Codeberg must take a stricter stance against cryptocurrency projects #2184

clarkelizabeth commented 2025年10月25日 06:55:35 +02:00

Comment

There are a number of cryptocurrency projects that exist on Codeberg such as https://codeberg.org/darkrenaissance/darkfi and https://codeberg.org/Flowee/thehub. Projects like these are already banned on Codeberg alternatives such as SourceHut. Allowing these projects is not a neutral stance; the effects to the environment are severe. The "DarkFi" (seemingly some crypto designed for criminals, citing an FBI director) project for example uses a "PoW blockchain" (per their readme). PoW (Proof-Of-Work) projects waste an astonishing amount of computational energy, with Bitcoin alone using more energy than the entire countries of Argentina or the Netherlands. This energy is almost always from fossil fuels, which directly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and undermining any global efforts to fight climate change.

If you really need to read more, see: https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/
There was an issue about this two years ago and was closed unfavorably: #794

### Comment There are a number of cryptocurrency projects that exist on Codeberg such as https://codeberg.org/darkrenaissance/darkfi and https://codeberg.org/Flowee/thehub. Projects like these are already banned on Codeberg alternatives such as SourceHut. Allowing these projects is not a neutral stance; the effects to the environment are severe. The "DarkFi" (seemingly some crypto designed for criminals, citing an FBI director) project for example uses a "PoW blockchain" (per their readme). PoW (Proof-Of-Work) projects waste an astonishing amount of computational energy, with Bitcoin alone using more energy than the entire countries of Argentina or the Netherlands. This energy is almost always from fossil fuels, which directly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and undermining any global efforts to fight climate change. If you really need to read more, see: <https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/> There was an issue about this two years ago and was closed unfavorably: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/794

berk76 commented 2025年10月25日 10:10:16 +02:00

Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters.

Thank you :-)

Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters. Thank you :-)

Gusted commented 2025年10月26日 01:01:23 +02:00

I'm afraid there's little point in re-opening the discussion here (and I will lock this issue if the discussion resurfaces here). The conclusion still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote.

@berk76 wrote in #2184 (comment):

Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters.

This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop.

I'm afraid there's little point in re-opening the discussion here (and I will lock this issue if the discussion resurfaces here). [The conclusion](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/794#issuecomment-695805) still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote. @berk76 wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecomment-7897385: > Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters. This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop.

berk76 commented 2025年10月26日 10:03:36 +01:00

@Gusted wrote in #2184 (comment):

I'm afraid there's little point in re-opening the discussion here (and I will lock this issue if the discussion resurfaces here). The conclusion still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote.

@berk76 wrote in #2184 (comment):

Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters.

This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop.

I am sorry - you are right, it is up to your decision.

@Gusted wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecomment-7905679: > I'm afraid there's little point in re-opening the discussion here (and I will lock this issue if the discussion resurfaces here). [The conclusion](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/794#issuecomment-695805) still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote. > > @berk76 wrote in #2184 (comment): > > > Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters. > > This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop. I am sorry - you are right, it is up to your decision.

scy commented 2025年11月05日 20:17:04 +01:00

@Gusted wrote in #2184 (comment):

The conclusion still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote.

As the author of the previous issue, I wholeheartedly support any and all efforts to bring this to a vote, but I don't have the time or energy right now to actively work on it.

@Gusted wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecomment-7905679: > [The conclusion](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/794#issuecomment-695805) still stands: this needs to be a decision by Codeberg e. V. members and thus a discussion within the Codeberg e. V. space needs to be opened (that's not this issue tracker and is only accessible for Codeberg e. V. members). As far as I know nobody has opened such discussion since that issue was closed, I'm willing to open that discussion but I hope for someone else within Codeberg e. V. to do that who has time to pursue this matter to a vote. As the author of the previous issue, I wholeheartedly support any and all efforts to bring this to a vote, but I don't have the time or energy right now to actively work on it.

Gusted commented 2025年11月05日 21:22:20 +01:00

I've gone ahead and started the discussion about a vote in Codeberg.

I've gone ahead and started the discussion about a vote in Codeberg.

hanklank commented 2025年11月16日 15:38:16 +01:00

This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political.

Is this your personal opinion, or something that the board states somewhere? The F.A.Q says nothing about it. I'm thinking about migrating to Codeberg for my free and open source software projects from GitLab and GitHub, but I can not do it if the foundation is leaning into politics, especially if I do not what the politics are.

> This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. Is this your personal opinion, or something that the board states somewhere? The F.A.Q says nothing about it. I'm thinking about migrating to Codeberg for my free and open source software projects from GitLab and GitHub, but I can not do it if the foundation is leaning into politics, especially if I do not what the politics are.

Gusted commented 2025年11月16日 16:12:44 +01:00

@hanklank wrote in #2184 (comment):

Is this your personal opinion, or something that the board states somewhere? The F.A.Q says nothing about it. I'm thinking about migrating to Codeberg for my free and open source software projects from GitLab and GitHub, but I can not do it if the foundation is leaning into politics, especially if I do not what the politics are.

This is not my personal opinion, this is a fact that can be derived from how Codeberg has been operating and communicates. The mere nature of working on Free and Open source software is political. This does not imply that Codeberg supports political parties.

In case you'd like to see examples of Codeberg being political: https://blog.codeberg.org/we-stay-strong-against-hate-and-hatred.html, https://blog.codeberg.org/one-year-into-the-war-your-help-is-still-needed.html and https://blog.codeberg.org/on-the-cloudflare-tor-takedown.html (Our Position section).

Saying that Codeberg is apolitical would be a false statement, as this is not in line with Codeberg's mission statement.

The main objective of Codeberg e. V. (as defined in our bylaws) is to promote the development, collection, distribution, and conservation of free and open content. We aim to support equality of opportunities to access and share knowledge, and to spread awareness about the relevance of FLOSS to society

@hanklank wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecomment-8304977: > Is this your personal opinion, or something that the board states somewhere? The F.A.Q says nothing about it. I'm thinking about migrating to Codeberg for my free and open source software projects from GitLab and GitHub, but I can not do it if the foundation is leaning into politics, especially if I do not what the politics are. This is not my personal opinion, this is a fact that can be derived from how Codeberg has been operating and communicates. The mere nature of working on Free and Open source software is political. This does not imply that Codeberg supports political parties. In case you'd like to see examples of Codeberg being political: https://blog.codeberg.org/we-stay-strong-against-hate-and-hatred.html, https://blog.codeberg.org/one-year-into-the-war-your-help-is-still-needed.html and https://blog.codeberg.org/on-the-cloudflare-tor-takedown.html (Our Position section). Saying that Codeberg is apolitical would be a false statement, as this is not in line with Codeberg's mission statement. > The main objective of Codeberg e. V. (as defined in our bylaws) is to promote the development, collection, distribution, and conservation of free and open content. We aim to support equality of opportunities to access and share knowledge, and to spread awareness about the relevance of FLOSS to society

hanklank commented 2025年11月16日 16:39:06 +01:00

"The main objective of Codeberg e. V. (as defined in our bylaws) is to promote the development, collection, distribution, and conservation of free and open content. We aim to support equality of opportunities to access and share knowledge, and to spread awareness about the relevance of FLOSS to society" — yes, that definitely sounds like something I fully agree is a good focus.
If FOSS is political motivations for some then I'm completely fine with that as well, even if it is not for me. I was mainly asking to check whether there was something more controversial from Codeberg that I had missed. After reading the links above, I don’t see anything odd there either. Supporting a country invaded by an bully aggressor, and following GDPR are good (and non-controversial steps in a democratic society). Thanks for the clarification, @Gusted I’ll start the migration this week. :)

"The main objective of Codeberg e. V. (as defined in our bylaws) is to promote the development, collection, distribution, and conservation of free and open content. We aim to support equality of opportunities to access and share knowledge, and to spread awareness about the relevance of FLOSS to society" — yes, that definitely sounds like something I fully agree is a good focus. If FOSS is political motivations for some then I'm completely fine with that as well, even if it is not for me. I was mainly asking to check whether there was something more controversial from Codeberg that I had missed. After reading the links above, I don’t see anything odd there either. Supporting a country invaded by an bully aggressor, and following GDPR are good (and non-controversial steps in a democratic society). Thanks for the clarification, @Gusted I’ll start the migration this week. :)

natx commented 2025年12月01日 17:04:10 +01:00

I don't use Codeberg much so feel free to ignore me, but in my opinion banning cryptocurrency projects is insanity in a world where more and more banks are integrating stuff like Play Integrity API and governments are banning cash payments.
It's also the only reliable payment method you can use to buy stuff like HRT or ADHD meds without being gatekept by doctors. It's also how minors can pay for regular other stuff online without a bank account which they often can't have due to strict parents (that's the situation I had) or because of some weird KYC regulations.

If Codeberg is going to proceed with some restrictions, then it shouldn't be a ban on the entire space and should be done very carefully. I actually wouldn't expect any actual scam/grifter/snake oil projects to be on Codeberg for visibility reasons.
For example https://codeberg.org/silverpill/mitra is a Fediverse node that has a Subscriptions functionality which uses Monero for payments. Is this a scam? I don't think so. It doesn't hurt environment either despite using a PoW cryptocurrency, because XMR is designed in a way that makes huge mining farms pointless.

I don't use Codeberg much so feel free to ignore me, but in my opinion banning cryptocurrency projects is insanity in a world where more and more banks are integrating stuff like Play Integrity API and governments are banning cash payments. It's also the only reliable payment method you can use to buy stuff like HRT or ADHD meds without being gatekept by doctors. It's also how minors can pay for regular other stuff online without a bank account which they often can't have due to strict parents (that's the situation I had) or because of some weird KYC regulations. If Codeberg is going to proceed with some restrictions, then it shouldn't be a ban on the entire space and should be done very carefully. I actually wouldn't expect any actual scam/grifter/snake oil projects to be on Codeberg for visibility reasons. For example https://codeberg.org/silverpill/mitra is a Fediverse node that has a Subscriptions functionality which uses Monero for payments. Is this a scam? I don't think so. It doesn't hurt environment either despite using a PoW cryptocurrency, because XMR is designed in a way that makes huge mining farms pointless.

charlesrocket commented 2025年12月08日 08:45:30 +01:00

If crypto is bad for the environment, then the first bullets should land on gaming and streaming topics. Most people build gaming rigs that outperform fat X00-watt miners. Not to mention how much power streaming burns. And both these industries burn electricity for ******* entertainment! Oh, what about compilers that scammers use to build their malware? And let's not forget about all this dumb LLM business too! To be honest, this feels like some sore loser got greedy while refusing to do the homework.

If crypto is bad for the environment, then the first bullets should land on gaming and streaming topics. Most people build gaming rigs that outperform fat X00-watt miners. Not to mention how much power streaming burns. And both these industries burn electricity for ******* entertainment! Oh, what about compilers that scammers use to build their malware? And let's not forget about all this dumb LLM business too! To be honest, this feels like some sore loser got greedy while refusing to do the homework.

makarenm commented 2026年01月10日 18:11:44 +01:00

Disclaimer: I am personally completely uninvested and largely uninterested in web3/crypto/blockchain stuff.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but controversial/dangerous projects are already covered by the Codeberg Terms of Use §2(1)6.

We also explicitly do not tolerate: [...] Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg.

Which I interpret that malicious and scammy projects, be they crypto/blockchain-based or otherwise, are expressly forbidden. I don't see why further restrictions ought to be placed on research, hobbyist, and genuinely useful and benign crypto and crypto-adjacent projects, especially in an age when anonymity and privacy are growing ever more important in the face of attacks on digital rights by the likes of Digital ID and Chat Control legislation.

Where would you even draw the line? Is a project that is merely decentralised by nature and later adds blockchain-based features as bad as a pump-and-dump coin/token? What about projects that add blockchain-based based forms of financing, like cryptocurrency payments (as in many VPNs), Brave's BAT token, or Signal's MobileCoin?

PoW (Proof-Of-Work) projects waste an astonishing amount of computational energy, with Bitcoin alone using more energy than the entire countries of Argentina or the Netherlands. This energy is almost always from fossil fuels, which directly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and undermining any global efforts to fight climate change.

Energy needs and consumption rise constantly, and are effectively being met by ever faster rollouts of ever more efficient renewable energy sources. The core environmentalist/climate issue does not stem from "too much energy is being used" but rather "we're unnecessarily reliant on fossil fuels as an energy source". A perfect example is China's energy mix over time, while energy use is growing linearly, the move from fossil fuels to low-carbon and renewable sources of energy has been accelerating at an impressive pace in recent years. It is a fact that green energy sources can more than meet ever-rising electricity demand. This is at its core a geopolitical issue: had nation-states listened to climate scientists from as early as the late 20th century then PoW projects would be using clean energy with zero climate impact.

If energy usage is to decide whether a project is allowed on Codeberg or not, then that would likewise restrict objectively good and beneficial projects like Folding@Home.

If you really need to read more, see: https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/ There was an issue about this two years ago and was closed unfavorably: #794

That website is cited often, but it is largely just a collection of breaches/hacks/exploits and poor financial decisions by companies, something that exists and can be observed in practically everywhere, not just in the crypto space. Should Codeberg restrict projects based on the history of security incidents in that projects particular ecosystem/industry/niche, then npm and PyPI packages for example would run afoul and be forbidden from being hosted here.

These arguments for a blanket ban on crypto/blockchain projects are completely indefensible, and I strongly believe that Codeberg should avoid following in Sourcehut's footsteps on this issue.

Disclaimer: I am personally completely uninvested and largely uninterested in web3/crypto/blockchain stuff. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but controversial/dangerous projects are already covered by the [Codeberg Terms of Use §2(1)6.](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse.md#2-allowed-content-usage) > We also explicitly do not tolerate: [...] Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg. Which I interpret that malicious and scammy projects, be they crypto/blockchain-based or otherwise, are expressly forbidden. I don't see why further restrictions ought to be placed on research, hobbyist, and genuinely useful and benign crypto and crypto-adjacent projects, especially in an age when anonymity and privacy are growing ever more important in the face of attacks on digital rights by the likes of Digital ID and Chat Control legislation. Where would you even draw the line? Is a project that is merely decentralised by nature and later adds blockchain-based features as bad as a pump-and-dump coin/token? What about projects that add blockchain-based based forms of financing, like cryptocurrency payments (as in many VPNs), Brave's BAT token, or Signal's MobileCoin? > PoW (Proof-Of-Work) projects waste an astonishing amount of computational energy, with Bitcoin alone using more energy than the entire countries of Argentina or the Netherlands. This energy is almost always from fossil fuels, which directly contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and undermining any global efforts to fight climate change. Energy needs and consumption rise constantly, and are effectively being met by ever faster rollouts of ever more efficient renewable energy sources. The core environmentalist/climate issue does not stem from "too much energy is being used" but rather "we're unnecessarily reliant on fossil fuels as an energy source". A perfect example is [China's energy mix over time](https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/china#what-sources-does-china-get-its-energy-from), while energy use is growing linearly, the move from [fossil fuels](https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/china#how-much-of-china-s-energy-comes-from-fossil-fuels) to [low-carbon](https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/china#how-much-of-china-s-energy-comes-from-low-carbon-sources) and [renewable](https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/china#how-much-of-china-s-energy-comes-from-renewables) sources of energy has been accelerating at an impressive pace in recent years. It is a fact that green energy sources can more than meet ever-rising electricity demand. This is at its core a geopolitical issue: had nation-states listened to climate scientists from as early as the late 20th century then PoW projects would be using clean energy with zero climate impact. If energy usage is to decide whether a project is allowed on Codeberg or not, then that would likewise restrict objectively good and beneficial projects like [Folding@Home](https://foldingathome.org/). > If you really need to read more, see: https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/ There was an issue about this two years ago and was closed unfavorably: #794 That website is cited often, but it is largely just a collection of breaches/hacks/exploits and poor financial decisions by companies, something that exists and can be observed in practically everywhere, not just in the crypto space. Should Codeberg restrict projects based on the history of security incidents in that projects particular ecosystem/industry/niche, then npm and PyPI packages for example would run afoul and be forbidden from being hosted here. These arguments for a blanket ban on crypto/blockchain projects are completely indefensible, and I strongly believe that Codeberg should avoid following in Sourcehut's footsteps on this issue.