...how can you say that Java defines an API better? I'm not sure where you feel I made that claim. I'm comparing the qualities of the code samples, not the qualities of the languages used.
The Java example makes it more clear that an API is being used, as it references the java.lang package, a member class, and a member method. Now, we have a concrete example and use of an API which closely resembles APIs and their use in this case, where the API was written (or owned, if you prefer) by one company, but used by another. If Google had just used their own methods, as in the Python example, there's no case.
Also, if we look at just the declarations for the methods, we're able to get a bit more information from the Java example. Admittedly, much of it isn't pertinent to the matter at hand, such as the 'static' and 'int' keywords. However, the 'public' keyword is important in this context because it is an explicit statement that this method is expected to be used beyond the scope in which it was written. It is not as clear whether or not the Python method is meant to or even if it could be used in any other Python script. Although, having to write my own max method in every script where I need one isn't a pleasant thought, so I feel safe in assuming that Python has a way to achieve this. That's the Python example that should have been used, instead.
Finally, it's not clear to me how my perspective ultimately leads to the end scenario you describe. Could you explain that part a little more, well, verbosely? Thanks!
Roundup (glyphosate) is a herbicide, and contains no genetic material. Roundup-ready crops allow the farmers to apply Roundup to the crops, killing the weeds, while the crop survives, leading to increased yields. Which means that more people can be fed with the same amount of cropland. Thus, the claim that they are helping starving people.
I wonder if the judge was thinking of Lutz's "who's on first" testimony in Florida. And, as that was a Sunlust case, I think Prenda managed to keep Lutz away from this one altogether. Too bad - I'm extremely curious as to what Lutz is doing these days and where.
I can't possibly be the only person that watches (and enjoys) YouTube content like How it Should Have Ended and Everything Wrong With.. even for movies and shows that I've never seen. I gave up being devastated by spoilers a long time ago, and somehow, still managed to be entertained, anyway.
If Thune isn't careful, he may end up getting the same reputation as Daschle, who wasn't able to shake the perception that he was toeing the party line as opposed to the interests of his constituents.
I've mentioned this before, but he'd also do well to remember that government regulation helped bring electricity and phone service to many rural areas in SD at a time when European countries like France and Germany were miles ahead of the US in that regard, and the industry wasn't competitive enough to make the investment worthwhile.
Thune used to lobby for and had received campaign funding from the railroad industry. This seems a bit at odds with his recent hard pushing for the Keystone XL pipeline, though, so the railroads may not be as much of an influence on him as they once were.