What do the folks here see as the goals of new computing?
Is it to find ways to use technology to help people be more productive?
Is it more about education? Is it about maximizing MIPS/Watt? Something else
entirely?
My impression (which may be wrong) is that most of we think of in retrospect
(pardon the top-post)
granted, I probably don't speak for others here, who may have differing
opinions, I just speak for myself...
I am not formally involved with the project in question here, but work on
some of my own stuff in a similar domain (VM and compiler technology).
well, that is
I would imagine that the goals align with the task of augmenting human
intellect, to borrow Engelbart's phrase.
The STEPS project, in particular, seems concerned with compact
representations that approach the entropies of the systems being
simulated. Computing, to me, anyway, is very closely
I personally do not believe technology actually improves lives. Usually, it
is the opposite. Technology creates instant gratification and addiction to
it thereof, and the primary reason we are so addicted to technology is
because we have become so empty inside.
For me, new computing is about
Thoreau said We become the tools of our tools; McLuhan: We become what we
behold.
Both are scary, but the latter one has some hope in it, if we could make
something that by beholding it we would become better.
And technology literally means anything that humans make so ideas count here
also
I think Ryan has best articulated what it's all about for me anyway:
regaining control of our technology. Simplicity and clarity are, to some
extent, their own imperative. That's nothing new: Occam's Razor has long
been the dominant aesthetic in mathematics and the natural sciences at
least. In a
Alan Kay wrote:
McLuhan: We become what we behold.
We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are. - Anais Nin
(just to add some recursive futility to the mix)
Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html
___
fonc mailing list
- Original Message -
From: John Zabroski
To: Fundamentals of New Computing
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
I personally do not believe technology actually improves lives. Usually, it
is the opposite. Technology creates instant
Not to put down Anais Nin, but this saying is written in the Talmud
and attributed to Buddha (great minds)
Kim
On Jul 8, 2010, at 9:40 AM, Ryan Mitchley wrote:
Alan Kay wrote:
McLuhan: We become what we behold.
We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are. -
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:10:12 -0700
Max OrHai max.or...@gmail.com wrote:
A computer is a necessary tool for engaging with the modern world
of human knowledge and culture. A truly personal computer should be fully
understandable and extensible, inside and out, by its individual users,
without
On 08 Jul 2010, at 10:34 , Steve Dekorte wrote:
What do the folks here see as the goals of new computing?
Is it to find ways to use technology to help people be more productive?
Is it more about education? Is it about maximizing MIPS/Watt? Something else
entirely?
My impression (which
Actually, Nin got her quote from the Talmud
From: Ryan Mitchley r...@peralex.com
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Thu, July 8, 2010 9:40:45 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
Alan Kay wrote:
McLuhan: We become what we behold.
We don't
- Original Message -
From: Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
On 09/07/2010, at 1:44 AM, John Zabroski wrote:
I personally do not believe technology actually improves
I agree with the whole mental masturbation thing. Unless something
is produced and actually increases productivity then it's been a waste
of time. Frankly, I don't see anything substantial every coming out
of this project. It's just an academic exercise. Sorry for the
harshness.
On Thu, Jul
On 8 July 2010 17:40, BGB cr88...@hotmail.com wrote:
however, morals, ... would seem to be degraded in industrialized nations
(note the widespread prevelance of promiscuity, gays, gangs and violence,
...), so this may be a cost associated with industrialization (although
there is not any
People, I really think this isn't the right mailing list for this kind of
discussion.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:11 PM, chris mills chrmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 July 2010 17:40, BGB cr88...@hotmail.com wrote:
however, morals, ... would seem to be degraded in industrialized nations
(note
Agreed. Apologies folks, it was a knee jerk reaction to a statement I found
offensive.
ChrisM
On 8 July 2010 19:17, Alex Abate Biral abatebi...@gmail.com wrote:
People, I really think this isn't the right mailing list for this kind of
discussion.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:11 PM, chris mills
I understand (and I hope the other people in this list do so too), but I
really think that there should be a separate list for arguing about the
project's philosophy (which is as important, if not more, as this list).
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:20 PM, chris mills chrmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Agreed.
(pardon this thread's continued existence...).
well, each generation has to have come from somewhere...
but, yeah (prior to the big ethics issue), the general point I tried to make
is that it is generally much more a matter of pragmatics (what people can
get from technology or use it to
Once a project gets going it usually winds up with a few more goals than those
that got it started -- partly because the individual researchers bring their
own
perspectives to the mix.
But the original goals of STEPS were pretty simple and longstanding. They came
from thinking that the size
much agreed.
pardon my likely inelegant extension:
seemingly, nearly any problem can be abstracted, and a set of more elegant
solutions can be devised to long-standing problems.
for example, to abstract over the HW, there was the CPU instruction set;
to abstract over the instruction set,
Thanks for the response. That kind of sounds like the goal is fewer lines of
code (and presumably less labor) per unit of function (increasing
productivity). Is that correct?
On 2010-07-08, at 06:01 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Once a project gets going it usually winds up with a few more goals than
22 matches
Mail list logo
