Status and money is essential, people with high status make good money, and you need it just to get to retirement, money that is. I do not like X good think will not bring happiness, its a pattern of X where X = working hard, money, status, etc does not bring happiness. Its dangerous and bad to teach people to be anything other than selfish in a constructive way.
I share your skepticism to some extent, but where I think I also think the perspective of the post has some merit is in recognizing that those things you equate with X are not all the same, and not interchangeable.
In my experience, you can work hard, be smart, work smart, and that still doesn't necessarily equate into money or status. This is more true the more that the system you're operating in is broken or corrupt.
At some point you question what it is you're doing, and what the payoffs are or whether or not they're worth it. Maybe getting to retirement financially is better done through a different circle with different status markers.
The thing about status is it's inherently heterogeneous. Although there are ideas of status that are more or less prevalent, everyone has a different idea of what status means at some level. I can think of very concrete, real examples that are objectively very high status under very reasonable definitions, but to me come across as gauche, immoral, and unintelligent.
GUI for package manager is fairly useless IMO. Homebrew is CLI only AFAIK and nobody cares, apt has aptitude but I've seen nobody use it in real life. Honestly only relevant package manager GUI I see are Play Store/App Store, and that's a different discussion.
Linux has a few app store style GUIs, e.g., Discover and the GNOME Software Center.
Btw, aptitude includes an ncurses TUI, but it's also an improved CLI frontend for apt that includes a few really nice features. Check it out next time you're on a Debian-based distro and try some of the special search patterns at least.
Agree. It's difficult to guess the definition of "exist" while reading it. The phrase
> ...accepting the existence of the reals means that there are numbers that exist but can never be described ...we can never interact with these numbers even conceptually
is also full of vagueness: what is "be described"/"interact"?