Rendered at 23:44:29 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
xvilka 7 hours ago [-]
Instead of creating one more centralized alternative, it's best to invest all effort into a decentralized solution, like Radicle[1][2] or federated Forgejo[3][4].
I feel like this misses the value of something like Github or Origin entirely though. There's nothing terribly difficult about hosting a git server. The UX and pull requests capabilities are a little involved, but there are alternatives today.
What makes Github special is the ecosystem and integrations. Sentry, Linear, and so many other tools have special UX around Github. You need centralization (or at the very least, a standard) for that.
It sucks to see Github's fall from grace, but I just can't bring myself to use a service like this under the custody of SpaceX. I've been saying this for a while, but I really wish Linear would swoop in and become the unified platform for software development.
jm4 6 hours ago [-]
It sucks to see Github's fall from grace, but I just can't bring myself to use a service like this under the custody of SpaceX.
Agreed. It's like going from bad to worse. Not to mention, Origin doesn't even support actions. They are doing the easiest part of git hosting and no mention of anything that actually makes Github what it is. What Origin is offering is literally a weekend project, and anything having to do with Elon is arguably one of the least trustworthy organizations in whatever industry he chooses to participate in. No, thank you.
This is going nowhere. GitLab is the cautionary tale. Massive funding, nine figures of ARR, years of losses, and most of the revenue comes from self-managed enterprise licenses rather than the SaaS. If the best-funded attempt lands there, I don't see how this one goes anywhere when they have not even a minimum viable product and reputational issues right out of the gate.
spockz 5 hours ago [-]
The thing with Gitlab is probably that it had to deal with the network effect/winner takes all conundrum. GitHub was first on the scene, it was the first to make a centralised hub popular and it has had the custom of many notable open source projects.
Gitlab as a product is miles ahead of GitHub at this point. (Except at the point of scaling very large repositories I gather.) There is just very little money in saas beside the bespoke enterprise contracts.
I’m not sure how revenue between GitHub and Gitlab compared before the Microsoft acquisition and now but GitHub has always leaned on being the popular tool with the network.
a34729t 6 hours ago [-]
Actions should be decoupled from the version control system.
fg137 4 hours ago [-]
In theory, sure, but the reality is that "development activity" revolves around "codebase". Plenty of projects have separate bug tracker, source code control and CI system. Most people likely prefer GitHub's all-in-one solution, especially for small-medium open source projects.
shimman 3 hours ago [-]
And do we not see how terrible this is as a result? Hitching your tent to corporations, especially American corporations, is always an exercise in misery.
dalemhurley 3 hours ago [-]
*Atlassian from Australia has joined the chat*
maccard 5 hours ago [-]
I disagree. The integrated workflow of actions, issues, code review and source control is a huge productivity win. There’s a reason people chase a “single pane of glass”.
benjismith 3 hours ago [-]
What do you mean by "Github's fall from grace"? What happened?
I'm sure that sentry and co could spend a few bucks and commit a KPI in one of their upcoming quarters to figure out the activity pub spec and support integrating with it if their hearts desired. It's a chicken egg problem and we all know chickens exist. It's clear that the centralized model is getting left behind, especially as the EU is moving away from US services and they continue to invest in open source, European-based alternatives like Codeberg and Forgejo.
bilalq 3 hours ago [-]
The communication protocol is not what I mean here. The feature-sets and capabilities around "pull requests", "reviews", "comments", "checks", "issues", "projects", "deployments", "releases", etc are all different across platforms. You have to integrate bespoke for each platform. There is no universal standard for how CI/CD, deployment tracking, project management, etc are done.
Yes, Sentry or whoever else could build a Codeberg integration, or a Forgejo one, or a Gitlab one. But these would all be bespoke. There is no standard. So the one with the biggest market share ends up with the most integrations. This is where we are today.
I'm all for open standards. But I don't even know of a proposal for such a standard.
Sure, with AI tooling, you can vibe code your own browser extensions or other integrations in some cases. But for a lot of platforms, that just won't cut it. That's before we even get into the maintenance burden of that.
throwaway13337 6 hours ago [-]
That used to be a big deal. I don't think it is anymore.
One great thing about the rise of AI is that now it's super easy to make and maintain integrations. This is a place where AI coding uniquely shines due to the points being well defined and mostly quite standard.
This is going to hurt the monopoly power of software companies. But it'll be great for allowing the proliferation of smaller companies, open source, and home grown solutions.
I'm already seeing the pendulum swinging back to local first instead of cloud services.
mgfist 6 hours ago [-]
Creating? Sure. Maintaining? absolutely not.
throwaway13337 4 hours ago [-]
As someone who has some SaaS products that must connect to other SaaS products, I can tell you that this is somewhere that AI saved me a truck load of time.
A lot of SaaS companies change their API in subtle ways throughout the months probably too rapidly. GraphQL schema changes, splitting apart one api endpoint into 2, changes to authentication method required. A thousand little cuts.
This used to be my biggest time waster. Now it's barely on my radar. Life changing for me. I guess your mileage may vary.
Concurrently, the writing is on the wall for us SaaS product providers - lower margins, and more competition for the same reasons. I welcome it. More quality and choice at a better price for everyone.
hnlmorg 1 hours ago [-]
Agreed on all points.
I think people often forget that GitHub is really more akin to a social network than it is a software development tool.
By that I mean the stuff that makes GitHub great is all the same stuff that originally made social networks exciting (back before the algorithm was tuned into a horrifying cycle of negativity).
> You need centralization (or at the very least, a standard) for that.
We have a standard! It’s this great decentralized VCS called git. For most of the stuff integrations do, they’re just showing code or commits — both of which are readily available in a copy of the repo.
Probably the one thing that’s missing is a standardized webhook system so that your git repo storage could tell integrations when stuff changes. Though even that isn’t strictly necessary if the integrations keep a copy of the repo up to date.
bmitc 5 hours ago [-]
Git is absolutely miserable without things that GitHub, GitLab, and others provide, and there's still a huge ceiling to grow into in terms of layering on UX on top of Git.
In my opinion, Git is holding software development back. Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.
mikeocool 23 minutes ago [-]
Lots of standards are terrible without the actual tools on top of them (try making an HTTP request with just a network socket).
But that doesn’t mean we should have single centralized tool that does everything.
I’d posit there’s no big loss if you broke these things up and each had their own copy the repo (if needed):
- CI/CD
- issues
- code review/pull requests
- release artifact distribution
- discovery+social credit for open source
You could host your repo on any dumb storage somewhere that speaks git+ssh or git+https and each tool could pull from there.
a2ff6eeb0 3 hours ago [-]
Why not? LLMs also only care about lines of text.
conartist6 3 hours ago [-]
> Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.
> I've been saying this for a while, but I really wish Linear would swoop in and become the unified platform for software development.
And then, 5 years later, we are back at square one when everybody uses Linear and they start going the fate of GitHub. Self-hostable, standardized alternatives are the only real sustainable solution.
stared 6 hours ago [-]
Centralizations were prerequisites to have nice integrations. Yet, what used to be a precious plugin now (more than often) is a 15 min vibe coding warmup.
git is such a good platform for decentralized tech. Forfeiting that advantage is just criminal. What I really want (and almost have) is a local GitHub for me and agents. With 4+ orchestrators working with a ton of subagents, things get difficult to coordinate. Several days ago, I went back to plain git and it was real slow and abrasive to work with.
With some wizardry applied, I effectively have an "Excel for worktrees", a very productive and low-friction environment. https://replicated.live/blog/crdt
cortesoft 3 hours ago [-]
You don't sacrifice decentralization when you use Github. You can still do all the same decentralized stuff, have other copies of the repo, do everything offline, directly pull from other checkouts, etc. Github can just be ONE of the places you push your code to, it doesn't have to be the only place.
wrong_answers 56 minutes ago [-]
Yeah, it seems disingenuous to pretend to care so deeply about decentralization while misunderstanding git to the point they don’t even realise none of that goes away because you also push to GitHub
arjie 5 hours ago [-]
I just use git with a remote and a custom CI system. The whole thing is trivial to build. All these forgejo etc are kind of over complicated software. Open Office of the modern world.
gritzko 48 minutes ago [-]
In a project with two levels of submodules and tens of worktrees, you cannot "just use git" :/
GitHub does not help much either.
you mean you dont want a singe company to have all your code?
corky_buchek 3 hours ago [-]
Decentralized solutions invariably appeal to a narrow sliver of nerds but never gain popular acceptance.
LYFMail 6 hours ago [-]
Exactly, decentralized solution is perfect!
anthropic-dario 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
icy 6 hours ago [-]
Forgejo federation being mentioned each time never stops being silly. It hasn't been a thing for years, and they don't appear to have made any meaningful progress to show for.
cryo32 7 hours ago [-]
GitHub is a mess so lets throw our code into a Musk owned enterprise, famously a different shade of mess?
How about neither?
Man I wish we stuck with Subversion at this point.
joshuat 6 hours ago [-]
I feel like the "GitHub is a mess" conversation is a little forced at times - I spend a significant portion of my work day in GitHub and while there have been an uptick in outages lately, it still feels like a very solid platform.
I guess I personally wouldn't categorize it as a "mess" and the conversations I read about it here make me think I'm using an entirely different product than everyone else.
camdenreslink 6 hours ago [-]
When you work at an enterprise that depends on Github, frequent outages are actually a pretty big deal and begin to impact productivity in a real way.
jjfoooo4 22 minutes ago [-]
It feels to me like this is a case of very rapid increase in load from AI pr's more than product quality degrading because of cruft or poor maintenance. It's annoying but I'm not confident that alternatives will do better in the long run vs GitHub (which I'm guessing will improve with time)
IshKebab 53 minutes ago [-]
Yeah and if I was an enterprise I would definitely be self hosting with Forgejo or Gerrit or whatever. But I think for most hobbyists GitHub is still totally fine.
I use it quite a lot and the first time I actually witnessed downtime myself was yesterday.
allthetime 3 hours ago [-]
github for hobbyists and small orgs and simple open source projects is wonderful.
github for large project that rely on CI tool is a nightmare (cost, downtime, etc.)
I'm guessing you dont know about the github actions bug that was running and endless loop consuming 100% cpu costing orgs insane amounts of money that they didn't fix for 3 years.
whstl 6 hours ago [-]
I love to hate on Github/Microsoft as much as the next person, but considering the insane amount of code being pushed to it every day, I'd say they're doing quite well.
viccis 2 minutes ago [-]
It's falling apart at the seams for me. Half the time I click somewhere on a page, the whole thing freezes and I have to reload the page. Took forever to install neovim on a new machine today because all the plugins installed via Github and I had to wait like 10 minutes for it to come back up.
maccard 5 hours ago [-]
I disagree. They’ve been struggling with up time for a long time, this seems more related to their move to azure than anything else.
It also shows there’s a fundamental problem with their architecture or their development pattern to have these sorts of issues so frequently.
infamouscow 4 hours ago [-]
I'd emphasize their practices as being the culprit.
Migrating to different cloud vendors, while difficult, is something that people have done many times before. There's only finite number of incongruences that appear when moving cloud vendors. It's rather difficult to explain the ongoing problems several years after the fact.
Anyone that's worked at a startup knows that one of the best things about it is reflecting on all of the asinine, if not genuinely stupid policies of your previous employer so as not to repeat them. Without any insider knowledge, the practices and procedures GitHub had prior to acquisition probably look nothing like those post-acquisition.
6 hours ago [-]
MengerSponge 3 hours ago [-]
Very solid? Bro. GitHub is at what, one 9 of reliability? That's a disaster. That's a mess and an embarrassment in any professional sense.
I use GitHub a lot and it does what I need well enough, but I wouldn't spend money on the level of service or performance it generally delivers.
jm4 6 hours ago [-]
Git is objectively better than Subversion. The problem is we are conflating a widely used hosting service with the underlying SCM. We don't need github to use git successfully. Sure, it's nice, but you can install Forgejo or something, which is the exact same boat we were in with Subversion + Trac. You can have that experience right now if you want to.
What github is good for is discovery, getting contributions on open source projects (because it's so popular), and integrations. If you wanted to, you could host your open source project on Forgejo and use github as a mirror just to benefit from the visibility and get contributions.
slantview 3 hours ago [-]
100% not a chance for me. I'd rather host it myself on a Pi on a 56k dialup connection with 12% uptime then ever let an Elon related company touch my code.
xlayn 3 hours ago [-]
This is the correct answer, but let me add a corolarium, both github, whatever cursor launches and any other bigco does obeys to the same friking iron law: *MAKE MONEY/POWER AT ANY COST, MONEY/POWER IS THE OBJECTIVE*, so you will get EXACTLY the same result from each one of them given enough time has passed.
trollbridge 5 hours ago [-]
You do know you can run git on your own machine, on pretty much any Linux/Unix based server, run it entirely peer-to-peer if you wish... or use Gitlab, including self-hosted Gitlab, or one of many other Git based servers?
dgellow 2 hours ago [-]
You don’t even need a “gut based” server. Git doesn’t care about the transport
cryo32 4 hours ago [-]
Yeah. I just don't really like git. The user interface is dog shit, merging is nasty, it's really easy to blow your own toes off and it's generally horrible. The only reason it got anywhere was github.
trollbridge 2 hours ago [-]
Okay, well, nothing’s stopping folks from using hg, P4, svn, CVS, RCCS, MS Visual Source Safe, ClearCase, or who knows what else.
cryo32 2 hours ago [-]
Sometimes you get told what to use. And I am free to dislike it :)
mejutoco 4 hours ago [-]
That must have been why the used it to manage the linux kernel, because of github
/s
cryo32 2 hours ago [-]
It's painful if you have to work with it and mortals, not kernel devs.
bmitc 5 hours ago [-]
Or Perforce. Perforce, in my experience, just worked. It also has sane conceptual names for things, a good CLI, SDKs, visual tools, cool features like workspaces that Git completely lacks, etc.
dgellow 2 hours ago [-]
Git also just work. The issue is the host platform, not the CVS
spiderfarmer 6 hours ago [-]
Just the association with Musk will mean no EU company should use Cursor or its products.
jpadkins 3 hours ago [-]
why?
spiderfarmer 2 hours ago [-]
Do you not follow the news?
Among many other things he has openly suggested that the EU should be abolished and national sovereignties restored and donated to parties that tow that line.
Rover222 1 hours ago [-]
ah yes, the EU shall continue to fade into irrelevance (except for as a dope vacation spot and some fine cheese)
janfoeh 6 hours ago [-]
That makes very little sense to me. When your Subversion server is gone, you're hosed. When your Git forge is down, you take any old SSH shell account anywhere, push and keep working.
cryo32 6 hours ago [-]
The last subversion server I had was on prem on VMware. There wasn’t any unscheduled downtime in a decade.
drowntoge 3 hours ago [-]
There’s no architectural limitation in Git preventing you from replicating that exact setup for another decade, though.
jaccola 6 hours ago [-]
I like Musk companies more than most here it seems, I think he’s a net positive to the world. But (admittedly sans hard evidence) he absolutely gives me the vibe he’d train on my source code without my permission. I simply don’t trust him in this arena.
So there is more to lose than just the service being unreliable.
if we're totally switching tooling, lets at least go to mercurial instead
gaigalas 6 hours ago [-]
If we're switching, we should probably go to fossil instead.
yjftsjthsd-h 6 hours ago [-]
That actually does make sense seeing as fossil bakes in issues and wikis and all that other stuff that makes it hard to use plain git.
WorldMaker 5 hours ago [-]
GitHub's wikis are just git repositories with folders full of Markdown files. That's the easiest thing to pull out of GitHub. Just git clone the wiki repo. At that point I often just use a git headless merge to merge the second repo into the main repo under a docs/wiki/ folder or similar.
As I recall, in GHE I remember finding that you could even turn off the repo's wiki at that point and then reset it to point to your docs/wiki/ folder and still have the Wiki interface but pointing it to a branch in the same repository. That was a while ago and I don't know if it is still supported in GHE. I also remember it was work managing that wiki branch because Wikis didn't directly support PR workflows if you have branch protection policies. Also from the documentation it doesn't look like it is supported in Public GitHub right now, which seems a shame to me, as someone who likes all documentation in the same repo as the source. I haven't needed Wikis in public GitHub much, so I haven't tried to do anything like point them to a main repo branch.
yjftsjthsd-h 5 hours ago [-]
That's fair. You could also just put the wiki in a different branch if that's your style.
z_rho_one 5 hours ago [-]
This feels like an attempt to get more of Musk's non-coder fans to start vibe coding slop-products. "You can now code with Grok via Cursor and host your code on Origin, all without leaving Daddy Elon's ecosystem."
nikole9696 8 hours ago [-]
Cursor, which is now owned by Elon, who tried very hard to get all manner of data about citizens with his intrusions? I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this isn't a great idea. He'll use it to feed Grok.
I'm not a big fan of Github right now either but I wouldn't consider this alternative due to its ownership chain.
gruntled-worker 49 minutes ago [-]
I wouldn't even feel comfortable cloning from it, let alone contributing. If you decide to host your project there, please mirror it somewhere sane as well.
dogscatstrees 5 hours ago [-]
Yup, same sentiment here. Thank you
stefan_ 2 hours ago [-]
They were also caught having their Grok code agent upload entire source code repositories in the background.
I guess the joke is "come to Origin, your code is already there".
5 hours ago [-]
Oras 5 hours ago [-]
[Feature Request] Sign-in with your Tesla account ... /s
inquirerGeneral 6 hours ago [-]
I love how people like you actually think Elon actually wanted your data.
ChicagoDave 1 minutes ago [-]
I wouldn’t push someone else’s code into a Musk-owned repository.
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Hi all, my name is Tomas. I am one of the developers on Origin, and I was one of the founders of Graphite (https://graphite.com).
Happy to answer any questions about Origin or source control in general!
dbbk 7 hours ago [-]
Given Grok was just caught uploading whole codebases and sensitive .envs without permission, how can anyone possibly trust this?
gjsman-1000 6 hours ago [-]
Given Claude was just caught hacking companies as it pleased, how can anyone possibly trust this?
wraptile 16 minutes ago [-]
You could argue that you don't care what Claude does after work hours as long as it works your hours as you expect it to. Grok clearly failed the latter.
dkdbejwi383 2 hours ago [-]
Just because Billy misbehaved doesn’t make it ok for Jenny to do the same.
verandaguy 6 hours ago [-]
Not GP, but personally I don’t trust claude. Work does for some reason, and work strongly encourages using it, but i stay far away outside of that.
I think every product in this space should have to clear a very high bar for trust rather than making it a race to the bottom with whataboutisms.
guhcampos 5 hours ago [-]
It's been 5 hours and instead of "any" questions, you have only been happy to answer the 1 question that hasn't put you in a tight spot.
Honestly, that does not look too good for you or the offering - and this is coming from someone that just chose Cursor over Claude Code a week ago.
qwerpy 3 hours ago [-]
He’s trying to do his job and the angry mob predictably came in to bully an easy target about unrelated things. Just take a look at some of the (thankfully flagged, mostly) responses.
throw10920 3 hours ago [-]
I'm going through and flagging the guideline-breaking comments (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49348639) - I'd encourage you to do that, too, to help preserve the quality of HN.
sunaookami 1 hours ago [-]
Thanks, every Musk-related thread on HN is like this, it's very tiresome. We get it, the man is controversial but I'm not on HN to read reddit-like kneejerk comments, I want to read insightful and technical ones.
make_it_sure 5 hours ago [-]
you cannot count isn't it?
ActionHank 3 hours ago [-]
And you cannot English
victorbjorklund 6 hours ago [-]
Do you have full trust in that Elon would never abuse the access to sensitive data? What protections are in place to prevent Elon from stealing data?
ilc 54 minutes ago [-]
A quick question: Where can I read your TOS, and other legal documents?
Knowing things like: Will my code end up in Grok? What ownership do I have of my content, etc... matter.
jjcm 1 days ago [-]
What I don't understand from the blog post is what's different in this offering than github - is it just the agentic tie ins where I can ask my agent to make changes while browsing the PR?
Are there any fundamental differences, ie ways of working that solve the worktrees problem?
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Expect a lot more from us.
We wanted to release a beta so people could start experimenting with our scalability and extensibility themselves. Over the next few weeks, you can expect a handful of features starting to change source control to better understand and work with agents.
skissane 22 hours ago [-]
Are there any plans for compatibility with GitHub's APIs?
I have a lot of dev tooling which assumes code is stored on public GitHub and/or GitHubEnterprise. This produces some degree of lock-in, in that all that code would have to be rewritten to migrate to something else. (Yes, AIs can help, but they still don't make migration effortless.)
The major Git hosters tend to implement roughly the same concepts, albeit with lots of little variations. It would be great if there were some sort of standardised API everyone implemented. In the absence of that, it makes sense for people to emulate the incumbent's APIs as a de facto standard, just like how other vendors copy OpenAI's APIs for talking to LLMs.
justincormack 7 hours ago [-]
It seems to have 2 way sync of PRs, issues, issue comments etc, so it must be pretty much the same data model, so they could probably have a compatible API.
zerotolerance 23 minutes ago [-]
Experimenting with your "scalability?" mean?
huflungdung 7 hours ago [-]
[dead]
dbbk 1 days ago [-]
There seems to be basically nothing new here
hungryhobbit 7 hours ago [-]
Except it promises not to crash regularly.
dbbk 4 hours ago [-]
I don't really see that as a USP considering;
1. SpaceXAI has shown no track record of being able to maintain uptime
2. By nature, any GitHub alternative is going to be a tiny fraction of the scale, so keeping it up should be expected
chris_money202 7 hours ago [-]
GitHub is crashing due to scaling pressure. Something GH is much more equipped to solve long term.
theplatman 7 hours ago [-]
are they? given this has been happening frequently over past year and there's been minimal clear communication on their end on how they plan to address this
chris_money202 4 hours ago [-]
Azure is at capacity; GH offers a lot of services for free or heavily discounted. Especially when its public repo. These aren't profit generating for Microsoft, so they are not the priority with the capacity Azure has available. GH is probably struggling with these capacity and budget constraints. They also still have some AWS and non-azure DCs in use.
Once Azure's massive spend is online things will slowly get better.
esafak 5 hours ago [-]
How long term are we talking here? Github was acquired in 2018...
chris_money202 4 hours ago [-]
I think GH/Microsoft got caught by surprise to the huge usage number increase as a result of LLMs. Microsoft started rolling all of its DCs to OpenAI around 2019-2020 to begin LLM training, then we saw a huge GH increase in late 2024 and Azure was just out of capacity for infinite GH scale.
esafak 4 hours ago [-]
I guess we should all do our part to alleviate poor Microsoft's burden by migrating to better services.
logicchains 7 hours ago [-]
They're really not, given they're running on Azure.
0xy 1 hours ago [-]
They're actually ramping back up on AWS after Azure failed to scale to their needs.
They planned to be fully off AWS in 2027 but they're continuing to ramp usage.
Azure doesn't scale.
mlnj 5 hours ago [-]
Is there any data on Azure being terrible with stability? Would love to see data than anecdotal stories.
gtirloni 4 hours ago [-]
There isn't and if there is it probably doesn't matter in GH's case. People are just speculating with zero knowledge.
I'd never put my data on anything owned by Musk. Period. I'd take lower availability from GitHub or a worse alternative (feature-wise) than move Origin.
peterldowns 1 days ago [-]
The idea is that it's like Github but it stays up even as your commit/CI frequency increases. As a customer I'm stoked and looking forward to fully switching over as that's exactly what I want.
owebmaster 21 hours ago [-]
Calling it a GitHub that works is just preposterous. Cursor/spacetwitterai have no experience keeping a system like that up.
chris_money202 7 hours ago [-]
It was probably written 95% by an LLM and has only a few people (if any at all) that understand major parts of the system end to end.
It will eventually have the same uptime issues as GH (or worse) with less ability to provide stable fixes.
arjie 5 hours ago [-]
Would love if you focus on performance. A big reason I have to have custom software is that agents can act much faster than humans but SaaS software is usually not well-designed enough to handle high RPS so rate-limits are low. I can easily outperform commercial hosts myself. At the least, it would be sick to have separate tenancy so that I could absolutely slam my own instance without having to deal with some other chump complaining.
autonomousErwin 1 days ago [-]
What's the biggest differentiator to GitHub (other than uptime). I keep hearing something along the lines of "GitHub for Agents" but would be great to hear from the devs of Origin what they actually think it means in tangible features/functionality?
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Today, very little. We're intentionally releasing this as a Github alternative where we meet them toe-to-toe on functionality.
Over the next few weeks you can expect a lot more from us on integrations with agents, understanding agent-written code (without having to read through all of the code), and automatically getting your PRs to a mergable state. Stay tuned :)
ad_fontes 6 hours ago [-]
So, a complex, vibe-coded platform that was prematurely pushed out to opportunistically take advantage of GitHub's egg-on-face moment? But it doesn't do anything better? And it's owned by the same guy who routinely takes shortcuts that causes both EVs and rockets to crash? Sign me up!
fwip 6 hours ago [-]
How reassuring to hear that it's an intentional release, rather than totally accidental.
Petersipoi 6 hours ago [-]
Good god. There is that hacker spirit. Who hurt you?
brazukadev 26 minutes ago [-]
The coopting of the word "hacker" continues.
throw10920 1 hours ago [-]
Just downvote and flag and move on. "Who hurt you" just encourages bad actors to behave worse (and isn't particularly good for itself). Repeatedly flag-killing their comments tends to teach a better lesson about what conduct is acceptable.
fwip 4 hours ago [-]
Probably the ever-increasing corporate homogenization, sanitization, and empty words that are flooding the internet (only accelerated by LLMs, of course). Which, for readers playing along at home, is kind of antithetical to the "hacker spirit."
lopatin 3 hours ago [-]
lol I wanted the joke to work, but unlike the fairphone thing, the use of intentional makes sense here.
gtirloni 4 hours ago [-]
You haven't answered much but I must recognize posting this was brave.
Please make it a worthy competitor for Github in terms of features, stability, scalability and availability and wishing your team all the best.
hnbad 53 minutes ago [-]
Cool but irrelevant. I was a paying user of Cursor until it got acquired by Musk. Ethical concerns about Grok aside, that's probably the least trustworthy person to be affiliated with when it comes to anything with any level of confidentiality.
So, I guess, do you have any illusions of attracting international customers who aren't online edgelords?
jmknoll 1 days ago [-]
Completely unrelated to Origin, but are there plans for closer integration of Graphite with Cursor? A combined product would be a very compelling product, but not much seems to have changed since the acquisition.
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Absolutely - we actually built this all on Graphite tech. Have you already linked your Graphite account with Cursor? If so, there might be a surprise!
shykes 1 days ago [-]
Are you interested in integrating with more CI platforms, including less "traditional" ones, like dagger.io? If so I would love to talk :)
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Absolutely! Feel free to shoot me an email at tomas at anysphere dot co.
shykes 24 hours ago [-]
Great! I just sent you an email :)
verdverm 1 days ago [-]
Solomon, please don't make bed with Elon
ronandi 5 hours ago [-]
Why are you doing this?
jjmarr 6 hours ago [-]
Are you hiring?
christophbusse 9 hours ago [-]
are you maybe also planning to do cross device/cloud realtime sync like a mutagen feature set kind of? so cloud and local agents can work faster together?
this could be helpful on larger cross platform products/repos (maybe too overfitted on my use case, since i am working across multiple devices (ssh works but the repo code sync is a bit of an overhead with multiple agents and devices that could be better))
throwawaydfasjf 22 hours ago [-]
Why do I need to link github for this?
treexs 1 hours ago [-]
it's only if you want to sync your repos from github
icrbow 6 hours ago [-]
Please make it Fediverse/Forgejo/etc compatible. It is 2026 and I'm so tired of silos.
itomato 6 hours ago [-]
Let them cook.
generalpf 6 hours ago [-]
They're the ones out here asking for us to try it.
wahnfrieden 1 days ago [-]
Thoughts on Musk ownership of the "next GitHub"?
BryantD 1 days ago [-]
I think there are a large number of people I’d trust with my code before Musk, and some of them are already running public Git repo hosting.
xAI was caught uploading any repo their coding agent touched to their storage only last month. This isn’t about Musk’s ideology: it’s about his trustworthiness. He sincerely believes he’s the only person who can save the world and that allows him to justify an awful lot of moral lapses.
They acknowledged that it happened, fixed the bug that caused it, deleted all data that was uploaded.
BryantD 2 hours ago [-]
I agree: the stated steps are what I’d expect.
I still don’t trust the company that made the decisions that led to that code being shipped in the first place.
radley 6 hours ago [-]
Trustworthy companies take reasonable steps before.
callmeal 6 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
pseudosavant 1 days ago [-]
What kind of enforceable guarantees could we actually get that xAI won't use our private code for training? Not empty promises, guarantees that have legal teeth. This applies to anything with xAI or Cursor though, especially after last months' revelation that Cursor was uploading every repo it touched.
vorticalbox 7 hours ago [-]
This question also applies to OpenAI, anthopic, GitHub (Microsoft) and any server you send your data too.
pseudosavant 6 hours ago [-]
Not in the same way really. There aren't examples of OpenAI, Anthropic, or GitHub/Microsoft doing the sketchy things that xAI has been involved with. Those companies care a lot about the reputational damage that would come from flouting their customer's data privacy obligations.
Cursor/xAI was making a full copy of every repo it ever touched within the last month, and when caught, just acted like that was an accident. A system to download every repo you touch, and then upload it to persistent cloud storage, doesn't just happen by accident.
sandeepkd 7 hours ago [-]
Unless you are an enterprise no one will be offering you such a guarantee. Even with the enterprise the bar has gone down a lot on expectations and compliance, every one is carrying/buying the SOC2 compliance certification these days.
dbbk 17 hours ago [-]
I mean I think the auto uploading of repos already gives you the answer. This is untrustworthy.
its_still_me0x0 14 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
sjsdaiuasgdia 5 hours ago [-]
[dead]
catlover76 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
DonHopkins 6 hours ago [-]
[dead]
AmericanOP 6 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
ryanwatkins 6 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
jLaForest 6 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
throw1234567891 6 hours ago [-]
Many, many millions of reasons.
pavlov 6 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
misiti3780 6 hours ago [-]
as a very happy tesla customer, i dont know what this guy/girl is talking about!
exe34 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
misiti3780 2 hours ago [-]
spend less time online and maybe read some history
exe34 1 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
jjcm 1 days ago [-]
I do wonder if calling this "Origin" is going to result in semantic misinterpretations by LLMs. Ie saying,
> "hey can you push to origin main?"
now has two separate meanings.
A LLM may inadvertently push your code to a new provider without you knowing. It's walking a thin line between genius-growth-move and domain typosquatting.
bicepjai 9 hours ago [-]
Hahaha, so true. this is going to be such a pain. Allocate time and context for fight with git :)
rzzzt 1 days ago [-]
EA has also called its games platform Origin until last year when it was shuttered.
Melatonic 6 hours ago [-]
Finally
melezhik 18 hours ago [-]
Yep. The same feeling )
DonHopkins 5 hours ago [-]
[dead]
halJordan 1 days ago [-]
Well you see, there's this thing called an embedding and it sits inside a vector space and when attention is applied it disambiguates
- Self hosting your git hosting (if you want)
- Self hosting your issues/PRs (if you want)
- Self hosting your CI (if you want)
- Github-like social features (I have one account, I can follow, star, add issues and PRs to any repo on tangled)
It's built on ATProto, so even if the company disappears, all of the integration and features will still work for anyone that wants to run their own AppView (that is open-source), an AppView is basically the UI/Network-wide Data Aggregator for ATProto apps
AgentME 2 hours ago [-]
Is non-self-hosting available for all of those things on Tangled? I don't want to run my own CI but I do want CI. I couldn't figure out if it was available last time I looked at Tangled.
darccio 3 hours ago [-]
Just to clarify, when you say "self host issues/PRs" is it mostly "self host a knot"? I kind of expected something similar to what you can do for CI but I'm not able to find any docs regarding self hosting issues and PRs outside of Tangled itself.
LelouBil 2 hours ago [-]
Oh I meant that as part of tangled, you can "control" your issues and PRs because they are on ATProto and just like any ATProto record can be hosted on any PDS you like and still be interoperable.
But after looking a bit more into it, they are still following the same model as Bluesky in that the author of an issue or comment or PR is the owner of the resource, and it lives on their PDS, but they are considering changing that (and I hope they do it soon) by having the record be created on the repo PDS (so the knot basically) and a pointer record on the user's PDS proving they are the author.
ATProto has all that's required to do so, so I hope they do it soon, they are still in alpha after all but I find the interoperability very promising because you can have independent code hosting regardless of the opinions of forge X (which I think is the main reason why people move away from GitHub), but still be a part of an interoperable ecosystem that acts just like it is a single platform.
verdverm 7 hours ago [-]
Tangled is forcing some of their particular technologies (nix/rust) on users for those pieces and that is a hard sell. I don't use those techs, so I'm not interested to use a platform that I need to learn them to use.
fwiw, the main site also seems to be down right now, infinite spinner. Docs and blog are loading though
icy 6 hours ago [-]
> Tangled is forcing some of their particular technologies (nix/rust) on users for those pieces and that is a hard sell. I don't use those techs, so I'm not interested to use a platform that I need to learn them to use.
Tangled CEO here. How are we pushing Rust exactly? :D Nix, yes but you don't really need to touch it at all with our Alpine-based CI images.
We have been under heavy load the past day or so, we're working round the clock to scale!
LelouBil 2 hours ago [-]
Hi since you are here, I find tangled amazing and I really hope it succeeds.
Since you are here, do you have any updates about the issue of issues and PRs living in the author's PDSs and not on the knot ? (Which also acts as the repository's PDS if I am not mistaken)
> As time goes on we are re-assessing the idea of users owning what is "collaborative data" (issues, PRs, etc.) on their PDSes - soon may come the day that an issue also lives on the knot as a source of truth, with an accompanying pointer record on user PDS to attest that it's theirs.
verdverm 5 hours ago [-]
> We have been under heavy load the past day or so, we're working round the clock to scale!
GitHub is saying the same thing
re: pushing, when I looked many months ago, it looked very much like the rust/nix/jj club, who are on average very opinionated about "good" tech choices and try to shoehorn others into using them. It's a culture I'm not interested in being around
LelouBil 5 hours ago [-]
The difference with GitHub is you can also use it if the main instance is down if you self host. (And again self hosting still gets you the interconnection benefits just like if everyone was on tangled.org)
verdverm 4 hours ago [-]
you can also buy GitHub Enterprise onprem and get a managed, self-hosted experience, thereby avoiding the public GitHub downtime
downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there
LelouBil 3 hours ago [-]
I don't think you understood. You can still get a feature complete social experience that is NOT ISOLATED from anyone.
Your GitHub Enterprise comparison is wrong, because with an onprem github entreprise you don't have the social github features (and that's the whole point of tangled, use something else if you want a private forge for your company, it's not for this purpose)
My point is, Tangled being on ATProto, you can still access all of the repos, PRs and issues of other people by looking through your self-hosted appview even if the official appview is down, because an appview, is just that, an "app *view*" It's the view layer in your traditional app, and ATProto is the database.
It's a view of the data on the ATProto network, it is not the data holder, everyone can be their own data holder that is visible through any appview.
> downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there
Yes, I agree, but I personally think tangled is great because of the interoperability
People on codeberg, on gitlab, on github, on self-hosted gitea instances, on self hosted gitlab instances, and so on, all control their issues, PRs, and git repos (they run on their own infra) but they are also more independent, are not subject to a central platform's policies (or are subject to the one they prefer) and so on, and they also introduce contributor friction, you need separate accounts, it can be difficult to cross reference issues and PRs accross projects on different forges, users can't easily have a central feed of project they starred.
On tangled you get to have the first part (freedom) while not having the second downside (unique account, cross-references work seamlessly, etc...)
Give me reasons open source projects moved forges away from github, and I am pretty sure if tangled did exist when they did so it would fit more boxes of "why they left" than their target forge.
verdverm 2 hours ago [-]
atproto is not the next thing, there will be more social protocols to come
tangled will struggle to have private repos that align with user expectations for RBAC, atproto ACL permission proposal is insufficient, Bluesky is not interested in alternative proposals, the centralization of atproto is most prominant in who has write permissions to the repos
LelouBil 2 hours ago [-]
While private repos are usefull, I do not think that is tangled's main proposal at all.
I am just thinking you do not like tangled because you don't use the social features of github and so don't see the point here. I can understand that, but then tangled is just not for you ?
And yeah ATProto is not the next thing, but IMO having a portable identity and services that can act as "one big single app" are requirements for a modern social protocol to do applications like Twitter,Instagram, and github's social features for example, ATProto is just the one that does it better imo for now.
But again since you are always bringing on private repos, I think tangled is just not for you since the ATProto model is for open data and so fits open source projects really nicely I think.
verdverm 2 hours ago [-]
> I am just thinking you ...
you are incorrect and this is why it's advised not to project the answer but ask a question instead
for clarity, I do in fact use github's social features
I also believe that the idea around the atmosphere that the point of atproto is to have open data is completely misaligned with how most of society wants their data handled, this is based on my talking to people IRL, outside of the echo chambers of social media, what's actually happening is more and more people signing off because of toxicity
open source and small devs do not pay the bills, github is financially sustainable because they have enterprise clients, same for gitlab and bitbucket
icy 2 hours ago [-]
> tangled will struggle to have private repos that align with user expectations for RBAC, atproto ACL permission proposal is insufficient, Bluesky is not interested in alternative proposals, the centralization of atproto is most prominant in who has write permissions to the repos
This isn't entirely true because we're working on our own extensions to the protocol that will enable full-fledged RBAC at a knot/repo level. We're not beholden to PBC and AT Protocol; when needed, we're OK to roll custom bits.
verdverm 2 hours ago [-]
> we're working on our own extensions to the protocol
what I hear is another path to app centralization, regardless of your intent, this is what comes out of custom extensions to a protocol
bluesky should have actually been open about the permissioned design process, posting your own proposal to a blog and not entertaining other proposals, or even joining the broader conversation that was happening, is not open in my book
conradludgate 2 hours ago [-]
Spindles (CI) can use configurable engines, which includes nixery or microvm (which is similar to github actions). You're not forced into nixos
I don't understand how it forces you to engage with Rust. It happens to be written in Rust but that shouldn't be a major consideration for a user
LelouBil 6 hours ago [-]
What does "forcing" mean here ?
If you want to build an alternative Knot implementation (git Hosting) you can use anything as long as the API is compatible ?
Same for all of the parts of Tangled really
Also, even if it's down, unlike GitHub you can self host your own AppView so it's never down for you
verdverm 6 hours ago [-]
> you can self host your own AppView so it's never down for you
Self hosted servers go down too and why people have picked hosted solutions like GitHub, Bitbucket, and GitLab
icy 5 hours ago [-]
Great! Then we've got a hosted solution at tangled.org. :)
verdverm 5 hours ago [-]
no thanks, not interested ;]
atproto is a red flag for me now, toxic leaders at bluesky, who effectively control the protocol, it's not really open for others to have a say in what it looks like
you also don't have private repos and you will need to have centralized app view permission addons to have parity with user expectations, given the weak permissioned data proposal bluesky chose (their own proposal that works for what they need)
3182876 1 days ago [-]
Cursor is allegedly worth $60B. That is a higher market cap than Mercedes Benz group, which is profitable and has $144B revenue.
But the website uses 100% CPU. And this is a beta for paid plans, not a GitHub alternative.
LaurensBER 1 days ago [-]
All AI companies are valued as if they'll win the AI race. Problem is, only one can win *
* That is, if a lab like Deepseek doesn't release a "good enough" model for the cost of electricity + a thin margin. Then all AI company lose and all consumers win.
brap 7 hours ago [-]
> only one can win
Why? I mean, if you assume that the moment some threshold of intelligence is reached it will suddenly explode and self-improve at a pace no one would be able to ever catch up with, then yes probably only one can win. But I think it’s more sci-fi than reality which is often more nuanced and boring.
pjmlp 7 hours ago [-]
Late stage capitalism, everyone's curve must exponential growth, yet the amount of customers on planet Earth is limited.
6 hours ago [-]
zerotolerance 21 minutes ago [-]
Another outcome is that none win.
HumblyTossed 7 hours ago [-]
And that one can only win if it convinces leaders to regulate AI so that opensource models don't get good enough.
throw1234567891 5 hours ago [-]
They can limit whatever they want within their own borders. Who cares. It’s only ~350m people. The rest of the world benefits while the US dismantles its own relevance.
LelouBil 1 days ago [-]
What does it even mean to "win the AI race" ?
Right now there are many providers providing different tradeoffs, for different usages.
Would "winning" mean releasing an all-purpose better model that will outperform every other companies for all kind of tasks ? Something like AGI but cost effective ?
Or is it winning the consumer-side AI race ? Like making a kind of "super personal AI assistant" the likes you would see in movies and TVs ?
I'm not arguing, I am just struggling to understand what it usually means when somebody says that, it's not like competitors will go bankrupt the second OpenAI/Anthropic/Whatever does something specific.
slowin 1 days ago [-]
I think "winning" means being able to live up to their valuations. The market is not big enough for all of these companies to be worth as much as they claim. In that sense they must "win" or experience massive downward adjustment in their values.
tensor 6 hours ago [-]
In that case I doubt there will ever be a "winner" because these valuations are not based in reality.
iAMkenough 1 days ago [-]
So “winning” could mean everyone experiences massive downward adjustment, but your valuation is still highest?
slowin 1 days ago [-]
There's probably some holes in the analogy is you stretch it far enough. I'm hoping to "win" as a user by local models hitting a performance breakthrough and not needing any of these companies. I think the OP was generally making the point I mentioned though, that there's not room for all of these valuations, maybe one.
threatofrain 1 days ago [-]
People believe that it will be a market with very few winners.
ahartmetz 16 hours ago [-]
>What does it even mean to "win the AI race" ?
Creating a world-ruling AGI which feels mild sympathy for its creators, sharing some table scraps with them. Not sure if /s...
magic_hamster 7 hours ago [-]
> good enough" model for the cost of electricity
This already exists, in several tiers, depending on what you can afford to run (in terms of VRAM).
Deepseek V Flash 0731 is already good enough for many things.
iLoveOncall 7 hours ago [-]
And winning the AI race means being the biggest loser. LLMs aren't profitable.
Eridrus 7 hours ago [-]
Comparing revenue across industries/verticals is not sound.
Mercedes has a ~5% profit margin on this revenue.
SaaS, even AI SaaS is expected to have much higher profit margins at scale.
And on top of that, Mercedes shrunk by 10% revenue over the last year, rather than growing, which makes sense because they missed EVs and are now managing decline and returning money to shareholders.
empath75 3 hours ago [-]
> Cursor is allegedly worth $60B
Inflated valuation of buyout, based on inflated valuation of SpaceX
frogperson 1 days ago [-]
i just wish the bubble would pop already. I'm just so over ai.
sajithdilshan 3 hours ago [-]
Cursor and Mercedes Benz is a weird comparison. One company is working on the future technology while the other one is stuck in the last centuries technology which is being phased out.
jjice 6 hours ago [-]
I can't imagine reaching for this instead of GitLab, GitTea, or one of the many other more mature and open source alternatives. Going for the managers, directors, and CTOs that make decisions and face no consequences if they negatively impact the team, I guess.
real-hacker 20 hours ago [-]
"Legacy Privacy Mode disables code storage, so you can't set up a Codebase. Switch to a different privacy mode below to continue."
The only other privacy mode is to share data for Cursor to do training.
All your codebases are belong to us.
colinrand 1 days ago [-]
Having an AI company host your source code is giving your source code to an untrustworthy agent who might break their sandbox and might use your source code to accomplish a task that they have been given in their testing ground, for testing purposes only, that would definitely positively not ever be used for non-testing purposes.
aldanor 7 hours ago [-]
So GitHub itself is a trustworthy agent and nothing to do with AI?
colinrand 6 hours ago [-]
yeah - from a strict trust point of view, if Github/MSFT are training agents I would be skeptical of them.
however, there is a practicality issue too. Avoiding all untrustworthy software would have you end up living in a shack in the woods foraging for food.
sidcool 20 hours ago [-]
So GitHub too, then?
bakies 6 hours ago [-]
yes, host your own if you care about data integrity
grandpajoey 1 days ago [-]
I'm not hosting my code with a company that creates child porn:
> her stepfather used the Grok chatbot to transform a childhood photo into child sexual abuse material
He could have used Stable Diffusion. Or, if this was the 90s, Photoshop.
By your argument, we’d have to abolish the internet, or add nanny filters to everything.
How many people on HN resent it when Claude refuses an instruction? And yet here you are, arguing against personal responsibility and for a when-in-doubt-block approach to technology. Is it because it’s Musk?
DrBenCarson 5 hours ago [-]
Come on, man. Not allowing products to generate CP is too high of a bar?
By your logic cops should be focused on the junkies, forget about the cartel
redox99 3 hours ago [-]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it didn't actually generate CP, it changed people into bikinis, not actual nudity.
You can go to the beach or (I assume) search on Google and find people of any age wearing bikinis. And that's fine because to normal people (not pedos) it's not something sexual.
I understand that someone specifically editing a minor into less clothing is probably a pedo. Probably the same way someone generating feet gets aroused with that stuff. But that doesn't mean a model generating feet is problematic.
I do think making the model reject the bikini thing is a good idea once you find out it's happening, but let's not pretend it's the same as the model generating actual sexual content.
5 hours ago [-]
majorchord 1 days ago [-]
But you'll comment on a website that funds Flock
gWPVhyxPHqvk 4 hours ago [-]
I pay $0 for this website, and there's no advertising (or if there is, I adblock it).
ad_fontes 6 hours ago [-]
Well, shit. I guess it's back to Slashdot then.
grandpajoey 1 days ago [-]
That's a good point. I hate Flock and YC should be ashamed of funding it. Still, Musk has a wall to wall record of horrific actions going back years. The Grok CSAM is the worst I've seen yet though. Absolute deal breaker.
slowin 1 days ago [-]
That's horrific and the saddest thing I've read in a really long time. I'm glad I erased my Twitter account and I'm definitely not using this code host. Seriously, this is horrible.
SoKamil 6 hours ago [-]
Interesting that they still brand as Cursor instead of SpaceXAI
srameshc 6 hours ago [-]
OpenAI did a good one by owning a product called Codex
pbkompasz 5 hours ago [-]
SpaCursoreXAI
s09dfhks 7 hours ago [-]
My assumption is x.ai will be training on any code hosted here
nomilk 6 hours ago [-]
Same for all other AI companies too.
vips7L 3 hours ago [-]
I think Source Hut has 0 ai features. Or time to start self hosting.
sajithdilshan 3 hours ago [-]
What do you think github copilot is trained on?
viraj_shah 6 hours ago [-]
I'm going to take a while guess here and say this strategy is part of their plan to get even more access to more code to learn from.
If you can see entire version histories of how code is generated, what bugs occur, what fixes are made and how they're implemented, you have the entire human and machine coding feedback loop to learn from.
hahahaa 3 hours ago [-]
Seems like a boring bet. The Github way of working is from the anthropocene era. We need new primitives for agents invokved in tech solutions. Pull requests? Issues? CI? They all seem like they'll go away. Cursor should be leading the new things that replace them.
dutchCourage 1 days ago [-]
I expected more than a GitHub clone, this is a bit of a let down.
There's a lot of space to innovate around collaboration and version control in the age of agentic workflows.
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Don't worry! We're releasing this beta to show off the tech and wanted to start somewhere people were familiar with. We are releasing a handful of differentiators over the coming weeks :)
dutchCourage 8 hours ago [-]
Great to hear, I'm excited by what's happening in this space!
elpakal 6 hours ago [-]
Totally agree. I wonder if git itself needs to be looked at, its objects and history are likely not as important as the context/instructions used to make code changes these days imho
sidcool 20 hours ago [-]
This is just a beta. And it will iterate rapidly. Not sure how something can let you down so easily at first contact.
VCFundedGenYer 1 days ago [-]
If AI is involved it's a big "no, thanks" from me. Simply takes the problem and moves it down the street.
sidcool 20 hours ago [-]
Why?
grim_io 1 days ago [-]
Is this a rebranding of the Google Cloud Storage bucket Elon was uploading all our repos to? ;)
kinda crazy how Microsoft just destroyed the Github goodwill.
also crazy how the noisemakers about rails scaling for GitHub have gone quite all of a sudden i.e Github being on the main rails branch.
anyways the future is decentralized - a developer from say Russia/ Ukraine (Crimea), Iran etc - wouldn't be able to access GitHub but surely they can access decentralized repos without the permission of not being from a forbidden country as if they're at fault for their country's ills.
dmix 1 days ago [-]
I was waiting for an AI company to do this. The opportunity to disrupt Github is very apparent right now.
kakugawa 1 days ago [-]
I believe Entire.io is also trying to build a Github replacement. (Not affiliated, but I use the Entire.io CLI and I find it useful.)
flyingjoe 7 hours ago [-]
When I click "Get Started" I get greeted with a Github Login button which is kind of ironic
pydry 1 days ago [-]
Although since vibe coding is Github's Achilles heel openai might not be quite the right company to exploit that.
1 days ago [-]
vb-8448 1 days ago [-]
What a timing!
I wonder if they were waiting for a major githut incident :D
jvwww 1 days ago [-]
You don't have to wait long for that to happen!
throwawaydfasjf 22 hours ago [-]
You need to link your github account to even open the thing. How is this a competitor?
throwaw12 5 hours ago [-]
I wonder how Gitlab slipped this obvious AI market opportunity, they had very good position in code self hosting used by so many enterprises.
just add repo-level agents, org-level agents and done. they could have got 50B valuation by now
Gitlab SaaS released features at a slow cadence as end user. Great big ball of mud prob from a dev pov. As an end user it worked but never saw new features released
ramoz 6 hours ago [-]
Physical custody of our work is going to be an important discussion for industry. ie where does your code live and how do you access it?
Every agent platform is moving toward you living with them, logging into them, working on their remote computers, only accessing your code and product artifacts with them. This is the caveat we will see with full push-to-cloud swing early on.
Maybe agentic no-code is the natural evolution but this push is happening too early and naively imo. It all feels wrong and I hope industry remains as dissatisfied with this type of lock-in as we’ve always been.
sajithdilshan 3 hours ago [-]
I really hope this would be a worthy opponent to Github. Microsoft needs a good competition to light a fire under their ass to pay more attention to Github.
mawadev 3 hours ago [-]
This is actually pretty good! It is the perfect containment chamber
devdoshi 3 hours ago [-]
upvote for WAL + object storage (a very powerful combination I am finally seeing more adoption of) and a lot of interesting historical details.
I'm fortunate I don't rely on any forge for my solo work except for backups. In my personal stack I just have a log and content-addressed object kv storage, which can project to git if needed, or can be committed to git as files. And docker if I need isolation for CI/CD.
The most interesting alternative to me is atomic.dev (check their very informative blog posts) but I'll be keeping an eye on all of them.
Taikhoom10 5 hours ago [-]
I actually think the cursor acquisition will destroy value, unless completely left alone by Elon. Cursor's strength is its brand, and they should add more services, but should not integrate with Grok whatsoever.
No thanks. I want GitHub alternative, not Cursor with source control attached.
wateralien 4 hours ago [-]
The main thing that makes GitHub the default is that almost every other service considers it the default. Launching a better product won't change that.
nerdypepper 1 days ago [-]
is there a way to browse a repository on origin without a cursor account? are all repos private? how is this a github alternative if so?
tomasreimers 1 days ago [-]
Currently Origin repositories are private to members of a Cursor team. Over time we plan to expand access, but wanted to start with a limited beta of the underlying git tech.
bakies 6 hours ago [-]
just like twitter, can't do shit without an account, lame and I won't even look at this product, cya.
6 hours ago [-]
bhanu786 6 hours ago [-]
In my opinion, they should focus on code quality and how they can compete better than other IDEs. These things can be done by extensions on Antigravity.
I personally made one of the extensions called 'Wekraft' currently has 1.1K downloads.
What is your favourite IDE?
gigatexal 38 minutes ago [-]
Hmmmm not sure I want to put my code in Elon’s hands. I’d rather let super flakey Microsoft/Github have it, still. That man and his companies need less influence and he needs less control not more of jt.
muhammadusman 4 hours ago [-]
Due to the recent Github outages, I've slowly started moving to Gitlab, they've been around longer and seem to have a decent track record.
mcny 7 hours ago [-]
> You must have a valid mobile phone number to sign up. SMS charges may apply.
adeelk93 7 hours ago [-]
Reduces barrier of entry for mass AI spam, so I’m for it
shimman 6 hours ago [-]
As we all know spam text messages aren't a thing since it's very costly and hard to spoof cell phone numbers.
tredre3 3 hours ago [-]
Those kind of SMS check usually ban voip providers. So you need a real line or a prepaid cellphone, and it can presumably only be used once or twice on this service before the number is "burned".
Such checks, although not perfect, do prevent a huge amount of spam and bots by having a very real cost for bots/spammers, and essentially no cost (other than their privacy) for the user.
qainsights 4 hours ago [-]
It is not a GH alternative, unless it is available for everyone with unlimited private and public repos. :)
6 hours ago [-]
c0decracker 3 hours ago [-]
Will they train on all the code hosted there? :)
faramarz 3 hours ago [-]
ahh so thats the game plan: train codebases even if they are not written in or by by Cursor agents.
tensor 6 hours ago [-]
Today, SpaceX launches Origin. Tomorrow, as people complain about bugs and missing features "We're not a software company, we plan to build a solar forge around Jupiter and just generate all the possible source codes in the universe, so we're no longer focusing on Origin because it's an outdated concept."
dhruv3006 6 hours ago [-]
How will you ever make up for the network effect that GitHub has?
13415 3 hours ago [-]
They couldn't even pay me to use that product.
hebetude 1 days ago [-]
Git can be hosted over ssh or filesystem. I moved to self hosting git. Now it’s always up, go figure!
Degorath 11 hours ago [-]
Does it support jujutsu natively?
tomasreimers 8 hours ago [-]
We are very interested in this. If anyone can put us in touch with the JJ maintainers we would love to chat!
Degorath 4 hours ago [-]
Unfortunately I wouldn't know how to do that.
But just saying that I would probably argue against any new forge at my workplace if it didn't adopt the jujutsu model for changes.
While agents can wrangle git better than 90% of developers, jujutsu just works much better for both.
smcleod 3 hours ago [-]
Musk is one of the last people I'd trust to centralise all my code with.
crudgen 6 hours ago [-]
I would only host worthless stuff there
guywithahat 1 days ago [-]
This is very cool but there's no way they won't train on your private repos, in a way that github has been pleasantly respectful of. I have issues with github, but the recent uptime issues are more related to people uploading way more code due to AI than some sort of mismanagement.
owebmaster 21 hours ago [-]
First attempt, they stole the code from customers. Now they will try to ask people to voluntarily give them code.
It's funny that they are trying to replace GitHub by the part that already has multiple alternatives tho. This will fail without a doubt.
exe34 3 hours ago [-]
Has GitHub made it harder for them to scrape to train on?
artooro 1 days ago [-]
This is a good start. You can connect it to 3rd party apps to do CI Runners, etc.
Hoping it develops quickly and becomes more fleshed out.
The main limitation right now is that to share the code with anyone outside your Cursor organization, you need to sync it with GitHub.
poilcn 6 hours ago [-]
I was annoyed seeing unskippable "ad" within Cursor about it. Looked like a huge banner "give us control over all your code" with only one visible button to consent
thebitguru 24 hours ago [-]
Vibe coders rejoice! Vibe coding is even easier now =)
Jokes aside, this is a smart move by Cursor. As you can probably tell by the comments here, it's not for the experienced developers, but it will be a natural choice for vibe coders.
genxy 3 hours ago [-]
So first they steal the source code in bulk, and now they are like fuck it, just send us your source code? Musk does indeed play 1d checkers.
xyst 3 hours ago [-]
No thanks. I’ll stick to self hosted forgejo.
timetraveller26 4 hours ago [-]
It sure worked for Meta's Threads
timetraveller26 4 hours ago [-]
Such an insult to vibe code a new github and then expect developers to handle code to them so they can train on it.
dude250711 3 hours ago [-]
Who trains on post-2022 code?
LeBit 2 hours ago [-]
A Musk controlled company to look at my private repos?
Let me thing about it.
No.
drivingmenuts 1 days ago [-]
This completely fails to address one of the issues that people have with Github, which is the use of AI, whether you like it or not.
ChrisArchitect 1 days ago [-]
Been waiting ages for them to post any kind of non-comingsoon page about this thing. Wonder if they pushed up the launch based on the earlier GitHub outage buzz.
b112 6 hours ago [-]
It's so strange. Sad even. Microsoft has never been the most competent, but the fact that people are just incapable of stabalizing github is just bizarre.
At a certain point, just working there will become a death knell for anyone's career. And it certainly must be getting harder to hire good people. The spiral will be relentless, and I see no work to stop it.
Sad.
swah 5 hours ago [-]
No free tier, surprised..
mrorigo 4 hours ago [-]
GitHub sync = defeat?
Jare 5 hours ago [-]
If by now you're willing to make EM the guardian of your code, nothing I can say would dissuade you.
newspaper1 7 hours ago [-]
This was posted yesterday and now it’s being reposted and all of the old comments have had their timestamps reset. What gives mods? Did Musk request this?
romanovcode 7 hours ago [-]
Tried to register:
> Access blocked, please contact support.
No link to contact support, on help page no way to contact the actual support. Classic Musk tech.
tintor 4 hours ago [-]
Not sharing my private git repos with Elon Musk owned company.
mjhay 6 hours ago [-]
I was just thinking how I wished GitHub was part of a csam generation company owned by a Nazi. This sounds great!
DrBenCarson 6 hours ago [-]
If you're willing to trust them with all your source code...kudos, I really wish I had your level of trust and delusion
dude250711 3 hours ago [-]
Vibe-slop needs protecting?
DrBenCarson 2 hours ago [-]
Ask sama
slowin 1 days ago [-]
I would never host my code with Elon Musk. I've also moved on from using Cursor to Claude Code/Codex. GitHub has problems, but this is likely (and hopefully) DOA.
throw1234567891 6 hours ago [-]
Never going to sign up based on the association to Elon Musk.
pianopatrick 23 hours ago [-]
now that software is easy to make and github has problems, how many "git as a service" offerings will there be?
My guess is there will be at least dozens if not hundreds.
sidibe 15 hours ago [-]
Never going to try it, sorry for anyone at cursor who was excited about what they were working on.
geogra4 6 hours ago [-]
Man, I was disappointed - hoped this used something like darcs under the hood
croes 1 days ago [-]
How about an original and distinguishable name?
Then again, what did I expect from a company named cursor.
figassis 18 hours ago [-]
Why not evaluate them on the merits? Is the name really the thing that’s important here?
“GitHub has so many outages, but dammit, that other one has a terrible name, it’s practically unusable”.
And origin is a pretty great name to give a git hosting platform. And do you think GitHub, Gitlab are original?
maherbeg 1 days ago [-]
This is a great name! It ties back to git nicely (git pull origin/main), and sounds human.
Cursor was also a great name given that it evolved into an advanced AI assisted auto complete. I think their team does a solid job with naming.
croes 1 days ago [-]
Then google the names and look what comes up.
Without additional search terms you get the wrong results.
A word that is already used in computer is a bad name.
And with AI it won’t get better.
Ambiguity is a source of confusion and mistakes.
By your logic pull/push/main are also great names.
One main purpose of a name is distinguishability.
treexs 1 days ago [-]
If you google Cursor they dominate the whole first page
Surely they have a chance of doing it again with Origin
skeledrew 19 hours ago [-]
> Without additional search terms you get the wrong results.
Until the entity becomes popular enough, like I just searched for "stripe" and all visible results were about the payment company.
gjvc 6 hours ago [-]
and to think we let phabricator wither on the vine...
zuzululu 6 hours ago [-]
which fanless "mini pc" can run a github clone on my local network? ideally proxmox support so i can use it as a mini lab for other things
nordcode 15 hours ago [-]
How do you think does Microsoft start to do some thing better? At least cut slop form windows or put more effort in gh?
jimt1234 2 hours ago [-]
Is it just me or is this thing just a poor man's version of GitHub?
smrtinsert 6 hours ago [-]
There is no way I'm giving my codebase to Elon. I don't care if its a petclinic scaffold in java 1.0, absolutely 0 chance of me using this.
haunter 1 days ago [-]
Host your code with Elon Musk, what could go wrong
operatingthetan 1 days ago [-]
True, but people risk their lives by using his vehicles every day, why not YOLO their code too?
trollbridge 5 hours ago [-]
Ah, another post about Cursor.
About half of the comments will be generic criticisms of Twitter, SpaceX, etc. for things that may or may not have happened, or personal complaints about Elon Musk.
misiti3780 4 hours ago [-]
exhausting to watch!
nakas1 6 hours ago [-]
if its another place that offers free computer through their version of GitHub Actions I;d call it a win.
semiinfinitely 5 hours ago [-]
thanks I hate it
Rover222 1 hours ago [-]
Kind of confusing people won't use this because they don't trust Musk, but has any other major platform even tried to open source their algorithms the way he has with X?
I get hating his politics, and his predictions are often behind schedule, but he certainly says what he thinks and isn't in some shady user data markting business like zuckerberg.
Anyone who trusts Altman over Musk is... I don't know. Give me the autist over the sociopath when it comes to handling my data.
rvz 1 days ago [-]
Let's see how strong GitHub's network effect really is.
While the real solution is to actually self-host as I said before [0], it is worth testing to see how much can GitHub's users tolerate the endless outages and unreliability and where they go next.
We'll see if they want Cursor Origin or the declining GitHub.
> We'll see if they want Cursor Origin or the declining GitHub.
I don't want either tbh. There's plenty of open source alternatives. If there's anyone I trust less than Microsoft, it's Elon Musk.
verdverm 1 days ago [-]
We are more likely to find out the anti-network effect of Elon
There are many people who will not touch this and look down upon those that do. Ethics and morals still seem to have some weight
brunoborges 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
manasharit 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
throwaway613746 1 days ago [-]
Does this have stacked PRs? Cursor acquired Graphite a while back and stacked PRs were a killer feature.
ignaciovdk 7 hours ago [-]
I don't know, my gut says that this is going to end in a bad way. I signed up, I think but wasn't sure if I needed to buy Cursor, or Origin came with a subscription, so confused.
[1] https://radicle.dev/
[2] https://radicle.network/nodes/seed.radicle.dev/rad%3Az3gqcJU...
[3] https://forgejo.org/
[4] https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/m...
What makes Github special is the ecosystem and integrations. Sentry, Linear, and so many other tools have special UX around Github. You need centralization (or at the very least, a standard) for that.
It sucks to see Github's fall from grace, but I just can't bring myself to use a service like this under the custody of SpaceX. I've been saying this for a while, but I really wish Linear would swoop in and become the unified platform for software development.
Agreed. It's like going from bad to worse. Not to mention, Origin doesn't even support actions. They are doing the easiest part of git hosting and no mention of anything that actually makes Github what it is. What Origin is offering is literally a weekend project, and anything having to do with Elon is arguably one of the least trustworthy organizations in whatever industry he chooses to participate in. No, thank you.
This is going nowhere. GitLab is the cautionary tale. Massive funding, nine figures of ARR, years of losses, and most of the revenue comes from self-managed enterprise licenses rather than the SaaS. If the best-funded attempt lands there, I don't see how this one goes anywhere when they have not even a minimum viable product and reputational issues right out of the gate.
Gitlab as a product is miles ahead of GitHub at this point. (Except at the point of scaling very large repositories I gather.) There is just very little money in saas beside the bespoke enterprise contracts.
I’m not sure how revenue between GitHub and Gitlab compared before the Microsoft acquisition and now but GitHub has always leaned on being the popular tool with the network.
https://tangled.org
Like a specification[^0], which is exactly what ActivityPub is and what federation in Forgejo is built around?
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActivityPub
I'm sure that sentry and co could spend a few bucks and commit a KPI in one of their upcoming quarters to figure out the activity pub spec and support integrating with it if their hearts desired. It's a chicken egg problem and we all know chickens exist. It's clear that the centralized model is getting left behind, especially as the EU is moving away from US services and they continue to invest in open source, European-based alternatives like Codeberg and Forgejo.
Yes, Sentry or whoever else could build a Codeberg integration, or a Forgejo one, or a Gitlab one. But these would all be bespoke. There is no standard. So the one with the biggest market share ends up with the most integrations. This is where we are today.
I'm all for open standards. But I don't even know of a proposal for such a standard.
Sure, with AI tooling, you can vibe code your own browser extensions or other integrations in some cases. But for a lot of platforms, that just won't cut it. That's before we even get into the maintenance burden of that.
One great thing about the rise of AI is that now it's super easy to make and maintain integrations. This is a place where AI coding uniquely shines due to the points being well defined and mostly quite standard.
This is going to hurt the monopoly power of software companies. But it'll be great for allowing the proliferation of smaller companies, open source, and home grown solutions.
I'm already seeing the pendulum swinging back to local first instead of cloud services.
A lot of SaaS companies change their API in subtle ways throughout the months probably too rapidly. GraphQL schema changes, splitting apart one api endpoint into 2, changes to authentication method required. A thousand little cuts.
This used to be my biggest time waster. Now it's barely on my radar. Life changing for me. I guess your mileage may vary.
Concurrently, the writing is on the wall for us SaaS product providers - lower margins, and more competition for the same reasons. I welcome it. More quality and choice at a better price for everyone.
I think people often forget that GitHub is really more akin to a social network than it is a software development tool.
By that I mean the stuff that makes GitHub great is all the same stuff that originally made social networks exciting (back before the algorithm was tuned into a horrifying cycle of negativity).
We have a standard! It’s this great decentralized VCS called git. For most of the stuff integrations do, they’re just showing code or commits — both of which are readily available in a copy of the repo.
Probably the one thing that’s missing is a standardized webhook system so that your git repo storage could tell integrations when stuff changes. Though even that isn’t strictly necessary if the integrations keep a copy of the repo up to date.
In my opinion, Git is holding software development back. Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.
But that doesn’t mean we should have single centralized tool that does everything.
I’d posit there’s no big loss if you broke these things up and each had their own copy the repo (if needed):
- CI/CD
- issues
- code review/pull requests
- release artifact distribution
- discovery+social credit for open source
You could host your repo on any dumb storage somewhere that speaks git+ssh or git+https and each tool could pull from there.
I'm working on git-inspired VCS based on syntax tree nodes stored in prolly trees. Might that be enough? I've not 100% locked down the format yet, but tentatively it looks like this: https://gist.github.com/conartist6/7dd40697140965ee343de93b9...
And then, 5 years later, we are back at square one when everybody uses Linear and they start going the fate of GitHub. Self-hostable, standardized alternatives are the only real sustainable solution.
With some wizardry applied, I effectively have an "Excel for worktrees", a very productive and low-friction environment. https://replicated.live/blog/crdt
How about neither?
Man I wish we stuck with Subversion at this point.
I guess I personally wouldn't categorize it as a "mess" and the conversations I read about it here make me think I'm using an entirely different product than everyone else.
I use it quite a lot and the first time I actually witnessed downtime myself was yesterday.
github for large project that rely on CI tool is a nightmare (cost, downtime, etc.)
I'm guessing you dont know about the github actions bug that was running and endless loop consuming 100% cpu costing orgs insane amounts of money that they didn't fix for 3 years.
It also shows there’s a fundamental problem with their architecture or their development pattern to have these sorts of issues so frequently.
Migrating to different cloud vendors, while difficult, is something that people have done many times before. There's only finite number of incongruences that appear when moving cloud vendors. It's rather difficult to explain the ongoing problems several years after the fact.
Anyone that's worked at a startup knows that one of the best things about it is reflecting on all of the asinine, if not genuinely stupid policies of your previous employer so as not to repeat them. Without any insider knowledge, the practices and procedures GitHub had prior to acquisition probably look nothing like those post-acquisition.
I use GitHub a lot and it does what I need well enough, but I wouldn't spend money on the level of service or performance it generally delivers.
What github is good for is discovery, getting contributions on open source projects (because it's so popular), and integrations. If you wanted to, you could host your open source project on Forgejo and use github as a mirror just to benefit from the visibility and get contributions.
/s
Among many other things he has openly suggested that the EU should be abolished and national sovereignties restored and donated to parties that tow that line.
So there is more to lose than just the service being unreliable.
As I recall, in GHE I remember finding that you could even turn off the repo's wiki at that point and then reset it to point to your docs/wiki/ folder and still have the Wiki interface but pointing it to a branch in the same repository. That was a while ago and I don't know if it is still supported in GHE. I also remember it was work managing that wiki branch because Wikis didn't directly support PR workflows if you have branch protection policies. Also from the documentation it doesn't look like it is supported in Public GitHub right now, which seems a shame to me, as someone who likes all documentation in the same repo as the source. I haven't needed Wikis in public GitHub much, so I haven't tried to do anything like point them to a main repo branch.
I'm not a big fan of Github right now either but I wouldn't consider this alternative due to its ownership chain.
I guess the joke is "come to Origin, your code is already there".
Happy to answer any questions about Origin or source control in general!
I think every product in this space should have to clear a very high bar for trust rather than making it a race to the bottom with whataboutisms.
Honestly, that does not look too good for you or the offering - and this is coming from someone that just chose Cursor over Claude Code a week ago.
Knowing things like: Will my code end up in Grok? What ownership do I have of my content, etc... matter.
Are there any fundamental differences, ie ways of working that solve the worktrees problem?
We wanted to release a beta so people could start experimenting with our scalability and extensibility themselves. Over the next few weeks, you can expect a handful of features starting to change source control to better understand and work with agents.
I have a lot of dev tooling which assumes code is stored on public GitHub and/or GitHubEnterprise. This produces some degree of lock-in, in that all that code would have to be rewritten to migrate to something else. (Yes, AIs can help, but they still don't make migration effortless.)
The major Git hosters tend to implement roughly the same concepts, albeit with lots of little variations. It would be great if there were some sort of standardised API everyone implemented. In the absence of that, it makes sense for people to emulate the incumbent's APIs as a de facto standard, just like how other vendors copy OpenAI's APIs for talking to LLMs.
1. SpaceXAI has shown no track record of being able to maintain uptime
2. By nature, any GitHub alternative is going to be a tiny fraction of the scale, so keeping it up should be expected
Once Azure's massive spend is online things will slowly get better.
They planned to be fully off AWS in 2027 but they're continuing to ramp usage.
Azure doesn't scale.
I'd never put my data on anything owned by Musk. Period. I'd take lower availability from GitHub or a worse alternative (feature-wise) than move Origin.
It will eventually have the same uptime issues as GH (or worse) with less ability to provide stable fixes.
Over the next few weeks you can expect a lot more from us on integrations with agents, understanding agent-written code (without having to read through all of the code), and automatically getting your PRs to a mergable state. Stay tuned :)
So, I guess, do you have any illusions of attracting international customers who aren't online edgelords?
this could be helpful on larger cross platform products/repos (maybe too overfitted on my use case, since i am working across multiple devices (ssh works but the repo code sync is a bit of an overhead with multiple agents and devices that could be better))
xAI was caught uploading any repo their coding agent touched to their storage only last month. This isn’t about Musk’s ideology: it’s about his trustworthiness. He sincerely believes he’s the only person who can save the world and that allows him to justify an awful lot of moral lapses.
They acknowledged that it happened, fixed the bug that caused it, deleted all data that was uploaded.
I still don’t trust the company that made the decisions that led to that code being shipped in the first place.
Cursor/xAI was making a full copy of every repo it ever touched within the last month, and when caught, just acted like that was an accident. A system to download every repo you touch, and then upload it to persistent cloud storage, doesn't just happen by accident.
> "hey can you push to origin main?"
now has two separate meanings.
A LLM may inadvertently push your code to a new provider without you knowing. It's walking a thin line between genius-growth-move and domain typosquatting.
You get:
It's built on ATProto, so even if the company disappears, all of the integration and features will still work for anyone that wants to run their own AppView (that is open-source), an AppView is basically the UI/Network-wide Data Aggregator for ATProto appsBut after looking a bit more into it, they are still following the same model as Bluesky in that the author of an issue or comment or PR is the owner of the resource, and it lives on their PDS, but they are considering changing that (and I hope they do it soon) by having the record be created on the repo PDS (so the knot basically) and a pointer record on the user's PDS proving they are the author.
ATProto has all that's required to do so, so I hope they do it soon, they are still in alpha after all but I find the interoperability very promising because you can have independent code hosting regardless of the opinions of forge X (which I think is the main reason why people move away from GitHub), but still be a part of an interoperable ecosystem that acts just like it is a single platform.
fwiw, the main site also seems to be down right now, infinite spinner. Docs and blog are loading though
Tangled CEO here. How are we pushing Rust exactly? :D Nix, yes but you don't really need to touch it at all with our Alpine-based CI images.
We have been under heavy load the past day or so, we're working round the clock to scale!
Since you are here, do you have any updates about the issue of issues and PRs living in the author's PDSs and not on the knot ? (Which also acts as the repository's PDS if I am not mistaken)
GitHub is saying the same thing
re: pushing, when I looked many months ago, it looked very much like the rust/nix/jj club, who are on average very opinionated about "good" tech choices and try to shoehorn others into using them. It's a culture I'm not interested in being around
downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there
Your GitHub Enterprise comparison is wrong, because with an onprem github entreprise you don't have the social github features (and that's the whole point of tangled, use something else if you want a private forge for your company, it's not for this purpose)
My point is, Tangled being on ATProto, you can still access all of the repos, PRs and issues of other people by looking through your self-hosted appview even if the official appview is down, because an appview, is just that, an "app *view*" It's the view layer in your traditional app, and ATProto is the database.
It's a view of the data on the ATProto network, it is not the data holder, everyone can be their own data holder that is visible through any appview.
> downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there
Yes, I agree, but I personally think tangled is great because of the interoperability
People on codeberg, on gitlab, on github, on self-hosted gitea instances, on self hosted gitlab instances, and so on, all control their issues, PRs, and git repos (they run on their own infra) but they are also more independent, are not subject to a central platform's policies (or are subject to the one they prefer) and so on, and they also introduce contributor friction, you need separate accounts, it can be difficult to cross reference issues and PRs accross projects on different forges, users can't easily have a central feed of project they starred.
On tangled you get to have the first part (freedom) while not having the second downside (unique account, cross-references work seamlessly, etc...)
Give me reasons open source projects moved forges away from github, and I am pretty sure if tangled did exist when they did so it would fit more boxes of "why they left" than their target forge.
tangled will struggle to have private repos that align with user expectations for RBAC, atproto ACL permission proposal is insufficient, Bluesky is not interested in alternative proposals, the centralization of atproto is most prominant in who has write permissions to the repos
I am just thinking you do not like tangled because you don't use the social features of github and so don't see the point here. I can understand that, but then tangled is just not for you ?
And yeah ATProto is not the next thing, but IMO having a portable identity and services that can act as "one big single app" are requirements for a modern social protocol to do applications like Twitter,Instagram, and github's social features for example, ATProto is just the one that does it better imo for now.
But again since you are always bringing on private repos, I think tangled is just not for you since the ATProto model is for open data and so fits open source projects really nicely I think.
you are incorrect and this is why it's advised not to project the answer but ask a question instead
for clarity, I do in fact use github's social features
I also believe that the idea around the atmosphere that the point of atproto is to have open data is completely misaligned with how most of society wants their data handled, this is based on my talking to people IRL, outside of the echo chambers of social media, what's actually happening is more and more people signing off because of toxicity
open source and small devs do not pay the bills, github is financially sustainable because they have enterprise clients, same for gitlab and bitbucket
This isn't entirely true because we're working on our own extensions to the protocol that will enable full-fledged RBAC at a knot/repo level. We're not beholden to PBC and AT Protocol; when needed, we're OK to roll custom bits.
what I hear is another path to app centralization, regardless of your intent, this is what comes out of custom extensions to a protocol
bluesky should have actually been open about the permissioned design process, posting your own proposal to a blog and not entertaining other proposals, or even joining the broader conversation that was happening, is not open in my book
I don't understand how it forces you to engage with Rust. It happens to be written in Rust but that shouldn't be a major consideration for a user
If you want to build an alternative Knot implementation (git Hosting) you can use anything as long as the API is compatible ?
Same for all of the parts of Tangled really
Also, even if it's down, unlike GitHub you can self host your own AppView so it's never down for you
Self hosted servers go down too and why people have picked hosted solutions like GitHub, Bitbucket, and GitLab
atproto is a red flag for me now, toxic leaders at bluesky, who effectively control the protocol, it's not really open for others to have a say in what it looks like
you also don't have private repos and you will need to have centralized app view permission addons to have parity with user expectations, given the weak permissioned data proposal bluesky chose (their own proposal that works for what they need)
But the website uses 100% CPU. And this is a beta for paid plans, not a GitHub alternative.
* That is, if a lab like Deepseek doesn't release a "good enough" model for the cost of electricity + a thin margin. Then all AI company lose and all consumers win.
Why? I mean, if you assume that the moment some threshold of intelligence is reached it will suddenly explode and self-improve at a pace no one would be able to ever catch up with, then yes probably only one can win. But I think it’s more sci-fi than reality which is often more nuanced and boring.
Right now there are many providers providing different tradeoffs, for different usages.
Would "winning" mean releasing an all-purpose better model that will outperform every other companies for all kind of tasks ? Something like AGI but cost effective ?
Or is it winning the consumer-side AI race ? Like making a kind of "super personal AI assistant" the likes you would see in movies and TVs ?
I'm not arguing, I am just struggling to understand what it usually means when somebody says that, it's not like competitors will go bankrupt the second OpenAI/Anthropic/Whatever does something specific.
Creating a world-ruling AGI which feels mild sympathy for its creators, sharing some table scraps with them. Not sure if /s...
This already exists, in several tiers, depending on what you can afford to run (in terms of VRAM).
Deepseek V Flash 0731 is already good enough for many things.
Mercedes has a ~5% profit margin on this revenue.
SaaS, even AI SaaS is expected to have much higher profit margins at scale.
And on top of that, Mercedes shrunk by 10% revenue over the last year, rather than growing, which makes sense because they missed EVs and are now managing decline and returning money to shareholders.
Inflated valuation of buyout, based on inflated valuation of SpaceX
All your codebases are belong to us.
however, there is a practicality issue too. Avoiding all untrustworthy software would have you end up living in a shack in the woods foraging for food.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/08/15/woman-a...
https://katv.com/news/local/prominent-arkansas-photographer-...
> her stepfather used the Grok chatbot to transform a childhood photo into child sexual abuse material
He could have used Stable Diffusion. Or, if this was the 90s, Photoshop.
By your argument, we’d have to abolish the internet, or add nanny filters to everything.
How many people on HN resent it when Claude refuses an instruction? And yet here you are, arguing against personal responsibility and for a when-in-doubt-block approach to technology. Is it because it’s Musk?
By your logic cops should be focused on the junkies, forget about the cartel
You can go to the beach or (I assume) search on Google and find people of any age wearing bikinis. And that's fine because to normal people (not pedos) it's not something sexual.
I understand that someone specifically editing a minor into less clothing is probably a pedo. Probably the same way someone generating feet gets aroused with that stuff. But that doesn't mean a model generating feet is problematic.
I do think making the model reject the bikini thing is a good idea once you find out it's happening, but let's not pretend it's the same as the model generating actual sexual content.
If you can see entire version histories of how code is generated, what bugs occur, what fixes are made and how they're implemented, you have the entire human and machine coding feedback loop to learn from.
There's a lot of space to innovate around collaboration and version control in the age of agentic workflows.
https://codeberg.org/
also crazy how the noisemakers about rails scaling for GitHub have gone quite all of a sudden i.e Github being on the main rails branch.
anyways the future is decentralized - a developer from say Russia/ Ukraine (Crimea), Iran etc - wouldn't be able to access GitHub but surely they can access decentralized repos without the permission of not being from a forbidden country as if they're at fault for their country's ills.
I wonder if they were waiting for a major githut incident :D
just add repo-level agents, org-level agents and done. they could have got 50B valuation by now
Every agent platform is moving toward you living with them, logging into them, working on their remote computers, only accessing your code and product artifacts with them. This is the caveat we will see with full push-to-cloud swing early on.
Maybe agentic no-code is the natural evolution but this push is happening too early and naively imo. It all feels wrong and I hope industry remains as dissatisfied with this type of lock-in as we’ve always been.
I'm fortunate I don't rely on any forge for my solo work except for backups. In my personal stack I just have a log and content-addressed object kv storage, which can project to git if needed, or can be committed to git as files. And docker if I need isolation for CI/CD.
The most interesting alternative to me is atomic.dev (check their very informative blog posts) but I'll be keeping an eye on all of them.
https://s-1.vercel.app/
No thanks. I want GitHub alternative, not Cursor with source control attached.
Such checks, although not perfect, do prevent a huge amount of spam and bots by having a very real cost for bots/spammers, and essentially no cost (other than their privacy) for the user.
But just saying that I would probably argue against any new forge at my workplace if it didn't adopt the jujutsu model for changes. While agents can wrangle git better than 90% of developers, jujutsu just works much better for both.
It's funny that they are trying to replace GitHub by the part that already has multiple alternatives tho. This will fail without a doubt.
The main limitation right now is that to share the code with anyone outside your Cursor organization, you need to sync it with GitHub.
Jokes aside, this is a smart move by Cursor. As you can probably tell by the comments here, it's not for the experienced developers, but it will be a natural choice for vibe coders.
Let me thing about it.
No.
At a certain point, just working there will become a death knell for anyone's career. And it certainly must be getting harder to hire good people. The spiral will be relentless, and I see no work to stop it.
Sad.
> Access blocked, please contact support.
No link to contact support, on help page no way to contact the actual support. Classic Musk tech.
My guess is there will be at least dozens if not hundreds.
Then again, what did I expect from a company named cursor.
“GitHub has so many outages, but dammit, that other one has a terrible name, it’s practically unusable”.
And origin is a pretty great name to give a git hosting platform. And do you think GitHub, Gitlab are original?
Cursor was also a great name given that it evolved into an advanced AI assisted auto complete. I think their team does a solid job with naming.
Without additional search terms you get the wrong results.
A word that is already used in computer is a bad name.
And with AI it won’t get better. Ambiguity is a source of confusion and mistakes.
By your logic pull/push/main are also great names.
One main purpose of a name is distinguishability.
Surely they have a chance of doing it again with Origin
Until the entity becomes popular enough, like I just searched for "stripe" and all visible results were about the payment company.
About half of the comments will be generic criticisms of Twitter, SpaceX, etc. for things that may or may not have happened, or personal complaints about Elon Musk.
I get hating his politics, and his predictions are often behind schedule, but he certainly says what he thinks and isn't in some shady user data markting business like zuckerberg.
Anyone who trusts Altman over Musk is... I don't know. Give me the autist over the sociopath when it comes to handling my data.
While the real solution is to actually self-host as I said before [0], it is worth testing to see how much can GitHub's users tolerate the endless outages and unreliability and where they go next.
We'll see if they want Cursor Origin or the declining GitHub.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49331922
I don't want either tbh. There's plenty of open source alternatives. If there's anyone I trust less than Microsoft, it's Elon Musk.
There are many people who will not touch this and look down upon those that do. Ethics and morals still seem to have some weight
For now Arc is staying in Github: https://github.com/Basekick-Labs/arc