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

GitHub's fake star economy

awesomeagents.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 403 posts

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#221

Post by jcalx »

mauvehaus wrote: post #124

Can anyone explain why on earth VC's are making actual investment decisions based on imaginary internet points ? This would be like an NFL team drafting a quarterback based on how many instagram followers they have rather than a relevant metric like pass completion, or god forbid, doing some work and actually scouting candidates. Maybe the Cleveland Browns would do that[0], but it's not a way to mount a serious Super…

> This would be like an NFL team drafting a quarterback based on how many instagram followers they have rather than a relevant metric like pass completion, or god forbid, doing some work and actually scouting candidates. Maybe the Cleveland Browns would do that

Not quite the same, but the New York Jets (one of the few NFL teams that can match the dysfunction of the Browns — they have the longest active playoff drought in big 4 North American sports) passed on a few successful players because the owner, Woody Johnson, reportedly didn't like their Madden (video game) ratings [0]:

> A few weeks later, Douglas and his Broncos counterpart, George Paton, were deep in negotiations for a trade that would have sent Jeudy to the Jets and given future Hall of Fame quarterback Aaron Rodgers another potential playmaker. The Broncos felt a deal was near. Then, abruptly, it all fell apart. In Denver’s executive offices, they couldn’t believe the reason why.

> Douglas told the Broncos that Johnson didn’t want to make the trade because the owner felt Jeudy’s player rating in “Madden NFL,” the popular video game, wasn’t high enough, according to multiple league sources. The Broncos ultimately traded the receiver to the Cleveland Browns. Last Sunday, Jeudy crossed the 1,000-yard receiving mark for the first time in his career.

...

> Johnson’s reference to Jeudy’s “Madden” rating was, to some in the Jets’ organization, a sign of Brick and Jack’s influence. Another example came when Johnson pushed back on signing free-agent guard John Simpson due to a lackluster “awareness” rating in Madden. The Jets signed Simpson anyway, and he has had a solid season: Pro Football Focus currently has him graded as the eighth-best guard in the NFL.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6005172/2024/12/19/woody-jo...

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#224

Post by cmrdporcupine »

palmotea wrote: post #220
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer isn't that they're morons. It's that they aren't people who "invest" in "good businesses" to make money, but instead on the whole a class of individuals classed with gambling on high risk ventures that will have absolutely massive returns and they don't care if 90% of them fail and 9% flounder because the 1% that succeed bring in absolutely apeshit amounts of $$ when they are acquired by someone else. Usin…

> Again, VCs don't care if you'll make a profitable business some day. They're just interested in if someone else will come along and pay out giant bags of cash for it later in a liquidity event. If they get even one of those successes, all the stupid GH star watching pays off. And if that's true, they should be slapped, hard. They're no longer performing a socially useful function, and and have degraded towards pure…

I don't think there's ever been an argument that anybody in a free market capitalist economy has to perform a "socially useful function"?

I do think that ZiRP distorted things extremely badly. There's an entire generation in this software industry that lives around the business-culture expectations set during that time which as far as I could see basically amounted to "I build Uber but for X" (where X is some new business domain).

Perhaps after a bit of a painful interregnum things will be a bit different now that rates are higher and risk along with it.

Also anybody can throw a SaaS together in a few days now. Separating the wheat from the chaff in the next few years will be... interesting.

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#225

Post by rib3ye »

kibwen wrote: post #169
mauvehaus wrote: post #124

Can anyone explain why on earth VC's are making actual investment decisions based on imaginary internet points ? This would be like an NFL team drafting a quarterback based on how many instagram followers they have rather than a relevant metric like pass completion, or god forbid, doing some work and actually scouting candidates. Maybe the Cleveland Browns would do that[0], but it's not a way to mount a serious Super…

[flagged]

this is compounded by young, newly rich tech workers (no kids, no mortgage, maybe not even a car) experimenting with being a VC because they've recently reached accredited investor status.

and it's not just ZIRP. every recent IPO or liquidity event creates literally 500 more of these guys.

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#226

Post by rpdillon »

whatisthiseven wrote: post #106

I don't think I have ever used stars in making a decision to use a library and I don't understand why anyone would. Here are the things I look at in order: * last commit date. Newer is better * age. old is best if still updating. New is not great but tolerable if commits aren't rapid * issues. Not the count, mind you, just looking at them. How are they handled, what kind of issues are lingering open. * some of the co…

Agree! My longstanding metric uses just two values:

* Most recent commit

* Total number of commits

This might have to die in the era of AI, but it's served me well for a long time. Rather than how many people are paying attention, it tries to measure the effort put in.

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#227

Post by biker142541 »

palmotea wrote: post #220
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer isn't that they're morons. It's that they aren't people who "invest" in "good businesses" to make money, but instead on the whole a class of individuals classed with gambling on high risk ventures that will have absolutely massive returns and they don't care if 90% of them fail and 9% flounder because the 1% that succeed bring in absolutely apeshit amounts of $$ when they are acquired by someone else. Usin…

> Again, VCs don't care if you'll make a profitable business some day. They're just interested in if someone else will come along and pay out giant bags of cash for it later in a liquidity event. If they get even one of those successes, all the stupid GH star watching pays off. And if that's true, they should be slapped, hard. They're no longer performing a socially useful function, and and have degraded towards pure…

“no longer”… lol

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#229

Post by palmotea »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #224
palmotea wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Again, VCs don't care if you'll make a profitable business some day. They're just interested in if someone else will come along and pay out giant bags of cash for it later in a liquidity event. If they get even one of those successes, all the stupid GH star watching pays off. And if that's true, they should be slapped, hard. They're no longer performing a socially useful function, and and have degraded towards pure…

I don't think there's ever been an argument that anybody in a free market capitalist economy has to perform a "socially useful function"? I do think that ZiRP distorted things extremely badly. There's an entire generation in this software industry that lives around the business-culture expectations set during that time which as far as I could see basically amounted to "I build Uber but for X" (where X is some new bus…

> I don't think there's ever been an argument that anybody in a free market capitalist economy has to perform a "socially useful function"?

That's a extremely strong statement, and may only be true in libertarian-land, where pure capitalism is a god to be worshiped and "good" has been redefined to be "whatever the unregulated free market does."

But in the real world, capitalism is a tool to perform socially useful functions (see the marketing about how it was better able to do that than Soviet central planning). When it fails, it should be patched by regulation (and often is) to push participants into socially useful actions, or at least discourage socially harmful ones.

Re: GitHub's fake star economy

#230

Post by cmrdporcupine »

palmotea wrote: post #229
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's ever been an argument that anybody in a free market capitalist economy has to perform a "socially useful function"? I do think that ZiRP distorted things extremely badly. There's an entire generation in this software industry that lives around the business-culture expectations set during that time which as far as I could see basically amounted to "I build Uber but for X" (where X is some new bus…

> I don't think there's ever been an argument that anybody in a free market capitalist economy has to perform a "socially useful function"? That's a extremely strong statement, and may only be true in libertarian-land, where pure capitalism is a god to be worshiped and "good" has been redefined to be "whatever the unregulated free market does." But in the real world, capitalism is a tool to perform socially useful fu…

How is it strong or controversial? It's the open ideology of the times.

I didn't say I agree with it.

Post reply on HN