[Haskell-cafe] Off-topic: complexity of technology [was: When did it become so hard to install Haskell onWindows?]
ben.franksen at online.de
Tue Apr 28 13:23:34 UTC 2020
Am 28.04.20 um 14:59 schrieb Joachim Durchholz:
> Am 27.04.20 um 19:32 schrieb Ben Franksen:
>> Am 27.04.20 um 17:34 schrieb Joachim Durchholz:
>>> Am 27.04.20 um 12:55 schrieb Ben Franksen:
>>>> This very much differs from how I view the /result/ of the work: here I
>>>> regard everything that has not been done in a clean and orderly fashion
>>>> as deficient. (And that goes for software, too, especially if it is
>>> Sure, but how do you judge that work if you're not an expert?
>>> With old-style cars, you could inspect the machinery, even if you
>>> weren't fully educated you could see if there was grime in the gears or
>>> not. With today's cars and their electronics, and today's
>>> millions-of-lines software, that kind of check has become impossible.
>> Which is why I dislike modern cars. If I ever happen to buy another one
>> in my lifetime it will be an oldtimer.
> And that's the rub: you won't get a silent, safer, low-emission car,
More silent: Okay, I'll give you that one.
Safer: Physically, yes. OTOH, the manufacturer will constantly spy on
you and some evil hacker may remotely control your car & crash it. Just
like your "smart home" devices & the "smart health" devices. No, thank you.
Low-emission: Ever heard of the rebound effect? Modern cars could indeed
have much lower emission if that wasn't over-compensated by featurism
and added weight. Production side must also be taken into account, but I
have no numbers for that.
After all, what I miss mostly is being in control of the machine,
instead of the machine (or its vendor) controlling me. This also readily
translates to (pure) software / operating systems. Call me
old-fashioned, if you will.
> I agree that much of the non-repairability modern cars is just lock-in,
> not by necessity.
> That's where the analogy breaks down: some things in software are too
> complicated for the casual user by necessity.
> Though... it's not that much of a break-down actually: Some OS vendors
> are indeed known for their persistent attempts to lock their users in,
> and making stuff needlessly complicated to that end.
Yeah, first Microsoft/Windows, now quite similarly IBM/systemd.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe