free as in freedom for humans. machines neither want nor need freedom

Speak for yourself

i spoke for nobody. neither myself nor you or anyone else. and machines can't speak or hold opinions, so i can't speak for them either

I wonder how much internet-argument bandwidth would be saved if we used different words for "freedom from" vs "freedom to", instead of putting both things on a single scale and then arguing over which is "more free"...

It's a matter of perspective and what you perceive to be the default. Freedom from prevention of X is Freedom to not do X.

Machines are tools used by humans. Codeberg has banned a certain class of tool.

as is their right, and the wish of a very significant chunk of their users. you're still free to use other platforms.

"free to use other platforms" doesn't mean that Codeberg is a "free" platform.

might as well say Google is a free Git alternative because you're free to use another one since you can't use it for git

I don't know what this means. Is close source software open because you're free to use other software?

So if I'm not free to use a hammer, that's actually not a constriction of my freedom because "the hammer neither wants nor needs freedom"?

That's like saying you're free to build your own shed, as long as you don't use hammers. Hammers don't need nor want freedom.

Okay, what's the downside tho?

Restricting user freedom.

Wading through piles of human slop.

Insecure human slop on top of that. Projects not checked in-depth by AI is recklessness at this point, prove me wrong with an example.

Their ToS only forbids projects that 'mostly consist of code' created with genAI, it says nothing of code that is reviewed through it or projects where it only makes up a small portion of the whole package. The reasons for that are outlined and quite clear - their organization focuses on projects with a certain license and LLM code is in limbo regarding its copyright status.

Basically, unlike your stance, they are rejecting people who are outright saying that AI alone > humans. Which seems to be a popular opinion on HN. Given how angry you are about this, I don't think there's as much separating your opinion from the vibe coders' view as you think there is. I mean, look at this, we're only a few years into LLMs being viable code generators and we already have people accuse them of malice, recklessness and embracing 'human slop' because they dare to have a softball policy on using this brand new tech. What will the average opinion be like in 2 years? Humans are just bad and can't be trusted to do anything manual at a computer, leave it to the agent?

> What will the average opinion be like in 2 years?

The people who pretended to be virusologists and financial moguls in the previous bubbles and are now pretending to be software developers will move on to something else once this bubble pops.

So they will never have these frequent downtime issues because they will never be bombarded by agents building millions of personal tools with no license applied. Clever.

Free as in freedom has had a rather specific meaning in software for the past 40+ years, which is "software that matches the Free Software definition." Codeberg runs on Forgejo, whose authors grant you the rights to run, study, modify, and distribute it - unlike GitHub, which is proprietary. (Indeed, there are many Forgejo instances besides Codeberg, it's not just a theoretical benefit.)

It is a ridiculous misinterpretation to assume it means "somebody else will host anything I upload, free of charge", which is of course not the case - not on GitHub either, by the way, their ToS just happens to be more friendly to slop.

(For understandable reasons, too; while M$ is making a killing from selling LLM access & Free Software as training data, the main "benefit" Codeberg sees is getting DDoSed by LLM scrapers 24/7 and vibecoders using up disproportionate amounts of resources.)

Hmm I have my Hugo website there, closed repo and build, in part, with LLMs. Never realized tbh while settings thing up that BOTH are not allowed? I just wanted to no choose GH.

Do they really prohibit all use? My reading of their policy is that they mainly block vibe coding. It doesn't seem like LLM auto-complete or using it to review your code would run afoul of it.