list, one has to compose a PDF file that clearly explains HOW java sucks, according to computing science, and not just anecodotal hunches. An example would be comparing plain C where you can just create a procedure such as delete_file() without welding it to some noun (noun oriented programming, i.e OOP) and instantiating your stupid noun. delete_file() is simple (a verb that gets to the point, not some stupid noun-verb-noun-factory-factory-nonsensical-joke. delete_file() is to the point, without jumping through complex OOP hoops forcing you to weld everything to some overrated hyped up bloated baroque Class (and is a class the same as an object? what's an object, what's a class? No one has scientifically defined this crap). I see he even looked into TutorialD in place of SQL. TutorialD tries to put scientific rigor into OOP. However tutorialD seems verbose and complex, so I'm not sure how far Uriel got into researching TutorialD.
Criticizing Uriel is kind of a moot point now since he is gone, and maybe it is in bad taste to criticize him... so rather than just criticize his ways, I'm instead saying that he should inspire people to write about why software sucks - but let's back it up with more scientific evidence that software sucks, not just anecdotal quotes that it sucks because such and such person said so. "Uriel Reincarnated" is anyone who continues his attitude about software sucking. He lives on in my mind, at least. Also, he supported Ron Paul, which is strange, considering Ron Paul doesn't even believe in the theory of evolution, but again this is in bad taste criticizing him so I will stop. He inspired me to do some writing in computing science about how to improve software. Thanks Uriel.
His arguments about baroque complex crapware are definitely sane and correct, but I think he didn't realize something basic: you can't just rant about stuff, you have to actually contribute logical articles that prove your point using computing science and code. I.e. just ranting that java sucks, is correct, but you have to show people exactly how it sucks in what ways, with code snippets, in a computing science article. Just ranting about it, is not as effective as logically reasoning and demonstrating with code that it is inferior to other languages.
An example of a rant supported by real evidence is "Why such and such is not my favorite programming language". Often one will back up his statements with code, and experience, proving that the language is lacking and is inferior. What I saw with Uriel is mostly ranting and making references to other people who also ranted (his references were just quotations of other people ranting about the language).
Although I agree with Uriel about software basically sucking majorly, I think he should have backed up more of his arguments with code snippets and computing science articles that actually demonstrated WHY, HOW, and WHERE those languages went wrong. I will be writing some articles about how java sucks, c++ sucks, and not just ranting about it, but providing code to back up my claims. Uriel has inspired me to do some writing. Instead of just saying Java sucks on some mailing list, one has to compose a PDF file that clearly explains HOW java sucks, according to computing science, and not just anecodotal hunches. An example would be comparing plain C where you can just create a procedure such as delete_file() without welding it to some noun (noun oriented programming, i.e OOP) and instantiating your stupid noun. delete_file() is simple (a verb that gets to the point, not some stupid noun-verb-noun-factory-factory-nonsensical-joke. delete_file() is to the point, without jumping through complex OOP hoops forcing you to weld everything to some overrated hyped up bloated baroque Class (and is a class the same as an object? what's an object, what's a class? No one has scientifically defined this crap). I see he even looked into TutorialD in place of SQL. TutorialD tries to put scientific rigor into OOP. However tutorialD seems verbose and complex, so I'm not sure how far Uriel got into researching TutorialD.
Criticizing Uriel is kind of a moot point now since he is gone, and maybe it is in bad taste to criticize him... so rather than just criticize his ways, I'm instead saying that he should inspire people to write about why software sucks - but let's back it up with more scientific evidence that software sucks, not just anecdotal quotes that it sucks because such and such person said so. "Uriel Reincarnated" is anyone who continues his attitude about software sucking. He lives on in my mind, at least. Also, he supported Ron Paul, which is strange, considering Ron Paul doesn't even believe in the theory of evolution, but again this is in bad taste criticizing him so I will stop. He inspired me to do some writing in computing science about how to improve software. Thanks Uriel.