Geometron: A Geometry Based Meta-language

We are told that computers have been a revolutionary technology because they enable more powerful "computation" than ever before. A close examination of the specific applications that have revolutionized society shows that this is false. Nature and technology can compute just fine without us. We know based on our current world view that all mechanical, electrical, chemical, fluid and biological interactions may be viewed as computation.
What a "computer" actually does is communicate. It creates an information channel between the human mind and the system that is computing, and creates languages that allows us to modify that channel at will. Furthermore, it allows us to use this to communicate with each other, again by allowing us to not just use our existing languages to but to create new ones.
Consider what "computing" technologies have had the largest impact: graphical user interfaces, object oriented programming, ethernet, the tablet computer, the touchscreen, the LCD and LED display, Facebook, Microsoft, uber, eBay, amazon, paypal, twitter, and many others--none of these things are based on actual computation in the original Turing machine definition. They are based on creating new ways to communicate, building their own specific languages for a specific task.
"Experts" in computer concepts continue to be surprised that the technologies that change everything are based on small differences in things like brand and marketing rather than "pure" technological superiority. But this is based on a false dichotomy. If we view the computing system as being a combination of the machine and the users, things like brand and marketing are actually a part of the information processor, and are just as central to its functioning as things like clock speed or memory density.
We must remember that most of our core ideas about computer science from the middle part of the last century were worked out by either spies(anyone who was anyone in computation or applied math worked for the intelligence community during WWII) or phone company employees(Bell Labs). They should be forgiven for not seeing the big picture of a system that did not yet exist in their day, but they missed the largest and most powerful part of any computer system: us. Humanity. The modern "computer" is not useful because it computes in some classical mathematical sense. It is useful because of how it process human information.
This leads to the core problem Geometron is designed to address: the rapid construction of specific languages for human and machine communication. Right now we have a multitude of very specific languages we use for many tasks: hail a car from Uber or Lyft, tell Amazon to ship a book, send an emoticon to a Facebook friend, or add a hashtag to a tweet. All of these are constructed by large slow moving companies that separate the user from the developer. This system has become the nervous system of our society and the distinct separation between the developers and the users is at the core of the problems with that society.
I want to say a little more about how broadly I'm defining "language" here. I would say that almost everything people do in a modern industrial society is effectively some form of information processing. Increasingly we find that people in almost every different field who are at the top of their respective fields mostly make something similar to Powerpoint slides and move those slides around. This system, based on a few words and a lot of pictures powers big companies, finance, government, the creation of new startup companies, and the funding of non profits and religions. It governs our politics, culture and art. And yet very little attention has been focused on trying to improve the core structure of this. We find people solving billion dollar problems(like building a quantum computer) using a 100 dollar piece of software designed by people who know nothing about their industry(Powerpoint), and people making huge amounts of money for very little as middle men, simply by "owning" the pipe that others use to communicate.
What I have attempted to accomplish by creating Geometron is a generalized alternative. I want to allow all users of machines to be able to create our own languages on the fly, so that the people who use all these languages can have control over their own informational environment. If done correctly, this project can address the core injustice of our age: inequality. Put another way, the goal is to democratize information processing.
And how do we do this?
  1. First of all we must recognize that geometric thinking is more natural for most people than numerical. People object when I say this because they found concepts in school involving trigonometry, geometric proofs or computation of areas and volumes to be difficult. But that's not what I mean. I mean people recognize shapes and symbols and pictures more effectively than numbers, and those things carry a more useful meaning in most cases. It's not accident that 50 years ago computers worked with punch cards, pure binary data, and now are largely used to work with an image with a few words of text over it(this describes both a PowerPoint slide and an Internet meme). Emoticons, glyphs, memes, gifs, slide decks, icons--these are the things that make up the most powerful part of the modern computer, and we should build language accordingly.
  2. The "Open Web", consisting of HTML5, Javascript, and CSS are the most powerful machine language in history by far. Linguists have a saying: "a language is a dialect with an army." Number of users and the power of those users in society determines the power of a language. No other system of communication even comes close to the scale of use of this system: if you make something using the open web that runs on the standard browsers, you have something that can run on any phone, tablet, computer, game system, server, and a whole lot of other things, and you have something that has a huge social infrastructure built in to keep that whole system connected and running. Even as the specs of this system evolve it seems unlikely to be surpassed by anything in the foreseeable future.
  3. We as a society already know way more than any of us, or even a reasonably sized group of us(say 100 people) can get a mental handle on. We know enough to provide infinite plenty for all humans, but we can't get there because none of us control our technology. Thus the major task of our time is not to find still more information, as we are taught in school(I was trained as a scientist), but to *organize* the information we already have.
  4. If we want to democratize control of information is must be as "light weight" as possible, and as physical as possible. It's much easier to save, load, read, and encrypt a a piece of information a few characters long than a gigabyte file. Part of why the modern html-based web is so powerful is that we can use hyperlinks to existing resources as shortcuts, avoiding re-saving the same huge block of data by simply pointing to that information. I use that principle here repeatedly, making pointers both to information outside of Geometron and mostly to other elements of Geometron itself. Also, rather than hide the physical layer in some mysterious hardware buried inside the machine, I seek to create a system of storing and recalling information that connects directly to the open web by encoding information in physical objects by cutting into solids like plastics, stone, ceramics, metal, glass etc, using simple machines controlled from the browser and reading them out using cameras also controlled from the browser. This can create a physical data layer for the open web which is not just easy and secure and free, but can actually last for thousands of years rather than single digits of years as is common now. Furthermore, the integration of physical data into machines can democratize the process of industrial production by integrating the documentation of building a thing into the thing.
The above list constitutes a set of motivating *ideas* toward creating Geometron, but there are also a set of principles that have guided me, which I propose to keep in mind in further development. They are three positive rules and three negative rules: