Omarchy is so funny. There’s nothing interesting there (it’s just Arch with some questionable configs). It doesn’t solve any existing problem that wasn’t solved before, because it’s still Arch.

And yet the technofascists can’t stop supporting it. It must be virtue-signaling.

Wowie, you’ve credited another Arch fork derivative with a shitload of usage credit for your fourth-grade AI model. Surely this will have an impact on technology.

Then again, it’s a match made in heaven. Nobody cares about Omarchy, and about the same number of people would care about Grok if they couldn’t get pornography out of it.

Technically, the question was even easier (yes/no), but I agree with the sentiment

Well, but the question wasn’t “what is a hash used for”, but rather “what is a hash”

I’m pretty sure AI partners are not the primary reason people don’t have human partners. The issues are systematic and root very deeply. While I do think AI partners are a very toxic and dangerous way out of this, I highly doubt they were the reason people were single in the first place.

deleted by creator

It should be noted that e.g. DeepL which is a very good AI translation service isn’t an LLM but rather falls into the category of “Neural machine translation”. So this would still be fine

Edit: I leaned it’s an LLM now, my knowledge is outdated.

Not being POSIX is one of its main selling points. If you want POSIX, you’re not the target audience

It’s just a very nice shell that’s conceptually very close to common shells like bash and others while it has a nicer syntax than those. All in all very reasonable and rather evolutionary than revolutionary. So the learning curve is rather flat compared to shells like nu or elvish

The year of the Linux desktop is already there for me. There is more and on a better foundation than I ever thought would happen when I started using it. Personally, I miss nothing.

Well aware that this isn’t the case for everyone.

Funny to read this when I’ve been using Linux for over 20 years

Well, technically, it’s not broken, just slower

It’s a choice I can live without, I see the appeal of !! but usually, history is informative only, if I want something reusable, I write a function.

Ah, okay.

It shows that I’m not using POSIX shells

Yeah, I wasn’t sure there, the question mark was supposed to apply to all shells…

These additions are about user familiarity, not inter-shell compatibility is my point. Fish and bash are fundamentally incompatible. Just because they share keywords doesn’t mean they’re compatible. You wouldn’t say Rust got Python compatible just because it introduced a keyword or a concept from it.

Yeah, fish is a very comfortable shell in all regards. The standard installation does basically about 90% of what you typically want, probably more. Just very sensible in all aspects

No, but I feel bad when I need to deploy a big package for a bit of scripting.

For example, nushell is about 160 MB installed… which I find a bit much. It’s fine on my desktop, but I also have machines where this would be a significant addition.

I’m not the biggest fan of bash either, there’s a reason I use fish, though I also like elvish for interactive use (though it’s rather young all things considered) and in maybe going to use YSH for my next script project as that shell is very small (2MB or so) and yet makes sense.

Fish is really a pleasant shell, nothing groundbreaking but it’s just nice.

That said, I wouldn’t speak of “bash compatibility” just because another symbol/ operator from bash can now be used in fish (this happens sometimes), but this isn’t for compatibility but rather so that you don’t need to learn the fish equivalent. Fish has a different syntax from bash (e.g. command substitution doesn’t use $, no do in for loops…) so they’ll never be compatible. There are bash compatible shells out there (I guess zsh, dash and probably oil?), but fish isn’t and doesn’t try to be.

NixOS went from not being visible to… beating Manjaro!

Whatever that’s supposed to tell