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

551–560 of 720 posts

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#551

Post by rwz »

Yeah, I'm not interested in a service that makes their product decisions based on the political hot button issue of the day. Was it only yesterday when they decided to ban "vibecoded" projects? Nobody in comments had a clear idea on what exactly the definition of "vibecoded" is, so half of the discussion was just confusion.

Now it's this.

I want my code hosting to host my code and only consider removing something when there's a legal demand from authorities.

Otherwise you can't be sure that the code you host peacefully today won't fall out of political activists favor tomorrow and be deleted forcing you to scramble figuring out where to move to. Fuck this.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#552

Post by iamnothere »

inigyou wrote: post #475
iamnothere wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, this all sounds like the kind of fuzzy reasoning and nondescript language that turns communities into popularity contests and backstabbing competitions. If Codeberg wants to put a flag up to draw in every programmer with a personality disorder, well that may be their right , but it’s not a good idea.

Tough. The world is fuzzy and nondescript. Platform says no porn, you ask if one bare nipple is porn. Platform says English only, you ask if it's okay to use loanwords. These would be good questions if you were programming a computer, but dumb questions to ask about a judge.

The real world (as in society) has labyrinthine processes and procedures, with multiple checks and balances, designed to ensure that justice is at least partially served. Codeberg appears to lack this.

And nations with civil law systems would disagree with your premise. Laws in these systems are expected to be clearly written without excessive room for interpretation. There are obviously still grey areas, but the systems aren’t flexible and open to interpretation like common law systems.

But in any case, we’re talking about a freaking git project host here, not a nation. They can set the rules however they want. But from a developer (user) perspective, they should favor rules that treat projects fairly and with a more liberal moderation policy.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#553

Post by b40d-48b2-979e »

iamnothere wrote: post #181
b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Comparing crypto scammers to political dissidents is a WILD slippery slope strawman.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#554

Post by NetOpWibby »

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…

They really quoted the FBI Director in their reasoning? Unserious people.

Anything law enforcement can’t peek into is “designed for criminals.”

EDIT: This person echoes my sentiment completely; https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19...

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#555

Post by [deleted] »

tbrownaw wrote: post #217
Forgeties79 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re the one who seems to be conflating things - everything is political =/= opinions are mandatory.

The comment I was replying to said > 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. That assertion is incorrect. Said incorrect assertion is derived from the conflation I called out.

[deleted]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#556

Post by Forgeties79 »

orbital-decay wrote: post #383
Forgeties79 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re the one who seems to be conflating things - everything is political =/= opinions are mandatory.

Reminder that you're commenting on the decision to make someone's political opinion against crypto mandatory for Codeberg

They’re banning crypto projects. There’s no screening for your opinion on crypto. Let’s not make this into something it isn’t.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#557

Post by [deleted] »

inigyou wrote: post #444
ChocolateGod wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I don't use Mastodon. What you can see is completely reliant on what kind of politics the admin supports at that time.

But you use HN, where what you can see is completely reliant on what kind of politics the admin supports at that time?

[deleted]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#558

Post by iamnothere »

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #553
iamnothere wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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.

Comparing crypto scammers to political dissidents is a WILD slippery slope strawman.

Your willful lack of understanding is remarkable. There are non-scam uses of crypto, although I admit that there are more scams right now than non-scams. Regardless, painting all crypto devs as “scammers” is as absurd as painting political dissidents as “subversives” or “traitors”. It’s manipulative language, and it opens the door for classifying other software as “good” or “bad” based on highly flexible public opinion.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#559

Post by Forgeties79 »

mlrtime wrote: post #494
hogwasher wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather companies actually care (or even just care about seeming to care) about ethics, rather than only caring what makes the line go up the fastest, yes. A company that treats ethics as optional, or that thinks "it's a business" excuses every imaginable sin, is one that will happily screw you and me over too. Also, in the long term, making climate change worse is a catastrophically bad decision for absolutely ev…

The problem is they can change their mind at a whim and all of a sudden you are on the other side of what they care about. Not worth the risk, I'd say don't use them.

And go where instead? GitHub?

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#560

Post by iamnothere »

tkel wrote: post #503
StrontiumK9 wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have 1085 Voters, only 306 Voters voted for the proposal, and it passed. That might clear their governance requirements on paper, its certainly not a majority of their eligible voting community.

Ok, have you ever been part of a directly democratic organization? Not everyone shows up to every meeting or every vote. An organization I was a part of had quorum at 10%.

Did you know that Australia requires everyone to vote in national elections?

There are also systems that exist between “legally mandated voting” and “whoever shows up”.

You could even set different thresholds based on the importance of the issue! (Decisions like ToS changes would seem to be quite important.)

Post reply on HN