RafaelFajardo

Programmers, computer scientists, and critical theorists have reduced software to a recipe, a set of instructions, substituting space/text for time/process. The current common-sense definition of software as a “set of instructions that direct a comptuer to do a specific task” and the OED definition of software as “the programs and procedures required to enable a computer to perform a specific task, as opposed to the physical components of the system” both posit software as cause, as what drives computation. Similarly, alexander Galloway argues, “code draws a line between what is material and what is active, in essence saying that writing (hardward) cannot do anything, but must be transformed into code (software) to be effective… . Code is a language, but a very special kind of language. Code is the only language that is executable … code is the first language that actually does what it says. This view of software as “actually doing what it says” (emphasis added) both separates instruction from, and makes software substitute for, execution. It assumes no difference between source code and execution, between instruction and result.