So, 1. Thanks to y'all for bein' all smart and stuff in my mentions, and 2. One non-philosophy route to process philosophy is writing Clojure. I think that's why I was able to understand some of Myk's ideas when we met https://github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/blob/master/Hickey_Rich/AreWeThereYet.md …
-
-
this talk is great, thanks for linking it. this feels like retroactive validation from one of the sharpest minds in CS so I feel like I'm onto something, though I really diverge from some of his models!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Thanks, if I saw this before I'd forgotten. It's nice to see how widely accepted many of these ideas are, nine years on. I'm also glad to see major software initiatives coming from people capable of talking about them philosophically.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
One of the purposes of the thing I'm working on now is to find a viable model of computation that moves beyond the single point of view. Philosophically, relativistic and constructivist. Technically, exploring distributed computing and collaboratively constructed representations.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh gosh hello that’s sorta what I’m building too. CRDT deltas all the way down, any set of deltas can be reduced into a stateful snapshot (constructivist), different users can see different deltas so its relativistic.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This is still early but the pieces are taking shape. If any object can be decomposed into the processes that it's composed of, if those processes can be reified and 'owned', then everyone can have a local set of processes representing _their_ view of a given object, and share!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But the sharing is at the individual delta level, so you really can literally 'dis-integrate' an object into deltas, recombine them, filter them, whatever, then re-integrate into a new object with new properties, etc, all transparently.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mykola
We're (
@EdBaskerville and I) starting with Datalog (a la Datomic) and sharing histories of (E,A,V,T, assert/retract) tuples. Don't know how closely that maps to your deltas.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @peidran @EdBaskerville
I want to say that a tuple there corresponds to a delta, if it represents some fully defined state change to your system as of time t. How exactly the delta is expressed is of some limited utility but there's room for many ways to do it, I think.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mykola @EdBaskerville
For the time being, our model of time more closely resembles Hickey's: the operations/transactions of any particular actor are totally ordered. CRDTs ops are partially ordered per application semantics, typically by referring to prior entities. IIUC.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
For now our app is just a chat app so we don't have much need of mutability, so it doesn't really matter. That won't last long.
-
-
Replying to @peidran @EdBaskerville
As long as the mutability is purely a function of time as Hickey outlines I think you're set, lots of flexibility from there. "There is no such thing as a mutable object" is a Big Truth.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.