GitHub'ing
Index by images
1,0

See GitHub'ing (and At GitHub) to watch progress.
For each of these, see the README.md, Rlog.md, and the blog.

We'll post in this area for a while as we organize our thoughts about next steps and a lot more. Such as, meet deadlines. Such as, now the priority is getting The Gardner Annals, Vol. V, No. 1 into a draft form. Then, establish a process that is related to all content (not just code). We'll see. The below will be push down not unlike when I used Concrete 5 for our What's New for an extended period.

I'm going to start a list of issues to discuss (ala Quora or similar) related to software as it is now (a product of what it was) and how it will be. Huge task? Not really. It's necessary in terms of truth engineering.

1. Open versus cloaked. Of course, the former is seen here on GitHub to the extent of public access; one can see all of the details. Public implies, too, repositories that can be seen by anyone. There are private ones, however those working thus are using the same tool set which is an important element to understanding. The latter? Any of those who offer services, say web presence development, through means that are opaque. I bounced off of those in 2012 (this is documented and will be part of the summary).
2. Affectation. What? That related to computing? Has to do with expectations and their mismanagement which is a common theme. Somewhat, this issue was softened a bit throught the disruptive assumption. Yes, top-down inforcing of change for no reason other than to line the pockets of some, albeit with glowing reviews on some sides while others (many) suffer (we'll point to more than the gig economy's failings of the populace).
3. Posture always comes before the act. Somewhat, like the spark of the neuro-world.
4. There's a reason that the old guy lags behind those rushing forward. For one thing, the maddening crowd rushes after what's hot at the moment. Some get rewarded. Guess what? Many get punished for things outside of their control and knowledge. Truth engineering has a whole new realm to poke into, now, courtesy of this article (Surviving Software Dependencies) by Russ Cox at Google. Case in point is the Equifax fiasco. But, there are many more. Russ makes good points about being safe. Guess what? They may use, carefully; but, they rewrite; they, as in Google. Roll-your-own. I would say, like we had this saying in the 60s, 'God grows his own' (very much an analog). Here is an example of code that is pulled that Russ uses as an example: sindresorhus/escape-string-regexp. Russ mentions an inhibitor to doing things right, which I have written on (post at the truth engineering blog). Cost. Yes, if we did this stuff right, we wouldn't have the excess power for things like trying to show that DL is AI. We would be proving, minute to minute.
5. As an aside, OpenAI has $1B, or so, in funding. That ought to keep things popping for a while. Putting off the 'inevitable' winter (would be the 3rd), except discussing that will be part of landsacpe for the next few years. For now, we can assume that interest will be there; demonstrations of wonders will be there. So, too? Truth engineering coming to the fore. And, aNN will be tamed.
6. Juxtapose these two realizations: 3D-printer producing through processes to be defined (they are already being worked) an object with properties that define its existence (no limit to this and various mixtures); a well-endowed mind producing an existential state that results from interactions with advanced computational resources (lots of capability) and that might show some type of metrical'ness. Not polar opposites as we are talking a continuum'like phenomena. However, the latter deals with knowledge (to be further defined in terms of grasping a better notion of intelligence).
7. Modes? Some minds are interruptable almost always, ready to transition cheerfully. Are these minds ever involved with what is considered 'deep' at any time? Examples are those who deal with people (host, child care, etc.). There are other minds that can hold, seemingly, large models in their heads, such as that needed to solve gnarly problems with code. In this case, some useful state might be attained after a extent of time in a cogitative framework; if this is effective, ah-ha might ensure. Not always. As, wrestling with the devil is very much of this variety. But, the state is not left without a reaction, as in having an interruption from out of nowwhere that collapses the thing. The phrase losing one's train of thought applies to this type of event. The reaction? Irritable'ness, usually. Impatience to get back to the proper state which can be faster the second time around. These two states are not usually attainable by the same type of mind. That is, there is a difference that we need to understand. The former is more common. The latter is of the realm of the wizard. Methinks that, too, this latter type uses ritual in order to improve the expectation of a positive outcome. Much to discuss.
8. Some activities, of which we can include the 'mental' oriented, never seem to look below the floor. Yet, they are in need of assistance as well as are those of technical orientation. It's like breathing. We do it all of the time; at times, it's hot and heavy.
9. ...


--- see the blog.





... little floater down here to avoid truncation ...