Eckel realizes Java Generics aren't
...at least, not like they are in C++, Python, Ruby, etc.
Bruce Eckel, Thinking About Computing: 3-10-04 Generics Aren't
I can't say I'm surprised. Java is not a dynamically-typed language, period. And it's important it stays that way, for security purposes. Generics aren't really generic, they're convenient (for collection classes anyway). Parametized collections aren't generic either, they're just a more convenient way of specifying a new static collection type (with parametized return types as to avoid casting).
It will be amusing to see all the Java code that pops up using parametized parameter types that effectively are the same thing as simply specifying an interface or common superclass, and people thinking it's somehow better.
But I guess we can all hope Bruce is wrong and Java Generics really aren't so useless.