思考与写作blog.fogus.me
六部计算机科幻作品
Six works of Computer Science-Fiction (2015)
2015 — 2020，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Fogus 博客列出的六部“计算机科幻”作品——指那些读起来令人难以置信却真实存在的计算机/编程经典（如 SICP、《The Art of the Metaobject Protocol》、Literate Programming 等）。文章探讨了这类作品为何显得像来自另一个世界的科幻，评论区则延伸讨论了 Smalltalk、Forth、传播子模型等“非主流”编程范式。
为什么经久不衰：它提出了一种看待经典技术著作的独特视角：最好的计算机书籍读起来像科幻，因为它们展示了与主流惯例截然不同却真实可行的计算世界，这种启发历久弥新。
HN 评论精选
推荐列表之外的传播子论文，认为它揭示了一种全新的编程范式
《The Art of the Propagator》就像发现了一种全新的编程范式——不是 Lisp，也不是 Datalog，而是一种奇特的分布式、性质有趣而强大的东西。BLOOM 项目和 Eve 语言似乎发现了类似的东西，Edward Kmett 的新语言也大量使用传播子。配套的科幻读物推荐特德·姜的《你一生的故事》。另外《Out of the Tarpit》这篇论文可能间接启发了 Clojure、React、Elm 等。
a-saleh查看英文原文
Art of the propagator It is like a discovering a new programming paradigm. Something new and different, not a Lisp, not a Datalog, weirdly distributed, with interesting properties, but powerful. There are adjacent things, BLOOM project and Eve language seems to have discovered something simmilar, and Edward Kmett working on his new language is using propagators quite heavily. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/755c/48fd10aa303497ef849977c36529c0bb09ff.pdf Sci-fy to go with it: probably Ted Chiangs Stories of your Life (or its movie adaptation Arrival) Out of the tarpit I thing this is a paper that might have lead to Clojure, React, Elm, e.t.c ... but not really, a weird parallel reality where we really like reactive relational databases. http://curtclifton.net/papers/MoseleyMarks06a.pdf
文学编程是“难以置信却真实”的典型例子
Knuth 的《Literate Programming》对我来说简直超凡脱俗。我喜欢软件可以写成与文学作品无异的形式这个想法——我至今仍不确定它在现实世界中是否站得住脚，但至少能理解一次这样的想法真是太酷了。
mherdeg查看英文原文
Knuth's "Literate Programming" was kind of otherworldly for me. I liked the idea that software could be written in a form indistinguishable from literature. I could not quite believe that it was reality -- and I'm still not sure it holds up in the real world -- but it's such a cool idea to have wrapped my head around at least once.
真实硬件也能像科幻：iAPX 432 的激进设计若成功将改变计算史
Intel iAPX 432 处理器的架构手册读起来像平行世界的科幻小说。这款 1981 年的芯片本应是革命性的：硬件级对象支持、按对象访问保护、2^48 字节虚拟地址空间、硬件垃圾回收、多处理器支持，甚至为纯高级语言编程而设计。它失败了并被遗忘，但如果它取代了 x86，世界会大不相同——至少不会再有缓冲区溢出漏洞。
kens查看英文原文
The architecture manual for the Intel iAPX 432 processor reads like alternate-world science fiction. [1] This processor came out in 1981 and was supposed to be the revolutionary new thing in computers. It failed and was mostly forgotten, but the world would be very different if it had replaced x86. The 432 had incredible hype: "The vacuum tube, the transistor, the microprocessor - at least once in a generation an electronic device arises to shock and strain designers' understanding. The latest such device is the iAPX 432 micromainframe processor, a processor as different from the current crop of microprocessors (and indeed, mainframes) as those devices are from the early electromechanical analog computers of the 1940's." [2] This 32-bit machine had some very unusual features. It implemented support for objects at the hardware level, with access protection for on a per-object basis. Even the kernel doesn't have access to everything. The world would be much more secure with no more buffer-overflow exploits. This chip was started before the 8086 and included a virtual address space of 2^48 bytes. It was designed to be programmed entirely in high-level languages.The processor also included garbage collection in hardware. It also supported floating point and multi-processor operation, well before x86 did. Part of the operating system was built into the chip; the policies were defined in software, but the implementation was on the chip. It's interesting to think what computers and programming would be like if the Intel 432 had succeeded instead of x86. We'd probably have super-secure computers and be programming in Ada. [1] http://bitsavers.org/pdf/intel/iAPX_432/171821-001_Introduction_to_the_iAPX_432_Architecture_Aug81.pdf [2] https://archive.org/stream/Intel-AR-166UnderstandTheNewestProcessorToAvoidFutureShockOCR#page/n3/mode/2up
这些经典像非欧几何，证明许多计算“常识”只是惯例而非公理
与其说这些作品像科幻，不如说像非欧几何：把某个被视为公理的东西改掉，一个全新的世界就出现了。比如如果内存管理的代价同时换来对内存易失性的抽象，我们的系统会多么不同？Smalltalk 的存在告诉我们，当前许多计算观念只是惯例而非公理。
radiowave查看英文原文
I was thinking about this just recently, but instead of likening these kind of things to sci-fi, I was thinking more along the lines of non-Euclidian geometry, i.e. what if we take something that is considered to be axiomatic, and change it - a whole different world emerges. For example, throw out the notion that memory is volatile - or slightly more practically, what if the price we pay for automatic memory management in our programming languages also bought us abstraction over the volatility of memory? How different would our systems look? For one thing, switching things off and back on again wouldn't be the "cure-all" that it mostly is today. The fact that we can build systems like Smalltalk tells us that much of our current notions of computing are merely convention, not axiomatic at all. Smalltalk and Forth are definitely "different convention" things, while SICP and CTM are more like detailed examinations of things that might really be axiomatic, giving us the means of combination, and hopefully the means to imagine building things beyond what our mindset of present conventions would allow.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
保持你的身份认同足够小
Keep Your Identity Small (2009)
Paul Graham 2009 年的一篇短文：人一旦把某个话题当成自己身份的一部分（宗教、政治、编程语言皆然），讨论就会退化成站队和争吵，因为此时争论的不再是事实，而是"我是谁…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选苏格拉底式教学法：通过提问而非讲授来教学
The Socratic Method: Teaching by Asking Instead of by Telling
记录了作者用纯提问的方式，引导一群小学生从零推导出二进制计数法的课堂实验，展示了苏格拉底式教学法的惊人效果。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022garlikov.com你不能说的话
What You Can't Say (2004)
Paul Graham 2004 年的经典文章，探讨那些因道德时尚而不能公开说出的观点。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2014–2022paulgraham.com编辑精选龙暴君的寓言（2005）
The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant (2005)
哲学家 Nick Bostrom 于 2005 年写的一则寓言：一条每天吞噬数千人的巨龙（隐喻死亡与衰老）长期被人类当作不可抗拒的自然规律接受，直到有人提出并最终用导弹将其杀死，…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021nickbostrom.com编辑精选现实有着惊人的细节量
Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)
2017 年的博文指出，现实远比我们以为的充满细节：我们习惯用简化的心智模型看世界，直到真正动手做事（比如作者举的造楼梯例子）才发现处处是未曾预料的细节。
思考与写作上首页 4 次 · 2018–2025johnsalvatier.org编辑精选