Isnt this a fork* of https://x.com/WarnerTeddy/status/2060018688645115964?

https://github.com/Twarner491/AvianVisitors

https://theodore.net/projects/AvianVisitors/

Or maybe im missing to see is the same author? It went viral a few months ago

The new one appears to use real art from real humans, instead of AI art that was fixed.

And just because 2 things do the same job doesn't make one a "copy" of the other.

My mistake for calling it "copy", should have said fork maybe (?)

They are awful close to still require a reference to the original project imo. They are achieving the same output (identify birds and display them in a frame display all hosted in a raspberry pi) with that twist to how to generate the art.

Author here: I'll take any feedback and critisism. I haven't based any of my work directly on his project, but will be referencing it as a similar one in the readme, as well as e.g. https://github.com/veteranbv/inky-bird-frame.

Please take my praise as well then :) what a wholesome project!

What is "the new one"? The old one used AI, and this one seems to as well.

Author here: It doesn't, well at least not art-wise. All sources are attributed in https://github.com/arnegiacomo/fugleramme/blob/main/assets/a... and https://github.com/arnegiacomo/fugleramme/blob/main/assets/a...

This is much appreciated! Thanks for making this decision

From the link: "Half the point of this project is showing off some amazing public-domain natural-history illustrations. Over 800 cut-outs covering more than 400 species, every one taken from a real plate and hand-curated for this project (no art is AI-generated, though some has been retouched with AI)."

Idk what "retouched with AI" means. Does it mean they used a segmentation model to cut out the shapes, or were they shoved through an imagegen and completely recreated?

I agree I would expect a reference. Another difference between this an AvianVisitors is the image sources. AvianVisitors is all AI generated with a consistent prompt, but OP's is using chiefly public domain images with retouching by AI as needed.

Yeah agree

I understand OP is continuing the work and improving it as he sees fit, but that in my mind is a fork and should aknowledge the initial work that sparked it.

Maybe i'm wrong tho and this is completely parallel work! Waiting for OPs reply

Hi, yeah I'm not basing any of my coding or feature-work on that project. My biggest source of inspiration is actually just a paper poster I have hanging on my wall https://www.axelthorenfeldt.com/news/wwf-verdens-naturfonds-.... I wanted to make a version of that, showing the actual birds in my garden.

I accuse you of having good taste.

A fork implies that it builds upon code from another repository. I wouldn't use the word fork to mean "inspired by". I think it takes away from the effort that the author has put in. Anyone can create a fork of a project with the click of a button.

Fwiw an eink display is fairly common tech in the birdiverse. I also have a project that is the same thing.

Thanks! That one was discussed a few months ago:

Avian Visitors - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48343424 - May 2026 (20 comments)

I've put a link to the earlier project in the toptext above.

This one seems to be more North European focused

Its awful close with no attribution or mention of the original project, which should be the minimum i feel like.

Original author here. Fair point, this project was one of my inspirations, but I chose to take a different approach. This uses public domain natural history art and builds on top of BirdNET-Go which is a popular way of self-hosting bird-detections. (This is really a BirdNET-Go companion, as it cannot run without).

I've seen other similar projects pop up like https://github.com/veteranbv/inky-bird-frame and https://github.com/adamoberley/HABirdDashboard/tree/HABirdDa..., each with their own spin.

That's fair, and I totally get wanting to give it your own spin.

I still think it would be good to acknowledge the original project that sparked the idea, especially now that you've mentioned it was one of the inspirations.

Definitely keep going with yours and evolve it further. That's how good projects grow. But for a healthy open source community, I think we should make a point of crediting the people whose work inspires us. Otherwise, over time, it can discourage people from sharing their projects publicly in the first place.

Thanks, I’ll do that, and ofc link to this beautiful poster I have that actually originally sparked the idea: https://www.axelthorenfeldt.com/news/wwf-verdens-naturfonds-...

Contrary to the Great Man version of how we mostly talk about history, scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs and such have historically often occurred multiple times in multiple places often in close proximity time-wise but otherwise completely unrelated to each other. This of course makes sense if you consider that history seems to be primarily driven by material conditions (e.g. steam engines were known to Ancient Greece but their usefulness for industry simply hadn't occurred to them because they lacked the prerequisites to make them useful and neither economic efficiency nor access to cheap labor were significant enough concerns - plus there was no patent system of course).

I'll leave it up to you to decide whether one should expect the demographic of this website to be especially invested in the Great Man narrative but trying to convince them that two people can independently have similar-sounding ideas involving similar-but-different technology is probably an uphill battle. Just be glad you're not composing music for a living because there's literally an entire industry built around the idea that it's impossible for two people to come up with similar melodies without knowingly or unknowingly copying eachother and that it's very important that one of them (or rather the company they had to sign a deal with in order to make any money off their music at all) 100% owns that exact melody and should be paid by anyone who wants to use it.

Next time you have an idea you should just file a patent tbh - the insistence on prior art invalidating the work seems to be quite similar but at least if you're granted a patent you can shake down "copycats" for money.

  > Contrary to the Great Man version of how we mostly talk about history, scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs and such have historically often occurred multiple times in multiple places often in close proximity time-wise but otherwise completely unrelated to each other.
My favourite example of this is calculus, followed closely by heavier-than-air flight.

Added, see README. Thanks for the feedback!

true, but we are assuming that the author is aware of the other repo

[deleted]
[deleted]