It's laughable to me, imagine a company saying that they would only host projects that were written in assembly. I mean, "sure" you do you, but I will not be doing business there.

These kinds of ideological purity tests and the weird bureaucracies and little fiefdoms associated with them are anathema the hacker ethos.

Did you check the number of open PRs and commit/hour of vibecoded projects? If course they are banned from small community-funded hosts, they eat compute and data for free. Honestly, my vote would have been to make vibe-coded pay per commit, but I guess introducing money is taboo for those communities

> I guess introducing money is taboo for those communities

Sourcehut is a subscription service with multiple tiers of access.

I think the different tiers are just for show, but I could imagine that if they felt there was a subset of projects they liked that were putting extra stress on their system they wouldn't be above differentiation at that point.

I actually would have been fine with this move too, “look, first 5 commits per day are free, after that it’s $cost” would have been fine.

But look at the comments and discourse around this. I guarantee you it ain’t about the money.

Look at what happens in codeberg. Small non-commercial, AI driven and even vibe-coded projects are still on the platform. I don't care about what people say, I care about how they act. And to me, codeberg act appropriately.

If that company only hosted projects written in assembly and you don't write assembly... then you not doing business there is the desired outcome for the both of you, what's the gotcha there?

I mean, I get it; they've got a dying business model, and unless you're paying per commit, you're not a customer, you're a cost center.