211
Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects (codeberg.org)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
69 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1281550/codeberg-bans-cryptocurrency-projects

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)

Yeah, only "cryptobros" could be upset about an open source hosting site deciding to officially ban "anything they think makes them look bad", and using an entire field of software development as an example apparently based on the popular misconception that it's a scam. This certainly isn't a sign that any other projects could abruptly find themselves on the wrong side of someone's opinion of whether they're "bad" someday.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago* (6 children)

    I've got a blockchain based project - hosted on Codeberg no less - that has nothing like an ICO or other get rich quick scheme attached, it's about as sincere of an open transaction processing platform as you can get.

    But a quick read will come away with "this is a Cryptocurrency project" - so... am I banned? Even worse, although I started it 8 years ago, I made a quick pass with Claude code recently to clean things up and implement some of the lagging parts... now I'm double-banned from Codeberg, right?

    I'm glad they have principles, but one-word labels are really inadequate to separate "good" from "bad" - it's almost always more complicated than that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

    The AI code thing is geared towards vibe coded projects. Using AI to clean it doesn't mean it's vibe coded.

    Codeberg e.V. members voted to ban projects that “mostly” consist of code written by generative AI tools.

    You can argue, it's hard to prove that etc, etc... But you need to remember that they have limited funds/storage and if vibe coders start using that storage with dead-end projects, that can be a problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

    I think they're great for what they're doing, but, truthfully, any "free use" system which has non-zero operating costs for bandwidth and storage is going to have potential problems that can't be waived away with simple policy statements. 8 billion people on this planet, maybe only 80 million coders, maybe only 8 million active in creation of projects that would end up on Codeberg, but AI probably tripled that number to at least 24 million people, and those people (including myself) are making 3-300x larger projects with AI, not only because they can now, but because AI needs that extra documentation to successfully implement larger projects... just like teams of human programmers do, but AI makes it faster with less humans in the loop.

    On the "people count" Github cites 180 million "individual users" but, how many of those are work/home/alt/other accounts of the same person?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    I'm not sure what you're trying to say with arbitrary numbers pulled out of the air about the amount of "coders" and potential users on codeberg.

    A lot of people go to codeberg to get away from big tech.

    All their policy is saying is that they don't want vibe coded projects on the platform. They would rather their storage and bandwidth go to real people, not dead-end vibe coded slop projects.

    AI generated code is verbose, incredibly verbose, as you stated yourself... and a lot of the time verbose and bad.

    This policy allows them to get rid of the worst offenders and point to the policy as their reason.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    what you’re trying to say with arbitrary numbers pulled out of the air about the amount of “coders” and potential users

    No matter how wonderful and loved a project (aka business) is, it has expenses. A project like Codeberg's expenses scale with the number of users and how they use the system.

    This policy allows them to get rid of the worst offenders and point to the policy as their reason.

    Agreed. However, at the scale they are operating at, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up using a LLM assisted AI implementation to give them short lists of projects to review as potential "worst offenders".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent