On 9/24/2014 6:39 PM, David Leibs wrote:
I think Stephen is misrepresenting the Wolfram Language when he says
it is a big language. He is really talking about the built in library
which is indeed huge. The language proper is actually simple,
powerful, and lispy.
-David
I think it is
On 11/6/2013 3:55 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
BGB cr88...@gmail.com writes:
it is sad, in premise, that hard-coded Visual Studio projects, and raw
Makefiles, are often easier to get to work when things don't go just
right. well, that and one time recently managing to apparently get on
the bad
On 11/5/2013 7:15 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Casey Ransberger casey.obrien.r at gmail.comwrites
mailto:fonc%40vpri.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bfonc%5D%20Task%20management%20in%20a%20world%20without%20apps.In-Reply-To=%3CDD90A941-C94A-4F01-A013-6D838B0B2524%40gmail.com%3E
A fun, but maybe idealistic
On 7/21/2013 12:28 PM, John Carlson wrote:
Hmm. I've been thinking about creating a macro language written in
JSON that operates on JSON structures. Has someone done similar
work? Should I just create a JavaScript AST in JSON? Or should I
create an AST specifically for JSON manipulation?
On 4/6/2013 10:59 AM, John Carlson wrote:
When I was studying Revelation in the 1980s. We thought this same
scripture referred to the European Union. We also thought that Jesus
had to return by 1988, because that was one generation past when the
Jews returned to Israel in 1948. It seems
On 4/6/2013 12:13 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
On 6 April 2013 18:09, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org
mailto:eu...@leitl.org wrote:
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:08:35PM -0500, John Carlson wrote:
The Lord will return like a thief in the night:
http://bible.cc/1_thessalonians/5-2.htm
On 1/25/2013 10:11 AM, Kurt Stephens wrote:
Don't know if this has been posted/discussed before:
http://dslbook.org/
The 560-page, book is donationware. Lots to read here. :)
nifty, may have to go read it...
it does make me wonder:
how viable is donationware as an option for software,
On 1/9/2013 11:53 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:37 AM, John Carlson yottz...@gmail.com
mailto:yottz...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been collecting references to game POLs on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_entertainment_language
That's neat. I'll
On 1/3/2013 7:27 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
Whoa, I think you just invented nanotech organelles, at least this
is the first time I've heard that idea and it seems pretty
mind-blowing. What would a cell use a cpu for?
mostly so that microbes could be programmed in a manner more
On 1/2/2013 10:31 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Alan Kay alan.n...@yahoo.com wrote:
The most recent discussions get at a number of important issues whose
pernicious snares need to be handled better.
In an analogy to sending messages most of the time successfully
On 12/31/2012 10:47 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
On 12/31/12 8:30 PM, Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
So, I guess another meta-level bug in the Linux Kernel is that it is
written in C, which does not support certain complexity management
features, and there is no clear upgrade path from that because
On 1/1/2013 2:12 PM, Loup Vaillant-David wrote:
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 04:36:09PM -0700, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
On 12/31/12 2:58 PM, Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
2. The programmer has a belief or preference that the code is easier
to work with if it isn't abstracted. […]
I have evidence for this
On 1/1/2013 6:36 PM, Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
On 1/1/13 3:43 AM, BGB wrote:
here is mostly that this still allows for type-tags in the
references, but would likely involve a partial switch to the use of
64-bit tagged references within some core parts of the VM (as a partial
switch away from
On 12/30/2012 10:49 PM, Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
Some people here might find of interest my comments on the situation
in the title, posted in this comment here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3346421cid=42430475
After citing Alan Kay's OOPSLA 1997 The Computer Revolution Has Not
Happened
On 12/22/2012 5:52 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Thank you, captain obvious.
Man is a three-centered (three-brained if you will) being. Focussing
on only one of the brains is by definition imbalanced.
Bring back the renaissance man.
so, if, say, a person likes computers, but largely lacks
eventually all amount to nothing.
or such...
Julian
On 23/12/2012, at 1:52 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/22/2012 5:52 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Thank you, captain obvious.
Man is a three-centered (three-brained if you will) being. Focussing
on only one
the pieces
together, and design the various ways in which they may interoperate...
I really don't know if this helps, or is just me going off on a tangent.
Paul.
*From:* BGB cr88...@gmail.com
*To:* fonc
On 10/3/2012 2:46 PM, Paul Homer wrote:
I think it's because that's what we've told them to ask for :-)
In truth we can't actually program 'everything', I think that's a
side-effect of Godel's incompleteness theorem. But if you were to take
'everything' as being abstract quantity, the more we
On 10/2/2012 12:19 PM, Paul Homer wrote:
It always seems to be that each new generation of programmers goes
straight for the low-hanging fruit, ignoring that most of it has
already been solved many times over. Meanwhile the real problems
remain. There has been progress, but over the couple of
On 10/2/2012 5:48 PM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
BGB cr88...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/2/2012 12:19 PM, Paul Homer wrote:
It always seems to be that each new generation of programmers goes
straight for the low-hanging fruit, ignoring that most of it has
already been solved many
On 7/19/2012 7:32 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:28:18PM +0200, John Nilsson wrote:
More work relative to an approach where full specification and controll is
feasible. I was thinking that in a not to distant future we'll want to
build systems of such complexity that we need
On 7/18/2012 4:04 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Tomasz Rola wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Ivan Zhao wrote:
By Victorian plumbing, I meant the standardization of the plumbing
and
hardware components at the end of the 19th century. It greatly
liberated
plumbers from fixing each broken toilet from
On 7/17/2012 9:04 AM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
David-Sarah Hopwood david-sa...@jacaranda.org writes:
On 17/07/12 02:15, BGB wrote:
so, typically, males work towards having a job, getting lots money, ... and
will choose
females based mostly how useful they are to themselves
On 7/17/2012 11:12 AM, Loup Vaillant wrote:
Pascal J. Bourguignon a écrit :
BGB cr88...@gmail.com writes:
dunno, I learned originally partly by hacking on pre-existing
codebases, and by cobbling things together and seeing what all did and
did not work (and was later partly followed by looking
anyways.
but, yeah, probably this topic has gone on long enough.
On 17/07/12 17:18, BGB wrote:
an issue though is that society will not tend to see a person as they are as a
person, but
will rather tend to see a person in terms of a particular set of stereotypes.
Society doesn't see people
On 7/16/2012 8:00 AM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net writes:
Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net writes:
And seems to have turned into something about needing to recreate the
homebrew computing milieu, and everyone
On 7/16/2012 11:22 AM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
BGB cr88...@gmail.com writes:
general programming probably doesn't need much more than pre-algebra
or maybe algebra level stuff anyways, but maybe touching on other
things that are useful to computing: matrices, vectors, sin/cos/...,
the big
On 7/16/2012 8:59 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
On 17/07/12 02:15, BGB wrote:
so, typically, males work towards having a job, getting lots money, ... and
will choose
females based mostly how useful they are to themselves (will they be faithful,
would they
make a good parent, ...).
meanwhile
On 7/14/2012 5:11 PM, Iian Neill wrote:
Ivan,
I have some hope for projects like the Raspberry Pi computer, which aims to
replicate the 'homebrew' computing experience of the BBC Micro in Britain in
the 1980s. Of course, hardware is only part of the equation -- even versatile
hardware that
On 6/16/2012 9:19 AM, Randy MacDonald wrote:
On 6/10/2012 1:15 AM, BGB wrote:
meanwhile, I have spent several days on-off pondering the mystery of
if there is any good syntax (for a language with a vaguely C-like
syntax), to express the concept of execute these statements in
parallel
On 6/16/2012 10:05 AM, Randy MacDonald wrote:
@BGB, if the braces around the letters defers execution, as my
memories of Perl confirm, this is perfect. With APL, quoting an
expression accomplishes the same end: '1+1'
no, the braces indicate a code block (in statement context
On 6/16/2012 11:36 AM, Randy MacDonald wrote:
@BGB, by the 'same end' i meant tranforming a statement into something
that a flow control operator can act on, like if () {...} else {} The
domain of the execute operator in APL is quoted strings. I did not
mean that the same end was allowing
On 6/16/2012 1:39 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
If things are expanding then they have to get more complex, they encompass
more.
Aside from intuition, what evidence do you have to back this statement
up? I've seen no justification for this statement so far. Biological
systems naturally make use of
On 6/16/2012 2:20 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
a problem is partly how exactly one defines complex:
one definition is in terms of visible complexity, where basically
adding a feature causes code to become harder to understand, more
tangled, ...
another definition, apparently more
On 6/14/2012 10:19 PM, John Zabroski wrote:
Folks,
Arguing technical details here misses the point. For example, a
different conversation can be started by asking Why does my web
hosting provider say I need an FTP client? Already technology is way
too much in my face and I hate seeing
On 6/9/2012 9:28 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
While i agree with guy's bashing on HTTP,
the second part of his talk is complete bullshit.
IMO, he did raise some valid objections regarding JS and similar though
as well.
these are also yet more areas though where BS differs from JS: it uses
On 6/4/2012 6:48 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
and, recently devised a hack for creating component layered JPEG
images, or, basically, a hack to allow creating JPEGs which also
contained alpha-blending, normal maps, specular maps, and luma maps
(as an essentially 16-component JPEG
On 6/3/2012 8:31 PM, Shawn Morel wrote:
I'm a very visual learner / thinker. I usually find it mentally painful (yes
brow furrowing, headache inducing) to think of hard (distant) ideas until I can
find an image in my mind's eye. Understood that not everyone thinks like this :)
I guess I
. despite both being
visually-based, my thinking is not composed of flow-charts (and I much
prefer more textual formats...).
or such...
Cheers,
Jaros?aw Rzeszótko
2012/5/9 BGB cr88...@gmail.com mailto:cr88...@gmail.com
On 5/8/2012 2:56 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Isn't this simply
On 5/8/2012 2:56 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Isn't this simply a description of your thought clearing process?
You think in English... not Ruby.
I'd actually hazard a guess and say that really, you think in a
semi-verbal semi-phyiscal pattern language, and not very well formed
one, either.
On 4/21/2012 1:57 PM, Andre van Delft wrote:
TechCrunch has an interview with Linus Torvalds. He uses a MacBook Air (iOS,
BTW):
sure it is not OS X?...
although, it is kind of funny that he would be using a computer not
running his own OS...
[Start of Quote]
I’m have to admit being a
On 4/8/2012 8:26 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
On 4/4/2012 5:26 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
Not so sure. Probably similar levels of complexity between a
military sim. and, say, World of Warcraft. Fidelity to real-world
behavior is more important, and network latency matters
On 4/3/2012 9:29 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
On 4/3/2012 10:47 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Hah. You've obviously never been involved in building a CGF
simulator (Computer Generated Forces) - absolute spaghetti code when
you have to have 4 main loops, touch 2000 objects (say 2000
On 4/4/2012 9:29 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
On 4/4/2012 6:35 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
BGB wrote:
still not heard the term CGF before though.
If you do military simulations, CGF (Computer Generated Forces) and
SAF (Semi-Automated Forces) are the equivalent terms of art to game
On 4/3/2012 9:46 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org
mailto:eu...@leitl.org wrote:
It's not just imperative programming. The superficial mode of human
cognition is sequential. This is the problem with all of
(changed subject, as this was much more about physics simulation than
about concurrency).
yes, this is a big long personal history dump type thing, please
ignore if you don't care.
On 4/3/2012 10:47 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
David Barbour wrote:
Control flow is a source of much implicit
On 3/27/2012 12:23 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
karl ramberg wrote:
Slides/pdf:
http://www.dynamic-languages-symposium.org/dls-11/program/media/Ungar_2011_EverythingYouKnowAboutParallelProgrammingIsWrongAWildScreedAboutTheFuture_Dls.pdf
Granted that their approach to an OLAP cube is new,
On 3/18/2012 6:54 PM, Martin Baldan wrote:
BGB, please see my answer to shaun. In short:
_ I'm not looking for stack-based languages. I want a Lisp which got
rid of (most of the) the parens by using fixed arity and types,
without any loss of genericity, homoiconicity or other desirable
features
On 3/19/2012 5:24 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
but, hmm... one could always have 2 stacks: create a stack over the stack,
in turn reversing the RPN into PN, and also gets some meta going on...
Uh, I'm afraid one stack is one too many for me. But then again, I'm
not sure I get what you mean.
in
On 3/15/2012 9:21 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
I have a little off-topic question.
Why are there so few programming languages with true Polish syntax? I
mean, prefix notation, fixed arity, no parens (except, maybe, for
lists, sequences or similar). And of course, higher order functions.
The only
On 3/14/2012 8:57 AM, Loup Vaillant wrote:
Michael FIG wrote:
Loup Vaillantl...@loup-vaillant.fr writes:
You could also play the human compiler: use the better syntax in the
comments, and implement a translation of it in code just below. But
then you have to manually make sure they are
On 3/14/2012 11:31 AM, Mack wrote:
On Mar 13, 2012, at 6:27 PM, BGB wrote:
SNIP
the issue is not that I can't imagine anything different, but rather that doing
anything different would be a hassle with current keyboard technology:
pretty much anyone can type ASCII characters;
many other
On 3/14/2012 3:55 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
snip, interesting, but no comment
If you have a good version of confinement (which is pretty simple HW-wise) you
can use Butler Lampson's schemes for Cal-TSS to make a workable version of a
capability system.
The 286 protected mode was good
On 3/12/2012 9:01 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
mailto:jul...@leviston.net wrote:
On 13/03/2012, at 1:21 PM, BGB wrote:
although theoretically possible, I wouldn't really trust not
having the ability to use
(computer
programming languages, processor instruction sets, etc.).
possibly.
I was actually sort of aware of a lot of this already though, but didn't
consider it particularly relevant.
I'm postulating, BGB, that you're perhaps so ingrained in the current
modality and approach to thinking
On 3/12/2012 10:24 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
that is a description of random data, which granted, doesn't apply to most
(compressible) data.
that wasn't really the point though.
I thought the original point was that there's a clear-cut limit to how
much redundancy can be eliminated from
On 3/12/2012 6:31 PM, Josh McDonald wrote:
Since it's your own system end-to-end, why not just stop editing
source as a stream of ascii characters? Some kind of simple structured
editor would let you put whatever you please in strings without
requiring any escaping at all. It'd also make the
On 3/11/2012 5:28 AM, Jakub Piotr Cłapa wrote:
On 28.02.12 06:42, BGB wrote:
but, anyways, here is a link to another article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%27s_source_coding_theorem
Shannon's theory applies to lossless transmission. I doubt anybody
here wants to reproduce everything
On 3/8/2012 9:32 PM, David Barbour wrote:
Bret Victor's work came to my attention due to a recent video,
Inventing on Principle
http://vimeo.com/36579366
If you haven't seen this video, watch it. It's especially appropriate
for the FoNC audience.
although I don't normally much agree with
On 3/10/2012 2:21 AM, Wesley Smith wrote:
most notable thing I did recently (besides some fiddling with getting a new
JIT written), was adding a syntax for block-strings. I used[[ ... ]]
rather than triple-quotes (like in Python), mostly as this syntax is more
friendly to nesting, and is also
is the
message? Until we pass a generational shift where the bulk of
readers have little experience of analog books, these
considerations will be with us.
-- Mack
m...@mackenzieresearch.com mailto:m...@mackenzieresearch.com
On Mar 7, 2012, at 3:13 PM, BGB wrote
On 3/8/2012 7:51 AM, David Corking wrote:
BGB said:
by contrast, a wiki is often a much better experience, and similarly allows
the option of being presented sequentially (say, by daisy chaining articles
together, and/or writing huge articles). granted, it could be made maybe a
little better
On 3/8/2012 12:34 PM, Max Orhai wrote:
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Martin Baldan martino...@gmail.com
mailto:martino...@gmail.com wrote:
- Print technology is orders of magnitude more environmentally
benign
and affordable.
That seems a pretty strong claim.
On 3/7/2012 3:24 AM, Ryan Mitchley wrote:
May be of interest to some readers of the list:
http://nplusonemag.com/bones-of-the-book
thoughts:
admittedly, I am not really much of a person for reading fiction (I tend
mostly to read technical information, and most fictional material is
more
, books are controlled by literature culture, much like computers
remain mostly under the control of programmer culture (except those
parts under the control of business culture and similar...).
or such...
On Mar 7, 2012, at 3:13 PM, BGB wrote:
On 3/7/2012 3:24 AM, Ryan Mitchley wrote
not a
high-priority though, ...).
not really sure if stuff related to writing a JIT is particularly
relevant here, and no, I am not trying to spam, even if it may seem like
it sometimes.
On 3/2/2012 10:25 AM, BGB wrote:
On 3/2/2012 3:07 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
On 2 March 2012 00:43, Julian
On 3/2/2012 8:37 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
Julian,
I'm not sure I understand your proposal, but I do think what Google
does is not something trivial, straightforward or easy to automate. I
remember reading an article about Google's ranking strategy. IIRC,
they use the patterns of mutual linking
On 3/1/2012 8:04 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
On 1 March 2012 15:02, Julian Levistonjul...@leviston.net wrote:
Is this one of the aims?
It doesn't seem to be, which is sad, because however brilliant the
ideas you can't rely on other people to get them out for you.
this is part of why I am
On 3/1/2012 10:12 AM, Loup Vaillant wrote:
BGB wrote:
there is also, at this point, a reasonable lack of industrial strength
scripting languages.
there are a few major industrial strength languages (C, C++, Java, C#,
etc...), and a number of scripting languages (Python, Lua, JavaScript
On 3/1/2012 10:25 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
Yes, namespaces provide a form of jargon, but that's clearly not
enough. If it were, there wouldn't be so many programming languages.
You can't use, say, Java imports to turn Java into Smalltalk, or
Haskell or Nile. They have different syntax and
On 3/1/2012 2:58 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Below.
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:43 AM, Loup Vaillantl...@loup-vaillant.fr wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that limitation. I have the feeling however that
IDEs and debuggers are overrated.
When I'm Squeaking, sometimes I find myself modeling classes with
On 3/1/2012 3:56 PM, Loup Vaillant wrote:
Le 01/03/2012 22:58, Casey Ransberger a écrit :
Below.
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:43 AM, Loup Vaillantl...@loup-vaillant.fr wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of that limitation. I have the feeling however that
IDEs and debuggers are overrated.
When I'm Squeaking,
On 2/29/2012 5:34 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
With regard to your last point -- making POLs -- I don't think we are
there yet. It is most definitely a lot easier to make really powerful
POLs fairly quickly than it used to be, but we still don't have a
nice methodology and tools to automatically
On 2/28/2012 10:33 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
On 28 February 2012 16:41, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
- 1 order of magnitude is gained by removing feature creep. I agree
feature creep can be important. But I also believe most feature
belong to a long tail, where each is needed by a
On 2/28/2012 5:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 29/02/2012, at 10:29 AM, BGB wrote:
On 2/28/2012 2:30 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Yes, this is why the STEPS proposal was careful to avoid the
current day world.
For example, one of the many current day standards that was
dismissed immediately
On 2/27/2012 10:30 AM, Steve Wart wrote:
Just to zero in on one idea here
Anyway I digress... have you had a look at this file?:
http://piumarta.com/software/maru/maru-2.1/test-pepsi.l
Just read the whole thing - I found it fairly interesting :) He's
build pepsi on maru
On 2/27/2012 10:31 AM, David Harris wrote:
Alan ---
I appreciate both you explanation and what you are doing. Of course
jealousy comes into it, because you guys appear to be having a lot of
fun mixed in with your hard work, and I would love to part of that. I
know where I would be breaking
On 2/27/2012 1:27 PM, David Girle wrote:
I am interested in the embedded uses of Maru, so I cannot comment on
how to get from here to a Frank-like GUI. I have no idea how many
others on this list are interested in the Internet of Things (IoT),
but I expect parts of Frank will be useful in that
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%27s_source_coding_theorem
Julian
On 28/02/2012, at 3:38 PM, BGB wrote:
granted, I remain a little skeptical.
I think there is a bit of a difference though between, say, a log table, and a
typical piece of software.
a log table is, essentially, almost pure
On 2/25/2012 7:48 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
As I understand it, Frank is an experiment that is an extended version
of DBJr that sits atop lesserphic, which sits atop gezira which sits
atop nile, which sits atop maru all of which which utilise ometa and
the worlds idea.
If you look at the
will go back into lurk mode now...
Julian
On 26/02/2012, at 9:25 PM, BGB wrote:
On 2/25/2012 7:48 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
As I understand it, Frank is an experiment that is an extended
version of DBJr that sits atop lesserphic, which sits atop gezira
which sits atop nile, which sits atop
On 2/26/2012 11:33 AM, Martin Baldan wrote:
Guys, I find these off_topic comments (as in not strictly about my
idst compilation problem) really interesting. Maybe I should start a
new thread? Something like «how can a newbie start playing with this
technology?». Thanks!
well, ok,
On 2/26/2012 8:23 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
I'm afraid that I am in no way a teacher of this. I'm in no way
professing to know what I'm talking about - I've simply given you my
observations. Perhaps we can help each other, because I'm intensely
interested, too... I want to understand this
On 2/26/2012 11:43 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Hi,
Comments line...
On 27/02/2012, at 5:33 PM, BGB wrote:
I don't think it was a prank. It's not really hidden at all. If you
pay attention, all the components of Frank are there... like I said.
It's obviously missing certain things like
I don't know if this topic has probably been already beat to death, or
is otherwise not very interesting or relevant here, but alas...
it is a question though what is the ideal level of abstraction (and
generality) in a VM.
for example, LLVM is fairly low level (using a statically-typed
and scientists work? The same
On Jan 22, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
On 22 January 2012 21:26, Casey Ransberger casey.obrie...@gmail.com
mailto:casey.obrie...@gmail.com wrote:
Below.
On Jan 21, 2012, at 6:26 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
like
-pop boy-band, and adolescent females may respond poorly to
bass-filled wubbing growl-rap, or something...).
or such...
This is probably the raddest metaphor that I have ever seen on a mailing list.
BGB FTW!
P.S.
If you want to get this song out the door, I'm totally in. Dubsteprapmetal
list.
BGB FTW!
P.S.
If you want to get this song out the door, I'm totally in. Dubsteprapmetal
might be the next big thing. I can do everything except the drums. We should
write an elegant language for expressing musical score in OMeta and use a
simulated orchestra!
Oh come on, Dub Step Rap
On 1/22/2012 8:57 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 23/01/2012, at 2:30 PM, BGB wrote:
little if anything in that area that generally makes me think
dubstep though...
(taken loosely enough, most gangsta-rap could be called dubstep
if one turns the sub-woofer loud enough, but this is rather
On 1/21/2012 8:11 AM, Peter Franta wrote:
VPRI answer to their Government and Private Funders, not those of us
who have the fortune to observe as they go.
It is my understanding the deliverable is not a product but lessons
learned to go and do it for real! Not ideal for us but then they're
On 1/21/2012 11:23 AM, Shawn Morel wrote:
Reuben,
Your response is enlightening in many ways. I think it re-inforces for me how computer science is really more
of an automation pop culture. As a society, we've become engrossed with product yet we spend only
a few minutes at most usually
On 1/17/2012 10:58 AM, karl ramberg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Loup Vaillant l...@loup-vaillant.fr
mailto:l...@loup-vaillant.fr wrote:
David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:30 AM, karl ramberg
karlramb...@gmail.com mailto:karlramb...@gmail.com
On 1/17/2012 5:10 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:57 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
game art doesn't need to be particularly awe inspiring, so much
as basically works and is not total crap.
It can't be awe inspiring all the time, anyway
On 1/17/2012 9:50 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
There are different kinds of art, just like there are different
qualities of everything.
I think you may find on closer inspection that there can be things
that are intrinsically beautiful, or intrinsically awe-inspiring to
humanity as a whole. I
On 1/16/2012 10:26 PM, Neu Xue wrote:
There are commercial big boxes with some random crap in them game worlds now
and
have been since the 8-bit era.
The games that stood out by immersing us despite the limitations of technology
were usually
the ones which were lovingly crafted.
very
On 11/14/2011 4:42 PM, Max OrHai wrote:
Criticism of the OLPC project is easy to find, so I won't repeat much
of it here, except to say that I find their whole model obnoxiously
paternalistic; it's based on centralized government-controlled
institutions (that is, schools), government and NGO
PM BGB wrote:
most likely, processing power will stop increasing (WRT density and/or
watts) once the respective physical limits are met (basically, it would
no longer be possible to get more processing power in the same space or
using less power within the confines of the laws of physics
On 10/28/2011 7:28 AM, K. K. Subramaniam wrote:
On Thursday 27 Oct 2011 11:27:39 PM BGB wrote:
most likely, processing power will stop increasing (WRT density and/or
watts) once the respective physical limits are met (basically, it would
no longer be possible to get more processing power
On 10/28/2011 2:27 PM, karl ramberg wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:36 PM, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/28/2011 7:28 AM, K. K. Subramaniam wrote:
On Thursday 27 Oct 2011 11:27:39 PM BGB wrote:
most likely, processing power will stop increasing (WRT density and/or
watts) once
On 10/27/2011 10:10 AM, Steve Dekorte wrote:
BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
Leitl wrote:
John Zabroski wrote:
Kurzweil addresses that.
As far as I know Kurzweil hasn't presented anything technical or even detailed.
Armwaving is cheap enough.
yep, one can follow a polynomial curve to
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
