3 ms·

This analogy falls flat when you compare the levels of Unix 'bullshittery' to a shop. In a shop you have a limited number of already working machines that are r

by dexiwz 11y ago

This analogy falls flat when you compare the levels of Unix 'bullshittery' to a shop. In a shop you have a limited number of already working machines that are readily visible. In Unix, you not only have to know how to use the machines, but how to install them, how to repair them, how to select similar, yet slightly different ones, how to copy your machines and make them run the same way in a different location. And on top of that to a novice all of the machines are hidden, and you have to read manuals/tutorials/forums to even know that they exist. Unix tools can sometimes be horribly obtuse to use when first starting out. As you get use to them, you may discover the elegance of simple programs with pipable output, but their beauty is not readily obvious. Going from Windows installers to apt-get to git clone/make/setup, is a long process. Expecting students to already know this eats up time.

vacri 11y ago
You're talking about a mythical shop which already has all the tools - very few shops have them all. Similarly, there are plenty of physical tools which are not obvious to use; my housemate tinkers in the shed with wood and he's got a variety of tools, some of which I'm nonplussed in how to use. Plenty of the tools are hidden, whether 'hidden' is defined as 'not present' or 'unclear usage'. Likewise methodology. As a carpenter you might wonder how to curve wood. You might even hear about steam being involved. But unless you're finding out from someone who's already done it, it's not that simple to just steam a bit of wood and usefully bend it from first principles. Hell, even just using a chisel for a novice is easier if you talk to someone first - especially a metalworking chisel.
32bitkid 11y ago
Of course, the analogy falls down–like all analogies–at some point. However, there is a whole realm of industrial fabrication beyond what is available at a simple/hobby shop. To put it a different way: there are tools that I want to use when I am making one of something. Then there are different tools when I am making 10 of something. Again at 100, 1,000, and 1,000,000. I've been a teacher, and I think there is a inherent conflict: As a teacher, I want my students to learn _how_ to do something, but I also want them to do things "right". Those two goals are often at odds. Sometimes the best way to learn is to do it "wrong"; preferably in a safe environment where doing it wrong won't kill/maim you. I think the injustice is trying to teach students how to use the "for a million" tools (which they will _need_ later), when they really struggling with the idea of making one.

by dexiwz 11y ago

vacri 11y ago

You're talking about a mythical shop which already has all the tools - very few shops have them all. Similarly, there are plenty of physical tools which are not obvious to use; my housemate tinkers in the shed with wood and he's got a variety of tools, some of which I'm nonplussed in how to use. Plenty of the tools are hidden, whether 'hidden' is defined as 'not present' or 'unclear usage'. Likewise methodology. As a carpenter you might wonder how to curve wood. You might even hear about steam being involved. But unless you're finding out from someone who's already done it, it's not that simple to just steam a bit of wood and usefully bend it from first principles. Hell, even just using a chisel for a novice is easier if you talk to someone first - especially a metalworking chisel.

32bitkid 11y ago

Of course, the analogy falls down–like all analogies–at some point. However, there is a whole realm of industrial fabrication beyond what is available at a simple/hobby shop. To put it a different way: there are tools that I want to use when I am making one of something. Then there are different tools when I am making 10 of something. Again at 100, 1,000, and 1,000,000. I've been a teacher, and I think there is a inherent conflict: As a teacher, I want my students to learn _how_ to do something, but I also want them to do things "right". Those two goals are often at odds. Sometimes the best way to learn is to do it "wrong"; preferably in a safe environment where doing it wrong won't kill/maim you. I think the injustice is trying to teach students how to use the "for a million" tools (which they will _need_ later), when they really struggling with the idea of making one.