Please pick these ideas apart, a thread:
Conversation
Computer science has three lineages: engineering, math, and bicycles (of the mind).
Engineering: C, Unix, buffers, bits
Math: lisp, comparability, Haskell
🚲: engelbart, , etc
1
2
7
All great info tech requires all 3: the math to figure out what can be done, the engineering to build it, and the 🚲 for how it fits and amplifies our minds.
The math and engineering often forget about the 3rd leg of the stool, the bicycle design. This is what Apple got right.
1
3
A theory is not useful if not predictive: great new waves of computation are built on math and engineering, with a blind spot for the bikes part.
Find a great new tech platform that’s messy and cutting edge? The math and engineering comes first. The impact comes with the bikes.
1
2
Let’s take the web: math and engineering built it out in the 90s. But it wasn’t until we discovered that what humanity wanted to do with it was not share academic papers but to ~gossip (social media).
Exercise for the reader: where is ML today?
3
3
Replying to
Your engineering layer is one abstraction level too high. Hardware is the primary engineering driver. The software later is a mathematical abstraction/fiction on top of hardware and can be combined with the math part.
1
2
The biggest advances come from realizing the hardware envelope has expanded in an interesting way, and learning to exploit it by wasting/conserving hardware resources differently.
I mean, you basically innovate against Moore’s law, programming is a derivative layer
1
1
Replying to
This is a real thing, but there is still a distinction between C and Lisp. What would you call them?
1
Replying to
Mathematical aesthetics perhaps? Language design is underdetermined by all 3 elements (math, engineering, bicycle), that’s why there’s so much diversity there.
Bicycle is a good observation. In future it might just be applied neuroscience/biology.
2
2
Replying to
Language design doesnt feel underdetermined to me. You are right that there’s further variety, eg syntax.
these lineages all interbreed. Eg lisp *is* a bicycle for the programmer that uses it.
But some breeds are clearly of a kind. Chihuahua vs Great Dane.
1
Replying to
Individual languages may not be within their paradigm, but across languages with overlapping capability? That’s clearly undeterdetermined. You can pick a 1000 ways to output ‘hello world’ and there’s no “right answer”
Replying to
Dogs are underdetermined by “hunting, house pet, defender”. Doesn’t make the classifications useless.
1
Replying to
My point is it is a secondary “interior” phenomenology, not a forcing functions defining the bounding box of constraints. Ie, there are no fundamental constraint laws there. In engineering you have quantum limit, in math you have P=NP, in bicycle/ux you have 2 eyes/10 fingers
1
2
Show replies

