this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2367 readers
109 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Want to wade into the snowy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Last substack for 2025 - may 2026 bring better tidings. Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] flaviat@awful.systems 9 points 2 weeks ago (18 children)
[–] sailor_sega_saturn@awful.systems 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (17 children)

https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/blob/master/.claude/CLAUDE.md

Imagine if you had to tell people "now remember to actually look at the code before changing it." -- but I'm sure LLMs will replace us any day now.

Also lol this sounds frustrating:

Update prompting when the user is frustrated: If the user expresses frustration with you, stop and ask them to help update this .claude/CLAUDE.md file with missing guidance.

Edit: I might be misreading this but is this signs of someone working on an LLM driven release process? https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/blob/master/.claude/commands/release.md ??

Important Notes: NEVER merge PRs autonomously - always wait for the user to merge PRs themselves

[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (7 children)

So many CRITICAL and MANDATORY steps in the release instruction file. As it always is with AI, if it doesn't work, just use more forceful language and capital letters. One more CRITICAL bullet point bro, that'll fix everything.

Sadly, I am not too surprised by the developers of Lean turning towards AI. The AI people have been quite interested in Lean for a while now since they think it is a useful tool to have AIs do math (and math = smart, you know).

[–] jonasty@awful.systems 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

One of my old teachers would send documents to the class with various pieces of information. They were a few years away from retirement and never really got word processors. They would start by putting important stuff in bold. But some important things were more important than others. They got put in bold all caps. Sometimes, information was so critical it got put in bold, underline, all caps and red font colour. At the time we made fun of the teacher, but I don't think I could blame them. They were doing the best they could with the knowledge of the tools they had at the time.

Now, in the files linked above I saw the word "never" in all caps, bold all caps, in italics and in a normal font. Apparently, one step in the process is mandatory. Are the others optional? This is supposed to be a procedure to be followed to the letter with each step being there for a reason. These are supposed computer-savvy people

CRITICAL RULE: You can ONLY run release_steps.py for a repository if release_checklist.py explicitly says to do so [...] The checklist output will say "Run script/release_steps.py {version} {repo_name} to create it"

I'll admit I did not read the scripts in detail but this is a solved problem. The solution is a script with structured output as part of a pipeline. Why give up one of the only good thing computers can do: executing a well-defined task in a deterministic way. Reading this is so exhausting...

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)