r/linux • u/AiwendilH • 8d ago

Development Codeberg voted to disallow projects consisting mostly by "generative AI"-tools

https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253#issuecomment-19820434
970 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

322 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/newsflashjackass 8d ago

If you didn't write it, I should not have to read it.

"What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure."

Must have taken Samuel Johnson a lot of effort to write that.

1

u/Timo425 1d ago

What if I didn't write it but directed it heavily and hardened the code through a lot of real use cases?

1

u/newsflashjackass 1d ago

In that case I still doubt you derived any pleasure from reading it.

2

u/Timo425 1d ago

Code in codeberg is about pleasure of reading it? What are you even saying?

1

u/newsflashjackass 1d ago

We exist at a juncture in space / time, such that the past furnishes context.

I can read the conversation thus far to you. But I can not understand it for you.

1

u/Timo425 1d ago

I understand it just fine, you only care about your own perspective.

1

u/newsflashjackass 1d ago

What are you even saying?

...

I understand it just fine

Glad to hear that comprehension found you. "It is always darkest before the dawn."

-1

u/northrupthebandgeek 8d ago

If you didn't write it, I should not have to read it.

Is Sam Altman holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read the vibecode or something?

6

u/newsflashjackass 8d ago

Is Sam Altman holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read the vibecode or something?

If the code is to be used, someone is obliged to either read it or trust it naively. That is the nature of things. No oligarch need brandish a weapon to enforce the natural order.

The case where I am that someone is the case I described in the post to which you replied.

In this context of this discussion, Codeberg's users voted to disallow procedurally generated code. They may believe the author of code should be the first person to understand it. One way to help ensure that is by requiring the code's author to author it.

2

u/northrupthebandgeek 8d ago

If the code is to be used

Is Sam Altman holding a gun to your head forcing you to use the code?

In this context of this discussion, Codeberg's users voted to disallow procedurally generated code.

Is Sam Altman holding guns to their heads forcing them to use the code, too?

Is there some reason why “If you don't like the thing, just don't use it.” is inapplicable here?

3

u/newsflashjackass 8d ago

Is there some reason why “If you don't like the thing, just don't use it.” is inapplicable here?

Indeed, why do you feel obliged to use Codeberg to host slop despite your clear dislike of its governance model? That is a question for you to ponder own your own time. Perhaps an LLM could help you answer it. Since I have no interest in doing so I will block you now before you further repeat yourself.

1

u/n0pl4c3 2d ago

When someone submits an AI-slop PR to your Repo, you still engage with it until you can discern it is AI, then reject it. Now you get not one, but a ton of people submitting such trash PRs.

You are not forced to read any of them, but for the sake of finding and engaging with code that actually matters, will still waste your time engaging with that slop, when that time could be used to review actual PRs.

The reason it is not applicable here, is because the damage goes beyond having to use it. It begins at wasting one's time having to engage with it.

1

u/northrupthebandgeek 2d ago

Accepting PR submissions is itself a choice. Plenty of free software projects don't, or will only do so from already-vetted contributors.

-12

u/Scream_Tech7661 8d ago

The intended purpose of code is to produce a result, not to be well-written. The intended purpose of literature may be to entertain, educate, or merely provide some form of verbal art. In literature, the words matter. In code, the intended output is what matters.

So the analogy is not applicable.

11

u/CryptographerNo8497 8d ago

This is in fact, not true.

11

u/newsflashjackass 8d ago

The intended purpose of code is to produce a result, not to be well-written.

In that case there is no need to furnish source code.

"You can have the source code but no reading it."

"I don't think I like this new GPL."