Live data from Hacker News

Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

codeberg.org

11–20 of 720 posts

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#11
They are not the first code hosting service to do so. sourcehut banned cryptocurrency in 2022:

https://sourcehut.org/blog/2022-10-31-tos-update-cryptocurre...

https://man.sr.ht/terms.md#permissible-use

Mostly positive HN discussion when this happened: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33403780

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#12

Why? Banning abuse is fine, and disliking Cryptocurrency projects at a moral level is fine, but running a coffee hosting service and putting your moral judgements on projects like this just seems childish and unserious. I'm also apparently banned from reading the article, despite having no previous usage of Codeberg or any history with the project, so I can't even see their reasoning.

They also want to ban 'AI slop' - I'd love to see how they draw the lines on that one.

[flagged]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#13

Why? Banning abuse is fine, and disliking Cryptocurrency projects at a moral level is fine, but running a coffee hosting service and putting your moral judgements on projects like this just seems childish and unserious. I'm also apparently banned from reading the article, despite having no previous usage of Codeberg or any history with the project, so I can't even see their reasoning.

[flagged]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#15
The fact that Codeberg has the power to do this is a good reason not to host your code on Codeberg. The fact that they have ideological commitments that make them think banning cryptocurrency projects is a good idea is a separate good reason not to host your code on Codeberg.

Fortunately Codeberg is a relatively small player and Git forge hosting is fairly competitive and among the easiest types of online service to self-host, so the effect of this on most Git-forge-users is pretty minimal.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#20
I don't like crypto but this is poor reasoning, hastily implemented, and given very little time for discussion. There does not seem to be any concrete plan for notifying impacted projects or giving them a roadmap to migrate.

This is unprofessional and severely harms their credibility. It's not what was done but how they did it, and I don't doubt that subsequent policy changes can and will be implemented in the same manner unless it's addressed.

Post reply on HN