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

Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

kabir.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 502 posts

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#371

Post by alsetmusic »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #296

Must I beg to have an acronym spelled out a least once, the first time it's used? Even if you assume 90% of readers already know, the other 10% (including me, in this case) will thank you, it doesn't take much effort, and it expands the reach of your communication or idea. Exceptions for cases where the acronym is just so well known that a lot of people don't even know what it stands for even though they know the con…

At the same time, I did a search for "what is a ctf to play" and got the answer. We know how to find answers to these problems. I agree the blog post was poor form.

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#372

Post by varenc »

josh2600 wrote: post #165
IanCal wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t say you’re wrong but the last anecdote describes many I’ve had to review for jobs long before LLMs. Fizzbuzz is a classic thing that shockingly many devs genuinely cannot do, even at home.

Why is it important that a dev can’t do fizzbuzz without ai? If they can ship code that matches a spec, why does it matter if they’re using ai or not? Genuinely curious.

I can see this perspective, but FizzBuzz is such a low bar that so many can pass, I'd greatly prefer to hire someone that can ship code that matches a spec do this challenge.

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#375

Post by Yenrabbit »

s3p wrote: post #317

Don't hate me, I do agree with the premise of the article (I really do!) but I can’t help but notice: >The issue was never that AI could help. proceeds to write the next 3 sentences about how the problem IS in fact ai help >Teams that refused to use AI were not just missing a convenience; they were playing a slower version of the competition. >CTFs were not just a set of puzzles. They were a ladder. >The claim is not…

I got some AI writing vibes too, but looking closer, I think it might be human-written (or at least partly so) - perhaps just picking up some AI conversation styles? FWIW, Pangram gives it a mixed but mostly-human score too. Maybe AI is not just changing the way we speak; it's changing the way we perceive all writing ;)

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#376

Post by bawolff »

0x20cowboy wrote: post #346
bawolff wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which acronym do you mean? CTF? I think that acronym, just like BGP, is more well known by itself than what it stands for. More generally, not every piece of writing is meant for every audience. Like if someone writes a blog post about CTFs aimed at people who like CTFs, nobody in the target audience needs to have CTF explained to them. Ultimately HN is a link aggregator, but sometimes its a bit like eavesdropping on…

I dont know what CTF stands for so I dont know if I am interested in this article or learning anything about it. Maybe I am. Are you really arguing for not just typing out whatever 3 words this stands for once in the name of clarity?

Yes, i would argue that people writing articles about niche interests aimed at other members of that niche are under no obligation to clarify it for people outside the niche.

They aren't your teacher. They aren't trying to send the content to you. They are just blogging on their own website for their own audience.

And its hardly unique to this article. If you are writing about the nitty gritty of linux networking, you probably aren't defining what TCP or UDP means. If you are writing a super detailed article comparing and contrasting plot structures of different animes, you probably aren't going to start by explaining what the word anime means. Etc

I'm not saying the world should be all RTFM, but if you are reading some sort of specialized content, then yes i think its a reasonable assumption that the reader has some basic background knowledge on the topic at hand, or is willing to do the research themselves.

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#377

Post by samatman »

Sesse__ wrote: post #200
Levitz wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off the top of my head: DOMS being little crystals in muscles, tongue having separate areas for each type of taste, food pyramid, blue blood in the veins, the appendix being useless, body temperature doesn't change disregarding whether it's exposed to cold or to heat, and a whole lot of stuff related to politics and history I'd rather just omit (I don't live in the US). All things I learned in school which were wrong…

One of my teachers in elementary school told us that people in the Arabic world wore long garments because as Muslims, they believed the Messiah would be born by a male, and thus, it was important to have something to catch the baby as it unexpectedly popped out one day and would otherwise hit the ground. She only really had two faults: She wasn't very bright, and she wasn't fond of children. I had her in about 80% o…

It may interest you to know that this was a misremembered truth.

It is widely believed by their neighbors, that the _Druze_ wear baggy pants because they believe that the Mahdi will be born to a male, and the pants will catch the baby etc. I say "widely believed", the Druze are famously secretive and will not confirm or deny most things about their religion. The 'elect' Druze men do wear distinctive baggy trousers with the crotch down around the knees: no one else does.

The Druze are people in the Arabic world: moreover, they are Arabs. They began as an Isma'ili sect, but do not identify as Muslim: they call themselves al-Muwaḥḥidūn, meaning 'the monotheists', or 'unitarians'.

Much closer to correct than not!

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#378

Post by somesortofthing »

I have no experience in the CTF scene so I'm curious - why not lean in and design the puzzles with an AI harness like the one top teams use in the loop and use the(presumably) expert skills of the designers to patch up the holes until the AI can't find them? Do you just end up designing ~perfectly secure systems that no human can break without finding monetizable 0days?

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#379

Post by a_t48 »

somesortofthing wrote: post #378

I have no experience in the CTF scene so I'm curious - why not lean in and design the puzzles with an AI harness like the one top teams use in the loop and use the(presumably) expert skills of the designers to patch up the holes until the AI can't find them? Do you just end up designing ~perfectly secure systems that no human can break without finding monetizable 0days?

I think that misses the point - it's a little bit like asking why FPS game developers don't lean into aimbot usage. You could, but by default it's a bit boring, and a different type of game.

Re: Frontier AI has broken the open CTF format

#380

Post by mafro »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #296

Must I beg to have an acronym spelled out a least once, the first time it's used? Even if you assume 90% of readers already know, the other 10% (including me, in this case) will thank you, it doesn't take much effort, and it expands the reach of your communication or idea. Exceptions for cases where the acronym is just so well known that a lot of people don't even know what it stands for even though they know the con…

I didn't know what BGP is, but I did know CTF. YMMV
Post reply on HN