Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects • Hacker News Board

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#311

Post by tkel » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:26 AM UTC

fluoridation wrote: post #291

tkel wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still not understanding the point. It's not about an organization being "private" or "public" (what does "private" even mean?). Everything is political. When you try and cleave society into things that are and aren't political, what you are doing is creating a normative set of things that aren't allowed to be challenged, on the basis of your claim that they aren't political, obscuring/obfuscating their actual…

>When you try and cleave society into things that are and aren't political, what you are doing is creating a normative set of things that aren't allowed to be challenged, on the basis of your claim that they aren't political What are you talking about? Whether something is allowed to be challenged has nothing to do with whether it's political. Actually, what even is not allowed to be challenged? I struggle to come up…

Yes, in communities that try to claim that certain things are "political" and certain things are "not political", "banning cryptocurrency" could be rejected on the basis that it is "political". The point is that saying something like "we don't do politics" is absurd. There is always an underlying politics, even if it has been normalized or obfuscated, repressed or unexamined. Reread my above comment.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#312

Post by andai » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:27 AM UTC

tkel wrote: post #300

iamnothere wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

"Democracy works OK when I agree with the result"

I think there is a slight difference between open source and government there. With open source you can just leave and pick another one. Or start your own.

Well I suppose that's also technically true of governments...

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#313

Post by shikck200 » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:28 AM UTC

Cider9986 wrote: post #236

cute_boi wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only good thing about crypto is we can send money easily to stupid countries without any hassle and crazy forex exchange. Other than that, i don't see any value in crypto.

Monero is digital cash and protects privacy, a human right.

I hear this over and over. What kind of privacy are we taking about here? You mean X gives Y 100 bucks in cash privacy? Or purchasing a house where there is no paper trail, no knowledge of who is the previous/current owner and no insurance at all kind of privacy?

Would you be happy to send your kids to a school that no one knows whos the owner, who operates it and if there is any kind of hazards and/or insurance/maintenance? Lets not even talk about how and what the teachers get paid, as its all fully private.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#314

Post by abc42 » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:28 AM UTC

I believe that they (like every other non-governmental service) have the privilege to ban everything and everyone from their service for literally any reason they choose.

But this (and especially the AI ban) is a big red flag and I'm steering clear from Codeberg.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#315

Post by pluralmonad » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:30 AM UTC

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.

This seems like a useless definition of political.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#316

Post by andai » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:33 AM UTC

jjmarr wrote: post #99

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.

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…

I'm trying to find more information about their politics. But all I found was their bylaws and a gay flag. Maybe I'm supposed to read between the lines?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#317

Post by PeterStuer » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:34 AM UTC

Even though I do not host on Codeberg, but I do run my own Forgejo, and have no particular interest in Cryptocurrency projects, I consider this a serious red flag as to me it indicates an activist tendency, for lack of a better word, that I do not want from an IT infrastructure provider.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#318

Post by avaer » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:35 AM UTC

cush wrote: post #263

kurante wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, so I don't see why there is any harm in having this instance of Forgejo moderate itself as it sees fit. They have no moral requirement to support all kinds of software. If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code fo…

It’s bad because it’s subjective. It’s a liability to host anything there now - their opinion of your product category could shift tomorrow… oh wait that already happened

Exactly. It's not so much that there are rules, it's that the rules are decided by random popularity vibes. It's not clear what vibes they will be smoking tomorrow.

The least they could do as a nonprofit is make users aware that a core tenet of the service is to promote/ban whatever content the community voting decides any given day, and hopefully what ideology they are following.

Otherwise any serious person would to well to stay away from Codeberg; you don't know if your project will be in the community's sights in the next vote.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#319

Post by shikck200 » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:35 AM UTC

iamnothere wrote: post #105

loeg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just fundamentally disagree that hosting sites should be agnostic to content. Should they host malware? Anything related to CSAM? Clearly it is reasonable for them to exercise some editorial control, and this is not a crazy use of that power.

What about emulators? E2EE? P2P software? Software that gets used to leak state secrets? VPNs? Once you open the door, it’s going to be really difficult to resist political pressure in other areas. The mob is easily swayed against new targets.

Why would P2P/E2EE software be banned? Makes no sense to even compare that to crypto. Its like saying we ban C because the bitcoin is written in it.

> Software that gets used to leak state secrets?

Thats not really a "thing". If someone uploads something of the sorts, it probably going to be taken down. VPNs follow the same rules as P2P/E2EE, and has nothing to do with crypto.

Just look at github, they have taken down multiple repos during the years that are illegal, and/or breaks their TOS.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#320

Post by davkan » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 6:35 AM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #233

conartist6 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I don't know. It's impossible to draw a clear line, but the overall effect is not hard to identify. If your work supports a community and creates value, you can reasonably expect the community's support. If your work leeches from a community, you can reasonably expect the community to turn on you. To me slop is identifiable by its effect: it is the type of work which leeches value

> the overall effect is not hard to identify Yes, the effect is it will become a toxic community where your project can be summarily judged and instantly dismissed as slop because there's an AGENTS.md file in the repository or LLM attribution in the commit messages.

AI slop projects, or vibecoded projects, or projects made with heavy llm assistance, or whatever you want to call them are already divisive and the discussions about whether they aught be allowed are already causing strife in many communities.

Right or wrong many users are utterly uninterested in said content and wish that their existing communities could continue as they did prior to the onslaught. Naturally, some communities will decide to attempt to moderate in such a way that supports those users desires. As with most necessary moderation of online communities there will be gray areas and judgement calls and drama and abuse. There really isn’t an alternative.