3 ms·

Realtalk/Dynamicland is fascinating to me, though there's something about it which I haven't been able to get over, which is: how can it provide the kind of gen

Realtalk/Dynamicland is fascinating to me, though there's something about it which I haven't been able to get over, which is: how can it provide the kind of generality we're used to in computing without giving some set of re-combinable primitives? In other words, something like pixels where the primitive thing is simple and easy to configure algorithmically, and yet the range of configurations is vast enough to represent a large fraction of human imagination. I love 'being in the world' as opposed to sitting statically at a desk—but I would need something that could give me the similar feeling of vast possibilities when I consider what I'd like to build next. I wonder if some kind of re-combinable primitives for representation are part of the plan, or if it's an explicit aim of the project to avoid them—a kind of stance against abstraction, reduction, and uniformity. That's part of why it's so fascinating to me: I can't see a general enough system being built without that—but if it were to succeed, I'm fairly confident it would be one of the most interesting systems I'd ever encountered :) Edit: I should add: this is from what little I actually know about it. I've just seen a few few videos, read the blurb from the article, and read another article on the laser socks project which talked some about Realtalk.

skadamat 9y ago
Highly recommend Bret's 2 talks for context: [1] Seeing Spaces: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klTjiXjqHrQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klTjiXjqHrQ [2] Humane Representation of Thought: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agOdP2Bmieg&t=1913s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agOdP2Bmieg&t=1913s
- westoncb 9y ago
  I saw them both a while back, and reviewed the poster for Seeing Spaces just now. However, I haven't been unable to find anything that addresses the issue I brought up. I agree very much with most of the general principles Victor talks about (you can see my own extensive work on making program behavior visible here[0] for example)—but when it comes to the space concept, I have difficulty finding something concrete about how the space would be used beneficially. I get the flavor of this idea that your workspace should be 'extension of your body', but at this point, years after becoming familiar with it, I'd like to get more concrete on the subject. Dynamicland/Realtalk certainly are more concrete—but my thoughts on it are reflected in my first comment. [0] http://symbolflux.com/projects/avd http://symbolflux.com/projects/avd
  - DaniFong 9y ago
    visit and donate. they need help. it's foolish to speculate on the possibilities of a new medium on this extraordinarily limited medium. i can't even embed images here.
    - westoncb 9y ago
      I'm pursuing similar lines myself, and am only able to work in spare moments due to lack of funds, so I'm in no position to donate. > it's foolish to speculate on the possibilities of a new medium on this extraordinarily limited medium I'll be happy to be shown otherwise, but I haven't yet found any counter-example to the idea that the 'verbal medium' is sufficient to describe any principle. So my original question still remains: is there some principle which would allow them to achieve similar generality to traditional computing without using some kind of re-combinable primitives? Edit: to be more specific: without that, how could this ever compete with AR? People could build their own spatially interesting, room-scale workspaces without having to find physical materials to build every application out of. The fact that it can deal with actual physical things has an appeal to it, but I can't see any way of escaping the tradeoff of a massive loss in generality.
      - Glench 9y ago
        > how could this ever compete with AR? "How could the written word ever compete with pictograms?" It's a different medium with real benefits and tradeoffs. Right now for you it's all theoretical, but one day hopefully you'll be able to see for yourself if the medium has the time to grow, breathe, expand, and develop. Funding Dynamicland means that we as a species have the option of seeing how that medium might work if it was allowed to flourish.
        westoncb 9y ago
        We'll, I wish you guys luck and sincerely hope this removes some desk time from my life :)

skadamat 9y ago

Highly recommend Bret's 2 talks for context: [1] Seeing Spaces: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klTjiXjqHrQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klTjiXjqHrQ [2] Humane Representation of Thought: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agOdP2Bmieg&t=1913s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agOdP2Bmieg&t=1913s

westoncb 9y ago
I saw them both a while back, and reviewed the poster for Seeing Spaces just now. However, I haven't been unable to find anything that addresses the issue I brought up. I agree very much with most of the general principles Victor talks about (you can see my own extensive work on making program behavior visible here[0] for example)—but when it comes to the space concept, I have difficulty finding something concrete about how the space would be used beneficially. I get the flavor of this idea that your workspace should be 'extension of your body', but at this point, years after becoming familiar with it, I'd like to get more concrete on the subject. Dynamicland/Realtalk certainly are more concrete—but my thoughts on it are reflected in my first comment. [0] http://symbolflux.com/projects/avd http://symbolflux.com/projects/avd
- DaniFong 9y ago
  visit and donate. they need help. it's foolish to speculate on the possibilities of a new medium on this extraordinarily limited medium. i can't even embed images here.
  - westoncb 9y ago
    I'm pursuing similar lines myself, and am only able to work in spare moments due to lack of funds, so I'm in no position to donate. > it's foolish to speculate on the possibilities of a new medium on this extraordinarily limited medium I'll be happy to be shown otherwise, but I haven't yet found any counter-example to the idea that the 'verbal medium' is sufficient to describe any principle. So my original question still remains: is there some principle which would allow them to achieve similar generality to traditional computing without using some kind of re-combinable primitives? Edit: to be more specific: without that, how could this ever compete with AR? People could build their own spatially interesting, room-scale workspaces without having to find physical materials to build every application out of. The fact that it can deal with actual physical things has an appeal to it, but I can't see any way of escaping the tradeoff of a massive loss in generality.
    - Glench 9y ago
      > how could this ever compete with AR? "How could the written word ever compete with pictograms?" It's a different medium with real benefits and tradeoffs. Right now for you it's all theoretical, but one day hopefully you'll be able to see for yourself if the medium has the time to grow, breathe, expand, and develop. Funding Dynamicland means that we as a species have the option of seeing how that medium might work if it was allowed to flourish.
      - westoncb 9y ago
        We'll, I wish you guys luck and sincerely hope this removes some desk time from my life :)