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

Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

lists.sr.ht

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

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

#81

Post by swatcoder »

VariousPrograms wrote: post #68
GPerson wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does vibe coding mean to you? I use the term vibe code to mean software produced by conversation with an agent, with minimal or no understanding of the code / project structure by the person. Your process doesn’t sound like vibe coding to me, though maybe this part is “and even write code that I would never write”. If you’re just generating snippets as black boxes and putting that into a project you’re otherwise…

The people in support of these bans generally aren't interested in "good vibe coded" software. They oppose LLMs altogether on various grounds, not just the output quality. FWIW, if an LLM is writing significant code, I'd consider it vibe coding regardless of your understanding of the code or expert guidance and almost certainly ban-AI people would too. The scale people seem care about when this comes up is code perce…

> The people in support of these bans generally aren't interested in "good vibe coded" software. They oppose LLMs altogether on various grounds, not just the output quality.

I think you're very wrong.

I think many of the people who "support these bans" do recognize value in LLM's and use them as tools in the kit applied to their workflows but recognize that rampant abuse and misuse of those same tools threatens to ruin (or already has ruined) many community projects that had previously been healthy and thriving.

And so they find themselves insisting upon unambiguous firewalls as an existential necessity for the communities they have invested years or decades of their lives into.

How do we figure out who's right?

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

#82

Post by vunderba »

gadflyinyoureye wrote: post #32
websap wrote: 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.

The original definition, as put forth by Karpathy [1], was that you explicitly did not look at the code ever (diffs, errors, etc.). All development, review, etc. is driven entirely through the LLM agent.

But at this point, the term has been diluted down to basically being meaningless.

https://xcancel.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383

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

#83

Post by a2ff6eeb0 »

GPerson wrote: post #71
a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you ever care about looking at code? Code forges aren't really a useful tool going forward. As agents replace people writing code, the features of code forges really aren't that useful. Nobody will be reviewing agent code other than agents, and you don't need a pull request and code review model for that. Coding is just going to be asking for a result and manually testing it, no real thought about what code…

I find it fulfilling to write and read code. It’s also a powerful technology. That doesn’t just change just because there’s another technology more powerful in certain ways. These are some level 0 reasons to want to read code, but there are lots.

Ok, sure. Hobbyist purposes excluded.

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

#84

Post by dogleash »

orwin wrote: post #49
piloto_ciego wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's laughable to me, imagine a company saying that they would only host projects that were written in assembly. I mean, "sure" you do you, but I will not be doing business there. These kinds of ideological purity tests and the weird bureaucracies and little fiefdoms associated with them are anathema the hacker ethos.

Did you check the number of open PRs and commit/hour of vibecoded projects? If course they are banned from small community-funded hosts, they eat compute and data for free. Honestly, my vote would have been to make vibe-coded pay per commit, but I guess introducing money is taboo for those communities

> I guess introducing money is taboo for those communities

Sourcehut is a subscription service with multiple tiers of access.

I think the different tiers are just for show, but I could imagine that if they felt there was a subset of projects they liked that were putting extra stress on their system they wouldn't be above differentiation at that point.

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

#85

Post by iamnothere »

dogleash wrote: post #79

I thought sourcehut was general purpose git hosting, not open source mission focused like codeberg? obv they're going to have content restriction, but there is a spectrum from "actually illegal" to "wonderful chaps whom I love but happen to disagree with philosophically." Slop coding is neither of those, but is closer to the latter than I'd expect a general purpose host to draw a line.

It’s general purpose except for what the BDFL (Drew) takes a dislike to, with a veneer of consulting the community. Sourcehut is a rare case of a BDFL-led project making horrible missteps.

The Drew from the Wayland/Sway era is not the same person he once was. It’s sad to see the lost potential here. I used to defend him, even after his attacks on RMS, but I won’t be moving forward.

Slop is slop but people have a right to churn out slop if they want it. Paid users should be allowed to experiment if they aren’t exceeding limits. (IMHO slop will soon be a self-correcting problem, we’re already seeing normie slop fatigue.)

I don’t want my source forge banning anything that isn’t blatantly illegal or abusing resources, because there’s no guarantee that I won’t be next on the chopping block.

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

#86

Post by GPerson »

a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #83
GPerson wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fulfilling to write and read code. It’s also a powerful technology. That doesn’t just change just because there’s another technology more powerful in certain ways. These are some level 0 reasons to want to read code, but there are lots.

Ok, sure. Hobbyist purposes excluded.

You don’t buy the argument the open source movement has been putting out for decades about code transparency increasing freedom?

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

#87

Post by piloto_ciego »

GPerson wrote: post #74
piloto_ciego wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we will, tbh. But I also think these people saying, “how dare you use AI to write code” for ideological reasons or some variation on that theme are silly.

I don’t think they’re silly, though I don’t think it’s right to vilify the end users just because the people who’ve created the technology are criminals and the technology has lots of bad effects overall. Do you think it’s silly if these people protest the technology without vilifying people who choose to use it?

Oh, I definitely think its silly.

"Nobody should use nail guns! It's against the true carpenter ethos."

Nobody is spazzing out about Makita because they produce drill drivers and people can't built things with a plane and a manual screw driver. I think it's all silly.

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

#88

Post by a2ff6eeb0 »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #87
GPerson wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they’re silly, though I don’t think it’s right to vilify the end users just because the people who’ve created the technology are criminals and the technology has lots of bad effects overall. Do you think it’s silly if these people protest the technology without vilifying people who choose to use it?

Oh, I definitely think its silly. "Nobody should use nail guns! It's against the true carpenter ethos." Nobody is spazzing out about Makita because they produce drill drivers and people can't built things with a plane and a manual screw driver. I think it's all silly.

But Makita isn't selling machines that can decide how to build the house, and then go do it. AI tools are a mind and mechanism. They're a full replacement for the human, especially in the software space.

I think we're genuinely not far from taking end user tickets and turning them into requirements and working code autonomously.

The only remaining work for us monkeys is manual testing and verification that everything is actually working as desired.

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

#89

Post by g-b-r »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #77
g-b-r wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vibecoders like to make all kinds of things that already exist, often don't care (or notice) if the AI rewrites everything instead of using what exists, and LLMs love to do that.

Okay, you can pick between 90% NIH with some sharing or 95% NIH because you tried to stop the sharing. The amount doesn't matter; you're still causing more AI use.

NIH? Anyhow you kind of cause more use of AI also if it seems that everyone is using it, and thus you should adopt it too.

And nothing actually prevents a vibecoder to clone a repository on SourceHut, they just would be less able to add a ton of crap to it and spit it back on SourceHut (they'll just spit it back on GitHub).

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

#90

Post by rakel_rakel »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #47
neilv wrote: post #45

When I wanted to get experience with vibe-coding, and build a gen-AI portfolio, among the decisions about what to use it for and how to do it, I very consciously chose the most AI-enthusiastic, popular Git repository service, which is GitHub. I was a little surprised that some people were outraged that Codeberg (strong ideology/principles) banned generative AI output. Now that Sourcehut (craft-oriented?) is consideri…

It's laughable to me, imagine a company saying that they would only host projects that were written in assembly. I mean, "sure" you do you, but I will not be doing business there. These kinds of ideological purity tests and the weird bureaucracies and little fiefdoms associated with them are anathema the hacker ethos.

If that company only hosted projects written in assembly and you don't write assembly... then you not doing business there is the desired outcome for the both of you, what's the gotcha there?
Post reply on HN