JayM wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 1:57 amI noticed that a few normal, reasonable, intelligent people seem to throw their common sense and their ability to think and reason right out the window as soon as a computer enters the equation. They can no longer even read and follow instructions. It's as though they've convinced themselves on a subconscious level
ive talked about this for years, im trying to write a (short, simple) book about it as we speak.
computers werent really hard to use in the 80s. when i was 5, it was NOT HARD to type:
pbrush and hit enter. that was all it took to run what is now called "mspaint." oh, its fair to say the disk had to be in the drive. the door on the drive had to be down. see? already two more things that could go wrong. the latter of which was solved by 3.5" floppy drives (they latched automatically-- no drive door.)
they werent hard to use, but they were very intimidating. funnily enough, no amount of user-friendly design has stopped this trepidation. and in the 1990s, schools stopped teaching computer literacy and moved to application training. this basically turned schools into microsoft salespeople-- any near-monopoly turned into a complete monopoly in schools.
and with that monopoly, users could be dragged from one design/ui fad to the next, meaning that the application training (learning on the most superficial level) was only good for a couple years, before microsoft changed things again. you see that happening now in free software as well, as influence from corporate monopolies increase. but its harder to pull off when things can be forked.
users are kept helpless, which means they need more and more help from the companies exploiting them. teachers are also kept helpless-- they didnt receive adequate computer training, and wont be able to provide it. but at least that will vindicate their own lack of understanding-- they will produce students who are as helpless as they are.
i dont blame the teachers as much as the industry. but we
must have computer literate teachers or the public will continue to be yoked by these companies promising to "help".
one thing im not against is user-friendly design. im against monopoly; without it, you can have geek friendly designs-- those will actually come first, because thats what geeks will use to create friendlier designs (sometimes.)
only when there is monopolistic influence do the superficial layers become all-important at the expense of the necessities.
the problem started with application training instead of computer education. reverting back to computer education means we need to
undo the following:
1. the user cant be afraid of a computer without a working hard drive. they dont need to be able to install an os, but they should learn what a live distro is.
2. the user must know what a command line is, because a ridiculous industry is built on the fear of it. they dont need to be proficient, they just need to know enough to not panic or fear it, or think it means "the computer is broken."
3. the best way to increase computer literacy is to teach a small amount of simple coding. again, in the 80s it did not take much.
computers do not run software applications-- they run code. software applications are when code is put together to emulate a product. and thats fine, but teaching this twisting of basic facts benefits monopolistic companies more than it benefits people trying to help the user instead of yoking them.
as for how to make this happen, this is the plan ive spent years tweaking slightly:
http://techrights.org/wp-content/upload ... freesw.png
i started out trying to promote free software. i looked for various ways to do it, i talked to people, i wrote letters to the library, i offered to help people dual boot, i showed people my computer running free software. i showed them the fsf website.
nobody wants to install an os.
most people dont even want a computer. but they have one, because "it does stuff." they dont want the computer, they want the stuff that it does. this is an important distinction, because you or i might want a computer. because we associate the computer with its abilities.
they dont. at least not all of them.
"does it do facebook?" (i hate facebook as much as anybody, but i know how many people want to know this, despite the fact that i recommend people not use it.) it used to be email, now its facebook.
even operating systems say more about a computer than the computer itself. im a mac-- im a pc. i do facebook. this is about software, not hardware. most people dont think about hardware when they think about computing. they think in terms of applications, as theyre trained to do.
all the same, they know when the computer is broken-- thats typically when their software stops working. it might not have anything to with the computer itself. or perhaps they spilled something. but i stopped fixing windows computers, i stopped trying to convince people to dual-boot.
i simply told people with working computers that i take used computers and fix them and give them away. then i would take their used computers, fix them and give them away. the way i did this was to wait for someone to have computer problems and say "you can borrow this one. if you like it, you can keep it."
most people dont want a computer, let alone a spare. so they like knowing they dont "have to" keep the free computer. thats the only way some will let an extra one into their home. however once theyre happy with it, they want to keep it. so they have the option (it was my intention all along to let them keep it.)
and this was how i promoted free software, specifically debian. until about 2015, when i quit to design simple programming languages instead.
im still looking for a good distro to replace debian. i do think of the debian-based distros, mx and antix have the most promise. i spent a lot of time with devuan. i developed my favourite programming language on devuan. i havent really used devuan for more than a few minutes in well over a year.
we need computer literate people to help us make it through the next era of free software development. we cant rely on schools to produce them. we cant rely on our software to remain free-as-in-freedom unless we stand up for users, as well as ourselves.
but we need to try to solve the literacy problem. and thats what ive spent the past few years trying to rally people about. we dont need them to all be developers, just like traditional literacy isnt about getting everyone to write a novel.
we need to find a cure for the visceral fear of learning that schools instill in computer users. we can still make user-friendly software, but we should not cater to the fearmongering and encouraged helplessness that marketers and monopolies rely on. if we were
all part-time educators in this, we could produce an abundance of education.
and make that part of the gnu/whatever-kernel experience. (i dont think linux is going to be the most popular kernel in 10-15 years.)
i already know what sorts of reasons people think this wont work, or why they think its wrong. ive already taken those reasons into account when i say these things. but simple educational languages are a requirement. all ui is based on communication. but too much of it is designed as a way of avoiding basic literacy. thats fine for beginners, but it robs people who have already used computers for years. they deserve better options, and training that is less incomplete.
