- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
You must log in or register to comment.
It feels disengenuous to say people vibe code things.
I know it’s correct English, I just think it’s kind of a bullshit statement.
When dumbasses talk to AI’s and the AI’s do things for them, it’s wild to think the credit goes to the dumbasses.
This is like your boss saying he did all your dev work and calling it “boss coding”.
collabora for me. Libreoffice-based but adjusted for “normies” (user interface from this century)
The 1995 user interface soothes my nerves but I will give collabora a try
“… an AI slop version of Microsoft Office that doesn’t fucking work” also known as Microsoft Office 365
The only reason Microsoft exists today is because of Exchange and an old market share on consumer/prosumer OS.
They’re a glorified email hosting company and an embarrassment to software development. Idc what AI does to their shitty software. Fucking hate Outlook.
That’s not really accurate, Azure is massive.
But irrelevant for most users. Azure can stay all it wants but we must be freed from the shackles of Microsoft Office
Maybe for most personal users, but in B2B (where the money is) …
Linux
Long live Libre devs!! Been with yall for over a decade
a couple of months ago i asked about this one of local Forbes editors and they explained this phenomenon as “because it is expected to code by hand but managing to vibe anything is amazing”. i decided not to continue this conversation because that’s fucking stupid
“because it is expected to code by hand but managing to vibe anything is amazing”.
I don’t think it’s wise to stake the future of computing on “It’s not that the bear dances well, it’s that the bear dances at all.”
maybe that’s why some rando forbes editor is not a CEO of some nondescript startup.
they’re desperate for ai to be profitable.
you’re right
It’s not really stupid. Things that are unusual are more noticeable, and garner more comment. We’ve grown used to devs tirelessly doing what they do, to the point most people don’t think about where their software comes from, but a machine sort of doing it (poorly, so very poorly) is novel, so people talk about it.
Currently, software mostly working as it should is the norm, so people don’t talk about it much. When the wave of slopcoded disasters starts to grow, people will talk about it, because software is suddenly not working as it should.
and yet no one is celebrating a piece of software well done
Id be done for a “it just works” day to celebrate all of invisable labour that makes the world work
That’s supposed to be Labour Day/ May Day
Tinfoil hat time:
A year ago, I did some reverse engineering. I figured a pattern matching engine has to be good matching patterns, so I threw the messed-up output of Ghidra into Claude to clean it up and to give me an overview of what the fuck happens in a certain part.
I was absolutely surprised. Sure, it got some things wrong, but it knew way more than it should have been able to guess from that short bit of fucked up, optimised not-quite-C. Including guessing context that it should not be able to guess. This was a firmware with not-yet-released functions that, to my knowledge, shouldn’t exist outside of this bit of binary firmware. At least not for us non-NDA mortals.
At the time, Mistral had a new-ish model as well, so I figured I’d give it a try. It worked as expected, cleaned up things, gave variables reasonable names, made educated guesses and so on, but didn’t act as if it had background info. And I was using Sonnet 4.x, so the small Claude which shouldn’t be that much larger.
Since then, I have the conspiracy theory that the Claude people threw a bunch of proprietary sources in the training, too. I have no idea how, maybe aggressively training on user inputs? Anyway, this does not help to allalleviate my suspicions.
They’re using gig workers by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions to do “data annotation”. You can actually make quite a bit if you’ve got higher credentials like Phd, masters, or a very good resume.
My theory is they’ve been using professionals to inadvertently leak proprietary methodologies. They could be doing so by creating problems for them to solve that lead people to inadvertently expose solutions based on their actual jobs.
It’s lowkey corporate espionage.
Oh it learned enough from code that it has developed some basic, and hear me out of this, artificial verbal intelligence. I know I know, not just pattern matching, but actual artificial intelligence at a low level.
Please don’t downvote me (sorry don’t remember if this is fuckai or not) but I’m just saying it’s one possible explanation to this phenomenon you describe.
i would err towards it ingesting proprietary code before this, it’s not wrong but AI spits out copyrighted and should-be private stuff all the time.
There are studies and tools like LiCoEval and others that investigate LLM memorization. It does happen but it’s not all the time, and it’s very infrequent for real world (complex) examples. Mostly this concerns textbook examples or standard boilerplate code - from what I read. And I obviously don’t know the specific example mentioned. This is also a problem that can be fixed.
But I’m really just half mocking the very careful language used by the comment I replied to.
I threw about 10 short phrased meeting notes (4-5 words each) into an LLM to get some document formatting started with titles and sections etc. It built a full scope document and inferred a ton of information about the project and product. It was surprising how much it could infer, and suggested very sensible testing criteria and alternate solutions should the main product path not pan out.
I can see why people start believing it “thinks”, because it was remarkable what it “understood” about a vague new product. Had I sent the info out to stake holders, they would have assumed this person was a key team member that was involved from day 1.
“Intelligence”, as a word has always been ill defined. What’s it mean? It’s mostly been used to create prejudices via standardized tests, the bell curve, and IQ tests.
I don’t believe it’s “intelligent” as we don’t really know how to define that. But I do think it’s really really really good at writing reasonable seeming statements in various languages using probability.
Coding and programming, are just languages. So it will likely be able to get pretty damn good at it, just as it has with the English language.
I think with LLMs accurate regurgitation of facts, is the colary to good code.
But I don’t believe that means it “thinks” (which requires introspection, and an internal experience). It does multi-agent computing, and this might even simulate some aspects of thinking… But it’s not thinking. It’s computing.
It won’t be able to do any more than that, until it consistently gets data from having a body (and something like glial thought-interactions/organs/flaws/survival).
By the way, this also means if you could download a mind to a computer - it would slowly lose it’s humanity as it lived longer and longer interfacing with computer systems rather than human systems/organs/experiencs.
Eventually that “uploaded human” would become a Clankr, and stop understanding human life, the will to survive/think. Eventually it would just compute (not think/care or have flaws).
Many sci-fi stories are based on the man-to-technology-to-cold-rational-evil pipeline… Less have gone in the other direction, even though it often produces very popular characters: Spock, Data, the Terminator, Pinnoccio.
I specifically asked our CEO about this just to cover my ass. It seems insane to trust these guys at all. Here in the USA, small businesses have de facto no legal protection from large businesses.
Absolutely. Especially if you have company info / IP that someone else would pay a lot for. This is a question for lawyers and managers to negotiate with the lawyers at OpenAI, Anthropic etc, not for us little people to decide. I’m not throwing company data in an online service that is not cleared for us to use, and I don’t even work with spicy stuff. Back in my IT days we would have called that a data breach, which would have lead to something from an unpleasant hour in the boss’ office to a promotion to customer.
Makes me wonder how much of the frontier models hacking is just “our devs uploaded the codebase to Claude and suddenly it knows where all the backdoors are”?
I guess most, honestly
Since then, I have the conspiracy theory that the Claude people threw a bunch of proprietary sources in the training, too.
An enormous amount of people use this technology for privat company data without batting an eye; not just software developers, but business people for reports, etc.
They all throw their confidential data in there without even considering the implications, just “trusting” Anthropic. claude code bots are running on tens of thousands of proprietary code bases that used to be private, and of course they are using all this data to train their model.
It’s standard operating practice to steal everything. The world’s full of dumb fucks.
Then people are surprised that claude code gets better at coding
Better at replicating closed source software.
It surely gets better at coding in general, after all there are smart people at anthropic with near limitless budgets, but my conspiracy thesis is that it gets a lot better at replicating stuff it has seen before, but really shouldn’t have.
Meta had an explicit higher price for using their model without retention of prompts for training. This all but confirms your theory.
Wait… wait… you believe Facebook?
Oh, facebook will steal the data even if they say they won’t. What’s interesting is they put a price on blatant prompt copying.
We steal your data: $5 We steal your data and tell you we don’t: $10
I’m sure it’s all but officially confirmed, that all the people upload to it goes to training data unsanitised. And Microslop for sure uploaded entirety of their codebase to all the bots. This is at least part of the reason why claude is so surprisingly OK at reverse-engineering all the big stuff.
I don’t like LibreOffice but any actual Open Source dev deserves infinite more respect than those prompstitutes.
I disagree, their efforts don’t go unnoticed. Their recent no-AI claims prompted me to donate.
To be fair, neither does the real MS office
that doesn’t work
You see, they took the efforts to replicate Microsoft excel experience.
Excel is the 7th ring of hell
What level is Teams?
Hells sewage tunnels.
Satan just asked god to add new layers of hell.
But they got stuck in infinity meetings
He also asked to remove all the fun emojis because fun is banned in hell.
they made Teams 2, Satan might not get the note because he uses teams.
If you think using it is bad, try deploying/maintaining it
Wow, it managed to perfectly replicate Microsoft office?
Tells you something about Microsoft Office
My experience of using AI is it can save you a LOT of work, but you need to supervise it REALLY closely and give it sufficient code context for it to work properly. It only knows what it knows and if it doesn’t know it will make shit up. But if you do use it within its limits it will identify bugs, generate tests, generate a lot of boiler plate and help you be more productive.
Being open source is not a reason to avoid it. However AI does produce slop and unattended it can produce execrable patches which are practically incoherent to anyone used to human coding patterns. So there should be rules about coding style, patch / merge / pull requests that diffs are self evident, concise and obvious. Most AIs will read a guidance file so this stuff can be defined. And if a person uses AI to generate a patch they should review this patch first before daring anyone else to look at it.
Yes, personally I don’t have a huge problem if someone uses an LLM, that’s been trained only on opensource code, on a project, but that someone has to put their name to the code, documentation, tests or anything elsr produced, and take full responsibility for it. As in, they suffer the same consequences if it causes an issue as if they’d hand coded it, with particular attention paid to whether the result is maintainable, and whether it breaches any licences.
Of course, most LLMs have, by now, injested a lot of proprietary code that people have mindlessly sent in queries, rendering all of their output tainted.
LibreOffice - the only office suite that handles tables correct, even when multiple users change the document 🥳
For anyone not already aware, there was a push in the early 2000s to require government documents to be in a standard format rather than giving a specific vendor (Microsoft) unfair advantage (official government endorsement). LibreOffice (OpenOffice at the time) used the standardized ODF format, which should’ve pushed many European governments to switch to an open source office suite. Instead, Microsoft bribed a bunch of people to push through their “OOXML” format as a standard, even though it was just a snapshot of Office’s behavior, bugs and all.
There is another twist to this in that the OOXML format didn’t actually define the bugs in the format and MS Office itself didn’t actually follow the officially defined specification they pushed through. This inevitably led to every product that tried to make use of the official spec (e.g. Open Office) failing to be compatible with MS Office. It took the open source devs many years to properly duplicate the buggy mess that is the real MS Office formats.
