Tangentially related rant: We had a new contributor open up a pull request today and I gave their changes an initial look to make sure no malicious code is included.
I couldn’t see anything wrong with it. The PR was certainly a bit short, but the task they tackled was pretty much a matter of either it works or it doesn’t. And I figured, if they open a PR, they’ll have a working solution.…well, I tell the CI/CD runner to get going and it immediately runs into a compile error. Not an exotic compile error, the person who submitted the PR had never even tried to compile it.
Then it dawned on me. They had included a link to a GitHub Copilot workspace, supposedly just for context.
In reality, they had asked the dumbass LLM to do the change described in the ticket and figured, it would produce a working PR right off the bat. No need to even check it, just let the maintainer do the validation.In an attempt to give them constructive feedback, I tried to figure out, if this GitHub Copilot workspace thingamabob had a Compile-button that they just forgot to click, so I actually watched Microsoft’s ad video for it.
And sure enough, I saw right then and there, who really was at fault for this abomination of a PR.The ad showed exactly that. Just chat a bit with the LLM and then directly create a PR. Which, yes, there is a theoretical chance of this possibly making sense, like when rewording the documentation. But for any actual code changes? Fuck no.
So, most sincerely: Fuck you, Microsoft.
Surely you have to blame the idiot human here who actually has the ability to reason (in theory)
You think the decision to build this bot like that was not made by a human? Its idiot humans all the way down.
Of course but people selling/offering shitty tool options is not only expected, it’s guaranteed. I certainly do not understand this tendency to blame the machine or makers of the machine and excuse the moronic developer
Nono i agree with you, people like that cant be trusted with tying their shoes.
I just wanted to point out that the system is the way it is because of “idiot human here who actually has the ability to reason”
The person who uses the shitty tool is a moron. The person who makes the shitty tool is an asshole. At least in this case where the shitty tool is actively promoting shitty PRs.
Responsibility is shared. It’s not one or the other.
Many people don’t know what they’re doing. That’s kind of expected. But a tool provider and seller should know what they’re doing. Enabling people to behave in a negative way should be questioned. Maybe it’s a consequence of enablement, or maybe it’s bad design or marketing. Where criticism is certainly warranted.
Yes the only people ever to blame are everyone but the people who actually did a thing. That’s the same reason voters aren’t responsible for trump, Democrats are. /s
Well, for reasons, I happen to know that this person is a student, who has effectively no experience dealing with real-world codebases.
It’s possible that the LLM produced good results for the small codebases and well-known exercises that they had to deal with so far.
I’m also guessing, they’re learning what a PR is for the first time just now. And then being taught by Microsoft that you can just fire off PRs without a care in the world, like, yeah, how should they know any better?
ultimately the people responsible are the ones giving people tools that can be misused, you don’t hand a gun to a child.
deleted by creator
Lmao, what, that’s wild. How did they justify this??
deleted by creator
Oof.
My employer pays a
buttloadbottomload of money to CircleCI - for extensive checks (build, lint, formatting, full test suite, as well as custom scripts for translation converage, docs,… for the full tech stack) on every push. Reviews start only when everything passes.I think you have given me a new-found appreciation for the reasoning behind that decision… 😄
Commit with
Co-authored-by: Copilotor maybe better
--author=CopilotIt would certainly help evaluate submissions to have that context
We will never solve the Scunthorpe Problem.
It’s a clbuttic
Truly in a clbottom of its own
Hasn’t it been proven unsolvable?
Impossible. There is always some mf named like cum-sock, smh
some mf named like cum-sock
Excuse me? My family BUILT this country!
Or Grab-her.
Proven? I don’t think so. I don’t think there’s a way to devise a formal proof around it. But there’s a lot of evidence that, even if it’s technically solvable, we’re nowhere close.
Have you tried adding a few more kilobytes of regex?
Or a few more gb of LLM?
I swear, I just need 4-5 more graphics cards to solve this!
there’s a very trivial solution that always works actually, it’s called “stop being a prude”
I mean, you could just use a vaguely smarter filter. A tiny "L"LM might have different problems, but not this one.
So a TLM?
TJA suggests a TLM.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Awww, it’s trying its best!
Indeed; it definitely would show some promise. At that point, you’d run into the problem of needing to continually update its weighting and models to account for evolving language, but that’s probably not a completely unsolvable problem.
So maybe “never” is an exaggeration. As currently expressed, though, I think I can probably stand by my assertion.
Scunthorpe Problem
If only one could buttassinate censorship…
Don’t you mean buttbuttinate?
bottombottominateFTFY
I have no rebottomal for this comment.
It causes so much dawizard.
I had a Pycharm linter with “inconsiderate writing list” flag my use of “bi” as inappropriate, recommending to use “bisexual” instead. In my data job, BI, means business intelligence, it’s everywhere.
Gotta love Microsoft Power Bisexual
I now identify as a Power Bisexual.
Power top or bottom?
365
“I’m a power bisexual 365.”
That works.
How is that inconsiderate? That’s just informal
(Using “bi” to mean “bisexual”, I mean, not “business intelligence” lol)
No, it’s right.
Business intelligence is inconsiderate and must be stopped!
Fully agreed! And while we’re at it, get rid of Power Pivot!
I think it’s probably because it is informal or maybe ambiguous.
I’m confused how bi is inappropriate
Huh, I’ve only heard business logic before.
Business intelligence is in the context of analytics. It means something very different from “business logic”, in case you’re thinking they’re synonyms…
Holy shit, 10,000 commits because each change was individual (I’m assuming automated).
Those commit messages though 🤣
They automated randomization of the commit messages? Wtf?
Gotta appreciate the level of commitment on this commit…
oh god
yeah, no. haha
lol😁And they’re all with different commit message:
“switched arse to bottom to create a more uplifting vibe”
“took arse out and put bottom in to keep my language warm and friendly”
“thought bottom would sound a lot nicer than arse, so I used it”
And so on…
wtf it was real?
The problem was named after an incident in 1996 in which AOL’s profanity filter prevented residents of the town of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England, from creating accounts with AOL, because the town’s name contains the substring “cunt”.
haha
deleted by creator
Google: kill child process
FBI: ಠ_ಠGoogle: kill child process linux console
FBI:（︶︿︶)
It’s a clbuttic mistake.
I’ve been tempted to create a bot that does nothing but search comments in code for misspelled words and create pull requests for them.
If it stays in comments, little chance in breaking a working codebase and I’d have an insane amount of commits and contributions to a wide variety of codebases for my resume.
I’ll never be a top tier coder. But I might make management.
In case that wasn’t satire, please don’t 🥲 A small typo in a comment is not a big issue, and even if the PR is straightforward, a maintainer still has to take some time reviewing it, which takes time away from fixing actual bugs 😢
But think of the gains!
Simple changes require only simple reviews.
A better use of your time is to improve documentation. Developers generally hate documentation so it’s often in need of improvement. Rewrite confusing sentences. Add tutorials that are missing. Things like that. You don’t necessarily have to be a good developer or even understand the code of the project; you just have to have some knowledge of the project as an end user.
I have nominated you to the who’s who in america award
I am in doubt. That wouldn’t even compile. But who am I to think somebody changing something like this would actually do a test compilation afterwards…
HTML isn’t compiled, and unknown attributes are allowed. The best practice is to prefix non-standard attributes with
data-(e.g.<div data-foo="test">) but nothing enforces that. Custom attributes can be retrieved in JavaScript or targeted in CSS rules.Compile? HTML?
I’ve been off of web front end work for a while, but do CI systems actually do a “compile” type step on HTML these days?
Yeah, you’re right. My mind was stuck. No compilation for HTML of course. I was thinking of automatic testing in CI systems after you commit. Compilation for Java, C++, etc.; some other form of testing for HTML (renaming tags like these should throw some errors I suppose)
At least linting, which if strong enough is close
It’s time for chbottomt and clbottom to finally become valid HTML statements.
Or just have some random subset of browsers support them for some reason and other browsers not so much. It’s the html way.
clbottomt when the chtopt shows up [imagine this as that popular GIF meme]
What is a ‘charset’ in this depraved persons mind? A corset? Must be a mighty kinky corset.
It’s replacing all instances of arse and ass with bottom…but doing so in about the most naïve way possible.
Aah yeah, thanks!
Someone needs to learn regular expressions.
Nah too many false negatives. Vulgar language must be wholly extinguished
It’s got an arse in there
Fucking Scunthorpes!
OMG this took me way too long to get. They replace the substring “ass” 😭😭
and “arse”, as seen in charset
Ok, how is “charset” vulgar?
Edit: got it; arse
got it; arse
It would certainly be an issue if you didn’t have one
