Microsoft: Battle the Norm

When I ask Microsoft Windows users to try out Ubuntu should I be telling them that using Ubuntu is socially harder than using Windows? Sure Ubuntu is awesome technically, very easy to use and much better than windows, plus it’s FOSS, moral, science and all. But none of that helps the social barriers.

So I am more aware now that I’m not only pushing a technology but also perhaps a fight. Something that many users just don’t want to have to deal with. Some new users are enthused, well armed and well prepared to go into fight for their ecosystem and we welcome these new early adopters.

But Microsoft windows is normal and using anything else isn’t normal. We have a long way to go before Ubuntu is more recognised as a good technology, well made and not just used by social misfits and people who want to use obscure products to look cool.

Even if you just think about the technical aspects there is just a barrier from service providers, shops and the media.

One of the really nice things about Ubuntu is that it’s managed to improve (slightly) this by replacing the Linux brand in a lot of people’s minds1. More people seem to know about Ubuntu and FOSS by extension because of the work we do to be welcoming and accommodating to new users. But are we doing enough? What more could we do to reduce some of the social stigma of using none Microsoft products?

Thoughts?

1 I’ve come to see Linux as an ingredient, like flour. You can’t sell flour to a person wanting to buy cakes.

28 thoughts on “Microsoft: Battle the Norm

  1. I tell them it’s fast, free, virus-free, secure, and stable (it doesn’t slow down like Windows). That usually has them interested, though it depends what their attitude is. Some people are so fed up with all the problems they’ve had with Windows they’ll gladly switch to something else, with a little help. And what else is there? Macs are too expensive for a lot of people and it means changing the entire computer. With Linux they can keep they’re original computer and get a speed boost too 🙂 It also depends what apps they use. If they can use the same or very similar apps – or better ones – then they will be more likely to switch. Also it needs to work with their hardware devices like iPods, printers etc which has got much better in recent years.

  2. Tell them they’re getting “the next big thing” (think Wikipedia or the Web, but bigger). Tell them they’re leaving viruses behind. Tell them everyone else will be playing catch up in a couple years. Tell them the longer they cling to their Monopoly game, the more inept/behind they will look. (Remember the stigma that was attached to AOL users when the web hit?)

    Or if all else fails, and they’re still worried about social isolation, please tell them to move to Vancouver where we’re building the largest Ubuntu community anywhere, with real people, the kind that Ubuntu was designed for.

    Cheers,
    Randall
    Ubuntu Vancouver Buzz Generator

  3. Linux is indeed one ingredient in Ubuntu, as is Gnome, OpenOffice.org, etc.

    Saying that it’s “just” an ingredient though, is like saying an engine is “just a part” of a car. While that’s technically correct, it sounds like a down-playing of the function of the device. Linux is a very important part of Ubuntu.

    I think your comment about “No wonder so many people have bad things to say about Linux.” is also just plain wrong and misguided. People say great things about Linux. I walked in a phone shop a few weeks back and the sales person was explaining to a client which phone to buy, and I heard the client say “I heard that anything else than Android is basically a waste of time?” and another client in the shop said something to the tune of “Yes I heard the same thing! And it runs Linux so it’s fast and stable!”

    Linux is important and relevant. The top selling phones in the world run it now. My flatmate bought a new Samsung TV, it runs Linux. Apparently a large number of TV’s these days do. Linux is the one most ubiquitous operating system the world has ever seen. It’s all around us, it’s making its way in to more and more homes. It’s an absolutely awesome piece of technology and we should be only happy to have it in Ubuntu.

    As for “One of the really nice things about Ubuntu is that it’s managed to improve (slightly) this by replacing the Linux brand in a lot of people’s minds”- Ubuntu purposely didn’t include Linux in the title for similar reasons that you mention, but it’s certainly not to detach itself from Linux. I deal with many new users who use Ubuntu. And even though they don’t understand much of the underlying technologies, they know that there’s something called “Linux” in there somewhere and that it’s good.

    I installed Windows earlier this year because the software to upgrade my PMP’s firmware only works with that. In the installation process, I was prompted with a Windows dialog that said that I don’t have the right codecs installed and that there’s an answer page on Microsoft’s website. I visited it and it linked me to a download link to a 3rd party site where I was supposedly going to get the codecs. I ran the setup.exe file and installed plenty of 3rd party crapware that I didn’t want (without properly asking me if I want it), which ended up installing even more rubbish that did harm to my computer. If that’s your users’ idea of /normal/ then I’m afraid they probably have bigger issues than what operating system they should use and I probably don’t want anything to do with them either.

  4. Great post. I like the cake analogy a lot.

    If we talk about social stigma and not being normal than it is perhaps worthwhile to see how Apple just managed to exactly benefit from the non-normality with things like the “think different” campaign.

    IMHO today many of those how think differently use Ubuntu. Maybe there should be an Ubuntu campaign in this direction without copy Apple.

    The circle of friends could be the initial metaphor for such a thing. Ubuntu is about people and supporting each other. Not about being the solitary genius nor about being the helpless user in front of unwilling software.

    Just my two cents.

  5. Technically, yes Linux – the kernel – is flour, and you’ll need sugar, salt, eggs, and labor to make pastries. However, I view Ubuntu as that finished pastry. Some like creme-filled, while others like raspberries on top.

    The creme-filled crowd may occasionally see someone eat raspberry pastries and wonder what it tastes like. That’s when they try. People try new things because they perceive it to be better, easier, cooler, etc…or as a researcher, I should say it has higher relative advantages, lower complexity, higher observability, etc.

    See slides 12 and 13 on http://www.slideshare.net/sverma/ubuntulive-case-studies-panel

    Consumer behavior has known about this for years, and ad agencies put a lot of effort to tweak these perceptive attributes. My students see my Lucid Lynx Thinkpad boot up in a matter of seconds (I always cold boot after plugging into the projector) and run fast with apps, they see how easily I install a new app from the Software Center, spit PDFs from OOo, and amazingly, the “I want to try a raspberry pastry” crowd comes asking.

    Close to a 1/3 of my undergraduate classes now use Ubuntu or some other distro via dual-boot, vmware, etc. Its amazing how these perceived notions work, but they do 🙂

  6. I won’t recommend promoting Ubuntu by referencing to the principles of free and open software. Nobody cares! (except certain groups, but they are already using it anyway).

    The only reason someone will start using Ubuntu is if it offers something that is not available, or is superior what is available, elsewhere. In Ubuntu we have a stable, secure and user-friendly platform. However, I think the most important feature is a huge repository of tested and free software that is easy to install. These factors are the most important ones to point out when promoting Ubuntu. Also, showing some Compiz eyecandy usually impresses.

  7. Ubuntu is so much simpler and so much more awesome than Windows XP that that difference alone makes up for the social-technical isolation.

    7 may be another matter. When I tell people about Ubuntu, I extend my own support to them via ubuntunebraska.info (WIP). Currently the skype me button is about useless since skype for ubuntu can’t handle skype?user:call linkks and skype doesn’t want to run on my Cyanogen 6 DInc.. but still. I don’t direct people to forums or irc channels. *I* am support. *I* will be there for them. –although I must admit I kind of draft other ubuntu-users that the person knows into that also 😛

  8. No. You should be telling them that Ubuntu is actually socially much easier than Windows, because of its great community. Be careful to mention that there are people with diverse backgrounds in the community, using the system for different needs. The Ubuntu experience is actually much more personal.

    Also, mentioning integration might help – Windows users have to hunt down for the programs they need, checking for newer versions and clicking through the installation programs, whereas Ubuntu has a central “software store” available right out of the box where the users can get what they need, or browse for programs of potential interest. Throw in the fact that usually Ubuntu requires zero configuration and driver installation and comes with the necessary programs (Firefox, mail client, chat client, etc.) installed, and you have good arguments for using Ubuntu as an everyday-task machine.

    Just don’t sell it on the grounds of being free as in zero cost, and don’t start with the whole FOSS philosophy and how everything should have sources available – the former reduces the value of the product in the potential user’s eyes, while the latter drives them off with the prospect of technical and ideological community.

    My 0.02, coming from someone who uses both Windows and Linux.

  9. If we forget about FLOSS values, what would be Ubuntu? Another Windows or Mac OS X?
    Windows 7 is great for many common people, Mac OS X is a dream for the same people. I don’t believe Ubuntu is better than them if we forget about its values.

  10. As a former user of many Linux distros (e.g., Ubuntu, Linux Mint) the main thing that keeps me from using them is the lack of a truly good and appealing productivity suite like Microsoft Office (2007 or 2010). But not only. After several years with Linux I realized that I wasn’t having a good computing experience. The system was (is) constantly changing, most of the apps lacked (lack) coherence or a solid form and substance. and the system as a whole doesn’t look as a robust as windows 7, for example. Incredibly but other thing that pissed me off in Ubuntu, was my permanent temptation to keep changing themes and other visual stuff. It kept me distracted from the work that I had to do..weird, I know.
    I understand your doubts but I think the problem is not if you are doing enough but if Ubuntu is being built to be a coherent, solid, predictable and robust OS, with great apps for office productivity, etc.
    This is my short comment on your post. Many more could be said about this subject.

  11. Some people, that aren’t very good with computers, actually seem to like the fact that socially people respond to it differently.

    Given the situation, I would suggest we market Ubuntu as a distinctive choice for people for picky preferences and taste.

    It may not actually be our goal. But if the world, in reality fights us a little, we can take advantage of that. Some people like being different.

    Off course, how you actually sell Ubuntu should depend on the person. Perhaps, in this case, I just want you to realize that this downside, (like every other downside of anything life), can also be considered an upside.

    We play to the strengths.

  12. You shouldn’t be telling them anything.

    IME, people are much more resistant to change if you pushed the change on them, than if they came to it themselves. I no longer ever try to tell people “use Ubuntu, it’s great”. The only way to work for me is to simply use Ubuntu near them, until they *ask* for it. When someone is asking, rather than being told, then they’re infinitely more open to differences – and far more tolerant of issues (including social ones)

  13. Martin, in a word CHARGE THEM. That seems to remove any angst they have about the unknown. I learned that when I was a kid selling in flea markets. The lower the price I sold something for, the less likely I would sell it. The more I raised the price, the more people wanted it.

    Someone said “I won’t recommend promoting Ubuntu by referencing to the principles of free and open software. Nobody cares! (except certain groups, but they are already using it anyway).”

    Bullshit. EVERY single time I have explained Free and Open Source software to someone they have IMMEDIATELY gotten it, IMMEDIATELY seen the value of it and IMMEDIATELY wanted it. Maybe you are dealing with people that want to spend $5k US or more to play some damned games. I on the other hand am dealing with BUSINESS PEOPLE. People whose lives, incomes, mortgages DEPEND on their software. People of that sort know the intrinsic value of not being locked to single vendor solutions. It is only that until recently, they were unaware there was even an option. The moment the option is presented they WANT IT. That then leads to the next obvious question of whether WE have the software they can use at a deeper level than just the OS.

    Someone said ” I don’t direct people to forums or irc channels. *I* am support. *I* will be there for them.”

    Me too. People need to know they can get REAL SUPPORT from an F’n professional who isn’t going to chide them for the question they ask. Sending them to me means they don’t have to deal with the typical ableist and other prejudicial posts they’ll find in the Ubuntu forum/blogosphere when they’re just wanting to get something working. They know what they are getting with me and they know that when they need an answer, politics are set aside and they get an answer promptly, and accurately. Since I also offer free co-working, they know they can come and see me in person any time.

    Someone else said “No. You should be telling them that Ubuntu is actually socially much easier than Windows, because of its great community.”

    No it is not. When I need Windows support, I can get it from professionals who know how to speak to adults LIKE adults. When I am frustrated and I dare to use an adult word, my language is not policed. The few times people have disregarded my advice to avoid the Ubuntu “community” like black mold, they’ve always returned to me head shaking with an “you were totally right”. Socially Ubuntu sux AS A GROUP. There are few exceptions. TECHNICALLY it rocks.

  14. Ricardo: How much money or time did you invest in making a productivity suite? If you didn’t spend money or time fixing problems then you have no right to complain about weather it’s any good or not. You get what other people have had the good sense to build because they have paid for it.

    I’m so disappointed in the general culture that thinks FOSS owes people good software. It aint a charity people, it’s a method of production.

  15. You use the obvious benefits of Ubuntu to lure the low hanging fruit. The people who browse the Internet and check their email. Little or no more.

    These people can easily switch to Ubuntu and see immediate and permanent benefits. Convert enough of these people (there are LOTS of them) and Ubuntu will become normal enough to interest the hard cases.

    When Grandma’s computer works better than yours … and your the “computer guy” in your family … you’ll take notice.

  16. @doctormo: I think Ricardo and many others would gladly pay for an FOSS version (or even proprietary) of Office on Linux systems if it was available. You ask how much money did you invest, but to whom do I give the money? What will I get in return? Nobody will pay for vapourware that may or may not be made and not many people have enough money to fund hundred of professional developers making the entire productivity suite.

    FOSS is not a charity but “fix it or gtfo” attitude is certainly not helping it’s progress.

  17. I’ve used the ingredient/cake analogy in the past with a great deal of success:

    http://www.peppertop.com/blog/?p=592

    People easily understand the difference between a cake made by your neighbour who is happy to share the recipe with you, and a commercially produced cake where the recipe is a closely guarded secret. After understanding that, the difference between FOSS and proprietary software is a lot easier to swallow.

  18. @jesgar: I see the word “solely” has slipped from my sentence there. What I am meant is that this is a piece of information that comes second to the fact that Ubuntu is a very comfortable working environment. When the inevitable price question comes up, you can tie that in with the FOSS and explain why it is provided at no cost, and why it is not some amateur piece of work that some IT weirdo does in his free time.

    @Aoirthoir An Broc: First, stop shouting. If your point is really the objective truth, you don’t need to over-emphasize it to be accepted.

    Regarding the price – I am not saying one shouldn’t mention the price aspect of Ubuntu, but I’ve seen it used as the no. 1 hot feature of the product (meaning Linux in general). Ubuntu has a great value as a piece of software, and I think it is this it should be sold on first and foremost. Start with the price and people start looking for strings attached, or automatically is assume the quality is not good enough. You then have to do all the explaining of FOSS principles and how the distribution is being put together, and the fact that there are actually paid people doing this.

    True, price sells, but people expect a certain level of quality from their computing environment, which is something you actually sell the product on first. Just take a look at Apple – they make sure you’ve seen the plethora of product features and its design before you see the price.

    Regarding the community aspect – my experience so far has been very good, and the community was always helpful. Additionally, any problems that I encountered were usually well discussed in blogs or in forums. Problems with no current solution can be reported via Launchpad, and the users can actually gain some sort of reassurance when they see someone assigned to fixing it. On the whole, my experience of the community has been as a highly knowledgeable one, and one that is always willing to help.

    Your mileage may wary of course. But I cannot help but wonder whether your experience has been influenced by your behavior – shouting out your own opinion as if it is the ultimate truth of the universe, using kid language (“sux”) or adult language (which I am delighted to hear is actually being policed by the community). It is not only about asking, but also about the way you ask.

    @Martin: He wasn’t complaining about the quality of any particular productivity suite, he simply stated that Linux lacks a quality productivity suite.

    I don’t agree with your view of the “general culture”, whatever that may be. People expect a level of quality that allows a certain amount of comfort and productivity from the software they use. If they deem the level to be insufficient, they move to a competing product that offers the best price/performance+convenience ratio. Ultimately, if they were able to pay the same amount of money to get the exact ratio from a FOSS product immediately at the moment, they would do it. But they can’t – even though you can donate money, you have no guarantee of any particular result you envision yourself. Not to mention the fact that it won’t be available immediately.

    Like it or not, FOSS is competing with other products on the market, and people exhibit market behavior because they are on a market. Just because a particular FOSS product does not meet their expectations does not mean they can’t voice their negative opinion about it – it’s not like they demand the product gets any better. They paid for a proprietary one and moved on with their life.

  19. Simon: this is perhaps the crux of the problem with new users flowing into the ecosystem, we don’t have the systems set up to take their money and philosophically Canonical and other companies don’t trust users to have the common sense to put their money into the product anyway. which is a real catch 22.

    Either users won’t invest,
    Or programmers won’t let them.

    Either way it’s annoying as hell.

  20. Sirrus: The software ‘market’ for desktop operating systems is no such thing. A market would imply fair competition for a start.

    “”People expect a level of quality””

    People can expect chocolate rainbows and rains of gold, but it’s not going to happen unless “the people” put them there. This isn’t hard to understand, there isn’t a magical benefactor serving users every whim. OK so the economics are back to front from what people normally expect from off the shelf products, but that’s just how FOSS works. Any other way (like donations) doesn’t function correctly.

    It’s kinda funny, but in the arts world you can sustain yourself from donations, even if your not giving freedoms of your artistic works away. In software, the utilitarianism of it kills off the social donation model and I’m not exactly quite sure why. I think it comes from “the people” expecting something they’re not owed. (like a working computer for free)

  21. People who know better should do better, I implemented Ubuntu at my home in a very strict way not a Windows or Mac machine anywhere, so far everyone is doing fine for two and a half years now, I have proven something to myself and to others living with me, that one can really do without Microsoft Windows and other proprietary products,

    I tried to implement Ubuntu in a small school and that failed, I tried to implement it in a friend’s photo business and that failed, a lad who stayed at my home for a while who was not so used to Windows got a laptop with Vista that blue screened on him because of an update, got frustrated with Windows when he tried Windows 7 and asked me for Ubuntu, I showed him how to install it, it worked nicely for him, except for suspend resume which he said he did not care about, he is now a happy man going a year on, from this I gathered some good insights about where and when Ubuntu will and will not work.

    i do not think there is much to worry about Linux in general have a fair amount of supporters, the more savvy computer users with a desire to unshackle themselves from proprietary nonsense, these people will continue to grow Linux and spread its goodness where it will continue to grow incrementally outside of this circle.

    A small growth is better than no growth at all, I strongly believe that Ubuntu has provided compelling reasons for a good number of people to use it, I believe it will be recognized as a good alternative to Microsoft Windows someday.

  22. @Martin: I was not talking about the market of operating systems, but the software that actually runs on them. What good is a great OS if it does not have applications that you need in the quality you need? If there is a better solution available that is worth the cost to you, the rational market choice is to go for it.

    My response to you was essentially along the lines of what Simon argued – there are no easy means of actually making a particular product with a particular feature set available in the FOSS world, unless it’s a custom contract solution that actually has the specification penned down and agreed to by both sides of the contract.

    But the reality is that for readily available software, there are apparently software suites that provide superior functionality to its freely available FOSS alternative, or the FOSS alternative simply does not exist at all. And when you have a guarantee of a functional product with the features available immediately vs a product that “maybe” puts them in even if the money are invested, the choice is obvious.

    “OK so the economics are back to front from what people normally expect from off the shelf products, but that’s just how FOSS works. Any other way (like donations) doesn’t function correctly.”

    Yes, but then you can’t blame the users for complaining about the FOSS product not being good and _switching_ to a proprietary solution.

    “It’s kinda funny, but in the arts world you can sustain yourself from donations, even if your not giving freedoms of your artistic works away.”

    I’ve seen this comparison before. I don’t think programming, or software development, should be considered art. There is an element of beauty in it and it is a creative profession, but that does not make it an art. Mathematics has both qualities as well, yet professional mathematicians are not artists. They are mathematicians. (Not that you said that programmers are artists.)

    I really think software development is a form of engineering, even though still in its early stages. Ultimately, you are creating a product that enables you to do a certain thing, or do it better. Art does not address any need of performing some actual task, or performing it better than before; people consume the products of arts for self-enjoyment, not need. That is why the donation model works there.

    Programming is not art, even when it is being done as a hobby to create. You can do hobby electronics to construct devices, but this does not make you an artist either.

  23. Sirrus: You miss my point entirely. Proprietary software is an unhealthy diet of chains and guided cages and I don’t care how “good” it is or how good it can be. Because it aint science and it aint the future. It’s only short sightedness and modern consumer gullibility that promotes a lack of personal responsibility and an instant gratification. That users don’t need to consider who makes their software (or any other products) or by what means. It’s that kind of irresponsible consuming that puts this world in all kinds of jeopardy. And as much as I admit the reality of what you say, I will not admit to it being sound of mind.

    So consider this an idea that needs to spread: FOSS is software which has already been paid for; the way it works can only be changed with your time or your money. Paying for your FOSS software will ensure that the software will change for the better.

    And I need your help to spread it.

  24. doctormo, I have to right to express my opinion about an Office suite, even if I didn’t contribute to it’s development. I don’t like it but I even did my thesis on it, some years ago. But I started to realize that it wasn’t good enough. Fair enough. I prefer Bmw’s to Renault’s but I drive a Renault.

    I just told you my personal story. I have the freedom to choose and until I feel comfortable with Openoffice.org I will be sticking with Office 10. Most the people just want things to work and they don’t really care about the FOSS values or if Ubuntu is an african word for “human generosity”. They don’t care and I understand. I don’t blame them. Not everyone of us has the curiosity and time to go deep in this.
    I don’t see any problems with Ubuntu or Openoffice.org being paid. Bring it! I will pay for it if I like it!

    But hey! I really like Ubuntu but I don’t want to use it full time. Not nowadays. I tried but I don’t feel comfortable using it for work related tasks.

    Keep the good blog. 😉

  25. Richardo: But you won’t pay for it to be made good, so it won’t be. I understand that your coming from a culture which tells you that you must consume and want instant gratification. But this isn’t how FOSS works, it’s simply a huge misunderstanding which can not be resolved because culturally we are unable to get over it that we’re not here to be pampered to.

    On a technical note, if you were making a thesis then perhaps LaTeX would have been a better tool, openoffice is quite crap at all word processing tasks I’ve ever done. But then I don’t see how it could get any better than it is to be honest. No amount of personal stories or “rights” to express your opinions will change that. All your doing is creating noise, distraction, wasting time and resources for no good. Your complaints are not doing anything positive.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t expect you to be a master programmer or become dedicated to the cause. But it’s very unfair to compare one product with another when it’s made with very different sets of rules. Think about helping spread the word that your wallets have power and you can put them to good use investing in the future of free and open source.

    That would be a good positive move and the more people can commit to doing that the better.

  26. doctormo, let’s leave M$ alone for one second. I completely understand your point of view and I adhere to it.
    I would use Ubuntu or Linux Mint, for example, if:

    a) Ubuntu wasn’t always changing every 6 months; if it felt coherent, solid and “ready”; Did I say solid and “ready”?
    b) I had one Office suite that works well and looks good;
    c) Ubuntu and general Gnu/Linux enthusiastic’s/evangelists worried more about Ubuntu and the ecosystem and left M$ alone;
    d) I wanted.

    And doctormo, it would be wise not to say “must consume and want instant gratification” when you’re referring to me. That’s not true.

  27. @Martin: No, Martin, I understand you perfectly. The problem is you are operating in different semantics than the rest of the capitalist (and I am not using it as a derogatory term) world.

    Software has never been “science” – it is a tool for achieving a particular goal. It might be considered an application of science, but even that is questionable, since it already builds on many other applications of science. And while I see the many benefits of FOSS, I do not think it is the ultimate answer to the question of software development principles, just like I do not think proprietary software is the sole answer to it either.

    To your idea I will say this – most people cannot or will not commit time to a FOSS project, either because they lack the skills or they want to have a life as well, or because this represents lost income. And they won’t spend the money, because they don’t know what they will get for it, and when. (As has been argued here before.)

    So while I can say this as many times as I want, the standard, rational response will be to go and buy a particular piece of proprietary software that gives you what you want instantly.

    Neither FOSS nor proprietary software gives you any future guarantees, but unlike FOSS, there is an incentive system based on the goal of growing the user base of the product to generate revenue in the world of proprietary software, which at least serves as some sort of effort, otherwise the competition takes over. With FOSS, you get what you get.

    Ultimately, it’s not about the idea, it’s about how the potential users respond to it.

  28. Ricardo: Most consumers want instant gratification, it’s true of me and I know me. But while I may use proprietary stuff to get the job done today, I don’t shun FOSS stuff. I don’t expect FOSS to serve my needs immediately; I expect it to serve me when I put the time into it. For others it would be money. My point is that we can’t look at an ecosystem like a product shelf, it’s not the same thing at all.

    Sirrus: That’s a disappointing philosophical conclusion.

    Software _is_ a science, we build on the shoulders of giants and we amass functionality as mechanics in much the same was as the discovery of natural sciences. It may be that it’s put to use, but that doesn’t detract from it’s inherent nature. Proprietary software isn’t just unnatural, it’s scientifically abhorrent and irrational in a progressive society. It’s not a choice between one thing and an equal thing (as if they were both acceptable choices) you have the long term sustainable choice (foss) and then you have the short term unsustainable choice (proprietary) what the public chooses to spend it’s money on speaks volumes about the short sighted culture we have brought on ourselves.

    Of course if you were a programmer this might make more sense (and claiming that software isn’t a science pretty much disqualifies you unfortunately). I might as well be trying to argue the industrial revolution to someone who “only eats turnips” and doesn’t care how they’re made, despite the large social impacts modes of production revolutions have historically.

    If you would only help me teach ideas, ideas are far more powerful than any technology. With a better understanding we could do so much more.

Comments are closed.