[HN Gopher] Dusk OS
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Dusk OS
        
       Author : GTP
       Score  : 155 points
       Date   : 2025-05-13 19:44 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (duskos.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (duskos.org)
        
       | 90s_dev wrote:
       | > https://git.sr.ht/~vdupras/duskos/tree/master/item/fs/io/kbd...
       | 
       | I don't know forth. Is this a driver? How does it talk to the
       | hardware?
        
         | 7thaccount wrote:
         | Forth is usually kind of like a macro later on top of Assembly
         | or even machine code in the case of very simple CPUs, although
         | it can be written on top of anything (example: Python). I think
         | a layer on top of C is pretty common these days as the
         | processors keep getting crazy complicated. Another important
         | note is that although there are some conventions, almost
         | everyone rolls their own Forth, so they're all unique in a lot
         | of ways. The old saying is if you've seen one forth, then
         | you've seen one forth. There is an ANS standard, but it isn't
         | used a whole lot to my knowledge.
         | 
         | So I assume it talks to drivers like you would with Assembly?
         | That's just a guess and probably a bad one.
        
           | kjander79 wrote:
           | It's just an event loop, watching for status changes in a
           | memory location. Talking to the hardware just occurs when the
           | keyboard changes the values in memory.
        
         | skupig wrote:
         | The USB host code is in fs/drv/usb:
         | https://git.sr.ht/~vdupras/duskos/tree/master/item/fs/drv/us...
         | 
         | Not that I can read any of it... Forth looks unlike any other
         | language I've ever seen o_O
        
       | Calwestjobs wrote:
       | Mandatory question for all OSes - Does it run EMACS or does it
       | run inside of a EMACS?
        
         | luqtas wrote:
         | only Vi, the resource collapse resistant branch /j
        
           | tensility wrote:
           | VI runs EMACS?! I knew the opposite to be true, but...
           | 
           | ;-p
        
       | p0w3n3d wrote:
       | Tbh I agree with _almost_ every word there, but I can 't believe
       | this OS would be of any help in such a situation.
       | 
       | In dusk of our civilization it will not be possible to boot this
       | OS from any modern computer. Those things nowadays don't even
       | have CD. everything is dependent on internet, our data is being
       | disowned by us and put into cloud. In case of broken internet the
       | knowledge is going to be lost.
       | 
       | And how we're going to connect to this site using http? Via
       | dialup?
        
         | GTP wrote:
         | I think the idea would be to prepare beforehand and have your
         | own copy, alongside your own Wikipedia dump.
        
         | etskinner wrote:
         | You don't need a CD drive to boot an OS. A humble USB stick
         | does the trick. And nearly every computer made in the last 10
         | years has a USB port and the ability to boot from it
        
           | p0w3n3d wrote:
           | Sometimes it's only usb c. But... We're speaking about dusk
           | of civilization. Pendrive don't live as long as CDs
        
             | BenjiWiebe wrote:
             | I have a stack of CD drives. I'll trade you one for food
             | and medications.
        
           | alpaca128 wrote:
           | What kind of apocalyptic event that wipes out all computer
           | manufacturing capability would let USB drives (and compatible
           | computers) survive? And how would you power that thing?
        
       | jollyllama wrote:
       | Seems like a wishful thinking about the first stage portion of
       | collapse. You're going to be more interested in running some
       | obsolete version of Windows that controls some proprietary
       | infrastructure hardware, not running calculations of whatever
       | kind or building things from scratch.
        
         | markstos wrote:
         | But if you an need an OS for which no viruses or exploits have
         | been develop yet, you may be in luck!
        
           | alpaca128 wrote:
           | Would be funny to finally find an undamaged computer, boot it
           | up and see a ransomware notice.
        
         | Mainan_Tagonist wrote:
         | While it is most likely a very fanciful pet project borne out
         | of post-apo fantasy doomporn, there is one fatal fly in the
         | ointment: In a post apocalyptic situation, who will have THE
         | TIME (nevermind the resources) to dedicate to "operating" one
         | such OS? Apocalypse is generally synonymous with population
         | collapse. Many less humans to interact with means a greatly
         | diminished division of labour and rebuilding civilisation will
         | require first and foremost food production, 14 hours of daily
         | work in the fields, scavenging, hunting, etc....
         | 
         | Taking one worker away from these (tedious) activities would
         | likely be considered an investment that requires significant
         | returns, results, be it only to justify this to other workers
         | who would also like to be sat in front of a computer. Hard to
         | justify having swapped a hard days work for some code on a
         | computer screen.
         | 
         | For that kind of scenario, a lightweight Android rom with some
         | ham-radio driver would probably be more appropriate.
        
           | vdupras wrote:
           | See https://collapseos.org/why.html , under "Aren't there
           | more important things to do than an operating system?"
        
         | oneZergArmy wrote:
         | Depends on the level of collapse, and say you get
         | infrastructure up and running (temporarily, mind you, without
         | manufacturing..) - what then? That's what this is for. Cobbling
         | together the pieces left over.
        
         | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
         | That's assuming you can find the proprietary software that is
         | needed. In some cases you're better off just cutting the
         | proprietary bits out entirely and hooking straight into the
         | motor controllers... or whatever else is more immediately
         | upstream of the "business end" of the thing you're hacking.
        
       | os2warpman wrote:
       | >Its primary purpose is to be maximally useful during the first
       | stage of civilizational collapse, that is, when we can't produce
       | modern computers anymore but that there's still many modern
       | computers around.
       | 
       | Any event or series of events that removes mankind's ability to
       | produce modern computers is a global extinction-level event and
       | rather than dicking around with computers one should really be
       | considering suicide to avoid a slow, painful, inevitable death in
       | a hostile world surrounded by misery.
       | 
       | People act like computers are complicated. They are but they also
       | aren't.
       | 
       | Any moderately-sized US state university can (and some have)
       | build one from scratch: as in from fucking sand to "Shall we play
       | a game?", all in one go.
       | 
       | The state university nearest to me has a complete nanofab that
       | can make-- and package!-- ICs (somewhere around 14nm-ish), a
       | different lab that can make wafers from scratch, a chemistry
       | department where undergrads could make the plastics, and all of
       | the software guys you can shake a stick at.
       | 
       | The loss of the ability to make many things, including computers
       | but also other more important things like the industrial process
       | for making ammonia, globally, simultaneously, is the end of
       | humanity.
       | 
       | The knowledge and ability is so widely globally distributed that
       | taking it all out is death.
       | 
       | Do not mistake the centralization of consumer goods assembly with
       | the centralization of the knowledge needed to assemble consumer
       | goods.
       | 
       | Is this OS just for the brief period of time between the loss and
       | the ultimate end? To like, play some rounds of solitaire while
       | awaiting the inevitable?
        
         | nonethewiser wrote:
         | >Any moderately-sized US state university can (and some have)
         | build one from scratch: as in from fucking sand to "Shall we
         | play a game?", all in one go.
         | 
         | I am quite surprised to hear that. Really?
        
           | os2warpman wrote:
           | Yup!
           | 
           | Here's one in Utah: https://www.nanofab.utah.edu/
           | 
           | Here's one in Pennsylvania:
           | https://www.mri.psu.edu/nanofabrication-lab
           | 
           | Here's one in California: https://nanofab.ucsb.edu/
        
             | BenjiWiebe wrote:
             | Those aren't starting from sand though, so they do need
             | some external fancy tech to survive the apocalypse - to
             | produce their wafers.
        
           | packetlost wrote:
           | It won't be small, but you can create PCBs pretty easily with
           | chemical etching. I think making the silicon wafers is
           | probably harder.
        
             | ummonk wrote:
             | PCBs are something people can do in their garage.
             | Integrated circuit fabrication is definitely something that
             | requires a much more sophisticated lab such as a top
             | university lab.
        
           | guhidalg wrote:
           | Depends on the state, but for my alma mater (Georgia Tech)
           | I'm pretty confident the answer is yes.
        
             | os2warpman wrote:
             | Georgia Tech has one of the best fabrication programs in
             | the world.
        
             | cycomanic wrote:
             | I just had a look and I am not sure they are making silicon
             | wafers. I would be surprised, there's not really any
             | research in it, and it's costly to say the least.
        
         | joshmarlow wrote:
         | To your point - we do have some chokepoints in supply chains
         | here and there but I often wonder how much of that is due to
         | the learning curve. As in, things are centralized because just
         | how we as a civilization learned to build things in our
         | particular historical context - if the context changes and the
         | knowledge and resources are there to rebuild in a different
         | way, we can.
         | 
         | Relatedly - a lot of things seem intrinsically capital
         | intensive, but how much of that is due to the fact that we had
         | large pools of capital when we learned to do those things?
        
         | iamjackg wrote:
         | Perhaps I'm ignorant, but I wonder why I haven't seen this
         | aspect explored in post-apocalyptic media more. I mean, beyond
         | the obvious fact that if we can "keep making computers" all of
         | a sudden the apocalypse doesn't sound quite that bad, which
         | would somewhat lower the stakes.
        
         | WaitWaitWha wrote:
         | > Any event or series of events that removes mankind's ability
         | to produce modern computers is a global extinction-level event
         | and rather than dicking around with computers one should really
         | be considering suicide to avoid a slow, painful, inevitable
         | death in a hostile world surrounded by misery.
         | 
         | Hmmm... At a very high altitude extinction-level events have
         | sufficiently sharp edges. But, as we get closer to things it
         | becomes fuzzy. For examples: The Black Death (1347-1351), The
         | Spanish Flu (1918-1919), The Great Chinese Famine (1959-1961),
         | The Haitian Revolution (1791-1804), The Irish Potato Famine
         | (1845-1852), each one of these events were extinction-level
         | events for those in the middle of them. What year would you
         | have selected to self terminate? Remember you would not have
         | hindsight or knowledge that the events are temporary.
        
           | os2warpman wrote:
           | Those were all local events.
           | 
           | The only thing removing mankind's ability to make computers
           | is a large (Chicxulub-ish-sized) meteor strike or andromeda-
           | strain-like sci-fi story made real.
           | 
           | Luckily, I'll be killed by tidal waves if a meteor hits the
           | Atlantic and I'll be killed in the firestorm if it hits land
           | anywhere on Earth.
           | 
           | If it hits the Pacific or Indian oceans, it depends on the
           | size. If large enough, I'll shoot myself in the head to avoid
           | starvation after playing a few rounds of solitare.
        
             | glitchc wrote:
             | > Those were all local events
             | 
             | In a sufficiently catastrophic event (major loss of
             | infrastructure), one wouldn't be able to tell if the event
             | is local or global. To the people suffering from the Black
             | Death, the event must have felt global as everyone they
             | knew was experiencing it.
        
             | alexey-salmin wrote:
             | > Those were all local events.
             | 
             | > The only thing removing mankind's ability to make
             | computers is a large (Chicxulub-ish-sized) meteor strike or
             | andromeda-strain-like sci-fi story made real.
             | 
             | One of the possible causes of the Bronze Age Collapse
             | (which btw was very non-local) is a prolonged drought that
             | apparently lasted for decades. It's wasn't severe by itself
             | but long enough for the fertile soil to keep shrinking year
             | after year, decreasing the size of sustainable population.
             | 
             | I dwell on this sometimes and I think that probably we
             | underestimate how fragile our food production system is.
             | Feeding 8 billion people is not an easy endeavor. Multi-
             | year global food reserves are not only non-existent but
             | maybe even non-possible at this scale. A global event that
             | would somehow disrupt our ability to produce food for
             | several years in a row will make the hell break loose. I'm
             | not confident that humanity couldn't plunge in a couple of
             | dark age centuries as a result, all bets are off in a truly
             | global famine.
             | 
             | Then the curious question is how likely is such an event?
             | Chicxulub -- yes, but these are extremely rare, once in
             | millions of years. The Volcanic Winters however occur every
             | few centuries, the "Year Without a Summer" was 1816. Could
             | we have "3 years without a summer" at some point? And not
             | just in the northern hemisphere but globally? I don't know,
             | maybe.
             | 
             | After all, the way I think of it is this: modern food
             | production at scale is sun + water + fertilizers.
             | Production of fertilizers seem distributed enough to be
             | resilient at a global scale. Water at the Earth scale is
             | sun again -- as long as it's shining it will rain
             | somewhere, even if the distribution shifts (with dramatic
             | effects for sure, but not a completely desperate
             | situation). But then the sun does seem to be the single
             | point of failure. If there's dust or ash or something else
             | shielding the sun then it is in fact desperate.
        
         | hermitShell wrote:
         | Yeah we're not likely to ever face such a situation and still
         | even need that many computers. It's an interesting project
         | though in the sense that someone has a 32 bit OS running on
         | every ISA out there (or even aims to).
         | 
         | Interesting but not practical. CPUs are either 64 bit and have
         | memory management hardware or 32 bit and don't. This dictates
         | whether you have lots of addressable RAM or not, and changes
         | what an OS is for that CPU
        
           | GTP wrote:
           | It is also interesting in the fact that it is extremely tiny
           | in terms of lines of code, and the approach they took to
           | minimize its codebase is original.
        
         | NunoSempere wrote:
         | > Any event or series of events that removes mankind's ability
         | to produce modern computers is a global extinction-level event
         | and rather than dicking around with computers one should really
         | be considering suicide to avoid a slow, painful, inevitable
         | death in a hostile world surrounded by misery.
         | 
         | To give some color, here: https://blog.sentinel-team.org/p/how-
         | likely-are-various-prec... is a list of a few things that could
         | kill over 1M people in one year. Maybe your statement is not
         | the case for solar storms in particular.
        
           | alpaca128 wrote:
           | The probability estimation of "simulation shutdown" seems a
           | bit high. It's just as speculative as alien invasions or
           | vacuum decay.
        
           | matltc wrote:
           | Speculative rationalist dreck. Entertaining nonetheless
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | > Any event or series of events that removes mankind's ability
         | to produce modern computers is a global extinction-level event
         | and rather than dicking around with computers one should really
         | be considering suicide to avoid a slow, painful, inevitable
         | death in a hostile world surrounded by misery.
         | 
         | Wow... there are probably several ways we could lose the
         | ability to fab semiconductors. We can look back through history
         | at other periods where they "forgot" how to do various things.
         | Brunelleschi's dome on the Florence Cathedral was the first
         | major dome built in Europe in over a thousand years since the
         | fall of the Western Roman Empire. They lost the knowledge of
         | dome building. Should they have considered doing themselves in
         | because they found themselves in the Dark Ages? We might forget
         | how to do various very involved technical things like fab'ing
         | chips, or we might lose the knowledge/and or ability to even
         | build a fab, for example (just consider the supply-chain
         | required to build a fab and consider how fragile some of those
         | chains are). Yeah, it will mean that something really bad has
         | likely happened, but that doesn't mean that it's the end and we
         | should just go and kill ourselves. It will mean that there's
         | been some kind of discontinuity, but it doesn't necessarily
         | mean the end of humanity. People will still be able to grow
         | crops, hunt, fish, etc (given a reasonable climate remains in
         | enough places). Likely the population under these conditions
         | will be much smaller but it doesn't mean that we can never
         | recover as a species - sure, it might take 1000 years. That's
         | ok, we go on just like ancestors before us who endured great
         | hardship.
        
           | os2warpman wrote:
           | The world is more than Europe.
           | 
           | There are many domes that were built in the Middle East and
           | Asia while Europe was trying to figure out how to fund
           | expensive vanity projects (large domes).
           | 
           | Computers aren't vanity projects.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | > Computers aren't vanity projects.
             | 
             | Nor are they a requirement for survival. We didn't have
             | computers until about the 1930s and somehow we survived as
             | a species.
             | 
             | > The world is more than Europe.
             | 
             | Yes, very true. But under the conditions of some kind of
             | serious disaster such as we're discussing we wouldn't have
             | visibility into what's going on on the other side of the
             | world either, just as they didn't. The Dark Ages in Europe
             | weren't dark in places like China, but that didn't help you
             | if you were living in Europe. (and even in Europe the
             | "darkness" wasn't evenly distributed)
        
           | StopDisinfo910 wrote:
           | There are no Dark Ages. People in the Byzantine Empire
           | (capitale in Europe) and the Abbasid Caliphate very much knew
           | how to build domes and where actually busy advancing the
           | state of the art.
           | 
           | The fact that the Franks were more interested in warring
           | against each others than building great things is no evidence
           | of a dark age. They started building again once peace came
           | back and didn't restart from where they left off but from the
           | new state of the art as translations started pouring over
           | from the Arabic empires.
           | 
           | The idea that humanity somehow went back is a fantasy pushed
           | forward by catholic commentators.
        
             | kjs3 wrote:
             | The 'dark ages' weren't even the dark ages in Europe. The
             | idea was invented by guys in the Renaissance who pined for
             | the Greco-Roman world and pretended everything since then
             | was a slide downhill. Anyone who seriously trots out this
             | trope as 'proof' of anything should be taken about as
             | seriously as a flat-earther.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | > The idea that humanity somehow went back is a fantasy
             | pushed forward by catholic commentators.
             | 
             | A tangential aside: Wouldn't that make the catholics look
             | bad and as such why would they spread it? ("We had all this
             | great tech before the catholic/christians came along and
             | ruined everything and now we don't have nice things" seems
             | like another way to look at it)
        
           | palata wrote:
           | > Brunelleschi's dome on the Florence Cathedral was the first
           | major dome built in Europe in over a thousand years since the
           | fall of the Western Roman Empire.
           | 
           | I don't think it necessarily means they forgot how to do it,
           | though. Or does it? We too stopped building domes made of big
           | stones, it doesn't mean we don't know how to do it.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | For whatever reason they weren't building domes anymore in
             | Europe where they had been (the fall of the Western Roman
             | empire sort of changed priorities for a while). And after a
             | generation of not building domes the artisans (in Europe)
             | lost the ability to do it.
             | 
             | There's a much closer example: The US spent the 60s
             | developing the capability to land humans on the moon. And
             | they were successful. They did it about, what, 7 or 8
             | times? But then they stopped doing it. And now some 60
             | years later they're having a hard time doing it again (see
             | the woes of NASA's Artemis and Boeing's Starliner). Imagine
             | if the pause wasn't 60 years, but several hundred years.
        
         | binary132 wrote:
         | Some people would survive.
        
         | eGQjxkKF6fif wrote:
         | That was a hard, and good read. But remember Linux is Love.
         | Linux is Life.
         | 
         | If the end of the world happens I'm going down making and doing
         | dope stuff. I'm not going outside and mingling with people.
         | That's how you get a fucking spear thrown at you or mugged by
         | some newfound MS14 gang swinging hockey sticks and shit.
         | 
         | I'm going to forage for some fruits and vegetables, all that
         | good stuff since I'm too much of a bitch to kill an animal;
         | those things are cute.
         | 
         | I'm going to load up my laptops on solar power/battery, hook in
         | to some internet somewhere and live a normal life.
         | 
         | I don't know what Dusk OS is about but the making computers
         | from fucking sand, now that's dank.
         | 
         | I'll install Desktop Linux on it and we can all start the next
         | era of civilization; this time Microsoft and Apple aint selling
         | us out
         | 
         |  _catches spear to the chest_ Shit
        
         | louthy wrote:
         | > Any event or series of events that removes mankind's ability
         | to produce modern computers is a global extinction-level event
         | 
         | Semiconductors have been around for, what, 70 years? The idea
         | that humans couldn't survive without modern tech is ludicrous.
         | 
         | Sure, there will be fewer humans, but extincting humans
         | completely is likely to be incredibly difficult without an
         | atmosphere-on-fire scale event.
        
           | vanschelven wrote:
           | I think the stated claim is that any event that takes out
           | semiconductors takes out humanity, not that the lack of
           | semiconductors itself does.
        
           | ummonk wrote:
           | The point isn't that humans couldn't survive without
           | computers, but that any even that managed to stop humans
           | globally from manufacturing computers would be such a
           | massively disruptive event in much more important areas than
           | computing.
        
             | louthy wrote:
             | > massively disruptive event
             | 
             | That's not the same as what I was replying to: "a global
             | extinction-level event"
             | 
             | The difference is pretty substantial.
        
         | keybored wrote:
         | > The loss of the ability to make many things, including
         | computers but also other more important things like the
         | industrial process for making ammonia, globally,
         | simultaneously, is the end of humanity.
         | 
         | The end of us sedentary people. No more ammonia by itself won't
         | affect hunter-gatherers and uncontacted peoples. But if we're
         | talking about not the end of these things in itself but an
         | event like a nuclear winter: sure!
         | 
         | We've been through population bottlenecks in the distant past.
         | Again, if _we_ (reading this) die out not due to very severe
         | climate change or nuclear winter, other kinds of humans could
         | live on. Maybe.
         | 
         | By the way I think old-school Preppers are funny.[1] What's the
         | point of prepping with a bunker and canned goods? Truly. You
         | don't have enough time to train for the skills, or to hoard
         | enough stuff, to survive in a post-civilizational state. You're
         | just prepping for surviving a few months at best, that's it.
         | 
         | [1] This OS guy is probably more reflected.
        
         | 90s_dev wrote:
         | > to avoid a slow, painful, inevitable death in a hostile world
         | surrounded by misery.
         | 
         | Well aren't you a bundle of joy, recommending death to people
         | in bad situations.
         | 
         | A life of misery isn't all that bad. Much worse could happen.
         | 
         | This reminds me of A Man For All Seasons:
         | 
         | Thomas More: "At the worst we could be beggars and still be
         | keep company and be merry together."
         | 
         | Lady Alice: "Aha, merry."
         | 
         | Thomas More: "Aye, merry!"
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEa6XRZa9Vg&t=5459s
        
           | nrb wrote:
           | That advice sounds to me like it's more for "an entire world
           | where all people are in a bad situation from which they will
           | never escape and neither will their next of kin" but if that
           | comes to pass, the lighthearted talk of embracing the misery
           | will probably end around the time the starvation begins.
        
             | 90s_dev wrote:
             | Eschatology is always a controversial subject. Mostly
             | pointless to discuss in such a diverse environment.
        
         | hex4def6 wrote:
         | They can make their own ingots and ultra pure chemicals, and
         | turbopumps and ion implantation machines and spin coaters CVD
         | machines and and the HEPA filters for the cleanroom, and the
         | remote servers that control the licensing dongle for the robot
         | arm that movies the thingie from "A" to "B"?
         | 
         | Sand to "hello world" is a tall order. There is a pyramid of
         | industry that supports the entire thing. Even Sand -> 99.9999 %
         | Si (purification & Czochralski crystal growth) needs multi-
         | story furnaces, vacuum pulling stations, 10 MW of steady power,
         | and months of process engineering. All of have huge dependency
         | chains.
         | 
         | Even modern "mild" events like supply chain disruptions would
         | be enough to shut down any sort of non-toy level production in
         | short order.
         | 
         | So yeah, a university as it currently stands can make a
         | microchip, relying on all of these dependency chains being in
         | operational order. But I don't doubt that would quickly no
         | longer be the case if you had a hot war or societal collapse.
         | 
         | The exponential growth in processor capabilities relied on a
         | global manufacturing infrastructure from the 1970s until today.
         | To do the same level of progression would require much of that
         | infrastructure.
         | 
         | Assuming someone managed to strategically nuke every major
         | foundry / chemical / machine supplier, but leave everything
         | else the same? Sure, maybe we get back to our present tech in
         | 15-20 years.
         | 
         | Assume it's the result of a societal collapse? No way in hell.
        
         | cosmic_cheese wrote:
         | Most catastrophic scenarios I can imagine result in loss of
         | _advanced_ silicon production, but not necessarily _all_
         | silicon production. More likely than not there would be ways to
         | keep fabs for old well-trodden processes running. In that
         | situation, there'd probably be a temporary shock of no
         | computers followed by new computers being a lot less
         | powerful... it'd be less "no more computers" and more "new
         | computers are comparable to their Pentium 4 /PowerPC G5 era
         | counterparts", in which case operating systems would still be
         | graphical, just a lot more lightweight. Linux and BSDs would
         | probably quickly take over desktop computing due to being able
         | to run reasonably on such systems with minimal legwork.
         | 
         | If we can't manufacture chips _at all_ , yeah, things will be
         | in enough of a pickle that computers will be the least of our
         | worries.
        
       | nancyminusone wrote:
       | I hope the author doesn't take this the wrong way, but this feels
       | like another Temple OS driven by a different (perhaps milder)
       | kind of insanity.
       | 
       | It's quite technically impressive, but I'm not sure I'd know what
       | to do with it if I were experiencing an apocalypse, in a way that
       | would be more useful to me than an install of Windows XP or Linux
       | or Freedos would be
        
         | theletterf wrote:
         | Temple OS came to my mind, too. At least that one had a UI and
         | games; a much better option if civilization collapses.
        
         | emchammer wrote:
         | It's just such a boutique thing, saying you're prepared to run
         | 32-bit software on hardware during an apocalypse. If CPUs
         | suddenly become scarce, I would have figured a tube-based,
         | relay-based, or Enigma-type machine with specific useful
         | applications would be more practical.
        
           | zeroq wrote:
           | You do realize that your usb charger has a microprocesor that
           | is as capable as computers you used to play on as a child?
           | 
           | Seriously, finding a running 386 today will probably be more
           | challanging than finding a PC capable of running Cyberpunk in
           | 4k 5 years after the fallout.
           | 
           | Like others have mentioned at worst it's another TempleOS or
           | subtle way to point out to your acquaintance that they
           | shouldn't stay with you alone at best.
        
             | aziaziazi wrote:
             | > years after the fallout.
             | 
             | Ok, but that's not the purpose of the OS. I recommend you
             | to read the Why page:
             | 
             | https://collapseos.org/why.html
             | 
             | Two relevants parts:
             | 
             | > Computers, after a few decades, will break down beyond
             | repair and we won't be able to program microcontrollers any
             | more.
             | 
             | > It's not that modern ICs are more fragile than old ones
             | (maybe they are, after all, more can go wrong with millions
             | of transistors than with thousands), it's that old designs
             | are simpler than modern ones and thus more repairable.
             | 
             | The complete reflexion and arguments are way deeper and
             | interesting through. The most interesting parts is under
             | "Electronics evolved rapidly without any help before. Why
             | can't we pull it again?"
        
               | zeroq wrote:
               | Yeah, I've read that with the voice of Ron Perlman: "FAT,
               | FAT never changes...".
               | 
               | I get that not every vault dweller will be technically
               | apt enough to build a working computer out of a usb
               | charger, but there is plenty of hardware and software
               | that will be laying around in shrines near ghoul
               | settlements.
               | 
               | Every store has POSes that can be easilly repurposed,
               | there's DOS, Windows95 and if your tribe really wants to
               | get an edge during a siege on enemy village you will most
               | likely be able to calculate catapults trajectories on a
               | PIP... I mean old android phone.
        
         | horacemorace wrote:
         | An LLM and a modern desktop makes any sufficiently enthusiastic
         | human into an Operator, as the author describes it.
        
         | keybored wrote:
         | An OS for civilizational collapse is a million times more
         | relevant than an OS dedicated to God.
        
           | ummonk wrote:
           | Churches did a much better job of preserving knowledge
           | through the "Dark Age" than did doomsayer prophets.
        
         | EGreg wrote:
         | I gotta be honest
         | 
         | It didnt start out that way But 14 years later I would say this
         | was also a labor of love and I'm not sure if it was entirely
         | rational:
         | 
         | https://github.com/Qbix
         | 
         | and
         | 
         | https://community.qbix.com
        
           | GTP wrote:
           | What's this?
        
         | StrangeDoctor wrote:
         | I think the idea is:
         | 
         | some computing device is discovered, but the OS is
         | bad/missing/old/not useful etc. Or possibly a novel computer is
         | built from whatever is still around.
         | 
         | The computer itself would still be good if only it had an os.
         | 
         | Dusk OS is easy to port to new arch because it compiles from
         | source on every(?) boot, and only needs a tiny kernel to be
         | ported?
        
           | vdupras wrote:
           | Yes, every time Dusk boots, it boots from a kernel ranging
           | from 2.5 to 4 kilobytes in size, depending on the CPU. The
           | rest is all compiled (very quickly) from source on the fly.
        
         | thih9 wrote:
         | This and more is addressed on the "why.html" page. E.g.:
         | 
         | > (...) you and I are likely to be dead before Collapse OS is
         | actually useful.
         | 
         | or:
         | 
         | > People who are less technical have trouble seeing the point
         | of this project and ask "why can't we just use Linux?". People
         | who have actually lifted Linux' hood don't ask that question
         | because they actually understand the magnitude of complexity
         | involved, but if you haven't, it's a legitimate question to
         | ask.
         | 
         | https://collapseos.org/why.html
        
       | ummonk wrote:
       | There's a lot of idiosyncratic verbiage about stuff like collapse
       | of civilization and users vs. operators, but it's not clear to me
       | what makes this more lightweight or hackable than a typical
       | lightweight RTOS or even just baremetal drivers running on a
       | microcontroller.
        
         | nonethewiser wrote:
         | Or why an "almost C compiler" is better than a C compiler.
        
           | GTP wrote:
           | I think that having an "almost" C compiler is a trick they
           | use to minimize the size of the codebase.
        
             | vdupras wrote:
             | Yes, this is it. A C compiler in 50 kilobytes of code is
             | pretty innovative.
             | 
             | It's also doesn't lie about the "almost". It's really
             | almost C. It's just that C's stdlib is POSIX centric and
             | doesn't fit Forth well, so it's not implemented as is.
        
           | kaoD wrote:
           | Or rather, why is it not _much worse_ than an actual C
           | compiler.
           | 
           | In an apocalyptic event energy would be precious. You'd
           | rather have an optimizing compiler to run longer off your
           | solar-charged car battery or whatever.
           | 
           | I like the roleplay/lore and the tech effort is impressive
           | but I don't think it fits the idea.
        
             | fuhsnn wrote:
             | > I like the roleplay/lore and the tech effort is
             | impressive but I don't think it fits the idea.
             | 
             | "An optimizing compiler requires at least 500MB of RAM,
             | which can only be looted from level 7 Terminator elites!"
        
       | NunoSempere wrote:
       | I've seen this before, thought it was super interesting, kudos to
       | the author. Leaving this comment for contrast with some other
       | negative comments.
        
       | etskinner wrote:
       | According to the "Linking to this website" section:
       | If you want to link to this website, please use http:// links
       | rather than https:// ones. While http:// links are trivially
       | "upgradable" to HTTPS, the opposite is not.
       | 
       | Mods should update the link in this post
        
       | munificent wrote:
       | I think many of us feel a lot of existential dread about the
       | future these days, and if hacking on an OS helps the author cope
       | with those feelings and improves their psychology, then I'm all
       | for it. Whatever keeps you sane.
        
       | zeroq wrote:
       | That "civilizational collapse" scenario must be straight out of
       | the Fallout game.
       | 
       | In my mind I was reading their page with the voice of Ron Perlman
       | - "FAT, FAT never changes...".
        
       | blturner wrote:
       | Recent issue of Wired has an interview with the author
       | https://www.wired.com/story/forth-collapse-os-apocalypse-pro...
        
       | lykahb wrote:
       | I think that in the event of a such a collapse, there would be
       | two new directions: turning the surviving advanced digital
       | devices into general computers, and building new electronics.
       | Reusing existing common software would be easier than building
       | something from scratch. So, I'd expect that postmarketOS and
       | flavours of Linux for low-power machines meets most needs.
       | 
       | Also, it'd be fantastic if iPhones have a doomsday switch that
       | untethers them from Apple - that'd be the difference between a
       | useless brick and a precious artifact of a bygone era. The post-
       | apocalyptic setting has potential for a game that comes from the
       | perspective of a builder, and goes deeply into civil engineering
       | and IT - build architecture that can withstand the elements,
       | design a water chip, write embedded software for it.
        
       | r14c wrote:
       | I think forth is fun, but I can't really take the collapse
       | narrative of this project seriously. IG it's disrespectful, but I
       | kinda view it as a performance art piece with fallout vibes.
        
       | nntwozz wrote:
       | That's nice, but it won't replace the trusty abacus.
       | 
       | That's what you need for a real apocalypse.
        
         | timbit42 wrote:
         | My solar powered calculator will be fine.
        
       | tgma wrote:
       | Let me preface that I do not subscribe to the ideology at all,
       | but the concept of bootstrapping a complex system is
       | intellectually worthwhile and often practical in its use-cases.
       | For example, imagine a tech company with a bunch of datacenters
       | that boot from the network, have redundancy etc, but if you
       | somehow turn the macthines off all at once, no one knows if they
       | can reboot safely (say, service discovery cannot find the machine
       | hosting OS images anymore).
       | 
       | As a practical matter, you can flip the author's mental pessimism
       | and look at the optimistic situation where we conquer other
       | planets, in which case thinking about an optimal bootstrapping
       | path is going to be essential for the society and its industrial
       | needs.
       | 
       | It is also true that some fairly local shocks in human society
       | can cause a cascading failure and doing this analysis fairly
       | regularly can help identify and minimize the cascade.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related:
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43482705 -
       | March 2025 (199 comments)
       | 
       |  _Running CollapseOS on an Esp8266_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38645124 - Dec 2023 (1
       | comment)
       | 
       |  _Dusk OS: 32-bit Forth OS. Useful during first stage of
       | civilizational collapse_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36751422 - July 2023 (141
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _DuskOS: Successor to CollapseOS_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36688676 - July 2023 (4
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS - Why?_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35672677 - April 2023 (1
       | comment)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS: Winter is coming_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33207852 - Oct 2022 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31340518 -
       | May 2022 (8 comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS Status: Completed_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26922146 - April 2021 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS - bootstrap post-collapse technology_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25910108 - Jan 2021 (116
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS Web Emulators_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24138496 - Aug 2020 (1
       | comment)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS, an OS for When the Unthinkable Happens_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23535720 - June 2020 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23453575 -
       | June 2020 (15 comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS - Why Forth?_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23450287 - June 2020 (166
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS - Why?_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22901002 - April 2020 (3
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _' Collapse OS' Is an Open Source Operating System for the Post-
       | Apocalypse_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21815588 - Dec
       | 2019 (3 comments)
       | 
       |  _Collapse OS_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21182628 -
       | Oct 2019 (303 comments)
        
       | WorldPeas wrote:
       | Whenever I see something like this I wonder: how is it more
       | valuable than porting freeDOS/busybox to the same environments,
       | with its dearth of existing software and hardware support
        
       | aziaziazi wrote:
       | Many comments strawman the author then argue with what they
       | imagine he images. Guys just read the 'Why' page [0] and argue
       | with his thesis. I'm not sure to agree with everything but it
       | still is a very interesting and questioning read. Kudos to the
       | author for writing it.
       | 
       | This OS is _not_ for:
       | 
       | - you or your child
       | 
       | - a planet with working computers
       | 
       | - a planet with cheap and abundant 'bootstrap' energy like we had
       | from 1850 to 1960
       | 
       | - a planet where humans _really_ struggle to get food ( "you're
       | running away from cannibals", but I think this metaphor is a bad
       | choice after the mad-max refutation)
       | 
       | That page [1] is also a core part of the theory: "What makes
       | collapse inevitable and imminent".
       | 
       | [0] https://collapseos.org/why.html [1]
       | https://collapseos.org/civ.html
        
       | siddthesquid wrote:
       | I feel I can empathize with the ideology, and I want to argue
       | that an idea like this is a big piece of some puzzle.
       | 
       | The puzzle: During the collapse, I think the biggest thing we
       | would lose is our ability to communicate with each other in a
       | reliable way. Like telecommunications and internet and all that.
       | Who and what do we trust?
       | 
       | I imagine that before a collapse like this would happen, people
       | would get a hint to gather as much as they can to help with their
       | survival. Those things would include: this OS, the knowledge to
       | load a sequence of bytes from whatever device is holding the OS
       | to as many CPUs/controllers as possible, strategies to connect
       | any number of arbitrary CPUs to radio devices, some knowledge of
       | public keys and private keys. maybe all neatly organized into a
       | handbook
       | 
       | The OS itself would be responsible for providing as easy an
       | interface for any average joe to generate public/private keys,
       | communicate with other people who have followed their same
       | protocol, and use those public keys to build trust from
       | communications. before the collapse happens, you may even collect
       | a list of public keys you are likely to already trust.
       | 
       | The OS could maybe even have software for building communities of
       | trust or even handling adhoc finances through (don't hate me for
       | this) cryptocurrency.
       | 
       | anyways, this is all based on an assumption that the ability to
       | communicate quickly (and build trust in a decentralized yet
       | controllable way) is the best mitigation we have to a collapse
       | 
       | this answer is slightly influenced by the movie leave the world
       | behind lol
        
       | taylorallred wrote:
       | Where can I go to learn how to scavenge for microcontrollers and
       | load/operate an OS like this on them? (Low-key would like to know
       | that I could do that if need be).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-13 23:01 UTC)