I actually think that people should rather use EcmaScript name instead of JavaScript, because it's a way better name (much less confusing, given that this lang doesn't have anything to do with Java anyway). I wish Oracle started suing people to force everyone to use the better name.
But everyone already calls it JS. I think the transition would have been so much easier if the official name started with "J".
It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
261–270 of 393 posts
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that you wrote it wrong is hilariously ironic. JavaScript is simply the better term, and marketing is everything. Reminds me of Java's POJOs, which was a very simple pattern that no one used, until someone gave them a fancy name. ECMAScript is a horrible technical name. Might as well call it ACMEScript considering how willie e. coyote it feels to develop with it...
POJO is one of my favorite acronyms. Along with POTS and COTS. POTS = Plain Old Telephony System COTS = Commercial Off-The-Shelf
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop spreading defeatism. Either channel these energies into something better, or just get out of the way.
"Defeatism" is yet another shibboleth for people who refuse to accept reality. Wasting your money on things you can't change when you could be spending it on things you can is true "defeatism", as it accomplishes nothing.
Sometimes you'd be right, as some people use this as a shield to do whatever naive thing they want, and build sand castles. But I don't think this is the case here. Society needs some level of potentially useless effort, otherwise the things that are barealy possible are never attempted because they are so close to the line.
There's also plenty of causes for which people can mobilize themselves, we don't all need to jump on the ones that are highly likely to succeed.
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Defeatism" is yet another shibboleth for people who refuse to accept reality. Wasting your money on things you can't change when you could be spending it on things you can is true "defeatism", as it accomplishes nothing.
> "Defeatism" is yet another shibboleth for people who refuse to accept reality. Sometimes you'd be right, as some people use this as a shield to do whatever naive thing they want, and build sand castles. But I don't think this is the case here. Society needs some level of potentially useless effort, otherwise the things that are barealy possible are never attempted because they are so close to the line. There's also…
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's less the fact that someone owns JS's trademark, and more that it's specifically Oracle (they got it when they bought Sun). Oracle is an incredibly litigious company. Their awful reputation in this respect means that the JS ecosystem can never be sure they won't swoop in and attempt to demand rent someday. This is made worse by the army of lawyers they employ; even if they're completely in the wrong, whatever pro…
Assuming Oracle did decide to go down that route, who would they sue? No one really uses the JavaScript name in anything official except for "JavaScriptCore" that Apple ships with Webkit.
Anyone they feel like. Lawnmower gonna mow.
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#266Silly question: how are people negatively impacted by the trademark of "JavaScript"? Because in practice, isn't this a bit like "Kleenex" - where everyone knows you mean "tissue" (EMCAScript).
Not everybody knows. People who learn JavaScript don't know. In fact, they must learn this. And from my experience, most learning resources don't mention this, let alone teach this. It took me a really long time to understand what ECMAScript is and how it relates to JavaScript. And the effort I put in this understanding... I would have preferred to not having needed that.
So no, not everybody knows this.
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
From days of old... Invoking Applet Methods From JavaScript Code - https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/in... and Invoking JavaScript Code From an Applet - https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/in... Aside from the "Java is cool, name everything Java" in the early days - there was scripting between the browser and the applet using a language named JavaScript.
Eh, JavaScript wasn't the originally chosen name, it was LiveScript by Eich. I've never seen a justification for the name from anyone in the know, other than Eich's musing that Netscape wanted the "cool" factor. That "cool" factor was also why the original task of embedding scheme into the browser turned into a more C/Java-esque flavor.
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#268Silly question: how are people negatively impacted by the trademark of "JavaScript"? Because in practice, isn't this a bit like "Kleenex" - where everyone knows you mean "tissue" (EMCAScript).
It's less the fact that someone owns JS's trademark, and more that it's specifically Oracle (they got it when they bought Sun). Oracle is an incredibly litigious company. Their awful reputation in this respect means that the JS ecosystem can never be sure they won't swoop in and attempt to demand rent someday. This is made worse by the army of lawyers they employ; even if they're completely in the wrong, whatever pro…
Are there any examples of Oracle using their JavaScript trademark to sue anyone? If they did, that petition would have merit.
Unless Demo was, this feels like a marketing project. And it's working, too, so kudos.
Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#269Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)
#270The last time this was brought up, "WebScript" was mentioned as a possible alternative name. (Like WebAssembly, WebSockets, WebRTC, etc.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45297066