Perhaps this is one path towards Clojure on WASM

I never encountered the word "heterodox" before so thanks for that. Could you please elaborate? I'd like to understand your argument better.

I am not sure if you want to understand what I said in relation to licensing, or in relation to the way humans think and how our thinking (especially the shared part of it) has very old errors in them.

Both please!

Can't do both 🙂 But if you are curious, I think https://libcom.org/files/__Debt__The_First_5_000_Years.pdf this can give a good overall view of what I think how many opportunities we miss at the moment socially to do what licensing solves in part. As far as I understand, licensing is the way we can monetize directly or indirectly software (and not just software).

And the other is perhaps best explained by Thomas Kuhn in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

My personal take on this is that our brain doesn't care about truth, it cares about utility. It takes a lot of small truths and integrates it into a big lie, which we then share via communication and create society. Hence my point about the 50000 year old mistake, that's how old historians and archeologists and paleontologists say that language is.

I kind of see what you're getting at with licensing. It's a bit inconvenient, especially when my GH already shows I wrote the spacemacs anakondo layer but also who gives a shit who wrote the spacemacs anakondo layer? How about the relation to the way humans think then?

Then in our society we have these nice bubbles where lots of people have a relatively cushioned life where they don't have to think about survival and they don't really have much in the way of negative feedbacks so ideas that are useful are literally ideas that spread the most, not even nice or correct, not to mention true.

Is licensing one of those ideas?

I wouldn't say so, licensing to me by itself is just a tool, I need to see what it is used for to see if it's good or bad.

But the idea that we can own ideas is very much seems like a bad and to be honest, quite a nonsensical idea

Kind of. I think the intention was to protect people who have worked really hard to discover or invent something from an idea, and a more popular entity taking that idea making a worse version of it and being credited for discovering it.

I know licensing isn’t a perfect solution for that, but I see some benefit of having a common or standardized way of communicating the ownership or protection of said ideas.

again, ownership is the bad idea in my opinion. If you have decided that you have such a thing, especially ownership of ideas, then licensing might seem like proper way to go about it. That book from Graeber has a lot to say about ownership, it's also available on audible if you like audiobooks more.

Haha ok, I’ll check out those links.

@jayzawrotny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pETCs9Mktus 🙂 very succint way to talk about this, although I am not sure I subscribe to everything the same way Eric does.

that's perfectly understandable, I am no less full but should we start mocking each other if we are full?

apologies on the mocking

No worries, if I haven't seen him eat his feet, I would be thinking it was a praise 😉

Is this a compiler or interpreter?

Currently just an interpreter

I guess similar to joker (implemented in Go).

Will it give access to Rust libraries?

Indeed, the plan is to provide some sort of FFI or interop. I don't get the impression there's really some sort of rust runtime reflection I can tap into, so the plan is to experiment with parsing rust code ahead of time and generating the appropriate wrapper code. I have no idea what kinds of roadblocks I'll run into there, especially as I try to generalize this, so even now I want to be careful speaking on it, but that's the direction I want to head. I'm really glad to see you comment on this, aha

@U2M723H42 I think the joker folks do a similar thing for Go libraries.

I've recently started learning Rust and creating something like this certainly crossed my mind, but nothing more than that

No pressure or anything 😈 😄 @UBCSS6NGK

>:) right now its just very simple, naive reference counting. This will change, and I've got lots of ideas there, but I did not want to make the mistake I've made before of designing everything up front instead of iterating (especially when its harder to really see the eventual shape and bottlenecks of the program), and getting stuck into an endless cycle of designing and not creating. You don't need to manage lifetimes, as this is supposed to be Clojure -- although I'm not opposed to including a lower level, Rust-Clojure you can also drop into and embed, I think that would be cool.

Note, reference counting behind the scenes -- from the Clojure end, its just Clojure, not a lower level programming language (although I assume that's known)

@UBCSS6NGK looks amazing. would be cool to have this in https://github.com/chr15m/awesome-clojure-likes when you're ready!

Ahh that's awesome, I'm so glad! Its pretty young right now, I'm currently implementing Clojure RS's first programs (and, in doing so, beginning on its clojure.core), but otherwise the version on github has no such core yet with which to build a program. I don't mind when it gets added though