Something that I've really not seen mentioned, is that they are also (and still!) ignoring the licensing that Microsoft has around VSCode.
VSCode is built on open source of course, but the the OSS version is "Code - OSS". When Microsoft builds it and releases it, it becomes VSCode with the Visual Studio trademark and what not.
PearAI's Code fork is using the real VSCode marketplace which has strict "This has to be used with Visual Studio products" (well, and some other MS / GitHub bits), so they can't use that. If you look at other VSCode-adjacent editors, they all use open-vsix.org instead.
They also use extensions that are licensed in the same way:
https://trypear.ai/blog/wsl-setup
They have instructions on setting up the WSL extension...which has a "This can only be used in Visual Studio Code" License too, so it can't be used in their PearAI fork.
You can see some examples of the terms of use / LICENSEs here:
https://cdn.vsassets.io/v/M190_20210811.1/_content/Microsoft...
https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items/ms-vscode-remote....
It just shows a complete lack of regard for licensing...
Credit to Garry for unequivocally apologizing and shouting out https://amplified.dev . The whole PearAI situation was a bad look, and it made it seem like YC had not done their appropriate research before investing.
I doubt this really did permanent damage to their reputation (I don't know if anything can at this point), but this move was definitely necessary to placate anyone who was paying attention.
This says too little of substance. What errors were made in YCs assessment, which will be corrected? What is the path forward?
Subtle touch here in linking repeatedly to Continue and not Pear. Really nice implicit message on what Garry's final view of the situation was after getting more information.
The other day I was browsing the two most recent YC batches. There were so many times that I stopped in awe and thought: "WOW.. I cannot believe they funded that". But each time I would think, OK this looks like a terrible idea, but they have to know something that I don't, and I'm just being cynical.
This lack of due diligence makes me think that I may have been wrong, and they are really just throwing money at everything with AI in the pitch.
However, I do salute him for the honesty, and for apologizing.
This is a good and thoughtful response. As much as we’d like to get mad at it, there’s not much more to do.
> PearAI has apologized, removed the offending repositories, and is working to correct all their mistakes.
If the issue at heart is a forked repo...then what's left?
The thing about doing something like what PearAI did is that worst case, they get flamed, they apologize and make changes, but overall don't lose much. They still have the YC label, the money, and free publicity. In a few months nobody will care, so overall their decisions were a net benefit.
Has any startup founder ever really suffered due to bad publicity? Short of extreme cases like Theranos, worst case scenario is they get a golden parachute, enjoy a few months/years "soul searching" then emerge with another startup. However most of the time nothing really happens.
People only came after PearAI because their founders' arrogance was particularly egregious. A bit of preemptive covering their tracks and nobody would have done anything.
Why shouldn't YCombinator just drop PearAI from their program? I mean they literally stole another YC startup's work wholesale and effectively defrauded YC investors. I don't know much about startup land but it seems there's an absurd amount of forgiveness given to a company that is clearly fraudulent.
Who cares whether or not they received the standard amount of due diligence/vetting? The only reason a system like that can work is if participants act in good faith, and this company obviously didn't.
edit: Like I said, I'm not exactly knowledgeable about the world of tech startups. If i've learned anything though, it's that the money being given to obvious scam artists being excused as "vetting batch investments doesn't scale" has made me even more depressed and cynical about tech startups than I previously thought was possible.
Was doing a bit of searching to get context on this story and found an unrelated but interesting tangent... there's another unrelated startup named pear.ai that's been around for years.
It's in a different domain, but the name is basically identical. Are people just... not doing any due diligence around company names any more? At all?
So PearAI is actually forking VSCode? I wonder if they'd have been better off building on the latest iteration of Eclipse Theia.
Apparently YC has over a dozen active partners. They don't coordinate tightly. They compete against each other for investments and often overlap verticals.
That's why you see 2, 4, or more redundant investments in the same space from YC. It's a mess but not uncommon.
This is a pretty poor apology.
Open source has been infinitely more valuable and important to humanity than the latest LLM or AI trend will ever be. Without it Linux or Apple would simply not exist. And every startup would be solely dependent on Microsoft for their future. It would've set back software decades and seriously harmed the take up of the internet.
And all of it hinges on everyone agreeing to play by the same rules which are codified in the licenses. And acting like it's no big deal that can be safely ignored is to frankly spit in the face of all of the selfless developers who contributed their code for no financial benefit over the many decades.
> Out of instinct to defend YC companies
Credit to Garrry for realizing he is very biased and offering a tepid "apology."
Whatever everyone thinks, YC is playing to win. And they make winners
>>if you don’t make mistakes it means you are not trying hard enough. << Elon Musk
Big picture, people who never heard of PearAI or continue dev just did. I did. I tried it. It’s as good as cursor
And guess what?
whatever side you are on, YC and those startups won either way.
More developers heard about each one of them and more tried it.
These people of PearAI made a series of mistakes and felt the burn of the community. Give them a chance to learn from it, you might be pleasantly surprised. They’re people, and most people learn from mistakes.
I’m assuming it was all done in good faith, for now at least.
Much of the criticism comes with a tinge of envy. "How did those guys get funding and not me?"
Envy is insidious. Focusing on how other people have unfair advantages eats away at your principles, motivation, creativity, and presence of mind to capture the opportunities available to you.
As a founder myself, I appreciate the fact that it's so easy (for some people) to raise money. It means that the competition is softer than it seems.