Thread

Dutch governments builds alternative for Microsoft based on NixOS

1021 points · 583 comments · fjfaase

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://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html" rel="nofollow">https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...
1. gagik_co · 1790328456 · focus · HN ↗
  It’d make the most sense for the Dutch government (or DAWO) to have their own Forgejo instance if the goal is data sovereignty.
  edit: looks like this was originally the case and then they moved?
  1. utopiah · 1790328771 · focus · HN ↗
    clearly shows the need for federated forges, where you get to decide on your own rules but you still benefit from interacting with a broader set of collaborators.
    amiga386 · 1790330448 · focus · HN ↗
    That's likely to end up Balkanized like the fediverse, where every instance has a list of other instances they refuse to federate with, often because politics or petty drama. Though to be fair to the fediverse, sometimes it's because those other instances are full of child porn and most people just don't want to see that.
    It amuses me that Mastodon Central uses corpo-friendly labels for the sites they won't federate with, e.g. (<a href="https://mastodon.social/about" rel="nofollow">https://mastodon.social/about)
    tsundere.love Suspended (Hate speech) you**.**ve Suspended (Inappropriate content)
    Whereas the more free-wheeling sites, like the ones Mastodon Central blocks, tell it exactly how it is: (<a href="https://tsundere.love/about" rel="nofollow">https://tsundere.love/about)
    nadeko.pw CP mk.fedcast.ch Spam youjo.love hosts at least one admitted pedo
    mitxela · 1790339993 · focus · HN ↗
    If you want to follow some CP poster on nadeko.pw then you can ask your admin on tsundere.love to unblock it and he will probably just ban you for admitting you like CP.
    Where did we get this idea that federated instances should never block anything? Even warez sites have rules.
    amiga386 · 1790345753 · focus · HN ↗
    > Where did we get this idea that federated instances should never block anything?
    I'm not sure, but the OP was postulating that Forgejo instances could federate to solve the problem that the Dutch government runs its own instance to develop its software (including using AI extensively) but wants to engage with the wider community so is currently hosting things on Codeberg's centralised instance of Forgejo, and Codeberg's administrators hate AI.
    Adding federation doesn't solve that problem, it just moves it one level up. To collaborate with the Dutch government, you either need to directly register on their site, or set up an entire copy of Forgejo, publicly hosted, so you can federate your one-user instance with them, or you need to find a different instance that someone else hosts, and be at the mercy of that instance's admins, who may be even more cruel and capricious than Codeberg's.
    What I predict is a future codeberg.org/about saying
    code.overheid.nl Suspended (slopfondlers)
    And a future code.overheid.nl/about being full of dodgy Forgejo instances that host porn games
    mitxela · 1790347269 · focus · HN ↗
    Codeberg's AI position was about resource waste. Single-user AI projects were spamming their CI/CD as if they were KDE or the kernel.
    They don't care if someone wastes their own resources.
    amiga386 · 1790349599 · focus · HN ↗
    Federation is a people-problem, not so much the resource problem.
    Mastodon servers defederate because the people (or rather, the admins) of instance A don't want anything to do with the people (who toot at the discretion and policies of the admins) of instance B.
    Codeberg's AI position, as stated and voted upon, does not mention resource usage at all. That's completely invisible from the discussion. It is exclusively argued against on accord of 1) unclear copyright ownership, and 2) users have no idea what's in the code, therefore it could be full of security flaws or harmful code.
    <a href="https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253" rel="nofollow">https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253
    So they would not want to federate with another host that used a lot of AI-generated code, even if it claimed an open license, even if that federation caused little-to-no usage of their CI. They would fundamentally disagree with any other instance that allowed mostly-AI-generated projects. They would therefore block such instances, if federation was a thing.
    mitxela · 1790357727 · focus · HN ↗
    Those are all problems codeberg doesn't want on its system. Allowing a codeberg user to comment on someone else's system wouldn't bring those problems to codeberg.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.