Hi Julian
thanks for the note, I was a big unsure about including that line so I'm
going to have to defend it a bit better.
Folk psychology is no joke, it is in fact taken seriously by some
philosophers as a means of drawing relevant conclusions about an
individual's behaviour. (Daniel Dennett's comments about thermostats come to
mind). However the Churchlands have spent a great deal of energy trying to
discredit it, calling it "a stagnant and degenerating research program"
I did try to take a light tone in the paper as often as possible, so that
people wouldn't take things too seriously (but it seems some people did
anyway....). But the competitive performances are no joke - they really
happen and are a lot of fun!
Marcel
On 22/02/2008, Julian Rohrhuber <rohrhuber_at_uni-hamburg.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Marcel,
>
> it seems that many of your claims would need to be verified or at
> least sources should be added. An example: "Folk psychology tells us
> that stress is healthy and necessary for an individual to prosper."
> It seems that this is rather some kind of free market evangelist's
> folk psychology? Sorry maybe I take it to be serious and it is all a
> joke anyway..
>
>
>
>
> >Hi Kas and Andrew
> >
> >You both bring up some very interesting points.
> >
> >quoting Kas:
> >"I talked about this because of Marcel's competitions which have
> >rules about loading files (so everything has to be written on the
> >spot, (which I like as a perspective) but those rules don't take
> >into account that different systems consider different things to be
> >a part of the language itself nor for open-source systems being
> >changeable themselves, making the whole rule moot, in a way."
> >
> >and quoting Andrew:
> >"Yes, exactly, but it is important not to let the process become
> >more important than the result. Don't think I'm arguing for perfect
> >performances here, I certainly don't mean to suggest that, but if
> >you are going to have a programming competition then make it about
> >programming. "
> >
> >In the competitions that I organize I try to divert attention away
> >from these aspects. My primary focus is to bring live coding to a
> >lay-audience. The competitive element is there to create excitement,
> >and the rules that I've formulated are not intended to highlight
> >programming skills but thinking skills. I want an audience who
> >understands nothing at all about coding to at least understand that
> >what is being projected is a manifestation of a thought process. The
> >idea is that the performer who demonstrates superior thinking would
> >"win". The audience votes for the winner based on applause. And I
> >would prefer that the audience voted on the basis of what they
> >experienced as a performance rather than asking them to base their
> >choice on something they don't understand (C, SC, CK or whatever). A
> >competition which would be about programming would require an expert
> >jury to decide the winner, and I am targeting a decidedly non-expert
> >audience as the jury.
> >
> >I would like very much if we could go into the discussion further,
> >but I think it would be useful if the interested parties would read
> >my article and respond to what's written there:
>
> ><http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>
> http://kmt.hku.nl/~marcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/<
> http://kmt.hku.nl/%7Emarcel/LiveCodingArticleDRAFT/>
>
> >
> >(because it's still a draft I wasn't planning to make it broadly
> >public yet, but what the heck...)
> >
> >looking forward to debate...
> >
> >Marcel
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
Received on Mon Feb 25 2008 - 09:41:27 GMT