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

A Word on Omarchy

xn--gckvb8fzb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#41

Post by antonyh »

mtlynch wrote: post #7

These criticisms all feel very nitpicky and subjective. So many of them seem to boil down to, "this is an opinionated configuration, but their opinions differ from my opinions." This part was where I stopped taking the article seriously: > Moreover, taking into account that the system relies heavily on sudo (instead of the more modern doas), and also considering that the default installation configures the maximum nu…

Because it's opinionated? So maybe there are scripts that use sudo, and perhaps he needs more than 3 tries to fat-finger his password?

Personally, my opinion, I use sudo, and if I take more than 3 goes then I deserve a timeout to get my act together. Anyway, 10 attempts isn't enough to brute-force a decent password, and if bruteforcing is a concern then add 2FA codes or hardware.

There's more serious concerns in the article though - the part about the screensaver / hyprlock? That's just security theatre.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#42

Post by slightwinder »

pelagicAustral wrote: post #13
zvmaz wrote: post #11

[flagged]

You seem to be the one equating 'brit' to skin color.

Visual appearance is the main indicator to identify the perceived culture of some random person on the streets, so it's a justified assumption the writer was talking about this.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#43

Post by troupo »

mfro wrote: post #34
pinkgolem wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want something that works out of the box, i normally use Mac, but for my private machine I switched to omarchy. Much nicer configuration then fedora/Ubuntu for productivity. And be assured, i have not posted a single screenshot anywhere.

There are numerous other, much more professional and vetted distributions that will better serve you. If you had read the article you’d not be making this comment.

As always, there are some nebulous "processional" and "vetted" (by whom) distirbutions that will serve "better" (what is the definition of "better")? And it's always a different set. The article doesn't even pretend to qualify why the distributions it picked are better. It even goes as far as saying "If that’s still not to your liking, maybe explore something completely different." and links to distrowatch, as if that's helpful

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#44

Post by timeon »

> And by “a few” it means another 1.8GB. I’m still not entirely sure why the v3.0.2 ISO is a hefty 6.2GB, or why it requires downloading an additional 1.8GB after installation on a system with internet access.

Sounds like bloatware.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#45

Post by skydhash »

zahlman wrote: post #32
mickeyp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People who need "help" to switch, from what I've seen, are realistically going to care more about the included DE/WM than anything else. Any number of distros offer Windows-migration-friendly options like Cinnamon (and bundle popular software like LibreOffice, even if there are better alternatives and even forks). And the newcomers really do need to get used to a well-thought-out package manager rather than training…

For a new user that would prefer a familiar DE, linux mint and elementary is a good choice. If you’re willing to learn a new OS but wants to start quick, I would recommend Fedora.

Anything else is better suited when you have opinions about the ecosystem.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#46

Post by slightwinder »

paulglx wrote: post #2

This blog pranks you with changing titles when you switch tabs (some nsfw), then welcomes you back with a paragraph inciting you to disable Javascript. That's nice, but I actually need Javascript in my browser to do real stuff.

More important: Why does that person mobs people for using javascript, but then only displays an ugly trashy side when you disable it?

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#47

Post by bryceneal »

The author recommends using "Do Not Track", but this has been deprecated for some time. Safari and Firefox have both removed the option completely. Perhaps the author meant GPC?

For all of the security suggestions in this article I was also surprised to see the author recommending ungoogle-chromium, which has a number of security issues. See: https://qua3k.github.io/ungoogled/

The primary issue I take with the article is the chosen tone. I think there are ways that these points could have been made without being overly cynical and negative. I think speaking authoritatively throughout the article has the effect of equating the importance of subjective preferences (like the choice of which terminal emulator to include), with legitimate security concerns (bash shortcomings, migrations, firewall misconfiguration, piping curl | sh to install software).

I wouldn't use Omarchy, but I am glad it exists. It's bringing more people into the desktop Linux ecosystem, which should be positive sum. Omarchy comes off to me as a little hacky and immature, but at this stage that seems.. mostly fine? Perhaps they should be more clear about that in their marketing, but I understand the goals and I admire the enthusiasm from DHH.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#48

Post by ethersteeds »

neeeeeeal wrote: post #20
mtlynch wrote: post #7

These criticisms all feel very nitpicky and subjective. So many of them seem to boil down to, "this is an opinionated configuration, but their opinions differ from my opinions." This part was where I stopped taking the article seriously: > Moreover, taking into account that the system relies heavily on sudo (instead of the more modern doas), and also considering that the default installation configures the maximum nu…

Agree with this 100%. The article reads as a super gatekeepy “he made different choices than me so I’m going to trash it and him” piece. The author’s perspective seems to be “how dare he use bash scripts! REAL programmers use system level languages”. Come on buddy. Author claims there is no structure to the project but one look in the GitHub repo says there clearly is. Also, how many users will now try Arch (or Ubunt…

I'll admit I read only the summary linked at the beginning, so I surely skipped over minutae that might have lost me. That said, I disagree with this and gp: the conclusion strikes me not as gatekeepy but reasonable and humane to inexperienced users:

> In fact, it is Omarchy that complicates things further down the line, by including a number of unnecessary components and workarounds, especially when it comes to its chosen desktop environment. The moment an inexperienced user wants or needs to change anything, they’ll be confronted with a jumbled mess that’s difficult to understand and even harder to manage.

> If you want Arch but are too lazy to read through its fantastic Wiki, then look at Manjaro, it’ll take care of you. [...]

> On the other hand, if you’re just looking to tweak your existing desktop, check out other people’s dotfiles and dive into the unixporn communities for inspiration.

That strikes me as very fair. I don't think it's gatekeeping to say that setting users up with a "distro" that eschews package management for a pile of curl|sh invocations is a bad idea for which there are much better approaches.

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#49

Post by mexicocitinluez »

IMTDb wrote: post #17

The author seems very set on following "the proper way of doing things in the linux ecosystem". If I remember correctly, a key principle from Linus himself is: "Talk is cheap. Show me the code". So did the author open any PR to fix any of the issues he surfaced ?

lol hold up. Are you saying you can't criticize something unless you're actively working on it?

Re: A Word on Omarchy

#50

Post by timeon »

mickeyp wrote: post #18

It is so sad to see so many people -- including the article, to an extent -- and also people in the comments cast shade on this distro and the people who may try Linux either for the first time, or perhaps one more time, because they tried and failed to switch before. Calling it flashy is an especially amusing critique. You couldn't kick your way through the 90s and 2000s without the endless parade of semi-transparen…

I think many people have problem with the project because it is from alt-right environment.
Post reply on HN