[close04]

Maybe they use the definition from the HN guidelines [0]:

> Don't post generated text or AI-edited text. HN is for conversation between humans.

Does this change your view of HN? Of Codeberg? Of vibe enforced rules?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[ceres]

I don’t care about HN the same way I care about my development platform. If I want to show someone my life’s work I don’t send then to HackerNews.

[fragmede]

Wait, why am I commenting here then?

[close04]

You just expect platforms implement “no AI content” rules based on what you care about more. I mean you should leave the platform if you want to create more AI life’s work and they don’t let you, not everything works for everybody, but you can’t come out and object on principle when you accept it elsewhere. This is good for the people who want to signal there’s no AI slop in their work.

And if it’s your life work maybe you want to not hand it to every random platform out there, which can change rules on a whim, and instead host it yourself and own it with your own rules.

[matheusmoreira]

That rule's for HN comments, not submissions. Nobody's getting kicked out for vibecoding a project.

[close04]

You’re trying to make a meaningless distinction to justify holding different parties to different standards: comments are HN’s core content, code is Codeberg’s core content.

HN submissions are links to other platform, so not HN content. Codeberg will let you have links to AI generated content on another platform (like a GH link) so that’s not a worthwhile distinction.

Each platform states a “no AI generated content on our platform” rule or guideline. If you want to resolve the cognitive dissonance that was created when you realized HN does it too, may I suggest using a single standard for both rather than jumping on the weakest way out?

[matheusmoreira]

That's fair.

HN is a social network. Its value is human comments. People come here to see what the tech circles are saying.

A git host's value is in the source code it hosts, not who wrote it. Before all this, Codeberg was all about free software. This has a very precise definition. Free software communities used to gatekeep based on a very simple test: is it free software or proprietary software? The problem is people have started gatekeeping cryptocurrency, LLM usage. The definitions are imprecise, there's no telling where it's going to stop, and it causes needless fragmentation.