Doug Engelbart’s 1968 demo
dougengelbart.org
dougengelbart.org
I notice also, things didn't go as expected; he makes quite a few mistakes and very charmingly apologizes. But the fact that you can make mistakes and smoothly recover from them, was an important part of the demo.
For context, by 1968 the concept of interacting directly with a computer in what we today would call command-line mode had been around for several years. The DEC PDP-1 was released in 1959; the IBM 1620 in 1960; Multics had started in 1964; the IBM 360 series began deliveries in 1965; all allowed an operator who had the privilege of being in the "machine room" to enter commands and get responses at a typewriter. The PDP-1 was alone (I think?) in having a 2-dimensional vector-based screen, but it was used for graphics (including the original Space War), not for text.
Overwhelmingly, the paradigm for working with a computer was to prepare a "job" consisting of commands and blocks of data, all in punch cards, which was run as a "batch", producing output to print a/o disk or tape. If you made a mistake in setting up your job, you found out about it later, and could only "edit" by re-punching some cards, and re-running it.
So when Englebart showed smooth interaction with data, editing and changing data ad-hoc, and making mistakes and correcting them ad-hoc without drama, on a two-dimensional screen -- that alone was a revolution. Hyper-linked media, hierarchical lists, that was icing.
>The stenotype keyboard has far fewer keys than a conventional alphanumeric keyboard. Multiple keys are pressed simultaneously (known as "chording" or "stroking") to spell out whole syllables, words, and phrases with a single hand motion. This system makes real-time transcription practical for court reporting and live closed captioning. Because the keyboard does not contain all the letters of the English alphabet, letter combinations are substituted for the missing letters.
Here are two key links to his thinking on what's missing in today's information technology that would be very important to integrate in a seamless environment:
About Open Hyperdocument Systems - http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/ohs.html short description and links to resources
Toward High-Performance Organizations: http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-132811.html A Strategic Role for Groupware. 1992 Engelbart article [print-version] (AUGMENT,132811,). And here's a bit about what he himself pioneered and why: http://dougengelbart.org/events/1968-demo-highlights.html Video highlights of Doug's 1968 Demo
And lastly his historic work is captured in this repository for your browsing pleasure: http://dougengelbart.org/library/engelbart-archives.html Engelbart Digital Archive
A research center for augmenting human intellect https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/1476589.1476645
2018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18626215
2015 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9366039
2013 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6875879
2010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1939458
2010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1138879 (Stewart Brand shot the video? who knew)
Not for how it would be different because aliens are aliens, but because you're presumably looking at something that is the result of thousands of years of iteration and refinement. If you're the Asgard from Stargate, you presumably aren't just doing OS updates and re-skinning your UIs and throwing away your old frameworks every three to five years for the fun of it. At some point you presumably figured out how your software should work, wrote it right, iterated on it until it was essentially bug free, and only extend it as needed within the same set of frameworks, languages and UI paradigms your civilization has been using for hundreds of years.
What does that software look like?
My most recent one was Netflix’s Close, though that one was gibberish, it was just a html form with nonsensical attributes in that case.
Found it, http://thedailywtf.com/articles/Stargate-Code-of-the-Replica...
Although the computer geeks are probably inclined to think: yes, but what we are dealing is more complex than that- I don't think there is a big difference between knowing how to safely connect two wires together, and how to safely copy one string to a buffer. Electricians took time to arrive at a consensus (but they did it), and I believe software engineers will too.
It’s possible to imagine their equivalent to a GUI is entirely unlike ours, flat screens work for us because of our visual cortex and narrow field of view/depth perception framework essentially been tricked.
A UI for a something intelligent with a compound eye or ten eyes or whatnot could be very different.
Not to mention if we give said aliens hundreds of years of computers, they would likely arrive at something akin to a neural interface, I mean a computer as a direct expansion of your cognitive ability has to be the end point in user interfaces, you don’t even have to think about how to translate what’s in your head into something the computer can understand parse, you manipulate it as easily as thinking of a pink elephant in a tutu, it is just there.
It would also likely be heavily influenced by their psychology.
What would be fun is trying to create a router between our systems and theirs down the line.
We’ve had electric computers for a blink in time compared to the wheel, lot of places to go between a Ryzen 3950X and computronium.
William Gibson hints at something similar to this in the graduate work of a character in the short story “Dogfight”[0] from the excellent collection “Burning Chrome”.
I think before that, the act of programming will be supplemented by AI and will become more descriptive than procedural.
I think about SQL, where you typically describe the shape of the data and relationships you want, rather than how to get it. The database then creates a query plan... effectively a “program”, compiles it, then executes it.
I think programming will become more like that, on its way to what you describe.
I mean, look at us now - we're kind of analogous to super-AIs created by cells, and we try to program cells, but we can't really understand every detail; we try to manage them instead.
At some point the aliens would just have their lowest levels of abstraction frozen due to losing the ability to manipulate them. And take it for granted, like we take our brain cells or muscle cells for granted.
Since we're dealing with fiction, from a Deepness in the Sky:
>The Qeng Ho's computer and timekeeping systems feature the advent of "programmer archaeologists":[1] the Qeng Ho are packrats of computer programs and systems, retaining them over millennia, even as far back to the era of Unix programs (as implied by one passage mentioning that the fundamental time-keeping system is the Unix epoch):
>>Take the Traders' method of timekeeping. The frame corrections were incredibly complex - and down at the very bottom of it was a little program that ran a counter. Second by second, the Qeng Ho counted from the instant that a human had first set foot on Old Earth's moon. But if you looked at it still more closely ... the starting instant was actually about fifteen million seconds later, the 0-second of one of Humankind's first computer operating systems.
>This massive accumulation of data implies that almost any useful program one could want already exists in the Qeng Ho fleet library, hence the need for computer archaeologists to dig up needed programs, work around their peculiarities and bugs, and assemble them into useful constructs.
So to answer your question, a mess of standards going back millennia with glue-code everywhere. I blame the separation of documentation and code for the coming dark age.
[0] http://www.dubberly.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Cyberneti...
[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Machine-M-Mitchell-Waldrop/dp/1...
"Silicon Valley Story -- A Very Short Comedy" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXlyMrv8_dQ
[note: brief NSFW moment from 2:10 to 2:25]
Ted might do an AMA on Hacker News, if I haven't spoiled our chances by taking pathetically long to follow up about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLCIw-HSJc&t=221
(I set the start time to skip Rheingold's introduction but feel free to go back and view.)
I did go back and view Howard's intro and it's very nice as well. His love shines through.
Yes please!
Hyperlinking Computer mouse Videoconference
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos
Which influenced Xerox Parc which in turned influenced Apple.
Shortly after my original post about this the site was accessible and no warnings.. now I am receiving the same warning again from Malwarebytes. Not sure whats going on but thought I would let folks know.
Instead of files and mouse cursors we have a vastly different set of components that all work together, and of course they integrate with the modern features like ApplePay and QR code scanning. Oh yeah and there is videoconferencing... just like in his demo :)