It's claimed that @Codeberg has (will?) ban projects that are developed partly using LLM tools.
Is that correct? Then I'll have to take my donations and leave.
ALT
Replying to @menelion@dragonscave.space
@menelion While registering at @Codeberg I've got a very friendly captcha solving registration patch / assistance in a few minutes after contacting their support. I would say they don't want to host loads of unmaintained one time generated personal projects. If a project is maintained with more contributions from humans this should not be a real problem I would say. @troed
Replying to @pvagner@fedi.ml
@pvagner @Codeberg @troed Sorry but "a friendly support" as an accessible CAPTCHA alternative is absolutely not an option in 2026. there are audio captchas, math captchas, checkbox based captchas, captchas where you have to pick the correct sound (like "Select which of the three is a cat meowing"), something I definitely forgot — and "contact support to register" is the most humiliating and discriminating option you can ever imagine. It implies human intervention, so it's not #Accessibility, it's a crutch. And I'm not even talking about LLM here.
Replying to @menelion@dragonscave.space
@menelion Yes but google recaptcha, microsoft captcha, cloudflare turnstile, H-Captcha, these all reportedly accessible captcha solutions out there are contributing to data harvesting. I'll rather talk to a friendly human when it's for the good instead of informing one of the gate keepers about all my online activities requiring logging in
Replying to @pvagner@fedi.ml
@pvagner Sorry again, but I don't care about anything except for #Accessibility. I'm blind and I spend too much time fighting inaccessible solutions.
Replying to @miki@dragonscave.space
Platforms which consider themselves moral stewards tend to keep making moral decisions, and it's almost inevitable that they'll eventually make one that you heavily disagree with.
There are two problems with that:
- Moral decision doesn't have to be inaccessible or exclusive in other ways
- Unfortunately so called "moral" decisions are often just political and not based on real science or solid proofs.
First is simple: resources are limited and for developers of Forgejo it could not only be out of scope, but even out of their awareness.
Example of the second option is LLM usage rules some project introduce. There are a lot of controversy in this matter and despite some people claiming that it's "rather obvious that %insert_their_opinion_here%", every argument they'll give you (if they bother to) most likely will have opposing arguments. And they won't be interested in a productive discussion. They'll most likely just want to shove the thing they don't like under the rug and feel good about it.
And if this thread would be a bit more popular, I'd be ready to bet on "there's no moral AI usage" comment appearing under my comment which would've been a good proof of what I'm talking about.
P.S. A better example of trying to think about the issue is SFC recommendations:
https://sfconservancy.org/llm-gen-ai/llm-backed-generative-ai-recommendations.html
Although I think that they leaned a bit more into the "anti-AI" movement, they shown consideration for both sides and tried to achieve something productive and inclusive. This deserves respect.