- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Is there no git hosting service left that isn’t pushing censorship and fascism? I think I should just start self-hosting at this point.
You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
Is it facism if the community voted for it?Huh, do you think fascism only excists with minority supporting it?
I am confused. Do you think cryptocurrencies are people? or do you think excluding certain kinds of projects from your community is somehow fascism?
Nobody is excluded from using codeberg based on their identity alone. Every community and internet platform has rules of what you can bring to it and what you are able to do there.
Unlike github, being excluded from codeberg hosting doesn’t really cost you anything because they don’t intend to be a walled garden.
You might want to look into how fascism got into power in the 1930s.
The centrists let Hitler take power because fascism is better than comnunism for the bourgeoisie?
Even in the USA today, Trump wouldn’t have won without the anti -democratic electoral college.
That said, it is scary how popular fascist movements can get when capitalist societies get pressured.
deception, racism and populism?
There was nothing democratic about fascism, when Mussolini was elected, it was because he had marched on Rome and the king was like, “Hmm, let him in” and appointed him as minster because there was a desperate need of a stable government and everyone was “let the king do it, we can dismiss mussolini later, he is just an idiot” and you know what happened next
All the elections in which the fascists took part were marked by the fear caused by their violence
deleted by creator
Is there no git hosting service left that isn’t pushing censorship and fascism? I think I should just start self-hosting at this point.
Aw, is someone sad that a nonprofit won’t spend their own money to host shitty pump-and-dump tools destroying the environment? Little pissbaby need a minute to compose themself?
Edit: By the way, speaking of fascism, OP…
Edit 2: Just want to say I find it immensely funny that the two people in this thread bitching about this democratic decision and calling it “fascist” and “authoritarian”, respectively, have posted an image of Germany captioned “The aggressor nation?” and knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden.
It’s always projection from the “woke moralists!!” crowd.
I am against Germany’s fascist policies with Nazism. I am also against the British empire’s fascist policies on her colonies. You have to look at my comment in its context that it was under a post that tries to boil down history into “good guys vs bad guys”. I think it is a disservice to history to try to paint anything as black and white.
As a result of this type of thinking, you get the absolute failure that was de-colonization and de-Nazification, as the US and other capitalist-aligned leaders were completely fine with having Nazis in power as long as they weren’t communist. Britain and France have given hardly any acknowledgment of their wrongdoings in their colonies, let alone even speak of reparations. France still heavily extracts resources and money from her former colonies.
I am not afraid to say it, and am still not afraid to say, that the Allies and Axis were both horrible. The more we excuse the crimes of the Allies because they defeated the Axis, the more the 3rd world will continue to suffer, and the more that White supremacy will continue to spread in the world.
Excellent research! Thank you for sharing this. It’s good to know.
knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden.
Am I understanding you correctly that you’re accusing anyone who continues to use Mullvad as someone who supports neo-Nazis in Sweden?
If you know about this and continue to pay for it given viable alternatives, yes, you knowingly, willingly are. They wrote a whole spiel justifying it, so I’m going to point it out.
Flamman reports that [Berntsson’s] was the largest single private donation to any Swedish party in 2025, and on its own represented 72 percent of the [neo-Nazi] party’s income for the year.
I cannot speak for OP but you have intentionally mischaracterized my position on another matter instead of discussing and addressing the criticism leveled against Codeberg’s decision here and broader culture of authoritarian behaviour happening within the left.
I am myself left wing, its a mischaracterization to say “knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden”. Because first of all, I didn’t know. Secondly, if you read what I actually wrote I say I do not approve of the action by co-owner of Mullvad and that his actions to not represent the the entirety of the organization.
Furthermore, in your attempt at ad-hominem, you selectively cherry pick a nuance take on the Mullvad situation where I am rightfully concerned about the loss of a much needed force in the sphere of digital rights and online privacy. And then neglect to highlight a post I made before where I am critical of emerging far-right fascism and the neoliberalism that fuels it.
My initial critisicm of the left and the decision by Codeberg is something you are welcome to disagree with. But you can do so addressing the issue at hand and not resorting to misrepresentation and emotive language.
By acting bad faith you have successfully derailed the conversation as such that I have had to defend myself. I remind you of what Jean-Paul Sarte wrote regarding fascists:
They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Don’t claim to be an anti-fascist while employing the methodology of fascists.
And don’t promote anti-intellectualism and use emotive language to try enforce ideological conformity on the left and claim you are not an authoritarian.
I am entitled to my dissenting opinion and in any healthy community it would be welcomed. Again you can disagree but your behaviour and words are toxic and only serve to fracture the left.
That’s a big wall of text that never gets around to supporting your claim.
What out-group is punished for their identity on Codeberg? Because a cryptocurrency developer is allowed to host other projects there.
Calling community rules about what can be hosted on their platform fascism is absurd. Every platform does that, community or commercial platforms alike. You seem to care about fascism but you are watering the term down and that is dangerous.
Look, I have not called anyone a fascist.
My comment was using this action by codeberg to highlight what I feel is growing authoritarianism within the left.
The in-group is people who belong to the prevailing ideological hegenomy within the left and the out-group is the suppression of differing points of view outside the hegemony with methods invoking ad-hominem, coercion, appeals to emotion and intimidation.
It is plain to see in this thread.
Was my comment hyperbole? Maybe. But it highlights a valid concern in my opinion and that it ironically evokes such clearly authoritarian reactions proves it was an appropriate criticism.
I bemoan the false equivalence of all cryptocurrency based code with fraudulent activity. And I see such lazy thinking as an act of vanity at the expense of tolerance.
Community standards are not authoritarian. Good grief. You have talked yourself into a corner with that wooly thinking.
I made a sarcastic comment and then defended myself against false accusations. It’s that simple.
I defined what I consider authoritarian:
The in-group is people who belong to the prevailing ideological hegenomy within the left and the out-group is the suppression of differing points of view outside the hegemony with methods invoking ad-hominem, coercion, appeals to emotion and intimidation.
Am I wrong? Is it not appropriate bring up a wider discussion about the state of the left on a post about a code respository? I dunno.
You choosing to not to exchange with what I have written and instead use emotive language “good grief” because you felt like jumping on the bandwagon with others making false accusations of fascism goes against your own principles about “watering the term down”.
Yes, you are wrong. Communities limit the content they want to host. They always do. Cryptocurrency software are not people.
That communities limit the content they want to host is obvious. It’s whether it should be limited and what that says about that community.
Thank you for your opinion.
Not the person your arguing with.
But what sarcastic comment? You entrrd this thread with a long winded winge.
Original comment by me in the thread:
I’m so glad we’ve had this rising moral grandstanding authoritarianism on the left in the past 10 years.
It certainly has helped to protect the vulnerable and not merely served as egoistic vanity-based virtue signaling for a narcissistic and sycophantic minority.
/s
triggered a bunch of people, not a winge just defending myself against false accusations, calling out fascistic behavior.
One commenter decided to spread misinformation and falsehoods and the rest on the jumped on the band wagon.
And I think the behavior displayed is exemplary of my concern.
“Everything I don’t like is fascism”
What a moronic take, and good of Codeberg to kick those assholes out.
Its great that they are not trying to be a universal replacement for Github but something more focussed to their community. That will encourage others to spin up their own Forgejo instances and that decentralisation is a feature not a bug.
They don’t need to host everything and everybody. That kills community. They are even spending money on developing activity pub federation, just like here.
I’m not familiar with how this federation is supposed to work specifically, but does that mean in theory that you could still contribute to projects that do contain cryptocurrency through a Codeberg account?
Well not any more (your question is a bit bizarre).
git is decentralized for a reason. In the age of robots and cheap VPSs, if you really want a vanity web page / code forge to show your code, it is like an afternoon setting things up and the robot will do most of it for you. Yes, it has always been time to self-host your own code. I don’t bother with a code forge, but I do have gitweb/gitolite running for a very light weight setup to push and display code
Codeberg runs on and develops Forgejo - a lightweight open source forge anyone can take and run themselves.
it is like an afternoon
Heck, even less, just have to setup docker on the VPS, pull the Forgejo image and run it and it’s basically all done, just have to personalize it and maybe setup some permissions if you want more users
I dislike Codeberg’s decision.
But I would not even think of calling it fascism or censorship.I just dislike it.
So, I move on.And due to the fact that I do not like to run into the next dead end, I decided to self host my repositories now. The only way to be assured that tha rules do not ever change in a way that I do not like.
Yes, the overhead is substantial.
It’s the trade off I chose and accept.It’s the trade off I have chosen now as well, but it is annoying that only people with funds and technical expertise to self host are the ones that can bypass censorship. Freedom of speech, which includes code, should be a fundamental human right belonging to all–not just rich tech bros.
I hope to remove these barriers as much as I can, so I wrote a blog post on setting this up!
Poow babby u wnt hug?
Bye Shirley!
I dislike scam money as much as the next person. I do not, however, dislike cryptography. There’s a really good common in the thread about elliptic curve cryptography not having a place on Codeberg anymore and I think that’s valid. I don’t even know if OpenSSL could have a place on Codeberg with this decision. Their nonprofit, their rules. Just not very libre-minded and definitely sets a bad precedent. And before someone tells me Microsoft actively censors GitHub, this isn’t a whataboutism thread. It just reduces my trust in a supposedly open collective.
Exactly why I ban codeberg now.
Think this might be a hot take but crypto is better off hosted on a blockchained git alternative like ngit than codeberg or any other. And while unintentional is ultimately healthier for what crypto is.
“Oh no! They are banning the fascist enabler black market money machine who lobbied billions to place us in the fucked up fascist distopia we are now, how fascist of them!”
Strawman. There are good and bad use-cases of cryptocurrency and cryptography in general just like any other tool. Should we ban Diffie-Hellman as well since it is used by bad actors to send information on illegal and immoral stuff? Let’s just ban all of cryptography since it can be used by evil people to hide from authorities.
Cryptocurrency != cryptography please don’t put words in people’s mouths, that’s not very nice. I’ve been naive enough in the past to support Cryptocurrency but it will never work unless there’s a complete economic reset which will never happen… At least not without a total catastrophe.
crypto? you mean like fake money for laundering?
Yes, fake money that journalists use to launder so that they can report on human-rights violations!
Its incredibly trivial to just host up your own instance if gogs or gitea on a cheap computer, throw woodpecker on it if you want easy CI/CD
It doesnt take much hardware at all for a git server, a raspberry pi will handle it just fine.
Or just a cheap box liquidated from some office, just go buy some box from a used pc seller in your city, they’ll have some.
Toss a 1TB drive in it.
Throw debian on it.
Install Gogs + Woodpecker
And then set em up and connect the two together.
Grats, you have your own self hosted git server whee
What’s the definition of cryptocurrency-RELATED? Who defines what this all includes? Bad decision by codeberg…
They decide. It’s their platform.
They won’t ever be able to compete with GitHub or GitLab like this…
Who says they’re trying?
They’re a not for profit…
What do you mean?
Sorry typo. They’re not for profit.
Which is not what both github and gitlab are trying to be.
Why should they spend money hosting content the people who are dontating don’t want?
Hmm well, okay. Then Codeberg isn’t for me.
Doesn’t this go against one of the main principles in the open source definition? that is no discrimination against fields of endeavour.
Nope! You just made that up! Open source is when the source is openly available. If you were thinking of the free software movement, you’re still wrong! I hope that’s helpful.
Point 6
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
The OSI applies to software like forgejo, not services like codeberg. The term ‘open source’ does not imply a software uses an open license or follows any particular philosophy, it can be used by any project, with any license.
Whats stopping you from taking the software to host codrberg, and host your own?
Because its not the license. That’s software, not a service provider.
You are not restricted in your use of their software. Don’t make shit up. Go try and ask Debian to include a proprietary program in their main repo and see how far you get.
Mind highlighting the part that you think proves your point? You used some of those words, sure, but this is a completely different meaning from your original comment.
No, its a terms of use for what goes on their servers. Every open source project has that.
You are free to take Forgejo, their open source forge software, and run it on your own computer without any restrictions based on the free software license.
