Live data from Hacker News

A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

trevoragilbert.com

51–60 of 80 posts

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#52
post #31

One of the reasons why I love open source software is that I can maintain personal patches. I'll upstream changes when it makes sense to do so, but mostly, I keep local branches. Some of these tweaks are simple. Others are significant rewrites. But, the point is that I can approach computing on my own terms, and that's pretty neat.

I really appreciate how easy Nix makes this. It’s relatively straightforward to overlay a package in your configuration to add a patch - meaning I get to apply my own patches and also get updates from upstream - at least until my patch doesn’t apply cleanly.

That sounds interesting, do you have an example somewhere? I hadn't really considered this nix specific - does it make it easier than git normally allows (by keeping your patch in a branch?)

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#53
Frontpage was anything but discoverable. Ditto with the MS Office suite. I found Unix' (and by extension, GNU) philosophy much better to discover how did computers work. The Linux Gazzete taught you about HTML code, editors, system administration, networking without tons of hideous GUI's and Microsoft corpojargon to hide anything behind a lexicon wall having nothing to do with actual IT.

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#54

My Dearest TI-85 Calculator Games, (I shall name a few by names) In lines of code and pixels fair, Within your realm, I find solace rare. A love that's forged in binary strings, A tapestry of malleable digital things. Oh, how you captivate my heart, With your C-programming art. Your 8001 pixels dance upon my screen, Creating worlds, both vivid & serene. Through endless loops and if-else's rhyme, We tinker in space, o…

Ah, I wrote some TI-85 games in HS.. DopeWars I had to recreate from scratch after I moved, and I implemented some classic arcade games. The interesting thing was that the simpler games were much more popular than the complex games, even if there was no slowdown on the complex game. I think my entire school shared Whack-a-Mole but my pac man and asteroids barely made it out of my calculus class.

But, as I recall, it was TI-BASIC, not C, as the programming language. Was that the AI's mistake?

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#55
post #15

I think there’s a bit of survivorship bias in the tech industry. Many of us got into tech because we were able to explore computers with few limitations. But I’m not convinced it was mostly due to the tech of the 90s being more open. We are the ones who did that kind of stuff, so we’re a filtered audience posting on HN about tinkerable software. We likely tinkered for a lot of reasons that didn’t have much to do what…

Agree and disagree.

In the realm specifically of computers, I think kiddos today who do have the inclination to tinker in the ways we remember fondly doing so are going to have a lot harder time of it. I personally have spent time around Zoomers who were raised on iPads, and they love and are interested in learning more about technology, but at the same time are coming at it with what I perceive at least to be a far lower skill average than what I had at their age because all they know are iPads and smartphones, which are more and more locked down and untinkerable and who's muscle memory and general knowledge pool just isn't transferable to "real" computers, if you will. For example: a younger person once asked me where the file browser was on a Windows PC. I had to explain to them that's Explorer, but it didn't connect with them because it was configured on this machine to open their share drive on a university system which is just a drive letter, not a set of curated folders like "Documents," "Downloads," "Gallery," etc. And to be completely clear here: I am not calling this kid stupid, they weren't. They were untrained and ignorant, akin to someone who wants to learn to drive a sports car only ever being given access to the PlaySkool red and yellow pedal car.

Now that being said, there are still plenty of ways kiddos can tinker with software and electronics. 3D printers immediately come to mind. You (usually) can't just bang your sausage fingers on a capacitive screen and get good quality prints from go. There's calibration, for many there's assembly, for still others there's less computery-stuff but more things like chemistry if you're going the resin route, not to mention materials safety and of course, inevitable troubleshooting. It's not quite the same but IMO, it still promotes analytical, problem-solving, learning-to-research-and-self-teach type thinking which is critical to developing engineer brains.

That being said, if you do want your kid to go into software, if it isn't already obvious to you, take away their stupid phone and give them a proper computer. And if you don't want them necessarily going into software then just take away their stupid phone, at least sometimes, so the social media companies can't completely rot their brains out before they're even out of school.

> given recent advancements in UI

Also I have to push back on this specific point: I don't know of a single thing, except MAYBE iOS, that is consistently good with regard to UI. Windows is downright atrocious at this point, MacOS is fine (apart from Finder which is awful but it's always been awful), Android is a complete mess, every AAA game sports an interface that's even worse than the last, embedded systems are almost universally badly coded/organized and full to the brim with chinglish (is that term offensive?), web apps are slow as fuck with everything designed "mobile first" by which they mean they took out all the text and made everything stupid icons inside drawers so you end up sitting there translating some designer's idea of how hieroglyphs could work...

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#56

As a young child with only the scarcest grasp of programming, I spent endless hours using ResEdit to crack open and customize every application on my mac. Every game and utility was filled with its own surprises; graphics I could edit, tables of strings to pore over, dialogs to rearrange, menus to customize, and so much more. I never had a manual, but everything was so straightforward and clear I learned everything I…

I came to say the same. ResEdit was true tinkering... you could swap images, change user visible strings, menu items... I even managed to remove copy protection from a game (which I didn't have any way of purchasing due to being in a different country and stuff) which was compiled with (some) symbols and even though I didn't know 68000 assembly I figured out how to skip the call to the function which asked you for some word in the game's manual.

Years later, programming in Win32, I found you could do a lot of tinkering by getting window handles to windows and UI elements of other programs and changing attributes / calling various functions. I don't think this was exploited nearly enough by the curious youth.

These days if you show a kid that if you type

javascript:document.body.contentEditable=true

in the address bar you can change the contents of a web page just by clicking and typing they'll have a great time creating fake news items, etc.

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#57
post #15

I think there’s a bit of survivorship bias in the tech industry. Many of us got into tech because we were able to explore computers with few limitations. But I’m not convinced it was mostly due to the tech of the 90s being more open. We are the ones who did that kind of stuff, so we’re a filtered audience posting on HN about tinkerable software. We likely tinkered for a lot of reasons that didn’t have much to do what…

Agree and disagree. In the realm specifically of computers, I think kiddos today who do have the inclination to tinker in the ways we remember fondly doing so are going to have a lot harder time of it. I personally have spent time around Zoomers who were raised on iPads, and they love and are interested in learning more about technology, but at the same time are coming at it with what I perceive at least to be a far…

While I think your point is valid, IMO, entering in tech is so much easier. There's much more information available and you can tinker with hardware much more easier due to low prices. But it's very much easier to watch Youtube and play games on a playstation, so they do that.

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#58
Tinkerable software is alive in open source software of today.

I would recommend playing with simpler stuff and building it yourself from source and playing with adding things to it. It doesn't have to be useful things, try making all the menu text silly for the hell of it or whatever. It's still fun.

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#59

Since it hasn't been mentioned here yet, Emacs is deeply tinkerable. With Emacs, you are given an embarrassing amount of leeway to customize or even replace existing behavior to make it do what you want.

Also applies to Vim. Rekindled the joy of exploration in me.

Re: A Love Letter to Tinkerable Software

#60
"Tinkering neutral" is a terrific phrase.

I feel like the world of software can probably be divided into the same moral classes as D&D, with M$ as Chaotic Evil (sorry M$!), Google as Chaotic Good (or would it be Lawful Evil? Probably lawful evil) and GNU as Lawful Good. All have their merits, flaws and compromises.

But, tinkering neutral is a great addition to that framework.

Post reply on HN