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

101–110 of 171 posts

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

#101

Post by macintux »

vector_spaces wrote: post #79
mikewarot wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 idea…

One of my favorite talks by Joe Armstrong -- computer science, a guide for the perplexed. He talks through what he feels are some important but forgotten ideas in CS https://youtu.be/rmueBVrLKcY

Thank you, I hadn’t seen this. I miss him dearly.

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

#103

Post by hchasestevens »

andi999 wrote: post #99
kergonath wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t all major OS have virtual desktops now? A single desktop is very restrictive, it’s much easier to have some spatial separation between contexts. It might not be the most visible feature for most users, but it is definitely an important one, which I would hate to see go away.

How do you use virtual Desktop in windows?

https://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-to-use-multiple-desktops-in-...

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

#104

Post by ghaff »

juliendorra wrote: post #100
ghaff wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially as you get back to 20 or 25 years ago, the idea that you can just do some web searches to uncover much more than surface information is somewhat naive. A lot of information isn't accessible to casual public search. You need to use libraries, talk to people, etc.

You would be surprised, as I was, how much raw documents and primary sources much much older than 2000/1995 (to take your 20/25 year reference) are available, thanks to various digitization efforts. Check my notes for some nice sources dating back to the 60s. (Not in my notes but just yesterday I stumbled upon the original 1990 memo by adobe co-founder John Warnock for the PDF project, Camelot. Great read) You are ab…

Oh, I don't disagree. For a recent project, I found some real gems at a time when I couldn't go to a good library. But it's definitely fragmentary once you get past digital-first content.

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

#105

Post by commandlinefan »

I often find that when I can come across documentation that was written for a practitioner, say, 50 years ago, it helps clarify why things work the way they do today - the new, "streamlined" way of doing something only ever makes sense to me after I understand what the old way actually was.

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

#106

Post by auggierose »

svat wrote: post #24

To be clear about the "(2014)", although Knuth gave this talk in 2014, this transcript of the talk is from the upcoming (February 2021) issue of Communications of the ACM. The whole sequence of articles/talks is interesting: - (2007, Martin Campbell-Kelly), "The History of the History of Software" (DOI: 10.1109/MAHC.2007.4407444 ) — the trigger for what follows. - (2014, Donald Knuth): "Let's Not Dumb Down the Histor…

So, what Haigh is saying, what historians as a field do, is useless. I agree.

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

#107

Post by afarrell »

wernercd wrote: post #66
afarrell wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how is history going to land me a job interview Step 1. Go to software conference. Step 2. Get into hallway track conversation where a historical anecdote and its lessons are relevant. Step 3. Say things that prompt y'all to have insight and establish trust that you're thoughtful about how to build software.

> Step 1. Show 10+ years of experience > Step 2. Never talk about history because I don't need history to solve business problems with programming > Step 3. Make 6 figures. An anecdotal example made up about talking at some conference with big words won't provide business value and isn't useful in day to day problem solving. So again... 99% of programmers won't ever use the history of DARPA and the birth of the inter…

I this is the first time I've seen the same person simultaneously assert that:

1. What really matters is delivering business value.

2. Networking at conferences and talking about the social context of technology is useless.

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

#108

Post by brandmeyer »

Animats wrote: post #30
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. I know, I know. Norm Hardy was really good, his system, KeyCos, worked, and few could understand him. I used to know his "explainer", Susan Rajunas. We don't even have proper "rings of protection", like Multics, any more. Although the real problem today is that we ne…

> Although the real problem today is that we need to run programs with less authority than the user running them,

All true; But. What really stopped capability systems is that most users cannot be bothered to grant minimum privilege. Even most developers cannot - we invented containers in part as a way to mitigate the consequences of failing to grant minimum privilege.

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

#109

Post by Shorel »

bsder wrote: post #71
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. Basically, haven't we "reinvented" this via "The Eternal Mainframe"? Only now it's called Amazon Web Services?

That's not your system.

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

#110

Post by contingencies »

Animats wrote: post #30
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. I know, I know. Norm Hardy was really good, his system, KeyCos, worked, and few could understand him. I used to know his "explainer", Susan Rajunas. We don't even have proper "rings of protection", like Multics, any more. Although the real problem today is that we ne…

we need to run programs with less authority than the user running them, and we still lack a good conceptual model for doing that

Isn't this now the standard reality for most desktop and mobile OSs?

"Allow write to SD card" is far, far too powerful a privilege to grant.

Granting a permission based upon user approval is never secure anyway since if they want to see the porn / flashing lights they are going to click the button regardless. Having spent some time with both carriers and mobile device manufacturers, there are also areas of undeclared commercial utility in keeping control with the OS (device manufacturer) and out of the hands of the user: DRM, app sales, increased chargeable mobile data use, reduced chance of non-cellular data paths (mesh networking), etc.

Post reply on HN