How Tesseract dev felt before getting found out.

Just watched this movie for the first time on Tuesday. I highly recommend it. (The Lawnmower Man.)

Tell them then, not me. I’m not affiliated with Codeberg. I only read the change set.

Assuming this is a real post and not satire, my best guess is that they don’t think it’s a bottleneck, but still believe a way to talk to the computer without disturbing others in the office is useful. Like if Tide detergent said it would save your marriage – they don’t think it really will, but the ad is humourous and likely to gain attention because of it.

If you’re still in college, try to get an internship. Once you have something on your resume, it’s a lot easier to get into places. Plus try to network and stuff. Getting recommended by someone is much more likely to result in an interview.

The AI shit is really rocking the boat right now, but ultimately I don’t think it’s sustainable. I don’t know what the future of dev work will look like or when it’ll balance out, but right now, these AI agents are effectively heavily subsidized by investors. At some point, they’ll need to either turn to the public (IPO) as a last resort, or actually begin to turn a profit. I think this happened with Microsoft’s Copilot. “Tokenpocalypse” was the term that got thrown around. They can’t undercharge for this stuff forever.

Even if AI does end up being a significant part of work, actually knowing how to code will make you better at using it. Your skills aren’t useless. You’ll be better at noticing when the agents make shitty code or shitty decisions. If agentic development ends up being too costly for everyday use, you’ll still be able to assist with “manual” code writing.

AI companies over hype their products and say they’re world shattering as a way of marketing. They say the idea of developers are over because they want people to invest and buy their product. Agentic coding has gotten pretty fucking impressive in the past few months, but something’s gonna break at some point. The bill always comes due.

But yeah. Internship and networking. Learn AI, but don’t eschew traditional development practices entirely.

Heh, still living in the stone age? That’s why I use my Superwhisper™.

Lol. “Hide NSFW communities by default” and in the same commit totally blocks blahaj.

Weather boy

Pedophile and perchance

Yes, hello, cyber police? Yes. I have a backtraced IP to report.

UwU~

If you have more specific questions about Codeberg’s decision, you should ask them, not me.

Let’s be real here, the concerns about what the copyright is of code that’s produced by AI is still sort of in the air, especially for a site that wants to host content from across the globe. Codeberg picking its battles and not wanting to deal with that for now seems reasonable.

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).

Did you not read the actual change?

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).

deleted by creator

…by not posting a meme as a response? What? That doesn’t even make sense.

Never said misogyny is a small thing.

I can’t see the future, but this all doesn’t sound like an ideological “vibe code is bad, we don’t allow it” but a “the copyright of vibe coded content is unclear across jurisdictions, we don’t allow it.” So I don’t think it’s something they’ll say “hey, this looks vibe coded, deleted.” Many projects self proclaim they’re vibe coded. Many projects list every commit that is vibe coded. It seems likely they’ll go after those projects instead.

But yes, I’m not an oracle, and Codeberg could always heel turn and turn this into a witch hunt, but I don’t think they’ve earned that reputation.

It just feels really baseless to me. Have you read their terms of service? I’m sure there are other similar things in there. Like most terms of service there are parts that say they reserve the right to remove things for reasons not specifically listed. For example, they say if something is harmful to their organization they can remove it even if something isn’t listed explicitly. And that’s something that pretty much all services say. So why is this specifically the thing that makes you worried?

But you sure felt the need to tell me “it’s ok when other people do, too” though, so it sure seems like you interpreted what I said as saying people couldn’t.