• Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 year ago

    Also cybersecurity implications here. Nefarious actors can prop up their evildoings with fake stars and pose as legitimate projects.

    • aliser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      my first thought. I usually rely on stars for “trustworthiness” of random projects before running their code.

      • entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ironically an open source project with under 100 stars now seems more trustworthy by default because you can be sure they aren’t lying

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I almost commented something like “thats extremely overpriced, why dont you set up a raspberry pi to do it for you for free” and then i realized the people who could do that dont need fake stars.

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Automation. You replace the user with a script that does everything. Not that hard. Captchas dont really work anymore with ai, and you can pay people to do it for you for a fraction of a cent instead of the absurd prices listed.

  • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why would it be? Software is good based on it’s use and recommendations from real folk, not *s. Many project not on github

    • đź’­ ᴍɪɴʏᴀᴇɴ@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I’d argue that the project can be good and not widely used. Do you think that there are projects with real use case and are great open source software and not widely used because its buried under the *s?

      It could be a relatively inexpensive way for niche marketing. Especially if the developer has a payment option with the software. Probably a decent way to get the software out in the open for profitability, no?

      • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is more down to poor marketing. Here on Lemmy or reddit there are big open source communities where you can extol the values of it.

  • phar@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am not a programmer. But I have been using github as an end user for years, downloading programs I like and whatnot. Today I realized there are stars on github. Literally never even noticed.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The stars are more important when you’re a developer. It indicates interest in the project, and when it’s a library you might want to use that translates into how well maintained it might be and what level of official and unofficial support you might get from it.

      Other key things to look at are how often are they doing releases and committing changes, how long bugs are left open, if pull requests sit there forever without being merged in etc.

        • logging_strict@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s unfair. Throwing out FUD doesn’t make it true.

          Why be in a rush to judge? Might wanna watch some projects which have used this tactic.

          Might be legitimate projects are willing to do whatever to attract eye balls.

          Just for shiats and giggles, keep an open mind.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Closed PRs and Closed issues?

          What if it’s a side project with 1 star, 0 issues (because no one made any) and no PRs because no ones done work on it?

          • Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            More so if spme software had dozens or hundreds of open issues/PRs for months that never get looked at I’ll look elsewhere

            Don’t want unstable dependencies

  • RandomVideos
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Who would buy from the last service?

    Their prices are 5 times more expensive than the second most expensive service, their delay is the highest by far, and their minimum isnt even the smallest

  • toastal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Programming never needed these sorts of social media features in the first place. Do you part by getting your projects off of Microsoft’s social media platform used to try to sell you Copilot AI & take a cut of your donations to projects with Sponsors.

        • David J. Shourabi Porcel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Git is overrated.

          That’s interesting to read; I wasn’t even aware of the existence of Darcs — or any other alternative to git supposedly worth considering, for that matter. Would you elaborate on it?

          • toastal@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Pijul is also worth looking at.

            Fundamentally anything with a snapshot-based model is reliant on patch order mattering. As such you always end up with some centralized server. Pijul & Darcs are based on Patch Theory that says if Patch B is applied before or after Patch A assuming there is no conflict or dependence, it should not matter in a communicative way—that is to say the 1 + 2 ≡ 2 + 1. You can avoid a series of conflicts & better support a distibuted/decentralized development model if the order doesn’t matter.

  • Magnetic_dud@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why a real person would star a project? When I star a project then my GitHub home is littered with activity from that project. I hate that, so I never star anything

      • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think you’re joking, but if their accounts dont get banned immediately and the stars removed a week after you pay, then their stars are actually the bestest

  • geography082@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a clear situation in Foss( even more in self hosting) where projects are presented as free open source but they are intended to monetize at the end and use the community help for development.

      • David J. Shourabi Porcel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If I understand them correctly, @[email protected]’s point is not that it is wrong to monetize FOSS, but rather that companies increasingly develop open source projects for some time, benefiting from unpaid work in the form of contributions and, perhaps most importantly, starving other projects from both such contributions and funding, only to cynically change the license once they establish a position in their respective ecosystem and lock in enough customers. The last significant instance that I remember is Redis’ case, but there seem to be ever more.