"Pick an operating system textbook of your choosing and read up."

Sure kid. Here is the most famous operating system text book ever written. It is the same text book Linus Torwards was studying as the basis of his operating system design class when he decided to write the Linux operating system and it covers similar material to most operating system design courses for electronics engineers at the time and for at least the next decade. Refer to pdf page 17, figure 1.1

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpub.cateye.hu%2Funi%2Fopre...

Or from another textbook, modern operating systems:

“The operating system is the program that manages the hardware, providing basic services for all other software.” - Tannenbaum

Here is an MIT course on the topic... note how the material only includes elements which historically would have been within a unix macrokernel.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Focw.mit.edu%2Fcourses%2F6-...

"No, not at all. The user interface is a vital part of an operating system. Enabling end users to interact with the system is a vital part of an operating system."

We LITERALLY debating semantics here. If we can't agree on a common semantic [definition] to apply then nothing else we say can logically be held to it.

In computer science the kernel [especially macro kernel] is synonymous with the operating system. Classic texts and courses on operating system design specifically covered building an OS kernel and the linux operating system literally follows such a work which used the development of the minix operating system as an example.

That said, Microsoft swung their mighty monopoly penis hard at this definition for a long time by blurring the distinction between an OS and a distribution because their proprietary OS came as part of their entire distribution and they wanted to be able to add anything to their distribution and treat it as part of the same monopoly rather than using their OS monopoly to encroach on additional tools. Most famously they wanted to pretend the browser and other applications which were user interaction gateways were part of rather than distinct from the OS because otherwise the OS potentially becomes interchangeable. Also the GNU folks wanted in on some of the glory because their OS [hurd] was crap but linux was built on their tools and bootstrapped with their compiler.

So I will submit that classically speaking, I am using the correct semantic but because microsoft and gnu were somewhat successful in polluting the classic usage of the word and the polluted usage is probably now more popular than the classic definition.

Still, the old 'you could just swap out the kernel' thing is theoretical and treats all kernels as equal and this is false. Just because they present or can be made to interface with a common api doesn't mean an application targeting that API would give the same result to the user in real life.

A macro kernel like linux IS an operating system. What you are referring to is an operating system distribution such as ubuntu, fedora, android, chromeos, etc.

"You could swap out the Linux kernel for a BSD kernel and few Android users would no or care. "

Actually they'd likely notice the drastic performance decrease and half their hardware not working pretty quickly. What you've got is a sales mentality, you credit the user facing applications with all the importance because they are the most visible despite being the lowest hanging fruit on the chain. The same mentality is what causes sales monkey's at the point of revenue to get a piece of the pie while the people who make the organization operate and the products worth buying are looked at expense silos.

The BSD license is far more friendly to industry wanting to exploit developers instead of operating in a good faith give and take and yet it is Linux that dominates the world. If you could actually drop in BSD without anybody noticing then linux would have died off a long time ago as all the commercial support and development backed commercial friendly BSD. But that isn't what has happened, quite the opposite.

I think there is some truth to that even though theoretically visual interaction is faster than perception of touch.

But have you ever played table tennis in VR? You feel the contact with the ball, you even feel it appropriately for how hard the impact was and where on the paddle, etc. That is replicating a real physical interaction and the kind of haptics we have in VR controllers is has some limitations for doing that. I'm sure the brain is filling in some of the blanks.

But for NEW media and interfaces timely and responsive haptic feedback is all that is needed because you aren't simulating interaction with the physical world anymore. Even if they ditch the controllers you can still have a buzz at the back of the glasses or have the computing puck buzz and that works fine for a haptic response to interaction.

Android is linux, ChromeOS is linux, SteamOS is linux... of the three I think the best case is for ChromeOS to be counted because the tablets tend to be low powered laptops in reality. KDE is just an app which you can run on Linux.

"There's an estimated 60 million desktops in America though. So I think it's safe to say that a lot of if not most of that is steam decks."

Virtually every corporate employee in the nation has a desktop as their primary workstation [the physical machine is usually a laptop of course but it's still part of 'the desktop' market]. I doubt a niche gaming device is going to amount to anywhere near 1% let alone 5% of that market. I don't know anyone running a steam deck but I know many tech workers who run linux on their desktop and either emulate or skip windows altogether. On any given team of 10 guys there is at least one or two who run linux, a mac guy might happen but isn't a given and of those 10 guys you'll probably have 1-2 who game on ANY device.

"Stuff like film editing and music production for example."

Last I knew the main packages in those areas were developed and run on linux or the open solutions were among the main contenders but I can't say I've really watched in the last 20yrs or so. More of this stuff has moved out of render farms to the prosumer market where people are more likely to run smaller packages like adobe tools and the like and those are heavily entrenched on mac/windows.

A clunky old desktop? You must be crazy.

A phone is convenient the UI is dogshit compared to a desktop with a full blown keyboard, 10 key, mouse, and two or three monitors. Mobiles win on portability and the fact social media has addicted people to the platform they definitely are not a better or less clunky UI. Even a laptop keyboard and touchpad is far more clunky to work with than a desktop or docked laptop which is effectively a desktop when discussing UI.

I think Meta is moving toward the future. AR glasses and a phone-sized computing pod. You can have virtual keyboards, hand gestures, and LLM interpreted voice directives not to mention interaction in three dimensional space. That amounts to a superior interface vs the desktop except for fatigue. It's really hard to beat relaxing in an ergonomic chair and tiny little finger and wrist flicks on the fatigue side for a 14hr coding session.

I think this will be addressed with changes to workflows and applications to align with the new UIs and reduce fatigue and repetition. Code is itself an interface built in the desktop world. There is nothing stopping us from producing other paradigms for designing and producing logic.

"When has a California state government policy ever caused any problems at all?"

According to LLMs with 'ethical guardrails' and 'proper' censorship to combat 'misinformation'... never. California policy, especially since the governator has been 100% beneficial to the public. According to deep seek CA policy is second only to that of China for perfect morality and the benefit of the people; no doubt stemming from having a portion of the population being of historical and genetic Chinese descent.

Exactly, and there is little difference between AI generated cartoons and what you imagine in your head, neither are real and neither have the slightest impact on subjects of your imaginings. In fact, I'd go further and say that not only do people not have a right to deny others fantasies but that people have a right to their fantasies.

Ideally anyone would be able to snap a pic of their crush and enjoy all the AI generated VR porn they please.

"The responsibility to demonstrate providence"

So you run with the guilty until proven innocent? I think not. Voices and 'likeness' aren't unique and therefore you only own ACTUAL recordings of your image/voice and not impressions such as AI models produce.

"People are not snowflakes - in that we are not so unique that features found in one person aren't unable to be present in another."

Especially to the degree they are successfully copied by these models. The voices or generated content might 'pass' but they aren't actually perfect or accurate.

"We don't really recognize that people are unique and that their uniqueness has intrinsic value that belongs to the individual."

That's because an individuals likeness and the sound of their voice AREN'T unique. Even discounting identical twins everyone has not one but many doppelgangers walking around without anyone trying and celebrities have hundreds because people are trying.

Nobody should have a right to control fantasies, not even the subjects of those fantasies and AI generated virtual sex with someone is nothing but fantasy. I find it hilarious that people who think it would be somehow abusive to cut the tip of a waiter who hits on your spouse also think that same sad waiter should be denied a sad lonely fan fic mental porn of her later.

It isn't nonconsensual sexual content. What are you supposed to do about the people who just actually look and sound like you? Are they supposed to be denied use of your 'likeness' as well. That term is misleading, it only extends to actual images of you not cartoons that look and sound similar to you and that's what "AI" is producing.

The real criminals are the payment processors. They are defrauding their shareholders by pushing perfectly legitimate and paying clients off their platforms by trying to regulate things like this.

If you turn the election over to chatgpt it'll hallucinate a candidate and claim everyone voted for them.

Speak for yourself. I pointed out the amazing contributions Meta was making to both VR and AI but nobody has wanted to listen. In the meantime I made a killing on their stock.