3 ms·

So tech people have a big responsibility to make these "random Joe and Jane" educated, at least just enough that they can make more informed choices and learn f

So tech people have a big responsibility to make these "random Joe and Jane" educated, at least just enough that they can make more informed choices and learn further, if they should so choose. Is each tech person at least making a few other close non-tech friend/family aware about the hot issues in computing? And I'm not taking about that recalcitrant 90 year old grandma or that pop-singer who doesn't even know or care what an icon means. But there are plenty of people out there who are otherwise highly educated or intelligent who simply don't have sufficient domain knowledge when it comes to computers, to make more informed choices instead of being herded like sheep by the tech-giants. And I can't think of a single go-to resource on the net that can explain the intricacies of computers and apps to the average (but intelligent) Joe, with a particular view towards enabling more freedom and privacy for them.

vladvasiliu 5y ago
> But there are plenty of people out there who are otherwise highly educated or intelligent who simply don't have sufficient domain knowledge when it comes to computers, to make more informed choices instead of being herded like sheep by the tech-giants. That may be true, but I also get the feeling that they choose to spend their energy worrying about other things, as long as the computer does the job they want it to do. Hell, I have a friend who's actually a techie, tried Linux, actually even has it installed on his daily driver (dual boot on a single drive in a laptop), he just never uses it. He's a Java dev, so all his stack would probably work on Linux with little or no fiddling. But he just does not care. Windows doesn't bother him enough to make the change, so he didn't change. I think this is the most important part: Windows mostly works for most people. Paradoxically, I think that the fact that the OS is less and less important is actually a bad thing for Linux adoption. Because people just don't care about the OS as long as the browser works. And on Windows, it works well enough. So why would they change? There are of course philosophical reasons, but people don't appear to care. There are billions of Facebook users. This shows people don't care about these issues. I don't know if it's because they intrinsically don't care, or because we've done a bad job of educating them. Maybe a bit of both. But it sure feels like an uphill battle, even among "techies".
- tpxl 5y ago
  > Paradoxically, I think that the fact that the OS is less and less important is actually a bad thing for Linux adoption. Because people just don't care about the OS as long as the browser works. And on Windows, it works well enough. So why would they change? I disagree that it's a bad thing for Linux. If you install Linux on a persons machine where they only browse facebook, they wont notice and they save ~120$. Worked fine enough for a couple of non-techies I know (kindergarten teachers).
nspattak 5y ago
No we are NOT responsible for other peoples' life/choices. Period. This is no longer the 90s, every year there are articles "20?? is the year of the linux"! Linux has actually been around for longer than w95/NT and it is 10-15 years now that user friendly distributions are available. More or less, a laptop with a linux installation will work until it is thrown away. However, installing an operation system (be it win or linux or OSX) is not sth that everyone can do neither that can be expected of everyone. So, in my opinion: 1) Linux usage/adoption can not increase unless there are ways to be preinstalled on laptops/supported in a similar way as windows/osx are. 2) The importance of freedom is a personal matter which we can not impose on people.
pjmlp 5y ago
The same tech people that are now resposible for the Web having turned into ChromeOS, or the tech people that keep the Web open by advocating Safari and Firefox?

vladvasiliu 5y ago

> But there are plenty of people out there who are otherwise highly educated or intelligent who simply don't have sufficient domain knowledge when it comes to computers, to make more informed choices instead of being herded like sheep by the tech-giants. That may be true, but I also get the feeling that they choose to spend their energy worrying about other things, as long as the computer does the job they want it to do. Hell, I have a friend who's actually a techie, tried Linux, actually even has it installed on his daily driver (dual boot on a single drive in a laptop), he just never uses it. He's a Java dev, so all his stack would probably work on Linux with little or no fiddling. But he just does not care. Windows doesn't bother him enough to make the change, so he didn't change. I think this is the most important part: Windows mostly works for most people. Paradoxically, I think that the fact that the OS is less and less important is actually a bad thing for Linux adoption. Because people just don't care about the OS as long as the browser works. And on Windows, it works well enough. So why would they change? There are of course philosophical reasons, but people don't appear to care. There are billions of Facebook users. This shows people don't care about these issues. I don't know if it's because they intrinsically don't care, or because we've done a bad job of educating them. Maybe a bit of both. But it sure feels like an uphill battle, even among "techies".

tpxl 5y ago
> Paradoxically, I think that the fact that the OS is less and less important is actually a bad thing for Linux adoption. Because people just don't care about the OS as long as the browser works. And on Windows, it works well enough. So why would they change? I disagree that it's a bad thing for Linux. If you install Linux on a persons machine where they only browse facebook, they wont notice and they save ~120$. Worked fine enough for a couple of non-techies I know (kindergarten teachers).

nspattak 5y ago

No we are NOT responsible for other peoples' life/choices. Period. This is no longer the 90s, every year there are articles "20?? is the year of the linux"! Linux has actually been around for longer than w95/NT and it is 10-15 years now that user friendly distributions are available. More or less, a laptop with a linux installation will work until it is thrown away. However, installing an operation system (be it win or linux or OSX) is not sth that everyone can do neither that can be expected of everyone. So, in my opinion: 1) Linux usage/adoption can not increase unless there are ways to be preinstalled on laptops/supported in a similar way as windows/osx are. 2) The importance of freedom is a personal matter which we can not impose on people.

pjmlp 5y ago

The same tech people that are now resposible for the Web having turned into ChromeOS, or the tech people that keep the Web open by advocating Safari and Firefox?