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

▲

kajman a minute ago | parent | next [-]

> 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.

▲

simonw 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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".

	▲	matheusmoreira 7 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

matheusmoreira an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Welp. Looks like I'm never going back there.

▲

conartist6 an hour ago | parent [-]

I mean, that's your right, but also they'll get new users too. So much of the internet is drowning in slop that any place that's still brimming with original content will likely see its stock go up, and will tend to attract people who still do original work, creating a virtuous cycle

▲

matheusmoreira an hour ago | parent [-]

How do you define "slop" ?

▲

conartist6 an hour ago | parent [-]

Yeah I don't know. It's impossible to draw a clear line, but the overall effect is not hard to identify. If your work supports a community and creates value, you can reasonably expect the community's support. If your work leeches from a community, you can reasonably expect the community to turn on you.

To me slop is identifiable by its effect: it is the type of work which leeches value

	▲	iamnothere 43 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		To me, this all sounds like the kind of fuzzy reasoning and nondescript language that turns communities into popularity contests and backstabbing competitions. If Codeberg wants to put a flag up to draw in every programmer with a personality disorder, well that may be their right, but it’s not a good idea.

▲

conartist6 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm... unsure how to feel. On one hand I have the utmost sympathy for the idea of pushing people away from disposable software and towards collaboration. On the other hand this will definitely devolve into name calling and vigilantism. On the third hand, Github is already drowning in slop. It takes up huuuuge amounts of resources and delivers a tiiiiny amount of value to the platform per line of slop code

▲

matheusmoreira an hour ago | parent [-]

> On the other hand this will definitely devolve into name calling and vigilantism.

No doubt. Just look at Lobsters.

A quality filter would have been more effective.

▲

conartist6 an hour ago | parent [-]

You have to understand that this isn't about everyone being altruistic towards everyone else. When the industry declared that AI would replace humans, even perhaps make every single person worthless, they guaranteed beyond all doubt that the vitriol would reach at least these levels. There's no point in extending kindness to people whose stated goal is your extinction. At that point what's left is war.

▲

matheusmoreira 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

Then war it is. Like I told the fine people of Lobsters, they're going to take out a lot of innocent people as collateral damage during their crusade. I've already soft quit that site, and there goes Codeberg as well. What can you do?

	▲	conartist6 26 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I don't disagree, but it is not within my power to do anything to change that. There exists no person who could call off the backlash to the AI movement

▲

mbreese an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's a controversial stance. The first statement of not using codeberg hosted projects to train LLMs makes sense. But to outright ban LLM coded projects seems just silly. If the problem is that users have too many vibe coded projects, then limiting the number of projects seems like a more reasonable stance. To completely ban vibe coded projects just limits the number of users that will use them. I get that this is being spun as an effort to save resources, but this is a pretty blunt way to accomplish this. And a great way to alienate a lot of potential users.

It's their service and they can choose what they want to host. Maybe they don't see themselves as competing with Github and Gitlab and so they are happy serving the users they have. But to me this does not seem to be a great growth strategy.

▲

echelon 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

They obviously care more about social performance than code.

They just tanked my interest in ever checking them out.