"The UNIX command line and most programming languages are ineffective and slow tools, because they do not make use of the brain’s ability to process visual inputs quickly in parallel and contextualize large amounts of details into a cohesive idea."
"Too much reading!"
"Linux programmers are stupid."
This reads like satire. Surely this must be satire?
It's not satire, it's somebody with high education and low experience.
To quote from the 'About' section,
>To achieve this goal, I am developing a file system to replace the hierarchical file system paradigm used on every computer since the 1970s. I am also developing a human-computer interface to replace and extend the mouse and keyboard, which have kept the desktop experience from moving forward for nearly 50 years. I am working hard to move the desktop computing experience forward, breaking it out of the confines of tradition and integrating the full potential of advances in technology into the desktop experience.
It's essentially the cathedral mindset (vs. Linux' bazaar mindset). It's about designing a system according to the author's best knowledge vs. evolving a system according to both known and also unknown constraints.
I'm not sure, it sounds like someone blaming everyone else for his own mistakes and willing to spend more time writing this random rant rather than spending a bit of time learning things he's not familiar with.
Golly. Persistent live usb has been a thing for like, ever right?
It makes me feel a little bit like open source projects aren't doing documentation right when someone could have easily googled for this if they only knew the right vocabulary.
But, I'm not super worried about having lost this specific person since they're so quick to call linux as a whole "crap" and developers "stupid." Maybe after undergrad and some time in the field they will come around.
> Golly. Persistent live usb has been a thing for like, ever right?
Not only that, but it's definitely possible to install, e.g. Debian onto an external drive and not touch the internal bootloader. It seems that the author ran into a limitation with either Linux Mint or perhaps Ubuntu.
Its bizarre how often I see programmers complain about CLIs given the nature of the work. A CLI is just higher-order programming. At what threshold does the author find programming an appropriate solution? Perhaps we should do everything on paper in metal filing cabinets to maximize the stimulation we provide our visual cortex.
I'm not personally averse to GUI usage. It just seems to me that complaints of "too many options" are common in regard to CLIs. And yet to me it seems that CLIs have significantly fewer practical permutations than a Turing-complete programming language.
that's a good point. if only the CLI had the consistency of a real programming language. even PHP for all its flaws is more consistent than the commandline.
don't get me wrong. i live on the terminal. and the problem with inconsistency of commands, a GUI won't fix those. on the contrary, GUIs are probably worse, especially the web based GUIS we are getting everywhere now.
Could this article be summed up as “someone tries to install Linux onto hardware that wasn't designed for it and did reasonably well considering”?
IMHO if you want to use linux as a day to day operating system you are better off buying it pre-installed on supported hardware from someone like Dell or System76.
That it runs on a mac at all is a testament to a volunteer community.
The argument made that everything should be in a GUI sounds like a throwback to the 90s.
I think that Microsoft’s recent efforts to improve their CLI support on Windows are a good indicator that for a certain set of problems CLIs are just less restricted.
GUIs were there first on windows if you prefer otherwise but still Microsoft needed to add decent CLI support to stay competitive.
2. Painful to you does not mean universally qualified "SUCKS". I'm at a loss what the alternative is, maybe you can't understand a CLI, or something.
3. I figured it out. Here I fixed the headline:
"Understanding what the computer does is too hard SUCKS, and the only thing that can be done is to learn stuff"
Thinking one could use Linux on Apple's proprietary hardware without non-trivial problems was the first mistake. Really should have thought twice about installing Linux to an external drive on a system with it's own internal drive & bootloader too.
i did the same, it worked just fine. the only downside was that the USB device i used was to slow, so the result wasn't practical. and, i just can't deal with dual booting. i want my systems to be always on (or quickly restore state from sleep or hibernate)
Surely a better solution in this case would be to run linux inside a VM?
I ran this way for a couple of years on a black macbook, and it has a few advantages, such as the VM just suspending rather than rebooting if for some reason the host OS reboots, eg to install updates.
Now, there's docker et al too.
Personally I've always found setting up any complex dual boot configuration fraught.
And linux makes some things quite complex to configure (eg sound), requiring you to look online for solutions. Unfortunately those are often in the form of rambling and often outdated forum topics, or "educational" blog posts that start with "First, an introduction to computer sound hardware ...", when all you want is the cli command to change volume.
Wow, a computer something-ist trying to be a neuroscientist.
So maybe the visual cortex is 30% of the brain, it is also very coarse and imprecise. It sometimes ignores large part of the visual field. It is very immune to noise and that's why it is imprecise. It does much processing without you being conscious and that's why there are so many "optical illusions".
On the other hand audition (when working, not my case) is very precise (sensitivity), has very good frequency selectivity, huge dynamic.
If you want to run an OS from a removable external hard drive, you put the bootloader on the external hard drive too.
In his case, taking the easy option when he wanted a complex solution was his error. He should have selected the 'something else' option. Yes, he needed extra knowledge to pick that selection, but that is where Google is your friend.
Linux is User-Friendly. But it is very selective in choosing its friends.
Maybe this moron could have answered "no" to the question asking if he wants to install the boot loader on all drives but clearly, he's to dumb to do so just as he's too dumb to restore the uefi boot loader in os x (system settings-> syrup m startup disk). I stopped reading after that. People this clueless should not use computers without supervision especially Linux.
I think linux would do fine. As long as the different hardware you want to run it on is compatible with the version installed on your external disk. Which wasn't the case here apparently.
"Too much reading!"
"Linux programmers are stupid."
This reads like satire. Surely this must be satire?