World: r3wp

oops .. had my cache set to 10000 so I can see some old messages 
...and that made scrolling somewhat problematic

Intentional programming reminds me of the hype around the "The Last 
One" program generator a generation or so ago. (So called as it was 
the last program you'd ever need to buy -- it could write all the 
others for you)....I remember chuckling at the time at how seriously 
some people took it in the few months it took to drop completely 
out of sight:
http://www.presshere.com/html/wf8104.htm

So if there is intentional programming, there is unintentional programming?

I know of something called creative programming! ;-)

Reichart, I read the article, and my opinion is, that you will always 
need good programmers, no matter what abstraction you make to the 
problem.

A good programmer (or more general: developer) can something, a typical 
user can't. The developer can - based on logic - see the consequences 
of different rules within the software. When users are alloud to 
decide, how the software should work, you always end up with something, 
which will break logically, when some situation occur. A good developer 
can think of that beforehand and make sure, the whole system of rules 
makes sense and do the right thing, whatever will happen. The user 
may be happy for a while, if she "designed" the software, but a little 
later it'll break down logically, and she'll loose money and time 
again.

It's the ability to make something consistent, that make a good programmer. 
It's my experience, that very few people are really good at that.

alloud = allowed

Spending  years to learn correct spelling, but spending no time to 
learn correct logic - are'nt users silly ;)

not correct logic, computer logic.

Ah, you can't spell either ;-)

You catched me. :-)

you will always need good programmers


We strongly disagree, in fact the time of no need for programmers 
is probably closer than we (programmers) want. 


AI will one day be good enough to solve domain problems.  The architecture 
of computer systems will be self correcting, responsive, and self 
writing one day.


Software will fix itself in response to millions if not billions 
of people reacting to using it, and it will slowly and systematically 
correct itself, improve itself, and even offer new features simply 
for test.  In other words, software will eventually self evolve.

Consider nothing more than a routine that studies what options people 
select for themselves.  I reset my Word (and anything else I have 
control over) to *always* use Helvetica.  I *always* set my WinAmp 
to be "Always on top".  When I walk up to an ATM, I *never* select 
"Spanish".  When I get in my car I *never* want the radio "ON"


What if people's settings were simply gathered in a central database. 
 Categorized, etc.  What if every button on software had a unique 
ID, and a genus, and like senses or never endings created stronger 
connection in the database by how often they were pressed… 

The species of button called "Play | Pause" would be very strong.
It's brother "FF | RW" would be pretty well connected as well.

and like senses or never endings created

should be

and like sensors or nerve endings created

I would like to know, what all the people will be doing in the future 
where even programming will be automated:( It scares me a little 
bit

I've been hearing that, Reichart, for at least 30 years.

It remains as partially true as it ever was -- like we ned very few 
people to write spreadsheet programs, while zillions have been enabled 
to write spreadsheets. But it's hardly a self-evident conclusion 
for (say) someone considering a new career

That is so sad that it scares you.


Does it scare you that "your" people no longer have a job which is 
to collect the buckets of feces from people's homes.  There is no 
longer a guy in town that cuts hair AND pulls teeth?  That there 
is no work for the guy that stored ice from, and delivered it to 
homes?  


What about the entire industry that used to wash clothes with their 
hands, or WHAT ABOUT all the scribes (monks) those pesky Germans 
put out of business with that automatic machine that made copies 
of copies instantly.


Sundanda, untrue.  You are blinded by your own time frame and reference. 
 Don't look at what was promised or what can be done, look at what 
was not talked about and "IS"

Needless shots
Flat screens
In-ear wireless communication
Solar power (PV) 
Microwave ovens 

Glues (I can name 50 amazing adhesives that have changed the word)
Growable organs
UCAVs (Robots in the sky).

Your life "IS" longer, and better, way better.

The top 10 things that might have killed you 100 years ago are not 
even on the list today.

Reichard: so just tell me what al the people will be doing?

Sunanda, Reichart, based on your combined reasonings self-correcting 
software won't come into existence. Somethinge even better will wipe 
the concept "software" of the earth. Yay!

<<Sundanda, untrue.>>

I got a 30 year old analysis of Nostradamus' predictions -- it uses 
certain verses to prove that he predicted the atom bomb, cold war, 
WW2 etc.

I got a flyer the other day analysing Nostradamus' predictions -- 
it uses certain verses to prove that he predicted the Al Qaeda airplane 
attacks on the USA in 2001.
***
Oddly, it is the same verses used in both cases.
****

Similarly, I am still hearing the _same_ predications about the end 
of programming over the same timescale. Experience suggests caution 
in accepting the latest rendition of an old, old song.
***
Oops -- I've very nearly invoked Gresham'a law:

Double oops -- I mean Godwin's law, of course.

I think that the end-of-programming predictions come true all of 
the time. It's just that the new systems require work as well, and 
though that work is often very different, people call the new work 
"programming". So, since there are still people "programming" people 
think that the prediction failed. It didn't fail - the concept was 
just redesigned to match the new needs.

I have very little idea wha I will be doing 10 years from now, but 
I'm willing to bet that people will call it "programming".

10 years, sure...100, unlikely.

Oldes,  why do people "have" to do something?

hrian with a nod to FORTRAN

Hey, in a hundred years I don't even expect that the language that 
people speak will be recognizable. It'll be called "English" though.

and our precious spelling will be ...quaint

Tomc, yeah, I've heard that joke told about FORTRAN and COBOL, and 
lately Java and C++.

has english changed that much in 100 years apart from the addition 
of new words?

It's mostly the addition of new concepts, and changing patterns in 
grammar that come from mixing in other languages and cultures. The 
new words are almost incidental.

reichart:  programming really is just like macro building... people 
have forgotten that words process, application really are analogies 
to real concepts.

an application is not just a program, its the logical use of a process. 
 the processes change, the needs change, but the act of applying 
a process to a need will always remain.

wether its sifting through an audio library with your fingers and 
cardboard with vinyl inside... or browsing on your ipod...

both are applications.

in one case an ordered collection within a box or shelf, in the other 
its virtual... but the box, really is just like a mechanical software.

Sometimes it's good to remember that the terms "computer" and "database" 
predate electronics, or even electrical devices.

I know I'm not saying anything revolutionary... but "programming" 
has always been around us.  and since we will foreseeably continue 
to use machines... we'll always do so in the future... I only guess 
that in 50 years, we'll be making AI apps which learn concepts.  
and the interface to these systems will be more easy to use... but 
there will always be people who do work for others...

I myself am working on a concept which would significantly change 
the perspective on how "intelligent machines" computers and what 
have not... are used.

I saw a cheesy post-apocalyptic scifi movie recently where there 
were people that were essentially witches. They were called "programmers" 
:)

I hope to finally start working on prototypes later this year.

hehe

I look forward to your ideas. Later!

Reichart, about AI, if the AI does the programming, then the AI is 
the programmer. Note, that I don't see any reason why we should not 
consider the AI a "person". (if we don't, and the AI eventually kills 
all of us, I won't blame "it")

persons

 (whether running in an organic brain, or not) will still create informations; 
 that creation we can call "programming" (or "painting" or "composing" 
 etc, except that they become all the same thing since we get to their 
 deeper meaning of "information")

But, this is about "people", no?

its funny (or rather not) cause I see no point in developping AI 
within the confines of an economy.  once a true AI "conscience" will 
be feasible. we suddenly loose the need for "employes".  just like 
the romans soldiers, at one point, didn't have any new lands to conquer, 
so basically a big social rift was caused.

Reichart, I wouldn't worry too much. What you're talking about require 
true AI, and we're not even close to have that. First we need computer 
technology based on quantum physics, then we need someone to build 
the system. I don't see this happen any time soon.

I'm not worried at all, and I'm privy to project in AI that are already 
demonstrating very impressive results.  


Systematic automation of a large quantity of currently menial jobs 
will occur in dramatic proportions in the next 50 years.


Where are the secretaries of yesterday?  The banks and rooms of young 
ladies typing away?


Several years ago the FDIC (American banking overview group), mandated 
Electronic fund transfer over paper.  Who suffered?  10,000 pilots 
lost their jobs.  Since they were not union, no one made a fuss in 
the news.  They used to fly boxes of receipts from place to place.


Instead of asking what jobs will be lost, think of it in terms of 
what jobs are people currently doing that simply don't need to be 
done a person.


It is so odd to me how people (even smart people) hold on to the 
past like a dog with an old bone.


No AI was needed to replace these jobs.  Are these young ladies without 
work?  Are all these lads no longer flying.  NOPE.


There are more jobs for people that can type than any time in history. 
 And pilots are in huge demand, as the prices of private planes have 
dramatically fallen (Honda is releasing a plane!) the private executive 
sector has grown.

but real AI has the potential to replace a majority of jobs.  that 
is the issue... not just a type of job.  AI means downloadable and 
infinitely replicatable things you purchase once and abuse forever.