Spends the first 90% of the competition developing specialized subagents and custom MCP servers to allocate the problems and most relevant information efficiently into the LLM’s contexts.
All of his agents easily escape their own sandboxes and one accidentally configures itself into “delete-only mode”.
“Codex, how the fuck do you not have access to your own documentation?”
Places 29th globally after one of his subsubagents finds a way to reconstruct the full solution set from filesystem metadata in the online judge VMs.
Close. A script is readable and editable code. The LLM slop is “deep” so it’s opaque and you can’t really change the system prompt (you can jailbreak it).
Script-kiddie is a derogatory term for a computer user who can’t read or edit the code. Scripts might be useful to us, but they may as well be opaque to a script-kiddie.
I’d say a script-kiddie can modify a script, but only if there’s some resource that says ‘change this part to do x’. They don’t understand why that change does what it does, though, or how to troubleshoot if it doesn’t actually do the thing.
Signed: config file kiddie - I just do what youtube or forum denizens tell me to do until it works. Imagine there’s script-kiddies out there that do something similar.
there’s some resource that says ‘change this part to do x’.
Arguably, this is just a different type of script.
I think the real separation is that while you might seek out a few different resources, or try a few alternatives to solve a problem, a “script-kiddie” is likely stuck if the first result in Google doesn’t solve the problem immediately.
Missing the LLM developer with billions of tokens to burn.
I’m fairly confident this image is from before the rise of LLMs (or at least - from before they could solve AoC)
are they tho?
script-kiddie 2.0?
Close. A script is readable and editable code. The LLM slop is “deep” so it’s opaque and you can’t really change the system prompt (you can jailbreak it).
Script-kiddie is a derogatory term for a computer user who can’t read or edit the code. Scripts might be useful to us, but they may as well be opaque to a script-kiddie.
Would you really claim that a script-kiddie won’t alter a number or a string in some script?
For my definition of script-kiddie, its not that they won’t change something, they by definition cannot because they dont understand it.
We may have different definitions here, but that is the one I am familiar with.
I’d say a script-kiddie can modify a script, but only if there’s some resource that says ‘change this part to do x’. They don’t understand why that change does what it does, though, or how to troubleshoot if it doesn’t actually do the thing.
Signed: config file kiddie - I just do what youtube or forum denizens tell me to do until it works. Imagine there’s script-kiddies out there that do something similar.
Arguably, this is just a different type of script.
I think the real separation is that while you might seek out a few different resources, or try a few alternatives to solve a problem, a “script-kiddie” is likely stuck if the first result in Google doesn’t solve the problem immediately.
Exactly, we need a modern version of this meme.