Re^3: Could we get a more systematic approach to security in perl?

That sounds like an argument against all human endeavor.

Not at all -- just an argument against people creating phony "alliances" or "movements." In politics, it's called "astroturf." In the tech industry, it's called "PR," and usually starts with as "FooCorp, the leader in blah blah."

Comment on Re^3: Could we get a more systematic approach to security in perl?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Could we get a more systematic approach to security in perl? by SilasTheMonk (Chaplain) on Mar 30, 2010 at 06:50 UTC
Okay I rephrase it. You are lampooning people meeting via the internet and giving that meeting a goal and a name. That's pretty sad.	[reply]
Re^5: Could we get a more systematic approach to security in perl? by educated_foo (Vicar) on Mar 30, 2010 at 09:43 UTC
Your mistake is believing that "The Alliance for Some Good Thing" is always a meeting of actual people, and not a cynical creation of the self-interest of a single person or corporation.	[reply]
Re^6: Could we get a more systematic approach to security in perl? by SilasTheMonk (Chaplain) on Mar 30, 2010 at 11:43 UTC
Actually for a given "alliance" all sorts of things are possible: The alliance is a complete sham presenting a "good" face to the world; but actually out for its own interest. The alliance includes people who are in it for their own ends and people who are working towards a better world. All the people in the alliance have a mixture of altruistic and self advancing motives. The alliance is completely altruistic. etc etc I would say Scientology aspires to number 1. You seem to be saying that all "alliances" are number 1 and you are portraying me as believing all organizations are number 4. I have to admit that one motive I have is learning more about security and meeting people with a similar interest so that I can advance my career. If that is a selfish motive then you have a point.	[reply]