Re: Squeak: Smalltalk is still fun!

Dan Connolly (
Sun, 03 Jan 1999 05:07:35 -0400

Ron Resnick wrote:
> Dan Connolly wrote:
> >
> > IBM alphaworks has done enough cool stuff with Java and XML
> Yes.

Actually, no. After I went to all the trouble to bring
Java back to life on my desktop, I discovered the IBM
stuff isn't released with source.

Hence I'll be removing it from shortly.

> > that I want to get Java development tools on my desktop
> > again.
> Again? Where did they go?

Bit-rot. I re-installed the OS or something.

> > So I went surfing for +linux +Java.
> is the "definitive" JDK on Linux,

yeah... but that doesn't mean it actually works. I am
yet to get any interesting apps to build and run.
(Actually, I cheated: I haven't installed the blackdown
JDK. I installed Kaffe, cuz the download time wasn't
as scary. I'd like to hear a 1st-hand success story
before I spend the time/disk space to deal with the
blackdown JDK)

In fact, I didn't see much Open Source Java anywhere.
(are there *any* Open Source Java projects besides

> though OpenGroup
> has a port too. Currently supported is JDK1.1.7 on x86,PPC, with
> older JDK1.1s on Sparc & Alpha. Green& native threads as of 1.1.7.

Which one works?

> > The most
> > interesting thing I found was Squeak. Kept me up till 4am.
> IMHO, and this is just an opinion, Squeak will suffer the same
> fate

Sure. It's still cool, though.

> > According to my records, this is the first email
> > message I've received from you since 19 Aug 1998.
> >
> Unless you count the garbage I send you via the FoRK archive.

I don't subscribe. I read the archive via HTTP.

> > I intend to sue those who spam my mailbox. I do not give my time to phone
> > solicitors.
> Gee, the spammers are quaking. "I intend to sue" - somehow
> doesn't exactly instill great dread, does it?

The word "sue" is linked to what I think is a plausible scenario:


"A civil case without criminal penalties... Who will ever bother to

The benefit to this law is that because the offense and
the damages
are clearly stated in the statute, you can take this kind
of a case
to a Small Claims court -- for very little hassle and very
low cost
you can get a judgment. Then what? There are numerous
agencies who have specialists in pursuing these judgments
been doing it for junk faxes for 10 years). You get a
judgment for,
say $500, and the collection agency might pay you $300 for
right to collect whatever they can.

The reality, of course, is that most people won't need to
because the potential risk and cost to spammers will be
felt even if
only one one person is motivated to bring a case. If one
case can
result in even one law suit for upwards of $1500, it
doesn't take
many people to fight to make it no longer worthwhile to
spam. And
as one anti-spam activist's email signature line reads:

When the Smith Amendment passes,
My girlfriend will be very happy.
She's expecting me to buy her a 5 carat diamond ring
with the proceeds.

Dan Connolly