I will add that the policy is not just dumb and unenforceable, it is also poorly reasoned. Many of the arguments apply equally to other technologies, or don't apply to AI-generated code in the first place.
If resource usage/hardware costs are a concern, should games and databases be banned? If financial ethics are a concern, should SaaS services/apps with micro-transactions be banned? If ownership is a concern, should closed-source software or private repos be banned? And so on.
I think it is obvious that this choice, much like the crypto/blockchain choice, was made purely because of the "vibes" (if you will) around AI, and not for any logical reason.
As much as I like paying to escape a capitalistic monstrosity such as github, they still seem to be more … mentally stable, for the lack of a better term. At least you are not at a whim of some BDFL or an aggressive minority of radicals. It is quite sad, that we have a choice of enshittifaction and radicalization only, with nothing in between just providing good service to paying customers.
Maybe this is a question of point of view? I find github's stance on slop extremely radical (and totally contrary to my own values). At the same time, github is obviously enshittified, so I don's see the point in using it anymore.
You still have gitlab, which is some kind of middle ground. And if you only need to store private config files, you can host a private instance of forgejo--or a bare git repo--for much less than a sourcehut subscription. I hope you find your place! (still, I'm curious why your config files are AI slop, but that is another subject)
I moved to SourceHut from Github when their site stopped functioning without a JITed JavaScript engine or when you block certain AI elements. The bloat just got insane. Now it seems like I have to move again since SourceHut moved too far in the other extreme by embracing "minimalism" not only of their service but also of their users.
> you can [self-]host
I used GitHub and then SourceHut precisely so I don't have to do this.
I guess, back to github :)
Great, they said they will give you plenty of time and support to do so. I respect their decision, not everyone is allowed to do everything on every platform. By choosing a Github, you invariably support a whole set of other things through their owners. It's not a bad thing to be forced to consider the long term impacts of your choices. If this was a bad decision, the market will say so.
But I mean, I never used Sourcehub. With this stance, I respect them even more, so maybe I'll start paying. Guess that cancels you out!
If we can go as far as agreeing that this sucks, and that taking no stance only serves to reinforce the establishment of a technocratic authoritarianism, then paying attention to politics and who's at the losing end of what becomes a matter of survival.