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. 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. embedding-shape · 1790347434 · focus · HN ↗
    > I predict that Codeberg will soon realize that they have no choice but to loosen and allow AI generated code.
    I predict that eventually people will read the linked blog post and realize Codeberg already allows AI generated code. But this requires reading and nuance of course, which is hard to come by sometimes, so I guess we'll continue see misinformed comments like this until eventually the web is only autonomous agents.
    IslandRebel · 1790348479 · focus · HN ↗
    It doesn't really. It allows it in very limited context which has overlap with other existing tools that predate AI.
    embedding-shape · 1790349018 · focus · HN ↗
    Point out what verbatim piece of text forbids any and all usage of LLMs for coding and having that project on Codeberg?
    Literally the first "informal guidelines" (subject to change of course) states:
    > Projects who have an active community that cares about and maintains the software
    You can use LLMs for development + fulfill this requirement, contrary to popular belief.
    They want to get rid of slop projects and vibe coders, not any project that has any developer that used any LLM. But again, requires you to read through the actual text to actually get their intention here.
    IslandRebel · 1790350907 · focus · HN ↗
    > You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude, OpenAI Codex). Such projects having an unclear copyright status (see requirements § 2 (1) 1 and § 2 (1) 3) and furthermore have little safeguards to ensure that they do not include harmful code (c.f. § 2 (1) 5).
    <a href="https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/commit/96fac426a32d1ba91ff879366d59bf1af54080c2/TermsOfUse.md" rel="nofollow">https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/commit/96fac426a32d1ba...
    I have read it. This effectively narrows down the use of AI drastically IMO. Which is what I said.
    This effectively limits it to stuff like code completion and using it as a chat assistant and doing some medium level refactors.
    They should have just completely banned it. As the ambiguity itself causes problems. Even if you use LLMs maybe say 25% of the time, sooner or later that means that a significant portion of your code base is AI generated.
    > They want to get rid of slop projects and vibe coders, not any project that has any developer that used any LLM. But again, requires you to read through the actual text to actually get their intention here.
    I am not a vibe coder (I am a software dev with almost 20 years experience) and am using Heavy LLM assistance (I am running Qwen 3.8 locally) for some of my projects. I am making sure the code output is decent, well documented, has tests etc. Sure what I am doing is something betweeen "vibe coding" and "proper development" but there would be no way for me in the few hours an evening to even get to the stage I would be at in some of them without LLM assistance.
    I would not be able to use codeberg for hosting my project under their rules.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.