I'm glad he mentioned the "Silence trumps noise" point.
I like to call the idiom "no news is good news".
Tell me only when I need to know something (like a failure); "-v" is always there if I need it.
It feels uncomfortable to get no output at first, but once you get used to it there's much less to read.
It's rather like the Plan 9 convention of programs returning strings instead of ints when then terminate; an empty string means success, a non-empty string contains the error message. I wish other OSes had adopted that.
There is no silence vs noise problem. Send output to STDOUT and "noise" to STDERR. Use -q and -v when appropriate. I thought it was weird that the author created a false dichotomy between being informational and giving only output that can be easily processed.
Good hint, but it's value is very niche. Waiting until exit for status is fail. Many commands take seconds if not minutes/hours to complete. I wanna see some indication that they are working and not hung/etc.
It's rather like the Plan 9 convention of programs returning strings instead of ints when then terminate; an empty string means success, a non-empty string contains the error message. I wish other OSes had adopted that.