* * * * *
                                        
                                 What is Code?
                                        
> A computer is a clock with benefits. They all work the same, doing second-
> grade math, one step at a time: Tick, take a number and put it in box one.
> Tick, take another number, put it in box two. Tick, operate (an operation
> might be addition or subtraction) on those two numbers and put the
> resulting number in box one. Tick, check if the result is zero, and if it
> is, go to some other box and follow a new set of instructions.
> 
> You, using a pen and paper, can do anything a computer can; you just can’t
> do those things billions of times per second. And those billions of tiny
> operations add up. They can cause a phone to boop, elevate an elevator, or
> redirect a missile. That raw speed makes it possible to pull off not one
> but multiple sleights of hand, card tricks on top of card tricks. Take a
> bunch of pulses of light reflected from an optical disc, apply some math to
> unsqueeze them, and copy the resulting pile of expanded impulses into some
> memory cells—then read from those cells to paint light on the screen.
> Millions of pulses, 60 times a second. That’s how you make the rubes
> believe they’re watching a movie.
> 

Via Lobsters [1] (but really, many, many, other sites linked to this), “Paul
Ford: What is Code? | Bloomberg [2]”

Wow.

I've been a fan of Paul Ford [3] for many years (I even had a link to his
site in the sidebar years ago [4] but removed it as he hasn't updated his
site in several years now) so it's always nice when I come across his work
elsewhere.

This is a really good article on programming. It's also a really long article
(38,000 words) on programming. And while it's ostensibly for the non-
programmer (it uses second-person view point (which I do no like, Sam-I-am)
to paint you as an executive in a company trying to fund some internal
software development) I'm not sure if the average non-programmer won't be
overwhelmed by the presentation, or be unable to follow along when it gets
technical in spots.

Do I recommend it?

It's not technical enough for a programmer (and some of the details, while in
spirit okay, are technically inaccurate) but I'm afraid it might be a bit too
technical (or overwhelming) for its intended audience.

But yeah, I would recommend it.

You have been warned.

[1] https://lobste.rs/s/e6uvao/what_is_code
[2] http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-paul-ford-what-is-code/
[3] http://www.ftrain.com/
[4] https://web.archive.org/web/20030220062707/http://boston.conman.org/

Email Sean Conner at sean@conman.org

.