> I recall some time in 2016 when they were regex replacing variable names in peoples repositories and pestering them if they didn’t accept the request.
I'm conflating multiple things over 5 years, my memory seems imperfect. Apologies.
What I've mixed together:
1) The "Alex" bot, which was opt-in and seemed to be everywhere. [0]
2) The "inclusive-coding-bot" which was not opt-in and just inserted itself into everything (which came out later). [1]
3) Github disabling a popular repository for using the word "Retard". [2]
Neither of the first two were actually endorsed by github, I just conflated them because of the "WebM for Retards" controversy and because they'd been very public about other inclusive things like not interviewing white people [3] or calling white women "some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women". [4]
my God, even 11 years ago, people had the same stupid political arguments as today:
> I think the fundamental misunderstanding we're having here is that people on the left side of the political spectrum believe the solution to all answers is more government control.
Yes, its really similar and unsurprisingly its still inflammatory.
My girlfriend mentioned that this year is an election year in sweden, which made me realise how bad the propaganda was in 2016- but its all the same stuff.
Not for vibe-coders, and also not for any business or user with any project using AI for "most" of the code (an ill-defined term in their ToS that nonetheless safely excludes many serious projects adopting AI for a variety of reasons). I have a code base that is entirely handwritten JS. I am porting it to .NET/C# with AI assistance, plus a lot of supervision and manual revision by me to ensure the quality meets my requirements. When finished, the code base will be "mostly" AI-generated within the meaning of Codeberg's ToS, even though I wrote the underlying code base by hand, and will have overseen and approved every line of AI-generated C# code myself. I don't have any reason to trust that Codeberg will be more or less reasonable in my particular use case, nor that they will interpret their ToS consistently to permit or disallow my project even assuming their terms do allow my project (and it's just of many to be clear). They control their ToS and I assume they drafted it vaguely on purpose to ensure they have flexibility to kick out anyone deemed undesirable. At least that's what I would do in their shoes if I wanted flexibility. If coding is a hobby and you hate AI or simply never use it, you can definitely use Codeberg. If you are an enterprise customer, or you use GenAI to any significant extent (or both), you nearly certainly cannot safely do so. And that's fine; Codeberg can do whatever they want. But Codeberg is in no way a "perfect drop-in 1:1 replacement" for most developers.