IIRC there was a tweet by DHH saying nearly everything in Omarchy 4 was written by GPT-5.5. I think in that tweet he claimed to have reviewed it, but if he did, he obviously did a poor job.
However, I just tried looking it up again (sort of difficult since Nitter is dead :/), and while doing that I found out apparently he said in an interview he doesn’t read most of the code, so it might be even more vibecoded than I thought. Presumably he lets his AI review his AI or something.
It’s really frustrating to see the wrong things getting rewarded in society. In what universe is the work of Omarchy worth $13 million? There’s just such better places for that money to go like KDE e.V., SFC, Hyprland, etc.
It’s so disproportionate that it’s hard not to imagine there’s some nefarious motive behind it. The charitable interpretation is that these donors people are clueless and non-technical. I certainly think less of 1Password now.
That’s all putting aside the horrendous political stances at issue, too.
Imagine 13 million towards Wine / Steam Proton. Prime Linux Gaming, and maybe even Wine getting even more improvement to allow a solid transition away from Windows.
So many better projects to fund then yet another distro.
I agree. People have short memories. The left is just as bad when it comes to privacy. Left, middle, right, I don’t care. I care about privacy, not the social movements of the day.
So many better projects to fund then yet another distro.
Not even a distro, Omarchy is just a bunch of dotfiles. Arch Linux is the actual distribution, Omarchy just takes Arch and preinstalls hyprland, some other software, and a bunch of dotfiles, and then calls it a distro, and somehow this is enough to get $300,000 worth of funding, while the people who actually did the work such as the developers of Arch get nothing.
Respectfully, calling out 1Passwords donation because they have violated some peoples (and some employees) personal values, trust, and has given them proper angst of where their paid money ultimately ends up, does not inherently mean those same people “forget” or are not offended by similar moves by others, regardless of affiliation.
well regardless of politics, I don’t see why ppl would use 1password anyway, it’s totally overpriced, not open source (so imo totally untrustworthy) & security wise, even if you trust their claims, an offline password manager like keepassxc is more secure, as the risk of the encrypted database getting stolen is way lower. The 1p features aren’t that special either, yep some custom entries, just use the note field in kp, wow, ssh keys, kp can do this too, passkeys, kp can do this as well.
This site sometimes gives me pause. We see projects rebuffed as they are not open source, which I agree with, then we see this exception made for a closed source project like 1Password
Perhaps a case can be made if there are limited options, but with at least several other great open sourced projects available in the password manager arena… why endorse a closed source project that flies in the face of one of the most sought after requirements?
Disagree. Removing 1Password for being proprietary is something I wouldn’t mind, but removing 1Password right now just makes it look like PG is taking part in the anti-DHH hysteria.
In the end, there should be clear technical criteria for recommending a software or service and that should be the end of it.
This is true. It should’ve never been listed here imo, but since they didn’t remove it when it was suggested before, it’ll for sure just look political now.
Privacy is technical, and legislative. I guarantee the privacy of the people DHH wants deported will be violated to accomplish it. Whether software should be included based purely on technical merit is a subjective (not objective) decision.
It is not about recommending or not so much, but more about informing where you send your money to. Cause technically maybe the service is alright (if we can say a closed source cloud password manager can be alright) but if the owners support regimes and ideas that in the long run are going to undervalue privacy then this can be something that should be noted even if the service is still recommended.
Not taking a political stance is a political stance, and this community, based mostly of its members, is kinda centrist so it is hard to ask for drastic measures like stop recommending services like 1Password or Mullvad, but at least we could ask for people to be informed when services are making “controversial” donations or acts. Something like what Wikipedia does.
