Let me google that for you? No. It’s more like.

Let me read the error message for you. The error message says what is wrong. The one that you posted (to your credit). It’s right there.

Or they say that they don’t know what is wrong. And they don’t indicate that they have tried anything. But the error message says what they can try. And you point that out.

I don’t think they are incapable of reading error messages. They just want it to go away. And they want exact steps to make it go away and make whatever command not give them output they don’t want. So you explaining for three paragraphs what this means and why the suggestion in the error message might be something they should do or not—stop. Just give them one single command to run. Don’t worry that the situation is ambiguous and in turn “how to fix” is ill-defined without any followup.

This website talks about kindness. The thing is that whoever subjects themselves to these questions (for whatever reason) don’t get much kindness at all. For predictable reasons; the questioner says “thanks” and moves on, and then a week later the same kind of person shows up and asks the same question. For all intents and purposes they are the same persona here with the same knowledge. Does this persona have the knowledge required to be a kind questioner? No they don’t. Those are the predictable parts; they don’t know what they don’t know, and they certainly don’t know that these people have been answering the same question to the same persona twenty times.

Then these people take a step back and rather than initiating the eight-step procedure of torturing more info out of them than “it gives error”—which will not enlighten the world at all since the next person will be just as clueless—, they say, “you know there is a wider context here and you are a pain in my arse”.