A bounded set of principles for the general development of processes and systems (software-related and beyond):
- Arbitrary, but Consistent
- Slow, but Constant
- Sinuous, but Cert
- Imperfect, but Cooperative
- Destroy, but Calmly
- Untrustful, but Coordinated
- Orderly, but Casteless
- Universal, but Constrained
- Surgical, but Compassionate
These development principles are developed having in the back of the mind the software world and it's equations of hierarchization, however, one could generally put them to work in extraneous realms: the development of a company, of a community, of a selfhood.
Consistent arbitrariness is the foundation of the most sharp tool humanity has ever devised, language itself. Why these certain graphemes are linked to those certain phonemes and this certain assemblage points towards that certain concept or object? Because we have arbitrarily, willing consciously, but mostly not, chosen so. However, it is the long-term consistency (sometimes for millennia within the same frame of entanglement of words, things, and thoughts) which allows our extended communities to develop the making of fire into the generation of machines.
The speed of light is the fastest a particle-wave could possibly move. It might very well be an absolute limit. We discovered that the universe is so grand that this awe-filling speed could just as well be closer to nothing, because at the scale of the universe it needs millions and billions of human years to achieve meaningful displacement. However, regardless the speed of movement and the time required, the fact that the movement always exists, that there is always progress, a forward succeeding another forward, this is the important fact. If development is the target, one can afford to go slow towards it if constant progress is achieved, and sometimes slowness should be encouraged where the hastiness of today might hinder the progress of trans-tomorrow (the day after the day after tomorrow).
Trial and error against the benckmark of reality (controlled or not) is the single tool one needs for learning. Be it a child learning to walk, falling and stumbling again and again, or a gene pool making infinitesimal leaps from generation to generation. The straight line might not only be longer, on a non-Euclidean surface, but it might also take one's journey through less trials and errors, therefore less learning, and hence less readiness when the chips will be down. No matter how sinuous the path, one must be certain of one's learning.
The disablement of the superficial indicates the soon to come disappearance of the essence. The death of the natural is only followed by the fall of the artificial. No matter how imperfect a living system is, because it is live, if no other better system exists, then it must be always kept alive. The system should always respond to user input, striving for the best response, but more importantly, always cooperating with the user's interests.
Some of the systems are in such a state that one cannot even say that they need rethinking, that would imply thinking was involved in their conception. For such systems destruction is the only possible way for evolution. However, one should not be too hot-headed when engaging onto the path of destruction, one should not fall prey to the pleasures of dismantling. Being able to achieve a state of calmness when worlds fall apart is the measure, to some extent, of wisdom.
Services should not rely on each other, but they should optimistically await a response and optimistically reply.
Structure imposes hierarchy, the issues arrive when the hierarchy imposes control beyond the functional definitions the structure requires to maintain it's utility. Therefore, a system should strive for orderness, while having a loose dynamical equilibrium of the what which constitutes the order, remaining essentially a system without any kind of castes.
A universal adapter grows in the total utility when it's possibilities are limited to a certain domain.
One should mercilessly remove functions within the system, even the ones from the public interface, yet doing so must be done with consideration for both the legacy and the future.
Any kind of formalism or formalization stands as a mock for reality. And yet we attend to formality for convenience and even joy: it is playful to lay down rules. Started as a simple game, this text has found itself two rules: the structure of the principles will be X, but Y, where Y starts with the letter C, while all the X'es shall form the one and only actual principle/core-state of motion for development: ASSIDUOUS.