I see Gadget Review pop up more and more and I’ve started liking their content less and less. The editorial guidelines say they use AI right on the page you linked. And if I scroll down and click on a random article , it’s AI generated and based on a tweet by CSAM poster Dom Lucre. It’s not the first article I’ve seen that’s basically repeating a tweet from some extreme looking Twitter account either.
And Mozilla and Palantir and the Linux Foundation.
This entire letter is rancid. “Governments, invest in us!”
Policymakers have an important opportunity to act. This includes expanding access to compute for startups and researchers, investing in shared training assets (datasets, tools, evaluation frameworks)…
Mandatory “distillation is good when we do it but evil when foreigners do it”. Good job Mozilla, my favorite “internet is for everyone” company, sinking into nationalism!
Distillation… reflects a long tradition of learning from, building upon, and improving existing technologies, a tradition that has helped drive innovation since the rise of the open-source software movement. By contrast, unlawful efforts to extract value from closed models raise legitimate concerns .
Full list:
Ironically, if you visit this site, you’ll be hit with a “please disable JavaScript” message at the top. Seems the author understands “their platform, their rules”.
They also make some okay points and concessions, before making a terrible suggestion for what Codeberg should do. Apparently they think Codeberg needs to be more soapbox-y, not less.
I think Codeberg made a misstep, but this suggestion is somehow worse.
Jack Dorsey has recently gone full Crypto Bro and this is one of his latest projects. This one is designed to connect people based on their physical location (it’s very strange, you can enter groups based on an arbitrary grid that basically overlays a world map) and on its face this seems like a double edged sword at best.
That’s because it’s from Gadget Review, a website that looks like it uses AI to generate graphics and (at least) augment its articles.
The original article is at least helpfully linked at the top:
https://asia.nikkei.com/business/technology/five-us-tech-giants-hidden-debts-soar-to-1.65tn-on-opaque-ai-funding
Edit: I see Gadget Review pop up more and more and I’ve started liking their content less and less. The editorial guidelines say they use AI right on the page you linked. And if I scroll down and click on a random article , it’s AI generated and based on a tweet by CSAM poster Dom Lucre. It’s not the first article I’ve seen that’s basically repeating a tweet from some extreme looking Twitter account either.
Or “Meta Superintelligence safety director”?
(To be clear: screw them for insisting a bot, and not their own stupidity, should “terrify” anybody)
The longer the bubble goes without popping, the worse the pop will be.
Props to everybody here who helped to contribute to that drop just a teeny tiny little bit.
I explained it to you twice.
Ah yes, Microsoft, the company people love because of their AI pushing
Cryptocurrencies are generally open protocols, usable by anyone. Both the rich and powerful and the poor and powerless.
But its most popular uses are to defraud the poor and to allow the rich to speculate.
I agree with your earlier, more honest comment, that said that cryptocurrency is not inherently bad and Codeberg needs to clarify, but this new claim that it’s going after the “unpopular” is plain wrong.
The United States federal government is the largest known state holder of bitcoin in the world, estimated to hold about 328,372 BTC, as of February 2026.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Strategic_Bitcoin_Reserve
It’s popular as far as billionaires and corporations like Microsoft and Facebook are concerned, which was my point.
Cryptocurrency has largely been adopted by the rich and powerful to keep speculating while avoiding regulations and taxes. Look no further than how Donald Trump and his family use it to enrich themselves.
Acting as if cryptocurrency is maligned because it’s “unpopular” is like acting that Donald Trump is a victim because he’s unpopular.
why would you think I know more than what I’m seeing here and in the linked pages
Because 4 minutes earlier, you commented acknowledging their intent was to have a rule against harmful projects, not “unpopular” ones. I just explained this.
That’s not correct, and you should know better than to claim this. 4 minutes before making this comment, you acknowledged it was about harmful products, not unpopular ones.
It’s still rather poorly worded, though. The ban is: “Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg, such as cryptocurrency related projects”
And AI is wildly popular. Competitor Microsoft has sunk billions into it.
We had that before AI. Where’s this industrial revolution in concrete terms: specifically without having to say “if” or “when” or pointing out anywhere past a few weeks into the future for it
What does that first L in LLM stand for?
Large.
You realize math is exactly that right?
A large?
Protein folding is not done with an LLM.
I know you probably felt like a big gotcha cause you tried to move away from the term AI or AGI
No I was using your terms
Protein folding isn’t LLMs. You forgot to format your motte and bailey fallacy properly.
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?