7 ms·

On page 3, about "whoami" > type this command 20 times and say it out loud I have many years of daily command line use behind me and never needed to use this

by gbog 15y ago

On page 3, about "whoami" > type this command 20 times and say it out loud I have many years of daily command line use behind me and never needed to use this command. I don't like being taken for a child.

VonLipwig 15y ago
If you don't like it use something else. Copy and pasting usually means you never knew what the code said anyway. Typing it once means you will remember it till the end of the day but tomorrow? The day after? Typing it 20 times and saying it out loud to yourself helps it stick. There is no need to run to Google to look up the command. You should know it after doing it this many times. Especially if in the following days you recap with some basic memory exercises. I have always thought that this is what set's Zed Shaw's books apart. They teach you a language in a way that sticks. If you don't find it useful or for your style of learning pick up a book focusing more on theory rather than doing.
robbles 15y ago
Then why work through the examples? The "learn by rote" method he's using here is designed to help people with little or no experience catch up quickly, and remember what they've learned without the many years of daily use. If you just want to learn the odd helpful new trick, and basically know what you're doing, just ignore these parts.
- gbog 15y ago
  That is just one example of the tone of this book, and I just don't like it, and I don't understand why it has so many supposedly adult people accepting things like: > No, seriously, type it 20 times and say it out loud. Sssh. Just do it. I supposed it was a kind of cold joke but it appears not to be. It is just very disrespectful for the reader. Grown up human beings are not to be taken by the hand like /this/ to learn something as serious and advanced as command line.
  - jshen 15y ago
    Grown adults are taught in a manner similar this everyday in basic training for the army. They teach far more serious topics, and it's effective. Also, smart people learn to skim and skip when needed. Writing like thus serves both cause the smarter ones skip.
    - gbog 15y ago
      You can't seriously compare teaching command line kungfu to some wannabee geeks in their spare time with the hardcore brainwashing given to infantry troops so they acquire enough Pavlovian reflex to stand and run below a shower of bombs and bullets.
      - jshen 15y ago
        Your characterization of both is wrong.
        gbog 15y ago
        Pray explain a bit in which ways my characterization of both is wrong. (As any short description, my "portrait" maybe a bit of a caricature but I believe it expresses the meaning well enough.)
        jshen 15y ago
        "You can't seriously compare teaching command line kungfu to some wannabee geeks in their spare time with the hardcore brainwashing given to infantry troops so they acquire enough Pavlovian reflex to stand and run below a shower of bombs and bullets." 1. All geeks learned the command line at some point. Even Linus. Calling the next Linux a "wannabee geek" is wrong. 2. basic training is for all soldiers, not just infantry soldiers. You choose infantry for the baggage it carried, and you didn't care that you were flat wrong. 3. I find your use of "pavlovian reflex" wrong. It has a negative connotation, but is all reflexive action "pavlovian". If so, all of my command line use is pavlovian because I do it reflexively without conscious thought. With that in mind, the military style is perfect because it's designed to train people to do things reflexively when the time comes. 4. basic training teaches many great things. You're dismissal of it as teaching people to "run below a shower of bombs" is wrong. I learned CPR amongst many other good things in basic. Things that again require one to do them almost reflexively, just like I use the command line. In short, you are wrong.
grannyg00se 15y ago
I agree. The tone is not for me and it sounds really put on. "The only piece of advice I am going to give you is this: Shut the hell up and type this in then try to understand it. Sorry to be mean, but that's what you have to do. You have an irrational fear of the command line and the only way to conquer an irrational fear is to just shut up and fight through it." Why say "shut the hell up"? Why assume that the reader has an irrational fear? Most people are just trying to learn because they currently don't know. Not because they are afraid. They don't need some kind of drill sergeant to aggressively push them into it. They've already taken the initiative to seek out the knowledge and begin reading it.
- zedshaw 15y ago
  Is it the word "hell" you disagree with or being told to do something? If it's "hell" I can remove that. If it's just because you don't want to be told to do something then don't read my book. You won't learn anything from it since the entire book is me telling you to do repetitive boring tasks. As for why I wrote it: You may not have an irrational fear but a huge number of Windows and OSX users do. They've been told that the CLI is dangerous and antiquated so they avoid it and panic over it. Having someone like me just push them through actually gets them past that and on to learning how to use it.
  - grannyg00se 15y ago
    First off, thanks for writing something like this in the first place. I do believe that overall it is a helpful addition to the vast collection of instructional material that is available online. Regarding the tone of the text, it's not the word hell specifically - it's the overall tone, which is echoed elsewhere. You could've said "Shut your yap..." and that would have been just as bad. Why are you browbeating or scolding your readers as though they are misbehaved children? Telling someone to shut it is condescending, dismissive, offensive, and simply rude. It's like you're trying to help me, but you've been pushed into it and are now pissed off. And god damnit we're going to get through this one way or the other and if you have to beat me into submission and force my hand then that's what you'll do. It's just a personal opinion. I find it makes the experience less pleasant with that kind of writing.
dredmorbius 15y ago
It's handy in a multi-user environment when you're sudo/su -ing to various users. I'll use it reasonably frequently to test that sudo works as anticipated. "sudo whoami" should return "root".
- atsaloli 15y ago
  Yup. "id" is pretty good for that too, and is shorter to type. Give it a whirl.
jodrellblank 15y ago
I don't like being taken for a child. That's a problem with you which you should fix, instead of getting all defensive and whiny.
- gbog 15y ago
  I tried to express a view differing from the global appraisal in the comments. If it sounds defensive and whiny, maybe it is a problem with the way I expressed it, but it was not meant to be. I don't like "for the dummies" books either, I think this relatively new way to write books teaching something is no good for anyone. Showing a supposedly humorous disrespect for the reader seems to be acceptable in some cultures. It is not in mine. A very strong bullshitting of the reader is ok in some literary works, as it is part of the facture of the book (I am thinking LF Celine), but it is not ok in utilitarian literature. But, you'd tell me, it is a first-world problem, I can live with this new trend (it will be replaced soon enough), as long as I am allowed to express out-fashioned point of views in places like HN.
  - pessimizer 15y ago
    Not liking something is different than it being "no good for everyone." Though you see that your culture is not everyone's, not acceptable within your culture is not equivalent to not acceptable full stop. Not everyone agrees with your permissions rule distinctions between instructional works and literary works, but this does not mean that what they are doing is not ok. Being criticized is not the same as not being allowed to express yourself. P.S.: Characterizing all possible arguments against your position as soon to be replaced trendiness disqualifies anyone from having a discussion on this subject with you, and pre-insults anyone who would want to.
    - gbog 15y ago
      Ok, you have gained some rethorical points here. Some of my comments were a bit defensive, as a result of a feeling that I was circled. In fact some other commenters expressed views similar to mine and my first irruption has had some upvotes. Obviously some people understood what I meant, so I am not sure if it is needed to continue to explain. Just a note: When I said "Showing disrespect for the reader seems to be acceptable in some cultures. It is not in mine.", it was just a polite way to say. (To say what? I just wrote it, but after some thought I yanked the thing. It was talking about culture as universal need for cultivation of oneself, aka education, aka civilization.)
morsch 15y ago
I agree. I don't mind tongue-in-cheek rudeness or expletives in how-tos in documentions, but this thing just struck me as unpleasant and hostile. I'm not sure the format is well suited to the goal, either, and some of the didactic methods seem bizarre. I'm sure better tutorials have been available for years. E.g. http://linuxcommand.org/learning_the_shell.php http://linuxcommand.org/learning_the_shell.php
zedshaw 15y ago
It's not meant to be insulting, it's meant to be a method of learning the basics of a language that works. If you're insulted by it then just don't read it.
- jseban 15y ago
  Your goal: A resource containing a method for learning, in a non-insulting way, for people to use. What happened: People reporting of being insulted. So you failed, why not use the feedback to improve the thing instead of making it personal.
  - pessimizer 15y ago
    When somebody says that they didn't mean to be insulting, that doesn't mean that they meant to be non-insulting. If I run to catch a bus, and I didn't mean to start with my right foot, it doesn't mean that I meant to start with my left.
  - pbreit 15y ago
    > in a non-insulting way I don't think that's part of the goal.
S4M 15y ago
Well, as someone who has "many years of daily command line use" behind him, you will not learn anything from that book targeting newbies, but if you try something you're a complete noob at - a foreign language sticks to my mind - you will have to use this kind of technique to memorize the things you will learn.

by gbog 15y ago

VonLipwig 15y ago

If you don't like it use something else. Copy and pasting usually means you never knew what the code said anyway. Typing it once means you will remember it till the end of the day but tomorrow? The day after? Typing it 20 times and saying it out loud to yourself helps it stick. There is no need to run to Google to look up the command. You should know it after doing it this many times. Especially if in the following days you recap with some basic memory exercises. I have always thought that this is what set's Zed Shaw's books apart. They teach you a language in a way that sticks. If you don't find it useful or for your style of learning pick up a book focusing more on theory rather than doing.

robbles 15y ago

Then why work through the examples? The "learn by rote" method he's using here is designed to help people with little or no experience catch up quickly, and remember what they've learned without the many years of daily use. If you just want to learn the odd helpful new trick, and basically know what you're doing, just ignore these parts.

gbog 15y ago
That is just one example of the tone of this book, and I just don't like it, and I don't understand why it has so many supposedly adult people accepting things like: > No, seriously, type it 20 times and say it out loud. Sssh. Just do it. I supposed it was a kind of cold joke but it appears not to be. It is just very disrespectful for the reader. Grown up human beings are not to be taken by the hand like /this/ to learn something as serious and advanced as command line.
- jshen 15y ago
  Grown adults are taught in a manner similar this everyday in basic training for the army. They teach far more serious topics, and it's effective. Also, smart people learn to skim and skip when needed. Writing like thus serves both cause the smarter ones skip.
  - gbog 15y ago
    You can't seriously compare teaching command line kungfu to some wannabee geeks in their spare time with the hardcore brainwashing given to infantry troops so they acquire enough Pavlovian reflex to stand and run below a shower of bombs and bullets.
    - jshen 15y ago
      Your characterization of both is wrong.
      - gbog 15y ago
        Pray explain a bit in which ways my characterization of both is wrong. (As any short description, my "portrait" maybe a bit of a caricature but I believe it expresses the meaning well enough.)
        jshen 15y ago
        "You can't seriously compare teaching command line kungfu to some wannabee geeks in their spare time with the hardcore brainwashing given to infantry troops so they acquire enough Pavlovian reflex to stand and run below a shower of bombs and bullets." 1. All geeks learned the command line at some point. Even Linus. Calling the next Linux a "wannabee geek" is wrong. 2. basic training is for all soldiers, not just infantry soldiers. You choose infantry for the baggage it carried, and you didn't care that you were flat wrong. 3. I find your use of "pavlovian reflex" wrong. It has a negative connotation, but is all reflexive action "pavlovian". If so, all of my command line use is pavlovian because I do it reflexively without conscious thought. With that in mind, the military style is perfect because it's designed to train people to do things reflexively when the time comes. 4. basic training teaches many great things. You're dismissal of it as teaching people to "run below a shower of bombs" is wrong. I learned CPR amongst many other good things in basic. Things that again require one to do them almost reflexively, just like I use the command line. In short, you are wrong.

grannyg00se 15y ago

I agree. The tone is not for me and it sounds really put on. "The only piece of advice I am going to give you is this: Shut the hell up and type this in then try to understand it. Sorry to be mean, but that's what you have to do. You have an irrational fear of the command line and the only way to conquer an irrational fear is to just shut up and fight through it." Why say "shut the hell up"? Why assume that the reader has an irrational fear? Most people are just trying to learn because they currently don't know. Not because they are afraid. They don't need some kind of drill sergeant to aggressively push them into it. They've already taken the initiative to seek out the knowledge and begin reading it.

zedshaw 15y ago
Is it the word "hell" you disagree with or being told to do something? If it's "hell" I can remove that. If it's just because you don't want to be told to do something then don't read my book. You won't learn anything from it since the entire book is me telling you to do repetitive boring tasks. As for why I wrote it: You may not have an irrational fear but a huge number of Windows and OSX users do. They've been told that the CLI is dangerous and antiquated so they avoid it and panic over it. Having someone like me just push them through actually gets them past that and on to learning how to use it.
- grannyg00se 15y ago
  First off, thanks for writing something like this in the first place. I do believe that overall it is a helpful addition to the vast collection of instructional material that is available online. Regarding the tone of the text, it's not the word hell specifically - it's the overall tone, which is echoed elsewhere. You could've said "Shut your yap..." and that would have been just as bad. Why are you browbeating or scolding your readers as though they are misbehaved children? Telling someone to shut it is condescending, dismissive, offensive, and simply rude. It's like you're trying to help me, but you've been pushed into it and are now pissed off. And god damnit we're going to get through this one way or the other and if you have to beat me into submission and force my hand then that's what you'll do. It's just a personal opinion. I find it makes the experience less pleasant with that kind of writing.

dredmorbius 15y ago

It's handy in a multi-user environment when you're sudo/su -ing to various users. I'll use it reasonably frequently to test that sudo works as anticipated. "sudo whoami" should return "root".

atsaloli 15y ago
Yup. "id" is pretty good for that too, and is shorter to type. Give it a whirl.

jodrellblank 15y ago

I don't like being taken for a child. That's a problem with you which you should fix, instead of getting all defensive and whiny.

gbog 15y ago
I tried to express a view differing from the global appraisal in the comments. If it sounds defensive and whiny, maybe it is a problem with the way I expressed it, but it was not meant to be. I don't like "for the dummies" books either, I think this relatively new way to write books teaching something is no good for anyone. Showing a supposedly humorous disrespect for the reader seems to be acceptable in some cultures. It is not in mine. A very strong bullshitting of the reader is ok in some literary works, as it is part of the facture of the book (I am thinking LF Celine), but it is not ok in utilitarian literature. But, you'd tell me, it is a first-world problem, I can live with this new trend (it will be replaced soon enough), as long as I am allowed to express out-fashioned point of views in places like HN.
- pessimizer 15y ago
  Not liking something is different than it being "no good for everyone." Though you see that your culture is not everyone's, not acceptable within your culture is not equivalent to not acceptable full stop. Not everyone agrees with your permissions rule distinctions between instructional works and literary works, but this does not mean that what they are doing is not ok. Being criticized is not the same as not being allowed to express yourself. P.S.: Characterizing all possible arguments against your position as soon to be replaced trendiness disqualifies anyone from having a discussion on this subject with you, and pre-insults anyone who would want to.
  - gbog 15y ago
    Ok, you have gained some rethorical points here. Some of my comments were a bit defensive, as a result of a feeling that I was circled. In fact some other commenters expressed views similar to mine and my first irruption has had some upvotes. Obviously some people understood what I meant, so I am not sure if it is needed to continue to explain. Just a note: When I said "Showing disrespect for the reader seems to be acceptable in some cultures. It is not in mine.", it was just a polite way to say. (To say what? I just wrote it, but after some thought I yanked the thing. It was talking about culture as universal need for cultivation of oneself, aka education, aka civilization.)

morsch 15y ago

I agree. I don't mind tongue-in-cheek rudeness or expletives in how-tos in documentions, but this thing just struck me as unpleasant and hostile. I'm not sure the format is well suited to the goal, either, and some of the didactic methods seem bizarre. I'm sure better tutorials have been available for years. E.g. http://linuxcommand.org/learning_the_shell.php http://linuxcommand.org/learning_the_shell.php

zedshaw 15y ago

It's not meant to be insulting, it's meant to be a method of learning the basics of a language that works. If you're insulted by it then just don't read it.

jseban 15y ago
Your goal: A resource containing a method for learning, in a non-insulting way, for people to use. What happened: People reporting of being insulted. So you failed, why not use the feedback to improve the thing instead of making it personal.
- pessimizer 15y ago
  When somebody says that they didn't mean to be insulting, that doesn't mean that they meant to be non-insulting. If I run to catch a bus, and I didn't mean to start with my right foot, it doesn't mean that I meant to start with my left.
- pbreit 15y ago
  > in a non-insulting way I don't think that's part of the goal.

S4M 15y ago

Well, as someone who has "many years of daily command line use" behind him, you will not learn anything from that book targeting newbies, but if you try something you're a complete noob at - a foreign language sticks to my mind - you will have to use this kind of technique to memorize the things you will learn.