back to article Geek darling GitHub nabs $100m investment

Software developers aren't always known as the most social of creatures, but the venture capital firm of Andreessen Horowitz is betting big that the social networking craze will be a cash cow even among hardcore geeks. The firm, which was cofounded by Marc Andreessen of Netscape fame, has sunk $100m into GitHub, the online …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. David Hicks

    Why look at a resume?

    Could it be that it's a bad idea to restrict your search to github when a fairly small minority of developers work on open source projects?

    FOSS devs are not a bad choice - the subject their code to public scrutiny and (if not employed as a FOSS dev) are dedicated enough to do this stuff in their spare time. But of the few hundred developers I've met, very few contributed to open source, even amongst the top end.

    I find this whole thing deeply weird actually, $100 million to a centralised source repository to create more of a social network, it's silly money. And if they bungle it at all then people will just move on to some other free service.

  2. Pete Spicer

    I find I really, really hate Github as a tool for software development. I'm not against version control, and I could probably grow to like Git over time but the way Github does stuff just irritates me (do we *really* need those animations between pages?)

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    To hell with a programmer's resume being his work on Github - if a long, long, long IRC session between two friends (one experienced and one not) trying to make it work is any indication, being conversant in using github at all is evidence of significant technical skill.

  4. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Real SMART Virtual Machine InfraStructure Creating New Orderly World AdVenturers is a Colossus ....

    .... of a Chicken/Egg* Conundrum for New World Order Players who would Aspire to be and/or Require Great Titanic Gamers to Succeed in Future Fed Feed Systems.

    "I find this whole thing deeply weird actually, $100 million to a centralised source repository to create more of a social network, it's silly money. And if they bungle it at all then people will just move on to some other free service." ..... David Hicks Posted Wednesday 11th July 2012 02:29 GMT

    David Hicks, Hi,

    Methinks you may have completely missed the future reality of the evolving GitHub node, or I am working on another completely different level to it :-) It is not being developed for people being social, but for virtual machines being constructively communicative ....... with the obvious intention/goal/AIMission to exercise predominant absolute overwhelming control over universal assets ..... with a remote virtualised and relatively anonymous command and control interface ........ which in GitHub's case would be its active beta programming community, with decentralised individual powers in open source betatesting programmers/programs controlling sublime direction and development of Combined Core Power Projects.

    Thus are wholly New and Surreal Virtual Power Cores with SMARTR AI DNA [DynamICQ Networking Authorisation aka and/or akin to NEUKlearer HyperRadioProActive IT ] Created Naturally and Energised Autonomously with Power and Control of Future Systems for Present Global Administrations with Executive Office Privileges and Facilities ........ SMARTR Abilities for Virtual Reality Generations/ITeRations.

    * Well, you tell me ..... Do New Orderly World/New World Order AdVenturers Create Real SMART Virtual Machine InfraStructure or vice versa. Although, just between you and me and the world and their dogs, does it matter not a jot really to them, or to you too.

    But GitHub is not alone in the field whenever Google are HyperRadioProActive too?......... Google Remakes Online Empire With ‘Colossus’

    There is no denying that they would have the necessary flash cash stash pile to do whatever they want, and that might so easily include their plausibly denying New World Order AdVenturer Capitalist Play with Sticky Sweet Chocolate Factories in Ab Fab Fabless Labs.

    1. David Hicks

      Re: .... uh.... whatever that was.

      I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here, but I feel privileged to have been a part of it.

      +1, total biscuit.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The same Andreessen

    who gave you facebook?

    Expect an over-optimistic IPO price.

  6. toadwarrior

    Your article is wrong because you will find lolcats on github. Github is full of overly immature "rockstar" developers who love dongs and lolcats and poorly wriiten JS.

    Being profitable obviously isn't enough and you can't really make it unless you sell out in hopes of making billions quickly. Github is nice but I don't think a place chock full of immature mongos is worth 100 million.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    As per title, I prefer Bitbucket myself. Unlike Github it allows you to keep unlimited projects private on a freebie account —as opposed to Github's "make it public or pay" policy. Handy if you're just learning stuff or experimenting and don't want your shoddy code exposed for all to see. Bitbucket also offers the choice of Git or Mercurial as your version-twiddling software.

    No personal axe to grind. I just discovered Bitbucket after looking around for a better alternative to Github's freebie accounts.

    1. batfastad

      Re: Bitbucket

      Yep, me too. Github seems expensive if you're just working on open source stuff in your spare time and need private repos. I have a Github account mainly to watch and be notified about other projects. But I do all my development on Bitbucket which lets me keep my code private until it's at a stage where I'm ready to go public.

      If github let you choose whether your 5 free repos were public or private then I would probably use it more.

  8. Arrrggghh-otron

    Wait, what?

    "By orienting around people rather than repositories, GitHub has become the de facto social network for programmers,"

    Ignoring the issues that github has (as do, it seems, all other version control systems), have I missed something? I've not seen any features that look even vaguely like 'social media' in GitHub <loads client to check>, nope, nothing in there that looks anything like a social network except that you can add a photo to your account name that shows up with your commits.

    Why would you want to be constantly distracted by the inane chatter that makes up 99% of social media when you are concentrating on software issues/builds/commits?

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Wait, what?

      Maybe such features are just around the corner? Poke me, you know you want to.

      Personally I much prefer Bitbucket's T&C's over GitHub's, especially about indemnification. And I don't have to use git there but I could if I wanted to.

      1. Arrrggghh-otron

        Re: Wait, what?

        Yeah I thought that, but then read "GitHub has become the de facto social network for programmers" again. And the "has become" would suggest that it is already. But how so if it doesn't have any social media features?

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    GitHub rules

    From reading I couldn't work out exactly what the rules are for the free hosting. Could I put stuff there that isn't software (it could be poetry, for example) and isn't free ("Copyright. All rights reserved", for example)?

  10. Paul Bruneau


    > all without disturbing the efforts of other programmers who might be working on the same files.


    > "If you need to hire great programmers, why look at resumes when you can view a candidate's actual work on GitHub?" Levine writes.

    Because not every programmer wants to give away his work

  11. Smartini

    Social network

    Nuff said!

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021