代码即黏土
Code Is Clay

原始链接: https://campedersen.com/code-is-clay

最近的一次陶瓷课意外地与编程产生了联系。 老师希望学生制作杯子等实用器皿,但作者却制作了一个超立方体——一个明显*不*实用的作品——并发现了用粘土和编写代码之间意想不到的相似之处。 两者都是可塑的媒介,不断演变,并且容易出现“失败”(摇晃的粘土,有缺陷的代码)。 重要的是,两者都需要超脱;破碎的粘土和删除的代码都不是损失,而是重新开始的机会。 作者将人工智能的兴起视为代码领域的“工业革命”,就像工厂生产改变了制陶业一样。 正如手工陶瓷在批量生产*之后*获得了价值一样,作者认为独特的人类编程——“超立方体”——将变得更加重要。 随着人工智能处理常规任务,软件工程师可以专注于创造性的问题解决和创新项目,使编程工艺比以往任何时候都更具成就感。

## 代码如泥:摘要 一篇最近在Hacker News上的帖子引发了关于编码与传统工艺(如陶艺)之间比较的讨论。作者ecto探讨了一个观点,即两者虽然看似截然不同,但都是具有独特属性的表达媒介。泥土作为一种物理媒介,没有“撤销”功能,严重依赖经验和一定程度的不可预测的“窑烧魔力”。而代码则主要是一种逻辑思维实验,拥有易于使用的纠错工具和快速反馈。 评论者们争论了这个类比,一些人质疑其是否成立。人们对从事全职工艺的经济现实表示担忧,以及作者是否美化了传统就业之外的创意工作。另一些人则指出,科技领域存在一种追逐炒作驱动的开发而非扎实工程的趋势。 讨论还涉及了人工智能的影响,一些人认为讨论的核心——创意媒介的本质——在那个背景下被遗忘了。最终,这篇帖子引发了人们对物理创作和数字创作之间差异的反思,以及在科技时代工作和表达方式的不断变化。
相关文章

原文

Kerri and I took a ceramics class recently!

I made a hypercube.

My instructor was... disappointed. The class was supposed to make a mug, or a bowl, something functional. But I had this idea in my head and couldn't shake it. The glaze turned out amazing (this iridescent blue that shifts in the light). I've been wondering if it would look even cooler painted in Vantablack.

Anyway. I've been noticing parallels between code and clay. They're both mediums. Vessels for ideas. You weren't thinking about hypercubes until you saw one on the coffee table, and now you might be picturing what a ceramic tesseract would even look like.

Both are malleable. When you're centering the clay, it's constantly moving, constantly responding. You push a little too hard and the whole thing wobbles off center. Same with code. You add a feature, refactor something, introduce a bug, fix three more. It's never static. It's never done.

Clay breaks. A lot. My first few attempts collapsed on the wheel. One piece cracked in the kiln. I dropped another walking to my car. But nobody cries about it, you just start over. The clay doesn't care. It's just material waiting for the next idea.

You're gonna have a really bad time if you get too attached to it.

Code is the same way. We're so precious about it sometimes, like every line is sacred. But it's not. It's just text. Delete it. Rewrite it. Start fresh. The idea survives even when the implementation doesn't.

Before AI, we had to make every plate and coffee mug by hand. Every line of code, carefully typed. Every function, crafted manually.

Now? We've hit the industrial revolution of code.

When the industrial revolution came for pottery, factories started pumping out ceramics. Plates got cheap. Mugs became disposable. You'd think clay would have disappeared. Why bother with the slow, messy, manual process when machines could do it faster?

But clay didn't go away. Ceramics studios are everywhere now. People pay good money to throw pots on weekends. Kerri and I are proof. The craft got more valuable once it wasn't necessary anymore. When you don't have to make something by hand, choosing to makes it mean something.

Software engineers love to joke about automating themselves out of a job. Well, we're finally getting there. LLMs can write code. A lot of it, fast. The industrial revolution is here.

So what happens to us?

Maybe the same thing that happened to potters. The production work gets automated. The commodity code writes itself. But the craft remains. The weird ideas, the hypercubes, the things that don't fit in templates: that's still us. That's still human.

Honestly I think I'm going to like it more. I got into programming because I liked building things, not because I wanted to type boilerplate for the rest of my life. If AI handles the mugs, I can focus on the hypercubes.

The medium isn't going anywhere. It's just getting more interesting.

Ceramic hypercube by Cam

(i never said it was good)

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com