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

I regret migrating to Codeberg

xn--gckvb8fzb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 617 posts

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#131

Post by danpalmer »

NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #122
danpalmer wrote: post #105

The answer to big platforms enshittifying is not to move to smaller versions of the same thing. This didn't work for GitHub -> Codeberg/Sourcehut, it didn't work for Twitter -> Mastodon. Because the problem is not necessarily the size, it's the power. Codeberg is exerting power beyond what it should and users have little recourse and get caught up in the issues, some Mastodon servers are fine but there have been plen…

> it didn't work for Twitter -> Mastodon you mean Twitter -> Bluesky? Mastodon seems to work as intended

No this is my point, Mastodon doesn't solve this problem in the general case. The shift to Mastodon did not solve the problem of social network admins with too much power, because of the lock-in to instances. Most instances are fine, but there have been many that have caused their users a lot of difficulty, and users fundamentally don't own their data.

The way most users use Bluesky is no different, but the protocol is different, and it is possible to not fall afoul of these issues – data is portable, you can choose your moderation, UI, algorithms, etc, all separately rather than being forced to take a whole package and lose control.

See Blacksky for a completely separate stack, governed separately, that is still fully compatible. That's not possible with Mastodon or even ActivityPub.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#132

Post by adamddev1 »

> In addition, Codeberg conflates “having a community” with “being legitimate software worth hosting”

I don't think this is a fair summary. I don't see this conflation in Codeberg's blog post. The words in quotation marks don't actually exist in Codeberg's blog post.

It seems that what they are saying is: In a free hosting platform where we share all the resources, it's not fair that some people using LLMs are using up disproportionately huge hosting resources to handle the unnaturally large amounts of resources they can churn out with these tools.

I'm a solo dev, and I couldn't find the judgement against solo developers or any slight against people who don't have a team. The concern is that some people don't gobble up an unfair amount of resources.

I personally have been moving to self-hosted Foregejo for ultimate freedom. But I also think it's fair for some providers have the freedom to take a bit more of a harsh (or based - depending on your perspective) stance against LLM generated code. I mean, a lot of people have been bemoaning the fact that the human-generated material has been increasingly hard to find in a sea of AI-generated material. It could be nice to have a corner of curated, human-made code still available on the web.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#133

Post by microtonal »

Aachen wrote: post #47
Aachen wrote: post #16

I'm a member of Codeberg and was allowed to vote on these amendments. There was the annual assembly meeting before the ballots were sent by email. Each proposal had a short presentation and a few minutes of Q&A. It wasn't a discussion (the text was final at this point), it was just to ask for clarifications. In the meeting I asked about the server load that they mentioned in their presentation, but misphrased it and…

So I voted against, partly because I feel that the text doesn't to justice to such a multifaceted topic. If all projects on Codeberg were human-written, that would be a big seal of quality! There are a lot of projects coming out now where someone feels like they've made a cool thing but it breaks on the first edge case and is entirely unmaintainable. Many are built on wrong principles because the prompt authors aren'…

You'd have to migrate your repository and community away from Codeberg. Why take that risk? It's just not a worry I feel that developers need.

I feel like we are already there. I am not vibecoding a lot, but I certainly use LLM-assisted coding now for most of my work. Once you go beyond vibe coding, an LLM feels a lot like a compiler from your well-specified ideas to code. So, to some extend, these restrictions feel like disallowing a higher-level programming language in a time when everyone was still writing machine code.

I understand where this decision is coming from (especially because they have been under attack by LLM bots) and it is well within their right, but the vague language adds a lot of uncertainty:

You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools

It's clear that this excludes vibe coding. But what about LLM-assisted coding, where the developer writes very clear instructions of what to do and carefully reviews every line? In such cases a project 'mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools', but the quality is probably not worse than fully hand-written code, especially because an LLM is often more able to 'think' of all kinds of corner cases.

I have some projects on Codeberg and donate monthly, but I have to reconsider both, since with this change Codeberg does not really align with how I work anymore. The projects that I have on Codeberg are largely human-written, but certainly use LLM-assistance for new code.

At any rate, I guess I'm back to GitHub until I have found a better alternative.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#134

Post by gs17 »

bayindirh wrote: post #6

For a more informed discussion about what's banned and what's not, I'm leaving here this discussion on Mastodon: https://tldr.nettime.org/@tante/116962454004862117 TL;DR: AI assisted coding, when used responsibly, is not banned, however one-shotting something via vibe-coding and hosting it as a complete project, is. Also, Codeberg always had a limit on private repositories and never wanted to be a place for non-FLOSS…

> TL;DR: AI assisted coding, when used responsibly, is not banned, however one-shotting something via vibe-coding and hosting it as a complete project, is.

Doesn't seem to be what they put in their ToS:

>You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools

Unless you've defined "responsibly" in a funny way.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#135

Post by matheusmoreira »

anticorporate wrote: post #10

The author seems annoyed that Codeberg wants to focus on projects that have a legitimate contributor community and is not designed for one-off individual projects. I don't share that concern. It's not all that different from Mastodon instances. It's a community space, and the community gets to decide who they allow to use their resources. Personally, I have a group of friends who share a GitLab instance, for example.…

> The author seems annoyed that Codeberg wants to focus on projects that have a legitimate contributor community and is not designed for one-off individual projects.

Yeah, it feels so good to know my AGPLv3 free software projects are illegitimate because I haven't managed to build a community around them yet. They don't matter, they're just "one-off" individual projects. Literally prompting and shipping Fable oneshots here.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#136

Post by venussnatch »

adamddev1 wrote: post #132

> In addition, Codeberg conflates “having a community” with “being legitimate software worth hosting” I don't think this is a fair summary. I don't see this conflation in Codeberg's blog post. The words in quotation marks don't actually exist in Codeberg's blog post. It seems that what they are saying is: In a free hosting platform where we share all the resources, it's not fair that some people using LLMs are using…

Define resources and create a better limit then. 10 small code-only projects will take orders of magnitude less storage, bandwidth and cpu than one project with committed image and sound assets.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#137

Post by matheusmoreira »

kps wrote: post #36
anticorporate wrote: post #10

The author seems annoyed that Codeberg wants to focus on projects that have a legitimate contributor community and is not designed for one-off individual projects. I don't share that concern. It's not all that different from Mastodon instances. It's a community space, and the community gets to decide who they allow to use their resources. Personally, I have a group of friends who share a GitLab instance, for example.…

I moved my projects to Codeberg 3 years ago because it promoted itself as a host for FOSS, and I was starting to think that GitHub was not going to remain a dependable FOSS host. All of mine are one-man itch-scratching that I am willing to share with others. None so far contain any LLM-assisted work. A couple weeks ago I froze them, when https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48842611 came up. Not because of the LLM po…

Thanks for linking that thread, it told me everything I needed to know.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#138

Post by supriyo-biswas »

simoncion wrote: post #119
Yokohiii wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't look into codeberg really and didn't follow any discussions around it, except some projects fleeing to codeberg. At the first glance it just looks like a github competitor. Recently I tried to create a repo there and nothing pointed out any of the noted restrictions or preferences. I think that is a clear communication problem. Maybe the times are chaotic for them and they need to figure out how to position…

> ... Recently I tried to create a repo there and nothing pointed out any of the noted restrictions or preferences. > I think that is a clear communication problem. ... The following is very clearly posted on their account creation page: [0] By registering for a Codeberg account, you consent to our Privacy Policy [1] and agree to our Terms of Use. [2] You'll note that [2] is the same document linked to by the comment…

> Perhaps being informed of your obligations when you create an account is insufficient

I'm sure that if we were talking about a corporate entity, then people would have retorted with how "no one reads the ToS" and "most ToSes are unenforceable", and guess what? In a world where significant AI assistance is becoming common, finding out which project is AI generated or even knowing the level of AI assistance is well nigh impossible and could be very well unenforceable.

Edit: It has come to my attention that Codeberg is a registered association[1]. It would be "fun" to see them argue about how they may argue that an AI assisted project has "harmed their reputation".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_association_(German...

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#139

Post by HelloNurse » 

  >  It seems like many ‘vibe coders’ don’t realize that they don’t actually have a community around them.
This is not about demanding a community, as the article argues about at great length: it's only a polite way to say that many ‘vibe coders’ are annoying, negative net value assholes. Community would ensure that they are not aberrant lone wolves.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#140

Post by p2detar »

It was always an ideology-driven project. LLM-hating now turned into a mandatory religious ritual for places like codeberg. That‘s fine though, one can self-host forgejo, gitea, gogs and so on. In fact the role of github and places like codeberg to form communities is rapidly diminishing. Even for FOSS it makes more sense to host privately than rely on somebody‘s corporate or emotionally-driven platform management.
Post reply on HN