From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Attila Lendvai Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] The Guile junk drawer and a C plea Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 14:52:01 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20240629002027.13853-1-richard@freakingpenguin.com> <4d9d9c2e-0830-4267-b8e5-1a50cb815508@msavoritias.me> <87a5ifyd0g.fsf@web.de> <20240719104617.pLmG2C00D4SnA1G01LmG1n@andre.telenet-ops.be> <87wmlgkyix.fsf@web.de> <87o76qih7z.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12365"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Maxime Devos , Greg Troxel , MSavoritias , "guile-devel@gnu.org" To: "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 22 16:52:56 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sVuPD-0002uD-5l for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:52:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sVuOu-0000DJ-1S; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 10:52:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sVuOs-00008W-PU for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 10:52:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-40136.proton.ch ([185.70.40.136]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sVuOp-0001W4-1T for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 10:52:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lendvai.name; s=protonmail2; t=1721659934; x=1721919134; bh=y385TvdMewCDuxNhsDXwqkYa6sddDwEwrC2DThw0rcw=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=DVr/O94DcQyzl5ZOWX2rKGvOdIBL33PSU1t4Cg96wGVe/o+hfG9fo7JqYgeu0p06k B1rlGrGDVZmMRTk7Tc9xIzF7m/22mSbWrDjVLMkMULjERAwaE8rItGdvJZIBVQQ82+ pCUf7xIrnaiEk/Eqt3LhqWj3Xb7vYRVLNsz06rG77yAmEkJACefLvDKGW48EurKxWO oXNCVlGOk0b6NSyPXVTS/CdZeOzcNcgmteWhcgSBKpIzLBRqaZBY8I9DpH1s1SnZ5W jpQ/1uQE61gnAtj1YURI5E+qqYrc8iw4uv6CQos2s1XKHZCHhAGFgtsAFEK5CEt+Q4 P685SExdltMew== In-Reply-To: <87o76qih7z.fsf@web.de> Feedback-ID: 28384833:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: a4ef75c4e2ff3cb7986e38e7841a601e62f8c90f Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.136; envelope-from=attila@lendvai.name; helo=mail-40136.proton.ch X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.devel:22631 Archived-At: > > > Do you know that the Broken Window theory has been debunked? > > > https://cssh.northeastern.edu/sccj/2019/05/21/researchers-debunk-brok= en-windows-theory-after-35-years/ > >=20 > > there's no need for scientific papers about something i can observe mys= elf. both inside me, in my own reactions and judgments, and also in externa= l reality, in the behavior of other people. >=20 >=20 > Then I don=E2=80=99t know whether you speak of the actual broken windows = theory. >=20 > That theory says: if there are small problems like broken windows, crime > will go up, so being heavy handed even for the smallest kind of disorder > will reduce serious crimes. this is just a specific (mis)application of the general idea. the general idea of the broken window phenomenon (at least as it's used in = my circles) is that if there's a building that is seemingly not maintained = (e.g. a broken window is left unrepaired for a critical length of time), th= en that building will deteriorate with an increasing speed compared to buil= dings that receive just a baseline level of maintenance. (e.g. the other wi= ndows will typically get broken by human action). put differently, if it's not taken care of (i.e. if this is not someone's p= roperty) then for some people it's an invitation for a free-for-all. and in a codebase: if i don't see the signs of a careful local gardener, th= en why would i put much effort into improving it as a visitor, or why would= i even visit that specific garden among the many? > > but anyway, i don't have a dog in this fight. >=20 >=20 > When it comes to general statements against science, I do. i didn't mean to say something against science (the methodology), but rathe= r against The Science=E2=84=A2 (i.e. contemporary academia and publishing g= atekeepers, with its p hacking, citation circles, defunding as punishment, = straight out censorship, etc... generally, giving up truth-seeking for deli= vering results based on political/financial agendas). > I know the amount of work that goes into even a single publication, how > much more dilligence, effort, and skill that takes than writing a > newspaper article. How careful most (though sadly not all) people are > with their statements in publications. I only published two papers > myself and reviewed a few more, but that experience showed me the > difference between a scientific publication and just throwing some > statements into the web. which is respectable and admirable behavior! and many of the scientists, in= dividually, still pursue truth-seeking, regardless of where that may lead. = but sadly this cannot be said about the institutions, i.e. about the scient= ific cooperation of the individual scientists. the emergent behavior of the system has been successfully hijacked by polit= ics. and this won't change until we implement censorship resistant publishi= ng, and solve the decentralized financing of scientists. (pseudonymity may = also be needed in certain fields, but lasting pseuconimity is a much harder= nut to crack) and let me finish with a hand-picked quote this time: --=20 =E2=80=A2 attila lendvai =E2=80=A2 PGP: 963F 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39 -- =E2=80=9CIt is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established au= thorities are wrong.=E2=80=9D =09=E2=80=94 Voltaire (1694=E2=80=931778), 'The Age of Louis XIV'