Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clearly some people do care about Codeberg given how much palpitating outrage there is in this very thread.
[flagged]
The stunt angle might make sense, but banning vibe code too kinda contradicts it.
Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
171–180 of 720 posts
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the words of the person who announced the ban, when moderating a discussion on it 8 months prior:[1] > > Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters. > This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop. the maintainers of Codeberg do not believe that they are…
How do you know what the politics will be next? They banned vibe coded projects too… goodness knows how they think they can determine / enforce that.
> goodness knows how they think they can determine that
Asking people to define that nearly got me kicked out of lobsters.
These people don't want to have to define it. Ironically, they're going to enforce their rules based on vibes. Vibewritten rules, vibenforced.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#173Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…
They banned cypto projects two weeks ago. Today they banned vibecoded projects. https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...
That's a controversial stance. The first statement of not using codeberg hosted projects to train LLMs makes sense. But to outright ban LLM coded projects seems just silly. If the problem is that users have too many vibe coded projects, then limiting the number of projects seems like a more reasonable stance. To completely ban vibe coded projects just limits the number of users that will use them. I get that this is being spun as an effort to save resources, but this is a pretty blunt way to accomplish this. And a great way to alienate a lot of potential users.
It's their service and they can choose what they want to host. Maybe they don't see themselves as competing with Github and Gitlab and so they are happy serving the users they have. But to me this does not seem to be a great growth strategy.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#174Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…
> But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software
Apple does the same with the App Store btw, are you “staying very far away from” smartphones because of that censorship?
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I think you're misunderstanding "codeberg is political". Everything is political, FOSS is political, GitHub is also political. When people say "We're not political", or "That's not political". What they're actually saying is that it's within my own politics.
No I understand that. But the point I am making is saying that is much stronger than saying "our policy says we won't host crypto projects going forward". The latter is fine, any service provider can set terms as they fit within the law. But if you claim you are highly political, you must invite further questions into it.
How does Codeberg handle the diverse mix of politics within it and manage its influences? If we give the organization a character by calling it political, we create an obligation to explain further.
Overall, again I feel this is a self-own to project idealogue this hard since you flavor it in a specific way that is not inclusive.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#176Welp. Looks like I'm never going back there.
I mean, that's your right, but also they'll get new users too. So much of the internet is drowning in slop that any place that's still brimming with original content will likely see its stock go up, and will tend to attract people who still do original work, creating a virtuous cycle
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#177As with the AI ban this was a community decision done by a majority vote. It seems that most people commenting or writing articles in the last few days don't have a Codeberg account or never visit the forum.
I have an account and I donate regularly. I was not made aware a vote was happening.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#178Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…
> But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software Apple does the same with the App Store btw, are you “staying very far away from” smartphones because of that censorship?
Why yes, in fact I am. One of the major reasons [1] I switched to GrapheneOS.
[1] https://blog.okturtles.org/2024/06/the-ultimate-ios-to-graph...
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#179Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…
Fun fact: They deliberately chose to host in the EU because they were concerned that malicious actors could abuse the DMCA by filing fraudulent copyright claims to take down legitimate software repositories.
I guess software that doesn't fit their world view is illegitimate now.
Here is a talk from one of their presidium members about GitHub DMCA takedowns: https://vimeo.com/246282607?fl=pl&fe=sh