3 ms·

What is a vibe coded project? Where does it start? Cursor autocomplete? One shot Github project copies? [Edit] The pull link is https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/o

What is a vibe coded project? Where does it start? Cursor autocomplete? One shot Github project copies? [Edit] The pull link is https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253/files https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253/files and says "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)." Whatever "mostly" means. If you autocomplete a lot, and the code written is "mostly" written by AI by autocomplete - it seems you fall under this. I wonder what the ratio needs to be. And I wonder if auto-refactoring in Intellij is also included, because Intellij created the code and then also has "unclear copyright status" if we follow the logic. Together this opens up more questions to me than it answers.

Mashimo 3mo ago
> projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools I guess if you auto complete line by line and actually read the code it should be gucci. Edit: Oh, you found it as well now. Disregard my post.
- KingOfCoders 3mo ago
  "I guess if you auto complete line by line and actually read the code it should be gucci." Not from their wording.
- Ghoelian 3mo ago
  AI auto complete is still generative AI, why would that be any different? Unless you're talking about regular intellisense-like auto complete, which of course does not use generative AI at all, which would obviously be fine.
cwillu 3mo ago
“You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude, OpenAI Codex).” Seems pretty clear to me?
- jorisw 3mo ago
  If 'mostly' means over 50% you could call this clear. Otherwise I don't think this is clear at all. Otherwise, what is mostly? Mostly at the outset, or at any given time? Must the project move out when it goes from 49% to 51% AI-assisted code?
  - KingOfCoders 3mo ago
    "Mostly at any given time?" Yes, old project with 1M LOC of pre-AI code + 100% AI 100k LOC generated coded for the last three months, is that mostly?
    - lproven 3mo ago
      No. "Most" is clear and unambiguous. It means more X than Y. The value of X is larger than the value of Y. X = bot slop ; Y = human written code In your question, 90% human written, 10% bot generated; no, it is not "most".
      - KingOfCoders 2mo ago
        LOC? NLOC? Files? Calculated during the last week? Day? Month? Year?
        lproven 2mo ago
        Quibbling. If someone is in the process of intentionally turning their project into slop, replacing human written code with bot-extruded code, then they can pay to host their own... ... And they should still be held fully responsible for the true environmental cost of the power and resources used to run the bots replacing craft with slop. This activity is criminally wasteful, and should be treated as a crime.
- KingOfCoders 3mo ago
  What is mostly? >50%? >75%? What does "written by generative AI" means? Autocomplete? IDE-with-AI-normal-classname-completion? Everything not typed by a human. I personally don't find this clear at all and see many unhappy discussions in the future for Codeberg.
noosphr 3mo ago
If you have to ask then the answer is no.
- akmarinov 3mo ago
  I mean Codeberg will pretty soon start having to ask. How do they determine that and who'll be in charge to find violations there?
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    It isn't a public service. It is one person offering his resources to help FOSS. He decides if you align with his mission.
    - badsectoracula 3mo ago
      Codeberg isn't one person, it is a non-profit organization with ~1200 members (not to be confused with users - there are ~200k users), ~780 members of which have voting rights. The decisions aren't taken arbitrarily but they are proposed and voted for in an internal forum.
  - customguy 3mo ago
    Before Codeberg has to ask that, the person who would upload has to ask it themselves. People know what they did, or didn't. "If you have shit on your shoe, please don't walk across our carpet". "But how do they know? maybe we should test if they can tell", and all that stuff... no. Most people would simply take a good look, and if they're worried about something that could be be mud or not, brush it off just in case. And if they come directly from 12 hours of drunk partying in the wilderness, they can still simply take their shoes off and ask for a plastic bag at the door, just in case. Easy. And yes, maybe the owner goes crazy or hates you, and you just bought new shoes that are squeaky clean, but brown, and get thrown out with no appeal. That can happen. But in that case, they could use many other things to be petty about, too. And Codeberg does not strike me as that. How can you tell if you drank too much? What is the exact amount of alcohol molecules a given person could ingest in an exact instant (like, down to the exact Planck whatever) and no longer be fit to drive? And if someone says "no drunk driving on my property" while not caring what happens outside of it, can we really let them off the hook before they showed us the machine that can calculate it? If people are worried about using libraries that contain vibe code, sure, that may become a real concern, but even then, why not have a really restricted website? For projects where the people are either so good, or the project so small, that that they know for sure there is no vibe code in it? Why this oozing over and into everything? You cannot discuss in non-English languages on this site. Even though you could slur and degrade English, and therefore it being impossible to give you an exact heuristic right now that separates English from non-English exactly. The rule is still accepted, and cases dealt with as they come up.
childintime 3mo ago
They could have tagged these projects with "AI" or "MixedAI", and they'd be removed from the default views. It should also make clear that such projects may have a dubious legal status. Though within businesses no one cares?
- inigyou 3mo ago
  They are also opinionated about what they host. FOSS only. Now updated to: unvibecoded FOSS.
- selfisekai 3mo ago
  It's run by a charity as a public good. Without a profit incentive from it, there is no benefit to public from slop.
rdsubhas 3mo ago
Noone can discuss in good faith if the argument is: "If generated in bulk by vibe code" >> "what if I generate word by word with autocomplete". This is IMHO the reason why we can't have sanity, because there are people ready to hack it.
- tempfile 3mo ago
  I don't think this is a bad-faith response. Someone might fully retain copyright while using heavy autocomplete. I don't think such a person would be banned by the codeberg policy. This is at least a little bit unintuitive.
- inigyou 3mo ago
  That's why terms and laws are written vaguely. If you're obviously on one side of the line then you're obviously on one side of the line. If you're straddling the line, your punishment depends upon how the judge feels that day. So it would be wise not to risk it.
  - KingOfCoders 2mo ago
    So no autocomplete. This is why people vote against their interest, they always assume laws are to reign in on other people until they understand the intention was different from what they understood and it hits them. Same old story.
tempfile 3mo ago
If this opens more questions than it answers, then you are simply discovering that you don't understand copyright (which is ok, but not the fault of the Codeberg policy). > You must not share projects that mostly consist [of LLM-generated code] > Such projects having an unclear copyright status There is no bright-line threshold at which a code contribution becomes copyrightable (and therefore relevant). It is a legal question determined by courts. However, nobody in practice has any difficulty determining whether their code is copyrightable. Codeberg is essentially asking/demanding that "your code" coincides with "code you hold the copyright for". This responsibility can be delegated to other humans, but not to LLMs.
- graemep 3mo ago
  That is not what their wording says. They could have said "code that is mostly covered by copyright under German law", but they chose to say 'mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools'. Also, if you are a non-German user of Codeberg and there is a wide difference between what is covered by copyright in your country and Germany (e.g. if you are British) this might make Codeberg less of a suitable choice for you. What copyright laws matter to a particular user? Their country, the US because of its dominance and reach, or some sort of global safe/effective compromise? This has the feel of being done by people who do not understand how to work things to be clear legally, nor of an understanding of the consequences.
sashank_1509 3mo ago
I’d say even GitHub copilot autocomplete is LLM aided coding. Copy pasting from a chat too is. But let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The point is the intent. We don’t want AI generated code. Put that in github if you so please. This is for human generated code. Some day we will have a way to enforce the amount of AI usage on its participants, right now we can just rely on an honor code and clear intent that you’re not welcome here
- Ghoelian 3mo ago
  What do you mean "I'd say"? It's obviously a fact. Github copilot uses an llm for its autocomplete, so obviously it falls under llm generated code.
mattertoast 3mo ago
Acting like the decision to ban misween coded projects is a slippery slope is like being surprised that any hosting services refuse to store and maintain petabytes of your lorem ipsum novel.

Mashimo 3mo ago

> projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools I guess if you auto complete line by line and actually read the code it should be gucci. Edit: Oh, you found it as well now. Disregard my post.

KingOfCoders 3mo ago
"I guess if you auto complete line by line and actually read the code it should be gucci." Not from their wording.
Ghoelian 3mo ago
AI auto complete is still generative AI, why would that be any different? Unless you're talking about regular intellisense-like auto complete, which of course does not use generative AI at all, which would obviously be fine.

cwillu 3mo ago

“You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude, OpenAI Codex).” Seems pretty clear to me?

jorisw 3mo ago
If 'mostly' means over 50% you could call this clear. Otherwise I don't think this is clear at all. Otherwise, what is mostly? Mostly at the outset, or at any given time? Must the project move out when it goes from 49% to 51% AI-assisted code?
- KingOfCoders 3mo ago
  "Mostly at any given time?" Yes, old project with 1M LOC of pre-AI code + 100% AI 100k LOC generated coded for the last three months, is that mostly?
  - lproven 3mo ago
    No. "Most" is clear and unambiguous. It means more X than Y. The value of X is larger than the value of Y. X = bot slop ; Y = human written code In your question, 90% human written, 10% bot generated; no, it is not "most".
    - KingOfCoders 2mo ago
      LOC? NLOC? Files? Calculated during the last week? Day? Month? Year?
      - lproven 2mo ago
        Quibbling. If someone is in the process of intentionally turning their project into slop, replacing human written code with bot-extruded code, then they can pay to host their own... ... And they should still be held fully responsible for the true environmental cost of the power and resources used to run the bots replacing craft with slop. This activity is criminally wasteful, and should be treated as a crime.
KingOfCoders 3mo ago
What is mostly? >50%? >75%? What does "written by generative AI" means? Autocomplete? IDE-with-AI-normal-classname-completion? Everything not typed by a human. I personally don't find this clear at all and see many unhappy discussions in the future for Codeberg.

noosphr 3mo ago

If you have to ask then the answer is no.

akmarinov 3mo ago
I mean Codeberg will pretty soon start having to ask. How do they determine that and who'll be in charge to find violations there?
- inigyou 3mo ago
  It isn't a public service. It is one person offering his resources to help FOSS. He decides if you align with his mission.
  - badsectoracula 3mo ago
    Codeberg isn't one person, it is a non-profit organization with ~1200 members (not to be confused with users - there are ~200k users), ~780 members of which have voting rights. The decisions aren't taken arbitrarily but they are proposed and voted for in an internal forum.
- customguy 3mo ago
  Before Codeberg has to ask that, the person who would upload has to ask it themselves. People know what they did, or didn't. "If you have shit on your shoe, please don't walk across our carpet". "But how do they know? maybe we should test if they can tell", and all that stuff... no. Most people would simply take a good look, and if they're worried about something that could be be mud or not, brush it off just in case. And if they come directly from 12 hours of drunk partying in the wilderness, they can still simply take their shoes off and ask for a plastic bag at the door, just in case. Easy. And yes, maybe the owner goes crazy or hates you, and you just bought new shoes that are squeaky clean, but brown, and get thrown out with no appeal. That can happen. But in that case, they could use many other things to be petty about, too. And Codeberg does not strike me as that. How can you tell if you drank too much? What is the exact amount of alcohol molecules a given person could ingest in an exact instant (like, down to the exact Planck whatever) and no longer be fit to drive? And if someone says "no drunk driving on my property" while not caring what happens outside of it, can we really let them off the hook before they showed us the machine that can calculate it? If people are worried about using libraries that contain vibe code, sure, that may become a real concern, but even then, why not have a really restricted website? For projects where the people are either so good, or the project so small, that that they know for sure there is no vibe code in it? Why this oozing over and into everything? You cannot discuss in non-English languages on this site. Even though you could slur and degrade English, and therefore it being impossible to give you an exact heuristic right now that separates English from non-English exactly. The rule is still accepted, and cases dealt with as they come up.

childintime 3mo ago

They could have tagged these projects with "AI" or "MixedAI", and they'd be removed from the default views. It should also make clear that such projects may have a dubious legal status. Though within businesses no one cares?

inigyou 3mo ago
They are also opinionated about what they host. FOSS only. Now updated to: unvibecoded FOSS.
selfisekai 3mo ago
It's run by a charity as a public good. Without a profit incentive from it, there is no benefit to public from slop.

rdsubhas 3mo ago

Noone can discuss in good faith if the argument is: "If generated in bulk by vibe code" >> "what if I generate word by word with autocomplete". This is IMHO the reason why we can't have sanity, because there are people ready to hack it.

tempfile 3mo ago
I don't think this is a bad-faith response. Someone might fully retain copyright while using heavy autocomplete. I don't think such a person would be banned by the codeberg policy. This is at least a little bit unintuitive.
inigyou 3mo ago
That's why terms and laws are written vaguely. If you're obviously on one side of the line then you're obviously on one side of the line. If you're straddling the line, your punishment depends upon how the judge feels that day. So it would be wise not to risk it.
- KingOfCoders 2mo ago
  So no autocomplete. This is why people vote against their interest, they always assume laws are to reign in on other people until they understand the intention was different from what they understood and it hits them. Same old story.

tempfile 3mo ago

If this opens more questions than it answers, then you are simply discovering that you don't understand copyright (which is ok, but not the fault of the Codeberg policy). > You must not share projects that mostly consist [of LLM-generated code] > Such projects having an unclear copyright status There is no bright-line threshold at which a code contribution becomes copyrightable (and therefore relevant). It is a legal question determined by courts. However, nobody in practice has any difficulty determining whether their code is copyrightable. Codeberg is essentially asking/demanding that "your code" coincides with "code you hold the copyright for". This responsibility can be delegated to other humans, but not to LLMs.

graemep 3mo ago
That is not what their wording says. They could have said "code that is mostly covered by copyright under German law", but they chose to say 'mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools'. Also, if you are a non-German user of Codeberg and there is a wide difference between what is covered by copyright in your country and Germany (e.g. if you are British) this might make Codeberg less of a suitable choice for you. What copyright laws matter to a particular user? Their country, the US because of its dominance and reach, or some sort of global safe/effective compromise? This has the feel of being done by people who do not understand how to work things to be clear legally, nor of an understanding of the consequences.

sashank_1509 3mo ago

I’d say even GitHub copilot autocomplete is LLM aided coding. Copy pasting from a chat too is. But let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The point is the intent. We don’t want AI generated code. Put that in github if you so please. This is for human generated code. Some day we will have a way to enforce the amount of AI usage on its participants, right now we can just rely on an honor code and clear intent that you’re not welcome here

Ghoelian 3mo ago
What do you mean "I'd say"? It's obviously a fact. Github copilot uses an llm for its autocomplete, so obviously it falls under llm generated code.

mattertoast 3mo ago

Acting like the decision to ban misween coded projects is a slippery slope is like being surprised that any hosting services refuse to store and maintain petabytes of your lorem ipsum novel.