Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
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.
loading story #49455945
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.
loading story #49455073
loading story #49449068
loading story #49449193
You're repeating fake news. Link to where DHH specifically takes a stand against the "freedom to exist."
See links further down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49448069
I'm becoming really upset at people whom I otherwise align with for taking absolute statements that don't make sense.

DHH said some stuff you disagree with, incidentally while I have always identified with strong social systems, welfare, high taxes and things like free healthcare, I can't say I disagree with the core of what he tried to say, because there has been seizemic ethnic change within a single generation - and people not talking about it is actually fuelling the extreme position.

So when you say "has a right to exist", what do you mean exactly? Because if I was to stand in the lobby of a parliamentary building and was forcibly removed, would that mean I don't have the right to exist?

You have a right to exist, just not here, just like how White English people have no right to exist in India, and White Dutch people don't have a right to live in Zimbabwe.

Saying "Hey, this demographic and major cultural change in the last 20 years makes the environment different" is considered racism- which has the obvious consenquence of making the word "racist" have less power.. It's not racism to notice this, it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.

I'm reminded of the phrase "if you don't respect me, I won't respect you" whereby respect can mean as an authority or as a person, and they mean "if you don't respect me as an authority, then I won't respect you as a person".

You're saying "if you don't let me do everything I want then you're denying that I have the right to exist at all" which is a type of hysteric language which permits any atrocity in response it can be framed as an act of self defence.

Stop it.

>Saying "Hey, this demographic and major cultural change in the last 20 years makes the environment different" is considered racism

perhaps if he said it like this, rather than comparing Roma to wolves that should be shot and comparing immigration as something to be survived like a bombing blitz, people wouldnt care as much

>it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.

that is what he is doing

> You have a right to exist, just not here,

"Irish need not apply" right?

>there has been seizemic ethnic change within a single generation

There hasn't. Look at actual numbers, and what you see is the same hysteria that was directed against the Jews during the first half of the XXth century: foreign agents, traitors, parasites, nuisance... All for a tiny fraction of the population. All blown up by the same people who are the ones responsible for the misery of the majority of the population - yes, the "whites" are being screwed up by other "whites", not by the "brown" people.

>White English people have no right to exist in India, and White Dutch people don't have a right to live in Zimbabwe.

One: it was English people in Zimbabwe too, and two: they have the right to live there; the problem with them is that they took everything by force and decided the native people where subhuman. Pretending the situation is the same with brown-skinned low-wage immigrants coming in western countries is completely cuckoo crazy.

>it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.

Which is exactly what DHH does. Thank you for agreeing that DHH is a racist.

This is why I don't like getting into online debates... most people seem wholly uninterested in the (seemingly to them) blasphemy that is "other perspectives that aren't mine." To me, continually stroking your confirmation bias just proves you're not really as smart as you think you are. And indeed I think the Dunning-Kruger effect still applies to "smart" people.

You don't stop when you are estimating your ability correctly; as you learn more, you gain more awareness of your ignorance and continue being conservative with your self-estimates.

What this behavior has led me to do is basically only challenge people who are actually asking a question, because then there's a chance they might be willing to entertain other perspectives than their own. But if I say something and get a matter-of-fact response by someone with an obvious god complex... it's like they're not interested in mutual understanding, they just want to "win" the argument by asserting things loud enough until they're believed.

But when I see people being straight up dogmatic and preaching walls of black-and-white opinions as if they're somehow infallible and that there can't be any other perspectives... I just see incompetence. But it is frustrating because you want to set the record straight, because you know others are going to believe the louder person... but there's really nothing you can do about it. One time someone tried to argue with me that "cloud storage does not exist." All I could do in that moment was just ignore them and move on.

"As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding." -Sloman and Fernbach

Nothing in that linked comment points to where DHH specifically takes a stand against the "freedom to exist."
I disagree. Calling for ethnic cleansing counts to me as taking a stance against a group's right to existence.
loading story #49453185
He didn't call for ethnic cleansing.
loading story #49454149
loading story #49449867
DHH has the capacity to assess that going full on white supremacist is still relatively frowned upon, so he does only as much as he thinks he can get away with.

Sponsoring his badly made OSS and giving him any type of a limelight will only embolden him and the likes of him. I personally want nothing to do with him and anything he touches.

Literally any post on his personal blog in the past few years, for a start.
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.
loading story #49459104
loading story #49455979
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