Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • If you work for a tech company, I can practically guarantee that it bans a lot of lawful behaviors on its platforms. Paypal bans or restricts online dating, cigarettes, and firearm accessories. Youtube demonetizes swearing. Facebook prohibits the sale of bodily fluids (I don't want to know what triggered that policy) and "used cosmetics".

    If you're not interested in stuff like that when your company is doing it, but are up in arms about some other platform deciding that they don't like crypto, I think you should look in the mirror. Their reasoning is probably the same: they don't like it and don't want to put up with the task of sensibly policing the category.

  • I'm not personally a fan of this move or the vibe coding rule. That being said, I genuinely wonder how many people complaining about the rule are personally affected. Seems weird to me to complain about a service setting its own rules when you don't engage with it or contribute to it.
  • Crypto shills have alot of money and bots to push their agenda. Issue is the community is so toxic and scammy at this point it might be more disliked than AI slop by anyone with a pulse.
  • Publishing platforms’ censorship policies affect readers because they affect discovery and decide, like a parent, what you should or should not be allowed to read.
  • They don't have to be affected to be worried. It's how it was done and possibilities of further bans that is worrisome.

    I have small open source projects that I won't move to Codeberg ever now because I don't want to waste any mental energy pondering if I might get banned in the future.

    For example I have a stock trading backtracking strategy test tool. Will they ban anything related to fintech in the future because it is deemed evil? I don't want to have to think about that.

    Will they ban my crappy game macroing tool to automate some simple repetitive game actions because it is considered cheating or against some game ToS? I don't care and I don't want to have to care about a possible ban. It's a glorified auto clicker to prevent RSI health issues ffs.

    by bel8
  • It's HN. They like to think they are better than reddit, but in the end this site is a huge echo box, and any outlier causes these reactions, particularly when it's something or someone taking a moral/ethical stance
    by witx
  • Codeberg is not a public dumping ground. It is a service offered by a non-profit with specific goals and missions.
  • That's fair.

    They should probably put their political doctrines and ideologies on the home page so people can know if their projects fall into the category of undesirables before they make an account, since the list seems to be expanding.

    Otherwise it's hard to tell what will be banned next.

  • Time to move off of Codeberg. They provide a service, that's it. I don't want drama from my service providers, and censorship incurs drama. I think some censorship is needed (hate speech, CP), but I do not want projects deleted because someone running the service doesn't like how I make them, or what they are for. They have the right to do that, but I also have the right to vote with my feet and go elsewhere, and I'm doing that. LLMs assisting coding has it's place, crypto has its place, both have been overhyped and so we're now getting a rubberband effect as people express hatred of these things based on the hype - not on their legitimate purposes.
  • Were you paying for Codeberg?
  • > They provide a service

    Codeberg seems to disagree about that point.

  • In the prior words[1] of Gusted, one of the board members that announced the ban:

    > This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop.

    [1] https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecom...

  • So what is Codeberg’s political stance? From which ideology does it follow that crypto projects are bad, but VPN projects are not, for example?
  • Pretending to run an inclusive git hosting service for FOSS and then attacking your own users because their code is the wrong type of algorithm isn't politics, it's just being an asshole.
  • I don't like crypto but this is poor reasoning, hastily implemented, and given very little time for discussion. There does not seem to be any concrete plan for notifying impacted projects or giving them a roadmap to migrate.

    This is unprofessional and severely harms their credibility. It's not what was done but how they did it, and I don't doubt that subsequent policy changes can and will be implemented in the same manner unless it's addressed.

  • This was proposed 8ish months ago, and the annual assembly had this open for votes for 2ish months. I do think there was time for discussion, but I agree that there is poor reasoning.

    Making the proposal fit all the nuances would no doubt be a nightmare in an association structure with so many members distributed around the world, we've had 6h+ long meetings for deciding on wording of a controversial policy in our e.V., and that was with everyone involved in the same room.

    Codeberg may simply not be the right forge for many projects, which is probably fine, but does leave a gap for a good non-big-tech forge alternative (tangled isn't a good alternative, fwiw).

  • As with the AI ban this was a community decision done by a majority vote. It seems that most people commenting or writing articles in the last few days don't have a Codeberg account or never visit the forum.
  • putting aside the saying that goes something like "51% of the animal population votes to eat the other 49%", it takes a special kind of person to be both aware of such a vote happening and also care to participate in it.

    codeberg has outed themselves as an unserious undertaking. they will not be known for anything else now.

  • What does it take to get a vote? Could there be some sabotage here?
    by cush
  • The “majority” is a fiction. I received no email from Codeberg, nor was I aware that a vote was taking place. I use Codeberg as my main code forge. My projects are not vibe-coded, but some are indirectly related to cryptocurrency in that they use some of the same technologies. This decision appears arbitrary, and I no longer trust Codeberg to host my code for the long term. What will the 'majority' come up with next year?
  • I have an account and I donate regularly. I was not made aware a vote was happening.
  • I think their own community can make their own rules. My only thought in doing so the description of what they represent would then be subject to those rules.

    They state "The mission of Codeberg e.V. is to build and maintain a free collaboration platform for creating, archiving, and preserving code and to document its development process."

    It seems like they might now need to elaborate that they mean "free as in beer".

    by Lerc
  • "the community" being some tiny subset of busybodies out of an OOMs-larger body of users that don't want to be bothered?

    Real question, I don't know anything about Codeberg or its community.

  • Let this be a reminder to never trust any service be it one ran by a billion dollar company, to one ran by volunteers. You will be eventually screwed over. Make backup plans, and self-host whatever you can so nothing can be taken from you. For Git forges, I personally recommend Gitea[1], or Forgejo[2] (a Gitea fork by Codeberg)

    [1]: https://about.gitea.com/ [2]: https://forgejo.org/

  • there's decentralized git on Nostr:

    https://nostrapps.github.io/nostrgit/

    Your public key is your sovereign ownership of your project, and with Nostr is no longer bound to any single entity.

  • I’m using self hosted GitLab; any reason I should check out something else?

    (I also mirror projects to public GitLab and to GitHub.)

  • It’s probably not too important to choose a service that you think you can trust fully, because that trust might be broken at some point. But having an identifier that can be swapped to different backends, so people can find you again when the host inevitability changes, is a stronger strategy. I think the importance of owning domain names will increase, and using those as the canonical identifier of a project will give it more permanence. The procedures for seizure and censorship with domain names are better established and understood.
  • Self-hosting based on an external project is still a dependency on Someone Else to keep it up to date, unless you have both the time and skill to take over maintenance of that project.
  • Radicle provides self-hosting with decentralized mirrors for both added availability and DDoS resistance.

    A Tor-hosted mirror provides extra protection against attacks on DNS or your domain name, and some additional DDoS protection.

  • Yeah. Buying my own domain and migrating my email to it is one of the best things I've ever done. Setting up wireguard into my LAN permanently changed the way I used computers. Looks like it's time to get myself a VPS and just start hosting even more stuff.

    Sovereign personal infrastructure is amazing. Highly recommended. Dealing with the government's rules and their politics is obnoxious enough. I'm starting to really lose patience with all of these communities.