61–65 of 65 posts
I want to ask this in good faith Why do the very vocal "AI people" online have this thing where they are simultaneously: - proclaiming their thing to be inevitable and massive and a bulldozer of productivity; - responding to any negative reaction like they are almost like a persecuted group It seems paradoxical to me. If your LLM-written project is so amazing, who cares about the critics? Let them have their corner o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tend to agree but you can't deny that the widespread use of LLMs means that codeberg will expend more resources overall for projects taking advantage of them. And its members have spoken. We might disagree about the conclusion they came to and even how they went about it but their stance is clear now so we might as well just move on.
Yeah but if it's about the hardware resources, why not just establish an option to ban projects that use them unreasonably for their projects relevance? In their explanation they say each project will be evaluated individually and the whatever-AI-allegations are not the primary reason to eventually ban. They could have established a direct way to protect hardware resource with an option to ban users that cause unreas…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume "AI people" is in quotes to indicate that it's kind of a term of art. Like Car People. Or Computer People. Some visible, bothersome subset of the (much larger (like, how many people these days don't use a car? (ok, so it's not zero, but it's hardly the opposite either))) category of people that use the thing in question.
That's still making a strawman?
So who are you actually angry at? There was a vote, by people, in a democratic process, and Codeberg are adhering to it. Why is it Codeberg's problem that they don't defy the will of their members? Are you angry at them because the members put a motion against your particular special interests? If so, go make a new motion to reinstate them.
Well, for starters, banning content that is already present on the platform is a very aggressive measure. You are, in practice, kicking people out, and it's perfectly reasonable for those people to be upset at either Codeberg or its community. For seconds, this proves that Codeberg may in the future ban any project. The platform is, flat out, without a doubt, not reliable long term, and I reckon about anyone should b…
Thats the cost of hosting your code on a platform you dont control. Its nothing new either ideologically or practically, large forges have been banning repos for years.
>Third, this reeks of children playing politics.
This is the age old liberal way of whining about political action they dont like, they rarely critique the actual decision but target "how" it was done. You can view it as "childish" if you want, but for those of us that see these tools as inherently bad an outright ban is the correct and decisive move. Folks seem to think that if a political action isnt technocratic enough it is childish, but really its the type of action we need more of. There isnt nuance to these tools in many folks' minds, they are a scourge and should be banned as swiftly as possible.
So who are you actually angry at? There was a vote, by people, in a democratic process, and Codeberg are adhering to it. Why is it Codeberg's problem that they don't defy the will of their members? Are you angry at them because the members put a motion against your particular special interests? If so, go make a new motion to reinstate them.
Well, for starters, banning content that is already present on the platform is a very aggressive measure. You are, in practice, kicking people out, and it's perfectly reasonable for those people to be upset at either Codeberg or its community. For seconds, this proves that Codeberg may in the future ban any project. The platform is, flat out, without a doubt, not reliable long term, and I reckon about anyone should b…
as is their right, they're providing this service to you free of charge, if they don't like how you're using their service they are free to remove it.