5 ms·

As if there wasn't a massive amount of nuance between "you may keep your dotfiles private but don't upload your photo library". If their rules read this arbitra

As if there wasn't a massive amount of nuance between "you may keep your dotfiles private but don't upload your photo library". If their rules read this arbitrary, I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Assume you did some local LLM stuff in June that worked with a 200MB set of various jpegs and you wanted to keep it private: Is this still legit in September 2026? I wouldn't rely on it.

embedding-shape 11d ago
> , I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Yeah, I think this is a win-win for both parties. You strike me as someone who would "ride along the lines of the terms of service" basically, and you'll see anything not explicitly forbidden as being allowed essentially. While Codeberg is a project driven by humans, with human reactions to what's happening. If you're not comfortable with rules not being 100% defined, and requiring a humans value judgement to be had to figure out if the rule is broken or not, I don't think Codeberg is for you. The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules, are fine with this, because we know our private repositories won't be deleted. And if they are, you'll be able to speak with a human to explain, and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it. But if you try to argue about some "That wasn't explicitly stated", then yeah, they'll probably get tired of you quickly. Think your participating in your local user group vs some corporate/government forum, the rules will be enforced differently.
- jeremyjh 11d ago
  > "ride along the terms of service" By using AI to write code, like virtually everyone does? Tell me, what indication was there in their TOS, that this might be close to a line?
  - embedding-shape 11d ago
    Do X in whatever way you want, if you do so knowing it's against the terms of service, you're "riding along the line of the terms of service" for sure if you try to explain away how it is/isn't explicitly forbidden.
    - jeremyjh 11d ago
      Using AI was not against any terms of service at all three months ago.
      - embedding-shape 11d ago
        Ok, point being? Codeberg is a non-profit community that evolves and figures out where to move, all the time, this is the point of the association itself. Members discuss what to do, then a decision is made, then new rules eventually apply, this is how the project moves forward.
        jeremyjh 11d ago
        You said people were “riding the line”. They weren’t. Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting. Projects that were not illegal, indecent or dangerous. I can’t think of another time something like that has happened. They can do it, sure, but many had hoped they could be an independent host for all FOSS as GitHub deteriorates. They have disappointed those hopes, and we will have to look to others - like Codefloe - to carry that hope forward.
        xigoi 11d ago
        GitHub is deteriorating primarily because of LLMs. I’m guessing Codeberg doesn’t want to end up the same way.
        embedding-shape 11d ago
        > Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting What does "made up" mean? It was a decision by the actual members of the platform, you know, the actual people using it! Nothing "made up" about it. I think it's pretty clear you don't have an idea of what Codeberg is trying to be, nor do you have any interest in understanding, you just want to push this "Codefloe" platform for some reason. Codeberg make very public what the platform is for and yes, that'll change in the future too, as the world changes.
  - selfhoster1312 11d ago
    Not one programmer i know does this. Well no actually, one does because his boss makes him but it's so shitty he basically AI-washes his own job. How come on HN every week i come across someone who believes programming is dead and everyone has been brainwashed by Silicon Valley execs into destroying the planet with LLMs?
    - deleted 10d ago
      [deleted]
    - jeremyjh 10d ago
      Honestly it is astonishing to me that there are still people who believe things like this. AI is just a tool. Software development still requires human minds. There are people who don't understand that and crank out slop. Fuck those people. That isn't what I do. There are people who don't understand that and won't host my FOSS. Well, I've found someone who will.
- FabCH 11d ago
  Why do you assume they will be ok with it? They recently made some very ideological decisions…
  - embedding-shape 11d ago
    I didn't? Maybe I didn't explain properly, what did you understood I said/wrote?
    - FabCH 11d ago
      „ and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it“ That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Notably, Codeberg is morally opposed to AI.
      - embedding-shape 11d ago
        > That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Why on earth would Codeberg give even the slighest fucks about what the "hacker news population" finds "fine and good"? Makes absolutely zero sense. Codeberg made those things against the Terms of Service because paying members who use the platform voted for exactly that. This is how Codeberg works, the members of the platform decides how it works.
        FabCH 11d ago
        You changed the topic. The topic is not what Codeberg should care about. The topic was trust in the humans behind Codeberg to not delete private repositories on a whim. Codeberg community is free to care about whatever it sees fit. That doesn't protect them from criticism. Do I trust humans behind Codeberg to behave sensibly? No. Would more precise terms of service that explain what Codeberg community thinks is ok help with such trust? Yes. Should the humans behind Codeberg care what I think? Maybe? Presumably they do care about reaching _some_ users, otherwise why have the service public at all?
- jasonvorhe 11d ago
  What a weird take coming from a pro-Codeberg perspective considering that many their users I are proudly #actuallyautistic people who would prefer strict rules to follow in order to feel secure. > The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules [...] Better speak for yourself and not infer from your own views to others. With bad intention this could be interpreted as if I was incapable of dealing with human decisions when all I stated is that I mistrust people who rugpull me.

embedding-shape 11d ago

> , I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Yeah, I think this is a win-win for both parties. You strike me as someone who would "ride along the lines of the terms of service" basically, and you'll see anything not explicitly forbidden as being allowed essentially. While Codeberg is a project driven by humans, with human reactions to what's happening. If you're not comfortable with rules not being 100% defined, and requiring a humans value judgement to be had to figure out if the rule is broken or not, I don't think Codeberg is for you. The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules, are fine with this, because we know our private repositories won't be deleted. And if they are, you'll be able to speak with a human to explain, and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it. But if you try to argue about some "That wasn't explicitly stated", then yeah, they'll probably get tired of you quickly. Think your participating in your local user group vs some corporate/government forum, the rules will be enforced differently.

jeremyjh 11d ago
> "ride along the terms of service" By using AI to write code, like virtually everyone does? Tell me, what indication was there in their TOS, that this might be close to a line?
- embedding-shape 11d ago
  Do X in whatever way you want, if you do so knowing it's against the terms of service, you're "riding along the line of the terms of service" for sure if you try to explain away how it is/isn't explicitly forbidden.
  - jeremyjh 11d ago
    Using AI was not against any terms of service at all three months ago.
    - embedding-shape 11d ago
      Ok, point being? Codeberg is a non-profit community that evolves and figures out where to move, all the time, this is the point of the association itself. Members discuss what to do, then a decision is made, then new rules eventually apply, this is how the project moves forward.
      - jeremyjh 11d ago
        You said people were “riding the line”. They weren’t. Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting. Projects that were not illegal, indecent or dangerous. I can’t think of another time something like that has happened. They can do it, sure, but many had hoped they could be an independent host for all FOSS as GitHub deteriorates. They have disappointed those hopes, and we will have to look to others - like Codefloe - to carry that hope forward.
        xigoi 11d ago
        GitHub is deteriorating primarily because of LLMs. I’m guessing Codeberg doesn’t want to end up the same way.
        embedding-shape 11d ago
        > Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting What does "made up" mean? It was a decision by the actual members of the platform, you know, the actual people using it! Nothing "made up" about it. I think it's pretty clear you don't have an idea of what Codeberg is trying to be, nor do you have any interest in understanding, you just want to push this "Codefloe" platform for some reason. Codeberg make very public what the platform is for and yes, that'll change in the future too, as the world changes.
- selfhoster1312 11d ago
  Not one programmer i know does this. Well no actually, one does because his boss makes him but it's so shitty he basically AI-washes his own job. How come on HN every week i come across someone who believes programming is dead and everyone has been brainwashed by Silicon Valley execs into destroying the planet with LLMs?
  - deleted 10d ago
    [deleted]
  - jeremyjh 10d ago
    Honestly it is astonishing to me that there are still people who believe things like this. AI is just a tool. Software development still requires human minds. There are people who don't understand that and crank out slop. Fuck those people. That isn't what I do. There are people who don't understand that and won't host my FOSS. Well, I've found someone who will.
FabCH 11d ago
Why do you assume they will be ok with it? They recently made some very ideological decisions…
- embedding-shape 11d ago
  I didn't? Maybe I didn't explain properly, what did you understood I said/wrote?
  - FabCH 11d ago
    „ and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it“ That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Notably, Codeberg is morally opposed to AI.
    - embedding-shape 11d ago
      > That doesn’t work because „fine and good“ doesn’t mean the same thing to Codeberg voters/admins and to a large part of the hacke news population. Why on earth would Codeberg give even the slighest fucks about what the "hacker news population" finds "fine and good"? Makes absolutely zero sense. Codeberg made those things against the Terms of Service because paying members who use the platform voted for exactly that. This is how Codeberg works, the members of the platform decides how it works.
      - FabCH 11d ago
        You changed the topic. The topic is not what Codeberg should care about. The topic was trust in the humans behind Codeberg to not delete private repositories on a whim. Codeberg community is free to care about whatever it sees fit. That doesn't protect them from criticism. Do I trust humans behind Codeberg to behave sensibly? No. Would more precise terms of service that explain what Codeberg community thinks is ok help with such trust? Yes. Should the humans behind Codeberg care what I think? Maybe? Presumably they do care about reaching _some_ users, otherwise why have the service public at all?
jasonvorhe 11d ago
What a weird take coming from a pro-Codeberg perspective considering that many their users I are proudly #actuallyautistic people who would prefer strict rules to follow in order to feel secure. > The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules [...] Better speak for yourself and not infer from your own views to others. With bad intention this could be interpreted as if I was incapable of dealing with human decisions when all I stated is that I mistrust people who rugpull me.