Archive for February, 2010

The business case for Perl 6

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

Perl 6 is about value creation, and value creation is a product of [people solving problems] and [efficiency of tools used to solve these problems] — effort * efficiency.

For a while the focus in the Perl 6 community has been on increasing efficiency, and mostly by improving expressiveness and efficient use of programmer attention. This has lead to powerful constructs like grammars, junctions, roles, a wonderful type system and the tests that go with that – both for making sure the features work as intended and that they can be used in a sensible manner.

The cool thing here is that these features work as a “community size force multiplier.” For people to be attracted to a tool, they need to see it’s more efficient than it’s competitors. Efficient in learnability, expressiveness, utility, execution and fun. Right now, Perl 6 has reached a level of interestingness that makes it extremely well suited for hype, and with Rakudo Star on the horizon (Q2 2010) I’m expecting the Perl 6 buzz to increase a lot. The force multiplyer is about to kick in. :)

Better features -> More buzz -> Bigger community -> Stronger business case.

When it comes to business case, language popularity is the prime driver. When someone needs to hire people, availability of these people is paramount. Bad code can be fixed, but not hiring that programmer is so much more expensive than having to fix bad code. So if one should look at the skills market today (with so very few people in the world knowing Perl 6) the business case for it is almost non-existant.

With this in mind, I’m still very happy to see the Perl 6 crowd taking the long view and create an incredibly cool language instead of just focusing on a tiny feature set and then creating buzz. The buzz will come all by itself, and when it does, Perl 6′s awesome force multiplier will kick in and the fun will really begin.

Perl 6 might be small right now, but I’d say the outlook for Perl 6 is nothing less than spectacular. :)

Posted in Business, Entrepeneurship, Perl | No Comments »

Notes to self: “Atlas Shrugged”

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

So, I’ve managed to get through Atlas Shrugged. It’s a monster of a story in so many ways: difficult to digest, easy to criticize, full of stupid assertions and brilliant quotes. I’m not entirely sure what to take from the book. On the one hand it’s a story about the rational mind, it’s power and ethical implications on using it. On the other hand, it’s a titanic straw-man argument where Rand portrays a world filled with witless sheep-like people only waiting to be ruled by whoever brings the most “pull” (influence, power) to the table. It’s a polarizing story about extremes of philosophy and government, with some kind of a benevolent anarchy on one side and a totalitarian oligarchy on the other.

Rand presents good story in the sense that it’s thought provoking, forcing me to think about my motivation for doing things, make me consider what I’m doing with my life and even think about the meaning of “doing things” for myself or others around me. Some of the central points in the book are that it’s ethical just to produce more than one consumes and to do ones best regardless of ability and situation. Getting a reminder of this is always good, but where the story does well is by telling why this is ethical and good, then put it in context and made abundantly clear.

The sad thing is that Ayn Rand makes these points by creating a world and system based on preposterous claims like “there is no truth, no rationality and we can never be sure about anything” as a central philosophy. Rand picks a bunch of philosophic tenets (like Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”) out of context and presents them as foundations worth building a society on. The result is of course an evil and corrupt one, which Rand then proceeds to destroy. It’s almost like Rand ignores the conversational aspects society and science, that society is a collective effort where the climb upward goes both over the shoulders of midgets and giants. The world view she proposes also hinges almost exclusively on some genius-savior being the requirement for success in all activity, and that there is no way the mindless masses can do without the leadership of these titans. Maybe I’m an optimist to believe that people are smarter and more resourceful than Rand’s picture of the “common” man.

Still, it’s a good book and definitely worth my time. Even if she ignores it in the story, the book itself is an argument in a conversation – a somewhat questionable argument – but one that needs being reminded of: that Rationality is king, and everything hinges on it, no matter the state of the society you live in. :)

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »