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

Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 720 posts

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#221

Post by kurante »

p-e-w wrote: post #196
kurante wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, so I don't see why there is any harm in having this instance of Forgejo moderate itself as it sees fit. They have no moral requirement to support all kinds of software. If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code fo…

> If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code forge that better aligns with your beliefs. Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on wheth…

> Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them.

Well, they kinda do? Go on the main page, it's the second line of text: "Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led effort that provides services to free and open-source projects...". They're community-led, and this was a community decision.

> If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them

What do you want to see then? They've made a blog post about vibecoded with detailed explanations [1], a public banner mentioning they no longer allow cryptocurrency projects and restricting LLM content and with a link to the changelog with the differences in terms of use [2].

Should hackernews also mention that allowed content is dependent on its moderators with vaguely defined ideologies?

[1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-... [2]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e42...

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#222

Post by ShinyLeftPad »

zarzavat wrote: post #147
jjmarr wrote: post #75

In the prior words[1] of Gusted, one of the board members that announced the ban: > This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop. [1] https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecom...

Pretending to run an inclusive git hosting service for FOSS and then attacking your own users because their code is the wrong type of algorithm isn't politics, it's just being an asshole.

Run your own Codeberg instance with blackjack and hookers, it's open source.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#223

Post by matheusmoreira »

p-e-w wrote: post #196
kurante wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, so I don't see why there is any harm in having this instance of Forgejo moderate itself as it sees fit. They have no moral requirement to support all kinds of software. If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code fo…

> If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code forge that better aligns with your beliefs. Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on wheth…

> The ban on “vibecoded” projects is effectively an invitation to start witch hunts.

It's a guarantee. Those witch hunts will happen now that those opposed to LLMs have official approval.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#225

Post by matheusmoreira »

ashton314 wrote: post #177
trentor wrote: post #26

As with the AI ban this was a community decision done by a majority vote. It seems that most people commenting or writing articles in the last few days don't have a Codeberg account or never visit the forum.

I have an account and I donate regularly. I was not made aware a vote was happening.

I wasn't made aware of any votes either.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#226

Post by simonw »

conartist6 wrote: post #137
jdormit wrote: post #107

Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…

They banned cypto projects two weeks ago. Today they banned vibecoded projects. https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

I'm not crazy about this:

> We acknowledge that many developers have started to embrace LLMs as a tool in their workflows. Some use it extensively and rarely code by hand, others delegate only specific tasks to it. We understand that you want to know how the change affects your projects going forward. While we can't give an easy answer, we'll share some remarks that should address most of the concerns raised in the discussion.

Where terms and conditions are concerned I really do value "easy answers".

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#227

Post by matheusmoreira »

simonw wrote: post #226
conartist6 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They banned cypto projects two weeks ago. Today they banned vibecoded projects. https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

I'm not crazy about this: > We acknowledge that many developers have started to embrace LLMs as a tool in their workflows. Some use it extensively and rarely code by hand, others delegate only specific tasks to it. We understand that you want to know how the change affects your projects going forward. While we can't give an easy answer, we'll share some remarks that should address most of the concerns raised in the d…

They have no idea what "slop" is. They don't want to have to define it with any precision. Ironically, these rules will be enforced based on vibes.

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#229

Post by dizhn »

teravor wrote: post #206
trentor wrote: post #26

As with the AI ban this was a community decision done by a majority vote. It seems that most people commenting or writing articles in the last few days don't have a Codeberg account or never visit the forum.

putting aside the saying that goes something like "51% of the animal population votes to eat the other 49%", it takes a special kind of person to be both aware of such a vote happening and also care to participate in it. codeberg has outed themselves as an unserious undertaking. they will not be known for anything else now.

[flagged]

Re: Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

#230

Post by kajman »

conartist6 wrote: post #137
jdormit wrote: post #107

Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…

They banned cypto projects two weeks ago. Today they banned vibecoded projects. https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

> So while the following use cases are discouraged (similar to private repositories), they are likely to be tolerated in practice:

> Side projects and experiments with little resource usage > Specific tools and custom scripts that would be unlikely to find a community anyway, even if they were not LLM-generated

I really don't want to join a commons where something I make might be "tolerated in practice" based on a given moderator's vibe. Which I suppose is the message I was meant to receive from the issue that passed the vote.

Post reply on HN