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

Ah, the Codeberg Drama

gagliardoni.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#51

Post by zero_shift »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #49
zero_shift wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I said "AI enthusiasts" would that feel like less of an attack? > I think you're being dishonest in your framing Asking without malice: why are you telling me this? This is an open internet forum. You can suspect my sincerity but also, I can suspect yours. Neither of us can ever prove we mean what we say. We just have to muddle on and ignore anything we think is trolling

Because having been "voted off the island" and having to spend the last 3 days grinding away reworking my entire documentation, release process, community outreach, and hosting situation, I am naturally irritated by people then mischaracerizing motives about why I and others might be complaining? And then having the nerve to try to bucket me in some fictitious category of AI people to justify these aspersions? And th…

You are clearly very angry about this.

Codeberg wants to protect their hosting from the large volume of AI projects.

What do you think the right solution is here?

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#52

Post by jdiff »

Levitz wrote: post #41
jackb4040 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just as they are free to do this, I am free to move It doesn't seem like you're amicably moving your projects away. It seems like you're going around tech forums arguing with the democratic decision and fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next.

>fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next. Fear-mongering? What were legitimate projects are getting removed already. This is not fear-mongering, it's just not being incredibly shortsighted.

Where will this slope slide next? It doesn't seem all that slippery to me. First they came for the LLMs, Lord knows plenty of people are speaking up, but who will they come for next in the dead of night after a majority of voting members publicly decide to boot them?

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#53

Post by cmrdporcupine »

zero_shift wrote: post #51
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because having been "voted off the island" and having to spend the last 3 days grinding away reworking my entire documentation, release process, community outreach, and hosting situation, I am naturally irritated by people then mischaracerizing motives about why I and others might be complaining? And then having the nerve to try to bucket me in some fictitious category of AI people to justify these aspersions? And th…

You are clearly very angry about this. Codeberg wants to protect their hosting from the large volume of AI projects. What do you think the right solution is here?

The honest and respectful answer from the Codeberg community would have been: resource limits, quotas, and a reviewed application form for new projects.

And maybe a statement that: "Pre-existing vibe coded projects providing little value to the community may be subject to review."

Instead we got a Lord Of the Flies moment.

... Personally I was planning up to that point on donating once I got paying work again.

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#54

Post by microtonal »

jackb4040 wrote: post #35
microtonal wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is of course in the right of voting members to do this. However, it undermines Codeberg as a stable repo hosting platform. If you are hosting a repo there for an open source project, it may suddenly be in violation after a whim of the voting members. The signal is now that Codeberg is an activist platform. That is fine, but that makes it unfit for many projects that want a largely neutral hoster. Just as they are…

> Just as they are free to do this, I am free to move It doesn't seem like you're amicably moving your projects away. It seems like you're going around tech forums arguing with the democratic decision and fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next.

It doesn't seem like you're amicably moving your projects away.

I am moving my projects away because I will be in violation of the new rule:

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

While my projects are currently not 'mostly code generated by "generative AI"-tools', most new code for some of my projects is, so at some point in the not-too-far future I will cross the threshold where this becomes true.

around tech forums arguing with the democratic decision

Don't be so dramatic. What tech forums am I going around aside from a comment here? Also, I acknowledged that this is a democratic decision. That does not mean that I have to agree with it and if I don't agree with it, I can move my repositories somewhere else. I am just flagging that this can be a problem for existing open source projects.

fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next.

My projects are legitimate and have been used for years by many people and some will be in violation of this rule once enough LLM-assisted code has been added.

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#55

Post by microtonal »

Defletter wrote: post #47
logifail wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems like you're going around tech forums arguing with the democratic decision and fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next. If we're going to argue that a platform is free to make decisions, aren't its [ex-]users also free to make decisions, too?

Yes obviously, and they've already said that. What they're pointing out is that people are being petulant whiners about it. If we can all agree that Codeberg is free to make its decisions, and a decision has been made that you don't like, then just choose another provider. Going around slandering Codeberg is being a petulant whiner.

I think one of the issues is that people who already have repositories there have to migrate them, migrate the issues, existing pull requests, community, etc. For larger projects this can be quite a large time sink.

I think it would have been more palatable to people if the terms said something like "Additionally, for repositories after July 24, the following additional requirements apply:".

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#56

Post by Levitz »

jdiff wrote: post #52
Levitz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>fear-mongering about how legitimate projects will be removed next. Fear-mongering? What were legitimate projects are getting removed already. This is not fear-mongering, it's just not being incredibly shortsighted.

Where will this slope slide next? It doesn't seem all that slippery to me. First they came for the LLMs, Lord knows plenty of people are speaking up, but who will they come for next in the dead of night after a majority of voting members publicly decide to boot them?

You've got perfectly reasonable and predictable scenarios if you read the post.

CoC drama is already a much too known vector of problems, this adds fuel to possible fires.

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#57

Post by jdiff »

Levitz wrote: post #56
jdiff wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where will this slope slide next? It doesn't seem all that slippery to me. First they came for the LLMs, Lord knows plenty of people are speaking up, but who will they come for next in the dead of night after a majority of voting members publicly decide to boot them?

You've got perfectly reasonable and predictable scenarios if you read the post. CoC drama is already a much too known vector of problems, this adds fuel to possible fires.

All are quite large leaps.

Re: Ah, the Codeberg Drama

#59

Post by janantos »

c048 wrote: post #14
bagol wrote: post #7

Banning LLM or crypto currency related projects is very bad. I think it's better to flag them or mark them, but let them be.

They're not banning code written and maintained with the use of LLM's. They're banning projects entirely created by LLM's and heavily (or solely) maintained by LLM's. It's basically not allowing junkfood on their platform. Now that code is easier than ever to barf out, so will the amount of junk. As for tossing out any and all crypto projects... how is anyone still willing to associate themselves with that pile of ga…

Not true their explanation blog mentions as one of not welcomed projects are projects tied to LLM ecosystem, nevermind if written by human.
Post reply on HN