• 109 Posts
  • 5.66K Comments
Joined 6 年前
cake
Cake day: 2020年5月31日

help-circle
  • What always feels weird to me, is that we don’t need that inflection point of AI turning superintelligent or whatever. Already today, we’re producing drones that do autonomous killing, where we just need to scale up production.

    I guess, on the plus(?) side, the same is true for bombs and we have not wiped everyone out yet with those either.

    That is, I guess, where the inflection point comes in. Killing humans is ultimately quite pointless from a human perspective. But an AI with no understanding of this pointlessness might coordinate the killing with no restraint.
    Or well, as the blog post mentions, it might see wiping out humanity as the solution to climate change, or as a way to end violence between humans etc…

    Current AI iterations certainly prove to be much better at doing things than deciding whether these things make sense.




  • Ist auch außerhalb von Open-Source ein Problem. Letztens hat jemand bei uns in den Dev-Kanal einen Artikel geposted, dass bei unserer Firma ein Leak stattgefunden hätte, mit Passwörtern, E-Mail Adressen, allem.

    In dem Artikel ist dann ein Dashboard verlinkt. Also Name unserer Firma eingetippt. Steht da dran, dass 8000 Leute betroffen seien.
    Fuck, okay, das müssen wir nach ganz oben melden, da müssen alle Secrets rotiert werden.

    …aber Moment, irgendwie macht das Dashboard keinen Sinn. Also ist natürlich KI-generierte Grütze, aber irgendwie werden da zwei verschiedene Vorfälle angezeigt.

    Hat sich dann herausgestellt, dass die 8k Betroffenen bei einem anderen Leak waren, wo lediglich die IP-Adresse bekannt wurde, also komplett egal.
    Der Leak bei dem Passwörter und Co. dabei waren, waren betroffen *trommelwirbel* ganze 3 Personen.
    Jetzt nicht komplett egal, aber ist quasi ein normaler Montag Morgen…

    War eben eine zwielichtige Sicherheitsfirma, die bewusst verwirrende Informationen herausgegeben hat, in der Hoffnung, dass Journalisten darauf anspringen und auch diverse Geschäftsführungen, dann Geld dafür bezahlen.


  • Just as an example, neither the C++ documentation nor its sagely bloggers have ever shown why it is a good fit for, say, systems programming. A really neat way of handling bit-level data is actually in Erlang’s bit syntax.

    Erlang requires a runtime environment, which disqualifies it for situations where you don’t have a filesystem to load the runtime from, like developing a kernel or for microcontrollers.
    Of the popular languages, your choices are virtually just C, C++ and Rust for that.

    More towards your general question: Not needing a runtime environment also means you can use C, C++ and Rust for cross-language libraries. For example, SQLite and OpenSSL have just been implemented once in C, and then you simply have a thin wrapper for Java, Python etc…
    If you are looking to build a library that can be used by as many devs as possible, that’s a selling point which is hard to ignore.



  • After careful analysis (pun intended), I would say those pills are intended to make poop come out when desired, not when taking a pounding up where the sun never shine.

    And the commenter above is saying that it’s completely overdone and that they should just shit over the pounder instead.


  • Ephera@lemmy.mltoich_iel@feddit.orgIch_iel
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 天前

    Bei meiner ersten Fahrstunde bin ich eingestiegen als mein Fahrlehrer einen Anruf bekommt. Er gestikuliert, ich solle losfahren.
    Hab’s dann irgendwie geschafft, 7 km weit und 100 km/h schnell zu fahren bevor ich meine erste Praxiserfahrung mit dem Bremspedal gemacht habe. Mit Fahrlehrer immernoch am Telefon…




  • I feel like a big problem is that LLMs only produce previously learned logical patterns, they don’t do logical reasoning of their own. And code review was always bad at catching logic bugs as well.

    As a result, even with us diligently doing code reviews at $DAYJOB, we have more logic bugs than I have ever seen in any codebase before.

    I’ll spend three weeks discussing an existing feature with other devs and fixing up logic bugs before we realize that the entire feature is conceptually illogical and needs to be removed/replaced.
    This has happened twice for me in the past three months, which should tell you a lot about how much time is wasted here.

    TL;DR: I feel like we need something different than code review to catch these logic bugs. Maybe more of a presentation of the feature implementation to the other devs, and then a discussion of that.