i believe it was @chr@cybre.space who i once saw say something to the effect of "the fact that we're still programming in text shows how far computer science still has to go"
i think about that a lot
there's artfulness, and a sense of the arcane, in skillfully manipulating strange tokens to form the incantations that will get your computer to do what you want
but i often think about how much of programming is only intuitive to me because i've been steeped in it for years
i think visual programming is the next step, and i'm excited to see what people are doing in that area
incidentally: when you're using the shell in *nix, you're programming. there's a reason it's called shell scripting. and i think some of the complaints non-technical users have with learning to code can also give some insight into why the shell is often so user-unfriendly for that demographic
if you truly want a "year of linux on the desktop" someday, that's worth thinking about
i guess part of my fear is that what we have now (three huge OSes that are user unfriendly in deep and fundamental, albeit different, ways) is too entrenched to ever really change
It is beneficial to corporations to keep the control that they have, and encroach further on what they don't.
User friendliness via interface is a viable commodity, but not access to higher control functions that would deter corporate interests.
Corps HATE modding, because it can use parts and procedures that the corps do not control.
@typhlosion fun thought: visual "control flow" diagrams (probably the lowest possible form of "visual" anything) are exceedingly rare to see outside of disassembling; useful when taking things apart yet strangely absent when putting them together