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

141–150 of 171 posts

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

#141

Post by guidoism »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #88

This article returns error 500 for me. Seriously, STOP rendering your static web content with run-time server-side rendering! There is absolutely no reason this article couldn't be delivered as static assets by a CDN.

I’ve been saying the same thing so much that I should probably just get it tattooed on my forehead.

It’s crazy to think about the carbon we are pumping into the atmosphere in order to do the same computations over and over again. Same goes with layout and rendering on the client. There’s no reason we can’t just do this for a few standard widths and send that static content to the client.

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

#142

Post by jonjacky »

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…

See also Bret Victor's talk, "The Future of Programming". The conceit: it's 1973, he describes (with an overhead projector and transparencies) some then-innovative ideas that he hopes will be adopted in the future.

http://worrydream.com/dbx/

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

#143

Post by guidoism »

dwheeler wrote: post #3

One problem in understanding computer science history is the essentially perpetual copyright laws. It's illegal to view or share many important past programs' source code, a problem not shared by other fields. Imagine discussing literature without being allowed to read it! There are exceptions, but they are exceptions. The rise of open source software is finally letting us view some of that software. But we may never…

Fortunately people are putting up some of that early work: http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects

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

#144

Post by squibbles »

> There was a brilliant programmer at Digitek who had completely novel and now unknown ideas for software development; he never published anything, but you could read and analyze his source code.

Does anyone know about whom Knuth was referring? Did this have anything to do with the work on the PL/I compiler?

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

#145

Post by guidoism »

wernercd wrote: post #49
fooker wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

History is not just about time — what happened when. An equally important part is the ordering and the reasons something happened. You can know how to write simple programs in all paradigms, but fail to understand what to use when. You might have memorized a long list of algorithms but not understand the trade-offs involved in choosing one. Of course history is not the only way to understand this, but it is definitel…

Well like I said... I enjoy history. but. I've never used history to solve business problems. They are related and good to know... but I don't need to know history to flip burgers, run a business or plan my next sprint. I'm not arguing history is unimportant or good to know or even possibly useful just to have ideas of what to do - or what not to do... I'm just arguing it's importance is over-emphasized.

At the junior programmer levels yes that can be true. At the principal engineer levels it’s not true. At that level you have to invent new ways of doing things when existing ways don’t cut it. Looking into the past is super charging.

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

#146

Post by guidoism »

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…

https://planetpdf.com/planetpdf/pdfs/warnock_camelot.pdf

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

#147

Post by auggierose »

scott_s wrote: post #116
auggierose wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That is an absurd take. For all fields, most people are on the outside. Historical work for most people - produced by those on the outside - is how our society and culture understands itself. I recently finished an excellent one volume history of the Civil War, "Battle Cry of Freedom." It was written by James McPherson, a historian. This book has informed my understanding of not just the Civil War, but also the lead…

So, where are we now?

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

#148

Post by wernercd »

crististm wrote: post #68
wernercd wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. On…

The disdain for history as an expression of you not knowing how to code wordpress is strange considering that, as you allude to, you don't know the latter. You may want to think whether learning wordpress is the same with learning history of html at decade level. Since you're publicly exposing your thoughts, let me tell you that what you are doing is expressing your ignorance and being proud of it. You may want to dr…

I've not shown any disdain for history or an inability to code wordpress... in fact, I've said the opposite: I like history and simply don't need it to code.

I don't need to know history to code html, php, javascript, etc. I've a very successful programmer without using the "history' of programming in any shape or form.

"expressing your ignorance" or... I'm simply expressing that I'm a successful programmer who's never used "history" in a decade+ of programming...

You may want to reevaluate "ignorance" as you make claims that you can't support (IE: "disdain" for history and "can't code wordpress" - again, neither statements I've made). Reread my comments.

recap of them: I like history. I don't need history to code wordpress or windows services.

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

#149

Post by jonjacky »

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…

This was linked on HN a few days ago, contains links to dozens of classic papers back to the 1930s:

https://canvas.harvard.edu/courses/34992/assignments/syllabu... - Classics of Computer Science

and that page contains this link to a spreadsheet with links to over 150 historic papers and other sources:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wS6O7-ZoFL7Cfjgt-kdh...

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

#150

Post by ryukafalz »

contingencies wrote: post #132
mikewarot wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People manage permissions just fine in the real world... if you have money in your pocket, you can pick and choose what portion of it to hand to the cashier when you're purchasing something. When you had someone $3.50... you're giving them $3.50 of capability, and no matter how clever the Loch Ness Monster is, they'll never get more than that $3.50. If on the other hand, you have to give them the entire wallet... lik…

you can pick and choose what portion... That was the old way. The new way is you give them your credit card or WeChat 'bill me' code. You get billed whatever the merchant wants to bill. Any post-facto complaint will be at the cost of your own time. Your further analogy is factually inaccurate. Under Windows, AFAIK most programs have a partially restricted permission set, hence Run as administrator . In Linux, under m…

>The new way is you give them your credit card or WeChat 'bill me' code. You get billed whatever the merchant wants to bill. Any post-facto complaint will be at the cost of your own time.

Sure, that may be the "new" way, but that doesn't mean it's better! Much of the payment fraud online couldn't exist if customers were in control of how much money to send and when rather than the merchant.

>Under Windows, AFAIK most programs have a partially restricted permission set, hence Run as administrator. In Linux, under modern distributions, most programs run in both a user and a cgroup context, and some under further restrictions such as chroot and caps.

Under normal circumstances, they're restricted only to the extent that your user is restricted. That's far from the level of granularity that GP is talking about.

Post reply on HN