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

Codeberg Divides

lucumr.pocoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 242 posts

Re: Codeberg Divides

#211

Post by cwillu »

exiguus wrote: post #208
jujube3 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codeberg did make such a rule. Their announcement explicitly says that "Projects heavily tied to the LLM ecosytem" are "no longer [...] welcome on Codeberg". The code for an AI agent would definitely fall into that category.

That's not true. The new "rule" say: > 7. 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). https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/commi…

Yes, that is unrelated to the rule he is refering to.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#212

Post by cwillu »

Pay08 wrote: post #148
bigbuppo wrote: post #131

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?

Are you of the opinion that you are entitled to a free server and electricity?

Re: Codeberg Divides

#213

Post by mft_ »

illiac786 wrote: post #181
mft_ wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No; they aren’t making a judgement. They’re just describing a relationship between the nature of a platform and its likely future behaviour.

Who is “they“ is your sentence, I’m not following, sorry

The person you were disagreeing with.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#215

Post by theshrike79 »

mariusor wrote: post #197
theshrike79 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who would one ask to get an official and enforceable answer? I don’t want an opinion, I need a definitive ruling I can trust.

It's not like they don't have a contact page: https://docs.codeberg.org/contact/ > I need a definitive ruling I can trust Why? What's so special about the place where you host your source? It's the second time I see this sentiment in the thread, and I don't get it. If an official channel tells you a project is OK, and then someone else decides it's not, what does it really happen outside of you taking your project el…

Hosting a project with its issues, packages, releases, discussions and everything is an investment. The URLs will be in multiple places, some of which I don't control.

Then suddenly the hoster decides that my project isn't wanted because the zeitgeist is against some technology used in it and poof it goes away.

What now?

"Just move away", sure. I can do that if they still let me export my data. But to be honest I'd rather just use a platform with a smaller risk of getting booted because someone decided my project is "too AI" or something similar.

I have no idea if there's a way to argue against the decisions, what proof do I need to provide, do I need to prepare somehow? Like have video of myself with a dated newspaper typing the code by hand to prove AI wasn't used? :D

Re: Codeberg Divides

#216

Post by yogthos »

WolfeReader wrote: post #210
yogthos wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an incredible rate of adoption given that this stuff has only been really usable for the past year or so.

It sure is! But I guess it would be less fun to say "1 out of 5 developers will not be using Codeberg going forward". Especially since that may well be an intended effect of Codeberg's decision here. As long as AI is a source of environmental damage, cognitive harm, and a cause of rising hardware costs, there will always be a sizeable set of developers who want nothing to do with it. The headline should be "AI Divide…

There's no basis for thinking that LLM use will not continue to grow going forward. The fact that 1 in 5 developers already use this technology only a year or so after it's become really useful shows that adoption is growing rapidly.

Meanwhile, the arguments regarding environmental damage and cognitive harm are rather spurious. You can already run models like Qwen 3.6 27b on your laptop today, and it can do serious work. And the efficiency of the models only keeps improving. Meanwhile, studies showing cognitive effects you allude to have used laughably small samples, and these same types of arguments were made every time the way people work with code changed. I'm old enough to remember people screeching how you weren't a real programmer if you didn't use assembly, or that GC was ruining programming.

There's always a group of people who made a certain set of skills their whole identity who get really upset when those skill become automated. There will always be a sizeable set of current generation of developers who will want nothing to do with it, but people getting into development today will treat LLMs as a part of their regular toolkit. At the end of the day it's just a tool like any other.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#217

Post by yogthos »

andOlga wrote: post #206
yogthos wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The outcome is obviously going to be that most coders leave Codeberg because LLMs are not going anywhere, and they will continue to be integrating into people's workflows. But perhaps Codeberg intends on becoming something akin to a digital Amish community, and there's nothing wrong with that.

"Not going anywhere" is such a strange argument. Tomato juice isn't going anywhere, does it mean I'm going to be guzzling it at some point in my life? What? If you've made your choice about LLMs based on morals or ethics rather than the quality of the tooling, you're not going to change that choice because the models haven't disappeared or have improved, unless you're forced to (but that forced bit applies only to co…

Every moral or ethical argument ultimately boils down to problems inherent in how any piece of automation is used under capitalism, and has little to do with technology itself. If you spend a bit of time thinking about morals or ethics you'll quickly realize that LLMs are not the problem.

And no, a year is absolutely not long enough for everyone to have made a choice about this tooling. Claiming any sorts of absolutes about completely new technology that's rapidly evolving is absolutely delusional.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#219

Post by inigyou »

aliasxneo wrote: post #46
free_bip wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are effectively saying you do not trust the judgement of the community to accept you long term. Why is that? Is it because you believe there would be a new policy that would exclude your workflow? What would such a policy be? Do you really, reasonably believe it would be implemented "tomorrow"? Do you think adapting to such a policy would be unreasonable? Or is it because you don't trust the judgement of the peop…

> You are effectively saying you do not trust the judgement of the community to accept you long term. Correct. I was previously engaging with this community and had moved some repos over from GitHub. One of those repos deals with cryptography that has an intersection with "crypto" projects. Due to vagueness of the language ratified, it's unclear whether the repo now violates the ToS. This completely caught me off gua…

So it sounds like you're treating Codeberg as a neutral git host. They've made it clear they don't want to be that, they are a charity association that supports free software development by providing free software developers with services like git hosting. They are not wasting their services on people who don't align with the mission.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#220

Post by inigyou »

theshrike79 wrote: post #215
mariusor wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like they don't have a contact page: https://docs.codeberg.org/contact/ > I need a definitive ruling I can trust Why? What's so special about the place where you host your source? It's the second time I see this sentiment in the thread, and I don't get it. If an official channel tells you a project is OK, and then someone else decides it's not, what does it really happen outside of you taking your project el…

Hosting a project with its issues, packages, releases, discussions and everything is an investment. The URLs will be in multiple places, some of which I don't control. Then suddenly the hoster decides that my project isn't wanted because the zeitgeist is against some technology used in it and poof it goes away. What now? "Just move away", sure. I can do that if they still let me export my data. But to be honest I'd r…

Ok then do that. They're not asking for your business. They lose money on it.
Post reply on HN