I am unlikely to ever follow through on this pursuit, but I did like dreaming about it.
The core purpose of the computer program would have been providing text editing capabilities, requiring no more than the commonly acquired reading and writing skills most everyone has already learned. That is, reading and writing text, especially for any task, f.e. documents, email, instant text messaging, and so on.
The computer program would be customizable, and become unique for that person. Other capabilities could be learned about and added whenever desired, in no particular order. For example, enabling the computer to repeat workflows, changing the layout of the buttonboard, or controlling another computer remotely, and so on.
Old idea I have had about introducing computers to the everyday person. Motivating sort of like starting the very old game Uplink [gog.com] (2001), probably by emulating a newsgroup server from the 1990's for the "tutorial" information.
Additional knowledge could be learned whenever desired, in no particular order. The information in the program would introduce real computer commands much like the more recent computer game Hacknet [gog.com] (2015), but without a conflict story and without puzzles (though still plenty of learning). This would be along the lines of establishing a mindset for determining trustworthiness of computer programs and the various communication networks. Obviously, it must also introduce approaches to network security.
The intended interaction with the computer is inspired by the view manager StumpWM [stumpwm.github.io] along withsome additions [stumpwm.htm#additions]. It would also capabilities typical of a Lisp interpreter like Emacs [gnu.org] which also provides view management along with text editing. That is, either typing in commands or selecting them with a selection-base interface (like with video game consoles), rather than the laborious point-and-click that might also miss.
Most specifically interested in a more approachable interface for the everyday person. Remember: everyone is the everyday person, even a computer programmer. For example, would like to promote more common everyday words and phrases rather than the acronyms or the less dignified terms (f.e. "remote control" instead of "mouse"). For example, perhaps a "Do: " line rather than a "Command: " line.
The following description is mostly from when I considered the idea of seeking funding for developing the software. I cancelled the project at the funding site before submitting for review, because I had long forgotten about it there and never finished the description for it. I copied the text I had written and saved it for later inspiration.
No way I can ever do this, though. Besides having no knack for creating the conversational dialog for the newsgroups, I also now have a few other ideas for an everyday-speak intro (or alternate approaches) to computers.
A program for editing text that also introduces the basic concepts of personal responsibility with the computer medium (f.e. self-help and customization) and a basic foundation of security.
This is an attempt at a cultural influence by empowering the individual with the computer medium, rather than a product that makes the individual dependent on "alien technology" (t.i. foreign to the abilities of that individual and its peers) supplied by companies forever strangers to their "customers".
[ Edward Snowden ]Ultimately, it was a lesson in the principle of self-reliance.
Ours was now a country in which the cost of replacing a broken machine with a newer model was typically lower than the cost of having it fixed by an expert, which itself was typically lower than the cost of sourcing the parts and figuring out how to fix it yourself. This fact alone virtually guaranteed technological tyranny, which was perpetuated not by the technology itself but by the ignorance of everyone who used it daily and yet failed to understand it.
To refuse to inform yourself about the basic operation and maintenance of the equipment you depended on was to passively accept that tyranny and agree to its terms: when your equipment works, you'll work, but when your equipment breaks down you'll break down, too. Your possessions would possess you.
—From page 28 of Permanent record (2019) by Edward Snowden.
Eventually, the program could become the main program for everyday use by the person learning with it, as well be personally customized beyond its initial capabilities. With some operating systems (f.e. GNU/Linux), it would possible to make it into a system-wide view management program that would enable system-wide repeatable workflows.
Most everything is learned by reading conversations in old-fashioned Newsgroups (emulated servers) with (fictional) people sharing their experiences and discoveries. Additional abilities can be discovered from (emulated) document servers publicly sharing dcouments from the (fictional) people on the (emulated) local area network (LAN). The documents might be either personal notes they publicly share, or perhaps additional computer instructions (t.i. computer programs or scripts) by which they personalized their own computers.
The public discussions are intended to create a similar feel to the Internet itself, though kind of old-timey from the Newsgroups days (1990's). There might even be references and connections to (emulated) bulletin board systems (BBS), as the modern day (2000+) social websites are actually the same other than being managed and monetized by companies.
The interface would mostly avoid the point-and-click approach used with a motion remote control (t.i. misnomerd as a "mouse"). Perhaps a split-view approach (f.e. like in Emacs [gnu.org]). Basic functionality and networking skills would be made easy to discover and promoted similarly to the opportunites emulated in some computer games, like the game Uplink [gog.com] (2001) or the game Hacknet [gog.com] (2015).
Modernized software of the 1990's club Senior Citizens Understanding Computer Hacking.
Pronounced "scooch", as in scooching a chair forward.
The dedicated newsgroup server for that former club, along with their posts. Reveals their endeavors and progress. Possible to learn by reading their questions and answers and mutual support of each other, as well as from their disagreements and unresolved mysteries.
Emulated LAN corresponding to the advice and instructions shared in the newsgroups. This allows for putting into practice the advice, even though the original network is long gone.
Additional software available from an FTP server on the emulated LAN. The software works with this modernized version of their software. For example, a view management program for managing the view of all computer programs (when using a UNIX-type system).
Ultimately, the point is about incorporating computers culturally (f.e. as personally adaptable tools) rather than remaining beyond the culture as alien products and alien services.
I am just a nonexceptional computer wizard. The main challenges are having to do this alone, and currently nobody knows me anymore, t.i. no family or friends.
On the other hand, all of this has already been done in some form or another over the decades across the World Wide Web. It really is just a matter of piecing together the various parts and rearranging it as introductory and approachable.
Seemingly, no one has promoted an easier approach to computers without that approach becoming a service or product. This project is about promoting several approaches initially, and encouraging the emergence and sharing of additional approaches.
The main risks are about drawing ire from the established computer technology community, including the technology journalists.
Risk: This is contrary to automatically providing personal information to computer programs written by complete strangers. Also contrary to automatically trusting a company and its services for publicizing personal expression.
Risk: This is contrary to trusting computer programs written by somebody else.
Risk: This is contrary to trusting prewritten computer instructions collected in "frameworks" or "libraries".
Risk: While this does aid with personalization and especially with "disabilities", automated tasks are generally frowned upon by both security technologists and game developers. Might fail to completely persuade those parties to care more about the humans than the (sometimes misguided) ideal approaches or products of such organizations and companies.
The pledges are oriented towards personal commitment rather than the typical fundraising perception of purchasing something. A more accomplished backer considers pledging more money than an inexperienced backer. A less experienced backer makes commitments to apply new concepts for itself, and involve others such as by having a conversation with a peer.
| skill/means | ||
|---|---|---|
| self | self motivated | self enabled |
| others | motivate someone | enable someone |
| environment | shared guidelines | shared resources |
The backer makes a commitment for itself to consider and apply one of the meanings (particularly for the computer medium boundaries): a secret [words--culture.htm#2]; or privacy [words--culture.htm#]; or security [words--culture.htm#]. No need to agree to my definition; backer can rephrase or redefine. The backer should make a note to remind itself, f.e. perhaps on its own website.
The backer makes a commitment for itself to consider and apply one of the meanings: cracking [words--culture.htm#]; or hacking [words--culture.htm#]; or permission [words--culture.htm#].
Same commitment as "$1" pledges. Plus share with at least one other person. Preferably as a conversation in person, but no need to agree with each other.
All three "$1" pledges commitments: a secret, privacy, security.
Risks section for pledges with commitments.
Backers will not be held accountable for thier commitments.
No refunds for forgetting the commitments.
Similarly, commitments fulfilled before end of campaign when it fails to reach goal might be regretted by backers.