Comment on Codeberg bans vibe coded projects
povoq@slrpnk.net@slrpnk.net 1 day ago Sorry but you are clearly delusional. There is no magic involved, just being able to look at the structure of the code and the pattern of the commits. It’s fairly easy in fact.
Epp@lemmus.org 1 day ago
Oh, I see. You assume agentic AI that can perform it’s own commits. That would make it easy to tell, but you’d have to be really stupid to give AI such unfettered access to your repository.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 day ago
So 1) we absolutely know people are much stupider than that. and 2) does exactly that has widely been observed.
Epp@lemmus.org 1 day ago
Oh, without a doubt. They’ll get some low-hanging fruit, I’m sure.
JustEnoughDucks@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
And many, if not most, of the people vibe coding projects on git repos are that stupid. People who have never coded and never used anything other than
git clone. That is just a fact of many of the people who do it. They are the people who think they are tech geniuses because they once made an LED blink on arduino or made the millionth timer app.It is just a fact of who is flooding the most slop projects. There are plenty of people who use AI in subtler or more useful ways, but that is not what is the target of anti-vibecoding rules. It is the 1000 slop projects generated bloated repositories fully in 1 day that are killing bandwidth and storage limits for everyone else.
Epp@lemmus.org 1 day ago
That makes sense.
No need to asdume that. Just by using LLM to assist with code writing, the human in the loop changes their commit pattern.
Epp@lemmus.org 1 day ago
“Suspicious commit pattern” sounds like a pretty flimsy basis for banning a human from the platform. If nothing else, this futile crusade will be entertaining for almost everyone; except for their support staff who will need to investigate and either defend or repeal the been each time there’s a false-positive, and a person is accused of wrong-think because yesterday they commit twice in an hour whereas they usually only commit once per hour.
Most LLM users don’t try to hide it and the commit pattern is a result of the LLM assisted workflow, thus without losing the perseived benefits of using LLMs it can not be easily hidden. And the pattern isn’t only about when but also what. You might be oblivious to it, but the pattern is very clear and not possible to mistake with regular code writing patterns in an overall project. It is harder to spot in individual smaller PRs though, but that isn’t what Codeberg’s new policy is targeting.
And anyways, this isn’t a question of “wrong-think”, but simply of Codeberg not wanting to be associated with such low quality, likely copyright violating and resource hogging projects. The LLM using people have plenty of other code forges to use, so it is really a non-issue 🤷
Zink@programming.dev 1 day ago
All you need is another one of those global pre-processor directives! Then you’ll have commits that exactly match human output just like with the code itself!
Epp@lemmus.org 1 day ago
Technically, yes.
“Make commits sporadically, using inexact terms, occasional typos and every once in a while, forget to include a file that then necessitates a follow-up commit of a single line that simply says ‘whoops’”