Wait till you learn about companies replacing the opensource parts of their stack/products with something an AI coding agent produced. They do this to get rid of all the burden that comes with using opensource like risking to get sued if they dont ship the source code according to the licence. This is why sboms are a hot topic right now. Also coding agents are now good and cheep enough to do this.
I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
251–260 of 288 posts
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#252A guy that stole someone else’s idea by making a shinier website getting mad that someone stole his idea by making a shinier website. Such is life.
Grifter when getting outgrifted: :o
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
It took me a long time to realise that people value things by how much they pay for them, not by how much they cost to produce. It doesn't matter if that's software, a pair of trousers or a meal at a restaurant. This extends into the world of work as well. Employers that don't pay well tend to treat their employees poorly.
I think that's backwards. If something is expensive those who don't value it won't pay and thus won't have. It's not that paying results in respect but rather a straightforward case of sample bias.
There have been a ton of experiments that show otherwise. People prefer wines that they think are more expensive for instance.
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#254I'm sorry to hear that. But this is another reason why .com is king.
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course restrict it to his opinions on software licensing. I think that is the sort of thing people mean when they say he was right. Lots of people made similar claims. Most notably The National Council for Civil Liberties (now called Liberty), the UK's leading civil/human rights organisation made submissions to parliament claiming that sex with minors was not always harmful, had a pro-paedo organisation as an affi…
The entire point is of my post is that it's no longer his opinion. > Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. https://stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September...
Both your point and my point are true.
Obviously I am glad he has abandoned his opinions.
I do think it is terrible that the politicians, activists, teachers etc. who held such opinions in the past did not suffer severe career consequences even if they subsequently changed their opinions. I think they cannot be trusted in those areas. However, Stallman is not in such an area.
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#256It's shocking how many developers ans tinkerers still rely on Google when there's Brave, Kagi and others out there.
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#257kagi has you on first place, and the github project as #2.
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see any reason that GitHub should use rel="nofollow" Github only has authority because people put their shit there; if people want to point that back at the "right" website, Github should be helping facilitate that, instead of trying to help Google make their dogshit search index any better. I mean, seriously, doesn't Bing own Github anyway?
Perverse incentives strike again! Websites that allow links in user-generated content are spammed with user-generated spam links to improve SEO of spam sites, which hurts the site's own reputation because most of the links on it are spam. To avoid this, all sites use nofollow.
As this example shows, by all sites using nofollow, Github is improving the SEO of spam sites.
What the fuck are you talking about?
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#259I 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…
For you... But the results are different for different users. For me Google shows the .net site first the github one as second. Asking chatgpt 5.2 (Auto mode) to search for the nanoclaw site, it says the same, first links the .net site and shows the github as an optional page. When I try to give it a hint by asking "are you sure?" it still even hallucinates that it's linked from the github: "Yes — nanoclaw.net is the…
I was surprised by what you said, so I used a browser that's not logged in to a Google account, to compare. Indeed the fake site ranks #1! Dang!
I guess Google has my account in an autism bucket, so biases GitHub links higher ;)
Re: I'm losing the SEO battle for my own open source project
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most registrars and hosts consider phishing already malicious, even if there's no obvious malware download or anything.
"Phishing" has a _very_ different meaning from "offer the option to sign up for a newsletter", let's not conflate the two.
Well, pretending to be an unrelated 3rd party for the purposes of harvesting people's personal information, which can then be used to send them emails, which they will think are from that unrelated 3rd party...