Full Width 
FOCUS MODE
Shortcuts 
Sign Up 
Log In 
Articles 
Reading List More from David Heinemeier Hansson
Omarchy 2.0 was released on Linux's 34th birthday as a gift to perhaps the greatest open-source project the world has ever known. Not only does Linux run 95% of all servers on the web, billions of devices as an embedded OS, but it also turns out to be an incredible desktop environment! It's crazy that it took me more than thirty years to realize this, but while I spent time in Apple's walled garden, the free software alternative simply grew better, stronger, and faster. The Linux of 2025 is not the Linux of the 90s or the 00s or even the 10s. It's shockingly more polished, capable, and beautiful. It's been an absolute honor to celebrate Linux with the making of Omarchy, the new Linux distribution that I've spent the last few months building on top of Arch and Hyprland. What began as a post-install script has turned into a full-blown ISO, dedicated package repository, and flourishing community of thousands of enthusiasts all collaborating on making it better. It's been improving rapidly with over twenty releases since the premiere in late June, but this Version 2.0 update is the biggest one yet. If you've been curious about giving Linux a try, you're not afraid of an operating system that asks you to level up and learn a little, and you want to see what a totally different computing experience can look and feel like, I invite you to give it a go. Here's a full tour of Omarchy 2.0.
The Danish flag is everywhere in Denmark. It's at the airport when parents greet their kids coming back from holiday. It's on the birthday cake when you invite people over. It's swinging from the flagpoles in house after house, especially in the countryside. It's on the buses on the monarch's birthday. It's everywhere and all the time. I love it. I love that the Danes are so proud of their country that the flag is the most common symbol for celebrating any momentous occasion. Even just returning from a trip! Because being a Dane means something to the Danish. It's a unique identity, separate from everyone else in the world. It's local, it's close, it's personal. It's not like that everywhere. It seems like the American flag, for example, has now been solidly right-wing coded. You don't see many progressives putting up big flags in their backyards anymore. And you certainly don't see them putting American flags on their birthday cakes, like the Danes. What a shame to feel such shame about the country you live in. Don't get me wrong, the Danes don't all love everything going on in Denmark either. It's a national sport to rag on politicians. To complain about municipal services. To want things to be better. Perfectly healthy for a country to wish to see improvement. But once that search for better tips over into disliking or outright hating the national symbols, you're off the rails, and much less likely to actually fix anything. Don't even get me started with the UK. It seems flying the English flag is now as transgressive as posting you're not a big fan of mass immigration on Facebook. And given that the latter is already likely to land you in trouble with the increasingly authoritarian state, it seems likely that the former might soon too. National pride is a cornerstone of building a high-trust society. It flows from a strong national identity that defines clear norms, values, and priorities. What better reason than that to raise the flag!
You can just change things! That's the power of open source. But for a lot of people, it might seem like a theoretical power. Can you really change, say, Chrome? Well, yes! We've made a micro fork of Chromium for Omarchy (our new 37signals Linux distribution). Just to add one feature needed for live theming. And now it's released as a package anyone can install on any flavor of Arch using the AUR (Arch User Repository). We got it all done in just four days. From idea, to solicitation, to successful patch, to release, to incorporation. And now it'll be part of the next release of Omarchy. There are no speed limits in open source. Nobody to ask for permission. You have the code, so you can make the change. All you need is skill and will (and maybe, if you need someone else to do it for you, a $5,000 incentive 😄).
One day, I got a chance. It just seemed to show up. It acted like it knew me, as if it wanted something. This is how Kobi Yamada's book What do you do with a chance? starts. I've been reading that beautiful book to the boys at bedtime since it came out in 2018. It continues: It fluttered around me. It brushed up against me. It circled me as if it wanted me to grab it. What a mesmerizing mental image of a chance, fluttering about. What do you do with a chance? is a great book exactly because it's not just for the boys, but for me too. A poetic reminder of what being open to chance looks like, and what to do when it shows up. Right now, Omarchy feels like that chance. Like Linux fluttered into my hands and said "let's take a trip to the moon". I joked on X that perhaps it was the new creatine routine I picked up from Pieter Levels, but I only started that a few days ago, so I really do think it's actually Linux! This exhilaration of The Chance reminds me of the 1986 cult classic Highlander. There's a fantastic montage in the middle where Sean Connery is teaching Christopher Lambert to fight for the prize of immortality, and in it, he talks about The Quickening. Feeling the stag, feeling the opportunity. That's the feeling I have when I wake up in the morning at the moment: The Quickening. There's something so exciting here, so energizing, that I simply must get to the keyboard and chase wherever it flutters to.
We're going all-in on Omarchy at 37signals. Over the next three years, as the regular churn of hardware invites it, we're switching everyone on our Ops and Ruby programming teams to our own Arch-derived Linux distribution (and of course sharing all the improvements we make along the way with everyone else on Omarchy!). It's funny how nobody bats an eye when the company mandate is to use Macs or Windows, but when the prescription is Linux, it's suddenly surprising. It really shouldn't be. Your ability to control your own destiny with Linux is far superior to what you'll get from a closed-source, commercial operating system. Of course it is! The code is literally all there! True, you might face more challenges, and there won't be a vendor to call (unless you hop into the Enterprise Linux camp, which doesn't appeal to me either). But I've never given a damn about that. I started using Ruby to build Basecamp when we could barely fill a room in American with professional Ruby programmers. This is what we do here! This also means giving up on MacBooks and choosing Framework laptops as the new standard-issue equipment. Along with desktop machines from Framework and Beelink both. PC hardware has gotten incredibly good over the last few years, as AMD in particular has managed to extract many of the same processor improvements from TSMC, as Apple did so well with the M series. At least in terms of performance. Again, true, there is still a gap on the efficiency front. Nobody can currently beat Apple on the wattage-to-power ratio (but the gap is fast closing!). So battery life on Linux using Framework is currently a bit less. I get about 6 hours of mixed use from my Framework 13, so whenever I suspect that might be a problem, I bring a small 20K mAh Anker battery in the bag, and now I have double the capacity. A small concession on a rare occasion, but nothing like the performance AND battery deficit we willingly endured for decades on the Mac before Apple switched to their own chips. Because we wanted to run OSX. It was worth sacrifice a few other concerns for. Just like Linux is today. On the flip side, we'll get a massive boost in productivity from being able to run our Ruby on Rails test suites locally much faster. For our HEY application, even the fastest Mac, an M4 Max, is almost twice as slow as a Framework Desktop machine running Linux, which can do Docker natively. It's an exciting new adventure for us. Omarchy is already by far-and-away my favorite computing environment. Right up there in joy and wonder with the old Amiga days or early OSX. It's been a blast learning that so many other early-adopters have found the same feeling. Very reminiscent of the excitement in the early Ruby days. Knowing you'd found something super special that wasn't yet widely distributed (but poised to be). I spoke about all of this with Kimberly on a bonus episode of The REWORK Podcast. Give it a listen if you're curious about the why, the how, and the inevitable objections.
More in programming
<![CDATA[I'm exploring another corner of the Interlisp ecosystem and history: the Interlisp-10 implementation for DEC PDP-10 mainframes, a 1970s character based environment that predated the graphical Interlisp-D system. I approached this corner when I set out to learn and experiment with a tool I initially checked out only superficially, the TTY editor. This command line structure editor for Lisp code and expressions was the only one of Interlisp-10. The oldest of the Interlisp editors, it came before graphical interfaces and SEdit. On Medley Interlisp the TTY editor is still useful for specialized tasks. For example, its extensive set of commands with macro support is effectively a little language for batch editing and list structure manipulation. Think Unix sed for s-exps. The language even provides the variable EDITMACROS (wink wink). Evaluating (PRINTDEF EDITMACROS) gives a flavor for the language. For an experience closer to 1970s Interlisp I'm using the editor in its original environment, Interlisp-10 on TWENEX. SDF provides a publicly accessible TWENEX system running on a PDP-10 setup. With the product name TOPS-20, TWENEX was a DEC operating system for DECSYSTEM-20/PDP-10 mainframes derived from TENEX originally developed by BBN. SDF's TWENEX system comes with Interlisp-10 and other languages. This is Interlisp-10 in a TWENEX session accessed from my Linux box: A screenshot of a Linux terminal showing Interlisp-10 running under TWENEX in a SSH session. Creating a TWENEX account is straightforward but I didn't receive the initial password via email as expected. After reporting this to the twenex-l mailing list I was soon emailed the password which I changed with the TWENEX command CHANGE DIRECTORY PASSWORD. Interacting with TWENEX is less alien or arcane than I thought. I recognize the influence of TENEX and TWENEX on Interlisp terminology and notation. For example, the Interlisp REPL is called Exec after the Exec command processor of the TENEX operating system. And, like TENEX, Interlisp uses angle brackets as part of directory names. It's clear the influence of these operating systems also on the design of CP/M and hence MS-DOS, for example the commands DIR and TYPE. SDF's TWENEX system provides a complete Interlisp-10 implementation with only one notable omission: HELPSYS, the interactive facility for consulting the online documentation of Interlisp. The SDF wiki describes the basics of using Interlisp-10 and editing Lisp code with the TTY editor. After a couple of years of experience with Medley Interlisp the Interlisp-10 environment feels familiar. Most of the same functions and commands control the development tools and facilities. My first impression of the TTY editor is it's reasonably efficient and intuitive to edit Lisp code, at least using the basic commands. One thing that's not immediately apparent is that EDITF, the entry point for editing a function, works only with existing functions and can't create new ones. The workaround is to define a stub from the Exec like this: (DEFINEQ (NEW.FUNCTION () T)) and then call (EDITF NEW.FUNCTION) to flesh it out. Transferring files between TWENEX and the external world, such as my Linux box, involves two steps because the TWENEX system is not accessible outside of SDF. First, I log into Unix on sdf.org with my SDF account and from there ftp to kankan.twenex.org (172.16.36.36) with my TWENEX account. Once the TWENEX files are on Unix I access them from Linux with scp or sftp to sdf.org. This may require the ARPA tier of SDF membership. Everything is ready for a small Interlisp-10 programming project. #Interlisp #Lisp a href="https://remark.as/p/journal.paoloamoroso.com/exploring-interlisp-10-and-twenex"Discuss.../a Email | Reply @amoroso@oldbytes.space !--emailsub--]]>
Total disassociation, fully out your mind That Funny Feeling I was thinking today about a disc jockey. Like one in the 80s, where you actually had to put the records on the turntables to get the music. You move the information. You were the file system. I like the Retro Game Mechanics channel on YouTube. What was possible was limited by the hardware, and in a weird way it forced games to be good. Skill was apparent by a quick viewing, and different skill is usually highly correlated. Good graphics meant good story – not true today. I was thinking about all the noobs showing up to comma. If you can put a technical barrier up to stop them, like it used to be. But you can’t. These barriers can’t be fake, because a fake barrier isn’t like a real barrier. A fake barrier is one small patch away from being gone. What if the Internet was a mistake? I feel like it’s breaking my brain. It was this mind expanding world in my childhood, but now it’s a set of narrow loops that are harder and harder to get out of. And you can’t escape it. Once you have Starlink to your phone, not having the Internet with you will be a choice, not a real barrier. There’s nowhere to hide. Chris McCandless wanted to be an explorer, but being born in 1968 meant that the world was already all explored. His clever solution, throw away the map. But that didn’t make him an explorer, it made him an idiot who died 5 miles from a bridge that would have saved his life. And I’ll tell you something else that you ain’t dying enough to know Big Casino Sure, you can still spin real records, code for the NES, and SSH into your comma device. But you don’t have to. And that makes the people who do it come from a different distribution from the people who used to. They are not explorers in the same way Chris McCandless wasn’t. When I found out about the singularity at 15, I was sure it was going to happen. It was depressing for a while, realizing that machines would be able to do everything a lot better than I could. But then I realized that it wasn’t like that yet and I could still work on this problem. And here I am, working in AI 20 years later. I thought I came to grips with obsolescence. But it’s not obsolescence, the reality is looking to be so much sadder than I imagined. It won’t be humans accepting the rise of the machines, it won’t be humans fighting the rise of the machines, it will be human shaped zoo animals oddly pacing back and forth in a corner of the cage while the world keeps turning around them. It’s easy to see the appeal of conspiracy theories. Even if they hate you, it’s more comforting to believe that they exist. That at least somebody is driving. But that’s not true. It’s just going. There are no longer Western institutions capable of making sense of the world. (maybe the Chinese ones can? it’s hard to tell) We are shoved up brutally against evolution, just of the memetic variety. The TikTok brainrot kids will be nothing compared to the ChatGPT brainrot kids. And I’m not talking like an old curmudgeon about the new forms of media being bad and the youth being bad like Socrates said. Because you can never go back. It will be whatever it is. To every fool preaching the end of history, evolution spits in your face. To every fool preaching the world government AI singleton, evolution spits in your face. I knew these things intellectually, but viscerally it’s just hard to live through. The world feels so small and I feel like I’m being stared at by the Eye of Sauron.
I always had a diffuse idea of why people are spending so much time and money on amateur radio. Once I got my license and started to amass radios myself, it became more clear.
What does it mean when someone writes that a programming language is “strongly typed”? I’ve known for many years that “strongly typed” is a poorly-defined term. Recently I was prompted on Lobsters to explain why it’s hard to understand what someone means when they use the phrase. I came up with more than five meanings! how strong? The various meanings of “strongly typed” are not clearly yes-or-no. Some developers like to argue that these kinds of integrity checks must be completely perfect or else they are entirely worthless. Charitably (it took me a while to think of a polite way to phrase this), that betrays a lack of engineering maturity. Software engineers, like any engineers, have to create working systems from imperfect materials. To do so, we must understand what guarantees we can rely on, where our mistakes can be caught early, where we need to establish processes to catch mistakes, how we can control the consequences of our mistakes, and how to remediate when somethng breaks because of a mistake that wasn’t caught. strong how? So, what are the ways that a programming language can be strongly or weakly typed? In what ways are real programming languages “mid”? Statically typed as opposed to dynamically typed? Many languages have a mixture of the two, such as run time polymorphism in OO languages (e.g. Java), or gradual type systems for dynamic languages (e.g. TypeScript). Sound static type system? It’s common for static type systems to be deliberately unsound, such as covariant subtyping in arrays or functions (Java, again). Gradual type systems migh have gaping holes for usability reasons (TypeScript, again). And some type systems might be unsound due to bugs. (There are a few of these in Rust.) Unsoundness isn’t a disaster, if a programmer won’t cause it without being aware of the risk. For example: in Lean you can write “sorry” as a kind of “to do” annotation that deliberately breaks soundness; and Idris 2 has type-in-type so it accepts Girard’s paradox. Type safe at run time? Most languages have facilities for deliberately bypassing type safety, with an “unsafe” library module or “unsafe” language features, or things that are harder to spot. It can be more or less difficult to break type safety in ways that the programmer or language designer did not intend. JavaScript and Lua are very safe, treating type safety failures as security vulnerabilities. Java and Rust have controlled unsafety. In C everything is unsafe. Fewer weird implicit coercions? There isn’t a total order here: for instance, C has implicit bool/int coercions, Rust does not; Rust has implicit deref, C does not. There’s a huge range in how much coercions are a convenience or a source of bugs. For example, the PHP and JavaScript == operators are made entirely of WAT, but at least you can use === instead. How fancy is the type system? To what degree can you model properties of your program as types? Is it convenient to parse, not validate? Is the Curry-Howard correspondance something you can put into practice? Or is it only capable of describing the physical layout of data? There are probably other meanings, e.g. I have seen “strongly typed” used to mean that runtime representations are abstract (you can’t see the underlying bytes); or in the past it sometimes meant a language with a heavy type annotation burden (as a mischaracterization of static type checking). how to type So, when you write (with your keyboard) the phrase “strongly typed”, delete it, and come up with a more precise description of what you really mean. The desiderata above are partly overlapping, sometimes partly orthogonal. Some of them you might care about, some of them not. But please try to communicate where you draw the line and how fuzzy your line is.
