Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

Dynamicland 2024

https://dynamicland.org/
I had the good fortune of taking a field trip there in 2018.

The video is a very good overview of the project.

One interesting artifact of "the real world simulates itself" is version control. At Dynamicland, each version of a program is a sheet of paper (with a unique set of fiducials along the edges). If you want to edit a program, you grab a keyboard and point it at the program. A text editor comes up; you make your changes, and hit commit. When you do, it spits out a new piece of paper with your changes. Put it in the view of the camera to use the new version. Take it away and use the old paper to roll the change back.

Can you “pipe” the results of one paper onto one of the inputs of the next?

That’d be pretty funky.

Yes. Though not in the traditional way that we think of "pipe" working. A good example of this was the "zoom lens" in Omar Rizwan's Geokit: https://omar.website/posts/notes-from-dynamicland-geokit/
Anything on the table is open to reference by anything else on the table afaik. Direct references are usually done as cursors projected off the page so you can "point" and "click" on other objects to control precisely what you reference or select with the other tool.

You could also implement input and output piping between programs in a more organized way where their physical orientation isn't as critical as most page references seem to be. eg: Put a tag on a sticky note that represents a pipe, put it close enough to the 'output' of one page then stick it to the input of another compatible page.

Not sure how protected the individual pages are from outside modification because real details are quite thin on the ground. I think right now you could probably turn every display page into a rick roll if you wanted.

loading story #41465707
> with a unique set of fiducials along the edges

I suspect each piece of paper, if examined with a good enough camera, has a unique fingerprint, like a snowflake, and perhaps this could be used in the future for an "Isomer Addressed Filesystem". In other words, all pieces of paper ship with a UUID already, woven into their atoms.

I would suggest instead convincing every printer manufacturer to embed in every printer a routine that encodes a unique identifier on every print and then reading that using more typical cameras. The hard part has already been done.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots

I'm pretty sure that I mentioned the printer tracking dots to the researchers at the lab and certainly mentioned DataGlyphs. So they were aware of alternatives. The trick is to get a workable system with cameras that have the resolution to pick out those details from a dozen feet away, as well as a software stack that can recognize them at ~60fps.

The goal has always been to move away from the dots, you can see this in the progress report: https://dynamicland.org/2019/Progress_report/

That said, and this is purely my opinion, the system works well enough as it is, and there is so much fun stuff to build on top of what works, that it's hard to prioritize a better object recognition system over the myriad of other interesting things to be done.

I imagine it would very difficult to read these dots from a distance and dynamically. I just mention it because most printed documents already have indentifiers printed on them that don't require seeing individual fibers.
Ah, noted! With that in mind, did you know that those printer dots are what the team that won the 2011 DARPA Shredder Challenge used to win?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Shredder_Challenge_2011

Fun fact: Otavio Good, who led the winning team, learned about the printer dots on this very site. As I recall, he said that the dots were like a map that let them reconstruct the shredded documents.

I would had thought, even then, that this was not only commonly known, but not the sole only annulment/rule among a generally "rules-free" competition, having been rather obvious, especially to the audience these competitions attract.

Thank you for reminding me, and others, how immediate and obvious success can be.

Is there a better source that talks about it? Didn't see it mentioned on that page.
loading story #41459327
Oh, that’s why my HP inkjet refuses to print a black & white page when it’s low on yellow.
loading story #41452874
loading story #41453188
loading story #41451055
loading story #41452968
I assume this hasn't been "released" yet, but still thought I'd ask if the source code for the operating system (or "computing environment", in Dynamicland-speak) is available anywhere and also if there yet exists any DIY hardware guides for building your own to play with at my own location (far from the Oakland/Berkeley Dynamicland facility).

I believe the FAQ confirms that this is not possible at the moment:

> Where can I get Realtalk?

>> At present, Realtalk exists in Dynamicland spaces and in the spaces of our collaborators, where we can carefully grow and tend in-person communities of practice. In the short term, additional spaces will be started by people who have contributed significantly to an existing space and have internalized the culture and its values. Long term, we intend to distribute the ideas in the form of kits+games which will guide communities through building their own computing environments that they fully understand and control. Long long term, computing may be built into all infrastructure as electric light is today. This would also require an extensive network of educational support.

loading story #41448813
loading story #41448976
>In the short term, additional spaces will be started by people who have contributed significantly to an existing space and have internalized the culture and its values

there's something ominous, weird, and sort of damning about being protective of your "culture and values" in this way and to this extent. If Dynamicland offered a truly novel computing paradigm, it should be one that is accessible by other cultures. If it offers a valuable culture and worthwhile values, those values should be viral on their merits. They should be broadcast, rather than kept closely guarded.

If you have to carefully indoctrinate new users into your culture in order to protect it and keep out the Others who might ruin your culture with wrongthink, maybe what you actually have is a cult.

loading story #41449868
Yes-ish, I somewhat agree with your critique. I think it's a temporary measure though.

It is very America-centric and that's very sad to me.

I think Bret is a bit hesitant to share the stuff before people understand what it is, to prevent the same problem that happened when Jobs visited PARC and walked away with the idea of "we need to build computers with the desktop metaphor", without understanding at all that it was always meant to be about authoring and sharing, not about the visual metaphors.

Regardless, I hope to see more actual standalone instances/offshoots of dynamicland.

> to prevent the same problem that happened when Jobs visited PARC and walked away with the idea of "we need to build computers with the desktop metaphor", without understanding at all that it was always meant to be about authoring and sharing, not about the visual metaphors

Can you expand on this, or share some links so I can learn about it? I've not heard the story framed like this before. I'm interested to learn "what we missed out on" as a result of "visual metaphors" becoming overemphasised in the public mind.

loading story #41454587
> there's something [...] about being protective of your "culture and values" in this way and to this extent

Yes, AND it may also be because it's kind of innovation in the open, before it's really ready or that all the critical angles are fixed, and they might not want spoil specifics they would like to make flourish and present to the whole world, and see them ... let's say half-assed, or misunderstood enough that it does not "jell".

In the end, it will be embraced in some way. But it's understandable that they have a specific idea in mind.

See it as a trailer for a movie where post-prod is not yet fully done, perhaps.

Ideas are fragile, etc. There's a point at which you want feedback, but not before you've built enough for people to see the vision. Depending on your audience, you may need to build more or less to get to that point.

Still, they've been working on this for yeeeears.

This is how most hacker spaces and fab-labs and even community gardens I know operate.

Rule 0: "Behave in a way that lets us not need to make additional rules" and things like that.

And I can doubly see it, if you have something ~new, and I could very well see that this is the thing that works if and only if you play along.

loading story #41449595
Not quite Realtalk, but inspired by it:

http://paperprograms.org

loading story #41455700
I spent quite a lot of time at Dynamicland Oakland. It's great fun and the people are just wonderful. I think of Realtalk as adding another layer to programs, the Physical Layer. Program behavior can be determined and controlled by physical layout as well as code. It's not completely unlike a frontend/backend distinction, and in fact you could make a Realtalk simulator using a javascript canvas much more easily than building the camera/projector setup.

Just like building full stack software, there's a large amount of nonobvious skill in dictating your separations of concerns between the physical layer and software layer. Good programs are flexible, remixable, modular, intuitive, and let non-programmers make nontrivial interactions and enhancements via the physical layer. Bad programs require you to have the physical objects in a particular configuration, or break completely if one piece of paper is lost. I found these programming design questions a really interesting part of playing at Dynamicland.

A solid limitation of the system is that the pieces of programs aren't actually modular. You can't take a Cat from one program and a Dog from another program and have the dog interact with the cat. This is obvious in software - that's why we design APIs - but it's frustrating when all your programs exist in the same space (that's the whole selling point) and when bringing part of Program A into Program B is so intuitive and, when you have dozens of these programs lying around the room, inevitable.

I'd love to see them explore (wait for it...) using AI. Incorporating object recognition could remove the need for pasting dots onto every object by defining rules like "when you see a car, color it Red". It could allow for inter-program interoperability via the shared language of object recognition. And it could even determining logical interactions in a fun and surprising way: what _should_ happen when I take the cactus from this program and put it on top of the balloon from that program?

loading story #41452752
loading story #41451973
loading story #41452485
loading story #41454970
loading story #41448485
loading story #41448617
For those unfamiliar, the founder is Bret Victor. He made a name for himself working on human interfaces at Apple in the Steve Jobs iPad era. In 2012, he gave a couple of influential talks: Inventing on Principle, and Stop Drawing Dead Fish.

Bret's take on being a visionary/futurist is fascinating. He imagines the near-future world he wants to live in, prototypes enough of it to write a talk about, and gives the talk with the hopes that someone in the audience will be inspired to make it a reality. He gives ideas away with the hope that he'll be paid back with a world where those ideas have been realized.

https://worrydream.com/

that approach seems so off... i'm curious how it's justified.

like countless hundreds of quotes on execution vs ideas, here is one: "Ideas don’t make you rich. The correct execution of ideas does."

anyways, i'm gonna spend a little more time this evening to really dig in.

I assume his point is that he's not going to be able to execute on all his ideas anyway, so why not make them free to people who might? If the idea succeeds, the benefit to him is a better world, while the cost is nothing. It's a positive-sum proposition, what's not to like?
> If the idea succeeds, the benefit to him is a better world, while the cost is nothing. It's a positive-sum proposition, what's not to like?

I am unaware of any of the ideas having been picked up and productized. I might be mistaken.

However, if I'm correct, then the thing that could be better is picking ideas that have a high chance of being selected, everything else being equal.

While turning ideas into products isn't the benchmark for a successful idea, there are countless product folk who have definitely been inspired by Bret's work.

For example, this is Vlad Magdalin, one of the founders of Webflow:

> But I won’t claim credit that it was some magical insight that I had. It was a specific video that I saw that I think every maker and every creator should see called “Inventing on Principal” by Bret Victor. Seeing that talk, it’s a maybe 50-minute talk around creating games and doing animation and this broader concept of direct manipulation, but more importantly the principal behind why you do the work you do, what drives you.

> Seeing that video and being a designer and a 3D animator and a developer all at once, it just sparked that idea of, “holy crap.” The kinds of tools that we can have in animation land, the kind of tools we already have for game design and level design, the tools we have in digital publishing, all those things can be married together to front end and back end development and make it a much more human type of interface. That’s when it was boom, this has to be a product and a thing.

(source: https://www.indiehackers.com/podcast/144-vlad-magdalin-of-we...)

loading story #41455483
loading story #41449267
loading story #41449104
loading story #41449223
loading story #41452749
Elon Musk has certainly been made very rich from ideas alone.
No... teams of people had to execute on those ideas first, usually with far more valuable ideas of their own, as well as teams of engineers and employees to make them a physical and profitable reality. He didn't simply manifest his ideas from the aether like an arcane sorcerer.
loading story #41478051
loading story #41449724
loading story #41449234
loading story #41451837
loading story #41448459
loading story #41448506
loading story #41458564
whenever i'll teach newcomers computing, i will now adopt the approach laid out here. it's easy to forget how painful learning computing is, how much you need to know about the internet to make a single http request and read out it's response. user @simonw talked about this recently on twitter [0][1]

absolute beautiful point about needing a different kind of literacy in the modern age at the end of the video.

i wish, with all my heart, that this and similar projects develop a loving community which will enable other communities to learn computing in an accessible, cheap and memorable way.

[0] https://x.com/simonw/status/1829195655006531661 (original twitter link)

[1] https://readwise.io/reader/shared/01j6z4cj87f5ky3c6ese0thscw (backup because twitter is not the future of computing)

loading story #41449012
loading story #41451618
This feels like something you could get a whole lot more traction and experimentation in quickly if it also existed as a room in something like VRChat or added to people's rooms in a VR passthrough mode. You'd lose some of the benefits of being in a shared physical space but you would also lose some of the limitations around the tracking resolution and stability of the fiducial markers on the page and open it up to people who can't make it to the location in person.

A 2.0 version could even merge the two versions slightly, tracking irl people into the virtual space (with pose and position estimates?) and programs (? I don't know the lingo off hand, but I mean the paper sheets everything revolves around) and in the opposite direction project the programs from VR onto the real table.

I've been interested in it for years so I'm very glad to see it's still moving forwards and alive. There were years where I couldn't find any actual new information coming out of the project.

loading story #41453060
> This feels like something you could get a whole lot more traction and experimentation in quickly if it also existed as a room in something like VRChat or added to people's rooms in a VR passthrough mode.

That would be something entirely different.

I don't believe that honestly. There's many facets of what Bret is making here. Not all of them require a physical presence, the COVID lockdown and years of internet communities before that have shown you can build vibrant communities online.

Many of the ideas can be worked on and improved without requiring the expensive physical space so the OS and the concepts of the composed tools they talk about for the future of the project can all be improved and played with in a virtual space too separate from the physical presence.

I did not intend to discourage the idea! I think it sounds very cool and potentially worthy of study. But I really do think you're underestimating the difference.
loading story #41454422
loading story #41455381
loading story #41448801
loading story #41452564
As cool as Dynamicland is, I still don’t get why they won’t open source it or at least release it in some form.

I’ve heard various people give roundabout excuses, but none of them hold water. They often fall into one of the following categories:

- “People won’t get the core ideas and will use it to make things that go against the core ideas” — People who care about Bret Victor’s work will take the time to learn the ideas. People who don’t might try and make something Bret doesn’t like, but currently the world is full of things Bret doesn’t like, so I don’t get how that would be different than the status quo.

- “It’s actually ‘anti-internet’, reimagining computers as objects in physical space, without the intangible connections provided by the internet” — Cool! I’d like to use it to make an airgapped little lab thing for people in my city to play and experiment in, but I can’t do that unless it’s released to the community.

- “Yeah but remember it’s ‘anti-internet’, releasing it open source on the internet would violate the core principles.” — This feels too cute by half. I don’t consider this a legitimate objection.

- “Just come to Oakland, you’ll understand when you get here and use it.” — That’s way out of many people’s budgets. I also get the feeling that I wouldn’t come around just by seeing it, I think I’d want one in my city even more.

- “You’re not entitled to other people’s work.” — True, but most stuff done in this sort of research space is done with the intent of spreading an idea or increasing the public good. It seems kind of odd that the Dynamicland folks keep talking about what a revolutionary concept it is while preventing 99.9% of people from actually experiencing it.

Overall it just seems like such a weird attitude. I get that they’re worried about the world misunderstanding their ideas, but at this point there are tons of people who have been eating up Bret Victor’s work and have immense respect for his ideas, and would gladly watch, listen to or read whatever instructions would be necessary to help someone who’s already bought in “play by the rules” and get the best possible experience.

> - “People won’t get the core ideas and will use it to make things that go against the core ideas” — People who care about Bret Victor’s work will take the time to learn the ideas. People who don’t might try and make something Bret doesn’t like, but currently the world is full of things Bret doesn’t like, so I don’t get how that would be different than the status quo.

I think the problem is like what happened to "agile" after the manifesto. People took a term with a meaning, and ignored that meaning in promoting their own stuff, thus confusing the terminology and messing up discussion of the concepts.

loading story #41452208
loading story #41457704
I think you can look at some of the other replies in this thread to see how deeply this can be misunderstood. And I think the fear is more about losing the meaning of dynamicland.

The source code isn't the idea, the idea is. That's what needs to be communicated.

The web page is huge, though, with an unbelievable amount of information if you want to build your own.

https://dynamicland.org/archive/2023/Front_shelf

So like, if they want me to reverse engineer Dynamicland and make my own, fine. But I’m WAY more likely to misunderstand what it’s about through reverse engineering it than I would be if I had actual source code I could study. I’m sure there’s some truly revelatory stuff in the architecture of RealTalk OS, and a reimplementation would be missing all that.

If what they want is for people to try and reimplement Dynamicland without their guidance, then they’re certainly doing the right things. But if their goal is to convert people to a new way of thinking about computing, this is not a great approach.

> But I’m WAY more likely to misunderstand what it’s about through reverse engineering it than I would be if I had actual source code I could study.

What a low opinion you have of yourself. On the contrary, you're likely to learn a lot more (and of course, spend orders of magnitude more time) recreating something interesting from the ground up than you are simply copying the source code.

The source code isn't the interesting part.

Hell you might even make something better, which is I suspect one of the unstated reasons why the source is not released.
I can't tell if you're serious.
loading story #41453334
loading story #41451747
loading story #41448587
loading story #41451608
loading story #41470235
loading story #41448639
loading story #41451236
loading story #41449081
Kudos to Bret and all the best to the communal computing community (pun intended) hopefully this takes the cyber physical system including IoT and machine-to-machine to another (useful) level.

>Anyone can change any program at any time, and see the changes immediately

Not sure what programming language Bret implementing the system but recently there's discussion how difficult and how slow to parse/compile some of the popular programming languages including C++ and Rust. In this case D is a unique anomaly where it has immediate rdmd REPL facility although it's a complex and a compiled language [1].

For creative, inventive, intuitive and comprehensive programming cyber physical system that involve hardware with fast sensing, control and immediate responses, D language is hands down the best programming there is [2]. The D authors however don't believe in any killer applications but this Dynamicland of communal computing most probably the niche that D is looking for to propel it for more wider adoption.

[1] Parsing Awk Is Tricky:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41422283

[2] D Features Overview:

https://dlang.org/comparison.html

Smalltalk. I used to run a server in Smalltalk and if it had an error it would halt, I could debug where it halted, I could change the code and restart. The client would not know, unless my fixing it took too long.
loading story #41448826
loading story #41448593
loading story #41448497
loading story #41449095
loading story #41451133
loading story #41449824
loading story #41449926
loading story #41448303
loading story #41450796
loading story #41471585
loading story #41452614
loading story #41452244
loading story #41464240
loading story #41454640
loading story #41448574
loading story #41454407
loading story #41469997
loading story #41454900
loading story #41448733
loading story #41449793
Inspiring stuff. TLDR, AFAICT, no, you can not do this on your own without participating IRL and taking away what you learned. Am inspired that it keeps growing, am disappointed that an indoctrination of a sorts is the only (apparent) route in. That said, sign me up please.
loading story #41452154
Home page has been updated as well, though I am unable to submit that as I have previously submitted the same URL when the site launched back in 2017.

https://dynamicland.org/

Fixed now. Thanks!
{"deleted":true,"id":41448346,"parent":41448224,"time":1725471295,"type":"comment"}