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

301–310 of 785 posts

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

#301

Post by amenhotep »

palata wrote: post #246
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…

VCs have no clue. They have money and therefore they are in a dominant position. Everybody around them (professionally) is trying to flatter them and convince them that they should invest in their project. I had a few interactions with VCs (both professional and personal), where I didn't care because I wasn't benefitting from them. One of them was "an expert in CRISPR and blockchain" (WTF?) and... well I didn't need…

In fact, a certain amount of investment in frauds is acceptable and desirable; if you give £10m to 9 frauds who spunk it straight up the wall and to 1 true visionary who builds a unicorn, that's money well spent. Plus of course you can always hope that the fraudster is good enough to sucker the next guy so you can get out.

Per Matt Levine, the optimum amount of fraud is non-zero. Tune your detector too loosely or too tightly and you'll miss out.

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

#303

Post by fxtentacle »

Liftyee wrote: post #277
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But instead, we get a replacement for Git. [...] Why is nobody solving actual problems anymore? While I personally doubt that for $17M one could build such a vacuum robot prototype (for a vacuum cleaner company, investing this amount of money - if it worked - would be a rounding error), I will rather analyze the point that you raised: It is a very common situation that the workflows of companies is deeply ingrained…

As someone who makes things it always confuses me when millions just disappear whenever a company or government contractor makes things. Give me $17M and I'll build a vacuum robot prototype in under 2 years, I can't imagine 10 engineers getting paid $100+k/year can't do it in less time? Tooling is expensive, but not THAT expensive...

I would agree. CNC-ing POM also tends to work extremely well for prototype plastic parts.

Also, I already built a robot arm, a robot car, and a custom camera in my free time. So I’m having a hard time imagining that a robot vacuum prototype wouldn’t be possible for me to build in a year, let alone with the team size that $1m in annual salaries buys.

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

#304

Post by dare944 »

flomo wrote: post #99
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…

> Why is nobody solving actual problems anymore? Let me just state the obvious. Of all the major problems of society, sorting legos isn't one. If you disagree, try emerging from the cellar.

Completely unnecessary retort. At no point did anyone in this thread state that sorting legos was a major problem of society.

Rather, the GP merely implied that some parents would love to have a robot to sort their kids legos, and that (ironically) even that unimportant "need" is more important than replacing git.

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

#305

Post by petepete »

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.

You can follow, star, favourite and comment on things, you get a feed where recent updates on stuff/people you've interacted are listed, you can customise your profile page with snippets about yourself, a photo, a status, contact info and add whatever else you want (including more photos, images, charts etc) in markdown. It now has discussions which are essentially a forum.

It's as much a social network/collaboration tool as it is place to store your code these days.

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

#306

Post by aabhay »

dagurp wrote: post #242
Meleagris wrote: post #17

I recently switched to Jujutsu (jj) and it made me realize that “what comes after Git” might already exist. It turns out the snapshot model is a perfect fit for AI-assisted development. I can iterate freely without thinking about commits or worrying about saving known-good versions. You can just mess around and make it presentable later, which Git never really let you do nicely. Plus there’s essentially zero learning…

The biggest problem with Jujutsu is the name. I would love to hear a Swedish person try to pronounce it.

Its a backronym (or whatever you call it) that cones from the actual name, “jj”, which itself comes from the ease of typing jj on a keyboard

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

#307

Post by s1mplicissimus »

farouqjalabi wrote: post #174
tmountain wrote: post #125

I personally feel that: 1) Git is fine 2) I would not want to replace critical open source tooling with something backed by investor capital from its inception. Sure, it will be “open source “, but with people throwing money behind it, there’s a plan to extract value from the user base from day one. I’m tired of being “the product”. Critical open source tooltips by should spring from the community, not from corporate…

Gitbutler is backed by git. Gitbutler is essentially just ui for git which also allows you to have multiple branches. It isn't meant to replace git.

"Backed by" as in "running git under the hood", not as in "supported by the git organization". I'd probably use "powered by" in this case to avoid confusion

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

#308

Post by vanviegen »

phs318u wrote: post #267
braggerxyz wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... and sort LEGO bricks by colour You never sort by color, ever! You sort by form, and then throw every color of that specific form in one bin. If you throw every red brick in the same bin, you'll never find a specific formed red brick because to many red bricks. But if you first search by form and then by color, you are much faster.

As any DBA worth their salt knows. Index the many valued column, not the column with few discrete values.

Are you sure that's a good strategy if every unique index value requires you to buy a physical container?

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

#310

Post by petre »

fxtentacle wrote: post #303
Liftyee wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who makes things it always confuses me when millions just disappear whenever a company or government contractor makes things. Give me $17M and I'll build a vacuum robot prototype in under 2 years, I can't imagine 10 engineers getting paid $100+k/year can't do it in less time? Tooling is expensive, but not THAT expensive...

I would agree. CNC-ing POM also tends to work extremely well for prototype plastic parts. Also, I already built a robot arm, a robot car, and a custom camera in my free time. So I’m having a hard time imagining that a robot vacuum prototype wouldn’t be possible for me to build in a year, let alone with the team size that $1m in annual salaries buys.

The robot vacuum is already there. The Chinese buit a better, cheaper one and the original company went bankrupt.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1lr75lp239o

Post reply on HN