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

Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

statichost.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 265 posts

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#231

Post by selfhoster1312 »

jeremyjh wrote: post #131
selfhoster1312 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would i use codefloe and not a more reputable non-profit provider like codeberg/disroot/framagit? It says it's community owned, but i only see one codefloe team member on the forums and a few people (like you). I didn't find any good community rules or pricing, any political statement about the mission, etc. The only thing i found deep in the comments is that it seems to be for people who don't want FLOSS? Also t…

Codeberg does not permit personal repos, it is strictly for open source project communities. Also, it is painfully slow if you are working in a repo of any size. Codefloe is professionally hosted on a robust platform - it could probably support about 10x the volume Codeberg has currently with good performance. I have not used the other options you mentioned but I've long admired what Framasoft is doing. I'm not sure…

Thanks for the explanation. It's more detailed than what's on the homepage.

> it could probably support about 10x the volume Codeberg has currently with good performance

I'm very curious about this statement since it seems to also be based on forgejo, and hosted by Hetzner. Maybe there's some forms of clever caching involved? That could explain why the monthly expenditures seem to be moving around so much, which is unusual. Do you have a link about it?

> an ideology that restricts the types of projects hosted there

That's precisely what people who don't want FLOSS say. I appreciate that some communities prevent others from restricting our freedoms; if that means restricting their capability to engage in harmful behavior (eg. non-free software, LLMs, scams, etc) that's a plus. But even codeberg is not that "strict".

> They are owned by a commercial entity, devXY but they are not profit seeking.

I will never trust a for-profit corporation to host my data, and even less so if it claims to not seek profit. If you don't seek profit, there is 0 reason to setup a for-profit company. And depending on your jurisdiction, it may actually be illegal for a for-profit to receive donations.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I hope to be wrong and over time codefloe becomes a flourishing community full of interesting projects and people.

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#232

Post by xigoi »

jasonvorhe wrote: post #107
selfhoster1312 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would i use codefloe and not a more reputable non-profit provider like codeberg/disroot/framagit? It says it's community owned, but i only see one codefloe team member on the forums and a few people (like you). I didn't find any good community rules or pricing, any political statement about the mission, etc. The only thing i found deep in the comments is that it seems to be for people who don't want FLOSS? Also t…

Haven't used Codefloe but at least they're not restricting what projects you can host with them. I don't see any preachy neo-Luddite "don't use AI" or "no private repos pls" messaging on their site.

Apparently, not wanting to spend a huge amount of resources on storing slop makes a free hosting service “neo-Luddite”.

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#233

Post by rrr_oh_man »

tuwtuwtuwtuw wrote: post #227
rrr_oh_man wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enlighten everyone, me included, please?

EU is not the same thing as Europe. Europe is a continent, EU a political and economic union. Similar to the USA not being same as America.

Wow! Thanks! TIL!

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#234

Post by jasonvorhe »

selfhoster1312 wrote: post #230
jeremyjh wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using AI was not against any terms of service at all three months ago.

No, it was just against every value Codeberg ever stood for, and against the value humanity should stand for. There was no ambiguity ever about this. There is no moral ambiguity that if people develop military FLOSS on codeberg they will be banned, even though it's not in the ToS right now, because that's the right thing to do and the community will reach a consensus that we want to support human communities, not mil…

The rules say nothing about military AI and currently include selfhosted LLMs as well:

> 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 (1) 3) and furthermore have little safeguards to ensure that they do not include harmful code (c.f. § 2 (1) 5).

At least stick with the truth before launching with "the right the to do" (which is also a pretty bad rule because it's completely ambiguous.)

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#235

Post by embedding-shape »

jeremyjh wrote: post #199
embedding-shape wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, point being? Codeberg is a non-profit community that evolves and figures out where to move, all the time, this is the point of the association itself. Members discuss what to do, then a decision is made, then new rules eventually apply, this is how the project moves forward.

You said people were “riding the line”. They weren’t. Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting. Projects that were not illegal, indecent or dangerous. I can’t think of another time something like that has happened. They can do it, sure, but many had hoped they could be an independent host for all FOSS as GitHub deteriorates. They have disappointed those hopes, and we wi…

> Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting

What does "made up" mean? It was a decision by the actual members of the platform, you know, the actual people using it! Nothing "made up" about it.

I think it's pretty clear you don't have an idea of what Codeberg is trying to be, nor do you have any interest in understanding, you just want to push this "Codefloe" platform for some reason. Codeberg make very public what the platform is for and yes, that'll change in the future too, as the world changes.

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#236

Post by embedding-shape »

FabCH wrote: post #213
embedding-shape wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't? Maybe I didn't explain properly, what did you understood I said/wrote?

„ and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it“ That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Notably, Codeberg is morally opposed to AI.

> That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population.

Why on earth would Codeberg give even the slighest fucks about what the "hacker news population" finds "fine and good"? Makes absolutely zero sense.

Codeberg made those things against the Terms of Service because paying members who use the platform voted for exactly that. This is how Codeberg works, the members of the platform decides how it works.

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#238

Post by embedding-shape »

rrr_oh_man wrote: post #233
tuwtuwtuwtuw wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU is not the same thing as Europe. Europe is a continent, EU a political and economic union. Similar to the USA not being same as America.

Wow! Thanks! TIL!

You know, you might want to try another approach than doubling-down on sarcasm if you want to actually get something out of this platform. You kind of get back what you put in, in terms of effort of the comments and such. Or, continue whatever you're doing, it's clearly fun to you in some way :)

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#239

Post by PeterStuer »

selfhoster1312 wrote: post #231
jeremyjh wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codeberg does not permit personal repos, it is strictly for open source project communities. Also, it is painfully slow if you are working in a repo of any size. Codefloe is professionally hosted on a robust platform - it could probably support about 10x the volume Codeberg has currently with good performance. I have not used the other options you mentioned but I've long admired what Framasoft is doing. I'm not sure…

Thanks for the explanation. It's more detailed than what's on the homepage. > it could probably support about 10x the volume Codeberg has currently with good performance I'm very curious about this statement since it seems to also be based on forgejo, and hosted by Hetzner. Maybe there's some forms of clever caching involved? That could explain why the monthly expenditures seem to be moving around so much, which is u…

Forgejo user, but I do not trust Codeberg after their last "vote".

Re: Statichost.eu – European static site hosting

#240

Post by FabCH »

embedding-shape wrote: post #236
FabCH wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

„ and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it“ That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Notably, Codeberg is morally opposed to AI.

> That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Why on earth would Codeberg give even the slighest fucks about what the "hacker news population" finds "fine and good"? Makes absolutely zero sense. Codeberg made those things against the Terms of Service because paying members who use the platform voted for exactly that.…

You changed the topic. The topic is not what Codeberg should care about. The topic was trust in the humans behind Codeberg to not delete private repositories on a whim. Codeberg community is free to care about whatever it sees fit. That doesn't protect them from criticism.

Do I trust humans behind Codeberg to behave sensibly? No.

Would more precise terms of service that explain what Codeberg community thinks is ok help with such trust? Yes.

Should the humans behind Codeberg care what I think? Maybe? Presumably they do care about reaching _some_ users, otherwise why have the service public at all?

Post reply on HN