- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
Is there no git hosting service left that isn’t pushing censorship and fascism? I think I should just start self-hosting at this point.
You must log in or register to comment.
I dislike scam money as much as the next person. I do not, however, dislike cryptography. There’s a really good common in the thread about elliptic curve cryptography not having a place on Codeberg anymore and I think that’s valid. I don’t even know if OpenSSL could have a place on Codeberg with this decision. Their nonprofit, their rules. Just not very libre-minded and definitely sets a bad precedent. And before someone tells me Microsoft actively censors GitHub, this isn’t a whataboutism thread. It just reduces my trust in a supposedly open collective.
I dislike Codeberg’s decision.
But I would not even think of calling it fascism or censorship.I just dislike it.
So, I move on.And due to the fact that I do not like to run into the next dead end, I decided to self host my repositories now. The only way to be assured that tha rules do not ever change in a way that I do not like.
Yes, the overhead is substantial.
It’s the trade off I chose and accept.crypto? you mean like fake money for laundering?
“Everything I don’t like is fascism”
What a moronic take, and good of Codeberg to kick those assholes out.
Its great that they are not trying to be a universal replacement for Github but something more focussed to their community. That will encourage others to spin up their own Forgejo instances and that decentralisation is a feature not a bug.
They don’t need to host everything and everybody. That kills community. They are even spending money on developing activity pub federation, just like here.
What’s the definition of cryptocurrency-RELATED? Who defines what this all includes? Bad decision by codeberg…
They decide. It’s their platform.
They won’t ever be able to compete with GitHub or GitLab like this…
Who says they’re trying?
They’re a not for profit…
What do you mean?
Sorry typo. They’re not for profit.
Which is not what both github and gitlab are trying to be.
Why should they spend money hosting content the people who are dontating don’t want?
Is it facism if the community voted for it?Huh, do you think fascism only excists with minority supporting it?
I am confused. Do you think cryptocurrencies are people? or do you think excluding certain kinds of projects from your community is somehow fascism?
Nobody is excluded from using codeberg based on their identity alone. Every community and internet platform has rules of what you can bring to it and what you are able to do there.
Unlike github, being excluded from codeberg hosting doesn’t really cost you anything because they don’t intend to be a walled garden.
You might want to look into how fascism got into power in the 1930s.
There was nothing democratic about fascism, when Mussolini was elected, it was because he had marched on Rome and the king was like, “Hmm, let him in” and appointed him as minster because there was a desperate need of a stable government and everyone was “let the king do it, we can dismiss mussolini later, he is just an idiot” and you know what happened next
All the elections in which the fascists took part were marked by the fear caused by their violence
deception, racism and populism?
The centrists let Hitler take power because fascism is better than comnunism for the bourgeoisie?
Even in the USA today, Trump wouldn’t have won without the anti -democratic electoral college.
That said, it is scary how popular fascist movements can get when capitalist societies get pressured.
deleted by creator
Is there no git hosting service left that isn’t pushing censorship and fascism? I think I should just start self-hosting at this point.
Aw, is someone sad that a nonprofit won’t spend their own money to host shitty pump-and-dump tools destroying the environment? Little pissbaby need a minute to compose themself?
Edit: By the way, speaking of fascism, OP…
Edit 2: Just want to say I find it immensely funny that the two people in this thread bitching about this democratic decision and calling it “fascist” and “authoritarian”, respectively, have posted an image of Germany captioned “The aggressor nation?” and knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden.
It’s always projection from the “woke moralists!!” crowd.
Excellent research! Thank you for sharing this. It’s good to know.
I cannot speak for OP but you have intentionally mischaracterized my position on another matter instead of discussing and addressing the criticism leveled against Codeberg’s decision here and broader culture of authoritarian behaviour happening within the left.
I am myself left wing, its a mischaracterization to say “knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden”. Because first of all, I didn’t know. Secondly, if you read what I actually wrote I say I do not approve of the action by co-owner of Mullvad and that his actions to not represent the the entirety of the organization.
Furthermore, in your attempt at ad-hominem, you selectively cherry pick a nuance take on the Mullvad situation where I am rightfully concerned about the loss of a much needed force in the sphere of digital rights and online privacy. And then neglect to highlight a post I made before where I am critical of emerging far-right fascism and the neoliberalism that fuels it.
My initial critisicm of the left and the decision by Codeberg is something you are welcome to disagree with. But you can do so addressing the issue at hand and not resorting to misrepresentation and emotive language.
By acting bad faith you have successfully derailed the conversation as such that I have had to defend myself. I remind you of what Jean-Paul Sarte wrote regarding fascists:
They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Don’t claim to be an anti-fascist while employing the methodology of fascists.
And don’t promote anti-intellectualism and use emotive language to try enforce ideological conformity on the left and claim you are not an authoritarian.
I am entitled to my dissenting opinion and in any healthy community it would be welcomed. Again you can disagree but your behaviour and words are toxic and only serve to fracture the left.
That’s a big wall of text that never gets around to supporting your claim.
What out-group is punished for their identity on Codeberg? Because a cryptocurrency developer is allowed to host other projects there.
Calling community rules about what can be hosted on their platform fascism is absurd. Every platform does that, community or commercial platforms alike. You seem to care about fascism but you are watering the term down and that is dangerous.
Look, I have not called anyone a fascist.
My comment was using this action by codeberg to highlight what I feel is growing authoritarianism within the left.
The in-group is people who belong to the prevailing ideological hegenomy within the left and the out-group is the suppression of differing points of view outside the hegemony with methods invoking ad-hominem, coercion, appeals to emotion and intimidation.
It is plain to see in this thread.
Was my comment hyperbole? Maybe. But it highlights a valid concern in my opinion and that it ironically evokes such clearly authoritarian reactions proves it was an appropriate criticism.
I bemoan the false equivalence of all cryptocurrency based code with fraudulent activity. And I see such lazy thinking as an act of vanity at the expense of tolerance.
Community standards are not authoritarian. Good grief. You have talked yourself into a corner with that wooly thinking.
I made a sarcastic comment and then defended myself against false accusations. It’s that simple.
I defined what I consider authoritarian:
The in-group is people who belong to the prevailing ideological hegenomy within the left and the out-group is the suppression of differing points of view outside the hegemony with methods invoking ad-hominem, coercion, appeals to emotion and intimidation.
Am I wrong? Is it not appropriate bring up a wider discussion about the state of the left on a post about a code respository? I dunno.
You choosing to not to exchange with what I have written and instead use emotive language “good grief” because you felt like jumping on the bandwagon with others making false accusations of fascism goes against your own principles about “watering the term down”.
Not the person your arguing with.
But what sarcastic comment? You entrrd this thread with a long winded winge.
Poow babby u wnt hug?
git is decentralized for a reason. In the age of robots and cheap VPSs, if you really want a vanity web page / code forge to show your code, it is like an afternoon setting things up and the robot will do most of it for you. Yes, it has always been time to self-host your own code. I don’t bother with a code forge, but I do have gitweb/gitolite running for a very light weight setup to push and display code
Codeberg runs on and develops Forgejo - a lightweight open source forge anyone can take and run themselves.
it is like an afternoon
Heck, even less, just have to setup docker on the VPS, pull the Forgejo image and run it and it’s basically all done, just have to personalize it and maybe setup some permissions if you want more users
Bye Shirley!
Doesn’t this go against one of the main principles in the open source definition? that is no discrimination against fields of endeavour.
No, its a terms of use for what goes on their servers. Every open source project has that.
You are free to take Forgejo, their open source forge software, and run it on your own computer without any restrictions based on the free software license.
Nope! You just made that up! Open source is when the source is openly available. If you were thinking of the free software movement, you’re still wrong! I hope that’s helpful.
Point 6
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
You are not restricted in your use of their software. Don’t make shit up. Go try and ask Debian to include a proprietary program in their main repo and see how far you get.
Whats stopping you from taking the software to host codrberg, and host your own?
Because its not the license. That’s software, not a service provider.
The OSI applies to software like forgejo, not services like codeberg. The term ‘open source’ does not imply a software uses an open license or follows any particular philosophy, it can be used by any project, with any license.
I’m so glad we’ve had this rising moral grandstanding authortarianism on the left in the past 10 years.
It certainly has helped to protect the vulnerable and not merely served as egoistic vanity-based virtue signaling for a narcissistic and sycophantic minority.
/s
Unlike your post?
Yes. Unlike my post, a sarcastic comment which triggered all the people I am referring to, who then proceeded to prove my point.
Authoritarianism is when meanies won’t let me run scams for profit! I’m being oppressed!
“Reeee, a community vote that says we shouldn’t spend community-donated money hosting pump-and-dump projects that exist to put money in the hands of the wealthy far-right while destroying the environment is authoritarianism!!1 You should be forced to host my trash at your own expense; stop trying to control me, woke moralists! Stop caring about things and help me destroy the world!”
Doesn’t matter if a majority imposes censorship, its still an authoritarian act. Its not worded to ban fraudulent activity, its worded to ban an entire categrory of software.
Guilt by association.
Have a nice day
It’s not censorship you walnut.
I don’t know if the word ‘censorship’ is the one I’d choose, but assuming codeberg is committing ‘censorship’, what’s the problem? Private organisations do that all the time. It’s only illegal for the government. Have you never had a wage job? Every job training I’ve been through included multiple types of self censorship. The difference between it and government censorship is there’s competition in the private market, you can just leave the job if you don’t want to put up with it.
I mean you are right I am just expressing my disappointment with Codeberg and prevailing sentiments on the left.
I think censorship or the blocking of illicit actitivy like fraudulent activity or pump and dump schemes is valid but this proposal has blanket banned an entire field of endeavor.
And I question if the point of it is truely about protecting people or defining in-groups and out-groups and promoting ideological conformism.
Maybe my sarcastic response is an overreaction as responses here seem to indicate but in my opinion its more telling that asking us to self reflect on what the contemporary left is evidently such a taboo.
There’s no ingroup or outgroup here. Cryptocurrency isn’t people, and even cryptocurrency developers are perfectly able to host other projects there.
Community standards exist everywhere. Censorship implies the power to silence people, and in no way is Codeberg able to prevent people from sharing their project widely. They are an intentionally small platform supporting an open internet. This is no different than their long lived restriction on proprietary software. Which is again no different from Debian restricting what goes on their repos.
You can run proprietary cryptocurrency software on your own computer with both Debian and Forgejo (Codeberg’s forge software), but neither project will host it for you.
And I question if the point of it is truely about protecting people or defining in-groups and out-groups and promoting ideological conformism.
My point is, who cares if this is part of the community’s reasoning? All communities are defined by common beliefs.
its more telling that asking us to self reflect on what the contemporary left is evidently such a taboo.
Why do you feel like you can just drop that in without any explanation? Not everything falls into a left-right binary. Open discussions require both sides to be reasonable, you need to provide reasons for your claims, otherwise it’s just noise.
Well, I am part of that community and although it is the majority sentiment it is not something that is shared by everyone.
When I criticize the left I am criticizing from within that group. If you read my comment again you will find it is the replies from others who frame things as a left-right binary. By being of the left and being critical of the left and having a dissenting opinion I am negating that binary.
I think this decision is poorly thought out and authoritarian and I do not like that in our communities.
It is my sentiment, feeling and experience of an increasing demand for ideological conformity, politics of vanity and authoritarian behaviour on the left.
I could do some research for you and provide examples to backup this belief.
Or rather, let us be reasonable. When I critic the left for authoritarianism do you find it to be heedless agitation? When I speak of narcissism and self-aggrandizing behaviour do you yourself see no such evidence of this?
you will find it is the replies from others who frame things as a left-right binary.
You sure? Like, absolutely sure? Did you check?
All I asked was if you felt it was justified to assume everyone knows why you believe this is leftist. Do you consider yourself a reasonable person? That’s more important to me than anything else you said at the moment.
Sorry, someone who’s knowingly funding the neo-Nazi party in Sweden – not because they have no other choice but because they don’t fucking care – doesn’t get a vote on what is and isn’t woke moralizing authoritarianism.
Fuck crypto shills. Fuck neo-Nazis. And fuck you, you whiny little Nazi-funding bitch.
You say in another comment where you refer to me that you find the situation of dissenting opinion immensely funny.
And here like in your other comment you mischaracterize me. You claim to be a democratic but then quite happily want to revoke voting from me because we disagree.
I do not support nazism or fascism. We are both left wing, we are probably broadly in ideological agreement but you make your false claim because its more comfortable for you to fetishize nazis everywhere and make an enemy of your own would-be ally instead of fostering and creating broad coalition on the left that would actually be capable of standing up to the far-right wing elements in our society.
And that is just sad.
An entire category of fraud software that’s used literally only for scams and buying drugs, and isn’t even great for buying drugs.
What the hell does this have to do with politics or the left? Good fucking grief conservatives think everyone is attacking them and use it as justification to make everything shitty for everyone.
Its incredibly trivial to just host up your own instance if gogs or gitea on a cheap computer, throw woodpecker on it if you want easy CI/CD
It doesnt take much hardware at all for a git server, a raspberry pi will handle it just fine.
Or just a cheap box liquidated from some office, just go buy some box from a used pc seller in your city, they’ll have some.
Toss a 1TB drive in it.
Throw debian on it.
Install Gogs + Woodpecker
And then set em up and connect the two together.
Grats, you have your own self hosted git server whee
Think this might be a hot take but crypto is better off hosted on a blockchained git alternative like ngit than codeberg or any other. And while unintentional is ultimately healthier for what crypto is.
