because some people don't want AI and would rather even the files were not present in their computer.

I do want (some, carefully curated as to certain usecases) AI. But I don't want to waste my diskspace for this AI.

> All cameras (glasses, phones, etc.) then blur your face in recordings.

that requires too much goodwill and effort from the makers of such devices. They know their audience wouldn't want that. They don't give a shit about what people being filmed think.

Nor should they.

Think about it some more. It's all fun and games, until same technology is used against you. There was literally a Black Mirror episode about this very thing.

Some people are far too eager to build the Torment Nexus.

There are just two makers of devices, Google and Apple, both proprietary and user hostile and they'll do anything the government tells them. Remember how quickly they implemented that covid tracking bullshit? Yeah.

Culture/social pressures work better than purely technical solutions

bliss, that is what happens when it goes away.

Hence why I wear an old pebble to this day. Smart where it matters but not a data siphoning device.

by not having them at all.

Gonna be stolen from any parked bike in the UK…

I think it is named Rio cause the author is from Rio de Janeiro state...

Isn’t that choice mostly dictated by BSD license allowing them to keep things proprietary instead of GPL requiring them to release their changes?

Yes a big part of that, is being able to design Orbis OS whatever they feel like without caring about upstream, same with using clang on the devkit.

Gives them a line to justify removing projects in the future if they are caught violating the ToS.

Do we have a tool that can detect whether a project is majority LLM-written? This is an unenforceable rule, unless it's just coming down to vibes and they're going to decide what projects to ban based on their feelings.

They are monitoring their resource usage. If they find a resource leak and it's traced to an LLM project, they will delete it.

Terms of use should be read as a statement of intent, not a series of if-then statements.

> It is an unenforceable rule

Are you sure? It's pretty easy to find telltale signs of LLM usage, like the CLAUDE.md file, the '.cursor' directory, the 'vim'-sized codebase done in a week.

That's just vibes. Measuring how much data someone uses is concrete and empirical. They are implementing TOS rules that are based on judgement and require a judge. Very different when implemented practically, especially in terms of effort on the part of the org. Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual.

> That's just vibes.

They are not. You can probably draft some query to get candidates based on those criteria. And so very quickly.

> Quotas are automated, evicting projects is highly manual.

The human world is very chaotic. Automation is not a panacea, which is highlighted by Big Tech abysmal support. Sometimes, you want humans to judge, because the optimal result is based on heuristics and not rules written in stone.

Non-profits like Codeberg are resource-constrained. Apple is delaying app reviews and degrading the reviews that are done because of a slew of AI-generated app. Codeberg is basically adding a "human must review things" step to solve the "we have too much traffic" problem. As a bonus, they are instituting a process that's not only costly, but is vulnerable to being co-opted to ban projects that are not desired for any reason. It's just a naive policy mistake. Time will tell. Let's revisit in 2 years.