This is frustrating because what i did in the example with my roms and a python script is essentially the same as what a windows user would do the main difference being that a windows user probably wouldnt have to go to github because a fancy gui alternative software exists.

Agreed.

The user still has to worry about viruses all the same, just because the exe has a website and a download page doesnt make it safer than a terminal based alternative.

Agreed.

I just think if you subtract peoples preconcieved notions about the terminal the actual usual experience and results are the same.

Disagree.

When I run a GUI program and it just has a single button that says "do x", I trust that this software will do x when I run it and nothing else. Why? Because the developer has designed an interface for me, where there is only a single thing, so if I trust the developer, I can assume it will do that thing.

When I download a bash script, I'm downloading a series of commands that I do not understand, and I hope that when I hit run it will do what I want. Maybe the developer has made a CLI interface that gives me some trust, most likely not.

The reality is that a polished GUi isn't just shiny graphics, it's an inherent signal of intent, attention to detail, and minimizes cognitive overload. When I'm presented with just a button all I can evaluate is whether I trust the developer, and whether or noti trust this one button. When I download a list machine instructions I can now evaluate the safety of every single one of them. Thats empowering for coders who can read code, it's overwhelming and leads to decision paralysis for everyone else.

Even from a legality standpoint, if a company publishes a button that says "click me and I will do x", they are opening themselves up to legal liability if that button does anything other than x. If a company publishes a list of instructions I don't understand, they're only liable if those instructions do something other than they say, and I cant evaluate that.