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

GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 594 posts

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#391

Post by sitkack »

lowmess wrote: post #300
hyperbovine wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this obsession with the first derivative of value. GitHub already provides loads of value. I understand they need resources to keep the lights on, but they could do that by recouping a tiny fee from their users and most everyone would be happy.

don't they already attempt to do that though? i don't consider $7/month a large fee. (granted, they could probably get more subscribers at $3-5, but i'm assuming they landed on $7 for a reason)

They make vast more quantities off of actual businesses. The $7 repo fee is literally a soft wind on the face of Everest.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#392

Post by tscs37 »

mikepurvis wrote: post #267
joshlemer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or we could actually luck out, and settle on GitLab or similar.

Not that I hold out too much hope here, but given GitLab's emphasis on the enterprise and self-hosting, it would be amazing if they could put some effort into making disparate GitLab installations behave like one big network (think Six Apart with trackbacks/typekey/etc way back in the day). Github's huge win is the network effect of having one account and being able to interact on thousands of issue trackers, create…

IIRC Gogs/Gitea and GitLab have plans to enable pull request federation, so you could use your own instance to make pull requests on a completely different one.

I also recommend to check out Gitea (community fork of Gogs) if you haven't yet, it's a nice alternative to Gitlab for selfhosting.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#393

Post by tscs37 »

munchor wrote: post #93
Fiahil wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe gitlab's UI has gotten better lastly. Nevertheless, if 99% of the value provided by github comes from their interface, should we remember how much time they needed to implement the "+1" counters on messages?

Their UI/UX is still nowhere comparable to GitHub's. GitHub is so much simpler to use that GitLab and everyone I talk to seems to have the same opinion. GitLab is still lagging far behind when it comes to user experience, it's just not easy to find stuff.

If you need something simple and similar to Github, checkout Gogs/Gitea (Gitea is the community fork which I recommend to use)

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#394

Post by tscs37 »

I personally moved away from Github, mostly due to political issues, secondarily because of this funding issue. Can't keep burning money forever.

I put my private stuff on my own Gogs instance or on Bitbucket, tho I like Gogs UI much better, it's closer to github. The community fork of it, Gitea, is also making progress to enable pull request federation.

Would be awesome if I could work together with people using Gitlab, Github or Gitea without them having to sign up to my site. They just fork to their own site, make their patches and submit the pull request to my upstream.

GitHub has little value to me, the social network they built can move elsewhere like it is for many programmers and coders.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#395

Post by doktrin »

dang wrote: post #57
doktrin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The implication was clear enough - which is why I asked for substantiation. 1. does github in fact "only hire women and minorities" at the expense of superior, talented white men? 2. assuming #1 is true, what evidence is there that said hiring practices are at the root of their financial difficulties? It's easy to throw out loaded statements. I don't think it's nuts to request clarification.

To "request clarification" about that is, in fact, "nuts", because (a) it's off topic and worse, and (b) it guarantees a flamewar. Please stop.

Why am I the only one being asked to "stop"? I didn't open this can of worms, and I'm seeing a literal few pages and multiple threads of back and forth from others on this very topic.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#396

Post by new299 »

tscs37 wrote: post #394

I personally moved away from Github, mostly due to political issues, secondarily because of this funding issue. Can't keep burning money forever. I put my private stuff on my own Gogs instance or on Bitbucket, tho I like Gogs UI much better, it's closer to github. The community fork of it, Gitea, is also making progress to enable pull request federation. Would be awesome if I could work together with people using Git…

Which political issues? I'm honestly curious.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#397

Post by tomp »

new299 wrote: post #396
tscs37 wrote: post #394

I personally moved away from Github, mostly due to political issues, secondarily because of this funding issue. Can't keep burning money forever. I put my private stuff on my own Gogs instance or on Bitbucket, tho I like Gogs UI much better, it's closer to github. The community fork of it, Gitea, is also making progress to enable pull request federation. Would be awesome if I could work together with people using Git…

Which political issues? I'm honestly curious.

I'm guessing parent is referring to stuff like the "meritocracy rug" and "code of conduct".

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#398

Post by tscs37 »

new299 wrote: post #396
tscs37 wrote: post #394

I personally moved away from Github, mostly due to political issues, secondarily because of this funding issue. Can't keep burning money forever. I put my private stuff on my own Gogs instance or on Bitbucket, tho I like Gogs UI much better, it's closer to github. The community fork of it, Gitea, is also making progress to enable pull request federation. Would be awesome if I could work together with people using Git…

Which political issues? I'm honestly curious.

I'm not particularly comfortable with how Github has handled their community and executes takedowns of repositories.

I don't feel like my code would be safe on github.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#399

Post by jolux »

quadrangle wrote: post #380
wapz wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't follow when github started getting political. What happened?

They made a code-of-conduct. It pandered too strongly to the list-every-under-privileged-class attitude including explicitly rejecting the concept of "reverse discrimination" and so the reactionary folks who want to insist they aren't sexist and hate any moralizing or politics that challenge them etc. got up in arms. It was all a stupid side-show and had nothing to do with anything that matters to GitHub's basic serv…

The very suggestion that GitHub getting "political" supported by a single issue thread caused them to lose $66 million dollars is so laughable as to barely warrant confrontation.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#400

Post by noir_lord »

quadrangle wrote: post #380
wapz wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't follow when github started getting political. What happened?

They made a code-of-conduct. It pandered too strongly to the list-every-under-privileged-class attitude including explicitly rejecting the concept of "reverse discrimination" and so the reactionary folks who want to insist they aren't sexist and hate any moralizing or politics that challenge them etc. got up in arms. It was all a stupid side-show and had nothing to do with anything that matters to GitHub's basic serv…

> Most people never noticed either way.

Noticed, didn't give a shit.

Frankly it was a complete over reaction based on virtue signalling, band wagoning and the general mesd that is any kind of nuanced debate online.

When I run into that stuff now I just close the tab, life is literally too short for it.

Post reply on HN