Is it? What's the statement?
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.
"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.
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…
I have a feeling the right to exist might be something very relevant to a lot of people.
loading story #49452308
[dead]
loading story #49448353
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 "cannot be separated" is nothing but a cheap attempt to attach your own cause to some other, more widely accepted cause.
> 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.
> 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.
loading story #49450313
loading story #49454028
loading story #49449378
loading story #49448687
{"deleted":true,"id":49448377,"parent":49448159,"time":1787749314,"type":"comment"}
loading story #49448261
loading story #49448612
loading story #49447972
loading story #49448055
loading story #49447997
loading story #49449155
loading story #49450832