31–40 of 253 posts
P ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found E ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found Very wow. Shame they assumed everyone has "bc"...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely LLM. No humans write that many comments.
Honestly it's a bit of a shame. I checked and they could've shortened their base64 payload by 304 chars by removing all comments except the top two congratulatory ones, or by 524 if they removed those too.
Why does the shirt have an obfuscated bash script on the back?
Uniqlo frequently does collaborations. This was one with a tech company
The old one was: https://www.uniqlo.com/us/en/products/E459561-000/00
P ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found E ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found Very wow. Shame they assumed everyone has "bc"...
I thought it was funny that the author used a variety of OCR tools with mixed success before spending a lot of time manually fixing up the output from the best one, rather than just typing it in
Took me almost 2 minutes for 4 lines (and I missed a character in one of them!). I would opt for OCR too, obviously so I'm prepared for the next bash t-shirt I'd come across...
All in, you should have a non-corrupted string in 10-15 min.
P ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found E ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found Very wow. Shame they assumed everyone has "bc"...
Why would that be a shame? "bc" is a mandatory POSIX command, while /bin/bash isn't (/bin/sh is the standard).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely LLM. No humans write that many comments.
Honestly it's a bit of a shame. I checked and they could've shortened their base64 payload by 304 chars by removing all comments except the top two congratulatory ones, or by 524 if they removed those too.
The comments can be more cute/awe inspiring for people who aren't as familiar with bash but like solving puzzles as well.
P ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found E ./cool.sh: line 31: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 34: bc: command not found ./cool.sh: line 37: bc: command not found Very wow. Shame they assumed everyone has "bc"...
Which distro are you running? Perchance did you run the shell script in alpine Linux (docker)?
OCRing this is a nightmare and is a good benchmark to any self-proclaimed good OCR/vision model. I think though it could likely be easily OCR'd if you give the image to any decent agentic harness with a good vision model, e.g. newest Claude/GPT ones, and tell them to split the image per lines, and then just OCR each line individually. I wonder if the script itself was written by an LLM before obfuscation? There seem…
I don't think it was written by an LLM, some things stand out: The congratulations text is both in English and Japanese. Contains a single heart emoji. There was an intention to have a cyan to orange gradient, but the range starts in an ANSI block, ends halfway through the 256 color block and 256 terminal colors are not arranged like a gradient at all. There's no sleep at the end of the loop where I feel like an LLM…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely LLM. No humans write that many comments.
> No humans write that many comments. Especially in a case like this, I would definitely write a lot of comments to aid in understanding, thus increasing trust so people would try it out and tinker with it.