Book 2 – Page 73

[Sieggy]

The problem with all of that is that the brain is subject to external manipulation through any number of mediums, money being the most effective followed immediately (a very close second) by sex (or the prospect thereof). Money can, over time, overcome virtually any other metaprogram. Those who can resist the reprogramming powers of money are generally known as 'poor'. Though not necessarily in spirit . . .

But hey, you pays your money, you takes your choice.

[Ptharien's Flame]

To me it looks a lot more like functional programming, especially the way you've described it. Tell me, where are the classes in your model? Where are the method calls? Do we use generics/templating or are we parametrically monomorphic?

All in good fun, of course. I don't think we can model the brain accurately with a single paradigm.

Functional programming, Object Oriented Programming, it's all machine code in the end

Kidding aside, nobody in their right mind would design complex software by writing it out in machine code. Still, all programming paradigms are layers built above the basics of computation, and it's this lower layer that limits what can't and can be done, and how fast. OOP or functional programming, you still can't write something to compute Chaitin's constant, not unless you have a black box aka "oracle" that provides it by magic.

Oh, but don't you know some machine code is OO and some functional? *cough* jvm *cough* llvm *cough*

[Ptharien's Flame]

To me it looks a lot more like functional programming, especially the way you've described it. Tell me, where are the classes in your model? Where are the method calls? Do we use generics/templating or are we parametrically monomorphic?

All in good fun, of course. I don't think we can model the brain accurately with a single paradigm.

Functional programming, Object Oriented Programming, it's all machine code in the end

Kidding aside, nobody in their right mind would design complex software by writing it out in machine code. Still, all programming paradigms are layers built above the basics of computation, and it's this lower layer that limits what can't and can be done, and how fast. OOP or functional programming, you still can't write something to compute Chaitin's constant, not unless you have a black box aka "oracle" that provides it by magic.

Oh, but don't you know some machine code is OO and some functional? *cough* jvm *cough* llvm *cough*

EDIT: And don't forget the LisP machines! Those things were weird.

[gameboy1234]

Just some random thoughts:

I was looking at the front page. The header has some interesting design elements. Most of the images there I recognize. Rob, Xin, a dwagon, hexes, a small icon for each side, Hamstard. Interesting to note that each of the small icons represents a side, except for Wanda's. Will she be a side unto herself eventually?

I was also looking that the "o" in Erfworld. Is there a reason why it's all glowie? What does that represent? Parson's bracer? The fourth Arkentool? A portal? What's with the lines emanating from it? The ones below it seem to end in solder points, like a circuit board.

Also, the gold and black leaves and branches, I think are just design elements. They're an arabesque.

[gameboy1234]

Oh, but don't you know some machine code is OO and some functional? *cough* jvm *cough* llvm *cough*

Byte code is not in any way shape or form machine code. Two totally different types of things there.

[Amado]

Just registered to post this thought:

Has anyone commented yet on the fact that Fate seems to have labored fairly mightily (especially apparent in Text Update 052) to ensure that Lady Sylvia succeeds in bringing down the tower?

Whatever Parson's plans, and whether Jetstone or Gobwin Knob or whomever are destined to win or lose... that tower was gonna come down.

What do you think THAT means, in the context of all that has happened since?

[sleepymancer]

Just some random thoughts:

I was looking at the front page. The header has some interesting design elements. Most of the images there I recognize. Rob, Xin, a dwagon, hexes, a small icon for each side, Hamstard. Interesting to note that each of the small icons represents a side, except for Wanda's. Will she be a side unto herself eventually?

I was also looking that the "o" in Erfworld. Is there a reason why it's all glowie? What does that represent? Parson's bracer? The fourth Arkentool? A portal? What's with the lines emanating from it? The ones below it seem to end in solder points, like a circuit board.

Also, the gold and black leaves and branches, I think are just design elements. They're an arabesque.

Some interesting points you raise there, I'm not really sure what is going on with Wanda. I think if I'm kept on edge about it for the next few years/decades I'll be in a good place

I always asusmed the < O > in the logo was a portal, partly for the world-crossing but more because of the bits below it and the links with book 2, p. 58, panel 4 (http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/?px=%2F2011-04-07.jpg). The links to Parson's bracer are interesting as well, though, you are right. I guess an < O > is also quite good for symbolising a world. the best imagery of course works on many levels!

regarding the arabesque decorations, yes! they also remind me of the so-called 'Winchester style' of Anglo-Saxon art, which is noted for its swirling colours and lines, agitated drapery (i.e wind blowing through clothes and tapestries), vine work, tendency for fluid lines to cut across geometric borders and for an overall animated tendency. An style where people tend to step out of the illumination. Its quite a symbolic style, and really contrasts with the static poses and predictability of the Classical world, which the earlier medieval period also drew heavily on. When i see that kind of stylised vine work, agitation and crossing of lines I get an instant message that reform is underway in a human-oriented manner!

[BLANDCorporatio]

Oh, but don't you know some machine code is OO and some functional? *cough* jvm *cough* llvm *cough*

Byte code is not in any way shape or form machine code. Two totally different types of things there.

True that. There's a gazillion layers of abstraction and stuff between the coder and what the machine does.

[Oberon]

Speaking of aliens, I find the conversation between Kriestor and Bland to be fascinating. It quite supports the notion that aliens can exist with whom communication is utterly impossible.

Fear not, Earthlings. Both my species and Kreistor's have come to you in peace. As far as I can tell.

Wait. You can't tell whether or not your own species has come to us in peace???

Since communication is utterly impossible, the communication that the BLAND species comes in peace is highly suspect. BLAND's further communication that the Kriestor species, with which he is unable to communicate, also comes in peace, is simply insane.

[!Oberon]

Since communication is utterly impossible, the communication that the BLAND species comes in peace is highly suspect. BLAND's further communication that the Kriestor species, with which he is unable to communicate, also comes in peace, is simply insane.

And since the boards are now threatened by potentially two different species, it is in everyone's best interest at this point to join the Oberon Collective. We can protect you. Assimilation is easy.

[Goshen]

Since communication is utterly impossible, the communication that the BLAND species comes in peace is highly suspect. BLAND's further communication that the Kriestor species, with which he is unable to communicate, also comes in peace, is simply insane.

And since the boards are now threatened by potentially two different species, it is in everyone's best interest at this point to join the Oberon Collective. We can protect you. Assimilation is easy.

LOL! But the resistance is Feudal....

[Dr Pepper]

Oh, but don't you know some machine code is OO and some functional? *cough* jvm *cough* llvm *cough*

Byte code is not in any way shape or form machine code. Two totally different types of things there.

True that. There's a gazillion layers of abstraction and stuff between the coder and what the machine does.

Yup. And below the machine code there's the microcode where nothing is happening but stack, register, and memory operations. And below that it' all truth value manipulation. Below that it's votage level shifts.

[BLANDCorporatio]

And below that it's turtles, all the way down.

[Ptharien's Flame]

And below that it's turtles, all the way down.

Turtles made out of low-mass leptons.