Difference between revisions of "Alan Kay Turing Award Lecture (2004)"

Revision as of 03:22, 10 December 2017

association for computing Machinery's touring award lecture

the Turing award is

ACMs most prestigious technical

award if you look at past Turing laureates

it'll read like a who's who of computer

science the Turing award is

given out annually to an individual

who has contributed

has given

contributions of lasting and major technical importance

to the field and the

Turing laureate is invited to

give a talk on whatever

topic they'd like at any

ACM conference during the year and we

are privileged to have this year's

laureate choose oops law as their venue

so without further ado I'd like to

introduce dr. Alan Kay the he's a senior

fellow at Hewlett Packard he's president

of viewpoints Research Institute and the

Turing award was given to him for pioneering

many of the ideas at the root of contemporary

object-oriented programming languages for leading

the team that developed small talk and four

fundamental compute contributions to

personal computing let's give a warm welcome

of

course one of the funny things

about the larger citation was it also

said for coming up and

helping to come up with many of the ideas that eventually led to C++

and Java

and

the reminded me of Tony whores in

his Turing lecture

which was quite a bit of which was

about Al Gore he pointed out that algo is

a great improvement especially on its successors

o about a year

ago I got asked by Sigma C to

come and give a talk here which happened yesterday

about early experiences

in computing

primarily for high school and to

some extent for first year college

and I wasn't of course expecting

to get this award and I

was had spent a fair amount of time trying

to think about the high school and college

situation since I had no

real experience doing a first course

and I certainly didn't like what

I found when I went out and read

books and the AP

stuff and so

forth but I figured nobody

wants to hear anybody complain even

if they're telling the truth for an hour so

what I decided to do was to see if I were going to

teach a first course in high school

or college what would it be like and that was the talk I gave

yesterday and I

wound up thinking that

perhaps a slightly different version

of this would make a reasonable

Turing lecture so

⊕(time: 0:3:53)

here it is and first I want

to start off with a Don quote he

has lots of them but this is my favorite one of his beware

the above code I've only proved it correct

not tried it

his is

the perfect antidote to what what you might call the academy's

ation of the field which quite

a bit of which has been an attempt to use classical

mathematics to deal

with a new mathematics that requires a new math

to help describe it so what

new field I believe

math simple

statement about our field is that math wins

basically every time you can do something

reasonably mathematical what we're trying to do we

make great advances but it's

rare that old math wins

because we have a

new way of dealing with things our

theorems are not short and they're

not about infinite things

which is what classical math is generally about the

equivalent of our theorems and proofs are

very very long things about finite

structures and so

different way of doing about and hence Dawn's quote

which i think is absolutely

perfect and because our

⊕(time: 0:5:23)

field is the way it is everything

we do is done within a community and nobody

has benefited more from their community than I

have over the years and

for the stuff I'm

going to talk about and show tonight a lot of people contributed

especially over the last few weeks putting

together some of these examples

and these are some of the people

some of them you notice have gray hair

this guy I know is here Dan angles and

who's the the

actual creator of small

talk I just wrote the math part and

Dan was the guy who actually made it work so

we should give him a round of applause

so

⊕(time: 0:6:20)

I guess the first thing to think about here is we

have these terms computer science and software engineering

I happen to be around

both of these terms were made up al Perlas made up the term

computer science absolutely

not implying that we had one but

as something

to actually aspire to and he I

think he immediately regretted it even

in the first few years afterwards because what happened

was what some people have sometimes

called physics Envy basically everybody

who dabbles in the sciences wants

to be a physicist because

they deal with the absolute foundations

of the universe and they do it with serious

math and serious and experiments so

physics Envy is science Envy

is often found when fields wind

up having science in their name

so library science

social science

computer science

interesting physics chemistry and biology don't

have science in their name

so I

think there can be a science of computing

similar to science of bridge building

and in fact Simon

pointed out in his book called

the science of Sciences of the artificial

that you

can have a science about artifacts like

a science of bridge building build a

bridge by any means whatsoever stress

it in various ways analyze it come up with

a theory of build bridge building build some more bridges

and so forth and in many ways physics has

found itself becoming a science

of the artificial because a lot of physics

is actually all about the science of

building accelerators and detectors and

trying to figure out just exactly what

it is that those needle swings actually

mean software

engineering actually was a term that came about for

a conference like

in 68 and garmisch Germany

and again the people who went to that conference except for

a few did not think there was anything remotely like a

software engineering at that time and

in fact the slide shows kind

of a from

the depths to something that we

might call engineering today of the difference

between a pyramid made out of bricks with

no architecture just a garbage dump with

a nice limestone cover

made by slaves sounds like something

that happens a few miles south of here actually

I can just I can just imagine some

veronik architect

at some conference announcing their

new pyramid

on the other side of the scale we have one of my

favorite artifacts the Empire State

Building which is well documented and I urge every

single one of you who has aspirations to be an engineer

to read the

three or four excellent recent books about

the Empire State Building one of them is the actual log

by the foreman a basically

the Empire State Building was constructed

from start to finish that is

from carrying down the buildings that were there

to occupancy in less than 11 months

by less than 3,000 people

the flooring itself went

up at the rate of almost two stories a day and the

steel was still warm about a hundred

degrees warm from the steel mills in Pittsburgh

where it came from this is one of the greatest organized

projects and the Starrett brothers who did the Empire State

Building knew they were making a statement because

the Depression had just happened everything

was set up to do this thing they had already done a couple

of skyscrapers and they had a feeling this might be the last skyscraper

for a while and so they decided to

to make it an expression of

what it meant to be able to make a skyscraper so it's just the

greatest thing but I think if we look at

our own field we cannot find any instance of 3,000

people being put together to

something incredible in less than 11 months and have it

work so whatever it is that we've got

in engineering it might be closer to Egyptian

or Babylonian engineering

now somewhere

in

the middle things with archers

appearing an actual architecture appeared

interesting thing that happened some

years before the Gothic cathedrals was the Pantheon

in Rome which has this clear span

the dome clear span of fourteen

stories made out of the best reinforced

ever known but two thousand

years ago that was amazing be

her been in there it looks like it was made yesterday so

I think the best practice that we have right

now in our field as

far as engineering is a little bit like a Gothic cathedral

sometimes our projects take a hundred

years but we

can aspire to build rather

large structures by the standards

of the Middle Ages out of

much much less material than the Egyptians

needed so

little progress is being made but I

think that whenever we say computer

science or software engineering the

specially whenever we think we're teaching it the

worst thing we could ever do is to pretend to the students

that we know what it is because the

students are

going to be the only ones that are going to save us

so we should teach the students

what I was taught when I was in graduate school in the

sixties and that is it isn't done yet it's not

even close to done you have to understand

what the actual scope of computing is going

to be and you have to help us invent it and

in fact in those years

in the ARPA community the PhDs were given out for

actual advances in the state of the art as

opposed for as opposed to commentaries

and small additions to the state

of the art so it's a very different time back then but it's a lot simpler

⊕(time: 0:13:32)

so

I could

give a whole talk maybe not terribly

successfully about motivations in

the end everything we do is

being subject to other people's

interface I feel particularly

in education but I thought I'd show

a much simpler model

than we use but it's only a two-dimensional model and

just have us all ponder

it for a bit so one dimension

is in the reasoning and change area

is the incredible

disparity between the percentage

of human beings who are basically instrumental reasoner's

and those who are basically interested

in ideas so this has been studied

in a variety of different ways and it seems like

the the normal us

normal human beings are basically instrumental reason

isn't an instrumental reason er as a person who judges

any new tool or idea by

how well that tular idea contributes to his

or her current goal

so most of we're very goal-oriented we're working

on things somebody comes up with something new and

our ability

to accept it or reject it if we're instrumental

reasoner's depends on whether we can see it contributing to our current

goal so the other 5% are primarily

motivated by ideas so when a new idea

comes along that appeals to them they will transform

themselves and their goals in the presence

of that idea needless to say the

5% are much easier to teach

particular if you're trying to teach

them things that were inventions rather than things

that are built into human beings so if you're trying to teach

something really weird like science it is not an

easy thing because you're dealing with a

set of very practical

and pragmatic kinds of people so now

the other dimension here is

between basically about reward

inner motivated versus outer motivated

about 85 percent of us are motivated

by things outside of

ourselves about 15 percent motivated by things

inside ourselves and

so that's kind of interesting and

what we have

here if we look at this is we have a kind of an interesting category

of people who are in term ohta vated and

interested in ideas I'll leave it for you to

figure out who those people are an interesting

category number two is people who are out are

motivated and interested in ideas the

people who are in are motivated and not interested

in ideas tend to be dangerous and

caused a lot of trouble a

lot

of corporate executives

up in there

but basically

our field is a

field that's the next great 500

year idea after the printing press and so

we should all be properly concerned with something quite

different that

is we have to be concerned with how the entire

bulk of humanity is going

to respond and deal with the things that we

do so it's extremely interesting to

consider the 80% here

that our outer moat evaded and basically

practical and a fair

amount is known about this 80 percent

in the past I've used the term voting

but

⊕(time: 0:17:35)

you

know this group does not go to the polls to vote on

the things they believe in it takes

them a long time to change what they believe in but the

way they do it is kind of interesting and it's

a kind of a consensus

that is gradual

it's a seeping kind of consensus

and it has many of the same characteristics

as a model of a forest fire

so I have a little particle

system here and the

percentage of

trees - the percentage of clearing

here is just 50/50 so

if I say okay let's see if if we can spread the fire

throughout the forest here with a 50%

so I didn't initialize that

let's try again so

here's 50%

so surprising that he doesn't try

let's try go

up to 50 60 % let's say

you can think of the 60% as

people who are almost ready to agree people

are essentially there

so 10% more

it spreads better

try another one

each time the placement

random so you got a slightly different behavior

yeah so that's about what you get

babe

rings itself out so if we go up to like

66 percent or so 67 66

yeah

so in these contagion models

you can think of this as spreading means if you will

roughly two-thirds of

this 80% has to pretty

much be there before you can get them

to agree and do something because they just won't

do it unless everybody else is doing it

and this model works really great

for even weird things like wearing baseball

caps backwards and girls

showing their belly buttons

if you trace the girls showing their belly buttons

over the years you'll see how gradual

this change was until suddenly it was

okay and the thing is if it's okay now

was always okay so what's the problem well

the problem was that this group generally

didn't think it was okay it wasn't okay until about two-thirds

of them thought it was okay and then all of a sudden it became okay so

you're trying to reform education

or you're trying to get a group of

to understand real object-oriented programming or

any other new kind of thing that comes along

you get this incredible disparity

which in computing there

are many many instances of roughly

30-year lags from when

an idea was really proved out to

when it gets generally accepted but nobody knows

whether this thirty years actually means anything or

not but it's it's interesting to look at the

case of UNIX and all

of its different adventures

over the years and finally

being accepted even though it has

a basically late 60s architecture

which is better than the architecture of some of

the operating systems that are around

but still it's a fairly old architecture

and so I'm desperately

trying to hold on to life until

at least 2007 or

eight because some quite a bit of

the work at Parc peaked 30 years ago

and I'm curious to see whether those ideas will

actually be accepted

⊕(time: 0:22:05)

however if you look at an extreme case

Doug Engelbart who had some of the best

ideas ever I think he was on a different plane

his ideas are now

getting closer and closer to being 40

years old in their articulate

expression and most people still don't understand what

it was that he was trying to do I

⊕(time: 0:22:29)

think an ancillary

problem is that

our field and

people in general take great delight in complexity

seems

like you go to schools

is remarkable

how much work they make the poor kids do

when if they taught the math

better and differently the kids would have to do

much less work but in fact I

think people the light in complexity

and think that putting immense

amounts of hard work in even if there's an easier

way is actually there's

something morally good about it and

so I think for our field

one of the hardest things is the delight and

complexity because of the many levels of

structure in computing and

the difficulty of going from one level

to another pretty much everyone

who gets interested in computing and a successful

Abbot is a person who has mastered staggering

amounts of complexity now

believe that most of those complexity is absolutely

unnecessary and I believe it can be proved that

it's unnecessary so

⊕(time: 0:23:53)

what we really want is

to find the joy of simplicity a lot of

this talk is almost a living cliche

in the sense that

very little of what I'm going to say here

is stuff that you don't already know

but when I started thinking about what should

I say at this talk simplicity just kept on coming back

the all the projects

I've been involved in that have been successful have been

successful because the people who worked

in them put quite

a bit of effort into keeping things to be

simple and this community of ARPA

⊕(time: 0:24:35)

and then Xerox PARC was

outstanding at being

simple and

this is a very very confident

group of people

but surprisingly I

won't use the word modest because I don't think

anybody would recognize that word applied

to these people but I would say we

very very respectful of these grand

ideas they are trying to do Butler

Lampson here was

always pounding for simplicity

Chuck Thacker we

did the alto and just three months was

a master of simplicity dan angles master

of simplicity so and

Metcalf and Boggs

that calf tells a great great

stories about how he didn't actually

how many things he'd actually didn't understand and

it was incredibly important that he

of those things else he never would have been able to

invent the ethernet very

Starkweather who did the laser printer first

laser printer was a page a second 500

pixels to the inch faster

than most laser printers today

was about three-quarters made with

got from Edmunds typic hobby

catalog because

they were cheap so he could get many

of them and try them out and so forth

so this

this particular

way of looking at things which was basically

Hayward basically the this

group said we're just nowhere near as smart as IBM

claims to be they're always

announcing some new complicated network architecture

that we can't see how to make it work and

so we'll just stick to our old full

duplex ideas and retransmission and

put a few other things in there and it

may not work as well as what IBM claims it's going to do

but it's probably gonna work and

funny thing is the network's we use today are those

terribly designed

unbelievably inefficient stochastic

networks that are

far from perfect but what's great is that they

eventually get that packet through perfectly you

just have to be willing to wait so

⊕(time: 0:27:14)

the other thing that this group

was really good at was what I call

a different kind of simplicity

so it's it's hard to claim that Maxwell's

equations here is simple because

they're all that work you have to do

to understand vectors and curl

and divergence and gradient but

hing about it is once you've done that work it shrinks

down to something that's just a simple eyeful

the Constitution

the United States is one of my favorite systems design

think of it millions

and millions of mutually incompatible parts

running without completely breaking for more

than 200 years pretty amazing

can hold it in your hand the reason you can hold it in your

hand is there a wise not to put any laws in it

so it was not a law based thing it's not a case

based thing it was a principle based thing was a kernel

so these

are the kinds of things that appeal to me greatly

over the years and

I think trying to give beginners

at computing a taste for

the power of the particular kind of simplicity

that works so well is what we should do

⊕(time: 0:28:35)

now the other thing I've noticed in

talking with younger people

and teaching a course upper

division course UCLA once a year and

that is that the it's not so much that the

juniors and seniors don't

know that much they actually don't know

that much for being close

to graduating from college but the thing that is the

stressing about them is that the

things that they do know they know very badly as

they know them in ways that are almost

counterproductive for their thinking

and so I think in a first course

at anything you have a real chance

to not just teach

the one subject but in the first

you can actually touch on a lot of subjects so

for instance I think math and science should always be

taught together in the beginning they

came about that way one is a language

one is a process I think

systems and computing should be taught together

I think the four of them should be taught together

there arts we should teach you art

and engineering and why

not throw in a little bit about how these unusual

ways of looking at the world have affected

civilization I think the other

thing that is so critical and

so absent in most of our undergraduate computer

science curricula is the failure to

think what we're doing as

a kind of literacy literacy

is something that comes up about when

you have first ideas that are worthwhile talking about you

have a way of writing down those ideas and discussing

them that gives literature and literacy is

the ability to deal with both the spoken

and the written forms of these

ideas so when we teach an English class our first

English class in college we're not aiming

class at people who are going to become professional writers

when they graduate four years later

we actually think of the impact

of the printing press and the new

rhetorics and new ways of arguing that came with a printing

press as something that is

larger than

becoming a professional reader or writer I

think the same thing is true of computing

fifty years from now this will not be

controversial so right now it's thought

of as even in mighty Stanford with

its great endowment as basically vocational training

in Java and it's primarily thought

of as teaching kids programming

and it's absolutely important

to learn how to program but

computer science and software engineering

are not the same as programming any

more than building Chartres Cathedral is the same as Brick Lane

you have to understand one

the other but they're very different I think this

is absolutely critical because the picture on this little

slide here is Konrad Lorenz

out swimming in the pond with his ducks following

remember of Lorentz

found that whatever moved

near a duckling during one little critical period

of a few hours was taken thereafter

by that duckling to be its mother and

it would follow even into adulthood that that

person and rents

found that they would follow him even more happily if he jumped

into the water so there he is so

I think whenever we're introducing somebody to something we

have to realize that we are going to be a con

if we're successful we're going to be a kind of Konrad Lorenz and

we should take great care to

what we're going to imprint them on but we don't want to imprint

them on for God's sakes his data structures and

algorithms that was a

great idea in the 50s and

you had to understand it and it's still useful

today for optimization and other

of things but it is not the center of the field

for a long time and what's

worse about it it doesn't scale those

very little systems aspect in way

the data structures and algorithms are taught and so

I believe that we have to do

is give the students a real taste what

the whole deal is and so they have to

start thinking in systems ways thinking

in math and alkaway scientific ways as

we go along this is a tall order

obviously now we could all remember

our Conrad Lorentz and

mine

happened after I'd been a programmer for five years

⊕(time: 0:33:38)

a journeyman programmer putting myself through

school went to graduate school and

was given Ivan

Sutherlands thesis by Dave Evans and

Dave said read it

then come back and talk with me about it

and it was big thick

thing and but I saw that his thesis

advisor was a guy by the name of Claude e Shannon

and I'd heard of Shannon I thought well

boy if Shannon signed this thing maybe I should read it

and I discovered that it

was the most amazing thing that I

had ever heard of being done with a computer

up to that point and

just show

you a little bit of the idea

of it so this this

which is about the size of this auditorium

had only one guy on it from 3 o'clock

the morning you know as he just sketched in something

there then told those edges to become usually

perpendicular and sketchpad figured out how to do that for him

first system to have a clipping

window are you actually drawing on this huge

virtual sheet of paper Danny

draw quickly point to these two

guys and say okay become parallel figures

out how to do that now

he's saying be collinear

to lay yourself over

these lines and of course

this display on this machine only plotted points

about half the capacity of this machine

I'm about here over to the air it

was just to put these little dots up on the screen and pretend

it was a line drawing display

now he's got a hole in the flange

okay

and he wants to make a rivet

got some

more ink notice that the two-handed user interface

as all user interfaces should be

put

that other hand is for point

he center of the cross piece there to get the center

of the arc and again let's

do the mutually perpendicular trick

that drags the center guys which drags the

art guys we got a nice little symmetric rivet

and he could tell it to be

in some ratio the

two sides of the vertical part

of the rivet here he's just showing it us that will do another solution

and

now he's going to go

back to the original form and

show us one other interesting thing

which

is he can make instances of this guy

they gets

a instance of the rivet here I can move it around

and see the success of sketchpad

led to a desire for a better looking displays

actually

those twinkling is they

discovered right away that you got seasick unless

they randomly plotted the dots so

mething's being done in there they're actually sorting half

the memory of the machine to keep the dot display random

so it wouldn't swim around much more than

it it is here

he's

got four instances now and he says whoops I

forgot about the cross piece so it goes to the master

which we would call a class makes

the cross pieces transparent and

we see the instances all feel that

so now he

's going to

take this thing that he just made and make

it into a master so the new construction

is a master and now he can get some instances of this

flange here so the

the

range of sketchpad was surprising so

by the end of 1962 he

could not only do stuff like this but

he decided okay I need

letters and numbers so he

letters and numbers were actually made out of the sketchpad

stuff directly by drawing them in so

f the captions on all of his drawings and his thesis

were made by the system as well and

then he realized oh yeah I can actually do a bridge

because the bridge actually acts a

little bit like a very stiff set of Springs and

I can tell sketchpad

to try and keep these

guys constant when something is trying to force

them to move and I can measure the

disparity the strain

on each one of these guys and I actually can show

those labels on all of these guys and I get a simulation

of a bridge without sketchpad

ever having heard about a bridge and he realized

oh I can do that with EMF also I can make

circuits and the constraints will

actually drive all of these simulations so

in my career I think

what I've been doing for the last forty years is

trying to get the next version of sketch pad

out because if you think about what this

thing is this is kind of what we want we

want something in which anything that we are

interested in especially

dynamic things that were interested in we

can simply draw them in there

put in the relationships that we understand

piece by piece and have the system synthesize all

this into a dynamic simulation of astounding

range so it's just beautiful

if they're I don't know whether our field

Newton yeah I

knew then

I think it would have to be ivan sutherland

because the where

the field was before I even came on the scene and after it was fantastic

so I want to ask Ivan

how could you possibly in one

year in machine code

on this big

but rather slow machine with

no graphics display on it have done

the first graphics system the

first object-oriented software system and the

first dynamic problem-solving system

and I even looked at me said well

I didn't know it was hard

so the period by

way this thesis is available from MIT should

get it and read it my favorite line

from it is he says that his hope that future work will far surpass this

effort

so

that was my first day

in graduate school

⊕(time: 0:41:14)

and second day I found out about

hat I was actually in the middle of the ARPA community which I had no

realization about and look

lighter was

not the funder in 1966 it

was Bob Taylor and they

were just starting to talk about doing what Licklider called the

intergalactic Network and the reason he called it

that is he didn't want people to design a small network

those original theory was wherever

electricity plug on the face of the earth there should be

can plug into this into like intergalactic

network that the thing had

the scale at least up to 500 million

to a billion users so

people were starting to think about that

in a couple of days later I got

a tape and some

documents about a language called Simula from Norway

by Dahl

here and Nygaard and

it's very hard to understand and after a lot of

work and looking at the listings we realize well this is a programming

language that is dealing with the same kind

of structures as sketchpad by

the way I should mention the you know the name the

term object predates

object-oriented programming object

in the early 60s was a general term

was used to describe compound data structures especially

if they had pointers in them there was none

paraphernalia of what we think about as object native

programming today object was just a general

term you'll find it lots of old papers

and the

realization that you could write procedures

for dealing with

at sketchpad was doing was very liberating because

even though it was ugly compared

to what sketch patters gets bad was just unbelievably elegant

but nobody knew how to scale that's Oliver

in fact that problem has not been solved

today yet but by

going to the less elegant

way of being able to write code

against these structures we

all got excited about the possibilities of being able to do

in a system like Simula the

kinds of graphic and interaction manipulation and

my background coming into this was

in molecular biology and

mathematics and

particularly sketchpad just hit me

right here as one

of these kernels and the

thing I suddenly realized was that

if you were sufficiently

abstract if you ignored what

these systems were trying to do

if you just thought of

them as being cheap

versions of all these little computers on the ARPANET

you could

solve the same scaling problem in software

then you could actually subsume

everything in computing with just one kind of idea which

is essentially a little software computer

not a procedure not a data

structure but a whole computer a lot of the development

of OOP was

software engineering after that

interesting things to me in the development of

who the Elven of practical as it wound up in spark

was very similar to

what happened in Lisp earlier which is boy

we've got this incredibly elegant wonderful

thing too bad it runs so slow

but what if we could make it run

faster in a way that doesn't get in the users

way then we would have something really really nice and some

the best actually I just talked the guy Steele

who is one of the people who

helped make Lisp into something really special

to use as well as to contemplate

and so the image here was

WOW it's all about mess the

reasons about messages are not about objects

so much is that the messages are the abstractions

we spend

time in our field worrying about what the objects are

so

⊕(time: 0:45:53)

I need to move along a

bazillion prejudices I

love parallelism because

I learned how to program plug boards before

programming a computer and the beauty

about those things was you could make a kind

of a machine it was highly parallel

I loved

hardware like the B 5000 all of our

today that we use came out of the hardware of

that machine never

saw fit to learn anything about

software make our

lives much simpler I love

Lisp everybody should understand

it the giass was

programming language ever done it could hardly do anything but

it did it beautifully

so

it's an interesting challenge to take something of this level

of beauty and try to scale it you combine these

two together you got the original logo that's how logo came

about attempt to take Lisp and

have something prettier especially for kids

I love APL all

of these all of these systems I think can be done in

a different way but basically

the love of these things is because these guys

got to some special kernel I love what Engelbart

did a lot of spreadsheets I loved HyperCard

suppose you could amalgamate

all these wonderful things into

a simple system that regular people can

⊕(time: 0:47:32)

use and now let's talk about the

the why of

what we're doing why do people

do things well Frank Oppenheimer in the

Exploratorium

made 500 exhibits to teach just one idea the world

is not as it seems they asked him

why and he said well every child is different we

have 2,000 children in here bumping against 500

different exhibits there's a good chance that a child

will find the exhibit that speaks

to them clearly about this first important

about science so he

said 500 of them and I think if you're going to teach a course in this

you need

20 to 30 projects or

so for each area to give the

children the choice

I

won't

tell you what quadrant they're in

so

⊕(time: 0:48:59)

I think the another important

idea is scratch programming because

so much of computing education

today is learning the library and

I don't think beginners should ever be shown the library

the programming language can't do interesting

things without the library then what is it

so I think

it should be like a Model T Model T has

about 350 parts and you could

take it apart over a weekend and put it back together

but it was a completely real automobile

so a lot of what we're gonna

⊕(time: 0:49:38)

look at here in the next few minutes are

sort of first-order ideas that might

say some important things now a

good thing is that many people have

written about the

fun the beauty the romance what's important

and about looking ahead in computing

there's not just one book out there

and there's less than 1% of

books about computing or worthwhile reading

but it's not one book there are dozens

of them and so there's plenty of ideas

for how to do this stuff

⊕(time: 0:50:17)

the user interface had better not be

like Microsoft's

caricature of the stuff

that was done at Parc which is I always

have the feeling when I'm using Windows that I'm

dealing with a somewhat dangerous nuclear

reactor control panel

and that I haven't had enough training

on it whereas what I want is something like

pencil and paper where although there are things I can learn

about pencil and paper what I what is most important

about them is what I can do without knowing much so

I can find out the pencil and paper is fun

⊕(time: 0:50:56)

and I want an environment that

deals with a

set of ideas in

a way that

gets me to lose myself in

the ideas so my chick sandy hi

here was one of our advisors had this nice

model about this

balance between our

abilities and the challenges and

he said well if the challenges are higher

than our abilities then we start getting anxious

especially

if we're climbing up a rock face

we're giving a talk in front of an audience

but if our abilities are greater

than the challenge we start getting bored

so these are the two main states that humans

are in either anxious or bored

hard-to-get-to

is this flow state where everything

is just working and

we like to widen this flow State for a beginners

so for example

one of the things we could do to deal

with areas that where the challenge is greater than

our abilities is to increase the safety

so having undo an environment

nice most

programming environments don't have much of an undo

and on the other hand what because we get bored

so easily we want something to help us pay attention

better and a good user interface

basically deals with these things it provides more safety

than most computer people think an

ordinary person needs and it provides more ways of attracting

their attention than most of us

think people need

so I just

want to show you a

⊕(time: 0:52:56)

Alan is drawing a car, explain the viewer and some tiles.

give you a little bit of a flavor about

how children start

and then show you where I think things are

actually going to go so the work

we do with children we

want

them to have an experience that is

basically thinking

about ideas making pictures of

them so for example take

something that most kids would like to do for

one reason or another which is to

learn

how to drive their parents car

we get them to design a car and

most kids

boys and girls put on big off-road

tires like this because

part of the deal is feeling powerless and

wanting to feel empowered this is something that video

game manufacturers really understand

why are those games so violent

and so

we have a little graphic object here and

do things

to it we can open it up and

see

a viewer of it I

people in the back can't see very well so I'm looking

at a property here called the heading of the thing and I'm gonna count

up the number starts at zero and as

I count it up you can see the little car turning I've

got a behavioral property here forward

I've got a

another one called turn by and so

if I just drag out the

lines

of script here and turn on the

clock

then I've got my little car going there

are many different kinds of things

I can do with it for the kids they want to learn a little

bit about

driving the car so the first experiment is

what happens if I click this number it says turn by

now turn by zero

it goes straight turn by negative

I'll call this guy car keep

it straight here that's a little bit like

kissing your sister so because real

cars use wheels so I want to make a wheel here

just draw

one

it's got the same user

interface as the other one

is a system which is only one kind of object

so it's exactly the opposite

of the systems that you're used to that have zillions

and zillions of classes and subclasses and and

so forth and we can talk a little

bit about it about this in the question and answer system if you

would like and so here's this wheel it's

got a heading also and if

pick up the name of that heading and just drag it over to the script

here so it says car turned

by wheels heading now I can just turn

the car around now what's

important for ten-year olds that they is that

they learn what a variable is for the rest of their life from this one shot

that's good and actually I believe this

would be good for high school and college kids too because there's

quite a bit of evidence that they they don't ever learn

much about what a variable actually

is or does ways of

thinking about it so there are many different kinds of things here that

can be done so having

⊕(time: 0:56:50)

Open a viewer on the scriptor and rotate them.

one kind of object that's kind of weird I

mean here's a a

photograph which we can see has

the same kind of feel here the

script is one of these guys what if I open up its viewer

got

one called scripture here and I see

y'all look really the same kind of thing so what

if I make a script on the script here

and get

so I think about the implications of this

means that wherever I go out

for instance what if I go over here well

⊕(time: 0:57:32)

Open a viewer on the pane in viewer and rotate them.

the viewers got one of those things and so

does this category so

and

⊕(time: 0:57:41)

Open a viewer on the world, and show different panes.

this whole outside

thing that I'm giving

the talk in terms of is also

one of these things so I look at its viewer the viewer of the world

and

well it's got the same kinds

of things here we looked at the various traits

here this is like what Nathaniel Charlie was talking about

earlier this notion of

sideways composition also goes back to park

back back then in the 70s was called aspects

but that word means something somewhat different

now so we

various things you can see oh the thing is a collection

it's got stuff about

its colors and borders and other

kinds of things here and what

here's one that says as object now an

inheritance system the object would be way up at

the end of the inheritance system but in a sideways composition

object system it's going to be

one of the traits we're looking at it's a view of the object

as an object and we tried to think

about what would be an interesting way of showing

this idea of meta so

here's one where I'm what I'm going to do is suppress all

the costumes on all the objects and I think this will help you

see that everything is sort of abstractly the same

⊕(time: 0:59:5)

Choose world useBluePrintCanvas: to change the look.

here ok so

basically I just turned off the costume mechanism

now I have this interesting problem of getting back

but that's why I left

my mouse here so this is the guy who did it I'm gonna click the

little carrot here which I know is there

to make it false and then we're gonna hit the

exclamation point to turn everything back on again

you see I'm talking about them basically

meta is safe if you

can allow fence after fence after fence after fence

now there are many many

examples which have had

longer talk I'd show you but I wanted to show you the last

set of ideas here so if

we could just go to the video to please in the

back ok

so return to sketch pad here

and if we look at a more

future oriented environment

we see that we now have the

ability of doing much more complicated

ways of thinking of environments so

⊕(time: 1:00:17)

Switch to a Croquet Image.

here I am in a 3d

environment that we built called croquet by

the way the if your interests and the kids stuff that's found on the website

squeak LAN org and

this croquet environment

this is all free software croquet environment

is found on open croquet org

and

so again this is a completely

constructible environment here but

what we did was

to do a

kind of an interesting analogy to webpages

so each 3d

world here is like a web page and these portals are like a hyper

link to them

so I'm just going to pop Alice to enter this

guy here

I'm just going to do a 360

this

is a Mars environment all

of these environments are buildable

I'm just going to show

one last thing so

I can end on time I

kind of like bridges as an analogy here

so we

have a bridge structure

and

I want to show you what the kids scripting

environment looks like for doing

bridge so the first thing we want to look at is

the little script for Masse's basically

what we have here is F equals MA

acceleration is

the force divided by the mass the velocity is

increasing by the acceleration and

the location

of all the little elements on here

is going to increase by the velocity and

I'm going to turn on the the

force here

to work

and say okay let's do do that

so this bridge structures

feeling gravity

and you can see it coming into equilibrium

could have made it stiffer

but let's look at the springs the

springs are fairly stiff

K gets - 1400

here and so

what I'm going to what I'm going to do here is to make

it - 400 tell

it to go ahead that's going to let

it sag quite a bit more then

we all remember the Tacoma Narrows Bridge film

so of course we have to have

some wind and

basically what I'm going to do here

is turn on a variable

gusting wind that's completely described by

this script here and

okay so now it's going to do

some Tacoma Narrows stuff

I need sound I noticed the

sound wasn't working thank

you

let's take a look at our

bridge

and you know it's funny when you

look at a model of steel if

you remember that Tacoma Narrows Bridge movie

it was really like the bridge was made out of

fabric of some kind and this has this

kind of same aspect and that gave us an interesting idea here

so

I think a good way to end this talk is just to

say that if

we can't get kids interested in the romance why

this is unbelievably beautiful new

art form then

we're not living up

to what our duty is of enjoying the

stuff ourselves we have to reach deeply inside of

ourselves to remember what it was that first got

us interested in this wonderful new thing

remember that it hasn't

even started yet and it's

our duty to help the children as young as

possible try and do a better job of it than we have

thank you very much

Thank You Alan

for a fantastic talk and we

have a token of our affection here

as well that concludes

our Turing

Award lecture and you're welcome now

to go

get dinner and

then afterwards at 8 o'clock we'll

be beginning the last

thing on this evenings agenda

the tenth anniversary reunion

Difference between revisions of "Alan Kay Turing Award Lecture (2004)"

Revision as of 03:22, 10 December 2017

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Tool box

Tools

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 <slideview/>
-<note for="0:4:23">
+<subtitle id="0:0:5">association for computing Machinery's  touring award lecture</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:4:23" name="Don Quote.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:0:8"> the Turing award  is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:11"> ACMs most prestigious technical</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:14"> award  if you look at past Turing laureates</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:17">  it'll read like a who's who of computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:20">  science the Turing award is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:23"> given out  annually to an individual</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:26"> who has  contributed</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:29"> has given</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:32"> contributions of  lasting and major technical importance</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:35">  to the field and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:38"> Turing laureate is  invited to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:41"> give a talk on whatever</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:44"> topic  they'd like at any</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:47"> ACM conference during  the year and we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:50"> are privileged to have  this year's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:53"> laureate choose oops law as  their venue</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:56"> so without further ado I'd  like to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:59"> introduce dr. Alan Kay the he's  a senior</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:2"> fellow at Hewlett Packard he's  president</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:5"> of viewpoints Research  Institute and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:8"> Turing award was given  to him for pioneering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:11"> many of the ideas  at the root of contemporary</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:14">  object-oriented programming languages  for leading</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:17"> the team that developed  small talk and four</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:20"> fundamental compute  contributions to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:23"> personal computing  let's give a warm welcome</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:47">of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:50"> course one of the funny things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:53"> about  the larger citation was it also</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:56"> said for  coming up and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:59"> helping to come up with  many of the ideas that eventually led to  C++</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:2"> and Java</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:5"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:8"> the reminded me of Tony  whores in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:11"> his Turing lecture</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:14"> which was  quite a bit of which was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:17"> about Al Gore  he pointed out that algo is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:20"> a great  improvement especially on its successors</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:29">o about a year</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:32"> ago I got asked by Sigma  C to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:35"> come and give a talk here which  happened yesterday</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:38"> about early  experiences</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:41"> in computing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:44"> primarily for  high school and to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:47"> some extent for first  year college</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:50"> and I wasn't of course  expecting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:53"> to get this award and I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:56"> was  had spent a fair amount of time trying</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:59">to think about the high school and  college</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:2"> situation since I had no</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:5"> real  experience doing a first course</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:8"> and I  certainly didn't like what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:11"> I found when  I went out and read</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:14"> books and the AP</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:17">  stuff and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:20"> forth but I figured nobody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:23">  wants to hear anybody complain even</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:26"> if  they're telling the truth for an hour so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:29">  what I decided to do was to see if I  were going to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:32"> teach a first course in  high school</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:35"> or college what would it be  like and that was the talk I gave</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:38">  yesterday and I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:41"> wound up thinking that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:44">  perhaps a slightly different version</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:47"> of  this would make a reasonable</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:50"> Turing  lecture so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:3:53">
+<slide for="0:3:53" name="Don Quote.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:3:53"> here it is and first I want</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:56">  to start off with a Don quote  he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:59"> has lots of them but this is my  favorite one of his beware</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:2">the above code  I've only proved it correct</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:5"> not tried it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:8">his is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:11"> the perfect antidote to what  what you might call the academy's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:14"> ation  of the field which quite</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:17"> a bit of which  has been an attempt to use classical</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:20">  mathematics to deal</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:23"> with a new  mathematics that requires a new math</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:26"> to  help describe it so what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:29">new field  I believe</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:32"> math simple</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:35"> statement about  our field is that math wins</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:38"> basically  every time you can do something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:41">reasonably mathematical what we're  trying to do we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:44"> make great advances but  it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:47"> rare that old math wins</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:50"> because we  have a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:53"> new way of dealing with things  our</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:56"> theorems are not short and they're</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:59">  not about infinite things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:2"> which is what  classical math is generally about the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:5">  equivalent of our theorems and proofs  are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:8"> very very long things about finite</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:11">  structures and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:14">different way of doing about and hence  Dawn's quote</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:17"> which i think is absolutely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:20">  perfect and because our</subtitle>
 <note for="0:5:23">
 <slide for="0:5:23" name="colleagues.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:5:23"> field is the way  it is everything</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:26"> we do is done within a  community and nobody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:29"> has benefited more  from their community than I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:32"> have over  the years and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:35"> for the stuff I'm</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:38"> going to  talk about and show tonight a lot of  people contributed</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:41"> especially over the  last few weeks putting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:44"> together some of  these examples</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:47"> and these are some of the  people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:50"> some of them you notice have gray  hair</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:53">  this guy I know is here Dan angles and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:56">  who's the the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:59"> actual creator of small</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:2">  talk I just wrote the math part and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:5"> Dan  was the guy who actually made it work so</subtitle>
-<note for="0:6:25">
+<subtitle id="0:6:8">  we should give him a round of applause</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:6:25" name="Three Architectures0.png"/>
-<slide for="0:11:35" name="Three Architectures1.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:6:17">so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:6:20">
+<slide for="0:6:20" name="Three Architectures0.png"/>
+<slide for="0:11:29" name="Three Architectures1.png"/>
 </note>
-<note for="0:12:40">
+<subtitle id="0:6:20"> I guess the first thing to think  about here is we</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:12:40" name="Motivations.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:6:23"> have these terms  computer science and software  engineering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:26"> I happen to be around</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:29">both of these terms were made up al  Perlas made up the term</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:32"> computer science  absolutely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:35"> not implying that we had one  but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:38"> as something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:41"> to actually aspire to  and he I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:44"> think he immediately regretted  it even</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:47"> in the first few years  afterwards because what happened</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:50"> was  what some people have sometimes</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:53"> called  physics Envy basically everybody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:56"> who  dabbles in the sciences wants</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:59"> to be a  physicist because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:2"> they deal with the  absolute foundations</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:5"> of the universe and  they do it with serious</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:8"> math and serious  and experiments so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:11"> physics Envy is  science Envy</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:14"> is often found when fields  wind</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:17"> up having science in their name</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:20"> so  library science</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:23"> social science</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:26"> computer  science</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:29"> interesting physics chemistry  and biology don't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:32"> have science in their  name</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:35">so I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:38"> think there can be a science of  computing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:41"> similar to science of bridge  building</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:44"> and in fact Simon</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:47"> pointed out  in his book called</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:50"> the science of  Sciences of the artificial</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:53"> that you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:56"> can  have a science about artifacts like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:59"> a  science of bridge building build a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:2">  bridge by any means whatsoever stress</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:5"> it  in various ways analyze it come up with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:8">a theory of build bridge building build  some more bridges</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:11"> and so forth and in  many ways physics has</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:14"> found itself  becoming a science</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:17"> of the artificial  because a lot of physics</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:20"> is actually all  about the science of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:23"> building  accelerators and detectors and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:26"> trying to  figure out just exactly what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:29"> it is that  those needle swings actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:32"> mean  software</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:35"> engineering actually was a term  that came about for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:38"> a conference like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:41"> in  68 and garmisch Germany</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:44"> and again the  people who went to that conference  except for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:47"> a few did not think there was  anything remotely like a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:50"> software  engineering at that time and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:53"> in fact the  slide shows kind</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:56"> of a from</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:59"> the depths to  something that we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:2"> might call engineering  today of the difference</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:5"> between a  pyramid made out of bricks with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:8"> no  architecture just a garbage dump with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:11"> a  nice limestone cover</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:14"> made by slaves  sounds like something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:17"> that happens a few  miles south of here actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:26">I can just I can just imagine some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:29">  veronik architect</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:32"> at some conference  announcing their</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:35"> new pyramid</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:38"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:41"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:44"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:47"> on the  other side of the scale we have one of  my</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:50"> favorite artifacts the Empire State</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:53">  Building which is well documented and I  urge every</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:56"> single one of you who has  aspirations to be an engineer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:59"> to read  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:2"> three or four excellent recent books  about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:5"> the Empire State Building one of  them is the actual log</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:8"> by the foreman a  basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:11"> the Empire State Building was  constructed</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:14"> from start to finish that is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:17">  from carrying down the buildings that  were there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:20"> to occupancy in less than 11  months</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:23"> by less than 3,000 people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:26">  the flooring itself went</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:29"> up at the rate  of almost two stories a day and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:32">  steel was still warm about a hundred</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:35">  degrees warm from the steel mills in  Pittsburgh</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:38"> where it came from this is  one of the greatest organized</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:41"> projects  and the Starrett brothers who did the  Empire State</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:44"> Building knew they were  making a statement because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:47"> the  Depression had just happened everything</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:50">was set up to do this thing they had  already done a couple</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:53"> of skyscrapers and  they had a feeling this might be the  last skyscraper</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:56"> for a while and so they  decided to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:59"> to make it an expression of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:2">what it meant to be able to make a  skyscraper so it's just the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:5"> greatest  thing but I think if we look at</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:8"> our own  field we cannot find any instance of  3,000</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:11"> people being put together to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:14">something incredible in less than 11  months and have it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:17"> work so whatever it  is that we've got</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:20"> in engineering it  might be closer to Egyptian</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:23"> or  Babylonian engineering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:26"> now somewhere</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:29"> in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:32">  the middle things with archers</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:35">appearing an actual architecture  appeared</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:38"> interesting thing that  happened some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:41"> years before the Gothic  cathedrals was the Pantheon</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:44"> in Rome  which has this clear span</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:47"> the dome clear  span of fourteen</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:50"> stories made out of the  best reinforced</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:53">ever known  but two thousand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:56"> years ago that was  amazing be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:59"> her been in there it looks  like it was made yesterday so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:2"> I think  the best practice that we have right</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:5"> now  in our field as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:8"> far as engineering is a  little bit like a Gothic cathedral</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:11">  sometimes our projects take a hundred</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:14">  years but we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:17"> can aspire to build rather</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:20">  large structures by the standards</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:23"> of the  Middle Ages out of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:26"> much much less  material than the Egyptians</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:29"> needed so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:32">  little progress is being made but I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:35">  think that whenever we say computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:38">  science or software engineering the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:41">specially whenever we think we're  teaching it the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:44"> worst thing we could  ever do is to pretend to the students</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:47">  that we know what it is because the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:50">  students are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:53"> going to be the only ones  that are going to save us</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:56"> so we should  teach the students</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:59"> what I was taught  when I was in graduate school in the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:2">sixties and that is it isn't done yet  it's not</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:5"> even close to done you have to  understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:8"> what the actual scope of  computing is going</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:11"> to be and you have to  help us invent it  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:14"> in fact in those years</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:17"> in the ARPA  community the PhDs were given out for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:20">actual advances in the state of the art  as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:23"> opposed for as opposed to  commentaries</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:26"> and small additions to the  state</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:29"> of the art so it's a very  different time back then but it's a lot  simpler</subtitle>
+<note for="0:13:32">
+<slide for="0:13:32" name="Motivations.png"/>
 </note>
-<note for="0:12:40">
+<subtitle id="0:13:32"> so</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:12:40" name="Motivations.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:13:35"> I could</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:38"> give a whole talk  maybe not terribly</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:41"> successfully about  motivations in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:44"> the end everything we do  is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:47"> being subject to other people's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:50">interface  I feel particularly</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:53"> in education but I  thought I'd show</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:56"> a much simpler model</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:59">than we use but it's only a  two-dimensional model and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:2"> just have us  all ponder</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:5"> it for a bit so one dimension</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:8">  is in the reasoning and change area</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:11"> is  the incredible</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:14"> disparity between the  percentage</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:17"> of human beings who are  basically instrumental reasoner's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:20"> and  those who are basically interested</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:23"> in  ideas so this has been studied</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:26"> in a  variety of different ways and it seems  like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:29"> the the normal us</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:32"> normal human  beings are basically instrumental reason</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:35">isn't an instrumental reason er as a  person who judges</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:38"> any new tool or idea  by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:41"> how well that tular idea contributes  to his</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:44"> or her current goal</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:47">so most of we're very goal-oriented  we're working</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:50"> on things somebody comes  up with something new and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:53"> our ability</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:56"> to  accept it or reject it if we're  instrumental</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:59"> reasoner's depends on  whether we can see it contributing to  our current</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:2"> goal so the other 5% are  primarily</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:5"> motivated by ideas so when a  new idea</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:8"> comes along that appeals to  them they will transform</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:11"> themselves and  their goals in the presence</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:14"> of that idea  needless to say the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:17"> 5% are much easier  to teach</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:20"> particular if you're trying to  teach</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:23"> them things that were inventions  rather than things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:26"> that are built into  human beings so if you're trying to  teach</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:29"> something really weird like  science it is not an</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:32"> easy thing because  you're dealing with a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:35"> set of very  practical</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:38"> and pragmatic kinds of people  so now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:41"> the other dimension here is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:47">between basically about reward</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:50"> inner  motivated versus outer motivated</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:53"> about  85 percent of us are motivated</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:56"> by things  outside of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:59"> ourselves about 15 percent  motivated by things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:2"> inside ourselves and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:5">  so that's kind of interesting and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:8"> what  we have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:11"> here if we look at this is we  have a kind of an interesting category</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:14">  of people who are in term ohta vated and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:17">  interested in ideas I'll leave it for  you to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:20"> figure out who those people are  an interesting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:23"> category number two is  people who are out are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:26"> motivated and  interested in ideas the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:29"> people who are  in are motivated and not interested</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:32"> in  ideas tend to be dangerous and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:35"> caused a  lot of trouble a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:38"> lot</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:41"> of corporate  executives</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:44"> up in there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:47"> but basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:50"> our  field is a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:53"> field that's the next great  500</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:56"> year idea after the printing press  and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:59"> we should all be properly  concerned with something quite</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:2"> different  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:5"> is we have to be concerned with how  the entire</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:8"> bulk of humanity is going</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:11"> to  respond and deal with the things that we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:14">  do so it's extremely interesting to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:17">  consider the 80% here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:20"> that our outer  moat evaded and basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:23"> practical and  a fair</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:26"> amount is known about this 80  percent</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:29"> in the past I've used the term  voting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:32"> but</subtitle>
+<note for="0:17:35">
+<slide for="0:17:35" name="forestFire.png"/>
 </note>
-<note for="0:18:05">
+<subtitle id="0:17:35"> you</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:18:05" name="forestFire.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:17:38"> know this group does not  go to the polls to vote on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:41"> the things  they believe in it takes</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:44"> them a long  time to change what they believe in but  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:47"> way they do it is kind of  interesting and it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:50"> a kind of a  consensus</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:53"> that is gradual</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:56"> it's a seeping  kind of consensus</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:59"> and it has many of the  same characteristics</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:2"> as a model of a  forest fire</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:5"> so I have a little particle</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:8">  system here and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:11"> percentage of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:14">  trees - the percentage of clearing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:17"> here  is just 50/50 so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:20"> if I say okay let's see  if if we can spread the fire</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:23"> throughout  the forest here with a 50%</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:26"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:29"> so I didn't  initialize that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:32"> let's try again  so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:35"> here's 50%</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:38"> so surprising that he  doesn't try</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:44">let's try go</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:47"> up to 50 60 % let's say</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:50"> you  can think of the 60% as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:53"> people who are  almost ready to agree people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:56"> are  essentially there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:2">so 10% more</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:5"> it spreads better</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:8"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:11"> try  another one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:14"> each time the placement</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:17">random so you got a slightly different  behavior</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:26">yeah so that's about what you get</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:29"> babe</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:32">  rings itself out so if we go up to like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:35">  66 percent or so 67 66</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:44">yeah</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:47"> so in these contagion models</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:50"> you  can think of this as spreading means if  you will</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:53"> roughly two-thirds of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:56"> this 80%  has to pretty</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:59"> much be there before you  can get them</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:2"> to agree and do something  because they just won't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:5"> do it unless  everybody else is doing it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:8"> and this  model works really great</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:11"> for even weird  things like wearing baseball</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:14"> caps  backwards and girls</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:17"> showing their belly  buttons</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:20"> if you trace the girls showing  their belly buttons</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:23"> over the years  you'll see how gradual</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:26"> this change was  until suddenly it was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:29"> okay and the thing  is if it's okay now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:32"> was always okay so  what's the problem well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:35"> the problem was  that this group generally</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:38"> didn't think  it was okay it wasn't okay until about  two-thirds</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:41"> of them thought it was okay  and then all of a sudden it became okay  so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:44"> you're trying to reform education</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:47"> or  you're trying to get a group of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:50">to understand real object-oriented  programming or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:53"> any other new kind of  thing that comes along</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:56"> you get this  incredible disparity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:59"> which in computing  there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:2"> are many many instances of roughly</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:5">  30-year lags from when</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:8"> an idea was  really proved out to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:11"> when it gets  generally accepted but nobody knows</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:14">whether this thirty years actually means  anything or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:17"> not but it's it's  interesting to look at the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:20"> case of UNIX  and all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:23"> of its different adventures</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:26"> over  the years and finally</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:29"> being accepted  even though it has</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:32"> a basically late 60s  architecture</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:35"> which is better than the  architecture of some of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:38"> the operating  systems that are around</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:41">  but still it's a fairly old architecture</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:44">  and so I'm desperately</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:47"> trying to hold on  to life until</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:50"> at least 2007 or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:53"> eight  because some quite a bit of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:56"> the work at  Parc peaked 30 years ago</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:59">and I'm curious to see whether those  ideas will</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:2"> actually be accepted</subtitle>
+<note for="0:22:05">
+<slide for="0:22:05" name="NLS New.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:22:5"> however  if you look at an extreme case</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:8"> Doug  Engelbart who had some of the best</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:11"> ideas  ever I think he was on a different plane</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:14">  his ideas are now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:17"> getting closer and  closer to being 40</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:20"> years old in their  articulate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:23"> expression and most people  still don't understand what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:26"> it was that  he was trying to do I</subtitle>
-<note for="0:22:10">
+<note for="0:22:29">
-<slide for="0:22:10" name="NLS New.png"/>
+<slide for="0:22:29" name="JOY.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:22:29"> think an ancillary</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:32">  problem is that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:35"> our field and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:38">people in general take great delight in  complexity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:41"> seems</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:44"> like you go to schools</subtitle>
-<note for="0:22:34">
+<subtitle id="0:22:47">  is remarkable</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:22:34" name="JOY.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:22:50"> how much work they make  the poor kids do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:53"> when if they taught the  math</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:56"> better and differently the kids  would have to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:59"> much less work but in  fact I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:2"> think people the light in  complexity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:5"> and think that putting  immense</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:8"> amounts of hard work in even if  there's an easier</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:11"> way is actually  there's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:14"> something morally good about it  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:17"> so I think for our field</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:20"> one of the  hardest things is the delight and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:23">  complexity because of the many levels of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:26">  structure in computing and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:29"> the  difficulty of going from one level</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:32"> to  another pretty much everyone</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:35"> who gets  interested in computing and a successful</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:38">  Abbot is a person who has mastered  staggering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:41"> amounts of complexity now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:44">believe that most of those complexity is  absolutely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:47"> unnecessary and I believe it  can be proved that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:50"> it's unnecessary  so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:23:53">
+<slide for="0:23:53" name="JOY2.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:23:53"> what we really want is</subtitle>
-<note for="0:24:00">
+<subtitle id="0:23:56"> to find the  joy of simplicity a lot of</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:24:00" name="JOY2.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:23:59"> this talk is  almost a living cliche</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:2"> in the sense that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:5">  very little of what I'm going to say  here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:8"> is stuff that you don't already  know</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:11"> but when I started thinking about  what should</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:14"> I say at this talk  simplicity just kept on coming back</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:17"> the  all the projects</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:20"> I've been involved in  that have been successful have been</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:23">  successful because the people who worked</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:26">  in them put quite</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:29"> a bit of effort into  keeping things to be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:32"> simple and this  community of ARPA</subtitle>
+<note for="0:24:35">
+<slide for="0:24:35" name="PARC Inventions1.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:24:35"> and then Xerox PARC  was</subtitle>
-<note for="0:24:40">
+<subtitle id="0:24:38"> outstanding at being</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:24:40" name="PARC Inventions1.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:24:41"> simple and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:44"> this  is a very very confident</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:47"> group of people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:50">  but surprisingly I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:53"> won't use the word  modest because I don't think</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:56"> anybody  would recognize that word applied</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:59"> to  these people but I would say we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:2"> very  very respectful of these grand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:5"> ideas  they are trying to do Butler</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:8"> Lampson  here was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:11"> always pounding for simplicity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:14">  Chuck Thacker we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:17"> did the alto and just  three months was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:20"> a master of simplicity  dan angles master</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:23"> of simplicity so and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:26">  Metcalf and Boggs</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:29"> that calf tells a  great great</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:32"> stories about how he didn't  actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:35"> how many things he'd actually  didn't understand and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:38"> it was incredibly  important that he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:41">of those things else he never would have  been able to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:44"> invent the ethernet very</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:47">Starkweather who did the laser printer  first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:50"> laser printer was a page a second  500</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:53"> pixels to the inch faster</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:56"> than most  laser printers today</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:59"> was about  three-quarters made with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:2">got from Edmunds  typic hobby</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:5"> catalog because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:8"> they were  cheap so he could get many</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:11"> of them and  try them out and so forth</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:14"> so this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:17"> this  particular</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:20"> way of looking at things  which was basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:23"> Hayward basically  the this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:26"> group said we're just nowhere  near as smart as IBM</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:29"> claims to be  they're always</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:32"> announcing some new  complicated network architecture</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:35"> that we  can't see how to make it work and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:38"> so  we'll just stick to our old full</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:41"> duplex  ideas and retransmission and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:44"> put a few  other things in there and it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:47"> may not  work as well as what IBM claims it's  going to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:50"> but it's probably gonna work  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:53"> funny thing is the network's we use  today are those</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:56"> terribly designed</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:59">  unbelievably inefficient stochastic</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:2">  networks that are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:5"> far from perfect but  what's great is that they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:8"> eventually get  that packet through perfectly you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:11"> just  have to be willing to wait so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:27:14">
+<slide for="0:27:14" name="Some Prejudices.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:27:14"> the other  thing that this group</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:17"> was really good at  was what I call</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:20"> a different kind of  simplicity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:23"> so it's it's hard to claim  that Maxwell's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:26"> equations here is simple  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:29"> they're all that work you have  to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:32"> to understand vectors and curl</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:35"> and  divergence and gradient but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:38">hing about it is once you've done that  work it shrinks</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:41"> down to something that's  just a simple eyeful</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:44"> the Constitution</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:47">the United States is one of my favorite  systems design</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:50"> think of it millions</subtitle>
-<note for="0:27:20">
+<subtitle id="0:27:53"> and  millions of mutually incompatible parts</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:27:20" name="Some Prejudices.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:27:56">  running without completely breaking for  more</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:59"> than 200 years pretty amazing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:2">can hold it in your hand the reason you  can hold it in your</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:5"> hand is there a wise  not to put any laws in it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:8"> so it was not  a law based thing it's not a case</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:11"> based  thing it was a principle based thing  was a kernel</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:14"> so these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:17"> are the kinds of  things that appeal to me greatly</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:20"> over  the years and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:23"> I think trying to give  beginners</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:26"> at computing a taste for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:29"> the  power of the particular kind of  simplicity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:32"> that works so well is what we  should do</subtitle>
+<note for="0:28:35">
+<slide for="0:28:35" name="Four Areas.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:28:35"> now the other thing I've  noticed in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:38"> talking with younger people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:41">  and teaching a course upper</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:44"> division  course UCLA once a year and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:47"> that is that  the it's not so much that the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:50"> juniors  and seniors don't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:53"> know that much they  actually don't know</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:56"> that much for being  close</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:59"> to graduating from college but the  thing that is the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:2"> stressing about them  is that the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:5"> things that they do know  they know very badly as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:8"> they know them  in ways that are almost</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:11">  counterproductive for their thinking</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:14"> and  so I think in a first course</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:17"> at anything  you have a real chance</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:20"> to not just teach</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:23">  the one subject but in the first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:26">you can actually touch on a lot of  subjects so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:29"> for instance I think math  and science should always be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:32"> taught  together in the beginning they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:35"> came  about that way one is a language</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:38"> one is  a process I think</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:41"> systems and computing  should be taught together</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:44"> I think the  four of them should be taught together</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:47">  there arts we should teach you art</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:50"> and  engineering and why</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:53"> not throw in a  little bit about how these unusual</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:56"> ways  of looking at the world have affected</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:59">  civilization I think the other</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:2"> thing  that is so critical and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:5"> so absent in  most of our undergraduate computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:8">  science curricula is the failure to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:11">  think what we're doing as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:14"> a kind of  literacy literacy</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:17"> is something that  comes up about when</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:20"> you have first ideas  that are worthwhile talking about you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:23">  have a way of writing down those ideas  and discussing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:26"> them that gives  literature and literacy is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:29"> the ability  to deal with both the spoken</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:32"> and the  written forms of these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:35"> ideas so when we  teach an English class our first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:38"> English  class in college we're not aiming</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:41">class at people who are going to become  professional writers</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:44"> when they graduate  four years later</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:47"> we actually think of  the impact</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:50"> of the printing press and the  new</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:53"> rhetorics and new ways of arguing  that came with a printing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:56"> press as  something that is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:59"> larger than</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:2"> becoming a  professional reader or writer I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:5"> think  the same thing is true of computing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:8">  fifty years from now this will not be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:11">  controversial so right now it's thought</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:14">  of as even in mighty Stanford with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:17"> its  great endowment as basically vocational  training</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:20"> in Java and it's primarily  thought</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:23"> of as teaching kids programming</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:26">  and it's absolutely important</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:29"> to learn  how to program but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:32"> computer science and  software engineering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:35"> are not the same as  programming any</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:38"> more than building  Chartres Cathedral is the same as Brick  Lane</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:41"> you have to understand one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:44">the other but they're very different I  think this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:47"> is absolutely critical  because the picture on this little</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:50"> slide  here is Konrad Lorenz</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:53"> out swimming in  the pond with his ducks following</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:56">  remember of Lorentz</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:59"> found that whatever  moved</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:2"> near a duckling during one little  critical period</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:5"> of a few hours was taken  thereafter</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:8"> by that duckling to be its  mother and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:11"> it would follow even into  adulthood that that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:14"> person and rents</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:17">found that they would follow him even  more happily if he jumped</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:20"> into the water  so there he is so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:23"> I think whenever we're  introducing somebody to something we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:26">  have to realize that we are going to be  a con</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:29"> if we're successful we're going to  be a kind of Konrad Lorenz and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:32"> we should  take great care to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:35"> what we're going to  imprint them on but we don't want to  imprint</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:38"> them on for God's sakes  his data structures and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:41"> algorithms that  was a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:44"> great idea in the 50s and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:47"> you had  to understand it and it's still useful</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:50">  today for optimization and other</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:53">of things but it is not the center of  the field</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:56"> for a long time  and what's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:59"> worse about it it doesn't  scale those</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:2"> very little systems aspect  in way</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:5"> the data structures and  algorithms are taught and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:8"> I believe  that we have to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:11"> is give the students  a real taste what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:14"> the whole deal is and  so they have to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:17"> start thinking in  systems ways thinking</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:20"> in math and  alkaway scientific ways as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:23"> we go along  this is a tall order</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:26"> obviously now we  could all remember</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:29"> our Conrad Lorentz  and</subtitle>
-<note for="0:28:25">
+<subtitle id="0:33:32"> mine</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:28:25" name="Four Areas.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:33:35"> happened after I'd been a  programmer for five years</subtitle>
+<note for="0:33:38">
+<slide for="0:33:38" name="Sketchpad1.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:33:38"> a journeyman  programmer putting myself through</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:41"> school  went to graduate school and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:44"> was given  Ivan</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:47"> Sutherlands thesis by Dave Evans  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:50"> Dave said read it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:53"> then come back and  talk with me about it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:56">  and it was big thick</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:33:59"> thing and but I saw  that his thesis</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:2"> advisor was a guy by the  name of Claude e Shannon</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:5"> and I'd heard  of Shannon I thought well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:8"> boy if Shannon  signed this thing maybe I should read it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:11">  and I discovered that it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:14"> was the most  amazing thing that I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:17"> had ever heard of  being done with a computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:20"> up to that  point and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:23"> just show</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:26"> you a little bit of  the idea</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:29"> of it so this this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:32">which is about the size of this  auditorium</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:35"> had only one guy on it from 3  o'clock</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:38">the morning you know as he just sketched  in something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:41"> there then told those edges  to become usually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:44"> perpendicular and  sketchpad figured out how to do that for  him</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:47"> first system to have a clipping</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:50">window  are you actually drawing on this huge</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:53">  virtual sheet of paper Danny</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:56"> draw  quickly point to these two</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:34:59"> guys and say  okay become parallel figures</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:2"> out how to  do that now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:5"> he's saying be collinear</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:8"> to  lay yourself over</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:11"> these lines and of  course</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:14"> this display on this machine only  plotted points</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:17"> about half the capacity  of this machine</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:20"> I'm about here over to  the air it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:23"> was just to put these little  dots up on the screen and pretend</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:26"> it was  a line drawing display</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:29"> now he's got a  hole in the flange</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:32"> okay</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:35"> and he wants to  make a rivet</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:38"> got some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:41"> more ink  notice that the two-handed user  interface</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:44"> as all user interfaces should  be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:47"> put</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:50"> that other hand is for point</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:53">he center of the cross piece there to  get the center</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:56"> of the arc and again  let's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:35:59"> do the mutually perpendicular  trick</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:2"> that drags the center guys which  drags the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:5"> art guys we got a nice little  symmetric rivet</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:8"> and he could tell it to  be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:11"> in some ratio the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:14"> two sides of the  vertical part</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:17"> of the rivet here he's  just showing it us that will do another  solution</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:20"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:23"> now he's going to go</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:26"> back  to the original form and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:29"> show us one  other interesting thing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:32"> which</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:35"> is he can  make instances of this guy</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:41">they gets</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:44"> a instance of the rivet here I  can move it around</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:47"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:50"> and see the success  of sketchpad</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:53"> led to a desire for a  better looking displays</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:56"> actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:36:59"> those  twinkling is they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:2"> discovered right away  that you got seasick unless</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:5"> they  randomly plotted the dots so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:8">mething's being done in there they're  actually sorting half</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:11"> the memory of the  machine to keep the dot display random</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:14">  so it wouldn't swim around much more  than</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:17"> it it is here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:20"> he's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:23"> got four  instances now and he says whoops I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:26">  forgot about the cross piece so it goes  to the master</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:29"> which we would call a  class makes</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:32"> the cross pieces transparent  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:35"> we see the instances all feel that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:41">so now he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:47">'s going to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:50"> take this thing that  he just made and make</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:53"> it into a master  so the new construction</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:56"> is a master and  now he can get some instances of this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:37:59">  flange here so the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:2"> the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:5"> range of  sketchpad was surprising so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:8"> by the end  of 1962 he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:11"> could not only do stuff like  this but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:14"> he decided okay I need</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:17"> letters  and numbers so he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:20"> letters and numbers  were actually made out of the sketchpad</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:23">  stuff directly by drawing them in so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:26">f the captions on all of his drawings  and his thesis</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:29"> were made by the system  as well and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:32"> then he realized oh yeah I  can actually do a bridge</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:35"> because the  bridge actually acts a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:38"> little bit like a  very stiff set of Springs and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:41"> I can tell  sketchpad</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:44"> to try and keep these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:47"> guys  constant when something is trying to  force</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:50"> them to move and I can measure the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:53">  disparity the strain</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:56"> on each one of  these guys and I actually can show</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:38:59">those labels on all of these guys and I  get a simulation</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:2"> of a bridge without  sketchpad</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:5"> ever having heard about a  bridge and he realized</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:8"> oh I can do that  with EMF also I can make</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:11"> circuits and  the constraints will</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:14"> actually drive all  of these simulations so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:17"> in my career I  think</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:20"> what I've been doing for the last  forty years is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:23"> trying to get the next  version of sketch pad</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:26"> out because if you  think about what this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:29"> thing is this is  kind of what we want we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:32"> want something  in which anything that we are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:35"> interested  in especially</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:38"> dynamic things that were  interested in we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:41"> can simply draw them in  there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:44"> put in the relationships that we  understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:47"> piece by piece and have the  system synthesize all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:50"> this into a  dynamic simulation of astounding</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:53"> range  so it's just beautiful</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:56"> if they're I  don't know whether our field</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:39:59">Newton  yeah I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:2"> knew then</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:5"> I think it would have  to be ivan sutherland</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:8"> because the where</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:11">the field was before I even came on the  scene and after it was fantastic</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:14"> so I  want to ask Ivan</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:17"> how could you possibly  in one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:20"> year in machine code</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:23"> on this big</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:26">  but rather slow machine with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:29"> no graphics  display on it have done</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:32"> the first  graphics system the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:35"> first  object-oriented software system and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:38">  first dynamic problem-solving system</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:41"> and  I even looked at me said well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:44"> I didn't  know it was hard</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:47"> so the period by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:50">way this thesis is available from MIT  should</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:53"> get it and read it my favorite  line</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:56"> from it is he says that his hope  that future work will far surpass this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:40:59">  effort</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:5">so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:8"> that was my first day</subtitle>
-<note for="0:33:33">
+<subtitle id="0:41:11"> in graduate  school</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:33:33" name="Sketchpad1.png"/>
+<note for="0:41:14>
+<slide for="0:41:14" name="ARPAnet.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:41:14"> and second day I found out about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:17">hat I was actually in the middle of the  ARPA community which I had no</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:20">  realization about and look</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:23"> lighter was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:26">  not the funder in 1966 it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:29"> was Bob Taylor  and they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:32"> were just starting to talk  about doing what Licklider called the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:35">  intergalactic Network and the reason he  called it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:38"> that is he didn't want people  to design a small network</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:41"> those original  theory was wherever</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:44">electricity plug on the face of the  earth there should be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:47">can plug into this into like  intergalactic</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:50"> network that the thing had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:53">  the scale at least up to 500 million</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:56"> to  a billion users so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:41:59"> people were starting  to think about that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:2"> in a couple of days  later I got</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:5"> a tape and some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:8"> documents  about a language called Simula from  Norway</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:11"> by Dahl</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:14"> here and Nygaard and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:17"> it's  very hard to understand and after a lot  of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:20"> work and looking at the listings we  realize well this is a programming</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:23">  language that is dealing with the same  kind</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:26"> of structures as sketchpad by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:29"> the  way I should mention the you know the  name the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:32"> term object predates</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:35">  object-oriented programming object</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:38"> in  the early 60s was a general term</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:41">was used to describe compound data  structures especially</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:44"> if they had  pointers in them there was none</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:47">paraphernalia of what we think about as  object native</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:50"> programming today object  was just a general</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:53"> term you'll find it  lots of old papers</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:56"> and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:42:59"> realization  that you could write procedures</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:2"> for  dealing with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:5">at sketchpad was doing was very  liberating because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:8"> even though it was  ugly compared</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:11"> to what sketch patters  gets bad was just unbelievably elegant</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:14">but nobody knew how to scale that's  Oliver</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:17">  in fact that problem has not been solved</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:20">  today yet but by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:23"> going to the less  elegant</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:26"> way of being able to write code</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:29">  against these structures we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:32"> all got  excited about the possibilities of being  able to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:35"> in a system like Simula the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:38">kinds of graphic and interaction  manipulation and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:41"> my background coming  into this was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:44"> in molecular biology and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:47">  mathematics and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:50"> particularly sketchpad  just hit me</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:53"> right here as one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:56"> of these  kernels and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:43:59"> thing I suddenly  realized was that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:2"> if you were  sufficiently</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:5"> abstract if you ignored  what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:8"> these systems were trying to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:11"> if  you just thought of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:14"> them as being cheap</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:17">versions of all these little computers  on the ARPANET</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:20"> you could</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:23"> solve the same  scaling problem in software</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:26"> then you  could actually subsume</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:29"> everything in  computing with just one kind of idea  which</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:32"> is essentially a little software  computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:35"> not a procedure not a data</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:38">  structure but a whole computer a lot of  the development</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:41"> of OOP was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:44"> software  engineering after that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:47">interesting things to me in the  development of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:50"> who the Elven of  practical as it wound up in spark</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:53"> was  very similar to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:56"> what happened in Lisp  earlier which is boy</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:44:59"> we've got this  incredibly elegant wonderful</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:2"> thing too  bad it runs so slow</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:5"> but what if we could  make it run</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:8"> faster in a way that doesn't  get in the users</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:11"> way then we would have  something really really nice and some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:14">the best actually I just talked the guy  Steele</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:17"> who is one of the people who</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:20">helped make Lisp into something really  special</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:23"> to use as well as to contemplate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:26">  and so the image here was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:29"> WOW it's all  about mess  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:32"> reasons about messages are not about  objects</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:35"> so much is that the messages are  the abstractions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:38"> we spend</subtitle>
-<note for="0:41:10">
+<subtitle id="0:45:41">time in our field worrying about what  the objects are</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:41:10" name="ARPAnet.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:45:44"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:47"> so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:45:53">
+<slide for="0:45:53" name="Prejudices.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:45:53">I need to move along a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:56"> bazillion  prejudices  I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:45:59"> love parallelism because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:2"> I learned how to program plug  boards before</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:5"> programming a computer and  the beauty</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:8"> about those things was you  could make a kind</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:11"> of a machine it was  highly parallel</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:14"> I loved</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:17"> hardware like  the B 5000 all of our</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:20">today that we use came out of the  hardware of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:23"> that machine never</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:26"> saw fit  to learn anything about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:29"> software make  our</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:32"> lives much simpler  I love</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:35"> Lisp everybody should understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:38">  it the giass was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:41">programming language ever done it could  hardly do anything but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:44"> it did it  beautifully</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:47"> so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:50"> it's an interesting  challenge to take something of this  level</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:53"> of beauty and try to scale it you  combine these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:56"> two together you got the  original logo that's how logo came</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:46:59"> about  attempt to take Lisp and</subtitle>
-<note for="0:46:00">
+<subtitle id="0:47:2"> have something  prettier especially for kids</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:46:00" name="Prejudices.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:47:5">  I love APL all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:8"> of these all of these  systems I think can be done in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:11"> a  different way but basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:14"> the love of  these things is because these guys</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:17"> got  to some special kernel I love what  Engelbart</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:20"> did a lot of spreadsheets I  loved HyperCard</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:23"> suppose you could  amalgamate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:26"> all these wonderful things  into</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:29"> a simple system that regular people  can</subtitle>
+<note for="0:47:32">
+<slide for="0:47:32" name="Exploratorium.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:47:32"> use and now let's talk about the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:35"> the  why of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:38"> what we're doing why do people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:41"> do  things well Frank Oppenheimer in the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:44">  Exploratorium</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:47"> made 500 exhibits to teach  just one idea the world</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:50"> is not as it  seems they asked him</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:53"> why and he said  well every child is different we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:56"> have  2,000 children in here bumping against  500</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:47:59"> different exhibits there's a good  chance that a child</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:2"> will find the  exhibit that speaks</subtitle>
-<note for="0:47:40">
+<subtitle id="0:48:5"> to them  clearly about this first important</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:47:40" name="Exploratorium.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:48:8">about science  so he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:11"> said 500 of them and I think if  you're going to teach a course in this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:14">  you need</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:17"> you need</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:20"> 20 to 30 projects or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:23">  so for each area to give the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:26"> children  the choice</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:29"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:32"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:35"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:38"> I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:41"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:44"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:47"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:50"> won't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:53"> tell you what  quadrant they're in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:48:56"> so</subtitle>
+<note for="0:48:59">
+<slide for="0:48:59" name="Model T Scratch.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:48:59"> I think the  another important</subtitle>
-<note for="0:49:00">
+<subtitle id="0:49:2"> idea is scratch  programming because</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:49:00" name="Model T Scratch.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:49:5"> so much of computing  education</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:8"> today is learning the library  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:11"> I don't think beginners should ever  be shown the library</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:14"> the programming  language can't do interesting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:17"> things  without the library then what is it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:20"> so I  think</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:23"> it should be like a Model T Model  T has</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:26"> about 350 parts and you could</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:29"> take  it apart over a weekend and put it back  together</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:32"> but it was a completely real  automobile</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:35"> so a lot of what we're gonna</subtitle>
+<note for="0:49:38">
+<slide for="0:49:38" name="influences.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:49:38">  look at here in the next few minutes are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:41">  sort of first-order ideas that might</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:44"> say  some important things now a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:47"> good thing  is that many people have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:50"> written about  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:53"> fun the beauty the romance what's  important</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:56"> and about looking ahead in  computing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:49:59"> there's not just one book out  there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:2"> and there's less than 1% of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:5">books about computing or worthwhile  reading</subtitle>
-<note for="0:49:50">
+<subtitle id="0:50:8"> but it's not one book there are  dozens</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:49:50" name="influences.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:50:11"> of them and so there's plenty of  ideas</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:14"> for how to do this stuff</subtitle>
+<note for="0:50:17">
+<slide for="0:50:17" name="ControlvLearning C.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:50:17">  the user interface had better not be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:20">  like Microsoft's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:23"> caricature of the stuff</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:26">  that was done at Parc which is I always</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:29">have the feeling when I'm using Windows  that I'm</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:32"> dealing with a somewhat  dangerous nuclear</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:35"> reactor control panel</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:38">  and that I haven't had enough training</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:41">  on it whereas what I want is something  like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:44"> pencil and paper where although  there are things I can learn</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:47"> about  pencil and paper what I what is most  important</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:50"> about them is what I can do  without knowing much so</subtitle>
-<note for="0:50:20">
+<subtitle id="0:50:53"> I can find out  the pencil and paper is fun</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:50:20" name="ControlvLearning C.png"/>
+<note for="0:50:56">
+<slide for="0:52:05" name="FLOW.png"/>
+<slide for="0:52:17" name="FLOW2.png"/>
+<slide for="0:52:26" name="FLOW3.png"/>
+<slide for="0:52:29" name="FLOW4.png"/>
+<slide for="0:52:35" name="FLOW5.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:50:56"> and I want  an environment that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:50:59"> deals with a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:2"> set of  ideas in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:5"> a way that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:8"> gets me to lose  myself in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:11"> the ideas so my chick sandy hi</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:14">  here was one of our advisors had this  nice</subtitle>
-<note for="0:51:00">
+<subtitle id="0:51:17"> model about this</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:51:00" name="FLOW.png"/>
-<slide for="0:52:13" name="FLOW2.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:51:20"> balance between  our</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:52:23" name="FLOW3.png"/>
-<slide for="0:52:33" name="FLOW4.png"/>
+<subtitle id="0:51:23"> abilities and the challenges and</subtitle>
-<slide for="0:52:43" name="FLOW5.png"/>
-</note>
+<subtitle id="0:51:26"> he  said well if the challenges are higher</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:29">  than our abilities then we start getting  anxious</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:32"> especially</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:35"> if we're climbing up  a rock face</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:38"> we're giving a talk in front  of an audience</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:41">  but if our abilities are greater</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:44"> than  the challenge we start getting bored</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:47"> so  these are the two main states that  humans</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:50"> are in either anxious or bored</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:53">hard-to-get-to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:56"> is this flow state where  everything</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:51:59"> is just working and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:2"> we like  to widen this flow State for a beginners</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:5">  so for example</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:8"> one of the things we  could do to deal</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:11"> with areas that where  the challenge is greater than</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:14"> our  abilities is to increase the safety</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:17">  so having undo an environment</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:20">nice  most</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:23"> programming environments don't have  much of an undo</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:26"> and on the other hand  what because we get bored</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:29"> so easily we  want something to help us pay attention</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:32">  better and a good user interface</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:35">basically deals with these things it  provides more safety</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:38"> than most computer  people think an</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:41"> ordinary person needs  and it provides more ways of attracting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:44">  their attention than most of us</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:47"> think  people need</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:50"> so I just</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:53"> want to show you a</subtitle>
 <note for="0:52:56">
 Alan is drawing a car, explain the viewer and some tiles.
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:52:56">  give you a little bit of a flavor about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:52:59">  how children start</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:2"> and then show you  where I think things are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:5"> actually going  to go so the work</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:8"> we do with children we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:11">want</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:14"> them to have an experience that is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:17">  basically thinking</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:20"> about ideas making  pictures of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:23"> them so for example take</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:26">  something that most kids would like to  do for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:29"> one reason or another which is to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:32">learn</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:35"> how to drive their parents car</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:38"> we  get them to design a car and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:41"> most kids</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:44">  boys and girls put on big off-road</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:47"> tires  like this because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:50"> part of the deal is  feeling powerless and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:53"> wanting to feel  empowered this is something that video</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:56">  game manufacturers really understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:53:59"> why  are those games so violent</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:5">and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:8"> we have a little graphic object  here and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:11"> do things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:14"> to it we can open it  up and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:17"> see</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:20"> a viewer of it I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:23">people in the back can't see very well  so I'm looking</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:26"> at a property here called  the heading of the thing and I'm gonna  count</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:29"> up the number starts at zero and  as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:32"> I count it up you can see the little  car turning I've</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:35"> got a behavioral  property here forward</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:38"> I've got a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:41"> another  one called turn by and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:44"> if I just drag  out the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:47"> lines</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:50"> of script here and turn on  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:53"> clock</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:56"> then I've got my little car  going there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:54:59"> are many different kinds of  things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:2"> I can do with it  for the kids they want to learn a little</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:5">  bit about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:8"> driving the car so the first  experiment is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:11"> what happens if I click  this number it says turn by</subtitle>
-<note for="0:57:00">
+<subtitle id="0:55:14"> now turn by  zero</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:17"> it goes straight turn by negative</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:20">  I'll call this guy car keep</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:23"> it straight  here that's a little bit like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:26"> kissing  your sister so because real</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:29"> cars use  wheels so I want to make a wheel here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:35">just draw</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:38"> one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:41"> it's got the same user</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:44">  interface as the other one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:47">is a system which is only one kind of  object</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:50"> so it's exactly the opposite</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:53"> of  the systems that you're used to that  have zillions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:56"> and zillions of classes  and subclasses and and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:55:59"> so forth and we  can talk a little</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:2"> bit about it about  this in the question and answer system  if you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:5"> would like and so here's this  wheel it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:8"> got a heading also and if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:11">pick up the name of that heading and  just drag it over to the script</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:14"> here so  it says car turned</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:17"> by wheels heading now  I can just turn</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:20"> the car around now  what's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:23"> important for ten-year olds that  they is that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:26"> they learn what a variable  is for the rest of their life from this  one shot</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:29"> that's good and actually I  believe this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:32"> would be good for high  school and college kids too because  there's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:35"> quite a bit of evidence that  they they don't ever learn</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:38"> much about  what a variable actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:41"> is or does ways  of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:44"> thinking about it so there are many  different kinds of things here that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:47"> can  be done so having</subtitle>
+<note for="0:56:50">
 Open a viewer on the scriptor and rotate them.
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:56:50"> one kind of object  that's kind of weird I</subtitle>
-<note for="0:57:35">
+<subtitle id="0:56:53"> mean here's a a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:56">  photograph which we can see has</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:56:59"> the same  kind of feel here the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:2"> script is one of  these guys what if I open up its viewer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:5">got</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:8"> one called scripture here and I see</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:11">y'all look really the same kind of thing  so what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:14"> if I make a script on the script  here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:17"> and get</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:23">so I think about the implications of  this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:26"> means that wherever I go out</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:29"> for  instance what if I go over here well</subtitle>
+<note for="0:57:32">
 Open a viewer on the pane in viewer and rotate them.
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:57:32"> the  viewers got one of those things and so</subtitle>
-<note for="0:57:58">
+<subtitle id="0:57:35">  does this category so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:38"> and</subtitle>
+<note for="0:57:41">
 Open a viewer on the world, and show different panes.
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:57:41"> this whole  outside</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:44"> thing that I'm giving</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:47"> the talk  in terms of is also</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:50"> one of these things  so I look at its viewer the viewer of  the world</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:53"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:56"> well it's got the same  kinds</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:57:59"> of things here we looked at the  various traits</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:2"> here this is like what  Nathaniel Charlie was talking about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:5">  earlier this notion of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:8"> sideways  composition also goes back to park</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:11"> back  back then in the 70s was called aspects</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:14">  but that word means something somewhat  different</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:17"> now so we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:20">various things you can see oh the thing  is a collection</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:23"> it's got stuff about</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:26"> its  colors and borders and other</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:29"> kinds of  things here and what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:32"> here's one that  says as object now an</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:35"> inheritance system  the object would be way up at</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:38"> the end of  the inheritance system but in a sideways  composition</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:41"> object system it's going to  be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:44"> one of the traits we're looking at  it's a view of the object</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:47"> as an object  and we tried to think</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:50"> about what would  be an interesting way of showing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:53"> this  idea of meta so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:56"> here's one where I'm  what I'm going to do is suppress all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:58:59">the costumes on all the objects and I  think this will help you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:2"> see that  everything is sort of abstractly the  same</subtitle>
-<note for="0:59:00">
+<note for="0:59:5">
 Choose world useBluePrintCanvas: to change the look.
 </note>
+<subtitle id="0:59:5"> here ok so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:8"> basically I just turned  off the costume mechanism</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:11"> now I have  this interesting problem of getting back</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:17">but that's why I left</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:20"> my mouse here so  this is the guy who did it I'm gonna  click the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:23"> little carrot here which I  know is there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:26"> to make it false and then  we're gonna hit the</subtitle>
-<note for="1:01:30">
+<subtitle id="0:59:29"> exclamation point to  turn everything back on again</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:32"> you see  I'm talking about them basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:35"> meta is  safe if you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:38"> can allow fence after fence  after fence after fence</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:41"> now there are  many many</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:44"> examples which have had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:47">longer talk I'd show you but I wanted to  show you the last</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:50"> set of ideas here so  if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:53"> we could just go to the video to  please in the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:56"> back ok</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:59:59"> so return to  sketch pad here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:2"> and if we look at a more</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:5">  future oriented environment</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:8"> we see that  we now have the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:11"> ability of doing much  more complicated</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:14"> ways of thinking of  environments so</subtitle>
+<note for="1:00:17">
 Switch to a Croquet Image.
 <slide for="1:00:30" name="Croquet bridge1.png"/>
 <slide for="1:01:20" name="Croquet bridge2.png"/>
 </note>
+<subtitle id="1:0:17"> here I am in a 3d</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:20">environment that we built called croquet  by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:23"> the way the if your interests and the  kids stuff that's found on the website</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:26">  squeak LAN org and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:29"> this croquet  environment</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:32"> this is all free software  croquet environment</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:35"> is found on open  croquet org</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:38"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:41"> so again this is a  completely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:44"> constructible environment  here but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:47"> what we did was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:50"> to do a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:53"> kind of  an interesting analogy to webpages</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:56">  so each 3d</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:0:59"> world here is like a web page  and these portals are like a hyper</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:2"> link  to them</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:5"> so I'm just going to pop Alice  to enter this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:8"> guy here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:11"> I'm just going to  do a 360</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:14">this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:17"> is a Mars environment all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:20"> of these  environments are buildable</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:23"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:26"> I'm just  going to show</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:35">one last thing so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:38"> I can end on time I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:41">  kind of like bridges as an analogy here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:44">  so we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:47"> have a bridge structure</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:50"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:53"> I want  to show you what the kids scripting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:56">  environment looks like for doing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:1:59">bridge so the first thing we want to  look at is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:2"> the little script for Masse's  basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:5"> what we have here is F equals  MA</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:8"> acceleration is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:11"> the force divided by  the mass the velocity is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:14"> increasing by  the acceleration and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:17"> the location</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:20"> of all  the little elements on here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:23"> is going to  increase by the velocity and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:26"> I'm going  to turn on the the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:29"> force here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:32"> to work</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:38">and say okay let's do do that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:41"> so this  bridge structures</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:44"> feeling gravity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:47"> and  you can see it coming into equilibrium</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:50">  could have made it stiffer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:53"> but let's  look at the springs the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:56"> springs are  fairly stiff</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:2:59"> K gets - 1400</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:2"> here and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:5">what I'm going to what I'm going to do  here is to make</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:8"> it - 400 tell</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:11"> it to go  ahead that's going to let</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:14"> it sag quite a  bit more then</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:17"> we all remember the Tacoma  Narrows Bridge film</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:20"> so of course we have  to have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:23"> some wind and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:26"> basically what I'm  going to do here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:29"> is turn on a variable</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:32">  gusting wind that's completely described  by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:35"> this script here and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:38"></subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:41"> okay so now it's  going to do</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:44"> some Tacoma Narrows stuff</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:53">I need sound I noticed the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:56"> sound wasn't  working thank</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:3:59"> you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:2"> let's take a look at  our</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:5"> bridge</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:14">and you know it's funny when you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:17"> look at  a model of steel if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:20"> you remember that  Tacoma Narrows Bridge movie</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:23"> it was  really like the bridge was made out of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:26">  fabric of some kind and this has this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:29">kind of same aspect and that gave us an  interesting idea here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:4:59">so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:2"> I think a good way to end this talk  is just to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:5"> say that if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:8"> we can't get kids  interested in the romance why</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:11"> this is  unbelievably beautiful new</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:14"> art form then</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:17">  we're not living up</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:20"> to what our duty is  of enjoying the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:23"> stuff ourselves we have  to reach deeply inside of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:26"> ourselves to  remember what it was that first got</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:29"> us  interested in this wonderful new thing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:32">  remember that it hasn't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:35"> even started yet  and it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:38"> our duty to help the children  as young as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:41"> possible try and do a better  job of it than we have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:5:44"> thank you very  much</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:26">Thank You Alan</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:29"> for a fantastic talk and  we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:32"> have a token of our affection here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:35"> as  well that concludes</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:38"> our Turing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:41"> Award  lecture and you're welcome now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:44"> to go</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:47"> get  dinner and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:50"> then afterwards at 8 o'clock  we'll</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:53"> be beginning the last</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:56"> thing on  this evenings agenda</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="1:6:59"> the tenth  anniversary reunion</subtitle>