Hello Alex,
I agree with you. May I augment, or counter-argue in the opposite direction: Possibly in the research community there is a trend - however small - starting with that "Chaos a New Kind of Science" (Gleick's popular book), towards process rather than end product. But also in certain parts of design: People support "products" for example in Kickstarter, more because they are cool and support a process of exploration of new possibilities, and less because they expect them to be a perfect end product (contrary example: the iPhone and the rest of Apple's products). In this trend, Software Engineering is geared to be a pioneer. It is best equipped to help change the orientation towards process. Signs of that are seen also in the recent emphasis on the topics of Reproducible Research and Literate Programming. The convergence of Code Management Systems with Social Media as seen in phenomena like GitHub is an example of a massive turn. (
http://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_th
e_intern
et_will_one_day_transform_government?language=en <
http://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_the_internet_will_one_day_transform_government?language=en>)
So, live coders may be still swimming against the stream, but they are swimming in that river which has the potential to change course (if I may use a metaphor ...;-).
The point is, by bringing together those trends in different fields that point to the "process" direction (Live Coding, Literate Programming, Reproducible Research, Rapid Prototyping, Digital Fabrication, Distributed CMS, Social Media, Crowdsourcing), it is possible to find great potential, and the key lies in Software - as it was since the beginning of the Internet.
Iannis Zannos
> On Mar 27, 2015, at 3:00 PM, alex <alex_at_slab.org> wrote:
>
> The tagline of livecoding.tv is "watch people code products, live".
> This seems at odds with the ideals of many of us, which is about
> experience rather than productivity.
>
> In a way it's great+interesting to see live coding of music collide
> with software engineering, but could this crosstalk make gender bias
> even more evident? Not targeting breathing code in particular,
> especially as I think they're trying to avoid 100% male lineup, but
> this is a handy illustration:
> http://breathing-code.de/program.html
>
> As live coding grows in popularity, will it get less flexible, and
> less inclusive?
>
> I watched this nice paper by Martin Zeilinger:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2mqVcXgz9A
>
> He seems to have got the strong impression that live coding is
> difficult, and says the TOPLAP manifesto says live coding must be from
> scratch (it doesn't) and on show (well, it does say that).
>
> I guess we've run with an open definition of live coding here, but I
> worry that that definition is now being filled in by wider forces.
> It's been said before that women may tend towards not wanting to
> project their screen, and we've always discussed live coding as
> something you could do alone, which makes projecting screens a bit of
> a pointless constraint.. Time to actually edit the manifesto wiki
> page?
>
> But yeah, long live the temporary organisation!
>
> alex
>
> On 17 March 2015 at 08:36, Dan S <danstowell+toplap_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2015-03-17 8:33 GMT+00:00 Julian Rohrhuber
>> <julian.rohrhuber_at_musikundmedien.net>:
>>> maybe toplap has been a verb all along?
>>
>> :)
>>
>>> To toplap: tacitly operate programming languages and perform
>>
>> tacilty? turgidly!
>>
>>> To toplap around: hang about in smoky bars [fig. "don't toplap around!"]
>>> To toplap up: embark upon an activity bound to fail
>>>
>>> #toplap
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 17.03.2015, at 01:30, Amy Alexander <amy_at_plagiarist.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Could also say, "live coding performance." Which brings to mind the fact
>>>> that the term "perform" itself is fraught with confusing multiple
>>>> definitions. So maybe it's not so bad that "live coding" has more than one
>>>> definition/context.
>>>
>>> It always had, as far as I can remember. The proliferation of terminology is maybe more a problem of recognition.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Nick Collins <clicksonnil_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We can live code the definition of live coding as needed,
>>>>>
>>>>> but I did find myself pondering further terms for a musician-programmer
>>>>> (specifically from the music angle rather than fine art, visuals):
>>>>> coda
>>>>> programme-err
>>>>> DACker
>>>>> developmenter
>>>>>
>>>>> best
>>>>> N
>>>>>
>>>>> PS did you know that an anagram of software engineer is "foreseeing new
>>>>> art"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16 Mar 2015, at 21:26, alex <alex_at_slab.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess "live coded music" focusses on the outcome rather than the
>>>>>> activity (depending on whether you think music is a product or an
>>>>>> activity). "live music coding" is a bit better in principle but
>>>>>> doesn't roll off the tongue..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Originally we started off using "live programming" and "live coding"
>>>>>> interchangeably but I think the latter won out because it's easier to
>>>>>> say.. This seems to be the case in this new wave, to start with it was
>>>>>> called 'live programming' but over time has settled back on 'live
>>>>>> coding'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess I'll carry on calling it "live coding" because I'm interested
>>>>>> in non-musical live coding as well, and whether or not we're talking
>>>>>> about music is generally clear from the context.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So maybe we should carry on saying 'live coding', but refer to TOPLAP
>>>>>> more, as a safe space for live coders making video and music a little
>>>>>> outside the world of software engineering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It'll be interesting to see what happens to the wikipedia page..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> alex
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
>>>>>> http://lurk.org/r/topic/5h1yg929uOAr8wgCR7p4Vj
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following
>>>>> email subject: unsubscribe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
>>>>> http://lurk.org/r/topic/4pSin0aMefBWcTTCuyhlaK
>>>>>
>>>>> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email
>>>>> subject: unsubscribe
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
>>>> http://lurk.org/r/topic/7ptEnRVi6goJjzGX9A7G4Y
>>>>
>>>> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
>>> http://lurk.org/r/topic/3ETAObbo7HFyMsf6pl1Qas
>>>
>>> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
>>
>> --
>>
>> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
>> http://lurk.org/r/topic/4Nax8AeAt32A3vkwoEX2Wk
>>
>> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
>
>
>
> --
> http://yaxu.org/
>
> --
>
> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
> http://lurk.org/r/topic/1zUJksq5yB0vwGT13lIZHd
>
> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
--
Read the whole topic here: livecode:
http://lurk.org/r/topic/4nCFUY1cq9a4bUwWCCHrJ8
To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
Received on Fri Mar 27 2015 - 13:18:28 GMT