Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

Post by intunderflow » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:47 AM UTC

StrontiumK9 wrote: post #421

intunderflow wrote: post #413

I've just got back from my day, and I see the Codeberg PR has been stormed by new accounts. Please dont. I posted this here to spark a discussion on HN, not as a license to raid Codeberg. They're at liberty to set their own policies in the same way I'm at liberty to not use their services. If you want to discuss this and you're not already an account holder at Codeberg, the comments section is right here.

They are not necessarily new accounts, their flag shows this is the first time you engaged with a discussion. You could have had an account for months, and it still flags you as new.

Post by LtWorf » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:49 AM UTC

iepathos wrote: post #239

Prohibiting fraud or infrastructure abuse is one thing, but declaring entire categories of lawful software harmful to Codeberg’s reputation is another. They've ironically tanked Codeberg's reputation far more from these policy changes than any projects in that category could have possibly. After these changes, it is difficult for any business, or any project seeking stable infrastructure, to trust that its codebase w…

Post by bravetraveler » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:53 AM UTC

28304283409234 wrote: post #417

bArray wrote: post #367

I don't think you want to store your source code in a place where they ban projects based on politics [1]: > Allowing these projects is not a neutral stance; the effects to the environment are severe. The "DarkFi" (seemingly some crypto designed for criminals, citing an FBI director) project for example uses a "PoW blockchain" (per their readme). PoW (Proof-Of-Work) projects waste an astonishing amount of computation…

If you avoid the discussion, you never get anywhere. Kudos to Codeberg for taking position.

Post by inigyou » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:54 AM UTC

globular-toast wrote: post #297

Bitcoin was supposed to give us a way to have digital cash without bankers controlling the system for their benefit. How did we fuck this up so badly?

Post by inigyou » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:56 AM UTC

thinkingemote wrote: post #479

inigyou wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> platform vs publisher No such distinction exists. It was a just-so story made up by people trying to push the idea that moderation created a legal liability. And it's German, anyway. The DMCA doesn't even apply there.

Indeed we see legislation (from all sides of politics and nations) saying there is no distinction, that all services and websites are now publishers. It was ever thus except when we remember.