Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 668 posts

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

#481

Post by fwip »

tmp10423288442 wrote: post #457
frizlab wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In $COMPANY, for the mid-yearly review, the employees were asked whether their AI usage was 1/ efficient, 2/ adoptive (integrated in the way they work) or 3/ transformative. Saying “never used it” or “I tried and it was useless” was literally not possible.

You'd have to be a pretty stubborn software engineer to not find AI useful for anything at this point, unless they're making you use Github Copilot or something far behind the frontier. You don't have repetitive tests to write? You never need to write a script to run something?

And you'd have to be a pretty pig-headed exec to assume that the only experience an employee could possibly have with LLMs is positive.

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

#482

Post by uecker »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #466
sitzkrieg wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yea, we certainly wouldn’t want regular user applications to run fast or respect user resources. can’t have that

Even if that was the tradeoff, your average C/C++ program isn't notably fast or lean.

The C programs I use daily are generally very fast, very lean and very stable: Programs such as linux, terminals, shells, vim, etc.

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

#483

Post by inigyou »

insanitybit wrote: post #408
inigyou wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 u…

Sometimes when you look at code you know is slow, you can immediately see why it's slow. Obviously you didn't see it when you wrote it, which disproves your hypothesis.

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

#484

Post by Alpha3031 »

Phemist wrote: post #186
dybber wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google already controls Chrome/Chromium direction so much that you should use Firefox if you value an open web.

Which I do (actually a fork of firefox - waterfox), but it is still worrying as the viability of chromium-base browsers is what's keeping us having "merely" a chromium-monoculture (with viable ad blockers e.g. and website operators that check compatibility with more than one browser), rather than a chrome-monoculture (where ad-blockers surely would have been killed by now).

Microsoft surely has enough resources to keep their fork going if they choose to, so I see no reason why Google would try that given they would likely end up with less control over the web.

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

#486

Post by uecker »

margorczynski wrote: post #458
bschoepke wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust certainly helps for certain classes of errors but doesn't help at all for logic errors or incompletely understood requirements or occasional need for hacks due to business needs.

It basically completely eliminates the most common class of errors which are bugs related to memory management. Hard numbers and statistics show that every application with enough complexity will be riddled with those. It is simply impossible, even for the smartest human minds, to manage this kind of complexity. And this is a fact.

Somehow, magically, some people managed to write C software that I now use for three decade with not a single crash in all this time.

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

#487

Post by rpdillon »

raverbashing wrote: post #418
rpdillon wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire compute world was built on top of C and C++. Saying they're not fit for purpose doesn't seem correct. I think what you're really saying is they're not an optimal choice from a safety perspective. > All of these need to be ported to Rust or another memory-safe language ASAP to prevent mayhem. Seems like hyperbole... It might be ideal if we could snap our fingers and suddenly have rust ports, but I feel like…

Well we make work with the tools we have It worked well enough, maybe "fit for purpose" is a stronger word

Makes sense, but strangely, no one has responded to my question about why Servo hasn't been picked up, if Rust is such an important factor in browser engine implementation. People are calling using C and C++ "ridiculous" and "irresponsible" and "not fit for purpose". And yet, no one's using the alternative that's sitting right there?

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

#488

Post by colechristensen »

maccard wrote: post #462
colechristensen wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I'm saying the human inside the engineering loop is essential. If a person needs training, particularly if the set of high level advice I set out in a reply is rejected, a blog post isn't going to cut it anyway. Some AI skeptics paradoxically insist humans are irreplaceable and then get almost mad(?) when you discuss how humans are necessary in the loop. At least that's my interpretation of what is going on,…

> If a person needs training, particularly if the set of high level advice I set out in a reply is rejected, a blog post isn't going to cut it anyway. My problem with the “high level advice” is that the results it gives are bad. Sure, sometimes it gets it right, and it helps but I’d wager about half the time the results are just bad. Hence why I’m asking people to show their homework here. I think that the anthropic…

>But yet in this comment thread we have people saying

I'm writing for myself, not including myself in any group of people.

>I just want to know what is actually working today,

With LLMs I have facilitated the writing of about a million SLOC over the past 9 months.

- A GitHub "clone" with many enhancements which all of my development is hosted on

- A task manager as though kanban had a baby with a FIFO stack

- (in progress) a CAD kernel potential Parasolid competitor

- reverse engineered a vehicle diagnostics tool to diagnose and fix some car problems I was having more easily

- plenty of other small, half baked, or abandoned projects for one reason or the other

LLMs amplify me, they don't do things "for" me. They are working very well for me, but I have definitely hit their limitations in many places and transitioned back to the hardest problems to solve being on the human side of the equation.

What they can do for any particular person depends on the person and if they can come around to really grokking the human-machine relationship.

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

#489

Post by mikeydiamonds »

altmanaltman wrote: post #101
madeofpalk wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tests! Unit tests, integration tests, random adhoc scripts. You know - TDD! I’ve been working on UI component improvements and it was doing a lousy job until i specifically told it to test in a headless browser to validate it works. I think somewhere in an AGENTS.md i have an instruction to “don’t state your guesses as fact - validate findings and results”.

If the agent can write the tests its supposed to pass and we are worried that agent produces quite a lot of slop (which is why we are doing the tests), then what is the defense against test slop? Test the tests?

[dead]

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

#490

Post by slopinthebag »

bschoepke wrote: post #442
hn_submit wrote: post #389

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…

Rust certainly helps for certain classes of errors but doesn't help at all for logic errors or incompletely understood requirements or occasional need for hacks due to business needs.

That's like saying a condom isn't 100% effective so you just use the pull-out method instead.
Post reply on HN