I know this might be a controversial take but nevertheless I will state my opinion: I do not think "the year of the Linux desktop" is the good idea that most people seem to think. Everything that gets the eye of Sauron on it proceeds to become a complete mess.
Resources always win. All that is needed to ruin an open project is dump money into heavy development up to the point where it becomes impossible to do without it. Plenty such cases already.
This also ruins the development of the project akin to feeding wild life, you get them dependent on you, and if you stop feeding them they lose the ability to feed themselves in the wild. Such is the Linux ecosystem, based on a type of work that so far made a great project for people who have a bit of technical skills. Making it more accessible to the masses only brings that kind of bullshit into it. Inevitably. There is no way something of such importance, to the masses, won't get corrupted in one way or another. That never happens, if there is too much interest there will be funds dumped into corrupting it, one way or another.
The best path forward for Linux was as before, to fly just under the radar, to bee a bit too complicated for most people. This is what protects it. Most, if anyone, don't seem to understand this very simple fact. No older Linux user gets anything worthwhile out of this deal, nothing relevant, just inevitable enshitification of it. Historically proven over and over again. I find "the year of the Linux desktop" to be a childish take in a world that functions on completely different principles.
edit: To add a bit more context, Windows is not the mess that it is today because of evil Microsoft, it is a reflection of its user-base. Same with Linux.
They did that to Windows, with their behavior, with accepting all that nonsense.
You want to bring the very same type of people, with that kind of attitude, in Linux, what exactly do you thing is going to happen? They will adapt to Linux mentality or they'll proceed to ruin Linux with their behavior? I can take a good guess on what will happen. People will people, and corpos will corpo to milk them.
Linux is already integral to the tech and enterprise worlds, which have a lot more money to throw around the consumer desktop space. I'm having trouble seeing how Linux becoming a more popular consumer OS would lead to the types of problems you're talking about, if being a leader in the server space hasn't already led to them.
Also, Linux has a built-in mechanism against enshittification, which is its open source and multiple flavors. Ubuntu becomes enshittified? Move to Fedora. You can have a dumbed down consumer-friendly distro without affecting Arch.
> The best path forward for Linux was as before, to fly just under the radar, to bee a bit too complicated for most people.
Obviously with people like you, Linux would never be popular. Personally I’m fine with that, Linux is just too damn buggy and inconsistent for my usage, but I’m pretty sure that it could benefits people. Think of students or people in low income countries.
And then, what prevents you from having a mainstream friendly distribution that just work, and another for the nerd who want to spend their day in the terminal ?
Linux isn’t just one distribution, one doesn’t prevent the other but currently it sure isn’t for mainstream usage.
He's probably interested in getting an angle on the whole thing since he knows Christians will get more nervous as tech develops, and they still have a lot of power in this world. Primitive takes on new tech developments can be detrimental to humankind at large. Talking in the abstract of course, I'm not sticking up for any of his points, I don't even really know them to be honest.
As for the other party, probably curious on what he has to say, considering he's up to speed with today's tech and future perspectives on it.
If tech really finds a way for humans to proceed further in a different form that will be a major headache with religious people. One simple argument for changing form is that the Sun will eventually scorch Earth so we do have an expiry date. And there's no way we're making it out of here in this current form, this is developed for the conditions of this planet, forcing it in other environments will eventually wipe us out. So logically we'll have to change form if we want to make it outside of this planet.
In this sense, religious people can condemn humanity to basically death if they block tech developments, thinking some god will "save" us, and by "save" I mean let wipe.
So not as clear cut. You might hate the guy but he's not dumb, I think he knows what he's doing, or at least trying to do. But I have no clue on the "how", so I cannot talk about what he wants to do, specifically, with humans.
> One simple argument for changing form is that the Sun will eventually scorch Earth so we do have an expiry date.
uhhhh this is utterly ridiculous
the sun will expire and make the Earth uninhabitable in ~1B years
humans have existed in their current form for 300K years
so that's about one three-millionth of that time
> You might hate the guy but he's not dumb
you really have to be a special kind of dumb to believe humanity will snuff it because of something that'll not happen until 3.33 MILLION times as long as humans have walked on this Earth
that just makes no sense however you turn it, there is not a single thing that this has been the case for in the (much much longer) history of Earth, let alone humanity
And I wasn't talking about Peter Thiel being a special kind of dumb. If he's so smart he probably also secretly laughs in the face of people who go along with this reasoning.
It depends on the phone camera API. Some allow up to some fps and the highest option is available through some vendor API that's not public. At least on mine.
Resources always win. All that is needed to ruin an open project is dump money into heavy development up to the point where it becomes impossible to do without it. Plenty such cases already.
This also ruins the development of the project akin to feeding wild life, you get them dependent on you, and if you stop feeding them they lose the ability to feed themselves in the wild. Such is the Linux ecosystem, based on a type of work that so far made a great project for people who have a bit of technical skills. Making it more accessible to the masses only brings that kind of bullshit into it. Inevitably. There is no way something of such importance, to the masses, won't get corrupted in one way or another. That never happens, if there is too much interest there will be funds dumped into corrupting it, one way or another.
The best path forward for Linux was as before, to fly just under the radar, to bee a bit too complicated for most people. This is what protects it. Most, if anyone, don't seem to understand this very simple fact. No older Linux user gets anything worthwhile out of this deal, nothing relevant, just inevitable enshitification of it. Historically proven over and over again. I find "the year of the Linux desktop" to be a childish take in a world that functions on completely different principles.
edit: To add a bit more context, Windows is not the mess that it is today because of evil Microsoft, it is a reflection of its user-base. Same with Linux. They did that to Windows, with their behavior, with accepting all that nonsense.
You want to bring the very same type of people, with that kind of attitude, in Linux, what exactly do you thing is going to happen? They will adapt to Linux mentality or they'll proceed to ruin Linux with their behavior? I can take a good guess on what will happen. People will people, and corpos will corpo to milk them.