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

Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 298 posts

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#221

Post by graemep »

FinnKuhn wrote: post #192
graemep wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> copyright doesn't suddenly get declared as being of the model owner That does not seem to be likely. The article you link indicates it is the prompter and provider of any other inputs (in the case discussed the photographer who took the photo the LLM modified) who might have claims. > The US specifically has settled on it being (effectively?) public domain. My understanding is that sufficient human input makes it c…

German copyright works a bit different from US copyright, as it requires a "personal intellectual creation", but there have already been multiple court cases that decided AI generated content is not protected by German copyright as it doesn't meet this requirement. You can find the original (German) verdict here as it goes into some more legal details on this: https://www.gesetze-bayern.de/Content/Document/Y-300-Z-BE…

> German copyright works a bit different from US copyright, as it requires a "personal intellectual creation"

Can you explain how it is different from US law? It sounds closer to US law than to, for example, British law.

> You can find the original (German) verdict

I cannot read German. So you are saying Bird & Bird's explanation of the ruling is wrong? Or is it contradicted by other cases?

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#222

Post by AloysB »

skeledrew wrote: post #187
awesan wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not strange to ban chess computers at a chess tournament, and it's equally not strange to ban AI code on a code hosting platform. The costs involved with hosting a bunch of vibe coded stuff that no one is really invested in or cares about would undermine the mission of Codeberg, so it makes sense for them. Other code hosting platforms can go a different route.

> The costs involved How much does it cost to host a few text files in the same way a bunch of other text files are already being hosted? Particularly if there's no investment - ie no significant traffic - in accessing said text files?

> How much does it cost to host a few text files

At large scale, it probably adds up. Remember that they also need to ensure backup, etc. Whether or not your code is being "used" or not, it has a cost.

Even GitHub has been struggling last year with the ramping amount of LLM produced code. I can imagine that it is a real issue.

They already encourage users to use 'agit' instead of doing 'physical' forks.

I imagine that the costs are sufficient enough to motivate them to follow through on this; on top of the ethical and legal concerns.

---

Why don't you host your own git for those dormant projects? It's really easy, you don't even need a forge. Just a bare git repo on server via ssh and you off to the races.

I think their stance is fine; there are other providers if you don't agree with this.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#223

Post by GabeIsko »

noirscape wrote: post #205
GabeIsko wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's different for codeberg, because they have a lot of infrastructure they have to maintain, and are ideologically motivated to be a libre option to share peoples code. It's an entirely different motivation than promoting a subreddit that runs on reddit's infrastructure. They are really constrained on the infrastructure cost side, and stability is a constant struggle. They don't have the bandwidth to sort through th…

> I want a stable platform that will host my small static website blog at a very low cost, with high stability and uptime, no questions asked. Maybe try the neocities supporter plan[0]? They allow custom domains, offer decent bandwidth and put a lot of effort into open source and encouraging people to write their own sites from what I can tell. It seems like a better option than dealing with the Great Amorphous Corpo…

That sounds neat, I haven't seen it, although I think someone else mentioned they were using neocities. Do they support random static sites?

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#224

Post by cwillu »

badsectoracula wrote: post #212
cwillu wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not mistaken in any substantive way: it's still not a public square and those ~780 members have every right to make rules that offer a great deal of discretion to those doing the enforcing, and such discretion is entirely consistent with their other rules.

Well, IMO there is a bit of a difference between a "dictator" and a "democracy" :-P.

Sure, but at the same time, I'm not sure either one is by itself a great descriptor (nevermind the emotional valence of those terms)

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#225

Post by gnabgib »

inigyou wrote: post #174
cedws wrote: post #24

I'm tired of SlopHub but at the same time how do you realistically ban vibe coding? This will cause a bunch of infighting with people accusing each other.

You just delete the account of anyone caught vibe coding until they get the message.

That's bad news for you

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#226

Post by FinnKuhn »

graemep wrote: post #221
FinnKuhn wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

German copyright works a bit different from US copyright, as it requires a "personal intellectual creation", but there have already been multiple court cases that decided AI generated content is not protected by German copyright as it doesn't meet this requirement. You can find the original (German) verdict here as it goes into some more legal details on this: https://www.gesetze-bayern.de/Content/Document/Y-300-Z-BE…

> German copyright works a bit different from US copyright, as it requires a "personal intellectual creation" Can you explain how it is different from US law? It sounds closer to US law than to, for example, British law. > You can find the original (German) verdict I cannot read German. So you are saying Bird & Bird's explanation of the ruling is wrong? Or is it contradicted by other cases?

> Can you explain how it is different from US law? It sounds closer to US law than to, for example, British law.

Yes, there are some similarities. The "personal intellectual creation" requirement I think is also similarly used in the US where only genuine intellectual creations by the author count as works. Typing "generate an image of a flower" doesn't clear that bar. If you however write very detailed long description of the image then it could clear that hurdle. The verdict says that the personal creative input needs to dominate the result if you sue someone over it, it is on you to proof that your prompt meet this hurdle, which "vibecoders" are not going to meet I believe.

However, in Germany copyright always belongs to the creator (a natural person), while in the US it can also be held by a company. In practice, this means you can't sell your copyright, only license it, although even an exclusive license has limits. So an AI provider never holds copyright over generated output either way: it either belongs to the creator or the output has none. German copyright law aims to protect the creator while US copyright law focuses more on economic aspects.

So the result is that either the author has the copyright (so just like any other code) or there is no copyright. Either way I don't see what issue uploading it to Codeberg could cause for them as it should be fine either way.

> You can find the original (German) verdict

I tried to explain the argument from the verdict in more detail above, otherwise number 18-22 are the relevant part. See here for the translation of those: https://claude.ai/share/4d52fb18-a375-4ce7-9d7f-35e3d52971aa The Bird & Bird article seems to pretty much say the same from what I can tell, just in more detail.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#227

Post by cwillu »

anticorporate wrote: post #210
jazzypants wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would anyone ever be able to arbitrate this? It's an unenforceable policy if you actually care about fairness.

I suspect rather than posting whataboutisms that it would be more useful to adhere to the spirit of the rule rather than asking how close you can get to violating it without actually getting kicked off.

This is so obviously the case that I'm having a seriously hard time assuming good faith from everyone arguing about the edge cases.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#228

Post by inigyou »

cedws wrote: post #190
inigyou wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just delete the account of anyone caught vibe coding until they get the message.

I think you missed the point. How do you reliably identify and prove vibe coding? You accuse them of vibe coding, they say no I wrote it by hand. Or they say no, I only used a little bit of AI. At what point is it vibe coding? Is there going to be a Codeberg Stasi hunting down suspects and making them explain themselves?

Do you know what "caught" means? Murder is illegal, do the police track you 24/7 to see if you murder? Or do they wait for someone to come in with a complaint?

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#229

Post by customguy »

akmarinov wrote: post #119
noosphr wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have to ask then the answer is no.

I mean Codeberg will pretty soon start having to ask. How do they determine that and who'll be in charge to find violations there?

Before Codeberg has to ask that, the person who would upload has to ask it themselves. People know what they did, or didn't.

"If you have shit on your shoe, please don't walk across our carpet".

"But how do they know? maybe we should test if they can tell", and all that stuff... no. Most people would simply take a good look, and if they're worried about something that could be be mud or not, brush it off just in case. And if they come directly from 12 hours of drunk partying in the wilderness, they can still simply take their shoes off and ask for a plastic bag at the door, just in case. Easy.

And yes, maybe the owner goes crazy or hates you, and you just bought new shoes that are squeaky clean, but brown, and get thrown out with no appeal. That can happen. But in that case, they could use many other things to be petty about, too. And Codeberg does not strike me as that.

How can you tell if you drank too much? What is the exact amount of alcohol molecules a given person could ingest in an exact instant (like, down to the exact Planck whatever) and no longer be fit to drive? And if someone says "no drunk driving on my property" while not caring what happens outside of it, can we really let them off the hook before they showed us the machine that can calculate it?

If people are worried about using libraries that contain vibe code, sure, that may become a real concern, but even then, why not have a really restricted website? For projects where the people are either so good, or the project so small, that that they know for sure there is no vibe code in it? Why this oozing over and into everything?

You cannot discuss in non-English languages on this site. Even though you could slur and degrade English, and therefore it being impossible to give you an exact heuristic right now that separates English from non-English exactly. The rule is still accepted, and cases dealt with as they come up.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#230

Post by anticensor »

FinnKuhn wrote: post #220
gaws wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just vibe-code an alternative.

No need to vibe-code anything. You can just use their official Forgejo fork from here: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg-Infrastructure/forgejo

Btw OpenCommit (https://opencommit.eu), another European Forgejo instance with open registration, allows both cryptocurrency and vibe code. Keep in mind it requires 2FA.
Post reply on HN