Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!209.197.12.246.MISMATCH!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit3.readnews.com!panix!roy
From: Roy Smith <roy@panix.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:52:56 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <roy-5AA94E.22525614042011@news.panix.com>
References: <mailman.65.1302065189.9059.python-list@python.org> <4d9c5ca5$0$29991$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <87tyebf3r3.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> <4d9d6a4a$0$29992$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <6Nknp.10080$lx3.7480@newsfe02.iad> <BANLkTi=-9_F7ZQ8S23WCxGSWP-5mSt-LMw@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.118.1302200288.9059.python-list@python.org> <Ynonp.2277$YL5.1440@newsfe05.iad> <4d9e6551$0$29991$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <Z2ynp.10498$0s5.3031@newsfe17.iad> <4da0f1e1$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <cArop.17646$sS4.7406@newsfe11.iad> <mailman.219.1302542844.9059.python-list@python.org> <sRUop.2627$7N3.197@newsfe10.iad> <mailman.279.1302637061.9059.python-list@python.org> <D7wpp.14226$sy5.2295@newsfe22.iad> <mailman.353.1302772509.9059.python-list@python.org> <4da6fe5e$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.368.1302814014.9059.python-list@python.org> <4da7abad$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost
X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1302835977 12835 127.0.0.1 (15 Apr 2011 02:52:57 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:52:57 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3241

In article <4da7abad$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>,
 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:

> What they give is ubiquity, which is a point in their favour. But just 
> because something is common doesn't make it useful: for the most part 
> both are used for style over substance, of sizzle without sausage, rather 
> than anything actually useful or desirable: think of a misfeature that 
> *degrades* the user-experience, and chances are it's implemented in Flash 
> or Javascript on tens of thousands of sites.

There's certainly a lot to hate about JS (and even more so, flash), but 
they fill a niche.  They provide a way to have better user interaction 
than you could with just forms and a submit button.

That's not to say there's not lot of sucky shit build with them.  But, 
if they didn't exist, something else would have to take their place.  I 
don't see JS going away any time soon.

Flash, on the other hand, is an unadulterated pile of dung.