hell is empty and the demons are here: https://github.com/dbreunig/whenwords

[atax1a@infosec.exchange]

@SnoopJ veep_what_the_fuck.gif

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@SnoopJ@hachyderm.io I really hate our modern reality

[munin@infosec.exchange]

@SnoopJ @nullpo

chthonic gods below that's the most disturbing fucking horseshit I've seen all day

[snoopj@hachyderm.io]

@munin @nullpo ah sweet, man-made horrors well within my comprehension

[nullpo@masto.hackers.town]

@SnoopJ @munin me: "what the hell do you mean 'no code'"
readme: "whenwords contains specs and tests, specifically"
me: "jesus christ"

[munin@infosec.exchange]

@nullpo @SnoopJ

they're not even real tests; they're fucking llmingshit yaml ostensibly describing tests

[mercutio@hachyderm.io]

@SnoopJ God, even the spec is AI generated slop - horrifying

[aud@fire.asta.lgbt]

@xgranade@wandering.shop @SnoopJ@hachyderm.io totally random, vaguely related rant:

I feel like society focuses too much on the physical act of book burning as opposed to the impact of book burning. I feel like if people focused on what book burning does (i.e., why it is bad), it would probably be easier for people to understand that the scalable automatic legible text maker, deployed worldwide by a bunch of eugenicists, is bad.

[xgranade@wandering.shop]

@aud @SnoopJ I have long said people respect the physical object of books too much and the artistic expression of books too little.

Aside from the obvious connection to fascist iconography, and with obvious exceptions for any kind of antique objects or objects with historical significance, I don't give a fuck if you burn a book. As objects, books are cheap to make and print. I mind if you make a book *disappear*, if you erase it from culture.

[trochee@dair-community.social]

@SnoopJ
> whenwords is a ghost library—distributed as a specification, not code.

is that not called a "standard"?

> To use it, ask a coding agent to implement it in your language.

is that not "implement it or hire an implementer"

[cap_ybarra@beige.party]

@SnoopJ $dayjob will probably hire this guy and pay him 3x my salary due to all the productivity he is creating

[cap_ybarra@beige.party]

@SnoopJ i'm announcing my new library: whenwordswords

it's just a the idea for a prompt that says "write a good library and some specs"

you're welcome, open source community.

[gsuberland@chaos.social]

@SnoopJ this made me angry

[ireneista@adhd.irenes.space]

@munin @SnoopJ @nullpo may the void take these asshats, indeed

[snoopj@hachyderm.io]

@gsuberland I would simply write an unambiguous and complete specification of the behavior I wanted.

It would be easy for me.

(/s)

[arrjay@tacobelllabs.net]

@SnoopJ there is more to LaCroix than this

but I really wanna call it LaCroix Software

[brouhaha@mastodon.social]

@SnoopJ @gsuberland
[insert Sean Bean "one does not simply" meme here]

[rune@social.sound-city.dk]

@SnoopJ I do wonder how likely LLMs are to output code that ONLY works for the specific test cases and no other inputs

[joepie91@fedi.slightly.tech]

@SnoopJ "Instead of containing the code, this repository contains instructions which may or may not result in that code depending on unpredictable factors!" sure is a thing to advertise with, huh

[joepie91@fedi.slightly.tech]

@rune @SnoopJ Not even that, because the test code is also generated so quite likely at least some of them are not even going to match the testcase spec