> >Well, maybe for the same reason they stopped
>>using an abacus for everything and developed
>>symbolic algebra?
>
>Point taken. But whenever I program these
>machines, I feel like I'm stuck back in the days
>of using an abacus.
>
>
>
>Well, "they" did stop using the "abacus for everything" but there
>are situations where the abacus will outperform computers and so
>it's still used seriously, especially in (I believe) some banks in
>Asia. I'd like to know how those are operated, if I understand it
>correctly the way the symbols (beats in this case) are manipulated
>to input the question is also the way the calculation itself is
>performed leading to a speed increase compared to typing into a
>computer and reading back the answer?
>
>I find that a rather interesting angle on the link between symbols
>and operations on them but it may be entirely tangential to your
>debate?
no, I think this is, in a sense what is at stake here. The abacus was
of great influence to the introduction of the position thinking in
hindu numerals to Europe, and of course to the introduction of the
zero. My question was not rhethorical, and please forgive my usage of
'they' meaning 'humans'. To rephrase my question: Literature may
serve as a means to abstract from action, as to reason about action.
Symbolic algebra has evolved as a system of reasoning about such
reasoning, or action about action, and it has left the realm of
calculation of results of this action. Would you say that live coding
is about returning to the beautiful presence of calculating action
and its results? For me it is about the impossibility of such a
return.
--
.
Received on Sun Jan 06 2008 - 00:49:52 GMT