The Sapir Whorf hypothesis (language defines what we can perceive and think) is mostly wrong for natural language, but true for programming. Computer languages don't differ in what they can do but in how they let us think.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Is that really a fact or just a conversation starter? I was always wondering if it applies to programming languages.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dkrentzlin
How would I possibly know? I am just some story generated in a probabilistic biological computer that generates functions that try to model the world.
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
yes, with well founded, thought out and refined opinions. Which is why I assume that the probability that they correspond to objective facts is high.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @dkrentzlin
Nah, I am just very good at tricking myself. Don't be tricked by me too!
11:15 PM - 19 Apr 2018
from Cambridge, MA
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.