This is a bit heavy handed I think. This also forbids AI assisted code review and lots of other things. Perhaps they should have defined it a bit more focussed on getting rid of vibecoded spam instead of forcing a specific developing format for their whole platform.

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This also forbids AI assisted code review

It's worded in a convoluted way, but they explicitly allow it. In the chapter A matter of interpretation they say:

"Moreover, the use of AI for purposes other than co-authoring code, tickets, emails, and so on, is discouraged but not prohibited. If you use LLMs privately to review your work, to ask questions of, to perform security analysis, and so on, and then write original code to push to SourceHut, your use-case is aligned with our policy."

[–] vas@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The way I interpret it is that offline code review is fine. However, online AI-made comments or code suggestions on the platform are explicitly not allowed.

A policy I find very reasonable for projects like forgejo / sourcehut / codeberg.

[–] alexcleac@szmer.info 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

One of the things they want to highlight is that AI is associated with increase in energy usage, which will speed up climate change. It's not merely about "stop DDoSing us with AI-generated code", it feels more of a political statement "let's try to do better than just put fossil on fire so we can save X minutes writing code and thinking"

[–] nfreak@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

For some reason this gets swept under the rug in the software space, even the FOSS world. AI coding, code reviews, etc, are no different at all than AI "art" or chatbots or whatever. People will try to claim that it's no different than going to Stackoverflow or whatever, but these tools still utilize a fuckton of resources accelerating climate change, are built on mountains of stolen data, and Claude/ChatGPT/Github all line the pockets of fascists. The CEOs of all of these companies should legitimately be rotting in cells right now.

There's absolute 0 ethical use of this stuff. The closest you can get is an on-device model that runs offline on local hardware, but even those are trained on absurdly massive amounts of stolen data - sure you might not be using destructive resources to run it, but it wouldn't exist without that.

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

As far as I am aware nothing has been "stolen", merely downloaded. Downloading is not theft; when a file is downloaded from a web server, the original copy remains as-is. If I steal your car you no longer have a car; if I download your car, I have an exact copy of your car and you still have a car.

I do not believe the ideology of "intellectual property" to be ethical, in fact I think it's directly opposed to software freedom and users' rights.

Edit: The usual disclaimer, this is not a defense of proprietary "AI" companies, nor an endorsement of "vibe coding" or slop slinging in general.