Comment threads on the Closed Source OS topics like this regularly remind me about the large disconnect between skilled technical users and the "average" user. That average probably isn't your (great) grandparent who never learned how to type suddenly needing to learn the rapidly evolving early-days internet, but it's still just as dangerous to suggest "Use Linux" as the solution for everyone when plenty of "Average" users still don't know enough to be doing things safely in the console.
The "sudo rm -rf" and equivilant horror stories get told all too often as mistakes even made by "skilled users" who were in a hurry, and while that particular problem is becoming less common there is still a minefield out there. Wider use case where we need IT support is worse since there are plenty of Microsoft and Mac favoring restrictions and lockdowns required in the name of corporate level security requirements and certifications add to the mess and "security concerns" you can't get corporate to move away from.
I'm a daily Linux user who has had to put years of a software developer career's time into learning the easier system administration aspects and working with those who handle the harder issues, but doing this in my career I have had to step back every time someone comes to me with a problem. Once I understand the problem then go on to ask "at a guess, how much time will diagnosing this even take?" with the estimates varying based on how standard the OS install or deployment is.
Time and a relatively small amount of training is the problem with switching users from Windows to Mac or the reverse. Switching to Linux is training and introducing a technical mindset into a person. Idiot-proofing the system is a major issue Linux hasn't solved yet. VDI systems and the like might be a step in the right direction, but as soon as your use case for Linux requires a "average user" to open a terminal the problems will pile up and the minefield is exposed.
Years removed from using a Mac I still think of it as the most "child-proofed" OS. Windows being less restrictive but still doing a good-enough job of locking up the more dangerous things while also not drawing attention to them on a regular basis. Linux is like seeing the dangers left out in the open with few useful warning signs beyond some generic unspecified danger signs around the worksite.
imo, the 'grandparent' type user should really be on an ipad or chromebook etc. (unless they have some specific software needs). Too easy to get unwanted stuff running on windows and it needs admin.
I got an 80y/o a System76, for basic tasks. Knowledge transfer from Windows was relatively quick, a week at most (she was willing, which is not always the case). Maybe we'll see Linux support call scamming, but that's not the case right now - that advantage of Linux for old people cannot be understated.
You are the sysadmin for that machine. Just wait until an update borks or something. Maybe you are a hobbyist who likes fixing computers for free, so fine.
I have done zero technical support for my parent's ipads for like 15 years now. They even got it working with a printer without me. The biggest issue has been bogus emails from "Microsoft Tech Support" and "Norton Antivirus", so the Windows ecosystem still seems grim that way.
Windows has made improvements in that area in the last decade, but I don't disagree much. It could be the bias of having dealt with IT related issues for long enough, but I do think the "average" user might be regressing closer to that grandparent level as far as (needing, if not wanting to admit) that child-proofing the OS is needed. Chromebook and tablet PC stuff will probably continue to draw more entry level users in. As that marketshare grows we will have to wait and see how malicious programming evolves with it...
Same general guesswork, but everyone on here can make reasonably educated guesses at what the AI evolution process will do to the tech landscape. Nobody knows enough yet to have anything in cement, but it's out there, and the small changes of the last few years make it seem that we are going to regress rather than improve the level of technical knowlege needed to be "average" when working on a computer.
Really? I'm pretty sure all the GreetingCardPro-type stuff is available on iPads, and its a better device for banking/investment stuff (because GreetingCardPro can't fuck with it). I was thinking more like QuickBooks or a custom business app.
Big Assumptions on your part. Do you think 'grandparents' also don't use iphones and androids? If anything more people are more familiar with this interface than Windows/Mac WIMP.
Anyway, their Windows laptop got all sorts of shit "side-loaded" (and I have a benign theory about this happened), and put them on iPad like 15 years ago. You can object to the closed system, but zero tech support calls for me.
Recent years have made me realize that as bad as reading political threads in online circles can be, it still does bring a greater ability to self-innoculate yourself to emotional influences than watching and listening to other groups editorialized political media.
But yes, I also do wonder with these political topics on all online sites using text, votes, and comment trees what kind of things would become red flags about users if sites chose or were forced to make more metrics appear in them. "Lurker" votes, Estimated Geolocation or VPN use of commenters, anythings that could be shown in "suspect" topics even if not "bannable or confirmed" manipulation was happening.
Or maybe just a politics filter. I know I have a bad habit of getting into reading these topics and their comments when my sanity would prefer I filter them out entirely.
The select few lawyers on the right cases probably will be the only ones coming out ahead on this after the dust has settled.
The issue is that unpaid average people are being used, or rather forced, to act as QA and Beta Testers for this mad dash into the AI space. Customer Service was already a good example of negative preception by design, and AI is just being used to make it worse.
A production database being corrupted or deleted causing a company to fail sounds good on paper. But if that database breaks a bank account, healthcare record, or something life altering for a person who has nothing to do with the decision of using it the only chance they have for making it right is probably going to be the legal system.
So unless AI advancement really does force the legal system to change the only people I see coming out ahead from the mess we are starting to see is the Lawyers who actually know what they're doing and can win cases against companies that screw up in their rush to go to AI.
The answer you get will depend on how much a person has to travel or has traveled in the US. If someone lives, works, and never travels outside (for example) a 100 KM radius then what they do every day will play a big part. Frequent road travel for work, family, or other reasons probably will look towards the smallest or most efficiant car that can fit their need.
The average weather pattern of the region a person lives in plays a part, the amount of public transportation avaliable plays a part, how densely packed cities near you are plays a part. What car is avaliable is obviously a big part. All that stuff will be probably be considered before the "overall safety" of the car you want (and can afford) to get.
The people who can afford to think about safety will most likely be considering "passanger safety" rather than at the societial level. The more big cars around them the more someone concerned about safety will feel the need to own and drive in a big car. Sometimes you need the bigger car for the larger range a bigger gas tank allows. There are still places where you can find around 400 km between gas stations, especially if you are driving outside normal buisness hours.
One topic for the American car market has been how the "mid-sized" or "mid-range value" car space has been vanishing. That the options are increasingly moving towards either minimal passanger/storage Eco-Cars or the larger Trucks and SUVs. That plays a part, the used car market plays a part, and other world events play a part.
So at least from one point of view here all that leads to a lot of topics like this where there are people who have only lived in the US (and often not even moved around to other parts of the US) pushing their world view on others. You also have people who "have been to the US" claiming qualified expertiese based off their point(s) of reference, valid or not. The "US needs better public transportation" crowd will usually come out as well with sometimes more militant views against car use and ownership.
But all this circles back to the idea that the "normal American" has time to think about this or try to act on any of this. Some do, some don't, most won't really think about this unless a headline prompts something from their brain. The hard thing for the "normal European" to understand is the economics of distance and scale at play in the US given just how much space between cities and towns there can be.
People can blame the "American Dream" or the auto-industry, or whatever else you might want to imagine has contributed to the damage done in the last century of road construction and sprawl. The end result is that most Americans don't have a choice but to own a car, and may be far too tired to be trusted at the wheel of a vehicle. Multiple people driving less than a few miles to work may be involved in an accident with someone who had driven hundreds. Miles driven in a year is part of insurance calculations for a reason.
This was much more comment than I intended to give.
There are 13 years required (K-12) in the US. The way non-compliance is peanlized varies depending on the state.
Education in the US is a complicated subject given the "extreme individualistic American culture" as you say. That will be present in the teachers and school districts, and the lesson plans can/will differ greatly between teachers and school districts for getting students to the general standard.
I've just enjoyed the realization that I attended a meeting where our VMware support rep used "Just think about how much money using bare metal hardware is costing" as an argument to my management during that meeting after these price increases were becoming common news.
The "sudo rm -rf" and equivilant horror stories get told all too often as mistakes even made by "skilled users" who were in a hurry, and while that particular problem is becoming less common there is still a minefield out there. Wider use case where we need IT support is worse since there are plenty of Microsoft and Mac favoring restrictions and lockdowns required in the name of corporate level security requirements and certifications add to the mess and "security concerns" you can't get corporate to move away from.
I'm a daily Linux user who has had to put years of a software developer career's time into learning the easier system administration aspects and working with those who handle the harder issues, but doing this in my career I have had to step back every time someone comes to me with a problem. Once I understand the problem then go on to ask "at a guess, how much time will diagnosing this even take?" with the estimates varying based on how standard the OS install or deployment is.
Time and a relatively small amount of training is the problem with switching users from Windows to Mac or the reverse. Switching to Linux is training and introducing a technical mindset into a person. Idiot-proofing the system is a major issue Linux hasn't solved yet. VDI systems and the like might be a step in the right direction, but as soon as your use case for Linux requires a "average user" to open a terminal the problems will pile up and the minefield is exposed.
Years removed from using a Mac I still think of it as the most "child-proofed" OS. Windows being less restrictive but still doing a good-enough job of locking up the more dangerous things while also not drawing attention to them on a regular basis. Linux is like seeing the dangers left out in the open with few useful warning signs beyond some generic unspecified danger signs around the worksite.