Communicating Sequential Processes (Hoare),
The Next 700 Programming Languages (Landin),
As We May Think (Bush),
Can Programming Be Liberated from the von Neumann Style (Backus)
And this seems to be a cool course: https://canvas.harvard.edu/courses/34992/assignments/syllabu...
> This course examines papers every computer scientist should have read, from the 1930s to the present. It is meant to be a synthesizing experience for advanced students in computer science: a way for them to see the field as a whole, not through a survey, but by reliving the experience of its creation. The idea is to create a unified view of the field of computer science, for students who already know something about it, by replaying its entire evolution at an accelerated frame rate.
You’re on the right path my friend, hang on to the feeling that drove you to write this. Not everyone has it, and you may even find yourself having woken up with it missing one day. So use it while you have it
Thanks for the encouragement! I care for a 6-year old I've nurtured through anarchic principles. This feeling, if it can go missing, is reignited by things they say and normalized forms of childhood oppression they experience/witness.
Random tip... I noticed the volume sliders only take effect when you stop dragging the knob. You can use the 'oninput' event for the slider to set its value as the user moves it around. Something like:
I sometimes wonder if statistics are like a pane of glass that allow the light of god (the true nature of things) to pass through, while logic/rationalism is the hubris of man playing god. I.e. statistics allow us to access/use the truth even if we don’t understand why it’s so, while rationalism / rule-based methods are often a folly because our understanding is not good enough to construct them.
This is an interesting avenue to add to my search of “where the experts hang out”. I tried to reflect on it here: https://josh8.com/blog/mailing_lists.html
(As you can infer from the title, I decided that ‘mailing lists’ is one good answer).
I also had a brief discussion about the subject with an older person I respect, and this is what he had to say:
> Interesting post. I think you've hit on the central issue: where are
the experts?
>
> Back in the day, USENET was kind of the hotspot for that kind of thing; these days, it's mostly cranks and luddites; a few folks are
still around, but it's just not what it once was.
>
>The challenge is tapping into the current set of experts; the thing is, TUHS and COFF are great for talking to the older generation, but (and I think that Doug, Ken and Rob at least would admit this) they're mostly retired and have handed the torch off to the next batch. So where are THOSE people?
>
> I think that there is no central online presence for that group like
there was for the previous generation with USENET. I mostly chat with them at conferences or idly on social media, but the real work is
being done more or less independently. To the extent that folks are communicating about it, I think it's mostly point-to-point. :-(
You can use the US embargo on Cuba as a case study -- see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJETjgJM-Q4. The conclusion is roughly that the sanctions did not work, they only strengthened Cuba's relationship with the Soviet Union, as well as serving to unite the citizens of Cuba against a common enemy and thus consolidating support for Fidel Castro. Another comment makes the same point about Iran and China today
It turns out that there is a lot of discourse out there about "semantic
newlines", under a few different names. So far the names I've seen are:
- One Sentence Per Line (OSPL)
- Semantic Line Breaks (SemBr)
- Semantic Linefeeds
- Ventilated Prose
- Semantic newlines
Reading through the pages below was helpful in getting a better idea of
what language people use to discuss this. They're mostly historical
retrospectives or arguments for the merit of semantic newlines.
(Not the person you asked) but it helps to realize that vim in "insert" mode is just like any other text editor you know, you can use your arrow keys and the delete button to edit your document. You will get annoyed pretty quickly navigating with arrow keys and no mouse cursor, so you might search up "how do I jump the end of this damned line!" (hint: it's the $ sign). As you edit documents you will get more and more annoyed and search up more shortcuts which you will be happy to incorporate into your life. This is what worked for me, anyways.
And this seems to be a cool course: https://canvas.harvard.edu/courses/34992/assignments/syllabu... > This course examines papers every computer scientist should have read, from the 1930s to the present. It is meant to be a synthesizing experience for advanced students in computer science: a way for them to see the field as a whole, not through a survey, but by reliving the experience of its creation. The idea is to create a unified view of the field of computer science, for students who already know something about it, by replaying its entire evolution at an accelerated frame rate.
reply