I’m SURE they’ll be no repercussions for this guy 🤣
the consensus seems to be that adding instructions to code that sabotage other people’s work goes too far
Luckily, the LLM coding isnt people’s work
the consensus seems to be that adding instructions to code that sabotage other people’s work goes too far
I mean, my thought would be “Don’t fucking run code that you don’t understand”.
If we all followed that rule, we’d be using nothing more complex than an 8080.
It’s the stolen work of other people.
Hilarious. More of this please.
lol at the pearl clutching from AI heads.
The OG vibe coders.
I love everything about this, other than the people butthurt that their free software doesn’t like AI. I’ll give the smallest amount of criticism that it was obfuscated initially, because that’s just malware even if I think it’s justified. By clearly stating what it does, then the onus is on the user to audit the code and modify as needed. I would love to see more of this type of action to become standard practice, but just deleting the test suite isn’t quite painful enough for what I’d like to see.
Not all heroes wear capes. Based af.
mumble mumble “his code” mumble mumble “provided as is” mumble mumble.
I’d say this is only fair game if you have a no-ai policy on the readme. Otherwise you’re just being a dick.
I think its on the user of the bot for being a hack.
Hypothetically, what if a blind person used LLMs for coding assistance?
Oh gods, not the “Think of the blind coders” just stop. Stop using the disabled as a meat-shield for reckless foolishness.
For what? TTS worked fine for decades without LLMs and is less prone to hallucinating bullshit.
Heel yaw 👊
