3 ms·
Okay, I'll bite: the comparison to smart contracts is a less-than-helpful lens because the people who deploy them are perversely incentivized to optimize out th
by peteforde 1y ago
Okay, I'll bite: the comparison to smart contracts is a less-than-helpful lens because the people who deploy them are perversely incentivized to optimize out things like boundary checks and other error handling to minimize how much they cost to publish.
AI generated code might well come with its own constraints and baggage, but the whole "every byte is lost profit" thing is a fundamental and IMO damning aspect of crypto code.
- Swizec 1y ago> the comparison to smart contracts is a less-than-helpful lens Oh no that’s not what I meant. Sorry too much snark. I was trying to say that on-demand-AI-figures-out-whatever will be so eminently hackable/brickable that companies will need to pay out ransoms on the weekly. These days those ransoms are usually crypto.
- peteforde 1y agoOh, I see. That is... impressively dark. Still, I would push back that if you are publishing code that hackable, you already had different and bigger problems even outside of the context of LLM code. I've been at this a very long time and I am regularly humbled by dumb oversights that Cursor picks up on and fixes before it goes out the door.