231–240 of 271 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
find me one
No. Learn about the burden of proof and get some basic reason - your AI sycophancy will simply disappear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does indeed, but at the end added: >However, I should note: without access to the actual crash file, the specific curl version, or ability to reproduce the issue, I cannot verify this is a valid vulnerability versus expected behavior (some tools intentionally skip cleanup on exit for performance). The 2-byte leak is also very small, which could indicate this is a minor edge case or even intended behavior in certai…
Yet this is not reproducible. This is the whole issue with LLMs: they are random. You cannot trust that it'll do a good job on all reports so you'll have to manually review the LLMs reports anyways or hope that real issues didn't get false-negatives or fake ones got false-positives. This is what I've seen most LLM proponents do: they gloss over the issues and tell everyone it's all fine. Who cares about the details?…
I'm not talking about completely replacing humans, the goal of this exercise was demonstrating how to use an LLM to filter out garbage. Low quality semi-anonymous reports don't deserve a whole lot of accuracy and being conservative and rejecting most reports even when you throw out legitimate ones is fine.
You seem like regardless of evidence presented, your prejudices will lead you to the same conclusions, so what's the point discussing anything? I looked for, found, and shared evidence, you're sharing your opinion.
>IIRC DOGE did something like this to analyze government jobs that were needed or not and then fired people based on that. Guess how good the result was?
I'm talking about filtering spammy communication channels, that has nothing like the care required in making employment decisions.
Your comment is plainly just bad faith and prejudice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the ffmpeg situation How do you know that?
Because the vulnerability was published and it appeared real.
My question is why you know cURL is being “spammed” but that FFMPEG is just getting legitimate problems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> > Actually, you don't have to. You just want to. > Fair. I don't think it's fair. That ideology was unquestionably developed with humans in mind. It happened in the 80s, and back then I don't think anyone had a crazy idea that software can think for itself and so terms "use" and "learn" can apply to it. (I mean, it's a crazy idea still, but unfortunately not to everyone.) One can suggest that free software ideology…
> It happened in the 80s, and back then I don't think anyone had a crazy idea that software can think for itself and so terms "use" and "learn" can apply to it. (I mean, it's a crazy idea still, but unfortunately not to everyone.) Sure they did. It was the golden age of Science Fiction, and let's just say that the stereotype of programmers and hackers being nerds with sci-fi obsession actually had a good basis in rea…
At worst you are trying to disparage the entire idea of open source by painting the people who championed it as idiots who cannot tell fiction from reality. At best you are making a fool of yourself. If you say that free software philosophy means "also, potential sentient software that may become a reality in 100 years" everywhere it mentions "users" and "people" you better quote some sources.
> Also those ideas aren't crazy, they're obvious, and have already been obvious back then.
Fire-breathing dragons. Little green extraterrestrial humanoids. Telepathy. All of these ideas are obvious, and have been obvious for ages. None of these things exist. Sorry to break it to you, but even if an idea is obvious it doesn't make it real.
(I'll skip over the part where if you really think chatbots are sentient like humans then you might be defending an industry that is built on mass-scale abuse of sentient beings.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That freedom for many free licenses comes with the caveat that you provide basic attribution and the same freedom to your users. LLMs don't (cannot, by design) provide attribution, nor do LLM users have the freedom to run most of these models themselves.
That is if you redistribute or make a derivative work. Applying learnings you made from such software does not require such attribution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it might be the same issue as with WordPress and Jira - terrible plugins. Each company uses own special mix, and encounters issues often occurring in that one specific configuration. And it is the base platform that takes the blame.
In particular a place I used to work had a plugin for threaded comments in Jira. The specific one we were using slowed things down noticeably with the DB on the same server, but not too much to be an improvement in overall usefulness. Then we decided trying to make our Jira more reliable by splitting the DB out into a separate clustered DB system in the same data center. The latency difference going through a couple…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is if you redistribute or make a derivative work. Applying learnings you made from such software does not require such attribution.
In the first sentence "you" actually refers to you, a person, in the second you're intentionally cheating and applying it to a machine doing a mechanical transformation. One so mechanical that different LLMs trained on the same material would have output that closely resembles each other. The only indispensable part is the resource you're pirating. A resource that was given to you under the most generous of terms, wh…
So it's sort of sentient when it comes to training and generating derivative works but when you ask "if it's actually sentient then are you in the business of abusing sentient beings?" then it's just a tool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Being able to learn from the code is a core part of the ideology embedded into the GPL. I have to imagine this ideology was developed with humans in mind. > but LLMs learning from code is fair use If by “fair use” you mean the legal term of art, that question is still very much up in the air. If by “fair use” you mean “I think it is fair” then sure, that’s an opinion you’re entitled to have.
> I have to imagine this ideology was developed with humans in mind. Actually, you don't have to. You just want to. N=1 but to me, LLMs are a perfect example of where the "ideology embedded into the GPL" benefits the world. The point of Free Software isn't for developers to sort-of-but-not-quite give away the code. The point of Free Software is to promote self-sufficient communities . GPL through its clauses, particu…
A lunch in central Stockholm is well within 200 kronor. I can't imagine a country where an person with a computer and skills necessary to claim a bounty in cURL would consider that amount massive.
Get real.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In particular a place I used to work had a plugin for threaded comments in Jira. The specific one we were using slowed things down noticeably with the DB on the same server, but not too much to be an improvement in overall usefulness. Then we decided trying to make our Jira more reliable by splitting the DB out into a separate clustered DB system in the same data center. The latency difference going through a couple…
You're referring to the on-prem Jira. That might suck, sure. My experience has been purely using Jira Cloud and Confluence Cloud, both of which I've found to be snappy and responsive.