top 74 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 203 points 7 months ago (37 children)

Great... can't wait for politicians to use this as a way to pass "common sense" legislation banning 3D printers.

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 91 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    Aren't they already doing that due to their hysteria over "ghost" guns?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    I learned from Mario that ghosts can only harm you if you look away. They never had guns, but I guess the same applies for that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    They can try, but the parts that make up a printer are used in tons of other applications. It isn't hard to build one from scratch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    They already are over 3d guns, this will send them ballistic. They want every printer to keep a record of everything they've printed. Model legislation, I think CA tried and so far failed to pass it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    3D printers are even less useful here though. The rocket bit can be replaced with a cardboard tube and some balsa fins. The important parts are the active control and circuitry.

    But I guess logic doesn't really enter into the conversation anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 6 points 7 months ago (13 children)
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (10 children)

    This already would fall under an FFL for legal citizens anyway. As is the nature of the internet though, this open design will be preserved and available for those who seek it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 7 points 7 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago

    Most western terrorist attacks are by opportunistic losers who don’t have the knowledge or motivation to do something like this.

    They’d rather drive a car into people who make them angry and use a gun they already own.

    As for organized groups until recently there have been any good reason for an attack from any centrally organized group.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    The lack of simple attacks on soft targets is proof that the threat is overstated and that a statistically overwhelming portion of humans simply don't want to put bombs on busses and rig them to explode on bridges or in tunnels.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    Being in that category just prevents it from being sold. It's not illegal federally to build your own weapon without a FFL.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Is that the same rule for destructive devices? Genuinely curious - I know privately made firearms have different rules.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I wonder if there is some archive or torrent for STL files, like an archive of thingiverse or something. Would be nice to archive that just in case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago*

    Is that even necessary? Anyone with a CAD tool can recreate the 3D printed parts from a glance and a few specs.

    It's literally a tube. Which—to be fair—is a "weapon of mass destruction" according to President Bush (the other war criminal president).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 56 points 7 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 34 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    Home offence is the best defense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Imagine spending thousands of dollars stockpiling assault rifles and ammo for your revolution only to have your entire milita wiped out when some nerd with a $100 homemade missile blows-up the UHaul you all piled in the back of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    All the MAGA civil war two types forget about the nerds. Nerds win wars now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Only idiots bring a gun to a drone fight. However, it is perfectly acceptable to bring your limited edition Andúril replica to finish off any boogaloos that were merely wounded. 1d8 slashing (1d10 if using it two-handed).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 45 points 7 months ago

    What a time to be alive... For now

  • source
  • [–] 41 points 7 months ago* (23 children)
  • [–] 24 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    There's an anecdote that comes up in software about people working on missile software not caring about memory leaks because it's going to explode anyway before that becomes an issue.

    Who cares about bugs in your software if it's a hobby project that's going to blow up anyway.

    Also, including Claude doesn't inherently mean vibe coded, it can be for writing tests, small components, or debugging.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Tests should be written from requirements. Using LLMs to write tests after the code is written (probably also by LLMs) is a huge anti-pattern:

    The model looks at what the code is doing and writes tests that pass (or fail because they bungle the setup). What the model does not do, is understand what the code needs to do and write tests that ensure that functionality is present and correct.

    Tests are the thing that should get the most human investment because they anchor the project to its real-world requirements. You will have tons more confidence in your vibe coded appslop if you at least thought through the test cases and built those out first. Then, whatever the shortcomings of the AI codebase, if the tests pass you can know it is doing something right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago

    Honestly, never been on a team that stuck to TDD. As you test your stuff, and understand whatever libraries and apis you're calling you modify your implementation as you go.

    For public facing methods, especially ones called by customers, having pre agreed upon tests matter more but usually that's at the integration test and system test level. I usually use AI for unit testing and read what was written. Tests end up being a lot of writing harnesses and setting up mocks that you delegate to the model and if there's gaps or incorrect requirements, you change them.

    I would never let the agent define the code structure. It doesn't understand business processes or what might need to be extended or we're instead about.

    I've been doing software for a while, I know how to review code. I don't vibe code, I let the model implement boilerplate and mapping functions while I do other stuff, like manual testing or talking with product. If done correctly, you can incorporate generative models into your workflows without fully handing over all control.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    Using an LLM to write tests and small components is still vibe coding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Wikipedia says:

    Vibe coding involves accepting AI-generated code without reviewing it,

    If you are using LLMs to write e.g. small components, then you are typically understanding the structure of the program, and reviewing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    There's nothing inherent to small components to suggest that you have to review them. If they're small, it's easier to tell yourself that the LLM probably got them right and you're justified in not checking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Bro, if I don't have to sit there for a half hour banging out code to map structure A on to structure B, I won't. I'll let someone else write it and spend 5 minutes to check that the code is clean and it works

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -4 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    No matter how mad this makes people, its still true.

    What makes the code actually useful in most cases however, is enough understanding of the program to modify as its needed. That's where LLMs fall flat. Even when the code works, its terrible at adjusting the code to fit a specific use case. Dont even get met started on usable documentation or maintenance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    I disagree about better code. Claude has been pretty bad at understanding external context and deriving why you're doing something from the implementation. This can result in wonky structure that you need to fix, or at the very least tell Claude to redo over and over untill it looks clean and organized.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] 4 points 7 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

    spoilerBecause Australia is Australia I'll preface this with: this is a joke. Any depictions of high profile/high net-worth individuals in my area are strictly fictional and any resemblances are merely coincidental.

    Anyone got some high profile/high net-worth individuals in my area?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    just go to a junkyard and get some dead cars if you just need something to blow up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›
    4 comments in c/general@forum.guncadindex.com view that post