Thread

1. ricardobeat · 1790328018 · focus · HN ↗

   A note to the developers in the project, if anyone is reading: your repositories are in violation of the new Codeberg policy that forbids AI-generated code [1].

   [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.codeberg.org&#x2F;protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.codeberg.org&#x2F;protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

   1. rvz · 1790330523 · focus · HN ↗

      I predict that Codeberg will soon realize that they have no choice but to loosen and allow AI generated code.

      There is no point in being on the extreme end around banning all code generated by AI.

      Regardless, there is AI generated code in many repositories on Codeberg anyway.

      1. lucideer · 1790331717 · focus · HN ↗

         I&#x27;ve seen so much commentary on the apparent strictness &amp; extreme nature of Codeberg&#x27;s approach &amp; no actual examples of it.

         They have a strict policy (which many have rightly pointed out is impossible to fully enforce), &amp; their &quot;enforcement&quot; has mostly relied on good faith contributions to date. They&#x27;re also accounting for the fact the ToS change came without advance notice for many of their users who were already making active use of agents, hence there remains many AI repos (I have yet to hear of any removals).

         To me that seems like the best approach one can hope for - a lax policy is a slippery slope (presuming dissuading AI contrib is your goal), &amp; wouldn&#x27;t satisfy their legal concerns (hosting code of questionable copyright status), &amp; strict enforcement isn&#x27;t viable in any case (especially at their scale), so this seems to me to be the best compromise.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.