doc_ick

9 ms·

1. 181.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   1) https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/338.html 2) if a system has partial entropy, output can be predictable https://www.netbsd.org/~riastradh/tmp/20200510/getrandom.htm... 3) t
2. 182.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   I hear a lot of “basically” and “rock solid”, yet still no answer to my question or no “perfect” claim. Edit: an impractical attack can still be used
3. 183.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   You keep arguing random strings are “basically” perfect for cryptography. I’d potentially read your research paper for strings if you cited it, but my main question is what technology do you think is perfect? I don’t want to hear about misp
4. 184.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   I asked for a perfect tech in your eyes, that once created was never updated or improved upon. *edit: a recommendation for random strings in most cases isn’t perfect
5. 185.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   That’s dodging the question, and a very generic and blank recommendation.
6. 186.▲
   by doc_ick 4mo ago

   What do you recommend then? What technology has been designed, completed, then used for years without any updates or problems?
7. 187.▲
   by doc_ick 5mo ago

   I prefer Option 2 as musk has an alleged track record of trading things between his companies with no oversight, and how sAfE cybertrucks are
8. 188.▲
   by doc_ick 5mo ago

   No, the research paper is still a key point of validation for the process. Having a hallucination based tool read it to you also adds extra bias onto the work.
9. 189.▲
   by doc_ick 5mo ago

   ~html has more capabilities than markdown~ the real title Weren’t llms specifically originally set to output and print markdown format since it is simpler and easier everyone to read? No different rendering/libraries/apis to worry
10. 190.▲
    by doc_ick 5mo ago

    Already outsourcing your work to ai? Good for you, hopefully you can enjoy that 10-15 minutes of irony.
11. 191.▲
    by doc_ick 5mo ago

    How much of this article is written by ai?
12. 192.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    Agreed, otherwise it sounds like op is crowdsourcing just to avoid paying the manual effort. *Edit: op has been vibe coding all over, could just vibe code the guides themselves without human input?
13. 193.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    Oh no I’m not worried about the resources or rate limits. If I’d make a mobile app and users simply use your automation service instead of my mobile app, I’d lose traffic/money/motivation to improve it. If they run into issues fro
14. 194.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    This makes me want to never create a public service again.
15. 195.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    “To be clear: I’m sarcastic, I’m critical, I’m a perfectionist and impossible to impress, and I have a capacious ego.”-authors earlier article I’ll take this article as sarcasm.
16. 196.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    Probably Reddit.
17. 197.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    You probably would have to make an account with a valid personal email, just to trace your prompts.
18. 198.▲
    by doc_ick 6mo ago

    I wish I could downvote this multiple times.
19. 199.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    There’s also virustotal, any.run, probably a few others outside of GitHub/gitlab scans
20. 200.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    A vibe coded thought experiment, interesting but likely not worth the tokens to duplicate work. I just skimmed the fully vibe coded page and saw the quote “Machines now speak every human language better than most humans.”. Interesting, and
21. 201.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    Hmm, nice page, I may end up vibe coding my own showcase page
22. 202.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    Your loop is wrong, as it will go ‘intent -> llm(?) -> result’. Which doesn’t need to compile, but the llm its own black box of magic function that may or may not reproduce the same result based on intent. Also I would think the numbe
23. 203.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    It’s great to hear that! Hopefully you get the compliments you deserve after the logic is potentially reversed.
24. 204.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    Are you worried about someone training their own model and recreating their own bot off of your public logs?
25. 205.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    *What makes you think it hasn’t already been pulled/used in training from GitHub?
26. 206.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    Just re-train your own model on your own collected data. No problem there.
27. 207.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    “The solution is to remove humans from the per-operation decision loop and replace them with programmatic evaluation that does not fatigue, does not habituate, and does not rubber-stamp.” So instead of having a human peer review an ai bot,
28. 208.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    Could you provide the details of the complete verification? *On the original story you only showed Claude like responses, not how you dug into the binary
29. 209.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    See John Deere in the US, or Apple, or other fun companies. I fully agree it’s nonsense, but it’s commonplace.
30. 210.▲
    by doc_ick 7mo ago

    This is Claude’s output of its system prompt, can you verify without going Claude of the system prompt? There is still potential of hallucination.