Live data from Hacker News

I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

twitter.com

141–150 of 288 posts

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#141
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In particular, if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, and each tens of millions of dollars from it while you don't get a cent. There's writing code for charity, and then there's this . Charity wasn't meant to include hyper-corporations.

Maybe Stallman had something of a point...

Stallman is always right, and HN always downvotes it.

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#142

This is a google problem, but only secondary. The crux of the matter is that there's nothing that protects an open project besides reputation, and nowadays in the digital space it can be cheaply farmed. Laws could help, but they only work when you undertake purposeful actions to be covered by them, like register a trademark, and it's never cheap. Imagine you're in a local band playing shows. It's 3 month old and you…

You can trademark your open source project, but only the biggest projects do.

You used to be able to buy yourname .com, .net, .org and that was a de facto trademark. Now there are gTLDs you can't.

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#143

I did some experimenting using different search engines and AIs. Here's the results: Google and Brave linked to the official GitHub repo followed by the fake domain. DuckDuckGo and Bing linked to the fake domain first, followed by the official GitHub. Mojeek gave higher ranking to two third party articles, but linked to both the official GitHub and website without fakes. Qwant was the worst, as the official website w…

I tried AltPower Search and it exhibits the same issue as Google. I think you might just need to give it more time to index. Nanoclaw.dev has only been available for a week. Then, it's the lower relative reputation of the 'dev' vs. the 'net' domain ...

[1]: https://altpower.app [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20260000000000*/https://nanoclaw... [3]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/tlds

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#144

DMCA?

No copyright violation was mentioned here, but it's not a crime to submit a DMCA notice anyway because you don't know the difference between copyright and trademark. If you do know the difference, then it becomes a crime to submit a DMCA notice about something you know a DMCA notice isn't for, so don't read this comment before you submit one.

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#146

My advice to all OSS developers: if you open source your project, expect it to be abused in all possible ways. Don't open source if you have anxiety over it. It is how the world works, whether we like it or not. I appreciate that you open source your projects for us to study. But TBH, please help yourself first.

In particular, if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, and each tens of millions of dollars from it while you don't get a cent. There's writing code for charity, and then there's this . Charity wasn't meant to include hyper-corporations.

AGPLv3 attempts to solve this problem, by forcing SaaS providers to open-source their modifications.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#148

My advice to all OSS developers: if you open source your project, expect it to be abused in all possible ways. Don't open source if you have anxiety over it. It is how the world works, whether we like it or not. I appreciate that you open source your projects for us to study. But TBH, please help yourself first.

In particular, if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, and each tens of millions of dollars from it while you don't get a cent. There's writing code for charity, and then there's this . Charity wasn't meant to include hyper-corporations.

So? I am not about to create AWS. I'm glad people can use my free software on their own machines, on rented servers, or hosted by an expert.

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#149

A couple years back John Reilly posted on HN "How I ruined my SEO" and I helped him fix it for free. He wrote about the whole thing here: https://johnnyreilly.com/how-we-fixed-my-seo Happy to do the same for you if you want. The quickest win in your case: map all the backlinks the .net site got (happy to pull this for you), then email every publication that linked to it. "Hey, you covered NanoClaw but linked to a fak…

This is very generous of you! If I was the author, however, I'd still feel like I've been put in a predicament where I need to spend personal agency to fix something that Google has broken. While that may just be a fact of life, my internal injustice-o-meter would be raging. Like, Google is going to take hours of my life because they, with all their billions of capital, can't figure out the canonically-true website w…

How many Google search results would point to OP's site?

If Google didn't exist, how many Google search results would point to OP's site?

Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project

#150

My advice to all OSS developers: if you open source your project, expect it to be abused in all possible ways. Don't open source if you have anxiety over it. It is how the world works, whether we like it or not. I appreciate that you open source your projects for us to study. But TBH, please help yourself first.

In particular, if you license it MIT, and it's useful, expect Amazon to make a fork, not give you the source code, and each tens of millions of dollars from it while you don't get a cent. There's writing code for charity, and then there's this . Charity wasn't meant to include hyper-corporations.

I don't understand your point? If you write code with an MIT license, this is what you would expect.
Post reply on HN