JSON has become a kind of de-facto standard for sharing data among services on the web. The Lisp folks have enjoyed this luxury ever since … well ever since McCarthy made the language and his student implemented an interpreter for it. What’s more, they have also had the luxury of using the same syntax for sharing logic .. and in fact take it for granted. This post is a proposal to bring that “luxury” to the web programming world.
Status: Draft. Comments welcome.
Scheme and Lisp have for long had powerful meta-programming abilities due to the syntax of their language being the same as the syntax for the main data structure supported by the language - the humble list. These languages are therefore well suited for inventing smaller special purpose “domain specific languages.
I came up with such a mental model a while back and posted it on Hacker News … which I reproduce here.
(This is a “brain-dump” post).
Many write-ups and studies on social networks and privacy issues talk about the risk of using one’s personal information disclosed within social networks for identity theft. That made me think about whether it is really possible for an identity thief to steal my entire social environment and history or whether such theft is simply an indication of how broken the current paper-world identity systems are in the digital age?
Enter the “social hash” – a short identification string that can be generated from the data in your social network’s history that is very highly likely to be unique to you and very difficult to duplicate in a “prove your identity” challenge.
How would Newcomb’s problem look like in the physical world, taking quantum physics into account? Specifically, would Omega need to know quantum physics in order to predict my decision on “to one box or not to one box”?
Decoherence as projection discusses photon polarization as a phenomenon that can only be explained quantum mechanically even at the macroscopic level –