this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
898 points (98.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

19817 readers
98 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 158 points 1 month ago (6 children)

We will never solve the Scunthorpe Problem.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Truly in a clbottom of its own

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hasn't it been proven unsolvable?

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago

some mf named like cum-sock

Excuse me? My family BUILT this country!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month 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] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Have you tried adding a few more kilobytes of regex?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

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

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

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

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

Scunthorpe Problem

If only one could buttassinate censorship...

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Don't you mean buttbuttinate?

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

I have no rebottomal for this comment.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month 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 month ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Awww, it's trying its best!

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

¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

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

It causes so much dawizard.