Live data from Hacker News

Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

lists.sr.ht

31–40 of 101 posts

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t think their concern is “vibecode = bad” but more like they can’t handle the volume. Then they should not be in the business of hosting repos?

"if you cannot handle a 10x load over the historical standard of generally low quality content you should not be hosting repos" A ridiculous take

There are other ways to slow the traffic down.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#32
post #7

Yikes! I've been a software engineer for over a decade, and I've never had more fun in my career. Running an AI assistant on a cloud machine to pair with me, explore my ideas, learn new tricks, and even write code that I would never write due to timelines and deadlines has been fantastic. Using coding agents to search for patterns, understanding why our abstractions might not be working because of how users integrate…

I think the term vibe coded is unclear. I use agents to do most of my coding work now. Some might call it vibe coded. I use spec driven development of my own design. While the applications are relatively simple, they are reasonably well architected and maintainable.

Some would say I a, vibe coding since I don’t really write the code. I say I’m not because I’m thinking through the features more than vibe coders.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#33
It seems like they're using the term vibe coded as a pejorative to describe all llm use, which is disingenuous. They want to ban LLMs because of political reasons that I mostly agree with, but the term vibe coding invokes being lazy and not even looking at the bad code you generated. But it's just an email subject, so maybe im thinking too much about it.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#34

As more of these smaller forges get similar policies it makes me curious about the statistics behind vibecoded projects. My anecdata tells me that most of these vibecoded projects are one offs or abandoned. That’s not to say they don’t have value to the people who put them together. What I’m wondering though is: “Do these have enough value to the community to justify the cost of more infrastructure?” My guess is the…

> My anecdata tells me that most of these vibecoded projects are one offs or abandoned. That’s not to say they don’t have value to the people who put them together. What I’m wondering though is: “Do these have enough value to the community to justify the cost of more infrastructure?”

Isn't that true of human authored code?

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if you cannot handle a 10x load over the historical standard of generally low quality content you should not be hosting repos" A ridiculous take

There are other ways to slow the traffic down.

Sure there are other ways to do this same thing, they picked this option. Not particularly noteworthy of a thing

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#36

As more of these smaller forges get similar policies it makes me curious about the statistics behind vibecoded projects. My anecdata tells me that most of these vibecoded projects are one offs or abandoned. That’s not to say they don’t have value to the people who put them together. What I’m wondering though is: “Do these have enough value to the community to justify the cost of more infrastructure?” My guess is the…

> My anecdata tells me that most of these vibecoded projects are one offs or abandoned. That’s not to say they don’t have value to the people who put them together. What I’m wondering though is: “Do these have enough value to the community to justify the cost of more infrastructure?” Isn't that true of human authored code?

Sometimes, but definitely not to the same volume.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#37
post #24

'They are an environmental catastrophe' This for me the main source of concern. I am having a blast vibe coding. I understand my job is at risk. But I am totally oblivious to the fact that they are accelerating climate change.

If that's the main concern, wouldn't banning them from code sharing sites be harmful? If a person can create a project using AI and share it, then people can use their code without having to reinvent it. If it can't be shared, then anybody who wants that functionality will recreate it from scratch, and if they use AI to do so then you have now burned ~2x the compute=electricity=impact.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#38
I am sad to see this. Drew personally told me that I should use my real personal email to contribute ("Services like Firefox Relay are not compatible with the spirit of SourceHut. You should be using your real email address with the mailing lists") -- which I don't do because I don't trust others with it, let alone the general public -- so I was already excluded, but I still had some respect for the project as a whole. I am rethinking that now, and it is a real shame. All the GitHub alternatives are becoming too bigoted to be worth the trouble, because of these anti-LLM absolutists. Can no one see the middle ground? It's like saying that visiting StackOverflow at all is just as bad as copy-pasting solutions from it.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#40
Frankly this policy does not go far enough. What about coders whose thoughts were impure because they used ChatGPT to brainstorm or whose brains are ruined because they used Nano Banana to illustrate their blog? I'll hold off from storing my code anywhere until a more righteous service comes online.
Post reply on HN