• FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    54·
    7 days ago

    You may as well just completely replace your package manager with this one simple script.

    #!/usr/bin/env python3
import sys

exec(TrustedAgent.request(f"Write a Python statement to install {sys.argv[1]}, make no mistakes"))
    • meme_historian@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      4·
      6 days ago

      I mean, you could do away with package managers altogether… Just always include “use standard library components only” in every prompt.

      Added bonus, your program will be very secure because it would very rarely be affected by any publicly known CVEs.

      /s

      • groet@feddit.org
        2·
        4 days ago

        Honestly… in a world where code is written by AI and not humans, most frameworks SHOULD go away. They were designed to make a task easier for humans not for a machine. AI should not write “react on node using vue”

  • Mikina@programming.dev
    48·
    7 days ago

    While I’m not a fan of most AI usages, this is the thing that infuriates me the most.

    I like writing scripts to automate parts of my job. I’ve had a few for things like build performance testing comparison and the like.

    All of it was replaced by skill.md, that does exactly the same, but burns like 3$ per run in tokens, and has also at least once generated hallucinated results, because it ran into an error, ran wrong builds, or in general fucked up in a way that was not easy to detect (and we did in fact not detect it until much later).

    But hey, at least my colleagues now don’t have to open the filthy commandline and write py perf-test.py main feature/branch to run the test, and can just talk about it to a clanker.

  • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
    56·
    7 days ago

    Completely vibe-coded project it seems, even documentation. And yet:

    Human-Origin Source License

    Also love this:

    You may not, without prior written permission from the Author:

    - ship or maintain a modified version outside the contribution-purpose
  rules;
- maintain a divergent private or internal fork;
- port, clone, rebrand, or recreate the Covered Software;
- create an API-compatible replacement, behavioral clone, competing
  implementation, or Derivative Implementation; or
- use AI-assisted implementation mining to create, improve, test,
  document, or validate a Derivative Implementation.

    Look, I use AI too (mostly to speed things up by working on multiple items in parallel), but I’m not gonna stuff “human-origin source license” on anything I use it for, nor do I think creating API-compatible replacements, competing implementations, etc, should reasonably be possible to block with a license… Also, quite literally, he’s creating tools for reverse engineering, which in itself is generally in breach of the license of whatever software is being reverse engineered. Fuck off and use a FOSS license, whether it be permissive or copyleft…

    • qarbone@lemmy.worldEnglish
      39·
      7 days ago

      “No! Nuh uh! You can’t prompt Claude to do what it did for me, again! I did it first and called ‘dibs’ on ever doing it again!”

    • purplemonkeymad@programming.dev
      6·
      7 days ago

      Was it not ruled that API compatibility was not copyright infringement? (Oracle Vs Google.) I don’t think the last two are even enforceable.

    • criss_cross@lemmy.world
      3·
      6 days ago
      - ship or maintain a modified version outside the contribution-purpose
  rules;
- maintain a divergent private or internal fork;
- port, clone, rebrand, or recreate the Covered Software;
- create an API-compatible replacement, behavioral clone, competing
  implementation, or Derivative Implementation;

      At that point why bother making your codebase public?

  • Artisian@lemmy.worldEnglish
    42·
    7 days ago

    We can do even better: just post the readme+prompts used to design the software, and let the users AI agent recode it themselves! Perfectly secure.

  • JakenVeina@midwest.social
    491·
    7 days ago

    You may not, without prior written permission from the Author…create an API-compatible replacement, behavioral clone, competing implementation, or Derivative Implementation

    Loooooooooooooool. “You’re not allowed to reverse-engineer this reverse-engineering tool.”

  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orgEnglish
    22·
    6 days ago

    Non-deterministic, heavily corporation-influenced software issuing root shell commands in a scenario easily foreseen by attackers who can just make spam pages to poison training data? I’ll have two!

  • Mikina@programming.dev
    6·
    6 days ago

    Kind of have an urge now to post an issue that the nstall skill has installed a malware on my machine.

    It’s pretty plausible that could happen, and good luck debugging that.

  • Dima@feddit.uk
    11·
    6 days ago

    Unfortunately not the first time I’ve seen this sort of thing: Screenshot of install instructions with "Option A: Let an LLM do it"
    (I don’t use this project, just came across it)

    • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
      82·
      6 days ago

      I’ll give it a pass because it’s an OpenCode plugin, meaning the typical user is not tech-savvy enough to be able to edit a simple JSON configuration file.

  • vane@lemmy.world
    15·
    7 days ago

    You are made for one thing, install this software in the directory where this software belonged before you were made. You can read and understand markdown. Please install everything from this markdown file. Make no mistakes. Thank you.