246
submitted 2 years ago by Maven@lemmy.zip to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] fossphi@lemm.ee 97 points 2 years ago

Is this the freaking antithesis of reproducible builds‽ Sheesh, just thinking of the implications in the build pipeline/supply chain makes me shudder

[-] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 41 points 2 years ago

Just set the temperature to zero, duh

[-] superkret@feddit.org 12 points 2 years ago

When your CPU is at 0 degrees Kelvin, nothing unpredictable can happen.

[-] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

>cool CPU to 0 Kelvin

>CPU stops working

yeah I guess you're right

[-] superkret@feddit.org 4 points 2 years ago

CPUs work faster with better cooling.
So at 0K they are infinitely fast.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 years ago

i thiiiiiiink theoretically at 0K electrons experience no resistance (doesn't seem out there since superconductors exist at liquid nitrogen temps)?
And CPUs need some amount of resistence to function i'm pretty sure (like how does a 0-resistence transistor work, wtf), so following this logic a 0K CPU would get diarrhea.

[-] Finadil@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Looking at the source they thankfully already use a temp of zero, but max tokens is 320. That doesn't seem like much for code especially since most symbols are a whole token.

[-] groet@feddit.org 25 points 2 years ago

Just hash the binary and include it with the build. When somebody else compiles they can check the hash and just recompile until it is the same. Deterministic outcome in presumambly finite time. Untill the weights of the model change then all bets are off.

[-] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

this is how we end up with lost tech a few decades later

[-] Xanthrax@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

You'd have to consider it somewhat of a black box, which is what people already do.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 years ago

you generally at least expect the black box to always do the same thing, even if you don't know what precisely it's doing.

[-] mathemachristian@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago

someone post this to the guix mailinglist 😄

[-] arisunz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 89 points 2 years ago

A little nondeterminism during compilation is fun!

So is drinking bleach, or so I've heard.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 87 points 2 years ago

ah sweet, code that does something slightly different every time i compile it

[-] Dave@lemmy.nz 18 points 2 years ago

Just like the rest of my code.

[-] Dultas@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

Or as I like to call it, "Fun with race conditions."

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 2 years ago

nah, that's code that does something slightly different every time you run it. that's a different beast.

[-] mlfh@lemmy.sdf.org 56 points 2 years ago

The top issue from this similar joke repo I feel sums up the entire industry right now: https://github.com/rhettlunn/is-odd-ai

[-] lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 years ago

I think it's a symptom of the age-old issue of missing QA: Without solid QA you have no figures on how often your human solutions get things wrong, how often your AI does and how it stacks up.

[-] dimath@ttrpg.network 36 points 2 years ago

One step left - read JIRA description and generate the code

[-] propter_hog@hexbear.net 11 points 2 years ago

Congratulations. You've invented the software engineer.

[-] spez@r.gir.st 23 points 2 years ago

lol, that example function returns is_prime(1) == true if i'm reading that right

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 years ago

"hey AI, please write a program that checks if a number is prime"

  • "Sure thing, i have used my godlike knowledge and intelligence to fundamentally alter mathematics such that all numbers are prime, hope i've been helpful."
[-] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago

Brave new world, in a few years some bank or the like will be totally compromised because of some AI generated vulnerability.

[-] MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

Well it's only divisible by itself and one

[-] skeesx@lemm.ee 18 points 2 years ago

Even this hand picked example is wrong as it returns true if num is 1

[-] propter_hog@hexbear.net 15 points 2 years ago
[-] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago

That reminds me of Illiad's UserFriendly where the non tech guy Stef creates a do_what_i_mean() function, and that goes poorly.

I would say this AI function generator is a new version of: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DWIM

[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Create a function that goes into an infinite loop. Then test that function.

[-] Andrew15_5@mander.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

I cracked at "usually".

[-] 30p87@feddit.org 5 points 2 years ago

Does that random 'true' at the end of the function have any purpose? Idk that weird ass language well

[-] Maven@lemmy.zip 14 points 2 years ago

It's the default return. In rust a value without a ; at the end is returned.

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
246 points (97.3% liked)

Programmer Humor

42460 readers
12 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS