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

321–330 of 720 posts

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#321

Post by omnimus »

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

At the same time now it's quite clear what is codeber for. Hosting active free software projects that are not vibecoded.

It's not a dump to put anything you have stored in git.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#322

Post by imtringued »

kajman wrote: post #230
conartist6 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They banned cypto projects two weeks ago. Today they banned vibecoded projects. https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

> So while the following use cases are discouraged (similar to private repositories), they are likely to be tolerated in practice: > Side projects and experiments with little resource usage > Specific tools and custom scripts that would be unlikely to find a community anyway, even if they were not LLM-generated I really don't want to join a commons where something I make might be "tolerated in practice" based on a gi…

"Side projects with little resource usage"

Wow so they banned literally everything?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#323

Post by kleene_op »

kurante wrote: post #133
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 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…

This sends a really bad signal.

Why would I host my project there, taking the risk that they changed their mind overnight and declare my project inappropriate because of XYZ?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#324

Post by kurante »

p-e-w wrote: post #235
kurante wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. Well, they kinda do? Go on the main page, it's the second line of text: "Codeberg is a non-pr…

> Should hackernews also mention that allowed content is dependent on its moderators with vaguely defined ideologies? Absolutely. And it would be even better if the moderators each wrote a short summary that’s an honest attempt to describe what their individual ideologies are. I respect institutions that clearly state their biases much more than those that pretend they have none.

Fair enough! But surely you would allow them to update their summary on what their ideologies are, right? People change, after all. And people should know when those ideologies change too.

We should also make sure people read all the blurbs before they join a website. Maybe we should call it the Terms of Service? ;)

Despite most websites having nothing but legalese in there, Codeberg's is pretty short and human readable by comparison. I know most people have been desensitized to it, but I haven't heard of any better way of coveying them at an institutional level.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#325

Post by notrealyme123 »

fluoridation wrote: post #287
wolvesechoes wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the moment you step into social realm it becomes political, as Mr. Aristotle said.

What do you mean? If I talk to a friend about stargazing that's political? If a group of people meet up to play a game of cards that's political?

So I am very pedantic here, but yes it "can" be seen as political. You made the decision that your free time is more important than working and generating value.

I understand "everything is political" more in a sense that we as a society have the burden to shape our own rules, and saying "I only live in the society, but ignore the burden of making rules" is not really possible. In that case you actively decide to let someone else decide for you.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#326

Post by throw49404040 »

mbreese wrote: post #173
conartist6 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Silly is how it is handled and communicated. I want clear rules, not a rant that electricity is expensive!

I have bunch of projects and sites there for a year+, most of them are llm generated.

What is a grace period for existing projects to move? What are criteria for deciding what is "vibe coded"? If i get banned, is the repo just deleted, or made readonly...

Codeberg had outage for last 5 days, where some repos could not be commited into. I expected post mortem analysis, not this debate!

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#327

Post by andor »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #276
pretendgeneer wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 dude. Most things are not, in fact, political. When I enjoy a meal, that isn't political. When I hang out with my family and friends, that isn't political. When I sit down to read a nice book with a cup of cocoa, that isn't political . The notion that "everything is political" is an indicator that someone has an extremely toxic relationship with politics. Basically you're projecting your unhealthy level of politic…

> No dude. Most things are not, in fact, political. When I enjoy a meal, that isn't political. When I hang out with my family and friends, that isn't political. When I sit down to read a nice book with a cup of cocoa, that isn't political.

What do you eat and what do you refuse to eat? Which restaurants would you go to or not? Which companies do you buy from and why/why not?

Who do you meet with and who do you avoid? What do you talk about and which topics do you avoid?

Where is your cocoa grown, which brand do you buy and who ends up making money on your purchase?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#328

Post by omnimus »

Communitivity wrote: post #238

Time to move off of Codeberg. They provide a service, that's it. I don't want drama from my service providers, and censorship incurs drama. I think some censorship is needed (hate speech, CP), but I do not want projects deleted because someone running the service doesn't like how I make them, or what they are for. They have the right to do that, but I also have the right to vote with my feet and go elsewhere, and I'm…

Were you paying for Codeberg?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#329

Post by tkel »

I see this as a higher evolution of simpler community tech projects, which are incapable of tackling or comprehending these things as a group. And so simpler projects will often neglect or reject taking them up altogether, using various restricting justifications. But the truth is this is a step for the community towards actually thinking about how you exist in the world that you live in and having a say in it. Congratulations.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#330

Post by 0x3f »

tkel wrote: post #244
duxup wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well, if you're not part of the community, what do you care? Are you saying you are opposed to this on the grounds that anything could happen in the future? That doesn't really make sense. Yes, anything could happen. Yes, people change. That is true in nearly all contexts. If you're asking in good faith, you participate in the community democratically and try to influence others. Just like normal. There was a vote he…

> Well, if you're not part of the community, what do you care?

One benefits from the availability of alternatives and a healthy market regardless.

Post reply on HN