Kate R and I have boarded the big silver bird to travel to South America and Antarctica, the first stop being Santiago de Chile. The flight was twelve hours, and due to the peculiarities of time zones, we arrived two hours before we left. Our stay was in the CBD,
NH Collection Plaza, quite upmarket with nice features and next to the World Trade Centre. The afternoon arrival provided the opportunity for a walk through the local "Parque de las Esculturas", then a hike up the famous
Cerro San Cristóbal parkland to catch the sunset and return - a round trip of about five hours. It was sufficiently impressive that we returned the following day and took the ascent via teleferico (with the oversized statue of Mary that looks over the city) and descended by funicular to viist the nearby
"Casa Museo La Chascona", home of the Nobel Prize winning poet, politician, and diplomat, Pablo Neruda, a person who was certainly not without significant flaws as well as greateness.
This would be the start of en epic walking trip through Santiago that would be measured at 45km for the day (yes really), which would include a visit to the beautiful
Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes, the
Catedral Metropolitana with it's overwhelming baroque features, past the ridiculous over-sized flag at the Palacio de La Moneda, then to the
Museo de la Solidaridad Salvador Allende and, on return, to the remarkable collection in the
El Museo Chileno de Arte Precolombino and the "Horizonte Antártico" exhibit at
La Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional. El Museo de la Memoria y los Derechos Humanos, which was high on the agenda, was unfortunately closed for renovations.
Whilst far from the most visually spectacular part of the trip, the Salvador Allende museum was definitely the most emotionally significant location for me. The Allende events were utterly critical in the formation of my own political opinions when I became aware of them in my early teens. Helped by the film,
"Missing", I became a voracious reader of the history. For those who don't know, the summary is that a socialist president was elected supported by a left-wing alliance and implemented a programme of nationalisation of resource industries, land redistribution, significant health and education welfare improvements, and the remarkable economic and logistics computer system,
Project Cybersyn. Allende was dedicated to the idea that socialism could be achieved through parliamentary democracy; but ultimately the military disagreed (unsurprisingly supported by the United States) disagreed. A coup and the installation of the Pinochet regime resulted in years of torture and deaths of thousands of democratic activists. The Allende events is tragic and utopian, providing insights on the nature of the capitalist State, and has a lasting impact on history.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
andrewducker
I think there are many.
Some examples:
* The fastest code is the code you don't run.
Smaller = faster, and we all want faster. Moore's law is over, Dennard scaling isn't affordable any more, smaller feature sizes are getting absurdly difficult and therefore expensive to fab. So if we want our computers to keep getting faster as we've got used to over the last 40-50 years then the only way to keep delivering that will be to start ruthlessly optimising, shrinking, finding more efficient ways to implement what we've got used to.
Smaller systems are better for performance.
* The smaller the code, the less there is to go wrong.
Smaller doesn't just mean faster, it should mean simpler and cleaner too. Less to go wrong. Easier to debug. Wrappers and VMs and bytecodes and runtimes are bad: they make life easier but they are less efficient and make issues harder to troubleshoot. Part of the Unix philosophy is to embed the KISS principle.
So that's performance and troubleshooting. We aren't done.
* The less you run, the smaller the attack surface.
Smaller code and less code means fewer APIs, fewer interfaces, less points of failure. Look at djb's decades-long policy of offering rewards to people who find holes in qmail or djbdns. Look at OpenBSD. We all need better more secure code. Smaller simpler systems built from fewer layers means more security, less attack surface, less to audit.
Higher performance, and easier troubleshooting, and better security. There's 3 reasons.
Practical examples...
The Atom editor spawned an entire class of app: Electron apps, Javascript on Node, bundled with Chromium. Slack, Discord, VSCode: there are multiple apps used by tens to hundreds of millions of people now. Look at how vast they are. Balena Etcher is a, what, nearly 100 MB download to write an image to USB? Native apps like Rufus do it in a few megabytes. Smaller ones like USBimager do it in hundreds of kilobytes. A dd command in under 100 bytes.
Now some of the people behind Atom wrote Zed.
It's 10% of the size and 10x the speed, in part because it's a native Rust app.
The COSMIC desktop looks like GNOME, works like GNOME Shell, but it's smaller and faster and more customisable because it's native Rust code.
GNOME Shell is Javascript running on an embedded copy of Mozilla's Javascript runtime.
Just like dotcoms wanted to dis-intermediate business, remove middlemen and distributors for faster sales, we could use disintermediation in our software. Fewer runtimes, better smarter compiled languages so we can trap more errors and have faster and safer compiled native code.
Smaller, simpler, cleaner, fewer layers, less abstractions: these are all goods things which are desirable.
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson knew this. That's why Research Unix evolved into Plan 9, which puts way more stuff through the filesystem to remove whole types of API. Everything's in a container all the time, the filesystem abstracts the network and the GUI and more. Under 10% of the syscalls of Linux, the kernel is 5MB of source, and yet it has much of Kubernetes in there.
Then they went further, replaced C too, made a simpler safer language, embedded its runtime right into the kernel, and made binaries CPU-independent, and turned the entire network-aware OS into a runtime to compete with the JVM, so it could run as a browser plugin as well as a bare-metal OS. Now we have ubiquitous virtualisation so lean into it: separate domains. If your user-facing OS only runs in a VM then it doesn't need a filesystem or hardware drivers, because it won't see hardware, only virtualised facilities, so rip all that stuff out. Your container host doesn't need to have a console or manage disks.
This is what we should be doing. This is what we need to do. Hack away at the code complexity. Don't add functionality, remove it. Simplify it. Enforce standards by putting them in the kernel and removing dozens of overlapping implementations. Make codebases that are smaller and readable by humans.
Leave the vast bloated stuff to commercial companies and proprietary software where nobody gets to read it except LLM bots anyway.