• 0 Posts
  • 92 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 14th, 2024

help-circle


  • When I met a close friend’s husband at an event, somehow PCs and Linux came up. He asked if I’m a Linux user (which I like to think you can’t immediately tell); I assume he wanted to build some nerd cred. I said “yeah, I technically have Linux with me right now”. He asked what I meant, so I pulled out the Steam Deck. He was unfamiliar, so I briefly explained.

    When he heard it’s (obviously) a commercial product, he actually pretended to faint. And then kept acting as if I had personally insulted him, not in a joking way. I had clearly failed the purity test in that moment.

    It was a strange experience. Not even in hackerspaces I’d ever had a conversation like that. So these people are rare but they do exist.










  • Older people rely on logic. And most interfaces are the opposite of logical.

    Younger people have this idea of "press a bunch of buttons and once you see how it works, then memorize the steps ".

    That’s the exact opposite of my experience.

    I tried to explain Windows logically to the seniors in my family. This is a window. This is the taskbar, it shows your open windows. This is a folder, it contains your documents.

    Every time we would start over with these abstractions which are supposed to make logical sense, the very foundation of Windows’ early success with casual users. None of it ever stuck with them.

    They would instead write down every minor step to achieve a specific goal in a specific way, so they could basically control Windows without paying any attention to context presented on the screen. That’s the only thing that worked for them.





  • The mere presence of disagreement doesn’t make freethought. If someone actively resists engaging with counter-arguments and scientific research because it would undermine their controversial public profile with a certain audience, it doesn’t serve any legitimate interest to further platform their deliberate ignorance.

    I don’t know enough about the other two to speak on their relevant conduct, but the case of Richard Dawkins is quite clear-cut. Hence my comment pointing out how your criticism of the FFRF’s decision lacks awareness of the context that it was made in by providing this exact context to you and others.

    I hope this helps you to understand my point’s connection to your original comment, if you really weren’t just playing dumb with me.