• 0 Posts
  • 5 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: June 24th, 2023
  • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldtoSelfhosted@lemmy.world•Linux Kernel TCP Flaw With 9.8 CVSS Score Affects Ubuntu, Red Hat and Other DistributionsEnglish
    14·
    3 days ago

    They’re overhyping every god damn bug they can because they know most people won’t know how bad it actually is

    Where is Anthropic doing this? The one that finds the vulnerability are not the ones that assigns it a CVSS score. CVSS is calculated with a standardized format, and is not mean to be a measure of risk. So this is no the AI companies saying how bad the vulnerabilities are, but rather the owners/maintainers of the code.

    Hell, they don’t even manage to understand proper bug disclosure practices.

    Have you ever stopped to consider previous bug disclosure practices aren’t as applicable? If anyone can find bugs using AI, then even if Anthropic or OpenAI finds a vulnerability, they can’t know for sure they are the first. Even if they are the first, it’s only a matter of time before the next people find it even if the first discovery was never publicly disclosed.

    There have also been countless bugs given directly to companies, and fixed without a big blow up or news spectacle. You didn’t hear about those, because they didn’t blow up. So you are going to have a level of confirmation bias.

    Why couldn’t it be that there are just a ton of really bad vulnerabilities that have never been discovered until a tool like AI came by to find them? There is nothing special about Anthropic or OpenAI, they are just the fastest moving with this new technology. Why couldn’t the bugs they find be just as bad as they are claimed to be, especially when severity is often not determined by the AI company anyway

  • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldtoOpen Source@lemmy.ml•Ban AI Slop?
    11·
    1 month ago
    • someone with zero experience using AI to blindly create something barely functional, feeding in errors until it gets a working version. No checking for vulnerabilities, testing, error catching, no thought on architecture or scalability.
    • someone carefully using AI in a controlled manner to create open source software. They spend days making sure that is reliable, scalable, secure, and that the project is quality.

    You believe these two are them same? That both are equal slop? Quite frankly, I don’t care if an AI made most of the code for an open source project as long as it is made well, and allows me to get away from awful proprietary alternatives. If the output of an AI is distinguishable from a quality programmer, idk how that is also slop.