The ban doesn't even target projects with one AI-assisted patch. What are you talking about? Or does Torvalds also plan on using Claude Code to rewrite Linux and Git in Rust?
If a project uses AI assistance, it’s pretty much guaranteed that eventually 50% of the code in the project will in one way or the other be touched by AI assistance.
And Torvalds does seem to plan on continue using AI assistance.
It‘s because there is basically no way for code to become „clean“ so the entire process is one way.
My first push to Codeberg was 4 years ago. Back then I certainly got that they discourage small throwaway single-developer projects, and especially ones that are not FLOSS, and may exist only in the user's private repo. I pushed anyways, none of my projects took off, and they're basically just sitting there abandoned.
I get the feeling I should move the repos to my own Forgejo instance out of respect soon enough, but I'm certain they will not be deleted any time soon, at least not without me being notified of it. It's a community, not a corporation.
The whole blog post is also taking a stance. What is criticized is the specific stance taken by Codeberg. TFA seems to state that Codeberg should allow projects of all kinds to be hosted on their service (though apparently artificially limiting their resources would be alright).
> Despite not owning a single project that falls into either banned category, I’m now going to look into setting up my own public Git host
That's.. good, actually. I believe that even if Codeberg was good and perfect for every use case of code hosting, not every one and every project should be there. Vibe-coders, shitcoin cryptomaxis, and lovers of total freedom surely have other places to go and are able to set up forges using the same software that Codeberg uses as well. It's the magic of open source.
Seriously, we should let go of the idea that all of humanity should be part of a single Data Silo on the internet. GitHub, Twitter, Reddit, sure, they might have been better back in the day, but being _the_ places for a type of content online they were able to privatize a lot of very valuable data, sell it off for AI training, while slowly strangling to death any interoperability and "public access" that once made the services feel like a free-for-all market square of the internet. Long live the small web!
Codeberg is not in any way obligated to make sweeping infrastructure changes just to make sure that they can keep hosting projects they find to be against their mission.
> Seriously, we should let go of the idea that all of humanity should be part of a single Data Silo on the internet.
There's a reason these came to be in the first place though, and accounts are among the most prominent ones. A new forum means not just registering at yet another place, it also means creating a new label/folder in your email inbox and a new filter rule to properly redirect stuff. That's friction.
That was never much of a problem on the old internet. It's just something corporations made us feel entitled to. You don't use the same memorized password for all your really unimportant accounts and forget about them after you're done?
There's always the email option, too. "Found a bug? Email bugs@example.com." - that's the original decentralised discussion forum.
I'd argue that it's more democratic than the EU, and has a target audience of members who actually want the service to continue going in this direction. You most likely wont be missed. Thankfully there are a million other places to host your code.
If this, or the vibe-coding ban upsets you, you're not the target demographic of Codeberg. It's not a big tent project looking to host all the code in the word, like Github is. It's for principled, quality, open source, community-first software. Look at the explore page to see what that means: https://codeberg.org/explore/repos?q=&only_show_relevant=tru...
The entire point of Forgejo, the git forge that Codeberg runs on as well, is that you can run your own very easily. I've stopped having private repos on Github completely in favor of my own Forgejo instance, and it's way smoother and nicer. Codeberg was never meant for private repos, but if I get around to starting a new floss project that I want to put out there, Codeberg would be a great option!
And sure, right now there is no cross-forge collaboration, so you need to have multiple accounts. But forge federation is planned, eventually you should be able to contribute to your friend's project from your instance. If you don't wanna wait, go look at https://tangled.org/ or something.
The problem is that if you are the target demographic now, you’ll never know if you’re still next year or if you’ll be deplatformed and as such it makes for not a very reliable code host.
Slippery slope. AI and crypto are legitimetely controversial new technologies, though both have their uses. I can't imagine "offline mapping application" or "Linux CLI utility" or "self-hostable web app" being categories of software that become controversial in the future. Besides, migrating a repo to another Forgejo instance is simple enough.
But this is silly.I can't imagine any "offline mapping application" or "Linux CLI utility" or "self-hostable web app" will be produced without AI in any near future and be better for that.
The ban is not for "all blockchain-related projects", it's for "projects that harm the reputation of Codeberg" with the newly added clarification that they may include cryptocurrency projects for example. Moderation is not very proactive on Codeberg. This terms addition basically gives them clearance to ban a cryptocurrency project that is deemed to harm the site's/community's reputation by for example being a scammy shitcoin.
> with the newly added clarification that they may include cryptocurrency projects for example.
Yes. That's what the post you're replying to is discussing. 'Cryptocurrency projects' is a bizarre example of a project that would harm Codeberg's reputation (which they have harmed themselves by their odd stance in this matter). If you are unfamilar with blockchains, transaction fees for blockchain programs are paid using tokens (which used to be called 'cryptocurrencies').
Okay, I'm a tech nerd I admit it, but for my personal authentication life I find passkeys to make sense.
All my passwords and SSH key are already in Bitwarden. When a site starts supporting passkeys, I add that to Bitwarden as well. Now, instead of logging in by auto-filling my username and password, I just press the passkey login button (that hopefully exists) and click on the Bitwarden popup to select the account. It's less button presses for me, and I cannot be phished, nor can my passkeys be leaked on the dark web. All thanks to some fancy cryptography.
Okay, sure, if someone steals my Bitwarden vault by snatching my laptop while it's unlocked or something, I end up pretty screwed. That security aspect did not change, so I still use TOTP for all important services.
Also, I've made one invite-only web app where single-use invite codes and passkeys are the only ways to log in. It was not too hard, it was fun, actually. And I get the peace of mind that account sharing is pretty much impossible were a bad actor able to get their hands on an invite, as is hacking other people's accounts.
(Okay, I concede that I've had to help multiple people who find passkeys confusing as a result of this whimsical decision, and that it just might be that nobody is using my web app for real. So I'm just speaking from nerd privilege here... But it works well, trust me!!)
> Also, I've made one invite-only web app where single-use invite codes and passkeys are the only ways to log in. It was not too hard, it was fun, actually. And I get the peace of mind that account sharing is pretty much impossible were a bad actor able to get their hands on an invite, as is hacking other people's accounts.
It also makes access to the app maximally unrecoverable if someone loses access to the passkey...
The userbase is so tiny they can just ask me or another admin for another invite code. No data is tied to the account that would be lost in the process.
Ente Auth. Obviously not Bitwarden, I don't even know why that's an option. Having your 1st and 2nd factors in the same place seems foolish. I used to use Aegis, which might technically be a bit more secure, but Ente is also on the PrivacyGuides recommendations list (https://www.privacyguides.org/en/multi-factor-authentication...), so I opted to use it for more peace of mind in case my phone breaks.
Building a NAS from scratch is really fun! A small hinderance, but definitely part of the fun as well, is the lack of a "complete resource" on the topic covering how to do every single thing you need to do. Part of the point of my blog post is actually to bring to the internet yet another opinionated NAS setup "guide" (eventhough I would hesitate to call it a guide, but if I ever had to do the same thing again I would definitely read my own post first).
reply