What do you think about a "SteamBSD" machine ?

There is something unhealthy about failing to realize that man pages aren't the only resources out there. The web offers plenty of useful documentation on how things work—material that processes and presents information in a different way. That ought to be enough to calm expectations down. But it isn't. It seems, then, that what matters isn't simply that I learn (in my way), but that I should learn in *your* way. That shifts the conversation onto a different track. A broken track.

Let me know when I can run Battlefield 6 at 8k 120fps with 4x Ray Tracing and AI hypergoon Deep Realism.
 
man pages are created by the people who know best
the developer who wrote the software

you cant be sure that other resources are either up to date
or correct unless you compare them to the man page

its not my way it the unix way

if you want people to collaborate they are going to expect you to read man pages
and understand technical jargon

not reading the man pages before asking someone a question
can be seen as a sign of disrespect that you dont value their time
and expect to be spoon feed

thats how a lot of people will take it

saying you dont understand technical jargon
isnt going to fill people with much confidence on such a complex project if you want them to use it

I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.

NB : Check the picture attached to realize that I'm not using IA just because you think that IA put "—" in the sentences. This show how you are in bad faith. It's not the IA that puts "—",but the google translator.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2026-09-19_01-21-21.jpg
    Screenshot_2026-09-19_01-21-21.jpg
    241.4 KB · Views: 8
I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.

NB : Check the picture attached to realize that I'm not using IA just because you think that IA put "—" in the sentences. This show how you are in bad faith. It's not the IA that puts "—",but the google translator.
Given I can only grasp like 1/5 of the words on the original text, it seems to me that google translate is doing some LLM processing on it. There is no ways a regular translator would add spurious —, some markdown based emphasis on words.
Even the phrase structure are completely shifted.
If you want to emphasis on words, maybe use the forums feature to do so ? Because having *emphasis word* only scream LLM generated stuff.
 
I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.
Except that documentation shouldn't and almost certainly doesn't use any "technical jargon" to explain things, only concepts actually necessary to understand the subject. If you feel you have problems with some terms, it's expected that you stop there and sort things out until they get clear enough to move on. That's not the question of being able to do so. Everyone is, no doubt. Rather that's indeed a question of effort and putting some real consistent work. Telling otherwise, as well as stating that one has their own unique way to deal with complexity (constantly bombarding commercial LLMs to ELI5, I guess?) just screams about one's ignorance and incompetence, at least. And I'm just talking here about using the system, not about programming, and certainly not about designing stuff. To state that you can do the latter without knowing or being able to properly do the former is completely beyond the bounds of reason.

So no wonder why nobody takes you seriously. If you can't see it, there is absolutely no point in trying to explain or prove it to you over and over again. Perhaps only with time will you begin to realize that people with education and/or experience probably knew something that you simply didn't, and that it was only wise to try to listen to them instead of LLMs.
 
Llm output should include attribution and licence of source data if being used in a licensed work. But that information would likely be fabricated half the time by the llm program.
 
Except that documentation shouldn't and almost certainly doesn't use any "technical jargon" to explain things, only concepts actually necessary to understand the subject. If you feel you have problems with some terms, it's expected that you stop there and sort things out until they get clear enough to move on. That's not the question of being able to do so. Everyone is, no doubt. Rather that's indeed a question of effort and putting some real consistent work. Telling otherwise, as well as stating that one has their own unique way to deal with complexity (constantly bombarding commercial LLMs to ELI5, I guess?) just screams about one's ignorance and incompetence, at least. And I'm just talking here about using the system, not about programming, and certainly not about designing stuff. To state that you can do the latter without knowing or being able to properly do the former is completely beyond the bounds of reason.

So no wonder why nobody takes you seriously. If you can't see it, there is absolutely no point in trying to explain or prove it to you over and over again. Perhaps only with time will you begin to realize that people with education and/or experience probably knew something that you simply didn't, and that it was only wise to try to listen to them instead of LLMs.

What the hell are you talking about ? Don't you realize you're trying to dictate how I should do things—which strategies I should adopt and what material I should read to design projects ? You aren't inside my head, after all. You can't do that; just as I don't come along and tell you what or how to study, you shouldn't do it to me. I’ve actually found my own path, and I’m churning out plenty of working projects. Besides, what you’re writing is full of the usual prejudices about AI.
 
Back
Top