Live data from Hacker News

Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

blog.google

401–410 of 668 posts

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#401
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the point is more: are people going to flood the zone with infinite bikeshedding that drowns out the real gains

What is bikeshedding supposed to mean here?

LLM increase the range of things bikesheddable, so some folks will try to have a LLM design a nuclear reactor and manage the coffee budget in addition to the traditional bikeshed design complications. Whether this is an improvement or more engines of what passes for civilization catching on fire, well…

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have at least one coworker who literally copy-paste AI output to respond to code and doc reviews (and most of her communications like on Teams and Asana) despite me telling her multiple times to take it a notch down. Two days ago, she started answering my doc review questions with literally AI outputs (like "Good question. " and "You're right. "). That really bothered me that I finally announced AI "code of conduct…

If I were to be real, my coworkers that post AI responses straight rarely had insightful comments before AI.

Possibly, but the noise has increased so we're worse off.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#403

I've recently been using AI a lot for performance optimisation during a particularly busy period at work. I would say it was almost completely useless at the high-level direction - it would point out suspicious parts of SQL queries for example but on back to back testing these almost never resulted in any performance change. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that it made making the actual changes I identified much e…

You have to learn to use your tools, not try whatever intuitively made sense to you at first (expecting the tool to do all the work) and then whining on Hacker News when it doesn’t work out for you.

Incredibly dismissive of the parent comment. They made a comment explaining their usecase, and issues with the tool, which you just labeled as whining. Is this not a discussion board to talk about things? Is expressing issues with a use case you found now just considered whining on HN?

The parent commenter was trying to learn how to use the tool. Perhaps he could've used it better, but like you said, what may have worked was not necessarily the intuitive approach.

The parent comment also changed his approach, and AI worked for him to test out changes. That's not expecting the tool to do all the work, he's actually agreeing with you that "expecting the tool to do all the work" is a misstep.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#404

To me this merely signals how broken C++ development really is. Most if not all of the bugs being uncovered are memory related and therefore intimately tied to the mental memory model of C and C++, namely manual memory management. It's fine for a C or C++ program encompassing a couple hundred lines but beyond that it's a liability. C and C++ are simply not fit for purpose when large scale software projects are concer…

C++ has had smart pointers for memory (and other resource) management for a long time now (see e.g. the Windows ATL classes for working with COM objects and resources).

There are a number of challenges that make browsers more challenging (even in memory safe languages like Swift and Rust).

1. Back references/pointers like `parentElement` to other objects in the graph that create dependency cycles (where traditional/simple reference counting will prevent the objects being deallocated).

2. Interacting with (and creating resources in) a garbage collector when running/evaluating JavaScript code.

3. Just-in-Time (JIT) compilation of JavaScript and other complicated interpretation-compilation pipelines that can allocate and transfer objects between the different stages.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#405

I've recently been using AI a lot for performance optimisation during a particularly busy period at work. I would say it was almost completely useless at the high-level direction - it would point out suspicious parts of SQL queries for example but on back to back testing these almost never resulted in any performance change. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that it made making the actual changes I identified much e…

The useless suggestions are exhausting. One of my co-workers uses Claude for all asynchronous communication, including Slack messages, Jira comments, code reviews, and emails. Every single message from him, literally every time he communicates, it's a massive wall of text, overflowing with scope-creep suggestions like nothing I've ever seen before. It's impossible to ask him a simple question and get a simple answer.…

Would be pretty ironic if back to the office became the less distracting option.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linus: "it keeps finding embarrassing bugs" Linux Kernel: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wi4zC+Ze8e+p3tMv8TtG_80Kzs... The idea that software has gotten so complex that a machine can evaluate code paths better than a human, seems to bristle the fur of many. Some people didn't think we would see the day where that comparative human limitation was laid bare in simpler tasks than they expected. I believe older develo…

I don't know why people keep acting like any kind of LLM skepticism or criticism is based on bristled fur or something. I am very skeptical of these workflows, but I also use LLMs regularly. I specifically use them because they are better than me at sifting through massive amounts of complex information. They are also quite, uh, sketchy, for things that are significantly easier. A total mixed bag in my experience tha…

> They are also quite, uh, sketchy, for things that are significantly easier.

Like having real difficulty with basic counting while being able to solve extreme math problems.

Being context machines, talking about what they’re definitely good at and definitely shit at, in broad terms, has been… difficult.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#407
post #361

The real datapoint was Firefox not paying any money in Berlin's Pwn2Own competition round this May just gone. Unheard of to have nothing confirmed... they've paid out every event since 2007 (I checked). Does this mean we must move past the low-hanging fruit now? Probably... Certainly indicates some usefulness of these models.

Perhaps this was due to their red-teaming partnership [1][2] with Anthropic which they wrote about a few months earlier in March? 1: https://www.anthropic.com/news/mozilla-firefox-security 2: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/hardening-firefox-anthro... Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47273854

I just did a search and apparently this fact (the specific one about no payouts for the first time in almost 20 years) has not gotten a discussion on HN. Given the degree of skepticism around the utility of AI bug finding and fixing (this very thread is full of it), I would have thought that concrete evidence that it can help actually make real software more secure against attacks would have gotten a write-up somewhere.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can very easily spot performance issues through code. Allocations are often visible, slower hash maps are often visible, loops are visible, etc.

No you can't.

Are you serious? Of course you can. Some hash algorithms are slower than others, you can read that and know that. Allocating in a hot loop is probably slower than allocating outside of it. Duh? I can't believe this even has to be justified, of course you can look at code and get an idea of its performance properties lol

Obviously you want empirical evidence to justify changes, but like... duh, you can read code and understand how it executes.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Built exactly this for work a few months ago. Claude has a read-only account to the dev DB and a bunch of python postgres tools, I point it at queries/views and ask it optimize, and it has to: 1) verify identical query results 2) run repeatedly to get average, worst, best, etc duration of runs Sped up so many legacy things that none of us were ever going to bother with.

What if the shape of data in the dev db doesn't stay consistent with real life? Is the harness for the AI set up with any sort of instructions to generally prefer broadly-applicable first-principals query performance analysis over unintuitive results that may be local maxima due to certain things specific to that env? Even with humans I've had to unwind "optimizations" before that worked great for low-volume envs by…

[deleted]

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#410
post #41

A lot of people here seem to be living in a different universe than me or simply don't know how to work with AI. I think detractors believe you should just let AI do the job blindly instead of leveraging it as a tool to accelerate you. They get mad at Excel for the poor investment returns. At this point, this is such a strawman, it isn't worth counter arguing. I think I'll abandon this discussion and keep using AI qu…

[flagged]

It's true that metacommenting about leaving a discussion in order to leave a supercilious last word is a flamebait trope. But please don't respond by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN