HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
gitsense
chat
JavaScript2025–2026
gitsense / chat

chat

Discover this repository through its Hacker News conversations.

2Distinct people
18Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
7GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A public description has not been verified.

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 6:36:16 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month18 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2025-08-12 16:46:52 UTC to 2026-09-17 18:31:30 UTC.

02462025-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 0 submissions, 7 commentsAug 20252025-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments2025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsFeb 20262026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsSep 2026

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Aug 20252025-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-09-01 00:00:00 UTC707
Sep 20252025-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC606
Oct 20252025-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20252025-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Dec 20252025-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20262026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20262026-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20262026-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20262026-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20262026-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20262026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jul 20262026-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Aug 20262026-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20262026-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-10-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

6 sources
> Sonnet/Claude Code may technically be "smarter", but Qwen3-Coder on Cerebras is often more productive for me because it's just so incredibly fast. Saying "technically" is really underselling the difference in intelligence in my opinion. Claude and Gemini are much, much smarter and I trust them to produce better code, but you honestly can't deny the excellent value that Qwen-3, the inference speed and $50/month for 25M tokens/per day brings to the table. Since I paid for the Cerebras pro plan, I've decided to force myself to use it as much as possible for the duration of the month for developing my chat app (https://github.com/gitsense/chat) and here so some of my thoughts so far: - Qwen3 Coder is a lot dumber when it comes to prompting as Gemini and Claude are much better at reading between the lines. However since the speed is so goo
Read the rest
d, I often don't care as I can go back to the message and make some simple clarifications and try again. - The max context window size of 128k for Qwen 3 Coder 480B on their platform can be a serious issue if you need a lot of documentation or code in context. - I've never come close to the 25M tokens per day limit for their Pro Plan. The max I am using is 5M/day. - The inference speed + a capable model like Qwen 3 will open up use cases most people might not have thought of before. I will probably continue to pay for the $50 dollar plan for these use cases. 1. Applying LLM generated patches Qwen 3 coder is very much capable of applying patches generated by Sonnet and Gemini. It is slower than what https://www.morphllm.com/ provides but it is definitely fast enough for most people to not care. The cost savings can be quite significant depending on the work. 2. Building context Since it is so fast and because the 25M token limit per day is such a high limit for me, I am finding myself loading more files into context and just asking Qwen to identify files that I will need and/or summarize things so I can feed it into Sonnet or Gemini to save me significant money. 3. AI Assistant Due to it's blazing speed, you can analyze a lot data fast for deterministic searches and because it can review results at such a great speed, you can do multiple search and review loops without feeling like you are waiting forever. Given what I've experienced so far, I don't think Cerebras can be a serious platform for coding if Qwen 3 Coder is the only available model. Having said that, given the inference speed and Qwen being more than capable, I can see Cerebras becoming a massive cost savings option for many companies and developers, which is where I think they might win a lot of enterprise contracts.
In Cerebras systems raises $1.1B Series G
> A human can effectively discard or disregard prior information as the narrow window of focus moves to a new task, LLMs seem incredibly bad at this. This is how I designed my LLM chat app (https://github.com/gitsense/chat). I think agents have their place, but I really think if you want to solve complex problems without needlessly burning tokens, you will need a human in the loop to curate the context. I will get to it, but I believe in the same way that we developed different flows for working with Git, we will have different 'Chat Flows' for working with LLMs. I have an interactive demo at https://chat.gitsense.com which shows how you can narrow the focus of the context for the LLM. Click "Start GitSense Chat Demos" then "Context Engineering & Management" to go through the 30 second demo.
In Context is the bottleneck for coding agents now
I'm guessing you are referring to https://github.com/gitsense/chat/tree/main/data/analyze or https://github.com/gitsense/chat/tree/main/packages/chat/wid... The number is actually the order in the chat so 1.md would be the first message, 2.md would be the second and so forth. If you goto https://chat.gitsense.com and click on the "Load Personal Help Guide" you can see how it is used. Since I want you to be able to chat with the document, I will create a new chat tree and use the directory structure and the 1,2,3... markdown files to determine message order.
In Everyone's trying vectors and graphs for AI memory. We went back to SQL
You could instruct the LLM to classify messages with high level tags like for coffee, drinks, etc. always include beverage. Given how fast interference has become and given current supported context window sizes for most SOTA models, I think summarizing and having the LLM decide what is relevant is not that fragile at all for most use cases. This is what I do with my analyzers which I talk about at https://github.com/gitsense/chat/blob/main/packages/chat/wid...
In Everyone's trying vectors and graphs for AI memory. We went back to SQL
I haven't looked at the code, but it might do what I do with my chat app which is talked about at https://github.com/gitsense/chat/blob/main/packages/chat/wid... The basic idea is, you don't search for a single term but rather you search for many. Depending on the instructions provided in the "Query Construction" stage, you may end up with a very high level search term like beverage or you may end up with terms like 'hot-drinks', 'code-drinks', etc. Once you have the query, you can do a "Broad Search" which returns an overview of the message and from there the LLM can determine which messages it should analyze further if required. Edit. I should add, this search strategy will only work well if you have a post message process. For example, after every message save/upddate, you have the LLM generate an overview. These are my instructions
Read the rest
for my tiny overview https://github.com/gitsense/chat/blob/main/data/analyze/tiny... that is focused on generating the purpose and keywords that can be used to help the LLM define search terms.
In Everyone's trying vectors and graphs for AI memory. We went back to SQL

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.