Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 298 posts

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#271

Post by Ghoelian »

Mashimo wrote: post #38
KingOfCoders wrote: post #29

What is a vibe coded project? Where does it start? Cursor autocomplete? One shot Github project copies? [Edit] The pull link is https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253/files and says "7. You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude , OpenAI Codex ). Such projects having an unclear copyright status (see requirements § 2 (1) 1 and § 2 (…

> projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools I guess if you auto complete line by line and actually read the code it should be gucci. Edit: Oh, you found it as well now. Disregard my post.

AI auto complete is still generative AI, why would that be any different? Unless you're talking about regular intellisense-like auto complete, which of course does not use generative AI at all, which would obviously be fine.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#272

Post by Ghoelian »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #203
KingOfCoders wrote: post #29

What is a vibe coded project? Where does it start? Cursor autocomplete? One shot Github project copies? [Edit] The pull link is https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253/files and says "7. You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude , OpenAI Codex ). Such projects having an unclear copyright status (see requirements § 2 (1) 1 and § 2 (…

I’d say even GitHub copilot autocomplete is LLM aided coding. Copy pasting from a chat too is. But let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The point is the intent. We don’t want AI generated code. Put that in github if you so please. This is for human generated code. Some day we will have a way to enforce the amount of AI usage on its participants, right now we can just rely on an honor code and clear int…

What do you mean "I'd say"? It's obviously a fact. Github copilot uses an llm for its autocomplete, so obviously it falls under llm generated code.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#273

Post by badsectoracula »

customguy wrote: post #258
badsectoracula wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Before Codeberg has to ask that, the person who would upload has to ask it themselves. People know what they did, or didn't. This is going in circles. For someone to "ask it themselves", first they need to know what to ask. But the term is vague: what does "mostly" mean? You can't ask yourself if your code is "mostly consist of code written by" generative AI if you don't know what whoever is going to judge the rule…

> what does "mostly" mean? the same as "zero", in that if the amount is zero, you're fine. "did you pack your bags yourself?" "no/not sure/what does that mean let's discuss" = please leave the premises now "yes" = welcome

That is only your own interpretation. It is one that does conform to the rule but only because it takes one extreme side of the potential "amount" of allowed genAI use.

However this isn't what the terms update state. If that was the meaning then they would have explicitly written "zero" - or something along these lines. The fact they didn't do that (despite the update being there for weeks and people were able to vote on them for a long time - so it wasn't just some mistake) means they do allow "some" use of genAI - so at that point the question becomes "how much".

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#275

Post by customguy »

badsectoracula wrote: post #273
customguy wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what does "mostly" mean? the same as "zero", in that if the amount is zero, you're fine. "did you pack your bags yourself?" "no/not sure/what does that mean let's discuss" = please leave the premises now "yes" = welcome

That is only your own interpretation. It is one that does conform to the rule but only because it takes one extreme side of the potential "amount" of allowed genAI use. However this isn't what the terms update state. If that was the meaning then they would have explicitly written "zero" - or something along these lines. The fact they didn't do that (despite the update being there for weeks and people were able to vot…

> "If you have shit on your shoe, please don't walk across our carpet".

Even if you could afford the equipment to make sure you don't have a single molecule of shit on your shoe, you couldn't operate it. Most people couldn't. So what gives? How is it possible that people have parties and then not endless discussions for decades and centuries about this unsolvable issue, right up there with how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Because they're not playing games is why. Because it's simple, if you don't bend over backwards to make it seem hard. You don't walk through shit on purpose, and before entering you check your shoes to your best ability. The end. There will be small percentage of cases where this fails, and that's fine. Spirit of the law and all that.

You do the same with genAI. If you are worried it's too much, "the wrong kind", whatever, you simply ask them. Because you have good intentions and will respect their answer, you have no reason not to do that. If you don't even have anything you're unsure if you can upload there, it's totally moot.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#276

Post by KingOfCoders »

jazzypants wrote: post #191
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's reasonable to assume >50% by default, unless the source clarifies what they mean by "mostly".

How would anyone ever be able to arbitrate this? It's an unenforceable policy if you actually care about fairness.

“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken." -Atlas Shrugged

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#277

Post by KingOfCoders »

matkoniecz wrote: post #250
KingOfCoders wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until people get kicked off because their code is "mostly" AI and we have discussions on HN how unfair it is to kick people off for some fuzzy and unclear definition of genAI generated code. If they create a place for human written code, it would be much easier to say No AI generated code. Examples include but are not limited to: * No autocomplete * No prompt generated code * No automatic agent generated code *…

Claiming that all autocomplete is AI is clearly wrong, so I am not enthusiastic about your advise.

All autocomplete is machine generated, the result is the same, unclear copyright, potential slob, not human typed.

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#278

Post by KingOfCoders »

joepie91_ wrote: post #255
KingOfCoders wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until people get kicked off because their code is "mostly" AI and we have discussions on HN how unfair it is to kick people off for some fuzzy and unclear definition of genAI generated code. If they create a place for human written code, it would be much easier to say No AI generated code. Examples include but are not limited to: * No autocomplete * No prompt generated code * No automatic agent generated code *…

The people who would argue about how unfair it is that they got kicked out of somewhere because they flew too close to the sun, are also the same people who will rules-lawyer your "easy" list of rules and invent loopholes if they need to, just to be able to complain and stir up a crowd. Codeberg is run by people. People who can make contextual judgments. They're even pretty explicit about it in their blogpost; that i…

Every thread on HN about people getting kicked out of Stripe or Amazon, those flew too close to the sun?

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#279

Post by KingOfCoders »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #260
joepie91_ wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who would argue about how unfair it is that they got kicked out of somewhere because they flew too close to the sun, are also the same people who will rules-lawyer your "easy" list of rules and invent loopholes if they need to, just to be able to complain and stir up a crowd. Codeberg is run by people. People who can make contextual judgments. They're even pretty explicit about it in their blogpost; that i…

To be clear, nobody has been "kicked out." Not yet. We left . Because of people talking like you, people starting from categorical purist blanket judgements and implying that anybody who used these tools is immoral and their legitimate questions about what the policy would actually be were attempted rule breaking. Before there was even a rule. " They're even pretty explicit about it in their blogpost; that it's not g…

"that it's not going to be a search-and-destroy process"

Now. What about next week? When the mood changes?

Re: Codeberg bans vibe coded projects

#280

Post by KingOfCoders »

lproven wrote: post #251
KingOfCoders wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Mostly at any given time?" Yes, old project with 1M LOC of pre-AI code + 100% AI 100k LOC generated coded for the last three months, is that mostly?

No. "Most" is clear and unambiguous. It means more X than Y. The value of X is larger than the value of Y. X = bot slop ; Y = human written code In your question, 90% human written, 10% bot generated; no, it is not "most".

LOC? NLOC? Files? Calculated during the last week? Day? Month? Year?
Post reply on HN