5 ms·

Please point it out if I've missed it, but any list like this, of information that is changeable, should really have a publicly posted date of when the informat

Please point it out if I've missed it, but any list like this, of information that is changeable, should really have a publicly posted date of when the information was last confirmed.

easton 6y ago
Commit history could be used to figure it out: https://github.com/ripienaar/free-for-dev https://github.com/ripienaar/free-for-dev
- joshspankit 6y ago
  We need more of these as wikis, or GH repos that use robots to accept PRs. Tried it and it didn’t work? PR. Found a new one and it’s not on already? PR. Also, it would be a really nice bonus if “date added” was generated from the git commit that added the resource.
  - rovr138 6y ago
    That could be bad due to spam though Specially if you auto deploy it too
    - joshspankit 6y ago
      Some repos have already successfully used the vote method and that feels like a pretty solid defence.
  - pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
    > more of these as wikis, or GH repos The people who live on GitHub are unfortunately unable to recognize any distinction.
  - bombcar 6y ago
    The coupon sites do something like this - all you need is yes/no buttons.
- remram 6y ago
  That will only give you the date it was added, not the last time it was checked. Wikipedia does that through bot, adding an "accessed <date>" to external links. I supposed you could do the same here. You could even use Actions to generate a list of entries in need of checking (e.g. haven't been checked in 6 months).
  - anamexis 6y ago
    A bot can check that the link is not dead, but it can't check that the link still has the information claimed by the citation.
    - dwohnitmok 6y ago
      Sounds like a great experimental candidate for automation by something like GPT-3.
      - goldsteinq 6y ago
        GPT-3 is a text generator. How would you use it to check links?
        dwohnitmok 6y ago
        Text generation, when fed the data it needs, is a fully general task API. You would submit something like the following request to GPT-3. Wikipedia sentence: In 1735 a volcano on the island of Foobar erupted. Original article content: In the history of volcanic eruptions there have been many different notable eruptions. One occurred in the year 1601 on the island of Foobar. Another occurred 134 years later on the same island. Does the citation match: Yes. Wikipedia sentence: Bar Foobar was a prolific American poet. Original article content: In recent years, the number of athletes who have been added to the American Sports Hall of Fame has increased dramatically. In fact, the Sports Hall of Fame just added its 1000th new member, Bar Foobar, on June 15, 2014. Does the citation match: No. Wikipedia sentence: The leader of the Foolandian revolution was Bob Jones Sr. Original article content: The Foolandian revolution remains one of the hallmark events of the 20th century. It was spearheaded by Bob Jones Sr. who today has a Foolandian holiday named after him. Does the citation match: GPT-3 then fills in the last part (adding a Yes or No after "Does the citation match:") and you'd vary the final "Wikipedia sentence" and "Original article content." You'd probably flesh out the examples a little and add a few more of them, but that's the general idea. GPT-3 is very very good at delivering results in the right format (given this input, I would be very surprised if GPT-3 ever delivered something other than "Yes" or "No"). Whether it would be clever enough to do the matching well is a separate story, but I think it'd actually do a pretty good job since this is pretty up its alley.
justin_oaks 6y ago
Indeed. They rapidly go stale. Many of these lists are out-of-date by the time anyone finds them. Maybe it's different for services, but lists of software often list projects that aren't maintained. I've never found anything useful from any of these lists. What I do find useful is people on HN talking about what software/services they use.
- jldugger 6y ago
  In my experience this specific one is well maintained, via community contribution.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Please point it out if I've missed it, but any list like this, of information that is changeable, should really have a publicly posted date of when the information was last confirmed.

easton 6y ago

Commit history could be used to figure it out: https://github.com/ripienaar/free-for-dev https://github.com/ripienaar/free-for-dev

joshspankit 6y ago
We need more of these as wikis, or GH repos that use robots to accept PRs. Tried it and it didn’t work? PR. Found a new one and it’s not on already? PR. Also, it would be a really nice bonus if “date added” was generated from the git commit that added the resource.
- rovr138 6y ago
  That could be bad due to spam though Specially if you auto deploy it too
  - joshspankit 6y ago
    Some repos have already successfully used the vote method and that feels like a pretty solid defence.
- pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
  > more of these as wikis, or GH repos The people who live on GitHub are unfortunately unable to recognize any distinction.
- bombcar 6y ago
  The coupon sites do something like this - all you need is yes/no buttons.
remram 6y ago
That will only give you the date it was added, not the last time it was checked. Wikipedia does that through bot, adding an "accessed <date>" to external links. I supposed you could do the same here. You could even use Actions to generate a list of entries in need of checking (e.g. haven't been checked in 6 months).
- anamexis 6y ago
  A bot can check that the link is not dead, but it can't check that the link still has the information claimed by the citation.
  - dwohnitmok 6y ago
    Sounds like a great experimental candidate for automation by something like GPT-3.
    - goldsteinq 6y ago
      GPT-3 is a text generator. How would you use it to check links?
      - dwohnitmok 6y ago
        Text generation, when fed the data it needs, is a fully general task API. You would submit something like the following request to GPT-3. Wikipedia sentence: In 1735 a volcano on the island of Foobar erupted. Original article content: In the history of volcanic eruptions there have been many different notable eruptions. One occurred in the year 1601 on the island of Foobar. Another occurred 134 years later on the same island. Does the citation match: Yes. Wikipedia sentence: Bar Foobar was a prolific American poet. Original article content: In recent years, the number of athletes who have been added to the American Sports Hall of Fame has increased dramatically. In fact, the Sports Hall of Fame just added its 1000th new member, Bar Foobar, on June 15, 2014. Does the citation match: No. Wikipedia sentence: The leader of the Foolandian revolution was Bob Jones Sr. Original article content: The Foolandian revolution remains one of the hallmark events of the 20th century. It was spearheaded by Bob Jones Sr. who today has a Foolandian holiday named after him. Does the citation match: GPT-3 then fills in the last part (adding a Yes or No after "Does the citation match:") and you'd vary the final "Wikipedia sentence" and "Original article content." You'd probably flesh out the examples a little and add a few more of them, but that's the general idea. GPT-3 is very very good at delivering results in the right format (given this input, I would be very surprised if GPT-3 ever delivered something other than "Yes" or "No"). Whether it would be clever enough to do the matching well is a separate story, but I think it'd actually do a pretty good job since this is pretty up its alley.

justin_oaks 6y ago

Indeed. They rapidly go stale. Many of these lists are out-of-date by the time anyone finds them. Maybe it's different for services, but lists of software often list projects that aren't maintained. I've never found anything useful from any of these lists. What I do find useful is people on HN talking about what software/services they use.

jldugger 6y ago
In my experience this specific one is well maintained, via community contribution.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]