Codeberg seems to ban vibecoded Projects; reason might be german copyright law
>It looks like Codeberg want only copyrighted material in their service, so it is reliable in the future that e.g. licenses must be followed (e.g. GPL), and copyright doesn’t suddenly get declared as being of the model owner, and it isn’t a copy of something else.
That is a cautious reasonable position - in early days of LLM coding (3 years ago!) indemnity from model companies was a major issue globally because of the lack of clarity of the law around this. The US specifically has settled on it being (effectively?) public domain. But I don’t think that is fully settled, and it certainly isn’t settled in international copyright law.
The goal of the vague “mostly” in the Codeberg change is to ensure there is enough human input to the code they host, to be reasonably sure under German copyright law it is copyright of the person sharing it.
edit: link to poll that caused it (might be down due to high traffic) https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253#issuecomment-19820434
edit 1: i dont defend/oppose this move, i just find it interesting
Same here. I think Lemmy is the den of vipers when it comes to hate and prejudice of AI.
I use AI a little here and there, and want it not to be the evil that it is. But it fuckin’ is. It’s going to cause so many problems and it uses tons of electricity. Worst thing for the environment since cars. And even if you ignore all of that, it just plain makes so many mistakes that even ignoring the societal implications… it’s lacking at best.
I used to think like you (seem to), until I started noticing just how oblivious everyone is to the downsides. Actually seems like a good thing to have some people “overreacting” imo. It’s better than billions underreacting. Ignoring everything else, what are we going to do as a society when 60% of jobs go away? You imagine it will be an easy fight getting a universal basic income or some form of socialist policy? I think millions are going to die during that fight, very much best case scenario. This is going to disrupt society in so many bad ways that it’s hard to even anticipate.
…and yet, we get in our cars and go to work, play, vacations, and never think much about it. Economies would crash if there weren’t necessary means of transportation. I don’t disagree that cars are pollutive, even tho we have made great advances in controlling and mitigating a lot of the pollutive aspects, and I don’t deny that AI contributes to carbon emissions. Which is why I keep saying that AI needs heavy regulation, much like we did with the early years of automobiles to present day. Another consideration is that the internet displaces carbon emissions with people who work remotely at home, streaming vs physical media being produced, etc.
Oh, it is always wise to educate yourself, take steps to mitigate pollutive aspects in our lives. But I don’t think that throwing the AI baby out with the bath water is conducive, much like we’re not going to stop using transportation. So in order to get the best of both worlds, there must be regulation, as much as I dislike regulation.
So, like transportation, AI isn’t going away. There must be regulation. For example: If company xyz runs an AI data center, it must be powered by renewable energy sources by x %. And why not extend that to all data centers? During COVID, about 557 million workers, or 17.4% of global employment, worked from home. COVID should have been an eyeopener globally. Skies over cities cleared somewhat and in some instances, significantly. Animals returned to their native habitats in the absence of humans. We have the technology to do better. We are just greedy and shortsighted.
Actually a lot of people do think about it. Which is what I’m really advocating for here. I don’t expect or demand AI to go away. What I see as the problem is the same as the root problem elsewhere: all or nothing thinking. Either AI is good or it’s bad. I want there to be a world where we don’t run full speed with AI, dismissing valid point from detractors. In a world where 98% of people are not thinking about the dangers of AI, I’m glad 2% are, even if sometimes they come off like zealots…
I would tend to agree.
I feel the same way about video games. I love them, but I know it’s needlessly sucking away electricity just to entertain me. Not to mention the electricity used by the developers, artists, sound designers, composers, etc to create the game in the first place. They’re even worse for the environment than AI. And even if you ignore all that, they serve no purpose outside of the frivolity that is entertainment.
The worst part is that no one ever points it out. They’re all hyper-focused on AI to realize that video games are far more destructive, and have been for decades. With AI, at least, the productivity gains can be harnessed by taxing corporations that utilize it, to fund Universal Basic Income so everyone benefits, but there’s no productivity gains with video games - just productivity loss.
Oh well, I personally don’t think society will survive another decade, so I’m just going to enjoy my video games, and create more video games using AI, because my actions are a tiny drop in an overwhelmingly massive bucket I can’t even see the other side of.
…no. Likely not even close. You’re really saying that the likely ~10% of the world population playing video games an hour a day on average (admitted total guess but it cannot be super high) is going to exceed a technology that is getting shoehorned into literally everything? You cannot even search the internet anymore without these GPUs heating up to run AI for you whether you want it or not. Web searches are something any connected person does. You can hardly type a sentence these days without AI software running in the background. And that’s all only going to increase.
If the attitude is “fuck it we’re doomed regardless” then there’s no societal problem anyone can convince you to care about. I feel that way too sometimes but it really isn’t helping anything. It might be hard to contain that feeling for you, but I hope that changes. It overwhelms me a lot too. But I do hope we can fight that feeling off long enough to turn some key things around. The only hope we’ve got is to fight that fight.
Yes, video games as a technology are worse for the environment than AI as a technology. I think you don’t believe me because you’re conflating the technology of AI with the data centers being built for the express purpose of AI. Those data centers are much worse for the environment than video games, yes, but they aren’t necessary to have AI. AI can be performed using a fraction of the hardware used to play video games. I am very, VERY opposed to data centers, but I’m a huge proponent of both games and AI. So I’m being pedantic to make a point.
Thank you. I hope it changes, too. I’m just waiting impatiently for the Big Beautiful Day when I can read that Big Beautiful Obituary, and pop open a bottle of champagne and try to rebuild my hope for the future.
Does that matter if a thousand billionaires are building those based upon investors being convinced of the precise opposite? I’m not even sure what the truth is but it seems not all that important since I don’t get to decide what gets built. What I can do is have tiny influence on the people I speak to. I can make them aware of the problem and maybe that can bubble up to a larger understanding if enough people spread that awareness also.
Tho it may seem defeatist, I gave up trying to save the world back in the 60s when I came to the stark, yet liberating realization, that I cannot save the world, nor does it want to be saved. The very best I could possibly do is to influence a handful of people relatively speaking, and hope, in turn, they do the same.
I think we are on the same page there… I kinda think we are probably doomed, but I don’t want to fully give up.
Consider this: When I was a young man we were engaged in the
WarBay of Pigs, we had the Cuban missile crisis (there was a lot more going on in that area than most people realized), the very real possibility of global thermonuclear destruction, Vietnam, the violence and upheavals of the 60s, the 70s, and into the 80s, etc.In 700 BC, Hesiod lamented the Iron Age as an era of constant toil, strife, warfare, and moral decay. He wishes he hadn’t been born in such a degraded time, describing how fathers and children will be at odds and people will dishonor their parents. He portrays the younger generation as greedy, restless, and lacking the virtues of earlier ages. Socrates too, chimed in.
Same here. There’s too many evil people, and too many believe that people can’t be evil.
It does, yes, because policies meant to punish those billionaires also affect those using the technology responsibly, like myself. That’s why I make a point of highlighting the distinction. I don’t enjoy being maligned because people automatically associate AI with data centers.
Keep fighting the good fight! I was heartened to read that Erin Brockovich is leading the charge opposing data centers. I sincerely hope she, or someone like her, is successful.
What are you smoking?
Where did you come up with the numbers to back up this fantasy land you are painting?
You can cherry pick the numbers in either direction technically - you can operate an LLM without a GPU to make the AI power usage really low, and you can play a game with only basic 2D visuals that has low power usage.
However, the ideal in both cases will fully utilize a high powered GPU, so it’s a wash. During the day my GPU is answering prompts using the Qwen 3.6 LLM, and at night it’s ray-tracing in Cyberpunk 2077. In both cases it’s using a ton of power, but in only one of those two scenarios is it actually producing anything of value.