finding myself repeating "fuzzers are stochastic, with enough cpu time you will always find a bug, results are a usually demonstration of resources not algorithms"

like, hacking, along with spam and fraud are the sorts of activities where things only need to work 0.1% of the time to be successful

it isn't a demonstration of clever code or tooling but the uncompromising effectiveness of sheer brute force heh

https://blogs.gentoo.org/mgorny/2026/04/05/the-pinnacle-of-enshittification-or-large-language-models/

My recent favorite read. Despite what people around me are shifting to my contributions will remain 100% LLM-free.

> […] I didn’t talk of quality per se. I don’t think there’s a point in doing that. I believe that LLMs sometimes spit quality slop, and sometimes they don’t. […] That’s beside the point.
The point is, however you look at it, LLMs are unethical.

Over past few weeks `gcc` from `master` was crashing on all sorts of `c++` projects with suspiciously similar backtraces: `SIGSEGV` in `ggc_set_mark() / gt_ggc_mx_lang_tree_node()`.

Took me some time to find the culprit and have a workaround to stop the crashes.

Guess where the fix hides!

Spoiler: https://trofi.github.io/posts/347-another-memory-corruption-case.html

Remember being 15, fixing things nobody asked you to fix, staying up way too late debugging stuff for fun? We built the contest we wish had existed back then. 🤩

Any Free Software project. 6 months. No fixed topic. Up to €4096 + a trip to Brussels to meet their people.

Ages 14–18, anywhere in Europe. Solo or team. Totally beginner-ok.

📣 If you know a young hacker, tell them about it!

🔗 https://yh4f.org/register

🔗 More information on https://yh4f.org

#YH4F #FreeSoftware

After years in open source development, I've learned that sometimes I need to enable others to do things I would normally do trivially, even though they may take longer and won't be perfect (read: not the same as I would have done it :D). It allows others to grow, and I gladly accept that tradeoff. It pays off.

But no. I refuse to spend my energy on providing feedback to somebody else's LLM chat. Sorry, not sorry.

It's come to my attention that John Bradley, author of the "xv" tool has died. I never knew John, but I used "xv" a LOT in the early days of my career as a graduate student working in computational physics.

In many ways "xv" might have been more pivotal to my early career than even Python.

In this thread, I'm going to offer my tribute to "xv" and say a bit about its role in my 1990s "vibe"-coding project that definitely did NOT involve any AI.

This will probably meander a bit. 1/n?

Some people may think of LLMs as the great equalizer. People who aren't programmers can vibecode working programs now. People who aren't artists can slop out something resembling art. However, it's the exact opposite.

When I was a kid, I also pretended to write programs. Of course, I didn't have such sophisticated toys ("kids could play with a stick for hours", as the hyperbole went). But then, I was fully aware that it's just make-believe and it didn't harm anybody.

#Vibecoding creates a horrible chasm of inequality. We have people who believe they're good programmers (even treating vibecoding as an enlightened religion) who shit tons of code at real human reviewers who now need to sift through. And then, we have projects embracing vibecoding and shitting new releases at unprecedented rate. And these releases again need to be reviewed by humans downstream.

#AI #LLM #NoAI #NoLLM