4 ms·
I think you can significantly save on your claude tokens if you just give the llm `head -n 1 TRACE` execve("/usr/bin/ls", ["ls"], 0x7fff7e969540 /* 110 v
by eddythompson80 1y ago
I think you can significantly save on your claude tokens if you just give the llm `head -n 1 TRACE`
execve("/usr/bin/ls", ["ls"], 0x7fff7e969540 /* 110 vars */)
Some how it figures out how to implement `ls`. That indeed shouldn't be possible. It puts an AI skeptic into believing we're in post-AGI territory here.
Edit: tbf, I did not notice they replaced `ls` with `lol` in the trace file to avoid this, but still. To think the strace of ls was never part of the training data of the LLM then to think that is enough to somehow reverse engineer what binary blob is is insane thinking https://github.com/ghuntley/strace-to-application/blob/trunk/trace https://github.com/ghuntley/strace-to-application/blob/trunk...
- treetalker 1y agoIf you would, please explain why it shouldn't be possible (I am not a software engineer).
- eddythompson80 1y agoI was being sarcastic. The author asked an LLM to implement `ls`* and was so surprised when it did that he thought maybe he can use that insight into reverse engineering firmware blobs. Complete delusion, but chatbots have that effect on some people. * if you don't know what `ls` is, just think like implementing the simplest possible application that's 2 or 3 lines of code.
- bloppe 1y agoTo be fair, the author claims he removed any mention of "ls" from the file. But also to be fair, the post is annoyingly click-baity. I'd be impressed if the LLM could generate more than 2 lines of code from a strace.
- plorkyeran 1y agoThe LLM also failed to implement it. The rust code produced doesn’t actually result in the same syscalls as the strace contained.
- queenkjuul 1y agoIt doesn't even print the results lmao