Back from the dead with more vaguely-obscure technical bullshit

Working on a chatbot for my BS-CS. Almost done with college, so the assignment is to make a bot that recommends you a CS career. Cool.

I get through making a joint personality and skill-interest quiz that gives you number grades on different spectra. So far, so good. But this project has to be done entirely in pandorabots' online editor. So no scripting. Zero scripting. 100% markup language. That means to even do math, you need to copy a standard library off GitHub.

I mean, that's fine and all, but the syntax is just atrocious, because everything in AIML is input->response. If you ask the bot "what is 5+5?" you must have it go:

- recognize pattern WHAT IS * + *
-> redirect -> XADD * XS *
-> do math -> recurse result
-> 10

uncomfy. Plus, variables can only be accessed through <get> and <set> tags. But mangeable.

So here's where the story becomes a rant.

In the standard docs, there's all these math functions, and they work. There's also logic.

And then there's this fucker
XIF [ * ] XS [ * ]
Which has no documentation and just doesn't work. No idea what the brackets mean. Tried putting in TRUE, tried putting in true math statements (5 XEQ 5), tried putting in recursion tags to trick it, tried everything. It just ignores it.
There is not a single comment, stackOverflow post, or youtube video that even acknowledges the existence of this thing.

So unless I want to convert the entire logic of my program into nested SWITCH statements with the <condition> tag, I'm just fucked.

The icing on the cake is, I go to tech support on Pandorabots to ask for help with this. What do they have except a chatbot to cheerfully tell me that no humans are around to help me right now?

gonna have to build an entire fuckin turing machine in markup tags to calculate whether x = 3

(:

To err is human, to recurse is divine.

Stack Overflow people have profound buffallo bullcrap on their skulls, they are some software engineers who have fucked COBOL and BASIC, probably somewhere like NASA, just pondering out where someone post a question. They're probably some etilist cult banging a prostitute while delivering that awful downvote imitating the slap they give the chick during sex. They desire questions such as

"RANDOM_fuck_module_Abdul.method() not working in python" or "how to dock the dock by undocking" (tagged: AWS). Not things like "why does the audio tag not work in a PC but works in w3school tester?" or a genuine programming question. Fuck.

We don't tail recurse or loop abc for k in godfuck loops, huh? We make simple things as: a form, a http request to dell.

I hope there penises get rotten in the hell. Period.
this is just a part of SO.

1/2 dev and a fair warning: do not go into the comments.
You're going anyway? Good.

I began trying to figure out how to use stable diffusion out of boredom. Couldn't do shit at first, but after messing around for a few days I'm starting to get the hang of it.

Writing long prompts gets tiresome, though. Think I can build myself a tool to help with this. Nothing fancy. A local database to hold trees of tokens, associate each tree to an ID, like say <class 'path'> or some such. Essentially, you use this to save a description of any size.

The rest is textual substitution, which is trivial in devil-speak. Off the top of my head:
my $RE=qr{\< (?<class> [^\s]+) \s+ ' (?<path>) [^'] '\>}x;

And then? match |> fetch(validate) |> replace, recurse. Say:
while ($in =~ $RE) {
my $tree=db->fetch $+{class},$+{path};
$in=~ s[$RE][$tree];
};

Is that it? As far the substitution goes, then yeah, more or less. We have to check that a tree's definition does not recurse for this to work though, but I would do that __before__ dumping the tree to disk, not after.

There is most likely an upper limit to how much abstraction can be achieved this way, one can only get so specific before the algorithm starts tripping balls I reckon, the point here is just reaching that limit sooner.

So pasting lists of tokens, in a nutshell. Not a novel idea. I'd just be making it easier for myself. I'd rather reference things by name, and I'd rather not define what a name means more than once. So if I've already detailed what a Nazgul is, for instance, then I'd like to reuse it. Copy, paste, good times.

Do promise to slay me in combat should you ever catch me using the term "prompt engineering" unironically, what a stupid fucking joke.

Anyway, the other half, so !dev and I repeat the warning, just out of courtesy. I don't think it needs to be here, as this is all fairly mild imagery, but just in case.

I felt disappointed that a cursed image would scare me when I've seen far worse shit. So I began experimenting, seeing if I could replicate the result. No luck yet, but I think we're getting somewhere.

Our mission is clearly the bronwning of pants, that much is clear. But how do we come to understand fear? I don't know. "Scaring" seems fairly subjective.

But I fear what I know to be real,
And I believe my own two eyes.

So which do you think would be faster to detect related points in an image to a certain threshold ?

A. Scan a line at a time and define a rectangle surrounding the shape ?

B. Starting at a pixel find values in each direction within a tolerance and recurse each point found with the same function

C. Do something similar to above but try to find the edges by finding the last point before blank space to get a shape

D. Identify all line segments on the horiz very and diagonals and see which ones intersect ? Omg I asked this before. After discovering all the points that are within threshold and iterating through these alone?

E. Is there another goddamn method ??? Lol