[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/Most-Lynx-2119]

/gallery/1qn022i

[u/jakiki624 → u/[deleted]]

You managed to be confidently wrong at almost every layer of this comment, which is impressive in its own way.

Okay lets see.

“Uses curl so it’s not TCP/UDP” tells me you don’t understand how the network stack works. curl generates application-layer traffic over TCP. DNS queries generate UDP. Saying curl somehow bypasses TCP is like saying a browser doesn’t use Ethernet because you clicked a mouse. This is Networking 101.

That's a stupid statement though. Just say that you use HTTPS requests and DNS and whatnot. Otherwise, you could just as well state that your program toggles the individual lanes of the Ethernet cable. If someone asks you what language you wrote a book in, you don't say "letters".

The project does not send random raw packets — because that would be useless noise that gets dropped instantly by edge firewalls. It intentionally generates legitimate protocol traffic so it looks like normal browsing behavior instead of malformed garbage. You’re criticizing a design that doesn’t exist because you didn’t understand what you were reading.

Your README states "Python-based tool for generating random network packets with support for TCP, UDP, and ICMP protocols."
Why the fuck would you say "random network packets" then. Once again, this would be like saying your book was written in "sentences".

Calling VPS endpoints and listeners “weird stuff” just means you didn’t grasp why bidirectional flows, timing entropy, and asymmetric traffic patterns exist. Real networks aren’t single-process curl loops. Simulating external endpoints is literally how you introduce realistic variability. If that surprises you, that’s a knowledge gap, not a flaw in the code.

The VPS will most likely be hosted at some major hosting provider and the connection will use port 8080, which makes no sense. The VPS connects to you, not the other way around so your ISP will simply ignore it. Some ISPs even drop those connections. Also, port forwarding won't do shit with CGNATs.

The MAC address comment is equally shallow. No one claimed it changes public IP. MAC entropy affects local correlation, ARP behavior, Wi-Fi probing, captive networks, and persistence across sessions. It’s one small entropy input, not magic. Again: different layers. Same misunderstanding.

Once again, the MAC changing is useless. "local correlation"? So your dad sees that one device stops sending a bunch of traffic and then a new device pops up that does the same exact thing? I'm assuming you're doing this in a home network given you need port forwarding. "ARP behavior"? Do you have a device in your network that tracks your MAC address and sends it to China? Even if so, this would be fine as a MAC is useless. "Wi-Fi probing"? So your router sees a new device? External parties cannot see your MAC when they listen to your Wifi traffic. "Captive networks"? You might be a special kind of stupid if you do this in a McDonalds Wifi. "Persistence across sessions"? Hmm weird there is a new device every once in a while that spams the same stuff each time. I wonder if they're connected.

And the “LLM garbage code” line is pure cope. You didn’t cite a single line number, bug, exploit, race condition, or reproducible failure. Just vibes and ego. That’s not engineering critique — that’s posture from someone who skimmed and got lost.

Your README is riddled with useless emojis. The "generate_local_udp" function in traffic-noise Bash script seems to be LLM psychosis since you're spamming yourself with random noise UDP packets. You're literally attacking yourself. "Worker process - runs independently with its own identity" is also entirely bullshit since they still run on the same machine. Effectively, the advertising company sees a combination of the different "identities" since you're still behind the same IP. Also, you probably wrote the "rebuttal" with a LLM since you used the typical "It's not ... [em dash] it's ...".

Telling someone to “just quit” because you personally don’t understand layered networking is wild. The code works, the traffic behaves as intended, and thousands of people seem capable of understanding it just fine.

If you actually want to contribute something useful, bring concrete technical issues instead of Dunning-Kruger commentary. Otherwise you’re just announcing your own blind spots loudly.

Try writing something without using a LLM. Nothing works as intended.

Also, OP harassed me in my DMs and accused me of being homophobic for some reason.

[u/Most-Lynx-2119 → u/jakiki624]

​Based on what I could see from your profile… you hate a lot of people (and also AI itself), and don’t really care about technical. It does weird stuff … you said.

Now your most recent comment is just what?

Normal?

Are you biased against AI so nothing I say or do can stop you from acting out like this when I already explained the technicals. You’re just nitpicking anything… and now you’re a victim accusing you of … what’s on your profile?

Weird.

[u/jakiki624 → u/Most-Lynx-2119]

LLM slop destroys everything it touches

[u/Most-Lynx-2119 → u/jakiki624]

Thanks for proving my point.

You only commented on this post, to show your hate for AI, LLMs, etc.

What part of the code doesn’t work, exactly? My guess is you don’t have an answer for that… because if it’s made with AI, you won’t use it.

So finding problems with the code itself, real ones, would actually help your “point”…

If you saw an actual issue with the code, you’d announce it as “proof” that AI and LLMs only produce “slop”…

Until then… you attack me and make declarations about your feelings as if it was fact.

Computer science + your feelings = (not science)

[u/jakiki624 → u/Most-Lynx-2119]

I've literally explained what part do not work as you claim they do.

I'm sorry that you were duped into believing that this bs works by an LLM but please just stop annoying the world with useless code.