This article aims to enhance the understanding of programmers and scientists regarding the profound significance of their identity as creators. As stated in the Holy Bible, “God made us in His likeness,” suggesting that while we do not equate ourselves with the Creator, we possess capabilities reflective of our divine origin.

In the beginning, the earth was void. God envisioned creation and conceptualized a plan. The need for beings to inhabit the earth and exercise dominion led to the creation of humanity. However, God did not remain at the conceptual stage; He crafted a mental blueprint for the structure of humankind. Imagining the beauty of a being created in His own image, He sought a means to express Himself to the world.

With this model in mind, God designed what we now recognize as human beings. He understood that humans require breath, sustenance, thought, and creativity. Aware of these essential needs, He set to work, choosing not to delegate this task to angels. Instead, He invested His effort into realizing the model He had envisioned. God meticulously formed the mold, combining features with exceptional specifications. Finally, He breathed life into humanity, and thus “Adam” became a living being, embodying the life, form, and functionality of God.

The insights above may appear theoretical to some, but they clearly illustrate the parallels between God’s creation and the work of programmers and scientists today. Just as God modeled structures, objects, and abstract forms of energy during creation, programmers also create complex systems using computers.

At the core of any good software program is a main class. This main class serves as the fundamental representation of the entire system or software. Essentially, the name of the main class reflects the software itself; when mentioned, it should evoke recognition, much like responding to one’s name. The main class abstracts the primary object and encompasses various compositions, properties, and associations.

It is crucial to note that every software program must have at least one class, which becomes the base class. This base class provides a necessary identity for the formation or creation of objects.

The CLASS as a standalone can be defined as an abstract representation of an Object.

Before a programmer begins their work, they must carefully plan, understanding the procedures and steps involved in the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC). The project starts with identifying a need, which leads to a solution and, ultimately, the conceptualization of an idea. This idea is the foundation upon which the final product will be built. The programmer must start somewhere, thinking about a formula on how to build around the idea.

For instance, when developing a soccer game, the programmer would code the main class with the name of the game, such as “PRO SOCCER.” Additional classes could represent the players on the field, like Messi and Ronaldo. Configuring each player involves a detailed process, as each has unique playing styles and characteristics. The programmer must input the specific properties and compositions of each player within their respective modules. Messi for example does not have the same style of play as Ronaldo and in turn the Programmer decisively inputs all the compositions and properties of each player on their particular Module/Object.

This brings me to the discussion on Attributes of the Object to be created.

An attribute defines the characteristics that make a module unique. While different modules can share the same attribute—like Ronaldo and Bale both having a running speed of 90 m/s—attributes are vital for giving meaning and purpose to an object. Attributes determine whether a player is tall or short, fair or dark.

Attributes also give rise to methods. Methods, or functions, represent the actions that can be performed on an object based on its composition and structure.

For example, consider the action “SLAP”: if Person A slaps Person B, B experiences an impulse and reacts by shouting, “OUCH.” In this scenario, Person A triggers a method in Person B, resulting in a specific response. Similarly, in programming, when a method is invoked, it produces an outcome based on the input given. That Impulse can be termed a function or a method. Whenever a method is called on a program, it produces an effective response considering the input from the operating party.

We encounter this in our everyday experiences with video games. When a player taps the “Block” command, the character shoots the ball in a designated direction. The underlying code that executes this action is what we refer to as a method or function.

As humans, we were not only created to exist but to be creative, much like God. It is essential to discover our potential and take decisive action. Programmers have a significant role to play in this creative endeavor!!

The post Understanding computer programming from the lens of human creation appeared first on Izunna Okpala | AI/ML Engineer.

Without the conception of an abstract idea, there won’t be a tangible output. It all starts from the mind, and believe you me, anything the mind can conceive is possible. I still stand on the premise that all things are possible to them that BELIEVE. Another important factor to note having studied many great men in the Industry is that they started the journey without knowing the actual end but with strong belief/faith that the dream and vision is worth millions.
The question to answer now is!!

1. Do we want this?
2. Do we need this?
3. What are the positive effects?
4. What are the negative effects?
5. What does it show us?
6. How can we migrate to that future?

Many religious scholars have condemned the use of technology for human advancement, and I’m not of the opinion that they’re wrong because everybody is entitled to his or her opinion. However, the fact still remains: they can’t change the future; rather, people can change themselves, the way they perceive the world, and their perspectives towards tech dynamics. This is clearly recorded in the Holy book (the Bible) as one of the signs of the end times.

Truth be told, we have so many signs regarding the end times. As I continue my discussion, I vividly see a world where there won’t be any need for physically operating computers/machines. History has taught me a lesson: never doubt the possibility of anything. I read about the days of Mainframe Computers where a single computer was contained in a large room. We moved to the era of Minicomputers, where computers were still large but considerably smaller in size. We progressed to the Desktop, Laptop, and Handheld era. Now, what do you think the next in line will be? We see some handheld computers that are as slim as a broom. I tell you the truth, and I believe it 100%: the era of Airtop computers is coming, where there won’t be a need to hold the computers with physical hands. The computer can be held up by a force greater than the magnetic force. We normally believe that “what goes up must surely come down,” but scientists have gone back to work to explore the possibility of making what goes up stay up; a technology I believe was used by those exploring the moon.

The next 20 years are poised to be revolutionary, particularly in the programming and communication. I envision a future where traditional devices, like cell phones, will no longer be necessary. Instead, we might see a world where communication occurs through advanced technologies embedded directly within the human. Imagine a scenario where individuals rely on chips or signals implanted in their brains, enabling them to interact seamlessly with others without the need for physical devices.

For instance, when Mr. A wishes to connect with Mr. B, he simply thinks of Mr. B. This thought is transmitted through an intricate network of neural signals that Mr. B’s brain can interpret. Such technology would facilitate instant communication, allowing for conversations to occur in a mental space, devoid of language barriers or misunderstandings that often accompany verbal communication. Mr. B would receive an intuitive signal—a gentle vibration or pulse of thought—that alerts him to Mr. A’s intention to communicate. In this context, discussions would be a reflection of deeper thought processes rather than mere spoken words. The technology could analyze and measure thought patterns, accurately capturing the essence of what one intends to convey. This would move beyond simple phrases, enabling nuances of meaning, emotions, and intentions to be shared more fully and openly.

As I ponder these advancements, I find myself questioning how they will shape our interactions and relationships. How will our understanding of privacy change if our thoughts can be accessed so easily? What ethical implications will arise from technologies that can read or interpret thoughts?

I invite insights from all walks of life. Consider perspectives beyond technology—such as religion, societal values, medicine, and inventions. How will these revolutions in communication and technology influence our culture, our values, and our very understanding of what it means to be human?

The post Imagining 20 Years Ahead: The Future of Information Technology appeared first on Izunna Okpala | AI/ML Engineer.