this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
864 points (98.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

19483 readers
565 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 155 points 1 day ago (6 children)

We will never solve the Scunthorpe Problem.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 20 hours ago

there's a very trivial solution that always works actually, it's called "stop being a prude"

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Hexarei 6 points 22 hours ago

Truly in a clbottom of its own

[–] SatouKazuma 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Hasn't it been proven unsolvable?

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Impossible. There is always some mf named like cum-sock, smh

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 day ago

some mf named like cum-sock

Excuse me? My family BUILT this country!

[–] prowling4973 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Proven? I don't think so. I don't think there's a way to devise a formal proof around it. But there's a lot of evidence that, even if it's technically solvable, we're nowhere close.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Have you tried adding a few more kilobytes of regex?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 20 hours ago

I swear, I just need 4-5 more graphics cards to solve this!

[–] 0x0 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Scunthorpe Problem

If only one could buttassinate censorship...

[–] Scoopta 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't you mean buttbuttinate?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

I have no rebottomal for this comment.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I mean, you could just use a vaguely smarter filter. A tiny "L"LM might have different problems, but not this one.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Awww, it's trying its best!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Indeed; it definitely would show some promise. At that point, you'd run into the problem of needing to continually update its weighting and models to account for evolving language, but that's probably not a completely unsolvable problem.

So maybe "never" is an exaggeration. As currently expressed, though, I think I can probably stand by my assertion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

It causes so much dawizard.