"The point of chaos theory", he says, "is that interactions that appear to be highly random or complex can be collapsed into simple patterns", and then he proceeds to use it as the foundation for many of the arguments in his essay. Those who know any thing Chaos Theory will recognize that Mr. Arnett has -missed the point- entirely. The point of Chaos Theory, in short, is that simple, deterministic systems can produce highly complex rather-random-looking patterns. Of course it goes on to say some things about such systems. But Chaos Theory more than nearly any other he could have picked is a pro-reductionist theory, despite its caveats regarding sensative dependance on initial conditions and implications regarding prediction. In regards to the latter, Dijkstra's work on formalization (see: _A Discipline of Programming_, Edsgar W. Dijkstra, 1976) should be sufficient to convince any reasonable person of the predictive powers we can use with confidence regarding computers.
My essay on the disadvatages of GUIs and their relation to the nature of computing is forthcoming, as is my essay on why it is crucial to being a good user that one understand the "deep workings of the computer", as Mr. Arnett would have them.
as cool as their software is, they're trying to patent it, which is stupid. the idea of virtual machines is ancient. sub-OS-level virtual machines occured to me, like probably every other programmer worth a dime, when i was about seventeen. i even had my 386 dual-booting DOS using someone else's (free) software.
for chrissake, PERL??
on
Unix in Perl
·
· Score: 1
i suppose this is amusing, but as quick-easy-and-portable as perl is, i just can't see any advantage over the GNU utils.
of course, all of these ill effects can only come about if my software -uses- the PSN. i somehow doubt that the free software community is going to be jumping on this bandwagon.
Slashdot Mirror
"The point of chaos theory", he says, "is that interactions that appear to be highly random or complex can be collapsed into simple patterns", and then he proceeds to use it as the foundation for many of the arguments in his essay.
Those who know any thing Chaos Theory will recognize that Mr. Arnett has -missed the point- entirely.
The point of Chaos Theory, in short, is that simple, deterministic systems can produce highly complex rather-random-looking patterns.
Of course it goes on to say some things about such systems.
But Chaos Theory more than nearly any other he could have picked is a pro-reductionist theory, despite its caveats regarding sensative dependance on initial conditions and implications regarding prediction. In regards to the latter, Dijkstra's work on formalization (see: _A Discipline of Programming_, Edsgar W. Dijkstra, 1976) should be sufficient to convince any reasonable person of the predictive powers we can use with confidence regarding computers.
My essay on the disadvatages of GUIs and their relation to the nature of computing is forthcoming, as is my essay on why it is crucial to being a good user that one understand the "deep workings of the computer", as Mr. Arnett would have them.
viral, coercive GPL indeed.
i mean, it is, but that's not a -bad- thing.
*grin*
they're just jealous becasue they didn't think of it first.
as cool as their software is, they're trying to patent it, which is stupid.
the idea of virtual machines is ancient. sub-OS-level virtual machines occured to me, like probably every other programmer worth a dime, when i was about seventeen.
i even had my 386 dual-booting DOS using someone else's (free) software.
i suppose this is amusing, but as quick-easy-and-portable as perl is, i just can't see any advantage over the GNU utils.
of course, all of these ill effects can only come about if my software -uses- the PSN. i somehow doubt that the free software community is going to be jumping on this bandwagon.