[fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Paul D. Fernhout
The PataPata project (by me) attempted to bring some ideas for Squeak and Self to Python about five years ago. A post mortem critique on it from four years ago: PataPata critique: the good, the bad, the ugly http://patapata.sourceforge.net/critique.html I am wondering if there is some

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Waldemar Kornewald
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM, John Zabroski johnzabro...@gmail.com wrote: Why are we stuck with such poor architecture? A bad language attracts bad code. ;) Bye, Waldemar -- Django on App Engine, MongoDB, ...? Browser-side Python? It's open-source:

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread John Zabroski
Even modern technology like Windows Phone 7 encourages, as part of their App Store submission guidelines, that the app hardwire support for two screen resolutions. This is bizarre considering the underlying graphics implementation is resolution-independent. These bad choices add up. As Gerry

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Paul D. Fernhout
On 10/8/10 1:51 PM, Waldemar Kornewald wrote: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Paul D. Fernhout pdfernh...@kurtz-fernhout.com wrote: The PataPata project (by me) attempted to bring some ideas for Squeak and Self to Python about five years ago. A post mortem critique on it from four years ago:

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread John Zabroski
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Paul D. Fernhout pdfernh...@kurtz-fernhout.com wrote: But, the big picture issue I wanted to raise isn't about prototypes. It as about more general issues -- like how do we have general tools that let us look at all sorts of computing abstractions? In

[fonc] microscopes/telescopes

2010-10-08 Thread Michael FIG
Hi Paul, Thanks for your detailed post. It's inspiring me to share a little about my current work and understanding of VPRI's general approach (though, again, I should remind folks that I don't represent VPRI even though I had the pleasure of working closely with Ian in the past). You've cited

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Dirk Pranke
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 11:28 AM, John Zabroski johnzabro...@gmail.com wrote: JavaScript also doesn't support true delegation, as in the Actors Model of computation. Also, Sencha Ext Designer is an abomination.  It is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Web and how to glue together chunks of

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Dirk Pranke
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Paul D. Fernhout pdfernh...@kurtz-fernhout.com wrote: It's totally stupid to use JavaScript as a VM for world peace since it would be a lot better if every web page ran in its own well-designed VM and you could create content that just compiled to the VM, and the

Re: [fonc] microscopes/telescopes

2010-10-08 Thread Paul D. Fernhout
On 10/8/10 3:51 PM, Michael FIG wrote: So, in short, I think we need exactly one level of abstraction above the Semantic Web in order to make a true end run in the convergence game. Legacy systems of all sorts need to be described and preserved, not rewritten and rearchitected in a

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Casey Ransberger
I think type is a foundationaly bad idea. What matters is that the object in question can respond intelligently to the message you're passing it. Or at least, that's what I think right now, anyway. It seems like type specification (and as such, early binding) have a very limited real use in the

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for the dynamic semantic web

2010-10-08 Thread Richard Karpinski
But wait. I think we need more complex types than are even allowed. When we actually compute something on the back of an envelope, we have been taught to carry all the units along explicitly, but when we set it up for a really stupid computer to do it automatically, we are forbidden, almost