Thread

1. dmdiefjeidnn · 1790567748 · focus · HN ↗

   I always find these ideas funny. Been working with computers for decades and never once have I thought software “malleable”. Maybe back when I had to actually type the program into my Speccy to get anything to work… but then again it wasn’t a “let’s make software malleable” situation, it was more of a “this is how we can distribute software right now” type of thing.

   Software was never malleable. User agency is a tale you tell yourselves to try and justify your rose-tinted glasses. Could things be better in computer world? Absolutely. But you could’ve ask us the same way back then and the answer would still be “absolutely”.

   1. myaccountonhn · 1790570332 · focus · HN ↗

      Weird, I use emacs and form it as I please, and I do have agency. The way you describe it, I don't exist.

      1. ididjsjdjwj · 1790572675 · focus · HN ↗

         That’s… not a valid point. eMacs whole point is being “malleable”, but the point is that not every software has to be, and they never have been by default.

         1. gspr · 1790579216 · focus · HN ↗

            ... but the parent makes a good point that software can be malleable, and that it's a good thing.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.