Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what?
I've never heard of either one, this is only a article because it has crypto + ban = karma.
Yep. HN is a decade behind on crypto.
Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
541–550 of 720 posts
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#542I 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…
The problem with imposing ethics is that, in the future, they might change their views or mark other political problems as verboten.
No serious business or open source project can be built or such shifting sands.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretending to run an inclusive git hosting service for FOSS and then attacking your own users because their code is the wrong type of algorithm isn't politics, it's just being an asshole.
Run your own Codeberg instance with blackjack and hookers, it's open source.
You know what, forget the Codeberg instance!
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#544Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#545Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't want side projects. They aren't a git dump. They want actual projects.
Is that criteria clear in their platform?
Not entirely, but I think between the lines yes. They have a 100MB combined limit each person's non-promoted (i.e. not a serious project) repositories.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#547Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well this is a charity providing services for free. If you want to be provided a service for a price, go elsewhere.
That money had to have come from somewhere, whether it was taxpayers or individuals. What if I donated? Is it cool to just roll over and allow political groups to hijack a previously neutral service? Also there are other projects hosted there, and network effects involved.
Probably if you become a member you'll have more ability to discuss with the other members and the board and the operators, yes.
Clearly they are setting limits on a case-by-case basis where needed. If something like GNOME was on Codeberg, they'd happily raise the storage quota for them. So they can also exempt you from the AI code rule if you have a really good reason, which you don't.
They have noted somewhere (it's linked in this thread) that most vibe-coders act like they're big and valuable software projects (like GNOME), and use commensurate resources, even though they aren't. This is what they want to block. If you were actually GNOME and you were vibe-coding, they'd probably let you.
Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#549Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
My issue with this is not that codeberg and its members want to uphold a certain set of political beliefs. Any private organization is free to do that. It's that they haven't defined the rule that's supposed to encode those beliefs. As written, the rule is a non-exhaustive example of "content that harms codeberg's reputation". Someone asked in the pr whether "cryptocurrency-related" is defined anywhere and it merged…
Real-world lines are blurry. If you try to define a bright line, someone finds a loophole. Like the other thread (about codeberg banning vibecoded projects) had arguments about whether a project with 49.999% generated code would count. Which is based on a category error - things just don't work that way.
It sounds like Codeberg needs to define both clear guidelines and a systematic process by which potential violations of the policy can be fairly reviewed and/or appealed—table stakes for a system that’s going to be integrated into your project as a hosting provider and community hub.
What you seem to be arguing for is seat-of-the-pants reactive mob governance. Functional communities and societies don’t work that way.