I'm an exception. Terrible sense of direction... My sister in law is an exception too. I swear she had a virtual map in her head that was always perfectly oriented.
I actually prefer having a GPS map north up, so that I can train my brain to have a non-relative mental map so that once I orient myself to the compass I can figure out where to go.
As it is, my mental map bears little resemblance to reality.
It's hard for me to grasp what this negotiation would look like. Particularly with objects that haven't encountered each other. It just seems like such a huge problem.
I don't really know anything at all about microbiology, but maybe climbing the ladder of abstraction to small insects like ants. There is clearly negotiation and communication happening there, but I have to think it's pretty well bounded. Even if one ant encountered another ant, and needed to communicate where food was, it's with a fixed set of semantics that are already understood by both parties.
Or with honeybees, doing the communication dance. I have no idea if the communication goes beyond "food here" or if it's "we need to decide who to send out."
It seems like you have to have learning in the object to really negotiate with something it hasn't encountered before. Maybe I'm making things too hard.
Maybe "can we communicate" is the first negotiation, and if not, give up.
I need to read what you've said regarding simulations and pseudotime, but I've been wondering if this is along the same lines has as an HDL like VHDL/Verilog/SystemVerilog.
I do chip implementations in those languages, which of course involves simulation and a time concept. I get the idea that is not the sort of simulation you mean, but I'm not sure. The other thought I had was simulation more in the SPICE sense that iterate toward a solution in steps.
Any chance you could briefly clarify, and/or toss out a resource that points in the right direction?
I guess I would more specifically like to know what pain points drove Microsoft to even try such a massive change.