Urbit: a personal cloud computer

The choice of 0 for true and 1 for false is _wrong:_ On the Curry-Howard correspondence (and above) a type corresponds to a false sentence when it is not inhabited, like 0, and to a true sentence when it is. The Curry-Howard correspondence is fundamental, and so that is the. correct way to go, absent evidence in the other direction. I don't know whether Nock is a better foundation for a programming language than the Lambda Calculus, but it is at least as elegant—I'm glad someone is seeing where it leads I'm a fan of internet freedom, which often requires anonymity, and so I have my doubts about an OS that preserves exerything as a feature of the design.

"Anyway, perhaps we are all missing the underlying point - an overly complicated solution (to an otherwise straightforward problem) has been the received wisdom for decades, and a re-think from fundamentals is almost definitely worth the effort."

I don't know that the solution is overly complicated or that the problem is straightforward. Think of every human being as their own little Y Combinator startup -- everybody is their own little Me, Inc. Or Me, LLC. Whatever. Most people follow SOME version of "outsource everything that isn't a core competency." Like, it varies a lot from person to person -- some people go to McDonalds, some people are making their own meals from ingredients picked up at the local farmer's market, but very few people (not even most farmers) are fully self-sufficient farm-to-table for most of their meals.

So as a result of this, most people don't think of their computer in terms of it being a computer. And that's the most obviously computer computer they interact with! There's all sorts of even more abstracted away computers they deal with -- smartphones, cloud computers, etc. Most people don't care about computers, and don't in and of themselves want computers. They want to do things like "write a document," "share some family pictures with friends and relatives," "play a video game," so on and so forth. For those people, not only don't they CARE about HOW the computer is accomplishing those things, they get very upset whenever they see the wizard behind the curtain. They want all of those things abstracted away from them. From the point of the view of the most typical use case, trying to make computers easier to use by making sure the specification fits on a t-shirt seems to be rather besides the point.

From the article:

"It's definitely air travel. It's not exactly flying."

This phrase has an Alan Kay-ish quality, and was enough to pique my interest. Anyone seriously trying to execute on a project that addresses this concern seems worth following. Who knows, you might even succeed :)

This sentence made me laugh more than it should have. Or maybe exactly as much as it should have, given that I spent a year drawing a Tarot deck that riffs on the Crowley/Harris Thoth...

I'm just wondering if it will run on TempleOS.