Not sure if good faith is good enough to get me rate-undelimited, but here goes (:
[e.g. Maxwell's] Ratchets are part of the firmware debug, ideally a debug should be irreversible, yes?
Sorry about the TUFs, it was a lagniappe for gvicino (--assuming you've already seen my previous rant on it.) some (most?) have the form of a reverse rachet: discontinuity+monotonic. I surmise that it would be a good entity with which to model complexodynamic (economic) agents ("peers") trying to debug (cooperate with) one another.
(Each assuming an epsilon of bad faith in the other peers?)
For glasses, unbreakable or, in 30 years time, self-healing teutonic glasses.
EDIT: main problem with today's deployment finance ("VC"): it monotonically moves complexity/brittleness (eg cloud is arguably simpler than locally-served wares as a business model, but not as a technology) -- but not S-Sophistication.
The lust for funding software comes from the seduction of centralized simplification. The business of deploying atoms has no moat besides the violent one.
[e.g. Maxwell's] Ratchets are part of the firmware debug, ideally a debug should be irreversible, yes?
Sorry about the TUFs, it was a lagniappe for gvicino (--assuming you've already seen my previous rant on it.) some (most?) have the form of a reverse rachet: discontinuity+monotonic. I surmise that it would be a good entity with which to model complexodynamic (economic) agents ("peers") trying to debug (cooperate with) one another.
(Each assuming an epsilon of bad faith in the other peers?)
For glasses, unbreakable or, in 30 years time, self-healing teutonic glasses.
EDIT: main problem with today's deployment finance ("VC"): it monotonically moves complexity/brittleness (eg cloud is arguably simpler than locally-served wares as a business model, but not as a technology) -- but not S-Sophistication.
The lust for funding software comes from the seduction of centralized simplification. The business of deploying atoms has no moat besides the violent one.