- Difficulty of software security:
- Does what it should
- Doesn't do what it shouldn't
- No software is initially secure
- Only a minimal approach can produce software that is eventually secure
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Friday, October 23, 2015
"At the time it [E-lang] was the only language that provided first-class support
for simple, capability-secure distributed programming (first language to
provide transparent persistent event loops, first language to seriously
adopt promises and promise pipelining, first language to seriously
tackle the principle of least authority via capabilities). Other
languages have since adopted some of its principles."
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
> At some point Sussman expressed how he thought AI was on the wrong
track. He explained that he thought most AI directions were not
interesting to him, because they were about building up a solid AI
foundation, then the AI system runs as a sort of black box. "I'm
not interested in that. I want software that's accountable."
Accountable? "Yes, I want something that can express its symbolic
reasoning. I want to it to tell me why it did the thing it did,
what it thought was going to happen, and then what happened
instead." He then said something that took me a long time to
process, and at first I mistook for being very science-fiction'y,
along the lines of, "If an AI driven car drives off the side of the
road, I want to know why it did that. I could take the
software developer to court, but I would much rather take the AI to
court."
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Monday, October 12, 2015
Thursday, October 8, 2015
"But what still seems paradoxical is why Cocoa programmers
advocate Objective-C in the first place if such a technology was originally created to
discipline and their work? There are some possible explanations. First, although object oriented
programming disciplines a programmer, such discipline is seen as beneficial to
the programmer to avoid bad habits, ultimately freeing the programmer from tedious
debugging and allowing for more creative, artistic work to take place. Second, our
examination of Alan Kay’s motivations in creating Smalltalk suggests an ideological
component to advocacy of object-orientation. Kay’s project was part of a larger “personal
computing” movement associated with the 1960’s counterculture and with Doug
Engelbart’s human augmentation project. Through Stewart Brand’s Whole Earth
Catalog, a countercultural re-appropriation of cybernetics and small-scale digital
calculators as tools not for military-industrial-bureaucratic control but for personal
liberation and transcendence through information mastery lived on in the personal
computing movement, replacing LSD with PCs as mind expanding tools. Two key
features of the Smalltalk system, the graphical user interface and object-oriented
programming, both were intended to bring computing power to the masses. Seen in this
light, advocacy of dynamic object-oriented programming, and Cocoa in particular, is an
ideological project of conversion."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)