> Mastodon
> "Doesn't have algorithms"

You do not know how a computer works.
@lanodan given Donald E. Knuth's Definition of an algorithm vs. what he calls a a computational method, one might be tempted to deduce that personal computers and alike (cell phone etc..) run almost no algorithm and mostly computational methods, see scan
@fblchrstn We have programs that are known to end.

The QuickSort *algorithm* for example given a finite amount of data is also finite and determinist.
@lanodan sure, but if new data are constantly fed into a program (toots, images etc..) which are by their order unpredictable, what will be first on the list becomes unpredictable.
@fblchrstn Uuuuh.

Are you not familiar with how logging works?
@lanodan not sure what part of logging i would need to understand, but the point is that a program that produces a different log (such as a web server) when it gets different requests makes it pretty unpredictable what will be written in the log-file, for example it will impossible to predict which IP-address will appear in the logs of a web server in the next second. in that sense I would say a server log is a reactive process.
@fblchrstn The ordering, the actual thing that's part of the sorting is static and quite deterministic.
It's based on the time at which posts gets received, the content doesn't matters, mathematicians have been sorting fruits for ages with glossing over details that weren't used in their algorithms.
@lanodan I agree that the ordering is deterministic if the data is known beforehand, than i can run the whole thing over and over again and i will always get the same order. But even the time at which data comes in is unpredictable, so i would stick with Knuths definition that the log continually interacts with its environment, and thus qualifies as a reactive process.