Slashdot Mirror
Alan Kay Decries the State of Computing
gnaremooz writes "Computer pioneer Alan Kay (DARPA in the '60s, PARC in the '70s, now HP Labs) declares 'The sad truth is that 20 years or so of commercialization have almost completely missed the point of what personal computing is about.' He believes that PCs should be tools for creativity and learning, and they are falling short."
Another computer visionary with vague promises and criticisms.
Instead of doing [insert clearly-defined practical thing here], you should be doing [insert vague semi-buzzword here, like "education", or "object"] and you should be using [insert visionary's product here] to do it.
I do not agree with the writer. I takes me a lot of creativity to find different ways to frag my friends in Battlefield 1942. Also playing battlefield teach me some nice skills for the real life. (press 9 for parachute whenever I fall out of a airplane and such)
From the Article:
The chances that in the last week or year or month you've used the computer to simulate some interesting idea is zero--but that's what it's for.
I'd have to disagree with Kay here, just because his work was with education and simulation doesn't mean that is really what computers are to be used for. They're the most unique and versatile tool ever invented by man, their purpose is whatever we choose it to be at the moment.
Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
Anyone who has spoken with him personally- in person or via email- or read his words, seen his vision knows this. Alan is *the* man.
There's a great XEROX Video we've here at our uni library- "Doing with images makes symbols [videorecording] : communicating with computers," released in 1987 while Kay was a fellow with Apple. For an enthusiastic and engrossing view of what Kay thinks computers *should* be (and I'm 100% with him!) should check it out.
Also, look into Smalltalk. Alan works on Squeak Smalltalk- rather than C++ or Java- and there's a good reason for it. Smalltalk has the tendency to empower both end user and programmer. It's "open source" in a way that most slashdotters have never imagined. It's kind of like having your whole computer run Emacs, but without being stuck with some funky half-GUI half-terminal app with nothing but key commands to drive it. Squeak gives us the power to control our computing environment in a way similar to emacs, although Squeak is a lot closer to a "conventional" GUI environment than Emacs. That said, there are a lot of things about Squeak's GUI toolkit - Morphic- that are highly unconventional, but quite great to have around.
OK, enough early morning rambling from me...
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
you mean it's not about patches and updates?
"The chances that in the last week or year or month you've used the computer to simulate some interesting idea is zero--but that's what it's for."
Is the listener supposed to then ask a simple question like "what would you simulate?" and he would say "everything!" and the listener says "how do you do that?" and he says "by building a model of EVERYTHING!" and the listener, still not understanding what the value of "simulating everything" means, just writes him off as a kook who will research useless ideas for the rest of his life?
Does anyone else understand his vision?
Alan Kay says...
"The chances that in the last week or year or month you've used the computer to simulate some interesting idea is zero--but that's what it's for."
I disagree. Many business users use spreadsheets to "what-if". Perhaps he has a different idea of "interesting".
When I first started with computers back in the early 80's there was a lot of energy in the community. People ran BBSs, built circuit boards to attach to print heads to scan images, built weather facsimile machines, tinkered and hacked and built stuff. Those days were very enjoyable. But the only downside was that all the little hacks were for the computer. I.e., the gadgets celebrated the technology and the coolness of doing new things, but they were all about the technology itself.
Things have changed somewhat since then. There's still Linux and new experimental OSes (and BSDs too) to tinker with. Hardware is commoditized so there's not a lot of need or desire to build memory expansion boards, but people still do interesting things. However, the biggest change is that computers are now really cool tools for doing non-computer things.
I can only speak to my interests, but without computers I could not have easily played with video or recording, ray tracing, music production, math (some problems *require* computers to understand, at least in my case), etc.. The computer today is akin to what the printing press was several centuries ago. I.e., it gives some very powerful tools to individuals of modest means. So things that were only the demesne of researchers and big companies ten years ago is now available in a relatively low powered desktop system.
In techie terms, he is working on an infinitely scalable system for "real-time immersive collaboration done entirely as peer-to-peer machines."
He's probably talking about Croquet which is a 3d collaborative environment developed on top of Squeak. Impressive stuff.
I entirely disagree. Just about everyone is born creative. Watch some little kids sometimes. When they get bored they'll take whatever toys they can get their hands on and use them as props to get completely absorbed in a storyline or world that their brain makes as they go. It may not be very complicated, but kids don't yet have much to base it on.
/. is lego. When I was younger, I had a few random sets. Some spaceships, some the city, some just plain old blocks. And I made all sorts of crap. My next door neighbor had all of the sets from one of the spaceship series (including the badass monorail), but he was so obsessed with that series itself that he would just build each object according to the instructions, and sit it on the floor with all the others. He wouldn't dare take them apart, much less let me near them. The only decisions he made was which space station outpost got put next to the lunar landing pad. That jerk was pretty much the same way with all of his GI-joes too. Until I started throwing them down the stairs, he did enjoy that.
Life does a good job of teaching us to be less creative. Our culture is so full of complicated yet boring things that we have to spend most of our time doing, and so creativity can often fall by the wayside. I'm glad that I had to take all of those math classes in grade school, but every hour that I spent doing my geometry homework was one less hour I could spend playing with photoshop. Now-a-days, I've not only got work to deal with, I've also got to spend my free time paying bills, going grocery shopping, cleaning the house, trying to understand what the hell is going on with the politics in my city, state, and country... when I sit down with a pad and paper and try to design a table that I need to build, I'm too tired to think.
Sadly enough, I think things have gotten worse for kids as well. There are so many different toys, and they have such complex features, they almost take the need for creativity away. An example talked about often on
Anyways, while some people are naturally better at being creative than others, doesn't mean many people are inherently unable to be creative. Creativity is one of the defining features of our intelligence. It's what puts our minds above those of animals. Anytime you aid the creative process, you improve it. It's not a learned skill persay, it's a Re-learned one.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
Ok - I'll bite. And I'll bite for personal computing at large, rather than just as an Apple user (which I happen to be, but the below could be achieved on any platform).
The very interesting articles I've digging out recently are on how to play the clarinet. I do use my machines to write music. I quite definitely have my photo albums on the the machine. I'll add video to your list too, and DVD authoring. I'll add web authoring. I'll add accounts - not exciting, but definitely simulating ideas. I'll add communciation - email and video conferencing with friends who are at least hundred of miles away, in some cases on a different continent. In my case, I'll add development and web authoring. And yes, when circumstances allow I sit in my garden and use the 802.11g connection.
I honestly, truly, have no idea what Alan Kay is on about. Generalising the whole of computing on a business knocking out office documents is a bit poor. Then again, the article didn't have much in the way of direct quotes from Mr. Kay - perhaps his main thrust has been misunderstood?
Cheers,
Ian
HELP
?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
HI
?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
HELLO?
?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
EAT FLAMING DEATH
?SYNTAX ERROR
READY.
I'm old enough to remember the early days - my first computer was a 8k PET.. While the technology was primative, computers where sold as creative devices. My PET had a built in interpreter, and it switched on straight to the command prompt. The machine, by its nature, encouraged you to get involved with programming, because it was so simple. Yes, there where word processing packages, games and the like, and you got used to loading and running these, but all the time you knew that the real fun was learning to program.
Nowadays, a Windows PC doesn't even come with any kind of programming language (not counting batch files..) and the GUI metaphor discourages automation of tasks (which was the Great Hope that computing promised..)
The internet has been converted from a facinating library to some sort of dumb TV plastered with adverts... The increasing and unfettered commercialisation of the internet is gradually making it unusable. I can't even get my site listed on Google, never mind high up the list, because Google's more interested these days in promoting commercial sites. And don't get me started on spammers (unless I've a 2x4 in my hand!)
*--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
You can't teach anyone to be creative.
I don't know if that's true or not, but you can definitely teach people not to be creative. And that's just exactly what we're doing when we don't give our kids enough art, music, math, and language education.
You either are, or are not.
Maybe, but I tend to think that mostly everyone is born with a creative brain. Some kids grow up learning that it's okay and fun and good to think outside the box and are encouraged to solve their own problems in their own ways. Others grow up getting smacked for coloring outside the lines and are told not to think for themselves.
That said, I think there are a few useful tools to aid the creative process, writing, drawing, music, etc., but I don't believe there are many, if any, tools to enhance the creative process. Maybe computers can't do that.
I'm not sure what the differences is between "aid" and "enhance" above, but one way that computers can aid/enhance the creative process is to stop impeding it. There's probably a whole book to be written on this topic (and Kay might be the guy to do it), but in short I think that software often tends to get in the way more than it helps.
In the beginning, there were assorted ridiculous input systems such as punch cards, paper tapes, and (ha!) rows of switches. Computers weren't much fun to use, and way too expensive for most creative endeavors. (That's not to say that the pioneers of our industry weren't creative.) And then came terminals and command lines, and life was good! Much better than before, but still so expensive that you had to be a really smart and already creative college kid just to get to use one for a bit. (Read Steven Levy's "Hackers" for more on this.) Then came personal computers, which were relatively affordable and inspired all sorts of creativity.
But still, we were stuck with the command line, and you pretty much needed to learn all about "right" and "wrong" ways to do things, and if you did something "wrong" the computer normally did something unfriendly. (Note that text adventure games were wildly popular during this time, possibly because they encouraged one to explore a new world, and aside from maybe getting temporarily killed there wasn't much that you could do that was "wrong.") When GUI's first came into public consciousness with the Apple Lisa (there were others, but a normal person might actually have a shot at touching a Lisa), there was a lot of interest because with this strange new computing paradigm, you could tell the computer to do whatever you wanted, whenever you wanted, and there was little that you could do that was "wrong." At $10,000, though, Lisa's were too expensive for most folk. Then the Mac came along and people loved it. It was relatively affordable, and easy to use, and people (Microsoft included) did all sorts of interesting things with it. Even with just two apps, MacWrite and MacPaint, people were transfixed for hours just playing and creating and exploring. About the worst thing you could do resulted in having to swap the floppy disk five or ten times.
These days, computers are a lot more difficult and scary to use. No, don't open that attachment! You never know, it might contain a virus. Don't plug you computer into the network if you don't know the "right" way to do it, because hackers might take over your computer. Why did you set up your document like that? You've got it all wrong. Which of these 300 different commands that do a very specific thing do you want, and in what order?
Tools which inspire creativity are simple ones which don't have a "right" and "wrong" way to use them. Tools like Logo and MacPaint and paintbrushes and drums. You get that sort of (software) tool most often in the early and middle phases of a products life, when a product is implemented enough to be useful, but before the manufacturer needs to justify the next seven updates and throws in all manner of kitchen sink features.
Friends, it's time to demand simpl
you missed his point entirely.
He _knows_ it's a browser, his assertion is that HTTP should have been like WebDAV from the beginning, and that instead of writing a browser, they should have written a browser with authoring capabilities.
The trouble is, that you're looking at the world as it is now, and saying "it's obvious, this is how things should be", instead of looking back and asking yourself how things could be different....
Sure, he's not going to change anything by saying what he's saying, but that doesn't mean it's not worth saying.
Personally I pretty much agree with the overall sentiment - When I was a kid my first computer experiences were with the 8 bit home PCs of the 80s - the ZX81, ZX Spectrum, Commodore (16/+4 and 64) and Amstrad CPC - and every single one of those did far more for me in terms of encouraging my creativity than a modern PC does. Simply because they came with BASIC built in. Programming was what you _did_ and it was so easy to get started. These days the barrier to entry is much higher, and if you look at Windows, it doesn't even come with a programming language any more. At least DOS had QBasic - In fact, Dos with QBasic was almost as good as the 8bit machines...
Advanced users are users too!
The personal computing revolution has stalled with the advent of the WWW. Excluding the MS virus, personal computing was making a lot of progress up until the mid 90's. Since then we've failed to truly exploit the power of both a computing platform and a means of communication.
I have to disagree. The real leap from 1995 until now has been usability and people getting connected the the internet. The number of PC's that are "out there" have increased dramatically. I'm 1995 I could talk to a few of my nerdier friends online. Now I can talk to just about everyone. Communication VIA computers has really taken off in the past 10 years. PC's over the past 15 years have come to the point where a person with minimal knowledge can use them for online communication.
I would also say we should look at the business world, where there is a PC on every desktop. It wasn't like that in the 70's or 80's. Sure, maybe the PC isn't being used for some great learning experence for the world, but it is being used so people can do their jobs better including doctors and scientists. How much do you think PC's helped with mapping the genome? It probably worked out a lot more nicely than trying to get some timesharing system on a mainframe.
Squeak isn't all that hard to figure out. But if you're used to having a nicely written book, you can buy one- a couple exist for Squeak specifically. But Squeak's online documentation is lacking, there's no doubt about that- especially in the area of newbie reorientation. Making apps in Squeak is different than making apps in Java, C++ or even Lisp. The environment's different for one.
:P
The basic idea for creating a program in Squeak is to open up the Class Browser. Make a new class. Code away. Depending on what your program does, you may need more than one class.
Or, you can make apps without doing it the old fashioned way. In Squeak, you can draw up your GUI, composing it with widgets out of the Morphic Toolbox, and then adding scripts. When this button is clicked, do this or that. Etc. There are some good tutorials for this newer way of making programs.
It is an (not *the*- anything can be improved) ideal environment for kids- when you've got people teaching them. People used to coding in the same form for a long time often have a hard time learning Squeak. But then again, a lot of old assembly and C hackers have a hard time doing C++ or Java without spending a lot of time thinking about how to design OO systems instead of procedural ones. But old dogs can learn new tricks.
I learned Smalltalk and Squeak on my own, teaching it to myself. I had no problem doing it. Didn't have a text book- or any book, for that matter. While there were even fewer online docs back in those days, that's where I started, but then moving to mostly exploring the system. In Smalltalk, you have the Class Browser, which allows one to browse the source code to anything in the system. I learned by example and by doing. So far, that's how I've learned every language I know, and doing it by just reading books doesn't work for me. When I wanted to know how to make a GUI, I looked at the source of the simplest built-in apps in Squeak, learning how a GUI was constructed. Then making something simple of my own, a simple Address Book. After that point, it's just a matter of checking the reference- that is, looking at the class hierarchy and for the methods that are provided.
I think some personality types don't take well to this kind of exploratory programming, prefering to learn in a more passive way. That's fine- to each her own. Squeak tends to draw folks that do like that style of learning and doing. When it's learned, it is really handy. "Learning" Java for me didn't take that long, and it's mostly a matter of having the on-line class reference handy for me to write a program. In the best case, Squeak would provide more documentation for those who learned to program the old fashioned way, but in any OSS community, no one wants to be the one to write such docs.
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad