Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Computing is too easy

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: Computing is too easy

#41

Post by dagw »

EliRivers wrote: post #39
dagw wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are looking at a strong case of survivorship bias. The sample of 30 year old cars that still work represent some of the best made and most reliable cars made 30 years ago. Most of the unreliable and badly made cars from 30 years ago have died and been turned to scrap.

What proportion of modern cars will still be running in 30 years? I suspect it will be less than the proportion of 30 year-old cars that are running now. Some modern cars, I swear, almost feel like disposable items.

There where some truly terrible cars in the 70's and 80's. The Chevy Vega and Ford Pinto are just two classic American examples. Britain had a bunch of disastrous Morris and Austins. Alfa Romeo and Lancia also had some legendarily unreliable cars in that time period. And let's not even begin to talk about the brands from east of the Iron Curtain. At the end of the day I'll happily take the worst cars of today over the worst cars of the 70's and 80's.

Re: Computing is too easy

#42

Post by digi_owl »

Gracana wrote: post #25
jimmaswell wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I need a search tool to find my installed programs and settings. as if simply typing the name of or keywords for what you want to find into a search bar isn't fluid and inuitive?

Assuming that you know the name of your volume manager is "gigolo" and that your remote desktop client is "remmina," etc. If you're lucky the program might have a reasonable name, but still your OS decides the most likely thing you're looking for is ancient manuscripts... http://i.imgur.com/0ePB9sT.png

Well there is always the Gnome way, where the menu entry has one name (Archive Manager) but the command has a very different one (file-roller).

Re: Computing is too easy

#43

Post by digi_owl »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #35
PakG1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OSes were better twenty years ago because they were more predictable and stable because they couldn't do as much, especially if there was no multithreading. Limitations ensured stability and reliable performance. Today, it's too easy to overload your system. Except now I just realized that 20 years ago was Windows 95. Dang, I'm getting old. :(

They were neither more predictable nor more stable. Twenty years ago, if an application crashed, so did the entire OS. Twenty years ago, applications and the OS were very tightly coupled and they would both deliberately and unintentionally trample on eachother, often with disastrous consequences.

Maybe not stable, but perhaps predictable (at least outside of the MS sphere) because there was not as many interconnected processes bouncing around in the background.

Re: Computing is too easy

#44

Post by _ea1k »

Gracana wrote: post #25
jimmaswell wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I need a search tool to find my installed programs and settings. as if simply typing the name of or keywords for what you want to find into a search bar isn't fluid and inuitive?

Assuming that you know the name of your volume manager is "gigolo" and that your remote desktop client is "remmina," etc. If you're lucky the program might have a reasonable name, but still your OS decides the most likely thing you're looking for is ancient manuscripts... http://i.imgur.com/0ePB9sT.png

If I type "add printer" into the search on Fedora (Gnome Shell), the first item in the list is "Printers" with helpful text letting me know that this is the tool for adding printers. It's much easier than it used to be, IMO.

Re: Computing is too easy

#45

Post by digi_owl »

shiggerino wrote: post #40
GeneralMayhem wrote: post #21

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, as a developer, it frustrates the hell out of me when people don't have the slightest idea how computers work on the level of the "just write a program that writes programs" point from the article. On the other hand, I don't know how a car works in any sort of detail, and I'm sure mechanics feel the same about me. I (like to) think the difference is that I have some idea how to reason…

Indeed, the car/mechanic analogy is quite flawed. The driver is the user of the car, the mechanic isn't. Whereas the developer is also a user of the computer in the most fundamental ways. People who don't know how to use computers are merely along for the ride. Someone without a driver's license might have a tremendous benefit from a car. A lot of the time they even have a say in deciding where to go (especially if t…

Another thing is that even with more and more electronics coming into play, a car is still a mechanical system. As such, if a driver (user) complains about a new rattle or sound, the mechanical links can be traced back to the source.

And that touches on another thing. Computers are deeply visual. Yes, it can output sound and such. But most of the interaction is done by text and images. This means that when it is just sitting there with the screen off, you don't know if it is idle or transferring your porn collection of the NSA headquarters.

From time to time i wonder what would come out of putting a sniffer on the network and have it play some tones based on the packets picked up and their metadata.

All too often i find myself likening computers to small children. When they are noisy you can relax, but when they become quiet you really need to worry. This in particular when exposed to Windows, and its habit of announcing new USB devices with plings and popups.

Re: Computing is too easy

#46

Post by digi_owl »

pjc50 wrote: post #7

There's one of these articles every few weeks. I'd argue that the response has been the "maker" movement, built around Arduino and Raspberry Pi. People also need to distinguish between "you have to tinker in order to use the thing" and "you can tinker if you need to". Old cars were more tinkerable and less reliable.

Except that commercial offerings, both in terms of cars and computers, are "Contact a certified technician" these days.

Re: Computing is too easy

#47

Post by _ea1k »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #35
PakG1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OSes were better twenty years ago because they were more predictable and stable because they couldn't do as much, especially if there was no multithreading. Limitations ensured stability and reliable performance. Today, it's too easy to overload your system. Except now I just realized that 20 years ago was Windows 95. Dang, I'm getting old. :(

They were neither more predictable nor more stable. Twenty years ago, if an application crashed, so did the entire OS. Twenty years ago, applications and the OS were very tightly coupled and they would both deliberately and unintentionally trample on eachother, often with disastrous consequences.

As an OS/2 user twenty years ago, I disagree. Really, it was about twenty years ago that I switched to Linux which didn't crash due to a simple application crash either.

Stop making me feel old. :)

Re: Computing is too easy

#48

Post by _ea1k »

EliRivers wrote: post #39
dagw wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are looking at a strong case of survivorship bias. The sample of 30 year old cars that still work represent some of the best made and most reliable cars made 30 years ago. Most of the unreliable and badly made cars from 30 years ago have died and been turned to scrap.

What proportion of modern cars will still be running in 30 years? I suspect it will be less than the proportion of 30 year-old cars that are running now. Some modern cars, I swear, almost feel like disposable items.

I suspect that the proportions will be similar. There are plenty of amazingly reliable vehicles being built today.

Re: Computing is too easy

#49

Post by sp332 »

shiggerino wrote: post #5

Computing isn't too easy, it's too hard, and modern systems aren't contributing a solution, they are just glossing it over with their crippled tools. Not just crippled tools for office workers, also crippled tools for programmers and artists. Some things might not be possible to fix. Teaching people to RTFM, for instance. No search engine will be able to replace consistent and comprehensive documentation written by t…

The problem is sweeping all the complexity (and power) under the rug in pursuit of "easy". Modern computing hides all the cool stuff. We should expose the difficult and powerful side, even if it's less easy.

Re: Computing is too easy

#50

Post by Supraperplex »

prottmann wrote: post #3
scotty79 wrote: post #2

> Our laptops are sleek and polished. Our operating systems are fluid and intuitive. This is clearly a joke. And a cruel one. Laptops are just two steps away from overheating and falling apart no matter how much glue they put in these days. And operating systems are laggy and messy. They have still 50% of laggines and 90% of messiness of what was the standard two decades ago.

"fluid and intuitive" I must laugh at this too. I need a search tool to find my installed programs and settings. Most of the time i need google to find out, if a changeable setting exists ;) Operating systems are stupid since many years, on every new Version i think "god, please change not too much", cause on every new Version things not getting better and not easier and not smoother. Yes, they look nicer, they have…

Animations help a lot of people to better understand what is going on in the machine.
Post reply on HN