I rarely see yards used in the united states outside of football and other sports. Usually, distances to travel will go as feet, then right into miles. I can't think of many people who wouldn't say "quarter mile" over "440 yards". Anything less than that is in feet. Buildings and structures are measured in square feet, our long tape measures are usually labeled "300 feet" and not "100 yard", and in land surveying, measurements are often done in (decimal) feet.
One place I do come across yards is in "a yard of dirt" (or mulch, sand, concrete, etc) where it means cubic yard.
Hmm, I see metric distances (kilometers). Accessing from Germany. It's still using the English Wikipedia though, not the German one (which I think would have more local content).
PS: there's a side bar link to switch between miles and km, I might have pressed that (was expecting to see some sort of distance map though instead of switching between 'imperial' and 'modern' ;)
Because to convert from one to t'other, you have to multiply by 22 x 10 x 8 or whatever it is, rather than simply shift the digits.
For example, there's a park that's 1 mi 180 yds from me - if you were to pick one and stick with it then you could say either 1.1 mis or 1940 yds, rather than mixing the two and expecting people to do multiple rounds of arithmetic.
Could that be a UK thing? I wouldn't know tbh, because between mixing yards and miles versus sticking to imperial units in the 21st century, the latter is definitely crazier ;)
In Canada we have imperial for short measurements (inches and feet for lumber, people's heights) but metric for longer distances (kilometers for driving distances for example)
Which you appear to be the developer of from other comments in this thread. Not saying it's bad, but it's self-promotion rather than organic preference.
> Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity.
Interesting that this made to HN top, last week i posted as about my open source wealth tracker http://github.com/venil7/assets with all the same features, including self hosting
and it barely got any traction
> Source available for inspection and personal use only. Free to use non-commercially; commercial use reserved to the author. No warranty or liability. Contributions do not confer authorship or ownership rights.
So I don't want to be rude, and am saying this purely as feedback since you asked and I detect a bit frustation - the wealthfolio site linked in the post presents a lot better than your one linked in your github.
Nominally they appear to be very similar like you say (open source, locally hosted etc), but the presentation does make a big difference for at-a-glance engagement. The wealthfolio is just... very pleasant to look at. The site largely focuses on what the value to the reader is, versus 'how do I get it running'.
Just my thoughts. I know it's incredibly frustrating when you see a copy/version of something you've made, but it gets more attention. But honestly could also just be the mood of the day. There may just be nothing to read into here.
+1, very polite way of saying it. of course there's a difference between the two posts. open source is interesting but not enough with a financial app, since it's all about trust + usefulness.
landing page needs to look good and communicate the value prop super effectively. If it doesn't look good you'll lose people's interest in about 2 seconds.
This is nice of you. I just want to say to the GP it's mostly random IMHO. Survivorship bias is hard. You hear about only what you hear about, not all the great stuff. It's a matter of big numbers, don't give up, play the long game.
It's marketing and empathising with your market. A github page doesn't give the impression of a polished product and doesn't inspire confidence. It looks more like a draft. When I go to your page the first thing I see is a list of code files but I don't care about that I want to know what it can do for _me_ and my finances.
Sometimes, its just luck or timing. But I usually upvote open source projects with an actual website and not just a repo. Thats me of course. Also, the UI screenshots from your github didn't look that appealing. Hope this feedback is helpful.
Why does this app have a nice landing page? Who paid for that? Why? Nobody makes a landing page to wcratch their own itch. In some situations I'd rather have a readme.
I didn't see your previous post, but my feedback would be that your readme doesn't really list all the features? It has some screenshots, but maybe a short list of major features/what you can do with it would be helpful for people just driving by to look at it?
I don't think you need a fancy landing page for every oss project, but I have no way of telling what is different about your project without actually trying it out.
I am going to add it to my watch list on GitHub as it looks interesting. However, as the other post said, it needs an elevator pitch and do not be afraid to include more pictures.
I have a hard time finding the features of the program from the repository alone. For me personally, I do not have time to do a deep dive into the code (or even the api spec) of potentially interesting software to figure out what is going on. Especially in your case where it seems to use a pure functional approach in typescript, which creates additional overhead :)
Best of luck with the project.
Assets — Personal Wealth Tracker
https://github.com/venil7/assets
A self-hosted net worth and portfolio manager. Track multiple portfolios (ISA, General, Pension, Crypto, etc.) and monitor individual or total performance. Supports any asset available via the Yahoo Finance API, automatically converts to your base major currency.
All relevant files are stored in your UPLOAD_LOCATION which you defined in your .env file (if you deployed immich via Docker Compose). The files you absolutely need to back up are in:
- UPLOAD_LOCATION/upload ← Contains your images
- UPLOAD_LOCATION/backups ← Contains your postgres dumps
You should also back up these two directories:
- UPLOAD_LOCATION/library
- UPLOAD_LOCATION/profile
They're not strictly necessary, but it makes it easier to restore the same setup.
