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

Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 720 posts

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#181

Post by iamnothere »

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #163
iamnothere wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This attitude is toxic and will drive off other projects that aren’t associated with crypto. Once you have to factor in political risk with your source hosting, other alternatives become more appealing. At this point any project that’s even vaguely controversial ought to be looking at fully decentralized solutions like Radicle.

It's easy: don't be a scammer.

“Don’t be a scammer”

“Don’t be an AI bro”

“Don’t be a Russian”

“Don’t be a fascist”

“Don’t be an antisemite”

“Don’t be a (insert boogeyman here)”

“Don’t be a sympathizer”

“Don’t be an enemy of the state”

These words are manipulations, and they will eventually catch up with you.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#182

Post by matheusmoreira »

lopatin wrote: post #110
danpalmer wrote: post #5

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.

I guess that brings up the question of why do people use Codeberg in the first place. From what I understand, it's a decision based on values right rather than cost, functionality, or convenience. Well here you go, more values, enjoy!

I used it for a while because I write free software and Codeberg was aligned with that. I went back to GitHub because I couldn't get their CIs to work. Now that they banned "heavy LLM usage" I won't be going back there I guess.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#183

Post by mbreese »

DaSHacka wrote: post #134
firloop wrote: post #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

The difference is sourcehut has like 50 users

And has a very vocal/opinionated owner. You know what you're getting with Sourcehut. (And I don't mean that in a bad way).

Rightly or wrongly, Codeberg had a different feel. For a while it felt like it was trying to be a refuge from Github. But then again, maybe that was projecting something on them that they didn't intend.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#184

Post by matheusmoreira »

conartist6 wrote: post #176
matheusmoreira wrote: post #157

Welp. 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

How do you define "slop" ?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#185

Post by jjmarr »

altmanaltman wrote: post #143
jjmarr wrote: post #99

Earlier 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…

[flagged]

It's the politics of the paid membership of the Codeberg non-profit that funds the whole operation. They vote in yearly meetings.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#186

Post by [deleted] »

pretendgeneer wrote: post #160
altmanaltman wrote: post #143

Earlier 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.

[deleted]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#187

Post by tbrownaw »

raincole wrote: post #126
jdormit wrote: post #107

Wow. 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…

My rule of thumb: just use the most mainstream options unless I have a very, very strong reason to do otherwise. The mainstream options will screw you, but the niche options will screw you in totally unexpected ways.

A nice thing about Git is that you can trivially push to a new upstream any time you need.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#188

Post by comeonbro »

jdormit wrote: post #107

Wow. 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…

I can't recall which, but I'm certain that I've encountered and probably used Codeberg-hosted things, and from that had gathered a vague positive impression of them.

I guess what I'm worried about is that the proprietors of those nice projects I liked (and others) might have chosen Codeberg out of a reasonable set of common assumptions that it was a place for free-as-in-freedom, as they and clearly many of us have always understood it, which were not contradicted by how Codeberg presented themselves up-front. And have now had this sprung on them, after they'd already established themselves there, and might now be facing a miserable and sapping moral dilemma, or even be directly doubting the security of their home there.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#189

Post by tbrownaw »

duxup wrote: post #161
jjmarr wrote: post #99

Earlier 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.

> How do you know what the politics will be next?

That's the neat part, you don't.

(Or, well, you could pay attention to the individual humans involved?)

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#190

Post by iamnothere »

mbreese wrote: post #183
DaSHacka wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is sourcehut has like 50 users

And has a very vocal/opinionated owner. You know what you're getting with Sourcehut. (And I don't mean that in a bad way). Rightly or wrongly, Codeberg had a different feel. For a while it felt like it was trying to be a refuge from Github. But then again, maybe that was projecting something on them that they didn't intend.

Once again, the stability of a BDFL is vindicated.

Democracy works ok in extremely complex systems like giant distros—Debian’s governance is slow but functional—but it seems to need guardrails around the process. (From what I can tell, an excruciating process is the best guardrail. Glacially slow decision-making means that mobs burn themselves out before they get to voting.)

Post reply on HN