Hacker 2/HACKER2.mdf/cud/cud452c.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 7KB | 134 lines

Date: 13 Oct 92 01:15:59
From: The Dark Adept <[e-mail]>
Subject: File 3--The Essence of Programming

The Essence of Programming
by The Dark Adept

What exactly is a computer program?  Why do people wish to copyright
it?  Why do people wish to patent its effects?  Why do programmers
enjoy programming?

A lot of these questions cannot be answered in a straightforward
manner.  Most people would give you a different answer for each, but
there is an indirect answer: the essence of programming.

In a recent CuD issue a question was raised about Cyberspace being a
culture.  I am no sociologist, but it is apparent to me that every
culture has some form of artistic expression.  Cyberspace is no
different.  Beneath every piece of E-mail, beneath every USENET post,
beneath every word typed into a word processor is an underlying piece
of art hidden from the user's eyes: the computer program.

"A computer program is art? Is this guy nuts?"  Well, yes and no in
that order ;)  Art has many different definitions, but a few things
are apparent about true art.  True art is an extension of the artist.
It is his view of the world around him.  It contributes to his world,
not only aesthetically, but by influencing people.  This is true
whether the art form is music, sculpture, photography, dance, etc.
True art is also created.  It fulfills the artist's need to create.
It is no less his creation and part of him than his own child.

The source code for a computer program is art pure and simple.
Whether it is written by one programmer or many.  Each programmer
takes his view of the world the art will exist in (the core memory of
the computer and the other programs around it), and shapes the program
according to that view.  No two programmers program exactly alike just
as no two authors will use the same exact sentence to describe the
same thing.

And the computer program will influence people.  Aesthetic value may
come from either video games, fractal generators, or even a hot new
GUI (graphical user interface -- like MS-Windows(tm)).  But it does
more than this.  It changes how people work, how people think.  The
typist of the 1920's most certainly would look upon his work much
differently than the word processing secretary of the 1990's would
look upon his.  No longer is the concern restricted to "should I
single- or double-space," but also to "what font should I use?  What
size?"

Furthermore a computer program is interactive art.  Once the program
is written and executed, people interact with it.  Other machines
interact with it.  Other programs interact with it.  In fact, it is
not only interactive art, but *living* art.  It reaches its fullest
not when looked at and appreciated, but put to use and appreciated.
It is not created to sit in the corner and be enjoyed, but also to be
interacted with and brought to life.

And just as the literary world had artists whose influence upon
society was negative instead of positive, their works are also art.
Hitler, Manson, Machiavelli, etc. all wrote great works whose
influence tore apart society and crippled it.  However, even though
their work caused evil, it is nonetheless a form of art.  _Mein Kampf_
caused more deaths in this world than almost any other publication.
For one piece of printed text to have this great of an effect on
society, the soul of the writer must be within those words. In another
vein, think of the Bible.  Wars have been fought over it, miracles
have happened because of it, people have laughed and cried over it.
The reason is that the soul of the reader is stirred by the authors'
souls who are in the work itself.  In any case, even thought _Mein
Kampf_ caused much evil, no one can deny that it was a powerful work
full of Hitler's soul, and deserves study and thought.

The negative art of the programming world would most certainly be
viruses and worms.  Whether the author follows from Hitler and is bent
on the destruction of all unlike him, or is more of a scientist trying
to create life that is autonomous from the creator and it gets out of
hand like Dr. Frankenstein's, they are still great works.  The
miniscule amount of "words" in a virus program can cause a greater
effect on people than the millions of "words" used to create DOS.
There is an elegant evil to them like there is to Machiavelli's _The
Prince_ which deserves study and thought.

To ban viruses, to ban worms is to ban the free expression and the
free thought of the artist.  Yes, they should be stopped, but so
should the genocide proscribed in _Mein Kampf_.  However, neither the
writing of _Mein Kampf_ nor the writing of viruses should be
disallowed and neither should their reading be restricted since if
nothing else both serve as a warning of what could happen if a
brilliant madman bent on killing and destruction is given an
opportunity to fulfill those psychotic fantasies.

For those programmers out there who have dabbled in Object Oriented
Programming (OOP), this relationship between art and programming
should be even clearer.  In OOP, each part of the program is an actor
("who struts and frets" -- thanks, Bill) whose dialogue with the other
actors (objects) creates the play.  Each object has his own
personality and capabilities, and, sadly enough, tragic flaws as well.

Now as for copyrighting and patenting and other such topics, I give
you this to think about.  Who is the truer author of a great work:
Jackie Collins or Edgar Allen Poe?  Why would each copyright?  One
would copyright to protect their income, the other to protect their
child borne of their artistic expression.  Computer programs should be
allowed protection in various forms, but to protect the inspiration
and expression within and not the dollar value generated by them.  To
do so cheapens them and turns them into nothing more than trash
romance novels.  Both may serve their purpose and be useful, but only
one is a great work -- the intent of the author comes from his soul as
well as his work, and only those of the purest origins will be great
while the others may only be useful.

Like many artists, the programmer pours his blood and sweat, his heart
and soul into his work.  It is his child, a creation from his brow and
hand, and he loves it as such.

The essence of programming is the essence of the artist within the
programmer.  To cheapen it by calling it a "product" is like calling
the "Mona Lisa" a product.  Sure a price value can be placed on the
Mona Lisa, but the value stems from the affect that Leo's paint has
upon the observer, and not a sum cost of materials and labor so that a
profit of an acceptable margin is met and maintained.

Those who aren't programmers may not understand what I am talking
about, and there are programmers out there who may not understand what
I am talking about.  However a select few may understand what I am
saying, and they are the true programmers and the true artists of
Cyberspace.  Within them is the essence of the programmer and within
their source code is the essence of programming: their souls.

------------------------------


Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253