1 |
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 7:45 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés: |
3 |
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:46 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
>>>> • "There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX "do one |
5 |
>>>> thing and do it well" model where many workflows can be done as a |
6 |
>>>> pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face |
7 |
>>>> it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major |
8 |
>>>> applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's |
9 |
>>>> a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I |
10 |
>>>> think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of |
11 |
>>>> reality." |
12 |
>>>> |
13 |
>>> |
14 |
>>> He doesn't make an actual argument why useful abstraction cannot be done |
15 |
>>> in complex systems. |
16 |
>> |
17 |
>> He doesn't need to; |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Sure he does. |
20 |
|
21 |
No, he does not, because the link I posted was not an argument, was an |
22 |
interview and he was asked for his opinion, and in no moment was he |
23 |
asked to justify his opinion. |
24 |
|
25 |
You, on the other hand, seem to be arguing. I don't know exactly with |
26 |
whom, because surely is not with me. |
27 |
|
28 |
Regards. |
29 |
-- |
30 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
31 |
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias |
32 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |