Post by @penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org

@penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org

2026-07-22 10:24 UTC

@Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de have just passed, with a considerable majority, this modification of their Terms of Use: »7. 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).« (emphasis added) We welcome the change. We'd welcome it even more if that tiny word "mostly" wasn't watering it down so badly, leading to foreseeable conflicts. We're not worried about to which extent it can be enforced. To any extent it's a net positive. People demanding perfection in every step of the combat are usually combatants on the other side, following the Simple Sabotage Field Manual. #Codeberg " #AI"

Replies (4)

@dooms@selfdon.0x7c4.com 2026-07-22 12:32

@penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org @Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de although I support partially the cause, I don't see this kind of absolute attitude to help. Nobody taking code from stackoverflow also knows that code's license (or any other forum, site, etc.) It's a dangerous path to follow, the same where now everywhere there is captcha to verify that you are human. Punishing humans for just doing human things is not just annoying... I ponder utilizing of those services now.

Open ##4969561
@alxndr@tech.lgbt 2026-07-22 13:02

@penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org I warned them about this in the forum discussion, and as expected, I'm already seeing AI bros latching onto "mostly" and asking about ratios. 🤷 I'm sure the moderation team will handle this responsibly either way, but leaving this door open was unnecessary. @Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de

Open ##5164536
@Marija_@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 13:04

@penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org @Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de Intent matters, even if enforcement isn't perfect.

Open ##5164539
@targetdrone@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 15:50

@penguinrebellion@tldr.nettime.org @Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de I think they're carving out space for practical exceptions. In a crisis you may find accepting an AI generated patch is a more expedient solution than bureaucratically demanding a human developed response. You also need to consider discovering undisclosed past contributions tainting the code -- do you have to rewrite it all to remain compliant?

Open ##5164540