Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

blog.happyfellow.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 480 posts

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#421

Post by psionides »

quotemstr wrote: post #264
TehCorwiz wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom to compute" cannot be separated from "Freedom to exist" as it explicitly depends on it. The authors of Omarchy pay lip service to the former while taking a stance against the latter.

No, it is definitely possible to make great software without inserting messaging on irrelevant issues into it. Whatever the quality of Omarchy, DHH is right about parts of the free software world becoming entangled worth various irrelevant causes.

I feel like ironically their whole thing is doing exactly that, except in the other direction…

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#422

Post by psionides »

timmytokyo wrote: post #387
safety1st wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

"The project is in no way consumed by politics." https://bsky.app/profile/aly.codes/post/3mttrv3hjcc27

Also: "Omarchy is not just a distribution, but it's also a counterweight to all the nonsense that has plagued Linux for far too long. It's a refuge from the clowns and the circus that has been Linux politics since the old institutions got infiltrated." (https://bsky.app/profile/steveklabnik.com/post/3mtrdmfttak2s)

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#423

Post by e12e »

throwawaypath wrote: post #419
stymaar wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did. He claimed that the demographic has changed and he advocates for reverting this change. And it turns out that forcibly altering the demographic of an era is the literal definition of ethnic cleansing (and by the way the phrass has historicallt been coined with the specific meaning of removing Muslim people from Serbia, by the people who intended to perform that “cleansing”, so it's particularly apt here).

[flagged]

>> He did not call for forcibly altering the demographic.

> When wolves get out of control, you shoot them. When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them.

And while I'm quoting:

MerriamWebster: Xenophobe

> one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin

DHH:

> You can rest assured that I'd be in the streets waving a Danish flag if these were my conditions in my native country. I think that's a pretty universal sentiment. There's absolutely nothing racist or xenophobic in saying that Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes, Britain primarily a united kingdom for the Brits, and Japan primarily a set of islands for the Japanese.

I would say saying that is pretty much the definition of xenophobic.

Worse, in the context of DHHs rants, it comes off as racist - I don't get the sense he wants to throw out Norwegians from Denmark, for example.

Although shurly there are Norwegian migrants and foreign workers in Denmark.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#424

Post by andybak »

torstenvl wrote: post #418
andybak wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can also be "mostly true but exaggerated for polemic effect". Or your definition of political might be different to the speakers. Or it could be intended to highlight a way of perceiving the world and thus not be subject to truth claims. Etc. This list can be extended indefinitely. Language is not a game of symbol manipulation.

An absolute statement cannot be "mostly true." The definition of political is irrelevant. The result is supertrue. "If even one example of software is not political, then 'all software is political' is false" is true under all admissible values of "political." This is simple logic. All assertoric claims about the world are either true or false. If they are false they should be rejected. If they are true they should b…

Older Wittgenstein meet younger Wittgenstein.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#425

Post by throwawaypath »

e12e wrote: post #423
throwawaypath wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>> He did not call for forcibly altering the demographic. > When wolves get out of control, you shoot them. When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them. And while I'm quoting: MerriamWebster: Xenophobe > one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin DHH: > You can rest assured that I'd be in the streets waving a Danish flag if these were my conditions in my native country.…

No where did you quote where he's calling for forcibly altering the demographic. Enforcing immigration laws is not ethnic cleansing.

>And while I'm quoting: >MerriamWebster: Xenophobe >> one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin

He doesn't fear foreign people or things so this definition doesn't apply.

>I would say saying that is pretty much the definition of xenophobic.

Except it's not, words have meaning. Supporting indigenous people and their rights to their native homelands is not xenophobic.

>Worse, in the context of DHHs rants, it comes off as racist - I don't get the sense he wants to throw out Norwegians from Denmark, for example.

That's your interpretation, not the facts, and not what DHH has said.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#426

Post by throwawaypath »

preg_match wrote: post #414
throwawaypath wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The fact that this is up for debate already says all "The fact that Mamdani is an antisemite is up for debate already says all." Many people repeating fake news does not make it true.

Okay but reading DHHs own tweets and blog posts is not fake news. You can’t just call anything you don’t like fake news. It would be one thing if people were putting words into DHH’s mouth. They’re not.

>Okay but reading DHHs own tweets and blog posts is not fake news.

No one made this claim.

>You can’t just call anything you don’t like fake news.

Glad that's not what I'm doing.

>It would be one thing if people were putting words into DHH’s mouth. They’re not.

They are.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#427

Post by rbanffy »

ranger_danger wrote: post #399
mattstir wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which itself is fine, all software is political I don't mean to get distracted from the topic at hand, but is that really true? If I create my own software stack for the TRMNL display I received as a gift because I think it's fun and interesting, is that a political statement? What politics does that involve? If someone makes a small Rust library that implements some days structure and a few hundred people find it…

> is that really true? Since I don't really believe in a universal right or wrong sentiment, I'll just say I think it depends on each person's own interpretation/definition of the word politics. I don't personally care what people define it as to them, but if I were to look in my dictionary, I personally interpret that definition to mean "any time someone tries to influence others." Now... we could argue that softwar…

Politics is how we decide things as groups. It’s not something to fear, hate, or despise, but something to be aware of.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#428

Post by rbanffy »

_def wrote: post #288
TehCorwiz wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom to compute" cannot be separated from "Freedom to exist" as it explicitly depends on it. The authors of Omarchy pay lip service to the former while taking a stance against the latter.

Fully agreed. I have yet to encounter someone who is claiming something elss and is not privileged enough to just not need to worry about this. Ignorance doesn't reduce the political tech entanglement, it just... ignores it. Which is fine, do whatever. But don't claim it's not related.

> I have yet to encounter someone who is claiming something elss and is not privileged enough to just not need to worry about this

1000x this

People who say they don’t need their rights guaranteed do that because they never realised they were protected their whole lives.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#429

Post by rbanffy »

like_any_other wrote: post #323
TehCorwiz wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom to compute" cannot be separated from "Freedom to exist" as it explicitly depends on it. The authors of Omarchy pay lip service to the former while taking a stance against the latter.

Take one glance at history, and you'll see that having a sovereign ethnic homeland is crucial to that "freedom to exist". So you're wrong on both counts - they are also taking a stance for the latter, and the two freedoms can be separated. Distributing FOSS does not require one takes a stance on every ethnic and political conflict on Earth. The GNU manifesto never once talks about the occupation of Tibet. This "canno…

> Distributing FOSS

FOSS never was about the right of the distributor. It’s been always about protecting the user. The way to do it is to give the users a set of rights that cannot be revoked.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#430

Post by rbanffy »

ndiddy wrote: post #365
speak_plainly wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That OSS has become too entangled with political activism and ideological gatekeeping, when it should be about making great software, giving people control over their computers, and rediscovering the joy of computing. I don't think Omarchy is anti-political so much as an attempt to revive the enthusiast/hacker ethos of the OSS community.

Maybe DHH should live by his own ethos and "shut up and program" rather than continually making divisive political statements that alienate people who might otherwise use and contribute to his distro.

I don’t think he’ll refrain from using the political power he amassed by building a very popular web framework. We gave him a megaphone and a soapbox, and he’ll use it.

We probably should have known better.

Post reply on HN