"wetware" is a cute but dumb word. the "hard" part of "hardware" is about physicality, not non-squishiness
-
-
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime @JayTraveller
The wet is entirely too important :0 given most transmitters and ion channels influence through that
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @sm0b0t @JayTraveller
by that logic a breadboard should be called "conductiveware" it's not important for where it falls in the schema established by "hardware" and "software"
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime @JayTraveller
Breadboards are not the correct analogue here possibly silicon die chips are
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
-
Replying to @chaosprime @JayTraveller
....again the source of the ions are still hard in most tech we have currently
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I think wetware works for organic material because software is co-opted for abstraction etc :0
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
Chaos Retweeted Chaos
all i'm saying is that "concrete mechanisms", "abstract mechanisms", and "concrete mechanisms which have a lot of water in them" is a dumb schemahttps://twitter.com/chaosprime/status/1193732239030444032 …
Chaos added,
-
-
tending toward the Borgesian
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @JayTraveller
Hmm. I think because to me the circuits created by breadboards resemble primitive creatures whereas modern CPUs provide throughput much higher.. hmm.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 8 more replies
New conversation -
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.