3 ms·
Yeah, but this assumes the llm will follow the "Laws". I find llms routinely ignore steering docs etc, even outright instructions. Like "Dont use python", next
by shantnutiwari 14d ago
Yeah, but this assumes the llm will follow the "Laws". I find llms routinely ignore steering docs etc, even outright instructions. Like "Dont use python", next line it is trying to use Python.
Seems to me the llm will just try to work around the "laws"
- serial_dev 14d agoExactly, you can have all the laws, but an LLM (or even a human) will just delete or refine the laws and hide the change in a 5kloc PR, that the "code author" will not review carefully, and you have 5 min to review and stamp to make sure your company is moving fast...
- andy12_ 14d agoIf the LLM changes the laws to bypass them that's on you. The whole point of this is that you don't have to manually review most code written; only the laws. If the LLM changes the laws and you ignore it that's a you problem.
- serial_dev 14d agoI totally get it, but in companies where you gotta crunch out 10x more features, review 10x from other people, this could be easily overlooked.
- runeks 14d agoNo, it doesn't assume that. It simply assumes that you can verify whether or not the LLM's implementation adheres to the laws you defined up-front — which it does not if it modified the laws.