The current free ebook is located at this link:
http://haggishell.com/ridgeproject.pdf

For details about the ebook, click here.

140311. I'll post a conversation that went wrong below. In retrospect, it's a silly thread.

The issue was meta-communication. One part of the thread was about tuna fish sandwiches that may, or may not ever, have existed. Communication broke down, not over the sandwiches, but over communication about the sandwiches.

Thinking about the thread makes me tired. But I'll present it here. Parts are instructive.

Background: Guido van Rossum is the creator of the Python language. He's a significant figure though less influential, I think, than RMS, ESR, Linus Torvalds, and Andrew Tanenbaum.

I don't know Guido personally, but he and I had an email exchange this month. It happened because I wanted to be sure that one point on my resume was correct.

Additionally, in the year 2000, Dr. Michael Aivazis, who I'd worked with, had told me an amusing story related to Guido and tuna fish sandwiches. I thought I'd ask if the story was true or false.

Freenode Python people urged me to write to Guido. They said, “He doesn't bite”.

I wrote to Guido and he responded. It was kind of him to do so. He could have delegated the task to a subordinate but he wrote to me directly. In fact, he wouldn't stop writing to me :-)

Guido asked me not to quote his letters or even mention him publicly. I agreed initially, except for the tuna fish sandwiches part. I didn't feel that he had a right to ask me not to mention him in the context of a third-party anecdote.

I tried to end the discussion after that. But Guido wrote back and said that I was dishonest. I took exception to the latter point and told him that my agreement was withdrawn.

Here's the entire exchange with annotations added. The annotations, which include attempts at introspection, are in green italics.

140305 2:15pm Letter from me to Guido van Rossum:

Dear Mr. van Rossum,

The Freenode #python channel has suggested that I write to you about the following issue. I've promised them that I'll tell them your response.

In 2000, I worked for a while with Dr. Michael Aivazis. This was at a dot-com that is now long-deceased. It was essentially a spin-off of a unique software firm that had been killed by rising rents. They'd had a line of standard products and also did a lot of fixed-price development work.

The dot-com was Cleanscape Software, a spin-off of Steve Carr's company IPT. The spin-off was headed by Ted Batha, who subsequently went to Northrop Grumman, Monty Swaiss, and Tim Moriarty. For the story of the death of IPT, click here. For the IPT Reunion story, click here instead.

Dr. Aivazis was brought on board to design a next-generation framework but the money ran out, I ended up as the sole employee aside from one marketing person.

The marketing person used the name Arthur Chan but his actual name was Kwok Ning (or possibly Nin) Chan.

Michael was a strong Python proponent. He spoke of how the language might be useful, in time, to ordinary people. He was fond of breaking things down to the smallest possible components. Ten lines of code, to him, seemed like an overly generous size.

Michael Aivazis felt that ordinary people such as librarians and truck drivers would be comfortable with Python.

I'm writing to you to ask whether or not he played a role in the design of Python. The only specific remarks I can presently recall on the subject had to do with tuna fish sandwiches. He said that he'd go over to your place and make sandwiches while you worked on the language.

Were the tuna sandwiches, and the nutrition that they provided, Michael's primary contribution to Python or were his ideas a factor as well?

As a side note, I've developed my own Linux distro over the last 20 years and Python has been featured since around 2004. But it's really more of a Perl-based distro. The build system, the utilities, etc., are mostly in that language.

For the history of my Linux distro, click here.

I'm interested in Python frameworks such as Flask. However, I side with the famous xkcd cartoon which lauds Lisp but acknowledges that the gods probably hacked the universe together with Perl :P

For the xkcd cartoon, click here.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

140305 2:49pm Letter from Guido van Rossum to me:

Hi Robert,

Thanks for writing. Unfortunately the name Michael Aivazis does not ring any kind of bell — nor do tuna sandwiches (which I have never cared much about).

It's still possible that this really happened, but the probability that Michael made any real contributions to Python is remote. I hope this is not too disappointing to you or Michael.

Regarding XKCD cartoons, there are also several mentioning Python favorably. :-)

Good luck

140305 3:15pm Letter from me to Guido van Rossum:

Guido, thanks.

No need to respond further. For what it's worth, the two of you often show up together in Google searches. My understanding is that he was one of your thesis advisors but I gather that this is incorrect.

At this point, I considered the matter closed.

He and I haven't spoken for a decade but I think that he's at Caltech Center for Advanced Computing Research. I might call him sometime to see if I misunderstood the original remarks.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

140305 4:52pm Letter from Guido van Rossum to me:

Hm. I thought you were talking about an interaction around 2000. I never wrote a thesis nor did I ever have thesis advisers. But your mention of this makes me think he may have been one of the many visiting scientists at CWI while I worked there (from 1982-1995). (We had two different Greek visitors one year whose names I don't recall. :-)

140305 6:56pm Letter from me to Guido van Rossum:

Guido,

If I speak with Dr. Aivazis, possibly later this year, and establish that there's a connection, I'll let you know.

The point is of interest but not significant. I'm working on a book related to society and group dynamics, no direct connection to Dr. Aivazis, and if I mention him, even in passing, I'd like anything that's said to be accurate.

This is where things went wrong.

I felt that the conversation was over now. I'd offered to address Guido's apparent curiosity at a later date, emphasized that the issue wasn't significant, and offered an explanation that I thought would put the matter to rest.

The mention of the book was casual; an after-thought. This was appropriate as it wasn't the primary reason that I'd contacted Guido. The primary reason was related to my resume. But Guido hadn't asked me about reasons so I hadn't commented about this.

It didn't occur to me to spell out, at this late point, why I'd initiated communication.

As my text stated, there was no direct connection to Michael Aivazis. In fact, I indicated that Michael might not be mentioned. As Guido was at a greater remove, there would have been even less of a connection to him.

But each of us is the center of our own worlds. Things are filtered in this light. Guido concluded that our exchange was about the book, that he was likely to be quoted in the work, and that I should have explained all of this up front.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

140305 7:45pm Letter from Guido van Rossum to me:

I feel uncomfortable that you only tell me it's for a book after I've already told you a bunch of stuff. Please don't quote or mention me.

130306 5:01pm Letter from me to Guido van Rossum:

Guido, you said, “I feel uncomfortable that you only tell me it's for a book after I've already told you a bunch of stuff. Please don't quote or mention me.”

I was taken aback. Guido might have had the right to ask me not to quote him, but what was this part that said “don't ... mention me” about? I felt that he had no right to tell me who I could, or could not, “mention”.

Hm? You mean the parts about your career? Of course; I only wanted to check what I thought Dr. Aivazis had told me. I wouldn't quote you on personal matters without permission.

If it turned out that the tuna fish sandwich story was true, I *would* mention that. The tuna fish part isn't something that you told me. It's an amusing story that I've recalled for 14 years. But apparently it isn't true.

I'd like to be sure you've got this response and know that I'll comply with your request; except for the Dr. Aivazis story if he indicates that it actually happened. If time permits, reply to confirm.

Additionally, I'd like to say that it was kind of you to correspond.

I felt that I was being generous. I'd promised to do as Guido wished. I'd even requested that he confirm receipt of the promise so that there could be no misunderstandings. And I'd explained I understood he'd had no obligation to respond initially.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

130306 6:07pm Letter from Guido van Rossum to me:

I feel you weren't entirely honest with me (no mention of a book in the first message). I take that very seriously. As a consequence I don't want to appear in your project.

130306 9:50pm Letter from me to Guido:

At this point, I was annoyed. I'd written to Guido primarily to fact-check my resume. Not about a book.

I didn't explain much initially about my reasons for writing. But, from my perspective, if my reasons were important, why hadn't Guido declined to answer questions until I explained things to his satisfaction?

Additionally, the book was a side issue. It had nothing to do with Guido except indirectly. I'd thought about mentioning Dr. Aivazis in the book, perhaps in a single paragraph, and Dr. Aivazis's tuna-fish story, if it proved to be true, might have been the sole part that mentioned Guido.

Dr. Aivazis had told me about the tuna fish sandwiches. Guido hadn't done so. He had the right to correct an anecdote told by a third party. But no right to tell me not to use it.

I decided that Guido was “out of line” and withdrew my offer to comply with his request.

Guido, I wrote to you because, and only because, the Freenode Python people urged me to do so. And because they told me that you “didn't bite”. Empty promises.

I offered not to quote you without your permission. I was not interested in you personally; see the explanation below. You responded by calling me dishonest. My offer is unambiguously retracted. This exchange will be blogged and distributed to Autism groups.

I'm shy about talking to new people. I'm autistic and, actually, not high functioning. I communicate decisively when it's necessary, and I do run a friendly startups community in Freenode. However, in this exchange, I took the risk of talking to you only because I needed to determine the truth.

I've been telling people that I learned Python from somebody who'd contributed to the language; i.e., Dr. Aivazis. If this isn't true, I'll need to delete the assertion. In short, it was about honesty.

I also wanted to know about the tuna fish sandwiches. A simple and fun anecdote that I've remembered for a decade and a half. I just wanted anything that I said about the bread and hopefully tasty spread to be accurate.

I become more irritated here. My perspective was that I'd contacted this person originally because I'd wanted to be honest, I'd promised to do exactly as he requested, and yet he'd questioned my honesty.

Your remarks about my honesty were unwarranted and impolite. You are a role model to people. You should therefore be ashamed.

I'm nothing but honest. It's neurological and arguably the defining characteristic of my life. I'm literal, too. You could probably model me using a few Python classes.

Dr. Aivazis surely could have done so. He was sharp. And he worshiped the language that you created. I consider it pretty good too. Not as much pure fun in Python as in Perl. But Python is more useful than C++, which I view as the Devil's Playground.

The Python language is interesting. You, not so much :P

You were never going to “appear” in a “project” except by way of mention of a story about tuna fish sandwiches. And, if the tuna fish story is not correct, it will not be used.

If the story *is* correct, it *will* be used. As you and I probably will not talk further (to be honest, I prefer to speak with friendly people) I'll phone Dr. Aivazis and trust whatever he tells me about the matter.

Further remarks from you, Guido, are not requested or desired. Ignore everything else as you ignored my offer to do precisely as you wished. But do not write back.

I have little interest in your career or personal life. But as you've reached conclusions that are relevant to studies of Autism and literal communication, and as you've referred to me as dishonest, I feel that I'm entitled to quote you in this context.

This exchange will be blogged after all. And it will be distributed otherwise as I see fit. It will be shared, in particular, with advocates who are interested in reactions to Autistic (i.e., honest) correspondence.

I respect your achievements, and I consider you kind to have talked at all, but I did not deserve to be referred to in such a manner.

You continue to have my respect. You are an important figure in a pantheon that will be remembered for at least one or two generations. But, of course, you and possibly I are only human.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

130306 10:10pm Letter from Guido van Rossum to me:

I wrote about my feelings. You can't deny those. I now repeat my insistence that you don't publish or quote from email I wrote to you in good faith.

130306 11:24pm Letter from me to Guido van Rossum:

Guido's remarks about “denying feelings” seemed like nonsense. It wasn't even clear what it might mean to “deny” them.

I decided Guido meant that I should show respect towards his feelings. This was reasonable. But I felt that his feelings didn't give him the right to speak as he had.

Guido, I like you, I think. But I wrote to you in “good faith” myself.

I don't deny the validity of your feelings. But I offered to do exactly as you wished. I told you that I wanted to be sure you'd received my offer to comply with your request. How many “normals” would be as polite to you as this?

You responded by suggesting that I was dishonest. All that you needed to say was “O.K.”

It was pointless to discuss my career. But, by now, I was “steamed”. Not thinking objectively. I asked myself, who did Guido think that he was? I'd written to this person politely, after being urged to do so, and I'd been told that I was dishonest.

I felt deprecated. So I felt the need to assert that I was a peer.

I'm no college student engaging in meaningless midnight bull sessions. I'm a developer of your generation whose resume has been called “amazing” twice recently. Few people know of me but I've done my share.

My code handled half of the U.S. vote at one point, the DTIC used my code to convert the government's old microfilm into microfiche, and I did the initial design for one of Adobe's protocols. I simply borrowed it from BSD of course. We probably have associates in common, not counting Dr. Aivazis.

But I wanted nothing from you or about you that wasn't appropriate.

I told you the simple truth. To explain further, though you are not entitled to know this, I wanted my resume to be honest.

Do you follow? I'd been claiming something that wasn't true. That I had a connection to Python that wasn't there. It was unintentional and I wanted to tell the truth. So I contacted you to find out the truth. And to find out if a little story about sandwiches was true too.

I just wanted to tell the truth. I didn't deserve to be designated as dishonest.

The “project”, aside from correcting an error in my resume, is about the physical and emotional abuse of Autistic children and adults. People who suffer every day. It has nothing to do with you.

You know, my feelings are valid too. Has that occurred to you?

If somebody doesn't care about your feelings, should you care about theirs? I think that you should. However, it can be difficult.

I was irritated enough now to throw everything and the kitchen sink into the discussion.

I'd never deprecate your feelings. But you've referred to me as dishonest when honesty is my nature. Honesty has cost me all that I had. My entire life. Why do you suppose that I need the resume?

You are approaching retirement. I didn't create a language but the World reflects some of my small achievements. Yet I must start over now. And I wanted nothing from you but to be sure that I was speaking accurately.

I respect you, but I don't owe you anything further. I'll state publicly that you went out on a limb to speak to a stranger; but distribution of this exchange might help abused Autistic kids. As you have been impolite, their feelings matter more to me than yours do.

And don't take the position that you've been misused. I approached you in “good faith” and I offered to do exactly as you wished.

It isn't clear why Guido ignored my offer to do exactly as he wished. The offer was clear and concise. But people are often like this. If they make up their minds about something, facts don't matter.

If I come up with useful Python patches, I'll send them to you. Other than that, we have little further to discuss. But I'll add that Python 3 should have been more backwards compatible.

I've been working on my own Linux distro for 20 years so I'm entitled to comment on things like breaking compatibility. It's rarely a good idea. Look at what Perl 6, a true monster, has done to my beloved Perl 5.

Good Day, Sir. And I have feelings, too.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)

130307 8:44am Letter from Guido to me:

I apologize. Do you want a longer response?

130307 1:18pm Letter from me to Guido:

Guido, please excuse the delay in this response and delays in the future. There are minor complications IRL that presently have most of my attention.

You said, “I apologize. Do you want a longer response?”

The next few paragraphs were intended to be objective and polite.

I'm no longer sure, after decades, of what apologies signify. Or how to respond to them. They are a formal transaction but they take place in a space which is invisible to me. So, if it's all right, I'd like to disregard that part.

I don't believe that the space in question actually exists. It's simply pretend. But that's a thread for the book. I hope to map out some of the imaginary spaces in a manner that hasn't been attempted previously.

I'll say, though, that with effort I can perceive the assumptions that people operate under and the conclusions that they work backwards from.

And I understand, though it's difficult to accept, that as soon as conclusions are reached, based on pattern processing that dates back to the veldt, further input is discarded.

In some situations, moments after the start, people don't perceive words that are written or spoken. Or actions, actually. Recollections may contradict film of events.

I was still feeling irritated, so I added the kitchen sink again:

The issue has cost me my life. A minor kerfuffle is small potatoes by comparison.

My assumption is that we may now, at last, conclude this discussion. Note that I tried to end it a number of letters back.

But if you wish to understand the context behind our interaction, which was more tiring than expected, you may Google (tm) regarding the inventor of the Amazon Kindle, my Brother Ken Kiraly, another Brother, Tom Kiraly, former Vice President of Humana Corporation, and legal actions intended to stop the book I've referred to.

I don't “want a longer response”. You're welcome to write again if you wish thoughts on other matters from somebody who has worked with FOSS for decades but isn't beholden to the usual camps. However, I have what I need presently regarding Dr. Aivazis.

The next part was true but I worded it too bluntly:

And, though I'll offer you assistance in other areas if it's requested, I'm not greatly interested in you. I'd prefer to speak with Andrew Tanenbaum.

But, again, though I feel you didn't process what I was saying to you and worked backwards from conclusions, I'll state that it was very nice of you to respond to the initial inquiry yourself as opposed to delegating it to a subordinate or associate.

I've edited my resume and removed, for the time being, a reference therein to Dr. Aivazis and Python. If I speak with Dr. Aivazis, at some point, I'll advise you regarding whether or not the two of you were actually associated and the tuna fish sandwiches existed.

Additionally, if I ever produce something related to Python that might be of interest at your level, I might carbon it to you. However, this is unlikely. I've been working primarily on ways to package a sort of Small Python, Python 2, and Python 3 together for my Linux distro (LACLIN). I've also been patching code to improve forwards and backwards compatibility. This sort of thing isn't novel.

Regards, Robert Kiraly (the Old Coder)