Thank you for sharing her talk! It is something I needed to hear this morning - grateful for work that engages with the flawed social contexts of CS in a nuanced and sympathetic way.

Binder's STS project has got a cogent description of Leibniz's notations as an early upstream of blackboard cultures, like maths and CS (i.e. the refuge of constructive mathematics).

This algebraic sense of algorithm [...] placed the idea in an intimate relation to the development of new symbolic notations.

Another useful downstream of STS (by way of Susan Leigh Star's reading of symbolic notations as boundary objects) might be Ribes' "The logic of domains". With his lens, I'd read Ko's description of CS as having the useful domain-like characteristic of normalizing / abstracting problems, but also an unfortunate tendency of neutralizing / colonizing other domains.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0306312719849709

Thanks @Jasmine Otto, very grateful for STS perspectives as it's all pretty new to me. I did work with an STS scholar Annapurna Mamidipudi on a previous project and every conversation blew my mind! From the perspective of that project (which was about ancient weaving) Binder's book looks very Euro-centric, and seems to ignore the use of algorithms in the much longer history of craft.

That variable-frequency thing is clever. In a sense it’s similar to how old-school light pens worked: a light sensor can determine its position using a position-varying signal.

But: I can’t think of a situation where you’d be better off with this system than with Dynamicland-style fiducial tracking, given that this requires custom projectors (eep!) and active (wired or battery-powered) targets (yuck!).

Really need to bump up the FPS on this. About 10x

Oh that's a good idea!

I've updated the Member Handbook to specifically recommend this practice.

Thanks for being rad Ivan Reese

If you ever see me doing something inaccessible, I want to know! Can't always promise I can do anything about it, but I can promise that I care.

I updated my most recent post here, slack doesn't seem to let me edit older ones

james mickens is hilarious

youtube.com/watch?v=ajGX7odA87k

I should have probably provided an abstract to show its not just james mickens doing straight standup (which I love) 😅

the Atlantis browser looks cool too.

sorry, just joined last night and don't mean to be a prick but i've just read the handbook and wanted to let you know that you might want to re-format your link 🙂

also, great article. thanks for the share! reminds me of drifting and space, they are working on making it easier to adopt offline-first architectures

"oh.. it's like a dance party", if you make music live coding stuff then you can get paid by doing actual dance parties 😉

Very very interesting stuff. Its so nice to see "smart" people from the "nerd" corner putting their brain into matters that relate more closely to society.

love how Evan frames devs as “authors.”

I’d be interested to know what folks think of the “editor” model and how it relates to the future of coding.

That model where you start by licensing a really good editor (or lets just say “tooling”) for your system…I think this is intriguing because it really strongly links what are usually seen as separate, editor and “language” — leaning system over language

In general I am pro-free software, and make money from research grants, workshops and performances, so am not interested in charging for a premium editor.

The microsoft landgrab with the vs code editor is really worrying for a number of reasons, and might well make selling licenses for a premium editor a non-starter. I don't know how it works with kotlin though

whispering, but visual programming systems?

what are systems that VS Code can’t support?

I'm also generally with @Amy Ko that the future of coding hopefully doesn't involve capitalism

I don't actually use vs code so can't comment on that..

my tl;dr on vs code is that it is a pretty solid, but inaccessible text editor.

it takes as assumed text

it takes as assumed ram to spare

Capitalism is a big tent. It involves things like materialism.

But we can think about the quality of relationships with other people while working on software. The likes of Evan mentions with "DevRel" in his talk.

Well the particular brand of capitalism that we have means that we are living beyond our means, are very probably going to go beyond a global 1.5C temperature increase, which could ultimately mean the breakdown of civilisation

The future of coding should probably take that onboard

But maybe I'm drifting off-topic .. 😛

For me its about the term "sustainability".

I have something in my notebook , its a term - sorry no scientific or other 3rd party relation - I call it "size of an argument".

@Alex McLean have you seen @Devine Lu Linvega and Rek’s talk, Software Doldrums? or ran into the permacomputing crowd?

I think climate change and sustainability, fo rthe individual, for society and for society in relationship to nature are important things. We can use words and hope someone other can relate to them. So yes we are facing the metacrisis or moloch ( failure of coordination)

@Eli Mellen I am a keen follower of their work, but didn't know that talk, will have a watch thanks!

Devine also spoke on similar themes at Strange Loop this year. I think that’ll vibe with ya

It is difficult to speak about a paradigm which doesn't yet exist. But going beyond capitalism is definetly a paradigmshift.

also my self plug for some thoughts on permacomputing and community

Bret Victor's Dynamic land seems to go into that direction: still computing but different kinds of relationships. There are lots of other projects but the culture and the paradigms shift slowly 🙂

Yes dynamicland feels like it's trying to be a kind of holiday from capitalism

In my opinion it’s quite close what Seymour papert envisioned and what today is “maker space culture”

On a collapse computing tip, here at TTT Dave is currently working on making semiconductors from discarded mine waste

big dusk os vibes

@Eli Mellen Nice thoughts! In the earlier days of the live coding community (early 2000's), there was a feeling against the idea of an audience. At least, the 'powerbooks unplugged' audience would reject the stage and sit within the audience, writing code to make music for each other and the people around them, but rejecting the separation between producers and consumers. You can extend the idea to say that programmers should reject the idea of having users.

I think that connects well to your idea of rejecting anomie

Andreas S Maybe Graeber and Wengrow's "Dawn of Everything" is useful here.. Describing past advanced civilisations as having different structures. Then we can think about shifting to paradigms that have worked better before.. (but not necessarily a more 'primitive' one)

This was really nice to watch, I mainly just feeling seen in that yea this shit is really hard.

@Alex McLean I appreciate the spirit but as I referenced “paradigm shift” I also wanted to reference the associated book: the structure of scientific revolutions - Kuhn. In which he reveals that if people become to invested in a paradigm - even scientists- they can not change. So you basically have to wait for them to die.

So it’s sadly not as simple as: oh look there is a blueprint how to make thinks better, now ~just~ let us make things better.

That said I think meta modernism and related efforts are on their ways as discussed with Konrad Hinsen before.

So we just have to wait for them to infield and hope we don’t destroy ourselves before that :)

Andreas S Heh fair enough. I think it's possible for older generations to make space for and support the next generation though. Sadly they often end up fighting against them.. as former radicals who got to the top by fighting, and rather than change their behaviour, continue fighting by punching down

I'm interested in the paradigm of Andean Ayllu structures which are still active today, and interestingly for the future of code, present in the knot-based digital databases of pre-Inka Khipu.

Ah like indigenous knowledge? Yes they knew and know (hence it’s ~still~ sustainable , they even can sustain their knowledge today) how to sustain knowledge.

Sand Talk by Tyson yunkaporta made a positive impression on me in that context.

I enjoyed the talk. But I'll be honest and say I'm not worried about being "Jeffed" and I don't think others should be. Honestly, I find that worry a bit misplaced.

Datomic is mentioned and it definitely didn't get jeffed. Nor did dark, or anything else I can think of that is using hosting to fund language development. (I know datomic is closed source, but no datalog database has been jeffed (sadly))

But even if you do get jeffed, that isn't death. The companies that have changed license because of AWS taking their open source work are massive companies still. In fact, it is their relicense because of the worry about jeffing that seems to be causing their long term issues.

I agree Jimmy Miller -- I think there may be a disconnect around getting jeffed. Or like 2 flavors of it, the one described in the talk and then what I anticipated him to talk about was when some big company sort of buys up a dev behind a project and how that can either disappear, or dramatically change the nature of the project

I'm on the mailing list, but hadn't thought of following sr.ht/~vdupras/duskos/feed.rss. I'll try it 👍

Oh yeah! I've been on the mailing list since before it existed, it's super super cool. Have you tried to run it yet? It's suprisingly easy!

Yeah! It’s one of my favorite forths alongside UF for uxn and RetroForth, which is like “what if colorforth and joy but so smol”

colorforth is sick, I need to write more of it! It's such a cool idea to use that extra modality

I appreciate that the author of this work agrees with me about FORTH:

Forth is hard to read. Maybe you can create abstractions to make it easier to read, but it’s going to cost you in terms of simplicity and at some point it becomes self-defeating: maybe the language you’re after isn’t Forth.

I think it’s inherent to Forth, reading it simply requires a much higher cognitive load because you have to hold a lot more information into your head as you read along. It’s exhausting for the mind (but you get better at it after a while). It is also slower. Accept it or you’re going to have a bad time.

(FWIW, I do find this work to be compelling in the context of its intended use – maintaining use of electronics after widespread economic collapse.)

I love it! It really helps me hear the vocal articulations.

On the Indian music road I'm a big fan of Konnakol, which I think is really computational despite not being written down.. or maybe because it's not written down - to remember and recite a piece you have to generate it from rules.

• V Shivapriya & BR Somashekar Jois | Konnakol Duet
• B C Manjunath vocalising a pattern on insta with his son

@Arvind Thyagarajan this notation reminds me of the incredible Din is Noise software dinisnoise.org/?what=screenshots