diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content')
| -rw-r--r-- | content/posts/good-cs-books.md | 17 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | content/posts/nature-of-technology.md | 79 |
2 files changed, 82 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/content/posts/good-cs-books.md b/content/posts/good-cs-books.md index ba736e7..4b851d7 100644 --- a/content/posts/good-cs-books.md +++ b/content/posts/good-cs-books.md @@ -1,12 +1,10 @@ +++ date = '2025-07-25T11:29:52+02:00' draft = false -title = 'Computer Science books worth recommending' +title = 'Computer Science books every student should read' +++ -Includes Science-Fiction books. - -1. Frederick P. Brooks, _The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering_. +1. [Frederick P. Brooks, _The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering_](/posts/mythical-man-month). 2. Carl Hamacher and Zvonko Vranesic, _Computer Organization_. @@ -18,13 +16,4 @@ Includes Science-Fiction books. 6. Maurice Herlihy, Nir Shavit, Victor Luchangco, Michael Spear, _The Art of Multiprocessor Programming_. -7. Peter Seibel, _Coders at Work_. - -8. Philip K. Dick, _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?_ - -9. Isaac Asimov, _The Last Question_ - -10. Daniel Keyes, _Flowers for Algernon_ - -11. Aldous Huxley, _Brave New World_ - +7. [W. Brian Arthur, _The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves_.](/posts/nature-of-technology) diff --git a/content/posts/nature-of-technology.md b/content/posts/nature-of-technology.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..12f9d45 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/posts/nature-of-technology.md @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ +--- +title: "Review of The Nature of Technology by W. Brian Arthur" +date: 2026-02-11T08:26:48+01:00 +draft: false +--- + +(Writing in progress) + +"The Nature of Technology" explains how the inventions of modern science come to being. +This book, published in 2009, was recommended to me by my research project supervisor, Prof. Alexandru. +Inside, W. Arthur presents from a new perspective how technologies evolve, drawing a parallel between scientific advancements and a Darwinian-like theory of evolution. +The book is written fairly well, nonetheless there are points I would like to reflect upon. + +_One last disclaimer: Because I write a book on technology the reader should not take it that I am particularly in favor of technology. +Oncologists may write about cancer, but that does not mean they wish it upon people. +I am skeptical about technology and about its consequences._ + +Already in the preface of the book, the author makes a statement that I particularly like, as it conforms to my own beliefs and at the same time reassures me that it is not paradoxical to be a Computer Scientist and a technology sceptic at the same time. +Having read this, I breathe a sigh of relief, as this means I can continue in the direction of my discourse, without having to worry that I might be hypocritical. + +_I have many attitudes towards technology. +I use it and take it for granted. +I enjoy it and occasionally am frustrated by it. +And I am vaguely suspicious of what it is doing to our lives._ + +To elaborate further on this quote, on the next page the author enters a discourse as to the unease that technology brings to our daily lives. +Arthur makes a really good point that human roots go back one way - to nature. +As such, the more our modern world deviates from the familiar, natural environment, the more we question the technology that causes this shift. + +_Our deepest hopes as humans lie in technology; but our deepest trust lies in nature._ + +That is not to say that we should go out and live in the woods instead of cities. +Nonetheless, these first 3 quotes play well into why we should be sceptical of technology. +We hope for it to solve our problems, and with this hope come expectations and unconditional acceptance of solutions to modern issues that technologies provide. +However, this does not mean its correct to do so. +I must admit in the recent times I noticed that less and less people, myself included, separate nature from technology. +Since I was born (2004), I was surrounded by innovations such as cars, cellphones, computers etc. +As a 12 year old, I never felt "uneasy" about using a computer or a tablet. +You can almost argue it was natural to me. +It was only by becoming a Computer Science student that I was able to become aware of technology as separate from natural order of life. +We accept technology without critical thought, like the one of W. Arthur. + +_And so, the story of this century will be about the clash between what technology offers and what we feel comfortable with._ + +I disagree. +I think the clash that Arthur predicts will never come. +What we should be comfortable with will be imposed upon us, with little choice for the individual. + +Reading further, Arthur elaborates on why the book is needed - that the pure Darwinian model of evolution does not fit technology. +He puts forward the premise of the entire book: + +_[...] the novel technologies arise by combination of existing technologies and that therefore existing technologies beget further technologies._ + +This thought somewhat makes sense to me, but what is unacceptable from my point of view are the lines that follow roughly 5 sentences afterwards: + +_We can say that technology creates itself out of itself._ + +I understand what Arthur means here. +That all technologies have a common root, and there is a causal relationship between them. +However the formulation of this sentence is wrong according to me. +Technologies do not create themselves. +We make them into what they are, and it is us who can decide whether to put the new innovation forward or not. +Ethics forbid genetic engineering on humans, so we collectively are capable of stopping the march of technology for at least some innovations. +These statements of course can be challenged further, but for now this is the way I think. +Should new observations arise, I might change my mind. + +Further chapters of the book go more in-depth into the structure of technologies. +Arthur puts forward three different ways to define what a technology is and sketches an abstract view of its inside. +Here I can draw parallels between the concepts I was introduced with during programming classes. +Ideas like abstraction, encapsulation, modularity and compartmentalization were familiar to me already, so I was surprised to see how generic they are an that they appear in all technologies around us, regardless of their domain. + +Talking about the structure of standalone inventions: +_Each is an arrangement of connected building blocks that consists of a central assembly that carries out a base principle, along with other assemblies or component systems that interact to support this._ + +This comes back to the Tanenbaum vs. Torvalds debate about monolithic kernel design vs. micro-kernel design. +In the end, indeed Torvalds won, since Linux is now the most popular operating system in the world. +However the above quote begs the question: Did he ever stand a chance to win in the first place? +If the structure of invention is a wide body and smaller peripherals does this mean that all the inventions that do not follow this principle are bound to fail? +I might be misunderstanding the point Arthur makes here, you could also argue that a micro-kernel still includes a kernel, but I think it is worthwhile to reflect upon this, and whether or not all designs (should) follow this principle. |