Source Browser ?

1% language=us runpath=texruns:manuals/musings
2
3% naming-nature.jog
4
5\startcomponent musings-children
6
7\environment musings-style
8
9\definedescription
10  [presomething]
11  [headstyle=\bold,
12   alternative=hanging,
13   width=fit,
14   hang=1]
15
16\startchapter[title={Children of \TEX}]
17
18\startsection[title={The theme}]
19
20Nearly always \TEX\ conferences carry a theme. As there have been many
21conferences the organizers have run out of themes involving fonts, macros and
22typesetting and are now cooking up more fuzzy ones. Take the Bacho\TUG\ 2017
23theme:
24
25\startnarrower[left,8*right] \startpacked
26\startpresomething {Premises}
27    The starting point, what we have, what do we use, what has been achieved?
28\stoppresomething
29\startpresomething {Predilections}
30    How do we act now, how do we want to act, what is important to us and what do
31    we miss?
32\stoppresomething
33\startpresomething {Predictions}
34    What is the future of \TEX, what we'd like to achieve and can we influence
35    it?
36\stoppresomething
37\stoppacked \stopnarrower
38
39My first impression with these three P words was: what do they mean? Followed by
40the thought: this is no longer a place to take kids to. But the Internet gives
41access to the Cambridge Dictionary, so instead of running to the dusty meter of
42dictionaries somewhere else in my place, I made sure that I googled the most
43recent definitions:
44
45\startnarrower[left] \startpacked
46\startpresomething {premise}
47    an idea or theory on which a statement or action is based
48\stoppresomething
49\startpresomething {predilection}
50    if someone has a predilection for something, they like it a lot
51\stoppresomething
52\startpresomething {prediction}
53    a statement about what you think will happen in the future
54\stoppresomething
55\stoppacked \stopnarrower
56
57I won't try to relate these two sets of definitions but several words stand out
58in the second set: idea, theory, action, like, statement and future. Now, as a
59preparation for the usual sobering thoughts that Jerzy, Volker and I have when we
60staring into a Bacho\TEX\ campfire I decided to wrap up some ideas around these
61themes and words. The books that I will mention are just a selection of what you
62can find distributed around my place. This is not some systematic research but
63just the result of a few weeks making a couple of notes while pondering about
64this conference.
65
66\stopsection
67
68\startsection[title=Introduction]
69
70One cannot write the amount of \TEX\ macros that I've written without also liking
71books. If you look at my bookshelves the topics are somewhat spread over the
72possible spectrum of topics: history, biology, astronomy, paleontology, general
73science but surprisingly little math. There are a bunch of typography|-|related
74books but only some have been read: it's the visuals that matter most and as
75there are no real developments I haven't bought new ones in over a decade,
76although I do buy books that look nice for our office display but the content
77should be interesting too. Of course I do have a couple of books about computer
78(related) science and technology but only a few are worth a second look.
79Sometimes I bought computer books expecting to use them (in some project) but I
80must admit that most have not been read and many will soon end up in the paper
81bin (some already went that way). I'll make an exception for Knuth, Wirth and a
82few other fundamental ones that I (want to) read. And, I need to catch up on deep
83learning, so that might need a book.
84
85My colleagues and I have many discussions, especially about what we read, and
86after a few decades one starts seeing patterns. Therefore the last few years it
87was a pleasant surprise for me to run into books and lectures that nicely
88summarize what one has noticed and discussed in a consistent way. My memory is
89not that good, but good enough to let some bells ring.
90
91\startplacefigure[location=top]
92    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
93        {\externalfigure[covers/sapiens.jpg]          [height=5cm]} {history}
94        {\externalfigure[covers/homo-deus.jpg]        [height=5cm]} {futurology}
95        {\externalfigure[covers/children-of-time.jpg] [height=5cm]} {science fiction}
96        {\externalfigure[covers/superintelligence.jpg][height=5cm]} {informatics}
97    \stopcombination
98\stopplacefigure
99
100The first book that gave me this \quotation {finally a perfect summary of
101historic developments} feeling is \quotation{Sapiens} by Yuval Noah Harari. The
102author summarizes human history from a broad perspective where modern views on
103psychology, anthropology and technical developments are integrated. It's a follow
104up on a history writing trend started by Jared Diamond. The follow up \quotation
105{Homo Deus} looks ahead and is just as well written. It also integrates ideas
106from other fields, for instance those related to development of artificial
107intelligence (Dennett, Bostrom, etc.).
108
109Another inspiration for this talk and article is the 50 hour lecture series on
110behavioral biology by Robert Sapolsky of Stanford University, brought to my
111attention by my nephew Bram who visited a few \TEX\ conferences with me and who
112is now also forced to use \TEX\ for assignments and reports. (How come
113self|-|published books used at universities often look so bad?)
114
115The title of this talk is inspired by the book \quotation {Children of Time} by
116Adrian Tchaikovsky that I read recently. There are science fiction writers who
117focus on long term science and technology, such as some of Alastair Reynolds,
118while others follow up on recent development in all kind of sciences. One can
119recognize aspects of \quotation {Superintelligence} by Bostrom in Neal Asher's
120books, insights in psychology in the older Greg Bear books, while in the
121mentioned \quotation {Children of Time} (socio)biological insights dominate. The
122main thread in that book is the development of intelligence, social behaviour,
123language, script and cooperation in a species quite different from us: spiders.
124It definitely avoids the anthropocentric focus that we normally have.
125
126So how does this relate to the themes of the Bacho\TEX\ conference? I will pick
127out some ways to approach them using ideas from the kind of resources mentioned
128above. I could probably go on and on for pages because once you start relating
129what you read and hear to this \TEX\ ecosystem and community, there is no end.
130So, consider this a snapshot, that somehow relates to the themes:
131
132\startnarrower[left,8*right] \startpacked
133\startpresomething {premise}
134    Let's look at what the live sciences have to say about \TEX\ and friends and
135    let's hope that I don't offend the reader and the field.
136\stoppresomething
137\startpresomething {predilection}
138    Let's figure out what brings us here to this place deeply hidden in the woods,
139    a secret gathering of the \TEX\ sect.
140\stoppresomething
141\startpresomething {prediction}
142    Let's see if the brains present here can predict the future because after
143    all, according to Dennett, that is what brains are for.
144\stoppresomething
145\stoppacked \stopnarrower
146
147At school I was already intrigued by patterns in history: a cyclic, spiral and
148sinusoid social evolution instead of a pure linear sequence of events. It became
149my first typeset|-|by|-|typewriter document: Is history an exact science? Next I
150will use and abuse patterns and ideas to describe the \TEX\ world, not wearing a
151layman's mathematical glasses, but more from the perspective of live sciences,
152where chaos dominates.
153
154\stopsection
155
156\startsection[title={The larger picture}]
157
158History of mankind can be roughly summarized as follows. For a really long time
159we were hunters but at some point (10K years ago) became farmers. As a result we
160could live in larger groups and still feed them. The growing complexity of
161society triggered rules and religion as instruments for stability and
162organization (I use the term religion in its broadest sense here). For quite a
163while cultures came and went, and climate changes are among the reasons.
164
165After the industrial revolution new religions were invented (social, economic and
166national liberalism) and we're now getting dataism (search for Harari on youtube
167for a better summary). Some pretty great minds seem to agree that we're heading
168to a time when humans as we are will be outdated. Massive automation, interaction
169between the self and computer driven ecosystems, lack of jobs and purpose,
170messing around with our genome. Some countries and cultures still have to catch
171up on the industrial revolution, if they manage at all, and maybe we ourselves
172will be just as behind reality soon. Just ask yourself: did you manage to catch
173up? Is \TEX\ a stone age tool or a revolutionary turning point?
174
175A few decades ago a trip to Bacho\TEX\ took more than a day. Now you drive there
176in just over half a day. There was a time that it took weeks: preparation,
177changing horses, avoiding bad roads. Not only your own man|-|hours were involved.
178It became easier later (my first trip took only 24 hours) and recently it turned
179into a piece of cake: you don't pick up maps but start your device; you don't
180need a travel agent but use the Internet; there are no border patrols, you can
181just drive on. (Okay, maybe some day soon border patrols at the Polish border
182show up again, just like road tax police in Germany, but that might be a
183temporary glitch.)
184
185Life gets easier and jobs get lost. Taxi and truck drivers, travel agents, and
186cashiers become as obsolete as agricultural workers before. Next in line are
187doctors, lawyers, typesetters, printers, and all those who think they're safe.
188Well, how many people were needed 400 years ago to produce the proceedings of a
189conference like this in a few days' time span? Why read the introduction of a
190book or a review when you can just listen to the author's summary on the web? How
191many conferences still make proceedings (or go for videos instead), will we
192actually need editors and typesetters in the future? How much easier has it
193become to design a font, including variants? What stories can designers tell in
194the future when programs do the lot? The narrower your speciality is, the worse
195are your changes; hopefully the people present at this conference operate on a
196broader spectrum. It's a snapshot. I will show some book covers as reference but
197am aware that years ago or ahead the selection could have been different.
198
199\stopsection
200
201\startsection[title=Words]
202
203Words (whatever they represent) found a perfect spot to survive: our minds. Then
204they made it from speech (and imagination) into writing: carved in stone, wood,
205lead. At some point they managed to travel over wires but no matter what
206happened, they are still around. Typesetting as visualization is also still
207surrounding us so that might give us a starting point for ensuring a future for
208\TEX\ to work on, because \TEX\ is all about words. There is a lot we don't see;
209imagine if our eyes had microscopic qualities. What if we could hear beyond
21020KHz. Imagine we could see infrared. How is that with words. What tools, similar
211in impact as \TEX, can evolve once we figure that out. What if we get access to
212the areas of our brain that hold information? We went from print to screen and
213\TEX\ could cope with that. Can it cope with what comes next?
214
215The first printing press replaced literal copying by hand. Later we got these
216linotype|-|like machines but apart from a few left, these are already thrown out
217of windows (as we saw in a movie a few Bacho\TeX's ago). Photo|-|typesetting has
218been replaced too and because a traditional centuries old printing press is a
219nice to see item, these probably ring more bells than that gray metal closed box
220typesetters. Organizers of \TEX\ conferences love to bring the audience to old
221printing workshops and museums. At some point computers got used for typesetting
222and in that arena \TEX\ found its place. These gray closed boxes are way less
223interesting than something mechanical that at least invites us to touch it. How
224excited can one be about a stack of \TEX\,Live \DVD{}s?
225
226\stopsection
227
228\startsection[title=Remembering]
229
230Two times I visited the part of the science museum in London with young family
231members: distracted by constantly swiping their small powerful devices, they
232didn't have the least interest in the exhibited computer related items, let alone
233the fact that the couch they were sitting on was a Cray mainframe. Later on,
234climbing on some old monument or an old cannon seemed more fun. So, in a few
235decades folks will still look at wooden printing presses but quickly walk through
236the part of an exhibition where the tools that we use are shown. We need to find
237ways to look interesting. But don't think we're unique: how many kids find
238graphical trend|-|setting games like Myst and Riven still interesting? On the
239other hand a couple of month ago a bunch of nieces and nephews had a lot of fun
240with an old Atari console running low|-|res bitmap games. Maybe there is hope for
241good old \TEX.
242
243If indeed we're heading to a radically different society one can argue if this
244whole discussion makes sense. When the steam engine showed up, the metaphor for
245what went on in our heads was that technology, It's a popular example of speakers
246on this topic: \quotation {venting off steam}. When electricity and radio came
247around metaphors like \quotation {being on the same wavelength} showed up. A few
248decades ago the computer replaced that model although in the meantime the model
249is more neurobiological: we're a hormone and neurotransmitter driven computer. We
250don't have memory the way computers do.
251
252How relevant will page breaks, paragraph and line breaks be in the future? Just
253like \quotation {venting off steam} may make no sense to the youth, asking a
254typesetter to \quotation {give me a break} might not make much sense soon.
255However, when discussing automated typesetting the question \quotation {are we on
256the same page} still has relevance.
257
258Typesetting with a computer might seem like the ultimate solution but it's
259actually rather dumb when we consider truly intelligent systems. On the large
260scale of history and developments what we do might get quite unnoticed. Say that
261mankind survives the next few hundred years one way or the other. Science fiction
262novels by Jack McDevitt have an interesting perspective of rather normal humans
263millennia ahead of us who look back on these times in the same way as we look
264back now. Nothing fundamental changed in the way we run society. Nearly nothing
265from the past is left over and apart from being ruled by \AI{}s people still do
266sort of what they do now. \TEX ? What is that? Well, there once was this great
267computer scientist Knuth (in the remembered row of names like Aristotle |<|I just
268started reading \quotation {The Lagoon} by Armand Leroi|>| Newton, Einstein, his
269will show up) who had a group of followers that used a program that he seems to
270have written. And even that is unlikely to be remembered, unless maybe user
271groups manage to organize an archive and pass that on. Maybe the fact that \TEX\
272was one of the first large scale open source programs, of which someone can study
273the history, makes it a survivor. The first program that was properly documented
274in detail! But then we need to make sure that it gets known and persists.
275
276\startsection[title=Automation]
277
278In a recent interview Daniel Dennett explains that his view of the mind as a big
279neural network, one that can be simulated in software on silicon, is a bit too
280simplistic. He wonders if we shouldn't more tend to think of a network of
281(selfish) neurons that group together in tasks and then compete with each other,
282if only because they want to have something to do.
283
284Maybe attempts to catch the creative mindset and working of a typesetter in
285algorithms is futile. What actually is great typography or good typesetting?
286Recently I took a look at my bookshelf wondering what to get rid of \emdash\
287better do that now than when I'm too old to carry the crap down (crap being
288defined as uninteresting content or bad looking). I was surprised about the
289on|-|the|-|average bad quality of the typesetting and print. It's also not really
290getting better. One just gets accustomed to what is the norm at a certain point.
291Whenever they change the layout and look and feel of the newspaper I read the
292arguments are readability and ease of access. Well, I never had such a hard time
293reading my paper as today (with my old eyes).
294
295Are we, like Dennett, willing to discard old views on our tools and models? When
296my first computer was a \RCA\ 1802 based kit, that had 256 bytes of memory. My
297current laptop (from 2013) is a Dell Precision workstation with an extreme quad
298core processor and 16 GB of memory and ssd storage. Before I arrived there I
299worked with \DECTEN, \VAX\ and the whole range of Intel \CPU{}s. So if you really
300want to compare a brain with a computer, take your choice.
301
302I started with \TEX\ on a 4 MHz desk top with 640 MB memory and a 10 MB hard
303disk. Running \CONTEXT\ \MKIV\ with \LUATEX\ on such a machine is no option at
304all, but I still carry the burden of trying to write efficient code (which is
305still somewhat reflected in the code that makes up \CONTEXT). In the decades that
306we have been using \TEX\ we had to adapt! Demands changed, possibilities changed,
307technologies changed. And they keep changing. How many successive changes can a
308\TEX\ user handle? Sometimes, when I look and listen I wonder.
309
310\startplacefigure[location=top]
311    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
312        {\externalfigure[covers/the-mind-in-the-cave.jpg]         [height=5cm]} {paleontology}
313        {\externalfigure[covers/the-ancestors-tale.jpg]           [height=5cm]} {evolutionary biology}
314        {\externalfigure[covers/the-good-book-of-human-nature.jpg][height=5cm]} {anthropology}
315        {\externalfigure[covers/chaos-and-harmony.jpg]            [height=5cm]} {physics}
316    \stopcombination
317\stopplacefigure
318
319If you look back, that is, if you read about the tens of thousands of years that
320it took humans to evolve (\quotation {The mind in the cave} by Lewis|-|Williams
321is a good exercise) you realize even more in what a fast|-|paced time we live and
322that we're witnessing transitions of another magnitude.
323
324In the evolution of species some tools were invented multiple times, like eyes.
325You see the same in our \TEX\ world: multiple (sub)macro packages, different font
326technologies, the same solutions but with an alternative approach. Some
327disappear, some stay around. Just like different circumstances demand different
328solutions in nature, so do different situations in typesetting, for instance
329different table rendering solutions. Sometime I get the feeling that we focus too
330much on getting rid of all but one solution while more natural would be to accept
331diversity, like bio|-|diversity is accepted. Transitions nowadays happen faster
332but the question is if, like aeons before, we (have to) let them fade away. When
333evolution is discussed the terms \quote {random}, \quote {selection}, \quote
334{fit}, and so on are used. This probably also applies to typography: at some
335point a font can be used a lot, but in the end the best readable and most
336attractive one will survive. Newspapers are printed in many copies, but rare
337beautiful books hold value. Of course, just like in nature some developments
338force the further path of development, we don't suddenly grow more legs or digits
339on our hands. The same happens with \TEX\ on a smaller timescale: successors
340still have the same core technology, also because if we'd drop it, it would be
341something different and then give a reason to reconsider using such technology
342(which likely would result in going by another path).
343
344\stopsection
345
346\startsection[title=Quality]
347
348Richard Dawkins \quotation {The Ancestor's Tale} is a non|-|stop read. In a
349discussion with Jared Diamond about religion and evolution they ponder this
350thread: you holding the hand of your mother who is handing her mother's hand and
351so on till at some point fish get into the picture. The question then is, when do
352we start calling something human? And a related question is, when does what we
353call morality creeps in? Is 50\% neanderthaler human or not?
354
355So, in the history of putting thoughts on paper: where does \TEX\ fit in? When do
356we start calling something automated typesetting? When do we decide that we have
357quality? Is \TEX\ so much different from its predecessors? And when we see
358aspects of \TEX\ (or related font technology) in more modern programs, do we see
359points where we cross qualitative or other boundaries? Is a program doing a
360better job than a human? Where do we stand? There are fields where there is no
361doubt that machines outperform humans. It's probably a bit more difficult in
362aesthetic fields except perhaps when we lower the conditions and expectations
363(something that happens a lot).
364
365For sure \TEX\ will become obsolete, maybe even faster that we think, but so will
366other typesetting technologies. Just look back and have no illusions. Till then
367we can have our fun and eventually, when we have more free time than we need, we
368might use it out of hobbyism. Maybe \TEX\ will be remembered by probably its most
369important side effect: the first large scale open source, the time when users met
370over programs, Knuth's disciples gathered in user groups, etc. The tools that we
371use are just a step in an evolution. And, as with evolution, most branches are
372pruned. So, when in the far future one looks back, will they even notice \TEX ?
373The ancestor's tail turns the tree upside down: at the end of the successful
374branch one doesn't see the dead ends.
375
376Just a thought: \CD{}s and media servers are recently being replaced (or at least
377accompanied) by Long Play records. In the shop where I buy my \CD{}s the space
378allocated to records grows at the cost of more modern media. So, maybe at some
379point retro|-|typesetting will pop up. Of course it might skip \TEX\ and end up
380at woodcutting or printing with lead.
381
382\stopsection
383
384\startsection[title=What mission]
385
386We rely on search engines instead of asking around or browsing libraries. Do
387students really still read books and manuals or do they just search and listen to
388lectures. Harari claims that instead of teaching kids facts in school we should
389just take for granted that they can get all the data they want and that we should
390learn them how to deal with data and adapt to what is coming. We take for granted
391that small devices with human voices show us the route to drive to Bacho\TEX, for
392instance, although by now I can drive it without help. In fact, kids can surprise
393you by asking if we're driving in Germany when we are already in Poland.
394
395We accept that computer programs help physicians in analyzing pictures. Some wear
396watches that warn them about health issues, and I know a few people who monitor
397their sugar levels electronically instead of relying on their own measurements.
398We seem to believe and trust the programs. And indeed, we also believe that \TEX\
399does the job in the best way possible. How many people really understand the way
400\TEX\ works?
401
402We still have mailing lists where we help each other. There are also wikis and
403forums like stack exchange. But who says that even a moderate bit of artificial
404intelligence doesn't answer questions better. Of course there needs to be input
405(manuals, previous answers, etc.) but just like we need fewer people as workforce
406soon, the number of experts needed also can be smaller. And we're still talking
407about a traditional system like \TEX. Maybe the social experience that we have on
408these media will survive somehow, although: how many people are members of
409societies, participate in demonstrations, meet weekly in places where ideas get
410exchanged, compared to a few decades ago? That being said, I love to watch posts
411with beautiful \CONTEXT\ solutions or listen to talks by enthusiastic users who
412do things I hadn't expected. I really hope that this property survives, just like
413I hope that we will be able to see the difference between a real user's response
414and one from an intelligent machine (an unrealistic hope I fear). Satisfaction
415wins and just like our neurological subsystems at some point permanently adapt to
416thresholds (given that you trigger things often enough), we get accustomed to
417what \TEX\ provides and so we stick to it.
418
419\stopsection
420
421\startsection[title={Intelligence versus consciousness}]
422
423Much of what we do is automated. You don't need to think of which leg to move and
424what foot to put down when you walk. Reacting to danger also to a large extent is
425automated. It doesn't help much to start thinking about how dangerous a lion can
426be when it's coming after you, you'd better move fast. Our limbic system is
427responsible for such automated behaviour, for instance driven by emotions. The
428more difficult tasks and thoughts about them happen in the frontal cortex (sort
429of).
430
431\startplacefigure[location=top]
432    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
433        {\externalfigure[covers/death-by-black-hole.jpg] [height=5cm]} {astronomy}
434        {\externalfigure[covers/the-formula.jpg]         [height=5cm]} {informatics}
435        {\externalfigure[covers/hals-legacy.jpg]         [height=5cm]} {future science}
436        {\externalfigure[covers/lucky-planet.jpg]        [height=5cm]} {earth science}
437    \stopcombination
438\stopplacefigure
439
440For most users \TEX\ is like the limbic system: there is not much thinking
441involved, and the easy solutions are the ones used. Just like hitting a nerve
442triggers a chain of reactions, hitting a key eventually produces a typeset
443document. Often this is best because the job needs to get done and no one really
444cares how it looks; just copy a preamble, key in the text and assume that it
445works out well (enough). It is tempting to compare \TEX's penalties, badness and
446other parameters with levels of hormones and neurotransmitters. Their function
447depends on where they get used and the impact can be accumulated, blocked or
448absent. It's all magic, especially when things interact.
449
450Existing \TEX\ users, developers and user groups of course prefer to think
451otherwise, that it is a positive choice by free will. That new users have looked
452around and arrived at \TEX\ for good reason: their frontal cortex steering a
453deliberate choice. Well, it might have played a role but the decision to use
454\TEX\ might in the end be due to survival skills: I want to pass this exam and
455therefore I will use that weird system called \TEX.
456
457All animals, us included, have some level of intelligence but also have this hard
458to describe property that we think makes us what we are. Intelligence and
459consciousness are not the same (at least we know a bit about the first but nearly
460nothing about the second). We can argue about how well composed some music is but
461why we like it is a different matter.
462
463We can make a well thought out choice for using \TEX\ for certain tasks but can
464we say why we started liking it (or not)? Why it gives us pleasure or maybe
465grief? Has it become a drug that we got addicted to? So, one can make an
466intelligent decision about using \TEX\ but getting a grip on why we like it can
467be hard. Do we enjoy the first time struggle? Probably not. Do we like the folks
468involved? Yes, Don Knuth is a special and very nice person. Can we find help and
469run into a friendly community? Yes, and a unique one too, annoying at times,
470often stimulating and on the average friendly for all the odd cases running
471around.
472
473Artificial intelligence is pretty ambitious, so speaking of machine intelligence
474is probably better. Is \TEX\ an intelligent program? There is definitely some
475intelligence built in and the designer of that program is for sure very
476intelligent. The designer is also a conscious entity: he likes what he did and
477finds pleasure in using it. The program on the other hand is just doing its job:
478it doesn't care how it's done and how long it takes: a mindless entity. So here
479is a question: do we really want a more intelligent program doing the job for us,
480or do those who attend conferences like Bacho\TEX\ enjoy \TEX ing so much that
481they happily stay with what they have now? Compared to rockets tumbling down
482and|/|or exploding or Mars landers thrashing themselves due to programming errors
483of interactions, \TEX\ is surprisingly stable and bug free.
484
485\stopsection
486
487\startsection[title={Individual versus group evolution}]
488
489After listening for hours to Sapolsky you start getting accustomed to remarks
490about (unconscious) behaviour driven by genes, expression and environment, aimed
491at \quotation {spreading many copies of your genes}. In most cases that is an
492individual's driving force. However, cooperation between individuals plays a role
493in this. A possible view is that we have now reached a state where survival is
494more dependent on a group than on an individual. This makes sense when we
495consider that developments (around us) can go way faster than regular evolution
496(adaptation) can handle. We take control over evolution, a mechanism that needs
497time to adapt and time is something we don't give it anymore.
498
499Why does \TEX\ stay around? It started with an individual but eventually it's the
500groups that keeps it going. A too|-|small group won't work but too|-|large groups
501won't work either. It's a known fact that one can only handle some 150 social
502contacts: we evolved in small bands that split when they became too large. Larger
503groups demanded abstract beliefs and systems to deal with the numbers: housing,
504food production, protection. The \TEX\ user groups also provide some
505organization: they organize meetings, somehow keep development going and provide
506infrastructure and distributions. They are organized around languages. According
507to Diamond new languages are still discovered but many go extinct too. So the
508potential for language related user groups is not really growing.
509
510Some of the problems that we face in this world have become too large to be dealt
511with by individuals and nations. In spite of what anti|-|globalists want we
512cannot deal with our energy hunger, environmental issues, lack of natural
513resources, upcoming technologies without global cooperation. We currently see a
514regression in cooperation by nationalistic movements, protectionism and the usual
515going back to presumed better times, but that won't work.
516
517Local user groups are important but the number of members is not growing. There
518is some cooperation between groups but eventually we might need to combine the
519groups into one which might succeed unless one wants to come first. Of course we
520will get the same sentiments and arguments as in regular politics but on the
521other hand, we already have the advantage of \TEX\ systems being multi|-|lingual
522and users sharing interest in the diversity of usage and users. The biggest
523challenge is to pass on what we have achieved. We're just a momentary highlight
524and let's not try to embrace some \quotation {\TEX\ first} madness.
525
526\stopsection
527
528\startplacefigure[location=top]
529    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
530        {\externalfigure[covers/3-16.jpg]                [height=5cm]} {art}
531      % {\externalfigure[covers/dirt.jpg]                [height=5cm]} {history}
532        {\externalfigure[covers/the-winds-of-change.jpg] [height=5cm]} {history}
533        {\externalfigure[covers/pale-blue-dot.jpg]       [height=5cm]} {astronomy}
534        {\externalfigure[covers/the-third-chimpanzee.jpg][height=5cm]} {history}
535    \stopcombination
536\stopplacefigure
537
538\startsection[title=Sexes]
539
540Most species have two sexes but it is actually a continuum controlled by hormones
541and genetic expression: we just have to accept it. Although the situation has
542improved there are plenty of places where some gender relationships are
543considered bad even to the extent that one's life can be in danger. Actually
544having strong ideas about these issues is typically human. But in the end one has
545to accept the continuum.
546
547In a similar way we just have to accept that \TEX\ usage, application of \TEX\
548engines, etc.\ is a continuum and not a batch versus \WYSIWYG\ battle any more.
549It's disturbing to read strong recommendations not to use this or that. Of the
550many macro packages that showed up only a few were able to survive. How do users
551of outlines look at bitmaps, how do \DVI\ lovers look at \PDF. But, as
552typesetting relates to esthetics, strong opinions come with the game.
553
554Sapolsky reports about a group of baboons where due to the fact that they get the
555first choice of food the alpha males of pack got poisoned, so that the remaining
556suppressed males who treated the females well became dominant. In fact they can
557then make sure that no new alpha male from outside joins the pack without
558behaving like they do. A sort of social selection. In a similar fashion, until
559now the gatherings of \TEX ies managed to keep its social properties and has not
560been dominated by for instance commerce.
561
562% So, maybe should focus on acceptance and tolerance and then make sure that that
563% we keep what we have and let it not be influenced too much by sectarianism. It
564% makes a nice topic for a meeting of the context (sub)group, that actually has a
565% women as driving force. How can we preserve what we have but still proceed is a
566% legitimate question. Where do we stand in the landscape.
567
568In the animal world often sexes relate to appearance. The word sexy made it to
569other domains as well. Is \TEX\ sexy? For some it is. We often don't see the real
570colors of birds. What looks gray to us looks vivid to a bird which sees in a
571different spectrum. The same is true for \TEX. Some users see a command line
572(shell) and think: this is great! Others just see characters and keystrokes and
573are more attracted to an interactive program. When I see a graphic made by
574\METAPOST, I always note how exact it is. Others don't care if their interactive
575effort doesn't connect the dots well. Some people (also present here) think that
576we should make \TEX\ attractive but keep in mind that like and dislike are not
577fixed human properties. Some mindsets might as well be the result from our
578makeup, others can be driven by culture.
579
580\stopsection
581
582\startsection[title=Religion]
583
584One of Sapolsky's lectures is about religion and it comes in the sequence of
585mental variations including depression and schizophrenia, because all these
586relate to mental states, emotions, thresholds and such (all things human). That
587makes it a tricky topic which is why it has not been taped. As I was raised in a
588moderate Protestant tradition I can imagine that it's an uncomfortable topic
589instead. But there are actually a few years older videos around and they are
590interesting to watch and not as threatening as some might expect. Here I just
591stick to some common characteristics.
592
593If you separate the functions that religions play into for instance explanation
594of the yet unknown, social interactions, control of power and regulation of
595morals, then it's clear why at \TEX\ user group meetings the religious aspect of
596\TEX\ has been discussed in talks. Those who see programs as infallible and
597always right and don't understand the inner working can see it as an almighty
598entity. In the Netherlands church-going diminishes but it looks like alternative
599meetings are replacing it (and I'm not talking of football matches). So what are
600our \TEX\ meetings? What do we believe in? The reason that I bring up this aspect
601is that in the \TEX\ community we can find aspects of the more extremist aspects
602of religions: if you don't use the macro package that I use, you're wrong. If you
603don't use the same operating system as I do, you're evil. You will be punished if
604you use the wrong editor for \TEX ? Why don't you use this library (which, by the
605way, just replaced that other one)? We create angels and daemons. Even for quite
606convinced atheists (it's not hard to run into them on youtube) a religion only
607survives when it has benefits, something that puzzles them. So when we're
608religious about \TEX\ and friends we have to make sure that it's at least
609beneficial. Also, maybe we fall in Dennett's category of \quotation {believers
610who want to believe}: it helps us to do our job if we just believe that we have
611the perfect tool. Religion has inspired visual and aural art and keeps doing
612that. (Don Knuth's current musical composition project is a good example of
613this.)
614
615Scientists can be religious, in flexible ways too, which is demonstrated by Don
616Knuth. In fact, I'm pretty sure \TEX\ would not be in the position it is in now
617if it weren't for his knowledgeable, inspirational, humorous, humble, and always
618positive presence. And for sure he's not at all religious about the open source
619software that he sent viral.
620
621I'm halfway through reading \quotation {The Good Book of Human Nature} (An
622Evolutionary Reading of the Bible) a book about the evolution of the bible and
623monotheism which is quite interesting. It discusses for instance how transitions
624from a hunter to a farmer society demanded a change of rules and introduced
625stories that made sense in that changing paradigm. Staying in one place means
626that possessions became more important and therefore inheritance. Often when
627religion is discussed by behavioral biologists, historians and anthropologists
628they stress this cultural narrative aspect. Also mentioned is that such societies
629were willing to support (in food and shelter) the ones that didn't normally fit
630it but added to the spiritual character of religions. The social and welcoming
631aspect is definitely present in for instance Bacho\TEX\ conferences although a
632bystander can wonder what these folks are doing in the middle of the night around
633a campfire, singing, drinking, frying sausages, spitting fire, and discussing the
634meaning of life.
635
636Those who wrap up the state of religious affairs, do predictions and advocate the
637message, are sometimes called evangelists. I remember a \TEX\ conference in the
638\USA\ where the gospel of \XML\ was preached (by someone from outside the \TEX\
639community). We were all invited to believe it. I was sitting in the back of the
640crowded (!)\ room and that speaker was not at all interested in who spoke before
641and after. Well, I do my share of \XML\ processing with \CONTEXT, but believe me:
642much of the \XML\ that we see is not according to any gospel. It's probably
643blessed the same way as those state officials get blessed when they ask and pray
644for it in public.
645
646It can get worse at \TEX\ conferences. Some present here at Bacho\TEX\ might
647remember the \PDF\ evangelists that we had show up at \TEX\ conferences. You see
648this qualification occasionally and I have become quite allergic to
649qualifications like architect, innovator, visionary, inspirator and evangelist,
650even worse when they look young but qualify as senior. I have no problem with
651religion at all but let's stay away from becoming one. And yes, typography also
652falls into that trap, so we have to be doubly careful.
653
654\stopsection
655
656\startplacefigure[location=top]
657    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
658        {\externalfigure[covers/from-bacteria-to-bach-and-back.jpg][height=5cm]} {philosophy}
659        {\externalfigure[covers/the-lagoon.jpg]                    [height=5cm]} {science history}
660        {\externalfigure[covers/chaos.jpg]                         [height=5cm]} {science}
661        {\externalfigure[covers/why-zebras-dont-get-ulcers.jpg]    [height=5cm]} {behavioral biology}
662    \stopcombination
663\stopplacefigure
664
665\startsection[title=Chaotic solutions]
666
667The lectures on \quotation {chaos and reductionism} and \quotation {emergence and
668complexity} were the highlights in Sapolsky's lectures. I'm not a good narrator
669so I will not summarize them but it sort of boils down to the fact that certain
670classes of problems cannot be split up in smaller tasks that we understand well,
671after which we can reassemble the solutions to deal with the complex task.
672Emerging systems can however cook up working solutions from random events.
673Examples are colonies of ants and bees.
674
675The \TEX\ community is like a colony: we cook up solutions, often by trial and
676error. We dream of the perfect solutions but deep down know that esthetics cannot
677be programmed in detail. This is a good thing because it doesn't render us
678obsolete. At last year's Bacho\TEX, my nephew Teun and I challenged the anthill
679outside the canteen to typeset the \TEX\ logo with sticks but it didn't persist.
680So we don't need to worry about competition from that end. How do you program a
681hive mind anyway?
682
683When chaos theory evolved in the second half of the previous century not every
684scientist felt happy about it. Instead of converging to more perfect predictions
685and control in some fields a persistent uncertainty became reality.
686
687After about a decade of using \TEX\ and writing macros to solve recurring
688situations I came to the conclusion that striving for a perfect \TEX\ (the
689engine) that can do everything and anything makes no sense. Don Knuth not only
690stopped adding code when he could do what he needed for his books, he also stuck
691to what to me seems reasonable endpoints. Every hard|-|coded solution beyond that
692is just that: a hard|-|coded solution that is not able to deal with the
693exceptions that make up most of the more complex documents. Of course we can
694theorize and discuss at length the perfect never|-|reachable solutions but
695sometimes it makes more sense to admit that an able user of a desktop publishing
696system can do that job in minutes, just by looking at the result and moving
697around an image or piece of text a bit.
698
699There are some hard|-|coded solutions and presets in the programs but with
700\LUATEX\ and \MPLIB\ we try to open those up. And that's about it. Thinking that
701for instance adding features like protrusion or expansion (or whatever else)
702always lead to better results is just a dream. Just as a butterfly flapping its
703wings on one side of the world can have an effect on the other side, so can
704adding a single syllable to your source completely confuse an otherwise clever
705column or page break algorithm. So, we settle for not adding more to the engine,
706and provide just a flexible framework.
707
708A curious observation is that when Edward Lorenz ran into chaotic models it was
709partially due to a restart of a simulation midway, using printed floating point
710numbers that then in the computer were represented with a different accuracy than
711printed. Aware of floating point numbers being represented differently across
712architectures, Don Knuth made sure that \TEX\ was insensitive to this so that its
713outcome was predictable, if you knew how it worked internally. Maybe \LUATEX\
714introduces a bit of chaos because the \LUA\ we use has only floats. In fact, a
715few months ago we did uncover a bug in the backend where the same phenomena gave
716a chaotic crash.
717
718In chaos theory there is the concept of an attractor. When visualized this can be
719the area (seemingly random) covered by a trajectory. Or it can be a single point
720where for instance a pendulum comes to rest. So what is our attractor? We have a
721few actually. First there is the engine, the stable core of primitives always
722present. You often see programs grow more complex every update and for sure that
723happened with \ETEX, \PDFTEX, \XETEX\ and \LUATEX. However there is always the
724core that is supposed to be stable. After some time the new kid arrives at a
725stable state not much different from the parent. The same is true for \METAPOST.
726Fonts are somewhat different because the technology changes but in the end the
727shapes and their interactions become stable as well. Yet another example is \TEX\
728Live: during a year it might diverge from its route but eventually it settles
729down and enters the area where we expect it to end up. The \TEX\ world is at
730times chaotic, but stable in the long run.
731
732So, how about the existence, the reason for it still being around? One can
733speculate about its future trajectory but one thing is sure: as long as we break
734a text into paragraphs and pages \TEX\ is hard to beat. But what if we don't need
735that any more? What if the concept of a page is no longer relevant? What if
736justified texts no longer matter (often designers don't care anyway)? What if
737students are no longer challenged to come up with a nice looking thesis? Do these
738collaborative tools with remote \TEX\ processing really bring new long term users
739or is \TEX\ then just one of the come|-|and|-|go tools?
740
741\stopsection
742
743\startsection[title=Looking ahead]
744
745In an interview (\quotation {World of ideas}) Asimov explains that science
746fiction evolved rapidly when people lived long enough to see that there was a
747future (even for their offspring) that is different from today. It is (at least
748for me) mind boggling to think of an evolution of hundreds of thousands of years
749to achieve something like language. Waiting for the physical being to arrive at a
750spot where you can make sounds, where the brain is suitable for linguistic
751patterns, etc. A few hundred years ago speed of any developments (and science)
752stepped up.
753
754\TEX\ is getting near 40 years old. Now, for software that {\bf is} old! In that
755period we have seen computers evolve: thousands of times faster processing, even
756more increase in memory and storage. If we read about spaceships that travel at a
757reasonable fraction of the speed of light, and think that will not happen soon,
758just think back to the terminals that were sitting in computer labs when \TEX\
759was developed: 300 baud was normal. I actually spent quite some time on
760optimizing time|-|critical components of \CONTEXT\ but on this timescale that is
761really a waste of time. But even temporary bottlenecks can be annoying (and
762costly) enough to trigger such an effort. (Okay, I admit that it can be a
763challenge, a kind of game, too.)
764
765Neil Tyson, in the video \quotation {Storytelling of science} says that when
766science made it possible to make photos it also made possible a transition in
767painting to impressionism. Other technology could make the exact snapshot so
768there was new room for inner feelings and impressions. When the Internet showed
769up we went through a similar transition, but \TEX\ actually dates from before the
770Internet. Did we also have a shift in typesetting? To some extent yes, browsers
771and real time rendering is different from rendering pages on paper. In what space
772and time are \TEX ies rooted?
773
774We get older than previous generations. Quoting Sapolsky \quotation{\unknown\ we
775are now living well enough and long enough to slowly fall apart.} The opposite is
776happening with our tools, especially software: it's useful lifetime becomes
777shorter and changes faster each year. Just look at the version numbers of
778operating systems. Don Knuth expected \TEX\ to last for a long time and compared
779to other software its core concept and implementation is doing surprisingly well.
780We use a tool that suits our lifespan! Let's not stress ourselves out too much
781with complex themes. (It helps to read \quotation {Why zebras don't get ulcers}.)
782
783\stopsection
784
785\startsection[title=Memes]
786
787If you repeat a message often enough, even if it's something not true, it can
788become a meme that gets itself transferred across generations. Conferences like
789this is where they can evolve. We tell ourselves and the audience how good \TEX\
790is and because we spend so many hours, days, weeks, months using it, it actually
791must be good, or otherwise we would not come here and talk about it. We're not so
792stupid as to spend time on something not good, are we? We're always surprised
793when we run into a (potential) customer who seems to know \TEX. It rings a bell,
794and it being around must mean something. Somehow the \TEX\ meme has anchored
795itself when someone attended university. Even if experiences might have been bad
796or usage was minimal. The meme that \TEX\ is the best in math typesetting is a
797strong survivor.
798
799There's a certain kind of person who tries to get away with their own deeds and
800decisions by pointing to \quotation {fake news} and accusations of \quotation
801{mainstream media} cheating on them. But to what extent are our stories true
802about how easy \TEX\ macro packages are to use and how good their result? We have
803to make sure we spread the right memes. And the user groups are the guardians.
804
805Maybe macro packages are like memes too. In the beginning there was a bunch but
806only some survived. It's about adaptation and evolution. Maybe competition was
807too fierce in the beginning. Like ecosystems, organisms and cellular processes in
808biology we can see the \TEX\ ecosystem, users and usage, as a chaotic system.
809Solutions pop up, succeed, survive, lead to new ones. Some look similar and
810slightly different input can give hugely different outcomes. You cannot really
811look too far ahead and you cannot deduce the past from the present. Whenever
812something kicks it off its stable course, like the arrival of color, graphics,
813font technologies, \PDF, \XML, ebooks, the \TEX\ ecosystem has to adapt and find
814its stable state again. The core technology has proven to be quite fit for the
815kind of adaptation needed. But still, do it wrong and you get amplified out of
816existence, don't do anything and the external factors also make you extinct.
817There is no denial that (in the computer domain) \TEX\ is surprisingly stable and
818adaptive. It's also hard not to see how conservatism can lead to extinction.
819
820\startplacefigure[location=top]
821    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
822        {\externalfigure[covers/the-epigenetics-revolution.jpg]   [height=5cm]} {genetics}
823        {\externalfigure[covers/dark-matter-and-the-dinosaurs.jpg][height=5cm]} {physics}
824        {\externalfigure[covers/the-world-without-us.jpg]         [height=5cm]} {history}
825        {\externalfigure[covers/what-we-cannot-know.jpg]          [height=5cm]} {science}
826    \stopcombination
827\stopplacefigure
828
829\stopsection
830
831\startsection[title=Inspiration]
832
833I just took some ideas from different fields. I could have mentioned quantum
834biology, which tries to explain some unexplainable phenomena in living creatures.
835For instance how do birds navigate without visible and measurable clues. How do
836people arrive at \TEX\ while we don't really advertise? Or I could mention
837epigenetics and explorations in junk \DNA. It's not the bit of the genome that we
838thought that matters, but also the expression of the genes driven by other
839factors. Offspring not only gets genetic material passed but it can get presets.
840How can the \TEX\ community pass on Knuth's legacy? Do we need to hide the
841message in subtle ways? Or how about the quest for dark matter? Does it really
842exist or do we want (need) it to exist? Does \TEX\ really have that many users,
843or do we cheat by adding the users that are enforced during college but don't
844like it at all? There's enough inspiration for topics at \TEX\ conferences, we
845just have to look around us.
846
847\stopsection
848
849\startsection[title=Stability]
850
851I didn't go into technical aspects of \TEX\ yet. I must admit that after decades
852of writing macros I've reached a point where I can safely say that there will
853never be perfect automated solutions for really complex documents. When books
854about neural networks show up I wondered if it could be applied (but I couldn't).
855When I ran into genetic algorithms I tried to understand its possible impact (but
856I never did). So I stuck to writing solutions for problems using visualization:
857the trial and error way. Of course, speaking of \CONTEXT, I will adapt what is
858needed, and others can do that as well. Is there a new font technology? Fine,
859let's support it as it's no big deal, just a boring programming task. Does a user
860want a new mechanism? No problem, as solving a reduced subset of problems can be
861fun. But to think of \TEX\ in a reductionist way, i.e.\ solving the small
862puzzles, and to expect the whole to work in tandem to solve a complex task is not
863trivial and maybe even impossible. It's a good thing actually, as it keeps us on
864edge. Also, \CONTEXT\ was designed to help you with your own solutions: be
865creative.
866
867I mentioned my nephew Bram. He has seen part of this crowd a few times, just like
868his brother and sister do now. He's into artificial intelligence now. In a few
869years I'll ask him how he sees the current state of \TEX\ affairs. I might learn
870a few tricks in the process.
871
872In \quotation {The world without us} Weisman explores how fast the world would be
873void of traces of humankind. A mere 10.000 years can be more than enough. Looking
874back, that's about the time hunters became farmers. So here's a challenge: say
875that we want an ant culture that evolves to the level of having archaeologists to
876know that we were here at Bacho\TEX\ \unknown\ what would we leave behind?
877
878Sapolsky ends his series by stressing that we should accept and embrace
879individual differences. The person sitting next to you can have the same makeup
880but be just a bit more sensitive to depression or be the few percent with genes
881controlling schizophrenic behaviour. He stresses that knowing how things work or
882where things go wrong doesn't mean that we should fix everything. So look at this
883room full of \TEX ies: we don't need to be all the same, use all the same, we
884don't need some dominance, we just need to accept and especially we need to
885understand that we can never fully understand (and solve) everything forever.
886
887Predictions, one of the themes, can be hard. It's not true that science has the
888answer to everything. There will always be room for speculation and maybe we will
889always need metaphysics too. I just started to read \quotation {What we cannot
890know} by Sautoy. For sure those present here can not predict how \TEX\ will go on
891and|/|or be remembered.
892
893\stopsection
894
895\startsection[title=Children of \TEX]
896
897I mentioned \quotation {Children of time}. The author lets you see their spidery
898world through spider eyes and physiology. They have different possibilities
899(eyesight, smell) than we do and also different mental capabilities. They evolve
900rapidly and have to cope conceptually with signals from a human surveillance
901satellite up in the sky. Eventually they need to deal with a bunch of (of course)
902quarrelling humans who want their place on the planet. We humans have some
903pre|-|occupation with spiders and other creatures. In a competitive world it is
904sometimes better to be suspicious (and avoid and flee) that to take a risk of
905being eaten. A frequently used example is that a rustle in a bush can be the wind
906or a lion, so best is to run.
907
908We are not that well adapted to our current environment. We evolved at a very
909slow pace so there was no need to look ahead more than a year. And so we still
910don't look too far ahead (and choose politicians accordingly). We can also not
911deal that well with statistics (Dawkins's \quotation {Climbing Mount Probability}
912is a good read) so we make false assumptions, or just forget.
913
914Does our typeset text really look that good on the long run, or do we cheat with
915statistics? It's not too hard to find a bad example of something not made by
916\TEX\ and extrapolate that to the whole body of typeset documents. Just like we
917can take a nice example of something done by \TEX\ and assume that what we do
918ourselves is equally okay. I still remember the tests we did with \PDFTEX\ and
919hz. When \THANH\ and I discussed that with Hermann Zapf he was not surprised at
920all that no one saw a difference between the samples and instead was focusing on
921aspects that \TEX ies are told to look at, like two hyphens in a row.
922
923A tool like \TEX\ has a learning curve. If you don't like that just don't use it.
924If you think that someone doesn't like that, don't enforce this tool on that
925someone. And don't use (or lie with) statistics. Much better arguments are that
926it's a long|-|lived stable tool with a large user base and support. That it's not
927a waste of time. Watching a designer like Hermann Zapf draw shapes is more fun
928than watching click and point in heavily automated tools. It's probably also less
929fun to watch a \TEX ie converge towards a solution.
930
931Spiders are resilient. Ants maybe even more. Ants will survive a nuclear blast
932(mutations might even bring them benefits), they can handle the impact of a
933meteorite, a change in climate won't harm them much. Their biggest enemy is
934probably us, when we try to wipe them out with poison. But, as long as they keep
935a low profile they're okay. \TEX\ doesn't fit into the economic model as there is
936no turnaround involved, no paid development, it is often not seen at all, it's
937just a hit in a search engine and even then you might miss it (if only because no
938one pays for it being shown at the top).
939
940We can learn from that. Keeping a low profile doesn't trigger the competition to
941wipe you out. Many (open source) software projects fade away: some big company
942buys out the developer and stalls the project or wraps what they bought in their
943own stuff, other projects go professional and enterprise and alienate the
944original users. Yet others abort because the authors lose interest. Just like the
945ideals of socialism don't automatically mean that every attempt to implement it
946is a success, so not all open source and free software is good (natured) by
947principle either. The fact that communism failed doesn't mean that capitalism is
948better and a long term winner. The same applies to programs, whether successful
949or not.
950
951Maybe we should be like the sheep. Dennett uses these animals as a clever
952species. They found a way to survive by letting themselves (unconsciously) be
953domesticated. The shepherd guarantees food, shelter and protection. He makes sure
954they don't get ill. Speaking biologically: they definitely made sure that many
955copies of their genes survived. Cows did the same and surprisingly many of them
956are related due to the fact that they share the same father (something now trying
957to be reverted). All \TEX\ spin|-|offs relate to the same parent, and those that
958survived are those that were herded by user groups. We see bits and pieces of
959\TEX\ end up in other applications. Hyphenation is one of them. Maybe we should
960settle for that small victory in a future hall of fame.
961
962When I sit on my balcony and look at the fruit trees in my garden, some simple
963math can be applied. Say that one of the apple trees has 100 apples per year and
964say that this tree survives for 25 years (it's one of those small manipulated
965trees). That makes 2.500 apples. Without human intervention only a few of these
966apples make it into new trees, otherwise the whole world would be dominated by
967apple trees. Of course that tree now only survives because we permit it to
968survive, and for that it has to be humble (something that is very hard for modern
969Apples). Anyway, the apple tree doesn't look too unhappy.
970
971A similar calculation can be done for birds that nest in the trees and under my
972roof. Given that the number of birds stays the same, most of energy spent on
973raising offspring is wasted. Nevertheless they seem to enjoy life. Maybe we
974should be content if we get one enthusiastic new user when we demonstrate \TEX\
975to thousands of potential users.
976
977Maybe, coming back to the themes of the conference, we should not come up with
978these kinds of themes. We seem to be quite happy here. Talking about the things
979that we like, meeting people. We just have to make sure that we survive. Why not
980stay low under the radar? That way nothing will see us as a danger. Let's be like
981the ants and spiders, the invisible hive mind that carries our message, whatever
982that is.
983
984When Dennett discusses language he mentions (coined) words that survive in
985language. He also mentions that children pick up language no matter what. Their
986minds are made for it. Other animals don't do that: they listen but don't start
987talking back. Maybe \TEX\ is just made for certain minds. Some like it and pick
988it up, while for others it's just noise. There's nothing wrong with that.
989Predilection can be a user property.
990
991\stopsection
992
993\startsection[title={The unexpected}]
994
995In a discussion with Dawkins the well|-|spoken astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson
996brings up the following. We differ only a few percent in \DNA\ from a chimp but
997quite a lot in brain power, so how would it be if an alien that differs a few
998percent (or more) passes by earth. Just like we don't talk to ants or chimps or
999whatever expecting an intelligent answer, whatever passes earth won't bother
1000wasting time on us. Our rambling about the quality of typesetting probably sounds
1001alien to many people who just want to read and who happily reflow a text on an
1002ebook device, not bothered by a lack of quality.
1003
1004\startplacefigure[location=top]
1005    \startcombination[nx=4,ny=1,width=\textwidth,distance=0pt]
1006        {\externalfigure[covers/live-as-we-do-not-know-it.jpg][height=5cm]} {astrobiology}
1007        {\externalfigure[covers/life-on-the-edge.jpg]         [height=5cm]} {quantumbiology}
1008        {\externalfigure[covers/rare-earth.jpg]               [height=5cm]} {astrophysics}
1009        {\externalfigure[covers/austerity.jpg]                [height=5cm]} {economics}
1010    \stopcombination
1011\stopplacefigure
1012
1013We tend to take ourselves as reference. In \quotation {Rare Earth} Ward and
1014Brownlee extrapolate the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe. They are
1015not alone in thinking that while on one hand applying statistics to these
1016formulas of possible life on planets there might also be a chance that we're the
1017only intelligent species ever evolved. In a follow up, \quotation {Life as we do
1018not know it} paleontologist and astrobiologist Ward (one of my favourite authors)
1019discusses the possibility of life not based on carbon, which is not natural for a
1020carbon based species. Carl Sagan once pointed out that an alien species looking
1021down to earth can easily conclude that cars are the dominant species on earth and
1022that the thingies crawling in and out them are some kind of parasites. So, when
1023we look at the things that somehow end up on paper (as words, sentences,
1024ornaments, etc.), what is dominant there? And is what we consider dominant really
1025that dominant in the long run? You can look at a nice page as a whole and don't
1026see the details of the content. Maybe beauty hides nonsense.
1027
1028When \TEX ies look around they look to similar technologies. Commands in shells
1029and solutions done by scripting and programming. This make sense in the
1030perspective of survival. However, if you want to ponder alternatives, maybe not
1031for usage but just for fun, a completely different perspective might be needed.
1032You must be willing to accept that communicating with a user of a \WYSIWYG\
1033program might be impossible. If mutual puzzlement is a fact, then they can either
1034be too smart and you can be too dumb or the reverse. Or both approaches can be
1035just too alien, based on different technologies and assumptions. Just try to
1036explain \TEX\ to a kid 40 years younger or to an 80 year old grandparent for that
1037matter. Today you can be very clever in one area and very stupid in another.
1038
1039In another debate, Neil deGrasse Tyson asks Dawkins the question why in science
1040fiction movies the aliens look so human and when they don't, why they look so
1041strange, for instance like cumbersome sluggish snails. The response to that is
1042one of puzzlement: the opponent has no reference of such movies. In discussions
1043old \TEX ies like to suggest that we should convert young users. They often don't
1044understand that kids live in a different universe.
1045
1046How often does that happen to us? In a world of many billions \TEX\ has its place
1047and can happily coexist with other typesetting technologies. Users of other
1048technologies can be unaware of us and even create wrong images. In fact, this
1049also happens in the community itself: (false) assumptions turned into
1050conclusions. Solutions that look alien, weird and wrong to users of the same
1051community. Maybe something that I present as hip and modern and high|-|\TEX\ and
1052promising might be the opposite: backward, old|-|fashioned and of no use to
1053others. Or maybe it is, but the audience is in a different mindset. Does it
1054matter? Let's just celebrate that diversity. (So maybe, instead of discussing the
1055conference theme, I should have talked about how I abuse \LUATEX\ in controlling
1056lights in my home as part of some IoT experiments.)
1057
1058\stopsection
1059
1060\startsection[title=What drives us]
1061
1062I'm no fan of economics and big money talk makes me suspicious. I cannot imagine
1063working in a large company where money is the drive. It also means that I have
1064not much imagination in that area. We get those calls at the office from far away
1065countries who are hired to convince us by phone of investments. Unfortunately
1066mentioning that you're not at all interested in investments or that multiplying
1067money is irrelevant to you does not silence the line. You have to actively kill
1068such calls. This is also why I probably don't understand today's publishing world
1069where money also dominates. Recently I ran into talks by Mark Blyth about the
1070crisis (what crisis?) and I wish I could argue like he does when it comes to
1071typesetting and workflows. He discusses quite well that most politicians have no
1072clue what the crisis is about.
1073
1074I think that the same applies to the management of publishers: many have no clue
1075what typesetting is about. So they just throw lots of money into the wrong
1076activities, just like the central banks seem to do. It doesn't matter if we \TEX
1077ies demonstrate cheap and efficient solutions.
1078
1079Of course there are exceptions. We're lucky to have some customers that do
1080understand the issues at hand. Those are also the customers where authors may use
1081the tools themselves. Educating publishers, and explaining that authors can do a
1082lot, might be a premise, predilection and prediction in one go! Forget about
1083those who don't get it: they will lose eventually, unfortunately not before they
1084have reaped and wasted the landscape.
1085
1086Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft and others invest a lot in artificial
1087intelligence (or, having all that virtual cash, just buy other companies that
1088do). They already have such entities in place to analyze whatever you do. It is
1089predicted that at some point they know more about you then you know yourself.
1090Reading Luke Dormehl's \quotation {The Formula} is revealing. So what will that
1091do with our so|-|called (disputed by some) free will? Can we choose our own
1092tools? What if a potential user is told that all his or her friends use
1093WhateverOffice so they'd better do that too? Will subtle pressure lead them or
1094even us users away from \TEX ? We already see arguments among \TEX ies, like
1095\quotation {It doesn't look updated in 3 years, is it still good?} Why update
1096something that is still valid? Will the community be forced to update everything,
1097sort of fake updates. Who sets out the rules? Do I really need to update (or
1098re|-|run) manuals every five years?
1099
1100Occasionally I visit the Festo website. This is a (family owned) company that
1101does research at the level that used to be common in large companies decades ago.
1102If I had to choose a job, that would be the place to go to. Just google for
1103\quotation {festo bionic learning network} and you understand why. We lack this
1104kind of research in the field we talk about today: research not driven by
1105commerce, short term profit, long term control, but because it is fundamental
1106fun.
1107
1108Last year Alan Braslau and I spent some time on \BIBTEX. Apart from dealing with
1109all the weird aspects of the \APA\ standard, dealing with the inconsistently
1110constructed author fields is a real pain. There have been numerous talks about
1111that aspect here at Bacho\TEX\ by Jean|-|Michel Hufflen. We're trying to deal
1112with a more than 30|-|year|-|old flawed architecture. Just look back over a curve
1113that backtracks 30 years of exponential development in software and databases and
1114you realize that it's a real waste of time and a lost battle. It's fine to have a
1115text based database, and stable formats are great, but the lack of structure is
1116appalling and hard to explain to young programmers. Compare that to the Festo
1117projects and you realize that there can be more challenging projects. Of course,
1118dealing with the old data can be a challenge, a necessity and eventually even be
1119fun, but don't even think that it can be presented as something hip and modern.
1120We should be willing to admit flaws. No wonder that Jean|-|Michel decided to
1121switch to talking about music instead. Way more fun.
1122
1123Our brains are massively parallel bio|-|machinery. Groups of neurons cooperate
1124and compete for attention. Coming up with solutions that match what comes out of
1125our minds demands a different approach. Here we still think in traditional
1126programming solutions. Will new ideas about presenting information, the follow up
1127on books come from this community? Are we the innovative Festo or are we an old
1128dinosaur that just follows the fashion?
1129
1130\stopsection
1131
1132\startsection[title=User experience]
1133
1134Here is a nice one. Harari spends many pages explaining that research shows that
1135when an unpleasant experience has less unpleasantness at the end of the period
1136involved, the overall experience is valued according to the last experience. Now,
1137this is something we can apply to working with \TEX: often, the more you reach
1138the final state of typesetting the more it feels as all hurdles are in the
1139beginning: initial coding, setting up a layout, figuring things out, etc.
1140
1141It can only get worse if you have a few left|-|over typesetting disasters but
1142there adapting the text can help out. Of course seeing it in a cheap bad print
1143can make the whole experience bad again. It happens. There is a catch here: one
1144can find lots of bad|-|looking documents typeset by \TEX. Maybe there frustration
1145(or indifference) prevails.
1146
1147I sometimes get to see what kind of documents people make with \CONTEXT\ and it's
1148nice to see a good looking thesis with diverse topics: science, philosophy,
1149music, etc. Here \TEX\ is just instrumental, as what it is used for is way more
1150interesting (and often also more complex) than the tool used to get it on paper.
1151We have conferences but they're not about rocket science or particle
1152accelerators. Proceedings of such conferences can still scream \TEX, but it's the
1153content that matters. Here somehow \TEX\ still sells itself, being silently
1154present in rendering and presentations. It's like a rootkit: not really
1155appreciated and hard to get rid of. Does one discuss the future of rootkits other
1156than in the perspective of extinction? So, even as an invisible rootkit, hidden
1157in the workings of other programs, \TEX's future is not safe. Sometimes, when you
1158install a Linux system, you automatically get this large \TEX\ installation,
1159either because of dependencies or because it is seen as a similar toolkit as for
1160instance Open (or is it Libre) Office. If you don't need it, that user might as
1161well start seeing it as a (friendly) virus.
1162
1163\stopsection
1164
1165\startsection[title=Conclusion]
1166
1167At some point those who introduced computers in typesetting had no problem
1168throwing printing presses out of the window. So don't pity yourself if at some
1169point in the near future you figure out that professional typesetting is no
1170longer needed. Maybe once we let machines rule the world (even more) we will be
1171left alone and can make beautiful documents (or whatever) just for the joy, not
1172bothering if we use outdated tools. After all, we play modern music on old
1173instruments (and the older rock musicians get, the more they seem to like
1174acoustic).
1175
1176There are now computer generated compositions that experienced listeners cannot
1177distinguish from old school. We already had copies of paintings that could only
1178be determined forgeries by looking at chemical properties. Both of these
1179(artificial) arts can be admired and bring joy. So, the same applies to fully
1180automated typeset novels (or runtime rendered ebooks). How bad is that really?
1181You don't dig channels with your hand. You don't calculate logarithmic tables
1182manually any longer.
1183
1184However, one of the benefits of the Internet is watching and listening to great
1185minds. Another is seeing musicians perform, which is way more fun that watching a
1186computer (although googling for \quotation {animusic} brings nice visuals).
1187Recently I ran into a wooden musical computer made by \quotation {Wintergatan}
1188which reminded me of the \quotation {Paige Compositor} that we use in a \LUATEX\
1189cartoon. Watching something like that nicely compensates for a day of rather
1190boring programming. Watching how the marble machine x (mmx) evolves is yet
1191another nice distraction.
1192
1193Now, the average age of the audience here is pretty high even if we consider that
1194we get older. When I see solutions of \CONTEXT\ users (or experts) posted by
1195(young) users on the mailing list or stack exchange I often have to smile because
1196my answer would have been worse. A programmable system invokes creative
1197solutions. My criterion is always that it has to look nice in code and has some
1198elegance. Many posted solutions fit. Do we really want more automation? It's more
1199fun to admire the art of solutions and I'm amazed how well users use the
1200possibilities (even ones that I already forgot).
1201
1202One of my favourite artists on my weekly \quotation {check youtube} list is Jacob
1203Collier. Right from when I ran into him I realized that a new era in music had
1204begun. Just google for his name and \quotation {music theory interview} and you
1205probably understand what I mean. When Dennett comments on the next generation
1206(say up to 25) he wonders how they will evolve as they grow up in a completely
1207different environment of connectivity. I can see that when I watch family
1208members. Already long ago Greg Bear wrote the novel \quotation {Darwin's
1209Children}. It sets you thinking and when looking around you even wonder if there
1210is a truth in it.
1211
1212There are folks here at Bacho\TEX\ who make music. Now imagine that this is a
1213conference about music and that the theme includes the word \quotation {future}.
1214Then, imagine watching that video. You see some young musicians, one of them
1215probably one of the musical masterminds of this century, others instrumental to
1216his success, for instance by wrapping up his work. While listening you realize
1217that this next generation knows perfectly well what previous generations did and
1218achieved and how they influenced the current. You see the future there. Just look
1219at how old musicians reflect on such videos. (There are lots of examples of youth
1220evolving into prominent musicians around and I love watching them). There is no
1221need to discuss the future, in fact, we might make a fool of ourselves doing so.
1222Now back to this conference. Do we really want to discuss the future? What we
1223think is the future? Our future? Why not just hope that in the flow of getting
1224words on a medium we play our humble role and hope we're not forgotten but
1225remembered as inspiration.
1226
1227One more word about predicting the future. When Arthur Clarke's \quotation {2001:
1228A Space Odyssey} was turned into a movie in 1968, a lot of effort went into
1229making sure that the not so far ahead future would look right. In 1996 scientists
1230were asked to reflect on these predictions in \quotation {Hal's Legacy}. It
1231turned out that most predictions were plain wrong. For instance computers got way
1232smaller (and even smaller in the next 20 years) while (self|-|aware) artificial
1233intelligence had not arrived either. So, let's be careful in what we predict (and
1234wish for).
1235
1236\stopsection
1237
1238\startsection[title=No more themes]
1239
1240We're having fun here, that's why we come to Bacho\TEX\ (predilection). That
1241should be our focus. Making sure that \TEX's future is not so much in the cutting
1242edge but in providing fun to its users (prediction). So we just have to make sure
1243it stays around (premise). That's how it started out. Just watch at Don Knuth's
12443:16 poster: via \TEX\ and \METAFONT\ he got in contact with designers and I
1245wouldn't be surprised if that sub|-|project was among the most satisfying parts.
1246So, maybe instead of ambitious themes the only theme that matters is: show what
1247you did and how you did it.
1248
1249\stopsection
1250
1251\stopchapter
1252
1253\stopcomponent
1254