Has abliteration/decensoring been at all useful or relevant in your setup?

Most things in crypto aren't ever tested because the big players know they'd all lose if the faults were exploited.

Thank you, this actually makes some sense. It's disturbing to get these emails with zero explanation what's going on, and very frustrating that user community has to guess. But PHP vuln in a web client intercepting user logins is the only thing that makes sense, otherwise that would mean passwords in the clear or some other 1990s-era nonsense.

As in nothing functional at all? Or are there anonymous functions etc?

Then I upgraded OpenCode to 2.0 and pretty much all the bugs vanished. I still wish there was a happy medium between "parse tool calls for perms" (which fails all the time if the tool call is long/complex enough) and a full-on sandbox, but otherwise 2.0 is really solid.

"Cyber" at bigcos are paid to have a gigantic (and literal) fortress mentality where any change internal or external is a threat. As the saying goes, nobody in cyber ever gets fired for saying "no" to a change. As a bigco head you are basically paid to form an opinion.

A cyber head saying "ok this is a thing we'll have to defend against" is at a minimum routine if not purely CYA.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49887152

Points: 5

# Comments: 1

Why not both. Yudkowsky's social graph includes most of these folks.

I mean, people have been dreaming about this for decades. The whole reason UML was so overdesigned in the first place was in hopes that people could code by drawing boxes and lines. The full COBRA spec had software autonomously buying components in digital marketplaces and installing without human supervision.

It is funny to see engineers insisting that there's no way a machine could do this better. If anything, the surprise is that it took good old human language -- that second L in LLM -- to get the computer to sling code. The assumption was that a computer would just "speak code" like some kind of native tongue, but instead it just understands human language and associates that with code, and relies upon things like compilers and tests to see if it's right. Just like humans.

Predictably, now that it's actually happening, engineers are worried. As they should be, but I think it's a short-term worry. The job is changing, productivity is leaping, but its still a world where computers don't need to do stuff, humans do, so humans will be making it happen one way or another.