← Feed
@benjamineskola@hachyderm.io @AAKL@infosec.exchange
I can't believe I find myself _defending_ bot coding, but here we are.
1. You dismissed half a day of my work, and months of these Finnish Amiga hackers, in 3 words.
And now you're all surprised and hurt that I am upset.
Remember the human.
2. Amix isn't slop. Amix is hand-coded 1980s C code, optimised for low-end kit for '80s Unix. It was a remarkable product for a remarkable computer. Sure, it was a flop, but maybe the first production SVR4.1 version. Now, thanks to bot-aided reverse-engineering and some drivers and a tweaked bootloader, it runs on newer kit than its creators intended.
Part of that is a human-written bootloader from 24 years ago, which I link to and whose creator I name.
This is not some vibe-coded bucket of bot slop. This is very careful reversing, modifying, and updating of over 1/3 of a century old code that most fans _of that platform_ have forgotten ever existed.
That's why I wrote it.
Do you really not see how dismissing all this hard work with 3 words is hurtful?
Replies (1)
-
@lproven@social.vivaldi.net @AAKL@infosec.exchange I'm dismissing the 'work' of slop users, yes.
If it wasn't clear that I'm not calling Amix itself slop, then I apologise for that. I assumed it was obvious that I knew the thing written in the 80s was not LLM-generated but I suppose it was ambiguous what I was referring to. Likewise this isn't a criticism of your writing. As I said, a criticism of a thing you write about is not a criticism of your writing.
More fundamentally: I completely disagree with you that this is a positive use of LLMs. I'm not saying I'm happy if some significant historical code is lost and unusable; but 'fixing' it with LLMs still makes the world a worse place. You don't have to agree with me on that but you're going to have to accept the fact that not everybody sees things your way.
Open ##4819064