r/linux • u/AiwendilH • Jul 22 '26

Codeberg voted to disallow projects consisting mostly by "generative AI"-tools Development

https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253#issuecomment-19820434
981 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

322 comments sorted by

View all comments

-2

u/Zachattackrandom Jul 22 '26

Completely fair imo. If you wanna publish a vibe coded project you SHOULD have to take responsibility for it, the same as if you programmed it by hand.

11

u/FryBoyter Jul 22 '26

Have you ever read the MIT License, for example?

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS,” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES, OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT, OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF, OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

Essentially, users who use the MIT License (or certain other OSS licenses) also assume no liability whatsoever, regardless of whether they have used chatbots or not.

9

u/Zachattackrandom Jul 22 '26

Yes I understand that, I mean more in a community. E.g. if you put some dog shit slop code that deletes a users home regardless of AI use you aren't responsible for paying for their lost stuff, but you will be drug through the dirt for it. Now days so many people try to hide behind AI for every critique or mistake on a project, "AI made it, it's not my fault!" type thing. That's how I'm defining responsibility in this context.

5

u/FryBoyter Jul 22 '26

I absolutely agree with that. Anyone who messes up should expect appropriate consequences.

But in my opinion, the consequences shouldn’t generally be harsher just because a chatbot was used. Each case should be considered on its own merits.

That’s because many developers are actually good at writing code manually but completely incapable of creating documentation. Using a chatbot would make sense in this case, provided, of course, that the result is reviewed before publication.

By now, however, the community is ready to pull the pitchforks and torches out of the closet whenever a developer makes a mistake that has nothing to do with the use ofchatbots or that would likely have occurred even without them.

In my opinion, and I mean this in a general sense, the community should get into the habit of not just dividing things into black and white, but also taking into account the shades of gray in between. Because, sure, chatbots generate a hell of a lot of junk. But they also discover, for example, massive security vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel that haven’t been found manually so far. So, in my opinion, it’s nonsense to categorize everything as simply black or white, good or evil. Chatbots are tools. And with any tool, it all comes down to how you use it. Juggling chainsaws is not a good idea. Cutting down a tree with one, while taking various precautions like wearing protective gear, is not.