@namark

You don't need to convince me about the intrinsic evilness of #capitalism, but you are missing the point.

Would you like a world where you need to rely on an expert/élite to write or read anything?

That's what billions of people do everyday right now, through automatisms they do not understand (#WhatsApp, #GMail and so on).

Our craft is not like others, even if most of us are (or pretend to be) still unaware of our power.

We are the scribans of our age.

@Shamar of course it's all about capitalism, don't even try to read what I actually wrote.

As long as the expert is independent and provides a service fair and square I would very much appreciate it, just as I appreciate a services of construction workers, mechanics, electricians, plumbers, janitors, lawyers, translators, writers, doctors, hairdressers, interior decorators and anyone else who can do anything I can't do, because I'm not the father and the son and the holy spirit and the creator of the world, even if it were a virtual world in a bubble.

The only thing that makes our cruft not like the others, is that it is currently dominated with snake oil salesmen, and apparently people see no way out of it except going back to stone age. Serving our neighbours directly? What? Dealing with filthy humans? That is beneath us, waste of out immense galaxy brain power.

Why don't you get off your high horse and realize that if there was any real competition in the industry most of us oh so powerful scribans(what even?) would have been yer average plumbers, and that would have been good. Your hubris stems from the success of what you detest.

@namark

I'm not sure I understood your last paragraph, but I cannot take you seriously when you state that if you weren't able to read and write because writing was still a craftmanship like it was 5000 years ago, you would appreciate the expert that would read and write your letters "as long as the expert is independent and provides a service fair and square".

How would you know that her service is fair if you couldn't read them yourselves? Asking different experts to read your letters and see if they all say the same? And to read the letter written by an indipendent competitor?

I don"t know.

I'm glad the alphabet was invented.

And I think we lack an alphabet for #Informatics (and even lack fundamental concepts like ancient civilizations laked the zero).

@Shamar Asking different experts to read your letters and see if they all say the same? And to read the letter written by an independent competitor?

Yes exactly, cause that's how the rest of the world works in case you didn't notice. You don't hire all experts all the time, all you need is to find one that is honest, and unless you are one of the earliest adopters of the technology that work has already been done for you. Just ask your neighbours, that is if you ever even talked to them, or I guess read some online reviews, cause that's a thing now.

Your analogy with language while tear-jerking is not correct. Formal written language is a standard not a technology or a tool, and as such it's agreed upon by independent parties and proliferated to the point of being required. Despite that even today there are still some avenues of formal language, where you would need the help of an expert of both to read and write it, either to be extra creative while remaining correct, or to be as mathematically or legally (or otherwise) clear as possible.

Independent experts honestly serving the public means independent schools open to public, that are interested in finding more and better experts to expand the industry which does not rely on exploitation. Independent schools means that formal language standards must form for them to effectively cooperate.

@namark

I do not know why you are so aggressive, but for sure we attribute different value to privacy and freedom.

The parallel with, say, legal writing is weaker than it seems because any contract is going to be enforced in front of a human (a judge) that will interpret both the text, the law and the intents of parties.

OTOH, you are right that even with writing we have field experts (mathematicians, lawyers, poets, novelists and so on) and that's fine but there is a reason why such professions are strongly tied to something that can be read by anybody.

Would you trust a court that can jail you for violating laws you are unable to read?

Today in our industry there is a lot of fuss about #Ethics in #AI just because we don't want to admit that any software for which we cannot explain exactly and completely the relation between input and output is broken and should not be used on human data.

But the same is true for proprietary software and even with #opensource software that is too complex to be understood in a reasonable amount of time by any single programmer (not mentioning people unable to program).

That's the power I was talking about: we create automated system that impose our will to unsuspecting and unaware people that not only have no understanding on what it really does (think of trackers, analytics and so on), but do not even realize they should be enabled to have a saying!

We basically write secret #laws that self-enforce over unsuspecting people and that not only affect what they can and cannot do, but what they can and cannot think!

And not just on an individual level, but on a global scale!

I don't think that a carpenter, an architect or a plumber can be so dangerous, tbh.

@Shamar
> I do not know why you are so aggressive
I'm trying to scare your tears back into the eye sockets.

My main point about analogies was that tools are not the same as language that laws are written in, what are you even arguing? I was against your implication that all tools should be made for casual gamers instead of experts.

The language of the law is not a tool it's a sandard, read the last paragraph on my previous reply on standards. That's why law is not written in some weird dialect that some insular minority uses, and yet it's still an example of language that most people cannot properly interpret or use. Yes, I'm unable to read or interpret most laws let alone defend myself in court, I'd instead trust a lawyer a personal human level, and do whatever they tell me no matter how counterintuitive. What implying about trusting a judge? If you are being tried who cares if you trust the judge or not? Nobody goes to prison for 10 years like "oh yes, I totally deserved it, loved that judge", at that point they probably hate pretty much everyone who was present in the court.

"we create automated system that impose our will to unsuspecting people"
What does this have to do with the tools for experts? This is a result of pathological business practice, not complexity. Today no consumer grade software is made to be fit for any purpose, none of it comes with warranty, or as a part of a service directly provided to general public, nobody is accountable for it. It's exploitation because it's what it's meant to be, no by some indirect correlation.

The complexity is understood by experts collectively, and if they honestly serve the general public it's not a problem what so ever. I'm sorry to disappoint you, I understand you ultimate dream is to leave the society and go live in the city of oz that you'd build yourself in a week or so, but you also likely have not a single clue about how to build a rudimentary stone house. When it comes to thickness of the walls, you'll be at the mercy of evil construction workers, where the toilets and sinks go will be dictated by ruthless plumbers and heartless electricians will be demanding copper wire despite your endless please, all led by the global elite of architects to usurp your god given rights and freedoms.

Most people don't know how their fridges, washing machines, cars, let alone water piping or electrical wiring on the city scale work, and yet it's all fine, because there are local independent experts who serve them fairly, forming and enforcing quality standards, through the unwritten law of "don't buy that crap, I'm not fixing it for you".

@namark

Ok, now I see your aggressiveness in this thread is just due to confusion.

When you write:

```
The complexity is understood by experts collectively, and if they honestly serve the general public it's not a problem what so ever.
```

it becomes evident you have no clue about programming and software.

Do you know the history of #Heartbleed?

There are thousands of severe security vulnerabilities in software discovered every years because:

1) not even experts, collectively¹ or not, understand the software they code
2) when a system is not fully understood by any single mind, you just need ONE dishonest expert to introduce subtle vulnerabilities.

Indeed this happens continuously in the real world, like it or not (I don't).

Anyway, feel free to keep your loved chains on your mind singing "Don't worry... be happy..." 🎶🎙️🎶

Bye!
___
¹ whatever "collectively" means in the contest of understanding complex and ever-changing systems

@Shamar I'm sure in your magical city of oz there will be no problems what so ever, but unfortunately reality is not perfect, and the problem with heartbleed is not that it happened, but that no one was accountable. And please tell how the hell did they fix it if according to you nobody can to this day understand how it works? It's not a cause of insurmountable complexity it's just a mistake, an omission, basic sloppiness. I was supposed to put a wall here, but I forgot, oopsies! Except in construction if you forget to put a wall where you were supposed to, you're likely getting kicked out of the industry for life if not sued for damages, while in our industry the "oopsies" is actually enough. Did your copy of openssl come with a warranty, or did it come with huge all caps disclaimer stating that it is not fit for any purpose what so ever? Now with an answer to that question in mind was, think again why "There are thousands of severe security vulnerabilities in software discovered every years", while not any less complex engineering projects in other industries remain stable for decades at least. Is it because it's not understood by a single mind, or is it because nobody is even trying to make it secure or good or anything at all. For the established markets if it can be used to exploit people, then it's good enough, nothing else matters.

@lorendias

I don't know.

My rule of thumb is: if it takes more than a month to be fully read and understand a software, it's broken beyond repair.
The more time, the more it's broken.

How broken is #Python? #Rust? #GCC?

I ported GCC to Jehanne, because I used to share your insight about legacy, isolation, containerization and substitution... but I'm not sure anymore.