Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you have your agent create you your own codeberg, with blackjack, and hookers.
Can the LLM also materialise a server and free electricity for me?
No, but it can pretend to do that, which is close enough.
Codeberg Divides
151–160 of 242 posts
Re: Codeberg Divides
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been thinking along these lines more and more. Trying to specify exact limits and trying to account for every possible situation when making rules just encourages people to find holes and workarounds. It creates a game, a competition between the rule makers and everyone else. When instead you state higher level values and ask for cooperation, it encourages us to work together. It's the Honor System instead of a…
That's actually how EU law works! I think it's also why US companies keep getting in trouble here, they try to loophole-lawyer like at home, but it just... doesn't work that way. I had a whole long conversation about this with another commenter a while ago if you're interested in learning more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48707697
Very interesting discussion, thanks for sharing that.
India has a different system where generally speaking, it behaves more like UK/US courts (common law) over civil law.
But if Supreme Court reads fundamental rights are violated then Supreme Court can read the constitution in a similar way but Supreme Court has used it sometimes to force the government hands.
For example, when the Bhopal Gas tragedy happened where people died because of the accident (Rest in peace), instead of having individual people try to sue the govt. and fight for years with no end in sight, the supreme court used article 142 to impose single lump sum settlement and centralized compensation scheme. So it can force a govt to do something.
The Sahara-SEBI Case is even more direct when supreme court forced a company to refund amount and fast-tracked it in a more civil-law style case.
But Indian Supreme court is very slow and from my understanding, does try to use it rarely and only the Indian Supreme court can invoke article 142 and its more so done to prevent genuine gaps rather than already existing provisions
I found this whole discussion really interesting
In theory this split between common law and civil law is about who you trust more: judiciary or legislature. Civil law leaves more to interpretation for judiciary whereas common law leaves very little to interpretation. There doesn't seem to be very wide consensus on which system is necessarily better to be honest.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#153Just self host if you want freedom. I switched to Codeberg to maintain a semblance of project discoverability while having freedom from Microsoft but I don’t need the code police telling me what I can build or how I can build it. My open source values are more WTFPL "freedom to do whatever you want" and Codeberg is more AGPL "freedom to do whatever we allow you to", which is totally fine.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#154I reiterate what I said in another thread (and invoke Don Mattrick): If you want AI slop, there's a perfectly fine*** product for you already out there - it's called GitHub.
For those of us who are tired of AI messing with things, stop complaining and let this be. Codeberg made a great decision for those who are just tired and over AI coding unnecessarily taking over everything.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does exists for any bank. Where I'm at, the assurance is given by the national bank, not the individual banks. Anything else is just probability and marketing. In Codeberg case, what I would be looking at is the actual banning process, not "assurance" they won't ban me later. It's a Germany-based institution, if Germany applies a whole sanction to my country, I'm gone anyway.
> It does exists for any bank. No one is disputing the existence of the question. > In Codeberg case, what I would be looking at is the actual banning process, not "assurance" they won't ban me later. Okay, so then, what actually is the banning process? The recent changes sound like the banning process has been expanded to cover a lot of new things that it didn't before, and stating "well anyone can ban you" isn't pa…
> The recent changes sound like the banning process has been expanded to cover a lot of new things that it didn't before
This is the actual part of the TOS
Please be aware that this list is neither exhaustive nor complete (illustrating the spirit of the law, not its letter). Be aware that any account can get suspended at any time if it is used for activities harming Codeberg e.V. or its associated platform and services, directly or indirectly, even if these activities are not explicitly listed in the examples above.
So your best bets is to keep backups of your data soemwhere else. Which you should always be doing.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#156Re: Codeberg Divides
#157> I could not reliably assign authorship percentages to many of my own recent projects.
This feels like a strange statement. Unless you are going out of you way to disguise AI contributions it's extremely simple to do some git magic to get an exact percentage. But you can also just ask AI and it'll tell you directly. And even if you've tried to disguise it I'm fairly certain that if you set aside 10$ for tokens, it'll be able to deduce how much is AI even with someone having tried to disguise it.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#158I think this move by Codeberg is lowkey genius. They're trying to build a community based on a set of shared values. Those who disagree with those values are now self-selecting out of the Codeberg community, which is exactly the point of passing these kinds of resolutions. The fact that the rule is open for interpretation means that they can effectively shut down malicious actors (i.e those who intentionally misrepre…
I've been thinking along these lines more and more. Trying to specify exact limits and trying to account for every possible situation when making rules just encourages people to find holes and workarounds. It creates a game, a competition between the rule makers and everyone else. When instead you state higher level values and ask for cooperation, it encourages us to work together. It's the Honor System instead of a…
> there's no referee, most everyone does their best to just play hard and follow the rules
Only in small groups. Any sufficiently large groups will have a number of people (possibly sociopaths) that will break the rules for personal gain. And in a lot of cases it's enough if very few people do that.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#159All these issue and gitlab is still there, fully working and fully functional, open source and ready to host your stuff without useless drama.
It’s also got a great ci/ci experience.
Re: Codeberg Divides
#160I think this move by Codeberg is lowkey genius. They're trying to build a community based on a set of shared values. Those who disagree with those values are now self-selecting out of the Codeberg community, which is exactly the point of passing these kinds of resolutions. The fact that the rule is open for interpretation means that they can effectively shut down malicious actors (i.e those who intentionally misrepre…
> The fact that the rule is open for interpretation means that they can effectively shut down malicious actors
This also mean that some kind of charismatic leader can become a de-facto tyrant.
And btw, lone leader on top, bending the rules at will… that’s a trait all dictatorships have in common (hitler, mussolini, stalin, mao, etc). Just saying.