Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

sourcehut.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 279 posts

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#81

Post by seibelj »

ddevault wrote: post #61
zeroclip wrote: post #59

Seems like virtue signalling from an over-controlling project maintainer with a grudge against blockchains. Can you make a coherent case for why a legitimate and licit application of crypto should not be allowed on your source hosting platform? To give an example of a legitimate and licit application: Endaoment.

Legitimate use-cases are not banned, per the article: > We will exercise discretion when applying this rule. If you believe that your use-case for cryptocurrency or blockchain is not plagued by these social problems, you may ask for permission to host it on SourceHut, or appeal its removal, by contacting support.

So brave!

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#82

Post by tossl568 »

This moral high horsing on all things cryptocurrencies is getting really old. Thank God Bitcoin can't be stopped no matter how high the horse. We'll keep on voluntarily opting in to our own monetary system thank you very much, nobody is forcing anybody else to do the same. Keep making those horses as high as you like Bitcoin isn't going away.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#83

Post by encryptluks2 »

Hendrikto wrote: post #66
encryptluks2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says they are willing to make exceptions if you contact them with compelling reason.

Quoted post unavailable.

They aren't censoring anyone. People can pay to host their own infrastructure. Crypto projects are a legal liability for service providers and frequent abusers of service offerings. I honestly wish they would have been less specific in there reasons to not make it seem like some ethical dilemma but point is there are good reasons to not allow these types of projects. I don't trust them less I just know not to host certain projects there and follow a general etiquette. If I wanted to use them to host something more controversial then I'd reach out first to see if they'd allow it and build that relationship. This is no different than wanting to display a controversial banner in a private establishment. They end up taking on some liabilities which I'm sure they would like to be informed before doing so in order to make sure they will help provide some support if it becomes a challenge.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#84

Post by rvz »

Nathanba wrote: post #44

Terrible decision in my opinion but I'm actually glad that people expose their true feelings like this. It doesn't affect me because I don't host with sourcehut but this just makes it clear who they are and what they stand for. You can easily expect more of these types of bans now, because why not? Do you really think that he wouldn't also ban anti-vaccination information sites? Blogs that host antivaxx content? A cr…

Very good question. I'm very certain that this is where they would all be banned and it would become a very political case rather than a business decision, even if all of them accounted for 80% of Sourcehut's revenue; especially when your examples are not illegal in the US; this could be different when they move to another country.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#85

Post by ddevault »

_wolfie_ wrote: post #77

Hm, I do not see any definition of "blockchain technologies" in the new ToS. Will that be added? My understanding of "blockchain" is that for example git could be described as a application of blockchain technology. First question: Will there be further clarification regarding what is the precise definition? Second question: If there will be some HW accelerator thingie or something for blockchain technologies or cryp…

> Will there be further clarification regarding what is the precise definition?

It's intentionally subjective. A tounge-in-cheek analysis could conclude that git is a blockchain, but no one suggests this seriously. The terms establish a worldview and framework around the problems cryptocurrency and blockchain projects impose on society, and it's within this framework that projects will be evaluated -- not simply on the basis that the word "blockchain" appears in their README.

> If there will be some HW accelerator thingie or something for blockchain technologies or cryptocurrency, and the driver for that gets merged into upstream linux kernel, will that make linux kernel un-hostable on sourcehut? If not, why not?

That would likely be permitted on the basis of a subjective analysis of the situation. Linux is a project which is mostly used for use-cases other than cryptocurrency. After all, many blockchain tools already run on a Linux userspace, but that's no cause for dropping Linux.

The rules are not written in stone: they are guidelines that we enforce hand-in-hand with the cooperation of the community and within a space where all participants are encouraged to discuss the situation and argue for their views.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#86

Post by helen___keller »

A platform like sourcehut is designed to be self hosted and to allow you to migrate off platform, so I feel significantly better about this than if say GitHub banned all crypto projects.

Corporate megaliths have left everyone wary of platforms banning an entire topic or idea. Between shitty automation, unreachable support, and large blast radii, corporate megaliths are generally untrustworthy with moderation.

The fact is that sourcehut is not a corporate megalith. I don’t believe these concerns apply.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#87

Post by Cameri »

ddevault wrote: post #13
fazfq wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if any of their projects (or the projects of anybody who's reading these comments) are affected, this is a sign of things to come - kicking projects out for political reasons and moving to the EU means that one never knows what may come next.

We do not kick people out for political differences.

You most certainly are kicking people out for political choices. You gobbled up all the FUD and posted it on your ToS:

> These projects often encourage large-scale energy waste and electronics waste, which contributes to the declining health of Earth’s environment.

I honestly mean no offence but you are most definitely making choices for your users from a place that demonstrates lack of understanding.

Fiat currencies are the #1 tool criminals and corporations have used for ages to ruin the world and I don't see SourceHut banning projects using those (that would be ridiculous) but instead choose to ban a set of technologies that a minute percentage of the population uses like that's going to make any meaningful change.

Drew, fiat currencies are debased at the rate the old man chooses making everyone poorer and less well off every single day through inflation and that is what you choose to perpetuate.

The people will continue to innovate with or without Source Hut.

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#88

Post by ddevault »

openfuture wrote: post #79
ddevault wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what this project is for, but on the face of it it does not seem to be a problem. If it develops further and starts to run afoul of these rules, we can discuss it further and if necessary work together to ensure a smooth transition to another hosting provider. If you'd like to clarify more about this specific project, feel free to email me (sir@cmpwn.com) (or just elaborate here on HN).

It is meant to solve the class of problems (in the computer science sense) that is cryptocurrency. This is because I want a name system where the definitions are given meaning relative to our economic system but where the economics within the network should converge on better incentives (which is why the approach should encompass the space of solutions; so we can find the points in that space which have good tradeoff…

You can assume for the time being that this project is permitted on SourceHut. Once it materializes further and its relationship to the social problems of cryptocurrency becomes more clear, we can evaluate it properly. It seems that you at least have a pretty good background on the problems with cryptocurrency, so I'm optimistic about this project. Good luck!

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#89

Post by exo762 »

ddevault wrote: post #72
Hendrikto wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a huge fan of your work. Thanks for all you have done. But you are so opinionated, unrealistic, and unreasonable. Are you seriously suggesting that arbitrary censorship is ”making the right choice“? You brush aside valid criticism to push your own ideology. A little restraint and pragmatism would go a long way. You are the modern RMS, both in a good and bad way.

I understand your frustration, but this is not arbitrary: we've outlined a specific niche and clearly stated our reasons for banning it, and set aside a means for projects to appeal. I am an opinionated person, and perhaps you find some of my opinions unrealistic or unreasonable. However, SourceHut is handled separately from my personal opinions and governed by clear and well-defined values which are much narrower th…

Ok. I'll bite. Tornado Cash source code. Acceptable or not?

Re: SourceHut terms of service updates, cryptocurrency projects to be removed

#90

Post by woodruffw »

tossl568 wrote: post #78
arghwhat wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That a project using proof of work is bad does not meant that a project using proof of stake is good. The ban is cryptocurrencies, and that PoW cooks the planet for no benefit is only one of the listed reasons behind it.

Proof of work isn't "cooking the planet". Get a grip. And Bitcoin is a fantastic benefit for humanity resulting from proof of work.

Turning on shuttered gas and coal plants solely to mine cryptocurrencies is about as close as you can get to pointlessly cooking the planet.

The benefits have been relatively modest so far.

Post reply on HN