Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

cacm.acm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 171 posts

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#31

Post by jdsalaro »

mikewarot wrote: post #27

Unlike Medicine, many of the ideas that we had in the past were better than the commonly accepted way things are done now. Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part. On the other hand, the PARC focus on replicating paper was a step backwar…

> Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part.

For FreeBSD there's Capsicum(1) and for Linux, although the implementation is not strictly capabily-based, there's SE-Linux which depending on the usecase resembles capability-based restrictions.

Also, although not based around capabilities, Linux has supported them for awhile https://linux.die.net/man/7/capabilities

(1) https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/security/capsicum/

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#32

Post by Sharlin »

wernercd wrote: post #23
blt wrote: post #10

As a computer science graduate student, I am always surprised by how rarely my peers seem to know or care about the history of our field. I doubt many of them would write papers about computer science history even if the incentives were better. I think it is somehow related to the power of computer science to change the human condition. Everyone is thinking about the future. Mathematicians also crave novelty, but I d…

I like history but how is history going to get me a functional game released or land a job interview? I don't need to know about DARPA to create a wordpress page or a C# Windows Service...

The GP is talking about (future) researchers in particular. Still, there’s a tremendous historical myopia among practicing software engineers as well, leading us as a field to reinvent old ideas in new clothes every ten years or so.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#33

Post by C4ne »

mikewarot wrote: post #27

Unlike Medicine, many of the ideas that we had in the past were better than the commonly accepted way things are done now. Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part. On the other hand, the PARC focus on replicating paper was a step backwar…

I find the comparison between medicine and computer science very interesting! I have never thought about it this way. Could you elaborate on how you „dig back“? Do you read old papers / books? I imagine that one would have to dig through much old stuff that just isn‘t interesting until you find something that could be really usefull (like capability based security).

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#34

Post by mikewarot »

jdsalaro wrote: post #31
mikewarot wrote: post #27

Unlike Medicine, many of the ideas that we had in the past were better than the commonly accepted way things are done now. Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part. On the other hand, the PARC focus on replicating paper was a step backwar…

> Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part. For FreeBSD there's Capsicum(1) and for Linux, although the implementation is not strictly capabily-based, there's SE-Linux which depending on the usecase resembles capability-based restrictions…

SE-Linux is the worst possible way to secure a linux system, its like when Microsoft went overboard on warnings, instead of actually trying to solve the problem.

The main implementation difference in a capability based system is using a PowerBox to select files to give to a process, instead of letting the process access everything the user has rights to.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#35

Post by mikewarot »

C4ne wrote: post #33
mikewarot wrote: post #27

Unlike Medicine, many of the ideas that we had in the past were better than the commonly accepted way things are done now. Capability based security, for example was something that allowed you to run any program, with no danger to your system. It's not part of any common OS. They had it at Xerox PARC, but Steve Jobs chose not to take that part. On the other hand, the PARC focus on replicating paper was a step backwar…

I find the comparison between medicine and computer science very interesting! I have never thought about it this way. Could you elaborate on how you „dig back“? Do you read old papers / books? I imagine that one would have to dig through much old stuff that just isn‘t interesting until you find something that could be really usefull (like capability based security).

Look at the recent talks by Alan Kay, Ted Nelson, Joe Armstrong on YouTube. Watch "The Mother of all Demos" by Douglass Engelbart.

There is a lot of stuff online, just follow the threads. I've been pushing Capability Based Security for a decade... only in the last 6 hours did I learn that they had it at Xerox PARC, in an offhanded comment by Ted Nelson at the end of one of his videos, where he mentions the great ideas that got away.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#36

Post by mikewarot »

wernercd wrote: post #23
blt wrote: post #10

As a computer science graduate student, I am always surprised by how rarely my peers seem to know or care about the history of our field. I doubt many of them would write papers about computer science history even if the incentives were better. I think it is somehow related to the power of computer science to change the human condition. Everyone is thinking about the future. Mathematicians also crave novelty, but I d…

I like history but how is history going to get me a functional game released or land a job interview? I don't need to know about DARPA to create a wordpress page or a C# Windows Service...

The optimization bottleneck you're fighting against in the game might have been solved 50 years ago, if you don't know history, you don't have a complete toolkit of all the good tools.

There are good reasons to learn assembler, basic, forth, lisp, smalltalk, pascal, c, c++, python, java, etc. even if you don't use them on a regular basis.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#37

Post by redis_mlc »

herodoturtle wrote: post #28
Ice_cream_suit wrote: post #17

In most active and growing fields ( medicine is one example ), the history of the field is generally ignored by students and practitioners. There are a few pleasant exceptions. For instance, Neurology Minute have had occassional bits on the history of neurology. See https://neurologyminute.libsyn.com/ However, when reading something historical ( for instance this interesting podcast on the history of the Inverted Bra…

Funny you should mention Neurology in this context - my experience in South Africa has been the same. South Africa is renowned for grooming some of the world's best doctors (as subjective as this sounds, it is largely owed to the relentless influx of patients in state hospitals and the inevitable hands-on experience that follows). So practically speaking, you have some very young yet very experienced doctors emerging…

Western military doctors world-wide visit the US for a hospital term because of our unlimited quantity of gunshot patients.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#38

Post by wernercd »

mikewarot wrote: post #36
wernercd wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like history but how is history going to get me a functional game released or land a job interview? I don't need to know about DARPA to create a wordpress page or a C# Windows Service...

The optimization bottleneck you're fighting against in the game might have been solved 50 years ago, if you don't know history, you don't have a complete toolkit of all the good tools. There are good reasons to learn assembler, basic, forth, lisp, smalltalk, pascal, c, c++, python, java, etc. even if you don't use them on a regular basis.

I don't need history to know algorithms... so "that was solved 50 years ago" doesn't teach me how to build a balanced node tree or actually matter if I simply know to use sort library method A instead of B.

> good reasons to learn

Of course... but none of that needs HISTORY to use effectively.

Knowing functional programing, procedural, async, etc, etc, etc... I can know all of that without needing to know history.

One doesn't need the other.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#39

Post by bboreham »

I would submit that the “Graphics Gems” series of books does document a lot of rendering techniques in their historical context. They were written to be current for practitioners at the time, but the connections are drawn.

Similarly Michael Abrash’s articles on the development of Doom et al.

Re: Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science (2014)

#40

Post by thundergolfer »

blt wrote: post #10

As a computer science graduate student, I am always surprised by how rarely my peers seem to know or care about the history of our field. I doubt many of them would write papers about computer science history even if the incentives were better. I think it is somehow related to the power of computer science to change the human condition. Everyone is thinking about the future. Mathematicians also crave novelty, but I d…

A favourite quote, that appears on my Github profile:

> Computing is pop culture. [...] Pop culture holds a disdain for history. Pop culture is all about identity and feeling like you're participating, It has nothing to do with cooperation, the past or the future—it's living in the present. I think the same is true of most people who write code for money. They have no idea where [their culture came from]. - Alan Kay

Changed how I think about my career.

Post reply on HN