I would also say that the approaches taken by something like AlphaGo are more interesting, too. Because unlike chess the solution space for Go is too large to simply look at all possible moves.
Wine was a great technical achievement, but I remember it taking me hours crawling through WineDB and reading config guides to get most games working. Even for someone in the know, it was very impractical compared to clicking "Play" in Steam. That user experience makes all the difference.
No I do agree it's a general problem with software, but we're not talking about some rando throwing leftpad code up on GH. We're talking about a set of operating systems that clearly want more mainstream adoption being bewildered when they suck at respecting the user.
And people wonder why Linux isn't popular outside of industry and hobbyists... Like, sure, maintainers can tell all their users to sod off, but don't be surprised when very few people are left around using your software, and especially don't get confused when companies refuse to invest in Linux ports.
All the successful projects Linux users like to talk about nowadays (gaming now a practical thing, new kernel features, Wine getting really good) were all bankrolled by massive billion dollar corps like Valve and Google, because the community itself has no discipline to see things through.
At least GNU of the old days was organised enough to know not to break people's workflows - just look at how stable coreutils have been - but GUI software for regular people somehow doesn't deserve to get the same treatment.
I think a big issue is there's no discipline in the Linux community. The Kernel team has done an amazing job of preserving ABI compatibility through every last byte, but then you look at projects like glib or GNOME which seem to pride themselves on huge, sweeping, changes and don't care if downstream consumers are hurt by the changes.
It started a long time ago, back in the days of mainframes and thin clients. Mainframe boxes would run the sever side part of "X Server" while clients (ambiguous term in this context, I'll admit) would send commands (e.g. keyboard strokes) and receive graphics back.
XFree86 is a free software implementation of the X Window System.
The whole server/client thing is a bit outdated now, since almost nobody uses actual thin clients anymore. X forwarding is useful, but it's not a mainstream way to do your computing.
Schools do suck, but those 15+60 minutes free time and all class time (which is inherently social) are SO incredibly valuable.
> This article decries remote learning and offers nothing to move the conversation forward on what WOULD work. The author makes no point at all other than complaining about how her child can't sit still. And I'm saying I bet her child can't sit still in a physical school either, so its not about remote learning.
Agreed, though I'd put that down to schools being un-engaging and useless and that gets _worse_ with remote. I'd be in favour of making 30-40% of the school day free time, like it is in high school. For knowledge work like learning, more hours doesn't necessarily mean more output, and it's really destructive to put that onto students.
Maybe have have some empathy for the parents who are working from home, before you start insulting their parenting?
Of course the 7 year old is acting out, but it's probably more to do with being stuck in a box/house all day with no interaction with their friends. And no, Zoom calls don't class as interaction for kids. This child desperately needs to play outside, not stuck behind a blurry screen learning maths.
I would also say that the approaches taken by something like AlphaGo are more interesting, too. Because unlike chess the solution space for Go is too large to simply look at all possible moves.