smichel17 The "nontechnical" trojan horse: Design for tech-illiterate users need not undermine Software Freedom values
Locked-down devices, forced updates, removal of customizability and powerful/useful features — these restrictions are often implemented in the name of accessibility to "nontechnical users". These design practices are based on an implicit assumption that these people will never become "technical users". And, by removing any incentive for people to become "technical users", they create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The premise of Software Freedom is that people should be in control of [what code runs on] their computers. Tech literacy is necessary to excercise this freedom; it is a prerequisite for digital autonomy. Accepting that some people will never become tech literate is accepting that Software Freedom is not for everyone; it is an existential threat to this movement.
Fortunately, by "making simple things easy and hard things possible" we can design software which is usable by people at many levels of tech literacy.
I will elaborate on these ideas, with examples.
smichel17GTD calls for making lists based on context, but I think that's basically just an artifact of the fact that it was implemented on paper
smichel17Because — the important thing about contexts is that you can see all next actions for a given context in one placed
smichel17* Because — the important thing about contexts is that you can see all next actions for a given context in one place
smichel17On paper the only way to do that is to write them all in the same list
smichel17But digitally, you can write a checklist of actions needed for a project, and tag each of them with any appropriate context