uraldesigns/
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 5:39 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an
Congrats on explicitly broaching Complexity without the obligatory buzzword!
8^) But you've raised an important point about the inaccessibility of the
noumenal that also includes a practical programming paradigm:
"aspect-orientation". I've tried to combine AoP principles with Ziegler's
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 02:01:07PM +, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> "Like with the Great Man Theory, the actual causes of any phenomena in a
> complex and complicated system like Xerox Parc (embedded in culture, society,
> psychology, physiology, biology, chemistry, etc.) are multifarious and
>
Behalf Of Eric Smith
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 5:39 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
>
>
> > On Jul 19, 2018, at 5:26 PM, uǝlƃ ☣ > <mailto:geprope...@gmai
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 5:39 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What
> On Jul 19, 2018, at 5:26 PM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
>
> "the validator of our senses can only be our senses" waaay oversimplifies the
> set of experiences. If there were only 1 type of experience, then you'd be
> right. But there are (at least) many types of experience. And 1 experience
> of one
"the validator of our senses can only be our senses" waaay oversimplifies the
set of experiences. If there were only 1 type of experience, then you'd be
right. But there are (at least) many types of experience. And 1 experience of
one type can "validate" a different experience of an entirely
, July 19, 2018 4:36 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Perhaps one could argue that the studiously acquired lens that allows one to
think about the detailed mechanisms of a computer program is not helpful, nor
anywhere close to correct and is not an efficie
“Perhaps one could argue that the studiously acquired lens that allows one to
think about the detailed mechanisms of a computer program is not helpful, nor
anywhere close to correct and is not an efficient way to reason about the world
outside the computer?”
In that case, one can combine a
the detailed
> mechanisms of a computer program.>
> *From: *Friam on behalf of Nick Thompson
> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied
> Complexity Coffee Group *Date: *Thursday, July 19,
> 2018 at 1:05 PM *To: *'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
> Group' *Subjec
of a computer
program.
From: Friam on behalf of Nick Thompson
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Date: Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 1:05 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Marcus,
But it’s models all the way
lexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Nick,
If I were programming in Cello <http://cidarlab.org/cello/> , then actual
constraints of biology would influence me. If I were programming an agent
simulation for a system biology modeling project, what I unde
Yep. That's a fantastic example of metaphysical predisposition interfering
with one's ability to reason well. When I was a kid, my mom and I would argue
a lot about whether animals had souls. She claimed they absolutely did not.
Being young, I had no real idea what a soul was. But I would
Glen writes:
Ha! I made a Trump by leaving out the word "not". That should be "..., but it
does not 'go without saying'."
On 07/19/2018 08:42 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
> So, no, it does NOT go without saying that one's ideas influence the
> programming. It's true pretty much everywhere, but it does "go without
>
There's also a deeper objection to this than Marcus makes, that of "data
driven" modeling. I fight this battle all the time at biological modeling
conferences. Most modelers *do* develop models based on ideas ... or, more
technically, abstract hypotheses about abstract things (e.g.
uly 19, 2018 at 8:32 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Well, it goes without saying, doesn’t it, that it’s your current IDEAS of
biology that influence your programming, not biology itself, right? And your
biologiized
, July 19, 2018 10:01 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
"Like with the Great Man Theory, the actual causes of any phenomena in a
complex and complicated system like Xerox Parc (embedded in culture,
society, psychology,
//wiki.c2.com/?ArgumentsAgainstOop>
From: Friam on behalf of glen
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 7:22:17 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Of course it's reasonable for you to dissent! But over and above the most
i
Of course it's reasonable for you to dissent! But over and above the most
important example Marcus raises of biology (because *everything* is biology
8^), even your historical account is a litany of WHAT, not WHY.
Sure it may seem like you're examining the why of these artifacts. But you're
"The IDEA of Smalltalk derived from the IDEA of Simula; the philosophy and
ideas of Englebart, Bush, Sutherland; the metaphor of cellular biology, and
undoubtedly more. Alan Kay coalesced those influences and led the team that
implemented the team that actually created the language at Xerox
ick
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
> Clark University
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen
> Sent: Wednesday, July 1
Nick -
Another answer to your question, and those raised by the other responses
to yours is to another question... rather than literally about what OO
Programmers/Designers mean by "Object", but what features are most
useful to someone who *doesn't* write software or design systems.
It is worth
Sorry, my reference to the "why trap" refers to teleology and the (apparent)
success of science after it began focusing on "what" not "why". As a
pragmatist, I ass/u/me/d you'd understand that. Mea culpa.
It's *literally* irrelevant what OOP was designed to do. What matters is what
it
ogy
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 4:30 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an o
he compexlity, which unfortunately can
>mean sweeping deep algorithmic issues under the rug.
>
>From: Friam on behalf of Nick Thompson
>
>Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>
>Date: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 10:53 AM
>To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Comp
: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 10:53 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Marcus,
Am I correct that this is what “oop” is designed to avoid?
“This” being what you describe below?
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 12:18 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Nick writes:
“And like any modular
...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 12:17 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
Nick, how could you!
(about to get myself in trouble again for thinking I remember something that is
probably wrong)
> Her
foundation.
Marcus
From: Friam on behalf of Nick Thompson
Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Date: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 9:53 AM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
And like any modular system (DNA comes
Nick, how could you!
(about to get myself in trouble again for thinking I remember something that is
probably wrong)
> Here’s another story. Years ago my 1970’s era Troy Bilt tiller began to fail
> and I took it to a Guy. The Guy said, yes I can rebuild your engine, pretty
> much like new.
You're poking at the difference between a type/class/protocol/interface versus
an object/implementation. There can be no difference in the type/class unless
there's a difference in the objects that constitute that type/class. So, your
2 rats are of a type, implemented by different objects.
gt;
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfis
ttp://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 2:01 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
H
I think many non-trivial computational codes assume significant knowledge of
the subject matter in order to use the tools.
I’ve recently been using an optimization code that has 2445 tunable parameters,
and only a small percentage of them have any obvious, intuitive meaning.
Should it just do
Every one of the responses so far has said this. But it might help to say it
differently, anyway. Objects, unlike utilities or functions and other "soft
ware", have *particularity*. Each object is distinct from all other objects,
regardless of how similar they may be.
It may be useful to
Nick,
Many years ago I asked this question of an IT person in Austin (little
different, about distributed objects), and he pointed me at this book, which I
dutifully got and read:
https://www.amazon.com/Essential-Distributed-Objects-Survival-Guide/dp/0471129933
Beautifully stated, Dave. Thanks.
TJ
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018, 12:00 AM Prof David West wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> An object is a specific way to define and design a module and a module is
> a tool for segmenting, modularizing, the source code (what the programmer
> actually writes, not what the machine
Alan Kay is the coiner of the term Object-oriented Programming and the
biological cell metaphor. In later years he thought that programmers
might have had a better chance of writing object code if there was a
clearer distinction between OO Design implemented with Message-
oriented programming.
Hi Nick,
An object is a specific way to define and design a module and a module
is a tool for segmenting, modularizing, the source code (what the
programmer actually writes, not what the machine executes) for a
program. To parse this assertion - and then to explain how and why
object
Group
Date: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 at 10:35 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is an object?
And this is probably even better for your discussion
http://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKaysDefinitionOfObjectOriented
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Alfredo
And this is probably even better for your discussion
http://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKaysDefinitionOfObjectOriented
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Alfredo Covaleda Vélez <
alfr...@covaleda.co> wrote:
> I do not know if Alan Kay created the term object in the context of
> programming but he was a
I do not know if Alan Kay created the term object in the context of
programming but he was a pioneer of OOP when created Smalltalk. These are
few paragraphs where Kay is cited in relation to the term object and
concept is explained.
https://www.yegor256.com/2017/12/12/alan-kay-was-wrong.html
One can also have procedures bound to types where the procedures are pure.
OOP does not imply methods that have privileged access to state, although this
is common with languages like C++ and Java.
In contrast, a method (or type bound procedure) can have privileged access to
the meaning of
lol and here I was trying to be simple and not get into states wich is a
cluster IMO. but yeah that is a good point the computer needs to know how
and wen to bake cookies and set the timer (states)
Now look you've just made him more confused! :P
Just to make this reeely go more off the rails:
@Nick basically OOP may (or may not be) a good way to descibe and yes that
often leeds to flame wars. Essentially many years ago it was considered
hard (and a bad idea at the time) to make a recipe without descringing to
the computer what the different things were. Adding things to a computer
Not sure about "utility"/"tool", but an object is distinguished from a
function by having state. Call an object's method, and the method's
scope is populated by the object's data members, which of course,
differ from object to object.
By contrast a function either has no state (pure function), or
Nick,
An important aspect of object-oriented programming (OOP) is the ability to pass
around capabilities and not just lifeless state. With object-oriented
programming, the things objects can do as just another kind of stuff.
Without this property, it is more difficult to consider
48 matches
Mail list logo
