Vouch

Another way to solve this is how Linux organizes. Tree structure where lower branches vet patches and forward them up when ready

Is this the return of Advogato?

We got social credit on GitHub before GTA 6.

Is this social credit?

Does is overlap with Contributor License Agreement?

Fortunately, as long as software is open sourced, forking will remain a viable way to escape overzealous gatekeeping.

> Who and how someone is vouched or denounced is left entirely up to the project integrating the system.

Feels like making a messaging app but "how messages are delivered and to whom is left to the user to implement".

I think "who and how someone is vouched" is like 99.99% of the problem and they haven't tried to solve it so it's hard to see how much value there is here. (And tbh I doubt you really can solve this problem in a way that doesn't suck.)

this wouldn't have helped against the xz attack

Wait until he finds out about GPG signing parties in the early 2000s.

Central karma database next, please. Vouch = upvote, denounce = downvote

Doesn't this just shift the same hard problem from code to people? It may seem easier to assess the "quality" of a person, but I think there are all sorts of complex social dynamics at play, plus far more change over time. Leave it to us nerds to try and solve a human problem with a technical solution...

this highlights the saddest thing about this whole generative ai thing. beforehand, there was opportunity to learn, deliver and prove oneself outside of classical social organization. now that's all going to go away and everyone is going to fall back on credentials and social standing. what an incredible shame for social mobility and those who for one reason or another don't fit in with traditional structures.

Replacing merit with social signaling.. ..sigh..

The enshitification of GitHub continues

This makes sense for large-scale and widely used projects such as Ghostty.

It also addresses the issue in tolerating unchecked or seemingly plausible slop PRs from outside contributors from ever getting merged in easily. By default, they are all untrusted.

Now this social issue has been made worse by vibe-coded PRs; and untrusted outside contributors should instead earn their access to be 'vouched' by the core maintainers rather than them allowing a wild west of slop PRs.

A great deal.

[dead]

Easy for the koreans to game this.

[dead]

Illegal in europe. You are bot allowed to keep a black list of people with the exception of some criminal situations or addiction.

However good (or bad) this idea may be, you are shooting yourself in the foot by announcing it on Twitter. Half the devs I know won’t touch that site with a ten foot pole.

Who trusts people who still use X?

Oh and one other thing I was curious about. Did Mitchell comment on why he wrote it in nushell? I've not really messed around with that myself yet.

Would people recommend it? I feel like I have such huge inertia for changing shells at this point that I've rarely seriously considered it.