5 ms·
Initial commit was 24h ago, 363 stars, 20 forks already. Man, this goes fast.
by Gys 9mo ago
Initial commit was 24h ago, 363 stars, 20 forks already. Man, this goes fast.
- worldsavior 9mo agoCould be bots.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- directmusic 9mo agoDefinitely could be, but the dev has been posting updates on Twitter for a while now. It could be just some amount of hype they have built.
- alexpadula 9mo agoIt’s not, it’s just how hackernews works. You’ll see new projects hit 1k-10k stars in a matter of a day. You can have the best project, best article to you but if everyone else doesn’t think so it’ll always be at the bottom. Some luck involved too. Bots upvoting a post not organically I doubt is gonna live long on first page.
- worldsavior 9mo agoThe stars are on GitHub, they can come from somewhere else, e.g. the author himself buying stars.
- alexpadula 9mo agoThis is hella common. Companies have too much money to spend.
- Duendek86 9mo agoHi, I'm the developer's father. Trust me, he hasn't bought a single star in his life—not even in Super Mario :p
- Panzerschrek 9mo agoThat's not how it works. My publication with (subjectively) better language barely had a couple of comments and github stars.
- baranul 9mo agoBut, star buying for GitHub is a thing too. This is why you have to look at things like number of contributors, forks, watchers, and pull requests. Just a lot of stars, without the other positive indicators, can be an indication that the project is not so engaging as it might seem or its supposed popularity is fake.
- saidnooneever 9mo agoman has been posting a lot before the initial commit about his library. following the guy on linkedin.