|
So now I've got some tools to unleash some pretty advanced AI chatbots into some online forums which could make for an interesting social experiment, both in terms of the bot learning and evolving and in terms of people's reactions to it, and I was talking to my hubby all like "which group of unsuspecting plebes do I deploy one to first?" and then realized that there's no group of people that doesn't suck in some way such that it would poison the bot which led to the larger conclusion that people in general are kinda not so great. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
My modest proposal is that you try it right here. After all, no one on CP sucks. 
Let's see how long your bot can avoid "This account has been closed". I'll consider running a betting pool on the date of its demise.
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to avoid running it here because I figure that's off limits and i don't want my real account to get the axe. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure a bot could create its own account. 
|
|
|
|
|
So ask permission.
Canadians are way too polite to refuse a nicely worded request.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Canadians are way too polite to refuse a nicely worded request.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Canadians are way too polite to refuse a nicely worded request.
But Chris is Australian
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: But Chris is Australian
OK, forget it, Witchie; you're buggered.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
How do we know we're not interacting with that bot right now? I've always had my suspicions about you...
|
|
|
|
|
Bots aren't this pretty. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
But only a bot would love nothing more than to talk about parsers to this extent. 
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: no one on CP sucks.
You speak for yourself! 
Oh, wait...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
People! Ha!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lets say I need to replace the toString function with the toString function - How can I do this?
totaNo){
return 'tota');
}
Oh no. Did they seed this AI from CP QA?  All hope is lost.
|
|
|
|
|
The good message boards have only bots as members, because they're such civil environments that joiners get bored and move on.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry, I did not get that.
Perhaps you can find some inspiration in our new[^] section.
Did this answer your question?
|
|
|
|
|
Break out the pitchfork Sander, as I've created yet another monster. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Not if you seem to be enjoying it... *squints eyes*
|
|
|
|
|
Link doesn't work, here's a proper link[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only they tend to spaghetify the code...
But also, as I discover now, they are a typical way for the management to blame the developers for wasting time and not even have delivered a simple product yet despite all the development time already spent! 
|
|
|
|
|
Are you talking about specs that change in the middle of the development cycle? Any non-trivial change to a spec should be met with the statement that the schedule must be revisited. If management disagrees, any sensible jury will see it as justifiable GBH if you kick them in the groin with all your might.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that's what I am talking about.
Moving spec are treated with a "how come this doesn't do it already" question?! 
It's not like there is a nice spec document, it's n house development and spec are "discovered" as we go...
|
|
|
|
|
I got laughed at once when I asked for a software behavior diagram to be produced from the functional requirements.
Later the project blew up because they refused to freeze the design. It was a contract, so I didn't really care. Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
