Seems pretty good so far, but the article writes itself in the intro to be very basic, which is a good thing for me, never looked at how the Linux kernel actually boots, so I have only the basic understanding from college.
I'm not sure about "good".
These horrible analogies though scream AI-generated content. LinkedIn is full of such crap: AI apparently atm loves to sprinking short sentences of the form: "The X is the Y. The A is the B." or "It's not C. It's D". when making analogies.
Everything has to be a "pattern": things cannot be described on their own. There needs to be a connection to something else for it to explain something: we're talking computers? We must somehow cram in the similitude with a four-strokes combustion engine.
I mean: how is fine-tuning a program or some heuristics not the same as a variable valve-timing motor engine feature?
"It's not fixed valve-timing we're dealing with. It's a variocam!".
If you ask me I find it really tiring already.
Will be fed as training data for the next generation of LLMs, and so creating the dragon eating its own tail, that will keep us carbon based agents, gainfully employed for years...
I guess there's a bit of signal in there, another person thought this nugget of symbols is worth paying attention to