Comment by customguy
5 days ago
> what does "mostly" mean?
the same as "zero", in that if the amount is zero, you're fine.
"did you pack your bags yourself?"
"no/not sure/what does that mean let's discuss" = please leave the premises now
"yes" = welcome
That is only your own interpretation. It is one that does conform to the rule but only because it takes one extreme side of the potential "amount" of allowed genAI use.
However this isn't what the terms update state. If that was the meaning then they would have explicitly written "zero" - or something along these lines. The fact they didn't do that (despite the update being there for weeks and people were able to vote on them for a long time - so it wasn't just some mistake) means they do allow "some" use of genAI - so at that point the question becomes "how much".
"That is only your own interpretation."
There are many people on the internet who think their interpretation of things i the only right one. Don't argue.
"I totally could make a point but you wouldn't listen anyway so I won't"
Yeah, right.
If you come up with "so no auto-complete" that's totally a you-having-no-arguments issue, not me not giving a fair hearing to something nobody said, because it doesn't exist.
> "If you have shit on your shoe, please don't walk across our carpet".
Even if you could afford the equipment to make sure you don't have a single molecule of shit on your shoe, you couldn't operate it. Most people couldn't. So what gives? How is it possible that people have parties and then not endless discussions for decades and centuries about this unsolvable issue, right up there with how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Because they're not playing games is why. Because it's simple, if you don't bend over backwards to make it seem hard. You don't walk through shit on purpose, and before entering you check your shoes to your best ability. The end. There will be small percentage of cases where this fails, and that's fine. Spirit of the law and all that.
You do the same with genAI. If you are worried it's too much, "the wrong kind", whatever, you simply ask them. Because you have good intentions and will respect their answer, you have no reason not to do that. If you don't even have anything you're unsure if you can upload there, it's totally moot.
Can't you respond to a message without barely relevant comparisons? :-P
> If you are worried it's too much, "the wrong kind", whatever, you simply ask them.
If you have to ask them, then having terms of use is pointless. The entire point of ToU is to explain how one can use the service, if you have to "ask" then the terms are not doing their job properly.
Of course people aren't perfect and can write vague or misleading ToU - and considering i've seen the same questions about that "mostly" part here, on Reddit, on Mastodon, on Twitter, on Discord, on blogposts and even their bugtracker[0] where they claimed their blog post on the matter will clarify things, which it didn't, there is no question that the terms are inadequate here - but the response to that isn't to try and guess what they possibly could mean, the response is for the terms to be clarified.
If Codeberg wanted to tell people who use LLMs in their projects that those projects are not welcome there, then they should have put that in their terms of use in clear and unambiguous wording.
[0] https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1253
So no autocomplete.