|
I liked the joke more than the comedy autopsy fwiw
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
Gazpacho posted:Why, within the current renaissance of research in continental philosophy, is there a coincidence between the structure of ontological systems and the structure of the most highly evolved technologies of post-Fordist capitalism? I am speaking, on the one hand, of computer networks in general and object-oriented computer languages (such as Java or C++) in particular and, on the other hand, of certain realist philosophers such as Bruno Latour, but also more pointedly Quentin Meillassoux, Graham Harman, and their associated school known as speculative realism. Why do these philosophers, when holding up a mirror to nature, see the mode of production reflected back at them? Why, in short, is there a coincidence between today’s ontologies and the software of big business? i think you might find that latour, badiou & co. labor under the same setting upon that sets upon man and challenges him forth to reveal the real, in the mode of ordering, as standing-reserve as the corporate computer scientist and mathematician, op
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Blotto Skorzany posted:Convolve your ideas about ontology with the unit toke function and I'll think you'll find that you finally understand what a monad is
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
i seriously thought those posts were from a markov generator at first. still not sure.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Blotto Skorzany posted:Convolve your ideas about ontology with the unit toke function and I'll think you'll find that
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
gazpacho that was a real neat article thanks for postin it
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:the non-joke is that he was using biological definitions not philosophy my ap biology class in high school told me that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny was still considered mostly true so it was a bit weird seeing a 1978 citation for it being defunct
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:comedy autopsy mods plz
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Spime Wrangler posted:gazpacho that was a real neat article thanks for postin it idk anything about those philosophers he discusses but they're all piled on top of that very flawed starting premise Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 07:00 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
did hitler actually drink water?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
i'm just asking questions. truth does not fear investigation.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
hi guys, haven't checked the thread in a while. is python still the current hipste?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
actually Python is the new Java
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:i thought it was really dumb myself, his claim that object-oriented languages are a of hallmark of contemporary capitalist ideology is only slightly more persuasive than "hitler drank water." it is plain enough that software managers have used OOPLs to reify programming labor for market consumption, but that only partially explains the adoption of OOP and galloway offers nothing that i can see to explain adoption more generally as something that proceeds from the initiative of capitalists. indeed if you look beyond companies developing platform technology as such, managers will readily go to market with systems running amorphous poo poo, for reasons that bill gates expressed in a critique of OO hype around 1989: people buy software for the features and "no one cares that you used squirrels to build the thing" Here's the paper if anyone else is enough of a continentalist loser to want to read it: http://cultureandcommunication.org/galloway/pdf/Galloway,%20Poverty%20of%20Philosophy.pdf I think the bit about programming languages is sufficient for his purpose, which is to demonstrate that mathematics as we know it is both a tool of capitalism and has been historically shaped by the capitalist drive. I also think that OOP could be argued to have a deeper effect on the use and organization of labor, especially considering how program structure generally mirrors the structure of the teams working on it, the organizations that coordinate the teams, and the economic systems that structure the relationships between the organizations. Even if OOP isn't necessarily a core element of capitalist ideology, it is purpose-built for supporting capitalist systems and in use mirrors the structure of those systems. I think that you could substitute non-structured, functional, distributed, or whatever programming paradigm you would like and still come to the same conclusion, regardless of the quality of execution (amorphous poo poo). His specific point seems to be that set-theory-derived tools (chosen as his example because those are the ones being used by the philosophers he cites) may be either susceptible to cooption by capitalist forces or may have arisen due to pressure from capitalism. For example, would our command of data analysis or numerical integration methods be as sharp if they did not have military applications? Would set theory be as advanced if it was not useful for the categorizing and ordering tasks that benefit industry? Can mathematical tools associated with software engineering be the foundation of a moral, ethical philosophy? Basically, no: p19 posted:after software has entered history, math cannot and should not be understood ahistorically I think his point can be understood using two of heidegger's arguments about how science and technology evolve and shape our perception of reality. The first (presented in the Question Concerning Technology) is that modern technological humanity perceives natural resources first and foremost in terms of how they can be put to use: a dammable river as a stock/standing-reserve of hydraulic energy, a mountain as a stock of iron ore, people as a stock of labor effort, or in this case mathematics as a stock of useful tools for the extraction, transformation, and ordering of these other resources. The second argument (presented in The Age of the World Picture) is that the reality perceived by the scientific process necessarily perpetuates and extends a preexisting framework of thought (a "world picture"). New math is built on old math, while new physical experiments are built on, verify, disprove, and extend the prevailing model of physical laws and thereby perpetuate and reaffirm the use of that model. Galloway's argument is that, at best, realism and the abstract mathematical approach to philosophy lacks built-in, foundational morality or ethics and at worst is built on and therefore perpetuates capitalist systems of thought. If the math of set theory and object oriented programming arose historically through a drive towards capitalist ends (ie Fordism, post-Fordism), then "Object-Oriented Philosophy" and the realist program is built with tools that arose from and were designed for use in capitalist enterprise, and tools developed by anticapitalist philosophers can be easily coopted since by design they map well to the structure of the capitalist system: quote:As the opening remarks on Badiou and Java illustrated, there exists today a convergence between the logic of mathematical disciplines (such as computer science) and the logic of the mode of production.17 Let this serve as a grand dividing line between two schools of thought, those who consider today that symbolic logic, geometry, linear analysis, set theory, algorithms, information processing, and so on are outside of ontic history, that is, outside the history of instances (but not necessarily the history of essences), and those who recognize that such mathematization exists today at the very heart of the mode of production and therefore, not only drives history, but in some basic way is history itself. One approach will answer to the name realism, the other, materialism. Materialism (as originating with Marx) is founded on a historical assessment of material conditions instead of math: quote:What does materialism ultimately espouse? That everything should be rooted in material life and history, not in abstraction, logical necessity, universality, essence, pure form, spirit, or idea. Thus the true poverty of the new realism is not so much its naive trust in mathematical reasoning and object-oriented architectures but its inability to recognize that the highest order of the absolute, the totality itself, is found in the material history of mankind. Which in this forum probably sounds like a bunch of marxist circlejerking. Which it pretty much is, and which is cool if that's what you're into.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
its really not so much a paper about programming languages as it is a shot across the bow of some philosophers you probably don't care about
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 19:09
|
|
AWWNAW posted:actually Python is the new Java What makes you say that, Python is actually readable even if the whitespace enforcement is kind of piss. Still prefer Lua though.
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Noyemi K posted:What makes you say that buffer overflows are impossible with it vvv  it's a joke ^^^
double riveting fucked around with this message at 20:47 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 19:42
|
|
double riveting posted:buffer overflows are impossible with it I didn't think they were possible with any interpreted language except maybe perl also my opinion is meaningless because I actually think Ruby is good
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Nim is the new hipste
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
nim isnt even a hipste yet though. nobody at all uses it
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
im into some pretty obscure data types, you probably haven't heard of them
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Artisinal, free-range log structured b+ tree
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
b+spoke
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
DaTroof posted:b+spoke
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
available in all the latest cache colors, don't delay-slot!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:im gay, too https://vimeo.com/26640738 https://vimeo.com/26640738 Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 09:27 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:(epilepsy warning, skip to 1:51 for good stuff) what the gently caress did i just watch
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
rrrrrrrrrrrt posted:i don't know what ontological means and i'm pretty sure i don't wanna ontologies are the siren songs that lure unwary academics to their deaths where the waves of prolog dash against the hard rocks of reality, breaking into a foam of triplets
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:(epilepsy warning, skip to 1:51 for good stuff) this is the first thing posted in this thread that makes sense
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
suffix posted:ontologies are the siren songs that lure unwary academics to their deaths where the waves of prolog dash against the hard rocks of reality, breaking into a foam of triplets scala and charybdis
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
 I don't get it
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
I <3 Qt, mostly.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Max Facetime posted:
this is the mount gox guy? hahaha
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Qt is Good. I'm enjoying the signals/slots system far too much
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Qt takes forever to compile
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:lexing not parsing lex me
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Qt's core library is woefully incomplete, and Unicode support is clearly a cargo cult imitation of Windows Unicode support, but I appreciate things like all data containers being copy-on-write shared pointers, and the QObject hierarchy, and Q_FOREACH, and how easy it is to make cross-thread calls with signals and slots. makes a lot of classic pre-C++11 woes non-issues, and who knows when the gently caress QNX/BlackBerry 10 is getting C++11 support QtConcurrent is pretty basic and not terribly useful outside of map/reduce though. I find myself rolling my own threads with pthread a little too often
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
Rust has hit 1.0. Top post on the HN thread is a faux apology by some self-serving remora. Discuss.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
sarehu posted:Rust has hit 1.0. Top post on the HN thread is a faux apology by some self-serving remora. woohoo 1.0!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
sarehu posted:Rust has hit 1.0. Top post on the HN thread is a faux apology by some self-serving remora. can someone explain why I can't have both of these methods in rust code:
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2015 15:49
|
|
