this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
390 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

84949 readers
5086 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mote@lemmy.ca 32 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The dichotomy here is you can't be famous hosting exploits on smaller forges. Gotta be on the big platforms where you can be starred and forked for social media cred to make news stories to impress your friends. IIRC I think HeartBleed (maybe ShellShock?) was the tip of this popularity iceberg...

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 14 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Does anyone care about stars?

Openclaw is the most starred repo in years (i wonder why) and is incredibly niche.

Stars are kind of a scam.

[–] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I do loosely use stars to gauge how popular a library/framework is before investing a lot of time in it, however, I do also use other metrics like PR count, issues, etc

[–] mote@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 hours ago

Stars are just someone's bookmark (me included) because there's no simple "bookmark this because I'll forget in an hour and want to look at it later when I have time." If one trusts Stars, you're literally trusting a bookmark that I didn't put more than 2 seconds of thought into clicking because I have a bad memory. Many I know do the same.

I go straight to code history, show me what the commits look like. One can derive a lot about the project based on just the way the commit messages are written before looking at the code being changed. How the code is changed over time (process, communication, methods, etc.) adds more layers to the qualitative observation. I move on to Issues when I want to see how the devs interact with the users having problems, which is another story.