This page is no longer maintained — Please continue to the home page at

Kev's tanties

2 replies
Tony Morris 2
Joined: 2009-03-20,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.

(moved from [scala-user] SCALA processing data out of SQL database)

You still seem to be missing the point. I'll try spelling it out. I hope
this is worth it, I really do.

First, you said something about how responding with "the Either monad"
would be acceptable, while what I posted was not. This is clearly Kevin
saying, "I understand the Either monad, so that would be OK, but I don't
understand the other thing so that is not." I know this because there is
nothing specifically different about what I posted and "the Either
monad." To this, I say "fuck you Kevin." This is because your failure
disqualifies you to advise me on how to post in an instructive manner,
let alone your apparent desire to *order* me how to post. Yes indeed,
fuck you Kevin. How appropriate.

Next, you tried to take a side-swipe by predicting charges of
anti-intellectualism. I don't *need* to tell you that your behaviour
adheres to an anti-intellectual agenda. Do you think I enjoy watching
people like yourself throwing tantrums because they find learning
offensive? Let's be clear Kevin, I didn't even ask you to do any
learning -- you just decided to go on a rant about it and how you find
it terribly difficult and even offensive that I should mention it (even
though I didn't).

Next, you babbled on about scalaz concepts, which are completely
irrelevant. This is compelling evidence for the proposition, "Kevin
doesn't understand." The three lines given just happen to capture an
elegant solution to the OP's request. Kevin not only doesn't understand
this, but he then goes on to refuse to understand this, then...

Kevin is compelled to say something about the relevance of this code. I
mean WTF Kevin? You just babbled on about something totally irrelevant
yourself, *clearly* demonstrating you have no clue, then instructed me
on the relevance of it. Kevin, this is anti-intellectualism at its
finest. Do you *really* expect me to take you seriously here? You're
just having a tantrum because you don't understand something -- I have
only ever seen children and programmers do this. You immediately forfeit
any notion of instructing me if you aren't prepared to come to
understand. I would be doing others (the genuinely curious) a disservice
if I did not honour this forfeiture.

But then it got worse, much worse.

Then you sent me an email, with the [scala-user] email address mispelled
and I thought, great (on behalf of the list), now it's just me who has
to endure this whinging. However, I find that the email has found its
way back on to the mailing list somehow. Perhaps we need a mailing list
for when Kevin doesn't get it. I digress.

Next you crapped on about a point to a "Scalaz class." No Kevin, you
don't have to "follow through on the implicits in the rest of scalaz" or
if you do, you really are doing it wrong. No wonder you don't
understand. Kevin, scalaz.Iteratee is an implementation of a data
structure. You don't even need to read the code to learn about it --
some people even worked this out!

Next you complain about needing to know Haskell. Knowing how to use
Haskell, at least superficially, is a pre-requisite to using Scala
effectively. This is my opinion. But suppose it isn't. Do you really
think I should modify my answer because Kevin doesn't understand
Haskell? Really? Your over-inflated self-importance is fucking
outrageous mate. It really is and again, fuck you.

Next you went on a babble about category theory and how your university
didn't teach it. What the fuck does that have to do with anything Kevin?
You really seem to be doing it wrong.

Next you told me about your pet monkey and how you "don't have time."
Kevin, I don't have a life-long ambition to make you not clueless on
specific topics. It's entirely up to you how you spend your time and
educate yourself. But you don't get to make demands about how I answer,
*based on that cluelessness*. I'm open to advice Kevin, but if I were to
follow your instruction, nobody would be anywhere. I have lots of
students at this moment, learning various things -- I think they would
be let down if all I taught them was what they already understood. No
Kevin, fuck you and your demand that I answer in accordance with your
demands -- I will not disservice students like this and I will not even
compromise a casual answer on a mailing list, just because you're
throwing a little fucking tantrum.

Next you said you had to "learn Haskell to do a database query" and how
that is "excessive." Nobody said you had to learn anything Kevin. Crawl
back in your hole and watch me not care. I have no idea why you think
Haskell even came into this. Perhaps you should learn the basic syntax
so that you recognise what it is not. PS: This email contains no Haskell.

Next you asked the question about whether it is reasonable to accuse
people of being stupid. Nobody said anyone was stupid Kevin. This
response is just your own insecurities being exposed. As a matter of my
own personal interest, I would really like to take radiographic images
of your amygdala and front cortex during one of these neurotic episodes
of yours. I hope that such an exercise *would* ultimately help me to
teach people. I hope for more solid research in this area. I digress.

Next you tried to advise me on "wider adoption." This is where it all
falls apart for you Kevin. This isn't a fucking popularity contest.
Scalaz isn't trying to win the The Next Scala Idol. It's to get shit
done. If there is a chicken off to the side flapping its wings about how
he doesn't get it, then this does not obstruct the objective of getting
shit done -- really it doesn't. You even said "avoid answering Scala
questions with Haskell." Fuck you Kevin. If I feel it is appropriate to
answer with Haskell, I will do exactly that -- I really don't care that
you do not understand. Go on your merry way and take your feathers with you.

Next you try to explicitl advise me on how to teach and "my tendency
toward insults." Again Kevin, you're making shit up -- there were no
insults except a very appropriate response to your demands, which you
may consider an insult, if you twist hard enough.

Next you said something that both gets under my skin, and really gives
you away as believing that you represent many others in your babble (you
don't, you really don't). You said "stop bemoaning how few people there
are who understand scalaz..." First Kevin, "understanding scalaz" is a
really stupid goal. No wonder you still do not understand -- you don't
even understand what it is to understand. Scalaz exists to get shit
done; it uses concepts that Kevin fails to grasp and this will not
change. Nobody is bemoaning this fact, truly they aren't -- I don't care
if nobody uses it -- again, this is not a popularity contest. Scalaz may
contain concepts that are fundamental to computation itself, but Scalaz
is just a manifestation of the topics, not a topic itself. You don't
"learn Scalaz" you learn computability theory. Really, no wonder you
don't get it!

Let me tell you how Scalaz started. Four years ago, I was in a corner of
a room implementing a web application for a client using Scala. At the
time the Scala libraries were a joke (and the Java libraries of course)
so I wrote some libraries off to the side to help me achieve the goal. I
found out that others did the same, so I figured it would be helpful to
share. That's it, nothing more. Kevin, there are *heaps* of people who
"understand scalaz" (remember, this is inaccurate and I quote here to
appease you specifically). The amount of code I *didn't write* in scalaz
is a testament to this fact. You really really only represent yourself
here with your chronic whinging -- really you do. You have a complete
misunderstanding of what Scalaz is all about -- all this from three
lines of Scala.

Next you attack another straw man. Sigh Kevin, cut it the fuck out.
Nobody said if you don't know haskell and scalaz you hate thinking.
There are not many people who I consider averse to thinking -- you're
just one of a few and my reasons have nothing to do with the fact that
you do not know haskell or scalaz. Get the fuck over it. Chang it even.
Stop making shit up, then babbling about it. You look incurable when you
do this.

You might want to learn, but your misguided whinging is probably
preventing you from doing so. Personally, I think you need to work on
your basic learning skills, rather than Haskell or Scalaz or whatever
other irrelevant thing that your misguidance brings to you, but you

weren't looking for my advice.

On 14/03/11 00:24, Kevin Wright wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2011 13:25, "Tony Morris" wrote:
>> You may continue to protest all you like but your constant demands to
> respond such that "as long as Kevin understands it" will continue to be met
> with resistance. If you continue to make these demands in such a poorly
> thought-out manner, I will continue to think to myself, "fuck you", dismiss
> your babble and carry on.
>> Of course I want to teach, but even the most dedicated will take
> prognostic factors into account. If you think you represent a majority in
> your whining, you're horribly mistaken, again.
> I believe I represent the majority in having limited time in which to study
> entire new branches of mathematics, yes.
> If you want to teach, do so.
> I challenge you to stand by your claim and take all the creative energy that
> you clearly possess for the sake of personal criticism, using it to explain
> iteratees instead.
> Judge for yourself whether or not it's a useful exercise based on the
> responses to this list, don't just take my word for it.
>> I hope you work it out, I really do. I don't enjoy this one bit.
>> On 13/03/2011 11:06 PM, "Kevin Wright" wrote:

Ken Scambler
Joined: 2009-11-07,
User offline. Last seen 42 years 45 weeks ago.
Re: Kev's tanties
I love your educational exercises and quizzes, but Kevin and others -- I beg you please don't add any responses to this thread.

Joined: 2008-07-29,
User offline. Last seen 45 weeks 6 days ago.
Re: Kev's tanties
I'd say that's enough, Tony.

You are abusing an eco-system here. It seems you take Scala for granted as a sort of poor man's Haskell that happens to have industrial adoption. But that's not what it is. Scala is the work of many individuals who strive hard to make a platform that's powerful and friendly to everyone. Scala, and it's tools, cannot exist in a vacuum where just a dozen illuminati ``get it''.
You would not have a working compiler, libraries, IDEs, all you would have is a paper design.

To keep this going, it is essential that we maintain the momentum, keep getting effects of scale, and for that it is essential that we do not lose genuinely interested people with obscure comments that come off as plain arrogant.

I like the work you do with scalaz, and I have defended it in public, even to a degree where I got attacked by people who accuse me of catering too much to the functional crowd. You would sneer at those attacks, no doubt. But I don't, because I have to organize a community that has enough momentum to remain viable. And, without Scala there would be no scalaz.
So, let's keep on working, but cut the comments, please.

 -- Martin

Copyright © 2012 École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland