Stephen Wolfram

You look at the computational language, you run tests, you understand that's what's supposed to happen.

If we do a great job with compilation of the computational language, it might turn into LLVM or something like this, or it just directly gets run through the algorithms we have and so on.

So that's kind of a tearing down of this big structure that's been built of teaching people programming.

Mm-hmm.

But on the other hand, the other dynamic is vastly more people are going to care about computation.

So all those departments of art history or something that really didn't use computation before now have the possibility of accessing it by virtue of this kind of linguistic interface mechanism.

Yeah.

Well, I mean, I think the thing is that right now, you know, the average, you know, art history student or something probably isn't going to, you know, they're not probably, they don't think they know about programming and things like this.

But by the time it really becomes a kind of purely...

You just walk up to it.

There's no documentation.

You start just typing, you know, compare these pictures with these pictures and see the use of this color, whatever.

And you generate this piece of computational language code that gets run.

You see the results.

You say, oh, that looks roughly right.

Or you say that's crazy.

And maybe then you eventually get to say, well, I better actually try and understand what this computational language code did.

and that becomes a thing that you learn.

It's kind of an interesting thing because unlike with mathematics where you kind of have to learn it before you can use it, this is a case where you can use it before you have to learn it.

Yes, I think that there will be enough cases where people see, you know, because you can make it generate tests too.