hn-search VS git-bug

Vision therapy for myopia helps some people, but not everyone, likely due to genetic and neuroplasticity differences, https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu.... Nevertheless, many of the principles are useful for children whose eyes and brains are still developing.

I'm a huge Tesla skeptic, but Tesla and Musk are lightning rods for tabloid-style garbage that doesn't belong on HN, so it doesn't surprise me that we often see negative Tesla content flagged to death. Meanwhile we also see plenty of content that hits the front page and stays there [0].

Do you have examples of professional, interesting Tesla content that got flagged?

[0] More than half of the past year's most popular Tesla articles were negative: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=tru...

It's April 23rd, 2024, and I am still looking for a good, reliable, honest and simple search engine.

All I want to do is search.

No AI.

No ads.

No shopping.

Please don't "Answer my question." I enjoy doing my own original research, thanks.

I'm entirely willing - wanting even - to pay for it.

Currently Kagi has my $, but I'm saddened and frustrated that they're not even focused on Search, they're focused on AI[1] and t-shirts.

Amazingly, in 2024, there is still a market opportunity for a good search engine.

It can't really just be me, can it?

[1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22kagi%22+%22ai%22

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

For historical purposes

Most likely because there have been oodles of low-quality stories on these topics. We turned the flags off on this one since it maybe rises above the noise (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... for past explanations on how we approach that).

Hey HN,

I'm sure you've seen the monthly "Ask HN: What Are You Working On?" headlines on [Hacker News](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).

Honestly, it's my favorite topic because it's packed with insights about what other hackers are up to.

I wondered what it would be like if instead of just a headline, there was a whole website where hackers could post daily updates, and where we could follow the hackers we're interested in for their latest updates. And so, this web site was born.

I hope it gets used frequently so we can all benefit from it together. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Let me know what you think!

I don't know what one thing you're referring to, but it's a core principle of HN to try to avoid repetition, and especially the repetition+indignation combo, which is the commonest and most tedious thing on the internet.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

Happy 10,000 day to you

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nand2tetris.org

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

not sure. I searched comments: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=fal...

Most recent are more culture wars stuff but some earlier ones appear to suggesting a degree of alignment with the USA government.

This is a topic that has come up a ton on HN, in submitted articles[1] and practically once a day in comments[2]

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Unfortunately github appears to be actively breaking the ability to use git-bug on large repositories (like nixpkgs):

https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/issues/749#issuecomme...

True but getting less true by the day:

https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

Only not having access to https://todo.sr.ht made me to recognize fully, that I don’t have any access to it. https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug suddenly looks much more interesting.

Neither do the issues support. But there is git-bug [0].

[0]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

As a sort of spiritual successor to git-appraise, I've been working on git-bug[1] which support issues and will at some point support kanban and code review. There is a few notables improvements:

- CRDT-like reusable data structure [2][3] for true p2p workflow and easily create new entities (code review ...)

- bidirectional bridges to github, gitlab ... to ease the transition or just use git-bug as a complement of those platform

- CLI, terminal UI and web UI, for different taste and integrate into your tooling/workflow

[1]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

[2]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/doc/model...

[3]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/entity/da...

> but that is for the development of the platform and network of Gitopia. For the end user the workflows remain almost the same for collaboration.

I have to disagree here. Accidental complexity in a system can have severe downstream impacts on end users, whether that be in the form of poor performance, unreliability, or just slow update cycles. It's not something you can paper over and completely hide from the user.

> Along with this the blockchain layer layer offers immutable, transparent and tamper proof versioning of code

Tamper-proof can be accomplished natively by signing [0]. receive.denyNonFastForwards and receive.denyDeletes[1] can be used to make a git repository immutable. Git commits are also already content-addressable. And transparency is achieved by just having the repo available for people to clone.

> along with the collaboration meta and augments the current collaboration flow

Could this augmentation not be accomplished by storing the collaboration information in the repo under a set of special-purpose branches? Like git-bug[2] or git-issue[3]? Coupled with GPG signatures and you've got your immutability, too!

> Along with this it enables us to provide a novel means to incentivize open-source contributions along with fostering a more decentralized approach for governance (even for projects), every token holder could have a say in the decision making, reducing the risk of undue influence by a single party, hence eliminating centralized control.

This one I'll grant you, but it's by far the least compelling aspect of the project to me. I don't think we're going to solve the centralization of GitHub by centralizing on a new plutocracy, I'd much rather see efforts towards full decentralization. There's nothing inherent to Git that requires that we all use the same set of servers.

[0] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Signing-Your-Work

[1] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Configura...

[2] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

[3] https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue

Regarding the issues, there are some projects like git-bug https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug trying to embed these sorts of meta-work into git.

Probably git-bug is closer to what Fossil does: It uses Git as a storage engine, and can coexist with your code in the same physical repository, but the issues don't actually show up as source files. Instead, each issue is a special branch (buried in refs so it won't clutter up git branch) that has zero common ancestry with anything else. So in theory you can poke at it with Git, but really, the Git under the hood is mostly an implementation detail, and as long as you interact with those files through the tool, it guarantees you won't have merge conflicts.

You might be interested by git-bug and https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/doc/model..., which seems to be exactly what you describe. (Disclaimer: author).