Right - I see the other topic has been locked / author hasn’t returned to follow community rules.

Here’s the original topic https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49003386

and a measured (IMHO) response to it. (BTW, do your self a favour and change tabs with that site open :)

https://マリウス.com/i-regret-migrating-to-codeberg/

It’s a tough spot, Codeberg has found themselves in and I wish them luck. But beyond that, this is (yet) another reminder that in 2026, if you don’t self host it, the cloud is just someone else computer

  • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    Why are we posting this random tech bloggers whiny complaint again?

    I said it before: Codeberg uses Forgejo which is FOSS. If you don’t like Codeberg’s decision: stop complaining, self-host Forgejo and lose nothing.

    But fwiw, Fuck AI coding, not only for its unmaintainability but also for stealing of intellectual property.

    • AMillionMonkeys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      But fwiw, Fuck AI coding, not only for its unmaintainability but also for stealing of intellectual property.

      Would you be okay with a coding model that was trained only on open source software?

  • talkingpumpkin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    Frankly, I don’t see where the whole big deal of this story is.

    People who don’t like codeberg can just go somewhere else (even back to github) and/or found/support an alternative that better suits their needs.

    It’s not like the world needs to have one git hosting service to rule them all, it’s not like there must be free ones (entitled much?), and it’s not like whatever service happens to be the new “cool” one must be neutral as to what they host.

    BTW, although to my knowledge their policy is not enforced super-strictly, codeberg has never been neutral in this regard — see 1 and 2

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      People who don’t like codeberg can just go somewhere else (even back to github) and/or found/support an alternative that better suits their needs.

      searches

      https://gitgud.io/ provides free GitLab hosting for open source projects.

      https://gitlab.com/ has a free tier for personal/open source stuff, though looks like it has a 5 user limit on said free tier.

      Gitea can be self-hosted. It doesn’t look like they provide free hosting themselves, though, just paid. Apparently it’s considerably less resource-intensive to host than GitLab.

      GNU Savannah is available if one is writing projects under a specific set of licenses (the GPL family).

      • nagaram@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        I use Forgejo which is either forked from or built on Gitea

        Super easy to set up it was a docker container and a cloudflared tunnel.

    • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 days ago

      I agree, but I believe that there must be free git hosting and archiving for code projects.

  • curbstickle@anarchist.nexusM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    I’ll just note that they can make whatever decision they want, its their platform, and considering its just forgejo underneath - you can always take it and host your own.

    Also, I think it coincidentally lines up quite nicely with what we have here for posting an AI project now. Anything at that Generated stage is going to count as “mostly”.

    I find it disappointing that people are upset with codeberg over this.

  • DeckPacker@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    From what I understand from their blogpost, it was mostly about conserving their own resources, because a lot of the vibecoded projects they got were uploading insane amounts of binary releases and wasting resources on CI/CD while having no users or other collaborators.

    They wanna reserve more server space for projects, that actually productively use it, like bigger FOSS projects with actual users and contributors.

    That is perfectly understandable for me, even without taking my huge distaste for AI into consideration. Anyone that thinks, that this small, community funded project is obligated to host their huge slop repos semms pretty entitled to me.

    • endofline@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      What about setting quotas? They could introduce new account validations if they wanted

        • endofline@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          Slop is subjective… Bad code existed forever even eons before invention of llms

          • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 days ago

            We’re not talking about bad code, we’re talking about slop code. It’s different. It’s easy just to generate slop code, it is not so easy to code all by yourself.

            • endofline@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              19 days ago

              Slop has no definition and it’s subjective… It’s crystal clear that people cannot reliably determine what LLM slop from human slop

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I fail to see why people are getting worked up. While yes the tos says the ambiguous “mostly” the rest of the paragraph gives you a clear indication why. Copyright. Which I the same reason many other platforms don’t level allow vibe code into their codebases.

    CB does not want to host code a large number of repos that in the future could be classified as stolen code, and now as the code host will have to do the work of deleting it all when they get sued for hosting it. And you know right holders are just waiting to do that.

    • kingofras@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      It’s more than just the ‘mostly’. In legal proceedings they would really struggle to ‘demonstrate cause’, i.e. what is copyrighted, and what is not - not to mention demonstrating criminal intent.

      As I wrote before, these are phase 2 effects of a new emerging technology. All it will take is one company to go after them in court to reverse this.

      • DeckPacker@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        What do you mean? They are perfectly in their right to enforce this rule, even if they couldn’t prove that their reasoning made sense. They are not obligated to host your slop

        • kingofras@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          I agree they are within their right to do it, I’m saying it legally wouldn’t survive a challenge in court the way they implemented it.

          No need for your combative tone or assuming I have slop that needs hosting.

          • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            How would it be legally challengeable? No one can be legally forced to host someone else’s data against their will, that sounds ludicrous, otherwise people could sue YouTube for removing their videos before they were legally required to.

            The TOS are essentially a way to let you know what they will consider, but legally they can remove your repo without any reason, they’re not legally required to host your data.

      • copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        Okay, so I lack the sources, so I ask others to please back me up; but isn’t this anything but settled law? There was something in the US but it was more of a recommendation than a law, and will have to be tested in court. Also, Codeberg is hosted in Germany, so its laws would apply there.