Post-capitalism as fixing technical debt

There’s a term in software development, “technical debt”, which refers to the old stuff in a codebase that over time becomes something that has to be worked around, or accomodated, or otherwise becomes an impediment to further development. People often talk of addressing technical debt incrementally over the lifetime of a project by factoring out the problem bits and redoing them with the current tech, which is hard: complex, hard to keep the whole thing running while you change it, easy to break stuff that depends on it. At some point it becomes easier to just rewrite your code from scratch.

I’m starting to think of this as analogous to what we’re trying to do with late-stage capitalism. Take an old engine that bootstrapped the world to a certain place but which is now creating more problems than it’s solving: the climate emergency, inequality, oligarchy and corporate power. We’re trying to mitigate these things within the system, while preserving the bits without which the system would fall down, fixing the plane while it’s in the air. Theoretically, at some point it becomes easier to rewrite from scratch: given a global population of 8 billion, resources of X, what’s the best way to allocate resources to make everyone’s lives work? What institutions do we just get rid of, rather than fixing? But generally it’s easier, short-term, to just patch up what we’re doing and try to redirect it to address the issues.

Google’s VR dreams are dead: Google Cardboard is no longer for sale | Ars Technica

Google Cardboard is still open source, but Google is done with the project.
— Read on arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/03/googles-vr-dreams-are-dead-google-cardboard-is-no-longer-for-sale/

My friend Douglas and my son Ian both noted how Google has a tendency to drop things before they’re complete systems. Oh well. Sayonara, google cardboard.

Microsoft build the language I want to try for music

Overview of the Power Fx language
— Read on docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/power-fx/overview

Years ago, I thought about a language I’d like to build for music based on some ideas I’d had using HMSL’s “Action Table”.  Things in the language would be collections of properties, nothing more, and the values of any of the properties might depend on other properties.  Properties might include things like “density”, or “scariness”, or “lightness”.  Some properties might be objective things like “current time”, “last MIDI note played”, “number of people in the room”.  A piece would be a network of bundles of properties.

It occurs to me that this is a bit like the mental model of a patchable synthesizer: various circuits are entities with collections of properties, properties are patched into other properties, the whole thing is “live” all the time.  This is the pd/Max idea without the GUI elements.

Power FX (weird name) is a declarative, interpreted language that implements this idea.  They have incorporated the standard GUI widgets, database and other business-useful entities.  I wonder how hard it would be to add things that operate on physical musical entities, like MIDI, OSC, …

A job

Today I had a phone screen with a Microsoft manager who works on the HoloLens. A fun looking project, and I find that I wish I’d thought to tell him about my former life as a maker of musical instruments and pieces, since it seems so in line with what they’re making. And told him of work with Brickell and Cagent, and how Microsoft had bought the latter twenty years ago. Strange. I find I quite want this job. And I’m a little impressed with myself over some of the things I’ve built. And maybe I want to build some more. That’d be a relief.

Constitutionality

So, I’m a little confused. I’m applying for citizenship, and as part of that process I will have to answer 10 questions that may include ones about the US system of government. I have duly studied, and to the question “what is the function of the Supreme Court”, one of the accepted answers is “to determine whether or not an action is constitutional”.

We are in the process of impeaching the last president, and this constitutionality question has come up: can you impeach a President who is no longer in office? However, it appears that this question was not decided by the Supreme Court, but by a simple vote in the Senate.

I’m confused. Is the Senate not itself conforming to the Constitution in this case? What am I supposed to tell he examiner?