4 ms·

>Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today Indeed, in his own words, from 1998: https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging https:/

by chao- 1y ago

>Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today Indeed, in his own words, from 1998: https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging He also gave at least two conference talks where he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology: he thought of the objects like cells sending messages via exchanging various chemicals. I don't have either on hand, but I believe one time he shared this was in an interview with Joe Armstrong.

Rochus 1y ago
> he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any (independent) evidence), and I don't think the analogy he draws between his view of messaging and biochemical signaling really works. His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. Biological systems, in constrast to software systems, lack centralized orchestration, relying on emergent behavior from local interactions instead.
- Jtsummers 1y ago
  > I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any evidence) At least the ACM believes he does. https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm
  - Rochus 1y ago
    Thanks for the hint. That must then have been one of the earliest undergraduate courses in molecular biology in the USA (most universities did not have dedicated undergraduate majors or courses in "molecular biology" in the sixties), and it's a pretty strange combination with mathematics. Early molecular biology education was typically embedded within biochemistry, genetics, or general biology programs.
    - cxr 1y ago
      It's interesting that Wikipedia lists studies and a degree in molecular biology, started first at Bethany College prior to his draft in the Air Force and finished in Boulder from University of Colorado, whereas the Vita section of his HTML-ified thesis lists simply "biology" at Bethany College and lists anthropology when he returned to school in Boulder. It shows a BS in only math. <https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm>
      - Rochus 1y ago
        Good reference, thanks; still more things that just don't add up.
- 0x445442 1y ago
  Yeah, I've watched many of his talks and this has always bothered me. The biological model would be almost entirely asynchronous messaging without direct coupling. Something more like sending messages to an event bus.
  - Rochus 1y ago
    I don't think the term "asynchronous" adequately covers the situation. Even asynchronous messages are sent to specific objects in OO. In biological systems, senders and receivers do not know each other, or are not even aware of each other's existence. A model from computer science that corresponds better to biological systems is that of the untyped queue. But in biology, information is encoded not only in the type, but e.g. also in concentration of molecules; there is also no message order, but communication is subject to stochastic processes.
- andrekandre 1y ago
  > His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. he actually goes into this in one of his (many) talks where he explains what some next steps might be for objects to "sense their environment" and message into the ether so-to-speak very similar to how you describe [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjJaFG63Hlo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjJaFG63Hlo (he starts talking about that around 12 mins)
  - Rochus 1y ago
    Thanks for the link. We already have computer-implemented objects which "sense their environment" since the seventies; e.g. each network adapter "senses" the physical medium for packets it is interested in (which was actually also invented at PARC); also in message queue systems, senders and receivers are not directly connected, but the receiver observes the queues it is interested in and reacts to messages. Even though there are still significant differences to biological systems, where information is encoded not only in the type, but e.g. also in concentration of molecules; there is also no message order, but communication is subject to stochastic processes.

by chao- 1y ago

Rochus 1y ago

> he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any (independent) evidence), and I don't think the analogy he draws between his view of messaging and biochemical signaling really works. His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. Biological systems, in constrast to software systems, lack centralized orchestration, relying on emergent behavior from local interactions instead.

Jtsummers 1y ago
> I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any evidence) At least the ACM believes he does. https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm
- Rochus 1y ago
  Thanks for the hint. That must then have been one of the earliest undergraduate courses in molecular biology in the USA (most universities did not have dedicated undergraduate majors or courses in "molecular biology" in the sixties), and it's a pretty strange combination with mathematics. Early molecular biology education was typically embedded within biochemistry, genetics, or general biology programs.
  - cxr 1y ago
    It's interesting that Wikipedia lists studies and a degree in molecular biology, started first at Bethany College prior to his draft in the Air Force and finished in Boulder from University of Colorado, whereas the Vita section of his HTML-ified thesis lists simply "biology" at Bethany College and lists anthropology when he returned to school in Boulder. It shows a BS in only math. <https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm>
    - Rochus 1y ago
      Good reference, thanks; still more things that just don't add up.
0x445442 1y ago
Yeah, I've watched many of his talks and this has always bothered me. The biological model would be almost entirely asynchronous messaging without direct coupling. Something more like sending messages to an event bus.
- Rochus 1y ago
  I don't think the term "asynchronous" adequately covers the situation. Even asynchronous messages are sent to specific objects in OO. In biological systems, senders and receivers do not know each other, or are not even aware of each other's existence. A model from computer science that corresponds better to biological systems is that of the untyped queue. But in biology, information is encoded not only in the type, but e.g. also in concentration of molecules; there is also no message order, but communication is subject to stochastic processes.
andrekandre 1y ago
> His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. he actually goes into this in one of his (many) talks where he explains what some next steps might be for objects to "sense their environment" and message into the ether so-to-speak very similar to how you describe [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjJaFG63Hlo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjJaFG63Hlo (he starts talking about that around 12 mins)
- Rochus 1y ago
  Thanks for the link. We already have computer-implemented objects which "sense their environment" since the seventies; e.g. each network adapter "senses" the physical medium for packets it is interested in (which was actually also invented at PARC); also in message queue systems, senders and receivers are not directly connected, but the receiver observes the queues it is interested in and reacts to messages. Even though there are still significant differences to biological systems, where information is encoded not only in the type, but e.g. also in concentration of molecules; there is also no message order, but communication is subject to stochastic processes.