News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by 082349872349872 on Friday October 09, 2020 @09:26AM (#24729669)
Heterodox explanation:

> ”Nothing in Europe,” notes Jamil Ragep, a professor of the history of science at the University of Oklahoma, “could hold a candle to what was going on in the Islamic world until about 1600.”

Before the portuguese (1498-1974?) and the spanish (1492-1976?) overseas empires, the arab world was in the middle of the prime trade routes between asia and europe. Afterwards, their status as middleman was increasingly cut out (especially once the dutch and then british got into the maritime empire game).

Science happens where there are rich people; rich people happen where there are bottlenecks in trade.

As they say in the asteroid belt: na desh walowda walowda peyeting; imim na xunyam sasating?

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by narag on Friday October 09, 2020 @11:01AM (#24730528)
...rich people happen where there are bottlenecks in trade.

I was nodding all the way until "bottlenecks in"... and then the Expanse slang. Tsk tsk :)

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by 082349872349872 on Saturday October 10, 2020 @01:21AM (#24736853)
For the bottlenecks: I like to think of value chains as a young seasonal river. In season, there are alternations of pools and waterfalls, and exploitable margins are where the topography protrudes, at the waterfalls. In the pools the topography still exists, but doesn't matter. Until it does, because something changes significantly upstream or downstream, and now the waterfalls appear in different places.

Kowltim vedi fong bap unte kuwang. Depelesh imim ge sekrip. (Watch out for bottlenecks and corners. That's where money is made.)

Compare the parts of a program worth optimising...

Kowltim vedi fong bap unte kuwang. Da Dzhin im showxa desh deplesh imim du fashting gut. (Watch out for bottlenecks and corners. Amdahl's Law says that's where to make speedups.)

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by narag on Saturday October 10, 2020 @05:39PM (#24742060)
Too complex metaphor for me. If I've understood you, the flow is not exactly the trade. That's open to a lot of distracting objections. Beautiful anyway :)
Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by 082349872349872 on Sunday October 11, 2020 @01:25AM (#24743914)
Thank you. Maybe it's easier to recover the river from the optimisation case: we profile first, then optimise. This is because the only things that count are what actually eat wall clock time. Similarly, the only places in value chains that accumulate wealth are where there are actually consistent margins. And it doesn't matter if there are rocks in a riverbed (which could potentially make bottlenecks or waterfalls), if they're located in a pool between higher rocks, so the water level is higher than they are.

Does that make more sense?

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by narag on Sunday October 11, 2020 @02:20PM (#24747848)
I didn't mean it doesn't.

My point was that trade, in a wide sense, creates wealth. No one would cross the sea or the desert if there wasn't a prize, so I take for granted that there is an inbalance.

"Bottleneck" seems to suggest that commerce is like a natural process. It isn't. There are trade cultures like Phoenicians or Renaissance Venice, but often the powerful don't like commerce. Commerce implies some values that subvert authoritarian regimes, maybe just because different ways of understanding life make contact.

So when I hear bottleneck, I think of trade restrictions, not flow. You mean bottleneck as a funnel where the flow is more intense and thus more susceptible to capture wealth. It makes sense, but it's somehow a twisted metaphor, because it's the inbalance (gravity, or demand + the cheaper production elsewhere) that creates the flow, the bottleneck just make it easier to exploit. But a cascade can be wide or narrow, tall or short. In any case, there's water falling...

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by galfarragem on Saturday October 10, 2020 @04:42AM (#24737531)
> Science happens where there are rich people; rich people happen where there are bottlenecks in trade.

It can't be that simple. How do you fit there, for example, russian space exploration?

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by 082349872349872 on Saturday October 10, 2020 @12:53PM (#24740207)
Easy: the КПСС was the bottleneck between the oil and natural gas fields of the Union and the fuel importers of the West. They were the funders of the Космическая программа СССР from the 1930s on.

Two things happened in 1985: KSA opened the taps to full production, tanking oil prices, and the Plaza Accord weakened the dollar. Since oil is denominated in USD, this further kneecapped soviet hard currency income. While they were simultaneously attempting to fight a war in afghanistan, the real price of oil had dropped by a factor of 3. Elsewhere, as a result of the Plaza Accord, west germany used its stronger marks to buy out east germany as a fire sale from the Warsaw Pact, but I still have no idea what japan (or perhaps just the LDP selectorate?) got from its stronger yen, other than (averaged across the whole country) stagnation.

TIL Polan can into space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirosław_Hermaszewski (double checking received opinions never hurts, compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24737221 )

====

Conspiracy theory:

Compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24736853 and consider that anyone outside who for whatever reason had been modelling the soviet economy might have been able to show to the actors within it (especially after Gorbi's transparency reforms) that it was worth more in pieces than as a going conglomerate, in which case the implosion of the soviet union would have been the ultimate stakeholder activism geopolitical LBO.

If Mark Felt had been a Belter, he would have said du chesh peyeting instead of "follow the money."

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by galfarragem on Saturday October 10, 2020 @09:19PM (#24743150)
TIL ..a lot. Thanks.
Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by JPLeRouzic on Friday October 09, 2020 @10:56AM (#24730482)
> As they say in the asteroid belt: na desh walowda walowda peyeting; imim na xunyam sasating?

That's a language which is still missing in Google's translator.

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by kkshetty on Friday October 09, 2020 @12:32PM (#24731597)
Most likely Belter Creole => https://expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Belter_Creole

It is a fictional language :)

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by 082349872349872 on Friday October 09, 2020 @12:42PM (#24731693)
Yes, sorry, it was just a restatement. The english would be: "no massive trade flows; no science researched."

(sasating is not attested, but sasa is. I would draw the line between sciences and humanities as sasating and kengting)

(Anyone at google or yandex who cares to get cracking on this? The grammar is small and the vocabulary miniscule. Unfortunately the corpus as well...)

Edit: OTOH, maybe it may be useful to have a creole without extant sentiment analysis, etc. tools?

"Look at me still talking when there's science to do"

Re:Why the Arabic world turned away from science (2011) by kwhitefoot on Saturday October 10, 2020 @06:12AM (#24737876)
Google Translate auto-detect claims it is Igbo. But it can't translate it.