> people will get fed up and register an account, and github can brag about how many new users they brought in

This makes no sense. The number of people who use GitHub code search but don’t already have a GitHub account is surely negligible

it's about having you logged in for the day.

logged in user ad impression is 8 to 12 usd. anonymous user is .01cent per thousands.

There are ads on GitHub?

I don’t see how that relates to my comment

I believe the previous poster means that there are people who have an account but aren't logged in all the time.

I honestly don’t understand why. On my computer I log in once and that’s it. They don’t automatically log you out. I haven’t logged into GitHub since setting up my computer.

NueJS: “It’s just HTML!”

The HTML: <button @click=“count++”> {count} </button>

Please read the whole sentence. It starts with: If React is “Just JavaScript, then...” React users often say that "It's just JavaScript" but then they write:

  return (
    <div>
      <h2>You clicked {count} times!</h2>
      <button onClick={() => setCount(count - 1)}>
        Decrement
      </button>
      <button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>
        Increment
      </button>
    </div>
  )

Nue is the opposite side of the same coin.

> If React is “Just JavaScript, then...”

React is just JavaScript. React+JSX is JSX. This:

  <button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>{count}</button>

Is sugar for:

  React.createElement('button', { onClick: () => setCount(count + 1) }, count)

True, the JSX version is most popular, but it's trivial syntax sugar with no "magic." This is different then Angular, Vue, Svelte, etc templates

isn't that just syntax sugar? I believe it compiles into (for some el function and safe string tag)

    return el("div", { children: [
      el("h2", { children: [safe`You clicked ${count} times!`]) },
      el("button", { onClick: () => setCount(count - 1), children: [safe`Decrement`] }),
      el("button", { onClick: () => setCount(count + 1), children: [safe`Increment`] })
    ]}); 

The "it's just javascript" part comes from having no hidden getters, setters or proxies littered in code that may or may not behave as how we expect, and not littering the html with react-specific attributes for iteration, events, etc

It surely is. React is a good pick for frontend engineers who prefer to use JavaScript or TypeScript. Nue is designed for UX engineers, who prefer a HTML- like syntax for defining the structure & layout.

Do people generally say React is “just JavaScript”? I’ve seen it said about Svelte, never React.

In any case, why market your framework with an equally poor comparison?

Yes people say that, and it is 100% true.

You can use all React features without any special tooling.

He’s not complaining about it missing the features he wants, he’s complaining about it missing features of the products it’s presenting itself as an alternative to

Peak HN is using an overly smart-sounding word like "orthogonal" instead of the clearly more appropriate "independent"

Thank you for the kindly-worded editorial. It is a meaningful contribution to the topic at hand.

I think you meant "separate".

Sourcegraph[1] does this better and has done for a couple of years now. I use it for this reason all the time.

[1] https://sourcegraph.com

Yes, just change the URL from https://github.com/foo/bar to https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/foo/bar to be dropped in to a code search for that GH repo.

As far as consumer interest goes, the problem with Web3 is it sells the means rather than the end. Nobody cares if your Twitter/Substack/Spotify Web3 alternative is decentralised or you own your own data on the platform. To win it has to be immediately useful and/or better than alternatives.

Content generation AI is so obviously useful to the majority of people and it does not require an understanding of how it works in order to be impressed by it.

Impressive for sure. Usefulness is still being explored (outside of a few early things like Copilot).

The majority of people are still interacting with this stuff primarily as a toy, and while it's a much, much smaller leap to imagine how you'd use it in everyday life vs. something like web3, most people aren't yet, and I don't think it's an absolute certainty that they will (or at the very least, how universally they will).

Chris Dixon has no business on this list. He is A16z's chief crypto shill on Twitter and blocks anyone who even remotely questions crypto/web3/blockchain.

To say he is more interested in decentralized technology than money is laughable given his complete inability to engage in any sort of healthy discussion about it. He is bad for the space.

The way PG talks about these companies on Twitter makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

Mighty https://twitter.com/search?q=mighty%20(from%3Apaulg)&src=typ...

Mighty so obviously had no idea who its customer was. Can't afford good hardware to run CPU/GPU-intensive browser apps? Why not spend $420 a year on a browser. Is it for enterprise or consumer? Who knows. He spoke of it like a once in a generation company [1] and the fact they spent 3.5 years working a product that never even launched goes against what I thought his philosophy was.

Replit - https://twitter.com/search?q=replit%20(from%3Apaulg)&src=typ...

Replit I feel suffers from the same problem and, possibly not coincidentally, PG talks about it the same way. Is it an IDE? Hosting platform? Education platform? How have they not found PMF after raising $100M over 8 years [2]? I feel like every time I see someone talk about the company on Twitter it's about them launching some brand new feature in a new area. On that, I also only ever see the same few people on Twitter chatting about it and have never encountered Replit in the wild. It's almost always Codepen, Codesandbox, JS Fiddle or Stackblitz.

It makes me seriously question PG's opinions on individual companies as his bias is so clear and it makes him appear so naive.

[1] https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1561473124389888000

[2] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/replit/company_finan...

Nobody uses email to discover new email addresses, outreach is direct. Discoverability is a massive part of social media platforms and is hindered by the isolated pod structure that Mastodon supports

Discoverability and onboarding and authentication is hard.

I remember the fluffy days of Facebook, where almost in an instant there was a wildfire of 'you might know' suggestions, from harvested addressbooks and cross referencing.

I found, and find discoverability hard on Twitter. My follow list rarely gets bumped and I am pretty clueless as to who and what is in it. I have to make an effort to grow the list.

Tweet reach may be massaged by favs, comments and retweets. Not totally sure how this is different in Mastodon.

Are we talking timeline/search promotion?

I remember email round robins pre Facebook and you did add people if you recognised them.

Directory services just got pulled as they were harvested by spammers. Not that I think this would help. You need some nudging.

If I read an article and the author had an easy lookupable and addable feed, I might note it.

> This made it difficult to work with separate hosts (www.my.app vs. api.my.app).

This is still possible with session cookies if you use wildcard origin cookies i.e. *.my.app

I know, contrived example. Think of www.google.com and googleapis.com. Or CORS issues. There are legitimate problems with cross-origin requests.

Yeah, those are issues at google's scale. Almost no one who uses them is even at half of google scale.