3 ms·

Gives them a line to justify removing projects in the future if they are caught violating the ToS.

by soapdog 2mo ago

rpdillon 2mo ago
Do we have a tool that can detect whether a project is majority LLM-written? This is an unenforceable rule, unless it's just coming down to vibes and they're going to decide what projects to ban based on their feelings.
- skydhash 2mo ago
  > It is an unenforceable rule Are you sure? It's pretty easy to find telltale signs of LLM usage, like the CLAUDE.md file, the '.cursor' directory, the 'vim'-sized codebase done in a week.
  - rpdillon 2mo ago
    That's just vibes. Measuring how much data someone uses is concrete and empirical. They are implementing TOS rules that are based on judgement and require a judge. Very different when implemented practically, especially in terms of effort on the part of the org. Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual.
    - skydhash 2mo ago
      > That's just vibes. They are not. You can probably draft some query to get candidates based on those criteria. And so very quickly. > Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual. The human world is very chaotic. Automation is not a panacea, which is highlighted by Big Tech abysmal support. Sometimes, you want humans to judge, because the optimal result is based on heuristics and not rules written in stone.
      - rpdillon 2mo ago
        Non-profits like Codeberg are resource-constrained. Apple is delaying app reviews and degrading the reviews that are done because of a slew of AI-generated app. Codeberg is basically adding a "human must review things" step to solve the "we have too much traffic" problem. As a bonus, they are instituting a process that's not only costly, but is vulnerable to being co-opted to ban projects that are not desired for any reason. It's just a naive policy mistake. Time will tell. Let's revisit in 2 years.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  They are monitoring their resource usage. If they find a resource leak and it's traced to an LLM project, they will delete it. Terms of use should be read as a statement of intent, not a series of if-then statements.

Gives them a line to justify removing projects in the future if they are caught violating the ToS.

by soapdog 2mo ago

Gives them a line to justify removing projects in the future if they are caught violating the ToS.

Do we have a tool that can detect whether a project is majority LLM-written? This is an unenforceable rule, unless it's just coming down to vibes and they're going to decide what projects to ban based on their feelings.

skydhash 2mo ago
> It is an unenforceable rule Are you sure? It's pretty easy to find telltale signs of LLM usage, like the CLAUDE.md file, the '.cursor' directory, the 'vim'-sized codebase done in a week.
- rpdillon 2mo ago
  That's just vibes. Measuring how much data someone uses is concrete and empirical. They are implementing TOS rules that are based on judgement and require a judge. Very different when implemented practically, especially in terms of effort on the part of the org. Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual.
  - skydhash 2mo ago
    > That's just vibes. They are not. You can probably draft some query to get candidates based on those criteria. And so very quickly. > Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual. The human world is very chaotic. Automation is not a panacea, which is highlighted by Big Tech abysmal support. Sometimes, you want humans to judge, because the optimal result is based on heuristics and not rules written in stone.
    - rpdillon 2mo ago
      Non-profits like Codeberg are resource-constrained. Apple is delaying app reviews and degrading the reviews that are done because of a slew of AI-generated app. Codeberg is basically adding a "human must review things" step to solve the "we have too much traffic" problem. As a bonus, they are instituting a process that's not only costly, but is vulnerable to being co-opted to ban projects that are not desired for any reason. It's just a naive policy mistake. Time will tell. Let's revisit in 2 years.
inigyou 2mo ago
They are monitoring their resource usage. If they find a resource leak and it's traced to an LLM project, they will delete it. Terms of use should be read as a statement of intent, not a series of if-then statements.