They already have a solution to the Trusting trust attack thanks to DDC and live-bootstrap’s work.
https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2023/the-full-source-bootstrap-building-from-source-all-the-way-down/
lol wow this is gold
What does that even mean. Whoever said that just uttered some empty but smart sounding catch phrase. Such is all the talk about the wonders of Ai
I think it’s supposed to be that how AI turns high level instructions into code is compared to how compilers turn code into assembly. Implying that using AI is just a natural extension of the handing off work to the computers that we’ve already been doing.
I wonder if you gave different AI models some c++ or something and told them to write assembly based on it how well they would do compared to an actual compiler
At work, I use AI for some things. Right now I’m rewriting some legacy spaghetti code that’s had a bunch of things hacked into it over the years. I spoke to the person most familiar with the expected behaviour and used AI to combine his info plus the existing code and unit/integration tests into a list of requirements.
I wrote the new code and tests based on the requirements rather than based on the old code. After each commit, I used AI to check for parity between the old and new code, and keep a Google Sheet up to date with the progress (which features were fully implemented, and which ones were missing or had gaps). I had AI write some tests cases too - given the list of requirements, write integration tests for them based on the style of a few tests I wrote by hand.
It has some quirks (eg for tests it loves over-mocking even though our skills tell it to mock as little as possible) but it definitely speeds things up.
I use AI for small side projects at work too. Tweaking and adding features I want to shared libraries, internal tools to help our team debug stuff and automate triaging of bug reports (they’re all still reviewed by a human), etc.
The entire reason I can trust its code is because I can read it and tweak it myself. I sometimes need to go through a few iterations to get AI code into an acceptable state. AI writing machine code directly, like what’s been talked about recently and what this post is referencing, is such a dumb idea.
Dev’s what?
Dev is screwed.
For the uninitiated: who compiles the compilers?
If I remember correctly, they used KenC to bootstrap the Go compiler.
I’ve had it on my todo for years to work through ddc and trusting trust.
Which is a method to verify a compiler is matching its source and thus trustworthy.An orthogonal approach is reproducible builds, which among many benefits can make sure a few people verifying things benefit everyone who can then see they have the same verified binaries.
Devs should be “dev managers and executives”. Real developers know LLMs are basically just a tool for finding examples and helping with syntax. Sure they’re useful, but I’d never let them write code, much less compile it. Who knows what they’d inject into a build.
The very fact that Anthropic is now injecting a kind of watermark into every output, is solid proof that such a Ken Thompson hack is a inevetable risk
It’s a tool, use it where it works and don’t where it doesn’t.
And then your boss says: “Use it for everything or you’re fired. Why are you using less tokens than anyone else? You must be more productive or else…”
That saying (or, dare I say, thought-terminating cliché) glosses over the consideration of risks and costs that result from its uncritical usage. No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose, and that’s true whether or not it bears the latest combination of letters peddled by tech bros. It’s a dangerous, irresponsible mentality. It’s a tool the same way a sledgehammer made out of plutonium is a tool.
Plutonium sledgehammer sounds fucking awesome though
Pretty effective because of its high density, too. It’s a shame it’s brittle and would give you heavy metal poisoning.
🤘
As ways to die go that also sounds pretty rad
Oh, that would be rad alright
I mean in an old nuclear bomb that’s pretty much the situation. Use a conventional explosive to slam some plutonium like a sledgehammer and nukes have proven to be a strong deterrent when a country had them. Still a tool with a use case
Your comment is a sweeping statement that is thought terminating itself.
No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose
Using a tool for something it’s intended for automatically involves some thought process. And this thought process also involves its limitations and potential for danger.
Your criticism stems from your dislike for AI and your opinion that it’s generally not useful. An opinion that is shared widely here, but with little to no proof at all.
People probably say that about asbestos too.
And they’d be right
Of course, it still has uses. Just not in home insulation.
Your comment is so fit for purpose, displaying such a massive willful ignorance about the world in general. Because the biggest problem with asbestos wasn’t using it for home insulation. It killed millions of workers in manufacturing plants and mines. Its biggest industrial use case was for electrical insulation of high voltage transmission lines. Where it also killed hundreds of thousands of technicians in the us alone. Before that it was used for lamp wicks. Where it killed at least a couple of millions more over a century. Today, asbestos kills 250 thousand people a year, 12 to 15 thousand in the us every year.
I supposed any tool can be considered useful if you’re ignorant enough about it or if you’re willing to lie without remorse.
It’s a tool, use it where it works and don’t where it doesn’t.
But that doesn’t work with the people creating AI as they are totally dependent on the believe that AI can do absolutely everything (and an artificial general intelligence is just moments away…) to justify they insane investments. So they will make up a million stupid narratives why some people are “actually” not using AI as it obviously can’t be because of AI shortcomings…
If the tool don’t work then don’t use it. I wouldn’t try to unscrew something with chopsticks
You are probably also one of those insane ideologues that refuse to hammer in a screw for some reason, although you know how well that hammer worked on nails… 😂
