Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Phillip Frabott <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: GNOME/Freedesktop/redhat incompetent or malicious influence
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2024 18:51:45 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <vehiu2$run3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$bad8$b677bed3$aca0e5e2$5bb3eab5@linux.rocks>
 <lmjll1Fd52kU2@mid.individual.net>
 <slrnvgb2cp.5v0f.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
 <ve4go1$3ra8a$3@dont-email.me>
 <pan$4209e$40d36e28$c8a7c079$163ec1ab@linux.rocks>
 <ve5v74$2ld1n$1@dont-email.me> <ve85ik$muck$1@news1.tnib.de>
 <6708495f@news.ausics.net> <a66a3914-6c11-0ffb-f390-bb54cb5134e6@example.net>
 <vee8uq$7vmp$2@dont-email.me>
 <a954b84c-ed72-4a87-fd0a-a59023bb7fc9@example.net>
 <vef5s8$cdhq$2@dont-email.me>
 <58560593-dbc5-547d-6683-58c9f7a9c263@example.net>
 <vegk55$mnuu$4@dont-email.me>
 <15401563-621e-c021-92d8-6665d8f20f1d@example.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 00:51:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f125a04845164fd1bc1879fa9283ba67";
	logging-data="916195"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+v3Xnoz1Dbyu+SwbyzeTCZBTUW8C1DPWw="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:sS2UULi2brYNbbPwB5SJGH1vsrs=
In-Reply-To: <15401563-621e-c021-92d8-6665d8f20f1d@example.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5305

On 10/13/2024 16:37, D wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> 
>>> That's a good point. Maybe the OS-level is so mature, that not much 
>>> remains to be added.
>>>
>>> In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+ 
>>> years so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is 
>>> actually far better than any commercial alternatives.
>>>
>>> But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question, 
>>> will there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?
>>>
>>
>> I would think this would only happen/be necessary if/when a 
>> technological change in hardware happens that would cause more 
>> capability beyond the standard scope of what we have now. Remember, 
>> the OS is just an interface between the hardware below it and the 
>> software on top of it. It doesn't (and shouldn't) do much more then 
>> that. It's just an interface and mediator to share 1 piece of hardware 
>> with multiple pieces of software at the same time. So when you think 
>> about it, the real question is, what hardware paradigm shift will 
>> happen that will need the OS to be changed significantly.
> 
> The only thing I can think of that would be radically different would be
> quantum computers. Maybe it will work in 20-30 years or so, and perhaps
> that will bring with it changes?

It would honestly depend on how different the processing of input and 
output is from the hardware-level kernel exposure. Meaning, what 
interfaces does the kernel need to interface with a quantum processor 
and is it significant enough to warrant an incompatible change with 
existing kernels. Because software input/output wouldn't really change 
between the kernel/OS and the application. The data is just different 
but the method to get the data to the kernel for processing is likely 
not to change much (but I could be wrong). I mean if you go into the 
current kernel you will still find implementation to use internet-based 
applications over a ham (amateur) radio interface. I mean you can 
literally run a radio-only telnet/SSH server over radio transmission 
without any internet connectivity at all. But because the input/output 
between the kernel and the application is the same regardless of if it's 
over amateur radio or Ethernet, there is not enough to warrant a 
paradigm shift. So it all will just depend on exactly how interfacing 
with a quantum computer would work. It'll be an interesting subject 
that's for sure. I'll probably be too old by then to really figure it 
out though. heh.

> 
> On the other hand, another perspective on a computer interfaces is that
> I formulate things I want to do, and enter those formulations through an
> input device, and read the putput from an output device.
> 
> The physical world hasn't changed much, and the GUI does seem to do the
> job quite well, I mean, with a terminal and a GUI, I do not feel
> constrained in any way.
> 
> On the other hand, that's why they call it a paradigm shift, since I am
> probably not even aware of the next paradigm, so maybe I am contrained
> after all, I just do not know it. ;)
> 
>>> I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.
>>
>> If that happens, we'll all just hack the Gibson. The police will be on 
>> us in like, 10 minutes. And if we all do it together we can do it in 5 
>> minutes, Lord Nikon will safe all our a**es. Lets go shopping!
> 
> True! ;)
> 


-- 
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------