jj4211

joined 2 years ago
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Ironically, in Linux, if I ever see a Terminal, it's because I opened it. If I'm doing stuff in GUI, terminals never pop up.

In Windows, doing stuff in GUI a blank terminal opens up and goes away during GUI interaction, or while executing background tasks occasionally.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Like I get and appreciate the CLI and for networking, that's pretty much all I'm using anyway, but I am shocked that enterprise networking doesn't even bother to do any GUI. Once upon a time Mellanox Onyx bothered to do a GUI and I could see some people light up, finally an enterprise switch that would let them do some stuff from a GUI. Then nVidia bought them and Cumulus and ditched their GUI.

There's this kind of weird "turn in your geek card" culture about rejecting GUIs, but there's a good amount of the market that want at least the option, even if they frankly are a bit ashamed to admit it. You definitely have to move beyond GUI if you want your tasks to scale, but not every engagement witih the technology needs to scale.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

While you don't need to memorize button locations and menus, the frustration is that it takes longer, and memorizing those details slightly mitigates. It's torture helping someone do something while they hunt for the UI element they need to get to the next level of hierarchy. They will do it, in time, but it just feels like an eternity.

The main issue in GUI versus CLI is that GUI narrows the available options at a time. This is great, for special purpose usage. But if you have complex stuff to do, a CLI can provide more instant access to a huge chunk of capabilities, and provide a framework for connecting capabilities together as well as a starting point for making repeatable content, or for communicating in a forum how to fix something. Just run command "X" instead of a series of screenshots navigating to the bowels of a GUI to do some obscure thing.

Of course UI people have generally recognized the power and usefulness of text based input to drive actions and any vaguely powerful GUI has to have some "CLI-ness" to it.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

I suppose the point is that the way people interact with GUIs actually resembles how they interact with CLIs. They type from memory instead of hunting through a nested hierarchy to get where they were going. There was a time when Desktop UIs considered text input to be almost a sin against ease of use, an overcorrection for trying to be "better" than CLI. So you were made to try to remember which category was deignated to hold an application that you were looking for, or else click through a search dialog that only found filenames, and did so slowly.

Now a lot of GUIs incorporate more textual considerations. The 'enter text to launch' is one example, and a lot of advanced applications now have a "What do you want to do?" text prompt. The only UI for LLMs is CLI, really. One difference is GUI text entry tends to be a bit "fuzzier" compared to a traditional CLI interface which is pretty specific and unforgiving.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago

In a pretty high end high tech company, there's still lots of people who see a terminal and think "ha hah, they are still stuck in old mainframe stuff like you used to see in the movies".

My team determined long ago that we have to have two user experiences for our team to be taken seriously.

A GUI to mostly convince our own managers that it's serious stuff. Also to convince clients who have execs make the purchasing decisions without consulting the people that will actually use it.

An API, mostly to appease people who say they want API, occasionally used.

A CLI to wrap that API, which is what 99% of the customers use 95% of the time (this target demographic is niche.

Admittedly, there's a couple of GUI elements we created that are handy compared to what we can do from CLI, from visualizations to a quicker UI to iterate on some domain specific data. But most of the "get stuff done" is just so much more straightforward to do in CLI.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

He says "assuming", perhaps he could have further clarified for sake of argument. He's saying even without debunking the claim, you can just wave your hand around and point the simple reality of relatively few people with autism despite majority of people vaccinated.

That's not to say the claim is true, just that even if it were, it's still stupid

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's worth a shot, but by and large the more reasonable conservatives are generally no where near those communities. Certainly the moderation of those communities are fanatic about Trump. The conservatives that you might have hoped to call Trump on his stuff have calculated that they can't afford to challenge Trump even if they personally think he is in the wrong. The ones that have calculated otherwise have been pushed out of the conservative community.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Could keep all of them that don't have annual fees, and spread out your purchasing. I have three cards, one that's 2% off everything, and one that's more off food, and another that's more off online purchases. My aggregate credit limit is pretty high even if each one were a bit modest (they aren't as modest as they used to be though)

You can always pay off your balance more often than monthly. When I first opened my first card, I paid it off every Friday, to make sure the small limits were available if I needed them (I had a credit limit of $1,000 back then). Now I pay them off every payday, still multiple times a month. If you need to carry a large balance across payment cycles, you'll get stuck on a high interest rate treadmill you don't want to be on anyway.

The credit limits increase with time. The $1,000 card I started with now has a $10,000 limit. Mostly the limits came automatically, but I did request an increase to be able to pay for a home repair in a single transaction. Now between the three cards I have a lot of limit.

A fair number of places where you might want to spend a lot of money in a single transaction won't accept credit cards anyway over a threshold. Last time I bought a car after establishing the price I asked about just charging it to a credit card. They were willing to do it only for $2,000, so I had to cut a check for most of the car anyway.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah, happened earlier because they were expensive and unusual enough to attract attention. Now like half of houses have one and it's not 'weird' enough to troll over anymore.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Interestingly, it may backfire on them. For example they cite Real Id or passport.

So passport only people who travel internationally bother to get. The rural MAGAs are less likely to get this.

For Real Id, it's more likely since that can be done with your license, however most people I know who do not fly have not bothered, because it's a hassle, they have to find DMV acceptable materials for a feature they don't even need (if you aren't flying, you still won't need real id for much of anything).

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I have one, it's once every 3 months. Mostly it's about being notified of packages for me, and those guys will absolutely not message me.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Whether it's hardwired or not, the answer is yes, but the mounting is generally protected by some awkwardness (a 'security' bit or a really unforgiving pinhole) which is enough to deter a casual theft, and for those that would actually make an effort, the risk and effort doesn't pay off because those things are relatively cheap nowadays (negligible resale value), record their own theft if it happens (uploading it on the way out, higher risk of being identified).

view more: next ›