jacabado

I have a dream where you can code Lisp via diagrams, this is a nice aproximation of it.

Anybody ever tought of that? First you draw diagrams of Lisp metaphors with Lisp, then you can code Lisp by creating diagrams and evaluating them. Thanks to the almighty powers of Lisp you could then draw or code meta-diagrams to guide diagram modelling. The biggest challenge, imhhho, is getting the Lisp diagram representation right to make it sound.

I was thinking in joining a Lisp open-source project to get up with Lisp application coding pratices, any suggestion?

Obligatory reference: http://www.aperfectmess.com/ a book about the cost of neatness. And this debate covers a lot of areas. Anyone that trusts science must recognize the power of emergent patterns, and how they rule the world. This, the internets, is one of the most interesting examples of it because it was just born some years ago, world geography and big cities are as interesting but much more afflicting examples. Will there be a science of disorder? In the case of enterprise architecture and Craiglist, what are the principles? Are they embodied in Craig Newmark? Or there will never be a science of disorder, and rest of us will be left with the social sciences which try to explain how we value neatness and hoping more enlinghtned people like Craig Newmark will rule the world?

There is a breach in the Master & Commander pattern of today enterprises waiting to be opened.

"What about me, said C#. I look like Prince!" Couldn't have said it better! Now back to the funk!

haha, the blink tag!! He is the responsible!

"A wavelet is a part of a wave which can be best compared to a e-mail in a e-mail thread or a message is a discussion forum."

Isn’t this wrong? As far as I understand, a wavelet should be compared to an e-mail thread and a blip to an individual e-mail message. And this comparison just makes sense in the context of a messaging widget serving the same purpose e-mail serves today.

I would be eager to discuss possible outcomes of this new technology. Exciting times are coming, and more than never it’s unbelievable open to everyone to participate in the shaping of the future. Web 2.0 is becoming a commodity.

Three questions to discuss: - What will be the distribution and evolution of gadgets? Will we converge to winner takes all monopolies in each of the functionality spaces? This depends a lot on gadget inter-operability, how will one be able to move a wavelet from wave to wave. Will there emerge wavelet standards? This way gadget (and robot) developers can extend each other efforts opening up competition.

- How will online identity change? There are already a lot of privacy issues on debate, I think most of those are non-issues raised by the demoed gadgets. People are aware of those and most of the things raised by now will be just solved with some preference settings. Of primary interest to me will be how will these robots extend and manage our online identity? Big issue.

- Enterprise applications and google stake, if everything is open (as it seems right now) what will be Google’s interest on it? I might be being naive here, but I can’t see clearly how will google monetize the huge enterprise market for this. Wave provider hosting?

Well I can't see who is theirs' Matt Maroon, but I don't know if the world can stand two of those! :D That would be too much genius in the world, of course!

I subscribe, and if I can I would add: - Multicultural experiences, when I was younger I participated in a Camp with people from various backgrounds (races, income classes, countries) it was really a big experience. - Sharing, I guess in the near future we will be teaching to our children to be humble by giving, those new syndromes they're discovering of spoiled children who just had everything in their lifes and the parents lose control of them. I guess playing with another children also helps, and having strong bonds with relatives of the same age.

I am from a big family and I just see the differences when comparing myself to single sons, but I find the differences interesting, I even admire them.

I also wonder what are the influences of growing up in a family dominated by women. Anyone wants to elaborate?

Great discussion!

Blame PG, he started it all.

"Everybody serious about doing software should make their own hardware." Steve Jobs

That might no longer be true as PPC died, but anybody serious about doing software should experiment Mac OS and the application ecosystem around it. What surprised me the most was the fit between the Apple market and some applications that have no equivalent in Windows/Unix. For me Scrivener was a dream I had.

There's a lot to be said, and it's really interesting to compare the platforms, but not in reply to a post of a smart guy who finds counterintuitive to install in Mac OS.

Hey Matt you don't have to live with applications that have 20+ buttons in the first 2 rows of the interface.

And I also think u can keep the controversy tone of your posts without being dumb. You were in a great path.

I've learnt this lesson the hard way. Now my favorite book in social networks is "Why Most Things Fail" by Paul Omerod.

I'll recommend it to everyone, but specially to those with some interest, and little knowledge, in Economics.

"that most startup ideas are merely decisions to execute rather than ideas of intrinsic value"

Now he should start talking about giving the first step on a date with a girl ...

Save energy? IMHO it matters a lot!

Javascript-based apps are bad enough on desktop, I don't want to have them in my mobile device.

I recommend checking "Welcome to the experience economy", from B. Joseph Pine II and James H. Gilmore in Harvard Business Review July-August 98.

"everything will calm down and you will have time to think about deeper things and find deeper connections within your life" - my fear is what happens to those who already think about deep enough things and find scary deep connections within their life, so I'll stay as a master procrastinator!

Yesterday I was watching Smith&Jones, Britcom also has much of this, constructing ideas around the stupidly obvious and ignored on the perspective of the comic writer.

Is it just me or Twitter fits perfectly in that definition?

Be sure to check all the parts, 1 to 7 the first episode, and 8 to 14 the second.