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

411–420 of 785 posts

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

#411

Post by an0malous »

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 probably because you’re not willing to lie enough. There was some founder back in the 2010s, I forgot his name, but he’d go around giving talks on fundraising and he basically said he just lied all the time.

For example, instead of building a robot to pick up Lego bricks, say you’re building a platform for personal robotics, and it’ll cook you food, do your laundry, repair your fridge. It doesn’t matter if you have any idea how to do this, just say you need $50M and you’ll hire some robotics and vision guys to figure it out. The bigger and bolder the lie, the better.

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

#412

Post by kakwa_ »

staticassertion wrote: post #370
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…

I'm sure VCs give money to friends but I didn't know any investors when I raised millions. They invested money because they thought it was a good idea.

More like an idea decently likely to be resold for more.

Good ideas are a decent subset, but you could also have a bit of "Greater Fool Theory" compliant ideas.

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

#414

Post by skydhash »

zarzavat wrote: post #278
zelphirkalt wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference between "snapshots" and git commits? In my mind a git commit is already a snapshot of the repo and the changes one staged. In what way can you move around more freely than what one can do with magit, deciding for files, hunks, or even single lines of code, whether or not they get staged and committed?

Technically, nothing. But psychologically git commits represent a unit of completed work, whereas with AI agents what's needed is a kind of agent-wise undo history such that you can revert back to the state of the repo 1 minute ago before Claude did an oopsie all over your repo. You can definitely use git as a backend for building such a system, but some extra tooling is necessary.

> You can definitely use git as a backend for building such a system, but some extra tooling is necessary

Is it? There’s the stash for storing patches, the index for storing good hunks, branching for trying out different experiments. You can even use worktree if you want separate working directory especially when there will be changes in the untracked files.

Git has a lot of tooling for dealing with changes, directly or at the meta layer.

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

#415

Post by staticassertion »

kakwa_ wrote: post #412
staticassertion wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure VCs give money to friends but I didn't know any investors when I raised millions. They invested money because they thought it was a good idea.

More like an idea decently likely to be resold for more. Good ideas are a decent subset, but you could also have a bit of "Greater Fool Theory" compliant ideas.

Sure, but that doesn't really change anything. The poster plainly states:

> Money is not given to good ideas (though, it doesn’t hurt). Money is given to friends.

I have an obvious counter example. I'm sure money is invested for all sorts of reasons to all sorts of people. I'm also sure that money is not exclusively invested based on friendships, and I'm quite sure that money is at times invested based on the merits of an idea. Obviously those merits have to correspond to the ability to form the basis of a successful company, unless it's a philanthropic investment.

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

#417

Post by _fizz_buzz_ »

IshKebab wrote: post #397
DonThomasitos wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm sure that will go well for my formal model in a language that about 100 people use...

If only 100 people in the world are using this language, who are you even merging code with, lol.

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

#418

Post by chrysoprace »

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.

Not quite - it totally takes over your branching strategy and locks you into GitButler.

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

#419

Post by skyberrys »

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…

Hasn't someone already built that robot? At least my kids tell me this exists every time I tell them to clean up their Legos. Actually it just does Legos, not the general toys.
Post reply on HN