"Life is a journey, not a destination"
Although the origin is not that clear, I have heard this sentence in Amazing from Aerosmith - remember the time when pop music was not trapped in "love me baby" / "I hate the world" / "life sucks" triangle, but actually had lyrics that is worth reading and thinking about... :-)
Finally I have realized why I write a blog about Dust development instead of a wiki specification.
Of course it is a question if the whole idea has meaning, the fundamental question is good and I am looking for the answer in the right direction. But this is a question I can't answer, because this is my faith and passion that this has to exist, has to be written in this way, and I can write it. I can be wrong of course, but what a great way of making mistake this is! And anyway, being an employee now I plan to get a lot of money on using experiences that it gave me; and even if it is finally wrong, you can also find some useful ideas in it.
But what if it is right? I think it should turn the industry upside down. I think it can let us use the full power that we already have in the smallest gadgets (I started programming on machines that had less power than a ... I can't even think of any nowadays smart toys of that weak performance: 640k RAM? 4.77 Mhz (but had Turbo button)? 20MB HDD?). I think it means that what we call crap today can connect huge amount of less fortunate people to our technically global, but economically very limited world. I think the epic failure of a Java processor can be tried again: the Dust kernel is a better choice to be implemented in silicon; the hardware can know all applications internally, and adapt to them, optimize the behavior; Dust is inherently parallel, not by letting the programmer control threads but this is a fundamental element of the software component design.
All in all, I think huge mass of people would benefit from it - and this makes it worth the time and effort for that very little chance. But they will not understand the whole thing at all, which is not a problem.
There should be lots of adopters, who would understand a specification and can use it. For them, Dust will mean truly reusable designs (for more forethinking of course), having the housekeeping done by previous standard components in really any environment, etc. They will give the muscles to Dust, but sorry, I don't really write this blog for them.
There must be some people who will follow the way I think about Dust. They must take over this obsession of something that must be brought to life, to this world. To always take the longest, most weird path through a swamp if they feel that they must go that way - even if there is no light on the other end. And to understand why I do this, what experience and vision forces me doing this now. I publish this blog for that few dozen people out in the world now, or at any later time. They should take this concept further than I could, because of my limited knowledge and time.
So for them: yes, it's ridiculous how I am linked to Esperanto for both any programmer (why not use English, bro?) or for an Esperantist (you don't know the language at all, man!). But I have a very strong vision that Esperanto is an existing, full language; its grammar can be formalized and used to express any state of the world or exact orders without ambiguities; even the speech to text conversion is easier because of the fixed position of the accentuated syllable. Finally, I want to be able to express actually anything in Esperanto, and that should be understandable and executable orders to the Dust environment.
I had the same strong vision before, like "use message object only instead of call parameters", "there is no difference between service and data objects" - the result is a fully declarative software architecture; "the OO paradigm and the Operating System itself is a very useful but fatal failure" - and I could switch to C# in weeks for a POC system; I could design and implement a production system in Objective-C. I feel the same now.
