trystan.org

We tend to think of computers as tools and we do not tend to think of tools as things to which we integrate. Rather, they’re things we control to make us more efficient at a task and computers certainly do this. However, a computer is special and a strict tool analogy limits the potential of a computer. It facilitates a complex feedback loop between an entire environment that we sense and manipulate via our behaviors. As the environment is manipulated our approach to changing it ultimately changes. Traditional tools do not fit this description. When we use a hammer, it doesn’t change the way we sense it in response to our behaviors, assuming you don’t smash your thumb with it, but computers can. For instance, as one engages in the behavior of building higher levels of abstraction inside a computer they sense the information differently (the representation is different). This difference in sense causes a change in behavior and the loop continues. Unfortunately, the semantics currently is use for interfacing with computers bottleneck this loop which in my view hinders the evolution of computing. Currently, we deal with aspects that are tool related, a desktop, files, etc. What would happen if the environment allowed for evolutionary construction and relation of ‘ideas’ or abstractions? The user could sense these abstractions and then build greater abstractions, free of imposed convention. The tool analogy no longer restricts the flow of information between the human and machine. How is this accomplished? Beats me, but I think systems like Squeak have interesting things to say about the general idea.