3 ms·

That sounds dystopian as hell to me. Are security researchers willing to become interchangeable units of cognition, as devalued as uber drivers? I hope not. Bu

That sounds dystopian as hell to me. Are security researchers willing to become interchangeable units of cognition, as devalued as uber drivers? I hope not. But your edit makes my original comment unneeded. I was reacting to this jump to “we need ai to solve this!” when the ai is still largely unproven marketing hype from a bunch of highly leveraged ai companies with manic gambler ceos.

OutOfHere 7mo ago
You seem to be living in 2024 wrt your assertions about AI. Or maybe it is me who hasn't caught up with the AI-hate agenda of the hoi-polloi since 2024.
- kennywinker 7mo ago
  We’re talking about ai for security auditing. Until a week ago, ai for security auditing was virtually non-existent. But i guess if I was mainlining ai marketing in a haze of llm psychosis, a week ago might feel like 2024.
  - OutOfHere 7mo ago
    Just because Anthropic advertised something last week does not mean that other LLMs couldn't be used for the same purpose since 2024. Any decent code-generating tool-calling agentic LLM has had the innate ability to audit code. Anthropic's model wasn't the first answer and it's not the final answer.
    - kennywinker 7mo ago
      A toddler has the innate ability to audit code. They’re just not very good at it. I stand by my position that LLMs are an unproven tech when it comes to security auditing. As of this moment all we have is “data” straight from marketing departments, and a handful of anecdotes.
      - OutOfHere 7mo ago
        No, a toddler does not have the ability to audit code. It takes good software security skills, which agentic coding LLMs absolutely possess. It doesn't have to be perfect. With veritable dinosaur-grade beliefs like yours, nothing would ever change in the world, at least not for the better, with extinction being the only inevitability.
        kennywinker 7mo ago
        Maybe. But the change you’re proposing is still to destroy any power that security researchers have to demand good wages by breaking their work into small units of labour and dispatching them uber-style. So my line of thinking may lead to stagnation, but yours leads to inequality, exploitation, and concentration of market power in the hands of a few. Do you not see it’s better to stay the same than change things for the worse?

OutOfHere 7mo ago

You seem to be living in 2024 wrt your assertions about AI. Or maybe it is me who hasn't caught up with the AI-hate agenda of the hoi-polloi since 2024.

kennywinker 7mo ago
We’re talking about ai for security auditing. Until a week ago, ai for security auditing was virtually non-existent. But i guess if I was mainlining ai marketing in a haze of llm psychosis, a week ago might feel like 2024.
- OutOfHere 7mo ago
  Just because Anthropic advertised something last week does not mean that other LLMs couldn't be used for the same purpose since 2024. Any decent code-generating tool-calling agentic LLM has had the innate ability to audit code. Anthropic's model wasn't the first answer and it's not the final answer.
  - kennywinker 7mo ago
    A toddler has the innate ability to audit code. They’re just not very good at it. I stand by my position that LLMs are an unproven tech when it comes to security auditing. As of this moment all we have is “data” straight from marketing departments, and a handful of anecdotes.
    - OutOfHere 7mo ago
      No, a toddler does not have the ability to audit code. It takes good software security skills, which agentic coding LLMs absolutely possess. It doesn't have to be perfect. With veritable dinosaur-grade beliefs like yours, nothing would ever change in the world, at least not for the better, with extinction being the only inevitability.
      - kennywinker 7mo ago
        Maybe. But the change you’re proposing is still to destroy any power that security researchers have to demand good wages by breaking their work into small units of labour and dispatching them uber-style. So my line of thinking may lead to stagnation, but yours leads to inequality, exploitation, and concentration of market power in the hands of a few. Do you not see it’s better to stay the same than change things for the worse?