I'm mentioning hypercard specifically because I've been relearning hypercard recently, and it is *better* and more useful than I remember it being.

It's honestly revelatory.

Hypercard, if your unfamiliar, is powerpoint + instructions.

Here's a great introduction/example: loper-os.org/?p=568

The author walks you through building a calculator app in about 5 minutes, step by step.

Warning: There's a bit of ableist language tossed around in the last paragraph. Skip it, there's nothing worth reading there anyway.

You use the same kinds of tools you would use to build a slideshow, but you couple them with links, multimedia, and scripting.

Want a visual interface for your database of client data? Great! slap together a roladex card, and drop in a search function.

Go from concept to presentation ready in an hour or two (or less, if you've done this before!)

Hypercard was easy to use. Everyone who used it loved it. It was integral to many businesses daily operations.

Jobs killed it because he couldn't control it.

Microsoft doesn't ship any tools for building programs with their OS anymore, either.

They used to. There was a time when you could sit down at any windows or DOS machine and code up a program that would run on any other Windows or DOS machine.

But we can't have that anymore.

In the name of Ease of Use, they left out the Human aspect.

Use your computer how you're told to use it, and everything is easy.

Do anything new or novel and it's a struggle.

My nephew has an ipad.

He asked his dad how to write games. His dad didn't know. His dad asked me how to write games on an iPad. I told him not to bother.

My nephew asked me how to learn to write games.

I gave him a raspberry pi and a copy of pico 8.

Now he writes computer games.

He couldn't do that on his iPad.

Hypercard would be a perfect fit for the iPad and iPhone.

Imagine it!

Imagine the things you could build.

But we aren't allowed to have computers that are fun to use, that are easy to build for, that are human centric, or human literate.

The last 10 years of development in computers were a mistake. Maybe longer.

Instead of making computers Do More, or making them Feel Faster, we've chased benchmarks, made them more reliant on remote servers, and made them less generally useful. We brought back the digital serfdom of the mainframe.

In the first episode of computer chronicles (youtube.com/watch?v=wpXnqBfgvP) the mainframe guy is real adamant about how mainframes are good and micros are bad.

The host, a microcomputer legend, disagrees pretty strongly.

Later, when they talk about the future of networking, the mainframe guy talks about it as a return to mainframes. The micro guy talks about BBSs, peer to peer networks.

The mainframe guys are winning.

(this is not to say that I think mainframes are bad. I don't. Mainframes can be really good and interesting! Plato was wonderful, as were some of the early unix mainframes.

But IBM style Mainframe culture is The Computer as a thing you Use but don't Control culture, and I am very against that.)

I have to step away for a while. I'll continue this later.

@ajroach42 I want to respond, elaborate, & discuss at length here. I spent about 10 months some years ago immersed in the computing literature around the history of debuggers, during which I went from EDSAC to Visual Studio, but also all the other half-dead ends ends of computing history such as, e.g., Lisp machines.

Naturally, I came out of it a Common Lisper, and also naturally, with Opinions about modern computing.

Up for the discussion? It could get wordy and over a few days. :)

@pnathan for sure.

I haven’t gotten in to lisp machines yet, but I’m always down for discussion.

@ajroach42 @pnathan
This thread is going to be gold :)
(I'm replying here so that I won't forget about it...)

@ciaby @pnathan I hope you enjoy! I'm looking forward to the discussion as well.

@ajroach42 @ciaby
OK, so, I'm about a decade older than you, Andrew: I taught myself QBasic in the mid 90s, got online late 90s, never really looked back.

First, I want to say this: older computer systems - considered as systems - were generally more capable.

But to be clear, they were limited in use for those who didn't take an interest in learning them. I'm talking about things that weren't Windows 3.1+.

@ajroach42 @ciaby This was the Great Debate that was largely won by Microsoft. "Everyone can 'use' a computer.". That is to say, everyone can operate the appliance with preinstalled software. *everyone*. Apple pioneered the notion, but it turns out to be the preferred mode for businesses, who really rather don't like having specialized experts.

@ajroach42 @ciaby It is my contention that Windows (& *nix) computer systems are designed to be administrated and managed by sysadmins, and the user experience in this case is great.

When you have sysadmins, there are no driver problems. There are no printer problems. There are no problems, as a matter of fact: it's all been taken care of by the admins.

This is exactly how executives like it.

Apple does the same, with their iPhone.

Apple is the sysadmin, metaphorically.

@pnathan @ciaby This is a good point, but I think it deserves scrutiny.

I am employed as a support engineer and a sysadmin, and I still run in to driver issues, printer issues, etc.

I take care of them, eventually, when I can.

But, even after doing this for 10 years, I still encounter problems that I can't solve (because there isn't a solution.)

but the metaphor of Apple as sysadmin, I'll accept. I disagree with someone else admining my phone, but that's another issue.

@ajroach42 @ciaby your users pay you so they don't have to care about sysadmin issues. their world is great!

@ajroach42 @ciaby I'm glossing over the 1% failures to get at the core point: sysadmins are designed into the windows and unix world so users can focus on their core competency.

@Shamar @pnathan @ciaby I never said people can't learn to program.

I'm saying that some people don't want to learn to program, and that what we call "programming" is needlessly difficult for some tasks, in the name of corporate profits.

@Shamar @ajroach42 @ciaby @pnathan

sorry for digging up this old thread, but I have one remark that's been on my mind since I saw your post:

I knew how to read and write when I was 4. I don't remember how I learned it, but I guess I wanted to learn it, or found it fun.
Are not all people like that? Do other people only learn to read when forced to at school?
Is there a correlation between programmers and people who learnt to read before school?

@Wolf480pl @Shamar @ajroach42 @ciaby @pnathan I don't remember learning to read either, but different people learn at different paces, and learning later has little correlation to academic performance. The main correlation is being forced to learn to read causing later lack of interest in reading.

@seanl @Shamar @ajroach42 @ciaby @pnathan
Yeah, seems to make sense.
I was forced to learn to calculate integrals, and I hate integrals, and I forgot them already.

@seanl @Shamar @ajroach42 @ciaby @pnathan
btw. doesn't the school system seem to you like it's designed to destroy curiosity in children?

@Wolf480pl @pnathan @ciaby @Shamar @seanl and to turn them in to obedient workers who don't ask questions, and accept ridiculous punishments as a matter of course.

@ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby @pnathan
IOW, hackers are a danger to the state (or even society) ?

@ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby @pnathan
OTOH, I've seen state money being spent to pic the best students and provide them with an individualized education path, so that'd mean the state actually wants to support hackers... weird...

@ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby @pnathan
The incompetence part is IMO self-explanatory, so let's focus on malice.
Any ideas who and why doesn't want there to be many hackers?

@ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby @pnathan
Or maybe let's consider the incompetence.
It surely is hard for a single person to keep 30 children occupied, let alone teach them something.

Would homeschooling be better? In the best case it probably would, but what about the average case and worst case? Would homeschooling-as-default reinforce the divide between the rich and the poor?

Or maybe we should go for master-and-padawan model, where you learn by helping someone do what you want to learn?

@Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby

homeschooling is not practical nor possible to do well at scale.

it relies on having at least one highly educated & disciplined parent who throws their career & potential in the trash to teach their children. to be clear, that largely means women.

I had an *excellent* homeschooling education and I have 0 desire to suggest that anyone should pursue that path who isn't wealthy already.

fix the frigging school system.

@Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby to be even more blunt, most people aren't that unique or that interested in learning what's needed for general life success and achievement. That's the point of a regularized mandated curriculum: to ensure, on average, people know enough to be good citizens.

the legendary lack of care for education produces the antipathy towards education in the USA.

if you want excellent education, you must make rich kids go to public schools.

@Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @seanl @Shamar @ciaby in areas such as the puget sound where rich people get to siphon their kids off to private schools means that they let public schools go hang,

ban private schools both secular and religious.

Follow

@pnathan @Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @seanl @ciaby

I pretty much agree.

Up to 13 years ago I would have agreed completely.

However now I have some doubts about religious schools: maybe it's just that my conversion to Catholicism poses a bias, but I see a value in schools that have a religious bias.

IFF the quality of the education is equivalent to that of public school, the bias proposed to students differs from the mainstream consumerism, teaching them to take everything with a grain of salt.

@Shamar @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @ciaby From a political standpoint, forcing the rich to send their kids to public schools would certainly improve the quality of the public schools. Or it might just get the rich to move elsewhere.

In Palo Alto, one of the richest cities in the US, the wealthy largely send their kids to the public schools. Reason being that Palo Alto itself is exclusive, so the public schools are essentially private. They have parks that don't allow non-locals.

@Shamar @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @ciaby And that's what you'll get if you ban private schools & home schooling. Many more communities will start looking like Palo Alto, and public schools in poor communities will continue to suck. And then the rich will fight any requirements to bus kids around, funding for said buses, etc.

@Shamar @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ajroach42 @ciaby If anything, banning private schools would *benefit* the rich because instead of forfeiting the taxes they spend on public education, they'd now be getting them back.

@ajroach42 @Shamar @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ciaby I'm not sure how it is in other states, but in California the quality of the local schools is one of the top drivers of where upper middle class people choose to live. In my family's case we picked the school first and then moved near the school. Even if people didn't relocate right away, over time the clustering would happen, and it would be worse because there'd be no private school fallback.

@Shamar @ciaby @seanl @Wolf480pl @pnathan having worked in public and religious schools, most religious schools in the US are regressive and every one I’ve ever set foot in (many) have been horribly abusive.

I lose so much respect for people that subject their kids to that stuff.

@ajroach42 @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ciaby @Shamar A couple of the most respected schools in my area are religious. A majority of the students in both schools aren't even members of the religion of the school.

@seanl @Shamar @ciaby @Wolf480pl @pnathan my perspective is probably tainted by growing up in the rural south, where ‘religion’ is wielded as a weapon against education.

@ajroach42 @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ciaby @Shamar Yeah "religious school" to me (here) means Catholic or Jesuit, i.e. religions that value education. For many other (Christian) religions "religious school" seems like an oxymoron.

@seanl @ajroach42 @pnathan @Wolf480pl @ciaby @Shamar In the city I live in (Newark, OH), the public school system has a perception of being where you send your kids to become drug dealers, whereas the religious schools are where you send your kids to learn. (Most of them are Catholic in my area, AFAIK.)

@Shamar @pnathan @ajroach42 @seanl @ciaby
from what I've heard about catholic schools in Poland, they're the greatest source of atheists. If you're kinda-religious, and your parents send you to a religious school, you'll see the church's hypocrisy from so close that you won't want to have anything in common with Catholic Church anymore.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Invite-only Mastodon server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!