Let's for a moment take up the idea again that live coding is public thought. Then what is the medium of this thought? It is, in this case, algorithm, in its double meaning: prescription and process/result. We can use algorithms to reason about a domain (e.g. sound). We can also use a domain to display algorithms about which we reason.
Eventually though, live coding is thought being delegated to algorithms and becomes bling thought, and algorithms affect thought, so it changes direction. It is at its best when this whole process is conversational.
Then, under this premise, it comes down to the question what is thought, and how to recognise it? Then live coding may be the experimentation with what can still be called a thought or what can be recognised as thought (i.e. what is transmissible).
Received on Wed Aug 14 2013 - 20:40:58 BST