31–40 of 151 posts
[flagged]
I agree with everything you say. But wow, does that comment sound like AI. Probably Grok? Not saying you are AI, you might just be a heavy user who picked up the same patterns
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with everything you say. But wow, does that comment sound like AI. Probably Grok? Not saying you are AI, you might just be a heavy user who picked up the same patterns
The "is key - ", is a key giveaway. EDIT to expand the evidence: It's placing unnecessary emphasis on a one off mention in the article (differential fuzzing) and then writes a bunch of bullshit around what it thinks it means (it's wrong, differential fuzzing isn't running them both in parallel during a transition, it's a testing methodology based on inputs/outputs).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with everything you say. But wow, does that comment sound like AI. Probably Grok? Not saying you are AI, you might just be a heavy user who picked up the same patterns
The "is key - ", is a key giveaway. EDIT to expand the evidence: It's placing unnecessary emphasis on a one off mention in the article (differential fuzzing) and then writes a bunch of bullshit around what it thinks it means (it's wrong, differential fuzzing isn't running them both in parallel during a transition, it's a testing methodology based on inputs/outputs).
[flagged]
But it's not only the security-critical paths, but also most of the business logic (see the 2 posts above).
The interesting aspects, such as how they protect against supply-chain attacks from the dependency-happy rust toolchain or how they integrated the C++ code with the Rust code on so many platforms - a top challenge as they said - remain a mystery.
Would also be interesting to hear how much AI-driven development they used for this project. My hope’s that AI gets really good at Rust so one doesn’t have to directly interact with the unergonomic syntax.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "is key - ", is a key giveaway. EDIT to expand the evidence: It's placing unnecessary emphasis on a one off mention in the article (differential fuzzing) and then writes a bunch of bullshit around what it thinks it means (it's wrong, differential fuzzing isn't running them both in parallel during a transition, it's a testing methodology based on inputs/outputs).
I think it's a giveaway that it's human! A hyphen is incorrect punctuation.
> Two major hurdles were the initial binary size increase due to bringing in the Rust standard library [...]. They don't say what they did about it, do they? Did they just accept it?
Probably yes. It's ~300KB per binary, and it's a one-time cost. It can be avoided entirely by disabling the standard library, but that's inconvenient, and usually done only when writing for embedded devices. Usually the problem isn't the size directly, but duplication of Rust dependencies in mixed C++/Rust codebases. If you end up with a sandwich of build systems (when you have library dependencies like C++ => Rust =…
Binary size is a real concern on the client side. On servers the Rust stdlib overhead usually doesn’t matter, but when you’re shipping to billions of mobile devices, every KB counts. Good to see they invested in build tooling instead of just accepting the bloat.
Just like Google’s Rust-in-Android blogs this reads like a PR piece (and in the case of facebook also recruitment piece) with some technical words sprinkled in for effect. The overall communication quality is that of a random startup’s “look what we did” posts. The interesting aspects, such as how they protect against supply-chain attacks from the dependency-happy rust toolchain or how they integrated the C++ code wi…
[flagged]
I agree with everything you say. But wow, does that comment sound like AI. Probably Grok? Not saying you are AI, you might just be a heavy user who picked up the same patterns
It's more surprising to me that it seems to have already fooled a bunch of people looking at their replies to you.