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

We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

blog.gitbutler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 785 posts

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#231

Post by jve »

pjc50 wrote: post #158
caycep wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

granted how much did Linus spend on Git? probably well south of $17M and he's not beholden to the likes of a16z

The first version was written in ten days apparently, so more in the ballpark of $17k.

I want people to read this sentence from https://www.linux.com/news/10-years-git-interview-git-creato...

> So I’d like to stress that while it really came together in just about ten days or so (at which point I did my first kernel commit using git), it wasn’t like it was some kind of mad dash of coding. The actual amount of that early code is actually fairly small, it all depended on getting the basic ideas right. And that I had been mulling over for a while before the whole project started. I’d seen the problems others had. I’d seen what I wanted to avoid doing.

Just so that people know that creating software is not only coding.

My comment is unrelated on the point you are making about expenses.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#232

Post by imp0cat »

echelon wrote: post #223
Eufrat wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is not given to good ideas (though, it doesn’t hurt). Money is given to friends . If you look at how VC (or really any network) funding circulates, it’s just people who are allowed to enter that circle and money just flows between them constantly. On one hand, you have trusted people who you are willing to give money, on the other hand, this inherently creates a clique. It reminds me how the Bohemian Club’s slo…

> Money is given to friends. Money is given to ideas that might become billion dollar businesses and teams that look like they can do it. Pedigree, domain expertise, previous exits.

So it will be exactly like git, but with a monthly subscription fee.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#233

Post by jiggawatts »

fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

> sort LEGO bricks by colour and size

I just looked into this out of idle curiosity, after watching some guy build a LEGO sorting machine. (They work in a warehouse that sells used bricks for model builders.)

Interestingly, this is on the cusp of viability, but training the ML model would still be cost-prohibitive (for me). With $17M, it's within reach, but there's still the obvious mechanical hurdles: Kids don't disassemble their Lego, the conditions are "less than ideal", and even vibrating belts in a warehouse scenario have a lot of trouble keeping bricks separated for the camera to get a clear image.

Robot hands are nowhere near the point where they can reliably (or even unreliably!) take apart two arbitrary Lego bricks that are joined, let alone anything of even mild complexity. This is hard for most humans, and often requires the use of tools! See: https://www.lego.com/en-us/service/help-topics/article/lego-...

The machine vision part is... getting there! You could pull some clever tricks with modern hardware such as bright LED lights, multi-spectral or even hyper-spectral sensors, etc. The algorithms have improved a lot also. Early attempts could only recognise a few dozen distinct shapes, and the most recent models a few hundred, but they're about 2-3 years old, which means "stone ages".

A trick several Lego recognition model training runs used was to photo realistically render 3D models of bricks in random orientations and every possible color, which is far faster than manually labelling photos of real bricks.

These days you could use the NVIDIA Omniverse libraries to heavily accelerate and automate this.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#234

Post by rwmj »

satvikpendem wrote: post #202
latexr wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is not a hive mind with a single opinion. You get the extreme opinions of both sides and every nuance in between. There are people here who despise VC and people who live for it and think it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread.

No, but trends are very prevalent, it is not a uniform random distribution.

Unless you've done a study of sentiment on HN (please link if so) then you have no idea.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#235

Post by toyg »

Hamuko wrote: post #149
thwarted wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or whatever GitHub and the like are called GitHub is a social networking site that just so happens to have code hosting related features.

People keep saying this but I can't really find much anything social about GitHub.

Some people spend most of their time in issues and PRs, which are social features mapping social interactions.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#236

Post by user34283 »

arnvald wrote: post #209
toenail wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does that even mean? Multiple branches is a git feature.

I think it means parallel branches. Normally in git you can use one branch at a time. With agentic coding you want agents to build multiple features at the same time, each in a separate branch

That has been implemented 10 years ago:

  git worktree add -b feature-2 ../feature-2

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#237

Post by ludicrousdispla »

fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

It's primarily focused on "take from someone else" rather than create something new and useful.

Consider that many of the tech posts here are of the form, "i did X but with Z" as the poster hopes they will be recognized as some master of execution.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#238

Post by rwmj »

rhubarbtree wrote: post #155
fxtentacle wrote: post #15

I feel like I really need to learn how to raise money. For $17M, one could probably build a vacuum robot prototype that’ll also clean up all of the kids toys and sort LEGO bricks by colour and size. Parents worldwide would love it. But instead, we get a replacement for Git. And I didn’t even bother to click the link because I’m fine with how Git works. On the list of pain points in my life, “what comes after Git” has…

Unsure if you want the real answer, but the financials on gitv2 will be much more appealing to a VC. Hardware is hard, slow, expensive, risky. Finally, China is the place to build physical things not the US.

What would "the financials" be on a git replacement? No one makes money on git itself. Probably not much even on the services around git, given that Microsoft funds github for its own reasons, and gitlab is constantly running out of money.

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#239

Post by user34283 »

DonThomasitos wrote: post #225
IshKebab wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Git is fine. I would like something better than fine though, especially for dealing with rebase/merge conflicts where I would say Git is mediocre.

„Claude, merge these branches and resolve conflicts. Ask me if unclear.“ 16M$ VC money saved.

So far I have not let AI work with git, because I preferred handling version control myself.

Does it work well for resolving merge conflicts in your experience?

Re: We've raised $17M to build what comes after Git

#240

Post by ojura »

Mmmh. git is perfect as it is. It does one thing and does it really well: version control. Exact bits that go in come out. And it reconciles different versions and handles transferring them to remotes.

The need for exactly this is not ever going away, and its ubiquity proves that Linus nailed something that is truly fundamental.

This is like saying we need a new alphabet because of AI. That is VC hype, even if it comes from a Github founder.

Post reply on HN