This takes me back to the era of object oriented programming and UML diagrams. More time was spent framing the solution than implementing it. Is there maybe one more design pattern that could be applied? And when the time to implement came, all those diagrams were mostly in the way. But doing it was fun, since it allowed you to focus on the fun, big picture and skip the nitty gritty details that were actually hard to solve.
I feel like people are going down that slippery slope with harnesses and skills and what not. With the right prompt, and with the right model, and with a sprinkle of magic, the solution will emerge. Oh, it didn't? Let's see if there's a new model available, or if someone has come up with a new clever skill or something. Maybe then... Because actually solving annoying problems is not fun, even less so now that the code is a black box only the LLM can understand.
Diagrams and really, just designing the software you are trying to build is mostly about finding out painpoints before you start the programming (at least at point the time-consuming part). The diagramming allowed you to, without programming, show interactions between modules and check on a high level if you are missing edgecases that can’t be solved because of the design.
If you were just using it just to apply design patterns then you were doing it for the wrong purposes.
Oh, yeah, it was definitely being done for the wrong purpose. But it was fun, more fun than solving the problems. OOP and the design pattern craze made it feel like progress, when it was actually just about messing around.
We recently picked up Monopoly with a new generation of players, and the flaws of the design were now apparent to adults. I think this could be a significant improvement.
This was a problem with early models, I would say more than a year ago, and even then, this problem was solved completely by using the clojure-mcp tools for editing.
Today you don't even need to use clojure-mcp for balanced editing. The models do a perfectly fine job.
Thanks! Yeah, it was probably over a year ago that I tried it. Just the thought of a statistical program coding lisp while picking the number of closing parens based on a hunch made me shiver.
The trick before was to have really short files, max 50 LOC or so, and they were OK at balancing parens. Nowadays, most SOTA models seem to be able to handle it regardless of LOC in file.
I don't know if it's quite the same. To not have seen movies with sound would have required living under a rock for decades. To not know if the paren problem has been fixed only requires not having tried it for a year, and not being part of any lisp communities.
I'm the first one to admit my ignorance when it comes to LLM capabilities. Hence the honest question.
Well they did specify "successfully." EITW is a pretty broad tag, just means attacker are probing servers. I'm not saying it's good but there are usually some pretty big caveats with remote-remote memory corruption, don't know if all the people dooming are aware of that
> Exploit portability and reliability depend on the PHP build, extensions, frontend behavior and allocator layout.
Kind of seems like they just shut down their PHP service like everyone else... If this is the case, hopefully they can set up a temporary static site to inform about relevant updates.
I downloaded the thing, was going to try it out to verify. But the checksum didn't match (probably just a random string generated by an LLM). I left it at that and turned off php.
I'm not them, but I'd say Conficker and those other windows file share worms were worse. They went after peoples personal computers rather than web servers so affected people less aware of how to deal with it. It's a little early to tell what this php one will all affect though.
I feel like people are going down that slippery slope with harnesses and skills and what not. With the right prompt, and with the right model, and with a sprinkle of magic, the solution will emerge. Oh, it didn't? Let's see if there's a new model available, or if someone has come up with a new clever skill or something. Maybe then... Because actually solving annoying problems is not fun, even less so now that the code is a black box only the LLM can understand.
reply