|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 04 2012 @ 12:48 AM EDT |
No analogy is perfect, so yes, you can stretch it to absurdity. But even then,
I would say that the arrangement of the hot/neutral/ground is truly the
"API" in our example, so you are duplicating it, albeit in an unsafe
and unreasonable way.
I mean, supposing that Google had made some auto-translator thingy that changed
programs that referred to java.io to point to com.google.io (or what have you),
which is roughly the equivalent of what you said about using three bare wires.
Even then, Oracle would claim that Google used it by translating the one name to
the other.
There really isn't any work around, ultimately. When a program uses Math.avg,
some part of Google's library has to know what that means, even if that part
merely translates it to some other name. This in turn implies that some part of
it has to contain and use Oracle's name for it.
This is not the case for a taxonomy or coin prices. Neither one contains
anything to interoperate with. Neither coins nor butterflies have to
interoperate with machines last I checked.
But maybe someone can apply "Oracle" logic to that. And there is one
thing I can think of already: the first "bug" was an actual moth
stuck in a relay (which is in the order lepidoptera, if not an actual
butterfly). All the more reason to keep lepidopterans of all sorts from
"interoperating" with our machines.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|