1. Gratuitous overkill about how useless it was to try to make a kid-engaged laptop / OS / learning platform
2. Their first read on Digital Gardens was that it was it "feels too shallow to me, and it feels backward-looking."
Woof. First, yes olpc failed but trying to make a cohesive os that was observable, that could describe itself to kids, was neat, and DBus was a pretty good tool for doing that.
There is a backwards-ism, a literal "back to the land" ism about digital gardens; I'd allow that.
But rarely do I see people with strong sense of owning a property in computing, in information spaces, and I think that's missing. We have very little developed sense of ownership around computing, and that's a notable missing element that Digital Gardens address.
> We copy the idea that "everything is a file", but we apply that to the problems we actually encounter today (tab management, media management).
Sign me up for this 9p utopia that's replicated itself everywhere.
1. Gratuitous overkill about how useless it was to try to make a kid-engaged laptop / OS / learning platform
2. Their first read on Digital Gardens was that it was it "feels too shallow to me, and it feels backward-looking."
Woof. First, yes olpc failed but trying to make a cohesive os that was observable, that could describe itself to kids, was neat, and DBus was a pretty good tool for doing that.
There is a backwards-ism, a literal "back to the land" ism about digital gardens; I'd allow that.
But rarely do I see people with strong sense of owning a property in computing, in information spaces, and I think that's missing. We have very little developed sense of ownership around computing, and that's a notable missing element that Digital Gardens address.
> We copy the idea that "everything is a file", but we apply that to the problems we actually encounter today (tab management, media management).
Sign me up for this 9p utopia that's replicated itself everywhere.