Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

fablepool.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 301 posts

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#241

Post by addandsubtract »

andai wrote: post #235

I wrote this to a friend in 2022: Here's an idea: reverse kickstarter 1. people post ideas 2. good ideas go viral 3. people pledge actual money to encourage someone to step forward and build it 4. interested creators make kickstarter type videos explaining their proposal for making the thing 5A. people vote on which proposal to accept, or maybe 5B. each backer can select a project to support --- Here steps 4 and 5 ar…

Shouldn't we still have people in the loop for selecting/proposing the best implementation (plan)? Vibe coding an entire solution from a prompt still doesn't feel like the optimal way to write software.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#242

Post by halJordan »

addandsubtract wrote: post #241
andai wrote: post #235

I wrote this to a friend in 2022: Here's an idea: reverse kickstarter 1. people post ideas 2. good ideas go viral 3. people pledge actual money to encourage someone to step forward and build it 4. interested creators make kickstarter type videos explaining their proposal for making the thing 5A. people vote on which proposal to accept, or maybe 5B. each backer can select a project to support --- Here steps 4 and 5 ar…

Shouldn't we still have people in the loop for selecting/proposing the best implementation (plan)? Vibe coding an entire solution from a prompt still doesn't feel like the optimal way to write software.

At some point you have to say "Is not having it better than having it?" Where's your dude, today, who's gonna code this? If it were gone happen, it wouldve.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#243

Post by e-clinton »

halJordan wrote: post #242
addandsubtract wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't we still have people in the loop for selecting/proposing the best implementation (plan)? Vibe coding an entire solution from a prompt still doesn't feel like the optimal way to write software.

At some point you have to say "Is not having it better than having it?" Where's your dude, today, who's gonna code this? If it were gone happen, it wouldve.

We are not there yet... and Fable makes me feel like it will be a while before we get there.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#244

Post by m00dy »

andai wrote: post #235

I wrote this to a friend in 2022: Here's an idea: reverse kickstarter 1. people post ideas 2. good ideas go viral 3. people pledge actual money to encourage someone to step forward and build it 4. interested creators make kickstarter type videos explaining their proposal for making the thing 5A. people vote on which proposal to accept, or maybe 5B. each backer can select a project to support --- Here steps 4 and 5 ar…

not with prompts but "loops" maybe.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#245

Post by pwnie »

chronicler wrote: post #222
flexagoon wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Essentially $20 for unlimited GPT 5.5 agents entirely deployed in the cloud. How does it make sense financially for you?

yeah what is this guy yapping about

Why don't you just try it instead of commenting? Ive updated the trial per account to 15.

Edit: The site is currently broken so bad timing but probably check in later if you wanna try it :)

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#246

Post by pwnie »

flexagoon wrote: post #220
pwnie wrote: post #219

[dead]

> Essentially $20 for unlimited GPT 5.5 agents entirely deployed in the cloud. How does it make sense financially for you?

It doesn't. I can't necessarily disclose how I'm automating this. The entire promise is that it just works. Again, just try it. I think the fact that it just works out of the box without an email speaks for itself. Feel free to make unlimited trials. I could care less atm. I'm still working on the site and it requires a couple restarts so some tasks may be interrupted. Just turn on auto-loop and it'll resume where it left off :)

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#247

Post by Sharlin »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #228
amarant wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"I paid money to someone to write that code" is exactly the line of argument that would lead to no copyright. That's news to me. I (along with many hundreds of others) was paid to develop Minecraft, candy crush and battlefield, yet last I checked, they all retain their copyright.

They retain ownership over that code because you signed a contract saying explicitly that. Did you sign the same thing with Anthropic? Did your company?

Anthropic isn't a party to such contract either because they (most likely, in the reasonable reading of relevant laws) hold no copyright over the output of their LLM.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#248

Post by Sharlin »

true_religion wrote: post #221
plq wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

In this case, it's more like you paid money to FablePool. FablePool used Claude as a tool, and it delivers the product so they are the owners of the code, and have the MIT copyright assigned to them.

Nope. Copyright simply doesn't work like that. Unless there's real human creativity involved in the process, they can't just claim copyright to LLM output.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#249

Post by Sharlin »

47282847 wrote: post #214
plq wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

Ownership is not the same as authorship. Copyright is about authors rights, not owners. If you buy a text of me, I cannot sign away my authorship, and there’s certain limitations on what you can do with my text regardless of contract.

(This is correct in many jurisdictions but not in all; for example moral rights are not a thing everywhere.)

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#250

Post by amarant »

wongarsu wrote: post #229
amarant wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"I paid money to someone to write that code" is exactly the line of argument that would lead to no copyright. That's news to me. I (along with many hundreds of others) was paid to develop Minecraft, candy crush and battlefield, yet last I checked, they all retain their copyright.

Because you are human, and can thus create copyrighted works, and can assign that copyright when you do work for hire. Monkeys and AIs can't create copyrighted works, so there is nothing to assign when doing it for hire The other line of argument avoids that issue by arguing that you personally created the code with the help of a tool (like a compiler or camera), not just commissioned it

Sure, but that's not what GP stated at all, unless possibly if they're anthropomorphizing to the point that they refer to Claude as "someone".
Post reply on HN