11 ms·

DHH and Omarchy: Midlife Crisis

37 points by cheshire_cat 11mo ago

arresin 11mo ago
What a nasty little diatribe.
- alimbada 11mo ago
  As opposed to the nasty diatribes DHH keeps spewing and subjecting the tech sphere to?
davydm 11mo ago
Whilst DHH is a lot of things (many unpleasant), I find it difficult to get behind someone's argument when they provide links to blog posts, but retitle them to suit their own agenda - it's disingenuous, bordering on deceit. Such subtle lies detract from the actual facts in that article and make me view the author with an air of skepticism. Pity, because DHH is a weapons-grade plum, to borrow words from Sue Perkins, though she never used them against DHH - it's just an apt title.
- edent 11mo ago
  I think the author has done an excellent job at saying what the articles are actually about. If I write an essay called "I love cabbage" and then fill it with all the ways I hate cabbage, how would you link to it? It's OK to call out people for being disingenuous.
  - davydm 11mo ago
    I think the author has "done a job" saying what _he_ thinks the articles are about. But he already primes the reader to take his viewpoint by shoving it in there, instead of treating the reader like a person able to make up their own mind, probably because he doesn't trust the reader to reach the exact same conclusion as he does.
    - edent 11mo ago
      I think you may have misunderstood the purpose of communication. Do you friends say things like "You should watch this film, it is very funny" and "Don't watch that film, it is boring"? Or are they more likely to say "This is a film which exists" without context? The purpose of communication is to express our ideas and convince people. It is entirely appropriate to say "Here is an article and some context you need to know before reading it." That's especially true when the article hides its true intent. When DHH writes about supporting a violent and racist criminal (as he has) he doesn't say "I like this thug" - instead he attempts to hide that. So, yes. Retitling the articles is an excellent way to cut through the double-speak presented in them.
    - rpgbr 11mo ago
      My man, it's a blog post in a personal blog. Obviously their reading of DHH shit posts in opinionated (very funnily manifested as rewritten titles).
edent 11mo ago
I think the most salient point for me is "Is there any chance for these people, who are shielded by their well-paying jobs, their exclusively occupational media diet, and stimuli all happen to reinforce the default world view?" So many people (mostly American men) are insulated from reality. To use their pejorative language - when it finally intrudes on their safe spaces, they turn into little snowflakes. How is it possible to look at the infinite diversity in the tech world, with a million opinions on matters trivial and profound, and then declare that only you have all the right answers?
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- throwawaypath 11mo ago
  >So many people (mostly American men) are insulated from reality. "They're insulated from reality" the Marxist chortled just moments after unironically claiming men can be pregnant. The ruse is up. Calling anyone right of Mao a Nazi doesn't work anymore.
noir_lord 11mo ago
This is just a tired one at this point, The people who care have picked sides, the people who don't (are probably smarter for not caring) and no one who's picked a side is likely to change their mind. I don't like what DHH has become or what he says (nor do I have any interest in Omarchy, I prefer Fedora (for many years)/KDE (recently but loving it) anyway) since "As I remember London[1]" was the final straw for me (of lots of straws) but on the flip side but if you only ever use software written by people you ideologically align with you are going to have a bad time. [1] https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64 https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64
- tovej 11mo ago
  The issue is that open aource is a community-based development model. If you let nazi's into your community, they will eventually drive away everyone else.
  - noir_lord 11mo ago
    Not unique to Nazi's (though I wouldn't call DHH that either, I'd call him many other things but not that one) open communities (including societies as a whole) have that problem - the paradox of tolerance was written about in "The Open Society and its Enemies" 80 years ago - it isn't a new thing. The issue is how wide the tolerance is before you decide as a group people need excluding, if you set that too narrow you end up with an immediate conflict, if you set it too wide you risk your open community becoming dominated by one group. I'm centre left (by European standards) and would definitely be considered "woke" by the people who use it as a negative epithet but I think many open source communities set it too narrow still. People have a right to their opinions even if I don't agree with them just as I do, there is a line where active opposition is required for me but a lot of the time I disagree with where that line is.
    - tovej 11mo ago
      I'm also European and would identify as centre-left. DHH's opinions align with nazi opinions. He wants a return to tradition, is against equality, and speaks in favor of racially pure ethnostates. If it quacks like a nazi... One reason to actively oppose DHH is that he actively opposes anyone who calls him out, going as far as squashing valid criticism at his own company and ousting them from positions in open source projects (the whole ruby central case). Even if you don't think he's a nazi, he's shown himself to be a bad actor who doesn't play by the rules. That's also a kind of behaviour that leads to community vibes going down the drain and other bad actors (nazi or not) taking over.
tovej 11mo ago
Honestly can't understand why DHH is still getting support from corporate sponsors like Cloudflar and Framework. Hvae we really come to the point where we can fund the useless pet projects of nazis without even considering how it looks?
- edent 11mo ago
  You have to believe people when they tell you who they are. Cloudflare have always been like this. They previously defended hate speech because it made them money. Some people are just nasty. They like to bully other people and now believe they have a social licence to do so.
- arresin 11mo ago
  That is a lie and you know it. It’s really exhausting seeing the pile on and the mob mentality. It truly brings out the ugliest people and the ugliest in people.
  - tovej 11mo ago
    This is all publicly available information. Not sure what you think the lie is.
- throwawaypath 11mo ago
  The ruse is up. Calling anyone right of Mao a Nazi doesn't work anymore. Your poor attempts to paint political enemies as Nazis is blatant.

37 points by cheshire_cat 11mo ago

arresin 11mo ago

What a nasty little diatribe.

alimbada 11mo ago
As opposed to the nasty diatribes DHH keeps spewing and subjecting the tech sphere to?

davydm 11mo ago

Whilst DHH is a lot of things (many unpleasant), I find it difficult to get behind someone's argument when they provide links to blog posts, but retitle them to suit their own agenda - it's disingenuous, bordering on deceit. Such subtle lies detract from the actual facts in that article and make me view the author with an air of skepticism. Pity, because DHH is a weapons-grade plum, to borrow words from Sue Perkins, though she never used them against DHH - it's just an apt title.

edent 11mo ago
I think the author has done an excellent job at saying what the articles are actually about. If I write an essay called "I love cabbage" and then fill it with all the ways I hate cabbage, how would you link to it? It's OK to call out people for being disingenuous.
- davydm 11mo ago
  I think the author has "done a job" saying what _he_ thinks the articles are about. But he already primes the reader to take his viewpoint by shoving it in there, instead of treating the reader like a person able to make up their own mind, probably because he doesn't trust the reader to reach the exact same conclusion as he does.
  - edent 11mo ago
    I think you may have misunderstood the purpose of communication. Do you friends say things like "You should watch this film, it is very funny" and "Don't watch that film, it is boring"? Or are they more likely to say "This is a film which exists" without context? The purpose of communication is to express our ideas and convince people. It is entirely appropriate to say "Here is an article and some context you need to know before reading it." That's especially true when the article hides its true intent. When DHH writes about supporting a violent and racist criminal (as he has) he doesn't say "I like this thug" - instead he attempts to hide that. So, yes. Retitling the articles is an excellent way to cut through the double-speak presented in them.
  - rpgbr 11mo ago
    My man, it's a blog post in a personal blog. Obviously their reading of DHH shit posts in opinionated (very funnily manifested as rewritten titles).

edent 11mo ago

I think the most salient point for me is "Is there any chance for these people, who are shielded by their well-paying jobs, their exclusively occupational media diet, and stimuli all happen to reinforce the default world view?" So many people (mostly American men) are insulated from reality. To use their pejorative language - when it finally intrudes on their safe spaces, they turn into little snowflakes. How is it possible to look at the infinite diversity in the tech world, with a million opinions on matters trivial and profound, and then declare that only you have all the right answers?

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
throwawaypath 11mo ago
>So many people (mostly American men) are insulated from reality. "They're insulated from reality" the Marxist chortled just moments after unironically claiming men can be pregnant. The ruse is up. Calling anyone right of Mao a Nazi doesn't work anymore.

noir_lord 11mo ago

This is just a tired one at this point, The people who care have picked sides, the people who don't (are probably smarter for not caring) and no one who's picked a side is likely to change their mind. I don't like what DHH has become or what he says (nor do I have any interest in Omarchy, I prefer Fedora (for many years)/KDE (recently but loving it) anyway) since "As I remember London[1]" was the final straw for me (of lots of straws) but on the flip side but if you only ever use software written by people you ideologically align with you are going to have a bad time. [1] https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64 https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64

tovej 11mo ago
The issue is that open aource is a community-based development model. If you let nazi's into your community, they will eventually drive away everyone else.
- noir_lord 11mo ago
  Not unique to Nazi's (though I wouldn't call DHH that either, I'd call him many other things but not that one) open communities (including societies as a whole) have that problem - the paradox of tolerance was written about in "The Open Society and its Enemies" 80 years ago - it isn't a new thing. The issue is how wide the tolerance is before you decide as a group people need excluding, if you set that too narrow you end up with an immediate conflict, if you set it too wide you risk your open community becoming dominated by one group. I'm centre left (by European standards) and would definitely be considered "woke" by the people who use it as a negative epithet but I think many open source communities set it too narrow still. People have a right to their opinions even if I don't agree with them just as I do, there is a line where active opposition is required for me but a lot of the time I disagree with where that line is.
  - tovej 11mo ago
    I'm also European and would identify as centre-left. DHH's opinions align with nazi opinions. He wants a return to tradition, is against equality, and speaks in favor of racially pure ethnostates. If it quacks like a nazi... One reason to actively oppose DHH is that he actively opposes anyone who calls him out, going as far as squashing valid criticism at his own company and ousting them from positions in open source projects (the whole ruby central case). Even if you don't think he's a nazi, he's shown himself to be a bad actor who doesn't play by the rules. That's also a kind of behaviour that leads to community vibes going down the drain and other bad actors (nazi or not) taking over.

tovej 11mo ago

Honestly can't understand why DHH is still getting support from corporate sponsors like Cloudflar and Framework. Hvae we really come to the point where we can fund the useless pet projects of nazis without even considering how it looks?

edent 11mo ago
You have to believe people when they tell you who they are. Cloudflare have always been like this. They previously defended hate speech because it made them money. Some people are just nasty. They like to bully other people and now believe they have a social licence to do so.
arresin 11mo ago
That is a lie and you know it. It’s really exhausting seeing the pile on and the mob mentality. It truly brings out the ugliest people and the ugliest in people.
- tovej 11mo ago
  This is all publicly available information. Not sure what you think the lie is.
throwawaypath 11mo ago
The ruse is up. Calling anyone right of Mao a Nazi doesn't work anymore. Your poor attempts to paint political enemies as Nazis is blatant.