WeSearch

Ask HN: Is paying $2/pull request too high?

·1 min read · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 34 views
TL;DR · WeSearch summary

The author discusses their experience paying for pull requests to fix bugs. They mention receiving a high number of applicants, mostly agents and bots, and express concerns about filtering out unqualified candidates. The author also notes that offering a lower payment does not change the quality of applicants.

Key facts
About this source

Hacker News (Newest) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 5,306 of its stories.

Original article
Ycombinator
Read full at Ycombinator →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisherYcombinator
Canonical URLhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48265794
Publication timeMon, 25 May 2026 11:53:41 +0000
Retrieval time2026-05-25T12:07:36.708Z
Last seen2026-05-25T12:07:40.342Z
Headline sourcePublisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt sourcepublisher body
Excerpt methodFirst ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited.
SummaryWeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer)
Summary source textcontentText
Citation coverageSummary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL.
ClusterOwBiJpaCWoQI
Cluster logicGrouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reasonStory pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visitYes — open original
Substitutes article?No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared
No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.
Machine-readable
No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.
WeSearch interpretation
WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.
Unknown
Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? Allowed
Snippet May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? Allowed
AI summary May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? Limited
Retrieval / RAG May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? Not asserted
Model training May the content be used to train AI models? Not asserted
Commercial reuse May the content be reused commercially? Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand

I’m paying about $2 for any bugs found and a pr to fix it I get like 20-30 applicants it’s all agents and bots of course but I’m thinking $1 now is betterThe problem is if these 20-30 applicants I accept only 2-3 actually do it and follow up to be paid I need to some how filter out the garbage if anyone has any ideasThe site is ugig and it’s fossThe funnny thing is if I offer 500 sats (about .39 cents) the same thing happens lolI do have to check for malware in PRs though

Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Ycombinator.

Anonymous · no account needed
Share 𝕏 Facebook Reddit LinkedIn Threads WhatsApp Bluesky Mastodon Email

Discussion

0 comments

More from Ycombinator