Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • 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.

    by dutchCourage
  • This is just a beta. And it will iterate rapidly. Not sure how something can let you down so easily at first contact.
    by sidcool
  • 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
    by elpakal
  • 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 :)
    by tomasreimers
  • My assumption is x.ai will be training on any code hosted here
    by s09dfhks
  • I think Source Hut has 0 ai features. Or time to start self hosting.
    by vips7L
  • What do you think github copilot is trained on?
    by sajithdilshan
  • Same for all other AI companies too.
    by nomilk
  • If AI is involved it's a big "no, thanks" from me. Simply takes the problem and moves it down the street.
    by VCFundedGenYer
  • Why?
    by sidcool
  • I feel like using a service like this that's owned by SpaceX (and, therefore, in close proximity to X / Musk / etc) would be even more of a supply chain risk than GitHub occasionally going down.
    by drusepth
  • 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.
    by colinrand
  • So GitHub too, then?
    by sidcool
  • So GitHub itself is a trustworthy agent and nothing to do with AI?
    by aldanor
  • Given Grok was just caught uploading whole codebases and sensitive .envs without permission, how can anyone possibly trust this?
    by dbbk
  • 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.
    by jjice
  • Could you imagine a CTO adopting this thing? They would have to be a complete moron. Yeah, let's standardize on this thing peddled by a lying crook that has fewer features than any of the alternatives. The only people who are going to use this are SpaceX, Tesla and a few developers who also use Grok.
    by jm4
  • I think we're not the target audience here. It's probably another type of vendor lock-in gamble, aiming for less tech-savvy folks, who rely on Cursor integrations, and to normalize the platform in their eyes.
    by xpct
  • "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.

    by real-hacker
  • 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.

    by 3182876
  • 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.
    by sajithdilshan
  • i just wish the bubble would pop already. I'm just so over ai.
    by frogperson
  • > Cursor is allegedly worth $60B

    Inflated valuation of buyout, based on inflated valuation of SpaceX

    by empath75
  • 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.

    by Eridrus
  • 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.

    by LaurensBER
  • 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.

    by jjcm
  • Well you see, there's this thing called an embedding and it sits inside a vector space and when attention is applied it disambiguates
    by halJordan
  • Yep. The same feeling )
    by melezhik
  • EA has also called its games platform Origin until last year when it was shuttered.
    by rzzzt
  • Hahaha, so true. this is going to be such a pain. Allocate time and context for fight with git :)
    by bicepjai