"Literacy" vs. "Mastery"

[blackbelt_jones]

I've finally posted something on my blog that I'm really really proud of, and which I think says something important, and I want some comments.

"Linux Literacy" vs. "Linux Mastery"
One aspect of the world of Linux that I believe differs from Windows is a much larger gap between what I shall call "literacy" and "mastery". The tension this creates is always there, but I think it needs to be defined so that we can address it better.

Linux is a much bigger world to master than Windows, because it gives the knowledgable user much more freedom and power. There is simply no end to the reprogramming, reconfiguring, and re imagining that a really smart computer geek can accomplish with Linux, all the way up to creating a new Linux distribution. With Linux, the ceiling that defines mastery is a lot higher, because there is no ceiling. The sky's the limit.

Which is why we need to be careful to not give literacy short shrift. Linux literacy-- the ability to do practical things with a Linux system-- is a legitimate and respectable goal for an individual, and something that the community ought to be actively thinking and talking about promoting. I submit that linux's "no limits" philosphy and structure makes it much harder (if more fun) than Windows to master, but not really intrinsically harder to become literate in. I think that the distinction has been misunderstood way too often, especially outside the community. The resulting confusion has been exploited without shame or mercy by the usual traffickers in FUD. For business, Linux is more expensive than Window, the new line goes, because it's going to take thousands of dollars in support and training for employees to become proficient. This would be true, except that, in the vast majority of cases, mere literacy, not proficinecy, is all that is called for.

Everybody needs to understand that "literacy" and "mastery" are separate, if related, sets of skills. If someone wants to learn how to drive, you wouldn't try to teach em how to build an engine, but all too often, that's what happens in the linux community. Perfectly literate Linux users are made to feel like beginners. Beginners can feel overwhelmed.

I don't want to advocate wholesale splitting off, but someday I would like to see a Linux subcommunity for the literate-- documentation, sites, workshops, maybe a lug or two. As Linux continues to develop, not according to some corporate plan, but organically in every direction, in true free software fashion, I believe that this is going to happen, and I hope to be a part of it.

[Parcival]

I agree with every word.

BTW, I really enjoy reading your blog, I like your style. :)

[blackbelt_jones]

Thanks! Some people may recognize that I've been trying to say this for a long time, and now I feel like I finally got it right!

For me the real epiphany was a new understanding of who I am in the Linux community. We always talk about "newbies" and "gurus" as if there was nothing in between, and I've found that a little uncomfortable in the past, when I try to communicate where I am to others. It's been too long for me to be a newbie-- and, besides, I'm running Linux exclusively now-- but I still couldn't program my way out the shallow end of a bathtub. Maybe this lack of a clear identity shouldn't make me feel uncomfortable and stupid, but it has. You worry about looking like you're trying to appear more knowledgeable than youy actually are. At the last LUG meeting, I actually described myself as "a permenant intermediate newbie". How lame is that?

Well, I've decided that what I am is "linux literate". That doesn't sound lame at all, does it? In fact, I like the sound of that quite a bit.

[Sgood1971]

Originally posted by Parcival
I agree with every word.

BTW, I really enjoy reading your blog, I like your style. :)

I agree, nice work.

[XbaxeSysAdmin]

Originally posted by Parcival
I agree with every word.

BTW, I really enjoy reading your blog, I like your style. :)

This post is really interesting....
And very true however , if you spoon-feed people what they have to know , i do not think that they would remember it for long. But to drive a car , you need to mantain it . I do not think any driving course would let its attendess just go without knowing how to do basic maintenance.

Such is Linux , to be able to use it , you need at least a basic knowledge of its components. You have to be able to at least try to solve your own problems or be able to identify the bad component in minor mistakes.

This is my opinion , but what Parcival says is true , your writing style draws the reader into wanting to read your blog and its passionately written so thumbs up for that. :D

Sincerely
Xbaxe

[blackbelt_jones]

I took Driver Ed in high school. That was a long, long time ago, but I don't remember anything about maintanance. Anyway, it's not that auto mainanance isn't good to know-- it's just not the same thing as driving.

To get off the metaphor and back to brass tacks, I'm pretty sure that there are Linux maintanance tasks that are so basic that they fall under the category of linux literacy: installation, backup, managing the root account, basic interactive use of the command line, and installing software with apt-get-- these things are all pretty essential in my opinion-- and they aren't what you'd call rocket science.

What isn't essential is any kind of programming. Nor is compiling, if you've got apt-get and only want to use your computer for whatever is covered by those 16 thousand Debian packages. Nor is it really necessary to screw around with the kernel. At least it seems that way to me, because I don't know how to do any of these things, and I'm having a great time running Debian with no Windows partition whatsoever-- and not just on one computer.

Please don't think I'm basking in my ignorance; I'm somewhere toward the beginning of the process of learning shell programming. But honestly, sometimes I think I'm learning just for the hell of it. Basically, there's almost nothing that I want to do that I can't do.

The thing is, I've encountered people outside of the community who seem to think that you really need to know how to program in order to use Linux, and that's just nonsense. I think we need people to understand that Linux literacy is pretty easy to attain-- or at least, it should be.

I disagree with some of the expressions that are used whenever I talk about the need for better Linux documentation for non-eperts. I'm not advocating "hand-holding" or "spoon-feeding" or anything like that. What we need is good writers who can write clear and well-organized documentation that respects the readers enough to consider their point of view. Why are we so hard on impatient readers and so willing to give bad writing a pass?

[Valdner]

Very nice article.

What I would like to see is what exactly you mean by Linux literacy. Perhaps some sort of check list of things one needs to know to be considered Linux literate.

You already mentioned a few, such as apt-get and installation. But, it would still be nice to have some sort of check list that I can say "Alright, I'm fairly competant with that, let's see if I can now do the next thing."

I'm sure some people will flame me for this and say that I should learn on my own. I have been. It would still be nice to have some sort of guide though.

[Parcival]

Originally posted by Valdner
I'm sure some people will flame me for this and say that I should learn on my own. I have been. It would still be nice to have some sort of guide though.

Naw, no need to flame you on this. :) However, I still don't think such a list would be a big step any further. In earlier discussions here in /dev/random (here (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=121746&perpage=15&highlight=newbie%20guru&pagenumber=1) and here (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=101293&perpage=15&highlight=newbie%20guru&pagenumber=1) ) when we have been philosophying about when somebody isn't a newbie anymore, it was soon pretty clear that it's the way one sees oneself with an emotional flavor in it. There are gurus who still consider themselves newbies while there are script kiddies clicking (!) malware together and feel like they're the world's 31337 h4X0Rz. It really just depends on how one feels about oneself.

I for my part handle a couple gentoo boxes and start looking into IDS (intrusion detection systems), so I guess that makes me a little more than literate. Yet I am far from being a guru, like e.g. I don't know much about programing shell scripts because I'm too lazy to learn it. (I'm probably still waiting for the job that is too big to get it done without scripts)

mdwatts and bwkaz are considered true gurus from my side. Don't know if they have a social life, though. :p

[GmarAppledude]

I read your blog site the other day and was impressed, it made a lot of sense to me. I guess most people would call me a newb as I have only being using Linux for a couple of months but I don't feel like a newb. I have tried a few distros and learned new things from each one. I have the luxury of multiple PCs which helps this enormously. I have read almost every (recent) thread on this site and have gained so much from it. I am completely confident that I can now use Linux for (almost) everything I used windows for before. I only use Windows (at home) for gaming now and this will change for sure in the future.

I know what you mean about programming though, I have been programming profesionally for over ten years now in windows. I started a thread asking for advice on this and was pointed to quite a few sites by some kind people. When I got to read the threads, despite my programming talents, found the whole thing very confusing. Not necessarily the syntax of new languages but what libraries, modules, settings, support files and whatever would be needed just to get a program to run, or even to write one. Even where to type the code and what commands are needed to compile link it. I will get there but it's a whole other world to using Linux proficently.

So I agree with you that programming should be considered a whole other ball game, separate from any thing else Linux related when considering someones abilities. One things for sure I won't be dropping Linux
this time. It's too empowering and addictive.

[blackbelt_jones]

Originally posted by GmarAppledude
I have the luxury of multiple PCs which helps this enormously.

I don't mean to hijack my own thread, but you touched on something that I strongly believe in. I'm convinced that a second PC is no luxury for the Linux beginner. When I first started using Linux, I got an old PC with a 133mhz Pentium, 40 mb of RAM, and two 1 GB hard drives. I paid 40 dollars at a garage sale, monitor included. I installed Mandrake 8.1 on it, and it was sooooo slow, but I was able to get it online and drag my virtual keyster over to this site.

In a world where old computers are available for 40 dollars, there's no reason why any novice should put him/herself through the trauma of trying to repartition his/her harddrive for a dual boot, putting his main system at risk and cutting his/herself off from the aid and comfort that is available on the internet for the time that it takes to do the actual install. A second system, the cheaper the better, cuts down the intmidation factor to zero.

Originally posted by Valdner
I'm sure some people will flame me for this and say that I should learn on my own. I have been. It would still be nice to have some sort of guide though.

Amen, brother! Learning Linux was a long frustrating process for me, and while it was sometimes a lot of fun, knowing how to use it is even more fun. Looking back, I think it could have been a lot less painful if I could have found some documentation that was better organized, and geared toward literacy.