Thanks, Jon.  

This is helpful.  Still, absent dualism, why isn’t getting a machine to do what 
you want a kind of communication.  Why privilege the inter-human kind.  

 

n

 

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> thompnicks...@gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> 
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 12:46 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] coding versus music

 

Nick,

 

I am no longer a good programmer/coder, although once ...  Really good coders 
like Glen, Marcus, Jon ... on the list, will probably disagree with me; but:

 

Coding/programming is not communication — if restricted to coder ----> machine 
-----> machine action. The machine is nothing more than the embodiment of a 
mathematical abstraction and coding is analogous to rearranging the symbols in 
a mathematical expression, such that, when resolved, the expression yields 
different results.

 

No boss says what you quoted, but few programmers have not had the experience 
of "the damn machine keeps doing what I told it, instead of what I want."

 

But — a program has two audiences: the machine (no communication here) and 
other programmers (tons of miscommunication here). This is what the reference 
from Eric Smith talks about. There is an entire, usually ignored, paradigm in 
computer science called "literate programming"  — the most prominent advocate, 
Donald Knuth.

 

If one were skilled at literate programming, one would be communicating to 
another programmer (or herself at a later point in time) all the knowledge and 
meaning necessary for the latter to understand, modify, enhance, or correct the 
program as needs be. If possible this would be a communication skill worth 
developing — might lead to more precise and accurate communication outside the 
world of the computer.

 

"If possible," is key. Many, starting with Peter Naur, would argue that this 
kind of programmer-to=programmer communication is impossible because the 
medium, the code plus any written documentation, is too impoverished to 
communicate what needs to be communicated. In Naur's world, programming is 
joint theory building — a theory of "an affair in the world and how the program 
(addresses) it." Code and documentation represent maybe a tenth of that theory, 
the remainder being in the heads of those who developed it.

 

davew

 

 

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021, at 10:56 AM, thompnicks...@gmail.com 
<mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>  wrote:

This flies in the face of my belief that you coders know something about life 
that we citizens need to know.   I imagine coding to be like trying to write an 
instruction to a person such that that person always does what you want them to 
do.  So, it is an act of communication in which the communicatee is always 
right, no matter how idiotic may be it’s response.  No boss ever says to a 
coder, “Your code was brilliant but unfortunately the machine didn’t understand 
you.” 

 

Am I right about any of that?

 

Nick Thompson

thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> 

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > On 
Behalf Of Prof David West

Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:41 AM

To: friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com> 

Subject: [FRIAM] coding versus music

 

 

For a while now there has been a huge push to teach kids how to code. 
Ostensibly because it enhances skills like language, logic, and math; plus, 
"computer literacy" is essential in a world filled with computers.

 

A study at MIT suggests that coding skill is orthogonal to reading skill and 
has little, if any, influence on development of logic/math skills.

 

An article in the Journal of Neuroscience argues that if you want to increase 
the "skills and brainpower" of kids you should teach them music.

 

I came across this information peripherally and have not read the specific 
research reported on. I want the reports to be accurate representation of the 
research because it confirms long held biases against the value of 
"computational thinking" and computer science as a fundamental knowledge domain.

 

dave west

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
<http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 

un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

 

 

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to