Hacker News Reader

Comment by Analemma_ | Hacker News Reader

It's so cool to see people focusing on web app performance. Everyone complains about it but no one follows up their complaints with action. That's a big plus and I will definitely keep my eye on this.

This is going to sound petty, but I think it's important: you might want to come up with a better name. "Gitly.io" is, like, three different regrettable startup naming fads in one.

View on HN

Thanks for your feedback. Yeah, I'm not good with names. I'll most likely come up with something different.

I like the name, I'd keep it if I were you.

no issue with the name.. small and I can easily differentiate from other hosting services.

Yeah, I'd recommend it just to avoid confusion with other projects with a similar name. I was looking for more information on your project (before you had replied to some people) and some other uses.

Don't change your name. It doesn't matter and it's short. Good luck

Seconded.

Google was called "Backrub" before it was called Google[0] so a suboptimal name doesn't portend failure - focus on the product first! Nice work.

[0]: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-tru...

litgit - hella fast git

there is nothing wrong with the name, it's catchy and memorable ... and like Flickr and twttr you know.. it doesn't matter..

and always remember, if one is being 'critical' does not make them 'right' too. yep listen to it carefully, but do not assume they are right 'automatically'

How about one of those:

GitAndGo.com Git4Work.com GitCrew.com GitTools.com GitGun.com Git4Me.com GitDuck.com

Edit: I'm not trying to sell you anything. Those domains are freely available.

Do you own these.. Or what?

All of them are freely available.

Relavent username :)

It's short, and unique. Which means it has a brand associated with it. Using generic words, is worse than goofy "web2.0" cliches, in my opinion.

I'm sorry for littering this thread, but I wanted to ask Analemma_ a question and didn't know how else to communicate with him/her.

23 days ago, you made a comment: "Put down the Ayn Rand and go outside." in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13645996

I've been reading about objectivism, and wanted to ask what you meant by this comment.

Again, really sorry to be off-topic, but the question is burning.

Um, okay.

In your comment, you said that CL keeping their product free instead of taking money to improve it was "selfish" in that it was (if I understood you correctly) withholding or stealing innovation from everyone else. I felt this position was ridiculous and could only have come about from reading too much Ayn Rand, of whom I am (to put it mildly) not a fan.

Mine was admittedly an unnecessary and kinda trollish comment, and I've been trying to make fewer of those. Don't take it too seriously. To HN's credit, nobody upvoted it.

Appreciate your response, and I'm happy you made the comment as it piqued my interest in the subject matter.

Could you help me understand what part of the stated position reminded you of Ayn Rand / objectivism? I'm struggling to make the exact connection.

Is it that ppl who read Ayn Rand tend to project a selfish motive on others?

Also, would love to read more on why you're not a fan of Ayn Rand if you have any links.

And, for the record, upon further inspection, my statement about CL was misleading. CL makes a lot of money, and profits could easily cover the cost of product development. I'm guessing their business philosophy just runs counter to these improvements.

There's way too much here to get into on an unrelated comment thread (it's a little unfair to the OP). Kinda wish HN had DM functionality right now...

My recommendation would be to write a blog post about the virtues of Objectivism, then submit it to HN. If people like it enough and it gets front-paged, I promise I'll be there in the comments and we can argue all you like ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com