A proof of the cluelessness of economic and political and even scientific leaders:

1) Cheap energy creates exponential growth because it will be easier to use it than actually work.
2) Nuclear energy will use the last reserve of energy stored in the universe. Far beyond earth history (like fossil fuel), it goes all the way to the big bang: the energy in the atom. After that, it's GAME OVER
3) Exponential growth will always deplete resources in linear time. (Remember the story about the king, the checkerboard, and the grains of rice?)
*) Conclusion: The only way forward is to make a 180 degree course change and transition from an economy of expansion and growth, to one of collaboration and interconnectedness: the CreativeEconomy.

...an "Economic Sanctuary". Help me code it.

Holy shit, I didn't know the problem mentioned in my April 14th entry was so deep. It's not only OOP that needs factored (a 20 year problem), but the whole frickin' field needs re-invented (a 50 year refactoring).

Seriously, all the HolyWars and LanguageWars all revolve around a subtle, unconscious use of the same lexicon for two entirely separate different domains, one involving abstract LambdaCalculus and the other involving BooleanLogic and TuringMachines -- something tied to actual hardware which has to obey the laws of physics.

See ComputerScienceVersionTwo.

Could someone certify me out of this "Observer" oblivion. I've been here since 2000, for chrissake's! And an advocate for F/OSS software since before then. I just left for about 10 years and just got back where apparently I lost even my "Apprentice" status.

Thanks to the three who helped certify me. But it still doesn't seem to change my status.... Confused... :

I'm proposing the concept of a Kolmogorov Quotient (named after AndreKolmogorov of AlgorithmicInformationTheory fame) as a calculable number that measures the amount that a "programming language" simplifies the complex. That is, the amount of expressivity of a programming language. This idea of "simplification" is a factor of text-wise reduction (fewer characters needed to express a complex concept) and some other less-easy to quantify concept of maintainability. Fleshing out this latter concept, it is clear it has to do with the ease of establishing programmer ''consensus'' for the same task.

It is a quotient so that higher Kolmogorov numbers for a given language implies a reduction in the Complexity of writing the code to solve the problem.

I suggest Python or Ruby has the highest Kolmogorov Quotient. But see KolmogorovQuotient.

Okay as part of building this idea of a data ecosystem mentioned earlier, I'm realizing that the whole OOP paradigm needs refactored. Starting with AlanKay's definitions for Object Orientation, I invite the community to help me re-evaluate the paradigm.

Kay gives 6 points in defining his vision of his Object Architecture at AlanKaysDefinitionOfObjectOriented

I've rebutted them with ObjectOrientedRefactored. I invite others to comment.