> How did we get here?
Careful what you wish for, that’s how.
Just a simple example: when you play with firm biological facts, you might just open it all up to being bent. But then, wasn’t that maybe the goal all along?
“Science is not a process, a credential, or an institution.
It is the unflinching pursuit of truth, carried out by the few, co-opted by the many.”
When did we start institutionalizing it? How about letting the truth be bent? What about the focus on consensus? That’s also what lead to the current situation.
This may be my ignorance, but aren't most distributions [1] just an Arch / Fedora / Debian / whatever base with a desktop environment and a few opinionated choices (UI tweaks, installed applications, etc.)?
[1] I realise CachyOS makes some kernel modifications, but is that typical?
I believe the difference is between Omarchy simply having some default configuration for certain applications compared to CachyOS having a repository with a larger amount of packages which are being maintained by the CachyOS devs.
> [1] I realise CachyOS makes some kernel modifications, but is that typical?
Yes, very common. I think not making modifications (like Arch) is the atypical case, as "unmodified from upstream" is one of the core value propositions for Arch and why we chose it in the first place.
Still, CachyOS is probably an outlier in the amount of tweaks it does, and the amount of choices it surfaces to users about those tweaks.
reply