4 ms·

Although Bret Victor's ideas behind reactive documents are interesting, I think the first example on this page (regarding the state parks) is particularly unfri

Although Bret Victor's ideas behind reactive documents are interesting, I think the first example on this page (regarding the state parks) is particularly unfriendly and difficult to gain any understanding from. My views very closely aligns with (and was influenced by) Evan Miller's blog post [1] on the top that I highly recommend you read. The overall gist is that equations are actually the friendliest way to spread information about the relationships between several (ie more than 3 or 4) variables. The final paragraphs of Evan Miller's essay address this particular webpage (the Tangle demo) in particular. [1] http://www.evanmiller.org/dont-kill-math.html http://www.evanmiller.org/dont-kill-math.html

hsparikh 13y ago
Have yet to go through Evan's post, but as you point out, the equations might be the most accessible way to truly comprehend relationships between 4 or more variables. However, libraries like Tangle are powerful tools to visualize and understand relationships between 2-3 variables.
- dvt 13y ago
  Maybe visualize, but understand? Doubtful. I don't think the computational overhead justifies a complex subsystem instead of just something like "x = cos(theta)" without some fancy rotating control.
  - davorak 13y ago
    My take on the best way to write/use such a document would be first present the math, then a reactive example. The user should read the math formulate a hypothesis/visualization/understanding of the system then use the reactive document to verify or falsify the concept. This does not remove mathematical understanding from the document, but adds an opportunity for quick verification of an understanding. And according to my vague understanding of learning and neural connection getting quick feedback is key to forming strong connections.
glurgh 13y ago
Dijkstra wrote something (in the same vein, if not an exact topic-match) similar but a bit more strident in '85 http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD09xx/EWD917.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD09xx/EW...

hsparikh 13y ago

Have yet to go through Evan's post, but as you point out, the equations might be the most accessible way to truly comprehend relationships between 4 or more variables. However, libraries like Tangle are powerful tools to visualize and understand relationships between 2-3 variables.

dvt 13y ago
Maybe visualize, but understand? Doubtful. I don't think the computational overhead justifies a complex subsystem instead of just something like "x = cos(theta)" without some fancy rotating control.
- davorak 13y ago
  My take on the best way to write/use such a document would be first present the math, then a reactive example. The user should read the math formulate a hypothesis/visualization/understanding of the system then use the reactive document to verify or falsify the concept. This does not remove mathematical understanding from the document, but adds an opportunity for quick verification of an understanding. And according to my vague understanding of learning and neural connection getting quick feedback is key to forming strong connections.

glurgh 13y ago

Dijkstra wrote something (in the same vein, if not an exact topic-match) similar but a bit more strident in '85 http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD09xx/EWD917.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD09xx/EW...