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

441–450 of 486 posts

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#441

Post by busterarm »

em-bee wrote: post #437
busterarm wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but it was also made to showcase GNOME, which was kind of its own huge drama at that time. I mean I can't even believe you're seriously posting this. It was created intended to be a marketing tool and for something folks had long already made their decision either way about. So yeah, I never used your extremely niche distribution and that's some sort of gotcha on my argument. Weirdly, I've used a ton of niche Li…

yeah, but with that you are making the whole argument meaningless, because you are arguing that since you can't have life without drama, asking to minimize drama is useless. that's like saying that reducing pollution is useless because you can't eliminate pollution. yes, we can reduce pollution, and we can minimize drama. we can't entirely avoid it, but that was not being asked for.

But Omarchy has no internal drama. It's entirely external drama around how noninvolved parties feel about DHH. That's way different than internal drama or upstream drama affecting your project.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#442

Post by magarnicle »

thesuitonym wrote: post #342
CuriouslyC wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10 years ago Joe Rogan was basically a stereotypical Bernie bro.

10 years ago Joe Rogan was a well known douchebag far-right conspiracy theorist, what are you talking about?

I'm guessing that GP needs to update their mental timeline of how far back 10 years ago was.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#443

Post by kristofferR »

preg_match wrote: post #416
kristofferR wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on, this is so dishonest, his personality has basically nothing to do with Omarchys popularity, and it has loads of merit. It's way more pleasant to use than all other distros I've tried. To claim that it is super simple for everyone to transform Arch into Omarchy clones without reading the Omarchy repos and that everyone should just do that instead because of politics is beyond absurd.

His personality actually has everything to do with Omarchy’s popularity, because he gets funding based off of it. Omarchy is a set of dotfiles. That’s it. We all know the only reason you, and everyone else, even knows about it is because DHH is behind it. There’s, like, a million dot file repos on GitHub. Most probably higher quality than Omarchy. But somehow, Omarchy is popular. The actually dishonest view is to som…

They have their own apps and repos. By your standard Ubuntu is a bunch of dotfiles on top of Debian

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#444

Post by veeti »

valbaca wrote: post #440
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…

It's easy to think things are "apolitical" when resting on the laurels of the results of political struggles and revolutions that brought us to where we are. The idea that you should be able to create and own your intellectual efforts, and to do so without coercion. > political statement? > If I create my own software stack for the TRMNL display I received as a gift Should you own what you create? Should you BE able…

Did you consider that your ancestors who went through those struggles fought so that you wouldn't have to? If your Sundays and holidays consist of nothing but self flagellation, guilt and reflection for the privileged life you lead, maybe you ought to chill a little and focus on something more constructive. Believe it or not, but going outside and touching grass can be apolitical.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#445

Post by illithid0 »

6P58r3MXJSLi wrote: post #352
skywhopper wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He calls for removal of people based on their ethnicity. What would you call that?

As I've said before, I strongly disagree, but what I read is that he calls for the removal of those behaving in a way that (in his opinion) make the city of Copenhagen less safe, or at least that change the perceived security of the people living there. Gypsies create issues almost everywhere in Europe, but it's not based on ethnicity, most of the ethnic Roma are fully integrated, some of them are not, in Italy many…

No one will reply to you because it requires thinking through this problem with the same nuance they accuse DHH of not appreciating. I'm right there with you.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#446

Post by the_gastropod »

saelthavron wrote: post #396
the_gastropod wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, what a great point! It's totalitarian for a bunch of individuals to call out someone for their bad ideas. And it's definitely not totalitarian for someone to encourage governments to carry out textbook ethnic cleansing. You're a true thought-leader!

> someone to encourage governments to carry out textbook ethnic cleansing It seems you are indicating DHH has advocated for ethnic cleansing. When did he do this?

DHH has repeatedly advocated for remigration. Wikipedia defines remigration as: a far-right concept referring to the ethnic cleansing via mass deportation of non-white minority populations, especially immigrants and sometimes including native-born citizens, to their place of racial ancestry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remigration

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#447

Post by preg_match »

kristofferR wrote: post #443
preg_match wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His personality actually has everything to do with Omarchy’s popularity, because he gets funding based off of it. Omarchy is a set of dotfiles. That’s it. We all know the only reason you, and everyone else, even knows about it is because DHH is behind it. There’s, like, a million dot file repos on GitHub. Most probably higher quality than Omarchy. But somehow, Omarchy is popular. The actually dishonest view is to som…

They have their own apps and repos. By your standard Ubuntu is a bunch of dotfiles on top of Debian

Barely. Setting up a repo is next to nothing, and I would hardly call what they have "applications".

Omarchy is not an impressive, innovative, or exciting distro. Manjaro did what Omarchy did a decade ago, and better. Providing an out-of-the-box tolerable Arch Linux experience is very par for the course.

This is, at best, a weekend project. Not to mention I can find much more impressive, cohesive, and easier-to-use dotfile repos on GitHub.

I think the only people who think Omarchy is, well, anything, are either new to Linux or just like DHH. Which is fine. But if you're new to Linux, please, browse around. Arch Linux is really not the most cohesive and easy-to-use distro you can find.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#448

Post by bigbadfeline »

rbanffy wrote: post #332
preommr wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have taken 'everything is political' to mean 'politics must be discussed for everything'. I am old enough that I've been burned by both sides of the political aisle, often using the same rhetoric (think of the children, we're fighting for freedom, we're fighting against fascism, no true scoctsman, etc.) Maybe the day will come when we really will have to pick sides beyond the elections, like it's WWII, but tha…

> both sides of the political aisle There is a false equivalence happening. In this case, both sides are the people who just want to exist without being attacked for being themselves and the people who say they are wolves and that wolves need to be shot to protect the sheep. I want people like DHH and his supporters out of the tech I use. I don't trust them, nor do I trust their judgment.

>> OTOH, fighting bigotry is something we should never leave behind.

> [we] just want to exist without being attacked for being themselves and [they say we're] wolves who need to be shot to protect the sheep.

Weird, you're the author of both of the above quotes but "just wanting to exist" is very different from "a never ending war on bigotry". It's either one or the other, can't be both because war begets war.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#449

Post by nozzlegear »

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…

> Take one glance at history, and you'll see that having a sovereign ethnic homeland is crucial to that "freedom to exist".

United States disproves this harebrained theory.

Re: Omarchy development practices lead to predictable security issues

#450

Post by throwawaypath »

rbanffy wrote: post #287
throwawaypath wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not a "massive racist," but I guess if you repeat it enough of becomes true to you.

> He's not a "massive racist," Only in the sense he lacks physical mass.

>Only in the sense he lacks physical mass.

He lacks physical mass, so he's virtual, made up, like the claims that he's racist.

Post reply on HN